Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama to propose size limits for banks
AFP ^ | Jan. 21, 2010

Posted on 01/21/2010 12:29:59 AM PST by Free ThinkerNY

President Barack Obama will on Thursday propose new limits on the size of US banks after spending billions of tax-payer dollars to bail out "too-big-to-fail" firms, a senior official said.

The measures would place sweeping new restrictions on a sector seen as responsible for sparking the largest recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s.

"A couple of months ago the president began discussing with his economic team the need to include in financial reform more specific and stronger provisions to limit the size and scope of financial institutions" the official told AFP.

The proposals aim "to cut down on excessive risk taking" among the largest banks, after crises at a handful of the largest firms threatened to choke the flow of cash to the US economy.

"(On Thursday) the president will announce a series of measures that address size and scope" of the institutions the official said.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: banks; economy; idiocy; subversion

1 posted on 01/21/2010 12:29:59 AM PST by Free ThinkerNY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

If we haven’t the stomach to let these banks fail then we really have no choice but to limit the size.


2 posted on 01/21/2010 12:35:03 AM PST by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Occasionally a blind pig in the woods will find an acorn.


3 posted on 01/21/2010 12:36:27 AM PST by flash2368
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

This primitive jackleg economist needs to quit playing surgeon.


4 posted on 01/21/2010 12:40:00 AM PST by Psalm 144
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flash2368

This is a typical communist response to a non-problem. The issue was pushing banks to make bad loans with the community reinvestment act. When Reagan de-regulated the banks it helped fuel an unprecedented growth in the economy. Obama wants to hamstring us like FDR did when he deepened the depression.


5 posted on 01/21/2010 12:41:17 AM PST by JMS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Great. Start with the Fed.


6 posted on 01/21/2010 12:41:19 AM PST by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY
Amazing. You can replace Obama with Chavez, and US with Venezuela and the story remains totally unsurprising.
7 posted on 01/21/2010 12:43:09 AM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

As long as it isn’t his chums over at JPM and GS...


8 posted on 01/21/2010 12:46:13 AM PST by djf (2010 in review: A handfull of Wall Street banks got way more help than Haiti!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Size matters?


9 posted on 01/21/2010 12:47:21 AM PST by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

We fix the problem of being too big to fail by making them be little!

Seriously, we normally do not worry about things like that until it becomes an obvious anti-competitive issue.


10 posted on 01/21/2010 12:47:41 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JMS

If Democrats are hit in the head with a problem between A and B, invariably they turn to C.


11 posted on 01/21/2010 12:48:52 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

It is one thing to see a bank fail, it is quite another to see America fail.

Government needs to get out of the business of doing business.

ruefully


12 posted on 01/21/2010 12:53:49 AM PST by petro45acp (Free Republic, the only thing working on this sorry Bagram interweb thingy! Thanks Free Republic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Major banks can’t fail because of “contagion”. In other words, there is a fear of a domino effect since they are all tied to each other. But limiting a bank’s size is nothing more than control.


13 posted on 01/21/2010 1:07:21 AM PST by rbosque (11 year Freeper! Combat Economist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Why not just stop subsidizing them?


14 posted on 01/21/2010 1:27:42 AM PST by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Great. Just what we need.

So Zero and the pea brains in Congress will smile and tell us how this is necessary so we never again have to revisit what happened in the fall of 2008. Because, of course, the free market is what failed then, and now we need big gov to step in and fix things.

Never mind that this legislation all but institutionalizes “too big to fail”. Never mind looking into the real causes of the crisis, like the downward manipulation of interest rates by the fiat currency money czars at the Fed that fooled people into borrowing more than they could afford to buy houses at inflated prices, or the pols themselves, who had a big hand in creating the problem what with their continual push to put every American in a house.

And never mind considering real solutions, like sound money, or enforcing bankruptcy for insolvent banking institutions.

Nope, all we need is this little bit of extra regulation and all will be well. And a new regulatory agency, of course, staffed, no doubt, with typical big gov types who will put on a good show of looking out for the folks while secretly planning their futures bonuses on Wall St working for the very entities they’re supposed to regulate.

Politics 2010. Same as politics 2009. Same as politics in America since... forever. More big government solutions, brought to you by the perpetually clueless. More change we can believe in.


15 posted on 01/21/2010 1:44:47 AM PST by Swing_Thought (The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is a knowledge of our own ignorance. - Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Swing_Thought

Fannie and Freddie?


16 posted on 01/21/2010 2:18:06 AM PST by scooby321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Swing_Thought
Nothing will change in the banking world until over the counter CDO's and CDS's are regulated. When W and Congress deregulated the industry to allowed (encouraged) investment and commercial banks to merge.....we got the do-do we have now.

Basically, the turning the blind eye to the condoning of such mergers was paramount to the success of the last goobermint sponsored artificial credit bubble.

On the books and in the media and from DC, it appeared the economy was on the uptick from the residential and commercial construction boom. W needed this in order to manage our debt and raise money for the WOT and more goobermint expansion.

Allowing banks to leverage up to 80:1 in the markets and then bailing them out was total BS.

Still, from a national and global standpoint, we have hundreds of trillions of 'debt instruments' that banks really have now f'n clue as to their real risk versus their real value.

Fannie and Freddie are still pumping the CDS's out with no details as to exactly what is in those packages.

Now, China has formed 4 large Chinese owned investment groups who are gobbling up commercial real estate in the US using our US treasuries they possess as collateral.

This is all being kept quite in the LSM (state run media).

So, Zer0 & Co. and Congress are still both busy now playing more smoke and mirrors to the public with such proposals. Timmy & Ben Ben still will not answer the questions in Congressional hearings that would lead to the disclosure of 'The Agenda' and who is really running the show.

17 posted on 01/21/2010 2:25:17 AM PST by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter; All

You can’t be serious. Tell me you aren’t, even if you are.

This is full-on Socialism, boys and girls. Stop fawning over this fecal matter. Just think for two seconds: Is this Constitutional? (HINT: No.) If the Fed can decide how big banks can be, who’s next?


18 posted on 01/21/2010 2:55:19 AM PST by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Swing_Thought

Amen, brother. Amen.


19 posted on 01/21/2010 2:58:17 AM PST by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Straight Vermonter; Free ThinkerNY

Limiting banks’ size only reduces their competitiveness against major international banks. That’s one of the reasons Glass-Steagall has been dismantled.

While the action may “spread” the risk, it does nothing to reduce the risk; in fact, it actually multiplies it by making it “wider”.

If it is not an economic illiteracy or stupidity, then it can only be explained by deliberate undermining of one of the most successful and productive industries US has left.


20 posted on 01/21/2010 2:58:24 AM PST by CutePuppy (If you don't ask the right questions you may not get the right answers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Hey Barry - why not “limit the size and scope” of government while you’re at it?


21 posted on 01/21/2010 3:28:35 AM PST by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

this administration is right out of Atlas Shrugged. I expect The Equalization of Opportunity Act to be announced any day now.


22 posted on 01/21/2010 4:02:20 AM PST by cdcdawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

How about proposing a size limit for the Federal Government. A size limit that will require a huge reduction in federal jobs, projects and infrastructure?


23 posted on 01/21/2010 7:02:24 AM PST by FreeAtlanta (I support Checkbook Conservatives!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JMS
The biggest problem was that Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac were buying all the toxic mortgages. As long as the banks could pass them on to the FMs, they didn't mind originating them. If they had no one to pass them on to, they would have stopped originating them, regardless of the CRA.

Guess what? The FMs are still at it.....

24 posted on 01/21/2010 7:31:59 AM PST by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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