| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
 Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:01 pm Post subject: Obama to propose limits on bank size and limits to trading |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| WASHINGTON�President Barack Obama on Thursday is expected to propose new limits on the size and risk taken by the country's biggest banks, marking the administration's latest assault on Wall Street in what could mark a return, at least in spirit, to some of the curbs on finance put in place during the Great Depression, according to congressional sources and administration officials. |
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704320104575015910344117800.html
| Quote: |
Jan. 20 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama tomorrow will offer proposals to limit the size and complexity of financial institutions� proprietary trading as a way to reduce risk- taking, an administration official said.
Obama will announce the rules after he meets with former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker at the White House. The proposals will be part of an overhaul of regulations to help limit the size of financial institutions, the official said on the condition of anonymity. |
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-01-20/obama-to-propose-new-financial-rules-on-proprietary-trading.html
Can't be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Even if he did it, so what? Sooner or later the Republicans will take control back and repeal it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Clinton was the one who repealed Glass-Steagall. Though he had no opposition from the Republicans.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/beginning-end-wall-streets-various-prop-trading-desks
| Quote: |
| It appears that prop trading could soon be on its way out. Luckily, it only accounted for "just over" 10% of Goldman's revenue: it will therefore likely not be missed. Bloomberg writes: "President Barack Obama tomorrow will offer new proposals on limiting the size and complexity of proprietary trading systems as a way to reduce risk-taking, a senior administration official said." While this is not yet the formal end of prop trading which may or may not be a legal way to take advantage of the commingling between flow and prop trading, thus scalping clients in a perfectly acceptable manner (define the word "acceptable"), it has all the makings of the beginning of the end. And, much more importantly, this marks the long-awaited beginning of Glass-Steagall's return. |
The article is long but good (especially if one needs a refresher on what a "prop" desk is). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Clinton was the one who repealed Glass-Steagall. Though he had no opposition from the Republicans. |
The bills were passed by a Republican House and a Republican Senate. Clinton was a fool to get on board; the Democrats in the Senate largely rejected the repeal. Indeed, if not for the Republican majority in the Senate, it wouldn't have passed at all. I think it's fair to place this at the feet of the Republican Party, even if Clinton is still trying to defend it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 20, 2010 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose that's fair. Big blame to Robert Rubin though.
That said, Obama is in as tight or more with the big banks than previous presidents. He quickly marginalized Volcker in favor of Summers. Volcker has been saying for a while now that he would ultimately prevail, and if this announcement is meaningful, he's right.
Another big problem is the Vampire Squid thug at the CFTC (Gary Gensler). With oil prices rising again it would be prudent for Hope to get a handle on the wild speculation in energy markets. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 5:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Big banks have already begun poking the holes in Obama�s new rules�holes they expect their banks to pass through basically unchanged. |
http://www.businessinsider.com/big-banks-have-already-figured-out-the-loophole-in-obamas-new-rules-2010-1
Obama is being completely disrespected by the banksters. He has been gently masturbating them for the last year. They have become more wealthy due to him. Then he proposes a little tax, which they are going to challenge in courts. He should really be pissed about this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 22, 2010 6:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Obama's press conference was held at the same time Vampire Squid was doing their earnings call:
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/obama-bank-plan-overshadows-goldman-call/
| Quote: |
Mr. Obama�s announcement seemed to have thrown the entire Goldman call off balance.
�Man, the timing is incredible because Obama is speaking now,� Meredith A. Whitney, the head of Meredith Whitney Advisors, said on the call. �But I will take advantage of this anyway,� she continued.
Mr. Viniar shot back in jest, �We planned ours first.� |
Obama must feel personally slighted/insulted by the banksters. They've treated him like a total pushover. Having his press conference at the time of Vampire Squid's call is a message that only a very small % of the population will understand, and as such I believe it was in itself a message to GS.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1d2d6f54-06c4-11df-b426-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
| Quote: |
A declaration of war on Wall Street
Markets nosedived on Thursday when Barack Obama set out broad new measures on financial regulation. The most significant of them is banning deposit-taking banks from proprietary trading that is �unrelated to serving customers�. This activity has generated politically incendiary profits for banks and bonuses for bankers.
The timing was political: the president spoke on the day that Goldman Sachs announced fourth-quarter earnings of $4.95bn. Those of a more populist nature than Mr Obama � both on the left and on the right � will say that he comes late to the game.
Indeed, the White House and the US Treasury resisted the backlash against bankers earlier in 2009 � they opposed the punitive tax proposed in the House of Representatives. Instead of using the control they enjoyed over the banks through the troubled asset relief programme in 2009, the authorities rushed to free banks from the restrictions associated with Tarp.
Mr Obama may now be ruing this lost opportunity. The public mood has swung against Wall Street � to which Mr Obama appears too close for comfort. Trillion-dollar bail-outs for people on million-dollar salaries have infuriated Americans living in fear of losing their jobs and their homes.
Mr Obama�s political team is running to catch up. In December he called bank executives to the White House to scold them and, last week, he announced a $90bn levy on the banks to claw back some of the costs of the bail-out. These actions were broadly justified. The new proposal, however, is a radical shift � and a mistake.
The primary aim in regulatory policy should be to make it possible for banks to fail without endangering the rest of the banking system � and society. The proposed remedy, however, does not help with this. Even financial networks where companies each did only one thing would still be vulnerable to systemic crises.
Boundaries between bank functions will be hard to draw. Will affected banks be allowed to hedge their positions? This brutal regulation will be set upon by lawyers.
Banning prop trading by retail banks would prevent state-insured deposits being used as chips in the financial casino. This problem is, however, best tackled by charging banks appropriately for risks that the state insures them against.
The government�s key policy lever should be to make sure that institutions hold enough capital to reflect the risks that they run and the threats that they pose to the rest of the financial system.
|
The FT thinks the proposals are a mistake. Ok. The FT named Lloyd Antoinette Blankfein as their person of the year. If the FT doesn't like them, Obama is probably on to something.
http://skepticaltexascpa.blogspot.com/2009/06/lloyd-antoinette-blankfein-and-ft.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Speaking to this news service on Thursday, Shelby said if Democrats push forward with the proposals they risk unravelling much of the bipartisan support already reached regarding the passage of financial regulatory reform in the Senate. |
Like security, bipartisanship is just a code justification for doing things that are obviously detrimental to the public. Every single Republican Senator just voted against an incredibly basic law which enforces simple, obvious rules for fiscal reponsibility. Any serious that has bipartisan support -- and as such, is acceptable to these people -- is de facto corrupt and damaging.
Frankly it's looking more and more probable that I'm just going to be spending the rest of my life abroad, because I really don't want any part of this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asylum seeker
Joined: 22 Jul 2007
Location: On your computer screen.
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 01, 2010 10:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The republican senate has shown with this vote that they will not allow any sort of serious restrictions to be placed on the activity of the big banks no matter how many bailouts they get.
It seems they are almost brazenly in league with the big banks now. It's getting to the point where the big banks will basically be able to have any policy they want quashed, while Fox news and the conservative media can feign outrage and blame the democrats alone for not doing anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| asylum seeker wrote: |
| ...while Fox news and the conservative media can feign outrage and blame the democrats alone for not doing anything. |
The Dems are either completely in league w/ the Rs or they're just a pack of p^$sies. Or both. I vote for both. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 7:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Frankly it's looking more and more probable that I'm just going to be spending the rest of my life abroad, because I really don't want any part of this. |
You're not going to find a country that is perfect. The country you live in now is much more corporatist then the US.
You also have to consider the improvements that have been made. There are problems, but so much of the garbage has been reconciled.
Give this a read. You'll likely appreciate your home more.
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15108634
Few nations could have an article like that written about it. Maybe only the US, Canada, NZ and Aus.
That said, the banksters and their enablers should be hung. A quick look at history suggests they will be hung at some point. The financial ponzi comes apart eventually. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 5:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Frankly it's looking more and more probable that I'm just going to be spending the rest of my life abroad, because I really don't want any part of this. |
You're not going to find a country that is perfect. The country you live in now is much more corporatist then the US.
You also have to consider the improvements that have been made. There are problems, but so much of the garbage has been reconciled.
Give this a read. You'll likely appreciate your home more.
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15108634
Few nations could have an article like that written about it. Maybe only the US, Canada, NZ and Aus.
That said, the banksters and their enablers should be hung. A quick look at history suggests they will be hung at some point. The financial ponzi comes apart eventually. |
This is somewhat related. ReasonTV: Why California wine is a better buy than French wine. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_jdgA9gPr8 (8 minutes) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 02, 2010 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Frankly it's looking more and more probable that I'm just going to be spending the rest of my life abroad, because I really don't want any part of this. |
You're not going to find a country that is perfect. The country you live in now is much more corporatist then the US. |
This is true. However, I don't pay taxes here, so I don't meaningfully contribute to it. After my tax exemption is done, I'll probably head to another country for a while.
I don't need a perfect country, I just either need a reasonable country (and no, the shit that's going on Stateside is not reasonable), or a country where I don't have to contribute to the unreasonability. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
