This piece was reprinted by OpEd News with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.
It's business, not consumer-friendly, and why not when powerful insiders wrote it.
In June 2009, The New York Times explained how, saying:
"In the last two weeks alone, the administration has heard from top executives from Goldman Sachs, MetLife, Allstate, JPMorgan Chase, Credit Suisse, Citigroup, Barclays, UBS, Deutsche Bank, Morgan Stanley, Travelers, Prudential and Wells Fargo, among others. Administration officials also discussed the president's plan with the top lobbyists at major financial trade associations in Washington."
Among other provisions, the bill gives the Wall Street owned Federal Reserve greater power. It lets big banks be self-regulating, facilitates greater consolidation, crowds out smaller firms, and establishes a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP), unable to rein in financial excesses, including abusive mortgage lending that fueled the housing crisis.
Yet New York Times writers Calmes and Chan were effusive, saying:
"Basically, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will be a watchdog for the American consumer, charged with enforcing the toughest financial protections in history."
False. It's pretense, a veneer of change, not the real thing, a line from Gilbert & Sullivan's HMS Pinafore explaining it, saying:
"Things are seldom as they seem. Skim milk masquerades as cream," especially for corporate interests, Wall Street heading its queue, making the key rules, getting its way, including what passes for financial reform. It's cover for business as usual.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
