Comments on: How to clean the banking cesspit http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/ Mon, 18 Apr 2016 14:55:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: TheUSofA http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-457 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:10:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-457 Glass-Steagall.

Break up the big banks.

Rein in the derivatives market.

]]>
By: MindfulMoney_T http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-456 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 12:40:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-456 But if the problem is not one of regulation or business model, but banking culture then surely these actions are likely to go the same way as those that they are replacing? That is, either avoided, circumvented or obfuscated.

Have we become beholden to a myth that the banks can be preserved as they are reformed? Can those within it begin to change their behaviour while they maintain the semblance of control?

The models used for dealing with addiction may provide some interesting frames for a new type of discussion on these issues:

http://www.mindfulmoney.co.uk/13494/sect or-watch-/bankaholics-anonymous-12-steps -to-reforming-the-banking-system.html

]]>
By: breezinthru http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-453 Wed, 08 Aug 2012 07:58:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-453 It was against the law for Standard Charter to do business with Iran, but they did anyway. Why? Because it was against the law. Standard Charter surely charged a premium under such circumstance.

It’s not only boards that should hold their CEO’s accountable, but high-flying bankers should also be accountable to the law in the same way I would be if I robbed a bank. Fines are not enough, scoldings by politicians are not enough, resignations are not enough.

In America, high finance offenders could be prosecuted under RICO laws that allow for the perpetrator and everyone who knowingly assisted in the crime to be prosecuted and RICO allows for all ill-gotten gains to be confiscated by the court… and RICO allows for some serious prison time.

That is the only thing that will bring about change. Bankers are not very afraid of breaking laws… and that is the problem.

]]>
By: JessesCafe http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-452 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 17:09:21 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-452 Glass-Steagall worked for almost 70 years until it was repealed.

It would not be all that difficult to reinsitute it.

Banks don’t want it. They would like to see schemes like those proposed here that are relatively easy to beat. And they are.

]]>
By: TheUSofA http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-451 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 16:28:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-451 @zzpat

I think you need to take a better look at reality. Your simplified view of the problem has this idea that Democrats are angels.

The “simple reality” is that Democrats will not do anything meaningful to take on the banks. Democrats are a corporate party as well. To not see this is unbelievably naive.

“Solutions can only come from a party that thinks there’s a problem that needs fixing.”

Do you see Obama, Geithner or Bernanke calling for the break up of the big banks? Do you see them promoting or calling for meaningful EFFECTIVE regulation? They will parade the Volcker rule before you and you will hail it as some regulatory triumph I suppose.

Organized money has taken over the entire political landscape. You just choose to ignore the money that is going to your candidate which includes corporations, the insurance industry, the healthcare sector, big pharma, and Wall Street.

Few Witnesses to Obama, Romney as They Raise $1.5 Billion
bloom.bg/PGBuj0

The Obama/Democratic supporters are continually played against this lesser of two evils argument and made to compromise, rationalize, and go on continually lower their moral bars. It’s only the other guy that’s bad. So what if he’s carrying on Bush’s legacy regarding civil liberties? Patriot Act? No big deal. Surveillance state? Shrug. I mean it’s Obama this time so it must be ok!

As Greenwald states, Obama is indeed a pioneer: bit.ly/MjUFu1

“In fairness to Obama, he did campaign on a promise of change, and vesting the President with the power to order the execution of citizens in secret and with no oversight certainly qualifies as that.

…Here we have the political campaign of the same President who, in another moment of trailblazing, has waged an unprecedented war on whistleblowers, and whose top aides secretly met at coffee houses with industry lobbyists to draft bills so as to evade disclosure and record preservation requirements, marching, apparently with a straight face, behind the banner of transparency to demand disclosure of his opponent’s tax returns…

So to summarize the Obama campaign’s apparent argument: it’s absolutely vital that we know all about the GOP nominee’s tax shelters and financial transactions over the last decade (and indeed, we should know about that), but we need not bother ourselves with how the Democratic nominee is deciding which Americans should die, his claimed legal authority for ordering those hits, the alleged evidence for believing the target deserves to be executed, or the criteria used to target them. So low are one’s expectations for an American Election Year that there are very few spectacles so absurd as to be painful to behold, but the Obama campaign’s waving of the transparency flag definitely qualifies…

]]>
By: WeWereWallSt http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-450 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:27:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-450 Diamond and Watanabe fell on their swords?

More like these two were beheaded, isn’t it? They were thumbing their noses all the way to the, well, to the bank.

Good riddance. Two down. How many to go?

]]>
By: JamesSutton http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-449 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 03:28:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-449 Limit investment banks to doing domestic business within only the federal reserve area in which they are incorporated. Then “too big to fail” banks become less of a threat to the national economy; and the original megabanks, divided into eleven or so subsidiaries, would be worth more to stockholders than the originals. Would need one more Federal Reserve area for this to work, assuming Richmond is maintained.

]]>
By: JamesSutton http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-448 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 03:27:46 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-448 Limit investment banks to doing domestic business within only the federal reserve area in which they are incorporated. Then “too big to fail” banks become less of a threat to the national economy; and the original megabanks, divided into eleven or so subsidiaries, would be worth more to stockholders than the originals. Would need one more Federal Reserve area for this to work, assuming Richmond is maintained.

]]>
By: jphn37 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-447 Tue, 07 Aug 2012 02:35:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-447 This blog post suffers from being too short and offering many opinions, without discussing the nuances. For instance, yes, Lehman was an investment bank, but they did have to compete against combined investment and retail banks.
It does go without saying that implementing Glass–Steagall again would not help the economy in the short term. The process would need to have a long implementation period to work. That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it.
The Glass–Steagall Act oversaw the longest expansion of the economy and the largest expansion of the middle class, not just in American history, but in world history. If done by a wrecking crew, it would certainly be destructive, but if done by a surgeon, it might even promote growth. Again, here there is an opinion lacking discussion and analysis.
The Robin Hood tax was never meant to really make the banks safer. The tax is microscopic. It is a means to collect tax revenues for cash starved government, on the back of activities that do nothing to help the economy, ie the buying and selling of securities within hours or minutes of each other. The problem, of course, is that it would need to be implemented across all major markets simultaneously, or the behavior would simply shift to save the 0.1%.
Again, here is a discussion of one side of the issue. I’m sure many of you could counter. But, I did at least say what I mean. To say Robin Hood tax–wouldn’t make us safer, and then just leave it at that? Disingenuous? lazy? rushed? I don’t know, but this opinion piece is incomplete.

]]>
By: zzpat http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/2012/08/06/how-to-clean-the-banking-cesspit/comment-page-1/#comment-446 Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:13:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/hugo-dixon/?p=394#comment-446 Cleaning up the cesspool will not happen or be possible if Romney is elected or if republicans control either House of Congress. This is a simple reality that every person needs to understands. The money flowing into the republican party after Citizens United is appalling. Corporations have become the supreme entity of our political system and this was caused by conservatism. It must be eradicated as soon as possible.

Solutions can only come from a party that thinks there’s a problem that needs fixing. Republicans have never fixed a problem, they only create them.

]]>