In article ,
"HeyBub" wrote:

George wrote:

So you actually believe the drop all the regulations because we can
trust everyone to do the right thing Reagan thinking wasn't
responsible for dropping numerous banking regulations which allowed
super mega mergers of banking and investment institutions with
minimal regulation had nothing to do with last year's implosion? You
might want to hit the red kool-aid a little less if you don't.

Yep. It wasn't the LACK of regulation, it was too much of the WRONG KIND of
regulation. Specifically the requirements that lending institutions serve
"underserved" areas.

The biggest problem from the regulation standpoint was that the law
making the changes in bank regulation never got around to appointing ONE
lead agency. Thus, some regs that probably should have been put in
place, no one thought they had the authority or that some other agency
had it. In other areas, two or three different agencies thought they had
authority and either squabbled over who should do it or else all the
agencies came up with their own (often contradictory if not flat out
mutually exclusive) regs. COngress is preparing, from everything I have
seen, to compound the inefficiencies and pretty much fracture the
regulation to an even greater degree.
And don't EVEN get me started on current rumblings about trying to
get the executive more in tune with the shareholders since the tax law
changes that largely put us in this pay mess were instituted
specifically to do that.


Cruise through the worst parts of your town. You'll find a Bank of America
branch sandwiched between a pawn shop and a Stop-&-Rob in neighborhoods
where the only other retail businesses on the street are hookers and crack
dealers. Do you think BoA or Wachovia or Washington Mutual opened those
branches because of rational business decisions?

--
"Politics should be limited in its scope to war,
protection of property, and the occasional
precautionary beheading of a member of the ruling class."
-P.J. O'Rourke