Live data from Hacker News

McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

bloomberg.com

71–80 of 165 posts

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#71

I look at 8 year automotive loans, and I wonder- who is about to get screwed. People with jobs at gas stations buying new $30k vehicles. Either inflation is about to get bad, and our parents/Grandparents lose big or deflation happens and young people are screwed. Are there any other options?

$30k vehicles are cheap these days. My mouth dropped when I was at the auto show and seeing SUVs like navigator and escalade with price of $80k+

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>For the rest of us debtors...it remains an ongoing disaster Taxpayers didn't pay for bailouts. The Fed did. Taxpayers did make a profit form them, however, since the profits the Fed saw from the bailouts were, by law, handed over to Treasury (except for statutory operating expenses), offsetting taxes. >those who greased the runways for the shareholders with their lost homes Most of those those losing homes did so by…

True, looking forward to blaming a lot of US students for wanting education. While I do think borrowers are partly responsible, I also think there was a strong incentive for lenders to spread loans like candy and they probably de-emphasized the risks. So the correct strategy would have been to take even larger loans and probably bury the money somewhere.

>True, looking forward to blaming a lot of US students for wanting education.

Some perspective:

Under 40% of people get any college at all. Of those, 30% of students graduate with no debt. The remaining average $30k in debt. This is not much debt compared to other things they will buy in life.

Avg starting salary for a college grad is $50k.

Avg new car price is $35k. Some people buy many cars in a lifetime. Median home listing is $279k. ~65% of US is homeowners.

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#74
post #2

AKA On behalf of our banking customers we're going to be advising that governments get ready to do another bailout.

Depending on how you regard the Federal Reserve, it's already happening. The Fed has been making massive loans to banks that are unable to get overnight loans from other banks based on their portfolios. [1]

The amount and duration reporting has been. Originally it was $53 billion planned for a few weeks [2], and now it's over $128 billion [3], lasting into next year.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21004068

[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-fed-repo/n-y-fed-awar...

[3] https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/fed-repo-inj...

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taxpayers didn't pay for bailouts. The Fed did. The 2+ Trillion dollar expansion of the Fed balance sheet during the crisis costs taxpayers every day that they pay interest on a loan enabled by that 2T+ expansion. Every house that used to be $200K and is now $500K is part of the price people are paying for how the crisis was managed. > But don't just blame bankers. Also blame borrowers defaulting. The core function…

>The 2+ Trillion dollar expansion of the Fed balance sheet during the crisis costs taxpayers every day that they pay interest on a loan enabled by that 2T+ expansion. Taxpayers don't pay interest on Fed assets. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how monetary policy works. What makes you think your statement true? Did you read it in a explanation of how the Fed works, or did you make it up? >The financializati…

Compare your

> 'Taxpayers don't pay interest on Fed assets.'

with what I said; 'they pay interest on a loan enabled by that 2T+ expansion' (of Fed assets.) The Fed bought ~1.5-2T of MBS, turning bad loans that would never be repaid - credit that simply never should have been issued - into bank reserves. Those reserves both inflate asset prices and enable the banks to make loans on which interest is paid.

> When the prices stopped climbing, this process stopped.

The price climb - and the influx of less able borrowers - was primarily enabled by securitization.

> And bubbles from irrational people have been happening for millennia too. Does this simplistic tautology allow me to assign all blame to borrowers?

Borrowers can only exist if they've borrowed from lenders. Hence my point about lenders needing to evaluate risk to continue to be lenders.

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#76
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2k/hr?????

It's basically therapy for corporate executives, delivered via powerpoint, with a healthy side of blame insurance. And yeah, it's expensive.

This is so true, so much of management consulting is therapy with some generalist strategy and interesting analogies thrown in.

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#78
post #44

And if you're a bank, guess who is conveniently standing by ready to fix it for you with an army of $2000 an hour consultants? McKinsey. Same exact scam as the shady mechanic who wants charge you $400 to flush your transmission fluid and convinces you that your car will surely blow up if you don't do it.

> $2000 an hour consultants

… who graduated college three years ago and get 50 of those dollars per hour themselves.

Re: McKinsey: Half the World’s Banks Too Weak to Survive Downturn

#80
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zimbabwe doesn’t have the US military backing its debt.

So if the economy gets bad its the job of the US military to invade something to get their resources?

If the US really ran out of resources, I wouldn't count it out. In the mean time, it's more like we prop up dictators who agree to sell oil exclusively in our currency (see Saudi Arabia) and invade every country small enough to push around that tries to sell oil in anything but US dollars (see Saddam being in talks with France, or Gaddafi planning to sell oil in the gold dinar). Since the whole world has to buy oil, the whole world has to have dollars. Then we print more US dollars, devaluing the existing US dollars in global circulation and effectively stealing wealth from the rest of the world for the benefit of our banking system. Yeah, we also give sweet contracts to Haliburton so that they can pillage third-world oil fields in the middle of our wars and there is some immediate benefit from that as well, but I'm betting that propping up the petrodollar is the most important way that we're leveraging the military for economic ends.
Post reply on HN