Si he entendido bien, viene a ser algo como si prohibiesen a El Corte Inglés montar un negocio de taxis con los coches que los clientes tienen en el parking, ¿no?

Pues si es así ole sus huevos. ¡Reserva fraccionaria del 100% para los que simplemente quieran guardar su dinero!

IRONIC OFF

Obviamente hay gato encerrado.

Uff, Obama ha sido financiado por los grandes bancos. Muchos altos cargos proceden de este lobby. Incluso el secretario del Tesoro.

Este enfrentamiento de Obama versus grande banca después de la derrota del día anterior huele a discurso electoral. Se nota la mano del bueno de Paul Vocker detrás de la iniciativa pero las presiones políticas que va haber -quien te ha puesto y con que dinero-, la buena iniciativa del último gobernador de la FED puede ir al garete cuando entre en las cámaras legislativas.

La ley Glass–Steagall Act empezó a desvirtuarse cuando en 1971 el dólar dejó de ser canjeable por el oro. Para burlar la legislación en Estados Unidos se empezó a trabajar desde la City de Londres -fue cuando se empezó a convertir la plaza financiera actual-. Tras un montón de años el lobby de la gran banca consiguió en 1999 su derogación con un amplio apoyo bipartidista y refrendado por Clinton (Bill).

Pero cuando una moneda se puede inflacionar, creando exuberancias irracionales, donde no se sabe donde burbujear ya (montón de liquidez en la balance esperando rentabilizar -además los intereses reales negativos son un buen aliciente -), pues ya se burla el sistema. ¿Como y por que se creó las subprime?.

__________________

que velocidad, ya tenían preparada la encuesta y todo

Obama Seen as Anti-Business by 77% of U.S. Investors, Poll Says - Bloomberg.com

Obama Seen as Anti-Business by 77% of U.S. Investors, Poll Says


By Heidi Przybyla

Jan. 22 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. investors overwhelmingly see President Barack Obama as anti-business and question his ability to manage a financial crisis, according to a Bloomberg survey.

The global quarterly poll of investors and analysts who are Bloomberg subscribers finds that 77 percent of U.S. respondents believe Obama is too anti-business and four-out-of-five are only somewhat confident or not confident of his ability to handle a financial emergency.

The poll also finds a decline in Obama’s overall favorability rating one year after taking office. He is viewed favorably by 27 percent of U.S. investors. In an October poll, 32 percent in the U.S. held a positive impression.

“Investors no longer feel they can trust their instincts to take risks,” said poll respondent David Young, a managing director for a broker dealer in New York. Young cited Obama’s efforts to trim bonuses and earnings, make health care his top priority over jobs and plans to tax “the rich or advantaged.”

Carlos Vadillo, a fixed-income analyst at Wells Fargo Securities LLC in San Francisco, said Obama has been in a “constant war” with the banking system, using “fat-cat bankers and other misnomers to describe a business model which supports a large portion of America.”

Outside the U.S., Obama continues to get high marks with three-quarters or more of investors in Europe and Asia viewing him favorably. These rankings bring his global favorability rating to 60 percent among all poll respondents.

European Confidence

When it comes to his ability to manage a financial crisis, 55 percent of Europeans say they are either mostly or very confident; Among Asian respondents, 59 percent say they are somewhat confident or not confident; 38 percent expressed confidence.

Unlike other recent presidents, Obama hasn’t selected a leading business executive for his cabinet or a top advisory role. One year after taking office, he is coping with a jobless rate hovering around 10 percent and a federal deficit that rose to $1.4 trillion last year. In response, he has proposed a fee on as many as 50 large financial firms and yesterday called for limiting the size and trading activities of financial institutions as a way to reduce risk-taking.

“While the financial system is far stronger today than it was one year ago, it’s still operating under the same rules that led to its near collapse,” Obama said yesterday at the White House after meeting with former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker, who has been an advocate of taking such steps.

Outside U.S.

The U.S. investors’ perceptions of Obama stand in contrast to those of their European counterparts, most of whom say the president strikes the right balance when it comes to managing business interests. Europeans, however, are more confident in Obama’s leadership on financial matters than Asians.

The quarterly Bloomberg Global Poll of investors, traders and analysts in six continents was conducted Jan. 19 by Selzer & Co., a Des Moines, Iowa-based firm. It is based on interviews with a random sample of 873 Bloomberg subscribers, representing decision makers in markets, finance and economics. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.3 percentage points.

Obama’s 71 percent unfavorable rating among U.S. investors is almost matched by two members of his economic team. Both Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and Lawrence Summers, president of the National Economic Council. U.S. respondents give Geithner a 63 percent unfavorable rating and Summers 67 percent. In October, 57 percent held a negative view of Geithner and 66 percent said the same of Summers.

Like Obama, both men do better with Asian and European investors.

Popular Bernanke

One financial figure to find favor among U.S. respondents is Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, who garners a 68 percent approval rating, which is in line with his marks from non-U.S. investors and the rating U.S. investors gave him in the October poll.

There is one other figure U.S. and international investors agree on: former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, a potential candidate for her party’s nomination in 2012.

With a net favorability rating of 15 percent among all investors, Palin does best in the U.S., where she has the support of 27 percent of respondents. In Asia, it’s 14 percent, and in Europe just 5 percent of investors view her favorably.

“She revealed a complete lack of any global awareness,” said Anthony Gibbs, an agency broker at Vantage Capital Markets in London.

Right Balance

Investors outside the U.S. are more unified about Obama’s approach to business, with 67 percent of Europeans saying he strikes the right balance and 56 percent of Asians who agree.

“He is managing well a position he took over under great uncertainty,” said Sivanesan Muthusamy, senior vice president of funding and investments at Alliance Bank in Kuala Lumpur. “American leadership is again guiding the global financial markets into stability.”

The U.S. investors’ overwhelming characterization of Obama as anti-business stands in sharp contrast to the results of a Bloomberg National Poll in December, when 52 percent of U.S. adults said the president had the right balance in his approach.

The January poll shows an especially dramatic divide between U.S. and global investors when it comes to Obama’s overall favorability rating.

In Europe, 81 percent of respondents have a favorable opinion of Obama. In Asia, that number is 73 percent. The polarization is far greater by geography than by occupation, the survey found. Sales executives gave Obama his highest unfavorable rating, at 53 percent, compared with 28 percent of researchers and analysts and 35 percent of traders.

Globally, other central bankers are slightly less popular than Bernanke. Jean-Claude Trichet, president of the European Central Bank, has a 60 percent favorable rating globally, with 45 percent in the U.S. and 78 percent in Europe.

Zhou Xiaochuan, governor of the People’s Bank of China, who gets a 42 percent favorable rating overall, gets 39 percent in the U.S. and Europe and 51 percent in Asia.

__________________

No está tan mal este punto de vista

__________________

Ron Paul acaba de presentar en el congreso una propuesta para legalizar monedas en competencia. Eso sí que haría daño de verdad a los banqueros, imaginate que perdieran el monopolio del dinero... les da un sincope. Yo pagaría para ver la cara de Rockefeller si se aprobara algo así.

Durante estos próximos días irán saliendo analisis de la ley de Obama pero mi apuesta es que entre las lineas de la ley hay más favores a los banqueros que agujeros en un queso gruyere. Veremos.

Aquí tienes el discurso de hace unos días con el que presentó la ley:

__________________

A mi me parece, intuitivamente, que no solo los bancos crearian dinero. No he visto el video todavia, pero a lo mejor se refiere a que el dinerlo lo cree el estado...

__________________

Volcker ha colado su plan aprovechando que el lobby de Wall Street en la administración está en horas bajas (Geithner pillado en el escándalo del rescate de AIG, y Bernanke pendiente de que le renueven el mandato). Volcker tiene ochenta y tantos años, se la pela Wall Street, y piensa en legados y en cambiar las reglas a largo plazo. Obama, tocado por la perdida en Massachusets y buscando algo efectista, ha decidido que toca hacer de FDR, y el plan de Volcker le venía a huevo.

Que se lleve a cabo ono depende de si las encuestas le dicen a Obama que los votantes le aprueban. Hay un riesgo político para los republicanos si se alinean contra este plan; Obama se puede presentar como el defensor del pueblo contra Wall Street. A FDR le funcionó.

En Londres y Suiza se están frotando las manos.

__________________

Pues tiene razón salvo que saquen la letra pequeña de la Ley. Ahí, la prensa a veces ejerce de independiente y pueden hacer mucho daño. El lobby apoyó a saco a Obama. Pensaban que era muy dócil a diferencia de McCain que tenía ramalazos. Apuesto a que: ¿van hacer la cama a Volcker y que deja de ser oficialmente el primer asesor de economía de Obama?. El bueno de Volcker con su experiencia y sus ideas claras está comiendo la cabeza al joven Obama . Por lo que sé Voclker no es un "liberal" en la jerga europea pero por lo menos es más consecuente en otros aspectos. No anda con historias. Se enfrentó a Reagan -lo que conllevó la pérdida de su cargo- siendo gobernador de la FED aunque dejó al ex-actor la economía en plena recuperación, quien se apropió del éxito. Hizo la "limpia" cuando debía en vez del ex adorado Greenspan, quien en 2001 ante el acojone del 11-S se equivocó de estrategia y estamos pagando con creces.

La City si se aprueba esa ley están cantando victoria tras el hostión que han tenido.

Suiza como siempre, ni frío ni calor. Ellos están en otra historia. Sigue siendo el fortín y la caja fuerte de los secretos de muchos fondos y de muchos particulares.

__________________

Ahora mismo los gobiernos imponen un monopolio en el mercado del dinero, y se lo entregan a los respectivos bancos centrales y sus bancos comerciales. Las leyes están hechas para que en Europa usar cualquier cosa que no sea el euro como dinero sea dificil y poco rentable, por lo que están forzando a la gente a usar el euro. En USA pasa lo mismo con el dólar. Es algo que, como se ha visto toda la vida en los tiempos modernos, la gente no lo piensa mucho, pero en realidad que el gobierno imponga un monopolio de la moneda es algo muy raro historicamente. Y el problema es que como cualquier monopolio beneficia a los que controlan el monopolio y perjudica al resto. Y hay que pensar que la moneda es la mitad de cualquier transacción, con lo cual es el monopolio más importante que puede existir.

La ley de Ron Paul lo que haría sería eliminar estas leyes y permitir que cualquier otra moneda compita en igualdad de condicioines. Esto evitaría, por ejemplo, que surgieran nuevas burbujas como la que estamos viviendo.


Tb podría ser que la ley realmente no cambiara nada.

Big Banks Have Already Figured Out The Loophole In Obama?s New Rules

Big Banks Have Already Figured Out The Loophole In Obama’s New Rules

Big banks have already begun poking the holes in Obama’s new rules—holes they expect their banks to pass through basically unchanged.

The president promised this morning to work with Congress to ensure that no bank or financial institution that contains a bank will own, invest in or sponsor a hedge fund or a private equity fund, or proprietary trading operations unrelated to serving customers for its own profit.

But sources at three banks tell us that they are already finding ways to own, investment in and sponsor hedge funds and private equity funds. Even prop trading seems safe.

A person familiar with the operations of one big Wall Street bank said it expects that new regulation will affect less than 1% of its overall business.

The key phrase is “operations unrelated to serving customers.” The banks plan to claim that much of the business in which it engages is related in one way or another to serving customers. Even proprietary trading, for instance, can become related to customer service if it is done through internal hedge funds in which some outside clients are permitted to invest.

One insider at a bank pointed to JP Morgan Chase’s ownership of the hedge fund Highbridge Capital. It is thought that under a strict “no hedge funds” rule, Highbridge would have to be sold off. But under the rule proposed by the Obama administration, Highbridge can be retained by JP Morgan because outside clients are permitted to invest in it.

A still more devious way is to have a banks own employees be the customers who are invested in the internal hedge funds. That way trading operations can remain closed to outsiders while the regulatory requirement of relating the trading to customer service is met. Goldman Sachs is rumored to be considering this approach. (Goldman isn't commenting on the regs right now.)

“This thing is about showing the public that Obama is standing up to Wall Street. So the rhetoric is heated. But the implementation will require far less change than people think right now,” a person familiar with the thinking at the upper echelons of one of our largest banks said.

“The market is getting this wrong by selling off the megas,” a person at another bank said.

__________________