Originally Posted by NW Ponderer
I think it is important to understand what Glass-Steagall really is, and what it is not. The concept behind it - separating commercial bank activities from investor bank activities - is sound, but not a panacea. As one commentator put it, the crash was like the Titanic sinking, and Glass-Steagall was really about how many lifeboats were aboard. (Repeal of Glass-Steagall: Not a cause, but a multiplier - WaPo.) I completely agree, and Dodd-Frank has really done a sound, if incomplete, job of restoring some of the stability that Glass-Steagall provided. More needs to be done.

The Titanic still would have sunk, and doubling the number of lifeboats is good - but it still means a third of the passengers still drown. Glass-Steagall would mean the boat was smaller with fewer passengers, but would not have prevented it from sinking. Dodd-Frank comes closer to keeping it afloat.

It was better than what we had before 1929, and repealing GB allowed the foundation for the crash in 2008. Getting rid of GB took away 70 years protections we had-and needed to be improved upon, not taken away. Dodd-Frank has helped, but we still need some better protections. GS still has some worthy ones. Dodd-Frank should have been added to GS, not replaced it.


milk and Girl Scout cookies ;-)

Save your breath-You may need it to blow up your date.