In banking jargon, a stress test is an analysis conducted under unfavorable economic scenarios, which is designed to determine whether a bank has enough capital to withstand the impact of adverse developments.
Stress tests focus on a few key risks to banks' financial health in crisis situations – such as credit risk, market risk, and liquidity risk. The results of stress tests depend on the assumptions made in various economic scenarios, which are described by the International Monetary Fund as "unlikely but plausible." Bank stress tests attracted a great deal of attention in 2009, as the worst global financial crisis since the Great Depression left many banks and financial institutions severely under-capitalized.
Many in our movement (however they decide to call it) detest banks. Anyway this is not a piece about banks, but about the way this movement failed its own first "stress test" in the Ukrainian crisis. This was the first serious problem that our movement faced that had to do with a real world situation, rather than the usual problems of old-style nationalism. The situation in the Ukraine was not a bickering between philosophical approaches. It was not personal stuff being turned into political. It was not colliding dreams. Instead it was a real problem in the real world, which called for us not to take sides but to choose wisely.
Stress tests focus on a few key risks to banks' financial health in crisis situations – such as credit risk, market risk, and liquidity risk. The results of stress tests depend on the assumptions made in various economic scenarios, which are described by the International Monetary Fund as "unlikely but plausible." Bank stress tests attracted a great deal of attention in 2009, as the worst global financial crisis since the Great Depression left many banks and financial institutions severely under-capitalized.
Many in our movement (however they decide to call it) detest banks. Anyway this is not a piece about banks, but about the way this movement failed its own first "stress test" in the Ukrainian crisis. This was the first serious problem that our movement faced that had to do with a real world situation, rather than the usual problems of old-style nationalism. The situation in the Ukraine was not a bickering between philosophical approaches. It was not personal stuff being turned into political. It was not colliding dreams. Instead it was a real problem in the real world, which called for us not to take sides but to choose wisely.
