Lest we forget, again...
Maybe there should have been more regulation. Maybe a company that could bring down the entire U.S. economy if it "were allowed to fail" should never have been allowed to be so big. Maybe Roosevelt was right and Clinton and the republican house and senate were wrong in 1999 when they gutted the Glass-Steagall Act.
On a brighter note, Mike Bloomberg, just said yesterday that it could get much much worse if foreign entities stop purchasing U.S. debt. Oh, wait that's not a brighter note.
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this Forum topic
Poll
WSO Employment Rate: for those of you searching for a job, have you received an offer yet?
Yes
57%
No
43%
Total votes: 72
New groups
- University of California, Berkeley
- University Hawaii, Manoa - Shidler College of Business
- Penn State Finance Group
- Kogod Finance Group
- UT Freshman Business Association Members & Alumni
- Indiana University
- University of Texas at Austin
- Pittsburgh Marketers
- The Restructuring Group
- National Organization for Business and Engineering - Illinois Chapter
Invite a friend
Correct me if I'm wrong, but
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't the companies that benefitted from the gutting of Glass-Steagall (JPM, BofA, Citi) the strongest right now?
Yes, the repeal of G-S
Yes, the repeal of G-S allowed ibanks and commercial banks to exist under the same roof...I think the point was that there needs to be additional regulation but the above post is grossly over generalized
IB only or IB/CB, there are
IB only or IB/CB, there are players on both sides that could be considered "too big to fail." Agree though that regulation is important, especially to ensure that the operations of the I-banking vs C-banking portion of the company are kept somewhat seperate.
A week ago, when the LHC
A week ago, when the LHC went online, there was discussion as to whether it would cause the whole world to collapse.
In the midst of the collapse of the financial world, I find this ironic, to say the least.