{"title":"1933年的格拉斯-斯蒂格尔法案能阻止金融危机吗?","authors":"Maxime Delabarre","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3726739","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the common argument according to which the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was at the origin of the 2008 financial crisis. By arguing successively that the Act would not have covered the failing banks and that it would not have solved the “Too-big-to-fail” problem, this paper concludes by the negative. Had the Glass-Steagall act still been in place, the global Financial crisis would not have been prevented. Mortgage policies, low capital requirements, and Basel II seem to be more convincing alternatives.","PeriodicalId":20999,"journal":{"name":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","volume":"380 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Could the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act Have Prevented the Financial Crisis?\",\"authors\":\"Maxime Delabarre\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3726739\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper explores the common argument according to which the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was at the origin of the 2008 financial crisis. By arguing successively that the Act would not have covered the failing banks and that it would not have solved the “Too-big-to-fail” problem, this paper concludes by the negative. Had the Glass-Steagall act still been in place, the global Financial crisis would not have been prevented. Mortgage policies, low capital requirements, and Basel II seem to be more convincing alternatives.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20999,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal\",\"volume\":\"380 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3726739\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3726739","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Could the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act Have Prevented the Financial Crisis?
This paper explores the common argument according to which the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was at the origin of the 2008 financial crisis. By arguing successively that the Act would not have covered the failing banks and that it would not have solved the “Too-big-to-fail” problem, this paper concludes by the negative. Had the Glass-Steagall act still been in place, the global Financial crisis would not have been prevented. Mortgage policies, low capital requirements, and Basel II seem to be more convincing alternatives.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
