Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (423486)	10/7/2008 5:38:09 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571927

- Was it less regulation or more regulation that forced lenders to lend to low-income (read: high-risk) borrowers? It was less regulation that drove investment banks to buy crappy mortgages... and it wasn't just low income borrowers. These loans were mostly to medium income people who overextended in massive suburban developments and chic urban condos. It wasn't the dirt poor inner city folks. - Was it a lack of regulation, or a failure of existing regulation, that helped lead to this mess? If the former, why didn't any Democrats call for more regulation until just now? Lack of regulation of investment banks. Some commercial banks followed because they had to to compete. Obama actually called for tighter loan standards a few years ago... but you are right it's a failure of both sides. But the Reps had the Congress most of the time and the WH all of it. - Why should we trust the current politicians with even more regulatory powers when it was the same batch of politicians like Maxine Waters who said that there was absolutely nothing wrong with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a few years ago? Freddy and Fannie were mostly forced into this by competition and their mandate... they were followers not leaders. They were public companies and they were losing market share to the investment banks, and the only way to compete was to replicate. In hindsight certainly a stupid plan. McCain can go far by ridiculing the notion that "government failed, let's try more government." The only problem is that he doesn't seem willing to ruffle the feathers of a Congress that is more unpopular than Bush. He was that and then switched a couple of weeks ago to a super regulator. Now Sarah is small government, regulate the hell out of them in the same paragraph. Are you asking McCain to flip again? It looks like the investment banks are a part of history anyway, they are all turning into more heavily regulated commercial banks. Still, don't you think there should be a stricter measure of real assets to risk at this point? I mean have we learned nothing from this? If nothing else it will add confidence to the system... probably more than $700 Billion.