'That's Why We Need Donald Trump': Comments of the Week

A reader's reaction to government efforts to spur more affordable housing:

"Social liberal government policies create the crisis and then create more regulation to screw things up even more i.e. Dodd-Frank. That's a great idea. Let's let the guys who caused the debacle create more baggage for the honest American homeowners who are still trying to dig out from the last mob induced, bank supported crisis. All of them should be in jail. But they pardon themselves and here they come again. That's why we need Donald Trump."

In response to how regulators are exploring affordable housing programs to address rising rents in major cities:

"In a lot of these cities, there is a limit on the amount of housing stock that can be built due to local zoning law. Isn't there a risk that introducing more money (which can be encouraged via federal regulation) without introducing more housing (which requires a more favorable local regulatory environment) will just drive up prices without really helping access?"

On the mounting pressures including potential legal liability facing compliance officers:

"Keep in mind that for the compliance officer, it is not a matter of winning the case and being found not guilty. The process itself is the penalty. Defending yourself against unfounded accusations is plenty punishing, and vulnerability to such assaults does not help the compliance process."

Related Article: The Compliance Officer Bill of Rights

On the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau hitting Citibank with $8 million in fines and restitution:

"I'm not suggesting that the CFPB's actions weren't warranted, but at some point, when do Congress and the regulators step back, look at the bigger picture, and determine that no amount of laws, regulations, fines, settlements, and restitution is enough to get institutions to comply? And what action will be warranted and reasonable then? Revised laws and regulations? That usually compounds the issues rather than solving anything. Charter revocation? Or do Congress and the regulators just keep using the largest banks as a piggy bank for the U.S. Treasury?"

A retort to an op-ed challenging the notion that mobile innovation means the end of branches:

"Of course [mobile banking] is the death for branch banking. That doesn't mean every branch will disappear, but it does mean that every bank that relies on branch networks will die. Mobile has fundamentally changed day to day banking behavior. Annual visits to branch are the lowest in 50 years. Revenue from branch has been in decline since 2008, as have branch numbers. Two thirds of millennials don't use branches regularly, more than half won't visit a branch annually."

On the battle between Apple and the FBI over unlocking phone data of one of the San Bernadino attackers:

"What I'm liking about this San Bernadino DOJ vs Apple event is that it gives airplay to a wider question on whether technology providers such as Apple (device centric) or Twitter (network centric) for example, who's product's popularity relies in part upon the protection and maintenance of user privacy, should also have a 'break glass' mechanism designed-in? One which enables law enforcement agencies to access private data in the event of a crime being committed: whether to access the owner's true identity, location or other such evidence stored within or captured from personal devices (equivalent to property search warrants or phone tappings)."