Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will The Republicans Block Finance Reform?  
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8045 posts, RR: 8
Posted (4 years 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2001 times:

Just saw this in today's papers (lots of links on news.google,com):

Quote:
The Securities and Exchange Commission filed fraud charges Friday against Goldman Sachs, one of the most successful but vilified banks on Wall Street, for allegedly selling investors a financial product based on subprime mortgages that was secretly designed to lose value.

In filing the civil suit against Goldman Sachs, the agency is targeting one of the banks that largely escaped the wreckage of the financial crisis, and with the help of taxpayer bailouts, emerged stronger.

The SEC's suit strikes at a practice that was one of the main causes of the financial crisis: the creation of poisonous investments derived from home loans made to borrowers who couldn't afford the houses they were buying.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn.../AR2010041602161.html?hpid=topnews

It's amazing that in this country today we, average citizens, see this and are not surprised.

It shows that there is a need to bring reform to the financial sector, but that will require Republican support in not allowing a filibuster on the issue.

So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

30 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 1, posted (4 years 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1987 times:

In principle, no they won't. It depends entirely on what the proposed reforms contain.

So far I have not taken the time to study any of the outlines for these reforms (and so far they appear to be only outlines).

What I would strongly object to is if the Obama administration attempts to use this 'reform' movement to imbed 3 or 4 good ideas among a hundred or so really bad ones - like what was done in the health care bill.

I would also object that the federal government gains more direct control over the banking system. Banking regulations should be very straightforward - The Swiss are excellent at banking and the banks are regulated - but the rules can fit easily in a paperback book.

And of course, the most important thing I am looking for is proper regulation of the mortgage industry. This should be very simple:
- Ban the trading of Mortgages - a bank should not sell a mortgage unless the bank is willing to hold the mortgage itself for the 20-30 year life of the mortgage. Mortgages should only be sold in case of bankruptcy of the holding bank.
- If banks hold their own mortgages and trading of mortgages is banned, there is no need for Freddie and Fannie. Close them down.
- Eliminate CRA. If the government wants to subsidize certain people or minorities for home loans, let it do so in the open, and not hide behind the banks who take the risk and (like 18 months ago) the fall for bad government policy.

Of course, these reforms are the last thing we will see from this administration.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8045 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (4 years 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1981 times:

We really don't know about what was discussed when the Republicans on Dowd's committee were working with the Democrats. Might have been some good stuff there, but these days rejecting everything that comes from Obama and/or the Democrats is giong to be opposed. The top Republicans are out to repeal everything that has been passed during the Obama years. Health Care Reform and reform of the financial sector are just two areas.

Pity, as the situation with Goldman Sachs shows that there is a real need for both parties to work together for some solid reform, stronger restrictions and even some prison time for the yo-yos that play the games after reform is passed.


User currently offlinecasinterest From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4158 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (4 years 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1966 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
- If banks hold their own mortgages and trading of mortgages is banned, there is no need for Freddie and Fannie. Close them down.

I would argue that if we shut down Fannie and Freddie, that we would want the banks to be able to trade mortgages.

They would be doing so to even out risks, especially for banks located in speculative markets, or in recession/boom town areas.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
Eliminate CRA. If the government wants to subsidize certain people or minorities for home loans, let it do so in the open, and not hide behind the banks who take the risk and (like 18 months ago) the fall for bad government policy.

I agree whole heartedly here. The Tax Credit for 1st time homebuyers being an excellent example of the type of credit

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

Everyone has an interest in reform, however I do think that the current Republican party does not have an interest in any cooperation with the current administration. The health care reform bill shows that their is no real leaders that are strong enough to point out serious enough flaws to keep a bill being passed by the democrats, and no real leadership that shows any support for any barganing or negotiating on the bills. There ore the democrats will probably pass through a new law with no support from the Republicans, and plenty of whining.


I am not sure how much reform is needed for the financial sector in terms of the Goldman article though. It is clear to me that they broke the law by not properly representing their interests in certain opposing products to their investors.



Older than I just was ,and younger than I will soo be.
User currently offlinebhill From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 927 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 1937 times:

Prolly so, after this statement: ""There will be no cooperation for the rest of the year," McCain said during an interview on an Arizona radio affiliate. "They have poisoned the well in what they've done and how they've done it."
...after the health care bill passed...



Carpe Pices
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (4 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1922 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
It's amazing that in this country today we, average citizens, see this and are not surprised.

Why? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Fannie, and Freddie were all telling the banks to do this kind of lending. In years past Janet Reno threatened to take banks to court if they didn't start lending to poor people.

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

The skin color of the President is of no matter. His political ideology however is. The industry is only as crooked as the government wanted it to be.

Quoting casinterest (Reply 3):
Everyone has an interest in reform, however I do think that the current Republican party does not have an interest in any cooperation with the current administration. The health care reform bill shows that their is no real leaders that are strong enough to point out serious enough flaws to keep a bill being passed by the democrats, and no real leadership that shows any support for any barganing or negotiating on the bills. There ore the democrats will probably pass through a new law with no support from the Republicans, and plenty of whining.

Agreed. All it means if it passes is one more thing that has to be revised once the GOP retakes the Congress in November.


User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1909 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 5):
The industry is only as crooked as the government wanted it to be.

Perhaps, though you forget Lloyd Blankfein himself claimed to be "doing God's work". Remember, he thinks trading mortgage securities is far more important than other people's jobs - including yours.

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
- Ban the trading of Mortgages - a bank should not sell a mortgage unless the bank is willing to hold the mortgage itself for the 20-30 year life of the mortgage. Mortgages should only be sold in case of bankruptcy of the holding bank.
- If banks hold their own mortgages and trading of mortgages is banned, there is no need for Freddie and Fannie. Close them down.
- Eliminate CRA. If the government wants to subsidize certain people or minorities for home loans, let it do so in the open, and not hide behind the banks who take the risk and (like 18 months ago) the fall for bad government policy.

Bravo Charles!    That'll be the day...



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1899 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 5):
The industry is only as crooked as the government wanted it to be

Do you really believe that? Have you read about Goldman Sachs today?

Here's another article http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...tory/32906678/looting_main_street/ that describes some unsavory business.


User currently offlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2690 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1895 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"



View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8045 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1885 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 5):
The industry is only as crooked as the government wanted it to be.

You realize, of course, that you're talking about the Bush/Cheney years.

Quoting DXing (Reply 5):
In years past Janet Reno threatened to take banks to court if they didn't start lending to poor people.

But I don't remember Reno telling banks and insurance companies to develop unethical/unlawful scams, generating exceptionally high turn & churn in the mortgage industry. Those prostitutes started plying their trade during the Bush/Cheney years, regardless of how much you want to blame the Democrats.


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1873 times:

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 7):
Do you really believe that? Have you read about Goldman Sachs today?

Sure. Name the law that they broke. The government is suing them over losses which is one of the stupidest things I can think of. It's like Joe Pesci as Nicky Santoro in the movie "Casino" telling the investment banker he wants his money back after he made a bad investment, and investment he was warned could lose money up front.

So regulation should include provisions that no one can have a loss? That no matter how stupid you are you should be protected in your investments?

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
You realize, of course, that you're talking about the Bush/Cheney years.

I'm also talking about the Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Fannie. Freddie, Cinton, Reno years as well. At least Bush administration tried to reign the sub prime market in. None of the others involved can say they did.

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):
But I don't remember Reno telling banks and insurance companies to develop unethical/unlawful scams, generating exceptionally high turn & churn in the mortgage industry.

And exactly what percentage of the market was that? A hard number with a citatiion will do. Anything else is just the usual editorial suposition.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8711 posts, RR: 24
Reply 11, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 9):

You realize, of course, that you're talking about the Bush/Cheney years.

You think Obama is any better, if not even worse? You do realize that a very large number of Obama's economic team are Goldman Sachs alumni, just to list one major influence?



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 years 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1871 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 10):
Sure. Name the law that they broke.

*Shrugs* "Securities Fraud"

Quoting DXing (Reply 10):
So regulation should include provisions that no one can have a loss? That no matter how stupid you are you should be protected in your investments?

I didn't say that. I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth.

Does slimy, unethical and even criminal behavior by large banks bother you?


User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1852 times:

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 12):

*Shrugs* "Securities Fraud"

That's the charge, it has yet to be proven. It ought to be interesting to see how the government tries to take their involvement out of it.

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 12):
I didn't say that. I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth.

I didn't put them in your mouth, I put them in the governments mouth since that is what they seem to be implying by charging GS with this.

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 12):
Does slimy, unethical and even criminal behavior by large banks bother you?

What bothers me more is that some how the people that signed on the dotted line are given a pass for not doing even basic research into what they were signing. No one went around with weapons forcing signatures on lines. I'll be interested to see how the government gets around that as well.

If you read the story you will note that the GS product called CDO's didn't even hit the street until 2007 when it was apparent to even the casual investor that the housing market was in trouble. What idiot would buy those? The government seems to be saying that fools and their money somehow will not be parted as long as the government is looking out for them. It's never worked before and never will. Fools will always find a way to part with their cash.

The whole thing is a big waste of yet more taxpayer money.

As to the other company involved, I can walk into a casino and bet both red and black at the roulette table, should the casino be responsible for not allowing me to do that?


User currently offlineflanker From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1624 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (4 years 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1844 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

I love how you turn this into a race problem, another typical thing from the left. I am really sick of this mindless crap.

Nobody with a gram of sense gives a rats ass what color his skin is. Any and all opposition is based on ideology.



Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an unlicensed pharmacist
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (4 years 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1832 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 11):
You think Obama is any better, if not even worse? You do realize that a very large number of Obama's economic team are Goldman Sachs alumni, just to list one major influence?

Or the fact Geithner is a complete idiot?

This thread is a joke, another attempt to paint the right as racists who oppose Obama because he is black. When will the mods stop this?


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (4 years 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1819 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 1):
So far I have not taken the time to study any of the outlines for these reforms (and so far they appear to be only outlines).

Don't you know "first you pass the bill then you find out whats in it"!!!!


User currently offlinecws818 From United States of America, joined Aug 2008, 1171 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (4 years 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1813 times:

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 15):
This thread is a joke, another attempt to paint the right as racists who oppose Obama because he is black. When will the mods stop this?

Have any forum rules been broken? If not then the reality is that discussions occur whether or not you like what is being discussed.



volgende halte...Station Hollands Spoor
User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (4 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1778 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 13):
What bothers me more

So, are you saying that is does bother you? Or not? As usual, you've not actually answered the question directly.


User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3825 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (4 years 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 1766 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
Will The Republicans Block Finance Reform?

They'll certainly try..and certainly fail. Give 'em an A+ for effort and an F for results.

Quoting DXing (Reply 5):
All it means if it passes is one more thing that has to be revised once the GOP retakes the Congress in November.

As a long suffering Cub fan I can relate with you. We're used to "wait till next year" or "hope springs eternal."
We've been waiting for 100 plus years without a World Series victory, I'm sure you guys can as well.

[Edited 2010-04-16 20:43:52]


Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlineNIKV69 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (4 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1755 times:

Quoting cws818 (Reply 17):
Have any forum rules been broken

Yes

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
So the question is "will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

This is clearly flamebait and low quality and nothing more than something designed to start a war here.


User currently offlinefuturepilot16 From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2035 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1729 times:

Quoting Ken777 (Thread starter):
"will the Republicans actually go along with these first steps to reform a crooked industry, or will they work to block it simply because there is a Black Democrat in the White House?"

After seeing their pathetic attempt at trying to stop health care reform, it's kind of ignorant to ask if they will try and block finance reform. Most of these republicans in the gov't are for big business, and they are there to help their friends on wall street be as profitable as possible.

The horrible part of this is that both sides have terrible proposals for financial reform. But knowing the United States gov't, they'll never actually come together and agree on sensible financial reform and regulations. So we'll just take whatever they throw at us.

Quoting NIKV69 (Reply 15):
This thread is a joke, another attempt to paint the right as racists who oppose Obama because he is black. When will the mods stop this?

If it's such a joke, why respond?



"The brave don't live forever, but the cautious don't live at all."
User currently offlineAaron747 From Japan, joined Aug 2003, 7951 posts, RR: 26
Reply 22, posted (4 years 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 1671 times:

More crap from Obama on bank reform:

President Barack Obama on Saturday challenged opponents of tougher financial regulations, saying the U.S. is doomed to repeat the economic crisis without new rules and that taxpayers would again be stuck with the bill.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_financial_reform

Sorry Mr. President - this is flat wrong. Since both you and the last President are ignoramuses where finance is concerned, let me spell it out for you: having your industry-insider advisers convince you of bailing out their friends who went overboard on risk does not constitute a problem of sweeping federal concern. It's a problem of executive judgment and keeping a cadre of close advisors who have their hands deep in a cookie jar. The actual solution is to kill federal programs that stimulate this type of lending activity by maintaining 1950s fantasies of homeownership for all Americans.

Nearly 60 years after the baby boomer housing boom, look at the big picture: a completely different economic class of source population growth, vast changes in urban migration patterns, substantial loss of manufacturing jobs from coast to coast, possibly permanent damage to credit interest rates regardless of score or balances held and the kicker: no guarantee of future domination of the US dollar on FOREX markets. That picture should spell to any credible analyst the need to reevaluate the role of owning a home in the domestic economy. It's not 1955 anymore - please send this message to the White House pronto.



If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty
User currently offlineDXing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1627 times:

Quoting StuckInCA (Reply 18):
So, are you saying that is does bother you? Or not? As usual, you've not actually answered the question directly.

   Well when you pick the first words out of a multiparagraph statement I'm not surprised you feel that way. Of course unethical behaviour would bother me but in this case I don't see the unethical. They offered a product, derivatives based on sub prime mortgages that were already making news as being foreclosed on at higher rates than normal mortgages. Would you have invested in them given that news? Where is the unethical? That they offered a legal product?


User currently onlineStuckInCA From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 1922 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 1606 times:

Quoting DXing (Reply 23):

So you think that the SEC is targeting them for doing nothing illegal or unethical? Charging them with securities fraud for doing nothing?

OK.


25 474218 : It has nothing to do with having a "half black person" in the White House. The Republicans will work with the Democrates providing what they propose
26 Flighty : There is only one reform that needs to be made. Limit the size of financial bodies so they don't threaten the system. Otherwise, let them run wild. If
27 Dreadnought : You assume that size is an inherent problem, which is iffy. Would you break apart Ford, Exxon or General Electric purely because they are too big? I'
28 DXing : It wouldn't be the first time the government has charged a company with a crime only to lose the court battle now would it? Obviously the SEC thinks
29 Aaron747 : This is a surprise to anyone? That's the same as any other case. If the feds prevail this is actually more ammo to use against both Obama and Bush fo
30 Flighty : Sorry I should have explained the position a little better. Firms can be allowed to fail if they are not contagious. If firms can fail,l then we do n
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Abbey Road Studios Off The Selling Block posted Mon Feb 22 2010 12:07:53 by dxing
Campaign Finance Reform posted Fri Feb 12 2010 18:07:33 by MoltenRock
LHC: How Will The World End? posted Fri Aug 7 2009 16:41:05 by DocLightning
How Will The 2008 Election Affect Your Tax Bill? posted Fri Sep 26 2008 14:56:11 by LAXintl
Will The New Chevy Volt Be General Motor's Savior? posted Tue Sep 16 2008 17:40:40 by StasisLAX
Will The SmartCar Be A Success In The U.S.? posted Thu Nov 8 2007 08:48:31 by Alberchico
Will The Burmese Monks Overthrow The Junta? posted Fri Sep 21 2007 14:43:02 by MadameConcorde
What Campaign Finance Reform? posted Wed Aug 29 2007 05:28:42 by T56A15
SC Deals A Blow To Campaign Finance Reform posted Tue Jun 26 2007 14:20:03 by Mir
Will The "Group Of 88" Apologize? posted Tue Jun 19 2007 18:29:15 by DL021