Jack Cameron, 2012 Presidential Candidate
Presented by Jack Blasberg and Dom Cameron-Rouge
The Three Big Problems of Big
Business
In 2008, the world witnessed an economic crash rivaled in magnitude by only the Great Depression. It has
left much of the world scarred by mass unemployment, lending insecurity, and distrust in capitalism as an
economic system. This crisis was largely precipitated in the United States for a myriad of reasons: poor
judgment by government forces, lingering results of historical events, chances of fate, faults of human
nature, and the decisions of the country’s largest financial institutions. I recognize that to focus on the
issues of big business is to focus on only a portion of the problems in our economic system that allowed
this crisis to happen. Nonetheless, I must start somewhere.
Large financial firms, some of the crowning successes of capitalism, have helped create a highly risky,
complex, and tangled force in our economy. They are poorly regulated, overly complex, and their
operations can be hazardous to the global community. In this text I outline my proposals to fix the
problems related to large financial firms. Recognizing that there are many different issues on the topic of
big business, I will address what I believe are the three most significant. It is crucial that immediate action
be taken, and these are the first solutions I will implement as President of the United States.
My economic philosophy is one that I believe holds up the ideals of democracy in the United States. I will
strive to preserve the ideals of capitalism. I will fight to hold up the ethics necessary for the smooth flow
of information and the sense of trust inherent to this economic model. I will push to uphold a sense of
competition in our market so that men and women reap the benefits of what they sow. I will endeavor to
address the shortcomings of human nature; the greed, vanity, and dishonesty that often arise from selfinterest, but harm capitalism nonetheless.
I also recognize, however, that in today‚s world, a pure capitalist system is not necessarily the best
system for a smoothly running economy. Thus, I consider myself a follower of the middle road, the
nuanced road that allows for smart solutions to difficult problems. I aim to hold up capitalism in this
country. Yet I am not opposed to the slight expansion of government where it is absolutely necessary.
Sacrificing entirely pure, laissez-faire capitalism for a more middle road will prevent any drastic swings to
systems such as socialism or communism to occur in the future.
Even on this middle road, I believe that, in addition to their benefits, big businesses can be harmful to the
ideals of capitalism. These are the issues to which I will provide concrete solutions. My reforms will not
oppress these businesses, they will hold up the capitalist system that allowed them to develop. On the
surface, my proposals may seem liberal, as they expand the power of government, however if one
examines the reasoning behind them they will realize they are not ultra-left, just smart. That is what
Americans need today: smart reformers who can pinpoint the biggest problems before us. That is what I
propose with my middle road: a smarter, safer, and more steadfast America.
Jack Cameron, 2012 Presidential Candidate
Complexity
Issue
The brains working at the top are paid out to stockholders and
of the financial firms are the people capital is reinvested into the
The complexities of financial giants who developed these complex
corporation, the executives can take
create problematic interdependencies,mechanisms and relationships. Gone bonuses. However, these should only
and a system in which it is difficult to are the days where the brightest
be large enough to retain necessary
assess risk. With the removal of Glass- minds dispersed themselves
talent and provide incentives for
Steagall restrictions, which separated throughout the private sector
productivity. As Milton Friedman
commercial and investment banks, working as scientists, doctors, lawyers,stated, “There is only one…
banking giants such as AIG were able or engineers. Now, rather than
responsibility of business- to use its
to link themselves extensively with advancing research and technology to resources and engage in activities
the rest of the sector.
the benefit of society, they enter
designed to increase its profits so
iii
finance. They develop complicated long as it stays within the rules of the
One way in which these
game.”vi To a certain point, CEO
interdependencies were created was financial products that exploit
loopholes in the system for the
compensation promotes these ends,
through the credit-default swaps
which enabled them to disperse risk purpose of enriching their companies but when figures creep toward $10
among many buyers. Debt played an and themselves. Oftentimes, these million it starts to detract from more
extensive role in this realm, illustrated creations are only fully understood by profitable uses of the funds.
by the fact that the value of the CDS the masterminds who developed
Stock option grants allow the
them;
regulators
cannot
do
an
market outstripped the economic
executive in a company to buy shares
production of the entire world (of this efficient job, partly because of the
in a company’s stock at a set time in
intellectual gap that has developed as the future, but at the market price of
total, AIG controlled nearly $400
a result of pay discrepancy.
billion)i, and very few of the banks
when the deal was made. When the
involved possessed the reserves
required to pay off their obligations.
In another attempt to minimize risk,
speculation was widespread as
companies would pay for risk on
margin.ii This enabled them to lay
down very little actual capital in
advance of a trade, making both
enormous profits and losses possible.
When one of these huge
corporations fails and has to default
on the loans that it has spread out
into nearly every firm across the
sector, the entire system could come
crashing down. Thus the government
has gotten into the practice of bailing
the giants out and preventing them
from going under, coining the phrase,
“Too Big to Fail.”
This intellectual gap occurs
stock appreciates over the term of
because the smartest individuals in the option, executives profit wildly.vii
society gravitate to the careers that The ethical problem here lies in the
yield the highest salaries. Today,
backdating of stock option grants.
those careers are in finance. If one
Backdating is when a company
were to really examine how this is, he changes the date that a stock option
or she would see ethical red flags
was granted to when there was an
raised by the earnings of big business even cheaper market price; this
executives. For example, Lloyd
practice is legal when it is specified in
Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman Sachs, a contract, yet can be illegal, as it was
has a base salary of $600,000, yet
when Apple was sued in 2007.viii In
made $14,114,080 in 2010 because of the same way that bonuses can be
his cash bonus and stock option
awarded acceptably, so can stock
grants.iv
option grants. When indexed against
the market to give an accurate
Multimillion dollar bonuses
representation of the company’s
are cut out of overall corporate
profits, funds that should be directed performance relative to its
first and foremost to making money competitors, they can be
instrumental in ensuring maximum
for its shareholders.v After dividends
effort on the behalf of executives to regulation. I recognize that there are evening the playing field between
boost their employer’s value. The
benefits to large companies like AIG— regulators and big banks.
concept of backdating, however,
because they can take on greater risk,
One might argue that putting
defeats this purpose by providing
they can give out loans that improve
a cap on executive bonuses and
rewards even in the face of a
American quality of life. I do believe, illegalizing backdating will oppress big
decrease in the company’s value. This however, that this risk needs to be
businesses and expand the power of
goes against the capitalistic ideal of acquired intelligently. My proposals, government too much; I am justified
reaping the benefits of what you sow. therefore, will not suppress these
in these solutions, however, because
banks any more than any other
of the aforementioned ethical
regulatory
system
in
the
United
Solution
conflicts of these executive
States has. The United States
compensations. A company’s
To solve the problem of the complex government has been in agreement responsibility is to its shareholders,
that regulation of big banks is
nature of “too big to fail” banks, I
employees, and consumersxi; huge
necessary
since
the
passing
of
the
propose to reform, not expand,
bonuses over $2.5 million are
regulation. I will incentive regulatory National Bank Act after the civil war, unethical because they encroach a
work for the government by raising because of the fraud and
company’s ability to use its funds in a
manipulation that banks could do
the salaries of the government
way that can benefit shareholders.
without them.ix Thus I am not
employees who work in these
Backdating is also unethical because
expanding the role of government, I CEOs make money that doesn’t
capacities. In so doing, I hope to
am merely enhancing the regulators necessarily reflect performance and
slightly divert the constant flow of
intellect to large financial firms and that have already been put in place. effectively take away money from
have some of this brainpower
An argument against my
their shareholders.xii When
working to regulate our problems,
alteration of the regulatory system considering the economy, ethical
rather than create them.
will be that the Dodd-Frank Act
problems cannot be overlooked no
matter how much wealth they create
In order to shift the some of already addresses how the
the focus of promising young minds government can improve regulation because, at the most fundamental
level, a capitalist market cannot run
from private finance to government to prevent dangerous
interconnectedness of banks.
without upheld ethics. If someone is
regulatory work, I propose to limit
to buy a product, they must trust that
CEO and top executive compensation However Dodd-Frank has merely
increased
the
reaction
power
of
the
the product has been designed to
by capping bonuses and regulating
stock option grants. I propose to fully government and not the prevention work, if someone to invest in
power; the bill gives the government something whose rewards will take
illegalize backdating, regardless of
“… the power to seize and close down time to arrive, they must trust that
contractual specifications. I also
large firms failing in an orderly
the promise of these rewards will be
propose to put a 50% tax on
fashion…[and would create] in
kept.xiii In this scenario, to invest in a
executive bonuses over 2.5 million
dollars, and with this income I would addition a new council of regulators company, a shareholder must trust
that their returns will reflect the
raise the salaries of regulators. Rising that could recommend that large,
reasons to work for the government complex companies hold more capital fortunes of a business. Without
to cover potential losses.”x These are measures to ensure that the general
in the face of decreasing
compensation in the private sector merely precautionary measures that public trusts business practices, the
will further divert people from going anticipate more banking crises, and entire system of big business, and
don’t work to prevent them. Dodd- capitalism itself, would break down.
into big business and increasing its
Frank endorses the passive
complexity.
government behavior we have
Why This Solution
recently seen, such as the
government takeover of AIG, where
In regard to my regulatory solution
the government stepped in to fix a
for interconnected, too big to fail
problem after it had occurred. My
companies, I am not imposing any
proposal promotes government’s
more regulation, just smarter
active prevention these crises by
Jack Cameron, 2012 Presidential Candidate
Poor Regulation
Issues
the borrowers’ ability to pay them
relatively secure, many investors such
back, and sold these loans to
as retirement and pension funds
One of the keys to the market crash investment banks that packaged all poured their money into the loop.
of 2008 lies in the hands of the three their subprime loans into
With risk distributed throughout the
Rs: regulators, risk assessors, and
Collateralized Debt Obligations
financial sector, everybody became
raters. As the chief overseers of the (CDOs), before passing them on to
inextricably intertwined; when the
financial sector, it was these people's investors.xvi
housing bubble burst, CDOs
responsibility to prevent big business
A primary reason companies plummeted in value and everybody,
from acting in manners detrimental to take risks like these, which sacrifice from banks to mortgage holders,
the health of the overall system. The their long-term viability for temporary suffered huge losses.xxi
core of the issue, however, is not so gratification, is simple: projections
much that these people failed to fulfill preceding their quarterly reports.
Solution
their most explicit duties; it is that
Four times every fiscal year,
their positions within the industry are companies release earnings guidance To address the large gaps in
regulation as a result of the repeal of
seriously compromised and/or
reports for their stockholders with
ineffectual.
projections of the gains that will be the Glass- Steagall act, I propose the
creation of a larger, umbrella agency
The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 demonstrated in their required
in charge of all regulation. This body
separated commercial banks and
quarterly reports. If these later
investment banks, and set up a
quarterlies demonstrate earnings that will be subdivided into various groups
patchwork of regulatory agencies
fail to match up with the previously that will be responsible for distinct
sections of finance.
with vaguely defined jurisdictions
estimated figures, people sell their
xiv
A further measure required to
within the financial sector. When shares and the stock price
this legislation was removed in 1999, plummets.xvii As a result, an excessive protect banks from themselves is to
the system of oversight was left intact.amount of CEO and senior executive alter the system of ratings agencies.
More regulators did not correlate to time is used to ensure that the marks Rather than receiving compensation
from the banks whose securities they
better control of banking practices. on quarterly reports match the
are rating, these agencies will be paid
For example, the major result of the figures in their projections. In this
repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was to obsession, they frequently disregard by the groups who are buying the
securities. Although there is still the
broaden the ability of commercial
future consequences, ethical
potential for bias because of the
banks to buy and sell mortgageconsiderations, and/or the law.
undeniable link with one side of the
backed securities, credit-default
Privately owned ratings
transaction, it is not as glaring as
swaps, and other financial derivatives, agencies do not help regulative
practices that had previously been
approaches.xviii Hired and paid by the before. The companies buying
potentially sour securities are not
restricted to investment banks. These firms that issue securities, rating
new capabilities did not fall under the agencies face an obvious conflict of already saddled with toxic assets to
the degree that the banks selling the
clear jurisdiction of any of the existing interest.xix Thus they award a
xv
securities are. Thus the buyer stands
agencies and so were not regulated. disproportionate number of CDO
xx
We have recently seen the effects of packages the highest ratings of AAA . to lose more by getting embroiled in
this lax regulation; leading up the
Before the 2008 economic crises, with the precarious web.
2008 crisis, commercial banks wildly the misled perception that these
A solution to the issue of big
approved loans with little respect to investment opportunities were
business acting irrationally in the
short term, which is what
necessitates regulators in the first
place, will be to do away with the
concept of projections before
quarterlies. Ford, Google, and CocaCola already have moved in this
direction.xxii I propose a ban on these
projections, with penalties if they are
released to shareholders. This
alteration will allow banks to worry
less about immediate gains and
ensure that they are not jeopardizing
their future by acquiring toxic assets
in a market that will inevitably shift.
This will promote a much healthier
financial sector.
flexible in order to stay on top of
them and ensure that they are
operating responsibly in all aspects of
their business.
five-year roadmap, such as the one
provided by IBM to its investors.xxvi
The benefits of this strategy are
twofold. First it allows the company
Steadfast conservatives will to behave responsibly with regards to
inevitably argue that this proposal of its sustained viability. Secondly,
investors become committed to their
smarter regulation will inhibit
economic growth, and if they were holdings for a longer period of time
talking about rapid, short-term gains while their buying and selling reflect a
more accurate depiction of the
they would be correct. The system
that they are promoting is superficial stock’s strength or weakness. This
and unsustainable. Take, for example, contributes to a more stable stock
market. All of these benefits far
AIG. The old system of regulations
outweigh the perils that come with
stated that the riskier the assets a
bank holds, the greater the reserve the projections. The lack of
projections also creates less pressure
they must maintain. In order to
“decrease” the risk on their holdings, for business in the build up to the
Why This Solution
banks purchased billions of dollars of fiscal quarter. This atmosphere
credit default swaps from AIG so that promotes a more level-headed
approach to the planning of
The current “solution” to the they could invest more of their
financial crisis, the Dodd-Frank Act, investors’ money in securities rather continued operation.
fails to sufficiently improve the
than holding it in reserves. The CDOs
regulatory structure despite a mission,were seen as insurance policies solely
stated in its extended title, to protect to appease regulators and nobody
consumers.xxiii Under the legislation, a anticipated having to collect on
Financial Services Oversight Council them.xxvIn this case, even though
was set up to identify systemic risks banks got around regulations and
posed by complex financial firms.
were able to increase their short-term
Regulators have been given clearer profits, they were decimated later on
responsibilities as to whom and what when it came time for AIG to make
they are to be regulating.xxiv Though good on its policies and it was unable
the former is a good step because it to do so. An umbrella rating system
helps identify problems before they will counterbalance the human
occur and the latter prevents firms tendency to hunt for advantages
from hand-selecting their regulator, outside stated regulations and think
these changes are not sufficient to
solely about the short term.
dramatically improve the quality of
Finally, the benefits of
oversight. The inflexibility of the
eradicating
projections anticipating
current regulators is only reinforced
quarterly reports outweigh the
by specific definitions of agencies’
duties. An advantage of having one downsides. As mentioned previously,
large, overarching agency is that its these reports are an impetus for
senior executives to micromanage in
capabilities can remain loose. In a
system of many small organizations the short-term while their energy
with strictly defined jurisdictions, it is could be better focused on their
easier for business to exploit gaps and company’s big picture direction.
While these reports are important to
get around rules. One regulator
give shareholders an idea of the
promotes the opposite scenario
where banks have strict restrictions future health of their investments, a
better long-term indicator would be a
and regulatory agencies can be
Jack Cameron, 2012 Presidential Candidate
Global
Issue
investment-based dependency of
foreign countries on big business in
The global nature of big business
created several of the problems that the United States. This delicate
nature is apparent in the insurance
contributed to the 2008 economic
company American International
crisis. Firstly, China and other
Group.xxxi Leading up to the 2008
countries persistently flood US
economic crisis, AIG dealt many
treasuries and government-run
mortgage-finance giants, Fannie Mae credit default swaps where
and Freddie Mac, with foreign capital. international investors invested huge
sums of money as insurance for
In 2008, China bought $2 trillion of
various assets (subprime mortgages,
the dollar-based assets of these
companies, lowering American debt corporate bonds, etc.), should they
and interest rates.xxviixxviii This created default. As a result, the international
cheap mortgages that people were community became very dependant
eager to invest in. However, a fatal on AIG’s ability to honor the
xxxii
housing bubble was created in which policies. In 2008, when the
housing bubble burst, more loans
many people used credit to buy
were defaulted than the insurer had
houses they couldn’t actually
cash to provide the promised
xxix
afford. When real estate values
xxxiii The United States
stopped rising and the bubble burst insurance.
on the borrowers, general economic federal government was forced to
turmoil ensued as banks were unable use $85 billion to bail out AIG,
to collect on the multitude of loans because of its far-flung dealings,
they had approved and people found both foreign and domestic.
This delicate, global economy
themselves homeless and jobless.
The ability of foreigners like used to be overlooked by a system
the Chinese to buy our debt is largely devised at the Bretton Woods
due to a co-dependent relationship conference after the Great
Depression and World War II.xxxiv
we have created with them; we
However, this system of oversight
constantly import products from
China, repaying them in large sums was abandoned during the Nixon
administration, and in our financial
of US dollars. The Chinese invest
these excesses into Fannie Mae and system today, there is no global
Freddie Mac, buying our debt so that authority to prevent monopolies,
ensure fair trade, or mandate
we can continue to buy their
responsibility in the financial sector.
products.xxx
No single body is overseeing
A global economy is a
international coordination on the
delicate economy because of the
happenings of big business.xxxv Big
companies such as AIG that are
critical to the economy of the entire
worldxxxvi continue to be subject to
the lows of business cycles, keeping
the risk of global crises looming on
the horizon.
Solution
Firstly, it is clear that we must better
manage foreign investment in the
dollar. In order to stop this flood of
money into our economy, we must
stop the imbalance of our imports
from China. I propose the domestic
production of a portion of the items
currently delivered from China such
as machinery, shoes, cotton, textile,
and televisions.xxxvii To fund such a
program, I propose a graduated tax
on Chinese imports, beginning at 10%
in 2012, 15% in 2013, and leveling off
at 20% in 2014 and onwards. This
will stimulate our production and
slow imports and our payment of
Chinese business interests. This will
result in a decrease in Chinese
surpluses that come back into Fannie
Mae and Freddie Mac and lower
interest rates at the expense of longterm economic health.
To address the manner in
which international involvement has
created an overly-interconnected
economy, I will create a board to
oversee international investments in
large American firms like AIG. This
board, rather than regulating or
treasury outweigh the benefits.
may be predisposed by their
preventing any investments, will
background to the message
By lowering the demand for
xlviii
merely provide cautionary alerts
imports, I will boost industry in the preached by financial firms. The
when high international
IMF is in charge of “taking the
United States. Americans feel the
concentration in one firm is observed. difficult competition of trade: we
economic pulse”xlix of its member
Assisted by the regulators mentioned have trade deficits with more
countries and ensuring that they
previously, it will observe when a
countries than just China where we have the financial stability to ensure
firm is spending hazardously and
survival. Lacking, however, is a focus
import more than we export to
xlii
putting the system at risk to burst,
on the international practices of big
them. Specifically with China,
alert the company’s international
products like toys, kitchen supplies, business. In addition to the IMF and
investors, and advise the
bicycles, clothing and solar-powered the Financial Services Oversight
international community
Council, I propose an entirely
machines are cheaper when
appropriately.
objective council, made up of
exported, a fact that puts many
members with backgrounds in both
Americans in those lines of
xliii
the financial sector and international
production out of work. By
Why This Solution
encouraging domestic production, I relations, to educate the
will reinvigorate these industries and international community on the risks
One might argue that a better
put more Americans into jobs.xliv The involved with investing in certain big
solution to foreign flooding of our
graduated income tax will do little to companies.
debt is to inform foreign countries
damage our relations with them, for,
In creating this council I
when their investments are
at
the
onset,
it
is
minimal
(though
it
acknowledge
the futility of merely
dangerously lowering interest rates,
or to have the Federal Reserve base will subtly grow enough to make an trying to exert dominance over the
l
its monetary policy more effectively impact on our industries). I am not international system. I am not
proposing a council of people to
off international investment into the proposing a radical end to imports
US treasury. These solutions merely from China and other countries, but examine international investment
into big businesses, and then disband
put a band-aid on the problem, and rather slight stimulus of our own
industries
that
may
slow
foreign
those businesses or forbid foreign
are based off the dangerous
assumption that the government can excesses and stop the formation of investment in them; I am proposing
more bubbles. Under the current
an informative council that will give
persuade foreign investors to not
administration, little has been done countries the ability to make betterbuy our debt. I am proposing a
xlv
informed decisions. In the same vein,
structural cure to the problem that to address this issue.
this council will not limit the
One might also argue that the
gets to its root cause: global
profitability of business. I understand
board overseeing foreign
imbalance.
that much international wealth and
One might argue that, by buying investments in American big business
American hegemony stems from big
that I have proposed is already
our debt, Chinaxxxviii has made the
businesses such as AIG and the
dollar the dominant currency in the provided for by the Dodd Frank Act
assets they sell like credit loan swaps,
world today.xxxix Unfortunately, this and the International Monetary Fund
mortgages, and derivatives. I am
excessive power often has triggered (IMF). While the Dodd-Frank Act has
merely proposing a system in which
firms to approve precarious loans.xl created a Financial Services
Oversight Council to regulate global the international constituents of big
History has shown that a weaker
business can know more about the
currency often helps create jobs, and big business, it does not provide an
organization that focuses purely on high risk activities of these
I uphold that given the
the risk of big businesses in relation companies, and so act as more
unemployment rate in the United
xlvi
responsible, informed investors.
States today, creating jobs should be to foreign investment. Additionally,
a higher priority than strengthening because in the status quo many
li
American regulators are retirees of
our currency.xli These detrimental
xlvii
effects of international investment in big business, the members of the
Financial Services Oversight Council
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the
Anup Shah
Ibid.
iii
Luigi Zingales
iv
“Lloyd C. Blankfein”, equilar.com
v
Rich Blake
vi
Milton Friedman
vii
Charles Geams
viii
CNBC
ix
John Steele Gordon
x
“Financial Regulation: The Hope and the Worry”, New York Times
xi
Milton Friedman
xii Charles Geam
xiii
John MacmIllan
xiv
Eichengreen, Anatomy of a Crisis, 13
xv
Cyrus Sanati
xvi
Anup Shah
xvii
Dominic Barton
xviii
David Ellis
xix
Blinder
xx
Blinder
xxi
Inside Job, documentary
xxii
Dominic Barton
xxiii
“Financial Regulation: The Hope and the Worry,” New York Times
xxiv
Brady Denis, Alberto Cuadra: Reinventing Financial Regulation
xxv
John Carney
xxvi
Dominic Barton
xxvii
Stephen Roach, “Read China’s Lips”
xxviii
Eichengreen: Anatomy of a Crisis
xxix xxix
Eichengreen Anatomy of a Crisis
xxx
David Barboza
xxxi
“Financial Regulation: The Hope and the Worry,” New York Times
xxxii
Justin Fox
xxxiii
Justin Fox
xxxiv
Barry Eichengreen, “The Bear of Bretton Woods”
xxxv
Dani Rodrik
xxxvi
Inside the Meltdown, documentary
xxxvii
Ned Barker
xxxviii
David Barboza
xxxix
Andrew Batson
xl
Barry Eichengreen, “The Bear of Bretton Woods”
xli
Barry Eichengreen, “The Bear of Bretton Woods”
xlii
Stephen Roach, “America’s Other 87 Defecits”
xliii
Ned Barker
xliv
Ned Barker
xlv
Charles Kadlec
xlvi
“The Hope and the Worry,” New York Times
xlvii
Luigi Zingales
xlviii
Damian Paletta, “”Law Remakes US Financial Landscape.” 33
xlix
International Monetary Fund
i
ii
l
Dani Rodrik, “New Rules For the Global Economy.”
Bibliography
Barboza, David. "China's Treasury Holdings Make U.S. Woes Its Own." New York
Times, July 18, 2011. Accessed November 21, 2011. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/19/business/china-largestholder-of-us-debt-remains-tied-to-treasuries.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all .
Barker, Ned. "U.S. Trade WIth China: Expectations vs. Reality ." PBS Frontline .
Accessed November 21, 2011. Last modified November 6, 2004.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/walmart/china/trade.html.
Barton, Dominic. “Capitalism for the Long Term.” Harvard Business Review, March 2011.
Batson, Andrew. "China Takes Aim at Dollar." The Wall Street Journal, March 24, 2009.
Accessed November 21, 2011. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123780272456212885.html.
Blake, Rich. "Goldman Sachs Readies Bonus Bonzana, Braces for Backlash ." ABC
News, January 12, 2010. Accessed November 21, 2011. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/goldman-sachs-topearners-wall-streets-biggest-bonus/story?id=9540081#.TssNia6_Dta.
Dennis, Brady, and Alberto Cuadra. "Reinventing Financial Regulation." The
Washington Post, May 21, 2010.
Carney, John. "How Bank Regulation Helped Destroy AIG." Business Insider.
Accessed November 21, 2011. Last modified March 2, 2009.
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2009-03-02/wall_street/30024782_1_credit-default-swaps-aig-bankingregulation.
CNBC. "Is Apple's $20.5 Millions Backdating Settlement Illegal?" October 21,
2010. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://m.cnbc.com/id/39776098/Is_Apple_s_20_5_Million_Backdating_Settlement_Illegal.
Damon, Matt. "Short Inside Job CDO Explanation." Clip from documentary Inside
Job . Accessed November 21, 2011. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-S6rZ18KKk.
Eichengreen, Barry. "The Bear of Bretton Woods." Project Syndicate . Accessed
November 21, 2011. Last modified April 11, 2011.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/eichengreen29/English.
Ellis, David. "Rating the Rating Agencies." CNNMoney, April 14, 2009. Accessed
November 21, 2011. http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/14/news/companies/rating_agencies/index.html.
“Financial Regulation: The Hope and the Worry.” New York Times, June 25th, 2010.
Fox, Justin. "Why the Government Wouldn't Let AIG Fail." Time Magazine,
September 16, 2008. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1841699,00.html.
Friedman, Milton. "The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase Its
Profits." New York Times Magazine, September 13, 1970.
Geam, Charles, Matthew Rider, Marin Rutherford, and Leah Semann. Ethics of Stock
Option Backdating . Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://www.ethicapublishing.com/ethics/4CH6.pdf.
Gordon, John Steele. "A Short Banking History of the United States." Wall Street
Journal, October 10, 2010. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122360636585322023.html.
"The IMF in Action: Taking a Member Country's Economic Pulse." International
Monetary Fund . Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/center/action/eng/art_iv/index.htm.
Inside the Meltdown. PBS Frontline, 2009. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/meltdown/view/.
Kadlec, Charles. "Obama's Policies Make China Stronger And The U.S. Weaker ."
Forbes Magazine, November 14, 2011. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/charleskadlec/2011/11/14/obamas-policies-make-china-stronger-and-the-u-sweaker/.
"Lloyd C. Blankfein." Top 200 U.S. CEOs. Accessed November 21, 2011. Last
modified 2011. http://www.equilar.com/ceo-compensation/2011/sachs_group_lloyd_c._blankfein.php.
McMillan, John. Reinventing the Bazaar: The Natural History of Markets. Chapter One. NY:
WWNorton, 2002.
Roach, Stephen S. "America's Other 87 Deficits." Project Syndicate . Accessed
November 21, 2011. Last modified October 28, 2011.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/roach10/English.
Roach, Stephen S. "Read China's Lips ," Project Syndicate , accessed
November 21, 2011, last modified July 27, 2011, http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/roach7/English.
Rodrik, Dani. "New Rules for the Global Economy." Project Syndicate . Accessed
November 21, 2011. Last modified January 10, 2011.
http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/rodrik52/English.
Rodrik, Dani. "No Cheers For Globalisation ," The Guardian , accessed
November 21, 2011, last modified July 31, 2008,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/31/economy.globalisation.
Sanati, Cyrus. "10 Years Later, Looking at the Repeal of Glass-Steagall." New
York Times, November 12, 2009. Accessed November 21, 2011.
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/12/10-years-later-looking-at-repeal-of-glass-steagall/.
Shah, Anup. "Global Financial Crisis." Global Issues. Accessed November 21,
2011. Last modified December 11, 2010. http://www.globalissues.org/article/global-financialcrisis#Creatingmoreriskbytryingtomanagerisk.
Zingales, Luigi. "Capitalism After the Crisis." National Affairs, 2009, 22-35.