The Bank of England and FDIC unveil the first cross-border plan to deal with too-big-to-fail...

This news story has 21 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »

davidingeorgia Comments (2713)
 
I hope the folks who worked on these rules don't actually hold their breath waiting for these to be followed when another too-big-to-succeed bank (that also just happens to be a huge political contributor) fails (and they will fail). It'll never get done this way. The taxpayer will get stuck with the bailout bill yet again. Well, if taxpayers actually have any money left to have stolen by the government by that point.
10 Dec 2012, 06:30 AM Reply Like

Ted Bear Comments (436)
 
There's a novel idea. I guess throwing the world into a multi year recession will start people thinking logically.

Imagine if we had done the right thing in 2008/09 and written these fucktards off, let the shareholders (instead of the taxpayers taking a multi-trillion dollar shafting) take a trillion dollar hickey, and moved along?

The world would be a significantly different looking place in 2012, and we would have been four years into recovery instead of still swirling around the drain with a mountain of debt, zombie banks, and global financial collapse.
10 Dec 2012, 07:01 AM Reply Like

Getzeman Comments (34)
 
Unemployment would be 25% today if we had let our commercial banks fail. They paid everything back in a year because their insolvency was only based on mark-to-market accounting.

The mortgage problem was created by Congress and Wall Street, not the commercial banks. Nobody in this country knows the difference.
10 Dec 2012, 08:02 AM Reply Like

SHANE06 Comments (24)
 
I am so relieved to see that someone else has the right perspective on the 2008 debacle . Congrats Getzeman, i agree wholeheartedly with you.
10 Dec 2012, 08:27 AM Reply Like

myother Comments (2)
 
The too big to fail banks were created when the glass-steagall act was repealed 1999.
10 Dec 2012, 08:39 AM Reply Like

bankman1948 Comments (6)
 
Good call Getzeman! If it were not for the likes of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd we never would have had the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) which forced the lenders to loan money to people who could not afford to pay it back so they could own their own home. Lets sell cars to everyone that cannot afford one so all of us will have cars, and maybe cell phones and computers to those who cannot afford them so they can go on the net and text their friends. It is just a bunch of CRAP by the politicians to get votes. We should vote them all out and start fresh.
10 Dec 2012, 01:52 PM Reply Like

SHANE06 Comments (24)
 
Come on Bear, the Banks have repaid their borrowings with handsome gains for the Govt and through them the taxpayers, Don't forget the banks were forced by Congress to lend to' taxpayers' who couldn't afford homeownership, and it is the same 'taxpayers' who contributed to the crisis by not paying their mortgages.
16 Dec 2012, 10:46 AM Reply Like

MohanTX Comments (61)
 
Too big to fail, implies that the bank is so big that it would impact the whole US economy adversely. The derivative trading by these banks should be prohibited and they should have an internal wall between basic banking and investment banking.

High capital requirements would force these banks to earn less and it is possible that they may split up. But, right now, if I go to a local Chase Bank, they want to manage my savings and 401 K accounts. And they can make a lot of money managing these funds....
So, congress dances to the tune of money contributions and US citizens will never get Glass Seagull type regulations back. If UBS can sell stocks in USA, so can Chase and Wells Fargo. The lobbying by these banks in 2009 was very intense and was backed by big money.
But, that is how democracy supposed to work or works in real life
. They are like Muslim Brotherhood of USA and have changed rules to favor them.... Hell with doing what is right or ethical....




10 Dec 2012, 07:01 AM Reply Like

tonycordello Comments (2)
 
Isn't the government getting paid back with interest?
10 Dec 2012, 08:20 AM Reply Like

Lilliana Comments (57)
 
Havn't the shareholders and the trusting pensioners lost everything anyway by the lack of responsible and ethical actions by the bank executives and cloned directors.?
10 Dec 2012, 08:31 AM Reply Like

spybreaker Comments (235)
 
So it's a government take over and any investor who bought stock will get kicked out. Nothing like "buy and hold" for banks. Good thing I just sold my banking stocks and booked profit.
10 Dec 2012, 08:46 AM Reply Like

idkmybffjill Comments (574)
 
And how is that different from buy and hold in any company that approaches bankruptcy? It isn't...
10 Dec 2012, 09:18 AM Reply Like

spybreaker Comments (235)
 
But it sounds like a government can force a take over if they think a bank is going down. Just like they forced some banks to take a bail out even though they didn't want to.
10 Dec 2012, 11:43 AM Reply Like

plambert4 Comment (1)
 
Very little fed funds went to banks (some foreign), most went to welfare,unemployment, food stamps, and to states to prevent layoffs to state employees. Also to insurance companies-AIG.
10 Dec 2012, 11:57 AM Reply Like

Maj4 Comment (1)
 
Reality Check! ....."Big Brother" is on the march.
11 Dec 2012, 01:53 AM Reply Like

Lee Siu Hoi Comments (25)
 
It is amazing! I guess they mean HSBC. If HSBC is a country, it would be the size somewhere close to Oman or Syria. Is it too big to fail? Well, Syria is failing anyway whether it is too big to fail or not. I guess they want to fire Assad yesterday, if only they could.
11 Dec 2012, 07:03 AM Reply Like

gwynfryn Comments (1852)
 
Sure, but it won't be Americans starving if Syria collpases!

What I'd like to know is, when: "Senior management would be sacked", would that be with or without the usual golden parachute "failure award"?
11 Dec 2012, 12:42 PM Reply Like

Lee Siu Hoi Comments (25)
 
If UK Government bails out a bank, then they have the right to sack anyone. But UK Government does not have enough money to bail out HSBC so why on earth they think they have the right to sack anyone?

Legislators should make Golden Parachute illegal if a company fails to make money. This is regardless of company size, large or small or whether it is a bank or not.
13 Dec 2012, 11:40 AM Reply Like

gwynfryn Comments (1852)
 
I'd go even further; why give bonuses when they're only doing what they've already been (over) paid to do?
14 Dec 2012, 08:53 AM Reply Like

tonycordello Comments (2)
 
The national regulators will give up their supervision of the largest banks in their country to the ECB in Brussels. I don't think so.
14 Dec 2012, 08:46 AM Reply Like

Lee Siu Hoi Comments (25)
 
That is not how they see things. Regulators are accountable to politicians and politicians sometimes see troubled banks as political liabilities. To big to fail banks are too big to fail political liabilities.
18 Dec 2012, 03:57 AM Reply Like