Regulators Should Bring Back Glass-Steagall
@ 1:02 pmAnd there on the TV is the umpteenth financial ‘talking head’ stating the grim obvious, such as “we are going to be well into next year” before the housing market settles down, and banks re-start to lend. This is the financial economic guru from one of the biggest investment banks in the world. He’s just another face on the same breed of cat - the very same know it alls MBA’s and Ivy League graduates / mathematical geniuses, who with sophisticated computer models and algorithms, attempt to set up a portfolio that doesn’t lose money, but in a whisper - takes some risk. Go figure… The very premise behind risk is that you very well might lose money. That’s why commercial banks don’t belong in the securities industry in the first place.
I would ask our esteemed members of Congress and the regulatory authorities to consider putting Glass Steagall (or some evolved form of it), back in force. Glass Steagall was a law enacted in 1933 that did not permit commercial banks from being involved in investment banking pr brokerage operations. This would have meant that a bank like Citibank and Citibank Securities would have to be two separate and distinct companies with separate balance sheets and types of risk exposure.
If Glass Steagall were in place during this sub prime lending mess, big banks would have been prohibited from overly investing in the sub prime securities – or any part of an investment bank (aka brokerage firm) that was cooking these things up, in the first place. Read the rest of this entry »







