Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Banks Seen Dangerous Defying Obama’s Too-Big-to-Fail Move

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
No Elephants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-01-12 12:14 PM
Original message
Banks Seen Dangerous Defying Obama’s Too-Big-to-Fail Move
At the end of 2011, five banks held assets equal to 56% of the U.S. economy.

At the end of 2006, five banks held assets equal to 43% of the U.S. economy.

Wrong direction.

And three of those five years were on Geithner's watch. Actually, all of those five years were on Geithner's watch if you believe the program PBS is currently airing on Wall Street. However, he was only Secretary for three years.




Banks Seen Dangerous Defying Obama’s Too-Big-to-Fail Move
By David J. Lynch
April 16, 2012 2:02 PM EDT

Two years after President Barack Obama vowed to eliminate the danger of financial institutions becoming “too big to fail,” the nation’s largest banks are bigger than they were before the nation’s credit markets seized up and required unprecedented bailouts by the government.

Five banks -- JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. -- held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, according to central bankers at the Federal Reserve.

Five years earlier, before the financial crisis, the largest banks’ assets amounted to 43 percent of U.S. output. The Big Five today are about twice as large as they were a decade ago relative to the economy, sparking concern that trouble at a major bank would rock the financial system and force the government to step in as it did in 2008 with the Fed-assisted rescue of Bear Stearns Cos. by JPMorgan and with Citigroup and Bank of America after the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy, the largest in U.S. history.

<snip>


Simon Johnson, a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, blames a “lack of leadership at Treasury and the White House” for the failure to fulfill that promise. “It’d be safer to break them up,” he said.


The Obama administration rejects the criticism, citing new safeguards to head off further turmoil in the banking system. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in remarks on Feb. 2 the U.S. financial system is “significantly stronger than it was before the crisis.” He credits new regulations, including tougher capital and liquidity requirements that limit risk- taking by the biggest banks, authority to take over failing big institutions and prohibitions on the largest banks acquiring competitors.


Much, much more at http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-16/obama-bid-to-e...

Senator Sanders has said, "Too big to fail is too big to exist." As usual, I agree with Sanders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC