Here's to Newer, Better Rules

AIG will go down because no Shorts left. No more shorts to cover, this is gonna crash. 11.4M shorts already covered , only 5.63k shares short left. Shares Short (as of 10-Jun-09)3: 5.63K Shares Short (prior month)3: 11.95M

New better rules until the un-intended consequences occur. Limited straight forward regulation is the way to go. We are in this mess because of New and Better Rules.

pthlsstrvld, is exactly right, and why are the people that were using the exhisting rules to their benefit writting the new rules? These problems were cause not by lack of rules but by rules written by influenced people, or people that made them without understanding potential consequences. Complexity just makes it easier for the smart people and people with an inside track to make their next move. Need to stop at some point and not be doing stuff like this hastily and maybe enforce the existant rules and or undo the faulty legislation that caused this.

None of this would have happened if the Congress had not passed legislation that forced mortgage lenders to loan money to people who could not pay it back. That law opened the gates to all the fast money crooks (Lenders, Realtors, Builders, Fannie May and Freddie Mac, and the Wall street bunch to cheat big time. Later efforts made to get Congress to reverse these new (stupid) lending practices failed. Law reversal and Jail time for Barney and Cris and all the participants is all that's needed.

like what are these new rules gonna say, you have to lend them money even if they can't afford to pay the premium, but do not do that if it will cause an economic melt down? Its not rules that are the problem, its contradictions in the rules that are there. They write rules to protect the poor, so that they can make the middle class poor, they understand micro economics and argue with that, but play dumb with the macro so that they do what they are not really telling you.

Johnny "Money grows on trees" Ike

No - regulations are already in place...this is just to cover the lack of foresight/incompetance of Frank/Dodd/Schumer....Biden

so the answer is giving companies our tax dollars and taking their troubled assets away John Ike. See ussually companies need to make something sell it, and or provide a service, and as the quality of life increases more money is exchanged, then GDP can rise and more can be printed, thus good financial progress. I could post a profit too if the government handed me a check, but the net effect is negative as it is stealing from the tax payer, inefficiency in the middle, and being dolled out to someone other than me I know. That's not earnings, that up there with theft.

Does anyone know who Geithner's, and other Obama appointees, accountant is? I want to get away with not paying taxes to.

Yeah better rules... why not enforcing the ones that we already had? I many times was the SEC told about Madoff? All the new rules and laws won't do any good if you have a populace intent on trying to get their way around them to line their own pockets.

How about another set of rules: 1) You should not steal. 2) You should not lie in order to steal. 3) You should not desire to steal things that aren't yours and that you can't work honestly to get.

How about another set of rules: 1) You should not steal. 2) You should not lie in order to steal. 3) You should not desire to steal things that aren't yours and that you can't work honestly to get.

The world is getting smaller and government is getting bigger. We now have to deal with world government regulations. Life will just keep getting better.

wasn't there a movie where a guy was recruited to a law firm, and he was eating with a partner who was a Senator, and the Senator says, we make the laws, then charge them to tell them how to get around them? The more rules, the easier it is to insert the loop holes, complexity is not your friend. Save us Tom Cruise!!!

How about another set of rules: 1) You should not steal. 2) You should not lie in order to steal. 3) You should not desire to steal things that aren't yours and that you can't work honestly to get.

we are the governmet and we are here to help!!!!!

we are in this mess not because of new and better rules, we're in it because the rules we had were taken out by Phil Gramm and his repeal of the Glass-Stegal act. At that point, an institution could engage in all manner of conflicts of interest without fear of prosecution, and they did. Then Gramm proceeded to become involved with UBS on American investing strategies, and now, a few years after than situation developed, we're hearing about tax avoidance strategies involving American investors. With senior senators like Mr. Gramm in Government (and I'm sure there are more), we can look forward to more graft, corruption and unbridled greed being the driving forces of the US economy. When this situation be openly discussed and dealt with?

Phil Gramm was a democrat, then a republican. That's just one guy you know specifics about. Third party anyone?

and yes he took good rules out, but the reason for the high risk assets was because of a bad rule, it goes both ways.

very true - it does indeed go both ways. also, it will be interesting who has the numbered swiss accounts if that information is ever obtained - it could virtually destabilize the federal government if it turned out that the US government is UBS' best customer. Maybe that's why nobody will say a word about Phil Gramm's participation in all this. It was also amazing to hear Alan Greenspan say he was "appalled that financial institutions apparently had fiduciary responsibilty" (or however he put it) after he also played a role in keeping regulation away from derivatives. I used to be a capitalist, but I'm questioning the wisdom of the 'free market' philosophy since corruption is almost bound to take over.