wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Brian, I am all for the reform bill but I still feel that the fine money ( and a little over half a billion is chump change to Goldman Sachs) should have gone to us, the people who lost our homes to foreclosure. I am sure that most people who have gone through this devastating experience, have seen their lives change in ways they never imagined. We have suffered losses that go beyond dollars and cents and we should be compensated. We need to come first and not always last. Eugenia Renskoff

Hi- the Joe Crowley referred to by your guest
as protecting New York State, and thus its citizens, is under the Office of Congressional Ethics investigations for leaving the Capital during the House debate, and after collecting thousands of dollars, in checks, ...returned in time to vote against a series of amendments that would have imposed tougher restrictions on Wall Street. These checks where from a Lobbyist which featured financial firms. NYT 7/15/2010

Kathryn "Boy This Kool-Aid is Making Me Giddy" Wylde.

Thanks for the status quo.

it is really great to have an industry shill on the air, balanced with--or more properly countered by --a more real-world commentator.
Just glad you didn't have Ms Wylde on alone.
And sorry her group has a name that might have meant something.

If it makes credit card use more expensive, maybe it will make people think twice about using them. There are a lot of people who probably shouldn't be using credit cards.

@DSal -- I'm sure that the banks are _helping_ the wealth of the population as a whole. They are serving, with the aid of the US government, as a system for redistributing wealth from the poor and middle class to the wealthiest.

In other words, the wealthiest Americans are making so much money, that their gains offset the losses of the rest of us. I think this is pretty well supported by data from the Department of Labor, the IRS, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, etc.

Neither Schumer nor Gillibrand deserve the jobs they have so it’s no surprise Schumer was out there fighting in favor of another economic disaster. The only goals Schumer ever has are short term ones to secure his job.

sorry, if brian were in detroit i think he would ask the car industry question. he's not all the others!

The consensus among MOST economists (including Simon Johnson, Nouriel Roubini, Krugman, Stiglitz, etc.) is that the federal government, including Charles Schumer, et al, has GUARANTEED another collapse -- almost certainly within the next 10 years.

This is the CONSENSUS among economists. Wilde is a right-wing outlier.

Can Ms Wylde comment on how the consolidation of the banking industry has helped NYC? For example - JPMorgan Chase is the result of Chase Manufacturers Hanover, Chemical, JPMorgan and Bear Stearns.Thousands of jobs have been eliminated over the years locally. Does she have anything to say about what plans are for diversifying the economy of NYC?

It is COMMON KNOWLEDGE, even among conservative economists, that above a certain threshold there is NO added benefit to a bank's being larger.

In other words, the biggest banks could be broken up with no loss to the US or to New York at a financial center.

The only thing that the massive massive size of Goldman and others does is to make them Too Big To Fail -- and that has absolutely not changed.

Wilde is lying lying lying. Simple fact. Or she is just ignorant.

Hugh,
I as well have been pondering the possibility that in today's market, you are actually at a disadvantage by keeping money in a bank. (More so if you are a small account holder, as most people are). I would like to see a study on this to determine wether the banks are actually helping or hurting the wealth of the population. Perhaps a future show, Brian?

just tuning in dunno if this was covered and i'm sure mr. craig or david will skip over this, but

as big as goldman's fine is, it's just a cost of doing business -- and for me, that's what is the difference between Obama, and "Real Change."

Brian - What does Section 342 of the Bill have to do with financial reform except LIBERAL SOCIAL ENGINEERING. This section declares that race and gender employment ratios must be observed by private financial institutions that do business with the government. It’s nothing but a power grab - the new law inserts race and gender quotas into America's financial industry.

It will create twenty Offices of Minority and Women Inclusion, where they all get there own Amdinistrator & staff, within the Treasury, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the twelve Federal Reserve regional banks, the Board of Governors of the Fed, the National Credit Union Administration, the Comptroller of the Currency, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Sounds like more makework too me. Who pays for this? This is a farce!

MORALLY CORRUPT!

Gov't & banks sleep in the same soiled bed.

Geitner... HA!

How about Simon Johnson, Dean Baker, Paul Krugman, Paul Craig Roberts, Michael Hudson or -- unlike the two guests -- somebody (anybody) who knows economics.

The two guests are conservative propagandists.

Here is Dean Baker on what it is NOT lack of confidence behind our continuing economic woes: "Lack of Demand, Not Lack of Confidence, Is the Reason that Businesses are Not Hiring" http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/lack-of-demand-not-lack-of-confidence-is-the-reason-that-businesses-are-not-hiring?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+beat_the_press+%28Beat+the+Press%29&utm_content=Google+Feedfetcher

There actually is something that the big banks could do to make me less unhappy with them. And, this thing would give back to the community and to their employees. The solution is that they would contribute funding to completely bail out the MTA and expand/modernize/enhance the transit system that we all use every day. If they all got together, I don't see how it would hurt their bottom lines dramatically to contribute a billion or two in that direction. And, they would dramatically improve their image in the community. There are obviously other major issues, but they owe something to the community, in my view.

I worked on Wall Street from 2006-2009. I know guys who worked on the subprime desk at Goldman. This $550 million fine is such a joke that when I heard about it yesterday I was utterly stunned. And no admission of fraud? This makes me very, very, very angry. Let me put it this way: The people who work on Wall Street are the money changers of our time. Most people probably wouldn't even consider it an insult to be called a "money changer" -- and that pretty much sums up the state that our culture is in.

Please explain the value of a bill which passes so much power to unknown government regulators?

Where does Greg David bank that he still isn't paying fees? For years I avoided fees, but in the past year they've been popping up all over.

The solution to banking issues is to go to a credit union. I have never had an account at a bank, my little credit union account serves we VERY well, every feature of the big guys, but when I call they know my name!

MORALLY CORRUPT!

Contrary to the caller's assertion, an exclusive, all-consuming obsession with making money and only making money, is a morally depraved motivation.

The fundamental issue is that the banks maintain an adversarial relationship with their "customers". They are immoral and unethical in their unrelenting pursuit of obscene profits on the backs of the population. There still is no real proof that they provide society any benefit beyond the fat paycheck for NYC. This city is in the finacial industry's pocket.

A key fact for _average_ small consumer banking customers, once fees are taken into account, the extraordinarily low interest rates paid (or zero interest on the smallest accounts) means that MOST consumers actually LOSE money by keeping their money in a bank.

The way to go for many will be credit unions, which are still more regulated than banks.

Wow Ms. Wylde has really drank the kool-aid. Progress at all costs....I am so sick of living in a city chained to such a morally derelict industry as wall street. We need financially sustainable industries in this city. We can't keep rolling the dice.

Kathryn Wilde is just lying.

She knows that Goldman was NOT a bank in the relevant regulatory sense when the house of cards was falling.

She also knows that key financial instruments will remain substantively _unregulated_ under this legislation.

What planet is Kathryn Wilde living on?!

ANY judgment is retrospective! Who ever heard of a judgment BEFORE the fact.

And will somebody as Wilde to stop interrupting!

She is a tool of the finanical industry.

The 'fine' for Goldman Sachs is pocket change -- no more a fine for Goldman than 50 cents would be for a New Yorker going 100 mph on Broadway.

Moreover, Goldman will just deduct that fine from it taxes!

Simon Johnson, who writes at BaselineScenario.com and is a professor at MIT, has written repeatedly that the so-called reform package has no real substance at all. Paul Krugman and others have said likely.

Goldman, Citigroup, AIG, Bank of America and others should have been broken up.