Editors of Bloomberg were surprised to learn that Rep. Paul Ryan is, maybe, a closeted Volcker Rule supporter.
“If you’re a bank and you want to operate like some non-bank entity like a hedge fund, then don’t be a bank,” the House Budget Committee chairman and the Republicans’ leading policy wonk said. “Don’t let banks use their customers’ money to do anything other than traditional banking.”
Bloomberg News had recently broken news about huge trading positions taken by the London branch of JP Morgan Chase & Co.’s chief investment office citing it as an example in support of Volcker Rule.
Some of Macris’s bets are now so large that JP Morgan probably can’t unwind them without losing money or roiling financial markets, the former executives said, based on knowledge gleaned from people inside the bank and dealers at other firms.
Bloomberg posits that large positions, like the one taken by JP Morgan, could be speculation masquerading as market making. Jamie Dimon does not agree and calls it a tempest in a teapot. Chase’s competition did not have the similar opinion and were clearly ‘rattled by the London Whale‘.
After reading Ryan’s comments one wonders what Dimon would have said if it was done by some other bank and Chase was one of the banks rattled.
Ideology, politics and special interests are playing a very big role in the regulatory policy making. They are making various players to juggle their contradictory opinions and viewpoints – sometimes in opposition to their own true beliefs, which are kept secret. Many people, like I, do not have a great understanding about the Volcker Rule that is why we depend upon honest analysts, experts and reporters to inform us about the pros and cons. Perhaps, we are waiting for Godot.