Talk:Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject United States / Government (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (marked as Low-importance).
 
WikiProject Finance (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Business (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Law (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon


This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Crime (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Law Enforcement (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Law Enforcement WikiProject. Please Join, Create, and Assess.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 

Richard Cordray resource[edit]

99.181.136.158 (talk) 01:14, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 07:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)


United States Consumer Financial Protection BureauConsumer Financial Protection Bureau – "United States" is unnecessary disambiguation not supported by official usage. See the bureau's official site, which features CFPB branding. Popular references to the "United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau" surely exist, but these are either errors or prose disambiguation and contextualization; without similar offices in other governments, the "United States" qualifier is an artifice of ours. Note that a majority of the other members of Category:Independent agencies of the United States government, as well as its parent Category:Agencies of the United States government, lack this designation. --BDD (talk) 21:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

  • What evidence is there that the official name includes "United States" though? I don't see it on the website, at Learn about the Bureau or Creating the Consumer Bureau. Dodd–Frank established the bureau; although the references on that article are a mess, I see references to a "Consumer Financial Protection Agency," still without the "United States" qualifier. Of the references currently on the list, The New York Times, Mybanktracker.com, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal, Politico, the Chicago Tribune, and Law360 also use the proposed form; only Reuters seems to use the current form (abbreviated as "U.S."). If your reading of WP:NC-GAL is correct, categories such as Category:Independent agencies of the United States government need mass renaming. --BDD (talk) 17:17, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I could respond more effectively to you if you were specific as to which part you were referring to. Is it the part about "pre-disambiguation"? This implies, as MrBoire says, that there are similarly named (in translation) bodies in other countries, but I haven't seen any evidence of that. Note that all three foreign language versions of this page—Spanish, Norwegian, and Chinese—use translated versions of the proposed form. Are there really foreign agencies that necessitate pre-disambiguation? --BDD (talk) 18:41, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Additional information[edit]

Thank you so much for your prompt reply and guidance on contributing to Wikipedia. In response to your sourcing suggestion, I pulled some third party sources for each section of the text and cited them below with links. Please don’t interpret my citation of these articles or other links as an endorsement of the source by me or the CFPB. I just thought these sources might assist you and others interested in improving the page.

I would be excited to assist any editors interested in enhancing the CFPB’s Wikipedia article. Of course, I work at the CFPB, so I have a conflict of interest. But I believe that the Bureau has great resources for the public that are only useful if American consumers know about them. Wikipedia is a valuable resource for millions of Americans who want to know more about how their government works and what it can, and should, be doing for them. More information on the CFPB’s entry on Wikipedia would help citizens access this knowledge.

Please let me know if you have other suggestions on how I can support editors of this entry.

Thank you, Harris.CFPB (talk) 18:36, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

History

In July 2010, Congress passed and President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. The Act created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)[1]. The stated mission of the CFPB is to make markets for consumer financial products and services work for Americans.[2] On July 16, 2013, the Senate confirmed Richard Cordray to a five-year term as the Director of the CFPB.[3]

Congress established the CFPB to protect consumers by administering and enforcing several federal consumer financial laws.[4] Among other things, the CFPB:

  • Conducts rule-making, supervision, and enforcement for federal consumer financial laws[5]
  • Takes consumer complaints about consumer financial products or services[6]
  • Promotes financial literacy[7]
  • Researches consumer behavior[8]
  • Monitors financial markets for risks to consumers[9]
  • Enforces laws that prohibit unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices in the consumer financial markets[10]

Resources for the Public

The CFPB provides plain-language answers, from experts, to common financial questions in an interactive database called Ask CFPB.[11] The database provides a resource for consumers looking for information on various financial topics.

The CFPB accepts complaints from consumers about credit cards, mortgages, private student loans, bank accounts and services, consumer loans, credit reporting, money transfers, and debt collection and continues to work toward expanding complaint handling to include other products and services under the CFPB’s authority.[12] The CFPB accepts complaints through its website and by telephone, mail, email, fax, and referral from other agencies. Its U.S.-based contact centers provide services in more than 180 languages and for the hearing- and speech-impaired, via a toll-free telephone number.[13] Information about consumer complaints is available to the public through the Consumer Complaint Database.

Through the Paying for College online tool, the CFPB helps students and their families navigate the college financing process.[14] Students can compare financial aid and college costs for their different prospective schools, understand monthly student loan payments after graduation, and weigh average debt levels at graduation relative to average starting salaries.[15]

Mortgage Rules

Early in 2013, the CFPB issued a number of rules for the mortgage market. It issued loan origination rules to help ensure that mortgage lenders do not steer borrowers into risky and high-cost loans.[16] The CFPB also issued the Ability-to-Repay rule, which implements the requirement under the Dodd-Frank Act that lenders assess whether prospective borrowers have a reasonable ability to repay their mortgage loans.[17] The CFPB also issued mortgage servicing rules that, among other things, establish new protections for homeowners facing foreclosure.[18] These rules ensure that borrowers in trouble get a fair process to try to avoid foreclosure if possible. The CFPB published plain-language guides to help industry compliance with these new rules.[19]

Major Enforcement Actions

The CFPB is authorized to enforce federal consumer financial laws.[20] Using that authority, the CFPB has taken enforcement actions against companies that harmed consumers, including several actions against credit card companies that profited from deceptive marketing practices and, in one instance, discriminated against consumers. In a series of enforcement actions brought together with other regulators, including cases involving Capital One, Discover, and American Express, the CFPB secured $425 million in relief for consumers who were wronged, provided procedures for obtaining refunds, imposed penalties on the companies to deter such activity in the future, and made clear to all market participants that similar practices will not be tolerated.[21]

In June of 2013 the CFPB ordered U.S. Bank and one of its nonbank partners, Dealers’ Financial Services, to return approximately $6.5 million to servicemembers across the country after determining the two companies developed a joint program that engaged in deceptive marketing and lending practices while providing subprime auto loans to tens of thousands of active-duty military members.[22]

Supervisory Authority

The CFPB supervises large banks, thrifts, and credit unions and their affiliates in order to assess compliance with federal consumer financial law and detect risks to consumers and consumer financial markets.[23] The CFPB is also the first federal agency to have supervision authority over nonbanks in the mortgage, payday, and private student lending industries, as well as nonbanks that are larger participants in other consumer finance markets.[24] The CFPB’s supervision authority extends to about 175 debt collectors, which account for over 60 percent of the industry’s annual receipts.[25] In addition, the CFPB became the first federal agency to supervise participants in the consumer reporting market, which includes what are commonly called credit bureaus or credit reporting companies. The CFPB’s supervisory authority applies to about 30 consumer reporting companies, which account for over 90 percent of the consumer reporting market.[26] The CFPB coordinates its supervisory activities with other federal and state agencies to better protect consumers and minimize regulatory burden.[27]

Research and Market Monitoring

The CFPB studies markets for consumer financial products in order to identify risks to consumers.[28] The CFPB has issued reports and whitepapers on a number of these markets. In June 2012, the Bureau released a report on reverse mortgages that cited high consumer awareness of the product but low consumer understanding of particular product features.[29] In July 2012, the CFPB published a report on the private student loan market, detailing market trends, consumer demographics, and recommendations to improve consumer protections.[30] In September 2012, researchers at the CFPB issued a study finding differences in credit scores provided to consumers and those used by lenders during loan underwriting.[31] The CFPB also published a white paper detailing how consumer data and complaints are handled by the credit reporting infrastructure of the three largest U.S. consumer reporting agencies.[32] In 2013, the Bureau released reports critical of many short-term borrowing products including payday loans, deposit advance, and overdraft.[33][34]

  1. ^ Dennis, Brady (16, July 2010). "Congress Passess Financial Reform Bill".The Washington Post. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  2. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  3. ^ Cox, Ramsey (16 July 2013). “After Nearly Two Years of In-Fighting, Senate Confirms Cordray”. The Hill. Retrieved 23 August 2013.
  4. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  5. ^ "Primer on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau". Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  6. ^ O’Donnell, Jayne (4 August, 2013). "Watchdog's Complaint Tracking Gets Results". USA Today. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  7. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  8. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  9. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  10. ^ "Primer on the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau". Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  11. ^ Randall, Maya Jackson (22 March 2012). "Consumer-Protection Agency Launches 'Ask CFPB' Tool". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  12. ^ Weisbaum, Herb (10 July 2013). "Feds Will Now Help Resolve Debt Collection Complaints". Today.com. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  13. ^ "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Now Taking Private Student Loan Complaints". Office of Public Affairs, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  14. ^ Liberto, Jennifer (11 April 2012). "Compare College Costs with Online Tool". CNNMoney. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  15. ^ Liberto, Jennifer (11 April 2012). "Compare College Costs with Online Tool". CNNMoney. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  16. ^ Hutzell, Jacquelyn (March 2013). “A Look at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s New Loan Origination Compensation Rule Under the Truth in Lending Act”. Burr Alert. Retrieved 16 August 2013.
  17. ^ Wyatt, Edward (10 January 2013). "U.S. Consumer Watchdog to Issue Mortgage Rules". The New York Times. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  18. ^ CFPB Mortgage Servicing Standards”. PWC. February 2013. Retrieved 16 August 2013.
  19. ^ CFPB Publishes Compliance Guides for the Loan Originator and Mortgage Servicing Rules”. Anthem Newsletter. Northwest Credit Union Association. Retrieved 26 August, 2013.
  20. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  21. ^ Rieker, Matthias et al. (18 July 2012). "Capital One Dealt Fine for Pitch to Customers". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 8 August 2013; Liberto, Jennifer (2 October 2012). "AmEx to Refund $85 Million to Customers". CNNMoney. Retrieved 8 August 2013; Herron, Janna (24 September 2012), “CFPB: Discover to refund $200M” bankrate.com, retrieved 12 August 2013.
  22. ^ BuckleySandler LLP (20 December 2012). “CFPB Publishes White Paper on Largest Consumer Reporting Agencies”. JDSupra Law News. Retrieved 27 August 2013.
  23. ^ Dodd-Frank: Title X – Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection” Legal Information Institute. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  24. ^ "The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: What It Is and What to Expect". Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  25. ^ Witkowski, Rachel (10 July 2013). "http://www.americanbanker.com/issues/178_131/cfpb-to-debt-collectors-were-watching-you-1060478-1.html". American Banker. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  26. ^ Ellis, Blake (16 July 2012). "CFPB to Supervise Credit Reporting Agencies". CNNMoney. Retrieved 8 August, 2013.
  27. ^ "The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Week in Review: May 20-24, 2013". CFPB Observer. Greenberg Traurig, LLP. Retrieved 8 August 2013.
  28. ^ Bianco, Katalina. "Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: Evolution of a New Agency with Emerging Regulatory Framework". Wolters Klumer Law & Business. Retrieved 7 August 2013.
  29. ^ Ebeling, Ashlea (28 June 2012). “CFPB: Don’t Get Stung By a Reverse Mortgage”. Forbes. Retrieved 26 August, 2013.
  30. ^ Nelson, Libby (20 July 2012). “Assessing Damage of Private Loans”. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved 26 August 2013.
  31. ^ Douglas, Danielle (25 September 2012). “CFPB Finds Discrepancy in Credit Scores Provided by Credit Bureaus”. The Washington Post. Retrieved 26 August, 2013.
  32. ^ BuckleySandler LLP (20 December 2012). “CFPB Publishes White Paper on Largest Consumer Reporting Agencies”. JDSupra Law News. Retrieved 27 August 2013.
  33. ^ Anderson, Heather (24 April 2013). “CFPB Payday Lending Criticism Includes Banks, Credit Unions.” Credit Union Times. Retrieved 26 August, 2013.
  34. ^ Prior, John (11 June 2013). “CFPB Report Raises Concerns on Overdraft”. Politico. Retrieved 26 August 2013.
  • In a bid to make this edit request a bit more manageable, I'm striking out any parts which are already adequately covered by the article.—Neil 03:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
I have edited the above to make the references visible on the page. It appears that having the {{reflist}} within the <blockquote>...</blockquote> prevented them from appearing. — Makyen (talk) 19:31, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Article Has Become Outdated[edit]

This article is about a recently-created agency of the US federal government (which I work for). Because of how quickly the Bureau has grown and expanded, this article has become outdated and incomplete. Another representative of the Bureau has posted new (independently sourced) information about the Bureau that paints a more complete picture of its recent history, powers, and activity, however they do not want to edit this information into the article themselves to avoid a conflict of interest. This information is found below under "Additional Information" — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArthurBA (talkcontribs) 17:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

NOTE: To other people responding to this edit request: The "#Additional information" appears to be above this request, not below. I'm not nitpicking. When we follow a link to this edit request the page is displayed with the edit request at the top. It then says look below, we do and there is no information.
Suggestion: Consider breaking the edit request into smaller chunks which can be verified by reading a relatively small number of references. I am not suggesting reducing the number of references. I am suggesting reducing the total volume of change requested at one time. At least for me, when I got to this page I eventually found the #Additional information section and realized that what was being requested were dramatic changes with a large number of references. It is not a bad thing to desire to have these changes made. However, any editor coming in to perform the edits should be verifying that the references are WP:RS, that they support the text desired and that the article does not contain valid references which contradict with those provided. As it is, the request looks like multiple hours of work to perform a diligent job of verifying the information and performing the edit. With this amount of work involved many editors will just move on to the next request. This is probably one of the things contributing to this request languishing unperformed for several months. — Makyen (talk) 19:46, 21 March 2014 (UTC); fix links to #Additional information 21:14, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
I am here too. I am a bit confused about what ought to be done but yes, if this were broken down I would help integrate this and I want to participate. Could someone recommend a first step? Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:03, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: Since there seems to be a lot of changes and some of them fairly large in scale, I'm declining this mass request as is. I suggest you start a new request below, broken into much smaller chunks (as previously suggested above by Makyen) and we can go from there. This will allow the uncontroversial chunks to get handled right away and the rest of it can be appropriately discussed and have a consensus formed. I look forward to your broken up (broken down) requests below. — {{U|Technical 13}} (tec) 16:27, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Spinbot editor doesn't know the meaning of the word overview[edit]

do you know what the word overview means? It sure doesn't look that way. Spinbot is engaging in edit warring because it does not like.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.252.201 (talkcontribs) 21:25, 26 December 2013‎

I do not know what is going on here but edit warring solves nothing. Someone come to the talk page and propose something. Keep the proposal short. Provide references per WP:V. After discussion the consensus can go into the article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:36, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Spinbot has been cited before and banned from editing for engaging in edit warring and this instance is no different. It seeks to replace impartial information it does not like with something it does. What I added was almost year old news with a quote from the director of this agency, from a respected publication that enhances the scope of this agency. Spinbot prefers the word manage to control, added speculation, motivation et al or nothing at all to do with the overview of this agency.

There is no reliable source which supports the claim that the CFPB wants to "control" retirement investments. The reliable source (a BusinessWeek article) states that the agency is studying whether it has a role in regulating retirement investments, with an eye toward protecting the elderly from investment scams. The above editor is attempting to introduce a polemic version of this claim supported by nothing more than an opinion blog.
Furthermore, if there is anyone edit-warring here, it is you, anon. Your bold addition has been reverted - it is now *your* responsibility to begin a discussion of the suitability of that material and gain consensus on this talk page for its inclusion. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 21:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Control and manage are largely synonymous and only in spinbot world is businessweek a respected publication while Forbes is not. It is a fact that private retirement funds are already statutorily regulated by two other federal agencies. It is a fact that the agency does not deny seeking to control the nation's $20trillion in private retirement accounts. Spinbot does not like facts, nor specific words and hence is engaging in edit warring merely because it does not like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.252.201 (talk) 22:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
No, they really aren't synonymous. We don't say that the federal government "controls" the auto industry when they issue safety regulations for automobiles. Moreover, the Forbes link is to a personal blog which has never been vetted by an editor - hence, unreliable. It's also a polemic claim in an opinion piece, which makes it further unusable to support a statement of fact.
"It is a fact that the agency does not deny" is a meaningless conspiracy theory phrase. The FCC has never denied forcing radio stations to issue mind control waves over their broadcasts - that doesn't mean they have, either. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 22:01, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Yes they are largely synonymous, the government does not help people manage their money, they control the means with which it is done. The businessweek article was re-released 8 times as the editor like spinbot did not like. The director was asked directly twice when they were seeking to control the nation's private retirement funds and twice his response was they are looking into it. Spinbot does not like therefore it is engaging in edit warring and not only has spinbot been banned previously for same conduct, it has contempt for IP editors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.252.201 (talk) 22:11, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Well, no, they aren't. Words have meaning and "manage" is not "control." The article in question says nothing about "control." The word "control" does not appear in the article even once. Your assertion is entirely unsupported. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 22:27, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

The government does not help people manage their money, it controls the ways in which the people can do it.

Further, I cannot be engaging in edit warring here. I posted the businessweek link first until I searched further and found an unedited version which said absolutely nothing about protecting senior citizens. I posted both links, did not include any of the polemic material from the second link, unlike spinbot that included speculation about motivations and so forth, who posted a lot more biased material from the businessweek article than I had originally. I would have to be edit warring with myself.

The bureau’s core concern is that many Americans, notably those from the retiring Baby Boom generation, may fall prey to financial scams. Directly from the article. Third paragraph. That's another thing you're wrong about. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 22:45, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • We are not talking about much content here. Someone post the content here with a source. Instead of talking about this abstractly put it here and if there is anything to challenge, it should be either the source itself or the interpretation of the source. Also, what is spinbot? Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:54, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
"Spinbot" appears to be the anon's derogatory name for me. Cute, isn't it? NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

What's derogatory about it? Maybe the next edit should include the agency seeks to control the nation's private retirement funds oh but some liberals contend that they are really going to help people manage them instead even though they don't help people manage their retirement funds in any real world example, they merely control what they can and cannot be invested in. Nothing deragatory there either right? New game of spinbot nation-post accoprding to conservative as if it is some radical notion while posting the completely incongruent with reality liberal version as if that is some kind of mainstream truth. What spinbot did here is edit warring 101-it brought nothing new to the site and merely cherry picked amongst the sources I provided to best suit it's likes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.88.4.211 (talk) 05:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I posted the article, I know what it said, I know what I posted, I know what you edited. I also know what the original article said.

I'll make this extremely simple. I can list many ways the government is currently controlling the way american's can invest their private retirement money. The biggest way is that it is very easy to invest it in listed securities, bonds, most financial instruments that are heavily regulated, while making it very difficult to invest it in non-listed assets such as: art, real estate, physical commodities et al. That is the government controlling the ways in which the citizens can invest their private retirement funds, that is not the government helping people to manage their retirement money.

Although largely synonymous control is more accurate in this context than manage. Surely, spinbot has plenty of examples of the government helping people manage their retirement money and not controlling it. Since it has been edit warring over it.

Likewise it is a fact that the private retirement money is already regulated by the SEC and The Department of Labor. Why did businessweek leave that out while forbes kept it in? Why shouldn't be included on this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.252.201 (talk) 23:10, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

We are not talking about much content here. Yes, it is very ironic as the underlying topic involves $20trillion in private retirement accounts, a dead broke government and a guy in charge of a federal agency talking about linking one up with the other. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.225.252.201 (talk) 23:15, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


Maybe someone can explain how spinbot get's to revert pages ad infinitum without being blocked? If you blocked the anon editor for three reverts and spinbot's revert is the last one-guess what unless you failed math he violated the 3rr rule too.