The Congressional Progressive Caucus has a Plan too!

btw, not giving up on tracking that source back but PK's source was a textbook so hopefully I'll find a digital copy or something.

mame said:

Elizabeth Warren was on the Daily show today, she made a pretty compelling case for the Financial Protection bureau and really made a pretty good case overall for government regulation. Love that old lady haha

http://www.thedailyshow.com/

Click to expand...

The consumer protection agency must not be doing any consumer protection, we need a FDIC insurer, a Financial Protection Bureau. what other stupid government run tax payer funded entity will we need todo NOT A FUCKING THING. You could have a thousand "Protectors" and not a fucking thing would happen. Those TBTF banks operate with impunity, the FPB could never be effective, sure maybe they will catch that guy who defrauded 10 people out of $100,000, but you can forget about the guys who are defrauding the country out of TRILLIONS!!!

Her case was not compelling in the tiniest. Awww poor families out on the street, no food, THE CHILDREN!!!! Fuck that there isn't a thing the Financial Protection Bureau is going to do, they are ineffective!

NoDrama said:

The consumer protection agency must not be doing any consumer protection, we need a FDIC insurer, a Financial Protection Bureau. what other stupid government run tax payer funded entity will we need todo NOT A FUCKING THING. You could have a thousand "Protectors" and not a fucking thing would happen. Those TBTF banks operate with impunity, the FPB could never be effective, sure maybe they will catch that guy who defrauded 10 people out of $100,000, but you can forget about the guys who are defrauding the country out of TRILLIONS!!!

Her case was not compelling in the tiniest. Awww poor families out on the street, no food, THE CHILDREN!!!! Fuck that there isn't a thing the Financial Protection Bureau is going to do, they are ineffective!

Click to expand...

It's a brand new agency still being put together. They haven't even done anything yet and if you were listening there are bills in the house and senate trying to defund the agency.

I wasn't talking about the verbal diahrea "oh the families!" I was talking about her real case. You know, how she outlined that the goals of the agency was to help consumers make informed decisions. She gave a few examples, like presenting real costs - not the costs that you find out about because of the hidden fine print, etc. All in all, their mandate doesn't seem to be intrusive at all - quite the contrary, it seems the agency will protect a lot of people from increasingly predatory practices aimed at the average consumer.

Here, I'll just quote Treasury.gov:

the CFPB will work to promote fairness and transparency for mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer financial products and services. The CFPB will set and enforce clear, consistent rules that allow banks and other consumer financial services providers to compete on a level playing field and that let consumers see clearly the costs and features of products and services.

Click to expand...

mame said:

It's a brand new agency still being put together. They haven't even done anything yet and if you were listening there are bills in the house and senate trying to defund the agency.

I wasn't talking about the verbal diahrea "oh the families!" I was talking about her real case. You know, how she outlined that the goals of the agency was to help consumers make informed decisions. She gave a few examples, like presenting real costs - not the costs that you find out about because of the hidden fine print, etc. All in all, their mandate doesn't seem to be intrusive at all - quite the contrary, it seems the agency will protect a lot of people from increasingly predatory practices aimed at the average consumer.

Here, I'll just quote Treasury.gov:

Click to expand...

We already have one of those....Why am I, (And you) funding a doppelganger agency?

The goal of the Consumer Protection Mission is to prevent fraud, deception, and unfair business practices in the marketplace. The Mission is accomplished by identifying practices that cause the greatest consumer injury, stopping these practices through law enforcement, and preventing consumer injury through education.

Click to expand...

If you want people to make informed decisions about finance and economics, well then maybe they ought to teach it in school. There is a sucker born every minute, government cannot regulate how dumb people will be.

We do not need this agency, task the CPA with the job, the CPA is already funded and has a budget.

NoDrama said:

We already have one of those....Why am I, (And you) funding a doppelganger agency?



If you want people to make informed decisions about finance and economics, well then maybe they ought to teach it in school. There is a sucker born every minute, government cannot regulate how dumb people will be.

Click to expand...

I actually think there needs to be a four year requirement on government and economics classes like there is on English in HS. Of course, the naysayers will say school will turn into an "indoctrination camp" like many claim college is but I'm not convinced.. One of my favorite teachers was a conservative and he didn't buy it either, good guy... miss him haha.

We do not need this agency, task the CPA with the job, the CPA is already funded and has a budget.

Click to expand...

Okay, I dont really see a problem with this at all. I mean, the CPA would need to be better funded to handle the expanded duties but it makes sense. Hell, I'm not exactly sure the extent of the alleged "overlapping" between agencies but it would make sense to review and combine some agencies. For example, why do we need a specific "department of homeland security"? Shouldn't agencies like the FBI, CIA, federal, state, local authorities have the intelligence to work together? What about the military? I mean, it seems to me we have plenty of "protection" already.

edit: Maybe there is more power and flexibility enjoyed by the president who creates a new agency rather than expand an existing one? By creating a new agency the Pres. gets to appoint their own guy with their own agenda. But at the same time, he could just fire the old director, put in a new one and expand it's powers.. idk makes no sense, seems like there has to be some form of real motivation for creating an entirely new agency but I can't quite put my finger on it.