8 Burst results for "Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank"

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:59 min | 2 months ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"10 year Yield 1.6 whole percent gold little change Now 18 81 the ounce and west Texas intermediate crude today W T I out by about one About by about 3.9% 66 05 a barrel again Recapping stocks Rally s and P up 41 up by 1% I'm Charlie pellet that Bloomberg Business Flash. Thank you so much, Charlie. I'm Emily Wilkens. Here in our D. C studio, along with my co host Jack Fitzpatrick. Get me through the end part of another Monday in just a minute. We're going to be joined by Democratic Pennsylvania Congresswoman Madeline Dean. But first we're getting some breaking news across the terminal. Sounds like European Union leaders have agreed to sanctions on Belarus. The country came under scrutiny over the weekend when a commercial airliner was forced to ground and an opposition activist was taken off the plane. There's been widespread condemnation off this move, and we've been hearing Morfogen today from world leaders, but certainly that's European Union block is one of the big ones that we were watching today. I mean, Jack, what do you Sort of make of what we're hearing right now with these sanctions was pretty significant news that the you agreed, according to reporting from the A P just a little bit earlier this afternoon against Belarus, including a ban on the use of air space, But I think there's some really important unanswered questions, especially as it pertains to the U. S. You know, there is the news that Vladimir Putin is going to meet with the Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, seemingly in a sign of support after the arrest of this dissident, and it really seems to raise the question. What is the U. S do as in response to this as it pertains to not only Belarus, but Russia backing up, Lukashenko. So I would point that out as one of the really key outstanding questions now and Jack. We're going to get into that later. But now we're going to turn to Congress for a minute. No, the U. S House of representatives. They're out of town for the next three weeks. But that doesn't not mean that they are stopping working. They're going to be continuing from their district as they make progress on a number of bills, including changes to policing President's Biden infrastructure Bill. And a big thing this week. The House Financial Services Committee is holding a hearing with the heads of major banks on Thursday, where they will be questioned by number of lawmakers, including Pennsylvania congresswoman and noted while was super Fan Madeline Dean congresswoman were so grateful to have you join us today on the show. No latest week you will be a hearing with the heads of numerous major banks, including J. P. Morgan, Morgan Stanley Bank of America. What are you going to be looking for? In this hearing? And what are you going to be asking the heads of these major banks? Emily. Thank you for having me. Thank you for noting that when we are back in district were not only doing committee work we're doing district worked and outreach Esso and also thank you for noting I am a wall off fan. On abashed while Afghan I am looking forward to this hearing with the big banks. I've been a part of several hearings in my freshman term. On financial services. And my line of questioning is often towards governance. How are these big banks governing themselves? Under the regulations? A zoo? They appear now what did we need to know as policy makers to make sure we hold them accountable. Transparency on good governance and about four consumer protection. We've seen some of the big banks get hit was very massive fines for Mistakes they made. S so I wanted to see where they are in terms of consumer protection, caring about the customers who come in their bank or goes online. On and and borrows from them or space with them. That's why not one of them. Congressman Jack Fitzpatrick, you thanks for joining us more specifically on that note. I'm curious about how this breaks down either to supporting Dodd Frank, which many Republicans don't like. Or going for something bigger. Do you think that that Dodd Frank did enough, or do you when you are asking questions of these bank CEOs do you have in mind anything more punitive, more penalties for any wrongdoing. I guess my question really is. Do you want to protect the progress that you believe has been made or do you want to push more form or transparency or greater penalties on banks? I want to be with you also. I want both a story. I tend to be that way. I want to make sure that the reforms of God Frank are moved out. We moved up to But where there are gaps where consumers Are not being protected or where consumers are being taken advantage of. We have a role to play that policy makers to make sure that doesn't happen in a very changing marketplace at a really challenging time. This is a kind of a pandemic where people speak a gnomic. Future has been unsteady and unsure where Sally's trying to get folks back to work there trying to catch up on orders payments or rent payments for credit card payments. Student loan debt is a continuing issue. The big banks are are not in the student loan world, uh much at all anymore. But all of these measures need to make sure I'm somebody who wants to make sure we were reinforced. Meet the marketplace. Protecting the consumer first, while allowing banks to be competitive and and meet their needs for shareholders and marketplace. Congresswoman you the banks that are coming to this hearing. They are some of the global systemically important banks in the U. S. And in the past decade as Jack put it out, you know these banks were bailed out after the 2008 recession, They've continued to grow even bigger than before They hold half. Of domestic banking assets in the U. S nearly $4 trillion in loans. I'm wondering. Are you concerned that these banks are getting too big? Is there additional regulation that's needed there? Certainly we have to be concerned with that on so on financial services, please pay attention, not just to the big banks. We pay attention to credit unions. We pay attention to community bankers. We have to make sure that a the big banks don't have unfair advantage and unfair support policy support are elsewhere. But we also want to make sure that they are apart. Of the former economic recovery. You.

Vladimir Putin Thursday Jack Fitzpatrick Emily Wilkens Emily J. P. Morgan Madeline Dean Congress Jack Lukashenko Dodd Frank Sally Morgan Stanley Bank of America U. S House 10 year Monday House Financial Services Commi European Union this week about 3.9%
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

11:57 min | 2 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"What we have. We have been listening to the house committee grilling a number of Bank chief executive officers and a range of topics from foreclosures to diversity to lending, basically, trying to have some semblance of what exactly the backdrop for the financial world is also sort of plug their different pet projects in the process. Yeah. This was an opportunity. I think for the democratic lawmakers from both sides of the aisle to address the CEO's really as a group the first time since the financial crisis kind of the ten year anniversary if you will and across a whole range of issues more social issues than necessarily the economics of the financial services industry. So a number of issues that touched upon and I think a lot of issues that maybe some of the bankers were maybe not prepared to answer. On uncomfortable answering but still a I go round, it's interesting. And I think that it was crystallized by one comment, basically saying we are all still traumatized from the financial crisis. And there is a concern that the largest banks are still too big to fail. And then if smaller banks, do you get into trouble, they'll just be allowed to go out of business, whereas the big banks, it'd be too much of a problem for the overall society to allow that to happen. And so it does seem like that sort of attention under underlying these hearings, which is are these banks still too big to fail what systemic risks are there remaining since the financial crisis. And is there sort of some kind of equality or sort of how do we bridge the gap between wealthy and poor? And what is the role of banks to do that? Yes. Exactly. I think Jamie diamond had a comment. Also in his letter that they're not JP Morgan just speaking for the banks per se or just for J P Morgan not necessarily client for. A repeal of the regulations that came post-crisis, but perhaps smarter regulations more efficient regulations. But I think that's kind of where they are where perhaps some members of congress of the democratic control of congress, maybe thinking about more real regulation. Just to reiterate, we have been listening to the house committee and financial services holding a hearing with the heads of a number of banks, including CitiGroup JP Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank of America. Goldman Sachs Bank of New York Mellon and State Street, and they are having a recess. Currently the theme of this particular hearing is holding megabanks accountable review of global systematically, important banks ten years after the financial crisis. I'm Lisa Abramowicz along with pulse. Sweeney get caught up on the market action. The Dow slightly down the other two indices and p and NASDAQ both in the green NASDAQ leading the charge. You are seeing a little bit of actually a bid for treasuries as well after some disappointing economic data. Cornflakes cooling more than people had expected this a retail snafu or disappointment I should say, but some people are just tributing this to a shift in data ECB coming out with a dovish tilt. Also, pressuring yields lower interesting that guilds lower still supporting stocks, more broadly across the world. So definitely seeing the ongoing search for yield in light of very dovish central banks. That's the that's the tone. That's the mood music. Fair would say today setting up this Wednesday. Yeah. Exactly. I think one of the interesting things we saw as we wait for the fed minutes is kind of where the fed really thinks about the next three to six months. We'll get a little bit more color there when the fed minutes are in fact released. Yeah. Indeed. When it comes to these particular hearings. It comes on an interesting week because we are going to be hearing from Wells Fargo and J P Morgan Brian Friday. And the question is really we have not seen their profitability. Come back and shareholders have penalize them for this. This these hearings come at an interesting time that yes, these banks were bolstered traumatically by the tax cuts, and certainly benefited arguably as much as or more than most other than most other banks, but most other sectors. But it is interesting to see that coming at it sort of tenuous time right now for banks be very interesting to see as you mentioned the Bank earnings in the fourth quarter were very challenged Mcapital markets perspective and coming forward. About to see if there's any life at the first quarter looks to be relatively challenging as well. Well, let's bring in max Abelson a finance reporter for us here at Bloomberg to give a sense of what his big takeaway has been so far from the hearing. So max. Well, look, I have to shape these executives look confident, they look unrattled. At folks are watched eight opened the hearings opened with Maxine Waters trying to sort of like Ratatte Pat goes through a lightning round lightning round. That's right. She was interrupting them they were sort of interrupting each other. She was plowing to questions, I mean, it was fascinating. And as a viewer and alive blogger here for the terminal. I mean, honestly, it was exciting. But there has not been at any bombshells. There hasn't been anything scandalous and exciting. There hasn't even been a moment as. Shocking. As when Mnuchin told Maxine Waters, just in the last forty eight hours, you know, that she had to bang her gavel as the Treasury Secretary told her not long ago, the reality is it's been relatively predictable. Nothing crazy some exit. What would be a successful day here for these CEOs sitting in front of the congresspeople? Well, remember what this hearing is about accountability. And if they can leave today giving congress offense that you know, these banks are manageable. They're relatively ethical, and you know, that what they're trying to do is help the country. And how the economy rather than trying to hurt the country and hurt the economy, which I think it's fair to say is a picture that that critic had in their mind, you know, not long ago in the wake of the financial crisis that that counts as success, but it's also possible that congress members will get some body blows over things like investments in guns or forced arbitration. Or by the way, a lack of diversity what we're seeing is seven white men standing in a row, Jeff like in the tobacco hearings in the nineties. I'm wondering if that's gonna come later today. It's interesting Lloyd, blankfein the former chief executive of Goldman Sachs just tweeting out. Boy, I really miss my old job exclamation point. Exclamation point exclamation point. And he was he was quoting a tweet from the New York Post of lawmakers grilling Wall Street. Except for risks to the US economy. It does sort of highlight how being the CEO of a major Wall Street Bank is increasingly political, and it is a political role in. It is interesting to note this at a time when Wells Fargo is looking for another head, and what is that role at this point? I mean, can you talk a little bit about that? Wells Fargo is looking for any chief executive officer is because the last one did a pretty infamous job when he was hauled before congress not too long ago. Politics are part of of of Wall Street and Wall Street is a part of politics. One thing that we've been tracking on the live blog is that even Democrats like Carolyn Maloney, and especially Republicans some of their top donors in some cases there. Literal top donors over their political careers are banks or a Bank lobbying groups, you know, politics and finance are really intertwined in the United States. And I think the stark reminder of that is that some of these CEO's, you know, some of the banks that they work for would not be functioning companies if it hadn't been for the bail out now all my gosh, it's eleven years ago, it's more than decade ago. So politics are just a crucial part of of of what happens on Wall Street. But so far it feels like that. These executives have the upper hand, they sort of psalm. They just seem relatively calm and comfortable. So let's let's take a look at Jamie Dimon. It seems like a lot of the questions are going to him. He's taking in some cases, the lead here. How do you think is performance has been so far? Well, first of all, you have to give shut up Maxine Waters, this performance shoe in this by saying, I've read that you all you executives are going to try to rely on Jamie diamond taking the microphone, and I'm not going to allow that. She she presented diamond stealing the spotlight for too long, which. Fascinating. Is such an important influential character on Wall Street. I mean, first of all all of the executives here are essentially pups compared to Jamie diamond, we have you know, Solomon who took his job months ago, we have Charlie sharks up on up on. Sitting sitting in a couple of was basically diamonds protege at JT Morgan. And then he lost his job and ended up executive elsewhere Fargo, by the way. My excellent colleague Hannah did did a rundown of all the people who might take over the spot. It Wells Fargo and a couple of them are people who now work or have worked for Jamie Dimon. So he's just such a powerful influential figure also just a superficial sense. He's just also really magnetic guy he captured the attention of the room, which is why I want to. That. Why is it complicated question? But I want to warn folks that Michelle Davidson, I wrote about really interesting. So the ecosystem of protesters who've been falling Jimmy. He's mad magnetic not only in the sense that he attracts fans. He he's magnetic intensity. Also attracts critics, and we we wrote about critics who've been falling running I'd states, which is why I think it's fair to say that later this afternoon. It's totally possible. We're going to hear from some chase critics in the hearing itself. All right. So let's switch gears a little bit. Because this all comes ahead of Bank earnings that'll get kicked off talking about Jamie diamond J P Morgan it will be among the first to report alongside Wells Fargo. And I'm just wondering how that backdrop complicates these hearings. The fact that banks are expected to report some subdued numbers at best especially due to a lack of volumes and fixed income trading and just in general feeling of Malays in markets during the first quarter. How does that affect these hearings? I think that he can't take your eyes off the ball of the big picture, which is that the banks are still so remarkably profitable over the last few years they've gotten gotten bigger they've. Literally made more money than they've ever made before. And I think that it will be hard for Wall Street to plead tough times or to focus on fear. When just I think that it would be easy for critics disappoint out. Just just a simple scale of how big and and how lucrative their businesses have been even if the short-term outlook might might look then they'd like so max, where do you see again, you've mentioned that this morning session was relatively tame? Where do you think some of these banks use could be exposed here in front of the committee? One change we've seen recently after after Michelle, and I wrote that story I mentioned that ecosystem. A J P Morgan came out. And they said, you know, actually, we're no longer going to do business. We're no longer going to fund private prisons, and I have to say as a journalist who had written about this subject. Only few months earlier. I was really surprised it was sort of amazing to see powerful can change their ways thinks it actions have relatively powerless critics that JP Morgan made a decision that they were going to change..

Wells Fargo congress CEO JP Morgan Jamie diamond Maxine Waters Jamie Dimon chief executive United States Michelle Davidson JP Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank Goldman Sachs Bank of New York J P Morgan Morgan Brian JT Morgan New York Post
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

Bloomberg Radio New York

06:42 min | 2 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Bloomberg Radio New York

"Now, here's Michael Barr with more on what's going on around the world. Michael Karen, President Trump said he couldn't care less. If details from his conversation with the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin Berg released President Trump. Was responding to a Washington Post report which said he went to great lengths to hide details of his discussions with Putin. Stay twenty four the partial government shutdown in the NFL. The patriots advanced the AFC championship game. The saints beat the eagles to advance the NFC title game. Global news twenty four hours a day on Aaron that tick tock on Twitter powered by more than twenty seven hundred journalists and analysts in more than one hundred twenty countries. I'm Michael Barr. This is Bloomberg John Michael tycoons six thousand nine hundred on Wall Street line for the Bloomberg interactive brokers studios. I am John Tucker. Let's get you up to set up for the trading day of the week ahead right now joining us in New York, the senior executive editor John McCoy at London, we're joined by news director, David merrit. In Hong Kong, I'm pleased to have executive editor, Tracy Alloway breaking news. John mkhori. We're going to start with you reading AK filing for the securities and Exchange Commission PG and E directly from it will file for reorganization under chapter eleven things. Just. Keep getting worse for PG and E. California's biggest utility. Really, really serious situation. John for PG, and the the CEO resigned last night, there's been a shakeup all throughout the management ranks. And this all has to do with these wildfires in California fatal and costing billions of dollars, and perhaps core certainly in two thousand seventeen caused by PGA equipment. Maybe the one in two thousand eighteen that awful fire also caused by PGA equipment, and it's left about thirty billion in liabilities as much as thirty billion for PG. This is a real warning if you will to the market that PG is going to file for bankruptcy. But there's also an element of tactical move PG is hoping for a bailout from California and should California to be able to agree with the new governor Gavin Newsom that they will bail out. There's a chance at least that PG knee will have a different approach to remaining solvent. That said PG knee said it's not going to make an interest payment on some of its dead. This is a serious situation for credit creditors as well. The pre market this morning. Shares of PGE corporation down. Get this fifty one percent, Tracy Alloway in Hong Kong. Good morning to you. The trade war is hurting China the data stinks. So what's next? Yeah. This morning. We got the latest trade data for China. And you know, thinks is probably the right word to use for all you kind of need to know is that it came in much worse than pretty much. Everyone had expected. We had exports falling four point four percent in dollar terms in December. That was the worst fall since two thousand sixteen similar thing for imports which were down seven point six percent. So the thinking here is that all of this basically adds pressure on China to reach a deal with the US. You know, we have worries about a consumption downgrade in China, and that drop in imports kind of feeds into that narrative. But I guess the question at this point is whether or not the cards are actually being held by China because we have actually seen the authorities here. Make a lot of overtures to the Trump administration when it comes to trade, and we're not quite sure whether or not those are acceptable to the Trump administration. Just yet the pressure is on David in London. The pressures on their Brexit. Where are we? Well, the pressure is always all on Brexit. We are at a crunch moment though, this week for Mrs Maes withdrawal agreements the votes that has been touted for such a long time. That's finally gonna happen. Tomorrow night, MRs may making her final arguments to try to win over her rebel MP's. It doesn't look like she's gonna make it though. The numbers are stacked against she's heading for everyone expects a defeat tomorrow. The thing to look forward be the margin of defeat if it's maybe fifty votes, perhaps she can get some more assurances from need to get this vote of the line. If it's not she's going to have to come up with a bigger plan b no one really knows what that is yet. But at least we're going to get some sort of clarity amid all the turmoil in Westminster this week. Okay. John McCoy Bank earnings. They begin with CitiGroup today. Is there an overarching theme to all this? There is John also have obviously Goldman Sachs P Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank for America or reporting this week. And the theme is that analysts have been bringing down their earnings estimates for. The fourth quarter. And I think what investors are really going to be looking for is the guidance for the rest of twenty nineteen. There's an anticipation of an economic slowdown. So investors will be looking with revenue growth is also slowing down Tracy back to you in Hong Kong, despite the trade war China is opening up its financial markets, right? Yeah. And this is exactly the white right way to frame it. This is part and parcel of the ongoing trade conversation with the US and China so the country basically today that it is doubling the limit on one of the main foreign investment channels into its economy. This is the quota for the qualified foreign institutional investor program, which we affectionately refer to as the Q fee that quotas being expanded to three hundred billion dollars. This is the first expansion we've seen in almost five years. So the thinking here is that China is trying to open its financial system. Maybe in an effort to generate some goodwill with the US, but also arguably in order to get more foreign capital in to help offset a potential domestic slowdown. Okay. David in London told Tracy before the Chinese data stinks, the European data. That's nothing to write home about either butts, right really not much better. So bad numbers on industrial output in the year area falling one. Point seven percents in November more than a communists fit. I we've had bad numbers out of Germany out of fraud. This really shine. There's a broad-based slowdown happening across the euro area. And this comes off to the European central banks stopped adding stimulus in December after four years of Bombay and going to raise the question can Europe's economy exists without the extra stimulus from the or are we headed for a more broad down and possibly even technical recession leaving in Germany day, twenty four John MacQuarie of the shutdown who is feeling the heat give me ten sections. Well, right now, I'm not sure that anyone's feeling enough heat to end the shutdown. I would recommend everyone read just Bloomberg's just sinks piece that shows how why President Trump may indeed want to extend the shutdown John Mkhori here in New Yorker senior executive editor. Thanks a lot. David merrit.

China PG Tracy Alloway Bloomberg John Michael David merrit Hong Kong Michael Barr Trump London John mkhori John McCoy Exchange Commission PG President US Vladimir Putin Berg California Washington Post NFL John Tucker
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Climate Cast

Climate Cast

03:52 min | 2 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Climate Cast

"Finance in every sector of our economy. Climate risk is a real financial risk not only scientific imperative but the risk to the bottom line of thousands of companies is growing everyday Mindy. I'm encouraged to see the scale of investment in climate solutions. But looking at the atmosphere how much faster does it need to happen to mitigate atmospheric impacts on business in. The future. Like, paul. You're asking exactly the right question. It is a huge number that we've seen three hundred fifty billion dollars invested in clean energy. And it is not nearly enough. The problem is growing faster. We are being pulled by the world's leading scientists that we have to see a radical change in twelve years that's going to require a lot more than three hundred and fifty billion dollars. We are going to need to see. Well, over a trillion dollars a year invested in clean energy, clean transportation future. And those investments aren't only here in the United States. We need to see massive amounts of capital going to the developing world, we need to see massive changes in China. And India if we are to get to that below two degree world or a one point five world degree world is leading scientists tell us we must our investments need to triple quadruple on an annual basis. So I'm curious about the corporate boardroom corporate, see something's. Are essentially risk managers. How has climate risk worked its way into the boardroom, and how much is that changed over the last ten to fifteen years. Well, the change over the last fifteen years is nothing short of radical fifteen years ago the term climate risk barely existed. When we first convened hundreds of investors from around the globe, institutional investors, large pension funds as well as money managers from Goldman Sachs to J P Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank of America city. And so on they want to know why we were asking them to come into a room. Frankly, then it we did it at the United Nations to talk about climate change. They believe that was an environmental issue that had nothing to do with economy. That's of course, changed fifteen years from now, we know this is a colossal excess potential threat not only to the future of our kids and our planet. But to our economic well-being, we are being told by leading communists that the impact of climate is. Stanchly greater than the impact we felt from the subprime meltdown. So we're talking about massive economic impacts over the last fifteen years radical change, what a company's doing many of them are setting goals to bring their greenhouse gas emissions down. We're committing to one hundred percent renewable energy in the next five years and more and more of that is happening but still not nearly enough or last week at the international climate negotiations in Poland four hundred and twenty of our investors whose assets total thirty four trillion dollars called on government leaders at that international negotiation to implement a plan that's clear that has focused and that's consistent with the goals of the Paris agreement. So not only companies changing, but their largest owners the biggest investors in those companies are saying we want you to act on climate. And we want you to change your practices all the way through to your supply chain. Sooner rather than later and US about corporate boards, corporate boards are acting. I was in Naples, Florida. A couple of weeks ago with the national association of corporate directors talking with hundreds of corporate directors around why these issues why climate change is a governance issue for corporate board members why they need to examine the risk of climate change. Some are some aren't but the bottom line is five years ago..

United States Goldman Sachs Mindy Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank United Nations Naples China India Florida Poland Paris fifteen years five years three hundred fifty billion do thirty four trillion dollars
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Climate Cast

Climate Cast

06:37 min | 2 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on Climate Cast

"Support for climate cast comes from Bank of America as one of the largest global financial institutions Bank of America is in a unique position to help society. Transition to a low-carbon economy Bank of America NA member FDIC Mindy, big investors, like Morgan Stanley Bank of America are investing big and climate solutions. Why is private equity pushing climate change solutions on the market sprawling? There's no question the climate is changing, and we hear companies investors consumer scientists saying that and we know we need to act. So if we need to bring down our reliance on fossil fuels on coal and dirty oil. We need to go somewhere and that somewhere around renewable energy. And that's why you're seeing whether it's private equity Republic equity or large institutional investors were saying far more money flow into renewable energy and cleaner buildings cleaner transportation, and it's adding up last year there was somewhere around three hundred and fifty. Thirty billion dollars put into a clean energy future. That's a global number next year, it'll be substantially more. We're seeing it because there's a market for it. People want it. They're demanding it they're calling for it. And we need to be able to get them to clean energy. They'd like to see Mindy. We talk about climate risk here on climate. How're big company seeing that climate risk show up in their supply chains and even their bottom lines companies and small companies alike across every sector of our economy seeing that climate risk show up, and let's give a couple of examples if you're a farmer or you're an agriculture and the climate changes for better or for worse. Sometimes there's more rain sometimes it's too dry in either case we've seen agricultural crops die we've seen farmers able to farm half their land. We've seen farmworkers put out of work. We've seen restaurants not have the food. They need or groceries. If you're in the apparel business, you're the gap your Levi stressed your banal. China Republic or anyone of our global retailers. When you're cotton crop is because there's not enough water in the places where you've had that planted. You lose substantial resources in revenue if you're in the insurance sector last fall when we had three three storms looking at Houston looking at Puerto Rico and looking at the keys in Florida. The numbers were over one hundred billion dollars in losses. We are not talking about small losses. We're talking about huge impacts on real estate on agriculture on insurance on finance in every sector of our economy. Climate risk is a real financial risk not only scientific imperative but the risk to the bottom line of thousands of companies is growing everyday Mindy. I'm encouraged to see the scale of investment in climate solutions. But looking at the atmosphere how much faster does it need to happen to mitigate atmospheric impacts on business. In the future. Like, paul. You're asking exactly the right question. It is a huge number that we've seen three hundred fifty billion dollars investing in clean energy. And it is not nearly enough. The problem is growing faster. We are being told by the world's leading scientists that we have to see radical change in twelve years that's going to require a lot more than three hundred and fifty billion dollars. We are going to need to see. Well, over a trillion dollars a year invested in clean energy, clean transportation future. And those investments are in only here in the United States. We need to see massive amounts of capital going to the developing world, we need to see massive changes in China. And India if we are to get to that below two degree world or a one point five world degree world is leading scientists tell us we must our investments need to triple quadruple on an annual basis. So I'm curious about the corporate boardroom corporate, see something. Are essentially risk managers. How has climate risk worked its way into the boardroom, and how much is that changed over the last ten to fifteen years. Well, the change over the last fifteen years is nothing short of radical fifteen years ago the term climate risk barely existed. When we first convened hundreds of investors from around the globe, institutional investors, large pension funds as well as money managers from Goldman Sachs to chase P Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank of America city. And so on they want to know why we were asking them to come into a room. Frankly, then we did it at the United Nations to talk about climate change. They believe that was an environmental issue that had nothing to do with economy. That's of course, changed fifteen years from now, we know this is a colossal excess essential threat, not only to the future of our kids and our planet. But to our economic well-being, we are being told by leading a communist that the impact of climate is. Stanchly greater than the impact we felt from the subprime meltdown. So we're talking about massive economic impacts over the last fifteen years radical change what it companies doing many of them are setting goals to bring their greenhouse gas. Emissions down were committing to a one hundred percent renewable energy in the next five years and more and more of that is happening but still not nearly enough or last week at the international climate negotiations in Poland four hundred and twenty of our investors whose assets total thirty four trillion dollars called on government leaders at that international negotiation to implement a plan that's clear that has focused and that's consistent with the goals of the Paris agreement. So not only companies changing, but their largest owners the biggest investors in those companies are saying we want you to act on climate. And we want you to change your practices all the way through to your supply chain. Sooner rather than later, and you asked about corporate boards, corporate boards are acting. I was in Naples, Florida. A couple of weeks ago with the national association of corporate directors talking with hundreds of corporate directors around that why these issues why climate change is a governance issue for corporate board members why they need to examine the risk of climate change. Some are some aren't but the bottom line is five years ago. Very few if anywhere now that number is growing, I think we are seeing real change in corporate America and at the investor level, but not nearly

Bank of America Mindy Morgan Stanley Bank of America Florida United States Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank America Levi China Republic United Nations China Goldman Sachs India Puerto Rico
Is there enough investment in clean energy?

Climate Cast

06:24 min | 2 years ago

Is there enough investment in clean energy?

"Mindy, big investors, like Morgan Stanley Bank of America are investing big and climate solutions. Why is private equity pushing climate change solutions on the market sprawling? There's no question the climate is changing, and we hear companies investors consumer scientists saying that and we know we need to act. So if we need to bring down our reliance on fossil fuels on coal and dirty oil. We need to go somewhere and that somewhere around renewable energy. And that's why you're seeing whether it's private equity Republic equity or large institutional investors were saying far more money flow into renewable energy and cleaner buildings cleaner transportation, and it's adding up last year there was somewhere around three hundred and fifty. Thirty billion dollars put into a clean energy future. That's a global number next year, it'll be substantially more. We're seeing it because there's a market for it. People want it. They're demanding it they're calling for it. And we need to be able to get them to clean energy. They'd like to see Mindy. We talk about climate risk here on climate. How're big company seeing that climate risk show up in their supply chains and even their bottom lines companies and small companies alike across every sector of our economy seeing that climate risk show up, and let's give a couple of examples if you're a farmer or you're an agriculture and the climate changes for better or for worse. Sometimes there's more rain sometimes it's too dry in either case we've seen agricultural crops die we've seen farmers able to farm half their land. We've seen farmworkers put out of work. We've seen restaurants not have the food. They need or groceries. If you're in the apparel business, you're the gap your Levi stressed your banal. China Republic or anyone of our global retailers. When you're cotton crop is because there's not enough water in the places where you've had that planted. You lose substantial resources in revenue if you're in the insurance sector last fall when we had three three storms looking at Houston looking at Puerto Rico and looking at the keys in Florida. The numbers were over one hundred billion dollars in losses. We are not talking about small losses. We're talking about huge impacts on real estate on agriculture on insurance on finance in every sector of our economy. Climate risk is a real financial risk not only scientific imperative but the risk to the bottom line of thousands of companies is growing everyday Mindy. I'm encouraged to see the scale of investment in climate solutions. But looking at the atmosphere how much faster does it need to happen to mitigate atmospheric impacts on business. In the future. Like, paul. You're asking exactly the right question. It is a huge number that we've seen three hundred fifty billion dollars investing in clean energy. And it is not nearly enough. The problem is growing faster. We are being told by the world's leading scientists that we have to see radical change in twelve years that's going to require a lot more than three hundred and fifty billion dollars. We are going to need to see. Well, over a trillion dollars a year invested in clean energy, clean transportation future. And those investments are in only here in the United States. We need to see massive amounts of capital going to the developing world, we need to see massive changes in China. And India if we are to get to that below two degree world or a one point five world degree world is leading scientists tell us we must our investments need to triple quadruple on an annual basis. So I'm curious about the corporate boardroom corporate, see something. Are essentially risk managers. How has climate risk worked its way into the boardroom, and how much is that changed over the last ten to fifteen years. Well, the change over the last fifteen years is nothing short of radical fifteen years ago the term climate risk barely existed. When we first convened hundreds of investors from around the globe, institutional investors, large pension funds as well as money managers from Goldman Sachs to chase P Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank of America city. And so on they want to know why we were asking them to come into a room. Frankly, then we did it at the United Nations to talk about climate change. They believe that was an environmental issue that had nothing to do with economy. That's of course, changed fifteen years from now, we know this is a colossal excess essential threat, not only to the future of our kids and our planet. But to our economic well-being, we are being told by leading a communist that the impact of climate is. Stanchly greater than the impact we felt from the subprime meltdown. So we're talking about massive economic impacts over the last fifteen years radical change what it companies doing many of them are setting goals to bring their greenhouse gas. Emissions down were committing to a one hundred percent renewable energy in the next five years and more and more of that is happening but still not nearly enough or last week at the international climate negotiations in Poland four hundred and twenty of our investors whose assets total thirty four trillion dollars called on government leaders at that international negotiation to implement a plan that's clear that has focused and that's consistent with the goals of the Paris agreement. So not only companies changing, but their largest owners the biggest investors in those companies are saying we want you to act on climate. And we want you to change your practices all the way through to your supply chain. Sooner rather than later, and you asked about corporate boards, corporate boards are acting. I was in Naples, Florida. A couple of weeks ago with the national association of corporate directors talking with hundreds of corporate directors around that why these issues why climate change is a governance issue for corporate board members why they need to examine the risk of climate change. Some are some aren't but the bottom line is five years ago. Very few if anywhere now that number is growing, I think we are seeing real change in corporate America and at the investor level, but not

Mindy Morgan Stanley Bank Of America Florida United States Levi Morgan Morgan Stanley Bank China Republic United Nations China Goldman Sachs America India Puerto Rico Naples
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on BizTalk Radio

BizTalk Radio

01:57 min | 3 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on BizTalk Radio

"Mcdonald's too in change united help a little break out are might mcdonald's almost breaking out travellers up two and a half insurance stocks very strong regulations a boeing american express two and a half american express up one eighty caterpillar up one eighty soak in financials member what we've told you here there's no chance of bear market if financials are doing well and there's no chance of even corrections of financials are going to break out again no chance zero fuji not a several zippo you got that other places today if i can find them transports good day up one fifty eight just everything was up nothing was up real big just a bunch of ones and twos in the transports i mentioned the financials in the insurance in the housing uh retail pretty much green remember those dollar stores daltry up two and three quarters burlington up two and a half thala gentle tjx both buck change commodities mixed couple up couple down but good day golden silverwood down and that's the story natural you need any more in the general nature but just when you have a chance technically go look with jp morgan morgan stanley bank of america and the x l f health matter of fact if you look at the xl left look where it's held for the last one two three four five six seven eight nine ten hugging the fifty they moving average and today jumps off of it.

Mcdonald boeing jp morgan morgan stanley bank three quarters
"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on BizTalk Radio

BizTalk Radio

02:15 min | 3 years ago

"morgan morgan stanley bank" Discussed on BizTalk Radio

"The housing uh retail pretty much green remember those dollar stores daltry up two and three quarters burlington up two and a half foul general tjx both buck in change commodities mixed couple up couple down but good that golden silverwood down yes and that's the story natural you need any more in a general nature but just when you have a chance technically go look with jp morgan morgan stanley bank america and the x l f health the matter of fact if you look at the xl left look where it's held for the last one two three four five six seven eight nine ten hugging the fifty day moving average and today off of it yes go look at bankamerica hit the fifty they move in eight days ago held a today go look at j p morgan looks like the ex lf and volume picked up a little bit today go look at morgan stanley mortgage held a fifty day that's what you always want to see measuring this dow little break out arranged that i snp a little break out of range today the the nasda i gather or no hi it's been sending not ranging and the general thoughts of the day feel in may could so up next we'll have the movers of the day and i promise i promise i am done wining and complaining about the socialist more on that some more up next whatever else this is the one.

jp morgan morgan stanley bank morgan stanley mortgage dow fifty day three quarters eight days