Streams

Rewriting The Financial Rules: Jim Himes

Tuesday, July 07, 2009

Congressman Jim Himes (D-CT) discusses how Washington wants to remake the banking industry. Restructuring Wall Street. What do you think needs to happen to prevent the next banking collapse? Post your new banking rules below!

Guests:

Jim Himes

The Morning Brief

Enter your email address and we’ll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.

Comments [14]

Joseph Keating from Short Hills NJ

Eliminate fine print from mortgage documents All print to be full size.

Jul. 08 2009 12:19 PM
Joseph Keating from Short Hills NJ

Obtain a list of all financial products available from any institution. require CEO to define three randomlym selected items under oath. Passinf score is 100%.

Jul. 08 2009 12:12 PM
Tim Kunz from Baldwin, NY

Regulation alone will never solve this one. As indicated by Mr. Himes, big business will hire the lawyers to find a way around the regulation. To end this problem we must have comprehensive personal income tax reform to remove the incentive to feudalistic practices.

The vast wealth of the top 2% is created by the same means as in the days of kings and feudal lords: a small percentage of the population amasses the wealth created by the 98%. This principle of wealth accumulation is the same for Bill Gates as Bernie Madoff, even though the methods cannot be compared.

We must return to top marginal tax rate in the high 90's (adding to this formula "loop-hole free") to return the nation's wealth to the persons who are creating it.

And please, don't think "decreased incentive!" 98% will not be affected by this rate and most super high earners will reinvest in their businesses or expand the economy rather than pay this tax. If we were to tax the second billion at 99.9%, the individual would still net a million. That's not a bad bonus for the individual collecting the wealth that can only be created by the rest of society.

Jul. 07 2009 09:36 PM
John Bell from Brooklyn

It seems to me that years ago Goldman Sachs began to amass as much elected political power as it could. I believe that Corzine's one term election to the Senate, and his subsequent recruitment of Obama, signaled the commencement of Goldman Sachs' overt efforts to achieve this end. There are many other examples of this, in addition to the several high level appointees with Goldman Sachs history, in Obama's and previous administrations.

I used to know a retired vice-chairman at Goldman Sachs. He is a genuinely good and admirable person. I can only hope his former associates share his outlook and practices.

It is up to Congressman Hines to demonstrate that he is the representative of his constituents, and not a financial institution.

Jul. 07 2009 11:55 AM
Andrew B. from New York City

Funny how the people who shout "Too big to fail" about some big financial institutions are the same ones with the vested interests in those institutions.

Jul. 07 2009 11:23 AM
superf88

pound of flesh in the game and nothing less. skin is just skin.

Jul. 07 2009 11:22 AM
butnotgreenspan

only thing that has worked so far... 100millionaire insiders over age 78

Jul. 07 2009 11:22 AM
muri from ny

Congressman--

Please don't let the SROs muck up the Pres's plan. They are really only lobbying organizations. Especially NASAA, and they really want a place at the table organizing this. Even FINRA is not terribly good. Don't let them usurp this new compliance regime.

And the way you pull folks into the gov't work is to keep those bonuses down!

Regards,
ex-Citi and ex-UBS compliance worker

Jul. 07 2009 11:21 AM
Terry B. from Inwood, Upper Manhattan

Explain why 5% or less is sufficient "skin in the game?"

Jul. 07 2009 11:20 AM
James

Given the amount of money Jim Hines has received from the financial industry ($150,000 from people affiliated with Goldman Sachs alone), I'm somewhat skeptical of how much he would be try to fix the system.

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00029070&cycle=2008

Jul. 07 2009 11:17 AM
Andre Mirabelli from Manhattan

The lack of liquidity caused by the lack of trust between firms that were 'too big to fail' was one choke point that led to the financial crisis.
If we require that firms with more than $500B in total holdings post their holdings daily to a public web site, then large firms will spin off their risky investment departments so that the big firms left will be too transparent to lose liquidity and the spun off firms will be too individually small to initiate a systemic crisis.

Jul. 07 2009 11:16 AM
mcgill grad student from montreal CANADA

Banks which have FDIC insurance should not be able to be owned by any upstream company.

They should be stand-alone banks.e

They should only take deposits... no issuance of other liabilities. They should only hold Treasury bills and notes.

Anyone else who want higher interest should NOT get FDIC insurance.

For all other financial firms... no OBI no OFF BALANCE SHEET ITEMS.

Syndication of loans would not obviate originator of risk of loss so that underwriting is prudent.

Jul. 07 2009 11:16 AM
Andrew B. from New York City

The Matt Taibbi articles in Rolling Stone tell us all we need to know.

The disaster happened because investment banking guys, especially Goldman Sachs ones, infest our government.

They ensured that the whole junk mortgage-backed-securities market - backed by credit default swap insurance got off the ground - by ensuring that the taxpayer would pay off the credit default swaps.

Without the guaranteed bailouts - none of this stuff would have happened. Wall Street will NEVER eat its own dog food if they can control the government and make US do it.

Jul. 07 2009 11:13 AM
hjs from 11211

why doesn't CT get more back from the taxes sent to the federeal government?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/UserFiles/Image/Blog/ftsbs-large.jpg

Jul. 07 2009 10:32 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.