Would Mitt Romney Repeal Dodd-Frank?

[BuyHigh]

Here's a good question that would make me vote for Mitt Romney no matter what other issue he is for or against.

WOULD MITT ROMNEY REPEAL DODD-FRANK?


http://www.exposemittromney.com/image/askromney.jpg

Considering this was a democratic legislation merrily signed into law by Barack Hussein Obama, MMMMmmmm MMmmmm Mmmmm, a law that stiffles business, a law that wiped out thousands of small traders like me out of Forex trading for the rest of time, a law that was supposed to prevent huge trading losses from big banks but whoops JP Morgan lost another 2 Billion dollars last week despite Dodd-Frank's magical bill that was to prevent that. Dodd-Frank did nothing to curtail bank fraud but did everything to curtail little guys like us from being our own bosses.


http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-12BIqYhI7IU/TaSRR5vM7yI/AAAAAAAADEE/-hvRL_Sfvm8/s1600/kneel_before_zod.jpg
2802

Shame on Dodd-Frank, eternal shame and damnation, and on judgement day, the Gods of finance will cast them to the realm where Superman cast General Zod and his merry bunch of superhuman assholes.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_iBuNz7Kv1jk/TJQjO-3TkAI/AAAAAAAAA5M/n4SkOqmPiNk/s1600/Superman2b.jpg

[TopTrader]

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act as signed into law on July 21st of this year, requires forex dealers to comply with several new regulations. Of these, the most contentious limits leverages for trades involving the major currencies to 50:1.

Contentious for some forex dealers perhaps, but OANDA has never offered leverage greater than 50:1.

The reason for this is simple; encouraging over-leveraged positions is actually a disservice resulting in unnecessary risk for most investors. For years now, this principled decision has been an easy target for other brokers who center entire marketing campaigns on the fallacy that trading at 100:1 or higher is a “benefit”.

Certainly there is a benefit for trading with excessive leverage, but it is the broker that benefits – not the client. Especially when the broker’s idea of making a market is to merely bet against its clients.

It is ironic to hear the response from certain brokers who for so long advertised high leverage ratios as a trading advantage, now describing the 50:1 limit as “reasonable” . If they truly believe 50:1 is an appropriate limit, why do they still offer greater leverage in other jurisdictions in which they operate? If 50:1 is reasonable in the US, should it not also be reasonable in the UK? The answer of course, is that in the UK, forex dealers are still permitted to offer leverage as high as 200:1.

It is no mere coincidence that these same brokers have busied themselves for the better part of two years with moving US accounts together with their capital reserves to their London affiliates. They may camouflage this practice as a “service” providing clients with greater choice, but clearly it’s nothing more than an attempt to bypass regulations. Thankfully, the Dodd-Frank Act will soon close this loophole making it impossible for forex dealers to evade the scrutiny of US authorities by simply moving accounts to a location that permits them to continue taking advantage of their clients.

The Dodd-Frank Act also formalizes the relationship between Introducing Brokers (IBs) and forex dealers. The use of IBs to recruit potential customers is gamed to benefit the broker and rarely adds any value for the client. With the new Act, any intermediary that promotes forex trading service on behalf of a dealer must now meet minimum capital requirements and undergo audits to ensure compliance. Alternatively, an IB may enter into a formal agreement with one, and only one, forex dealer and that dealer will be held responsible for the actions of their IBs. This is a welcome first step towards protecting the rights of traders and creating a more transparent and level playing field for all market participants.

OANDA has always encouraged a prudent, risk-adverse approach to foreign exchange trading and continues to uphold the belief that you can treat clients in an open and honest manner, and still be profitable. The approach of some dealers – simply churning through clients in an attempt to scoop as much of their money as possible before they go bust – is not a credible, long-term business plan. Worse, it impinges the reputation of all forex dealers. We applaud the Dodd-Frank Act together with recent leverage reductions in other jurisdictions as these actions validate our even-handed approach to forex trading.

[ultratrader2]

I doubt it, Dodd-Frank is set in stone and cement... would Mitt Romney take a jackhammer to it? I don't know

[ForexThinktank]

I doubt it, Dodd-Frank is set in stone and cement... would Mitt Romney take a jackhammer to it? I don't know

Yea, that seemed more like a wall street thing than a Democrat or Republican thing. If all the Forex Traders in America would pool their money together to buy thsemselves a lobby in DC, maybe we'd have a fighting chance of flushing The Dodd-Frank Act down the toilet where it belongs.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_nFUq8O1wff0/TPe87OB-nhI/AAAAAAAAJK8/G4T6YYHvPr0/s640/Dodd+Frank+Financial+Reform+Act.JPG

[Riviera]

I don't even know Mitt Romney's stance on Dodd-Frank... no one ever asked him.

[jugarde]

I don't even know Mitt Romney's stance on Dodd-Frank... no one ever asked him.

He's probably against it. 99% of business owners are against it. 99% of people in finance are against it. 20% of the American public are against it.

What that tells me, people are ****ing stupid.

[DickP]

If Romney repeals Dodd-Frank i'll kiss the man, and DickP kisses NO man.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02105/kiss_2105799b.jpg

[Neto]

I hope Mitt Romney repeals Dodd-Frank, I hope so because Dodd-Frank are retards...

[trade_forx]

Mitt Romney would probably keep Dodd-Frank in place, that bull**** legislation is pretty much set in stone like the fat asses of the senators that wrote it.