Quote

I see no reason for giving the capital employed in agriculture greater protection than the capital vested in other branches of trade, manufacture, or commerce.

It's hard to tell which assets will be toxic. The best way to ensure that only shareholders and banks feel it is have adequate capital.

In the future, financial firms of any type whose failure would pose a systemic risk must accept especially close regulatory scrutiny of their risk-taking.

Regulation is necessary, particularly in a sector, like the banking sector, which exposes countries and people to a risk.

It is probably the case that some regulation of financing will make crises less likely, and I would say higher capital requirements are an almost fail-safe way to make banks safer. But there are a lot of other things that may not be doing that, and so we need to be careful about sort of, like, rushing to one conclusion or another.

If there's something that can be formulated, regulated, give you security, then nobody would lose money. Every movie would be successful. And that's certainly not the case.

Regulation creates a moral hazard.

I believe that we have to have a new regulatory regime for our financial system.

Federal regulations should promote safety without unnecessarily burdening small firms and costing much-needed jobs.

If there had been a Financial Product Safety Commission in place 10 years ago, the current financial crisis would have been averted.