Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

jlf1961 -> Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 2:58:57 PM)

quote:

Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street

Washington (CNN) - Americans appear to support a proposal to give the government new powers to regulate Wall Street banks and other financial institutions, according to a new national poll.

A Gallup survey released Tuesday indicates that 50 percent of the public supports the move, with 36 percent opposed and 15 percent unsure.

The new powers to regulate large banks and financial institutions are included in a bill backed by Senate Democrats that would create a new process to shut down failing firms and require banks to beef up capital cushions, while creating a new consumer regulator to watch over mortgages and credit cards. Senate Republicans are opposed to the legislation.


Why is this not surprising? Wall street put us into this economic crisis, forced a bailout, and of course, pay the Republicans to NOT support regulation.


full story



Fellow -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 3:20:48 PM)

The government has all the power needed to regulate, audit and prosecute Wall Street institutions. The problem is lack of action due to government corruption. 



brainiacsub -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 3:30:42 PM)

No, the new reforms being proposed have to do with establishing transparency in derivatives trading and ensuring that large banks cannot be over leveraged by setting new liquidity to debt ratio standards. There are other things being proposed but these are the big ones and the govt does not have this capability today.



pahunkboy -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 3:58:43 PM)

Does this mean that we return to a constitutional money system?



brainiacsub -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:01:48 PM)

As usual, I don't have a clue what you are talking about.



stef -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:03:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

As usual, I don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You're in good company, neither does he.

~stef



jlf1961 -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:05:39 PM)

Now be nice to hunky, he is a sock puppet.



pahunkboy -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:06:20 PM)

Consider that many in Washington are from Goldman Sachs.

A revolving door of sorts.

The two are so entwined- it hardly matters any more.

Note to that JPM is feuding with GS.



DomKen -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:11:23 PM)

The SEC complaint against Goldman and John Paulson should be ample evidence that the derivatives and credit default swap markets need to be regulated. It is especially troubling that goldman and Paulson aren't charged with over selling credit default swaps, which they certainly did, but only for defrauding investors by creating a bond full of swaps that were believed, by Paulson, likely to be called in.



pahunkboy -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:12:51 PM)

...what is needed is a global glass stegal under a 4 powers agreement.



Real0ne -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:16:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

As usual, I don't have a clue what you are talking about.


you must not know what a federal reserve note is then I take it?  I mean regardless of the green squiggleys and the numbers written on it.

Do you know?



brainiacsub -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:20:13 PM)

I do. I just don't know what that has to do with anything pertaining to this discussion. Please spare me the "reserve notes are unconstitutional" bullshit.



Real0ne -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:24:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

I do. I just don't know what that has to do with anything pertaining to this discussion. Please spare me the "reserve notes are unconstitutional" bullshit.


nothing to do with the constitution, I asked you WHAT they are?

We know the obvious, they are paper and have numbers and writing on them, but what are they?



Mercnbeth -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:33:07 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fellow

The government has all the power needed to regulate, audit and prosecute Wall Street institutions. The problem is lack of action due to government corruption. 


With both sides of the aisle complicit and benefiting directly - where exactly will the reform originate and who would be naive enough to think it would be, at best, superficial and ineffective?

The Senate? While the Majority Leader explains it away like this?

After criticizing Republican leaders yesterday for having a secret, closed-door meeting with Wall Street executives, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid today faced his own questions about a fundraiser he attended this year hosted by the president of Goldman Sachs.

Asked by reporters to confirm his attendance and how it played into the debate over financial regulatory reform, Reid didn't answer the question directly. Instead, he read from what appeared to be prepared remarks, touting his reform efforts.

"I'm leading the effort to rein in Wall Street," he said at his weekly on-camera news conference. "I'm going to make sure that in this legislation I do everything within my ability to make sure that banks aren't too big to fail."

The Executive Branch?
U.S. Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias pushed his Republican opponent in Illinois to give back donations from Goldman Sachs Group Inc. without saying whether President Barack Obama should return almost $1 million that bank employees contributed to his White House bid.

Obama, a political mentor and basketball buddy to Giannoulias, received the money from employees and their family members, making Goldman Sachs second only to the University of California as his biggest single source for donors in 2007 and 2008, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

Goldman Sachs and its employees and family members gave $5.9 million to candidates in the 2007-2008 election cycle, the Washington-based center’s data shows. Three-quarters of that went to Democrats, the non-partisan group said.

Wall Street provided three of Obama’s seven biggest sources of contributors for his presidential bid. In 2007 and 2008, Goldman Sachs employees and family members gave him $994,795, Citigroup Inc. $701,290, and JPMorgan Chase & Co. $695,132.

Well, at least I now understand why Obama and Congress passed the 2nd Bush bail out Bill - they had to pay back their campaign sponsors.

Now people expect these same sources of campaign funds will be regulated by the people they bought and put into power? Seriously?



Real0ne -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:45:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth
Well, at least I now understand why Obama and Congress passed the 2nd Bush bail out Bill - they had to pay back their campaign sponsors.


yep we knew that before the election but people are to busy routing for the home team to hear





brainiacsub -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 4:54:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: brainiacsub

I do. I just don't know what that has to do with anything pertaining to this discussion. Please spare me the "reserve notes are unconstitutional" bullshit.


nothing to do with the constitution, I asked you WHAT they are?

We know the obvious, they are paper and have numbers and writing on them, but what are they?



Sorry RO, but I am not one of the forum posters who is willing to go down one of your anti-govt rat holes and chase your logic and reason through 10 pages of discussion. I responded to PA who made a comment about returning to a constitutional money system. I don't want to get in to a discussion with you over whether you believe fiat currency is real, or whether the Federal Reserve is acting outside the Constitution by printing money.
If you have a point, make it. If you have a question, ask me directly, but don't bait me because I ain't bitin.



Fellow -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 5:00:33 PM)

quote:

No, the new reforms being proposed have to do with establishing transparency in derivatives trading and ensuring that large banks cannot be over leveraged by setting new liquidity to debt ratio standards.

It sounds good, but considering the government allows and even encourages routine accounting fraud, it would be meaningless. For example; the current balance sheets of the major banks are totally bogus designed to pay bonuses and not pay taxes. Anyway, the government itself produces bogus data. Like the GDP number for instance. I have no trust in the bill authored by C. Dodd. Unless there will be prosecutions and bankruptcies US big business finds its way to evade the regulations. I am not fully familiar with the bill but, as I heard, the bill legalizes "bailouts" by creating a special insurance fond.



OrpheusAgonistes -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 5:04:12 PM)

quote:

Why is this not surprising? Wall street put us into this economic crisis, forced a bailout, and of course, pay the Republicans to NOT support regulation.


In fairness, Lloyd "We're Doing God's Work" Blankfein at Goldman and Jamie Dimon at JPM have their claws in pretty deeply to both parties, as well as at the Fed.  At this point there is no reason to let Rahmbama off with a shrug of the shoulders and an exasperated sigh about how those damned Republicans are thwarting our every move but some day, when the Democrats have 110 seats in the Senate and 9,564 seats in the House, as well as 17 Supreme Court justices and also a Death Ray, then by golly by gum we'll see some real reform.

This isn't to say that the Democrats are just as culpable as the Republicans for this mess--I think they're probably not.  But Democrats will do as much as they can to serve corporate interests without losing so much support from their base that it starts to cost them elections and, more importantly, starts to hurt their fund raising efforts.

I think the most entertaining reporting being done on the banking mess is still Taibbi, and some of the best reporting and analysis (especially of how shit-your-pants-terrifying Goldman's reach really is) is at zerohedge.



Brain -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 7:48:42 PM)

They definitely need to be regulated because they have not learned anything and their arrogance is outrageous - more bonuses for what?
 
Goldman Sachs Under Investigation-But Bonus Pot Keeps Growing

Goldman Sachs is facing renewed damage to its reputation as it prepares to release details of a bumper bonus package for staff amid mounting concern about potential fraud at its controversial mortgage unit.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/19/goldman-sachs-sec-inquiries



Brain -> RE: Poll: Public backs giving Washington more power to regulate Wall Street (4/20/2010 8:09:33 PM)

I don't know I don't hire people qualified to do did their jobs!

"High Frequency" Financial Trading, High-tech Highway Robbery on Wall Street

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) knows that High-Frequency Trading (HFT) manipulates the market and bilks investors out of tens of billions of dollars every year. But SEC chairman Mary Schapiro refuses to step in and take action. Instead, she's concocted an elaborate "information gathering" scheme, that does nothing to address the main problem. Schapiro's plan--to track large blocks of trades by large institutional investors-- is an attempt to placate congress while the big Wall Street HFT traders continue to rake in obscene profits. It achieves nothing, except provide the cover Schapiro needs to avoid doing her job. 

High-frequency trading (HFT) is algorithmic-computer trading that finds "statistical patterns and pricing anomalies" by scanning the various stock exchanges. It's high-speed robo-trading that oftentimes executes orders without human intervention. But don't be confused by all the glitzy "state-of-the-art" hype. HFT is not a way of "allocating capital more efficiently", but of ripping people off in broad daylight. 

It all boils down to this: HFT allows one group of investors to see the data on other people's orders ahead of time and use their supercomputers to buy in front of them. It's called front-loading, and it goes on every day right under Schapiros nose. 




If the financial crisis has taught us anything, it's that the system is NOT self-correcting. And it takes more than just rules. It takes regulators who are willing to regulate.




http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=18724



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125