Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: bronxville
I don't want to get into an argument, but I have my doubts about that repeal being the sole cause. Here's why:

In Canada, the Canada I grew up in, there was a Glass-Steagal-like provision that split financial services into four sectors. Any firm that wanted to conduct business had to stick to one of the four; no cross-ownership was allowed. The four sectors were: banks, trust companies (basically S & Ls), brokerage services and insurance. They used to be known as the "Four Pillars."

The Government of Canada allowed some cross-ownership starting in late 1987, and allowed complete cross-ownership in late 1991. Since then, Canadian banks have been permitted to own any financial institution they want.

Canada's financial-services sector was one of the few to get through the crisis of '08 largely unscathed - bloodied, yes, but unscathed. As for previous meltdowns, the same.

In order to claim that the repeal of the cross-ownership restrictions of Glass-Steagall was the major causative force, the difference between the American and Canadian experience has to be explained too. The CRA growing teeth might suffice.

(If anyone's interested, this master's thesis goes into the Canadian experience of cross-ownership deregulation.)

30 posted on 11/14/2010 9:30:34 AM PST by danielmryan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]


To: danielmryan

No problem - I enjoy input. You’ve given me info to read and reflect. The repeal of Glass-Steagal and the consequences just might have been a coincidence or added to... Will keep for a read later. Thanks. :)


33 posted on 11/14/2010 3:45:46 PM PST by bronxville
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson