[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"America Must Slash Red Tape to Make Nuclear Power Great Again!!"

"Why the DemocRATZ Activist Class Couldn’t Celebrate the Cease-Fire They Demanded"

Antifa Calls for CIVIL WAR!

British Police Make an Arrest...of a White Child Fishing in the Thames

"Sanctuary" Horde ASSAULTS Chicago... ELITE Marines SMASH Illegals Without Mercy

Trump hosts roundtable on ANTIFA

What's happening in Britain. Is happening in Ireland. The whole of Western Europe.

"The One About the Illegal Immigrant School Superintendent"

CouldnÂ’t believe he let me pet him at the end (Rhino)

Cops Go HANDS ON For Speaking At Meeting!

POWERFUL: Charlie Kirk's final speech delivered in South Korea 9/6/25

2026 in Bible Prophecy

2.4 Billion exposed to excessive heat

🔴 LIVE CHICAGO PORTLAND ICE IMMIGRATION DETENTION CENTER 24/7 PROTEST 9/28/2025

Young Conservative Proves Leftist Protesters Wrong

England is on the Brink of Civil War!

Charlie Kirk Shocks Florida State University With The TRUTH

IRL Confronting Protesters Outside UN Trump Meeting

The UK Revolution Has Started... Brit's Want Their Country Back

Inside Paris Dangerous ANTIFA Riots

Rioters STORM Chicago ICE HQ... "Deportation Unit" SCRAPES Invaders Off The Sidewalk

She Decoded A Specific Part In The Bible

Muslim College Student DUMBFOUNDED as Charlie Kirk Lists The Facts About Hamas

Charlie Kirk EVISCERATES Black Students After They OPENLY Support “Anti-White Racism” HEATED DEBATE

"Trump Rips U.N. as Useless During General Assembly Address: ‘Empty Words’"

Charlie Kirk VS the Wokies at University of Tennessee

Charlie Kirk Takes on 3 Professors & a Teacher

British leftist student tells Charlie Kirk facts are unfair

The 2 Billion View Video: Charlie Kirk's Most Viewed Clips of 2024

Antifa is now officially a terrorist organization.

The Greatness of Charlie Kirk: An Eyewitness Account of His Life and Martyrdom

Charlie Kirk Takes on Army of Libs at California's UCR

DR. ALVEDA KING: REST IN PEACE CHARLIE KIRK

Steven Bonnell wants to murder Americans he disagrees with

What the fagots LGBTQ really means

I watched Charlie Kirk get assassinated. This is my experience.

Elon Musk Delivers Stunning Remarks At Historic UK March (Tommy Robinson)

"Transcript: Mrs. Erika Kirk Delivers Public Address: ‘His Movement Will Go On’"

"Victor Davis Hanson to Newsmax: Kirk Slaying Crosses Rubicon"

Rest In Peace Charlie Kirk

Charlotte train murder: Graphic video captures random fatal stabbing of young Ukrainian refugee

Berlin in July 1945 - Probably the best restored film material you'll watch from that time!

Ok this is Funny

Walking Through 1980s Los Angeles: The City That Reinvented Cool

THE ZOMBIES OF AMERICA

THE OLDEST PHOTOS OF NEW YORK YOU'VE NEVER SEEN

John Rich – Calling Out P. Diddy, TVA Scandal, and Joel Osteen | SRS #232

Capablanca Teaches Us The ONLY Chess Opening You'll Ever Need

"How Bruce Springsteen Fooled America"

How ancient Rome was excavated in Italy in the 1920s. Unique rare videos and photos.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Economy
See other Economy Articles

Title: Without rules, financial markets don't work
Source: Elizabeth Warren | U.S. Senator for Massachusetts
URL Source: http://www.warren.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=774
Published: Apr 17, 2015
Author: Sen. Elizabeth Warren
Post Date: 2015-04-17 11:53:49 by A Pole
Keywords: None
Views: 4343
Comments: 23

For too long, the opponents of financial reform have cast the debate as an argument between the pro-regulation camp and the pro-market camp. They generally put Democrats in the first camp and Republicans in the second.

But that so-called “choice” gets it all wrong.

Rules are not the enemy of markets. Without some basic rules and accountability, financial markets don’t work. People get ripped off, risk-taking skyrockets, and markets fall apart. Rolling back the rules or firing the cops can be profoundly anti-market.

Republicans claim – loudly and repeatedly – that they support competitive markets, but their approach to financial regulation is pure crony capitalism. It helps the rich and the powerful protect and expand their wealth and their power – and leaves everyone else behind.

This week, I gave a big policy speech where I presented ways we can promote competition, innovation, and safety in financial markets. The speech was long and wonky, but it really boils down to two principles:

First, financial institutions shouldn’t be allowed to cheat people. Markets work only if people can see and understand the products they are buying, only if people can reasonably compare one product to another, only if people can’t get fooled into taking on far more risk than they realize just so that some fly-by-night company can turn a quick profit and move on. That’s true for families buying mortgages and for pension plans buying complex financial instruments.

Second, financial institutions shouldn’t be allowed to get the taxpayers to pick up their risks. That’s true for using insured deposits for high-risk trading, and it’s true for letting Too-Big-to-Fail banks get a wink-and-a-nod guarantee of a government bailout. We know what changes we need to make financial markets work better. Strengthen the rules to prevent cheating. Make the cops do their jobs. Cut the banks down to size. Change the tax code to promote more long-term investment. Tackle shadow-banking done by non-bank firms and subsidiaries.

Changes like these can make a real difference. They can help protect hard-working families from cheats and liars. They can help rein in the lawless practices that are still too common on Wall Street. They can end Too Big to Fail.

The secret to better markets isn’t turning loose the biggest banks to do whatever they want. The secret is smarter, more structural regulation that forces everyone to play by the same rules and doesn’t let anyone put the entire economy at risk.

The key steps aren’t hard. It just takes political courage – and a strong demand from people like you – to complete the unfinished business of financial reform.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 19.

#2. To: A Pole (#0)

First, financial institutions shouldn’t be allowed to cheat people. Markets work only if people can see and understand the products they are buying, only if people can reasonably compare one product to another, only if people can’t get fooled into taking on far more risk than they realize just so that some fly-by-night company can turn a quick profit and move on. That’s true for families buying mortgages and for pension plans buying complex financial instruments.

Second, financial institutions shouldn’t be allowed to get the taxpayers to pick up their risks. That’s true for using insured deposits for high-risk trading, and it’s true for letting Too-Big-to-Fail banks get a wink-and-a-nod guarantee of a government bailout. We know what changes we need to make financial markets work better. Strengthen the rules to prevent cheating. Make the cops do their jobs. Cut the banks down to size. Change the tax code to promote more long-term investment. Tackle shadow-banking done by non-bank firms and subsidiaries.

Changes like these can make a real difference. They can help protect hard-working families from cheats and liars. They can help rein in the lawless practices that are still too common on Wall Street. They can end Too Big to Fail.

Sen. Warren is 100% correct.

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-17   12:19:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Jameson (#2)

Sen. Warren is 100% correct.

Best case scenario is Warren is 100 percent naive. Worst case scenario is Warren is 100 percent a demogogue. Maybe she falls somewhere in between.

The politics of strife and envy. Two-bit politicians exploit it - they tell everyone how "we're gonna get those evil rich and make those bastards pay."

I wish these a-holes (and those that follow them) would learn that The Perfect Society ....... is NEVER going to happen (this side of the pearly gates, that is)

But the search for the perfect society - when it's at the hands of ever- increasingly totalitarian government- never ends well. At it's best, we end up with an Obama.

At it worst, well name any 20th or 21st century dictator or tyrant.

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-04-17   13:39:02 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Rufus T Firefly (#5)

Best case scenario is Warren is 100 percent naive. Worst case scenario is Warren is 100 percent a demagogue.

Senator Warren's argument here is certainly not naive, and is clearly and very simply rational.

There isn't so much as a whiff of politics in her conclusion...

(if there was she'd be talking about Glass Steagall)

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-17   14:10:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Jameson (#8)

There isn't so much as a whiff of politics in her conclusion...

Aw come on. She's a public official, and as such every time she speaks . . . it's political.

Not saying that's a bad or a good thing. It's just the way it is. Whenever ANY public official speaks, it's political. They're either 1)running for office, 2) planning on running for office, or 3)supporting someone else running for office.

Now going back to what I posted earlier. Warren supports a political point of view that's (my opinion) very naive. And dangerous.

The perfect world that statists like Warren envision is NEVER going to happen on this earth.

Sorry.

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-04-17   14:48:05 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Rufus T Firefly (#9)

Warren supports a political point of view that's very naive. And dangerous.

The perfect world that statists like Warren envision is NEVER going to happen on this earth.

Perhaps you're reading a different article....this one is addressing the need for further reform and regulation of the financial services industry.

This is not really a "perfect world" exercise...it is directly related to the work done by the committee on which she sits.

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-17   14:57:35 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Jameson (#10)

Perhaps you're reading a different article....this one is addressing the need for further reform and regulation of the financial services industry.

This is not really a "perfect world" exercise...it is directly related to the work done by the committee on which she sits.

Some questions for you (in no particular order). These pertain to the financial services industry, but the questions could be applied to anything subject to regulation (i.e. campaign finance)

1. How long has the financial services industry been regulated?

2. How many regulations are enough?

3. Is there a "magic regulation" out there that - if imposed - would "fix" everything? Would we then have no need for more regulations?

4. Why is it - speaking in general terms - that when a regulation doesn't solve the issue it was supposed to solve or, worse yet, causes other problems, that the regulation is never repealed? More regulations are just piled on top of it?

Name your statist: Zero, Warren, the Xlintons, the Bushes. They all have one thing in common. They LOVE regulations because it gives gov't more power.

Why people (who seem afraid of freedom) fall for this speaks to the power of cradle to grave indoctrination, I suppose.

Viva La Publik Skools!

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-04-17   17:45:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Rufus T Firefly (#12)

Ok, I see that you really aren't interested in discussing the merits of Senator Warren's positions on the need for Banking reform.

Instead you want to beat the dead horse of "more government power"......

Good luck

Jameson  posted on  2015-04-18   5:57:33 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 19.

#21. To: Jameson (#19)

Ok, I see that you really aren't interested in discussing the merits

It is not in his job description.

A Pole  posted on  2015-04-18 06:32:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Jameson (#19)

I see that you really aren't interested in discussing

There's plenty of that to go around.

Let's review the cast of characters that has been brought into the "discussion". Not by me, by the way:

Rush Limbaugh- post 3
Rush Limbaugh again - post 11
"Dubya" - post 16

I did mention others in post 13 - but the "discusssion" was already off the rails at that point.

To review, I saw the post about Liz Warren, and I wanted to comment on it. I'll admit that my saying in my first post "what a tool" may not have been the best way to go. Obviously she has fans out there in flyover country, and I should respect that.

While I observe politics in general and am fascinated by it, I am not a student of the banking or financial industry. I do know it's been regulated for years and years, and yet problems remain. Perhaps Warren will finally propose the "magic regulation" that will fix it once and for all?

So because I follow politics, I took the opportunity to make this more about her (Warren). That's why I quoted her statement (in post 1) thus:

Republicans claim – loudly and repeatedly – that they support competitive markets, but their approach to financial regulation is pure crony capitalism. It helps the rich and the powerful protect and expand their wealth and their power – and leaves everyone else behind.

The point was/is: If so-called "crony capitalism" is all on the republican side, then why are mega-billionaires like Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Tom Steyer and George Soros all democrats?

This is a legitimate question, and you'll note it was posed in post 1. Yet no one chose to answer it before going off on rush limbaugh and george bush rabbit trails.

Just to close (as this will be my last comment on this topic): the Elizabeth Warren phenomenon is interesting. Not necessarily because of her - but because of what she represents.

I believe that the democrats are going to come to realize that with Hilliary Xlinton they have a pig in a poke. She is not Bill; she is not warm and fuzzy, she is not likeable; and (even with all the billions that will be spent and the inevitable election fraud) she may not be electable.

So I believe they will turn to Elizabeth Warren, and there is a good chance she will be the nominee.

Do I believe it makes a difference (at this point) whether Elizabeth Warren, Hillary Xlinton, or Jeb Bush occupy the WH after next election? No, not really. The seeds of our destruction were planted long ago (yes, even before George W. Bush, believe it or not).

All we're doing now is rearranging the deck chairs of the Titanic.

Rufus T Firefly  posted on  2015-04-18 07:38:13 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 19.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com