Posted on 07/20/2016 4:23:23 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The Republican Party has taken a page straight out of the campaign books of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren.
What? No, we’re not kidding.
In the party’s 2016 platform, the GOP advocates for reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act, a Depression-era law that regulated the U.S. banking industry until it was repealed in 1999. Bringing the law back would lead to the breakup of major U.S. banks like JPMorgan Chase in order to separate investment banking from commercial banking. …
(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...
I'd favor a middle road. Banks may apply for an exemption to Glass-Steagall, but in doing so, they also need to set up their own alternative to FDIC and forfeit claims to bail-out money in the event of failure.
Outfits like J.P. Morgan and Goldman Sachs are big enough to set up self insurance funds. They may partner with Swiss and other international banks to do so if they wish.
The European Central Bank is not affected by the existence or lack thereof of Glass-Steagall; its manipulation of interest rates is one of the unspoken direct causes of the 2008 crisis.
Yeah, the AP and their games.
Interesting
it’s about damned time, hopefully it will happen.
yes that is exactly how it works
Glass Steagall prevented the concept of too big to fail. It was a good thing. Removing it was the banksters dream and laid the groundwork for the subprime crash where the investment side of banks were pushing the consumer side to give out crap loans they knew could never be serviced.
And this also opened the door for the haircut concept. Investment banking was never considered too big to fail before this.
maybe. not sure.
if you can set it up so that the fdic/govenment/taxpayers ARE DEFINITELY protected from getting dragged into any bank failures
maybe
maybe
but those insurance dineros have to be REAL and on deposit where we can SEE them at ALL times
not just some re-insurance contract from a foreign bank or other piece of paper printed up with photoshop in some banker’s cubicle
If too big too fail means they are too big to exist. Break them up.
Sorry if it offends some here, but I WILL NEVER support the demands of big bankers.
THEY GAVE US THE 2008 MELTDOWN, and yes, I know the excuses, like they had to loan money to deadbeats - but did they complain about it? Did they mention it? Is there a single article from the big bankers saying this would be a disaster? NOPE! They were raking in the bucks - they knew it would all crash, but the money was simply TOO GOOD.
Thoughtful comment. The problem is FDIC and FSLIC. As long as the public is insuring deposits, the mixing of banking banking and investment banking is problematic.
The banks take the profits and the taxpayer takes the losses.
If it comes down to it, we will never be able to bail out a derivative meltdown. It would be the end of civilization as we know it. I mean there are a quadrillion dollars worth of derivative contracts out there. Let’s say 99% cancel out. One percent is still $10 trillion.
I too have mixed feelings. On the one hand I favor free enterprise as far as reasonably possible. But I am not an economic anarchist and these mega banks represent a threat to the economic security of the country. They are so large and powerful that they are effectively above the law and government regulation. Further, we can’t afford to bail them out again. Nor should we have to.
I think we basically have two choices. Either we reinstate Glass Steagle, or we invoke the long moribund anti-trust laws and break up the giant banks. Glass Steagle is probably easier and less likely to involve decades long litigation since it has already been upheld in the courts.
It's time.
What it does do is it makes Hillary stand on the debate stage in October, in front of tens of millions of Americans, and formally announce she is the Wall Street candidate when she is attacked on this by Trump.
The big banks haven’t been paying her 250k per speech for her to advocate drying up their line of gambling credit...just sayin’.
Anything we can do to keep the banks from growing more powerful than the government is a good thing. Many politicians have said that the banking interests control Washington.
Those things need to be unwound or totally put on the backs of the Banker Gangsters with NO public exposure. Bailout? Bbbbwaaaaahaaaaabhhaaaaa.
Also, he says a Philadelphia lawyer can't figure out what is in Dodd-Frank or how to implement it.
The responses to this proposal in this thread are what I would have read on DU in ‘12
So called conservatives on FR are endorsing major gov’t interference into how banks run their businesses.
Put this law back on the books. Repealing it, combined with the reauthorizing and strengthening the Community Reinvestment Act, led directly to the massive housing bubble that nearly collapsed the world economy in 2008...
...and the Philanderer-in-Chief did both of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.