Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What's wrong with this and how does it differ from the Administration's plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-30-09 12:01 PM
Original message
What's wrong with this and how does it differ from the Administration's plan
Edited on Mon Mar-30-09 12:29 PM by ProSense
This is a piece written befor the official unveiling of the plan:

Nowadays a lot of banks have the bulk of their assets funded by things that are not deposits. Indeed at many banks deposits constitute less than half the balance sheet.

The old FDIC guarantee can’t stop runs because the run that happens is wholesale – it happens outside FDIC guarantee limit. If you want to stop bank runs the way that the original FDIC stopped bank runs you need to bite the “Swedish Bullet” – that is you need to effectively guarantee everything.

<...>

However just as the creation of the FDIC did not require you to be “prepared to put all troubled banks in receivership” a Swedish guarantee also does not require you to put all troubled banks into receivership.

What the FDIC guarantee required – and what a Swedish Guarantee will require – is you be prepared to (a) regulate banks heavily on an ongoing basis, (b) test the capital of banks, (c) force them to be adequately capitalised (rasing money if they can), and (d) nationalise the banks that cannot raise adequate capital.

When the good times return you probably need walk away from this general guarantee. In other words you have to regulate banks in such a way that they can’t become large enough to destroy the whole economy - so that you reduce the systemic risk at the cost of stifling "financial innovation". That means that the recidivist Citigroup – a bank that seems to blow up every cycle – will never be allowed to become as big and nasty again. It would be a terrible policy outcome if we did not learn from this crisis and did not regulate in such a way that it was less likely to happen again. Willem Buiter's call for "over regulation of banks" looks right to me.

Krugman’s illogic however does not help the debate. There is a need to guarantee all banking assets – and it should be done provided it is affordable. There is no consequent need to nationalise the whole system – though there will be a need to have a process which will result in nationalisation of some institutions – what I call nationalisation after due process.

(Emphasis added)

The underlined section reads like the Geithner plan. More here, including Krugman's response.

How is the above underlined section different from the administration's plan, expanded authority and regulatory reform?


Edited for clarity.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-30-09 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
1. No comment? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aloha Spirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-30-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
2. ...
ha, well, I tried to read it, but couldn't figure out what the source of the block quote is or what the point was... my eyes are going all blurry on me!
too much internets
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-30-09 12:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. The source is linked at "here"
No emphasis at the link, easier to read.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC