another meaningful win for Dems last night

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Slipknot

"I am not sure where you are getting that"



I got it from you.


the bailing out buddies part is the political hacks taking care of bankers but screwing people. The recession is on it's way yet the guy in charge of the rate keeps it low fending off the inevitable. I am talking in general terms not specific to harp or whatever you are fixated on.

Good for regulations, I'm glad they work to prevent mistakes, now keep the corrupt people away and things will go well. I guess time will tell

Not fixated on anything. There were two different programs discussed here, though limped together by some. I agree completely about political hacks taking care of the bankers. There is no way to keep corrupt people out of banking since money corrupts and attracts corrupt people to banking. Only defense is regulation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Not fixated on anything. There were two different programs discussed here, though limped together by some. I agree completely about political hacks taking care of the bankers. There is no way to keep corrupt people out of banking since money corrupts and attracts corrupt people to banking. Only defense is regulation.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The more that government is centralized and the less it is limited, the greater the connection between the banks and the government--so the more that regulations become favorable for the central banks. It was government regulation that led to the housing bubble, and government stimulus that created the following stock bubble that is now experiencing a correction which is not finished and may get worse and create a new financial "crisis." And that will lead to more regulation to save the ability of government to borrow money by saving the big banks.

And so will continue the growth of that symbiotic relation between our expanding government and the banking system. The real defense against that is a free market in which poor or corrupt banking policies actually lead to failure instead of government protection and greater wealth for the bankers.

If our government regulations protected a free market rather than supporting its cash cow, that would be, as you put it, the "only defense."

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The more that government is centralized and the less it is limited, the greater the connection between the banks and the government--so the more that regulations become favorable for the central banks. It was government regulation that led to the housing bubble, and government stimulus that created the following stock bubble...

And so will continue the growth of that symbiotic relation between our expanding government and the banking system.

If our government regulations protected a free market rather than supporting its cash cow, that would be, as you put it, the "only defense."

this can't be correct...democrat politicians would never work in conjunction with evil businesses to rig the system in their favor...they are only concerned for the "little guy" and therefore all of the regulation that they propose and support and pass must naturally fix all that is wrong with the world....can't possibly be the reason for or contribute to any such failures...more government=freedom and fairness for all...ideally...we move to one, government run banking system(after healthcare gets done)...then there will be no more greed and pillaging and profit by those running things

[spence]

Originally Posted by detbuch

The more that government is centralized and the less it is limited, the greater the connection between the banks and the government--so the more that regulations become favorable for the central banks.

And decentralization can lead to localized corruption as well. See it all the time in communities.

It was government regulation that led to the housing bubble, and government stimulus that created the following stock bubble that is now experiencing a correction which is not finished and may get worse and create a new financial "crisis."

Pretty much exactly the opposite. The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans, further exacerbated by additional lack of regulation that encouraged corrupt banking practices to obfuscate the risk.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

And decentralization can lead to localized corruption as well. See it all the time in communities.


Pretty much exactly the opposite. The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans, further exacerbated by additional lack of regulation that encouraged corrupt banking practices to obfuscate the risk.

"The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans,"

You are correct there. But I wonder what would have happened, if the Bush administration had put a stop to that. if the feds passed laws saying banks had to follow more traditional mortgage underwriting, then people would have said Bush was trying to keep poor people from buying houses. But I think you nailed the causes. The Clinton administration, with the GOP congress I think, removed the regulations which prevented traditional banks from getting too involved in these fishy investments.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"The bubble was mainly caused by a lack of regulatory control that allowed for cheap and reckless loans,"

The Clinton administration, with the GOP congress I think, removed the regulations which prevented traditional banks from getting too involved in these fishy investments.

The traditional banks were directed and encouraged by a regulation that substantially led to these fishy investments--The Community Reinvestment Act.