Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: combjelly who wrote (563557)	5/3/2010 2:17:12 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) of 1575535

The (partial) Reapeal of Glass Steagal had just about nothing to do with the financial crisis. The main effect of it was to allow investment banks to merge with deposit taking insured banks, but most did not, and those who did where not more prone to fail, either before or during the finical crisis, than investment banks that didn't go through such mergers. Your statement "The repeal of Glass-Steagall resulted in there being no regulations on the derivatives market" is false on several levels. First of all the repeal, was in the same law as the limitation on regulations, but was not the same action. You can have either part without having the other. Secondly derivatives where largely unregulated before the law was passed. You already had the result of derivatives being largely unregulated. Lastly Gramm–Leach–Bliley only prevented the possibility for SEC regulation of security-based swap agreements, not all regulation of any type of derivative from any source, and certainly not leaving the markets in general alone (which was the point you where responding to). "Security-based swap agreements being left alone", doesn't equal "the markets being left alone".

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next