Most of what I've heard on the radio and read on various news sites give strong hints that "Paulson"s Great Messiah Act" on investments is not so much a boon for small investors, retirement savers, mom and pop with money in the stock market as it's a get out of regulations free from the Bush administration.
Well, what did we expect from Bush's Treasury secretary?
One source (radio) said the plan was to dump the control of investment funds into the lap of the Fed. (Sorry, no link on that) My thoughts on that are that it is a typical method of setting up a proxy through which to manipulate people or to fail to control Wall Street,.
Setting up proxies is an old game in the "post colonial" world. This was most effective in South Africa, where the top leaders were allowed to be elected from the majority but not much changed for the rest of the nation. Of course, we and our buddies "mugabe'd" one African leader to show other black leaders who are allowed to take" charge that they better not get uppity and think they can take back the land and resources that our fellow whites took from them.
A New York Times analysis says Secretary Henry Paulson (could he go back to being "do nothing Paulson now?) 's plan would put an end to the SEC. Bush 41's SEC chairman Richard C. Breeden is quoted saying in "On Paper, Wall Street Gets Its Way ":
“It’s the height of disregard to America’s investors to abolish the one agency that has done something to protect the public from the baser urges of Wall Street,”
And why do we come to this?
Wall Street, among the most deep-pocketed and politically savvy industries in America, senses opportunity.
And notice that New York Senators are particularly Wall Street partisans:
A separate report, released two months later by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and Senator Charles E. Schumer, stated in stark terms that the United States was falling behind.
“The last thing that New York and the country, for that matter, need is to wake up one morning and find we are no longer the financial capital of the world,” Senator Schumer, Democrat of New York, said at the time.
Senator Schumer, who in most other cases might be called a 'liberal' wears a very different hat. That probably is the same for the junior senator from New York as well. I know her campaign funds are very heavily dominated by donations from Wall Street. Much more so than Barack Obama's when compared to the total amount of donations for each candidate.
Mostly Krugman gets it right in The Dilbert Strategy except that our friend, the Clinton partisan, forgets to mention the bill Hillary's intended co-president signed that destroyed the last of FDR controls on Wall Street just months before Mrs. Clinton announced her campaign for her current seat as New York's junior senator as I noted in an earlier post.