• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Frontrunner for Clinton VP supports more consistent liquidity reporting frequency!

Status
Not open for further replies.

StoOgE

First tragedy, then farce.
Can Finance-GAF tell me if this is a huge deal or not? This seems to be the crux of his argument for big bank deregulation.

As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"
 

AnAnole

Member
Never thought I'd say this, but if this guy gets picked, I will probably just vote 3rd party. Maybe the system needs to be burned down.
 
Everyone else answered, and in this context, it's the fact that Hillary is equated as too conservative (whether this is true or not), has a Bernie/Warren side of the party that is wary of her (once again, who knows if that matters or not, the anti Trump vote may matter more than a pro Hillary one), and is seen as in the pockets/in cahoots with wall street (once again, doesn't matter if it's true or not, its the optics of it). This will only embolden all these points.

This.

I hope its not Kaine.

I will still vote for her regardless.
 

Spider from Mars

tap that thorax
The VP barely does anything. I would rather keep the power players like Warren in the Senate and have Stavridis be SoS or something. Kaine is a perfectly acceptable VP who can help lock up Virginia, speaks fluent spanish, and can help with blue collar white men.
 
In a letter to Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen, Comptroller of the Currency Thomas Curry and FDIC Chair Martin Gruenberg, Kaine argues that it is unfair for these large banks to be required to calculate and report their liquidity ― a critical measure of risk ― on a daily basis. Kaine wants to change that reporting to once a month.

Kaine and his coauthors do draw an exception to this principle for “systemically important” banks ― a term that usually means the six largest banks in the country: JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Citigroup. These should be regulated closely. Firms controlling over $400 billion, not so much.

TBH, I'm not well versed enough on banking policy to judge this proposal on the merits. But this hardly seems worthy of the freak-outs that it's causing.

Kaine doesn't believe that large banks carry inherently more risks to the financial system merely by virtue of being large, and wants to reserve the most burdensome regulations for those banks which do. That's debatable, but it doesn't make him a dirty corporatist.
 
As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"

Hmm this is interesting. Thanks.
 

Blader

Member
As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"

Thanks. That's what it sounded like to me. Reminded me of when congressional Republicans demand that HHS report weekly enrollment figures for ACA exchanges, knowing full well that doing so would be a huge resources drain.

Never thought I'd say this, but if this guy gets picked, I will probably just vote 3rd party. Maybe the system needs to be burned down.

If there was ever a white privilege calling card.

Compromise. Pure, unadulterated racism or back to 2008.

Back to 2008 is still better.

:(

This is hardly back to 2008, come on.
 
It doesn't seem to have changed his rhetoric... who the fuck cares about facts, anyway?
Because Trump is in the business of telling people what they want to hear. He has no firm policy positions on anything beyond building wall, and has contradicted his own stated positions sometimes in the same day!
 
Yeah, actually reading this, can anyone tell me what exactly he is pledging to do? The thread title implies he wants complete deregulation for banks. The actual letter he signed seems to say he wants to change a report timing.
 
The VP barely does anything. I would rather keep the power players like Warren in the Senate and have Stavridis be SoS or something. Kaine is a perfectly acceptable VP who can help lock up Virginia, speaks fluent spanish, and can help with blue collar white men.

Let's look at it like this. Putting Kaine as Vp actually removes his vote from the senate where he could try and stop a financial regulation bill. This is only about bad optics because Kaine will have very little power.
 
I mean do people really expect him to be able to follow through? Hillary very well knows how this would be received in her administration. It's exactly the kind of thing where theyd say "that nice Tim, go do a telemundo interview now"

Not that it isnt ridiculously stupid. But let's not freak out and go vote for Jill stein
 

AnAnole

Member
As a minority, thank you for wanting to burn all my rights down

Rights are important, but sometimes I feel like they're a distraction from far bigger issues such as global warming and consolidation of wealth.

Does it matter who you can marry or which bathroom you can enter when your existence is threatened?
 
Yeah, actually reading this, can anyone tell me what exactly he is pledging to do? The thread title implies he wants complete deregulation for banks. The actual letter he signed seems to say he wants to change a report timing.

There was also a vague statement that bigger banks don't necessarily mean more risk...
 

bananas

Banned
Never thought I'd say this, but if this guy gets picked, I will probably just vote 3rd party. Maybe the system needs to be burned down.
Voting 3rd party will make it more likely that Trump wins.

So I guess the system would burn down.

Along with everything and everyone else.
 

kirblar

Member
TBH, I'm not well versed enough on banking policy to judge this proposal on the merits. But this hardly seems worthy of the freak-outs that it's causing.

Kaine doesn't believe that large banks carry inherently more risks to the financial system merely by virtue of being large, and wants to reserve the most burdensome regulations for those banks which do. That's debatable, but it doesn't make him a dirty corporatist.
Canada has 5 gigantic national banks and their system's more stable than ours is.
 

BajiBoxer

Banned
I'm gonna be that guy.

What does "optics" mean in the context I'm constantly seeing it in on GAF politics? Where did it originate from, I've never even heard news sources use it in their vocabulary.
It means it looks bad. In reality his opinion doesn't mean much as far as his actual power to make this happen. He will actually have less say on things as VP than he does as a legislator. Biden was more conservative than President Obama too. But it does hurt Clinton's image among progressives (especially with the money she's received from wallstreet), and there's always the risk of something happening to Hillary Clinton.
 

bananas

Banned
Rights are important, but sometimes I feel like they're a distraction from far bigger issues such as global warming and consolidation of wealth.

Does it matter who you can marry or which bathroom you can enter when your existence is threatened?
Oh.

Your first post hinted at it, but this post confirmed that you're a garbage person.

Thanks.
 

manakel

Member
As a minority, thank you for wanting to burn all my rights down
Seriously, talk about white privilege.
As a minority as well, please stop with this garbage line of thinking. Stop trying to belittle and guilt people into voting for your chosen candidate; they have the freedom to vote third party if they so choose. You do realize not just white people are looking at other options, right?

If Hillary chooses this guy, I'm done. I already don't like her, but I'm pushing that aside and voting for her. This would probably be the nail in the coffin that makes me look at third party options.
 

TheCrow

Member
Rights are important, but sometimes I feel like they're a distraction from far bigger issues such as global warming and consolidation of wealth.

For many of us the bigger issue is just trying to survive in our neighborhoods long enough for even the chance at making a better life for ourselves. Seriously, sometimes liberals are so out of touch with realty.
 
As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"
Interesting, thank you.
 

jett

D-Member
We need a third party system.

Just a third one? What if that third party is the tea party? You need a system that doesn't fuck you over by presenting less than a handful of viable options. But hey, since the people in power belong to either of these two parties, when is this really ever going to change for you?
 

Blader

Member
Rights are important, but sometimes I feel like they're a distraction from far bigger issues such as global warming and consolidation of wealth.

Does it matter who you can marry or which bathroom you can enter when your existence is threatened?

Blacks and Hispanics in America face a threat to their existence on a daily basis already.
 
As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"

Going to quote this. I think we have to stop and look and realize that not everything that helps a bank is EVIL
 

Geg

Member
As a former regulatory liason for two giant banks, it's a good change of the rule.

Daily liquidity calculations are super arduous, cost lots of money, are not horribly accurate and don't offer much view into the bank that monthly calcs would provide.

But the optics of this are horrid because most americans are just going to see "going easy on wall st"

Sooooo this whole story is just more fear mongering aimed at Bernie fans?
 

Torokil

Member
Hillary is gonna pivot to the right to grab those centrists and some republicans who hate Trump too.

If this were like Joe Biden then yeah it would be good to pick up the dying breed of moderate republicans.

However, Hillary is the she devil and public enemy number 1 and no republican is gonna willingly go out and vote for her.
 

kirblar

Member
Just a third one? What if that third party is the tea party? You need a system that doesn't fuck you over by presenting less than a handful of viable options. But hey, since the people in power belong to either of these two parties, when is this really ever going to change for you?
The current system forces people to compromise instead of getting to select from a list of vanity candidates. People don't like having to compromise.
 
3rd party in the US is not viable due to the Electoral College. Now at other levels of government, sure. But presidential level voting allows for only two parties.
 

guek

Banned
No thanks.

Also, I wish people weren't so reactive whenever anyone suggests they're unhappy with Hillary as the nomination. Saying you won't vote or vote for Trump is one thing but I'm one of the many people who will vote for her in November but wish they were voting for someone else.
 

Noirulus

Member
I mean, is this surprising at all? We already know how many millions she made from giving speeches to Wall Street...

Fuck the supreme court and all the people (women and minorities and LBGT) the GOP would fuck over amirite?

You're damage controlling a bit too hard. Why would republicans fuck over women, minorities and LBGT? Sounds crazy.
 

Abounder

Banned
It means it doesn't look good. Hillary has been claiming to be tough on the big banks.

Word. Hillary is already known as Wall Street's best friend and the people are still pissed that no one's been arrested for the great recession caused by corrupt bankers.

I guess the dems advocating for a higher minimum wage and worker's rights is just them appeasing the corporate overlords!

Fair point but workers still don't want the TPP, it is seen as only hurting the middle class even more. What's so good about wages and rights if all you got is MickeyDs kind of thing. Still, voting Dem > Rep is an easy decision.

Trump already ruined that talking point when he picked Pence who also supports the TPP. And if we believe Donald Jr. It's going to be Pence whos in charge of domestic and foreign policy lol.

Trump will still swiftboat TPP, let's all hope it fails but I doubt it. That message is what is resounding with angry workers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom