wnyc.org / 93.9fm / am 820

Comments

• [1] Hugh Sansom from Brooklyn NY November 12, 2009 - 10:12AM

  The machinery is already chugging to dilute any law that might curb the obscenities of Wall Street. Colin Peterson -- a Democrat -- offered an amendment (Alternative Swap Execution Facility) to HR 3795 (Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets Act) to effectively torpedo exactly what the bill is supposed to provide -- greater transparency.

  Part of the basic issue is that many of these very complex financial instruments are trade almost entirely in secret. Ben Bernanke and before him Alan Greenspan wholly endorse this secrecy.

  
  
• [2] jen from manhattan November 12, 2009 - 10:13AM

  I wouldlike to know if there are any reports that President Obama has discouraged potential democratic challengers to Dodd as he has done in NY with Senator Gillibrand.

  
  
• [3] Carl from New Jersey November 12, 2009 - 10:19AM

  The ONLY thing that the banks and Wall street fear is someone watching the terrible things they do - every day - to defraud the rest of us. We need to regulate -- and punish offenders. To do nothing now just says that everything (corruption, greed, lying, destroying millions of lives)was OK & remains OK. There should be hyndreds of trials going on right now - we should not be talking about the only 2 guys that have been even 'threatened' with jail time.

  
  
• [4] Hugh Sansom from Brooklyn NY November 12, 2009 - 10:23AM

  When it comes to private institutions versus public, we know that the Republican party takes the view that privatizing magically makes the the institution pure and flawless. This is the view in health care and with Wall Street.

  It's absurd, and most Democrats buy into it, too. No surprise -- they're getting plenty of kickbacks from health insurers and Wall Street.

  
  
• [5] Rich from Staten Island November 12, 2009 - 10:25AM

  Can you discuss further the linkage of the growth of the economies of India and China and the loss of United States jobs to these countries.

  
  
• [6] Patrick Carmody from Boston, MA November 12, 2009 - 10:29AM

  Love your show. Mr. Gross did not answer the question regarding the question about the repeal of Glass Steagall accurately, I believe.

  During the 1990s and 2000s, in accreting financial market, a hedge fund only had to do to leverage the equity capital

  undermanagement to beat the index and thereby obtain "outsize" returns. Unfortunately, many investors did not care to check or analyze how

  returns were achieved relative to leverage. In the meltdown, banks were caught holding the pale, as they had extended enormous margin

  financing in their role as prime brokers.

  You would think the Obama administration

  would try to de-couple investment banking from routine lending by re-

  enacting Glass Steagall, but no. Goldman Sachs and others became

  bank holding companies allowing them to access federal funding to re-lever

  the market at taxpayer risk.

  In case it interests your listeners at all, I would like to bring to your

  attention a relatively innocuous article from yesterday's WSJ. Here is

  the link: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091030-717126.html. Mr. Griffin's credit lines have been cut and he is now trying to

  acquire a bank so as to access the fed funding. He will use this tolever his funds to beat his benchmark. This is an outrage, but I thought it might interest you. The WSJ missed the point.

  All the best,

  Patrick Carmody

  
  
• [7] gowanus from nyc November 12, 2009 - 10:29AM

  since when can't criminal activity be stupid too?

  "surprised at the lack of criminal activity" - it's something out of the twilight zone!

  they got off on being stupid not criminal...wtf!

  
  
• [8] brad from nyc November 12, 2009 - 10:32AM

  Did i just hear your guest jokingly answer "plastics" in replying to your parting question? Funny!

  
  
• [9] Barry from Westchester November 12, 2009 - 10:36AM

  For Lou Dobbs -- secretary of State and Masonry in the Palin administration.

  
  
• [10] Amy from Manhattan November 12, 2009 - 10:55AM

  I think the question isn't whether the fraud trial defendants were criminal or stupid, it's whether the "not guilty" verdict means that their actions didn't rise to the level of criminality or that the law wasn't written strictly enough to *make* their actions criminal.

  
  
• [11] Eugenia Renskoff from Williamsburgh, Brooklyn November 12, 2009 - 02:22PM

  I feel that these 2 Bearn Stearns guys who got acquitted the other day in Brooklyn should be held responsible if their incompetence has caused investors loss of money. Maybe I am a little biased because of my own unfortunate mortgage fraud experience in GA. But I believe that this should be the next big thing to focus on: financial crimes due to lack of skills/competence on the part of traders/mortgage brokers, etc., and/or downright greed. If people are suffering (the ones who invested money in any way, shape or form) those responsible for the loss must be held accountable. Let them go through hard financial times. I am betting they won’t like it one bit. Eugenia Renskoff