Blankfein supports financial reform legislation

A financial regulatory reform bill has at least one supporter outside of Congressional Democrats, Lloyd Blankfein, the head of investment bank Goldman Sachs.

I'm generally supportive, Blankfein told the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

Wall Street will benefit from the bill because it will make the market safer, Blankfein said.

The biggest beneficiary of reform is Wall Street itself, he said. The biggest risk is risk financial institutions have with each other.

Blankfein said he didn't know all the bill's details and couldn't speak to provisions that affect community and consumer banks and mortgage originators because they are remote to our experience.

This bill is about strengthening the grip the vampire squid has on the world while doing a at least a couple things (and probably more):

destroying angel investing: it is just too "risky" for some rich guy to write a check to some entrepreneur without the proper regulation
making vendor credit just about impossible: if you have a payment plan of more than 3 installments, you can't do it because that's "risky" and only certain banks should be able to do that.

This bill points out once again that the banksters own congress. It points out the unholy alliance between Congress, the Federal Reserve's phony money, and large financial institutions.

Let's try FREEDOM. I thought this was Free Republic. Let's see how long it takes before the freedom options are called kooky or, inexplicably, "liberal".

Audit the Fed, then end it.
Also repeal legal tender laws. It is not freedom when you are forced to use paper printed by a private party under the force of law.
Abolish the SEC.
Abolish other laws and regulations that put up barriers to entrepreneurs interacting with people with money to fund start-ups. Entrepreneurs are the engine of economies. Large companies protected by government stagnate and take economies with them. Look at Europe. Europe sucks for this reason.
Abolish laws that protect or prefer unions and unionization.

Wall Street will benefit from the bill because it will make the market safer, Blankfein said.
The biggest beneficiary of reform is Wall Street itself, he said.
Ha! I wish I had read this before I wrote this...

There is a maxim that you try to reduce the amount of taxes you owe as much as you can. So the rich hire lawyers and accountants to find loopholes and arrange trusts and other ways of protecting theirs. The not so rich claim every deduction they think they can legally get away with. The poor and single simply say it's a shitty deal all around and just file a 1040EZ.
So whichever way you play you're usually trying to get the best deal for yourself. So why is anyone surprised at the Wall Street banks for getting the best deals for themselves with the housing loans they were forced to give?
The government knew the banks would hedge their bets because that's what banks do to ensure that no matter what they come out on top. The banks knew they would hedge their bets when they put up no resistance to the legislation enacting them to give potentially faulty loans because there was nothing in the new law telling them they couldn't! (you can bet your bottom dollar if they couldn't find a way to make a dollar they would've bitched)
The rich and those "in the know" threw tons of money betting against the loans being made because only a fool, or a government flunky, would be stupid enough to believe that the loans would ever be paid back in full.
Everyone, politicians and bankers, knew what was going on and they've all made their money off of it because nothing is against the law and until legislation is put in place to stop the whole game, which is still, and has been, going on since Black Monday they're going to keep on raking in the chips.

So now Congress wants to put on a donkey show to screw the banks and the banks all say "It isn't my fault, you didn't tell me I couldn't!" and the American people look on in a daze while the picker continues working the crowd.

(if I'm too simplistic or astray then someone please correct me)

I think the big guys are going to benefit more because of the nature of regulation. Regulation routinely turns into collusion between government and the big players in the industry under regulation to drive smaller players from the industry and bar entry of new players.

The regulations set up hurdles that become fixed costs of doing business. The larger the player, the more easily the fixed costs are amortized.

The vampire squid Goldman Sachs is huge in their industry.

This law also outright bars small players, such as maybe a furniture company, from engaging in risky financial endeavors, such as offering payment plans.

This law is nothing but protection for Goldman Sachs and other huge financial players at everyone else’s expense.

I think the big guys are going to benefit more because of the nature of regulation.
This law also outright bars small players, such as maybe a furniture company, from engaging in risky financial endeavors, such as offering payment plans.
This law is nothing but protection for Goldman Sachs and other huge financial players at everyone else’s expense.

Yep. The government will define and regulate what is "risky" and how to "protect" you from it, in return for more of your taxes and fees and limiting your (consumer and investor) financial options. See the link in my first post comment, and you'll see exactly what the scheme is behind the "reform" bill.

The SEC case against Goldman is being used because of GS high visibility, and with the hope to attract "conservatives" and Republicans who may confuse this for "let's get Goldman Sachs and other rich liberal bastards" bill. This will institutionalize TBTF players at everyone's expense for the benefit of the rich and government elite.

Off Wall Street, Worries Over Financial Bill Abound - CNBC / NYT, 2010 April 27, by Eric Lichtblau and Ron Nixon

Mars, the maker of M&M’s and Snickers, wants to make sure it can continue dabbling in the derivatives market to protect the price of sugar and chocolate for its candies. Harley-Davidson is worried that its dealer-financed loans to bikers will fall victim to new federal financing regulations. And eBay is concerned about possible restrictions on PayPal, a subsidiary, in moving money in the Internet marketplace. .....

Even über-rich Democrat Warren Buffett wants exemptions from this bill for his Berkshire Hathaway before giving his blessing to this bill, with Ben Nelson (D-NE) doing his bidding.
Democrats Reject Warren Buffett's Bid for Derivatives Exemption - CNBC /WSJ, 2010 April 26, by Alex Crippen

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.