Comments on: Team Obama punts again on derivatives http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/2009/08/11/team-obama-punts-again-on-a-derivatives-definition/ Now raising intellectual capital Sun, 08 Nov 2015 08:31:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Rose Eli http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/2009/08/11/team-obama-punts-again-on-a-derivatives-definition/comment-page-1/#comment-2065 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:54:04 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/?p=2504#comment-2065 Without the separation of investment banking and saving banking, any financial companies (just like AIG and Citi) would think everything would be invested, re-invested and even rubbish can be packaged and invested. This leads some of the incapable companies to pretend that they are “smart” enough to do the investment business as well. Any eventually and nearly every time, only investors got burnt…
Thus the problem is not the investment vehicle such as derivatives but the eligible entities to do investments. This financial mess may be actually caused by some entities without the “smart” or tangled by too much “conflict of interests” to do real investment business. Just see who can survive and who die or need to be recused in this mess can figure out those respective entities.

]]>
By: Steve Marshall http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/2009/08/11/team-obama-punts-again-on-a-derivatives-definition/comment-page-1/#comment-2059 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 09:34:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/?p=2504#comment-2059 Absolutely agree with Pete. Bell Telephone and Standard Oil weren’t too big too split up, what’s so special about banks? It’s should be easier – aren’t they supposed to operate with chinese walls between their different divisions anyway?

These banks sell off their investment banking arms to each other at the drop of a hat if it suits them – why is it suddenly impossible if a government requires them to do it?

]]>
By: Pete http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/2009/08/11/team-obama-punts-again-on-a-derivatives-definition/comment-page-1/#comment-2036 Tue, 11 Aug 2009 23:27:01 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/commentaries/?p=2504#comment-2036 We had a program it was called the Glass-Steagall Act and was repealed in 1999. It kept savings banks and investment banks separate. Now Obama says they cannot restore the Glass-Steagall Act because these banks have gotten “too big to separate”. What a steaming pile. We do not need more government meddling in this. We had a system that worked well since 1932. Put it back.

]]>