Financial Reform: A Quick Summary

Tim Carney sums up the legislative battle over financial reform:

just as drug companies and insurers used Republicans to kill the public option before using Democrats to mandate insurance and subsidize drugs, big banks are using Republicans to kill a bank tax while using Democrats to erect barriers to entry, to institutionalize bailouts, and to restore confidence in Wall Street.

For details, read the rest of the article.

Comments

[Jordan Elliot]

So is this some type of twisted Quid Pro Quo thing or just a natural balancing of the "lets fuck pretty much everybody over" scales?

[John]

Uh huh. It is a giant pay out to the big banks. It basically fucks any small banks or new banks who want to form and get large. And it insures that the big banks, the ones who fucked up during the boom and most deserve to go broke, have a government mandated oligarchy.

[Karen]

Right! It's a heist by the privately owned Federal Reserve. Companies that have more than 50 billion in assests will be regulated by the FED. Non-banks such as IBM,Walmart etc. will be re-classified as a financial companies
if they do something as simple as extending credit to their customers. These companies will be taxed to bail out any large company deemed financially risky.
Any start up company seeking assistance from angels must apply with the SEC for approval. It will take at least 90 days.

[Rahm Emanuel]

Emanuel, White House chief of staff, was paid $35,000 as a consultant to Goldman

Well, yes, but I was consulting about the color of the drapes.

[P Brooks]

Obama's fundraiser and economic adviser Warren Buffett is very long on Goldman, having bet on them in 2008 in the expectation of a bailout.

Speaking of "predatory lenders"...

[LLoyd Blankfein]

Let me give you a little inside information about Warren Buffett. Warren Buffet likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives Goldman Sachs the capital it needs. He gives us this extraordinary gift, and then what does he do, I swear for his own amusement, his own private, market gag reel, He sets the competing trades in opposition to ours. It's the goof of all time. Trade but don't profit. Profit, but don't pay out bonuses. Pay out bonuses, but in deffered comp and stocks. AhahaHAHAHAHA. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, fuckin' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Give a decent ROI to him? NEVER!

[Ken Shultz]

"...using Democrats to erect barriers to entry, to institutionalize bailouts, and to restore confidence in Wall Street."

The "institutionalizing bailouts" aspect is by far the most troubling to me, and I think the best way to combat that is to try to get people to put the responsibility for the bailouts where it belongs.

And the people who were responsible are the people who created TARP, the people who orchestrated TARP, the people who funded TARP and the people who voted for TARP--the politicians.

Sanity starts when we stop blaming the financial industry for what our politicians did. And over the coming weeks, as the government trots out people we all love to hate, we should try to keep that in mind.

Goldman Sachs didn't vote to squander my future earnings on bad investments--but our President and our political representatives did.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit.....-vote.html

Goldman didn't take your tax dollars--Barak Obama and Congress did. It should be clear as day who was responsible for TARP, so for goodness' sake, let's not fall for the ol' bait and switch...

We don't need to reform Wall Street because of what our politicians did; we need to reform our politicians because of what our politicians did.

[TP]

"You want the truth? You can't handle the truth. Son, we live in a country with an investment gap. And that gap needs to be filled by men with money. Who's gonna do it? You? You, Middle Class Consumer? Goldman Sachs has a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Lehman and you curse derivatives. You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what we know: that Lehman's death, while tragic, probably saved the financial system. And that Goldman's existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves pension funds. You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want us to fill that investment gap. You need us to fill that gap.

"We use words like credit default swaps, collateralized debt obligation, and securitization? We use these words as the backbone of a life spent investing in something. You use 'em as a punchline. We have neither the time nor the inclination to explain ourselves to a commoner who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very credit we provide, and then questions the manner in which we provide it! We'd rather you just said thank you and paid your taxes on time. Otherwise, we suggest you get an account and start trading. Either way, we don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!"

Bwahahahahaha

[Ken Shultz]

That's ingenious! Who wrote that?

"We have neither the time nor the inclination to explain ourselves to a commoner who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very credit we provide, and then questions the manner in which we provide it!"

Obama saw it comin' from a mile away, though, didn't he? Once he force fed them TARP money, everything they did was the people's business. No wonder Goldman didn't want the money! No wonder Barak Obama and others forced it on them.

It's just like me paying cash for my healthcare--what me and my doctor decide to do isn't any of Barak Obama's damn business! ...and it isn't anyone else's either. ...now that the government's involved, my health is everybody's business. And I don't want that.

That's what I've been trying to say all along! All those little parasites, thinking they should have a say whether I can get a home loan...

Thank you.

Where's the link?

[TP]

http://www.zerohedge.com/artic.....n#comments

Comment by by Mentaliusanything
on Tue, 04/20/2010 - 17:38
#310063

[Steve Nash Equilibrium]

Goldman could get away with pretending that they didn't want TARP money because they got billions through the AIG bailout.

[Ken Shultz]

"Goldman could get away with pretending that they didn't want TARP money because they got billions through the AIG bailout."

That's what Barak Obama is saying. But it's ridiculous.

The regulators were waterboarding money down their throats on the one hand, and Goldman fought tooth and nail for the right to give them the money back as soon as possible--which the government didn't want to let them do...

But it was all a rouse so they could get away with having their insurance contracts paid back at 100 cents on the dollar?

The government was shoving money in every hole they could find back then...

I think if you're gonna stick with that line, you should probably try to keep the proportions in mind too, but even beyond that, why would we blame Goldman for what the government did?

People keep trying to play a shell game with the blame here, and really, your money didn't disappear under one of the shells. The guy that's movin' the shells around? He's the one that took your money.

And his name is Barak Obama.

...at least he's the principle guy since Bush is out of office, but there are plenty more people to blame on both sides of the aisle... You know what I mean!

The guy that's guilty of the armed robbery isn't the bartender that sold him drinks after the heist--the guy that's guilty of the armed robbery is the guy who actually committed the armed robbery.

[TP]

I don't blame Goldman for what the government did, I blame Goldman for what Goldman did. Can it be any clearer than this:

"Goldman did not just withhold information, they told people, 'Hey, the investment decisions are being made by experts who would only choose good quality stuff', when in fact, the stuff that was put in was chosen because it was considered the most likely to suffer near-term downgrades." So they deliberately misled investors. That's fraud. They also never told investors that the securities were selected (in part) by a prominent hedge fund manager, John Paulson, who planned to bet against the same CDO. That's another no-no. So the suit looks reasonably straightforward. As SEC Director Division of Enforcement Robert Khuzami said, "The product was new and complex, but the deception and conflicts are old and simple."

But was the government really responsible for the backdoor bailout, or was Goldman's former CEO responsible? Was he acting as an agent of the government, or an employee of the firm? You know who I'm talking about, and sure as shit isn't Obama. And you also know who else was sitting in the room when that deal was arranged, don't you?

Look, you want to trash Obummer, fine. But if you think you can get away with making GS look like angels, you are sadly mistaken.

[Ken Shultz]

I don't have a problem with hatin' on Goldman if that's what you want to do...

...but I think it's important to keep in mind that what's being done to Goldman is being done to justify a regulation scheme that's on the table.

Not all the things people are saying about Goldman are true; in fact, most of the things people are saying about Goldman are false.

If Goldman somehow did the impossible and sold the dregs of a D rated tranche as if... What? As if it were a CC rated tranche? Then they should have to do whatever's right because of that.

But this isn't about getting the investors their money back. It's about publicity and justifying this new regulation scheme.

I'm not saying Saddam Hussein was an angel. But there weren't any mobile WMD labs. There wasn't any Niger yellow-cake. And just because Saddam Hussein did what he did, that's no reason for us to shoot ourselves in the foot.

And what this proposed regulatory scheme would do, if you follow the Iraq analogy, is shoot ourselves in the foot.

They're creating a crime to fit their regulatory bill. It's written all over everything they say and do.

[?]

just as drug companies and insurers used Republicans to kill the public option

Sweet plan! If they'd have done it. They couldn't.

There aren't enough Republicans in either house to get that kind of leverage on any TEAM BLUE! bill, and the handful who were willing to switch their votes to get it passed were never called on to do it, and never catered to in case the call might come, because it was never coming. Says math. And actual events that happened.

The "public option" was there to be showily chucked out, to give Democrats in TEAM RED! areas an excuse to vote for the "scaled back," "moderate" bill, if Pelosi needed them. She needed a few. Got 'em.

Judging by their lobbying and contributions, "drug companies and insurers" want their industries nationalized. But they'll settle for "corporatized," for now, if it keeps a few more Democrats in office. They need those votes later.

[John]

I don't think they want their industries nationalize. It is just that the Democrats are running a very effective shakedown operation. When you run amok threatening to take over and regulate everything, your victims are going to pay up, which is of course the point.

Remember, if obama is involved, it is always about stealing. If you remember that, all of his actions make a lot more sense.

[Inkblots]

The country's in the very best of hands! The best of haaaannndddssssss...

[Jesse Walker]

The Treasury says the national debt is climbing to the sky
And govermnent expenditures have never been so high
It makes a feller get a gleam of pride within his eye
To see how our economy expands
The country's in the very best of hands.

[Xeones]

You mean politicians from BOTH branches of the Major Party are in it to wield power, and not to be selfless servants of the public good?
Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat

[LLoyd Blankfein]

The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the allegations of the foolish and the self-righteous accusations of average men. Blessed is he, who in the name of greed and avarice, shepherds the bankers and politicians through the valley of darkness, for he is truly his brother's keeper and the finder of lost bonuses. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know my name is the Lord Blankfein when I lay my vengeance upon thee.

[TP]

Bill Black's eye-popping opening statement at House FinServ hearing on Lehman Bros. failure
Visit: http://firedoglake.com

[TP]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....r_embedded

[TP]

Sorry link to written statement pdf:

http://static1.firedoglake.com......20.10.pdf

[Dan T.]

Wow, the libertarian Catch-22 rears it's ugly head again.

[Dan T.]

Stop spoofing me! And learn the definition of "Catch-22."

[Dan T.]

I haven't even posted on this thread yet, assholes.

[Dan T.]

None of the three proceeding posts were written by me. Are you libertarian hacks so afraid of actually arguing with me?

[Dan T]

Hey quit it. I am serious.

For the record that is not me. And I don't think anyone on here is an illiterate hack.

[Dan T.]

I don't have to quit anything, spoofer. I'm the real Dan T., asshole.

[Dan T.]

Oh fuck off. All these posts are fake.

Including this one.

[Dan T.]

I'm a little T.-pot, short and stout.

[Dan T.]

Here is my handle.

[Dan T.]

Here is my spout.

[James]

Any federal intervention into the market interests me. Having made my living in the sub-prime market for many years, I can talk first hand to the impact of government regulation. Despite the heavy hand they have in some industries. I usually find myself agreeing with the goal of the feds in spirit. It's just the execution and watered down implementation that hurts.

President Obama has taken more cash than I expected from the folks at GoldMan Sachs. Too bad our goverment Lawyers are going to need a million short term loans to pay for this little trial.

[Invisible Finger]

Goldman Sachs is doing God's work - creating disasters.

[T]

Yeah, time to reinstall greasemonkey and incif.

[norris hall]

The Republicans were at the helm of the economic ship when it crashed and sunk during the Great Recession of 2007. Millions of businesses went belly up, homeowners lost their homes, and investors lost half of their equity
Republicans were at the helm of the ship when they proposed a Paulsen $700 billion dollar "No questions asked" bailout bill for Wall Street.

No surprisingly it is a Democratic administration that has finally closed the door on the Republican's "Great Recession", brought back a lot of investor equity and is now working to make sure that Republican "free market" excesses don't drag us back down into another Recession.

Only after one year of a Democratic administration we are finally beginning to see light at the end of the tunnel.