美國最近通過許多法令,

想要擴大稅基來緩和國債的問題。

可是,

一來美國國債已經無可挽回了

(美國每年全國的稅收金額

勉強只能支付國債的利息罷了,

就好像是被卡債壓得喘不過氣來的人一樣)

所以增稅無法從根本解決問題;

 

二來

這些增加的稅源,

完全課不到真正有錢人的稅,

政府又要考慮選舉的票源,

所以也不敢增加一般上班族的稅賦,

因此這次的增稅

完全就是加諸在中小企業的身上,

根本就是變相懲罰企業家,

那些在創造就業機會的人們。

這將會讓當前的經濟,

以及就業狀況更加的惡化。

 

反正當政府錢不夠用的時候,

就只會「伸手」向百姓要,

也就是將手身到你我的口袋之中。

已經有消息指出:

由於有錢人相繼退出歐美,

因此新加坡很有可能取代瑞士,

成為世界財富的新天堂。

 

這些新法規都會讓銀行

加速流出歐美國家

All Of This New Regulation Is Going To

Make Banks Leave The U.S. And Europe

n 由於民眾的憤怒,歐美各國開始對銀行業
嚴加限制(這是好事),造成銀行的出走,
連帶將會引發資金的出境

 

Jeff Carter, Points and Figures | Sep. 29, 2010, 7:30 PM

Over the course of the past two years, a lot of tomatoes have been thrown in the direction of Wall Street. Some of it was deserved. Much of it wasn't.  It was uninformed populist anger.  It's really easy to blame a bunch of egotistical rich guys in Brioni suits for problems that were caused elsewhere.  

This anger has given rise to dual hyper regulation of both sides of the Atlantic.  In Europe, regulators have come down hard on the investment banks.  Many politicos have advocated a trading tax.  The United States is not any different.  Barney Frank and Chris Dodd combined to pass one of the most damaging bills ever to the US financial system.   The Financial Regulation Law that President Obama signed last summer is yet to be filled in. The terms are so broad that they have sent a chill up the spine of bankers.  

Goldman Sachs traditionally gives most of it's large sse to the Democrats. Jaime Dimon of JP Morgan says he is a Democrat. But since they all were taken to the woodshed, they have begun donating money to the Republicans.  

Correct regulation is good.  It levels the playing field.  It creates competitive markets.  If incentives are written with care and concern for economic growth, the market will respond with enthusiasm.  If applied capriciously, we get laws like Sarbanes-Oxley.

For years, investment banks and trading firms have tried to play regulatory arbitrage with different countries financial regulators.  Corporations also do this with taxes, recognizing revenue in certain countries to lessen tax liability.  The regulators have turned their howitzers on the banking industry.  

Lloyd Blankfein of Goldman Sachs today said, “Operations can be moved globally and capital can be accessed globally,” he told the panel.  “It’s not arbitrage to thwart [regulation]. It’s about a need to compete with rivals."

The regulators are playing a game of chicken with banks. This is a game the banks will win.  

Countries need bank capital to grow.  Excessive regulation, excessive limitations on operations limits profitability.  Banks must answer to their shareholders and will allocate capital where it does the most for shareholder value.  That allocation also happens to do the most for their own pocketbooks!  Nationwide GDP increases faster with good banking.

Cities like Chicago, New York, London, Geneva, and Hong Kong have all benefit ted by having an active banking community and a deep deposit of capital housed in city banks.  It gives local businesses an advantage.  

Where does all this capital go with aggressive regulation?  

Asia.  Asia has been steadfastly quiet during this whole debate.  Ironically, Singapore is not a member of the G-20.   It doesn't need to abide by any G-20 pronouncements.  Singapore has excellent banking regulation that makes it the "Switzerland of Asia".  Capital is beginning to flow there.  If hedge funds, high frequency traders, and the rest of the marketplace are smart, they will follow that capital over there.

There is a 600 trillion dollar a year OTC market at stake. Most of it makes its home in the US and Europe.  It might find a new home in Asia. 

US regulators don't understand the function of places like LaSalle Street in Chicago, and Wall Street in New York.  Many in Washington DC see them as simply greedy traders looking to steal the last piece of bread off the plate.  The current leaders in control of the levers of power have decided to aggressively target them.  Some of the hearings that I have seen at the House Financial Services Committee, and the Senate Banking Committee make it abundantly clear that many of our elected officials don't understand the world of high finance.  The laws that they have passed, the regulations they have enacted over the past years have confirmed that suspicion.

Now the banks will make them pay for their lack of understanding.  Capital can leave with the flip of a switch.  Blankfein issued a warning shot today.  They are getting ready to turn that switch.   The markets of Europe and the US will suffer.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/regulation-banks-moving-2010-9#ixzz110rNxpWh

原文(全)連結:

http://www.businessinsider.com/regulation-banks-moving-2010-9

 


FrederickWang 發表在 痞客邦 PIXNET 留言(9) 人氣()


留言列表 (9)

發表留言
  • silver-knights
  • 美國夢,終是美國,夢

    相信不少人都有住在美國的親友,今日美國約八分之一的人領食物券度日,而五分之一的家庭即將面對房屋貸款無法繳出的情況,這些數據台灣的媒體是不會報導的!(政府為了安定民心及維持金融秩序).......今天看MLB playoff的時候心中在想,爆滿的球場之中有多少球迷是失業的?又有多少球迷的希望是建立在所支持的球隊上!加油~~~費城人~~~加油'台灣職棒!!
  • 氣瘋
  • 胡說到離譜 美國長期的還有10兆阿 誰去買 中國 日本 要做空就要先做多 大蕭條要來了
  • 感謝你最近在Fred的部落格
    經常分享一些精闢的看法。
    在下對於您所指出的世界趨勢,
    幾乎跟你如出一轍。

    Fred認為您不要為那些
    沒時間深入瞭解這些前因後果的一般人動怒,
    就好比犯不著跟不懂相對論的人解釋
    「地心引力是因為空間扭曲而形成的」
    (大多數人所學的地心引力
    還是以質量為本亦即牛頓的萬有引力定律)。

    在此想請問您所說的「胡說到離譜」
    是指Fred所寫的內容嗎?
    新聞媒體的內容嗎?
    還是一樓的回應嗎?

    FrederickWang 於 2010/10/15 08:15 回覆

  • 好事者
  • 記者問愛因斯坦:您的相對論是否已經推翻了牛頓力學 ?

    愛因斯坦回答:沒有
    相對論沒有推翻牛頓力學 
    相對論只是[擴張]了牛頓力學 
    牛頓力學(曲率=0)是相對論 ( 曲率>0, =0, <0都可以)的[特例] 
    相對論是把牛頓力學的特例延伸到[一般化]
  • 沒錯!
    但是Fred想表達的重點就是:
    有時候道理無須說這麼清楚,
    (誰知到又有位天才證明
    相對論也只是個「特例」罷了?!
    人類就是要這樣才會一直進步!)
    90%的人只要能接受引力存在的事實,
    並予以應用即可。
    而且自然有人偏好引力的存在(支持,例如鞋底、輪胎業?!),
    也會有人覺得引力的問題很麻煩(反對,例如運輸、航太業?!)

    自古以來,
    凡是任何事件每每都是幾家歡樂幾家愁,
    不能竟如人意,但求無愧我心。
    人人都可以自由地表達自己不同的觀點,
    人人絕對也有質疑他人看法的自由
    但是不能因為自己持不同看法
    進而攻擊、謾罵、甚至誹謗他人的看法。

    就如同信教一樣,
    自己的人生體驗比較接近A教,
    想要信奉倡導A教並無可非之處;
    但是就因為自己的A教信仰
    而開始駁斥、非難、打擊B、C等教的教義,
    就不算是在尊重宗教自由了。

    其實Fred本身相信
    「窮諸玄辯,若一毫至於太虛;
    竭世樞機,似一滴投於巨壑」
    許多時候講了也是白講,
    寧可收拾兩片唇皮與打字的雙手,
    靜靜過著自己的生活吧!

    FrederickWang 於 2010/10/15 10:13 回覆

  • 好事者
  • 清崎和王老師用淺易的白話來介紹深奧隱晦的x謀,真是無私的大好人.
  • 這不是宗教是經濟  這邊是一貫道的道觀嗎?
  • 用學術來談 你跟我談宗教談原則 去找葉教授 我口舌爭營你們 對我有好處???? 黃金ok 的話我會大買 沒時間跟你抬槓 再用宗教式的話語 我會顯身績開分身喔
  • 糾正
  • 美國長期債券 我少打了債卷
  • news
  • 主計處資料,2009年每戶可支配所得105萬以上者,累計佔全台灣40%。平均每戶人口數4人。平均每戶可支配所得為八八‧八萬元


    以主計處所編製的可支配所得資料為例,其定義如下:

    可支配所得=所得收入總計-非消費支出

    其中,非消費支出由利息、賦稅支出及經常移轉支出所組成。由此而知,此處的可支配所得較接近Discretionary Income。

    Discretionary Income為可支配所得(DI)扣除日常生活中的固定支出,例如房租、貨款、保費等,也就是扣除不得不支出的費用後的所得淨額。
  • nervlee
  • 政府的職責就是從窮人的口袋榨出錢來,拿給有錢人享樂花用 , 再此同時會再進行合理化的動作, 並美化數據演給窮人看
  • 財政數據
  • 2010美国財政税收10,900 億美元,歲入21,617 億美元
    聯邦政府利息支出 1,969 億美元