A Quote by Bob Corker

I find it very difficult to see a scenario where financial regulation doesn't pass the Senate. — © Bob Corker
I find it very difficult to see a scenario where financial regulation doesn't pass the Senate.
With less regulation, I think you would see growth come back. Of course, there are situations where you need regulation. Antitrust regulation, for example, is a good idea because you want competition. But beyond that, it gets very difficult.
The British have been particularly shy about the issues of financial regulation, and attentive only to the interests of the City - hence their reluctance to see the introduction of a tax on financial transactions and tax harmonisation in Europe.
I find it very difficult to relate to India's new middle class. This very patriotic and neoliberal group that mixes religion and economics together. I find them very irksome. Very difficult to like. They are privileged, but they don't want to talk about their privilege. It's difficult to find poetry amongst these people. Some sort of hidden spirit of beauty.
I find it very difficult to see the boundary between womenswear and menswear. It's bizarre the ways in which society reacts; they find it difficult to comprehend seeing parts of the body on a man. I think it's fascinating.
There is a very real danger that financial regulation will become a wolf in sheep's clothing.
In the wake of the 2008 recession, Congress and the Obama Administration rightly focused financial regulation on protecting the nation's financial system from itself.
Being in a scenario where you're thinking, 'I can't do what I want to do due to the financial burden that comes with some of it,' makes you think, 'Well, I could go and do an after-dinner speech every night.' I'd probably earn more than I could in track-and-field. But that's a dangerous scenario to get yourself into.
Ted Cruz said he wanted to find a compromise. Ted Cruz said he wanted to bring 11 million people out of the shadows. Ted Cruz said that he wanted immigration reform to pass. Here's the bottom line. I tried to solve a very difficult issue, and we tried to produce the best and most conservative bill possible in a Senate controlled by Harry Reid at the time, and then send it over to the House and have them, conservatives, make it even better.
But our system of regulation must keep up with this. If it fails to keep up, it will hold back economic expansion. We need financial market regulation that works at national and European level.
Soon after the financial crisis of 2008, I was at a meeting in Washington with a group of U.S. senators. They had invited me to provide a point of view on new regulation; regulation aimed at ensuring we never have to go through the events of 2008 ever again.
I am not really inclined to think there is any very effective regulation of the derivative securities markets that would be useful. People who go into it essentially ought to know what risks they're taking and I don't see any useful regulation.
The Senate needs 60 votes to pass anything. They have to compromise with liberal Democrats to spend more money. Even though arguably we have control of the Senate, we really don't.
Inappropriate macro economic policies in some economies, characterised by [a] low savings rate and high consumption [and] failure of financial supervision and regulation to keep up with innovation which allowed financial derivatives to spread.
North Carolina is home to some of the largest financial institutions in the country, and a vibrant network of community banks. We're a banking state, and we're proud of that distinction. But we also understand that responsible financial regulation protects consumers and businesses.
What we have to find is the right level of regulation of our financial system so that it has the incentive to invest in things, but at the same time, it is sufficiently regulated so it can't get in the kind of trouble that we have seen in the past and we have seen recently.
What I find most appalling is the Senate calls it a qualified blind trust when it's not blind. Since the Senate says it's OK, the Senate has made it a political question. It's up to the voter. But there's no doubt it's a conflict of interest.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!