Will companies dodge financial reform by moving abroad?

Now that we have no major manufacturing in the US we might as well get rid of the financial service sector aswell?

U.S. banks, hedge funds and other Wall Street firms are weighing whether to move more of their operations abroad now that Congress has toughened financial regulations at home.

The Volcker Rule, named for former Federal Reserve chief Paul Volcker, which prohibits banks from trading in financial markets for their own profit but not their clients' and limits bank investments in hedge funds and private equity funds.

If I won't/can't make a profit why be in business?

http://www.usatoday.com/money/indust...nks19_ST_N.htm

[Buddahaid]

Let'em. Just charge import duty for all their products.

Originally Posted by Buddahaid

Let'em. Just charge import duty for all their products.

The cost of which is applied to the consumer. Which leads to less for everyone, except the government of course, which redistributes it from each according to ones ability to each according to his needs.

[Takeda Shingen]

Interesting.

[AVGWarhawk]

Let it all go outside the country and turn the US into one big vacation resort! Manufacture nothing and just promote the tourist trade.

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Let it all go outside the country and turn the US into one big vacation resort! Manufacture nothing and just promote the tourist trade.

I didn't want to bring illegal immigration into this.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

If I won't/can't make a profit why be in business?

If your profit model includes helping to create the financial crisis that's destroyed our economy, then quite frankly, screw your profit model.

They'll make plenty of profit. They did just fine under Glass Steagall, and the Voelcker Rule is much milder than that. Unfortunately.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

If your profit model includes helping to create the financial crisis that's destroyed our economy, then quite frankly, screw your profit model.

They'll make plenty of profit. They did just fine under Glass Steagall, and the Voelcker Rule is much milder than that. Unfortunately.

If you consider the housing bubble as the initiator of the current depression, let me remind you that it was government regulation and punishment for non-compliance which started it. As early as 2002 the executive branch was calling on congress to make changes.

Yet in the current Financial Bill no regulation of Freddie or Fannie are instituted. The very firms who sell mortgages to the large private firms with the understanding of government support.

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

If you consider the housing bubble as the initiator of the current depression, let me remind you that it was government regulation and punishment for non-compliance which started it. As early as 2002 the executive branch was calling on congress to make changes.

No, it was the lack of regulation that helped fuel the fire. You can save your typing on blaming CRA or whatever debunked party-line garbage that you want to trot out. It was the dismantling of Glass Steagall, the removal of leverage limits on investment firms, the Fed keeping rates at then-record lows for too long, the lack of regulation of derivatives in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, and the relatively lax-regulated non-bank lenders making loans that would never pay.

Yet in the current Financial Bill no regulation of Freddie or Fannie are instituted. The very firms who sell mortgages to the large private firms with the understanding of government support.

Since you don't even understand exactly what FNMA/FHLMC do, I'll skip the well crafted argument and just say you're wrong.

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

No, it was the lack of regulation that helped fuel the fire. You can save your typing on blaming CRA or whatever debunked party-line garbage that you want to trot out. It was the dismantling of Glass Steagall, the removal of leverage limits on investment firms, the Fed keeping rates at then-record lows for too long, the lack of regulation of derivatives in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, and the relatively lax-regulated non-bank lenders making loans that would never pay.



Since you don't even understand exactly what FNMA/FHLMC do, I'll skip the well crafted argument and just say you're wrong.

Since I have a home I know exactly what freddie and fannie do since I was required, by government reg, to go through them to purchase a home.

Unfortunately they also allowed those who couldn't own a home to purchase one. That is the collapse in a nut shell.

[Platapus]

Originally Posted by The Third Man

Since I have a home I know exactly what freddie and fannie do since I was required, by government reg, to go through them to purchase a home.

Third Man, please share with us the "government reg" that "required" you, an individual, to go through them to purchase a home. This would be interesting to see.

Originally Posted by Platapus

Third Man, please share with us the "government reg" that "required" you, an individual, to go through them to purchase a home. This would be interesting to see.

The first part comes from what is called 'the good faith estimate'.

Fannie Mae Underwriter inspection report is next. (This is the important part)

Title report is next.

Uniform Residential loan Application. (Fannie regulation?)

[mookiemookie]

FNMA is in the secondary mortgage market. The loans are made by a bank or other lender. They do the underwriting. They make the credit decision. Not FNMA or FHLMC.