So the ' dog & pony ' derivatives show continues. I forgot, who's best interests did OUR representatives say THEY were protecting? We're the suckers who keep on givng by falling for their continued smoke & mirrors theatre. :grr:
" Buried in a research report released yesterday on the growth potential of equities in the U.S. financial services industry, Goldman Sachs may have offered a glimpse into what the final version of the Wall Street reform bill might look like. (Hat tip to Morning Money.)
In particular, the report predicts the Senate bill's most controversial element won't make it through the conference committee negotiation process. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) proposed a measure that would require the nation's largest banks to spin off their derivatives desks, a move that initially passed with GOP support.
Though the spin-off requirement could cost banks billions annually, Goldman isn't at all convinced it will pass. From the Goldman Sachs report:
The report "while regulatory risk is (hopefully) reaching a peak it does create the specter of an overhang for some time. In particular our Washington analyst does not expect hte Lincoln proposal to make it into the final version of the bill, but shoudl this occur it would be very negative for investment banks and potentially exchanges as volumes would suffer.
Lincoln's derivatives language is also getting targeted by some Democrats. Bloomberg reports that Rep. Mike McMahon (D-NY) has come out against the provision:
My position is that it should come out now," McMahon, one of the lead derivatives negotiators for the self-described "moderate, pro-growth" New Democrat Coalition, said in a telephone interview yesterday. "The House bill is based on principles on how to reduce risk and make the system more transparent, it's not based on wiping out the system or destroying the system and that's what the provision does.
more and read the report:
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/25/goldman-sachs-lincolns-de_n_588394.html>