Comments on: Rep. Barney Frank: I Hope Final Volcker Rule Would Prevent JPMorgan’s Actions

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 21 May 2012 02:48:07 +0000

When they say JPM lost 2bil to 5bil IMHO they leave out one huge
point. This unacceptable risk management causes untold losses to
investors portfolio as this is just one more thing that reduces
confidence. Risk management is the issue, these firms making
outrageous big bets actually do not have any risk management we
have all read the WSJ article which pointed out the risk manager
at JPM was some top executive brother in law who had no experience
in these trades. I do not accept Jamie Dimon that this was a
stupid situation , this is a built in culture only when the stupid
trades fails is there any concern. Just like the AIG problem top
management did not want to know about this they just wanted it to
work. Bottomline I and many other investors are being ruined by
these actions we do our homework we take conservative risk and
these big time operators take all kinds of risk which no matter
what will ever change their lifestyle, which we cannot control and
it cost us our savings because as I said before nobody has any
confidence in the market.

By: kafantaris

kafantaris — Tue, 15 May 2012 06:23:29 +0000

The derivative hedging game played by JPMorgan Chase is no different than that played by AIG in 2008.
Yet Jamie Dimon tells us that JPMorgan had merely “made a terrible, egregious mistake.” He might as well have said that the bank was wrong to keep raising in a poker game when it was apparent it should have folded.
And why was JPMorgan busy betting in the first place — right after our economic meltdown, and while fighting government regulation?
One answer is that it knew it could bear the gambling losses.
That’s right. With $2 trillion at hand, JPMorgan can yawn when $3 billion goes down the tube.
Nonetheless, Dimon tells us that he sees no problem with the government dismantling big failing banks. This is good to know because the government might have to start dismantling big banks before they fail — and before they have another chance to take us down with them.
The important lesson from the JPMorgan fiasco is not that stringent regulations are still needed to reign in on derivatives, but that banks big enough to remain standing after taking huge hits are ripe enough for us to chop down to size.

By: MaryinChicago

MaryinChicago — Mon, 14 May 2012 08:46:58 +0000

I’d love to go back to Glass-Steagall, but I suspect the big banks are correct that, if we don’t offer these investments, they’ll simply migrate to London or Singapore or Hong Kong. But I absolutely support the Volcker Rule and higher capital requirements for legitimate hedging, and I question whether “synthetic” or “naked” derivatives are EVER legitimate. If you DON’T OWN the underlying assets, or if the underlying assets DON’T EXIST, how can a derivative based on those underlying assets EVER be anything other than gambling?

By: L Nelson

L Nelson — Mon, 14 May 2012 00:48:10 +0000

Your poster thought the woman guest was rude to Barney.. Really!!! We fillibustered the show and acted as he normally does…Barney… In his new marriage there be hopefully be one gentleman & it sure wouldn’t be Barney.. He & other democrats repealed Glass -Seagal which lead to the crisis along with the dems taking power away from Brookley Borne in regjullating the commodies market..i.e. dirivatives; credit default swaps & hedge funds.. The leaders that accomplished that was Robert Rubin, Larry Sumner: Alan Greenspan & Chris Dodd during Clinton Presidency

By: Sirius

Sirius — Mon, 14 May 2012 00:18:50 +0000

Everyone has a past that includes good things and bad things……of course it all depends on the one making the judgement, doesn’t it? Well, here is my judgement about this morning–not last month! or last year! And I am not being paid to ‘say this’ or ‘convince that’—but my parents DID teach me the meaning of ‘good manners’.

Mr Stephanopoulos—-you were not so great this morning. As a moderator, not only did you ALLOW that woman to interrupt and talk over Frank (or was it you could not ‘control your female guest? in favor of your show?)—-you, yourself, talked over Frank and interrupted him and essentially, cut him off! From where I sat, it seemed as though you had full intention of supporting the GOP point of view—and much of it was misleading, BTW—-and dissing the DEM point of view–which we barely heard! I am one of those ‘dreaded’ news junkies, who spends all day listening and reading and documenting and remembering……and writing…some will tell you that I must be ‘CLAIRVOYANT’ when all it is, is having the freedom to ‘pay attention’…to every point of view, and for checking the facts……your ‘right side of the aisle’ was showing this morning, and it was not pretty—as an ABC newster–on mainstream TV , broadcasting to the masses, most of whom are illiterate to what is REALLY going on. Are’nt you supposed to NOT choose sides? This morning you CHOSE the GOP propaganda rather than the middle road of truthdom……shame on you….

By: Greg

Greg — Sun, 13 May 2012 22:36:20 +0000

I’m well over 60, and I have belonged to both parties. I am now a Republican, but I don’t ever recall being a democratic. When I was working for Kennedy and McGovern I was a Democrat…..And, that is what the party was and should still be. Get a grip.

By: Freedom

Freedom — Sun, 13 May 2012 21:11:22 +0000

Barney is the one that said Freddie and Fannie were great and didn’t need to be audited when they were under his control…What a dunce.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 13 May 2012 20:44:46 +0000

Frank from the Democrat party (lol) HOPES, he HOPES the Volcker rule would have prevented the JPM/Chase loss. WHAT?? He let the financial meltdown happen now after three years he freaking HOPES it’s been prevented? Despicable. And the fools on here are worried about how someone says Democrat Party? How pathetic.

By: bill

bill — Sun, 13 May 2012 19:06:53 +0000

if you ever wondered why there is such gridlock in congress, simply watch as representative barney frank continually talks over everyone. he appears too busy to listen to any one’s point of view but his own, and has the arrogance to assume his is the only opinion worth listening too. it would appear that if you want an enlightened discussion where all sides of an issue receive opportunity, barney frank should be excluded from the conversation.

By: denny abrams

denny abrams — Sun, 13 May 2012 18:56:41 +0000

Ms. Blackburn continiues to voice the idiotic republican mantra of too much regulation. Fine Ms Blackburn just pass one law that does not allow a bank to act as an investment company. Force the banks to divest their imvestment operations from normal bankiing business. Change the model once and for all. Give us our banks back!