Obama Vows to Watch US Financial Industry



Obama vows to watch US financial industry (via AFP)

President Barack Obama promised Saturday to watch the US financial industry to prevent what he called “irresponsible behavior” as he defended his nominations to key financial watchdog agencies. The comments came after Obama nominated Mary Jo White to lead the Securities and Exchange Commission and…



Author: Guest Voice

Share This Post On

19 Comments

  1. I guess I don’t know what Obama is referring to as far as “predatory practices”. There is already legislation in place to pretty much allow the banks to do whatever they want to do as long as they can circumnavigate the wording and find back doors to use ( which they do).

    It’s really a joke. This is an industry that has already been determined to be Too Big To Fail….. nuf said.

  2. Wow, the last four years has really produced an avalanche of prosecutions of bankers and Wall Street vermin. Well, the next four will even be better.

  3. I certainly hope he’s right about these guys, because we could use a little more enforcement. There’s still a big disconnect between the rhetoric and the reality though. A free market believer knows that the players have to liable for their own failures. The new mortgage guidelines, which are slightly tighter, also give the originators immunity from lawsuits if they follow those guidelines. That’s going to bite us further on down the road.

  4. He chose as his new Sec. of Treasury a guy who was instrumental in deregulating the industry. Who the hell is he trying to kid?

  5. I’ll believe it when I see it, not because the prez makes pretty talk about it.

  6. Well, this may be a little bit better than relying solely on the former brand of the SEC that was totally under the thumb of Congressmen who desired as much DE-REGULATION as possible. But like other commenters, I have to voice my skepticism over whether these changes will produce actual results.

    PBS has run a series of documentaries about the workings of Wall street, and our area is currently running one of them—”The Untouchables” that has to do with the virtually legal invulnerability of corporate executives. It reveals, as sheKnows says, that lobbyists can initiate changes in any real regulations affecting Wall street by working towards the process of simply changing legal wordings, as well as a host of other scams designed to keep special interests in full charge, no matter what government agencies or laws are created.

    However, even though the bark of these new consumer advocates is probably way more threatening than their actual bite, it has been refreshing to witness the Obama Administration take on some rather minor aspects of the way business is done—after all, we have forced credit card companies to spell out their rules for all to see, and, have successfully limited the endless creation of different charges designed to nickel and dime their customers without their awareness. There has also been an effort, although insufficient, to help honest homeowners with their mortgages, and hopefully eliminate some of the sub-prime mortgages that offered considerable risk, which fell primarily on home owners, so that “predatory lenders” will not continue to entice working families in pursuit of honest American dreams.

    I really think we need to contemplate the idea of responsible Capitalism and business ethics, as well as the unfortunate tendency of Wall Street to pursue immediate results and short term gains, over long term stability. In this sense I hope that new consumer protections are taken seriously by the Administration, and that Obama might be emboldened to act forcefully by virtue of no longer having to run for office and jeopardize elections with controversial policies.

    One of the Documentaries I watched on PBS left viewers with the impression that Obama has deliberately played soft-ball with Wall Street in order to avoid fruitless political confrontations with institutions deemed too big to fail—this in order to prevent antagonism from executives, and political polarization in Congress, and, destroying the trust of the business community by being too authoritative concerning the prosecution of financial crimes.

    By pursuing this course, the President may have indeed, contributed towards salvaging the confidence of the private business sector, which is now beginning to see a solid economic recovery. Lets hope that economy stays healthy and that new consumer protections are adequately enforced.

    How long lasting, and how many more of these financial meltdowns will we have to see before, as witnessed in the recent fiscal cliff conflicts, Republicans finally exhibit some political sanity regarding the regulation of businesses deemed to big to fail, just like they have recognized the hazards of holding the Government hostage to their own agendas?…Knock on wood!

  7. I really think we need to contemplate the idea of responsible Capitalism and business ethics, as well as the unfortunate tendency of Wall Street to pursue immediate results and short term gains, over long term stability.

    True. Also classic understatement.

  8. Maybe any fines these corporations see as a business expense, and nothing more, could be used to finance mandatory courses in ethics and good business practices in all colleges and universities that offer business degrees.

  9. They already have ethics courses so why don’t we require that all politicians also attend.

  10. All Presidents fail, somewhere. This President’s glaring failure is the failure to protect us little guys, our economy, the world, from the US Financial Industry.

  11. All Presidents fail, somewhere. This President’s glaring failure is the failure to protect us little guys, our economy, the world, from the US Financial Industry.

    A statement like this with all the Republican obstructionism that has shackled this administration is (IMO) the most partisan comment I’ve read on TMV in years… Beyond the beyond

  12. You are mistaken about me being partisan; but I have no problem with you feeling I am “beyond beyond” on this one. That makes me a centrist :)

  13. O.K… KP what is it that you think President Obama should have /could have done to protect “us little guys, our economy, the world, from the US Financial Industry”?

    Your comment, as well as any ‘slash and burn’ comment, containing accusations while totally devoid of specifics is the very definition of a partisan talking point.

    As one who has paid close attention to the 112th Congress (their actions, inaction, and blatant obstructionism) it’s easy for me to doubt your theory that the actions and misdeeds of the US Financial Industry all lie at President Obama’s feet.

    That said… I’m open to any specific comments you might have regarding what you think President Obama could have done to protect ‘everyone in the whole world’ from the US Financial Industry.

    Maybe you could start by explaining why your comment ignores all those fine folks in congress… You know, the ones that are charged with the legal responsibility of regulating business / industry and passing laws to protect “us little guys.”

    KP the centrist… OK, What’s the punch line? :)

  14. Steve, I think the President has wide leeway in prosecution with or without Congressional approval. Obama has been as big a failure on this as anyone else. It’s my main beef with him, aside from the fact he signed a bill allowing him to do away with Habeus Corpus. The financial sector has run roughshod over the people, turned the world economy on its head, and no one has gone to jail over the vast majority of it. This whole thing was a non issue during the election precisely for the reason that neither candidate was addressing the issue in their platform.

  15. slamfu nailed it.

    @SteveK said: “Maybe you could start by explaining why your comment ignores all those fine folks in congress.”

    My comment doesn’t ignore congress. It was a comment on the article. The article was about Obama’s “vows”; not a comment on his/your ideology. My comment doesn’t absolve congress — the worst congress in the history of this country (my view).

  16. “it’s easy for me to doubt your theory that the actions and misdeeds of the US Financial Industry all lie at President Obama’s feet.”

    Re-read: I never said the misdeeds of the US Financial Industry all lie at President Obama’s feet. I think the President has been successful in many areas. What I said (my view) was that this issue is where I think he has been weakest.

    His appointments and comments are hopeful. But to date, his leadership has been sorely lacking. There are four years to alter history on this topic.

  17. Zzzzzzzzzzzzz… etccccccccccccc!

  18. Very creative, using only four letters to insult.

  19. If you’d pay attention duck you won’t have to waste 17 letters in a failed effort to do the same. :)

Submit a Comment