LyrArc Article Gist
The American Treasury Secretary who handled the 2008 financial crisis, Henry Paulson, gives the new US financial reform legislation an incomplete grade. His main concern is that the too-big-to fail risk in the US banking system continues, and without clear rules a lot depends on the regulators. He does not see higher capital requirements doing much to ease that problem, and sees another crisis in a few years as inevitable. Former SEC chief, Harvey Pitt, gives it an F for failure or an I for Incomplete. He sees it as a boon for lawyers, because it is not clearly written and leaves so many loopholes, to a degree that is simply astounding. He says it does nothing in the way of preventing another crisis. Does nothing for transparency, nothing for monitoring and action by regulators, all factors that led to the crisis of 2008. Nouriel Roubini gives it a C+, because it does little to fix the reasons why securitization failed and caused the crisis, and in this way will keep credit creation and expansion in a weak state. He sees this financial reform bill as a failed effort that is laying the ground for the next crisis, with little action in the "too-big-to-fail" area, a huge dilution of what former Fed Chairman paul Volcker had advocated in the Volcker rule, and no real impact on the risky trading of derivatives. Bill Gross of PIMCO gives his frank assessment in no uncertain terms. A D+ for this bill. It shows how lobbyists for the banks still control Congress he says. It would have been better to let Paul Volcker take charge completely, than to have the lobbyists dilute the critical reform proposals. Simon Johnson gives it the lowest passing grade at MIT, a B. The only large change he says, is the Kanjorski Amendment, which give federal regulators the authority to breakup the large banks. But he cautions that it may require another crisis for the regulators and Congress to "get it," and do what they should be doing....
The American Treasury Secretary who handled the 2008 financial crisis, Henry Paulson, gives the new US financial reform legislation an incomplete grade. His main concern is that the too-big-to fail risk in the US banking system continues, and without clear rules a lot depends on the regulators. He does not see higher capital requirements doing much to ease that problem, and sees another crisis in a few years as inevitable. Former SEC chief, Harvey Pitt, gives it an F for failure or an I for Incomplete. He sees it as a boon for lawyers, because it is not clearly written and leaves so many loopholes, to a degree that is simply astounding. He says it does nothing in the way of preventing another crisis. Does nothing for transparency, nothing for monitoring and action by regulators, all factors that led to the crisis of 2008. Nouriel Roubini gives it a C+, because it does little to fix the reasons why securitization failed and caused the crisis, and in this way will keep credit creation and expansion in a weak state. He sees this financial reform bill as a failed effort that is laying the ground for the next crisis, with little action in the "too-big-to-fail" area, a huge dilution of what former Fed Chairman paul Volcker had advocated in the Volcker rule, and no real impact on the risky trading of derivatives. Bill Gross of PIMCO gives his frank assessment in no uncertain terms. A D+ for this bill. It shows how lobbyists for the banks still control Congress he says. It would have been better to let Paul Volcker take charge completely, than to have the lobbyists dilute the critical reform proposals. Simon Johnson gives it the lowest passing grade at MIT, a B. The only large change he says, is the Kanjorski Amendment, which give federal regulators the authority to breakup the large banks. But he cautions that it may require another crisis for the regulators and Congress to "get it," and do what they should be doing....
