Replying to Avatar Stuart Lee Archer

It does sound more and more like the start of "The Big Short 2".

I'm torn between:

"F*ck the Banks"

&

"F*uck Regulations"

In a truly free market: Let them do what they want and let them fail.

In a state insured market: Regulate them harder.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/jan/08/bank-of-england-plans-to-let-insurers-make-riskier-investments-as-regulations-eased

Avatar
Stuart Lee Archer 1y ago

Summary -

The Bank of England is set to relax its regulations, allowing insurance companies to engage in riskier investments. This move is part of a broader effort to encourage insurers to invest more in infrastructure projects and other long-term assets, potentially freeing up significant capital. The easing of rules is aimed at boosting the UK economy by allowing insurers to take on more risk while still maintaining policyholder protection. This decision follows a period of debate over the balance between financial stability and economic growth, with the Bank signaling a shift towards promoting investment opportunities for insurers. Critics have previously expressed concerns about the potential risks to policyholders given the reduction in capital requirements, but the Bank aims to ensure that the new regulations do not compromise the financial safety of policyholders.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Stuart Lee Archer 1y ago

What happens when insurers cant guarantee the viability of the infrastructure projects and the long term assets they invest in. I haven't seen any projects like that being done in an efficient, timely and fiscally prudent manner over the last two decades. There is a reason they are high risk. I'd expect and explosion in costs and time caused by regulations, planning and court cases.

So either:

Layoffs and bust companies,

Money printing bailouts paid for by Joe Blogs

or

Massive insurance premium increases for Joe Blogs to cover the losses.

All bad for the country in the current climate.