Comments for Pro-Growth and Pro-Wall Street is an Oxymoron at http://www.cepr.net , comment 1 to 7 out of 7 comments http://www.cepr.net Mon, 17 Jun 2013 23:46:26 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18667 It is time profits were made the old fashioned way ---investing in REAL TANGABLE ASSETS! People today get their wealth fix by the use of Deravitive Trading , which is nothing more than side bets and employ a few well heeled money boys on Wallstreet . If this form of trading was eliminated money once again would flow back into , Industrial, Commercial , Institutional and the much needed Infrastructure to improve North American Productivity. Along with this we would revive the Middle Class which has been decimated with the increased use of Derivatives. It is time to give back some of the American pie to the Middle Class which in turn would allow people of the lower class , through hard labour , at least have the chance to better the economic status! - grimsbyjohn Thu, 06 Sep 2012 08:49:37 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18665 People do not create wealth the old fashion way (real estate , industry , commercial , institutional and of course the much needed infrastructure that would improve North American Productivity. They have become addicted to getting their wealth fix from derative trading to the detriment of Middle Class North America . With the decimation of the middle class all hope of the lower class with hard labour having a chance to move up to a better economic status has disappeared! Time to end the use of Derivatives so money can flow back into tangable assets so the People of North America can once again a fare share of the North American PIE!!![b][/b] - grimsbyjohn Thu, 06 Sep 2012 08:31:28 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18664 My favorite part, watching the speeches on PBS, was to see David Brooks, who had been complaining since last night about a lack of addressing the deficit and debt issues 'that so concern the independent voter', lose his sanguine equanimity after the Clinton speech. - David Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:47:38 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18660 Lawyers and brokers and investment bankers are unproductive labor. They represent transactions costs. We want widgets...we want stuff, not bank accounts. We use lawyers and brokers and investment bankers to arrange the corporations and the financing. The more they take in a haircut, the less widgets, the less stuff, we have to consume. Clearly there is some optimal amount of "Wall Street" to get some efficient level of growth. But more is definitely not better all the time. And less could be bad too. It depends. Rent seeking by Wall Street may conflict easily with rent seeking by Main Street. - pete Thu, 06 Sep 2012 07:09:13 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18650 It's important to recognize that excess finance does produce what is usually considered growth, but it's only temporary. When finance dominates, there are exhilarating bubbles, but devastating crashes. The historical record from the Great Depression and before is clear, but New Deal regulations probably damped the cycles long enough that people forgot how bad a cyclic economy can be. As Dean says, deregulation during the Clinton administration probably facilitated the dot-com bubble (which luckily for Clinton broke after he left office), but it also was important in the housing bubble. A critical element in the housing bubble was unregulated credit-default swaps, and the decision not to regulate them was made mainly by an unholy alliance of Clinton advisors and Alan Greenspan. Clinton is rather stupidly given credit by Democrats for the bubble of the late 90's, while escaping blame for its collapse. Republicans can't call out this myth because that would call attention to the necessity for regulation reining in Wall Street. - skeptonomist Thu, 06 Sep 2012 04:02:10 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18648 Joe's gone crazy over there at Business Insider. Here's a summary:http://www.forbes.com/sites/karlwhelan/2012/09/05/did-bill-clintons-budgets-really-destroy-the-american-economy/. Never mentions the value of the dollar once and trade deficits effects on saving. - Stephen Thu, 06 Sep 2012 03:08:16 +0100 http://www.cepr.net/index.php/blogs/beat-the-press/pro-griwth-and-pro-wall-street-is-an-oxymoron#comment-18647 What would a very stable, very efficient Wall Street look like? Is there any fundamental reason why Wall Street's share of GDP needed to double over the past few decades? Shouldn't the increased computerization of transactions have done the opposite? Looking forward into the 21st Century, it's easy to see a declining need for banks and brokers as more and more of our financial transactions eliminate the need for anything but a consumer and a computer. An efficient banking and brokerage industry should consume a third or less of GDP than it does now. A financial transactions tax, ending too big to fail banks and ending monopoly practices on credit card transactions would be a good start towards shrinking Wall Street and saving Wall Street from itself and from blowing up the economy for everyone in the future. If we are really Pro-Wall Street than we must tear it down and relegate it back to it's proper place as the boring part of our economy. - Robert Salzberg Thu, 06 Sep 2012 02:29:44 +0100