Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John Pitera who wrote (135214)	8/24/2017 4:59:55 AM
From: TobagoJack	1 Recommendation Recommended By bart13 Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218030

re <<"yes, well you see the thing is that I don't think that we need any reaping"...........>> :0) grew up on that show. they really do not make them like the way they used to and i am beginning to sound aged. something has to break, and maybe already broken, but ... the market keeps going ... not down we wait as would good hunters we wait, until we see the red threads in the white of their frightened eyes, and when their silent screams loudest

To: John Pitera who wrote (135214)	8/24/2017 11:30:50 AM
From: Elroy Jetson	Respond to of 218030

A remarkable recent interview in the Financial Times with Fed vice-chairman Stanley Fischer argued that the United States’ political system “may be taking us in a direction that is very dangerous”. Referring to moves to roll back elements of the new regulatory order established in response to the debacles of 2008-09, he lamented that “everybody wants to go back to the status quo before the great financial crisis”. And he declared that “one cannot understand why grown intelligent people reach the conclusion that you should get rid of all the things you have put in place in the last 10 years.” This is remarkable language, which merits deconstruction. Fischer cannot possibly mean literally that “everybody” wants to return to the status quo ante. The academic community is mainly in favour of even tighter regulation of banks, with higher capital requirements. With few exceptions, the press is even more hawkish. Furthermore, I do not know a single bank chairman who thinks that going back to leverage ratios above 40, and tier 1 capital of 2%, would make any sense at all. The only concrete proposals to emerge from the administration so far are in a thoughtful paper published in June by the US Treasury. It is true that the paper’s title, A Financial System that Creates Economic Opportunities, has a political flavour; but the specific ideas it floats are not exactly those found on the wilder shores where “free banking” advocates roam. The authors of the paper – which was signed by Mnuchin himself – want to reform the complex and overlapping patchwork of regulatory agencies left in place since the crisis. Former Fed chair Paul Volcker, hardly a lobbyist for investment banks, has been making the same argument for some time. The paper also recommends some rationalisation of the extremely complex rule books, relieving some simpler banks of the most burdensome and costly processes, and reducing the number of required regulatory submissions and stress test exercises. One can argue about the details, but, overall, this does not look like a return to a pre-crisis free-for-all. There is no suggestion in the paper that capital requirements should be significantly lowered, though it does recommend that the capital surcharge for systemically important banks should be “re-evaluated.” The one worrying section, concerns international capital standards, which should be accepted and implemented only if they “meet the needs of the US financial system and the American people”. As the Fed authored these "foreign standards" known as the Basel accord, it's not clear who would decide whether the Fed's standards are in the interests of the American people.

To: John Pitera who wrote (135214)	8/24/2017 12:11:45 PM
From: Pogeu Mahone	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218030

Thanks John That is so funny. "The Meaning of Life"...... chapter 7 was Death....

To: John Pitera who wrote (135214)	8/29/2017 6:19:57 PM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 218030

am unsure of the economic effect of the houston natural disaster that may soon be exacerbated by human intervention whilst in another corner of the arena the amazon induced price drop for a sector famous for extremely thin margins may tip over a slew of competitors, and their bonds, which would lead on to ... and over it all, n.korea always wished for 1-on-1 dialogue w/ the team usa, but team usa had always shied away from mano-a-mano, preferring either to not-talk, alt-talk, or 5-parties talk now looks to the untrained eyes that n.korea not only got what it wished for, one-on-one with team america, and better, kim-on-trump tweet storming, we can suggest a new strategy, that trump keeps tweeting, triggering more n.korean missile launches, thus exhausting supply, i guess funnies aside, the rocket lobbed across japan seems to have violated sovereignty by over-flight. am unsure what overflight definition stops and satellite in failed orbit starts, but yes, the music tempo sped up a bit it would seem that team usa best materially react to such provocation, and not by simply more failed sanctioning, shouts, and exercises on the beaches nearby, else folks around the region may feel alliance w/ the usa is a liability or alt-asset, and should such become prevalent, what would happen to the usd, that secret weapon of level-field competition? am selling the last bit of my paper gold this day, to better ready to buy paper gold later however, am holding on for macro-reasons all physical, and fully intend to add more in line with realisation of paper profit