The 'authority' under current laws of the USA to 'break up' banks too big to fail falls under "Anti-Trust." Obviously the practice of Anti-Trust has been weakened and avoided since the days of "Ma Bell." When a single 'private' entity, such as Goldman Sachs, becomes so invasive through a fiscal infrastructure it becomes a single authority that can seek 'leverage' from government. That is exactly what occurred during the YEARS of Bush/Cheney. The private sector was 'preferred' and there was vast deregulation that began with Clinton but enhanced under the majority of Republican 'clout.'Quite literally, with so much money OWED to the USA by these banks the soverignty of the country can fall into question if they 'fail again.' And they don't care if they 'fail again' because their executives will have scalped the USA for everything its worth and left on the first plane THEY OWN out of town. "Too Big to Fail" is best defined "Too Big to Exist." It is up to the government of a free market economy to not 'just' regulate them, but, rid the danger of their influence from its people and that of their allies. If Japan wants a stronger USA dollar, then the USA wants a stronger USA dollar, especially if that was verbalized by the Secretary of the Treasury in an official visit.
Government 'authority' has to return 'back to the people.' This mess has to end. The USA can't be the 'petty cash' to Wall Street. The country needs regulation, the 'REPUBLICAN' economic of privatization of every aspect of life DOES NOT WORK !
The fact of the matter is the USA Treasury should never have been involved in any bailout. We compromised the only company worth its salt in J. P. Morgan when we bailout out the incompetents of Wall Street. All of it should have imploded and the country would have started over with a clean slate and a reasonable treasury.
Right now, the country has more invested in the outcome of these banks than it should and Morgan stands to lose all its gains through its practices of 'free market' if there are issues with any of the others that received the monies.
The TARP funds were required for Morgan to take because without them their 'capacity/assets' would have been diminished while the other banks were allowed to regroup for yet another attack with more ricidule than Morgan had. Morgan had to take TARP to 'KEEP' its viability. I am glad they did take the funds and they are still doing well. I found it interesting that Paulson and Co., didn't sell their shares in Morgan, but, couldn't wait to get out of Goldman to buy Citigroup.
Governors of the Federal Reserve (click here)
All I ask of any 'change to a single authority' is to picture it operating under Bush and Cheney. Then 'secure' the sovereignty of the nation and Middle Class to exist. Okay?
January 2004
Bush-Cheney Energy Strategy: Procuring the Rest of the World's Oil (click here)
By Michael Klare
Foreign Policy In Focus
When first assuming office in early 2001, President George W. Bush's top foreign policy priority was not to prevent terrorism or to curb the spread of weapons of mass destruction--or any of the other goals he espoused later that year following the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Rather, it was to increase the flow of petroleum from suppliers abroad to U.S. markets....
Republican exploitation of the USA is NOTHING without exploitive wars. General Eisenhower developed the USA Military Industrial Complex, Vietnam Nixon, Iran-Contra Regan, Iraq Bush. DO NOT give Executive Power over the USA fiscal infrastructure. DO NOT ! Don't even give it access.
Single US banking regulator proposed (click here)
The Federal Reserve should be stripped of the bulk of its banking regulation powers and hand them to a new banking regulator, according to draft legislation being proposed by a powerful US Senator.
By James Quinn, US Business Editor
Published: 9:42PM GMT 10 Nov 2009
...Senator Dodd's aim is to eliminate what he calls the "alphabet soup of multiple bank regulators that has led to weak, confusing regulation where it's easy for problems to fall through the cracks and difficult to know who is responsible."
His proposals are the most wide-reaching in addressing some of the root causes of the financial crisis, and go much further than existing proposals backed by the US Treasury....
It would appear as though in carrying out the 'will of the people,' Secretary Geithner is in for a 'show down' with Mr. Bernanke and his former social network on Wall Street.
Ya see, there isn't any reason to continue down this road with "The Fed" as its actions, direct actions by Bernanke, CAUSED the fall in the USA Dollar. Bernanke at the time of "The Goldman Sachs Emergency (You emergency is not mine.)" flooded the USA dollar circulation with $1 Trillion of 'loose cash.' It still remains to be realized if that will 'cause' rampant inflation in the USA while company CEOs are grabbing all they can before everything goes south.
Secretrary Geithner needs to live up to his word and not hand out major policy statements like candy to a baby only to take them back when he returns to the pressure of his peers in DC and Wall Street. Change is change and given the history of his family, I am sure Secretary Geithner will reflect on the loyalities of those people.
Secretary Geithner has an interesting family history according to Wikipedia. According to Wiki his family may have met President Obama's mother some time ago. But, reflecting on that and the fact his family had ties to another beloved President, former five star general and President Eisenhower (Cardiac Patient while President. He did have Nixon as a VP though.), that simply couldn't get enough of the American People and their Middle Class (maybe that was FDR.), Secretary Geithner needs to seek to control the fiscal infrastructure of the USA and stop the financial excoriation of the country's treasury by entities that once provided him a very nice living.
Nov 11, 2009
Strong dollar vital to US (click title to entry - thank you)
TOKYO - US TREASURY Secretary Timothy Geithner said here on Wednesday that a strong dollar was 'very important' to the United States, seeking to reassure Asian nations concerned about the greenback's recent slump.
'I believe deeply that it's very important for the US and the economic health of the US that we maintain a strong dollar,' he told reporters.
Given the dollar's key role in the world financial system, 'we bear special responsibility for trying to make sure that we are implementing policy in the US that will sustain confidence' among global investors, he said.
US officials regularly express their backing for a 'strong dollar' but have done nothing to arrest its slide, which many see as necessary to reduce the big US trade deficit.
The dollar has plunged about 15 per cent against a basket of six other major currencies from a peak earlier this year, sparking concern among Asian countries who have big holdings of dollars in their foreign exchange reserves....
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner pays lip service to keeping dollar strong (click here)
The Obama administration may prefer a weaker currency because it's a boon to U.S. exporters, but no one is going to say so for fear of waving a red flag at markets....
...Besides, the administration has to be figuring there's no reason to mess with success.
Consider: One long-term concern about a falling dollar is that it could undercut U.S. financial markets by scaring away foreign investors, whose dollar-denominated assets lose value as the greenback falls.
But the Treasury bond market isn't suffering from a lack of investor demand even though the administration is borrowing record sums. And the U.S. stock market, too, remains robust, as investors see dollar weakness as good news for American multinational firms. The Dow Jones industrials rose to a fresh one-year high Wednesday.
"It's the best of everything right now," says Win Thin, a currency strategist at Brown Bros. Harriman in New York.
UPDATE 2-Fed's Tarullo--Idea of big bank surcharge appealing (click here)
Mon Nov 9, 2009 8:26pm EST
By John Parry
NEW YORK, Nov 9 (Reuters) - U.S. Federal Reserve Governor Daniel Tarullo on Monday endorsed the idea of requiring big banks to hold more capital and renewed his suggestion that direct efforts to limit the size of banks may be worth considering.
Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and other officials have raised the idea of a capital surcharge to prevent banks from getting so big that the government is compelled to prop them up in a crisis.
The idea "has substantial appeal," Tarullo said in remarks prepared for a speech at New York University.
Tarullo did not comment on the outlook for the economy or interest rates in a speech on financial regulation.
The Fed governor said that in the debate over reforms to prevent a repeat of the recent financial meltdown, policy-makers could also focus on changes to the structure of the financial system as well as regulations.
He said both regulators and the financial industry were to blame for the crisis.
He renewed his suggestion that directly limiting the size of financial institutions may have merit....
US bank reform bill seeks to strip powers from the Federal Reserve (click here)
By Tom Braithwaite and Sarah O'Connor in Washington
Published: November 11 2009 02:00 Last updated: November 11 2009 02:00
An influential US Senate committee has proposed a sweeping overhaul of the country's regulatory architecture that would strip powers from the Federal Reserve and create a single banking regulator....
...Mr Dodd said most institutions would benefit from a regulator that would provide "clarity, cut red tape and make it easier to compete" but banks would "no longer be able to shop for the weakest regulator"....
...The Senate draft legislation creates an agency to oversee systemic risk, which could call for banks to be broken up if they threatened the entire financial system. The proposals, although more radical than other versions, stop short of forcing the break-up of healthy banks, which has been advocated by some economists.
Republicans declined to support the proposed legislation, which Mr Dodd said was vital to cracking down on abusive selling of mortgages and credit cards. But he said he was still "optimistic" that the Republicans could be brought on board.
