Live data from Hacker News

Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

npr.org

301–310 of 342 posts

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only they are not taking risk, they get to pick who gets the funding so they further optimize their bottom line, by say favoring bigger loans or loans to their most indebted customers. I hope there is a reckoning but I am pretty sure there will be bonuses to the CEO's instead.

Maybe someone can get a class action lawsuit together on this.

How can we say that banks are not taking any risk, but then imagine a class action law suit against them? Wouldn't the possibility of getting deluged with lawsuits count as a risk?

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You outline the problem very well. The banking sector has an ENORMOUS amount of power over the economy/society in a way that no other industry does because it literally has the ability to create money out of thin air (by loaning it into existence). The banking industry is the arbiter and credit in our society and decides where money get allocated. This would be fine if it were their own money, but it's not - it's our…

Finance is a very important industry that adds a lot of value. If you get a student loan, you can go to university tomorrow and earn more in a few years, that's much more valuable than spending 20yrs at McDonald's earning nothing and saving very slowly to pay for your degree upfront as you would have to otherwise. Ditto mortgages. Ditto getting a car or starting a business or basically anything finance permits. The g…

> Finance is a very important industry that adds a lot of value. If you get a student loan, you can go to university tomorrow

The vast majority of student loans are guaranteed by the federal government. The banks take zero risk on these loans and still charge higher rates than home mortgages. Something seems broken there.

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#303
post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Robosigning and NINA loans of the past lead me to be skeptical.

Banks paid sanctions for failing to do due diligence on loan applications, that's what the banks want to avoid this time round.

Wouldn't their value add here be that they can quickly do due diligence and expedite these loans given their expertise in the field?

Seems you're extolling their ability to perform quickly, while also excusing away their inability to perform quickly.

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#304

The headline misses the point. The total means nothing out of context. What's the fee per loan? >Loans worth less than $350,000 brought in 5% in fees while loans worth anywhere from $2 million to $10 million brought in 1% in fees. I've read that the average loan is $50K, so that's $2500 per loan, which seems high, And 1% of a $1millio loan is ridiculous, as it's not subsidizing the smaller loans, AND these loans are…

The root problem was Trump team didn't put in enough money, included too many rich businesses, and didn't require a fair order. Banks knew they didn't have enough meat yet were feeding a frenzy: of course the big dogs pushed through to the front. So now we blame Banks instead of Trump. Yet if Trump repeats the plan without prioritizing actual small businesses, the co's big enough for in-house accountants and big loan…

People really didn't like that comment.

Imagine your boss was running this program. You're in a regulated industry, so he's forced to ask another team to pick the budget and the basic design... though the majority are actually his guys. His job is to keep sending it back with fixes until he's confident enough to put his name on it. It's just a design, so his job then switches to putting together the team to run the project and then actually running it.

The first project ended up giving the wrong people tons of money and then running out of funds. He's free to propose something else, but if he doesn't have any real ideas, the board tells him to try to at least get this right. He's seen what other orgs have done, but rather try this again..

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that Trump is to blame for the implementation details because he has the veto power is a little silly. Congress, on both sides of the aisle, has responsibility for any flaws in the legislation.

He's the president, if he cared, he'd prioritize SMBs. He's the check and balance. Instead, congress, judicial, and executive are now all effectively Republican controlled, with Trump de-facto leading the party because McConnell decided to go with it. Trump can pass the buck during one of the biggest losses of life in US history & the biggest recessions, but as the ultimate elected check, no way should we give a free…

Yeah it’s pretty clear that the president is responsible for legislative drafting. :-/

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it wasn't useful, people wouldn't be paying for the services it provides, they're all optional. Honestly, in my opinion this could not be a more misinformed take on the reality of banking. Today there exist no alternatives to commercial money (private bank debt), because our governments' demand taxes in it. Finance and banking are also different, yet you seem to use the words interchangeably. Banking = creation…

You haven't answered the question though: if finance isn't useful, why do people keep using it and paying for it? You for instance (forgive me getting personal) don't have to engage in high volume trading products using Blackrock Aladdin. You can just get a job, get paid, and spend what you earn.

I just re-edited the above comment - does this new edit answer the question you ask?

> You for instance (forgive me getting personal) don't have to engage in high volume trading products using Blackrock Aladdin. You can just get a job, get paid, and spend what you earn.

The problem is that because of the monopoly on today's money, I am literally unable to not take part in society (in the way you describe) without at some point being negatively affected by the slippery things Wall Street does. An example is the recent US government bailouts during COVID-19, which means we are basically paying to clean up corporate fuck-ups caused by the effects of the extremely risky and parasitic ‘financial products’ sold by these big financial institutions.

Leilani Farha, a Canadian human rights lawyer working as the UN's special rapporteur on adequate housing, provides an inside look into one of these dark patterns in the 2019 documentary 'Push'[1]. It focuses on the financialization of housing and in it Blackstone's blueprints are laid out in full. They've now started a new fund to buy more 'distressed real estate' in Europe [2], repeating the same heist they pulled off during the '08 crash. It comes down to buying up housing and becoming landlords en-masse for society's most vulnerable, extracting rents from them, turning neighborhoods (groups of homes) into financial instruments/products, and selling a stake in such a financial product as just another commodity on the market. Yet these are people's lives we're talking about - and they are being systematically destroyed in the pursuit of profit. Profits which are then used to pay for huge corporate bonuses.

In my eyes, the real parasites of today's society are the propertied classes. Not the Precariat class [3], who faces ever-more unstable labor contracts and precarious working conditions, in the global North as well as the South.

The proprietary protocols of the money system constrain and shape all my actions in the world. Unless I live with an indigenous tribe who live in a gift economy, I cannot escape the rules and constraints imposed by the rules of today’s money. This means I am at the mercy of the Rentier capitalist class, which is growing in power every day.

To be honest, we'd have to go deeper and examine Capitalism's move into digital property, and the government granting state backed monopolies - and thus violence backed, through the criminal justice system - in the form of 'intellectual property', which is what I believe is causing a lot of issues in a world:

"…today, a tiny minority of people and corporate interests across the world are accumulating vast wealth and power from rental income, not only from housing and land but from a range of other assets, natural and created. 'Rentiers’ of all kinds are in unparalleled ascendancy and the neo-liberal state is only too keen to oblige their greed.

Rentiers derive income from ownership, possession or control of assets that are scarce or artificially made scarce. Most familiar is rental income from land, property, mineral exploitation or financial investments, but other sources have grown too. They include the income lenders gain from debt interest; income from ownership of ‘intellectual property’ (such as patents, copyright, brands and trademarks); capital gains on investments; ‘above normal’ company profits (when a firm has a dominant market position that allows it to charge high prices or dictate terms); income from government subsidies; and income of financial and other intermediaries derived from third-party transactions." [4]

I want us to move to what is commonly referred to as 'Commons based peer production' (Yochai Benckler) - in scholarly circles it would be called ‘Open Access development’. This is literally about connecting the whole world to a hyper-connected network of open source repositories [Ceptr.org], in effect moving us from Platform Capitalism to Protocol/Open Cooperativism. I believe this can start by first evolving or reinventing our wealth acknowledgement systems.

When we also start using Cooperative Open Value Networks instead of enclosed firm-based/Corporate Enterprise Resource Planning systems, we can have transparent supply chains that reveal to us all of the complex information and measurements that are important and which respect humans and planet (say the regenerative capacity of sustainable timber forest, or the productive capacity of a farm during one season).

What happens today is that we reduce everything to one number, it's $dollar value. By doing that we lose a lot of important and vital information about the complex relationships between people, places and resources. Those relationships are obscured. Today's system creates an impoverished one-dimensional view of the physical world where we lose depth by oversimplying things without respecting their complexity and intricacy. Basically the question I am asking is this: how do we fully exploitat the near-zero marginal cost of digital technologies in meeting the promise of a more empowered, less hierarchical, internet?

[1] https://vimeo.com/ondemand/pushthefilm, or available to watch for free with a VPN at https://www.tvo.org/video/documentaries/push-feature-version

[2] https://twitter.com/Noordam/status/1248313189332406273, more info here: https://theconversation.com/wall-street-landlords-are-chasin...

[3] https://progressiveeconomyforum.com/blog/rentier-capitalism-...

[4] https://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-08-03/book-day-corru...

--

Edit: the way you say I could 'just get a job and get paid', shows me that you might not see that money is merely a human creation, and something without inherent worth. It then stops you from knowing about the possibility for locally-stewarded mutual credit community currencies, together with Commons based peer production. This view however is something I am seeing surprisingly often. When I started learning about the money system, it was all a bit of a mindfuck to me. I found this blog post to be an exciting read and it helped me a lot:

https://howwegettonext.com/the-future-of-money-depends-on-bu...

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#307
post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming this deal is the same as previous ones. Its not even close https://www.marketwatch.com/story/united-airlines-details-it... Grants for employee salaries and benefits like health insurance, low interest loan to be paid back, and a stake in the company in the form of equity. And all with strings attached so they can't hand out bonuses or lobby congress. Businesses operate on revenue and margin and compa…

> Businesses operate on revenue and margin and companies like airlines can't justify using even 1% of its revenue to "save" for rainy days. Huh. Where did they get the money for the stock buybacks they initiated last year?

Repurchasing shares is what companies do with profits they cannot effectively leverage into new investments. I suggest you read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Share_repurchase

But to sum up: if you are a company with $1 million on hand at the end of the year you have to disperse it somehow.

- If you put it in a bank account you'll earn 0.2% interest on your "investment"

- If you pay out dividends your shareholders will earn 1-2% (estimate) on their investments

- If you buy back your own stock your shareholders can see 4-5% (estimate) on their investments + you have shares you can award to employees in the form of options or direct without diluting the market

The number 1 factor in your decision? Taxes. Which option pays the least tax? Option 3

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#308
post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow this is misinformed. Posting incorrect information in such a cocky way is detrimental to the forum. Look at any global bank's stock price throughout this crisis. Being a lender to the businesses of a shut down economy is not very profitable.

Stock price does not tell you how the fundamentals of a business are operating. Especially not in this environment, everyone's stock price is down. Also these are the banks that got a huge bailout from the government a decade ago for failures of their own making. If a big bank goes under due to coronavirus then I will of course apologize for being wrong, but I doubt that will happen. Too big to fail remember. So we b…

Everyone's stock price is not down. Another false statement. The majority are down though, as they should be.

I am not defending bailouts, I'm saying you should get your facts straight.

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's the president, if he cared, he'd prioritize SMBs. He's the check and balance. Instead, congress, judicial, and executive are now all effectively Republican controlled, with Trump de-facto leading the party because McConnell decided to go with it. Trump can pass the buck during one of the biggest losses of life in US history & the biggest recessions, but as the ultimate elected check, no way should we give a free…

Yeah it’s pretty clear that the president is responsible for legislative drafting. :-/

He's the shepherd, or not, if he declines to do his job. We elect the president to preside. The pandemic has become the most important thing on his desk.

The power relationship is more complicated, but that's what it boils down to. For example, congress could take it in a direction he doesn't want to happen, but they'd need 2/3rds for that. By default, it's his show.

Re: Small business rescue earned banks $10B in fees

#310

Gotta ask whether the banking system makes sense in its current form. - Part of it is actually a utility. Payments, sending money from one place to another, making sure there's an account at the other end of that number. Everyone needs this, yet being a huge international network there isn't a whole lot that one bank offers that another cannot. - Part of it is deciding who to lend money to. Makes sense for the bank t…

There have been suggestions over the years for the post office to offer banking services. They have branches literally everywhere, they're independent yet still a government agency, and have no profit motive.

This was one of Andrew Yang's policy proposals in his presidential bid (and it was one of my favorites). Looks like a bunch of other countries already do it as well.
Post reply on HN