Display:

Taking Hard New Look at a Greenspan Legacy

Still, over a long stretch of time, some did pose questions. In 1992, Edward J. Markey, a Democrat from Massachusetts who led the House subcommittee on telecommunications and finance, asked what was then the General Accounting Office to study derivatives risks.

Two years later, the office released its report, identifying "significant gaps and weaknesses" in the regulatory oversight of derivatives.

"The sudden failure or abrupt withdrawal from trading of any of these large U.S. dealers could cause liquidity problems in the markets and could also pose risks to others, including federally insured banks and the financial system as a whole," Charles A. Bowsher, head of the accounting office, said when he testified before Mr. Markey's committee in 1994. "In some cases intervention has and could result in a financial bailout paid for or guaranteed by taxpayers."

(...)

Ms. Born was concerned that unfettered, opaque trading could "threaten our regulated markets or, indeed, our economy without any federal agency knowing about it," she said in Congressional testimony. She called for greater disclosure of trades and reserves to cushion against losses.

Ms. Born's views incited fierce opposition from Mr. Greenspan and Robert E. Rubin, the Treasury secretary then. Treasury lawyers concluded that merely discussing new rules threatened the derivatives market. Mr. Greenspan warned that too many rules would damage Wall Street, prompting traders to take their business overseas.

"Greenspan told Brooksley that she essentially didn't know what she was doing and she'd cause a financial crisis," said Michael Greenberger, who was a senior director at the commission. "Brooksley was this woman who was not playing tennis with these guys and not having lunch with these guys. There was a little bit of the feeling that this woman was not of Wall Street."

No, nobody could have predicted. Grrrr. This makes me so angry.

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes

by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Thu Oct 16th, 2008 at 09:28:23 AM EST
Comments from detlef and DoDo in the in DoDo's Shifting Frame thread give us the German Version.  Reading from the weissgarnix blog, Merkel asked Schröder's gubmint when they would take the restrictions off derivatives.  The answer was that it was a priority.

More evidence that Anglo Disease infects everywhere.

"Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one's courage." - Anaïs Nin

by Crazy Horse on Thu Oct 16th, 2008 at 10:04:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Seen and Noted | DeFazio | 29 Sep 2008

um ...

Oh, to hell with that! | Treasury SSFIP | 14 Oct 2008

Programs for Systemically Significant Failing Institutions
The Treasury Department is currently developing a third program to potentially provide direct assistance to certain failing firms on terms negotiated on a case-by-case basis. Treasury is issuing guidance for the executive compensation standards that will apply to the firms participating in such programs and their senior executives (Treasury Notice 2008-PSSFI). These standards are similar in all respects to the Capital Purchase Programs executive compensation standards described above, with one significant difference. In situations where Treasury provides assistance under the systemically significant failing institutions programs, golden parachutes will be defined more strictly to prohibit any payments to departing senior executives.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Thu Oct 16th, 2008 at 10:16:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series