Remember Nader?

[Dover]

Anybody see any conflicts of interest with this trend?

....the 1999 signing by President Clinton of the Financial Modernization Act, which allows securities firms, banks and insurance companies to enter each other's markets, is changing the industry's landscape. For example, now that insurance companies can sell securities products, Allstate has begun selling mutual funds.

"That's what people want," said Bill Howell, president of the Insurance Education Foundation in Indianapolis. "They don't want to go to one place to get insurance and one place to get stocks. They want to go to one place to get their insurance, stocks and do their banking." While financial services organizations are expected to get bigger, mergers and acquisitions will reduce the number of them creating more competition for jobs. The people working for these financial advising giants will need to be the best at what they do and be able to sell, market or work with a variety of financial products. By 2008, the Bureau of Labor Statistics projects the percentage of jobs devoted to the finance, insurance and real estate professions will fall slightly to 5.2% of all U.S. jobs from 5.5% in 1998.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3628/is_200010/ai_n8927052

___________________________________________________________________

TESTIMONY OF RALPH NADER

HR 10

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES

U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

February 11, 1999



Mr. Chairman, members of the House Banking Committee, thank you for the invitation to comment on HR 10.

These hearings mark the third consecutive Congress in which financial deregulation has dominated the agenda of this Committee. Thousands of hours of the time of Members of Congress and their staffs have been expended in a futile effort to craft a bill that will be embraced by the maximum number of corporate lobbyists.

Unfortunately, little of this time and legislative labor have been used for a broad detailed examination of the issues which affect the safety and soundness of our financial system and the needs and desires of citizens who will use the system. Little time and few resources of the Congress have been allocated to devise a rational and modern regulatory system which protects the taxpayers and ensures the delivery of financial services to all citizens on a nondiscriminatory basis.

HR 10 is not a bill for consumers. It is a bill designed to create new profit centers for a relative handful of banking and financial services corporations--corporations that will form combinations which will dominate the delivery of financial products and fuel the already alarming trend toward mega mergers and the concentration of economic power.

Apparently the sponsors of HR 10, themselves, have major questions about where this legislation will lead and what problems may emerge when banks, securities firms, insurance companies merge under common ownership. Section 186, for example, requires the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) to conduct a study of how these mergers will affect the safety and soundness of the taxpayer supported deposit insurance funds. Elsewhere in the bill, the General Accounting Office is instructed to determine the impact of HR 10 on community banks and consumers, again only after the legislation is enacted..

These are critically important questions that go to very heart of the bill. These are areas where the Committee needs to determine the facts before HR 10 becomes law. What happens if the FDIC and the GAO do, indeed, find serious defects, problems that could seriously jeopardize the health of the financial system? Does anyone believe that major remedial action will be possible against the opposition of the combined lobbying forces of the financial industry--the political power of conglomerates that will reach into virtually every Congressional district across the nation.

..snip..

Instead of dealing with issues involving safety and soundness and the economic well being of consumers and communities, most of the effort has centered on mediating the differences between competing industry groups, all of which want deregulation on their own terms. As a result, the current version of HR 10 is a patchwork of inter-industry compromises that fall far short of meeting the sponsors' self-serving claim that they are "modernizing" the financial system.

HR 10 is designed to create a financial system for the more affluent in our society. In the financial world envisioned under HR 10, the needs of middle and low-income consumers have been largely ignored or shunted aside in the rush to accommodate the high rollers.

Don't be taken in by industry and political propaganda that financial deregulation--or "modernization" as its proponents prefer--is consumer friendly. The legislation does contain some important disclosure requirements regarding uninsured products, but for the vast majority of citizens, the mega conglomerates created by HR 10 will only add new hurdles to the already nightmarish task of obtaining basic financial services without incurring outlandish and arbitrary fees and being sent off to the wasteland of endless 1-800 numbers and pricey automatic teller machines...cont'd

http://www.nader.org/releases/hr10.html

_____________________________________________________________________


Here are some things to keep in mind:

A stockbroker at your bank or savings institution can sell securities and mutual funds that are protected against certain losses, but not by the FDIC and not in the same way the FDIC insures deposits. The Securities Investor Protection Corporation (SIPC), a non-profit corporation (not a government agency) funded by brokerage firms, provides limited coverage if, for example, a member brokerage firm goes out of business. The SIPC doesn't insure you against financial losses caused by market declines. (To learn more, go to the SIPC Web site.)

Your bank or savings institution can sell annuities, which are investments with income guaranteed to start some time in the future. Annuities may appear to be "insured" because they guarantee a minimum payment for life, but these products are not FDIC-insured.
As part of the FDIC's ongoing efforts to educate consumers about what is and is not FDIC-insured, and to help you better understand the wide array of investment, savings and insurance choices available from banks and saving institutions, we offer the following guide...>

http://www.consumer-guides.info/Financial/financial_consumer_knowledge.html

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. The guy who got seatbelts in cars?

Sure.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

2. He's That Dumbass Ignorant Selfish Lying Fuck In Large Part Responsible For * Being In Office Right?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I remember the guy right.

[Dover]

3. Hardly....but good try. I see you got the DLC meme...n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

7. Nah. I Think My Memory Is Correct. That's Him Alright.

[Warren DeMontague]

14. And what party do you represent? nt

[Dover]

18. The question is and should be, which party represents ME?

Still waiting....

[Warren DeMontague]

20. If you're waiting for the Democratic Party to come kiss Ralph Nader's ass

you're going to be waiting a long time.

Speaking of "DLC memes", I guess it's a DLC meme to believe that we would have been better off with Al Gore in the White House for the past 6 years? "No difference", right?

Although, actually, I think even Ralph notices a difference between the GOP and the Democratic Party- after all, he ONLY criticizes Democrats, and as noted elsewhere, he lets Republicans take top jobs in his Presidential Campaigns. Funny, that.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

21. You Need To Answer That For Yourself, And Then Find Whichever Website Caters To It.

Since we don't know your political ideals, we can't pick a political party for you. If you value decency, honesty, fairness, tolerance, genuine caring for society and all around smart policy and human decency, then the Democratic Party might be a good fit for you. If you value foolish selfish ignorance while proposing policy with heads up their asses while deceiving the public and playing the role of schoolyard spoiler with a neener neener neener mentality, than Nader might be a good fit. If you're an all around evil and misguided motherfucker, then maybe the republicans.

We don't know you. You need to figure that out for yourself. Then you need to make sure you take part in whichever website is designed to cater to those specific ideals.

[Dover]

23. I've been at DU a hell of alot longer than you.

Since this WAS an underground.

Let me introduce myself. I'm from the far left wing of the Democratic Party. And I don't quote the latest party meme or follow blindly according to the party line. I question everything.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

25. Want A Scooby Snack? I Don't Give A Rat's Fat Ass If You Arrived Yesterday. That's Irrelevant.

Furthermore, my comment was a logically sound response to your reply. It wasn't saying that you shouldn't be here. It was saying that I can't tell you which party represents you since only you know your ideals. So therefore only you can figure it out.

[Dover]

28. LOL!!!!

Thanks for the laugh.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

29. No Problem. :o)

[11 Bravo]

4. You left out narcissist. n/t

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

9. Ran Out Of Room LOL

[TheCowsCameHome]

11. Feel free to use my space.

[unpossibles]

5. I disagree

for one thing, Gore won the popular election. For another, it's not guaranteed that all Nader voters would have voted for Gore. Sure, perhaps they would, but perhaps they might not have voted or would have voted for some other 3rd party.

I blame Bush's win not on Gore, but on Bush cheating and stacking the deck. They took away the voting rights of many people that day in Florida (and likely elsewhere). I also feel that Gore could have run a smarter and stronger campaign - as evidenced by his "comeback" potential now.

Sure, rail at Nader all you want, but he has done a lot of good over the years, most likely saving many lives.

[Iwasthere]

8. Fuck Nader...

He IS a spoiler. Worse, her enjoys being the spoiler.

[Dover]

13. LOTS of spoilers here....Clinton did pretty good damage with this bill and NAFTA..

but hey....you keep that DLC meme going...maybe someone will buy it cheap.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

15. One Spoiler That Counts Though: That Narcissistic Misguided Selfish Piece Of Crap Nader. LOL

Shame on him for his stupidity. Shame on him. His soul will forever have a dark mark on it because of what he has done.

[Warren DeMontague]

16. So Bill Clinton is worse than Ralph Nader, who let Republicans run his 2004 state campaigns.?

Bill Clinton as president was no better than what we have now?

[Dover]

22. Nader has done MUCH more FOR you than Clinton

Put their records on legislation/policy side by side sometime.

Looking at Clinton's record, it's often very difficult to distinguish the two parties re: privatization
and corporate support. Which is why the Dem party is so split right now.

Have you even considered what this one bill alone has done to the U.S. economic landscape? What harm has Nader done to this country via his long-lived work?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

26. Yeah, Much More. Negatively Speaking Of Course.

God he's such a fuckin moron that guy.

[Dover]

27. Yeah, always best to resort to name calling than to supply substantive responses

based on the OP, when you've got nothing of value to say.

So what are your thoughts on that bill that Clinton passed merging banking, insurance, real estate, etc.? Hmmmm? How has it effected people, the economy, the class system?

Any thoughts at all? Nah.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. You Want A Serious Reply? Fine. Here Ya Go:

FUCK NADER.

[Warren DeMontague]

33. Bullshit.

Clinton was easily the best President of my lifetime. Not perfect, but a damn sight better than many others.

And again you don't want to address the issue of Nader letting Conservative Republicans run his state campaigns in 2004. Again you don't want to address the issue of why he criticizes Democrats but not Republicans. Again you don't want to answer whether or not we would have been better off with Gore these past 6 years, if there really was "no difference" between the two candidates in 2000 (like Ralph said).

Maybe Ralph does something for you. How typical of the solipsist Nader mindset to assume that THEIR priorities must be EVERYONE'S priorities, and what they deem important takes high holy scorched Earth precedence over everything else.

I will be the judge as to whether that self-centered asshole has done anything for ME, thank you very much.

[Dover]

34. So you want me to answer all YOUR questions but you won't address

the OP and the question of how that bill has affected this country? Do you disagree with Nader's stated concerns in his address to the House of Representatives? Do you see any serious problems with the bill?


Do you find ANY of those things you mentioned about Nader more damaging than that bill or NAFTA?

[Warren DeMontague]

36. Yes. I think what Bush has done to this Country and the Constitution far outstrips

any damage caused by this Bill, NAFTA, or anything else Clinton did while in office.

And Nader's ego, Nader's stubborn refusal to acknowledge "any difference" between the parties, all Naders BULLSHIT for the past seven years- all of that is a part of this nation being saddled with Bush.

No, I don't think NAFTA or this bill have caused the sky to fall. Sorry. I don't. We've got much bigger problems, and Bill Clinton isn't the source of them.

Now, how about answering my questions.

[Gatchaman]

17. If 1 in 10 Nader voters had voted for Al Gore

the whole florida debacle would have been avoided.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. Nader who?

[TheCowsCameHome]

10. He makes me want to ralph....................

What does he do in the four years between elections, anyway?

[Warren DeMontague]

12. Oh, He's a HERO! Please, allow me to swoon.

Oh, wait, I don't want to swoon, I want to barf. :puke:

Hmmm. Ralph "integrity" Nader, who let spoiler-minded far right Republicans run some of his state campaigns in 2004? (funny, how none of the Nader gang ever wants to talk about that.)

Spare me. This is DEMOCRATIC underground. Stop shilling for that weasely, egotistical fuck.

[WI_DEM]

19. Mr. Nader once accomplished a lot of good, but in the last many years has allowed his ego to run

amok.

[ronnykmarshall]

24. I'd rather FORGET Nader.

:puke:

[Dover]

31. So, anyone care to address the information in the OP? Any thoughts on the effects of that bill

passed back then. It's really only recently been fully integrated and operating which is why I brought it up now. Was Nader right in his response? Was Clinton right to sign and support it? Any substantive thoughts on that?

[northofdenali]

32. Isn't he the nutcase that occasionally runs for whatever office

he can be sure to fuck up?

[Warren DeMontague]

35. I think all the OP wants is for us to say this: "Thank You, Ralph Nader!"

So here goes.



Thanks Alot, Ralph Nader. Thanks A Whole Fucking Heap, You Egotistical Ass Carrot.

[Dover]

37. No, it's more about Clinton's actions. Nader just happened to be the guy who pointed it out.

Best to look at actions rather than the latest meme. But thanks for that thoughtful response.
I can always count on the regulars in GD to demonstrate the measure of their political manhood with one little finger.

:think:

[ronnykmarshall]

38. Bravo!

:yourock:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

44. Hear Hear To A Perfect Post!!!! LOVED IT!!!!!

:toast:

[WinkyDink]

39. George?

[laylah]

40. I'd rather not, tyvm! n/t

[Catherine Vincent]

41. Yeah, I remember Nader.

He needs to get laid.

[jpgray]

42. No. He only says important things on the eve of an election

And his days of -doing- important things are decades behind him. We have plenty of world-class hypocrites and egomaniacs to choose from that have a chance of winning, why should anyone have an interest in Nader? There are better men and women who fight for the same things, such as Kucinich.

[SammyWinstonJack]

43. Yeah fuck that GOP puke!

:puke: