Political Crossfire Forums

both have been manipulating the economy; one to win elections the other to make stupid amounts of money.

every time we've slacked on regulating banks in the past it's hurt the economy. during that gilded age you often cite, they had a hell of a lot more regulation on banks and investment houses than prior to the Civil War during the economically meh "wildcat" bank era.

I think that we need to make it harder to become a national private bank and we need to rebuild the wall between commercial and investment banking....or as it is otherwise known, the 20th century.

But, it was the gubmint that made banks get bigger and influential by propping them up with taxpayer money when they could have regulated themselves. In the Gilded Age there was no Fed Reserve and consequently America's economy expanded at a much greater level. Its clear that regulations aren't the answer but rather a free market should be encouraged rather than stifled using unnecessary regulations.

The Gilded Age was terrible, what's wrong with you?

Two things that definitely need regulation.

1) The exact nature of financial instruments.

2) The capital to lending ratio in every-bank.

1 + 2 were major major flaws inherent in the system that lead to then rapidly exacerbated the crisis.

Its also rather silly to suggest that various financial instruments bouncing around banks is really wealth generation. High level Insurance markets are especially bad for they have basically been turned into retarded bookies with 'swaps'. There should also be very clearly defined rules about how debt can be consolidated.

In a nutshell, allow high level financiers to pluck magical new abstract and importantly tradeable instruments out of the aether having government declare them a legally tradeable commodity then basically operating like a bookies. Has proven to be a shitty idea.

Where as the capital to lending ratio is already something set by the state. I can't speak to murika, but gordo full of hubirs decided to set it super low so we could all enter a magically new age of prosperity based on financial institutions operational as if they had 10 times or more capital than they actually had. WHAT COULD HAVE GONE WRONG HERE>

Banks preform a very useful function. Turning otherwise 'out of the game' savings into fluid capital for investment.

They need to return to that function.

And this isun't about interfering with markets. Dem markets already be mixed son. Its about actually making regulation meaningful and not just token.