I agree it should not have been repealed, but there are those who disagree that this was the principal cause for the troubles that followed in 2008. Here's why:
http://www.businessinsider.com/bubble-derivatives-otc-2010-5
Alternet slams the Clintons as crony capitalist
- Thread starter WeToddDid2
- Start date
http://www.businessinsider.com/bubble-derivatives-otc-2010-5
Oh, sorry. Completely misread your post. Please elaborate.
This article refutes your claims regarding the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. In other words, you were attempting to solely blame the repubs and deflect blame from Clinton which is just not accurate at all.
"An attempt by the CFTC to regulate OTC derivatives in 1998 was rejected by Alan Greenspan, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Robert E. Rubin, then Secretary of the Treasury, and Lawrence (“Larry”) H. Summers, then Assistant Secretary of the Treasury. At the time, regulation ran counter to the dominant ideology in Washington D.C., which reflected the views and interests of the banking and financial services industry."
The article is wrong. If Glass-Steagall was not repealed, money center banks could not have engaged in OTCs and MBS. However, Wall Street firms could have and did. In other words, 2008-2009 would not have impacted Chase, BofA, Wachovia, etc. It would have been contained to Wall Street firms such as Goldman and Lehman. Furthermore, JP Morgan could not have merged with Chase. That article was written by someone that does not fully understand the capital markets and most likely a Clinton apologist.
In other words, the repealing of Glass-Steagall is what allowed for the interconnectedness of the US financial system. Before the repeal, banks and Wall Street were largely separate.
I am shocked that I am having to explain all of this on a trading forum.
Last edited:
I mean did you guys not read the Alternet article? The Clintons are the poster children of crony capitalism. They are and have been in bed with Wall Street. They are the epitome of what libtards supposedly hate. However, I guess because they call themselves democrats libtards love them and will vote for Hillary. It is just shocking the level of sheepleness that libtards display.
He clearly did not think at the time he signed it that it was a mistake.
In fact, Clinton thought it was basically the best thing since sliced bread.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=56922
"Statement on Signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
November 12, 1999
Today I am pleased to sign into law S. 900, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This historic legislation will modernize our financial services laws, stimulating greater innovation and competition in the financial services industry. America's consumers, our communities, and the economy will reap the benefits of this Act.
Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America's underserved communities. Passage of this legislation by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the Congress suggests that we have met that goal.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes the most important legislative changes to the structure of the U.S. financial system since the 1930s. Financial services firms will be authorized to conduct a wide range of financial activities, allowing them freedom to innovate in the new economy. The Act repeals provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the Great Depression, have restricted affiliations between banks and securities firms. It also amends the Bank Holding Company Act to remove restrictions on affiliations between banks and insurance companies. It grants banks significant new authority to conduct most newly authorized activities through financial subsidiaries.
Removal of barriers to competition will enhance the stability of our financial services system. Financial services firms will be able to diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue. They will also be better equipped to compete in global financial markets.
Although the Act grants financial services firms greater latitude to innovate, it also contains important safety and soundness protections. While the Act allows common ownership of banking, securities, and insurance firms, it still requires those activities to be conducted separately within an organization, subject to functional regulation and funding limitations.
Both the Vice President and I have insisted that any financial services modernization legislation must benefit American communities by preserving and strengthening community reinvestment. I am very pleased that the Act accomplishes this goal. The Act establishes an important prospective principle: banking organizations seeking to conduct new nonbanking activities must first demonstrate a satisfactory record of meeting the credit needs of all the communities they serve, including low- and moderate-income communities. Thus, the law will for the first time prohibit expansion into activities such as securities and insurance underwriting unless all of the organization's banks and thrifts maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA will continue to apply to all banks and thrifts, and any application to acquire or merge with a bank or thrift will continue to be reviewed under CRA, with full opportunity for public comment. The bill offers further support for community development in the form of a new Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs (PRIME), to provide technical help to low- and moderate income microentrepreneurs."
More at link.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=56922
"Statement on Signing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
November 12, 1999
Today I am pleased to sign into law S. 900, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This historic legislation will modernize our financial services laws, stimulating greater innovation and competition in the financial services industry. America's consumers, our communities, and the economy will reap the benefits of this Act.
Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America's underserved communities. Passage of this legislation by an overwhelming, bipartisan majority of the Congress suggests that we have met that goal.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act makes the most important legislative changes to the structure of the U.S. financial system since the 1930s. Financial services firms will be authorized to conduct a wide range of financial activities, allowing them freedom to innovate in the new economy. The Act repeals provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act that, since the Great Depression, have restricted affiliations between banks and securities firms. It also amends the Bank Holding Company Act to remove restrictions on affiliations between banks and insurance companies. It grants banks significant new authority to conduct most newly authorized activities through financial subsidiaries.
Removal of barriers to competition will enhance the stability of our financial services system. Financial services firms will be able to diversify their product offerings and thus their sources of revenue. They will also be better equipped to compete in global financial markets.
Although the Act grants financial services firms greater latitude to innovate, it also contains important safety and soundness protections. While the Act allows common ownership of banking, securities, and insurance firms, it still requires those activities to be conducted separately within an organization, subject to functional regulation and funding limitations.
Both the Vice President and I have insisted that any financial services modernization legislation must benefit American communities by preserving and strengthening community reinvestment. I am very pleased that the Act accomplishes this goal. The Act establishes an important prospective principle: banking organizations seeking to conduct new nonbanking activities must first demonstrate a satisfactory record of meeting the credit needs of all the communities they serve, including low- and moderate-income communities. Thus, the law will for the first time prohibit expansion into activities such as securities and insurance underwriting unless all of the organization's banks and thrifts maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA). The CRA will continue to apply to all banks and thrifts, and any application to acquire or merge with a bank or thrift will continue to be reviewed under CRA, with full opportunity for public comment. The bill offers further support for community development in the form of a new Program for Investment in Microentrepreneurs (PRIME), to provide technical help to low- and moderate income microentrepreneurs."
More at link.
Closing statement from above:
"The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is a major achievement that will benefit American consumers, communities, and businesses of all sizes. I thank all of those individuals who played a role in the development and passage of this historic legislation.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
The White House, November 12, 1999."
"The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act is a major achievement that will benefit American consumers, communities, and businesses of all sizes. I thank all of those individuals who played a role in the development and passage of this historic legislation.
WILLIAM J. CLINTON
The White House, November 12, 1999."
it's a non point, it all comes down to trying to blame the Clintons for something
and like I said, any thinking person is against her, but once she is nominated all these complaints from the left will miraculously disappear.
and in 2010 I swore I would never vote for a republican or democrat ever again, but just between you and me, compared to all the republicans running, I do think she would make the best President.
It doesn't matter, dems are not going to vote for the party that openly admits it's in bed with Wall Street--the GOP. Who's left, some libtard (libertarian retard) candidate?