All would be well advised to confine criticisms and recommendations to mitigating JPMorgan's systemic risk. What remain are decisions that affect stakeholders. The bank's owners have already spoken in favor of their CEO, and rightly so.
Misinformation from various sources could cause compliance officers to needlessly prohibit bankers from making perfectly legal campaign contributions. Don't let a false impression chill freedom of speech.
Senator Nelson W. Aldrich introduced a plan to create a central regulatory authority over commercial banking, investment banking and the stock market in 1912. Sound familiar?
Dodd-Frank extends oversight of compensation at large banks to anyone paid an incentive for performance. That's not just the top five or 100 executives, but more likely around 25,000 employees.
Long-Term Capital Management and AIG owned the markets that did them in. Who besides Jamie will sign for the proposition that JPMorgan Chase actually has a "fortress balance sheet"?
The recently passed Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act had the laudable goal of giving small companies easier passage to IPOs, but it did so by unwinding some Sarbanes-Oxley protections and permitting a new method of financing called crowd-funding.
The government filled a cookie jar, watched as the jar was emptied and then had to bring the fattened raiders back to health. Who was most at fault, those who provided the cookies or those who ate them?
To ensure covenants are satisfied, loan syndicates obtain private information that would give an equity market maker an advantage. Reinstating Glass-Steagall may be the only way to prevent reuse of such information.
We need pro-growth reforms that fix the numerous tax, expenditure and regulatory policies that undermine individual incentives, both within and outside our social welfare systems.
