drsmooth wrote:

pacino wrote:i have one freebie NYT article left, this better be good

Most worrying for the big banks, Mr. Fisher is more broadly on the right of the political spectrum. On Friday, he will address the Conservative Political Action Conference. I’m not sure a senior Fed official has ever done this before.

Mr. Fisher is not only entirely correct. He is also on a completely convergent path with Senator Brown of Ohio. In fascinating new development on Wednesday, Bloomberg News reported more details on the Fisher-Rosenblum push for a hard size cap on big banks, which would force JPMorgan and Bank of America, for example, to become significantly smaller.

The executives who live well on subsidies at big banks should be very afraid.

The Fed cannot long resist the pressure to measure and assess too-big-to-fail subsidies. The Government Accountability Office is in the process of doing exactly this, at the request of Senators Brown and David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana. As Senator Vitter put it, “Despite the claims made by the paid cheerleaders of the megabanks, Too Big To Fail is alive and well, and the banks receive taxpayer subsidies.”

good as the others you chose to read without thinking much about it

Signed by Reps. Conyers, Ellison, Grijalva, Edwards, Honda, Holt, and McGovern, the letter seeks a full response and formal report to Congress outlining the architecture of the drone program going forward and reads, “The executive branch’s claim of authority to deprive citizens of life, and to do so without explaining the legal bases for doing so, sets a dangerous precedent and is a model of behavior that the United States would not want other nations to emulate.”

Rep. Lee, Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus Peace and Security Task Force said of the letter, “It is far past time that the White House openly discuss the drones program. The President has full reign to protect the United States as Commander in Chief, but Congress has a vital oversight role in this issue, and we cannot shy away from those responsibilities. We have to protect the checks and balances that are at the heart of our democracy.”

The letter cites several concerning factors of the Administration’s drone policy including, “An unbounded geographic scope; unidentified ‘high-level; officials with authority to approve kill-lists; a vaguely defined definition of whether a capture is “feasible,” an overly broad definition of the phrase “imminent threat,” which re-defines the word in a way that strays significantly from its traditional and legal meaning.”

pacino wrote:U.S. plans to let spy agencies scour Americans' finances:

The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.

Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).

The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.

More than 25,000 financial firms - including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies - routinely file "suspicious activity reports" to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.

they already overreport, and now they want the ability to access EVERY transaction without any stated purpose other than 'terrah'?

and yeah right they'll only check $10,000+. just look at what happened to Spitzer to know that's not the case.

drsmooth wrote:

pacino wrote:U.S. plans to let spy agencies scour Americans' finances:

The proposed plan represents a major step by U.S. intelligence agencies to spot and track down terrorist networks and crime syndicates by bringing together financial databanks, criminal records and military intelligence. The plan, which legal experts say is permissible under U.S. law, is nonetheless likely to trigger intense criticism from privacy advocates.

Financial institutions that operate in the United States are required by law to file reports of "suspicious customer activity," such as large money transfers or unusually structured bank accounts, to Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN).

The Federal Bureau of Investigation already has full access to the database. However, intelligence agencies, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Security Agency, currently have to make case-by-case requests for information to FinCEN.The Treasury plan would give spy agencies the ability to analyze more raw financial data than they have ever had before, helping them look for patterns that could reveal attack plots or criminal schemes.

More than 25,000 financial firms - including banks, securities dealers, casinos, and money and wire transfer agencies - routinely file "suspicious activity reports" to FinCEN. The requirements for filing are so strict that banks often over-report, so they cannot be accused of failing to disclose activity that later proves questionable. This over-reporting raises the possibility that the financial details of ordinary citizens could wind up in the hands of spy agencies.

they already overreport, and now they want the ability to access EVERY transaction without any stated purpose other than 'terrah'?

and yeah right they'll only check $10,000+. just look at what happened to Spitzer to know that's not the case.

I'm a fan of economic transparency. All transactions, all the time. Free markets! Because if people want economics to be viewed as physics (lookin' at you, free marketeers), all particles (and/or waves) in the economic universe ought to be treated as actually or potentially impacting all others.

So let evidence of the elemental particles of free markets be free. Just as long as anyone who wants can tap the data. Anyone.

Monkeyboy wrote:
On a nearly related note, my wife jut applied for a job at Cern so she could make more money.

pacino wrote:they've figured it out!!! Michelle Bachman and Tim Griffing have proposed a bill to elminate Safelink/Lifeline (the 'Obama phone' started under Reagan in 1984 and expanded to cellphones under Clinton in 1996 and under Bush in 2008). This will fix everything!!!! I mean, sure, it costs taxpayers nothing, and gives out 250 minutes a month on a $10 flip go-phone and is promoted and paid for by private phone companies, but imagine the money it won't save us! and imagine how it will hurt poor people!!! MMM, I can already taste their tears

jerseyhoya wrote:Sen. Rob Portman comes out in favor of gay marriage after son comes out as gay

Just need Rubio and Ryan's kids to grow up and be gay now