Is 10 million enough to develop, implement and enforce, pending new banking laws?

For those who missed my regulatory write up last night, here you go.
No matter how much you speculate, its the bootm line to me.





A grand total of only 10 million dollars has been put aside for this entire program. Thats it for the whole year.


That includes getting the rules written, including the rules of audit and compliance, implementing the program throghout all member banks nationwide, which means the Feds have to go to the different banks and what not to train these people, and then enforcing it all nationwide.

All that for 10 million. First tell me this, WHOM IN THE HELL DO THEY HAVE HIRED, TRAINED AND IS READY TO DO ALL THIS? Somebody please tell me.


Up to 270 days my ass. Never. First, outside of the "Treasury" whom the hell is going to lead all this, but more importantly, TAKE THE FALL, when it cant be enforced and they call for his job and so on.


Please stop thinking people are going to walk into the office next week and turn everything off. Do you think the people whom work in all these places have a clue. In addition, a place like Bank of America cant just turn on a switch and read every transaction or sync there computers WORLD WIDE, to stop you, just like that.


Plus, I know how the regulation game is played. Do you have any idea the type of personnel these places will have to hire to comply with this. How many of these type of transactions of any eft or check kind take place a day at any one place. Weeks could go by with nothing happening.


In regulation, you have to prove you policed it. This means each bank has to have a compliance officer whom fills out the paperwork that says what happened that day and what measures were taken if any to keep things regulated.


All this has to be sent upstream to the person who oversees all of the banks in a district, lets say and he/she has to make sure they did everything right and did not miss anything. Any mistakes along the way you will be made to look like a criminal for letting somebody slip thru.


In order to pull off just the first two levels, you need an audit department to make sure everybody did everything right, and filed it correctly.


From there it goes into a bigger stream.


DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE ALL THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN 270 DAYS? OR EVEN IN THE NEXT 27 YEARS? DO YOU?



Can I stop anytime now or do I need to continue? I will continue when needed.

Of course not. This is just going to pay for some lavish research and salaries for some connected people. Its as ineffective as the amount they set aside for their wall on the Mexican border. You are making the mistake of believing your congresspeople when they say they are doing shit. They are just saying they are doing shit so you vote for them. The wall on the border will never be complete, nor will it shut out illegals and this legislation will never do much more than get publicly traded companies out of the game. Betting will still go on. There is no amount of money they could spend on this to stop it and they all damn well know it, but they just hope you don't figure it out.

"Is 10 million enough to develop, implement and enforce, pending new banking laws? "

LOL, that will not even cover the legal fees to write the "outline".:drink:

BUT they can always ask for more funds.:smoking:

$10 million? $10 million will be used up before they can train bank of america.

Anyone think they are gonna get to Sam's Dairy credit union?

I keep hearing about honey bees with lenses and rats that find mines - yes, but we spend hundreds of billions on the military.

If the US wanted to spend $100B on this, they could probably block 80-90% of transactions, but you can't spend $100B on a $6B industry.


You have to remember, most people do not care about online gambling. You got a few nuts in congress who slid this through. Eventually some nut like Hanaway will take on some bank, but the short of it is with $10 million, you can not regulate an industry. Most people in the DOJ are intelligent folks with more important things to do.

99% of transactions will be fine. Occasionally someone will need to find a new bank or will have a wire stopped.


-Sean

The dog and pony show only takes a minimum budget. In my mind there are three ways this can go.



It was all an election year poserthon. They will raise each other's arms in triumph, with their right wing backers applauding. That was us. We wield power. Attornies, consultants and other experts will burn through that before you can say, we ran out of funds.


Then the real test will happen.

1. They will come to the conclusion after the law is already law they cannot afford it, cannot enforce it and hope everyone forgets about it. Some governement patsy will be appointed scapegoat for failing, and their will be more hand wringing.

2. They are broke but encourage or threaten the banks to do it for free or else. Problem is banks operate at very thin margins, are always cutting costs and employees. Plus it will trash the bank profit statement, quarterlies and piss off institutional investors. End of show or political careers end.

3. They ask for money, as if the other failing miserable wars are not sinkholes enough. More money for anti terrorism, the Freedom Act, homeland security, Iraq, Afghanistan and drugs, especially the crank epidemic. Plenty of money left, we will just go deeper into debt. But we will never be able to enforce it? That common sense never works, as every single war we are in involved in now is failing, and we fix that by throwing more money at it. This scenario would not surprise me. In fact, it has a lot of precedents.

This is what we wait for, if nothing dramatically happens before then. 10 million cannot even get the ball rolling. It will in most likely circumstances fund the feasibility study. That is it.


Best Wishes...OF :howdy:


Best Wishes...OF

"Under the legislation as passed, 'If you are acting as a normal bank, and you're not in some sort of conspiracy with a betting house, then you are not going to be held liable,' Verdier said.

In addition, the legislation will be guided and enforced by regulations written by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury Department.

'If they find that the banks just don't have the technology to track and block these transactions, then we don't have to,' Verdier said. 'The Fed and Treasury are not supposed to ask us to do the impossible.'"


_____________________________________________________________
Banks see protections in gambling bill

ST. LOUIS (AFX) - The Internet gambling legislation passed late last week by the U.S. Congress, which led to a major sell-off of Britain-based online gambling stocks Monday, remains a concern to the U.S. banking industry but isn't as burdensome as feared.

'We got some language in the bill that looks like it protects the financial services industry,' said Steve Verdier, director of congressional relations for the Independent Community Bankers of America, which represents almost 5,000 banks in the United States. 'It could have been a lot worse.'

The legislation is designed to prohibit U.S. banks and credit card companies from processing payments for illegal online gambling. Financial services companies and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had expressed concerns about the compliance burdens that would be imposed, such as tracking and blocking potentially millions of transactions.

Under the legislation as passed, 'If you are acting as a normal bank, and you're not in some sort of conspiracy with a betting house, then you are not going to be held liable,' Verdier said.

In addition, the legislation will be guided and enforced by regulations written by the Federal Reserve and the U.S. Treasury Department.

'If they find that the banks just don't have the technology to track and block these transactions, then we don't have to,' Verdier said. 'The Fed and Treasury are not supposed to ask us to do the impossible.'

Still, Verdier said, 'we will have to see how those regulations get written.'

The legislation, attached to an unrelated port security bill, was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives Friday and by the U.S. Senate early Saturday. It is expected to be signed into law by President Bush.

Shares in Britain-based betting companies, such as PartyGaming PLC, 888 Holdings PLC and Sportingbet PLC, plunged Monday. The companies said they would suspend business from the United States if the legislation is enacted.

The U.S. Justice Department has been bringing fraud charges against online gambling companies and their executives.

For example, BetOnSports PLC and its former chief executive, David Carruthers, were indicted in June in federal court in St. Louis, and the company closed its U.S. operations Aug. 12.

Sharp post Omni Frog.

Husker fan, dont blieve, In regulation you need someone to blame to make it look like you are doing your job. They have every intention of policing these banks and there is nothing to stop a prosecuter from getting an indictment against anyone, before the fact.

It may not stick, but the damage will be done and the banks will look like criminals.


Regulation demonizes those who have been deputized to watch it all. Just ask me or go read my crusade stroies in my 90's sportsbook stories thread.


In fact the crusade and whats happening today are very similar.

I will also say no one has adressed my compliance part of the write up.Thats where the real problem is.

What are the rules of audit and compliance. How will the Feds know the banks are regulating things.