Comments on: Whither financial reform? http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/03/11/whither-financial-reform/ A slice of lime in the soda Tue, 21 May 2013 18:32:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: GingerYellow http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/03/11/whither-financial-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-12648 GingerYellow Fri, 12 Mar 2010 00:55:04 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=2943#comment-12648 The Reuters headline is bizarre - it totally oversells the story, and I don't see anything in the body of the story to substantiate the "going solo" line. What the story actually says is that Dodd will have to compromise and get some Republicans on board. How is that going solo? The actual article is fine - it's basically saying, with decent evidential support, that it's increasingly likely the bill won't get passed this year. It just doesn't have much in the way of news. Which makes the headline even weirder. I'm willing to bet the reporter put a fairly bland headline on it and a sub decided it had to be spiced up. The Reuters headline is bizarre – it totally oversells the story, and I don’t see anything in the body of the story to substantiate the “going solo” line. What the story actually says is that Dodd will have to compromise and get some Republicans on board. How is that going solo? The actual article is fine – it’s basically saying, with decent evidential support, that it’s increasingly likely the bill won’t get passed this year. It just doesn’t have much in the way of news. Which makes the headline even weirder. I’m willing to bet the reporter put a fairly bland headline on it and a sub decided it had to be spiced up.

]]> By: DonthelibertDem http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/03/11/whither-financial-reform/comment-page-1/#comment-12647 DonthelibertDem Thu, 11 Mar 2010 23:33:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=2943#comment-12647 I had a similar idea: http://www.interfluidity.com/posts/1253928854.shtml Don the libertarian Democrat (mail) (www): I want to look at this from a different view, although I take your point. I want the CFPA to be an informational source that has the people and resources to give consumers excellent advice about the options available. In that sense, I want to encourage competition. One way to do that is to not require Vanilla Options, but, for the businesses that don't, the CFPA should have a big Buyer Beware sign posted about this company. They Do Not Offer Easy To Understand Products At All. In other words, I want to have the CFPA help consumers get the cheapest and safest product for them. A lot of what we're worried about looks to me like plain old fraud and professional negligence. These should be investigated and prosecuted. The CFPA should keep a record about complaints, fines, etc., and make that easily accessible. My main point would be to require 20% down, to be incrementally increased as housing prices rise relative to other goods. If we want to help the less well off, we should simply pay their down payment. 9.27.2009 5:13pm" The difference is that I'd like a big Skull & Crossbones with DANGER on it badge for the ones that don't comply. I had a similar idea:

http://www.interfluidity.com/posts/12539 28854.shtml

Don the libertarian Democrat (mail) (www):
I want to look at this from a different view, although I take your point. I want the CFPA to be an informational source that has the people and resources to give consumers excellent advice about the options available. In that sense, I want to encourage competition. One way to do that is to not require Vanilla Options, but, for the businesses that don’t, the CFPA should have a big Buyer Beware sign posted about this company. They Do Not Offer Easy To Understand Products At All.

In other words, I want to have the CFPA help consumers get the cheapest and safest product for them. A lot of what we’re worried about looks to me like plain old fraud and professional negligence. These should be investigated and prosecuted. The CFPA should keep a record about complaints, fines, etc., and make that easily accessible.

My main point would be to require 20% down, to be incrementally increased as housing prices rise relative to other goods. If we want to help the less well off, we should simply pay their down payment.
9.27.2009 5:13pm”

The difference is that I’d like a big Skull & Crossbones with DANGER on it badge for the ones that don’t comply.

]]>