It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Banking Overhaul Bill Passed

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:03 PM
link   
Today marks the passage of the new banking overhaul bill by the Senate. For the most part, I really like it, as it presents a true compromise with the American people and their security in mind. There are some points/short-falls that I didn't agree with though, such as no reform for Fannie & Freddie (I'm not sure, but prior legislation with the new requirements for home lending may have already dealt with that though).

Here's a few key points:

1. Govm't is granted to power to liquidate any bank in financial trouble, even the "too-big-to-fail" banks... but it doesn't limit the size of a banking institution. So, all those monster banks like BoA, Chase, Capital 1, etc won't be going anywhere but up. This kinda sux because of the lending power still is held mainly by the biggies, which leads way to a pseudo-monopoly in a sense.

2. Govm't is granted powers to break up companies that threaten the economy. This is nothing new though; the Govm't has always maintained the power to destroy any deemed monopoly or destructive economic scheme. This just gives the Dems another reason to start up another Governmental agency to enact some sense of control imo.... poor fit for the bill and unnecessary in these times (maybe in the Great Depression when the original law was enacted but not so much now). There may be more to this issue (I haven't read page 1 of the 2,300 page bill) but it seems unnecessary on the face in light of present laws. This would also be better if the agency was independent of the Govm't, but more on that later.

3. Banking institutions will be limited on the amounts they can charge for debit card swipes. These are normally upwards of 2%, yet Europe has already done the same thing and have noticed rates locked as low as 0.2% in some countries. The f'd up thing is that the analysts don't know if this will help the consumers... hell yeah it is! Lower overhead costs to the seller means a lower product cost to consumers. This will not effect credit cards though; those will remain around a point & 1/2 (1.5 to 1.6% a swipe).

4. Congress will enable regulators to determine banking salaries, decide when a bank is "too-big-to-fail" and the cash reserves they must keep, and the types of investments banks can pursue. Ummm, can we say outside influence from lobbyists? This just screams of potential problems concerning bribes, etc. And, once again, this excludes Fannie & Freddie from any of these regulations.

5. The CFPA (Consumer Financial Protection Agency) and the FSOC (Financial Stability Oversight Council) will be formed (yes, more Government agencies). The CFPA will be setting the new standards on mortgages (didn't we JUST do this in the last 2 years?!?), payday loans and credit cards. They'll be within the Fed Reserve and there's not much clarification on the extent of their new powers. The FSOC on the other hand is supposed to look at the world economy as a whole and allieve any possible hiccups in the system, but their powers are unknown as well. They will also require the transparency of the derivatives market (real f'n convoluted and confusing investments atm) to a more clear sense, yet it does not require FULL transparency.

Mainly, we have 2 new policing agencies that are Government-controlled - this bothers me that they're not an independent watchdog and will be subject to persuasion from whoever is in office at the time; very similar to the IRS, where if a Repub is in office, the IRS is ordered to "take it easy" on taxpayers & if a Dem is in office, orders are to collect any & all taxes regardless of taxpayer situations or proper protocol.

That was about all I can remember but I'm sure there's tons more being the length it is. There will also be the Repub reports of the pork contained or other frivolous crap in this bill in days to come, but for the most part I like it as it stands. There was very little drama involving this bill, and unlike the Health Care Bill of equal size that took undermining tactics to get passed, this bill passed on it's first attempt. The Repubs stated that this would be the end of banking when this crap started a few months ago, but apparently settled down after seeing the compromise the bill contained and the value to the people.... the bill passed 60 to 39 - not a landslide by any means, but still passing in the first try with no daily drama reports.




posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I'm at a loss for why anyone could think more government control is a good thing.

Sure it might look good for you in the short term, but in 200 years when our ancestors are brought up in the control of the government, what is there to stop corrupt politicians from forcing their agenda on them? Nothing! It will be normal and accepted by that point.

And I'd love to hear any arguments against politicians being corrupt. It is absurd how people openly state this yet actually WANT them to have more control on our lives. Absurd!



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheFinalTruth14
I'm at a loss for why anyone could think more government control is a good thing.

Sure it might look good for you in the short term, but in 200 years when our ancestors are brought up in the control of the government, what is there to stop corrupt politicians from forcing their agenda on them? Nothing! It will be normal and accepted by that point.

And I'd love to hear any arguments against politicians being corrupt. It is absurd how people openly state this yet actually WANT them to have more control on our lives. Absurd!


It depends on where the control is. I'd rather have an elected congress control the banks than, say, unelected businessmen. We can't expect capitalists to do something good for the populace without an incentive to do so.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Oh this is just lovely. I cannot wait to see what kind of crap they put in there to screw up the economy. Now that its passed, I guess we will get to see what goodies are in there for us.

1. Why should they be able to decide what salary anyone gets in a public or private company?

2. I heard they put in some rules where you have to have a certain % of loans to minorities and women regardless of whether they can pay it back or not. Real Smart.

This country is SCREWED!



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheFinalTruth14
I'm at a loss for why anyone could think more government control is a good thing.


Live on the gulf coast much?

Not saying its good or bad.....but sometimes it maybe a necessary evil.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:32 PM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Oh you mean the gulf coast where the oil spill happened partly due to the fact that the government didnt even enforce its own rules and hasnt done a damn thing to help the situation, but to do its usual bitching, whining, and baseless threatening?

Oh yeah and I really like how the President forced a private company to put money in escrow without any legal authority to do so. Not that I dont think BP should pay, but I also think the President should keep his behavior within the limiits of the law.

[edit on 16-7-2010 by ZuluChaka]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by ZuluChaka
 


Hidden agenda's and conspiracies aside, who else really has the power and the "know" to help alleviate the issue though?

Lets not get off topic and turn this into an oil crisis thread.

[edit on 16-7-2010 by -Blackout-]



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by -Blackout-
 


Certainly not our pathetic government. They can barely wipe their own asses without some lobbyist holding the paper for them. They should have just said we dont have any expertise on this and encouraged the entire oil industry to get involved. What did they accomplish by calling BP to 50 meetings? They just distracted them with all their bullying and other bull stuff. Maybe instead of Obama running around worrying about whose ass to kick he could have asked them to tell them what they need and make sure they got it.

There is plenty of time to sue their rear end off and they have it coming, but if you want to accomplish something you cooperate and lend a hand and not just sit to the side and nag the guy trying to solve the problem.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   
Is this what we the people want? I cannot see how this will improve the quality of life. It's bigger Government eating up our tax dollars.

I personaly hope the Dems pass Cap and tax and Amnesty. Their Tyranny will soon come to an end.

They are passing crap like this just wait until after the november election when they dems have nothing to loose. We will see some of the most draconian legeslation the world has seen.

Hell they could theroreticaly ban all private owned firearms by taxing the crap out of the guns and ammo. That would not violate the second amendment. But if they did .... well I will leave that up to your imagination.



posted on Jul, 16 2010 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheFinalTruth14
I'm at a loss for why anyone could think more government control is a good thing.



i'm at far more of a loss as to why anyone thinks less controls (of any type, government of not) of inherently dangerous, toxic, and predatory organizations is a BAD thing.

do you know why you're likely to live past the age of 30, enjoy a standard of living higher than almost anywhere in the world, aren't crippled by lead poisoning or dead of salmonella, and can trust that your household appliances won't randomly explode and kill you?
because the government controls the stuff that would see you dead for the pennies in your couch.
why the heck would you want to limit their ability to keep you alive and well?

i mean really, what's the WORST THING that happens in the US when the government goes balls-out nanny-state over-regulating?
i have to order my clove cigarettes from india and there isn't quite as much gore in my movies and video games... the worst that can be said of over-regulation in this country is mild inconvenience.

what's the worst thing that happens from under-regulation?
lethal disease outbreaks in our food, catastrophic car malfunctions, environmental disasters, economic collapse, and the foundation of our consumer society falling apart.

so justify to me how that statement is anything other than complete bat-# insanity



new topics

top topics



 
9

log in

join