Author Archives: GrantBramlett

ERP Blogstorm Part 3: Banking

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Part three of our series of charts from the Economic Report of the President is all about banking. Mostly, it’s a trip down memory lane. Here’s a look at the worldwide market in derivatives over the past couple of decades:

The volume of derivatives went from $10 trillion to $35 trillion in two years starting right before the market crashed. Here’s another perspective on that:

In 1990, shadow banking was about the same size as the traditional banking sector. By 2007 it was more than twice as big. Just before the crash, shadow banking comprised two-thirds of the entire banking industry and it was almost entirely unregulated. This is why I was happy that Hillary Clinton at least mentioned shadow banking during the campaign.

Here’s how all this affected tradition banks:

In 2007, losses from trading amounted to about $30 billion. By 2009 that had skyrocketed to about $100 billion—and that’s in addition to about $40 billion in traditional loan losses. This is what happens when you start with a housing market that’s already in bubble territory and then egg it on with insane levels of rocket science derivatives, most of them unregulated bastard offspring of the shadow banking sector.

So what’s happened since then? We had a huge crash, the Fed instituted higher capital ratios for “systemically important financial institutions,” and we passed the Dodd-Frank reforms. Here’s what banks look like now:

Before the Great Recession, the biggest banks (green line) had Tier 1 equity ratios of about 7 percent. That’s why they couldn’t weather the crash. Today they’re above 12 percent. Is that enough? Maybe not. But it’s a helluva lot better than it used to be.

Finally, here’s an intriguing chart that shows one of the specific consequences of Dodd-Frank:

Most single-name derivatives are now cleared through a central clearinghouse, which makes it easy for traders to cancel out mirror-image positions they hold. This is called “compression,” and it reduces the total volume of derivatives and increases the safety of the financial system. Today, derivatives worth $200 trillion (notional) are compressed out of existence each year.

Needless to say, Republicans are hellbent on repealing Dodd-Frank. Sure, it makes the banking system safer and helps protect consumers, but big banks don’t like it, so that’s that. The party of Donald Trump, the working man’s president, will do whatever Wall Street tells them to do. Funny how that works, isn’t it?

Continued: 

ERP Blogstorm Part 3: Banking

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on ERP Blogstorm Part 3: Banking

California’s cap-and-trade program now covers cars

California’s cap-and-trade program now covers cars

By on 2 Jan 2015commentsShare

After a long PR battle between oil industry lobbyists and California’s regulatory agencies, the state’s cap-and-trade program was extended on Jan. 1, on schedule, to cover companies that sell fuel to drivers. That means fuel retailers will have to either provide lower-carbon fuels or buy permits for the pollution their products put into the air.

Industry front groups have been labeling this new extension of the cap-and-trade program a “hidden gas tax.” Citing calculations based on outdated figures, these groups have been threatening that, starting this month, prices at the pump will go up for Californians by as much as $0.76 per gallon.

That’s not true, say the California government and independent economists. Yes, some of the cost — something in the neighborhood of 9 or 10 cents per gallon — could be passed on to consumers. But with gas prices across the U.S. falling ever lower, California drivers likely won’t notice much of a difference. Furthermore, as the Natural Resources Defense Council’s Simon Mui points out, AB 32 — the California climate change legislation that led to the creation of the cap-and-trade program — takes steps to encourage fuel efficiency and to promote alternatives to gasoline-powered cars, from electric vehicles to high-speed trains. Those initiatives, NRDC estimates, could end up saving families hundreds of dollars in transportation costs each year.

So why is the industry warning of a major hike in fuel prices even when independent analysts are saying Californians can expect to pay only an additional dime a gallon? Some consumer advocates worry it’s a sign that the industry may try to have the last word by artificially hiking prices in protest of the program. For instance, the oil industry might pull one or more of the state’s 14 refineries offline, causing prices to spike. So last month, Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, sent a letter to the state agency that oversees fuel markets warning it to watch for market manipulation from a spiteful industry.

“Oil companies launched a ballot initiative, backed a number of failed bills to dismantle clean energy efforts and have spent $70 million lobbying Sacramento politicians” to undermine the state’s climate law, said Shannon Baker-Branstetter, policy counsel for Consumers Union, in a press release put out with the letter. “Through it all, consumers have been steadfast in their support of clean energy and energy efficiency.” Baker-Branstetter noted that even as oil prices are falling, industry-backed groups “continue to claim that gas price spikes are coming starting in January 2015. … We want to make sure that California consumers are protected against possible market manipulations.”

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that, perhaps in response to these concerns, California’s Energy Commission appointed new members to the state agency that monitors how regulations affect fuel prices — including the head of antitrust operations in the state attorney general’s office.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get stories like this in your inbox

AdvertisementAdvertisement

Source – 

California’s cap-and-trade program now covers cars

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California’s cap-and-trade program now covers cars