Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Thanks man, for parroting Liz Warren's new talking point. Now can you do everyone a favor and cite the specific Dodd-Frank provision that would have prevented the collapse of SVB, had it not been relaxed?
Fauxcahontas couldn't.
In 2019 the Federal Reserve compounded the pullback from Dodd-Frank by instituting new rules that eliminated liquidity requirements entirely for banks with assets under $250 billion and softened other regulations.
SVB’s deposits surged from $50 billion in 2018 to $220 billion in early 2022, it remained conveniently below the new standard that would have triggered more oversight and higher capital-adequacy requirements.
In 2019 the Federal Reserve compounded the pullback from Dodd-Frank by instituting new rules that eliminated liquidity requirements entirely for banks with assets under $250 billion and softened other regulations.
SVB’s deposits surged from $50 billion in 2018 to $220 billion in early 2022, it remained conveniently below the new standard that would have triggered more oversight and higher capital-adequacy requirements.
Nope, the bank would have closed because of increased costs and merged with larger bank.
That is problem, all the government regs due is concentrate wealth and create monopolies.
On the one hand, this guy makes reasonable sense, while on the other hand he's from Harvard and on the Clinton News Broadcasting Channel (CNBC).
Quote:
Harvard Prof., Fmr. IMF Economist Rogoff: Bank Issues Not Fixed ‘at All’ and Things Will ‘Break’ Due to High Inflation, Slow China Growth
On Thursday’s broadcast of CNBC’s “Squawk Box,” Harvard University Economics Professor and former International Monetary Fund Chief Economist Ken Rogoff argued that the issues around banks have not been fixed “at all” because in a world with higher inflation and interest rates and poor growth in China, “we’re in a situation where things are going to break.” He also argued that it’s “surprising something hasn’t happened earlier.”
Co-host Kelly Evans asked, “Ken, talk about the contagion risk here, do you see it? Have authorities stopped the problem in its tracks?”
Rogoff responded, “Not at all. I think that we’re in a world where inflation’s higher, real interest rates are higher, China’s not going to be the growth force that it was. It’s not easy to have a soft landing here. It’s just surprising something hasn’t happened earlier. So, I think they did a good job in preventing bank runs, and credit both what the Swiss National Bank did and what the Fed did. But they can’t necessarily fix the deeper problem in some banks’ books. And it’s not just banks. In the economy more broadly, we’re in a situation where things are going to break.”
At least we now can see why Yellen and Joey Bribes want to make sure that Americans are insuring Chinese depositors to the fullest extend possible, above the current law.
Central Digital Currency. Which can be turned on and off, at will, for any particular reason, even no reason given at all...
And just like that, there it is...A shiny new Central Currency, complete with social credit score linkability. Just in time for Easter.
Quote:
Federal Reserve Will Launch ‘FEDNOW’ Payment Service In July
As the banking system begins to collapse, the Federal Reserve is launching its “FedNow” program in July.
The United States Federal Reserve announced Wednesday it will roll out “FedNow,” its long-awaited instant payment system, in July.
The FedNow Service will be available 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year for instant bill payments, money transfers including paychecks and disbursements from the government.
The system does not rely on blockchain technology and is operated by a consortium of large banks.
The Fed will “begin the formal certifications of participants during the first week of April in preparation for the July launch.”
“The first week of April, the Federal Reserve will begin the formal certification of participants for launch of the service. Early adopters will complete a customer testing and certification program, informed by feedback from the FedNow Pilot Program, to prepare for sending live transactions through the system,” the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced in a statement issued on Wednesday...
...“Certification encompasses a comprehensive testing curriculum with defined expectations for operational readiness and network experience,” the Fed continued. “In June, the Federal Reserve and certified participants will conduct production validation activities to confirm readiness for the July launch.”
The Federal Reserves announcement of FedNow comes days after the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank on Friday and Signature Bank on Sunday.
Sheila Bair, who ran the FDIC during 2008/2009, said the FDIC should temporarily guarantee all bank deposits. She's right. Otherwise we're at risk of having more bank runs, with more depositors jerking their funds from otherwise healthy banks. If that happens the FDIC will have to bail out more insured depositors, so it may end up paying more than if it just went ahead and issued a temporary guarantee now. They should just jack up what the banks pay for FDIC insurance and do it. The taxpayer ultimately wouldn't have to pay.
Sheila Blair, who ran the FDIC during 2008/2009, said the FDIC should temporarily guarantee all bank deposits. She's right. Otherwise we're at risk of having more bank runs, with more depositors jerking their funds from otherwise healthy banks. If that happens the FDIC will have to bail out more insured depositors, so it may end up paying more than if it just went ahead and issued a temporary guarantee now. They should just jack up what the banks pay for FDIC insurance and do it. The taxpayer ultimately wouldn't have to pay.
If you ignore current law and increase the costs of doing business, the increased cost is not ever, under any circumstance, passed on to the lowly consumer (customers) of such services. You got a name for that economic theory? Is it called "The Socialism doesn't hurt near as much when you use anal lube" theory? I might of just gone with "Tyranny", presently known as the "You will own nothing, be happy and eat the bugs" theory -- but you do you.
If you ignore current law and increase the costs of doing business, the increased cost in not ever, under any circumstance, passed on to the lowly consumer (customers) of such services. You got a name for that economic theory? Is it called "The Socialism doesn't hurt near as much when you use anal lube" theory? I might of just gone with "Tyranny", presently known as the "You will own nothing, be happy and eat the bugs" theory -- but you do you.
Socialism and tyranny my ass. You end up with contagion and a breakdown in the system like 2008/2009 and we're going to be on the hook for a lot more than the temporary "increased costs of doing business" which would be born by bank customers and bank shareholders.
