<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The regulatory fight moves from Washington to Basel</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/06/25/the-regulatory-fight-moves-from-washington-to-basel/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/06/25/the-regulatory-fight-moves-from-washington-to-basel/</link>
	<description>A slice of lime in the soda</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2013 02:31:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: HBC</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/06/25/the-regulatory-fight-moves-from-washington-to-basel/comment-page-1/#comment-16200</link>
		<dc:creator>HBC</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:41:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4441#comment-16200</guid>
		<description>Correct me if I&#039;m wrong, G-bahn, but it might be easier to regulate banks in a climate that won&#039;t take &quot;D&#039;uh, not sure, but how about some more of that taxpayer money?&quot; for a good answer from any banking conglomerate to the question of what they&#039;ve been doing with funds entrusted to them. 

It might be easier to regulate banks that aren&#039;t viciously obstinate toward any sort of regulation, and it might be even easier still to get answers out of banks that weren&#039;t outright bribing people who ought to be asking questions not to ask them.

In other words, you could say Obama&#039;s job&#039;s really a piece of cake, as long as you don&#039;t ask where the cake&#039;s coming from.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Correct me if I&#8217;m wrong, G-bahn, but it might be easier to regulate banks in a climate that won&#8217;t take &#8220;D&#8217;uh, not sure, but how about some more of that taxpayer money?&#8221; for a good answer from any banking conglomerate to the question of what they&#8217;ve been doing with funds entrusted to them. </p>
<p>It might be easier to regulate banks that aren&#8217;t viciously obstinate toward any sort of regulation, and it might be even easier still to get answers out of banks that weren&#8217;t outright bribing people who ought to be asking questions not to ask them.</p>
<p>In other words, you could say Obama&#8217;s job&#8217;s really a piece of cake, as long as you don&#8217;t ask where the cake&#8217;s coming from.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gotthardbahn</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2010/06/25/the-regulatory-fight-moves-from-washington-to-basel/comment-page-1/#comment-16179</link>
		<dc:creator>Gotthardbahn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Jun 2010 16:16:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/?p=4441#comment-16179</guid>
		<description>&#039;And there are still far too many bank regulators: the OTS goes away, but the OCC remains, along with the FDIC and the SEC and the NCUA and the Fed. It’s a recipe for inconsistency, confusion, regulatory arbitrage, and turf wars.&#039;

Perhaps when Mr. Obama is enjoying dinner in Toronto this weekend with our Mr. Harper, he might ask how Canada manages to regulate its banking system with just one regulator - the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Canada has six or more quite large banks and a myriad of smaller, regional banks and trust companies, yet they all emerged largely unscathed from the recent financial crisis. &#039;Just how did that happen?&#039; would be a good question for Mr. Obama to ask.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8216;And there are still far too many bank regulators: the OTS goes away, but the OCC remains, along with the FDIC and the SEC and the NCUA and the Fed. It’s a recipe for inconsistency, confusion, regulatory arbitrage, and turf wars.&#8217;</p>
<p>Perhaps when Mr. Obama is enjoying dinner in Toronto this weekend with our Mr. Harper, he might ask how Canada manages to regulate its banking system with just one regulator &#8211; the Superintendent of Financial Institutions. Canada has six or more quite large banks and a myriad of smaller, regional banks and trust companies, yet they all emerged largely unscathed from the recent financial crisis. &#8216;Just how did that happen?&#8217; would be a good question for Mr. Obama to ask.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
