Regulation vs. Responsibility: A Wall Street Story

Coin stacksThe tensions between Wall Street and the Federal Government and the cries to rein in bankers and level the playing field for the average worker existed long before ‘Flash Boys.’
 
In response, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act was passed in 2010 with the hope that it might bring about much-needed reform of the financial services industry. Predictably, the industry resisted any attempt to curb its immense power, flooding the halls of Congress with lobbyists and the campaign coffers of legislators willing to roll back parts of the 2010 bill. As a result, many regulations are still not in place, and the Securities and Exchange Commission and CFTC budgets have been slashed, limiting their ability to investigate wrongdoing.

What Is Responsible Regulation?

Critics of Dodd-Frank assert that it does not address institutions deemed too big to fail since it explicitly permits bailouts via a “resolution authority” provision to be initiated at the discretion of government authorities. Many people – including Sandy Weill, John Reed, and Richard Parsons (all former Citigroup chairmen) – argue that banks are, in fact, too big. Federal Reserve Governors Tarullo, Fisher, Stein, Plosser, and Bullard argue that the only solution is to break up the mega-banks.
 
However, others would simply require that banks raise their capital ratio to 10% or more of their assets, and require more cash reserves. They note that during the Great Depression, large New York banks maintained more than 15% of their assets in equity and cash reserves in excess of 25% – and none of these banks failed.

 
Cam Fine, CEO of the 7,000-member-strong Independent Community Bankers of America, bluntly claims, “Too-big-to-fail firms should be downsized and split up.” Rather than reducing the risk that mega-banks pose, the Dodd-Frank Act has aggrandized the advantage of large banks over smaller competitors, imposing such a burden on the latter that “they will simply have to sell out to larger institutions that have the staff to deal with the massive volume of new reports and rules,” according to American Bankers Association President Ed Yingling.
 
The provisions of Dodd-Frank extend well beyond bankers to other segments of the financial industry. While unpopular, many players have reluctantly prepared for its new rules and discovered that the situation is not quite as dire as initially projected. According to Wulf Kaal, a University of St. Thomas professor who surveyed 94 private equity, venture capital, real estate, and hedge fund advisers, 7 of 10 say that the new laws haven’t affected their investors’ rates of return, nor do they plan to alter their investment style. In other words, the regulations have been diluted and defanged to the extent that no real change is required.
 
Read more . . .

5 Challenges for America’s Businesses in a Global Market

american-flag-businessFor almost 200 years, America has enjoyed global leadership in science, commerce, and government. As a consequence, the United States has become one of history’s greatest economic powers, dominating the 19th and 20th centuries. The ability of Americans to “think outside the box,” their courage to challenge conventional thinking, and their confidence to persevere despite numerous setbacks has inspired generations and continues to change lives around the globe.
 
Leaders understand that greatness is more than building personal wealth or power, but creating products and services that improve the lives of individuals and the overall human condition. But as trade barriers between countries have fallen, leaders are faced with new challenges, and America’s preeminent status as the world’s dominant economy has been and will continue to be challenged as never before.

21st Century Challenges for America’s Businesses

There are a variety of factors that may negatively affect the competitiveness of American firms in the coming years, including three identified in McKinsey Quarterly:
 

1. Dynamism in Emerging Markets

The world has become “flatter” with the disappearance of natural and artificial borders that protected local and regional markets. As a consequence, markets are worldwide and more competitive, as economist and “New York Times” columnist Thomas L. Friedman predicted in 2005.
 
Within the next decade, China will be home to more large companies than either the United States or Europe, with almost one-half of the companies on Fortune’s Global 500 list of major international players hailing from emerging markets – a 900% increase in 20 years. The emergence of nearly two billion consumers in the emerging markets will create markets in their home countries to support aggressive international growth.

2. Technology and Connectivity

Moore’s Law – a computer term professing that overall processing power doubles every two years – is alive and well, and may prove to be conservative. According to SingularityHUB, many computer scientists project that the world’s first “exaflop” computer will be available before the end of this decade. An exaflop computer will perform a quintillion operations a second – the inputting power equal to the human brain.
 
As a consequence of the anticipated quantum leap in computer power, businesses can start and gain scale with stunning speed while using little capital, value will rapidly shift between country and industry sectors to reflect the constant changes, and entrepreneurs and startups will have new advantages over large established businesses. The life cycle of companies is already shortening and decision making has never had to be so rapid fire.
 
Read more . . .

7 Factors That May Affect Your Retirement

man on computer work3In 2010, a Pew Research report indicated that three out of every four members of the workforce expect to keep working for pay after they retire. 60% of them believe this will be by choice, not necessity – but pre-retirees may be more optimistic than justified in their expectations. According to the Center of Retirement Research, less than half of all households are financially prepared for retirement at 65; a quarter will need to work at least one to three more years; and almost one in ten will need to work past age 72 or longer.
 
Whether by need or choice, it’s clear that plenty of folks are likely to continue working in one capacity or another after they officially retire. The decision of whether or not to do so is dependent upon a range of factors.

Factors Affecting Retirement Security

Financial security for American citizens usually results from a combination of government programs, personal assets, and employer benefits. However, each of these factors is undergoing historical transformations right now. Unfortunately, these transformations may mean Americans have to move the goalposts back a bit when it comes to their retirement goals.

1. Investment Volatility

Conventional wisdom suggests that the average annualized return for common stocks over a period of 10 years or more is positive, somewhere between 7% and 9%. However, statistics have a way of disguising inconvenient truths: According to AllFinancialMatters.com, there is actually substantial volatility in the numbers – mainly related to start and end dates.
 
Suppose three brothers work for the same company and each invests $50,000 in its 401k plan over a period of 30 years. Joe, the oldest brother, begins investing in 1966 and – assuming the results mimic the S&P 500 return – retires in 1996 with $1,871,111 in his account. Bill, the middle brother, who began investing in 1976, retires in 2006 with $1,520,397 in his account. And Mike, the youngest brother, begins in 1983 and retires in 2013 with $1,050,416. These figures do not include the effects of inflation or the deduction of fees.
 
Older workers – those most likely to retire in the coming decade – found the impact of the last stock market decline to be especially harmful. Two-thirds of those between the ages of 45 and 60 reported at least a 20% decline, according to one survey. As Gad Levanon, director of macroeconomic research at the Conference Board, observed, “The older you are, it makes it more difficult to make up for [loss of value] and more people are delaying retirement as a result.”

2. Low Interest Rates

Many retirement professionals previously advised that an annual 4% withdrawal rate would result in sufficient funds to last through 30 years of post-work life. In other words, a fund of $1 million could provide $40,000 per year.
 
However, due to lower yields on fixed income investments, many retirement planners now recommend a withdrawal rate between 2.7% and 3.0% in order to achieve a 90% probability of not outliving your assets. Lowering the distribution rate means that income must now be replaced from other sources, and your standard of living must be lowered.
 
Read more . . .

Is America the New Rome?

roman colosiumThe example of the first great republic in recorded history (509 B.C. to 29 B.C.) was omnipresent in the minds of America’s founders as they created a new republic centuries later. As a consequence of their deliberations and, perhaps, the “protection of divine providence” as written in the Declaration of Independence, the United States of America, in the mind of many of the founders, was intended to be the modern equivalent of the Roman Republic. The Roman Republic ended with the infamous assassination of Julius Caesar in 27 B.C..
 
After a protracted civil war, Octavian became the first “Imperator Caesar,” or Roman emperor. The subsequent period – post-republic – of Roman dominance is known in history as the “Roman Empire.” While Rome enjoyed an additional 500 years of world dominance and internal conflict under the Caesars, history reports its disintegration in the fifth century A.D. (476 A.D.) following the successful invasion of the barbarian Germanic tribes.

Common Influences on the Founding of Each Society

While the facts of the founding of the Italian city Rome are shrouded in myth, the Roman Republic was established in 509 B.C. by the overthrow of the last Roman king (Lucius Tarquinius Superbus) and expulsion of the Etruscan theocratic government by the Latins, one of the three Italic tribes in central and southern Italy. Similarly, the “Republic for the United States of America” was birthed in a bloody revolution against the British King George more than 2,000 years later.
 
According to historian Carl J. Richard in “Greeks & Romans Bearing Gifts: How the Ancients Inspired the Founding Fathers,” the earlier Roman Republic heavily influenced the founders of America who shared many common fears and hopes of the earlier architects of that Republic. These included the following:
 

Fear of Centralized Authority

Having learned the lessons of despots and emperors, both societies attempted to establish checks and balances to avoid abuse of unchecked government power. The Romans replaced their king who served for life with a system of two consuls elected by citizens for an annual term. America’s founders created the executive, legislative, and judicial branches to diffuse potential power and abuse.
 

Open Societies

Rome welcomed other people – particularly its vanquished enemies – into Roman citizenship, even accepting the gods of the newcomers. Likewise, America has long been recognized as a “melting pot.”
 

Selfless Leadership

Rooted in agrarian societies, commitment to family and mutual citizen interdependence were basic in each society. Cincinnatus, a Roman farmer, saved the republic from invading Aequi tribes in 458 B.C. and again in 439 B.C. when a conspiracy threatened the government. In both cases, he was named dictator, but shortly thereafter resigned his commission to return to farming. George Washington, a Virginia farmer who led the fight against the British, resigned after his second term as president to return to his Virginia estate. Both men are examples of leaders who put the needs of their country before their personal interests.
 
Read more. . .