The article "Geithner Says Banking Regulation Law Worth Fighting to Preserve" discusses the financial reforms that were set in place to protect the stability of our banking institutes. Geither states that the regulations are long overdue. In fact he claims that "If these reforms had been in place a decade ago, then the rise in debt and leverage would have been less dangerous, consumers would not have been nearly as vulnerable to predation and abuse, and the government would have been able to limit the damage that a financial crisis could have on the broader economy."
The banks of course have a different view. They claim that the new regulations are too complex and restrictive. They do not allow them to take enough risk to grow the banks and reduces their ability to turn a profit. Please comment.
The comments are true. The banks will always fight regulation that restricts the actions of the bank for two reasons; imposing regulations usually means that the entity, and in this case the banks, are admitting that something is wrong and needing change, or that there has been massive ...
This solution discusses the article, "Geithner Says Banking Regulation Law Worth Fighting to Preserve." It provides discussion as to the comments of the article, to give a breakdown of the concepts involved.