Davos 2016 - The Transformation of Finance

Economy | Information | History | Online | Facts | World | Global | Money

1. No worries
   
   https://plus.google.com/114598302178371586646
2. Yes. When you conquer the world , we'll consider letting you control all our money. Your empire is crumbling.
3. If you want to invest in my Youtube Channel, you can ahah :)
4. laundering millions of dollars of drug traffickers' money is not suspicious activity from a banker's perspective apparently
5. banks are an extension of law enforcement? which is they'll launder millions of dollars of drug traffickers' money? these idiots in their ivory towers...
6. As a former insider within the banking sector I can say that quite a few of us saw the asset bubble accumulating by the early 2000s. In my own organization I did what I could to raise the issues up the chain of management, even having a one-on-one meeting with the president of our firm. The pressures on our firm to keep up transaction volume to satisfy stock analysts were enormous given the level of competition coming from more non-traditional sources of mortgage lending activity.
   
   Our market segment was the purchase and securitization of conventional residential mortgage loans. By 2000 the signs were clear that Wall Street firms were teaming with mortgage originators to pour huge sums of credit into the sub-prime mortgage market. The firms that produced this business were those experienced in marketing second mortgage loans to households that were by definition (of conventional underwriting) more likely to run into financial problems and default on their loans. Another characteristic of this business segment was the high level of fraud and misrepresentation characterizing the business. At best, these mortgage loans were grade B or C paper. High rates of interest charged to borrowers, while justified on the basis of pricing for the potential default risk, was self-defeating. Defaults were almost automatic when the loan terms involved an initial "teaser" rate that within a year or less was adjusted upward. Pooled together as collateral for private label mortgage-backed securities, these junk-bond equivalent securities were fraudulently rated as AAA bonds. Naturally, investors were drawn to the higher nominal yields.
   
   What has largely escaped the discussion of causes of the crash is the annual increase in the maximum loan limits set by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. By the early 2000s, these limits had significantly eroded what had been the jumbo market enjoyed by the banks. It was only natural, then, that the banks would pour excess reserves into the sub-prime business as a strategy to recapture market share. This decision turned out to be disastrous.
   
   So, what then happened? When the private label MBS started to experience massive loan default rates, investors dumped them and their value dropped to junk bond values. Unfortunately, investors pulled out of the conventional MBS market as well, which brought on the collapse of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, even though the performance of the loans bought and securitized by the GSEs was still quite strong. However, once the nation fell into recession and unemployment grew, mortgage defaults and foreclosures skyrocketed (particularly in those regions where property values had climbed well above affordable levels).
   
   Nothing that has been done on the regulatory front since 2008 has been effective in preventing another credit-fueled, speculation-driven property market cycle. Here in the United States, the Federal Reserve decision to reduce interest rates to historic lows produced short-run "positive" results. Some borrowers were able to refinance out of high cost sub-prime mortgage debt. Losses to investors in mortgage loans were reduced to what they would have been. However, within a fairly short period of time the demand side of market stagnated because neither household incomes nor savings were increasing. The interest cost savings was quickly capitalized by market forces into higher land prices (and, by extension, higher housing prices). The window of affordability created by low interest rates closed. Mortgage lenders are now back to the challenge of coming up with ways to produce transaction volume. We are back to considering reductions in cash down payment requirements, to more flexible underwriting criteria, the acceptance of lower credit scores, looking to government to provide "soft second" type forgivable loans, closing cost assistance grants, and other forms of public subsidies to lower construction costs.
   
   What should have been done? Rather than draw out these comments further, I refer readers to a collection of articles by emeritus economist Mason Gaffney (University of California) published about five or six years ago titled, "After the Crash." Professor Gaffney lays out a long list of legislative and regulatory reforms that address the cause of our boom-to-bust economic experience and how to protect the bankers from themselves and the taxpayer from the bankers.
7. I don't know how they do things in Deutchland, but here in the US, banks don't only lend out the money they take on deposit from depositors. They are specially granted the power to create many times the deposited amount of money -- out of thin air -- and lend that out as well - at interest.
   I rather suspect that things work the same at Deutche Bank. Is he trying to misrepresent the truth of the matter?
8. Khong the mang tien ao vao, vi no risk of sercurty we may have to deal with in the future
9. http://go.ted.com/Cmio
10. Well Lagarde, financial markets are A MESS and it happened under your watch. The answer is NOT to have even more regulation, rather fix the fundamentals.
    
    It would also help if you had a talk with people who actually predicted the crisis years in advance, guys like Peter Schiff, Marc Faber, ... and other "austrian" economists. It is not that difficult, all it takes is an honest look.
11. Day mast all go to prison ! Day never STOP ! Professional Thief's ! Electronic prison fore the population ! What a world GOD Helpe US ! Basters !
12. 26:23 the xplosion of cell phones, well I don't have one. Fuck that technology.
13. At 4:06 the leather skinned reptilian transgender hybrid comes alive, yes indeed it said "whooo''
14. To me this debate is well informative and I truly like the whole contents.
15. no comments on the US$ 1.500 trillion on casino financial markets of derivatives and swaps? the real issue is about the 130 Financial conglomerates that control 40%of wold GDP survival? The system is build to privatize gains and socialize debt as seen in every bobble burst?
16. The banking sector is the main contributor of the sustainable economic growth, currently there is imbalance on the ground.
    Based on academic research Banking sector to lend its money no more than 5 % to the real sector.
    More than 95 & goes to derivatives financial market, this behavior derail of the banking sector should be .
    Banking sector should playing on the prudential ground not the high risk ground like derivative financial market.
    This behavior should be transformed to the proper ground the baking should do.
    Derivative financial market will be useful if properly regulated, it can leverage the capital but in practice the financial market regulator difficult to supervise derivative financial market due to too complex and sophisticated as well .
17. This wonderfully polite and careful panel is missing the elephant in the room - growing risks of global warming - a progressively destabilizing risk.
    
    Where is the talk about true cost accounting? Carbon energy in any form is an exponential liability - not a true asset. The very definition of carbon combustion is an instant change from an energy fuel asset into an existential liability.
    
    The Davos' organization this year issued a great report saying that the failure to address global warming and the refugee crisis are the highest risks to the future.
    
    From the report: "After its presence in the top five most impactful risks for the past three years, the failure of climate change mitigation and adaptation has risen to the top and is perceived in 2016 as the most impactful risk for the years to come,.."
    
    So, what are you talking about? The World Bank gets it, scientists are very clear - stop all carbon emissions now. You are all whining about regulations, yet you ignore the ruthless shackles of physical reality. Food stresses, famine, drought, refugees, heatwaves and wildfires will completely destabilize your best intentions.
    
    You need to change the subject. Bitcoins is just one small cushion in the leaky lifeboat. Where are we going? All your laudable goals for economic vitality are brought up short by physical reality.
    
    Our carbon-energy civilization will be stranding carbon assets, it will happen voluntarily or by harsh reality of increasing global heating. But it will happen And if you don't think that's a risk, then you should refer back to your reports sourced from your own membership.
    
    I fault the moderator for failing to steer conversation back to the issues that the DAVOS Risk Report 2016 described as the greatest risk and trends. Otherwise this amounts to a cheerleading pep rally for a game you do not understand.
    
    You had better start talking about the increasing risk from the "climate sector" - because the risks are ultimate. And those of us casting an eye toward Davos are losing respect for your ability to be aware of these financial risks.
18. When asked "What is money?" JP Morgan replied "Gold and only gold."  Bankers will only allow interest in a monetary unit that has zero value.   If a currency is not worthless, how else can the bankers counterfeit and steal?  You can't print gold.  You are all thieves, banking is theft and the usury by these criminals has ruined every civilization in history.
19. I still appreciate this content #Davos2016
20. Lol, they got CEOs of Investment Banks to talk about change in Finance- the irony!