France to Require Insurers, Banks to Run Climate Change Stress Tests in 2020

December 2, 2019

  • December 2, 2019 at 9:49 am
    Rosenblatt says:
    Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 13
    Thumb down 3

    Let’s see how long we can stay on-topic and not devolve the debate into insults, attacks, off-topic rants and the like…

    Regardless of your stance on man-made climate change, I think we can all agree every business – especially in our industry – needs to ensure their Catastrophe Plan and/or Disaster Recovery Plan are working as expected in case an event (be it weather or terrorism or natural disaster) occurs.

    • December 2, 2019 at 11:56 am
      Craig Cornell says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 5
      Thumb down 13

      Wrong. This is PC nonsense for anyone with knowledge about the facts about Climate Change.

      First, investors are usually large pension funds or mutual funds that aggregate dozens of stocks into one fund.

      Forcing a few finance-type companies into this “disclosure” and avoiding the more real risk to companies that, for example, grow crops or invest in beach front real estate, is just stupid. And most investors – as mentioned – are sophisticated. They don’t need the government to posture for political brownie points in order to make wise investing decisions. They don’t need Big Government to force things.

      Secondly, REAL climate scientists tell us the worst-case scenario involves costs to the global economy that are beyond manageable, annual costs in the billions of dollars in 40 plus years for a global economy expected to be nearing $100 trillion. Peanuts, my friend.

      And this is the reason NOTHING is going to get done. It is all posturing, all moralizing, taking stances that will do nothing to address the real problem. As I have stated before, the vast majority of Americans who “believe” in climate change don’t want to spend $10 per month to address it.

      Which is why the Left is pushing force onto a democracy to get what they want: using the courts to have silly lawsuits fronted by children demanding protection for “their future”. Using the regulatory apparatus to force insurance companies to genuflect to the Scary Monster.

      Meanwhile, as the United Nations pointed out last week, carbon emissions globally keep rising. And “believers” avoid the one true solution if things are as dire as we are told. You know what that is.

      • December 2, 2019 at 12:18 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 3

        (confused emoji goes here)

        My comment was about Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity Plans.

        You think I’m wrong that “every business… needs to ensure their Catastrophe Plan and/or Disaster Recovery Plan [is] working as expected in case an event…occurs”?

        How am I wrong about that?

        Does your company NOT have a DR/BCP plan, or do they have one and they don’t test it?

        • December 2, 2019 at 1:23 pm
          Craig Cornell says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 8

          I thought we were supposed to stay on point under your Civility Rules. The article is not about voluntary Disaster Planning. It is about government-forced reporting on the impact of Global Warming.

          For a bank, that has NOTHING to do with Disaster Planning for the bank. The bank is not going to suffer direct physical loss from Climate Change that a Disaster Plan could address.

          The article is about forcing the bank to report on something the bank is not reporting on now. If you don’t think the bank is doing the right job, invest in another bank.

          • December 2, 2019 at 1:59 pm
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 6
            Thumb down 3

            I apologize if I was wrong in interpreting “climate change stress test” as it is my understanding such a test is meant to ‘…develop macroeconomic scenarios that encapsulate the impact of climate on economic activity.”

            I believe(d) that one such scenario would be that businesses – either the banks or the companies with whom they do business – would not be able to open or operate under normal conditions in a disaster/catastrophe scenario, and such a scenario would need to be tested.

            If I’m wrong, again, I apologize for misunderstanding the term used in the article which lead me to bring up DP/BRP situations. I thought that was on-topic.

          • December 2, 2019 at 2:52 pm
            Jon says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 7
            Thumb down 4

            We’re supposed to stay on point per the email from Andrew where he said he would suspend you and I if we continued the offensive, self-referential posting. You know, with things like “PC Nonsense” out of the gate. Don’t worry though, he was fine with your repeated misinformation attempts, and lack of data on blanket statements like “REAL climate scientists say…” FYI you are not a climate scientist and you do not speak for them. Provide proof of your statements. Oh except you can’t. Guess you were just spouting conservative nonsense, huh?

          • December 2, 2019 at 6:29 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 10

            “The current evidence, weak and incomplete as it may be, as summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, suggests that moderate warming—say, what we might expect around the year 2075—would make the average person feel as if she had lost 0.2 to 2.0 percent of her income. In other words, a century worth of climate change is about as bad as losing a year of economic growth.”

            OH MY GOD! A 2% drop in income! Please Al Gore, save me.

            (You sleepy? I feel a little sleepy.)

          • December 3, 2019 at 11:25 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 2

            Acknowledge an apology? No. Reply on-topic? No. Do you really expect me to reply to that comment? No? Then why did you post it in this section of the comment thread?

    • December 3, 2019 at 1:59 pm
      bob says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 5

      What is the point of your last comment of working as expected in that capacity? That is not related to these stress tests.

      These are government related stress tests, very similar to the stress tests Bill Clinton employed, he established the 4, and it is what caused banks to have to make loans to get high CRA ratings, which caused them to collapse.

      Implementing a climate change stress test would seem to potentially have bad affects as well, especially if that starts to affect your bank charter, mergers, and other aspects. The government should not be touching this.

      Also, no matter how much you talk about devolving into insults, in which you take part of the insults, it doesn’t make you better than anyone here.

      • December 3, 2019 at 2:36 pm
        bob says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 4

        And knee jerk reaction dislikes, the usual.

        Rosenblatt does a humble brag, I call him on it, and you know, we have to all go crazy now.

        • December 3, 2019 at 2:53 pm
          Boomers? says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 3
          Thumb down 4

          Weird we never see you do it to Craig, Polar, Commonsense (previously agent), or anyone else who agrees with you.

          That doesn’t matter though right? Your thoughts of bullying/insults have warped bob, and it really shows.

          • December 3, 2019 at 5:00 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            Apparently, you don’t come here often. bob is one of the few bipartisan critics; he has disagreed and criticized my comments several times.

            The real question is why no Lefty on this site has ever criticized or disagreed with another Lefty. Care to weigh in?

            With people like Jon, there is a wealth of opportunity for Lefties to take exception. Care to lead?

          • December 3, 2019 at 5:18 pm
            Boomers? says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 4

            Been here for years Craig. Just started posting around March of this year, but I disagree Bob was what you are describing, but he has changed over this year a lot.

            I think multiple people have pointed this out, but you wouldn’t feel that as he no longer does this to you.

            I have disagreed and voiced how I disagreed with Jon and captain before, but we are still able to keep it civil. I have said I disagree with Jon’s overall tactics, as I used to point out when bob was being hypocritical. Bob took a break, he is recently back, and he is still doing the new bob stuff. Care to follow my lead and look at this from the real perspective?

          • December 3, 2019 at 5:32 pm
            Craig Cornell says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 5

            I’m not really into being a Hall Monitor myself, except to note when hypocrisy shows up. More interested in engaging with intelligence on the topics at hand.

            But good for you.

          • December 3, 2019 at 6:56 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            Never? I have indeed commented on Craig and Agent. Also, it was a minor accurate comment no matter how much you want to divert the scenario. Rosenblatt just basically tried to call insults before they happened, clearly insulting the other side, (or degrading character) and it is really not as hip as he thinks it is. It’s narcissism. I’m sorry, it is.

            My thoughts on bullying are not warped. I grow tired of this nonsense.

            My original comment still stands and mostly focused on Rosenblatt’s complete miss of the mark. Saying that everyone should monitor risk, is not the same thing as government stress tests, something I know a great deal about. I looked at the CRA ratings as the collapse happened, I warned on it in advance, and those stress tests are what lead to companies getting low CRA ratings if they did not give loans to low income borrowers. Literally, the amount of loans given to those in poverty was a form of stress test that if you failed on, you would get a low rating, and would be restricted. You tell me how you will word a stress test about climate change, to be able to account for climate change in the first place (how much water rising and climate change and how much damage will be done, how much money do you need set aside, should you give loans in coastal areas, or, as the government will likely do fine you for not giving enough loans on coastal lines, that could happen) and do it in such a way it doesn’t mess up the market.

            When you can’t beat me on points, beat me on style, right? You can’t beat me on either. I’m a millennial conservative. I’m used to hip liberal, and it’s over done at this point.

          • December 4, 2019 at 8:16 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 4
            Thumb down 1

            “Rosenblatt’s complete miss of the mark. Saying that everyone should monitor risk, is not the same thing as government stress tests”

            I understand that now. That’s why I’ve apologized TWICE for misunderstanding the term used in the article, once to Craig and once to you.

            What else do you want me to say about that, buddy?

      • December 3, 2019 at 3:17 pm
        Rosenblatt says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 5
        Thumb down 0

        1) I was wrong. Again, I apologize for misunderstanding the term used in the article.

        2) Where did I insult Craig?

        3) I’m not better than anyone else. You don’t have to remind me.

        • December 4, 2019 at 7:07 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 4

          1. You didn’t misunderstand the term, you misunderstood the application. You were willing to support a law you didn’t understand how it applied because you believe in prudence. That is more concerning to me than anything.

          2. I don’t care.

          3. I do. Clearly. Your intro post was saying surely insults will come. If I don’t have to remind you, you don’t have to remind me or crystal ball me about what is coming, for no other real purpose but to be grandiose and humble brag.

          I don’t mind your insults, when they happen, if they are spur of the moment, and if they aren’t linked to someone’s ability to debate.

          I tire of this.

          • December 5, 2019 at 8:23 am
            Rosenblatt says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 0

            1) I admitted my mistake based on what you and Craig explained and I apologized for my error. What else do you want me to do about it???

            2) If you don’t care, you shouldn’t have said I was “clearly insulting the other side” in the first place.

            3) The sole intent of my lead-in was clear: I made an on-topic (or so I though, but now I see I was wrong and that’s why I apologized for my error) non-emotional comment about the article and request replies are also on-topic and non-emotional.

            I don’t know why you have a problem with that. I’m not being grandiose or bragging – I’m simply saying “if you want to post insults and attacks, don’t reply to my comment.”

            4) I, too, tire of this.

  • December 3, 2019 at 7:26 am
    PolarBeaRepeal says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 5

    Let France impose climate stress test based risk premium loads on consumers through insurers forced to comply with their regulatory authority and see what ‘feedback’ occurs. Mon Dieu! Sacre Bleu!

  • December 3, 2019 at 9:29 am
    Augustine says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 4
    Thumb down 0

    This type of overregulation–amongst many other examples in France–is why their economy has been relatively stagnant for about a decade. Massively high rates of marginal income tax along with a central government that tries to tax everything that moves has lead to a brain drain.

  • December 5, 2019 at 8:44 am
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 1

    Deniers, same as vapers, same as dopers.

  • December 5, 2019 at 2:35 pm
    FFA says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 1
    Thumb down 2

    Good to know what they can predict the weather to be over there. Our weather men cant get it right a few days out much less some point in the future. .

    • December 6, 2019 at 9:05 am
      Captain Planet says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 2
      Thumb down 1

      C’mon, FFA. You know the difference between weather and climate.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*