When the banks fail, Singapore will surely follow suit....

When the banks fail, Singapore will surely follow suit....

rebeccasu4 said:

Thread: Future World in 2030?
Hmm I dont think hyperinflation would be an issue in singapore in 2030. Yes inflation is on the rise and will continue to be. But hyperinflation is one of the most extreme forms of inflation and I think the government would be able to control it.
An issue in 2030 could be outflux of talent. If singaporeans dont feel a strong enough sense of belonging and ownership to the country and the grass gets greener on the other side.
Robots seem to far a stretch too i feel?
What do the rest of you think?

Click to expand...

[emphasis in quote mine]

Zimbabwe borrowed $$$ thinking that their GDP will balloon so much, they'd easily return the foreign currency that they borrowed, Greece I believe thought the same.

Zimbabwe ended up printing Z$ with the highest denomination at Z$100Trillion in about Feb2009, and then some more (they tried but failed), and whether Greece will leave the Euro or drag the entire Euro down is still in debate.

Hyperinflation or not, I don't think that the world would be a peaceful place if inflation rears its ugly head (Zimbabwe) or if vital government services are curtailed because of shortage of funds (Greece: funds are first used to pay interest on national debt valued at approx 160% GDP).

The US is taking the lead to print jobs through printing $$$, Japan is now doing the same, China is accused by US of currency manipulation when they simply match dollar printing with Yuan easing (printing)... so anyone there tell me that SG govt is the special case that DOES NOT print $$$? Then why have SG foreign reserves ballooned so much> Pls go check out M1, M2, M3: measures of money supply (volume) in the world today (see the exponentially rising charts in every state). As the supply of money increases, prices will automatically rise as the rising tide of currency supply rises (Zimbabwe in degree was an extreme but no less a pertinent case in point).

PM Lee has already alluded to using SG reserves to bail out banks: too big to fail and too big to jail: they just have to threaten collapse at the same time for the doors of the MAS treasury to be opened:
Lee Hsein Loong: "'if all the banks threaten to die at the same time, governments cannot help but go and rescue them', as they did in 2008 and 2009." ['Regulating tightly 'not always feasible'' (ST 08Oct2012)]

Ever tried paying for your electricity by barter with eggs; when the time comes, then you'll know what I mean, by then, even having eggs to spare would be a pipe dream, life would be most painful for those who live in the developed world....

PM Lee loves his 'too big to fail, too big to jail' banks, so when banks fail, Singapore will surely if not automatically, follow suit.

Caption: Currency anyone?[img source]

bic_cherry said:

When the banks fail, Singapore will surely follow suit....
...
PM Lee has already alluded to using SG reserves to bail out banks: too big to fail and too big to jail: they just have to threaten collapse at the same time for the doors of the MAS treasury to be opened:
Lee Hsein Loong: "'if all the banks threaten to die at the same time, governments cannot help but go and rescue them', as they did in 2008 and 2009." ['Regulating tightly 'not always feasible'' (ST 08Oct2012)]
...

Click to expand...

Full text of 'Regulating tightly 'not always feasible'' as follows:

News: The Straits Times - 8 October 2012
Regulating tightly 'not always feasible'
by Elgin Toh
THE desire to regulate banks more tightly in the aftermath of the global financial crisis is understandable but not always practicable, Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said last night.

The pressure in the West to separate commercial banking from investment banking, for example, might in reality be impossible, he argued. The latter is "intrinsic to the financial system", he said.
In his response to a question on bank regulation at a dialogue session with Kiwi businessmen last night, Mr Lee weighed in on a debate raging in developed nations, especially ones where taxpayers' money have been used to bail out banks, to the outrage of many.
One argument is that a wall should be built between the safer commercial banking functions - that mainly involve taking deposits and giving out loans - and the more risky sort that hedge funds and investment banks engage in - which Mr Lee said sometimes amounted to "gambling".
The viability of commercial banks is then effectively guaranteed by the government to prevent any possible meltdown of the whole financial system. The latter, however, must be allowed to fail if they make the wrong bets.
Mr Lee expressed his scepticism with this argument yesterday, pointing out that "financial markets have variegated into all kinds of sophisticated activities, products, derivatives, investment activities, trading - and the (commercial banks) are also in these".
"It's very hard to draw a line," he said.
Furthermore, "if all the banks threaten to die at the same time, governments cannot help but go and rescue them", as they did in 2008 and 2009.
The Singapore Government's approach was therefore to accept that mishaps were in the nature of the capitalist system, and to build up the nation's reserves instead, in anticipation of such events.
In the 2008 crisis, said Mr Lee, Singapore could do the "right thing" and protect jobs by helping employers with Central Provident Fund payments because the reserves were there. Singapore was also fortunate that the storm passed relatively quickly, he said.
"Next time, better make sure we have got ammunition and powder dry, ready for a crisis."
http://www.pmo.gov.sg/content/pmosi...tober/regulating_tightlynotalwaysfeasible.htm

Click to expand...