quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

See, you think of this in terms of the American people. They are thinking of this in terms of benefits to their wealthy supporters. And for those people, unregulated markets rock. It's how we got this social inequity in the first place. It's not stupidity--it's theft.

Though in this case, it's political theater about theft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

See, you think of this in terms of the American people. They are thinking of this in terms of benefits to their wealthy supporters. And for those people, unregulated markets rock. It's how we got this social inequity in the first place. It's not stupidity--it's theft.

Though in this case, it's political theater about theft.

They couldn't possibly be expecting bailouts again, could they?
I mean, what exactly is the endgame here?

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Yes, but after the crash they must know that people aren't going to stand for more bailouts.
I mean, what is the endgame politically?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

See, you think of this in terms of the American people. They are thinking of this in terms of benefits to their wealthy supporters. And for those people, unregulated markets rock. It's how we got this social inequity in the first place. It's not stupidity--it's theft.

Though in this case, it's political theater about theft.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

See, you think of this in terms of the American people. They are thinking of this in terms of benefits to their wealthy supporters. And for those people, unregulated markets rock. It's how we got this social inequity in the first place. It's not stupidity--it's theft.

Though in this case, it's political theater about theft.

Yep its like when I complained about how many stoolees there are ranting 'dubya is stupid', or what a stupid thing for the damobcracyto do.

I have complained about the monetary system (along with the legal cabal) for years and still do about fraud and their ongoing criminal syndicate and was laughed at, well cdo's and tranhes are when the chickens came home to roost.

It will happen again, roughly every cycle like clockwork.

They act we react because we are always behind the 8 ball. For the people its a waiting game, when will the next shoe drop, because the gubmint is in bed with wall street and the bankers instead of being the bank at no profit as they were intended to be.

Sure this wound up in the hands of the federal reserve not because it was designed to help the people but 'of the .1% by the .1% for the .1%, We The .1%'.......

All banking in the US should be under the treasury, since these banking schemes not only take out our own country and are devastating to 'we the people' there should be no free enterprise what so ever for banking in the US and it should be 100% regulated.

MR is correct in all respects as are you on this matter, its theft, and they continue to get away with it because gubmint and worse the average joe instead of being on the front lines are in the rear reacting to what they have done and the shitmesses they create and believe me there is no end to the shit messes banking can create.

Dubya was not stupid, da gubmint is not stupid, in fact they are the opposite, they are brilliant because they peddled stupid as a forgiveable commodity and and put everyone to sleep shutting down their brains long enough to rob them blind, and funny part is it works every time, right now, today.

today gubmint and voting is a spectator sport, nothing more. and I agree also with MR that the big short is an awesome clip, and the face slapping punch line is at the end

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Yes, but after the crash they must know that people aren't going to stand for more bailouts.
I mean, what is the endgame politically?

Could be a real, big, long (very long) bank 'holiday' this time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Paul Ryan called it the “crown jewel” of the G.O.P.’s effort to undo financial regulation.
Remember 2008? Lots of regulations were put into place to make sure that doesn't happen again. But the banking lobby doesn't like Dodd-Frank, and remarkably, neither does the GOP.
Dubbed the Financial Choice Act (Republicans love choice!), the bill, authored by Representative Jeb Hensarling, would relieve banks of certain regulatory requirements imposed on them by Dodd-Frank, provided they meet certain capital requirements. It would subject banks to stress tests every two years instead of every year; scrap the Volcker rule, which restricts banks from making risky bets with taxpayer-backed deposits; jettison the fiduciary rule, which is intended to protect retirees from getting ripped off by their brokers; and gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Hensarling has previously described as dictatorial. People like House Speaker Paul Ryan—whose life-long dreams include taking away health care from millions—say the F.C.A. is great, calling it the “crown jewel” of the Republican effort to send Dodd-Frank home in a body bag. Others, not so much. On Wednesday, Senator Sherrod Brown said Hensarling’s bill would “put taxpayers on the hook for Wall Street’s greed and recklessness.”
However one comes down on the merits of the bill, the Choice Act stands almost no chance of becoming a law in its current form. “We . . . see no path forward for this legislation in the Senate,” Cownen & Co. analyst Jaret Seiberg wrote in a note to clients ahead of the House vote, seeing as there’s no way Senate Democrats would go for it. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo has already said he plans to write his own legislation, for which he intends to seek input from Democratic colleagues. As long as Democrats retain the power to filibuster legislation in the Senate, Ryan and Hensarling may just have to let this particular dream die—for now.
More: http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/financial-choice-act?mbid=social_twitter

quote:

Kovacevich noted the regulatory mechanisms haven’t been capable of reining in the risk of financial institutions. He expects banks will continue to fail and that “there’s nothing in Dodd-Frank that would have prevented the last financial crisis, nor will it prevent the next crisis.”

Instead, Kovacevich said the Dodd-Frank financial reform is the $180 billion bill the taxpayer must pay to rescue Fannie and Freddie. “And the price is going up,” he said. Banks will also get bigger under Dodd-Frank, Kovacevich warned because the increased regulation is stifling smaller banks.

quote:

The CBO wrote that it:

“…the cumulative claims rate (default) for the program would be about 35 percent and that recoveries on defaulted mortgages would be about 60 percent of the outstanding loan amount. Those rates reflect CBO’s view that mortgage holders would have an incentive to direct their highest-risk loans to the program, and are based on the expectation that the underwriting standards established for the new program would be less restrictive than those currently in place for FHA’s single-family loan guarantee program, thereby allowing FHA to insure loans with a greater risk of default.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
Of course it wouldn't prevent a problem -- it would make sure the problem was visible, not hidden under a scaffold of derivate bundles, along with more regular scrutiny and tighter reserves (which inherently restrict banking activity, yes).
The sudden break down in 2007 was the dam breaking that should have been leaking over the previous decade, letting the economy adjust to the actual problem all along the way. Then investors would know what they're buying, including the risks, and depositors wouldn't have to wonder just how sound their banks investments are.
Did the bad-unethical policies help contribution to issuing low cost mortgages? Of course -- that was the point, to take on riskier investments but to hide that risk and sell the bundle.

quote:


"I will tell you that this crisis we went through, financial crisis, did not have to happen," Bill Isaac, former FDIC chair, said in an interview.

The regulators had every power needed to deal with institutions that were getting out of line and taking excessive risks, he said. "The only issue is, do you have the political will to take action?"

Richard Kovacevich, former CEO of Wells Fargo, agrees. “There were five safety valves that usually keep things under control that all failed,” he said, pointing the finger at the credit ratings agencies, Fannie and Freddie Mac, the Securities and Exchange Commission, bank regulators and state regulators.

“How could credit rating agencies in any set of circumstances rate some of this stuff triple-A?,” he asked, referring to the tranches of mortgage-backed securitiescreated by the investment banks and then sold off to investors. “It is inconceivable if you know anything about the mortgage business.”

Fannie and Freddie guaranteed many of the subprime mortgages, while the SEC was the regulator of the credit agencies and the investment banks, Kovacevich noted. State regulators had oversight of the mortgage brokers. Kovacevich said there was “absolute fraud” by the mortgage brokers who originated many subprime mortgages without documentation.

Echoing Kovacevich’s assessment, Isaac, said “The SEC is at fault. They made a number of egregious mistakes.” Isaac also put the blame on the Federal Reserve, the Basel capital accords, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

quote:

“We need to sensible reform and it begins with the regulators,” Isaac said. “We do need to have a much stronger, simpler regulatory system.”