Opinions on the president Bush''s speech?

[AGBF]

Date: 9/25/2008 4:38:43 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

no one is saying that but then right after someone says exactly that! Haha classic.

Gosh. Ain't it the truth? Each of us gets to speak for himself. Imagine that? I mean, just because Moonwater and I are both liberals, I can speak for myself. Haha! That's classic, all right.


Deborah

 

[AGBF]

Date: 9/25/2008 4:38:43 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

I guess Investor''s Business Daily is a worse source than an op-ed piece from the NYT around here...

Well, yeah. Here and everywhere else.


But let''s not stop there. I didn''t. I produced the source from which I was quoting within, "The New York Times", specifically the writer Ron Suskind who had great access to Treasury Secretary O''Neill, President George W. Bush''s first Secretary of the Treasury. I have nowhere seen the story which he recounted refuted, have you?

You mentioned "Investor''s Daily" in passing, but provided us with no quotations, let alone its primary sources, to show why it is supposedly a source of superior information for some point of view that shows that problems other laxity in enforcing regulation is behind the current Wall Street crisis.

Please note that I said, "enforcing" regulation. You seem fixated on explaining that Congress passes legislation about regulation. I truly understand that, but the executive arm has gotten far too strong-stronger and stronger and stronger. Much (as I am sure you know) has been written about an Imperial Presidency. President Bush (and the departments he oversees) has enormous authority over how legislation will actually be enacted. Put into action.

Perhaps now is the time for Congress to seize some power and pass that legislation once looked upon as draconian, that legislation that actually holds CEO''s accountable and punishes naughty CEO''s (in the manner that former Fed Chairman Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary O''Neill suggested) should their corporations get out of line.


Deborah

 

[Krissie]

Date: 9/25/2008 5:29:49 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 9/25/2008 4:38:43 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

I guess Investor's Business Daily is a worse source than an op-ed piece from the NYT around here...

Well, yeah. Here and everywhere else.


But let's not stop there. I didn't. I produced the source from which I was quoting within, 'The New York Times', specifically the writer Ron Suskind who had great access to Treasury Secretary O'Neill, President George W. Bush's first Secretary of the Treasury. I have nowhere seen the story which he recounted refuted, have you?

You mentioned 'Investor's Daily' in passing, but provided us with no quotations, let alone its primary sources, to show why it is supposedly a source of superior information for some point of view that shows that problems other laxity in enforcing regulation is behind the current Wall Street crisis.

Please note that I said, 'enforcing' regulation. You seem fixated on explaining that Congress passes legislation about regulation. I truly understand that, but the executive arm has gotten far too strong-stronger and stronger and stronger. Much (as I am sure you know) has been written about an Imperial Presidency. President Bush (and the departments he oversees) has enormous authority over how legislation will actually be enacted. Put into action.

Perhaps now is the time for Congress to seize some power and pass that legislation once looked upon as draconian, that legislation that actually holds CEO's accountable and punishes naughty CEO's (in the manner that former Fed Chairman Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary O'Neill suggested) should their corporations get out of line.


Deborah

Thank you for drawing the important distinction between the branches of government and their respective responsibilities, which is something those who proclaim their awareness of constitutional law would do well to remember. ETA: In this instance, it is the agencies which are tasked with implementing Congressional regulation of the markets/securities laws/banking laws, etc., and the agencies form part of the Executive branch of government. The Treasury Secretary is an arm of the executive branch, etc ...

 

[MoonWater]

If there were only a way, I''d buy Deborah a rose.

 

[coatimundi_org]

...

 

[Anna0499]

Date: 9/25/2008 5:29:49 PM
Author: AGBF

Date: 9/25/2008 4:38:43 PM
Author: IndyGirl22

I guess Investor''s Business Daily is a worse source than an op-ed piece from the NYT around here...

Well, yeah. Here and everywhere else.


But let''s not stop there. I didn''t. I produced the source from which I was quoting within, ''The New York Times'', specifically the writer Ron Suskind who had great access to Treasury Secretary O''Neill, President George W. Bush''s first Secretary of the Treasury. I have nowhere seen the story which he recounted refuted, have you?

You mentioned ''Investor''s Daily'' in passing, but provided us with no quotations, let alone its primary sources, to show why it is supposedly a source of superior information for some point of view that shows that problems other laxity in enforcing regulation is behind the current Wall Street crisis.

Please note that I said, ''enforcing'' regulation. You seem fixated on explaining that Congress passes legislation about regulation. I truly understand that, but the executive arm has gotten far too strong-stronger and stronger and stronger. Much (as I am sure you know) has been written about an Imperial Presidency. President Bush (and the departments he oversees) has enormous authority over how legislation will actually be enacted. Put into action.

Perhaps now is the time for Congress to seize some power and pass that legislation once looked upon as draconian, that legislation that actually holds CEO''s accountable and punishes naughty CEO''s (in the manner that former Fed Chairman Greenspan and former Treasury Secretary O''Neill suggested) should their corporations get out of line.


Deborah

Actually, I provided a link to their actual site for the actual article (didn''t just mention it) for anyone who wanted to read the article. Anyone who follows finance knows who Terry Jones is, so I apologize for not posting his CV here. Your article doesn''t refute mine, so I have no idea why you were asking me to refute yours?

I agree that Congress should pass legislation to overturn the legislation passed during the Carter & Clinton years that rewarded banks for giving loans to anyone who held their hands out. There''s *nothing* to enforce when the rules are not there. And don''t get me started about different branches being more powerful than the Constitution grants them the authority to be *cough*SCOTUS*cough*

I have *not once* placed the blame entirely on one person/party for the current state of things but it seems most Dems are quick to target Bush/Reps for this just like everything else. It''s fine if you do, but I disagree. IMHO it was truly a bipartisan effort haha

 

[MoonWater]

OMG coati, tears are streaming down my face. LMFAO!!!!

 

[coatimundi_org]

Date: 9/25/2008 9:26:20 PM
Author: MoonWater
OMG coati, tears are streaming down my face. LMFAO!!!!

Mwah HA HAAA! I was hoping you''d catch it, Moon!

 

[MoonWater]

Date: 9/25/2008 9:49:08 PM
Author: coatimundi

Date: 9/25/2008 9:26:20 PM

Author: MoonWater

OMG coati, tears are streaming down my face. LMFAO!!!!

Mwah HA HAAA! I was hoping you''d catch it, Moon!

Hahaha I passed that one around!!

 

[AGBF]

IndyGirl and I were discussing the lack of regulation on Wall Street. I thought this might be of interest to some people. It is an excerpt from an article in, "The New York Times".



September 27, 2008
S.E.C. Concedes Oversight Flaws Fueled Collapse
By STEPHEN LABATON

WASHINGTON — "The chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, a longtime proponent of deregulation, acknowledged on Friday that failures in a voluntary supervision program for Wall Street’s largest investment banks had contributed to the global financial crisis, and he abruptly shut the program down.

The S.E.C.’s oversight responsibilities will largely shift to the Federal Reserve, though the commission will continue to oversee the brokerage units of investment banks.

Also Friday, the S.E.C.’s inspector general released a report strongly criticizing the agency’s performance in monitoring Bear Stearns before it collapsed in March. Christopher Cox, the commission chairman, said he agreed that the oversight program was ''fundamentally flawed from the beginning.''

''The last six months have made it abundantly clear that voluntary regulation does not work,'' he said in a statement. The program ''was fundamentally flawed from the beginning, because investment banks could opt in or out of supervision voluntarily. The fact that investment bank holding companies could withdraw from this voluntary supervision at their discretion diminished the perceived mandate'' of the program, and ''weakened its effectiveness,'' he added."




Deborah