Obama goes from White House to Wall Street in less than a year

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,210
48,352
136
IronWing said:
Bullshit, plain and simple. The Dems helped gut worker protections, gut welfare, gut student financial aid, and gut bank regulation. Dodd-Frank put a band-aid on the wound left by the repeal of Glass-Steagall but certainly didn't advance any type of liberal economic agenda. The Reps are the party of the filthy rich, the Dems the party of the merely rich.
Click to expand...

So basically you're just going to make up nebulous ideas and declare yourself right in the face of empirical evidence. For example, Dodd-Frank is a VASTLY larger and more comprehensive regulation of Wall Street than Glass-Steagal ever was.

Let's talk specific positions of the median Democratic Party number in 1980 vs. today. Tell me what they wanted then vs. now and how they have moved to the right.
 
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,638
29,294
146
Ns1 said:
Boy that'll make Trump mad, Obama is poaching the talent pool.
Click to expand...

Actually, this will force Trump to finally put the collar on Wall Street. If the thinks he can steal Obama's money, he'll do whatever is necessary. :D
 
zinfamous

zinfamous

No Lifer
Jul 12, 2006
110,638
29,294
146
imported_tajmahal said:
Picking Hillary as his Sec. of State?
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/09/new_hillary_emails_warrant_special_prosecutor.html

"
Judicial Watch today released 1,617 new pages of documents from the U.S. Department of State revealing numerous additional examples of classified information being transmitted through the unsecure, non-state.gov account of Huma Abedin, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, as well as many instances of Hillary Clinton donors receiving special favors from the State Department.

The documents included 97 email exchanges with Clinton not previously turned over to the State Department, bringing the known total to date to at least 627 emails that were not part of the 55,000 pages of emails that Clinton turned over, and further contradicting a statement by Clinton that, “as far as she knew,” all of her government emails had been turned over to department."
Click to expand...

lol @ Judicial Watch. :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: soundforbjt and Sheik Yerbouti
E

Exterous

Super Moderator
Jun 20, 2006
20,389
3,460
126
fskimospy said:
He enacted the single largest suite of regulations on Wall Street since the Great Depression
Click to expand...

I'm not sure enacting the largest suite of regulations is the positive example you think it is. Mortgage disclosures 345 pages long, 20,000 pages of regulations and a high cost of compliance helping drive the consolidation of small banks even further:

As the clauses multiplied, so did the compliance burden on banks. Between 2010 and 2016, Dodd-Frank soaked up 73m paperwork hours and $36bn in costs. The big banks complain, but they have the heft to cope. The financial implications are worse for small lenders. A study by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve found that adding two extra members to their compliance departments tips a third of small banks into the red.
Click to expand...

https://www.economist.com/news/lead...r-all-means-not-expense-safety-right-way-redo

Regulatory costs were cited as one of the major reasons Chase exited the repo market leaving Bank of New York Mellon the sole handler of the $3.5T market. The Frank Dood regulations are on top of the already increased term and costs regulations and are leading some to be concerned this will drive more into the derivatives market.

As of last July, six years after the law was enacted, some 30 percent of the proposed rules had not been finalized. A fifth of them hadn't even been proposed, according to Davis Polk & Wardwell, a law firm that has tracked Dodd-Frank rule-making progress since the law was enacted.
Click to expand...

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/06/des...-slowed-lending-to-business-or-consumers.html

Even Frank has issues with his bill:

Frank says his namesake financial reform law has been too restrictive on smaller banks. He also believes the threshold used to identify other banks "as too big to fail" should be higher.
Click to expand...

http://www.npr.org/2017/06/08/53203...at-reversing-dodd-frank-financial-regulations

And it stripped powers from the Fed that the Fed used quite successfully in 2008-2009 to avert a worse financial disaster and more restrained their ability to act.

Were some valid issues addressed? Absolutely. Unfortunately it largely focused on areas where the 2007 financial system fell flat while opening up weakness in other areas of our financial foundation
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,210
48,352
136
Exterous said:
I'm not sure enacting the largest suite of regulations is the positive example you think it is. Mortgage disclosures 345 pages long, 20,000 pages of regulations and a high cost of compliance helping drive the consolidation of small banks even further:

https://www.economist.com/news/lead...r-all-means-not-expense-safety-right-way-redo

Regulatory costs were cited as one of the major reasons Chase exited the repo market leaving Bank of New York Mellon the sole handler of the $3.5T market. The Frank Dood regulations are on top of the already increased term and costs regulations and are leading some to be concerned this will drive more into the derivatives market.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/06/des...-slowed-lending-to-business-or-consumers.html

Even Frank has issues with his bill:

http://www.npr.org/2017/06/08/53203...at-reversing-dodd-frank-financial-regulations

And it stripped powers from the Fed that the Fed used quite successfully in 2008-2009 to avert a worse financial disaster and more restrained their ability to act.

Were some valid issues addressed? Absolutely. Unfortunately it largely focused on areas where the 2007 financial system fell flat while opening up weakness in other areas of our financial foundation
Click to expand...

We are discussing if Dodd-Frank is an overall liberal piece of legislation, not debating the merits of it.
 
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
69,151
27,104
136
fskimospy said:
We are discussing if Dodd-Frank is an overall liberal piece of legislation, not debating the merits of it.
Click to expand...
If Glass Steagall had been restored much of the convoluted regulation of Dodd Frank would not have been needed.
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
IronWing said:
Can't argue with this. If Obama had stuck to the ideals he campaigned on, the Dems would have been the majority party for decades. Instead he sold out to the conservatives and we have Trump.
Click to expand...
Democrats who needed to get re-elected disagreed with you.
 
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
69,151
27,104
136
werepossum said:
Democrats who needed to get re-elected disagreed with you.
Click to expand...
And look what happened to them. The Dems backtracking on the liberal agenda espoused by the Obama 2008 campaign led enough liberal voters to stay home to flip the House in 2010. When the Dems embrace and articulate a clear liberal economic agenda, they win. When they deliver milquetoast conservative legislation, they lose.
 
werepossum

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
IronWing said:
And look what happened to them. The Dems backtracking on the liberal agenda espoused by the Obama 2008 campaign led enough liberal voters to stay home to flip the House in 2010. When the Dems embrace and articulate a clear liberal economic agenda, they win. When they deliver milquetoast conservative legislation, they lose.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Another way to look at it would be that the Dems went too far to the left too quickly, and as a result faced the exact voter backlash that the less progressive Democrats predicted and feared while their arms were being twisted to support Obamacare.

If there was truly a far left progressive electorate in America, we'd have President Bernie today. We've never had a major party Presidential candidate nearly that far left. Even absent Clinton's and the DNC's dirty tricks, Sanders was never leading to any degree.
 
J

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
IronWing said:
And look what happened to them. The Dems backtracking on the liberal agenda espoused by the Obama 2008 campaign led enough liberal voters to stay home to flip the House in 2010. When the Dems embrace and articulate a clear liberal economic agenda, they win. When they deliver milquetoast conservative legislation, they lose.
Click to expand...

Hardly. Dems had the problem that the Ownership Society was falling to pieces when Obama was inaugurated, kinda like taking the controls of an airplane in a tailspin. They downplayed it instead of exploiting it, catching the blame for not fixing it fast enough, as if such a thing were possible. We narrowly avoided a rerun of the Great Depression but it wasn't anything anybody wanted to make hay out of while it was in doubt. Not to mention the whole black thing, the Death Panels & Repub obstructionism every inch of the way.
 
M

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,516
756
146
werepossum said:
Maybe. Another way to look at it would be that the Dems went too far to the left too quickly, and as a result faced the exact voter backlash that the less progressive Democrats predicted and feared while their arms were being twisted to support Obamacare.
Click to expand...

How did they go too far left? The problem leading up to 2010 was the inordinate time spent on health care reform.. Considering how disruptive it is, it's going to be controversial since there is winners and losers. Look how much worse the GOP angle is in the polls and you can see why it's just a bad policy for either side to stake on leading up to the new Census. It also deviated from the pressing economic problems people were facing.

If there was truly a far left progressive electorate in America, we'd have President Bernie today. We've never had a major party Presidential candidate nearly that far left. Even absent Clinton's and the DNC's dirty tricks, Sanders was never leading to any degree.
Click to expand...

We have a two party system with a corporate bent. If we had more democratic institutions, our pols would be more liberal.

It's misleading to just look at who is leading in the party primaries. Sanders did better with Independents. Heck, the Dems say he's Independent. While Independents aren't more liberal, they don't like partisanship which helps bolster Bernie. Unsurprisingly, his poll numbers in general were better.
 
ivwshane

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,252
14,989
136
Maxima1 said:
How did they go too far left? The problem leading up to 2010 was the inordinate time spent on health care reform.. Considering how disruptive it is, it's going to be controversial since there is winners and losers. Look how much worse the GOP angle is in the polls and you can see why it's just a bad policy for either side to stake on leading up to the new Census. It also deviated from the pressing economic problems people were facing.



We have a two party system with a corporate bent. If we had more democratic institutions, our pols would be more liberal.

It's misleading to just look at who is leading in the party primaries. Sanders did better with Independents. Heck, the Dems say he's Independent. While Independents aren't more liberal, they don't like partisanship which helps bolster Bernie. Unsurprisingly, his poll numbers in general were better.
Click to expand...

You do realize that Bernie was one of the most, if not the most, partisan senator, right?

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/who-are-the-most-partisan-senators-220365

http://www.thelugarcenter.org/ourwork-Bipartisan-Index.html
 
F

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,210
48,352
136
M

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,516
756
146
fskimospy said:
It is interesting to see people argue that Sanders was both the most ideologically liberal senator due to his uncompromising positions but then say he was one of the least partisan. Lol.
Click to expand...

lol I was getting that from Nate Silver. And it makes sense in a way. Perception matters. Sanders is far removed from the pols people despised. It's a similar way in how Trump plowed through everyone in the Republican primary because of his phony outsider status.
 
G

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,095
513
126
This is a shocking development. Never saw this coming. He went after Wallstreet so hard over the 08 debacle. I figured he wouldn't be welcomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom