Frankly, Trump's Plan To Review and Reform Dodd-Frank Makes a Lot of Sense

The president promises to prevent taxpayer-funded bailouts, and, hey, that makes sense too.


Aude Guerrucci/CNP/AdMedia/Newscom

President Donald Trump concluded his second week in office by signing an executive order on Friday setting new guidelines for financial regulations and promising to roll back aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act, which gave government vast new powers to regulate financial markets in the wake of the 2008 economic crisis.

"Dodd-Frank is a disaster," Trump said earlier this week. "We're going to be doing a big number on Dodd-Frank."

While headlines at the New York Times and elsewhere on Friday suggested that Trump literally told Wall Street bankers that they now would be free to do anything they wanted, the reality of Trump's executive order is far simpler and less scary.

Rather than scrapping Dodd-Frank in a wholesale manner, Trump's order actually does little more than call for a review of Dodd-Frank. It also sets a series of, frankly, quite reasonable guidelines for the White House and executive agencies to follow as they work to restructure Dodd-Frank in the coming weeks and months.

In the order, Trump says he wants to "empower Americans to make independent financial decisions and informed choices in the marketplace," and wants to "foster economic growth and vibrant financial markets through more vigorous regulatory impact analysis." In other words, he wants the Treasury, the U.S. Department of Labor, and other executive branch departments to act with caution when issuing regulations that almost always come with unintended consequences.

Perhaps most importantly, and most welcome, of Trump's new regulatory guidelines is one that pledges to "prevent taxpayer-funded bailouts."

Passed in the wake of the financial collapse, Dodd-Frank did little to prevent future bailouts from taking place. In some ways, it reinforced the idea that government (ultimately, taxpayers) would be a backstop for banks that became "too big to fail."

"Part of the public dissatisfaction that drove Trump into office is a direct result of Washington's response to the financial crisis," wrote Mark Calabria, director of financial regulation studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. "While big banks, along with the auto companies, were rescued, middle-class Americans were left picking up the tab."

Beyond the question of bailouts, reviewing and reforming the Obama administration's major financial regulation is something that absolutely should be done, and by no means does it require scrapping all of the law. Regulations stemming from Dodd-Frank have made it harder for smaller banks to comply with federal regulations, and, as Trump pointed out Friday, has made it harder for start-ups and other businesses to borrow, stunting growth of new firms.

"The Dodd-Frank so-called financial reform law has been a huge burden to community banks, credit unions, and consumers," said John Berlau, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based free market think tank, in a statement to Reason. "Directing financial regulatory agencies to ease the burden of implementation within the bounds of the law is a sensible action."

Congress, Berlau added, must do the important work of repealing the most burdensome aspects of Dodd-Frank.

One of the biggest fights will be over the future of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the independent agency created as part of the Dodd-Frank law. Championed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts), the CFPB was given wide authority to regulate financial institutions, supposedly in the interest of American consumers.

Republicans in Congress have opposed the agency since it was created and groups like CEI have encouraged Trump to replace Richard Cordray, director of the CFPB, with a pro-market head.

All of that will be sorted out in the weeks to come. For now, Trump's executive order on financial regulations seems like a straightforward effort at understanding the impact of one of the most complicated pieces of legislation passed during the previous administration—it's hardly cause for hyperventilating about deregulation on Wall Street.

Whether Trump would abide by his promise to avoid taxpayer-funded bailouts in the wake of another financial collapse is anyone's guess (and hopefully we'll never have to find out), but for now this is one of the few areas where libertarians can find agreement with the new president.

NEXT: U.S. Imposes New Sanctions on Iran After Putting Country 'On Notice' Over Missile Test

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Dodd-Frank is a disaster,” Trump said earlier this week. “We’re going to be doing a big number on Dodd-Frank.”

    I is my guess that this new president is going be easy fodder for comedians.

    1. I’m hoping that big number involves big-band swing tunes, and a well-choreographed dance routine involving long-take overhead shots of synchronized-swimming women while dolphins jump through flaming hoops wearing American-flags

  2. It

    It is my guess….

    1. Think again: South Park’s Creators Have Given Up on Satirizing Donald Trump.

      I think we’ve pretty much run out of joke material by now.

      1. Oh my.

        That reminded me of the Key & Peele story another poster provided a link to a few days ago.

        1. My post was a response to Jerry on the sea.

      2. It was far and away the worst season of South Park ever, and then when Clinton didn’t win like they wanted her to they just phoned the rest of the season in. I’d always thought Mat and Trey acted pretty non partisan up until now, even in ’08 when they had all of the Obama voters cheering and rubbing his victory in their neighbors faces. But they obviously had a secret love affair with turd sandwich…

      3. Pretty tough when the target of your ridicule keeps one upping you.

  3. There were 3 very good outcomes that I believe would come of a Trump rather than a Hillary presidency.
    The elimination of Dodd-Frank is one of them alongside the appointment of a decent (from a libertarian perspective) SCOTUS justice, and a blow towards PC culture.
    Looks like he’s already beginning to accomplish all 3 in just 2 weeks.

    1. Given the sheer number of threats against him, and not just by random cranks, the rush is probably reasonable.

      1. PFFFFT.

        Yeah, and Obama was totally going to be assassinated by a racist redneck, remember?

        1. When TPTB are mostly not unsympathetic to the idea, it’s a little more likely to happen. To their misfortune, rednecks are mostly law abidin’ folk. Pissing off people who think they’re above the law and entitled to eternal rule is a little more dangerous.

        2. I won a bet that he would not be and I have another one for a grand that Trump will not be.

    2. Unfortunately those few positive things are dwarfed by the sheer dystopic horror that Trump will create by adjusting the token number of refugees allowed into the country, or by potentially replacing our large heavily-guarded border fence with a wall.

    3. I agree, but as with all things Trump we must await the actual implementation to see how it really plays out.

      Regulators, aka future lobbyists, will not go quietly into the night

  4. The libertarian moment never ends !

  5. That the president can significantly impact such a piece of legislation shows that Congress did its usual crackerjack job of crafting the thing, giving the Executive Branch a great deal of discretion interpreting the law. I guess the CFPB isn’t that independent, after all.

    1. The CFPB is going to not only be not independent, but also nonexistent if the federal courts keep attacking it.

      1. Is the CFPB still forcing banks to shut down the bank accounts of porn stars and pay day loan companies?

        1. I don’t know about that aspect, but the challenges to the CFPB that have been successful so far deal with the structure of the entity, i.e. having a single executive (Cordray) with for-cause termination.

    2. This is just it. Actual legislation is typically crazy-vague. “Establish some sort of Environmental Protection Agency to protect the fucking environment. The congress finds that the President shall now figure out how to protect the environment. And we shall use the power of the purse to pay for it.” -U.S. Congress

      We’re short a lawyer, but isn’t the CFR actually how laws are actually implemented? And I don’t think it’s the legislature that writes the CFR, at least not in its entirety.

      1. The bill itself is 848 pages, and resulted in something like 14K pages of rules to implement.

      2. Funny isn’t it. congress writes a law ordering the Executive to vastly expand that branch of government and everyone (at least in D.C.) says “this is just great, we are on it.” Because, power of the purse.

        But should Congress attempt to roll back anything via specific legislation, or simple defunding, suddenly it’s all “you can’t tell me what to do.” Because, co equal branches and all that.

        It’s a scam and the ratchet only goes one way.

  6. Am I at the wrong website?? What’s a positive article about Trump doing here?

    What’s next? An article questioning the wisdom of mass immigration from the Third World?

    1. Don’t worry. In 20 years, Winston Smith will throw this article down the cyber memory hole as any positive reference to Donald Trumpstein will be considered crimethink.

    2. “An article questioning the wisdom of mass immigration from the Third World?”


    3. but for now this is one of the few areas where libertarians can find agreement with the new president.

      You’re on the right website.

      1. Other than his penchant for making snowflakes spaz, that is probably going to be true. We’ll see, though.

  7. file under: enough irony to build a battleship

    Massive Amounts of Trash Left Behind By Standing Rock Protestors Leaves North Dakota at Risk for ‘Environmental Disaster’

    In the last year, thousands of people have flocked to North Dakota to protest a pipeline they claim could contaminate water. But they’ve left behind enough detritus that they’ve risked causing an environmental disaster for the Missouri River, North Dakota’s governor said in a statement this week.

    The state has seen record snowfall this year, which has buried huge amounts of trash, camping materials and even vehicles abandoned by protestors.

    “Because of this risk of flood, we’re worried about what’s going to be left at the camp,” the Standing Rock Sioux’s tribal chairman, Dave Archambault, told the Bismarck Tribune earlier this month. “What we want to do is make sure none of that waste gets in the Missouri River. ? We’re water protectors, but we’re the ones that are going to start contaminating the water.”

    Though as many as 10,000 people have participated in the protests, many of them coming to North Dakota from out of state, few remained to help with the mess.

    1. A bunch of so-called environmentalists trashing a place? When was that happened before? Oh right. The first Earth Day.

      1. Lazy fucks are lazy. Let me find my god damn shocked face.

    2. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is leading the cleanup, working in collaboration with local law enforcement and the state.

      It’s almost like the Tribe doesn’t want to burn down the oppressive patriarchy.

    3. It’s North Dakota’s fault for be attracting the protesters.

  8. Anything to get rid of the CFPB and Warren.

  9. ‘few areas where libertarians can find common agreement (with Trump)’

    Well, this, and his court nominee, choice for the FCC (who opposes net neutrality), repeal of Obamacare, his Secretary of Education pick, his FDA pick, his ‘one in, one out’ regulatory reform, and his pledge for tax reductions.

    But, hey- he’s not letting refugees in! One full week of pants shitting!

    1. Some refugees, from specific countries. Refugees from other places are presumably unaffected?

    2. Maybe he meant Shikhatarians.

    3. Actually, it’s “one in, two out” regulatory reform. And don’t forget gun rights.

      “OK, but other than those things, what has the Roman Empire ever done for us?”

  10. Wow, wasn’t expecting a normal libertarian take on it. No “but” or “on the other hand”? Wow.

  11. “Frankly, Trump’s Plan To Review and Reform Dodd-Frank Makes a Lot of Sense”

    Anonbot is writing the headlines now?

  12. Salon: going full retard as no one else can

    To commemorate Black History Month, Trump administration decrees that white supremacists can’t be terrorists
    Trump wants to focus counterterrorism exclusively on Muslims. Is this a thank-you note to white supremacists?

    1. BHM is dumb.

      Talk about belittling history.

      1. One of the stupidest things I’ve ever experienced is being taught about George Carver Washington and peanut butter every February in school. The reason for that is that elementary school is (was for me?) almost 100% focused on US history through the Civil War. Most ‘black history’ happened after the Civil War, for obvious reasons.

        1. Actually, peanut butter was invented by a white man.


            1. It’s true. SIV has a lithograph of his wife in her petticoat.

            2. Did they tell you that George Washington choked down a cherry tree as a boy?

          2. Mr. Peanut seems to have brown skin.

          1. Thanks. My lysdexia is acting up.

    2. Check the author’s twitter feed. He’s fucking retarded.

        1. chauncey devega ?@chaunceydevega 4h4 hours ago
          chauncey devega Retweeted James Surowiecki
          Confederate flag is the American Swastika. General Sherman was right. Should have had full and total punishment of the CSA traitors.


          1. chauncey devega ?@chaunceydevega Feb 2
            “All Lives Matter” is a racist slogan. Trump’s white nationalism is anti-Semitic. Connecting the dots here:


            1. chauncey devega ?@chaunceydevega Feb 1
              Trump is the White Nationalist in Chief. Terror Dome folks. You have been warned. Wake up!

              WAKE UP

          2. We’ve been handed a rare second chance to eliminate secessionist Democrats. Hopefully chauncey appreciates that.

        2. Seems like the kind of guy who would get mad if you suggested any black stereotypes. Yet has a picture of Redd Foxx holding a Colt 45 as his picture.

          1. I can only imagine what the author thinks of Norman, Is That You?.

      1. “Check the author’s twitter feed.”

        Alas, there are limits to even *my* tolerance for derp.

        1. “Alas, there are limits to even *my* tolerance for derp”

          And then you post something from Everyday Feminism:) lol

          1. EF I can handle. Twitter asymptotically approaches peak derp.

            1. Was that the Word of the Day:)

    3. What does bhm have to do with counter terrorism?

  13. Don’t call me Frankly.

    1. Nor direct?

      1. Nor collect. Nor Shirley.

        1. Thanks JB.

          Does jig .

  14. Everyday Feminism: your one stop shop for child rearing advice

    5. Encourage a Healthy Blend of Individualist and Collectivist Principles

    There is nothing wrong with being an individual ? being independent is wonderful. But when combined with a respect for group dynamics, the result is a well-rounded child.

    Here are some of the ways individualism and collectivism differ:


    fostering independence and individual achievement
    promoting self-expression, individual thinking, personal choice
    associated with egalitarian relationships and flexibility in roles (like upward mobility)
    understanding the physical world as knowable apart from its meaning for human life
    associated with private property, individual ownership


    fostering interdependence and group success
    promoting adherence to norms, respect for authority/elders, group consensus
    associated with stable, hierarchical roles (dependent on gender, family background, age)
    understanding the physical world in the context of its meaning for human life
    associated with shared property, group ownership

    1. Explaining the difference between individualist and collectivist for Everyday Feminism’s readership: people without a third grade understanding of etymology.

      1. I always found understanding etymology most useful for tying flies.

    2. The link doesn’t work, but maybe it’s for the best.

    3. I wonder how this writer would have responded to that authoritarianism quiz – you know, the one about whether it was more important for a child to be creative or to be respectful, etc.

  15. Drudge often puts up photos that are wildly misleading. I don’t think there is much context that would put this one in any other light, however.

    1. A spiderweb, surely.

    2. They’re portraying Trump’s thoughts. He is thinking about a targeting reticule for his new drone army.

  16. Once again, Donald Trump striking a blow for libertarianism and capitalism.

    Between doing his best to get rid of Dodd-Frank and the individual mandate, he’s done about as much as can be reasonably expected for libertarians–considering that he’s not a libertarian.

    Thank you, Citizen Trump.

    Now, if the GOP could make this official by putting it through Congress, the economy would greatly appreciate it.

    Y’all know, the biggest news on Wall Street today (besides this) is that there was healthy hiring and the unemployment rate ticked up anyway because people who were discouraged are rejoining the labor force. Now would be a great time for Congress to show Main Street that they’re serious–and officially repeal the ACA and Dodd-Frank.

    Shouldn’t take much time for discussion. They’ve already been discussing it for almost eight years.

    1. Repeal individual mandate + Repeal Dodd-Frank + Repeal capitulation to Iran + (maybe) Association rights = Repeal of Obama.

      +3 (maybe +4) Trump.

      1. He did at least add some new sanctions on Iran over there missile tests (designed specifically to not involve the nuclear deal, so it’s up to Tehran to break the deal by trying to weasel out of the new strictures, leaving Trunp in the clear), so there’s that.

      2. capitulation to Iran


        Stop being so damned Republican.

    2. Yes Ken, they have been discussing it. They spent 8 years blowing hot air and now the time has come and they are empty handed. They have no plan. Worthless sacks of shit.

      1. Hey Suthen,

        I heard a rumor that you’re leaving. Is that true? If so, are you plugged in to get info about the alternatives when they get fired up?

  17. The crazy thing about this is you have someone in Washington potentially UNDOING incompetent government actions. When does that ever happen? Please just focus on undoing instead of doing and you’re going to be pretty popular. Of course undoing Obamacare has to be damn near top of the list.

  18. Ladies and germs, the illustrious Matt Yglesias:

    “The reality, however, is that whether Republicans call it repairing Obamacare or replacing it, they are going to be stuck with the exact same problem ? Americans want better health insurance, but Republicans want them to have worse health insurance.”

    1. “Republicans want them to have worse health insurance”

      Yes, of course. ~rolls eyes

    2. Perhaps I’m a bit too late on this one, as Reason’s 2016 and beyond coverage resulted in much less frequent commenting on my part–and clearly I’m not alone in that regard–but I’d like to see the practice of people using or equivalent links to deny ad/pageview revenue from festering boils like Vox and make it easily detectible when stories are edited without notification.

      I realize it would be a herding-cats situation as it’s merely a suggestion, but, well, I don’t want to supply that shithole with even a fraction of a cent.

    3. A common error: nobody really cares about insurance, they just want health care.

      1. The entire country seems to not grasp that there’s a difference between the two. It’s infuriating.


    Cory Doctorow, ladies and gentlemen. When Gamergate came around this author of “Little Brother” decided that progressive social signaling instead of moral principle was the way to go. A tale of woe that sounds all-too-familiar nowadays…

    1. Ohhhhhh so that’s how Eisenhower became Hitler.

    2. On a similar note, I saw that game show contestant turned intellectual Arthur Chu was celebrating the unprovoked assault of a woman at Berkeley. These guys are really keeping their movement alive.

  20. “While headlines at the New York Times and elsewhere on Friday suggested that Trump literally told Wall Street bankers that they now would be free to do anything they wanted, ……..Trump’s order actually does little more than call for a review of Dodd-Frank. It also sets a series of, frankly, quite reasonable guidelines for the White House and executive agencies to follow …… Trump says he wants to “empower Americans to make independent financial decisions and informed choices in the marketplace,” and wants to “foster economic growth and vibrant financial markets through more vigorous regulatory impact analysis.” In other words, he wants the Treasury, the U.S. Department of Labor, and other executive branch departments to act with caution when issuing regulations that almost always come with unintended consequences.

    Perhaps most importantly, and most welcome, of Trump’s new regulatory guidelines is one that pledges to “prevent taxpayer-funded bailouts.”

    So, the NYT lied? I wonder if CNN set them straight?

    1. Yes, I’m sure they corrected them for their lack of a holocaust comparison.

      1. Yes, I’m sure they corrected them for their lack of a holocaust comparison.

        Is there any comparison to a Hitler , JB?

        1. What a misuse of HTML that was.

          “Is there any comparison to a Hitler comparison , JB?” is what I intended.


    2. CNN – ‘Trump Scraps Reforms’

      It isnt as bad as I expected. Some are for it, most against it are former Obama fluffers.

      Ending taxpayer bailouts? There is another holy grail.

    3. I’m sure they will issue a retraction. Maybe around the year 2100 or so.

  21. What’s the deal with Trump and all the executive orders? I know he’s the chief executive so any order he gives is technically an executive order, even if it’s an order for a chicken salad sandwich for lunch, but why does he have to have this ceremonial signing of the document in cases like this where he’s just ordering his underlings to take a close look at Dodd -Frank and see if there’s not some way they can finagle a different interpretation of what the thing says? Can’t he just send them a memo or an e-mail or a twitter? He’s their boss, he’s allowed to tell them what to do without making a big production out of it, isn’t he? Or is this just like the paper-training phase of the operation where he gets everybody so accustomed to seeing him issue 3 or 4 executive orders a day they don’t think anything of it when some of the EO’s start including stuff like annexing Patagonia, renaming Maryland Melanialand, and declaring that pi equals 3?

    1. “renaming Maryland Melanialand”

      Just Maryland, why not the whole Northeast?

      1. Yuuuuge!

    2. Well, he is a showman. He is making a spectacle out of it as a show to his voters that he is keeping his promises.

      I am a little leery of what he might get up to after he has stricken the last one off of his list.

    3. I guess he could pull an Obama and write Executive Memorandum instead.

    4. and declaring that pi equals 3?

      Only if he wants another civil war, Sir.

    5. Is this a serious question?

    6. I think he’s making sure he has publicly acted on a ton of his promises, to earn major political capital with his base. Once they have hope of victory and a beloved leader, he can generate a genuine mass movement. As horrible as that is likely to turn out, if the left decides to pull out all the stops and regain power through violence, they’ll have the advantage of institutions and elites on their side. If he doesn’t want to end up against a wall, he’ll need that mass movement.

      1. If the left turns violent en masse, the number of them who are proficient with firearms will be outnumbered about 100 to 1 by gun toting conservatives.

  22. Frankly, Trump’s Plan To Review and Reform Dodd-Frank Makes a Lot of Sense

    No, no, no, Eric. Let me help:

    “Markets roiled today as Trump promised a return to ‘wild wild west style’ deregulation. He further directed all EPA officials to report for training for their new jobs raping American family pets. He closed with a bizarre claim that his hands were ‘at least twice as big as Michael Jordan’s, maybe more’.”

    1. DenverJ writes for the NYT. I never suspected.

  23. shikha sood dalmia ?@shikhadalmia 1h1 hour ago
    Here’s the absurdity of the right: Fox guest compares fear she felt w/ Obamacare to fear generated by Trump’s purges of actual people!

    It’s the fucking PURGE people! Grab yer guns!

    1. Guessing that last sentence wasn’t mean to be included in the block quote. If it was, Shiko has simple been forgetting the /sarc tag. Come back guys! It was all a joke!

      1. A very elaborate piece of in-character performance art. I WANT TO BELIEVE.

      2. No. The last sentence was me. Must’ve jacked up the tag.

      3. straffinrun,

        I missed the angst event(s). Do you or anyone else care to summarize why several commentators say they are going to post elsewhere?

        Thanks in advance.

        1. I’ll repost what I said in the links, although it may be incomplete.

          Shikha did this

          Reason refused to cover sloopy’s mom getting beaten by cops while trying to help a physically ill kid during a basketball game (she’s a nurse) because, according to KMW ‘it wasn’t quite Reason.’

          Over 20 articles about the Trump immigration EO.

          Those are the three that really spurred the mass exodus AFAIK.

          1. Password: pode$ta,

            Thanks again. Reason refused to cover sloopy’s mom getting beaten by cops while trying to help a physically ill kid during a basketball game (she’s a nurse) because, according to KMW ‘it wasn’t quite Reason.’

            Please provide me a link to the reference you made with regards to “according to KMW”.

            I wrote a comment to sloop after I learned – on H&R – that a member of his family was assaulted.

            1. Please provide me a link to the reference you made with regards to “according to KMW”.

              Riven mentioned it in yesterday’s PM Links (her 4th or 5th comment, somewhere in there… still not sure how to link to specific comments). Apparently she reached out to KMW and that was the response. It was repeated in other threads yesterday, but I don’t remember which ones.

              1. Thank you Password: pode$ta. although I did not find what I needed.

                1. Riven|2.2.17 @ 5:03PM|#

                  For those seeking #justiceforsloopysmom… You should know that KMW came out about ten minutes ago and said that they won’t be covering her case because… “it’s not quite right for Reason.”

                  So it’s been fun and all that… but very sincerely fuck those guys.

                  If you want to stay in touch with me, get yourself a Steam account or stay in touch with the Reasonoids because I’m out after today.

                  No problem, man! HTH. Riven is replying to an actual email exchange here, although I’m not sure if the transcript was ever posted in full.

        2. Check out her twitter page. Sounds like she would’ve supported beating the hell out Skokie Nazis. Robbie is being the hang dog, “Well, yeah, free speech is necessary, but these guys are real scumbags”. It’s getting surreal.

          1. What Robby did in his Daily Beast article, claiming that Milo supporters are “also violent” and “just as illiberal” as the college leftists, while citing one incident of a Milo supporter who was acting in self-defense during a leftist-fueled riot to support that claim, pisses me off more than Shikha. Shikha is a known idiot. Robby seemed redeemable.

            1. Robby may have learned from Kathy Young. I’m sure you could go further back and find other instances of qualified defenses of free speech, but check out what comment was FIRST! Bitchez

              1. The definition of “Poster Child” =

                The term poster child (sometimes poster boy or poster girl) originally referred to a child afflicted by some disease or deformity whose picture is used on posters or other media as part of a campaign to raise money or enlist volunteers for a cause or organization.

                Both Cathy Young (and Soave) have bemoaned Milo as being the “poster child” for free speech/the Alt-right, respectively.

                Both usages seem to misunderstand the term as suggesting that a ‘poster child’ is supposed to be some pretty, airbrushed spokesperson for the cause.

                The opposite is in fact the implication of the term = it *should be* the “Worst Case Example” of something by definition.

                Milo wouldn’t be the ‘poster child’ for the alt-right = he’s too mild. But as a case-study in “how free speech works?” Yes. A right-wing vulgar gay guy is pretty much perfect.

                1. correction – cathy & robby both bemoaned “people they didn’t like” (in cathy’s case, Pamela Geller, in robby’s case, Milo).

                  my point was that a ‘poster child’ should be shocking by definition – not appealing.

                  1. It would be like Jerry Lewis using kids that have hang nails for his telethons.

                2. Holy shit! That was so bad that it drove Hihn to sanity!

                  Michael Hihn|5.17.15 @ 4:41AM|#

                  Umm, Free speech is about restraining government. Cathy Young is not a government. ,

                  Is Young suggesting that the only people that are suitable to be poster children are those with whom she agrees?
                  Do you know what “poster child” means?

                  That turns the concept of freedom of speech on its head.
                  And here I thought only progressives were confused by the right to free speech. Perhaps the nuance is too complicated for Sharia conspiracists … between defending free speech while also criticizing how it has been used.

                  1. Wait… Nope! Sorry. I read that wrong. Believing that Hihn was, at one time, sane, is a vice of mine.

                    1. he (hihn) actually has made maybe a handful of “Not entirely batshit crazy” comments over the years.

                      Out of thousands of absolutely deranged ones.

    2. I’m thinking she’s desperate for some conservative blogger to pick her up and trash her, to give her some notice and ‘street cred’ and she can move on up to write for some lefty rag.

    3. I think “retweeting crazy-mary” is grounds for termination by itself.

      1. I saw that too. When Kizone is your best friend, you have a problem.

  24. Well, I’ll probably hang around Reason for a bit longer, but if the cool people keep leaving I may go, too.

    If the phone doesn’t ring, you’ll know it’s me.

    1. If you decide to go, stay plugged in with somebody so that you can get info on alternatives. I’m not privy to information on what those alternatives are, but I know that people are working hard to avoid having any regulars fall through the cracks.

      At the very least, my email is (the first word of my username) at

      I don’t check it often, but I can make sure that updates make it to you.

    2. I assume that you’ll end up going wherever tonio goes; the two of you would be lost without each other.

    1. Well, if you won’t show any twerking, I will.

    2. HM,

      I think you and I disagree here.

  25. While headlines at the New York Times and elsewhere on Friday suggested that Trump literally told Wall Street bankers that they now would be free to do anything they wanted…

    I watched The Big Short again last night. I think it is a great movie, but never touches on the governments hand in creating the housing collapse. It is all evil banks and in the end infers Greenspan caused it. I wish they were more honest in making that movie.

    1. Blasphemy against God L’Etat might not get you a lightning bolt up the arse, but it will definitely ruin your day.

  26. Rather than scrapping Dodd-Frank in a wholesale manner, Trump’s order actually does little more than call for a review of Dodd-Frank.

    Scrapping Dodd-Frank in a wholesale manner wouldn’t actually be a problem either.

    Most of what’s “good” or “harmless” about the regulation doesn’t actually NEED the regulation.

    Most of what’s bad or damaging about the regulation would be fixed without it and wouldn’t necessarily return to prior scenarios. most of what existed before the regulation (e.g. extensive cross-contamination between hedge fund and investment bank trading & product marketing) was disposed of in advance of its passage.

    in short, nothing “cures” market problems quite like a massive kick in the nuts (e.g. the financial crisis) and fear of future additional regulation.

    One of the worst things about Dodd Frank is its open-ended and incomplete quality. For fuck’s sake, do you know how many years the “Volker” rules took to ‘finalize’; only to remain in perpetual “refinement” states? No one knows exactly how they’re supposed to be implemented even now.

    The consequences are widespread and counter-purposive. a single isolated example

    Also =

    It also sets a series of, frankly

  27. I’m just waiting to see how the Republicans are going to fix Obamacare without eliminating the mandate or the pre existing conditions parts. That would be some “fix”.

  28. Unless Congress passes a law preventing the Treasury Dept. and the Fed from engaging in a bailout – either publicly or via back door – it is just naive and wishful thinking that any of this stuff Trump proposes will make a difference. Why? Because when push comes to shove there will be many tears about the prospect of Goldmans or Chase or BofA going under. And don’t forget the cries of systemic risk. “Guidelines” are quickly forgotten.

    I would go so far as to say, it is not even sufficient to pass an anti-bailout law alone. Prior to that, the biggest names must be broken up to sufficiently reduce the risk that one going under poses to the entire house of cards financial system. If you do not do that, there will be tremendous pressure on the critters to revoke or waive any such bailout statute. It will be far easier to walk away when those going under, if left to die, are not likely to take the whole ship with them. Though such a breakup may ding the bottom line and result in some inefficiencies, over the long run that is a smaller price to pay. It also might actually bring back some competitiveness to the banking industry as consumer choice will be greater.

    1. If you’re too big to fail, you’re too big to exist.

  29. There’s no point in trying to equivocate or virtue signal to the Trump haters on this one since he’s supporting financial deregulation. You’re pretty much in the doghouse already.

  30. When you have built a system that depends upon the government as a backstop, or even the perception of the government as a backstop, and then definitively take that away, who knows what could happen? But I’m sure that Goldman Sachs has no intention of cutting loose from the US Treasury, any more than they are interested in improving the competitiveness of small banks. So, the things you think you like about this review ain’t gonna happen.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.