Well said - you got it bro! The fed always goes to far with inflationary risk - falling knife syndrome - remember their mandated goal is 2-3% - deep systemic risk to banking system (Fed is trapped right now - check mate!) and a hot war going in Ukraine adds Political risk (you gotta ask yourself - why is the US not actively negotiating a peace a agreement there - both sides seeming love the war machine) - AI is going to replace human capital - I'm a CFO and 5 years ago we had a payables person, A/R person, Fixed asset, Sr. Manager, Sr Analyst, Director of FP&A and Controller - with new tech I can do all those jobs with just 1 controller - This will impact college educated middle class the most - the worldwide banking system is getting "reimagined" - small and mid side banks will disappear and the small guy will pay the price.
REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
How’s the stock market?
- Thread starter lagunaboy
- Start date
When talking about banks and other financial institutions a more regulated market is my answer. Its not a coincidence that SVB collapsed after successfully lobbying for a repeal of sections of dodd/frank which applied to banks of its size. In my view the constant push to deregulate markets has basically always been a bad thing in the long run for anyone who isn't in the top 1%.
bottomline,
the stock market rules the US economy and not for the better other than for the 1% of the 1% that own most of the wealth of this nation and maybe the world.
Everyone's greedy especially the wealthy but everyone's greedy.
Stock market = speculation = gambling = greed
that's it that's why you invest not for the benefit of the company you are investing in but to line you pocket with some anticipated and "maybe" realized wealth.
Learned this long ago...
What goes up
Eventually comes down
including national economies and power
in 1987 oliver stone presented us a mirror like we did with platoon but like as always you refuse to see and learn what you don't what to see and learn, so here we again
the stock market rules the US economy and not for the better other than for the 1% of the 1% that own most of the wealth of this nation and maybe the world.
Everyone's greedy especially the wealthy but everyone's greedy.
Stock market = speculation = gambling = greed
that's it that's why you invest not for the benefit of the company you are investing in but to line you pocket with some anticipated and "maybe" realized wealth.
Learned this long ago...
What goes up
Eventually comes down
including national economies and power
in 1987 oliver stone presented us a mirror like we did with platoon but like as always you refuse to see and learn what you don't what to see and learn, so here we again
That's the Democrats' talking point.
What's the other part of the equation you're leaving out?
UBS has agreed to buy Credit Suisse for $2b
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/UHSAJKACFZK7DKLZ4JKGKY2R4M.jpg)
www.reuters.com
Central banks try to calm markets after UBS deal to buy Credit Suisse
UBS will pay more than $3 billion for Credit Suisse and assume up to $5.4 billion in losses, while the Fed, ECB and other central banks issued statements to reassure markets walloped by a banking crisis that started with the collapse of two regional U.S. banks.
www.reuters.com
Oh right, I forgot that SVB employed women which is the real reason they went under.
UBS has agreed to buy Credit Suisse for $2b
Central banks try to calm markets after UBS deal to buy Credit Suisse
UBS will pay more than $3 billion for Credit Suisse and assume up to $5.4 billion in losses, while the Fed, ECB and other central banks issued statements to reassure markets walloped by a banking crisis that started with the collapse of two regional U.S. banks.
Okay, let's hear the "other part of the equation".Uh, no.
You love repeating political talking points, huh?
I say tighter regulations is preferable to the economic hostage situation of having to decide between bailing out these uninsured rich idiots or letting them take a bath and hoping it doesn't trigger further bank runs and full on economic meltdown.
The other part of the equation was the bank would have met the liquidity requirements under the repealed portions of Dodd-Frank.
Further it was already under supervision by Federal and CA regulators.
Since we go that out of the way, what further regulations would you suggest?
And perhaps more importantly, who would be doing the regulation?
IIRC it was something along the lines of being loaded up on bonds that had a lower interest rate than the prevailing mortgage rate. They were having liquidity issues and had to sell them for a loss.
Tomorrow my lovely stonkies are gonna shoot to the moon!!!
Or, stonk, as I have gone all in on a seismic survey company to regain my brutal loss.
Saved by the taxpayer clowns again. Thank you and have a nice evening
Or, stonk, as I have gone all in on a seismic survey company to regain my brutal loss.
Saved by the taxpayer clowns again. Thank you and have a nice evening
Correct - they were holding a bunch of long term treasuries in a rising rate environment...while still meeting the requirements of the repealed Dodd-Frank portions.
Then customers wanted their money.
That is why SVB failed. Period.
As SVB grew beyond 50 billion in total assets it would have had to meet, "enhanced requirements including stress tests, stricter capital requirements and risk management practices". Those requirements were put into place to prevent larger "systemically important" banks from making high risk bets. But, because they repealed that portion of the law, raising the cap to banks over 250 Billion so SVB was not subject to those regulations as it grew beyond it's 50B asset value. SVB was around 210 billion at the time of collapse.
Obviously there is no way to go back in time to prove the counter factual that SVB wouldn't have collapsed had they been subject to stronger regulation but I feel pretty comfortable saying that stricter capital requirements and risk management wouldn't have hurt.
Once again - SVB would have very, very likely met those Dodd-Frank requirements.
SVB's collapse was about rising interest rates, long term t-bonds, and MOSTLY a bank run.
Stress tests are about recessions, not bank runs.
But let's say Fed regulators came knocking.
The Fed said "there is no inflation" and "inflation is transitory." Those were the auspices it was operating under. Rate hikes were not on the horizon. Yellen was saying there is no recession, so was the Fed.
The bank's funds were sitting in what is globally considered the most secure financial instrument - U.S. treasuries.
There is actually a good chance SVB would have been fine it weren't for the bank run, not to mention their client portfolio.
If the repeals in Dodd-Frank were about bank runs and banks vetting their depositor's sources of income you'd have a case.
The Federal Reserve and five other central banks announced coordinated action on Sunday to boost liquidity in their standing US dollar swap arrangements.
The Fed announced the move with the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the European Central Bank and the Swiss National Bank in a statement saying the action was designed to “enhance the provision of liquidity via the standing U.S. dollar liquidity swap line arrangements.”
=====
Same thing happened on March 15, 2020
SXP daily
The Fed announced the move with the Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the European Central Bank and the Swiss National Bank in a statement saying the action was designed to “enhance the provision of liquidity via the standing U.S. dollar liquidity swap line arrangements.”
=====
Same thing happened on March 15, 2020
Coordinated Central Bank Action to Enhance the Provision of U.S. Dollar Liquidity
The Bank of Canada, the Bank of England, the Bank of Japan, the European Central Bank, the Federal Reserve, and the Swiss National Bank are today announcing a
www.federalreserve.gov
SXP daily
looking forward -
should triggering a bank run be illegal?
blue horseshoe pulling deposits can move markets, apparently.
Absolutely not.
Who is going to define "triggering a bank run" anyway?
This was already done in Argentina in the beginning stages of turning their currency into Monopoly money:
corralito:
and then the corralón: