U
What happened to all of the doom and gloom economic threads?
- Thread starter Ulaven_Demorte
- Start date
- Status
richard_daily
Slut Whisperer
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2006
- Posts
- 36,898
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
One has to ask
WHY?
What do they know?
What are they ANTICIPATING?
WHAT TEH FUCK IS GOIN ON??????????????
Sound Like Cyprus? The SEC Proposed This Strict New Rule on Money Market Account Withdrawals
The Securities and Exchange Commission proposed last week a new rule that would make it more difficult for investors to withdraw from money market investment funds “during times of financial distress,” as Reuters puts it.
Yes, the SEC is mulling a proposal that would delay withdrawal requests from institutional investors (as opposed to individual investors) during financial crises. Sounds a little like Cyprus, no?
The SEC voted 5-0 to advance additional reforms, which would require shares of some money-market funds to “float”, instead of having a fixed value of $1 per share. The proposal failed to gain support last year but has since won the backing of a panel of regulators that include Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
The agency also proposed new fees on withdrawals from funds if their assets that can be readily converted into cash fall below a certain level.
The public has 90 days to comment on the proposals. At some later point, the agency would finalize the rules or settle on a modified version of them.
Requiring values to float would make some money funds more like bonds, whose principal changes with increases or decreases in interest rates. That’s a fundamental shift because it means investors could lose principal if the value falls below $1.
Proponents say it is necessary change because it would show money funds, while safer than stocks and many other investments, still carry some level of risk. They say more awareness of the risk would reduce the potential for runs on money funds.
The SEC proposal would limit the floating-value requirement to those money-market funds known as “prime.”
Prime funds attract mainly big institutional investors as opposed to retail customers and are considered more risk-prone because they invest in short-term corporate debt. They represent roughly half of the total $2.9 trillion assets held by all money-market mutual funds.
.
Exempt from the floating-value requirement would be money-market funds that hold at least 80 percent of their assets in cash or government securities, and retail funds – those limiting an investor’s withdrawals to a maximum of $1 million per business day.
The problems in money-market funds during the 2008 crisis didn’t involve those types of funds, SEC officials said.
“While money-market funds have … long served as an important investment vehicle, the financial crisis of 2008 highlighted the susceptibility of these products to runs,” SEC Chairman Mary Jo White said before the vote.
Mary Schapiro, who stepped down as SEC chairman in December, pushed unsuccessfully last year for a floating value for all money-market funds and a requirement that money funds hold capital reserves of 1 percent of the fund’s assets. But three of the five commissioners opposed those changes and her proposal was never brought to a vote.
Some commissioners appeared to be sympathetic to arguments made by representatives for the industry, who complained that most of the changes previously recommended would make money funds unattractive and lead to fewer investors.
This time, however, the SEC faced pressure from the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a group of high-level regulators that has backed both the floating-value requirement and calls for strict capital reserves. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew both sit on the panel.
WHY?
What do they know?
What are they ANTICIPATING?
WHAT TEH FUCK IS GOIN ON??????????????
Sound Like Cyprus? The SEC Proposed This Strict New Rule on Money Market Account Withdrawals
The Securities and Exchange Commission proposed last week a new rule that would make it more difficult for investors to withdraw from money market investment funds “during times of financial distress,” as Reuters puts it.
Yes, the SEC is mulling a proposal that would delay withdrawal requests from institutional investors (as opposed to individual investors) during financial crises. Sounds a little like Cyprus, no?
The SEC voted 5-0 to advance additional reforms, which would require shares of some money-market funds to “float”, instead of having a fixed value of $1 per share. The proposal failed to gain support last year but has since won the backing of a panel of regulators that include Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke.
The agency also proposed new fees on withdrawals from funds if their assets that can be readily converted into cash fall below a certain level.
The public has 90 days to comment on the proposals. At some later point, the agency would finalize the rules or settle on a modified version of them.
Requiring values to float would make some money funds more like bonds, whose principal changes with increases or decreases in interest rates. That’s a fundamental shift because it means investors could lose principal if the value falls below $1.
Proponents say it is necessary change because it would show money funds, while safer than stocks and many other investments, still carry some level of risk. They say more awareness of the risk would reduce the potential for runs on money funds.
The SEC proposal would limit the floating-value requirement to those money-market funds known as “prime.”
Prime funds attract mainly big institutional investors as opposed to retail customers and are considered more risk-prone because they invest in short-term corporate debt. They represent roughly half of the total $2.9 trillion assets held by all money-market mutual funds.
.
Exempt from the floating-value requirement would be money-market funds that hold at least 80 percent of their assets in cash or government securities, and retail funds – those limiting an investor’s withdrawals to a maximum of $1 million per business day.
The problems in money-market funds during the 2008 crisis didn’t involve those types of funds, SEC officials said.
“While money-market funds have … long served as an important investment vehicle, the financial crisis of 2008 highlighted the susceptibility of these products to runs,” SEC Chairman Mary Jo White said before the vote.
Mary Schapiro, who stepped down as SEC chairman in December, pushed unsuccessfully last year for a floating value for all money-market funds and a requirement that money funds hold capital reserves of 1 percent of the fund’s assets. But three of the five commissioners opposed those changes and her proposal was never brought to a vote.
Some commissioners appeared to be sympathetic to arguments made by representatives for the industry, who complained that most of the changes previously recommended would make money funds unattractive and lead to fewer investors.
This time, however, the SEC faced pressure from the Financial Stability Oversight Council, a group of high-level regulators that has backed both the floating-value requirement and calls for strict capital reserves. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew both sit on the panel.
U
unregistered
Guest
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,304
From your own article:
So what it really says is not that there's an 85% increase, but a 55%-85% increase. But 85% sounds more scary so you concealed (or denied) the truth. And that's before a 70% tax subsidy for a family making $49k - and that subsidy is applied AFTER the increase. THAT MEANS THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF AMERICANS ARE GOING TO ME PAYING LESS WHILE ALSO GETTING MUCH BETTER INSURANCE.
This is why you don't have any credibility Vette. The facts (math) says that most people are going to be getting more health care for less money. And you lie, spin, and parrot lies all day long to avoid having to tell the truth about something.
Now if you think I've missed something here then I'd love to hear what facts you can show me. But I have the feeling that your response will be more fact-free gibberish, non-sequiters, personal attacks, or fecal-based retorts. Prove me wrong.
I'm apparently having a retard day. Where does it say 70% subsidy and where does it show how much the family needs to make to receive them?
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,197
Take a look HERE and plug numbers in.
72% subsidy for a family of four (2 children), all non-smokers, parents age is 40.
Monthly out of pocket cost is $268 and that's for the SILVER plan.
The Vettebigot refuses to acknowledge the subsidies, and once again his dishonesty brings great shame to himself, his family (including his three surviving sons Lee, Harvey and Oswald) and the United States Marine Corps.
U
unregistered
Guest
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,197
Previously addressed and debunked. You have no honor.
mercury14
Pragmatic Metaphysician
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Posts
- 22,158
Just to be clear, the group this article is referring to is about 7%-10% of the population.
Secondly, the vast majority of them will be getting a subsidy that exceeds the value of their premium increase. That means they'll be paying less. And they're going to get better coverage for paying less and their insurance company can't drop them in case they need expensive care.
Busybody
We are ALL BUSYBODY!
- Joined
- Jan 23, 2011
- Posts
- 55,323
U
unregistered
Guest
IrezumiKiss
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2007
- Posts
- 72,602
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,197
who is gonna PAY for the subsidy
We had a national referendum on that last November called an "election".
The American people voted to increase certain taxes to pay for Obamacare.
U
unregistered
Guest
mercury14
Pragmatic Metaphysician
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Posts
- 22,158
who is gonna PAY for the subsidy
That's not fair!
If you're insisting that the subsidies don't exist then nobody has to pay for them.
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,304
Teddybear has been pretty quiet. Should I assume the stock market did okay today?
phrodeau
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2002
- Posts
- 78,588
The DJIA has been breaking a new record high every week or so.
Beco
I'm Not Your Guru
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2002
- Posts
- 57,795
When did we agree to that?
Sean Renaud
The West Coast Pop
- Joined
- Feb 5, 2004
- Posts
- 58,304
I know, I meant today. Usually our adorable Teddy will tell us "Stocks falter on fears Obama might golf" if the stocks aren't at least up double digits.
When we voted OBama back in and he said he'd raise taxes to pay for the deficit and the debt. Were you not paying attention?
U
unregistered
Guest
richard_daily
Slut Whisperer
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2006
- Posts
- 36,898
Right underneath "Barack Obama" there was a little note that said, "Don't forget the tax increase." Rob is soo fucked up.
"underneath"? Are you having BBC bottom fantasies again?
Shame on you. Nasty comment
mercury14
Pragmatic Metaphysician
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2009
- Posts
- 22,158
Obama laid out his agenda which included Obamacare and tax increases. America then voted for him and his agenda. Where have you been?
RobDownSouth
Never Banhammered
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 72,197
- Status
