The Proof this whole mess was the Bush admins fault

evince said:
The hate bit was for YURT you guys.


They were alllowed by the owner to change my posts contents , change my sig line, retitle my posts as insults and were completely dishonest. When I asked the owner for help he told me to fuck off.

There is NO rules for some people over there and the rules for people they can not push out with the idiot behavior are hyper sensitive.

Its how cons see fair and balenced.
Click to expand...

? why the hate ?

and i've seen liberal mods take you to town on that board...in fact, i've seen both libs and cons destroy youir arguments and prove your lies...so stop lying that it is only cons
 
Yurt said:
? why the hate ?

and i've seen liberal mods take you to town on that board...in fact, i've seen both libs and cons destroy youir arguments and prove your lies...so stop lying that it is only cons
Click to expand...

Gee I wonder. Why don't you read your very next sentence, but without your yurt colored glasses on.
 
Damocles said:
I think you have evidence of the opposite here, Desh. But I think you can believe what you want. I think they are less likely to ban that DU, and usually they do it for better reason. I can't say what happened to you because I haven't been there in a while, but they usually have better reason than they have at DU before they ban you...
Click to expand...
DU is strictly far-left fascists that cater to ONLY dedicated, partisan, pinheads....and desh was probably an embarrassment even to them....
 
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7226703/Regulation-R-Broker-Push-out.html



Prior to passage of GLBA, US banks (including US branches and agencies of non-US banks)3 enjoyed blanket exception from the definitions of "broker" and "dealer" under the Exchange Act. GLBA replaced these blanket exceptions for banks with 11 functional exceptions - exceptions largely based on the capacity in which the bank is acting or the type of security involved in the bank's activity. Although the SEC adopted final rules to implement the dealer exceptions four years ago,4 final rules to implement the broker exceptions were not promulgated until now due to substantial adverse reactions to previous proposals from the banking industry, their regulators and key members of Congress.5
 
http://www.sec.gov/rules/other/34-47649.htm
April 8, 2003


IV. Conclusion
Accordingly, pursuant to Section 36 of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78mm],

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that banks, savings associations, and savings banks are exempt from the definition of the term "broker" under the Exchange Act until November 12, 2004.
 
Last edited:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2005-130.htm


Washington, D.C., Sept. 9, 2005 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it issued an order further extending until Sept. 30, 2006, the compliance dates for banks with respect to certain broker registration requirements contained in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). The Commission does not expect banks to develop compliance systems to meet the terms of the "broker" exceptions until the Commission amends its rules. Banks have indicated that they will need time to implement systems to ensure compliance with the new statutory requirements regarding the definition of "broker."
 
evince said:
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-7226703/Regulation-R-Broker-Push-out.html



Prior to passage of GLBA, US banks (including US branches and agencies of non-US banks)3 enjoyed blanket exception from the definitions of "broker" and "dealer" under the Exchange Act. GLBA replaced these blanket exceptions for banks with 11 functional exceptions - exceptions largely based on the capacity in which the bank is acting or the type of security involved in the bank's activity. Although the SEC adopted final rules to implement the dealer exceptions four years ago,4 final rules to implement the broker exceptions were not promulgated until now due to substantial adverse reactions to previous proposals from the banking industry, their regulators and key members of Congress.5
Click to expand...

Again DESH.... tell me.... WHAT is the definition of 'broker' in this case? DO YOU KNOW?

Again DESH... tell me... WHY did CLINTON not take care of this in 1999 or 2000? You continue to blame Bush, but refuse to accept the FACT that it was CLINTON that put this all in place, it was CLINTON who also did not do whatever it is you are suggesting should have been done.

Again DESH... tell me... do you understand that before the 'final ruling' that there were 'interim final rules' in place? do you understand that the SEC has been modifying the 'ruling' for the past ten years? Do you realize that in the end, the damage was done because GLB abolished the barriers between retail banks and investment banks? Do you realize that these barriers are STILL non-existant even though you had your dream scenario of a Dem in the White House and super majorities in the two Houses of Congress?

Again Desh... tell me.... do you actually UNDERSTAND what was IN THE LINK YOU PROVIDED? Because thus far, you have not shown any comprehension of it.
 
evince said:
how many years did they push off the requirements?
Click to expand...

Again DESH.... tell me.... WHAT is the definition of 'broker' in this case? DO YOU KNOW?

Again DESH... tell me... WHY did CLINTON not take care of this in 1999 or 2000? You continue to blame Bush, but refuse to accept the FACT that it was CLINTON that put this all in place, it was CLINTON who also did not do whatever it is you are suggesting should have been done.

Again DESH... tell me... do you understand that before the 'final ruling' that there were 'interim final rules' in place? do you understand that the SEC has been modifying the 'ruling' for the past ten years? Do you realize that in the end, the damage was done because GLB abolished the barriers between retail banks and investment banks? Do you realize that these barriers are STILL non-existant even though you had your dream scenario of a Dem in the White House and super majorities in the two Houses of Congress?

Again Desh... tell me.... do you actually UNDERSTAND what was IN THE LINK YOU PROVIDED? Because thus far, you have not shown any comprehension of it.
 
evince said:
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/09/how-sec-regulatory-exemptions-helped-lead-to-collapse/
Click to expand...

Again DESH.... tell me.... WHAT is the definition of 'broker' in this case? DO YOU KNOW?

Again DESH... tell me... WHY did CLINTON not take care of this in 1999 or 2000? You continue to blame Bush, but refuse to accept the FACT that it was CLINTON that put this all in place, it was CLINTON who also did not do whatever it is you are suggesting should have been done.

Again DESH... tell me... do you understand that before the 'final ruling' that there were 'interim final rules' in place? do you understand that the SEC has been modifying the 'ruling' for the past ten years? Do you realize that in the end, the damage was done because GLB abolished the barriers between retail banks and investment banks? Do you realize that these barriers are STILL non-existant even though you had your dream scenario of a Dem in the White House and super majorities in the two Houses of Congress?

Again Desh... tell me.... do you actually UNDERSTAND what was IN THE LINK YOU PROVIDED? Because thus far, you have not shown any comprehension of it.
 
evince said:
http://www.nysun.com/business/ex-sec-official-blames-agency-for-blow-up/86130/


Ex-SEC Official Blames Agency for Blow-Up of Broker-Dealers
Click to expand...

Again DESH.... tell me.... WHAT is the definition of 'broker' in this case? DO YOU KNOW?

Again DESH... tell me... WHY did CLINTON not take care of this in 1999 or 2000? You continue to blame Bush, but refuse to accept the FACT that it was CLINTON that put this all in place, it was CLINTON who also did not do whatever it is you are suggesting should have been done.

Again DESH... tell me... do you understand that before the 'final ruling' that there were 'interim final rules' in place? do you understand that the SEC has been modifying the 'ruling' for the past ten years? Do you realize that in the end, the damage was done because GLB abolished the barriers between retail banks and investment banks? Do you realize that these barriers are STILL non-existant even though you had your dream scenario of a Dem in the White House and super majorities in the two Houses of Congress?

Again Desh... tell me.... do you actually UNDERSTAND what was IN THE LINK YOU PROVIDED? Because thus far, you have not shown any comprehension of it.
 
evince said:
Got nothing to say now huh super?
Click to expand...
'

and for the record, I am rarely on the site on weekends....



Again DESH.... tell me.... WHAT is the definition of 'broker' in this case? DO YOU KNOW?

Again DESH... tell me... WHY did CLINTON not take care of this in 1999 or 2000? You continue to blame Bush, but refuse to accept the FACT that it was CLINTON that put this all in place, it was CLINTON who also did not do whatever it is you are suggesting should have been done.

Again DESH... tell me... do you understand that before the 'final ruling' that there were 'interim final rules' in place? do you understand that the SEC has been modifying the 'ruling' for the past ten years? Do you realize that in the end, the damage was done because GLB abolished the barriers between retail banks and investment banks? Do you realize that these barriers are STILL non-existant even though you had your dream scenario of a Dem in the White House and super majorities in the two Houses of Congress?

Again Desh... tell me.... do you actually UNDERSTAND what was IN THE LINK YOU PROVIDED? Because thus far, you have not shown any comprehension of it.
 
it was held up because plenty of democrats had to get thier hands in on the bonaza before the fleecing stopped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top