COSTAS ANTONIO 28/01/2011
in the body I have the uneasy feeling that we are about to commit
greater financial misbehavior of our story: the delivery of the
half half!, the English financial system, at bargain prices and
scrapping, banks, private investors "vulture funds", as he calls them
a known and reputable financial analyst, Joseph Carlos Diez, in his blog.
Perhaps this discomfort is due to an outburst of patriotism. In any
case, the consequences would be very important.
First, an excessive concentration and significant reduction of banking competition, which will hurt families, professionals and small and medium enterprises.
Second, the emergence of risk of financial exclusion for people with low financial literacy, which were in the vicinity of the offices of a public service boxes that banks will not lend. Third, the loss of Social Work of the boxes, which acts as a second
welfare state, in responding to social situations where no public policy
arrived.
And fourth, the loss of an instrument of cultural revitalization, especially in poor or remote areas. The economic value would be lost to society as a whole would be immense. Much greater than the equity or accounting, which is what is at stake now.
If we want to preserve the economic value, the solution is not
flight to the front to give them to private investors. The solution is the return
back at what should never have ceased to be.
The boxes are a unique financial institution. Its natural
geographic market is local and provincial levels. And its natural role lending to households and SMEs. That market and that were consistent operational with a specific ownership structure than the banks.
has been a success story so far.
This situation has come through a long road of folly.
are many who have worked with: legislators, regulators, supervisors and
boxes.
legislators, economic and monetary authorities have put a decent effort from other causes
to liberalize the boxes to break
natural geographical borders and let all that they do banks.
not measured risks. That freedom was granted to managers
clashed with the slowness of its organs of government when making decisions in times of crisis
.
managers took advantage of this liberalization
irresponsible expansion and concentrate investments in property and land. As
deposits to the depositors did not give credit to finance the expansion
, borrowed up to their eyeballs in
European capital markets. Property risk and high leverage has been an explosive cocktail
.
The most surprising is to see the supervisor, the Bank of Spain, left
increase the risk and debt. Its monitoring and supervision has been clearly improved
. The current situation challenges his work, to
least until 2007. Now it does not blame the "politicization" of the
boxes. You can not wash their hands.
deserve some explanation English bank and the authority to tell them what you will in the future to further develop its role
.
regional and local authorities have put their grain of sand. Al
seek a solution in endogamous marriages
have worsened the situation. The union of two infected does not lead to a healthy one.
Finally, the Government has been too long believing your own lie
: we had the best
world's banking system worldwide. Missed early diagnosis to see the spread
and diligence in the application of medicine I had at hand: their own Guarantee Fund and the Savings
FROB. Now everything is hurry and precipitation. And so it goes.
The solution to preserve the economic value of the boxes have to
English society and the economy is temporary intervention and debugging
responsibilities. Such intervention should be accompanied by the conversion obligation
banks. Instead, it should force banks intervened
to take a step back, regain its natural
business scope. It is not impossible. This has been done at other times
banking reform.
How much would the intervention? The vice president has
Elena Salgado estimated that some 20,000 additional million, including banks. In total
3% of GDP. Manageable amount, and more productive than spending Pharaonic
AVE. And less than 6% of GDP that took the intervention of the private banking sector
in the eighties, from Rumasa to Banesto.
In any case, that cost is nothing compared with the economic value
lost with the disappearance of the boxes.
I think are worth saving boxes. If not, the epitaph of the historians of our financial system is that "among all the killed, and she died alone."
0 comments:
Post a Comment