“Some regulation is required but over regulation brings it's own set of problems…” – DJ
Specifically, what problems have over regulation brought to the USA? Presumably, these problems would be at least as dire as the result of deregulation. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#ambig_assertion “Finding a balance is difficult and the more regulation you have the harder it is to keep track.” – DJ Surely you aren’t suggesting that legal complexity is the problem here, are you? http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#complexity “A few simple rules that are ENFORCED and an active and vigilant SEC are what we need.” – DJ Specifically which ‘simple rules’ are you proposing Don? And, I agree that enforcement is a big issue. Unfortunately all too often political ideology enters into the picture rather than more objective analysis. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#ambig_assertion “… I assume you are referring to Clinton's Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.” – DJ Not specifically. While it is all linked together, most of the recent stuff started with RR’s signing into law of the Garn–St. Germain Depository Institutions Act of 1982. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#generalize “I agree this sweeping removal of regulation was probably a mistake.” – DJ Good, I’m glad we agree that deregulation was the problem. “... As usual, the government is the problem, not the solution. ..” – DJ Well, it is very easy to quote Ronnie’s one liners, isn’t it? :-) Too bad such ideological propaganda is used to influence thinking rather than facts. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#slogan “No use crying over spilt capital now. Lets take the lessons learned and do whats right to go forward. Not throw the baby out with the bath water.” – DJ You left out “The good lord willing and the creeks don’t rise.” Don! ;-) http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#slogan On Feb 8, 9:47 pm, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 2:50 PM, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> > wrote: > > “…In a free market you can shop > > for the right loan. In a heavily regulated industry you get banks > > that are "too big to fail."” – DJ > > > Perhaps my memory fails…I was *sure* that the recent banking situation > > occurred *after* years of deregulation… > > Some regulation is required but over regulation brings it's own set of > problems. Finding a balance is difficult and the more regulation you > have the harder it is to keep track. A few simple rules that are > ENFORCED and an active and vigilant SEC are what we need. I assume you > are referring to Clinton's Financial Services Modernization Act of > 1999. I agree this sweeping removal of regulation was probably a > mistake. A gradual tweaking would have made more sense but Dems > prefer total make-overs it seems. Stubborn Democrats like Barney > Frank fought against regulation for Fannie and Freddie GSE's that > could have prevented the meltdown. Bush could have pushed harder but > was distracted by the wars. These two GSE's and Ginnie Mae are huge > issues in the real estate meltdown that probably wouldn't have > happened(as badly) if these 3 entities weren't supported and backed by > the government. As usual, the government is the problem, not the > solution. > > No use crying over spilt capital now. Lets take the lessons learned > and do whats right to go forward. Not throw the baby out with the > bath water. > > dj > > > > > > > On Feb 8, 7:00 am, Don Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> They still get their pound of flesh. The bank buys the property and > >> then rolls all the customary fees and interest and taxes into a new > >> selling price for the buyer. And since the buyer is now unable to > >> take the customary mortgage payers deductions they get screwed another > >> way. Foolish. Like so many other religious tenets there was probably > >> a good reason for doing this a thousand years ago. Just like there > >> was probably a good reason for not eating pork. Those reasons don't > >> exist in the civilized world anymore. In a free market you can shop > >> for the right loan. In a heavily regulated industry you get banks > >> that are "too big to fail." > > >> dj > > >> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 7:21 AM, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > On 3 Feb, 16:35, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> This sorta stuff is getting our of hand isn't it? > > >> >> I mean this culture of blame, okay we can certianly blame the banks > >> >> for the world wide finacial situation we are currently in, but can we > >> >> really blame any politician for not solving the problems quickly > >> >> enough? > > >> >> Shit even if Mr Cameron comes to power over here I still just couldn't > >> >> put blame on him for not sorting out this mess. I don't how to sort > >> >> it, do any of you? > > >> > Yup. Islamic banking! And I mean Islamic banking WITHOUT all the > >> > loopholes that people, lately, have brought into it. The current > >> > banking problems simply would not have been possible. Think of a > >> > world without institutionalised usury that constantly preys upon those > >> > with little or no money by charging them even more. Of course Islamic > >> > banking isn't in concord with capitalism and that means that greedy- > >> > arsed money-grubbers won't like it. Tough, I say!! > > >> >> On 3 Feb, 15:20, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > There have been many articles about homeowners just walking away from > >> >> > their mortgages because of the depressed value versus their payments, > >> >> > insurance, taxes, etc. Obama will not be able to solve this one and he > >> >> > and his administration have made the situation catastrophic for the > >> >> > present and future. Contract law is becoming a joke as people feel > >> >> > free to do as they please and they feel justified by pointing to > >> >> > scandals that make the news. > > >> >> > On Feb 3, 7:55 am, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > I believe Obama was successful in getting info from the Swiss banks > >> >> > > themselves, or so the press here reported. Perhaps the German > >> >> > > government might be successful in getting this information from the > >> >> > > banks. > > >> >> > > On Feb 2, 9:10 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > > No morals involved Francis. We do people for pennies in benefit > >> >> > > > fraud > >> >> > > > on the basis of information from much slimier sources. The only > >> >> > > > questions are about how to agree how to pay the informant. > > >> >> > > > On 2 Feb, 17:13, Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > > > I think that perhaps Fran this is actualy a much larger > >> >> > > > > question than > >> >> > > > > at first percived to be. > > >> >> > > > > What actions should a goverment take in the running of the > >> >> > > > > country? > > >> >> > > > > I think that any goverment has it's own share of 'wet' and > >> >> > > > > 'black' > >> >> > > > > work going on don't you? I also think that thye majority of us > >> >> > > > > understand the necisity of such work, and so cannot in all god > >> >> > > > > conciousness complain over much about such dubiouse morality. > > >> >> > > > > So when measured against this, and in these chaotic finacial > >> >> > > > > times, > >> >> > > > > then perhaps theft can also be forgiven? > > >> >> > > > > Well like most things I guess we need to look at specifics, but > >> >> > > > > personaly I'm going to have to say on this one, that at times > >> >> > > > > any > >> >> > > > > goverment is bound to act imorraly for the benifit of the > >> >> > > > > country, and > >> >> > > > > in all probabilty this being the case we have to deem such > >> >> > > > > actions as > >> >> > > > > exceptable. > > >> >> > > > > On 2 Feb, 16:59, frantheman <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > > > > > The German government has been offered a CD containing data > >> >> > > > > > concerning around 1,500 bank accounts in Switzerland where > >> >> > > > > > money has > >> >> > > > > > been squirreled away by Germans to avoid paying tax in > >> >> > > > > > Germany. The > >> >> > > > > > data was stolen. The asking price for the CD is € 2.5 > >> >> > > > > > million. The > >> >> > > > > > information is estimated to be worth around € 100 million to > >> >> > > > > > the > >> >> > > > > > German tax authorities. > > >> >> > > > > > The Swiss are, predictably, incandescent. Personally, as > >> >> > > > > > someone who > >> >> > > > > > pays taxes in Germany, I don't have much sympathy with those > >> >> > > > > > rich > >> >> > > > > > enough to avoid paying their taxes by trying to hide money in > >> >> > > > > > other > >> >> > > > > > countries and taking a hit for doing so. On the other hand, > >> >> > > > > > there is > >> >> > > > > > no doubt that the German government is giving a signal that > >> >> > > > > > certain > >> >> > > > > > kinds of crime pay, as long as the return from other > >> >> > > > > > criminals (rich > >> >> > > > > > tax dodgers) is big enough. In one sense, the government is > >> >> > > > > > undoubtedly guilty of the crime of knowingly receiving stolen > >> >> > > > > > goods. > >> >> > > > > > Should they do it? > > >> >> > > > > >http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,675371,00.html > > >> >> > > > > > Francis- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> > -- > >> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > >> > Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. > >> > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > >> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > >> > [email protected]. > >> > For more options, visit this group > >> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.-Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > ""Minds Eye"" group. > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > [email protected]. > > For more options, visit this group > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
