Neil Barofsky: Obama's Wall Street Reforms Deserve An 'F' Grade

[Ahso!]

The former bailout watchdog says President Obama "gets an F" for his Wall Street reforms. "He's fighting to maintain the status quo of the too-big-to-fail banks and fighting against bipartisan efforts to break them up," said Neil Barofsky, the former special inspector general of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP), the U.S. bank bailout program, in an interview with The Huffington Post on Wednesday. "The core stuff that was supposed to go toward resolving too big to fail has come up way too short."

Neil Barofsky: Obama's Wall Street Reforms Deserve An 'F' Grade

[Wandrin]

I concur. Not enough has been done.

[Saint_]

I'd like to see more done too. On the other hand, the guy's name reminds me of 'barf."

[Wandrin]

If both the Dems and Reps are afraid to tackle the issue, I don't see how any progress can be made.

[Accountable]

Antitrust reforms were ostensibly enacted to keep companies from becoming too large. It seems to me that something similar could be done to break up a corporation that has grown so large that a collapse would be damaging to the American economy.

Of course the corporate sponsors would never allow their politicians to vote for such a bill, so the point is really moot.

[gmc]

Accountable;1408352 wrote: Antitrust reforms were ostensibly enacted to keep companies from becoming too large. It seems to me that something similar could be done to break up a corporation that has grown so large that a collapse would be damaging to the American economy.

Of course the corporate sponsors would never allow their politicians to vote for such a bill, so the point is really moot.


America has some of the toughest anti-trust laws on the planet and the legislation already exists within it to prevent companies becoming too big. They are not applied and you have some right wing think tanks that argue that some types of monopolies are actually good for business. Take microsoft for example it's a de facto predatory monopoly by the time competitors get to court they are usually bankrupt and without the resources to fight their case and in any case have lost their market share. Remember netscape? microsoft used it's dominant position to push it's own browser and they knew by installing it free they would ipe out Netscape. Try buying a computer without windows on it. Something could be done but I think you are right, the big corporations have their monetary hands on the politicians balls.

[Accountable]

Breaking up companies is good for the economy as well, because it creates jobs. It multiplies the number of bureaucratic positions because each new company needs management teams, HR, admin, etc etc.