This is no time to start unwinding the largest banks. There's enough uncertainty in this fragile economy. But starting a conversation now about the costs and benefits will lay the groundwork for sound action when conditions improve.
The modern, neo-Glass-Steagall advocacy has a mystical quality about it, an appeal that proposes to rise above the tough debate over the thorny details and reach back to a mythical time when bank regulation worked so very well.
In a society where blatant expressions of discrimination are largely considered to be unacceptable, discrimination often takes on subtler and more insidious forms.
A Congressional investigation found HSBC engaged in money laundering and sanctions busting for ten years, in multibillion-dollar amounts. Perhaps not coincidentally, the bank has been disinvesting from the U.S. Let's invite them to complete their departure-fast.
As the HSBC hearings demonstrate, there's a growing expectation that individuals, not just institutions, will be held accountable. Recent enforcement actions also show a more risk-based, rather than rules-based, approach.
For many, it is more beneficial to take advantage of mechanisms that are integral to the fabric of the company and of the financial ecosystem, as a way to achieve compliance and maximize investments in current foundations.
A regulatory settlement or a Senate hearing can remove a particular cloud enveloping an institution, but create deeper doubts than the ones it removes.
Use eminent domain to refinance unaffordable mortgages, cut through the mire of servicers, home equity investors and trustees. Protect homeownership and communities while respecting everyone's property rights.
