Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well I read your link, and frankly, don't think so.
Some of the pundits question the timing, but currently there is no evidence that the timing of the lawsuit is the result of collusion between the White House and the SEC. Schapiro so far has been demonstrating considerably more aggression in pursuit of these cases.
Some of the pundits don't question the timing at all, but instead point out the weaknesses in the case. And they are quite right.
One of the pundits is remarking on the SEC board not unanimously voting to pursue this case. But that's not remarkable. While Schapiro's predecessor was noted for trying to achieve unanimous decisions, the board has an odd number for precisely the reason that originally it was never intended to be unanimous in its decisions, that a majority would carry the vote. And, in fact, historically, non-unanimous decisions outnumber unanimous decisions.
Regardless what happens , the real trial is in the court of public opinion. These " banks" have gained a reputation far beyond what is legal, or can be successfully prosecuted.... The principals should go directly to jail....as far as the pitchfork crowd is concerned.
Take a look at how Canada handles what THEIR FINCINAL COMPANIES CAN GET AWAYWITH... We had laws put into place in 1935 to balance the risks and limit the exposure. Gradually over time , it all went away, mostly when Regan came to power...all in the name of deregulation. !980 was a turning point with this trend. Some has been good , some bad. Open entry I believe is a good thing, but playing fast and loose with the economy is not. The Big Guys need to be broken up, way too big, or , it will happen all over again. Forget what you think about bailouts, any institution that large WILL be bailed out if it happens again. Credit cards are controlled by four Banks....that's another story with usury worse than the Mob. The bottom line.....downsize the big guys...its time has come.
Regardless what happens , the real trial is in the court of public opinion. These " banks" have gained a reputation far beyond what is legal, or can be successfully prosecuted.... The principals should go directly to jail....as far as the pitchfork crowd is concerned.
Take a look at how Canada handles what THEIR FINCINAL COMPANIES CAN GET AWAYWITH... We had laws put into place in 1935 to balance the risks and limit the exposure. Gradually over time , it all went away, mostly when Regan came to power...all in the name of deregulation. !980 was a turning point with this trend. Some has been good , some bad. Open entry I believe is a good thing, but playing fast and loose with the economy is not. The Big Guys need to be broken up, way too big, or , it will happen all over again. Forget what you think about bailouts, any institution that large WILL be bailed out if it happens again. Credit cards are controlled by four Banks....that's another story with usury worse than the Mob. The bottom line.....downsize the big guys...its time has come.
During the Clinton administration we had Reno threatening banks, and we had the 0bama lead ACORN disrupting banks by protesting them if they did not increase lending to low income and minority home buyer.
Banks were being heavily pressured to give out risky loans, and the managers at both F&F were getting larger and larger bonuses for buying up every piece of mortgage paper they could get their hands on, and they felt safe in doing so because the federal government had their backs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.