Comments on: Larry Lindsey ’76: Haste Makes Waste in Financial Regulatory Bill http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2010/07/larry-lindsey-76-haste-makes-waste-in-financial-regulatory-bill/ A repository for Bowdoin news archives Wed, 14 Nov 2018 20:25:19 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.1.11 By: James http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2010/07/larry-lindsey-76-haste-makes-waste-in-financial-regulatory-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-3690 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 21:34:37 +0000 http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/?p=11062#comment-3690 Conservatives are fond of using the length and complexity of legislation as a general indictment of any bill and of Government in general, but it is the inevitable result of the legislative process. As anyone – doubtless there are many others, in addition to Larry – who has participated in legislative process can attest, it is a messy process because of the need to balance competing interests outside of a market context, and a bill would NEVER be completed without a deadline. Skeptics should rejoice that legislation is not easy or there would be more of it – but I think it is unfair to blame any bill for being long and complex, and it is disingenuous to say – as the right often does – we support this bill in concept but we just need simpler language, more time, and more participation by our side of the aisle. They are really saying – “kill it!”

]]> By: Dale Tomlinson http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/2010/07/larry-lindsey-76-haste-makes-waste-in-financial-regulatory-bill/comment-page-1/#comment-3680 Wed, 07 Jul 2010 14:42:46 +0000 http://community.bowdoin.edu/news/?p=11062#comment-3680 I am sure Dr. Lindsey knows his subject, and have to agree with many of his points. However, the statement, “…a special fund to be financed by large financial companies—banks, insurance companies, other finance companies—to pick up the bill. Forget for the moment that these companies, their shareholders, depositors, and policy holders are also taxpayers.”, glosses over the point that shareholders, depositors, and policy-holders all have a choice: stay with the big company or move to a smaller one not subject to the tax. If the tax is indeed that onerous — which I do not believe — all of these people can “vote with their feet”, as Reagan said; this will actually have the effect of making the big institution smaller, which will be better for all of us.

Also, the bill does not “…tax the capital of all the other banks and financial institutions with which it does business” when one bank gets into trouble, but does so on a predictable, continuing basis before any trouble arises. The tax — again, if it is really a strain on the banks who pay it — will presumably take note of risky practices of fellow banks and exert pressure on them to rein in those practices, if only to avoid a downturn and the possibility of an increased tax. The longer it is unspent and seen as unneeded, the better chance that the banks will get a refund in the future; they know as well as I that none of these policies are written in stone.

]]>