Ian wrote:Coito ergo sum wrote:Ian wrote:
The bill that just passed the Senate can't possibly be construed as fixing anything?

If eliminating jobs, driving capital out of the United States, and increasing credit card costs is your idea of "fixing" things, then yes.
Note - the bill doesn't address the mortgage lender issues that were a big part of what caused the financial mess in the first place, and the Democrats blocked any reform of FannieMae and FreddieMac which were a big reason why subprime and high risk mortgage lending got out of control.
The bill increases banks’ costs by restricting the ability of banks to enter into contracts charging retailers for the convenience of using credit or debit cards to collect payment from customers. When Australia did this credit card holders suffered, as banks passed on the increased costs to them by hiking annual fees and getting rid of cash-back, rebate, and rewards programs. Ironically, recent interest rate hikes are partly the product of a law recently passed by Congress, the CARD Act, which forces responsible people to bear the costs of irresponsible borrowers.
The bill would also give government officials the ability to nationalize businesses that they "claim" are at risk of failing — and block meaningful judicial review of such seizures by shareholders.
Ah, so there isn't much good about the bill. Even though four Republicans broke ranks to sign it.
I didn't blame a particular party. The bill is not a good one, regardless of who voted for it.
Ian wrote:
And moreover, the Chamber of Commerce's criticism was that the bill didn't go far enough in regulating banks and trading.
That is part of it. The Chamber of Commerce also specifically stated that it would drive capital from the United States. I believe the director of the national Chamber of Commerce said "If you want a bill that will drive capital out of the United States, this is it."
Ian wrote:
I expected them to say the exact opposite, that it was anti-business, etc. Nope, they're whining that it won't do enough. Go figure.
They're whining that it will drive capital from the united states, and that it did nothing to regulate the mortgage lenders or repair the broken FannieMae and FreddieMac entities which were at the heart of the breakdown. Go figure.
Ian wrote:
You say the bill doesn't address mortgage lender issues. Wouldn't that responsibility fall to the new consumer protection agency?
Only if the law provided for that, which it doesn't. Agencies are only empowered to act within the limits provided by their implementing legislation that delegates to the agencies their powers.
Ian wrote:
Why should the bill be so specific and redundant about overseeing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac?
Redundant? No. It should reform them. It doesn't.