Obama signs sweeping Wall Street overhaul

[Barefootsies]

It's a start fine sires.

(Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Wednesday signed into law the most comprehensive financial regulatory overhaul since the Great Depression and vowed there will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts for Wall Street.

"Because of this law, the American people will never again be asked to foot the bill for Wall Street's mistakes," Obama said at a signing ceremony for the legislation approved by the U.S. Congress last week.

The bill targets the kind of Wall Street risk-taking that helped to trigger a global financial meltdown and also aims to strengthen consumer protections.

Obama, who has drawn fire from Americans for bank bailouts that began under Republican President George W. Bush and continued by Obama, said the legislation's provisions make clear that no firm is protected because it is deemed "too big to fail" like AIG during the financial meltdown.

"There will be no more taxpayer-funded bailouts. Period," he said. "If a large financial institution should ever fail, this reform gives us the ability to wind it down without endangering the broader economy."

Obama spoke to an audience of about 400 people in the Ronald Reagan Building close to the White House that included Wall Street bankers, people hurt by the 2007-2009 financial crisis and lawmakers.

The Senate last week gave final approval to far-reaching legislation sought by the Obama administration to tighten rules on Wall Street and across the financial industry in an effort to avoid a repeat of the financial crisis.

With Republicans poised to make gains in the November congressional elections, Obama's Democrats are eager to show voters that they have taken steps to tame an industry that dragged the economy into its deepest recession in 70 years.

But it remains unclear whether Obama can gain much traction from the legislative victory, with Americans still anxious about a 9.5 percent jobless rate and ballooning deficits.

The American Bankers Association expressed disappointment with the legislation, saying it "contains a tsunami of new rules and restrictions for traditional banks that had nothing to do with causing the financial crisis in the first place," said ABA President Edward Yingling.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66K1QR20100721

[Vendzilla]

still want to know why freddie mac and Fannie may were excempt from this, sounds a little fishy, or did that change?

[Dvae]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

still want to know why freddie mac and Fannie may were excempt from this, sounds a little fishy, or did that change?

How else would the "important" people like politicians get sweetheart deals on their mortgages?

[marketsmart]

its nowhere near what it needs to be, but i guess its a start...

although i expect this to change back when the republicans gain control again...




.

[fatfoo]

For the general purpose of preserving human life, I think it makes more sense to bailout poor people rather than to bailout out rich people.

[directfiesta]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

still want to know why freddie mac and Fannie may were excempt from this, sounds a little fishy, or did that change?

where do you get your info from ?

The new financial reform legislation requires the administration to submit proposals for overhauling Fannie and Freddie no later than early January.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6eb5e536-9...44feab49a.html

[erooup]

"In bailing out failing companies, they are confiscating money from productive members of the economy and giving it to failing ones.¨

By sustaining companies with obsolete or unsustainable business models, the government prevents their resources from being liquidated and made available to other companies that can put them to better, more productive use.

An essential element of a healthy free market, is that both success and failure must be permitted to happen when they are earned. But instead with a bailout, the rewards are reversed – the proceeds from successful entities are given to failing ones.

How this is supposed to be good for our economy is beyond me.... It won’t work. It can’t work... It is obvious to most Americans that we need to reject corporate cronyism, and allow the natural regulations and incentives of the free market to pick the winners and losers in our economy, not the whims of bureaucrats and politicians."

- November 24, 2008, American Republican Congressman Ron Paul

[Dvae]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

where do you get your info from ?

A proposal does not equal legislation Asshat.

[Vendzilla]

Originally Posted by directfiesta

where do you get your info from ?

From your article
?It?s amazing that we passed financial reform legislation and still have this big, glaring hole,? said Fred Cannon, co-director of research for Keefe, Bruyette & Woods, an investment bank that is urging the Treasury to take action. ?The real question is: are the GSEs some kind of third rail of the financial industry that Congress is afraid to touch?? Mr Cannon said.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38250967...n_the_economy/

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...169958328.html

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chic...d-freddie.html

[Barefootsies]

Originally Posted by marketsmart

its nowhere near what it needs to be, but i guess its a start...

True dat fine sire.

[Vendzilla]

Build up the regulation, the government intervention, the more we have, the harder it is for business to grow, next comes the higher taxes. We're fucked
This is why business is moving out of California, most that are in California have LLC's in Nevada