7 ms·

>In that kind of situation do the normal rules apply? Yes.

by M2Ys4U 8y ago

tumetab1 8y ago
Well, the rules also stated that the ECB couldn't buy government bonds and now that's the norm. Central banks, and some banks, have a political side in it which deals badly with rules. And off course, banks and political institutions are always filled with corruption so just looking at rules text doesn't say much about what is really condemned or not.
benj111 8y ago
So if at the worst extent of the financial crisis it was becoming clear a bank was going to collapse. If the central bank fast tracked through a deal to get that bank sold over a weekend, you would be against that?
- chmod775 8y ago
  I don't know how you could even get that idea. Upholding the law is significantly more important than saving some company, even if it's a large bank. If you're going to throw law and order out of the window over saving some shitty banks, then you already have a bigger problem than disagreeable numbers on balance sheets.
  - benj111 8y ago
    It isn't about saving the company, or its share holders. It's about saving all the savings of other depositors, about preventing a run on that, and other banks, about trying to maintain the banking system. Banking laws are meant to maintain stability. If they get in the way of that, they should at least be re examined.
    - chmod775 8y ago
      "Re-examining" and changing laws is different from not punishing criminals and law-breaking corporations. You can change the law later as much as you like. The point is upholding it in the first place and not adding subjective measures like "but it's not a good law!" into the equation when you determine guilt and fines. Even if you immediately repeal or change the law, you still have to punish those that broke it.
      - benj111 8y ago
        Were the last people to illegally practice homosexuality in your country punished? It is societies choice to decide whether to enforce a law. I meant 're-examine' very broadly. And the 2 examples I've given so far in this thread have both involved the authorities.
    - cinquemb 8y ago
      >Banking laws are meant to maintain stability. If they get in the way of that, they should at least be re examined. I hope one thinks this can be done ad infinitum to maintain stability…

>In that kind of situation do the normal rules apply? Yes.

by M2Ys4U 8y ago

>In that kind of situation do the normal rules apply? Yes.

Well, the rules also stated that the ECB couldn't buy government bonds and now that's the norm. Central banks, and some banks, have a political side in it which deals badly with rules. And off course, banks and political institutions are always filled with corruption so just looking at rules text doesn't say much about what is really condemned or not.

benj111 8y ago

So if at the worst extent of the financial crisis it was becoming clear a bank was going to collapse. If the central bank fast tracked through a deal to get that bank sold over a weekend, you would be against that?

chmod775 8y ago
I don't know how you could even get that idea. Upholding the law is significantly more important than saving some company, even if it's a large bank. If you're going to throw law and order out of the window over saving some shitty banks, then you already have a bigger problem than disagreeable numbers on balance sheets.
- benj111 8y ago
  It isn't about saving the company, or its share holders. It's about saving all the savings of other depositors, about preventing a run on that, and other banks, about trying to maintain the banking system. Banking laws are meant to maintain stability. If they get in the way of that, they should at least be re examined.
  - chmod775 8y ago
    "Re-examining" and changing laws is different from not punishing criminals and law-breaking corporations. You can change the law later as much as you like. The point is upholding it in the first place and not adding subjective measures like "but it's not a good law!" into the equation when you determine guilt and fines. Even if you immediately repeal or change the law, you still have to punish those that broke it.
    - benj111 8y ago
      Were the last people to illegally practice homosexuality in your country punished? It is societies choice to decide whether to enforce a law. I meant 're-examine' very broadly. And the 2 examples I've given so far in this thread have both involved the authorities.
  - cinquemb 8y ago
    >Banking laws are meant to maintain stability. If they get in the way of that, they should at least be re examined. I hope one thinks this can be done ad infinitum to maintain stability…