Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon
All three of the bolded portions are essentially out of congresses hands, the supreme court's decisions are essentially final,
you cant just tell them what to do.
And there is a huge difference between thinking someone is guilty of something and proving it.
And of course all of this ignores completely the fact that the vast majority of the voting public are on the other side of the issue.
|
I agree.
As I've stated before, the remedies to these demands are essentially legislative, best argued on the campaign trails, at legislatures or protested at the White House . . . . . which leaves one wondering why the protests ended up on Wall St.
Right now, protesters are typically drawing out somewhere between 3/1000's to 5/1000's of a percent of a local population. Organizors are trying to sell an expansion of locations as indications of momentum but they'll need to be move beyond the roughly 500 "Usual Suspects" per one million local population to be convincing. Right now they don't seem to be "inspiring" the thousands and tens of thousands who wouldn't normally turn their heads at something like this.
On evidence, it looks like Occupy Wall St. represents "the 1%" while the system represents "the 99%."
They're definitely hampered by radical left wing rhetoric and some bent for revenge which the general populace probably doesn't share.
Enhanced regulations and oversight for leverage-creating derivatives in particular, regulations better separating investment banking from regular banking and, in Europe, better regulations ensuring institutions can't carry elevated single lender risk . . . . . would probably be enough to ensure the global financial system remained steadier.
And that is all done at the political level.
Ben Bernanke yesterday was also calling for more central banks to take a more aggressive posture in pre-empting "bubble's" instead of relying on market forces to take care of them, thus lessening volatility risk in the global economy.
Europe recently agreed on an overhaul of derivatives oversight:
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/10/...vatives&st=cse
While banks are loading up again on derivatives in America, even with enhanced oversight on the way.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/09/...vatives&st=cse
Derivatives are a $600 TRILLION industry and, as the stories above both agree, derivatives and the excessive leverage they created was at the heart of the 2008 financial crisis. Its also an industry that was largely without regulatory oversight through the early 2000's as the bubble was building.
On another point, I see a lot of bitterness over executive pay but I generally think, unless I'm a shareholder in the particular company in question, that its none of my business. As a shareholder, its very much my business and you've seen a large increase in shareholder activism in the latter part of the 2000's as a result. Top end compensation HAS become ridiculous. As a common man, not a shareholder, I regard it as an internal company matter.
And, lastly, a good column on this in the National Post today, particularly the last few lines on "Occupy Mumbai," a reminder that we are in a global competition for jobs and many of the companies we are angry with are global in nature and not purely American.
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...s-in-the-west/
Cowperson