Reply With Quote
Didn't the law run out in 2000 or so, and the Fed (Greenspan himself) said that the Fed would no longer set monetary goals as had been done under Humphrey-Hawkins? The Fed still reports to congress semi-annually, but only as a courtesy.
Not only was Greenspan the object of adulation by Wall Street, but Wall Street itself was considered the pinnacle of American and Global Capitalist Brains and Brawn. The best and brightest wanted to go work there...it was everyone's belief that it was proof of American capitalist meritocracy.
The regulation of Wall Street has been considered anathema, including by the guru himself, Greenspan. Problem is, nobody else knows any other way to do it any moe. We have been turning out mba candidates steeped in what has become orthodoxy as to the belief in all things Wall Street.
Empiricism no longer has a place in the training of finance students. It is a matter of religion, not study. Students in b-schools are taught how to measure things...but not to question those things.
New paradigms are needed but nowhere on any horizon.
Didn't the law run out in 2000 or so, and the Fed (Greenspan himself) said that the Fed would no longer set monetary goals as had been done under Humphrey-Hawkins? The Fed still reports to congress semi-annually, but only as a courtesy.
Still around, if Wikipedia is any guide:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphre...Employment_Act
try this link...The act did expire, according to this and Forbes.
http://invest.yourdictionary.com/humphrey-hawkins-act.
I can get you the Forbes link if you want, but it is a bit vitriolic.
Trying to compare the manipulation of the system - the ACTIVE manipulation - by the financial sector and their lobby to crumbs that are thrown toward the middle class is completely disingenuous.
MarcusBryant I have agreed with nearly everything you've posted in the political forum for nearly the last year. I don't know if that speaks to a change in your beliefs or mine or both.
But I haven't seen you so completely off base lately about something until now.
To seriously believe that the middle class shares even one smidge of responsibility for what happened relative to the active actions and dealings of the financial elite either shows you
1) have not educated yourself enough on the subject
2) are just insanely biased
I know number 1 is pretty far-fetched, because you do know your stuff.
So you're just biased out the ass on this one, probably because you must work in the financial sector yourself and treasure your precious bonus for staying in the black.
.
It's the policies put forth by politicians of both parties over the last half century, primarily to cater to middle class voters that created the environment for this to happen.
So, according to Mr. y-Bollocks, it's a conspiracy of greedy/lazy working/middle class voters. What a pompous tosser.
Absolute crock of . Explain to me how the failure to regulate the financial sector catered to the middle class?
That's right, the GSEs never existed.
Thats right, the unregulated derrivates market didn't just bring the world's economy to its knees. Thats right, there weren't people in the financial sector making a ton of money off those GSEs.
Just because the government said it was doing things for the middle class doesn't make it the case. You should know better.
That's right, policies which inflated the home mortgage loan market to unconscionable levels by the direct actions of Fannie and Freddie had nothing to do wih it.
Yeah, the big middle class lobby wanted those policies SO bad. It was the big middle class lobby that killed a bill in congress that would have prohibited them from holding MBS because it was making the middle class lobby so much money. Even though Fannie and Feddie didn't hold nearly the toxic assets other banks did, we'll go ahead and pretend they did so that we can fit this square peg into your crazy round hole.
By the way, the insinuation that the mortgage market was inflated by Fannie and Freddie make CBF's point that you're either extremely ignorant of the causes of the financial crisis or you're just willfully wishing it was a different way.
"policies which inflated the home mortgage loan market to unconscionable levels by the direct actions of Fannie and Freddie"
you're so full of
non-bank, non-regulated predatory lenders, and non-regulated subsidiaries created specifically by regulated banks to get into sub-prime market/liar's loan market, financed with cheap, bubble-y Fed interest rates and $100Bs of private capital freed up by Repug tax cuts inflated the housing bubble, violated F&F requirement for qualifying loans, etc, etc, then sold a known crock of , on bad faith, to F&F.
oh, just in case you right-wingers bring it up, CRA didn't AND COULD'T force banks to write bad loans for red-line neighborhoods. the lenders wrote those predatory loans voluntarily.
As it currently stands, unless you put severe draconian regulations on on wall street it will never prevent things like the mortgage crisis from happening. The game is rigged--the field slopes downward. The ball is always going to end up down there it's just a matter of how.
Financial ins utions aren't typical corporations. Their product is money. You can't regulate them enough.
He does know better. He's just biased out of his ass on this one.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions