http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/14/opinion/krugman-why-we-regulate.html?nl=to
daysheadlines
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/14/opinion/krugman-why-we-regulate.html?nl=t
odaysheadlines&emc=edit_th_20120514> &emc=edit_th_20120514
 
Why We Regulate
 
Paul Krugman
NY Times Op-Ed: May 14, 2012
 
One of the characters in the classic 1939 film "Stagecoach" is a banker
named Gatewood who lectures his captive audience on the evils of big
government, especially bank regulation - "As if we bankers don't know how to
run our own banks!" he exclaims. As the film progresses, we learn that
Gatewood is in fact skipping town with a satchel full of embezzled cash. 
 
As far as we know, Jamie
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/d/james_dimon/in
dex.html?inline=nyt-per> Dimon, the chairman and C.E.O. of JPMorgan Chase,
isn't planning anything similar. He has, however, been fond of giving
Gatewood-like speeches about how he and his colleagues know what they're
doing, and don't need the government looking over their shoulders. So
there's a large heap of poetic justice - and a major policy lesson - in
JPMorgan's shock announcement that it somehow managed to lose $2 billion in
a failed bit of financial wheeling-dealing. 

Just to be clear, businessmen are human - although the lords of finance have
a tendency to forget that - and they make money-losing mistakes all the
time. That in itself is no reason for the government to get involved. But
banks are special, because the risks they take are borne, in large part, by
taxpayers and the economy as a whole. And what JPMorgan has just
demonstrated is that even supposedly smart bankers must be sharply limited
in the kinds of risk they're allowed to take on. 

Why, exactly, are banks special? Because history tells us that banking is
and always has been subject to occasional destructive "panics," which can
wreak havoc with the economy as a whole. Current right-wing mythology has it
that bad banking is always the result of government intervention, whether
from the Federal Reserve or meddling liberals in Congress. In fact, however,
Gilded Age America - a land with minimal government and no Fed - was subject
to panics roughly once every six years. And some of these panics inflicted
major economic losses. 

So what can be done? In the 1930s, after the mother of all banking panics,
we arrived at a workable solution, involving both guarantees and oversight.
On one side, the scope for panic was limited via government-backed deposit
insurance; on the other, banks were subject to regulations intended to keep
them from abusing the privileged status they derived from deposit insurance,
which is in effect a government guarantee of their debts. Most notably,
banks with government-guaranteed deposits weren't allowed to engage in the
often risky speculation characteristic of investment banks like Lehman
Brothers. 

This system gave us half a century of relative financial stability.
Eventually, however, the lessons of history were forgotten. New forms of
banking without government guarantees proliferated, while both conventional
and newfangled banks were allowed to take on ever-greater risks. Sure
enough, we eventually suffered the 21st-century version of a Gilded Age
banking panic, with terrible consequences. 

It's clear, then, that we need to restore the sorts of safeguards that gave
us a couple of generations without major banking panics. It's clear, that
is, to everyone except bankers and the politicians they bankroll - for now
that they have been bailed out, the bankers would of course like to go back
to business as usual. Did I mention that Wall Street is giving vast sums to
Mitt Romney, who has promised to repeal recent financial reforms? 

Enter Mr. Dimon. JPMorgan, to its - and his - credit, managed to avoid many
of the bad investments that brought other banks to their knees. This
apparent demonstration of prudence has made Mr. Dimon the point man in Wall
Street's fight to delay, water down and/or repeal financial reform. He has
been particularly vocal in his opposition to the so-called Volcker
<http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/v/volcker_rule
/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier> Rule, which would prevent banks with
government-guaranteed deposits from engaging in "proprietary trading,"
basically speculating with depositors' money. Just trust us, the JPMorgan
chief has in effect been saying; everything's under control. 

Apparently not. 

What did JPMorgan actually do? As far as we can tell, it used the market for
derivatives - complex financial instruments - to make a huge bet on the
safety of corporate debt, something like the bets that the insurer A.I.G.
made on housing debt a few years ago. The key point is not that the bet went
bad; it is that institutions playing a key role in the financial system have
no business making such bets, least of all when those institutions are
backed by taxpayer guarantees. 

For the moment Mr. Dimon seems chastened, even admitting that maybe the
proponents of stronger regulation have a point. It probably won't last; I
expect Wall Street to be back to its usual arrogance within weeks if not
days. 

But the truth is that we've just seen an object demonstration of why Wall
Street does, in fact, need to be regulated. Thank you, Mr. Dimon.  

* * * 

 <http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/05/14-8>
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/05/14-8 
 
Published on Monday, May 14, 2012 by Common Dreams
<http://www.commondreams.org/>  

'Victory': Palestinians End Hunger Strike After Israel Agrees to Demands


Though deal does not end future use of 'indefinite detention', all current
detainees will be charged or released

- Common Dreams staff 

Nearly 1,600 Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli prisons have ended a
28-day hunger strike after an Egypt-brokered deal was successful and amid
fears that any deaths would result in a violent backlash in the occupied
West Bank and in Gaza.

 
<https://www.commondreams.org/sites/commondreams.org/files/imagecache/headli
ne_image/article_images/prisoner.jpg> A Palestinian, showing solidarity with
Palestinian prisoners on hunger strike in Israeli jails, stands chained to a
cage during a demonstration in the West Bank city of Ramallah. (Credit:
Abbas Monani / Agence France-Presse / Getty Images) The prisoners' hunger
strike centered on demands for an end to solitary confinement, more family
visits, and the elimination of "detention without trial", a practice
condemned internationally as an affront to justice and human rights.

An Egyptian official involved in the talks, tells
<http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2012/05/2012514153120630951.html>
Al-Jazeera that under Monday's deal to end the strike, Israel had agreed to
end solitary confinement for 19 prisoners and lifted a ban on visits to
prisoners by relatives living in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

Palestinian Authority Prisoners Minister Issa Qaraqi called the agreement a
victory, according
<http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/05/hundreds-of-palestinian-p
risones-will-end-hunger-strike.html>  to the Los Angeles Times.

"This is a first step toward liberation and victory," said Fawzi Barhoum, a
spokesman for the Islamist group, reports
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/14/us-palestinians-israel-prisoners-
idUSBRE84D0DG20120514>  Reuters.

"An agreement has been signed to bring about the end of a 28-day hunger
strike by Palestinian security prisoners," the Israel Prisons Authority said
in a written statement.

* * *

Al-Jazeera:

Most of some 1,600 prisoners, a third of the 4,800 Palestinians in Israeli
jails, began refusing food on April 17 although a few had been fasting much
longer - up to 77 days.

Their protest centred on demands for more family visits, an end to solitary
confinement and an easing of so-called "administrative detention", a
practice that has drawn international criticism on human rights grounds.

An Egyptian official involved in the talks said that under Monday's deal to
end the strike, Israel had agreed to end solitary confinement for 19
prisoners and lifted a ban on visits to prisoners by relatives living in the
Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

Israel also agreed to improve other conditions of detention,and to free
so-called administrative detainees once they complete their terms unless
they are brought to court, according to the official.

Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri confirmed the deal, telling Reuters that "the
prisoners signed the deal after their demands were met. The deal was
brokered by Egypt."

Israel also confirmed an accord had been struck.

* * *

The Los Angeles Times reports
<http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/05/hundreds-of-palestinian-p
risones-will-end-hunger-strike.html> :

The deal ends the longest and one of the largest hunger strikes ever
organized by Palestinian prisoners. About 1,600 Palestinians prisoners had
refused food since April 17. Two detainees -- Bilal Diab, 27, and Thaer
Halahleh, 33 -- began their strike Feb. 28 and are now in serious condition.

Many Palestinians leaders had warned that the death of any prisoner might
spark widespread public outrage and possibly violence in the West Bank and
Gaza Strip.

Palestinian Authority Prisoners Minister Issa Qaraqi called the agreement a
victory. Israeli officials said they agreed to go further in making
concessions than they had previously as a goodwill gesture toward
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who made a personal appeal on
behalf of the prisoners over the weekend.

* * *

Reuters adds
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/14/us-palestinians-israel-prisoners-
idUSBRE84D0DG20120514> :

Israel did not say whether it would free any administrative detainees, but
pledged in its statement that an inter ministerial team would look at
prisoner requests and issue recommendations.

Around 320 of Palestinian prisoners are held in "administrative detention",
a security measure Israel defends as a precaution to protect undercover
sources.

Many of the other prisoners have been convicted of serious crimes, including
murder. Palestinian leaders say they should be treated as prisoners of war,
something Israel rejects.

Israel says the detentions without trial are necessary because some cases
cannot be brought to open court for fear of exposing Palestinian
intelligence sources who have cooperated with Israel.

Palestinians jailed by Israel are held in high esteem by their compatriots,
who see them as heroes in what they term a struggle against occupation.

# # #

  _____  

No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2171 / Virus Database: 2425/4999 - Release Date: 05/14/12



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAAMN: Los Angeles Alternative Media Network
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subscribe: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Digest: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive1: <http://www.egroups.com/messages/laamn>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Archive2: <http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]>
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/laamn/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to