Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]


Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 10
GFC II GFC2 New Global Financial Crisis Mark 2 Alert; Almost half of Australians believe world is on cusp of another financial crisis
Topic Started: 27 Jun 2011, 01:21 PM (14,296 Views)
newjez
Member Avatar


raveswei
6 Jul 2011, 05:15 PM
b_b
6 Jul 2011, 03:36 PM
Australia (nor any other major economy) does NOT have a fractional reserve banking system.

Banks do not lend reserves. Banks expand the money supply endogenously.

For more, this is a very useful explanation
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10733
right,
banks keep deposits and create (from thin air) money that they lend
They don't exactly lend money from thin air. Any money lent by a bank will eventually find it's way back to a bank, and some of that money will be lent again. That is how banks work, and as long as the interest rates take into consideration the risks of the loans, it all works very well. The problem with the GFC is that some banks were lending more than was being deposited, and the risks of these loans were unknown.
Whenever you have an argument with someone, there comes a moment where you must ask yourself, whatever your political persuasion, 'am I the Nazi?'
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
b_b
Default APF Avatar


newjez
6 Jul 2011, 06:31 PM
They don't exactly lend money from thin air. Any money lent by a bank will eventually find it's way back to a bank, and some of that money will be lent again. That is how banks work, and as long as the interest rates take into consideration the risks of the loans, it all works very well. The problem with the GFC is that some banks were lending more than was being deposited, and the risks of these loans were unknown.
100% incorrect.

It is impossible for a bank to lend more than deposited - their balance sheet would not balance.

If you ever take out a loan you will note you will have two accounts. Loan and deposit. Both are created at the same time.

For more please read
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10733

or this
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/
Edited by b_b, 7 Jul 2011, 12:41 AM.
(S – I) + (T - G) + (M - X) = 0
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
AK4
Default APF Avatar


b_b
7 Jul 2011, 12:31 AM
100% incorrect.

It is impossible for a bank to lend more than deposited - their balance sheet would not balance.

If you ever take out a loan you will note you will have two accounts. Loan and deposit. Both are created at the same time.

For more please read
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10733

or this
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/
I still find it amazing that this basic key point is overlooked by so many when describing monetary systems and the creation of money.

I have had many very long discussions with people working in senior positions of treasury departments of banks who overlook this point.
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
b_b
Default APF Avatar


AK4
7 Jul 2011, 01:18 AM
I still find it amazing that this basic key point is overlooked by so many when describing monetary systems and the creation of money.

I have had many very long discussions with people working in senior positions of treasury departments of banks who overlook this point.
Agree.

Nice to hear from you AK

what are you doing up so late?
(S – I) + (T - G) + (M - X) = 0
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
AK4
Default APF Avatar


b_b
7 Jul 2011, 01:22 AM
Agree.

Nice to hear from you AK

what are you doing up so late?
Hi b_b :bye:

There's always some work around that manages to keep me busy!

Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
newjez
Member Avatar


b_b
7 Jul 2011, 12:31 AM
newjez
6 Jul 2011, 06:31 PM
They don't exactly lend money from thin air. Any money lent by a bank will eventually find it's way back to a bank, and some of that money will be lent again. That is how banks work, and as long as the interest rates take into consideration the risks of the loans, it all works very well. The problem with the GFC is that some banks were lending more than was being deposited, and the risks of these loans were unknown.
100% incorrect.

It is impossible for a bank to lend more than deposited - their balance sheet would not balance.

If you ever take out a loan you will note you will have two accounts. Loan and deposit. Both are created at the same time.

For more please read
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=10733

or this
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/01/31/therovingcavaliersofcredit/
This is probably the best explaination I've read, It's a bit long so I'll just post the link.

http://gregpytel.blogspot.com/2009/04/largest-heist-in-history.html

What you say may be true for Australian banks.
Whenever you have an argument with someone, there comes a moment where you must ask yourself, whatever your political persuasion, 'am I the Nazi?'
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
Admin
Member Avatar
Administrator

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-next-worse-financial-crisis-2011-07-06?dist=beforebell

Quote:
 
July 6, 2011, 8:57 a.m. EDT

The next, worse financial crisis

By Brett Arends, MarketWatch

BOSTON (MarketWatch) — The last financial crisis isn’t over, but we might as well start getting ready for the next one.

Sorry to be gloomy, but there it is.

1. We are learning the wrong lessons from the last one. Was the housing bubble really caused by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Community Reinvestment Act, Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, “liberals” and so on? That’s what a growing army of people now claim. There’s just one problem. If so, then how come there was a gigantic housing bubble in Spain as well? Did Barney Frank cause that, too (and while in the minority in Congress, no less!)? If so, how? And what about the giant housing bubbles in Ireland, the U.K. and Australia? All Barney Frank? And the ones across Eastern Europe, and elsewhere? I’d laugh, but tens of millions are being suckered into this piece of spin, which is being pushed in order to provide cover so the real culprits can get away. And it’s working.

2. No one has been punished. Executives like Dick Fuld at Lehman Brothers and Angelo Mozilo at Countrywide , along with many others, cashed out hundreds of millions of dollars before the ship crashed into the rocks. Predatory lenders and crooked mortgage lenders walked away with millions in ill-gotten gains. But they aren’t in jail. They aren’t even under criminal prosecution. They got away scot-free. As a general rule, the worse you behaved from 2000 to 2008, the better you’ve been treated. And so the next crowd will do it again. Guaranteed.

3. The incentives remain crooked. People outside finance — from respected political pundits like George Will to normal people on Main Street — still don’t fully get this. Wall Street rules aren’t like Main Street rules. The guy running a Wall Street bank isn’t in the same “risk/reward” situation as a guy running, say, a dry-cleaning shop. Take all our mental images of traditional American free-market enterprise and put them to one side. This is totally different. For the people on Wall Street, it’s a case of heads they win, tails they get to flip again. Thanks to restricted stock, options, the bonus game, securitization, 2-and-20 fee structures, insider stock sales, “too big to fail” and limited liability, they are paid to behave recklessly, and they lose little — or nothing — if things go wrong.

4. The referees are corrupt. We’re supposed to have a system of free enterprise under the law. The only problem: The players get to bribe the refs. Imagine if that happened in the NFL. The banks and other industries lavish huge amounts of money on Congress, presidents and the entire Washington establishment of aides, advisers and hangers-on. They do it through campaign contributions. They do it with $500,000 speaker fees and boardroom sinecures upon retirement. And they do it by spending a fortune on lobbyists — so you know that if you play nice when you’re in government, you too can get a $500,000-a-year lobbying job when you retire. How big are the bribes? The finance industry spent $474 million on lobbying last year alone, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

5. Stocks are skyrocketing again. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index SPX +0.10% has now doubled from the March 2009 lows. Isn’t that good news? Well, yes, up to a point. Admittedly, a lot of it is just from debasement of the dollar (when the greenback goes down, Wall Street goes up, and vice versa). And we forget there were huge rallies on Wall Street during the bear markets of the 1930s and the 1970s, as there were in Japan in the 1990s. But the market boom, targeted especially toward the riskiest and junkiest stocks, raises risks. It leaves investors less room for positive surprises and much more room for disappointment. And stocks are not cheap. The dividend yield on the S&P is just 2%. According to one long-term measure — “Tobin’s q,” which compares share prices with the replacement cost of company assets — shares are now about 70% above average valuations. Furthermore, we have an aging population of Baby Boomers who still own a lot of stocks, and who are going to be selling as they near retirement.

6. The derivatives time bomb is bigger than ever — and ticking away. Just before Lehman collapsed, at what we now call the height of the last bubble, Wall Street firms were carrying risky financial derivatives on their books with a value of an astonishing $183 trillion. That was 13 times the size of the U.S. economy. If it sounds insane, it was. Since then we’ve had four years of panic, alleged reform and a return to financial sobriety. So what’s the figure now? Try $248 trillion. No kidding. Ah, good times.

7. The ancient regime is in the saddle. I have to laugh whenever I hear Republicans ranting that Barack Obama is a “liberal” or a “socialist” or a communist. Are you kidding me? Obama is Bush 44. He’s a bit more like the old man than the younger one. But look at who’s still running the economy: Bernanke. Geithner. Summers. Goldman Sachs. J.P. Morgan Chase. We’ve had the same establishment in charge since at least 1987, when Paul Volcker stood down as Fed chairman. Change? What “change”? (And even the little we had was too much for Wall Street, which bought itself a new, more compliant Congress in 2010.)

8. Ben Bernanke doesn’t understand his job. The Fed chairman made an absolutely astonishing admission at his first press conference. He cited the boom in the Russell 2000 Index RUT +0.43% of risky small-cap stocks as one sign “quantitative easing” had worked. The Fed has a dual mandate by law: low inflation and low unemployment. Now, apparently, it has a third: boosting Wall Street share prices. This is crazy. If it ends well, I will be surprised.

9. We are levering up like crazy. Looking for a “credit bubble”? We’re in it. Everyone knows about the skyrocketing federal debt, and the risk that Congress won’t raise the debt ceiling next month. But that’s just part of the story. U.S. corporations borrowed $513 billion in the first quarter. They’re borrowing at twice the rate that they were last fall, when corporate debt was already soaring. Savers, desperate for income, will buy almost any bonds at all. No wonder the yields on high-yield bonds have collapsed. So much for all that talk about “cash on the balance sheets.” U.S. nonfinancial corporations overall are now deeply in debt, to the tune of $7.3 trillion. That’s a record level, and up 24% in the past five years. And when you throw in household debts, government debt and the debts of the financial sector, the debt level reaches at least as high as $50 trillion. More leverage means more risk. It’s Econ 101.

10. The real economy remains in the tank. The second round of quantitative easing hasn’t done anything noticeable except lower the exchange rate. Unemployment is far, far higher than the official numbers will tell you (for example, even the Labor Department’s fine print admits that one middle-aged man in four lacks a full-time job — astonishing). Our current-account deficit is running at $120 billion a year (and hasn’t been in surplus since 1990). House prices are falling, not recovering. Real wages are stagnant. Yes, productivity is rising. But that, ironically, also helps keep down jobs.

You know what George Santayana said about people who forget the past. But we’re even dumber than that. We are doomed to repeat the past not because we have forgotten it but because we never learned the lessons to begin with.

Brett Arends is a senior columnist for MarketWatch and a personal-finance columnist for the Wall Street Journal.
Follow OzPropertyForum on Twitter | Like APF on Facebook | Circle APF on Google+
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
b_b
Default APF Avatar


newjez
7 Jul 2011, 01:43 AM
This is probably the best explaination I've read, It's a bit long so I'll just post the link.

http://gregpytel.blogspot.com/2009/04/largest-heist-in-history.html

What you say may be true for Australian banks.
I read the first few paragraphs of the artcile. I'm sorry but its premise is fundamentally flawed.

There is no money multiplier.

Banks do no lend from reserves.

When a bank approves a loan they make the following entries in their accounts

Dr Client Loan Account (asset to the bank)
Cr Client Deposit Account (liability to the bank)

Thats it. The only major constraint is to ensure the ratio of risk weighted loans is greater than 8% of tier capital. The deposit is then spent (on a house or car etc), and the money ends up in another account and they system stays in balance. No 10% reserve requirement needed.

Banks do not walk down to the RBA and ask for cash to on lend. If that was the case their account would look like this.

Dr Loan
Cr Central Bank for deposit
Cr Client deposit

The numbers just don't balance.

It is truly unbelievable people still get taught the money multiplier.
(S – I) + (T - G) + (M - X) = 0
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
raveswei
Default APF Avatar


b_b
6 Jul 2011, 06:20 PM
raveswei
6 Jul 2011, 05:15 PM
right,
banks keep deposits and create (from thin air) money that they lend
No
Formally no, in practice yes
http://popping-bubble.blogspot.com/

Thinking of an Australian property speculator (PI):
Inaction = missing opportunities.
Missing opportunities = losing.
Too much thinking = inaction.
Thinking = missing opportunities.
Therefore thinking = losing.

disgraceful little man Frank Castle owes a house to Salvation Army

Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
b_b
Default APF Avatar


raveswei
7 Jul 2011, 12:13 PM
Formally no, in practice yes
No

See my post to newjez above.

Loans create deposits.
(S – I) + (T - G) + (M - X) = 0
Profile "REPLY WITH QUOTE" Go to top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Fully Featured & Customizable Free Forums
Learn More · Register Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Australian Property Forum · Next Topic »
Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 10



Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.

Forum Rules: The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.

Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.

Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.

This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.

For more information go to Limitations on Exclusive Rights: Fair Use

Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ

Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy