Should We Re-enact Glass-Steagall?

[Sallow]

They make these "mistakes" because those "mistakes" aren't mistakes at all. They are, in part, what caused the crisis. They're not allow sufficient to explain the crisis, but no set of factors is. The problem is that the list of "causes" coming from your side of the aisle bare no relationship to reality.

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

We had banking crises during GS. It didnt prevent anything other than banks making money, which people seem opposed to. They also seem opposed to banks not making money. Wish they could decide.

The issue is not deregulation, but regulation. With deposits insured banks have little incentive to be prudent with depositors' money. With bailouts as far as the eye can see they have no incentive at all. Remove all the Depression era regulation of banks and let the market sort out good from bad. It will punish bad players more effectively than any gov't agency.

You don't seem to know what happened during the depression.

 

[The Rabbi]

They make these "mistakes" because those "mistakes" aren't mistakes at all. They are, in part, what caused the crisis. They're not allow sufficient to explain the crisis, but no set of factors is. The problem is that the list of "causes" coming from your side of the aisle bare no relationship to reality.

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Wait. So the issue was brought about by FDIC guarantees, which is regulation. It was aggravated by Fed policy, which is regulation.
And the solution to the problem is more regulation? Are you insane?

 

[The Rabbi]

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

We had banking crises during GS. It didnt prevent anything other than banks making money, which people seem opposed to. They also seem opposed to banks not making money. Wish they could decide.

The issue is not deregulation, but regulation. With deposits insured banks have little incentive to be prudent with depositors' money. With bailouts as far as the eye can see they have no incentive at all. Remove all the Depression era regulation of banks and let the market sort out good from bad. It will punish bad players more effectively than any gov't agency.

You don't seem to know what happened during the depression.

Actually you don't seem to know what happened. Ever.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

They make these "mistakes" because those "mistakes" aren't mistakes at all. They are, in part, what caused the crisis. They're not allow sufficient to explain the crisis, but no set of factors is. The problem is that the list of "causes" coming from your side of the aisle bare no relationship to reality.

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

GS would have stopped banks from making bad loans? How?

GS would have stopped Bear Stearns from funding a huge bond position with overnite loans? How?

GS would have stopped Lehmann from doing the same thing? How?

GS would have stopped Fannie and Freddie from buying trillions of dollars mortgages with taxpayers on the hook? How?

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

FDIC was there under GS and is still there after 1999. Not sure what your point is.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero,

Rates didn't drop to zero until after the crisis.

That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

People have always used HELOC to do home imporovements. Most small business start ups are funded with home equity and cc debt. Neither has anything to do with GS.

 

[Sallow]

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Wait. So the issue was brought about by FDIC guarantees, which is regulation. It was aggravated by Fed policy, which is regulation.
And the solution to the problem is more regulation? Are you insane?

Cute.

But no cigar.

Most of this was caused by "self regulation".

The people who were supposed to be minding the store..like S&P, FINRA and SEC completely dropped the ball.

 

[Sallow]

These banks got in big financial trouble because they were heavily leveraged up with short term commercial paper and mortgage-backed securities. This was just as much of trouble with the merged banks and the ones which remained separate.

That is the reality. Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented this. At all.

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

GS would have stopped banks from making bad loans? How?

GS would have stopped Bear Stearns from funding a huge bond position with overnite loans? How?

GS would have stopped Lehmann from doing the same thing? How?

GS would have stopped Fannie and Freddie from buying trillions of dollars mortgages with taxpayers on the hook? How?

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

FDIC was there under GS and is still there after 1999. Not sure what your point is.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero,

Rates didn't drop to zero until after the crisis.

That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

People have always used HELOC to do home imporovements. Most small business start ups are funded with home equity and cc debt. Neither has anything to do with GS.

You answer your own questions with questions.

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

After? It was anyone. It was a real wild west show. And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened. There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan. In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

And unless you were living under a rock..you know that interest rates were dropping like crazy well before the crisis.

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Run on the bank.

What happens then?

 

[Sallow]

We had banking crises during GS. It didnt prevent anything other than banks making money, which people seem opposed to. They also seem opposed to banks not making money. Wish they could decide.

The issue is not deregulation, but regulation. With deposits insured banks have little incentive to be prudent with depositors' money. With bailouts as far as the eye can see they have no incentive at all. Remove all the Depression era regulation of banks and let the market sort out good from bad. It will punish bad players more effectively than any gov't agency.

You don't seem to know what happened during the depression.

Actually you don't seem to know what happened. Ever.

Well it seems I have a far handle on history then you, ace.

Which really says something.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

GS would have stopped banks from making bad loans? How?

GS would have stopped Bear Stearns from funding a huge bond position with overnite loans? How?

GS would have stopped Lehmann from doing the same thing? How?

GS would have stopped Fannie and Freddie from buying trillions of dollars mortgages with taxpayers on the hook? How?

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

FDIC was there under GS and is still there after 1999. Not sure what your point is.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero,

Rates didn't drop to zero until after the crisis.

That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

People have always used HELOC to do home imporovements. Most small business start ups are funded with home equity and cc debt. Neither has anything to do with GS.

You answer your own questions with questions.

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

After? It was anyone. It was a real wild west show. And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened. There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan. In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

And unless you were living under a rock..you know that interest rates were dropping like crazy well before the crisis.

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Run on the bank.

What happens then?

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

Right, Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from making bad loans.
So it wouldn't have stopped the crisis.

And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened.

Which part of GS would have force someone to perform this due diligence?

There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan.

Which part of GS would have prevented these lies?

In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

That's awful! They couldn't do the same under Glass Steagall?

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Glass Steagall would have saved them?

You have some very strong feelings about the issue, your knowledge is lacking.

 

[Sallow]

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

GS would have stopped banks from making bad loans? How?

GS would have stopped Bear Stearns from funding a huge bond position with overnite loans? How?

GS would have stopped Lehmann from doing the same thing? How?

GS would have stopped Fannie and Freddie from buying trillions of dollars mortgages with taxpayers on the hook? How?

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

FDIC was there under GS and is still there after 1999. Not sure what your point is.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero,

Rates didn't drop to zero until after the crisis.

That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

People have always used HELOC to do home imporovements. Most small business start ups are funded with home equity and cc debt. Neither has anything to do with GS.

You answer your own questions with questions.

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

After? It was anyone. It was a real wild west show. And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened. There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan. In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

And unless you were living under a rock..you know that interest rates were dropping like crazy well before the crisis.

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Run on the bank.

What happens then?

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

Right, Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from making bad loans.
So it wouldn't have stopped the crisis.

And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened.

Which part of GS would have force someone to perform this due diligence?

There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan.

Which part of GS would have prevented these lies?

In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

That's awful! They couldn't do the same under Glass Steagall?

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Glass Steagall would have saved them?

You have some very strong feelings about the issue, your knowledge is lacking.

Funny..you've agreed with each of my points..yet my knowledge in lacking.



Gotta love it.

 

[The Rabbi]

That's astounding.

Sure Glass Steagall would have prevented what happened.

Handily.

These guys knew what they were doing..and they knew it could go horribly wrong.

So they took out insurance with AIG.

And they knew if that failed..the government would have to come in to save their asses because of FDIC.

Add in we had an administration that fueled the housing bubble by dropping interest rates to zero, defunding regulators, populating those regulators with vulture capitalists and encouraging entrepreneurship. That last part is important because in addition to having people doing home improvements via what they thought was a cheap loan, you had people opening up first time businesses by taking out mortgages.

This was a perfect storm caused by de-regulation.

Wait. So the issue was brought about by FDIC guarantees, which is regulation. It was aggravated by Fed policy, which is regulation.
And the solution to the problem is more regulation? Are you insane?

Cute.

But no cigar.

Most of this was caused by "self regulation".

The people who were supposed to be minding the store..like S&P, FINRA and SEC completely dropped the ball.

So the solution is more regulation? Please explain how that's supposed to work.

 

[The Rabbi]

You answer your own questions with questions.

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

After? It was anyone. It was a real wild west show. And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened. There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan. In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

And unless you were living under a rock..you know that interest rates were dropping like crazy well before the crisis.

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Run on the bank.

What happens then?

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

Right, Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from making bad loans.
So it wouldn't have stopped the crisis.

And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened.

Which part of GS would have force someone to perform this due diligence?

There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan.

Which part of GS would have prevented these lies?

In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

That's awful! They couldn't do the same under Glass Steagall?

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Glass Steagall would have saved them?

You have some very strong feelings about the issue, your knowledge is lacking.

Funny..you've agreed with each of my points..yet my knowledge in lacking.



Gotta love it.

You're actually getting your ass handed to you because the mroe you post a) the more you show little grasp for what actually happened, and b) the more you argue against your own position on GS.

 

[Toro]

Yes.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You answer your own questions with questions.

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

After? It was anyone. It was a real wild west show. And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened. There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan. In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

And unless you were living under a rock..you know that interest rates were dropping like crazy well before the crisis.

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Run on the bank.

What happens then?

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

Right, Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from making bad loans.
So it wouldn't have stopped the crisis.

And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened.

Which part of GS would have force someone to perform this due diligence?

There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan.

Which part of GS would have prevented these lies?

In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

That's awful! They couldn't do the same under Glass Steagall?

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Glass Steagall would have saved them?

You have some very strong feelings about the issue, your knowledge is lacking.

Funny..you've agreed with each of my points..yet my knowledge in lacking.



Gotta love it.

Each of your points was wrong.

You're a very confused person.

 

[The Rabbi]

Toddster, it's part of being in the low information set.

 

[Toro]

Banks shouldn't be trading with FDIC insured deposits.

Even if the subsidiaries are bankruptcy remote entities, the government will be prone to bailing out these banks if they're big enough.

 

[The Rabbi]

Banks shouldn't be trading with FDIC insured deposits.

Even if the subsidiaries are bankruptcy remote entities, the government will be prone to bailing out these banks if they're big enough.

Get rid of FDIC insurance and you solve that problem without taxpayer subsidy.

 

[Sallow]

Before Glass Steagall it was banks making loans and freddie/fannie backing those loans.

Right, Glass Steagall wouldn't have prevented banks from making bad loans.
So it wouldn't have stopped the crisis.

And financial companies were backing the loans. No one was doing due diligence..in fact the opposite happened.

Which part of GS would have force someone to perform this due diligence?

There were predatory lending outfits that LIED, in many cases, unknown to the client, about the ability to pay back the loan.

Which part of GS would have prevented these lies?

In fact, firms like Goldman were pressuring these outfits for as many mortgages as they could get.

That's awful! They couldn't do the same under Glass Steagall?

As for the FDIC? What do you think would have happened had the financial institutions failed to cover the poisoned issues? Eh?

Glass Steagall would have saved them?

You have some very strong feelings about the issue, your knowledge is lacking.

Funny..you've agreed with each of my points..yet my knowledge in lacking.



Gotta love it.

Each of your points was wrong.

You're a very confused person.

Then why agree?

Look up confusion, ace.

It doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[Sallow]

Banks shouldn't be trading with FDIC insured deposits.

Even if the subsidiaries are bankruptcy remote entities, the government will be prone to bailing out these banks if they're big enough.

Bingo.

 

[Sallow]

Banks shouldn't be trading with FDIC insured deposits.

Even if the subsidiaries are bankruptcy remote entities, the government will be prone to bailing out these banks if they're big enough.

Get rid of FDIC insurance and you solve that problem without taxpayer subsidy.

Well no..you don't.

Because prior to FDIC insurance..people lost their savings because private entities didn't have the means or inclination to pay them back when they were lost.

The Depression was a huge problem and the government as well as the financial industry was on the brink of collapse. Had FDR not taken the steps we might have become a very different country.

 

[The Rabbi]

Banks shouldn't be trading with FDIC insured deposits.

Even if the subsidiaries are bankruptcy remote entities, the government will be prone to bailing out these banks if they're big enough.

Get rid of FDIC insurance and you solve that problem without taxpayer subsidy.

Well no..you don't.

Because prior to FDIC insurance..people lost their savings because private entities didn't have the means or inclination to pay them back when they were lost.

The Depression was a huge problem and the government as well as the financial industry was on the brink of collapse. Had FDR not taken the steps we might have become a very different country.

So? Banks can get insurance privately for their deposits. Organizations can rank banks and consumer can make decisions for themselves as to the level of risk. Etc.
People invest in mutual funds and lose all their money today. Why should a bank deposit account be any different from that? Why should taxpayers be on the hook for decisions by banksters? I am surprised to see a committed marxist like you arguing for the right of banksters to make lousy decisions up to and including fraud.