[Pesqueeb]

Now what? I've not perused this bill. What does it mean and why is it better than just re-enacting Glass-Stegall?

 

[ohio]

The article didn't say specifically which bill it was talking about, nor did it offer any details of the bill, only vague commentary from politicians. So it was about as useful as, well, a Huffington Post article.

However, if it's the bill I think it is, it includes similar functions to Glass-Steagall in defining the different types of banks, separating them and setting limits on their leverage. But additionally and more importantly to me, it expands the FDIC to have a sufficient reserve and budget to take over and break up failing large banks the way it already can with smaller banks. What this means is that no bank will be too big to fail, and if one over-leverages itself, the FDIC will be able to step in and break it apart for resale at market values, without disrupting the flow of capital or allowing any domino effects. It means no more bailouts. Ever.

 

[Secret Squirrel]

The article didn't say specifically which bill it was talking about, nor did it offer any details of the bill, only vague commentary from politicians. So it was about as useful as, well, a Huffington Post article.

However, if it's the bill I think it is, it includes similar functions to Glass-Steagall in defining the different types of banks, separating them and setting limits on their leverage. But additionally and more importantly to me, it expands the FDIC to have a sufficient reserve and budget to take over and break up failing large banks the way it already can with smaller banks. What this means is that no bank will be too big to fail, and if one over-leverages itself, the FDIC will be able to step in and break it apart for resale at market values, without disrupting the flow of capital or allowing any domino effects. It means no more bailouts. Ever.

It's the FEAB*. I like it. Srsly.


* - F*ck 'Em All Bill

 

[dante]

Really? Any of the major news stories have been talking about this for weeks, and now that it passed the Senate, all the major newspapers have broken it down.

Here's the NYT's take on it:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2010/05/20/business/20100520-regulation-graphic.html

I'd like to see it even stronger, but I'll take what I can get.

 

[rockofullr]

At least it makes it clear that nobody's getting bailed out next time.