Senate to Roll Back Banking Regulations
banned
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2888) 9 months ago
Here's another way Republican policies are going to harm the economy of the United States.

The Republican controlled U.S. Senate (with the assist of a few Democrats, including Montana's Senator Jon Tester) is going to roll back the banking rules imposed after the great recession of 2008. It will be just a matter of time until the next financial meltdown occurs -- only next time, it will probably be a full-blown 1930s style Depression because the U.S. will be even more in debt (thanks to the recently passed GOP tax plan) and the U.S. government will not have the resources to bail us out of the meltdown like it did in 2008. This is really bad news.

If you will recall the banking/housing meltdown back in 2008:

"The [Dodd-Frank Bank Regulation] law was a response to the 2008 financial crisis that felled hundreds of banks and large financial companies, nearly toppling some of the largest U.S. financial institutions, including Bank of America and Goldman Sachs. The Bush administration was forced to seek a $700 billion rescue package [TARP] that stabilized the economy by keeping some of the largest firms afloat."

"The crisis was fueled by risky investments at all levels of the financial system. Local banks and mortgage brokers offered subprime home loans to people who had little chance of keeping up with their payments, and then sold those loans to firms up the chain. They were in turn bundled by larger firms and used for a string of exotic financial instruments sold around the world. When homeowners defaulted on their loans en masse, the bonds they’d been bundled into — as well as other assets based on those bonds — collapsed in value, threatening to take the global financial system down with them."

Senator Elizabeth Warren, a former law professor specializing in bankruptcy, has this to say:

“The bill permits about 25 of the 40 largest banks in America to escape heightened scrutiny and to be regulated as if they were tiny little community banks that could have no impact on the economy.”

https://www.washingtonpos...ost&wpmm=1

If you disagree, call Senator Tester at his Billings office Phone: (406) 252-0550 and let him know you don't want banking regulations to be rolled back.
Top
supporter
Posted by Richard Bonine, Jr. (+13769) 9 months ago
They are not "rolling back banking rules". they are removing public-sector protections. Private industry and profit doesn't exist without public-sector infrastructure which we should all value and protect. They are socializing the costs and privatizing the benefits.
Top
Posted by The man from snowy plains (-244) 9 months ago
Richard

I've had the same ranch banking institutions for 36 years. One is a local bank. The other is a Ag financial service. A few years ago I purchased some new property. Using the same loan structure agent may times over. This last loan was a paperwork nightmare. For a 1/4 of my last major loan it took months to get it finished. Everyday was another pile of required forms. My agent said it was Barney/Frank that complicated the process.
The fact is you can't buy a $400,000 dollar house if you can only afford a $50,000 house.
My grandson will be taking over the operation in a few years. He is already well aware, DON'T borrow more than you can pay off in a couple years. Go without when you can. Keep your banker well informed and always pay all the Interest and some on the principle every chance you get. Plan for the worst. Borrow the least.Fix what you got and work an off ranch job every chance you get. Working for a banker is bad business.
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1
supporter
Posted by Jeri Dalbec (+2630) 9 months ago
Today I called and visited with a lady who has been with a Credit Union for years and she said that they have actually lobbied for some relief in the regulations. The regulations are really more applicable to the very large banks but because they exist, they have to adhere to them as well and it is very costly to small banks and credit unions. The costs have to be passed on one way or another. So..this would be a reprieve for smaller entities and it helps me to understand why Senator Tester would be in favor of it.

Probably, a good thing would be to hope that the larger institutions learned a lesson and will avoid the behaviors that required the Dodd-Frank enactment in the first place☺

I think I like how Richard explains it...but, every write-up that I have read says, "Rolled-Back"?
Top
banned
Posted by Mary Catherine Dunphy (+2888) 9 months ago
I guess we can only hope the banks and credit unions will do the right thing. I was sorry the Glass-Steagall Act of 1932 got rolled back in the 1990s.

https://en.wikipedia.org/...egislation

These articles attempt to explain what is happening with the current bank legislation:

https://www.vox.com/polic...regulation

https://www.vox.com/expla...egulations
permalink   ·  vote tally
Top
+1