| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Geithner on Financial System Reform | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Apr 13 2010, 04:45 AM (169 Views) | |
| jon-nyc | Apr 13 2010, 04:45 AM Post #1 |
|
Cheers
|
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/12/AR2010041203341.html |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| kathyk | Apr 13 2010, 06:34 AM Post #2 |
|
Pisa-Carp
|
Good article. This one, the one posted by Ax about reductions in Congressional earmarks and the one I posted about the shrinking federal deficit fit nicely together to show that things are looking up. Geithner may have been sloppy about his own taxes, but when it comes to fiscal policy, he's one smart cookie. Hope springs eternal.
Edited by kathyk, Apr 13 2010, 06:35 AM.
|
| Blogging in Palestine: http://kksjournal.com/ | |
![]() |
|
| Mark | Apr 13 2010, 07:03 AM Post #3 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
|
|
___.___ (_]===* o 0 When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the human race. H.G. Wells | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Apr 13 2010, 07:05 AM Post #4 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Good, those are important stuff; let's hope those provisions become stronger. |
![]() |
|
| Red Rice | Apr 13 2010, 09:58 AM Post #5 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Rule of thumb: if the banking/finance lobby opposes it, the American people should support it. |
|
Civilisation, I vaguely realized then - and subsequent observation has confirmed the view - could not progress that way. It must have a greater guiding principle to survive. To treat it as a carcase off which each man tears as much as he can for himself, is to stand convicted a brute, fit for nothing better than a jungle existence, which is a death-struggle, leading nowhither. I did not believe that was the human destiny, for Man individually was sane and reasonable, only collectively a fool. I hope the gunner of that Hun two-seater shot him clean, bullet to heart, and that his plane, on fire, fell like a meteor through the sky he loved. Since he had to end, I hope he ended so. But, oh, the waste! The loss! - Cecil Lewis | |
![]() |
|
| Kincaid | Apr 13 2010, 11:24 AM Post #6 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Of that snippet, I am only concerned about how the gov't somehow decides when they want to I guess what I'm saying is I don't like artificial things like a bureaucrat deciding it's time to take down somebody. If my money is in that firm still, I think I'd like a chance for the firm to rescue themselves (and my money) rather than just wiping it out. |
| Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006. | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Apr 13 2010, 12:32 PM Post #7 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Think FDIC "winding down" failed consumer banks. It happened 120 times in 2009, and 43 times in 2010 so far. There's nothing arbitrary about it -- failed banks' depositors' assets are safe (depositors can still withdraw their money and their checks won't bounce; literally no interruption in business as far as the depositors are concerned), but equity and bond holders got wiped out. Apply same to other financial institutions (insurers like AIG, investment banks like Goldman Sachs, lenders like GE's financing arm, etc.). |
![]() |
|
| Kincaid | Apr 13 2010, 01:40 PM Post #8 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Well, Joe Lunchbucket is protected by the FDIC in a bank failure. We all know there is no protection on a stock. So, the question still remains, is not Joe Lunchbucket an equity/bond holder if he just happens to have fund invested there on a 401k? Do we want some bureaucrat deciding, based on some rules (perhaps open to interpretation) to wind down a company and wipe out those equity/bond holders? I still remember my Savings and Loan going down in that great debacle. They complained that rule changes encouraged them to undertake certain lending practices. They claimed they were strong enough and solvent but then Federal regulators changed the rules and forced them to be swallowed up by Bank of America. |
| Kincaid - disgusted Republican Partisan since 2006. | |
![]() |
|
| jon-nyc | Apr 13 2010, 02:21 PM Post #9 |
|
Cheers
|
They want to avoid another Lehman scenario. Right now, once a firm is insolvent, they go to the bankruptcy courts who's mission is sorting out creditor claims rather than minimizing systemic damage. Essentially, they want to be able to do to failed investment banks what the FDIC does with failed deposit-taking institutions. Notwithstanding the whining of the former WaMu CEO, I don't think there's any real issue with the FDIC intervening before its absolutely necessary. |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |






4:56 PM Jul 10