Talk:Glass–Steagall legislation
It says that it took the US off the Gold Standard, but at the bottom it mentions that that act was in fact totally different and happened later. Which is it? Because that is an unclear definition and I need to know the difference for an exam. Can someone please edit it?
the version is wrong. I'm trying to post a new one. In short:
There are two Glass Steagall Acts. The one from 1933 is also called Banking Act of 1933, and it is the more important one. Literature in economics usually refers to the 1933 act.
First Glass Steagall Act of February 1932
This act allowed that government obligations as well as commercial paper can be used as reserve in banks. Therefore, banks were able to increase credit, and more money was in circulation. It was enacted under President Herbert Hoover. Do not confuse this act with the second Glass Steagall Act of 1933.
See: [http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1504.html ]
Second Glass-Steagall Act (officially called: Banking Act of 1933) (June 16, 1933)
This act introduced the separation of bank types according to their business (commercial and investment banking), and it founded the Federal Deposit Insurance Company for insuring bank deposits. In modern literature usually this is referred to as the Glass Steagall Act, since it had a stronger impact on US banking regulation.
See:
Original Text of the act: "Banking Act of 1933", (= Glass Steagall Act), in: Walsh, Gerard P. Jr. (ed.), Federal Reserve Act of 1913. With Amendments and Laws Relating to Banking, Washington 1981, pp. 163-199. A pdf is available here (downloading takes a while): [1]
"Understanding How Glass-Steagall Act Impacts Investment Banking and the Role of Commercial Banks" [2]
Do not confuse those two acts with this one:
Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933 (March 9, 1933)
This act authorizes President Roosevelt to forbid hoarding of gold coins. It authorizes the Treasury to request all people and companies of the U.S. to send in their gold reserves (transportation will be paid by the Treasury.) In addition, this act rules that all banks stop their business (bank holiday) until the Comptroller of the Currency has examined the soundness of such banks and has approved reopening. This act has nothing to do with the Glass Steagall Acts, however, it has often been mixed up.
See:
President Franklin Roosevelt's Bank Holiday Declaration, 1933: [3]
Original Text of the Emergency Banking Relief Act of 1933: [4]
Repeal of the Act
This section is the biggest pile of garbage I've ever seen on Wikipedia. Can we just reference the page on [Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act] and kill the rest of the section?
"Citigroup, which has fallen 36 percent since reporting in January the biggest quarterly loss in its 196-year history, may have writedowns of $15 billion this quarter, according to New York-based Merrill Lynch & Co. That would add to the $22 billion that Citigroup already lost because of the housing slump."
January of WHAT year?
66.108.217.8 (talk) 05:38, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
This sections has facts. It states some opinion but also clearly states that the opinions are widely held. It then goes on to list pro's and con's... I think this discussion is a farce. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.42.50.51 (talk) 23:08, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
"This section is the biggest pile of garbage I've ever seen on Wikipedia." You forgot: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.108.99.72 (talk) 00:24, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Bovine Scatology
The Act was repealed with President Clinton's aigniture.
The objector here is clearly an Obama supported so am I but in the intrest of NEUTRALITY I avoid this policital crap.
Duplication of Emergency Banking Act?
There is a section about the Emergency Banking Act, but I believe that already has its own article titled Emergency Banking Act. I will go ahead and remove the passage in this article about the Emergency Banking Act. Mazin07C₪T 00:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Problems in "Background" section
The Background section was clearly cut-and-pasted from another document (which is cited) but is written in such a way that it is unclear that it is a quote. As it is written now it attributes to Wikipedia opinions that rightfully originate with the FDIC. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.20.181.206 (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2008 (UTC)