Comments on: Aren't you sort of glad Congress repealed Glass-Steagall? http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/ Commentary on the economy, the markets, and business Sat, 28 Nov 2009 16:55:17 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: econoblog.info » Don’t let Goldman Sachs go back to being (post-1999) Goldman Sachs http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-13708 econoblog.info » Don’t let Goldman Sachs go back to being (post-1999) Goldman Sachs Sat, 18 Apr 2009 15:40:49 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-13708 [...] up with some new way of organizing our financial system after this crisis. Or old way: After being extremely skeptical at first, I’ve been warming up to the idea of a new Glass-Steagall Act to divide conventional [...] [...] up with some new way of organizing our financial system after this crisis. Or old way: After being extremely skeptical at first, I’ve been warming up to the idea of a new Glass-Steagall Act to divide conventional [...]

]]> By: Don’t let Goldman Sachs go back to being (post-1999) Goldman Sachs :: The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-13685 Don’t let Goldman Sachs go back to being (post-1999) Goldman Sachs :: The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:37:04 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-13685 [...] up with some new way of organizing our financial system after this crisis. Or old way: After being extremely skeptical at first, I've been warming up to the idea of a new Glass-Steagall Act to divide conventional [...] [...] up with some new way of organizing our financial system after this crisis. Or old way: After being extremely skeptical at first, I've been warming up to the idea of a new Glass-Steagall Act to divide conventional [...]

]]> By: The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com » Blog Archive I take it all back: Bengt Holmström says securitization wasn’t the problem, but Glass-Steagall repeal might have been « http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-12316 The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com » Blog Archive I take it all back: Bengt Holmström says securitization wasn’t the problem, but Glass-Steagall repeal might have been « Fri, 12 Dec 2008 21:09:09 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-12316 [...] Justin Fox | Comments (3) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This I've done a lot of bashing here of those who think the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act separating banking from the investment [...] [...] Justin Fox | Comments (3) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This I've done a lot of bashing here of those who think the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act separating banking from the investment [...]

]]> By: The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com » Blog Archive Are Citigroup’s troubles evidence that Glass-Steagall repeal was a colossal mistake? « http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-12166 The Curious Capitalist - TIME.com » Blog Archive Are Citigroup’s troubles evidence that Glass-Steagall repeal was a colossal mistake? « Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:06:08 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-12166 [...] Posted by Justin Fox | Comments (0) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This Having made the argument a couple of months back that repealing the Glass-Steagall Act was a good thing because it allowed J.P. Morgan Chase to buy [...] [...] Posted by Justin Fox | Comments (0) | Permalink | Trackbacks (0) | Email This Having made the argument a couple of months back that repealing the Glass-Steagall Act was a good thing because it allowed J.P. Morgan Chase to buy [...]

]]> By: Justin Fox http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10652 Justin Fox Thu, 02 Oct 2008 03:14:36 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10652 Or, Ali123, you could read this: <a href="http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1841981,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1841981,00.html</a> Or, Ali123, you could read this:
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1841981,00.html

]]> By: Ali123 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10651 Ali123 Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:14:29 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10651 Do you have brain fog or are you getting lessons from Sarah Palins school of thought. Before you post such an idiot comment, you should actually look up what Glass-Steagall is. Glass-Steagall was formed as a reaction to the Great Depression to prevent thousands of bank failures from ever to happen again. Now that the government got rid of it, we will have another Great Depression where half of all our banks will close because they are all linked to the financial banks. Because there is no Glass-Steagall, designed by the ultimate deregulator Phill Gramm, Citibank, Bank of America, and J.P. Morgan Chase, who bought the most toxic house loans, will become the mega monopoly banks that will control everybody's money at their beckon will, even as they overleveridge their own bank sheets with all our deposits. In time you will be sooooo sorry they got rid of Glass-Steagall when these banks rip you off and government bails them out because they are too big to fail. PLEASE READ THE LOS ANGELES TIMES ARTICLE WED, OCT 1,08 ARTICLE IN THE BUSINESS SECTION, "TOO BIG TO FAIL" OR LOOK UP GLASS STEAGALL IN WIKIPEDIA. PLEASE. Do you have brain fog or are you getting lessons from Sarah Palins school of thought. Before you post such an idiot comment, you should actually look up what Glass-Steagall is. Glass-Steagall was formed as a reaction to the Great Depression to prevent thousands of bank failures from ever to happen again. Now that the government got rid of it, we will have another Great Depression where half of all our banks will close because they are all linked to the financial banks. Because there is no Glass-Steagall, designed by the ultimate deregulator Phill Gramm, Citibank, Bank of America, and J.P. Morgan Chase, who bought the most toxic house loans, will become the mega monopoly banks that will control everybody's money at their beckon will, even as they overleveridge their own bank sheets with all our deposits. In time you will be sooooo sorry they got rid of Glass-Steagall when these banks rip you off and government bails them out because they are too big to fail. PLEASE READ THE LOS ANGELES TIMES ARTICLE WED, OCT 1,08 ARTICLE IN THE BUSINESS SECTION, "TOO BIG TO FAIL" OR LOOK UP GLASS STEAGALL IN WIKIPEDIA. PLEASE.

]]> By: Linda S http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10650 Linda S Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:48:07 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10650 Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to imply that the repeal led to the CDS market. I only brought up the CDS market to illustrate that the "savior" side of the Bear deal in JP Morgan has some very large exposure to a different market that seems very shaky. My point to Justin is why should we all be happy that the repeal allowed BofA to buy Merill if it just extends the collapse of both firms for a while and potentially leads to severe downside for average Americans. My next question is this - is it true that what BofA got was the ability to use commercial bank deposits to fund investment banking operations? That is what has been posted on different sites. If this is true, than this is truly not a good thing in my opinion because then BofA will just be using depositor funds to hide problems on its balance sheet until they can no longer do so and fail due to insolvency. I guess this means that JP Morgan will be doing exactly the same thing with Bear. Then this is transfered to the FDIC who doesn't have the money either. Please, please, please say that they are wrong. Or if they are not wrong, please explain to me why this isn't going to result in the new BofA/Merill or JP Morgan/Bear becoming the #1 commercial banking failure in US history? Just to be clear, I wasn't trying to imply that the repeal led to the CDS market. I only brought up the CDS market to illustrate that the "savior" side of the Bear deal in JP Morgan has some very large exposure to a different market that seems very shaky. My point to Justin is why should we all be happy that the repeal allowed BofA to buy Merill if it just extends the collapse of both firms for a while and potentially leads to severe downside for average Americans.

My next question is this - is it true that what BofA got was the ability to use commercial bank deposits to fund investment banking operations? That is what has been posted on different sites. If this is true, than this is truly not a good thing in my opinion because then BofA will just be using depositor funds to hide problems on its balance sheet until they can no longer do so and fail due to insolvency. I guess this means that JP Morgan will be doing exactly the same thing with Bear. Then this is transfered to the FDIC who doesn't have the money either.

Please, please, please say that they are wrong. Or if they are not wrong, please explain to me why this isn't going to result in the new BofA/Merill or JP Morgan/Bear becoming the #1 commercial banking failure in US history?

]]> By: TomT http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10649 TomT Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:41:57 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10649 Justin, by credit default swaps were deregulated by some amendment put into some bill by Phil Gramm, no? Sorry to be lazy about fact checking this -- I'm busy today Justin, by credit default swaps were deregulated by some amendment put into some bill by Phil Gramm, no?

Sorry to be lazy about fact checking this -- I'm busy today

]]> By: Justin Fox http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10648 Justin Fox Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:22:20 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10648 @TomT: I'm kind of ignorant here too, but I don't see any connection between Glass-Steagall repeal and the rise of credit default swaps. What did happen is that Brooksley Born, as chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, tried to impose some regulation on over-the-counter derivatives like credit default swaps in the late 1990s, and was thwarted by Congress and Bob Rubin's Treasury Department. @TomT: I'm kind of ignorant here too, but I don't see any connection between Glass-Steagall repeal and the rise of credit default swaps. What did happen is that Brooksley Born, as chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, tried to impose some regulation on over-the-counter derivatives like credit default swaps in the late 1990s, and was thwarted by Congress and Bob Rubin's Treasury Department.

]]> By: TomT http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/comment-page-1/#comment-10647 TomT Mon, 15 Sep 2008 16:37:28 +0000 http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/2008/09/15/arent_you_sort_of_glad_congres/#comment-10647 Justin, I agree it seemed like that repeal may have been a good thing. Please excuse my ignorance but is its repeal related to the changes in credit default swaps? And am I right in thinking that said changes are a big part of what caused this meltdown? Justin, I agree it seemed like that repeal may have been a good thing.

Please excuse my ignorance but is its repeal related to the changes in credit default swaps? And am I right in thinking that said changes are a big part of what caused this meltdown?

]]>