Financial Reform Bill Passed in SenateFollow

Vote of 59-39, with two Senators abstaining.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/20/AR2010052003503.html

Now it goes off to committee.

Keep telling yourself that.

And go move to Somalia if you want to see unregulated finance in action.

Here buddy, have a cookie. You seem sad. It'll be ok.

HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA!

someone could write some pretty srs slash.

Why do the pubbies here always fall back on the "ugly liberal chick!!!" defense? I mean, really? Talk about grasping at straws. Not to mention, Catwho's ******* married and is pretty much a kept housewife who plays FFXI all day, so you obviously fail.

There are enough fat, ugly men out there willing to settle for their fat, ugly, female counterparts- omg, on either side of the party fence!!!! But hey, all Fox News shows is attractive women juxtaposed with the likes of Bill O'Reily so I guess that is the ideal, eh?

Cat,




Can liberals make it through one conversation without mentioning either having something shoved up their as* or shoving something up someone elses as*?




Guenny,



Because most liberal women who aren't in hollywood are butt ugly and in desperate need of someone to take care of them.

Oh, I can play that game, too!!

Most conservative men are closet homosexuals who are butt ugly and in desperate need of some sort of sugar daddy.

That's fun. Not terribly productive, though.

As someone who has to drive through a college campus fairly regularly, I honestly had no idea that all of those beautiful women crawling all over the place were conservative.

I guess all of those super liberal professors (which is every professor who doesn't teach at Bob Jones U) isn't doing a very good job at indoctrinating our youth these days.

I have on many occasions posted very long winded explanations

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

of the step by step process of government regulation which created the conditions which ultimately caused the sub-prime meltdown. It's not even hard to show how the combination of CRA requirements in the 1999 Financial Act, followed by ambitious lending practices by Fannie and Freddie, arguably could have not have resulted in anything else *but* a sub-prime mortgage crisis.

Which would have been, maybe, a $100 Billion crisis, if we're being extremely generous to your argument. Without a completely unregulated derivatives market larger than the GDP of the planet, it would have been impossible to simulate the crisis we had. Stop and think, now. What regulations *on the derivatives market* led to this crisis? Pretend you're not a moron, just briefly, and accept that the underlying security involved isn't germane to the failure of an overlevreged market. If it wasn't real estate it would have been securities, if it wasn't securities it would have been gold, or eggs, or pork bellies, or tulips, or gay ******* swaps. When a derived market fails, it has nothing to do with what the market's derived from.

When LTCM failed, it wasn't because Russia defaulted on bonds, that risk was explicit, it was known that the bonds weren't risk free. The problem was that position providing liquidity to a market seeking to hedge that very risk was unregulated and became too large.



In the same way that I can predict that health care costs will go up as a result of the new health care bill, because the new law further separates the people engaged in the health care transaction (the doctor and the patient) from the financial responsibility for that transaction. It's not like human nature is really that hard to figure out.

No, it isn't hard to figure out. In your case much less so than usual.



If you give someone a way to get something which appears to be free, they will take it. This is the same whether the guy selling a loan knows he can pass it on to Freddie and Fannie, and they'll bundle it and pass it on to the financial industry as a whole,

Excellent argument for regulation of the derivatives market, good to see you come around. We can't let the derived market of an asset undervalue the risk of that asset. We need REGULATION to enforce rational risk management and capital requirements.


or whether it's a hospital providing health care knowing they can just pass that cost on to an insurer, who'll pass it on to a larger health fund, which will be distributed cost-wise across the public as a whole.


Excellent argument for single payer. Glad to see you come around, thanks. We need ONE payer who can negotiate price unilaterally. You're right that allowing the current open market in health care, as this bill does, is a mistake.


It's not freaking rocket science, yet we make the same mistake over and over. Maybe one day we'll learn something...

The mistake of less regulated markets preying on inadequately informed consumers? Yes, we do. Excellent argument for socialism, good to see you come around.



Edited, May 22nd 2010 5:33pm by Smasharoo