The debate about reforming the financial system is often presented as an argument between regulators on one side and banks on the other. But it is also beginning to throw up some differences among banks. One such rift has been exposed by the suggestion that banks should be forced to hold greater reserves of liquidity and capital in national subsidiaries.
The Great Debate UK
That's the provocative question posed by Willem Buiter. His latest, characteristically lengthy, blog post tackles the regulatory vogue for forcing banks to hold much greater reserves of liquid assets - in practice, government bonds.
- John Ross is visiting professor at Shanghai’s Jiao Tong University where he writes a blog on globalisation. The views expressed are his own. -
Britain's asset protection scheme, invented to protect the banking system, is morphing into a bureaucratic monster. It's time to kill it off. Though state support is still needed, there are simpler ways for the government to prop up its ailing lenders.
from The Great Debate:
People are up in arms about bankers receiving bonuses when the banks they worked for have gone down the pan. But isn't it just as shocking that so many state-backed financial firms still subsidize the eye-popping wages of sporting superstars through rich sponsorship deals?