Regulation or rate hikes?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by mahram, Jan 14, 2010.

  1. I was wondering what people would prefer. Rate hikes or regulations. Bernake said there should be more regulation rather then rate hikes to pop bubbles.
  2. 1) GS, MS and JPM can evade regulation, not rate hikes.
    2) Rate hikes would "create" market activity. Regulation would tend to restrict market activity and make trading more expensive. Let the "tightening" begin! :cool:
  3. Increased regulation and rate hikes are both inevitable. Why do we need to choose one over the other?
  4. Choose the latter. :mad:
  5. Rate hikes won't solve anything long term. Rates have gone up and down in the past. Increased regulation is needed to fix (or at least partially fix), some of the fundamental problems with excessive risk etc.

    And I'm talking real regulation, not the bullshit the SEC claims to oversee.
  6. 1) You're optimistically assuming that "something" can be "done" to "improve" anything for the "better".
    2) Rate hikes mean that bond, note and eurodollar futures will become the "God of the world". :D
  7. Low credit access will limit bubbles for a while.