Sen. Christopher Dodd,the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, a Connecticut Democrat,on Tuesday unveiled a plan to take most oversight of banks away from the Federal Reserve and gives it to a new bank regulator.

By a 2-to-1 margin, a WSJ poll of 43 “..economists said the U.S. shouldn’t adopt a system where financial regulation is separate from the central
bank.”http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/11/10/economists-say-dodd-plan-to-split-fed-powers-is-mistake

Perhaps the reasons are related to the following:

Wall-Street prefers a single regulator: a single regulator is more easily influenced than multiple competing agencies.

Although the Fed is technically independent, their policies are usually aligned with administration goals. The administration of the day could more
easily affect regulatory changes; a separate regulator would likely be subject to more congressional oversight; its a matter of checks and balances.

The Fed’s primary goals are employment and price stability. There are inherent conflicts between these goals and regulation; credit expansion and innovative financial products sometimes clash with the goals of regulation . The Fed has stated in the past that regulation should be viewed through the lens of promoting economic growth. When push comes to shove, the Fed will err on the side of its “dual mandate”.

The Fed is a cheerleader, a regulator is a cop. The Fed aims to be popular, to be a friend to all. The Fed does not have the stomach to be a regulator. There is some evidence the Fed does not wish to a regulator; the Fed has produced surprisingly little research over the years on the systematic risk of
financial institutions, and how to manage that risk. More recently, Fed Vice-Chairman Kohn said “..that he does not want a mission for financial stability added to the same part of the Fed’s legal mandate that charges it with promoting price stability and maximum sustainable growth.”http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/10/23/kohn-warns-against-rushing-reform

An institution that is not enthused about it’s mission, is unlikely to do a good job; this would not be a problem for Wall-Street.

An actual revolt would turn the current circus into a monumental cluster **** (c.f. 1930-1945) where the outcome would be unpredictable, except that nearly all of the outcomes I can envision would be worse than the status quo.

Funny coincidence about my comment to you that everybody hates Wall St.
I just left the supermarket and my words are echoed on the cover of Time Magazine, “Why Main St. hates Wall St.”
So, rail all you want, you’re in good company, and don’t worry that the CIA will come knocking at your door…the CIA has to be concerned with AN ENTIRE POPULACE THAT IS READY TO REVOLT.

Sen. Christopher Dodd,the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, a Connecticut Democrat,on Tuesday unveiled a plan to take most oversight of banks away from the Federal Reserve and gives it to a new bank regulator.

By a 2-to-1 margin, a WSJ poll of 43 “..economists said the U.S. shouldn’t’t adopt a system where financial regulation is separate from the central bank.”http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/11/10/economists-say-dodd-plan-to-split-fed-powers-is-mistake

Perhaps the reasons are related to the following:

Wall-Street prefers a single regulator: a single regulator is more easily influenced than multiple competing agencies.

Although the Fed is technically independent, there policies are usually aligned with administration goals. The administration of the day could more easily affect regulatory changes; a separate regulator would likely be subject to more congressional oversight; its a matter of checks and balances.

The Fed ‘s primary goals are employment and price stability. There are inherent conflicts between these goals and regulation; credit expansion and innovative financial products sometimes clash with the goals of regulation . The Fed has stated in the past that regulation should be viewed through the lens of promoting economic growth. When push comes to shove, the Fed will err on the side of its “dual mandate”

The Fed is a cheerleader, a regulator is a cop. The Fed aims to be popular, to be a friend to all. The Fed does not have the stomach to be a regulator. There is some evidence the Fed does not wish to a regulator; the Fed has produced surprisingly little research over the years on the systematic risk of financial institutions, and how to manage that risk. More recently, Fed Vice-Chairman Kohn said “..that he does not want a mission for financial stability added to the same part of the Fed’s legal mandate that charges it with promoting price stability and maximum sustainable growth.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/10/23/kohn-warns-against-rushing-reform

An institution that is not enthused about it’s mission, is unlikely to do a good job; this would not be a problem for Wall-Street.

If convicted of treason, which I believe the TBTF crooks should be tried for, the maximum penalty is death. Personally, I’d be just as happy if their enormous wealth was confiscated and they were subject to public humiliation and/or banishment. I would, however, offer my services to participate in or (better yet) command the firing squad if called for.

I do take exception to your assessment of these people as common thieves. They are anything but common – I would say they are exceptional and therefore deserve exceptional punishments. Deliberately bankrupting the United States, or conspiring to do so, is IMO Treason if they are US citizens, or should constitute an act of war if foreign nationals. Either way, there’s this oath I took to defend the aforementioned Old Document against both foreign and domestic enemies, and I stand ready to do so.

I’m waiting for the Encyclopedia Galactica to time warp to the Earth from the future, so I can read that these people “were the first against the wall when the revolution came.” (D. Adams)

Maybe you’re not bloodthirsty, but I am. Those guys are despicable. The banksters made pots of cash as the bubble expanded, then after it popped they came to us hat in hand and ripped us off for the largest heist in all of history. 13 TRILLION dollars. That money could have PAID off every mortgage that exists. Where did the money go? I’m willing to bet that we’ve minted some billionaires from the bailouts. Millions out of work, losing their homes, losing their pensions, misery and suffering countrywide….and NOTHING has been done. No investigations, no perp walks, no indictments, no jail time for anybody!
What a time to be a banker-crook! They kill the dollar as the world’s reserve currency, cause the demise of the petro dollar trade, unseat us as the premier power on earth, and NOTHING IS DONE ABOUT IT.
These people are common thieves and deserve our contempt. You are 100% right, and don’t back down. It is treason, and treason is punishable by death.

You are absolutely right. What they did WAS treason.
What they did was compromise national security by their reckless behavior. In China they would be put to death, and rightly so.

http://www.pewfr.org/task_force_reports_detail?id=0016

Dudinrg a crisis you want discretion to prevent spillovers….

http://www.pewfr.org/task_force_reports_detail?id=0027