le, however, that deregulation is either or both (1) an underlying cause, to some extent, of each of the factors more generally cited as causes of the savings and loan problem, or (2) a primary cause of the savings and loan problem. Because the federal government is so ideologically committed to deregulation, however, it is difficult to get a fair hearing for the need for regulation in limited partnership investments. The fundamental objective of deregulation in the United States is the same, regardless of the particular industry which was being deregulated, and regardless of the extent to which a particular industry was being deregulated. This fundamental
objective is to permit industries to operate in a free market. Although this fundamental applies regardless of the industry involved, it is tempered to a degree by the characteristics of each industry. Thus, it is more appropriate to say that the objective of deregulation is to permit, to the extent possible, free market conditions to prevail. Being able to operate in a free market, however, should not translate into the acceptance of exploitative market conditions, such as those which often prevail in limited partnership investments.
The eighth full year of regulatory revision (deregulation) in banking and finance in the United States was completed at the end of 1989. In 1990, there exists some blurring of the functions of the major players in the industry, as well as the presence of many new players. As an example, the activities of commercial banks and investment type institutions overlap to a greater extent than was true prior to regulatory revision. The distinction between commercial banks and thrift institu tions had also been blurred. Thrift institutions are now per mitted to engage in all retail banking activities, although not all thrifts availed themselves fully of such opportunities. Further, the narrowing (or, in some cases, the elimination) of in...