Biden has presided over three of four worst bank failures in US history

You are speaking of 81,000,000 voters, right?

 

The only sketchy bit I know is, Trump removed some banking regulations, how it works in America, no idea. So rewind back to when Biden took over, did he reinstate these removed regs and/or put in place stronger regs, or does he need Congress to do that

 

LOL! Biden and the dems have screwed the economy. Just accept that already.

 

That number is your and trump's delusion. While certainly there are far too many of them, fortunately not nearly as many.

 

trump removed them by signing a Republican Backed Congress bill, into law.
Congress writes bills, President signs or vetos, if signed they become USA law. A president can't create their own laws.

In regards to this latest bank issue, here's a decent write up on it.

...
In response to the 2008 financial crisis, a Democratic-controlled Congress in 2010 passed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act — a bill that then-President Barack Obama called “the toughest financial reform since the aftermath of the Great Depression.” The Senate passed the bill 59-39 with the support of just four Republicans.
...
The Republican-controlled Congress passed the 2018 legislation with some Democratic support. It passed the House 258-159, with 33 Democratic votes. And it passed the Senate 67-31, with 16 Democrats joining Republicans.
What to Know About Trump-Era Bank Deregulation and Bank Failures - FactCheck.org

 

LOL! The Orange Stain and his MAGA incompetents already screwed the economy. Biden and the dems are picking up the pieces. Just accept that already.

 

Ok, so it was a Congress bill that removed some regulations.

 

Yes. With the signature of trump to make it law.

All 3 branches are needed to make or change laws.
House, Senate, and the Executive need to sign/pass it.

 

So does the president think, "I need to make changes to the banks", or does Congress do that and goes to the president to sign it off or get it vetoed?

When a president vetoes, can Congress still put the law(s) through?

 

Anyone can say, I need to make changes to the banks.
And submit a bill to be debated on.

If a president veto's a bill, congress can override it with a 2/3 majority vote.

 

Ok ta. Just updating my knowledge, just so when people say, "It was Biden", "It was Trump", "It was Obama" etc.. I now know, "It was congress".

 

Get real ofcourse Covid shutdown killed oil, it also recovered in 6 months, seems you need to give Trump credit if you blame him for oil dropping when every country in the world shut down for a couple months. I've never heard anyone so partisan on a subject, get real. One thing is f'ing for sure this Administration flooded the market with cash, another covid relief handout as prices were coming down and then the inflation relief flooded another 400b of cash in the market. You would have to ignore every law of economics to say that didn't fire up an already hot inflationary market.

 

And so many conservatives whining about Obama, Biden, HIlary, Pelosi, etc.

 

So basically, it lowered the threshold for the one size fits all sort of a thing.

If you limit the stress testing with banks and bank holding companies to $100 billion or more, that gives more credence to the argument that the banks had no limits on when to stop, which was the exact problem in 2007 when banks began relying on subprime mortgages for their profits. It is why our financial sector was in collapse. The Dodd-Frank would help prevent what happened to the four banks or warn them at the very least.

The increase of SIFI is what allows banks to lend money, especially venture capital-type loans to start-ups. Start-ups are risky with high risk high reward. It is what fueled the high-tech start-up industry,. Add the near zero percent Federal Reserve Interest Rate and qualatiative easing, it stayed the recession which allowed borrowers to borrow more, pay less per month, and increase GDP. That came at a cost with inflation now because of the qualitative and now, because in part of Covid and high inflation, the average consumer is more in debt and in worse financial stress than the US Government. So congrats.

 

Quote; Covid shutdown killed oil

BUT IT HAPPENED UNDER TRUMP’S WATCH!

Note; The reason why I’m saying this is to ridicule partisan politics.

 

WELL, YES: Fed Reserve Board Governor says save the banks, quit sweatin’ the climate change.



'Fed Reserve Bank of SF that missed massive red flags @ SV Bank run by openly gay diversity quota & Janet Yellen protege Mary Daly who focused more on "climate change and inequities" than regulating rogue banks like SVB. Also chairs SF Fed Diversity & Inclusion Council'

'All these bank failures have been in the SF Federal Reserve Bank's domain run by #ClimateChange #Equity zealot #MaryDaly. Daly is a #JanetYellen disciple. Leave it to @SenSherrodBrown to fix & we'll all be speaking Mandarin & wearing rice paper slippers.'

'Federal Reserve Board Governor Christopher Waller gave a speech today at an economic conference in Spain that has heads both nodding in agreement and exploding along with multiple tooth cracks from frenzied gnashing. It was laden with absolute pearls of forthright speech and what used to be known as “a level head”'

'Climate change does not pose such “significantly unique or material” financial stability risks that the Federal Reserve should treat it separately in its supervision of the financial system, Fed Governor Christopher Waller said on Thursday in a detailed rebuttal of demands for climate initiatives by the U.S. central bank.'

“Climate change is real, but I do not believe it poses a serious risk to the safety and soundness of large banks or the financial stability of the United States,” Waller told an economic conference in Spain. “Risks are risks … My job is to make sure that the financial system is resilient to a range of risks. And I believe risks posed by climate change are not sufficiently unique or material to merit special treatment.”'

'The aim of Fed oversight and stress tests of bank balance sheets, he said, was “general resiliency''

“In March we watched a bank run on Silicon Valley Bank” that heightened attention to the levels of uninsured deposits at some institutions, Waller said. “Those are the kinds of things I am staring at right now. I am not as worried about climate as I am about things like banks failing because of bank runs.”

'This will not go down well with the climate alarmists and ESG grifters…No lesser mortal than Fed Governor Christopher Waller has dared to proclaim that climate change does not pose such “significantly unique or material” financial stability risks that the Federal Reserve should treat it separately in its supervision of the financial system.'

' As policymakers, we must balance the broad set of risks we face, and we have a responsibility to prioritize using evidence and analysis. Based on what I’ve seen so far, I believe that placing an outsized focus on climate-related risks is not needed, and the Federal Reserve should focus on more near-term and material risks in keeping with our mandate.'

THE POWER OF TRUTH IN A RISING SEA OF LIES

 

You are going to have to pick. We raise interest rates to try to curb inflation. Without such a raise, inflation will get worse. And if you want to lower inflation, then you are likely looking at lower employment, which is what you will complain about next. Economics isa trade off, and Trumpists rely on economic illiteracy to manipulate their base.

 

It was a law passed by Congress. So to reinstate the regulations it would have to be another law passed by Congress.

 

Why did Waller fail to mention the reason there was no oversight of SVB is because of a 2018 law that raised the size of a bank that is required to undergo annual stress tests?

During the Obama administration a law was passed requiring banks with $50 billion in assets to undergo annual stress tests. In 2018 Congress passed a law (and Trump signed) that raised that limit to 250 billion.

Do you know who one of the people to testify before Congress urging passage of the law was?

In 2015 SVB CEO Greg Becker testified that the Dodd-Frank law put unnecessary burdens on smaller banks (such as SVB, who had 40 billion in assets at the time)

So Congress acted, Trump signed it and then SVB failed. At the time of the failure SVB had 204 billion in assists meaning that it was still below the threshold put in place by the Republicans in Congress and Trump.

 

So Biden will have tried to get Congress to pass Lefty fantastic banking regs then.

 

I know this seems like nit-picking, but Biden did not preside over those bank failures. Each had its own CEO and board of directors with a chairman who was tasked with those duties. They are private entities. The POTUS is a govt functionary and leader. Biden presides over his cabinet meetings, White House staff meetings, and Security Counsel meetings.

 

No I don't have to pick we are having to raise interest rates because of Bidenflation and his continued insistence we spend even more inflationary dollars and continue to explode the deficits and debt. Have you check recent for where we are on target to hit? CBO which notoriously under estimates says $1.5B for 2023. Except for the year of COVID emergency spending when have Republican's budgets ever come close? I can show you where Democrat ones have.

So what is your bottom line do you support just continuing to explode the debt by ever increasing it and the limit and inflation and taking us to default or getting our spending growth under control and the economy growing and people back to work paying taxes and getting out of this mess?

 

Such utter nonsense. No American President "Presides" over bank failures or bank successes. The banks are responsible for their own performance, as is the nature of our capitalist system. For a US President to be responsible for a bank being badly run, or well run, he could not be a President. He would need to be a dictator.A dictator with the capitalist system under his total authority.

 

He has here as his fiscal policies drove a strong recovery into negative growth followed by historical inflation and now heading to stagflation with the rising interest rates.

 

I found this interesting: Small Bank Insiders Are Buying Shares In Their Companies At A Near Record Pace


“Insiders in this group are expressing a strong belief that the regional-banking system as a whole is sound, that there’s not a danger of a wide-scale collapse."

I've of folks who bank at small banks being contact that they can put their savings, that are below the FDIC levels, into savings accounts that are paying annual interest rates, on the average daily balance, that is well in excess of their mortgage interest rates, and they maintain complete liquidity, they can pull money out, or add it, tomorrow.

I figured that the idea had to be stem the flow of money from these accounts to treasury notes, and, judging by the insiders buying, the insiders are confident in their approach.

'bank insiders are buying shares in their own companies at the fastest pace since the covid crash, a strong vote of confidence in the industry after the collapse of four regional lenders earlier this year.'

'one can debate if management knows something that others don't, and as a reminder the management of SVB and FRC were completely clueless about what was coming and lost everything in just days'

'Bloomberg which cites data from research firm VerityData, and which said the surge is being driven by small and midsize banks. More purchasers stepped up even as share prices sank to multiyear lows in early May.'

'Another measure of insider sentiment is the buyers-to-sellers ratio, which compares unique insider buying to unique insider selling. The average quarterly ratio for banks since 2011 has been 1.8 to 1, according to the report. So far in the second quarter, the ratio is at a record high of 14.7 to 1.'