What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

St. Clown said:
The man comes from Goldman Sachs, an institution that's intertwined with everything that Glass-Steagall forbade. Supporting GS would be to tear that company apart, create a lot of expenses in the process, and create what many would view as simple accounting trickery. Who will be the owners of the new companies if you split apart the banks? Well, it would be the people who own stock in the current banks that get split. It's the same net effect in ownership, only now you're paying the salaries of multiple boards, executive teams, etc. He would make some sort of economies of scale argument against the split.
Click to expand...

I am, however, curious as to how they are going to ratf-ck us, what cover story they'll use, and how blatant it will be.

This is such a weird situation because Trump, who can only hold at most one idea in his head at once, thinks he is anti-Bank. But simultaneously he picks a finance team that is the distilled essence of Predatory Banking.

To avoid a financial psychotic break, I think they're just going to have to lie. They're going to announce the "Break Up Too Big To Fail" Plan which specifies that Goldman must now own in full any financial institution that does any business in the US.
 
Kepler said:
I am, however, curious as to how they are going to ratf-ck us, what cover story they'll use, and how blatant it will be.

This is such a weird situation because Trump, who can only hold at most one idea in his head at once, thinks he is anti-Bank. But simultaneously he picks a finance team that is the distilled essence of Predatory Banking.

To avoid a financial psychotic break, I think they're just going to have to lie. They're going to announce the "Break Up Too Big To Fail" Plan which specifies that Goldman must now own in full any financial institution that does any business in the US.
Click to expand...

Da Banks: Donald, you're not going to be president forever. When you return to private life, where are you going to get credit for your next project? F with us and you can forget about building anything but Legos.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

dxmnkd316 said:
Mnuchin said he doesn't support returning to Glass-Steagall but said he supports a "21st century GS"

I'm interested what this means and what he proposes.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised if one reference is rules about how banks are prohibited from crossing state lines. It's also one of the big talking points about the replacement of the PPACA.
 
Last edited:
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

Is it me or has Wells Fargo's customer service plummeted? We've been banking with them since the Norwest days and they were stellar. Every month there's a new problem...beyond the boatloads of ethical issues. Simple trading with even a preferred member account has become a nightmare.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

5mn_Major said:
Is it me or has Wells Fargo's customer service plummeted? We've been banking with them since the Norwest days and they were stellar. Every month there's a new problem...beyond the boatloads of ethical issues. Simple trading with even a preferred member account has become a nightmare.
Click to expand...

Agree on all counts. They probably are headed down the sewer. No surprise.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

ScoobyDoo said:
Agree on all counts. They probably are headed down the sewer. No surprise.
Click to expand...

I just sent in a trade to Wells Fargo to short a stock...and was told there was a 50% charge to the total value of the trade. That is to say, if the stocks traded have a value of $1000...then there is a $500 fee.

:confused:

Pursuing it.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

5mn_Major said:
I just sent in a trade to Wells Fargo to short a stock...and was told there was a 50% charge to the total value of the trade. That is to say, if the stocks traded have a value of $1000...then there is a $500 fee.

:confused:

Pursuing it.
Click to expand...

Note to self: Don't use that broker...

And I thought my biggest headache was having to correct every line of the 8949 to include commissions...
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

5mn_Major said:
I just sent in a trade to Wells Fargo to short a stock...and was told there was a 50% charge to the total value of the trade. That is to say, if the stocks traded have a value of $1000...then there is a $500 fee.

:confused:

Pursuing it.
Click to expand...

Are they making the market on that stock? For stocks that aren't NASDAQ, NYSE, etc. traded, or nearly all penny stocks, a broker will have to make a market and will charge a premium rate to do that. If not, you might want to look into a new broker.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

While this may have been canceled for longstanding policy reasons, it is interesting that this would be canceled. I suspect if it was to honor Our Brave War Fighters it would not have been.

We need to have this discussion everywhere. Sadly, if we are ever going to seriously address poverty we will have to make the face of poverty a white child.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

St. Clown said:
Are they making the market on that stock? For stocks that aren't NASDAQ, NYSE, etc. traded, or nearly all penny stocks, a broker will have to make a market and will charge a premium rate to do that. If not, you might want to look into a new broker.
Click to expand...

So they came back with a detailed answer. The figure is not 50% of the value of the trade as originally stated...but rather 50% of the value of the trade divided by 350 per day held. In essence, they say they need a sort of an insurance on the trade. Still all sounds very suspicious. But have made good money off the Friday and today trade. Will investigate further with friends in the business. WF still appears to be struggling with service.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

Or, it's trying to prevent morons from playing with the big boys and sustaining life-altering losses. Unless you have a big boy account, they're going to make it as difficult as possible for morons who think they know what they're doing.

Those requirements go away if you have a big boy account.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

5mn_Major said:
So they came back with a detailed answer. The figure is not 50% of the value of the trade as originally stated...but rather 50% of the value of the trade divided by 350 per day held. In essence, they say they need a sort of an insurance on the trade. Still all sounds very suspicious. But have made good money off the Friday and today trade. Will investigate further with friends in the business. WF still appears to be struggling with service.
Click to expand...

Did you say you were taking a short position? If so, that sounds like they're protecting themselves from failures to pay the margin call. All short sales are performed using margin accounts, and industry thing. How a broker protects themselves from margin call failures will vary.

I had a friend in college who played AOL's stock on margin. He first took the position in 1998, kept maxing out the margin and buying more AOL as the stock price climbed. The guy's account bloomed to over $1MM. Then by late-1999 the stock started to fall and he had to sell position to make his margin calls. By the time he closed the position he'd made a couple thousand dollars in total. It wasn't a total loss for him, but a far cry from what he was expecting.

"The internet's the future, and AOL is positioned to only go up and up and up!" Right...
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

St. Clown said:
Did you say you were taking a short position? If so, that sounds like they're protecting themselves from failures to pay the margin call. All short sales are performed using margin accounts, and industry thing. How a broker protects themselves from margin call failures will vary.

I had a friend in college who played AOL's stock on margin. He first took the position in 1998, kept maxing out the margin and buying more AOL as the stock price climbed. The guy's account bloomed to over $1MM. Then by late-1999 the stock started to fall and he had to sell position to make his margin calls. By the time he closed the position he'd made a couple thousand dollars in total. It wasn't a total loss for him, but a far cry from what he was expecting.

"The internet's the future, and AOL is positioned to only go up and up and up!" Right...
Click to expand...

Yeah. During the great recession, I was off the hook. Probably the reason, but it was a decade ago. I'm not too concerned about this one...up over 8% in just over 24 hours of market. And I know this company, its just the beginning.

I am wearing big boy pants elsewhere in the bank...we'll see what kind of pants the bank chooses in the end.
 
Re: Completely Unwoven: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 4.0

5mn_Major said:
Yeah. During the great recession, I was off the hook. Probably the reason, but it was a decade ago. I'm not too concerned about this one...up over 8% in just over 24 hours of market. And I know this company, its just the beginning.

I am wearing big boy pants elsewhere in the bank...we'll see what kind of pants the bank chooses in the end.
Click to expand...

When I say big boy pants, I don't mean any of us. I'm talking people with tens of millions in liquid assets. Certainly millions as a minimum. I'm not talking about a rinkydink PMA either.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top