I am going to lose a lot of followers on this but you cannot continue to repeat something that is inaccurate

Glass Steagall was an unimportant piece of legislation- citation to follow

Other regs yes- GS - NO

A heavily cited thread

And open to discussion https://twitter.com/TurncoatD/status/1388331911580319744

Foremost let me explain what Glass Steagall is and why everyone uses this in cocktail conversation in an attempt to sound smart about the economy

It’s the Depression-era bank regulation that kept different types of financial institutions separate https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/aug/19/bill-clinton/bill-clinton-glass-steagall-had-nothing-do-financi/

Think about the date and time Glass Steagall was passed and 1990s/1990s

different realities we have since- then. Phones, computers, and tech

I would argue failure to keep up w/ how the world has changed played larger roles in our financial crashes https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042115/what-caused-black-monday-stock-market-crash-1987.asp

So now you understand where I am coming from

Regulation fails to adequately keep pace with technology and its affects on our market and economy

SO why would you center your entire regulatory argument on a law created in 1929 even before we regularly used telephone

By time Glass Steagall was put to rest it had barely the ability to speak for the 1980s must less the 1990s and definitely have no ability to be relevant today.

You can make the argument than a review of what was needed to replace it made sense - then I am hooked

But the ppl who make these argument - wrangle and squeeze a point “well Glass was more emblematic of a system of deregulation”

Hmm

“ I have a problem w/ lack of evidence based approaches”