If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   All the Big US banks who passed their Federal Reserve "stress test" step forward. Not so fast there Citibank, RBS, HSBC, and Banco Santandar. Oh and Goldman Sachs and Bank of America? See me after class   (usatoday.com) divider line 63
    More: Fail, Federal Reserve, Goldman Sachs, RBs, HSBC, Citigroup, share buyback, bank holding companies, stress testing  
•       •       •

1516 clicks; posted to Business » on 27 Mar 2014 at 3:43 PM (16 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



63 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-27 02:18:28 PM
Heads on pikes as an example to the others?
 
2014-03-27 02:36:12 PM

Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?


So that I can look up into their lifeless eyes and wave.
 
2014-03-27 03:24:55 PM

2wolves: Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?

So that I can look up into their lifeless eyes and wave.


I really need to rewatch that series.
 
2014-03-27 03:48:55 PM
Great, now I'll never be able to see Morden as anything other than a banking industry lobbyist.
 
2014-03-27 03:53:00 PM
The suggestion is that institutions big enough to be bailed out should have pay scales locked to the government scale of the guys that'll come to bail them out. If your bank like institution wants to pay more it can stay smaller.
 
2014-03-27 03:53:39 PM
Interesting... so Chase made it? Even after the $15 bn settlement and the losses from the "London Whale" trades? Or are their results not out yet?
 
2014-03-27 03:57:36 PM
Somehow we will eventually find out banks like Goldman and BofA are just giant pyramid schemes when they collapse and take our economy down with them.
 
2014-03-27 03:57:53 PM
I think we should give them more tax payer money to help them out.. Also it would be best if the federal reserve took some more bad assets of their balance sheets.
 
2014-03-27 03:58:56 PM
"Needs improvement"
"Check minus"
"What were you trying to say here?"
"Insolvent ends in '-ent'"
"This is right out of Wikipedia"
 
2014-03-27 04:00:40 PM
It's nice that the Fed is actually rating banks. That's something.
 
2014-03-27 04:09:31 PM

sendtodave: It's nice that the Fed is actually rating banks. That's something.


Too big to succeed
 
2014-03-27 04:13:11 PM
Boy, it sure is a good thing we didn't break these guys up. They learnt their lesson for sure. No way they will ever crash the economy again due to a shocking level of greed and incompetence.

/why listen to the rules when you're rewarded for breaking the rules to the tune of billions of dollars?
 
2014-03-27 04:18:36 PM
I'm a little confused. An article from a week or so ago said all of the major banks but one had passed their stress test.
 
2014-03-27 04:20:25 PM
Guess what? Nothing has changed since 2008. This is a paper tiger economy; I've thought so all along.

Norial Roubini got nothing on me.
 
2014-03-27 04:23:20 PM

shower_in_my_socks: I'm a little confused. An article from a week or so ago said all of the major banks but one had passed their stress test.


I'm guessing you can pass the test, but still have plans to increase dividends denied. Or something like that.
 
2014-03-27 04:24:12 PM

Communist_Manifesto: Boy, it sure is a good thing we didn't break these guys up. They learnt their lesson for sure. No way they will ever crash the economy again due to a shocking level of greed and incompetence.

/why listen to the rules when you're rewarded for breaking the rules to the tune of billions of dollars?


Ah, no.  What they did was to rewrite the rules before they stole anything, that's why nobody went to jail.  No rules were broken, at least not by humans.
 
2014-03-27 04:27:49 PM

Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?


Tywin Lannister: No one will stay here. Ser Gregor will head out with five hundred riders and set the riverlands on fire from Gods' Eye to the Red Fork. The rest of us will regroup at Harrenhal, and you will go to King's Landing.
Tyrion Lannister: And do what?!
Tywin Lannister: Rule. You will serve as Hand of the King in my stead; you'll bring that boy-king to heel and his mother too, if needs be. And if you get so much as a whiff of treason from any of the rest- Baelish, Varys, Pycelle-
Tyrion Lannister: Heads, spikes, walls. Why not my uncle? Why not anyone?! Why me?
Tywin Lannister: You're my son.
 
2014-03-27 04:31:26 PM
In other news, big banks can fail stress tests now. I suppose it's progress.
 
2014-03-27 05:04:57 PM

impaler: shower_in_my_socks: I'm a little confused. An article from a week or so ago said all of the major banks but one had passed their stress test.

I'm guessing you can pass the test, but still have plans to increase dividends denied. Or something like that.


Maybe paying the dividends would have put them below the threshold so they would fail the tests?
 
2014-03-27 05:06:27 PM

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: Communist_Manifesto: Boy, it sure is a good thing we didn't break these guys up. They learnt their lesson for sure. No way they will ever crash the economy again due to a shocking level of greed and incompetence.

/why listen to the rules when you're rewarded for breaking the rules to the tune of billions of dollars?

Ah, no.  What they did was to rewrite the rules before they stole anything, that's why nobody went to jail.  No rules were broken, at least not by humans.


Ah, no. While they are responsible for the lobbying that got some of the rules changed, it's not like they were cherub faced babes pure with innocence. I can't even imagine how you can come to the conclusion that there was ZERO crimes committed. Just because no one was convicted, doesn't mean shiat. Here is a New York law journal on the matter:  http://www.maglaw.com/publications/articles/00346/_res/id=Attachments / index=0

Towards the end they lay out why no one was convicted, they oddly didn't mention that absolutely no crimes were committed.

Here is some more evidence:
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/may/20/wall-street-role-fin an cial-crisis

And hell why not some light reading about what they've been up to since then:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2013/09/5-years-after-financial-crisis- bi g-banks-are-still-committing-crimes/

I will await your evidence that not a single crime was committed due to all of the activity among these too big to fail banks being legalized beforehand.
 
2014-03-27 05:27:31 PM
Banks should really be regulated to the point of being stogy and boring. The concept of banks gambling with everyone's cash seems insane.
 
2014-03-27 06:23:08 PM

BizarreMan: impaler: shower_in_my_socks: I'm a little confused. An article from a week or so ago said all of the major banks but one had passed their stress test.

I'm guessing you can pass the test, but still have plans to increase dividends denied. Or something like that.

Maybe paying the dividends would have put them below the threshold so they would fail the tests?


Pretty much this.

Not just paying dividends, but also stock buy backs and retiring certain classes of bonds.
 
2014-03-27 06:37:54 PM

johnnyrocket: Banks should really be regulated to the point of being stogy and boring. The concept of banks gambling with everyone's cash seems insane.


Carter Glass and Henry Steagall certainly thought so. Today's politicians know better though.
 
2014-03-27 07:03:22 PM

johnnyrocket: Banks should really be regulated to the point of being stogy and boring. The concept of banks gambling with everyone's cash seems insane.


They are gambling with everyone's everything. When they expand the money supply the way they do they are in essence using other peoples stuff as collateral.

Just the $17,000,000,000,000.00 is a lot of everyone's everything being tapped.

Banking is dead in both the directions from the way we were raised to think they operated.

It's gone way beyond just playing with our cash.
 
2014-03-27 08:22:26 PM

NateAsbestos: johnnyrocket: Banks should really be regulated to the point of being stogy and boring. The concept of banks gambling with everyone's cash seems insane.

Carter Glass and Henry Steagall certainly thought so. Today's politicians know better though.


I have an idea! Let's give them the Social Security fund!
 
2014-03-27 08:36:01 PM

clkeagle: Great, now I'll never be able to see Morden as anything other than a banking industry lobbyist.


What do you want...
 
2014-03-27 08:52:12 PM
imageshack.com
 
2014-03-27 10:51:51 PM

Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?


media2.s-nbcnews.com
"See, old man. I told you they'd never blame us."
 
2014-03-27 11:43:42 PM

Arkanaut: Interesting... so Chase made it? Even after the $15 bn settlement and the losses from the "London Whale" trades? Or are their results not out yet?


I vote we place them under a separate program where new regulations apply, specially they'll be required to change their logo to a guy in a mask running out of a bank with a large burlap sack with a dollar sign on it. They will also have to adopt the slogan "Chase: We're on the run."

The rest should take care of itself.
 
2014-03-28 12:15:44 AM

johnnyrocket: Banks should really be regulated to the point of being stogy and boring. The concept of banks gambling with everyone's cash seems insane.


Ummm... that's all banks can do with their deposits. They loan them out, and hope that the loans get paid back with enough interest to pay the depositors, their own overhead, and make a profit. If they only make the safest loans, they will run out of lendees long before they run out of cash to loan, and they have to pay interest on those deposits. This is what happens when you increase the money supply (either directly or by lowering reserve requirements). And, if you force the interest rate lower than its free market equilibrium point, you make risky loans look less risky.

Increasing the money supply and forcing interest rates below the equilibrium point is a recipe for disaster.

Increasing the money supply and forcing interest rates below the equilibrium point is also government policy.
 
2014-03-28 01:56:36 AM

2wolves: Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?

So that I can look up into their lifeless eyes and wave.


I see the Babylon 5 reference.

Nice.gif
 
2014-03-28 03:14:40 AM

sendtodave: It's nice that the Fed is actually rating banks. That's something.


farking stress test?!?!

How hard is it to just implement controls to prevent excessive leverage and taking on gargantuan amounts of risk?! Every other god damn country does it.
 
2014-03-28 03:17:06 AM

StokeyBob: When they expand the money supply


This is not happening.
 
2014-03-28 03:19:06 AM

DrPainMD: If they only make the safest loans, they will run out of lendees long before they run out of cash to loan, and they have to pay interest on those deposits.


No. They won't.
 
2014-03-28 06:13:34 AM

Ishkur: DrPainMD: If they only make the safest loans, they will run out of lendees long before they run out of cash to loan, and they have to pay interest on those deposits.

No. They won't.


Citationneeded.gif

There are a finite number of people and businesses with solid, AAA credit that want or need loans. If they *needed* cash, in many cases they wouldn't be riskless.

While *I* certainly don't have evidence one way or another that compares the credit worthiness of potential lendees to the amount of capital available to lend, you certainly seem confident that the supply of cash is less than the supply of credit-worthy people to lend to.

So, can you share?
 
2014-03-28 07:21:29 AM
TD Bank is an extremely conservative bank and seems to do well with loans.
 
2014-03-28 08:50:45 AM

Ishkur: StokeyBob: When they expand the money supply


This is not happening.



It sure looks like it to me.

See in earlier times when they introduced fake money into the system during times of war how the value of the real currency fell indicated by the chart moving up.

img.fark.net

The same thing is happening now as you allow those that don't have any money to fire up the fake money presses and print up what ever it takes to get their way.

The money supply is expanding so fast deposits can't account for what the banks are loaning. They seem to me to be false front organizations for the central banks.


Thus the puppet masters testing their strings.
 
2014-03-28 11:23:56 AM

DrPainMD: Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?

"See, old man. I told you they'd never blame us."


Yeah, cause Greenspan was only chairman of the fed under Clinton.

Time for Greenspan to write another "Don't blame me, and allow me to attempt to baffle you with further bullshiate" book.

"I had no idea that the banks would not invest in responsible ways."
 
2014-03-28 11:56:31 AM
We probably need to lend them more money so they can merge and become larger.

www.nextnewdeal.net
 
2014-03-28 12:20:55 PM

StokeyBob: Ishkur: StokeyBob: When they expand the money supply


This is not happening.


It sure looks like it to me.

See in earlier times when they introduced fake money into the system during times of war how the value of the real currency fell indicated by the chart moving up.

[img.fark.net image 600x437]

The same thing is happening now as you allow those that don't have any money to fire up the fake money presses and print up what ever it takes to get their way.

The money supply is expanding so fast deposits can't account for what the banks are loaning. They seem to me to be false front organizations for the central banks.


Thus the puppet masters testing their strings.


You don't understand how fiat currency works, do you?
 
2014-03-28 04:12:12 PM
anfrind:


You don't understand how fiat currency works, do you?

Maybe. Maybe not.

photos.imageevent.com
 
2014-03-28 04:49:46 PM

Ishkur: DrPainMD: If they only make the safest loans, they will run out of lendees long before they run out of cash to loan, and they have to pay interest on those deposits.

No. They won't.


Then where did they get the money to make all the high-risk loans, if they ran out of money making low-risk loans?
 
2014-03-28 04:54:29 PM

netringer: DrPainMD: Therion: Heads on pikes as an example to the others?

"See, old man. I told you they'd never blame us."

Yeah, cause Greenspan was only chairman of the fed under Clinton.

Time for Greenspan to write another "Don't blame me, and allow me to attempt to baffle you with further bullshiate" book.

"I had no idea that the banks would not invest in responsible ways."


A) I couldn't find a photo of Greenspan with all the presidents he served under.
2) Clinton was the one who campaigned on the promise that every person, regardless of creditworthiness or ability to pay, would be able to own his own house.
 
2014-03-28 08:48:26 PM

stratagos: While *I* certainly don't have evidence one way or another that compares the credit worthiness of potential lendees to the amount of capital available to lend, you certainly seem confident that the supply of cash is less than the supply of credit-worthy people to lend to.


You're misreading what I said.

I'm not disputing his assertion that they would run out of lendees before they run out of money, I'm disputing the assertion that they'd only make low risk loans, of their own accord or coerced.

The fallacy in his argument is the opening word: If
 
2014-03-28 09:05:46 PM

monoski: Somehow we will eventually find out banks like Goldman and BofA are just giant pyramid schemes when they collapse and take our economy down with them.


What? Again?
 
2014-03-28 09:08:32 PM

StokeyBob: Ishkur: StokeyBob: When they expand the money supply
It sure looks like it to me.
See in earlier times when they introduced fake money into the system during times of war how the value of the real currency fell indicated by the chart moving up.
[img.fark.net image 600x437]


Gee, I wonder what could have made it sky rocket like that???!? Hmmmmm...

www.fairus.org

You are a god damn dumbass with the most myopic understanding of economics and money on Fark.
 
2014-03-28 09:17:49 PM

StokeyBob: anfrind:
You don't understand how fiat currency works, do you?
Maybe. Maybe not.
[photos.imageevent.com image 536x640]


You must be really tired by now of being proven wrong over and over again every time you post that image.
 
2014-03-28 09:19:45 PM

DrPainMD: Then where did they get the money to make all the high-risk loans, if they ran out of money making low-risk loans?


They didn't.
 
2014-03-28 11:45:12 PM

Ishkur: StokeyBob: Ishkur: StokeyBob: When they expand the money supply
It sure looks like it to me.
See in earlier times when they introduced fake money into the system during times of war how the value of the real currency fell indicated by the chart moving up.
[img.fark.net image 600x437]


Gee, I wonder what could have made it sky rocket like that???!? Hmmmmm...

[www.fairus.org image 362x257]

You are a god damn dumbass with the most myopic understanding of economics and money on Fark.

Let's overlay the two graphs and see if they match up.

farm4.staticflickr.com

Ummmmm... OK.
 
2014-03-28 11:54:23 PM

Ishkur: DrPainMD: Then where did they get the money to make all the high-risk loans, if they ran out of money making low-risk loans?

They didn't.


Now you're arguing both sides of the debate. Either they run out of money before running out of low-risk clients or they don't (and still have money left over after all the low-risk lendees are serviced). Are you saying that they had a pool of low-risk lendees whom they turned away in order to make loans to high-risk lendees, because that is the only other possible option.
 
Displayed 50 of 63 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report