Dylan Ratigan Celebrates the Birthday of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
By Heather Friday Nov 13, 2009 1:00pm
Dylan Ratigan has a bit of fun with a deadly serious topic and 'celebrates' the anniversary of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which tore down the wall between Wall Street investment banks, commercial banks, and insurance companies. Gramm-Leach-Bliley repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 which prohibited any one institution from acting as any combination of an investment bank, a commercial bank, and/or an insurance company.
While I think Ratigan's theatrics are a bit over the top, the point he's trying to make is not. We're long overdue with some new regulations to get rid of these too large to fail entities with both regulating and breaking them up. Why the Obama administration has continued to keep our economy in a state where it could collapse again due to the risk these institutions pose is beyond me.
Login or Register to post comments.
Dems are just as deep in the pocket of Wall Street as repugs. Or to put it another way, we're screwed.
was it because he was under the pressure of a right-wing Congress? It's not an excuse or defense, I'm just wondering...because he did quite a few stupid things to appease the wingnuts, like "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" which turned out to be and still is another disaster.
I doubt it, though. I'm sure he thought he knew what he was doing.
Clinton was under the sway of HIS Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin, of Government Sachs.
The bill was written after Citibank had merged with Traveler's Insurance, a deal that should have been prohibited but was not.
After Rubin's government
plunderservice he went to Citigroup as it then had become known.It is one big revolving door in and out of the Government plunder.
The Plutocrats are overjoyed.
A few people knew exactly what was going to happen with the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
From Jesse at Le Café Américain is one here
The direct link to the NYT editorial letter is here
This was from 1995 when the proposals were being floated. The writer predicts with repeal the Robber Barons would rise again.
So they have.
EXCERPT:
--------------------------
J. P. Morgan and Andrew Mellon made their billions through inter locking directorates and outright ownership of hundreds of nationally prominent enterprises. Glass-Steagall is one crucial piece of a litany of legislation designed to place checks and balances on the concentration of financial resources. To repeal it would be tantamount to bringing back the days of the robber barons.
The unbridled activities of those gifted financiers crumbled under the dynamic forces of the capital marketplace. If you take away the checks, the market forces will eventually knock the system off balance.
MARK D. SAMBER
Stamford, Conn.
Feb. 28, 1995
The writer is a management consultant specializing in business history.
-----------------------------
He signed and pushed NAFTA! The begining of the end of America. The republicans have been driving nails in our coffin since.
republicanism/conservatism is a mental illness that is killing America!
of Canada's and of Mexico's sovereignty. At base, NAFTA allows for the trumping of a citizen-based democracy in a sovereign nation state by the corporatocracy (a.k.a., fascism).
that's when the Bushistas signed the SPP - the Security and Prosperity Partnership with Canada & Mexico...which moved the NAU one giant step forward....
What the hell is going on with news people? Even when their message is accurate, they deliver it like a kindergarten play.
.
INFOTAINMENT!
.
The problem isn't with news people it's with the people. This guy has been doing yeoman work trying to get this problem out there. Believe it or not it's bigger than healthcare. Because if what he's been saying is right, we're headed down the garbage shute, and if Glass Steagle along with some other regulations aren't re-enacted pronto there won't be any money left to bankroll anything, let alone government funded healthcare.
So Quit being such a stiff and listen to the message, because if you'd been paying attention to this guy for the past year he makes this point time and again in a buisness suit as well as the silly get-ups and schtick.
I couldn't agree more. You can criticize Ratigan for the theatrics if you like, but considering that the ratings these days are going to fever-pitched crying clowns like Glenn Beck, and that most of your intelligent TV audiences constantly praise comedy shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report for being more accurate (which, sadly enough, they are), it is painfully obvious that most Americans simply lack the attention span to sit through any straight-forward dispensation of facts.
Ratigan can run around in clown makeup throwing buckets of glitter at people for all I care, as long as the words coming out of his mouth actually have some substance and importance. It sure beats the hell of being shown three-year-old YouTube videos at the top of what still ironically referred to as the News Hour.
was a fantastic way to make a complex story accessible. This was the segment where Elliot Spitzer was a guest, declaring the Fed is a big ponzi scheme... It was less extreme that THIS segment; in fact one of the most effective presentations I've seen in years.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhfvE9bNls4
Ratigan understands the medium, and more impt, the dumbed down mainstream audience who won;t sit still for 10 minutes to learn the forces killing our country.
He should be on in prime time, rather than the morning!!!!!!
The Constitution has become like an infrastructure wedge. Something with a lot of canals, thruways and byways and any ways that you can. There are little paths and wide thoroughfares that are traveled by lawyers (lobbyists) who move through and across them like rats move through the subways and subterranean pools where all possibilities of perversion lay waiting for those so inclined.
"Something with a lot of canals, thruways and byways and any ways that you can. There are little paths and wide thoroughfares"...
...A libertarian would call all those "canals, thruways, and byways "regulations".(regulations that allow the corporations to) "engage in fraud"
Regulations that allow "corporate passage" around the constitution and all the other Laws...
A Libertarian would say...get rid of all the regulations. (return to the rule of law!)
all proven hopelessly wrong by reality and historical track record.
How many libertarians in office are there?
???
when I look at the record...
all I see is democrats and republicans and a financially screwed country
(not libertarians)
etc, etc, etc. Great "track record" going on there... LOL
Just because you guys are good at changing names (neoliberalism LOL) and passing the buck, you are only fooling yourselves.
Libertarians want to get rid of ALL regulations; not just regulations that allow the corporations to "engage in fraud."
Recessions have been a recurring feature of the American economy for centuries, even during the era of laissez-faire, when government left the economy almost entirely alone. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, eight American recessions worsened into depressions.
This is enough of a track record for me to know free market ideology is a failure.
The Corporate Special Interest System is an example of a free market failure: So who's bribing our Congress? Corporations have formed 75% of all PACs, and they donate over 80% of all contributions to political parties.
This poses a dilemma to believers in the invisible hand(libertarians): How do you condemn today's government without condemning the free market that controls it?
SOMEone has to speak out against the corruption. At least he gets attention, which is sorely lacking w/MSN.
The elephant in the room is that the Financial Institutions of America are essentially Glass Houses and the perception could be that if tight regulation does come in it will come shattering down.
The ones that they pay the outrageous salaries and bonuses with.
.
And to think they wanted Social Security "PRIVATIZED" so that grandma could "INVEST" it for herself...
... Imagine the scenario of all the homeless elderly because of lost SSC.
.
...in gold, she would be just fine!
Baloney -
Inflation adjusted chart on Gold since 1914 here
If grandma had got all her S.S. in one lump payment(8 yrs and two months ago)...and bought gold...
she would have almost quadrupled her money!
it is supposed to provide a baseline of decency to our citizens.
...to extract and hold your money for you (and not offer a penny of interest over all those years).
mighty decent of them. (not)
Social Security is a pay as you go system.
The money you pay in FICA taxes today, pays the benefits of recipients today.
It is NOT a personal savings account.
It used to be a "fund"
....until it (the fund) was raided to balance the budget.
(bad system)
It still is a fund, the Trust Fund which represents the surplus of the balance sheet.
It has always been a pay as you go system. The Trust Fund has special Treasury Bonds which cannot be used for anything else.
The chicanery has always been on whether and how the the Trust Fund is counted in the Federal Budget against the deficit.
The actual fund has never been raided. There is much purposeful misinformation about the SS system. Mainly by the people who want to privatize it, and thus plunder it.
...obviously there can't be anything to plunder.
America runs on borrowed money and borrowed time.
...and both are almost "up"
The privateers want the FICA tax income to go into the stock market. They don't make it quite clear how they will pay the current benefits.
What is certain is it is a horrible idea.
"Mainly by the people who want to privatize it, and thus plunder it." interesting.
Irregardless of the board of governors, OCC and all those players; as it stands now are you claiming it can not be plundered?
Anyone arguing that SS is a goner "coz its goin' broke" is being disingenuous at best. The borrowing of SS funds to supplant the General Fund is a problem of the GENERAL FUND. Not the Social Security Trust Fund.
SS is an UNBELIEVABLY successful program. (As was stated, it is an INSURANCE program. Not, a SAVINGS plan.)
Last person to talk about doing what the 'disingenuous' claim is "the issue", was mocked when he discussed putting the Trust Fund in a lock box. But Al Gore was right on. He also showed how unbelievably ideologically flawed and ignorant most Americans are to the design and purpose of SS.
... grandma :)
Federal reserve (1913)... any bearing? Thanks
gold-standard was the preferred tool for banks since the dark ages. It is a very easy commodity to speculate with.
BTW, things like the fed were passed with the tacit approval of libertarians.
♥
have been those based on pure fiat and printed by governments directly.
Interest-free currencies do what they are supposed to do: work as a representation of wealth for its exchange. Instead under modern interest-based money, regardless of wether it is backed by gold or fractional reserves, money's role gets reversed and it moves from being a representation of wealth to become the actual end of any economic activity.
but the FR is a quasi-governmental entity. Is that still OK?
is printed by the FR via Government bonds for the most part. It is far from optimal, but at least it allow the government to have a certain level of control over the interest rates.
As I said, it is far from optional. Since the arrangement of selling of bonds for dollars is just a nice scam. In the sense, that the government could as well print the money directly, since it is backing up the bonds... however, by having to go via bonds to get to the "print money" it means that the government has to pay the interest on the bonds. In ensence indicating that our government has to pay banks interest to use its own money.
The scam part comes from the fact that the banks that participate in the FR do not provide even the principal (the gov does). Not only that, but the banks use the fiat of the government as the justification for the validity of the "printed money (most of it is just numbers in computers no real physical dollars)"
So in essence, we are lending our money to the banks... so that they can give it back to us so that we can use it. But we have to pay the banks a fee in the form of interest, for the "privilege" of allowing us to lend them our money to get it back from them. There is literally no value propositiong for the banking side of this equation. And yet, it is amazing that the system is set up the way it is... it is almost a work of genius. Unsustainable, unfair, and a total rip off... but genius none the less.
...for your gracious explanation/opinion. It sounds good/bad to me. ;) ♥
> Why the Obama administration has continued to keep our
> economy in a state where it could collapse again due to
> the risk these institutions pose is beyond me.
It's not to me. I have been watching Obama in action since the inauguration, and I am coming to the conclusion that Barak Hussein Obama is in way over his head.
No doubt he is an intelligent man, but he is not of the calibre of FDR. And from what I read at Daily Kos, they are starting to grasp that fact.
... I wonder if it could/can be related to FDR's upbringing, in comparison to BO's?
From a financial perspective... I believe the environment when juxtaposed is interesting. Whatever the case may be... the forces at will, should become apparent, when all is said and done. The rest is just theory... some right and some wrong.
Obama is in over his head on this one. However, at least we have an adult in the White House.
... after all, he's not the "messiah". ;)
A concern many people have/share. :-/
FLUENTLY!!!!!!!!
Although I am not fond of him, you sound like a paid right wing troll!
... Thank you ♥
Why not just dust off Glass-Stegall and put it right back into effect? So, some big companies would have to spin off/divest some operations to come into compliance.
Not too unlike when ATT was split into 7 RBOCs and ATT. It has been done. Time to do it again.
The ill advised repealing of G-S in 1999 clearly has been shown to NOT work. Financial (or any) industry is absolutely incapable of self governing. Capitalism will ALWAYS drive excessive risk and unfair competition.
Try firing all the referees in the NFL and seeing if you get a legitimate champion out of the Super Bowl. The game CANNOT be played without a rule book and officials to enforce the rules.
Period.
There are a number of important people who want it reinstated.
Not the least of which is Paul Volcker who has many good ideas, none of which seem to be gaining traction with the administration.
In fact, Volcker seems to be the only sane, non Bankster captured person in Obama's coterie.
Obama and Congress appear to be fully bought and paid for by Goldman Sachs, et. al. There does not seem to be ANY real efforts to rein in excessive abuses of the finacial markets. It remains a complete casino game where the house always wins - insider info, tilted playing fields, ever changing rules of the game make it a suckers bet.
Meanwhile, it remains the main way for nearly every working citizen to fund retirement. Almost all corporate 401K plans are heavily mutual funds/equity oriented.
Like vampires so in vogue again, Geitner, Summers, Paulson, Blankfein feed on the countries lifeblood while turning it into a undead zombie.
Where is the sunshine, garlic and crosses Obama so famously promised?
All wrapped up in "threats", "talks", "considerations", etc.
"On 10th Anniversary of Glass-Steagall Repeal, Watchdog Says Bailout “Almost Certainly” Will Result in Taxpayer Loss
The top oversight official for the $700 billion Wall Street bailout says the program will “almost certainly” result in a loss for US taxpayers. Special Inspector General Neil Barofsky also says he’s conducting sixty-five probes into possible fraud by bailout recipients. Barofsky’s comments came on the tenth anniversary of the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a key deregulatory move widely seen as helping lead to the nation’s financial collapse. The repeal ended the separation of commercial and investment banking. In this clip from before the 1999 vote, Senator Byron Dorgan of South Dakota predicted how the repeal would be remembered on its tenth anniversary.
Sen. Byron Dorgan: “We are, with this piece of legislation, moving towards greater risk. We are almost certainly moving towards substantial new concentration and mergers in the financial services industry, that is almost certainly not in the interests of consumers. And we are deliberately and certainly, with this legislation, moving towards inheriting much greater risk in our financial services industries. And so, I come to the floor to say that I regret that I cannot support the legislation. I think we will, in ten years’ time, look back and say we should not have done that, because we forgot the lessons of the past.”
Come on Heather, you know why Obama hasn't done anything; because he is a DLC republican-lite Wall Street whore - that's why! This guy sucks.
The democrats need to find a real democrat to primary him out in 2012 (and I don't mean DLC Hillary either); because there are very few people I know - incuding myself, who will vote for this corporate fascist sellout again!
How anybody with two I.Q. points to rub together could have taken last years election mandate to mean the american people wanted 1990's Clinton style GOP-lite, is either a clueless blithering idiot, or corrupt beyond any redeeming qualities.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act screwed the working middle class in this country. It needs to go!!
Login or Register to post comments.