Deposit insurance is there to avoid runs on banks, where depositors all want to cash in all at once. But the key word is "cash", i.e. the number each of us sees at the #ATM machine or on the bank site as his own cash balance. However that's not cash. (/)
I have seen grandiose public plans about financial education, and deposit insurance is an ex post measure.. non one vaccinated citizens by telling them the truth: "when you deposit cash at a bank, you are LENDING them the money (which ceases to be yours). The bank invests it."(/)
That has advantages even when there is no interest: safety (better than under the mattress), convenience of payments, fast opportunity to transfer/invest the money, etc. Oh, you lose all privacy of course, and banking is a prime target for hacking. Single point of failure.(/)
Yet, you don't NEED any more transparency than now to know what banks do with the money you lent it: invest it, of course. Thst doesn't mean you cannot. The trouble is explaining to Joe Soap that his bank is both his provider AND HIS COMPETITOR.(/)
Why? Because if Joe Soap buys Treasuries, those get booked in HIS name separate from the bank balance sheet. If ALL those "poor" VC entrepreneurs had had the SAME long duration Treasuries that sunk #SVG, they'd be mildly annoyed that it will be a while before they transfer(/)
To another bank in their name and that bank won't be of their own choosing , as it happens here...a bit more slowly. You know why that public information campaign is not first priority, don't you?😈
Now, the vast majority of citizens don't HAVE cash balances exceeding 250k.(/)
So, for the avoidance of doubt, a full deposit bailout is not saving elderly grannies who need to pinch pennies to see the end of the week on a full belly. It saves people who didn't do their homework on cash management risk, and central banks who CHOSE this calculated risk:(/)
"We won't tell people that over treshold they shoud buy a financial instrument, preferably not something risqué, a T-bill would do, because that would reduce money available TO the banking system, and their profitability.(/)
But we will have to twist and change rules on the fly if we don't. Remove the treshold now, a pandora's box of malinvestment is unleashed on citizens as taxpayer, potentially leading to our heads on the block. So we will render law meaningless, with help from lawmakers.(/)
Eric, we've been through a decade of easy money, finance centric solutions of 2008 which was the key to the deindustrialization of the west. Now to some extent is better and to some is worse.(/)
The better part is that goods producing companies have NEVER returned to the blind trust in the banking system they had before. Less leverage, and slamming the door in bank salesmen's faces helped. (/)
Of course there is a whole section of equities which are more financial than Casino chips, but with #Zirp and #NIRP that couldn't be helped. I am not so pessimistic about the industrial base in the #US (#Europe is a different Bedlam). (/)
"you need to have a longer time horizon" roughly translates in my book in "Run for your lives !!".
For one, if you are a final saver... you rarely HAVE a time horizon, nor you need one. Incidentally that's proof of who wrote #MIFID.(/)
MIFID questionnaires have a mandatory section on time horizon. Why that measure? because while for an individual saver that concept is basically meaningless, for those meant to be KEPT from pushing unnecessary risk onto savers it's daily bread.(/)
Banks indeed have time horizons and time preferences well and truly planted into their brains since they have a teeny weeny share capital, and finance their assets through the issuance of debt. They indeed try to match maturities across assets and liabilities. (/)
Piece 2: an offshore wind farm big enough to have similar peak production, its attendant connections between individual windmills and the shore, plus all the attendant on-demand conventional production gas turbines on standby. plus expected life of the plant.(/)
It's not the first time that an #EU country imposes an extraordinary, TARGETED tax on energy companies profit. And as always, if there is a way to eff up, you can count on us Italians being the tip of the spear. One was imposed by then minister #Tremonti in June 2008. (/)
gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2008/08… in it, there was a surtax on only energy companies, quite similar to what it is proposed here. That law was then declared unconstitutional in 2015... only for the future. (/)
A mix of desperate need and marketing. It takes a willing suspension of disbelief to think that institutions the size of #Blackrock or #Vanguard actually manage money. To all practical purposes they are barges down a river, they depend on the current. (/)
As long as markets are reasonably favorable, that is not readily apparent. Amazingly, even events like 2022, with BOTH bonds and stocks falling more or less equally, are not a problem. That changes if one of two things happen:(/)
1. Bonds tank while equities lose small change: 2. For some reasons savers get rid of intermediaries and invest directly.
Both flavors of #MIFID work against 2. I won't even wonder if that's collateral damage or it was by design. (/)
#Italy DECLARES, according to #Eurostat principles, an higher GDP etc.
Yet, as @michaelxpettis asserted today about #China; 1. Most of it is "directed" by the government; 2. "Government" GDP measures activity, not value added, and it's usually one for one with debt. (/)
As such, just google "Italian GDP and Debt to GDP" , and see what happens; #Italy has lost two decades vs. The rest of the #EU , in a "the tortoise and the SLOWER tortoise" parody of "the Tortoise and the hare". (/)
In fact, it could be construed that #Italy's business model is this: compressing sector growth from future years into the present one forcibly ( see the 110% house energy efficiency fiscal incentive), coupled with a "private success must be punished" bent.(/)