Christa,
Apparently you didnâÂÂt bother to read my post, you say âÂÂI will try one more timeâ¦â and then go on to state almost verbatim many of the things I said in my post, so it seems youâÂÂre arguing with your imagination.
Your words: âÂÂWith the billions in PAC money spent by WS that has gone into the coffers of all the DC lawmakers, they pretty much make sure that every regulation that passes has a loophole that allows them to operate outside the laws that apply to all other business. It is selective enforcement.âÂÂ
My words: âÂÂI will certainly grant that over the years there has been no shortage of crony-capitalism going on in the finance industry⦠If youâÂÂre worried about banks getting favorable treatment, tax benefits, the revolving door between the regulators/government and private banks, then what you should be advocating is removing the opportunity for these things to occur, ie making government smaller⦠ItâÂÂs just a fact of life that the finance industry will be run by the wealthiest and best connected members of society, it always has been and by its nature always will be. No matter how many laws you try and pass, how many regulations you pile on, bankers will always be able to procure a favorable result, they fund the campaigns of politicians (yes Republicans AND Democrats â just look at ObamaâÂÂs âÂÂbrain trustâÂÂ), they fund the PACs, they have the best lobbyists, they fill the ranks of the Treasury Department and Central Banks, they will always get a fair shake and you will never change it with just one more law or one more regulation.
What can, and should, be prevented, though, is allowing the finance industry to feed at the public trough⦠If youâÂÂre worried about banks getting bailouts, gambling with other peoples money, too big to fail etc, what should concern you is the government that has enabled this to happen.âÂÂ
I completely agree with you that banks are able to extract huge benefits from the Federal government and Federal Reserve, I witness it first hand, however, where you go wrong is assuming youâÂÂre going to âÂÂfixâ that situation with a new law or new regulation. As I said and you acknowledge, the finance industry spends massively to lobby congress, fund the campaigns of politicians across the board, and run the presidentâÂÂs economic team, treasury department, and central banks, a new law or a new regulation is not going to change this. The finance industry controls the money, and those who control the money have the power, itâÂÂs as simple as that.
If you really want to ensure that bankers arenâÂÂt running Washington and lining their pockets with taxpayer money the only way to do it is by taking away the punch bowl â Stated again, the more favors politicians have to dole out, the more Wall St will spend lobbying, and the more favors that are ultimately going to end up benefitting Wall St. So yes, this does mean less government.
If you want to force real discipline back on Wall St we need to return to a much tighter monetary system and a more competitive market-driven environment â this will be accomplished not by new regulations or laws, which will inevitably be either misguided or rewritten to the benefit of Wall St, but by completely revamping the Federal Reserve, repealing laws like the FDIC and CRA, and getting rid of Fannie/Freddie. 300 million depositors and a very tightly managed monetary system will regulate banks far more effectively than any new team of Washington wizards.