In The USA: the Next Revolution

[motorfirebox]

Only to a very minor degree. The regulations didn't do much and their removel did little to contribute to the crisis. the actual causes are far deeper and a good deal harder to address. Probably the worst thing to do right now would be to pass a bunch of regulations and call it done... like blaming everything ion the banks, that's an easy way to avoid looking at actual causes and trying to develop systemic solutions.

Okay. Well, here's the list of arguments to keep Glass-Steagal, as written in 1987:

Conflicts of interest characterize the granting of credit (that is to say, lending) and the use of credit (that is to say, investing) by the same entity, which led to abuses that originally produced the Act.

Depository institutions possess enormous financial power, by virtue of their control of other people's money; its extent must be limited to ensure soundness and competition in the market for funds, whether loans or investments.

Securities activities can be risky, leading to enormous losses. Such losses could threaten the integrity of deposits. In turn, the Government insures deposits and could be required to pay large sums if depository institutions were to collapse as the result of securities losses.

Depository institutions are supposed to be managed to limit risk. Their managers thus may not be conditioned to operate prudently in more speculative securities businesses. An example is the crash of real estate investment trusts sponsored by bank holding companies (in the 1970s and 1980s).

I don't know about you, but to me that reads like a laundry list of the problems we're facing now. The one possible exception is that the government paid large sums to prevent collapse, rather than as a response to collapse.

I don't think view has a place on the political spectrum... it's just true. Anyone trying to blame this exclusively on banks isn't paying attention, and is pointing all of the blame at 1/3 of the problem, which is not a way to solve anything.

I don't think the banks were exclusively to blame. I doubt many in OWS think that, either. But I think, and I believe many of them think, that banks share a huge portion of the blame. A lot of that blame can be shared by the government--both major parties--for allowing the banks the latitude to fail the country so spectacularly.

Besides, that's a ridiculous thing to say. Where does the statement that Obama was born in Hawaii fall on the political spectrum?

I'm not even talking about "what most of the country wants". I'm talking about setting ideology aside and trying to actually look at what's wrong and how to fix it. That will probably not be what most of the country wants, because what most of the country seems to want is to blame somebody, hang somebody, and pretend nothing more needs to be done.

That strikes me as a fair characterization of the Tea Party. It doesn't strike me as a fair characterization of OWS. It seems pretty clear that the largest problem the country faces lies in how the major financial institutions are operating. Whether you want to blame that on the government or the banks or even those who accepted the liar loans, financial operations is where the problem is occurring. Fixing those problems is going to involve fixing how financial institutions operate. So pretty much no matter what, OWS's anger is at least aimed in something approximating the right direction. As opposed to blaming immigrants.