tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post8221793237492192731..comments2024-03-29T02:00:55.623-04:00Comments on Corporate Justice Blog: Dodd-Frank at One YearSteven Ramirezhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16741346526253732489noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post-33705940487005219632011-11-28T21:11:36.098-05:002011-11-28T21:11:36.098-05:00I agree with Kenneth that the Dodd-Frank act creat...I agree with Kenneth that the Dodd-Frank act creates rules that, when violated, hold individuals responsible where they might not have been held responsible before. I think that those in banking and on Wall Street who have wrongfully mismanaged money held by millions should be held accountable for this. Such injustices are not going to end until these rules are implemented and individuals fear the consequences of their actions.Lindsey G (Memphis Law)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post-32264642708017489022011-11-22T18:26:01.567-05:002011-11-22T18:26:01.567-05:00Regarding the (desperately) needed financial regul...Regarding the (desperately) needed financial regulatory reform that will (finally) be put into place by the Dodd-Frank Act…<br /><br />“Regulators have completed less than 20 percent of the 163 required rules that had statutory deadlines during the first year and only about 12 percent of all 400 rulemaking requirements in Dodd-Frank…” <br /><br />“[I]ndustry pressure has helped delay some of the most significant reforms for up to a year.”<br />-Article from the Huffington Post, July 21, 2011<br /><br />Is anyone surprised? Anyone? Anyone?JC (memphis law)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post-38123661024482000102011-10-02T17:18:43.413-04:002011-10-02T17:18:43.413-04:00In all honesty, I'm not sure what to think abo...In all honesty, I'm not sure what to think about bailouts and the subsequent Dodd-Frank act. In all honesty, I'm a big enough Frank fan that I'm sure, if nothing else, it's well-intentioned. <br /><br />The whole debit card thing, pointed out above, it's a good point. Maybe I should switch to a credit union to avoid these fees...because it's ridiculous that anyone should pay $3.00 a month (First TN) (BoA is going to charge $5.00) to use their own "check card" (remember that term?) at a store.<br /><br />Tamara D (Memphis)Tamara D.http://law.memphis.edunoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post-27318077914073735422011-09-30T22:31:50.585-04:002011-09-30T22:31:50.585-04:00Only time will tell if the Dodd-Frank Act will end...Only time will tell if the Dodd-Frank Act will end Too Big to Fail.<br /> <br />However, it seems as though the consumers are the ones that are currently held responsible for the provisions of the act. There has been much talk in the news recently about Bank of America and other large banks charging fees to debit card users. This action stems from the "Durbin Amendment", a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act which applies to banks with over $10 billion in assets. These banks would have to charge debit card interchange fees that are reasonable and proportional to the actual cost of processing the transaction. The bill aims to restrict anti-competitive practices and encourage competition.<br /> <br />Many consumers have talked about switching to credit unions and other smaller banks. However, I doubt that many will make the switch because of smaller number of available ATMs at these banks. What consumers would save on debit card fees, they will likely spend on out of network ATM fees. In the end, the consumers will likely have incresed costs and we will likely see little change in the competition amongst banks.Jessica R (Memphis Law)noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1194375569044391746.post-75397786588616448942011-09-30T21:42:38.732-04:002011-09-30T21:42:38.732-04:00Dodd- Frank since its inception has created recour...Dodd- Frank since its inception has created recourse to a system without rules. Major financial institutions who make high-risks decisions that impact the economy should be held accountable for their decisions. The government should have rules in place to prevent economic disasters by financial institutions especially when they seek tax payer dollars to save them when poor decisions backfire. Dodd-Frank creates a system of rules where there are none, so it should continue to be implemented step-by-step to limit the power of financial giants that make decisions that impact people. <br /><br />For example, the Dodd-Frank Act initially included a proposed provision called the Volcker Rule. This particular rule was aimed at prohibiting proprietary trading. This is when large financial institutions trade internally in order to gain a profit for itself. This type of trading does not seek to benefit customer, it is speculative in nature, and it was said that it played a key role in the financial crisis that we recently experienced. Later, the rule was implemented but in a weakened form that allowed trading but only up to a certain percent of banks' capital. <br /><br />Rules such as these are necessary because without recourse, financial giants are free to gain profit for themselves, while not taking customers or tax payers into consideration. These same tax payers are the ones that bail them out when risky investments go bad. Dodd-Frank includes provisions such as these that should be enacted to create boundaries for bank investments that result in bad outcomes for their customers.Kenneth W (memphis law_noreply@blogger.com