Investors had nary a care in the world today, with the Dow Industrials jumping 348 points and bank stocks finally putting some points on the board. But will that strength persists? Or does a hidden risk loom?
Market Roundup
Let me answer that question with another question: Have you ever read the QBP from the FDIC? Or even heard of it?
I can’t blame you if your answer is “no.” The acronyms stand for the “Quarterly Banking Profile” and the “Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.” The QBP provides a comprehensive portrait of the health of the banking sector every quarter. The FDIC, of course, is the federal agency that provides you and me with deposit insurance on our bank accounts.
We haven’t had to worry about the banking system for some time now. While net interest margins on core lending operations have been under pressure, delinquencies, defaults, and charge-offs have been negligible. Loan growth has been healthy and a decent, if not stellar, economy has generally helped borrowers meet their obligations.
Indeed, only eight FDIC-insured institutions failed in 2015. That was down from 18 a year earlier, and a huge drop from the peak years of 2010 and 2009. Almost 300 banks failed in those two years alone.
So-called “problem institutions” that the FDIC has identified as having financial, operational, or managerial risk also fell to 183 last year. That compares with a peak of 884 from a half-decade earlier, as you can see here:
So what’s the problem? Well, if you’ve been following the financial sector as long as I have, you know that failure is the last step in the process.
First, your borrowers start missing payments. Then if the underlying economy and loan fundamentals are too weak, your attempts to “cure” those delinquencies fail. Only then do you have to charge off your losses, something that erodes bank capital if those losses go above and beyond the reserves you’ve set aside. That, in turn, can push you one step closer to failure.
Bank stocks often start rolling over long before failures peak, too. Case in point: The SPDR S&P Bank ETF (KBE) topped out in the first quarter of 2007, then proceeded to lose a whopping 85% of its value over the next two years. It then began a long, slow climb back even though failures didn’t peak until 2010.
I’m not suggesting we’re on the cusp of a 2007-2009-style collapse. But the latest QBP report does note that provisions for loan and lease losses are rising again. In fact, they climbed for a sixth consecutive quarter to a three-year high of $12 billion.
As for charge-offs, they rose 7% from a year earlier – the first such increase in 22 straight quarters. Commercial and Industrial (C&I) loan charge-offs surged more than 43%, while auto loan charge-offs jumped almost 16%.
In other words, we’re starting to see some fraying around the edges.Â
| “We’re starting to see some fraying around the edges.” |
Energy losses are a key driver of the deterioration now, and some of the commercial real estate and auto sector risks I’ve highlighted could be problems down the road.
So keep an eye on this trend. There haven’t been a lot of Friday afternoon “bank closure” press releases like this one from the FDIC lately. But if the economic weakness in energy broadens out, and it turns out bank executives were too optimistic about their credit exposure, we’re going to see plenty more in coming quarters.
What do you think? Will it be time to talk about bank failures again before long? Or is the industry in good enough shape to weather the current level of credit risk? What do you think about investing in bank stocks here? Are they good bargains? Or is another major leg down looming? Share your thoughts when you have a minute.
|
Is something else responsible for the weak economic outlook, like demographics? Is there another leg down for the energy sector, only in a place few are talking about? You tried to answer those and other questions here at the website in the last 24 hours.
Reader Denise mentioned the demographic impact overseas in these comments: “Europe’s real problem is demographics. There aren’t enough kids born today and that’s going to hurt economic growth.”
In response, Reader Gordon said: “I think couples are getting smarter. They want a decent life for themselves and to not spend it all on raising kids. Being a parent, I will state that kids are a lifetime obligation and there is no real leaving the nest. The government, of course, thinks otherwise and wants you to spend, spend on them all the way from diapers to university.”
As for the reaction from European and U.S. policymakers to slow growth, Reader Al said: “The ECB, and for that matter, the Fed, somehow feel compelled to make changes. In the business world, ‘do nothing’ is a decision, so perhaps the ECB and the Fed should consider doing nothing and allowing the markets to move in and of themselves for a change.
“If anything, a tax cut for manufacturers who have lost business to China may stimulate real employment, therefore allowing the consumer to lead us out of this down market. And yes, when that occurs, the housing sector should also improve.”
Reader Myron also offered this take on the economy and the energy markets: “The economy has been propped up by the Fed’s ZIRP, and held back by the Affordable Care Act. The downturn in oil and natural gas has also had a big impact on confidence, spending and the housing market.
“In 1986, oil prices collapsed, and in 1987, the stock market crashed. I feel oil has bottomed, but natural gas hasn’t and the impact of low natural gas pricing will be the next shoe to fall in the energy sector.”
Thanks for your input. Declining birth rates and a general aging of the population are indeed longer-term issues for advanced societies, particularly in places like Japan. But to me, the biggest issue of all is lackluster income growth. Without substantial wage and salary increases, the U.S. economy (as well as economies in Japan and Europe) is going to continue to struggle. And I don’t see any evidence that disposable, take-home pay is going to accelerate any time soon.
As for monetary policy, Reader Al is right on. If policymakers would just get out of the way, and stop throwing monetary spaghetti at the wall every few weeks to see what sticks, maybe the economy and the markets would gradually heal on their own.
Agree? Disagree? Have anything else to add? Then let me hear about it in the discussion section.
|
European banks continue to melt down, with the U.K.’s Barclays PLC (BCS) the latest today. Its shares tanked 10% in London after the company cut its dividend in half and announced plans to exit its African businesses. The firm’s losses more than doubled to 394 million British pounds (about $548 million) in 2015, and it’s in the process of shedding thousands of jobs via attrition and layoffs.
 In just a couple of hours, we’ll know just how many states Donald Trump won in Super Tuesday elections. A total of 12 states, including Texas, Virginia, Georgia, and Minnesota, are awarding 595 Republican delegates overall. Donald Trump is leading in the polls in most states, though Texas could go to Ted Cruz.
We got more negative news out of China overnight, with the country’s official gauge of factory activity falling for a record seventh month in a row to its lowest level since January 2009. A companion index that tracks the services sector dropped to the lowest since December. But investors took heart in comments from officials saying they wouldn’t further devalue the yuan currency for now.
Also in Asia, Japan held the first auction of longer-term notes paying a negative interest rate. Roughly $19 billion of 10-year notes were sold to yield -0.02%, with talk suggesting “real money” buyers stayed away even as flippers and speculators looked to jump in and then re-sell the notes to the Bank of Japan soon after. Gotta love the unintended consequences of radical monetary policy.
What do you think of the latest news on China’s economy, or the fact Japan is now selling bonds at negative yields? How about these European banks? Will they ever get it together? Do you have any thoughts about the Super Tuesday results, and where the 2016 presidential election goes from here? Let me know in the comment section.
Until next time,
Mike Larson
P.S. Two huge Global Currency Investor “Buy” signals are due NO LATER than THIS WEEK!
Each one has the power to multiply your money more than ten times over — turn every $10,000 invested into more than $100,000:
That’s enough to turn $10,000 into $102,500 … $25,000 into $256,250 … and $50,000 into $512,500!
But only members will receive these all-important trade recommendations.
CLICK THIS LINK for details on Global Currency Investor — and activate your membership while there’s still time to make sure you receive these “Buy” signals the minute we release them!
Recommended Articles by Mike Larson:
Mike Larson graduated from Boston University with a B.S. degree in Journalism and a B.A. degree in English in 1998, and went to work for Bankrate.com. There, he learned the mortgage and interest rates markets inside and out. Mike then joined Weiss Research in 2001. He is the editor of Safe Money Report. He is often quoted by the Washington Post, Reuters, Dow Jones Newswires, Orlando Sentinel, Palm Beach Post and Sun-Sentinel, and he has appeared on CNN, Bloomberg Television and CNBC.
{ 67 comments }
Time to start a FAIR trade “NOT Free trade” premise, NO more cheap labor undercutting our manufactures….
Mike,
Why don’t you talk about the 1999 removal of the The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 as it relates to the bank failures that happened after November 2007?
Repealed under the Guidance and Watchful eye of a certain Bill Clinton lolol
My opinion and that of several prominent economists such as Allan Meltzer and others is that removal of Glass Steagall was a big mistake. Society has an unbelievable propensity to get caught up in the crowd’s movement, kinda like lemmings. At that time most thought we had control of the economy, through the Fed, and we could simply stimulate to get everything we need such as property value growth and stock market growth. 99 was of course the stock market top, and probably the biggest stock mania ever. Now most recognize the bubble that was so obvious but unseen during 99.
The fact is society does not have the capability to recognize a bubble in the midst of the party. So how should we deal with bubbles? Personally my belief is that we should let the bankruptcies happen so that lthe losses are taken by those who are fully leveraged which demonstrates to the populace the foolishness of leverage and excessive money formation.
Sorry Steve its to late for that. That ship has already sailed thanks to NAFTA and now the TPP. Remember all the NAFTA promises of high value jobs that were going to replace them well that never happened either. Big business joined hands with their government allies and danced off into the sunset on this one. You and your fellow workers were left holding the bag. The carpetbaggers of old are not dead they just changed with the times morphed. Sadly your upcoming election offers you little choice. Bernie looks like the only one that wants to help the people the rest are big business shills.
I would like to apologize for inferring last week that Sanders’s line about the one per cent getting wealthy by making everyone else poor was first used by The Bad German. It was actually Vladimir Lenin who first came up with it. Jim
your right Gordon bill Clinton was the one selling NAFTA he said it would bring 300,000 high paying jobs here in the 1st month except he got it a little wrong all those 300,000 high paying jobs went form the united states to mexico in the first month and they have been leaving ever since it was signed
We need to take a more global futuristic view of the world. The past global economy revolved around high priced oil. Now our friends in Saudi Arabia and Iran are selling us low cost energy. Yes; these are the same people who sent the pilots to Canada and then to Boston to crash planes into the World Trade Towers.
Their objective is to put United states oil and gas drillers and fracking companies out of business. We need to take advantage of this by transitioning people to this new low cost energy economy. We have to educate our workers for jobs in manufacturing, chemicals, fertilizer, farming, building and repairing robots for manual labor, cars that drive themselves and eventually personal flying transporters, that run on low cost energy. Many of the oil workers have already been educated and transitioned to jobs building wind turbines and solar energy. Our companies that have to compete with entire countries (China, Russia, North Korea) need Fair Trade policies and protection from dumping so that when the other companies or countries get done dumping and jack the price of energy back up we can go back to fracking for oil and gas. When the economy improves the birth rate goes up creating a new generation of workers that will have pay for their own future Social Security.
Wars are a drag on everyone’s economy. People who are fighting or fleeing wars are not providing goods and services and take away from those who do provide goods and services. Those who flee wars are a great expense for countries who take them in. We need to cut off the finances and resources to those who perpetuate war. Just Declaring (the (right to vote Democracy) does not work. The people who perpetuate wars or dictatorships just vote themselves in.
We need to stop fighting battles and leaving a void for those who perpetuate wars to fill. If we are not going to force people who lose the battle to implement the United States Constitution with the name of the Country Changed and nothing else, then we should not be fighting.
Low energy costs free up money that people can spend on non-energy items. The economy is already improving as a result.
We have to continue to expand the distribution networks from the wells already drilled in the U.S. to customers in the U.S. and around the world.
Check out the excellent debate taking place on OILPRO. The truth about shale and fracking is finally being exposed. It simply costs more to get a barrel of shale oil than it’s worth even at higher prices. Conventional shale wells were drilled thirty years ago and never paid out. The new ones make ten times the oil but take ten times as much to drill and complete and they won’t pay out either. It’s another Fed fueled bubble that has damaged our economy. There is also mounting evidence that prolific fracking is causing earthquakes. Jim
We were waiting for the hockey to come on and we were watching one of those “how is it made” shows. Even my wife, who cares nothing about the economy, pointed out the extreme lack of humans in any of the presented manufacturing plants. “There’s no one there!” Well of course my two sons would be there some where with their computer/mechanical skills in constant demand. Quality control, high production, low freight, just in time service, and an understanding of the local market will make most trade deals dead. Do your part Steve and look for quality local goods and shun crap.
Mike,
I think that your concerns about pending bank failures are well founded.
If you think you are covered by FDIC….think again. There is enough insurance money in the FDIC to cover ONE major bank collapse (with borrowing). ONE. After that, you will probably be on you own. As of Sept 2012, the amount of assets that the fund was attempting to insure amounted to roughly $10.5 Trillion.
It is hard to get current data on the reserves at FDIC but at most, it is probably on the order of $50-60 Billion at best. They can borrow $500 Billion (from us taxpayers, of course) if needed. When WaMu went down a few years back, the potential losses were in excess of $300 Billion. The great hope of the FDIC is that other banks can and will take over the failed banks. That has happened in the past……but if the crash is big enough…..no other bank is going to want to part with the reserves needed to buy those banks when everything is on fire.
There actually was plenty before G.S. was removed. Originally (in 1933) the FDIC was set up to cover Savings Banks…..Investment Banks had to get their own Insurance in the Commercial Market… Then after 1999 and G.S. removed, Investment Banks where added to the coverage and now we have a HUGE problem… :(
There was never “plenty” but there was enough for good times. I actually tend to agree with you on this one, Eagle(!!!!). We have been fighting Big Bank abuses in this country from day one. But…..I would argue that both Dems (like Hillary) and Repubs (like Bush)……are in cahoots with the Big Bank cartel. No party has clean hands on this corrupt mess.
If the banks fade this country will suffer the most severe of dollar devaluation plus this country cannot afford to pay it’s 3.2 triilion debt to China and another 60 trillion in other debt. If our country continues to sue the banks to make the debt payments you will have more issues. Without Banking and the Financials there is NO SAFETY Net for the Dollar instead of destroying ourselves to a demise we should rally and support OUR USA.
Yes the news out of China was not good BUT the government has again made promises to prop things up and the investors flocked in like lambs to the slaughter gulping up the government Kool-Aid. Beware of false gods. Investors in China and other countries still have not figured out the rhythm of things in that country. China again is using the carrot and stick approach rather than deal with the fundamentals of business. Its still a hide and seek economy folks. Mr. Xi has made a tour of all the major media outlets cajoling/warning them not to publish stories that hurt China. Yea ole ship China is starting to list a bit and the captain is battening down the hatches a storm is coming for sure.
One reason fewer banks failed in the last few years is that there are less of them. The Feds force failing banks to sell out to larger, more solvent banks. That is how big banks get bigger and small banks get fewer.
The five biggest banks in the U. S now handle 41 percent of the loans. In 2007-08 they handled 23 percent. The chart with Mike’s article from the FDIC (see page 25 of the QPB at https://www.fdic.gov/bank/analytical/qbp/2015dec/qbp.pdf ) is scary…scarier still is the amount of money lost…$6+ billion in 2015 versus $2+ billion in 2014. The big banks are bigger because the small ones got eaten in the Great Recession and new small banks have not come back…just like other small businesses, there are fewer startups than closures.
Look. No one has mentioned that students who complain about the cost of a college education should get a degree and attend classes on line.
The only real difference is no parties or college sports when you take classes on line.
You can earn a degree on line. Get a real paying job. Very little debt , and not be a slave to what is owed to a college.
Makes sense to me..
Just make sure it is a real accredited college or university….. I took some of mine online ( I had to work.. ) while getting my Business Degree from my state university and it was, indeed, a little cheaper….. Again, beware, lots of “college” scams out there…
Education does not consist of sitting on your ass in solitude answering prompts at a computer screen. Learning happens when you apply and test your research in your chosen career path and also interact and network personally with your professors and your peers. That’s why you pay tuition and attend classes. There’s no free lunch. If you choose to blow it on parties and sports, that’s your loss. Enjoy your “real paying job” stocking shelves at Dollar Tree.
BTW, the conventional spelling is “online”.
Ireland today has its election result. The two conservative parties FF and FG who have a majority of seats dont want to work together . It may take weeks or more to form a Government or there maybe another election !
Hope the financial markets keep faith in our democracy and we dont loose all the hard won economic recovery gained over the past 6 years .
However we must keep the faith and hope our political leaders put Ireland’s interest first and not their political parties. We await with interest !
J
How do they sell a negative rate treasury bond? With a negative interest rate do the buyers pay the government for the privilege of holding their bond? Or do they deduct the negative interest from the face value of the bond every month so hundred dollar bond pays less like ninety eight dollars at maturity? The whole concept makes no sense to me, but I haven’t got a degree in creative accounting either.
It is sold as a “safe” place to park you money (ha-ha). We are now in the era of principal protection as the goal for most investors.
Ted F
At this point the smart money buys gold. You do not buy treasuries the debt of a failing government. God help future generations.
You have the right concept about how markets work. Let the next desperate sucker buy it.
Mike,
Inform on how the banks are invested in derivatives again.
Joe, lets make it even scarier… They are investing in those derivatives with our savings!…
Mike
It could be useful to look at our banks exposures through credit default swaps sold to the European countries.
Joe
Suffice to say they are loaded up to the gunnels. They are all eyeing a chair to sit on once the music stops. Greed never left the banking system in 2008 in only took a hiatus.
THat’s if your want to believe the FDIC numbers. ??????
read them yourself and decide https://www.fdic.gov/bank/analytical/qbp/2015dec/qbp.pdf
Pretty soon there will be no small banking organizations left, only the main Federally backed huge banking facilities. Kind of like all the mom and pop businesses that the federal government has destroyed with huge government taxes and regulations that only the large corporations can afford. Everything points toward a huge Government backed take over of our nation by the richest people in the world. The middle class worker is being taxed to death and replaced by low income workers both legal and illegally in our nation. In the mean time all of our private assets are being seized by the central banking system. Next will be the government bail out with the seizer of our retirement funds.so the big banks can stay solvent.
You might consider voting for the Democratic Candidates….. What brought us here were all Republican Congressional Majority Initiatives also voted for by a few “turncoat” Democrats….. Clinton was one as he signed the Glass-Steagall removal and NAFTA…. :(
Really? You want another Clinton in the White House?
Nope, but I would take Bernie in a heartbeat…. He’s the only one who hasn’t sold his sould to the Super Pacs of the 3%…
I saw a linguistics analysis of the candidates. Ben Carson wins by communicating on a tenth grade level. Mrs. Clinton a fifth grade level. Donald Trump a third grade level. Draw your own conclusions. Jim
The best investment strategy for the next several years will be to own things that are hard to steal. Jim
What is harder to steal than property. Remember that some of the wealthiest people got that way by buying property and leasing/renting it out and never selling. That is still the surest way to wealth.
We have definitely reached “Peak Land”. Jim
Owning and leasing rental property is a labor and capital intensive business. If you aren’t prepared for that reality, you will be on the path to poverty. Obviously you also don’t know that tenants can steal your owner rights to use the property and destroy it also.
william you said it all.
With all the above in mind, we must not forget that there are several trillion on deposit and only a few billion to cover those deposits.
Jim
I have some paper gold that I will sell you for the real thing? Interested. Its the old shell game only there is no pea under one of them. Blows my mind that with all this negative news and thinking the stocked market soared last night on what?? Good news bad news the market now goes up. I find this really scary as the fundamentals of the market have completely disappear and we are now pursing higher prices on government promises of more skin in the game. How much more ridiculous can it get.
The Government needs more of our money and one place I have thought for a while they will take it is from property owners with increases in property taxes. Home owners are captive tax payers who probably don’t want to sell. Forget that lower property values may be a ‘saviour’ the government will simply just change the rules and/or the tax rates as they do with everything. When they need more of our money they will find a way to get it. And, as Harry Dent has said, even without a mortgage you don’t actually own your home if you are delinquent on your property taxes you could lose it.
Increasing property taxes makes politicians rather unpopular with owners, and owners are very likely to vote. A politician has to be pretty stupid to alienate those who vote them into their lush careers. That is why they increase other taxes and fees before they raise property taxes. Taxes on this and fees for that tend to attract less attention, which is why we have so many of them. More all the time.
Agreed. The growth of “fees”, “special district” assessments and other artful tax schemes by gubmint has been enormous. It all goes in the BigGov rathole of oblivion. Excess taxation is destroying the middle class of America. It is done slowly but surely….and we are like the proverbial frogs in the pot.
Here in Louisiana the city and parish ad valorem taxes and fees are equal to what the rent was twenty years ago. We all tend to think we are the only ones being squeezed. It’s happening to everybody. When they take more than half what you make there is no way to get ahead. They still try to tell us we aren’t paying our fair share. Nonsense! Jim
Chuck, I agree it would be unpopular but my point is that the government will get the money from somewhere and property owners are a soft target and to a lot of the country consider property owners are rich.
As I indicated, I think property owners tend to vote more often, especially when their interests are at stake. They are not that “soft” a target for politicians. Of course, a politician might not make property taxes and such a campaign issue, and push one through after the election – but he/she might not survive the next election as a result.
One problem is, confusing Investment Banking Firms, so-called, like Goldman Sachs, AIG, etc., with “real” banks. They were only “anointed” as banks as a result of the 2008 financial crisis so the Feds could regulate them more closely. Then you have Money Center Banks which lend to governments (so you have “country” risks), large corporations (typically through syndications with other money-center banks), and, supposedly, “regular” banks (probably done indirectly through Fed Funds). Then you have Multi-national Banks (including Wells, BofA, JP Morgan Chase, Citibank, U.S. Bancorp, etc.). Then you have regional banks. Then you have community banks. They all have “some” similarities (except the Goldman Sachs and AIGs), but many differences and many different risk profiles. More than I can get into in a comment. But investors should make sure they know “what” they’re looking at, and not lump everything into one basket called “banks.”
That was a big rally. I never heard of stealth bear market before. WE will know soon if this is a great fake or the real deal.
As for the effect of auto loans on banks – not so much as you might think. Banks don’t give auto loans to people they don’t think will pay them back. There are other entities doing the junk loans, often owned by the auto makers, who want to sell as many cars as possible, hence are willing to take more chances of a loss. Such losses won’t affect the makers’ bottom lines as much. ( Oddly, I originally typed “bottom LIES”. Maybe not so far wrong.)
I worked for the FDIC for seven years. Huge corruption in management and the CAMELS (capital, assets, management, earnings, liquidity, sensitivity to market risk) ratings. Then you had to examine the bank secrecy act. Lots of fraud and back scratchin between bankers and senior FDIC managers, who had bonuses tied to the number of well capitalized and well run banks.
According to the chart, the last four entries are for Q1 thru Q4 of 2015 and total to 867!
it really does not matter. The Great Experiment is over it failed. With Trillions in debt and only billions of dollars to cover it…there will be riots in the streets when the banks close and tell the people…” sorry no money”….America is finished kaput. I get many Wealth blogs emailed to me daily. I was shocked when recently so many were giving advice about living abroad having a second pass port. Unfortunately…I am dead…a former middle class executive who got burned by the economy. Now, when the society collapses…I have no money to bail out of the country and go to my second home in a another country, I have two choices, get killed by the zombies’ who will revolt and rob and loot the burbs where I live from their nest..the city or put on the gas jets…and hope the gas jets get me before the zombies do. With Trump and Clinton as the two contenders…there is no hope that there will be a turn around. There were a few real candidates in the crowd but the BS and the biased media has crushed them. Its now Trump or Clinton…no hope there for the salvation of the USA…
Regardless of how many of you feel about the Banks,I would place my faith in them WAY before I would trust the Government–at least banks attempt to make a profit,ever more difficult these days,while government fools only know the way of the profligate spendthrift!
“Each one has the power to multiply your money more than ten times over — turn every $10,000 invested into more than $100,000: ”
Yup, that’s if you trade a standard lot leveraged by 10x. If you trade on the wrong side of the trend, you will end up owing “more than $100,000”.
Ooops, forgot to mention that possibility?
A problem with living on debt money is that more debt is needed to pay off the old. Its a vicious perpetual cycle that either lasts forever or turns around one day. If it lasts forever then the debt burden perpetually grows forever and repaying the interest (lest the principal) also grows in tandem. This ensures that governments around will need to create new means and ways of increasing the taxation base on their respective populations. If the issuance of debt turns around and stops, then there is no more new fresh money available to pay off the old loans interest and a vicious downward spiral ensues. The only way to pay off the debt then is with real tangible assets. Either way, the people are on the losing end.
Mike, look at the derivatives in these banks its a casino it just takes one of them to blow up, they never learn from the past.
I agree with a number of readers above that the removal of Glass- Steagall Act in 1993 is the main cause of all the chaos in the financial sector. If they’re engaging in dubious activities (securitization, creation of SPVs…) FDIC money won’t be enough to cover for all these losses, but,in the end, aren’t we, the taxpayers, paying for it?
I think we are facing a bear market with oil prices falling, unemployment rising and ZIRP and NIRP having no effect. To my mind, the only cure for the economy is job creation to stimulate spending and tax reduction to stimulate investment and boost enterpreneurial activity.
Ivana,
1993 took a little bit og G.S…. 1999 took the rest…… Republican Congressional Majority Initiative voted on by every Republican and a few Democrats (Veto Proof Majority)… Turn coat Clinton signed it, when he should have vetoed it…..
Big Deal: ONLY Bernie Sanders (and Elizabeth Warren) is/are championing the reinstatement of Glass-Steagall. If ever there was a compelling reason to vote for Bernie Sanders, that is it….. Without G.S., we are sure to have another Stock Market Crash and Depression
Yahoo Finance has a rundown of Mr. Trump’s campaign promises, this morning – worth reading – and many of them are worth consideration – other than his Iron Curtain on the Mexican border, and his “countervailing” tariffs against China – which would simply be countervailed by China, to the detriment of U.S. exporters to that country. Remember though, these are campaign promises, and subject to change or forgetting. Mr. Obama made a number of promises, and to his credit(?) he has followed through on some of them. Are we happy with the result?
We sell little to China. they sell a LOT to us……. Other than Obamacare in his first term, Obama has been able to get little passed through the “do nothing” GOP Majority Congress of his 2nd administration… While he has cut Federal Spending, the needed tax increases on the 3% have failed to pass a Congress that is so funded by those same 3%….
If he’d reinstated Glass-Steagall in his first administration I’m guessing he would have still had a Maority in his 2nd…… Unfortunate that his advisors did not realize the huge response that Obamacare brought… :(.
Anybody have any concrete reasons why the candidates other than Bernie will bring legislation aimed at reducing our deficit and returning taxes on the 3% back to where they were in 1980 before our deficit began to go parabolic since Reagan had not the will to cut Federal Spending, even when he had a Republican Majority Congress…
hey quit your lying Eagle 495 you forgot to mention the democrats controlled the senate from 2004 -2014 and that the democrats controlled the congress from 2004-2010 and ….. barack Obama got nothing passed when everything was in control of the democrats………. that was the presidency ….congress ………….and the senate and you say Obama cut FEDERAL spending IS THAT WHY LITERALLY IN 7 YRS Obama has managed to double the national debt his new budget he put out in January was for 4.1 trillion dollars you are completely misinformed eagle495 Bernie sanders plans on spending another 30 trillion dollars he still thinks we are a creditor nation ALAS ………….. Bernie and eagle495 we are now a debtor nation over 19 trillion in debt on the national debt and over 101 trillion in debt in our unfunded liabilities the reckless spending habits of the democrats have buried our future generations under a mountain of unpayable debt
Back to your trailer hawk… Nice spelling and sentence structure also… Geezzz… Where did you read that ? On a Rush site? Ever do your own do diligence? Consider it for a change, aye?
Despite all the posture regulatory oversight for retail investor in Canada is a patchwork mess basics like vetting contracts for compliance with statutes is non existent. Vetting for dealer broker compliance with protocol for outsourced third party vendors to ensure goods products and services meet compliance standards also missing and the industry still believes the only investors worth protecting are those using advisors or purchasing mutual funds. The legislation is surprisingly current re investor and capital market issues but the enforcement there of is lax. There is no guarantee from province to province that there will be the same level of protection for an investor. And while some groups are working to try to harmonize. Under a federal umbrella other are still guarding their jurisdictional freedoms. The main reason Canada boasts about its solid banks is that they had to reform after several failedd. Late in the 1980 s but as for retail investor protections especially for those who try side step the costs and issues re advisors. Forget about it
The big bear attack will be back.