Deregulation

**CivilWars** · 10-15-08, 06:25 PM

I think I might be understanding better now. In 1999 Bill Clinton signed a bill that negated many of the banking regulations, and grayed the line between a commercial bank and an investment bank. Many blame this act for the current economic downturn. Many dems also blame this bill on the Republican Congress. Yet in an interview with Bill I read in Businesweek this week he said he supported the bill then, still supports it now, and does not think it had any impact on the current situation. Explain that one to me.

**MotoZ** · 10-15-08, 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Explain that one to me.

Bill isn't going to admit a mistake that big. He has nothing to gain from an admission.

**WorstPE** · 10-16-08, 08:05 AM

But explain! This is one of the place I really know anything about.

**triggerhappy2005** · 10-16-08, 08:37 AM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

Explain that one to me.

[/quote]

Could please be more specific about which piece of legislation you are referring to?

**MotoZ** · 10-16-08, 08:54 AM

Originally Posted by WorstPE

But explain! This is one of the place I really know anything about.

Worst,

As always, there's a lot more to the story than meets the eye. It would help to first understand the history before having a discussion. Here's a wiki article that gives a decent background. It also includes a link to the BusnissWeek article that Civil mentioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gramm-Leach-Bliley_Act

I'm not trying to be a dick by dumping this stuff on you. To the contrary, to have a fruitful discussion we need to start with similar amounts of background info.

**CivilWars** · 10-16-08, 09:35 AM

bacon,

I would not expect him to come out now and say I F'ed up, but if it were even remotely true I would expect him to say he was strong armed by the Rep led Congress, and he knew they would get it passed even if he vetoed it. What I was looking for an explanation on is why all of this is blamed on the "greedy", "capitalistic" Reps when the Dem President supported it just as much.

**MotoZ** · 10-16-08, 09:49 AM

I wish we could talk about this in TS. Most of the explanation is in that wiki article.

What the wiki article leaves out, and rightfully so, is the policy mood of the country at the time that law was signed. That law was signed during the height of the "New Economy". That's what we called it before it popped. Then we called it "The Tech Bubble".

This is another situation where there were several forces at play and you have to look at the shades of grey. If one tries to look at it as simple Republican vs. Democrat then they will drive themselves crazy trying to analyze the data.

If you want to talk about it then maybe we can get on TS, X-Fire, or something late tonight or Friday (whoot!). WorstPE and anyone else would be invited as well.

**CivilWars** · 10-16-08, 09:56 AM

So let me get this straight, when it was done by the Dems you call it natural speculation, and shades of gray. Now that the Reps propose new deregulation you call it forced speculation, and shades of failure. Seems you are using both sides of the same argument to paint a party guiltless, but maybe that is just my view.

**MotoZ** · 10-16-08, 10:04 AM

Do you want to work to understand the issues or continue being a drama queen?

**CivilWars** · 10-16-08, 10:08 AM

I prefer drama queen.

On a serious note, it just seems like spin doctoring, and not just from you. I said you specifically because if I were to accuse all Dems then I would be painted as a racists redneck from Texas that drives a 4X4 with a horse in the back and a rebel flag paint job.

I am just tired of both parties acting like anything that has ever worked is the product of their party, and anything that has ever failed is the product of the opposing party. For the last week or two you have asked me to prove why "my parties" deregulation plans will work, and i come to find out the reason you want me to prove it will work is beacuse the Dems already screwed it up.

Just my feeble minded attempt to explain my disgust.