Replies to post #280206 on Digital Brand Media and Marketing Group Inc (DBMM)

[VrilSociedad]

Ok, so maybe misunderstanding was less accurate. Miscomprehension is a better term.
I was not defending the function. Otherwise, I would have said so. I was pointing out why it did not function and who ultimately was responsible for approving the regulation. Our government, or to be more exact, all world governments.
Does anyone think the world governments are going to allow the world's financial institutions to fold? What happened in 2008? Governments bailed out the large institutions. This could only be done by the government. They have the power to print unlimited monopoly money. UMR is not going to help stop what happens in DBMM or others like it. It is going to make it very difficult for small to medium financial institutions to operate profitably. Which are the smallest offenders in naked shorting and other scams. UMR is going to bog them down in regulatory compliance, and they are going to become unprofitable. It's not about keeping up the collateral requirements. It is very expensive to pay for the systems or self integrate to remain compliant.
UMR in phase 6 starts at 8 billion, which is calculated using AANA. Only maybe 600 to 800 entities worldwide will fall under the phase 6 umbrella presently. So this is not going to affect the Kramers of the world like it does, say, Citadel. In fact, prior to phase 6 kicking off in September, Citadel and others opened a bunch of contracts to grandfather them in. Citadel LLP was liquidated prior because they could use a loophole by doing a voluntary closeout. This gave them a year to cover, escape margin requirements, and pass it off as reorganization.
Margin requirements will be financed collateral, and that will kick cans further down the road. There will be more loopholes found and exploited. The DBMM's of the world will still be targeted as will the investors. Huge financial institutions can wait it out through losses, we cannot. Most will capitulate at some point and accept losses to salvage something. Those losses will be institutional gains.
I am in complete agreement that the regulations don't work. Where I disagree is the assumption that new regulations from a different regulatory body that answers to the same kings is going to somehow be different.