Comments on: Structural Changes in Fed Reg of Financial Industry

By: mark mchugh

mark mchugh — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 05:22:20 +0000

Weird. The graphic looks like something prepared by the Detroit Lions offensive coordinator. Like changing the blocking assignments will turn the franchise around. Why doesn’t anyone want to talk about the failure of the individuals that were in place under the existing system.

As far as I can tell, Geithner spent 5 years at the New York Fed spinning in the big chair, and now he’s a reformer? Pass the Maalox…..

By: AmenRa

AmenRa — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:27:11 +0000

Didn’t the OCC publish the notational amount of who held what in the derivatives market? Are they being eliminated because they shed some light on the true value of the financial institutions?

By: Christopher

Christopher — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 04:16:59 +0000

Who needs comptrollers anyway….the bane of “creative capitalism”!!

That chart looks like the bottom part of my Scot-Irish-KY Hillbilly-Detroit Trailertrash family tree.

Speaking of …..
So now BIG TOBACCO is a drug company.
LOL

By: Mannwich

Mannwich — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 03:47:38 +0000

Sorry, a bit off topic, but had to post this re: the PPT……

http://www.marketskeptics.com/2009/06/still-researching-corruption-at.html

By: grundy

grundy — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 01:48:04 +0000

It seems the only two agencies that have really done their jobs are the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and the FDIC. The majority of the subprime/securitization/derivative issues occurred outside the bank charter and thus were under the purview of the Fed. As such, I see five steps that are prudent as we reform our regulatory system. First, eliminate the OTC and the thrift charter. Second, give the OCC supervisory power over banks and their holding companies. Third, do not split the consumer compliance out of the regulatory agencies. An additional agency will not only be less efficient, but also less effective. Fourth, place the Fed in charge of regulating insurance and other large systematically important institutions. Finally, Combine the CFTC and SEC.

The Fed’s core competency is monetary policy not bank supervision. Let OCC, continue with prudential bank supervision and let the Fed do what they do best – monetary policy.

On a somewhat related note, I can’t believe anyone still listens to Barney Frank. He has no class and just wants to push his personal agenda. Why does anyone on the hill listen to that guy?

By: rch

rch — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 00:57:49 +0000

Marcus Aurelius: perfect

By: cvienne

cvienne — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 23:56:57 +0000

@Pat G…

Looks like the “holy roller” play (Stabler – Casper)…Touchdown!

By: Pat G.

Pat G. — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:39:12 +0000

Looks like a sweep “left”. Fumble!!

By: VennData

VennData — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:03:47 +0000

I find it hard to believe Congressmen would object to giving authority to the Fed that’s outlined in this middle-of-the-road proposal. Why, who in the heck is going to receive the buckets of lobbyists money at the Fed?

By: bonghiteric

bonghiteric — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:10:46 +0000

I’d like to see the hiring/post-employment guidelines. The 30+ year menage a trois of banking, legal, and governmental personnel will neuter the most stringent regulatory framework.

Furthermore, I would also propose that a mandatory number of enforcement actions be legislated for each regulatory body. And if the agency doesn’t meet its quota of enforcement actions they get twice as much money in their subsequent year’s budget that must be allocated to enforcement actions. Just my way of countering the logic of bureaucratic inertia.