Tuesday, May 15, 2012

NEWSFLASH: Stopped Clock Accurate Twice Per Day

For all the ball-busting that I give the New York Times' Paul Krugman, I feel obligated to highlight those rare moments when he is right.  As the recent US$2,000,000,000 loss by the bankers of JPMorgan suggests, there really are good reasons for our nation to have banking regulations.

Mr. Krugman is correct; regulating banks is generally a good idea.

That should not be taken to mean that I think that all of his ideas on banking regulations are good.  Some are.  Some aren't.

Also, the article belies his real intent; to criticize Mitt Romney.  The fact is that the recent US$2B loss can came after the enactment of banking reforms by the Democrats and theoretically enforced by Mr. Obama's team.  Those reforms and their enforcement failed in this case. 

Perhaps there is more to this issue than whether or not a politician has a "D" or an "R" behind their name.  Perhaps the kind of regulation that is enacted and enforced is more important that just having any old regulation on the books.

No comments: