2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: THIS is who they want to put in the Whitehouse? Really?!? [View all]Hoyt
(54,770 posts)"The first domino to nearly topple over in the financial crisis was Bear Stearns, an investment bank that had nothing to do with commercial banking. Glass-Steagall would have been irrelevant. Then came Lehman Brothers; it too was an investment bank with no commercial banking business and therefore wouldnt have been covered by Glass-Steagall either. After them, Merrill Lynch was next and yep, it too was an investment bank that had nothing to do with Glass-Steagall.
Next in line was the American International Group, an insurance company that was also unrelated to Glass-Steagall. While were at it, we should probably throw in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which similarly, had nothing to do with Glass-Steagall.
For that article, Sorkin contacted Sen. Elizabeth Warren - one of the big proponents of reinstating Glass Steagall - to get her reaction. In my conversation with Ms. Warren she told me that one of the reasons shes been pushing reinstating Glass-Steagall even if it wouldnt have prevented the financial crisis is that it is an easy issue for the public to understand and you can build public attention behind.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/05/21/reinstating-an-old-rule-is-not-a-cure-for-crisis/?_r=1
The last paragraph strikes me as funny. For example, Warren is still saying that the TPP won't be released until 4 years after enactment. Of course, almost anyone here should know that is has been release in it's entirety. Warren is still trying to make things simple for gullible people. it appears to have spilled over to those who don't believe Dodd-Frank, with the Volcker Rule, and Clinton's new proposals for entities not covered by GS, is far better than GS.