Economic News

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 120K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
There's no chance it becomes nearly as bad as 2008. It's not going to be "much worse" than 2023. Google tells me that about $27B of solar loans have been securitized. In 2005-07, over $1T in residential loans were securitized. And that doesn't even count the side bets (e.g. CDOs and squareds).

This would be a hiccup at most. It would lead to a few thousand lost jobs, I'd imagine. Maybe a few tens of thousands. Even with downstream events, it's going to be a ripple at most.

The problem is that a thousand ripples can become a big wave.
Click to expand...
The problem is the money tied up in renewable energy.

www.beneficialstatebank.com

Beneficial State Bank | Banking on Renewable Energy

If you’re tired of funding a broken financial system, there’s something you can do about it.
www.beneficialstatebank.com www.beneficialstatebank.com

Clean Energy Credit Union

We’re an institution you can trust for affordable clean energy loans. Whether you’re looking to be more energy efficient or buy a stylish new electric car, we’re here to help you finance what’s important to you.
www.cleanenergycu.org www.cleanenergycu.org

www.triodos.com

Renewable energy

Energy generation is essential for modern life, but relying on fossil fuels to provide it has a high environmental and social impact.
www.triodos.com www.triodos.com

To be clear, I know nothing about those specific financial institutions. Maybe they'll be fine. But I do know there's a very substantial industry that has emerged to finance renewable projects, and if their clients fail en masse, they likely will as well.
 
superrific said:
An easier explanation is that labor and capital have adverse interests. When labor is doing well, capital makes less money and gets angry. When labor doesn't do well, capital is very happy. There doesn't have to be any geographic spread at all.
Click to expand...
That may be true, but in NC, there is. Or that's at least my impressions based on travel across the state.
 
lawtig02 said:
This is probably my biggest economic worry right now. The BBB absolutely gutted the renewable energy industry, to the point we're virtually certain to see a cascade of bankruptcies over the next year or so. It's not a massive part of the overall economy but it's more than big enough to impact other sectors as well. I'm not sure if it will be as bad as the mortgage collapse in 2008, but it will almost certainly be much worse than the small bank failures in early 2023.

If this turns into what it could, it will be 1,000% the fault of Trump and the congressional Pubs who decided to use their lawmaking power to eliminate competition for the fossil fuel industry.
Click to expand...
Not mention the impact it will have over the next 10-20yrs as the US falls further behind in the development of a new energy economy. Incredibly regressive on so many fronts. Even if you don't believe in the climate change, it is idiotic to stall the green energy economy.
 
lawtig02 said:
To be clear, I know nothing about those specific financial institutions. Maybe they'll be fine. But I do know there's a very substantial industry that has emerged to finance renewable projects, and if their clients fail en masse, they likely will as well.
Click to expand...
In a country and an economy as big as ours, things that look "very substantial" aren't necessarily so. According to google AI, the entire solar industry employs about 280,000 people. If every single one of them was laid off, it would be a hit on the order of 0.1% of total US employment.

Unless the solar loans were especially opaque, investors knew what they were buying. They've likely hedged accordingly. Perhaps risk was under-estimated and the whacking of the solar industry in the monstrosity just passed by the GOP was unanticipated, but I doubt it will be too often fatal.

The big problem in 2008 was the opacity of balance sheets. Literally nobody knew which institutions were exposed and how they were exposed. Hell, sometimes the institutions didn't understand their own exposure (see, e.g., Howie Hubler in the Big Short -- name changed for movie but he's the guy who tanked the bank that sponsored Steve Carrell's hedge fund). I very much doubt that is the case now. Everything is too small.
 
bassydude77 said:
Not mention the impact it will have over the next 10-20yrs as the US falls further behind in the development of a new energy economy. Incredibly regressive on so many fronts. Even if you don't believe in the climate change, it is idiotic to stall the green energy economy.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.
 
superrific said:
In a country and an economy as big as ours, things that look "very substantial" aren't necessarily so. According to google AI, the entire solar industry employs about 280,000 people. If every single one of them was laid off, it would be a hit on the order of 0.1% of total US employment.

Unless the solar loans were especially opaque, investors knew what they were buying. They've likely hedged accordingly. Perhaps risk was under-estimated and the whacking of the solar industry in the monstrosity just passed by the GOP was unanticipated, but I doubt it will be too often fatal.

The big problem in 2008 was the opacity of balance sheets. Literally nobody knew which institutions were exposed and how they were exposed. Hell, sometimes the institutions didn't understand their own exposure (see, e.g., Howie Hubler in the Big Short -- name changed for movie but he's the guy who tanked the bank that sponsored Steve Carrell's hedge fund). I very much doubt that is the case now. Everything is too small.
Click to expand...
I'm not comparing this to 2008. That's why I said 2023 is a better comparison.
 
lawtig02 said:
I'm not comparing this to 2008. That's why I said 2023 is a better comparison.
Click to expand...
Right. I was just giving some background to posters who might have seen reference from both you and nycfan to 2008.

What exactly happened in 2023? A few banks failed. What were the follow-up effects? I thought they were relatively standard bank failures.
 
superrific said:
Right. I was just giving some background to posters who might have seen reference from both you and nycfan to 2008.

What exactly happened in 2023? A few banks failed. What were the follow-up effects? I thought they were relatively standard bank failures.
Click to expand...
Understood. And you're right that the bleeding was stopped fairly quickly in 2023, largely because of the quick intervention of the Fed and the FDIC. I don't have nearly as much confidence those institutions would step up for renewable energy banks now, especially if there are more of them than SVB, Signature and First Republic.

And again, I don't know much about the collateral exposure of renewable energy banks. I just know that bank failures tend to create ripple effects that are unpredictable, especially when incompetents are minding the helm.
 
lawtig02 said:
Understood. And you're right that the bleeding was stopped fairly quickly in 2023, largely because of the quick intervention of the Fed and the FDIC. I don't have nearly as much confidence those institutions would step up for renewable energy banks now, especially if there are more of them than SVB, Signature and First Republic.

And again, I don't know much about the collateral exposure of renewable energy banks. I just know that bank failures tend to create ripple effects that are unpredictable, especially when incompetents are minding the helm.
Click to expand...
I would be really surprised if those banks have substantial deposits. Again, substantial as measured against the economy.

Obviously you're right over the long-term; and in the short-term the collapse would affect a lot of lives. I just don't think it's going to be seismic.
 
superrific said:
An easier explanation is that labor and capital have adverse interests. When labor is doing well, capital makes less money and gets angry. When labor doesn't do well, capital is very happy. There doesn't have to be any geographic spread at all.
Click to expand...
That's why a co-op model is a more stable and effective business model long-term.
 
Duke Mu said:
That's why a co-op model is a more stable and effective business model long-term.
Click to expand...
Um, no. Co-ops still care about labor costs. People think they don't but it doesn't work that way. Anyway, you're joking about it being more stable long-term, right? Like, I can't even name a co-op that has been around since the Great Depression. Lots of corporations from back then still exist.
 
The future of the United States' economy.


"So we seem to be stuck, which is why this moment is so perplexing. The system upgrade is pending: The right is offering its regressive modernization as the update. The left has yet to figure out which one of three paths it wants to take.

One possibility is to stay put with the gerontocracy of the Democratic Party and wait for Trumpism to implode. That might happen, and the Democrats’ current position as the party of the institutionalist status quo makes this the most likely path. But this will be a losing proposition if no reversion to the mean of the pre-MAGA American politics occurs.

The effort by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders to rally an anti-oligarchy movement advocates for a second option, of left-wing populism. But whether this appeals to young men who have been drawn to Trump, as well as young women who poll as more progressive, and can create a broad-enough coalition remains to be seen.

A third approach is the “abundance” agenda, promoted recently by Ezra Klein and The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson, which proposes a progressive political program based on lower-regulation, pro-growth policies as a spark for renewed economic growth—though critics on the left accuse this approach of failing to confront corporate power.

To develop an alternative to the regressive modernization underpinning Trump’s reelection, the left must come up with a governing economic idea that can compete. Technocratic fixes of the old system look very unlikely to inspire a broad-enough coalition to defeat the potent, if unstable, electoral alliance that reelected Trump. The most promising avenue—one that could address the needs of millions of Americans who feel shut out of growth and prosperity and alienated from America’s governing elite—might be a fusion of AOC/Bernie populism with a more political, less technocratic version of abundance."

Thoughts?
 
BillOfRights said:
The future of the United States' economy.


"So we seem to be stuck, which is why this moment is so perplexing. The system upgrade is pending: The right is offering its regressive modernization as the update. The left has yet to figure out which one of three paths it wants to take.

One possibility is to stay put with the gerontocracy of the Democratic Party and wait for Trumpism to implode. That might happen, and the Democrats’ current position as the party of the institutionalist status quo makes this the most likely path. But this will be a losing proposition if no reversion to the mean of the pre-MAGA American politics occurs.

The effort by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Bernie Sanders to rally an anti-oligarchy movement advocates for a second option, of left-wing populism. But whether this appeals to young men who have been drawn to Trump, as well as young women who poll as more progressive, and can create a broad-enough coalition remains to be seen.

A third approach is the “abundance” agenda, promoted recently by Ezra Klein and The Atlantic’s Derek Thompson, which proposes a progressive political program based on lower-regulation, pro-growth policies as a spark for renewed economic growth—though critics on the left accuse this approach of failing to confront corporate power.

To develop an alternative to the regressive modernization underpinning Trump’s reelection, the left must come up with a governing economic idea that can compete. Technocratic fixes of the old system look very unlikely to inspire a broad-enough coalition to defeat the potent, if unstable, electoral alliance that reelected Trump. The most promising avenue—one that could address the needs of millions of Americans who feel shut out of growth and prosperity and alienated from America’s governing elite—might be a fusion of AOC/Bernie populism with a more political, less technocratic version of abundance."

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
Well I’m probably closest to the left wing populism. I’d also like to see a workers party. Yeah I know bad idea, but really having to work to pay bills raise families and retire is the only thing that truly united most of us. Empower workers , close the prosperity divide, send the billionaires running for the hills.

And drop all of this culture war bullshit and the rest of it too. Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Do t like gays don’t be gay. Don’t like Christianity don’t go to church. End the war on drugs . Oh big one for me stop this ICE bullshit which deliberately ignores the teue criminal. Businesssthat hire them But leave everyone alone to pursue their form of happiness as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else. I’ll take things that will never happen for $1000 Alex.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top