Screw the Banks and Investment Firms

[Elderberry]

and the multi-million dollar bonuses will be back for wall streeters earning short-term gains too. nobody has learned anything. if they have, they are not seemingly doing anything about it.

JK

[Ugly Dougly]

I heard an interesting commercial on KGO radio today. It was a Farmers Insurance ad. It said something like, "Farmers. a responsible company that doesn't invest in "junk bonds" or "derivatives"...that part was definitely in the ad. Are some companies getting it? Seems so.

Seems like a sales pitch playing on common fears.
Might as well be toenail fungus.

[cowboyangel]

Dow tops 10,000 today.
Glass half full or half empty?
The choice of perspective is yours.

Leher News Hour on PBS said today that that gain was mostly pushed by profits from the big banks....ho hum, with bailout money and other fed giveaways fueling the surge. BFD (big fuckin deal)

[cowboyangel]

Take them all dear Lord, Take them all, please.


Lazard CEO Bruce Wasserstein dies at 61

By DAVID PITT (AP) – 1 hour ago

Bruce Wasserstein, the CEO of Lazard Ltd. and a prominent Wall Street dealmaker who helped negotiate some of the largest corporate takeovers in history, died Wednesday. He was 61. The death of the driving force behind Lazard raises questions about the future of one of Wall Street's top mergers and acquisitions advisory firms.

Wasserstein was hospitalized earlier this week for an irregular heartbeat, with the company saying Sunday his condition was serious but he was "stable and recovering." In a statement Wednesday, Lazard's board said the cause of death had not yet been determined.

The New York-based firm named Vice Chairman Steven J. Golub as interim CEO, effective immediately. Golub, 63, has been with Lazard since 1984 and served in various senior leadership positions, including as CFO and chairman of Lazard's financial advisory business.

But some say Lazard's success was so tied to Wasserstein that the company could face a tough road ahead.

"Mr. Wasserstein was the main driver that created Lazard as a public company," Rochdale Securities analyst Richard Bove said. "He forced the expansion of the business and his contacts brought in deals. He cannot be replaced easily or perhaps at all."

Collins Stewart LLC analyst William Tanona, however, said Lazard has a deep management bench, and expects the company to post improved profit as the merger and acquisition environment improves. Tanona said he does expect the company's stock to sell off in the wake of Wasserstein's death but is advising investors to take advantage of the opportunity to build positions.

A Wall Street superstar since the 1980s, Wasserstein worked on such landmark deals as Kohlberg Kravis Roberts' takeover of RJR Nabisco, and the Morgan Stanley-Dean Witter and AOL-Time Warner mergers. Most recently he was advising Kraft Foods Inc. on its unsolicited $16.7 billion takeover bid for British candy maker Cadbury PLC.

In the 1980s, Wasserstein and Joseph Perella ran First Boston Corp.'s mergers and acquisitions department before leaving to form their own boutique investment bank, Wasserstein Perella Group Inc. It was at Wasserstein Perella that the pair worked on the RJR Nabisco deal, at the time the biggest corporate takeover in U.S. history, with a price tag of $24.5 billion.

The deal was chronicled in the 1990 book "Barbarians at the Gate," by journalists Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, and later made into an Emmy award-winning television movie starring James Garner as RJR Nabisco CEO F. Ross Johnson.

Wasserstein was CEO of Wasserstein Perella between 1988 and 2001 before selling it to Germany's Dresdner Bank AG for about $1.4 billion.

Wasserstein joined Lazard in 2002 with a mission to turn the investment bank around, and make it more competitive against bigger firms like Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. He took the company public in May 2005, and continued to drive a series of high-profile deals. In 2006, he led a controversial report which agreed with billionaire investor Carl Icahn that Time Warner should be broken up into four companies — AOL, Time Warner Cable, publishing and entertainment — amid shareholder dissatisfaction with the outcome of the AOL-Time Warner merger, a deal with which he had been involved.

Lazard has remained relatively strong throughout the economic downturn. Its second-quarter profits fell 18 percent to $28.2 million, or 34 cents per share, but easily surpassed expectations. Lazard's financial restructuring business has thrived during the downturn, offsetting declines in mergers and acquisitions advisory business.

"We are shocked and greatly saddened by the passing of Bruce Wasserstein. He was a visionary leader, a devoted father to his children and a good friend," the company's board said Wednesday.

Aside from his work at Lazard, Wasserstein was chairman of Wasserstein & Co., a private investment firm, which targets investments between $30 million and $150 million. It has investments in companies ranging from Penton Media Inc., a publisher of trade magazines, to gourmet food seller Harry & David.

Wasserstein also owns New York Media Holdings LLC, which publishes New York magazine.

Forbes magazine estimates Wasserstein's net worth at $2 billion.

Former New York City public advocate Mark Green, one of Wasserstein's Harvard Law classmates and fellow former volunteer for Ralph Nader's consumer advocacy group in the 1970s, said in a statement Wednesday that Wasserstein used his great analytical skills to advise businesses how to be both responsible and profitable.

"No one did it better," Green wrote. "He earned the trust and respect of both the consumer side and the business side. He had a deep laugh, an agile mind and loved the game of business and of politics. I've never met anyone with a better sense of strategy."

Wasserstein was the brother of Wendy Wasserstein, a Tony award and Pulitzer Prize-winning playwright who died in 2006. Her plays included "The Heidi Chronicles" and "The Sisters Rosensweig." He is survived by his wife and children, including the daughter of his late sister Wendy, The New York Times said Wednesday.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

[Ugly Dougly]

My portfolio is up 65% from the beginning of the year.

[cowboyangel]

The floating casino may be making money for some but, lads, the damn boat is sinking.......


US budget deficit hits record 1.4 trillion dlrs: govt

By P. Parameswaran (AFP) – 22 hours ago

WASHINGTON — The US government closed its 2009 fiscal year with a record 1.417 trillion dollar budget deficit as it poured resources to contain a serious financial crisis that plunged the nation into recession.

The deficit was some 962 billion dollars higher than the prior year and amounted to 10 percent of US gross domestic product (GDP), the highest since 1945, officials said Friday.

The huge jump in the budget shortfall stemmed from both declining revenues and a massive ramping up of spending in a fiscal stimulus to jolt the world's largest economy from a prolonged recession following the worst financial crisis in decades.

Receipts for the fiscal year that ended in September totaled 2.105 trillion dollars while outlays were 3.522 trillion dollars, the Treasury said.

Officials, however, pointed out that the deficit was 162 billion dollars lower than the 1.580 trillion dollars forecast by the administration of President Barack Obama, who inherited the flood of red ink from his predecessor George W. Bush.

"The financial year 2009 deficit was largely the product of the spending and tax policies inherited from the previous administration, exacerbated by a severe recession and financial crisis that were underway as the current administration took office," Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and White House budget chief Peter Orszag said in a joint statement.

The deficit was lower than projected "in part because we are managing to repair the financial system at a lower cost to taxpayers," Geithner said.

"But future deficits are too high, and the president is committed to working with Congress to bring them down to a sustainable level as the economy recovers," he said.

Orszag said "it was critical that we acted to bring the economy back from the brink earlier this year," referring to the financial crisis that resulted from a housing market meltdown.

The crisis plunged the country into recession in December 2007 and led to the collapse of financial and investment houses and a massive government bailout of some of the institutions.

"As we move from rescue to recovery, the president recognizes that we need to put the nation back on a fiscally sustainable path," Orszag said.

As part of the fiscal year 2011 budget policy process, he said the Obama administration was considering proposals to put the country "back on firm fiscal footing."

Obama's Republican critics have stepped up their calls for the president to abandon his key reform plans to remake US health care and combat climate change that some estimate could cost several trillions of dollars.

"Congress simply can?t continue acting like a teenager on a spending spree with his parent?s credit card with no regard to who pays the bill," said US Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

"We need to listen to the American people: No more spending money we don?t have," he said.

Judd Gregg, the Republican leader of the Senate budget committee, predicted the Obama administration would be saddled with "deficits approaching one trillion dollars for each and every one of the next 10 years."

"These annual deficits translate into a build-up in debt that will crush our economy."

But House of Representatives budget committee chairman John Spratt said "It would be harmful to try to balance the budget at a time when the economy has not fully recovered and so many Americans are still struggling."

"So as the economy recovers, we will need to turn our focus back to deficit reduction."

Copyright © 2009 AFP. All rights reserved

[can't sit still]

The US went into a sharp recession in 1920. we came right out by NOT following Keynes;

By the time Harding took office in '21 the Panic of 1920 was taking the unemployment rate from 4% to nearly 12%. GDP fell 17%. Then, as now, the president's subordinates urged him to intervene. Secretary of Commerce Herbert Hoover wanted to meddle - as he would 10 years later. But Harding resisted. No bailouts. No stimulus. No monetary policy. No fiscal policy. Harding had a better approach; he cut government spending and went out to play poker:

"We will attempt intelligent and courageous deflation, and strike at government borrowing which enlarges the evil, and we will attack high cost of government with every energy and facility which attend Republican capacity...it will be an example to stimulate thrift and economy in private life.

"Let us call...for a nationwide drive against extravagance and luxury, to a recommittal to simplicity of living, to that prudent and normal plan of life which is the health of the republic."

Within a decade, Harding's views were collectibles. But in 1921, he still saw the economic world as a moral world ordered not by man, but by God. This was not the result of long study or deep reflection on his part. He was probably the dummy everybody said he was. As Keynes pointed out, politicians are always in thrall of some dead economist. At least Harding was in thrall to the good ones.

"No statute enacted by man can repeal the inexorable laws of nature," he announced. "Our most dangerous tendency is to expect too much of government..."

Harding was not the first to see the economy as a 'natural' order...one that you disturbed at your peril. A Taoist named Zhuangzi, who lived about the same time as Alexander, observed: "Good order results spontaneously when things are let alone."

Later, economists of the Scottish enlightenment, notably Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson elaborated. Smith, like Harding, saw the economy ordered by the invisible hand of God. Ferguson saw markets as a 'spontaneous order,' which were the "result of human action, but not the execution of any human design".

The same basic insight led Irving Fisher - the greatest economist of the 1920s - to come up with his debt-deflation theory of depressions. After people had borrowed, they needed to pay back. Busts followed booms; there was no getting around it.

Warren Harding may never have been the brightest bulb on the White House porch, but intuitively he understood that proper macro-economic policies were more the product of virtue than of genius. Debt led to trouble; that's all he needed to know.

Keynes came along a few years later. Keynes was a genius; everybody said so. And he had an answer for everything. Nature? Government could do better. Debt? Don't worry about it, he said. Why not just let capitalism sort itself out? Without government intervention, it will only get worse, said Keynes.

But Harding had already proved him wrong. Harding did the very opposite of what Keynes recommended. Instead of increasing government spending, he reduced it. He cut the budget almost in half. He slashed taxes too...and cut the national debt by a third.

Japan at the time struggled with the same downturn. But it had no Harding at the helm. Instead, its masters prefigured Keynes, trying to stay the correction using price controls and other interventions. The result was a long-drawn-out affair that lasted until 1927 and ended in a bank crisis. In America, meanwhile, by 1922 unemployment was back down to 6.7%. By 1923 it was down further - to 2.4%.

This lesson was entirely lost on the world's economists. When the next crisis hit a decade later, they turned to Keynes. Of course, it turned out to be a moral world after all. They got what they deserved.

Regards,

Bill Bonner

[can't sit still]

This is very interesting. GOV has stuck the FED with $ 1 trillion in debt that is NOT guaranteed. The FED is apparently served notice that they will only buy treasury debt for a short time. The FED is set to yank the rug out from treasury;
http://market-ticker.denninger.net/arch ... erday.html
this was predicted in a very good article, "When Money Dies"
http://news.goldseek.com/LewRockwell/1256710260.php
The author argues that eventually, the FED will tell GOV ,,,,, NO MORE!!
Dan

[cowboyangel]

Thanks Dan. There is a way to beat this and here it is...good ole North Dakota!


Forward this article onto your friends, local government, and anybody with enough influence and courage to get the ball rolling.



Cut Wall Street Out! How States Can Finance Their Own Economic Recovery
www.truthout.org/1031091

Saturday 31 October 2009

by: Ellen Hodgson Brown J.D., t r u t h o u t | Feature



Pouring money into the private banking system has only fixed the economy for bankers and the wealthy; it has not done much to address either the fundamental problem of unemployment or the debt trap so many Americans find themselves in.

President Obama's $787 billion stimulus plan has so far failed to halt the growth of unemployment: 2.7 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus plan began. California has lost 336,400 jobs. Arizona has lost 77,300. Michigan has lost 137,300. A total of 49 states and the District of Columbia have all reported net job losses.

In this dark firmament, however, one bright star shines. The sole state to actually gain jobs is an unlikely candidate for the distinction: North Dakota. North Dakota is also one of only two states expected to meet their budgets in 2010. (The other is Montana.) North Dakota is a sparsely populated state of less than 700,000 people, largely located in cold and isolated farming communities. Yet, since 2000, the state's GNP has grown 56 percent, personal income has grown 43 percent and wages have grown 34 percent. The state not only has no funding problems, but this year it has a budget surplus of $1.3 billion, the largest it has ever had.

Why is North Dakota doing so well, when other states are suffering the ravages of a deepening credit crisis? Its secret may be that it has its own credit machine. North Dakota is the only state in the Union to own its own bank. The Bank of North Dakota (BND) was established by the state legislature in 1919, specifically to free farmers and small businessmen from the clutches of out-of-state bankers and railroad men. The bank's stated mission is to deliver sound financial services that promote agriculture, commerce and industry in North Dakota.

The Advantages of Owning Your Own Bank

So, how does owning a bank solve the state's funding problems? Isn't the state still limited to the money it has? The answer is no. Chartered banks are allowed to do something nobody else can do: They can create credit on their books simply with accounting entries, using the magic of "fractional reserve" lending. As the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas explains on its web site:

"Banks actually create money when they lend it. Here's how it works: Most of a bank's loans are made to its own customers and are deposited in their checking accounts. Because the loan becomes a new deposit, just like a paycheck does, the bank ... holds a small percentage of that new amount in reserve and again lends the remainder to someone else, repeating the money-creation process many times."

How many times? President Obama puts this "multiplier effect" at eight to ten. In a speech on April 14, he said:

"[A]lthough there are a lot of Americans who understandably think that government money would be better spent going directly to families and businesses instead of banks - 'where's our bailout?,' they ask - the truth is that a dollar of capital in a bank can actually result in eight or ten dollars of loans to families and businesses, a multiplier effect that can ultimately lead to a faster pace of economic growth."

It can, but it hasn't recently, because private banks are limited by bank capital requirements and by their for-profit business models. And that is where a state-owned bank has enormous advantages: States own huge amounts of capital, and they can think farther ahead that their quarterly profit statements, allowing them to take long-term risks. Their asset bases are not marred by oversized salaries and bonuses; they have no shareholders expecting a sizable cut, and they have not marred their books with bad derivatives bets, unmarketable collateralized debt obligations and mark-to-market accounting problems.

The Bank of North Dakota (BND) is set up as a dba: "the State of North Dakota doing business as the Bank of North Dakota." Technically, that makes the capital of the state the capital of the bank. Projecting the possibilities of this arrangement to California, the State of California owns about $200 billion in real estate, has $62 billion in various investments and has $128 billion in projected 2009 revenues. Leveraged by a factor of eight, that capital base could support nearly $4 trillion in loans.

To get a bank charter, specific investments would probably need to be earmarked by the state as startup capital; but the startup capital required for a typical California bank is only about $20 million. This is small potatoes for the world's eighth largest economy, and the money would not actually be "spent." It would just become bank equity, transmuting from one form of investment into another - and a lucrative investment at that. In the case of the BND, the bank's return on equity is about 25 percent. It pays a hefty dividend to the state, which is expected to exceed $60 million this year. In the last decade, the BND has turned back a third of a billion dollars to the state's general fund, offsetting taxes. California could do substantially better than that. California pays $5 billion annually just in interest on its debt. If it had its own bank, the bank could refinance its debt and return that $5 billion to the state's coffers; and it would make substantially more on money lent out.

Besides capital, a bank needs "reserves," which it gets from deposits. For the BND, this too is no problem, since it has a captive deposit base. By law, the state and all its agencies must deposit their funds in the bank, which pays a competitive interest rate to the state treasurer. The bank also accepts deposits from other entities. These copious deposits can then be plowed back into the state in the form of loans.

Public Banking on the Central Bank Model

The BND's populist organizers originally conceived of the bank as a credit union-like institution that would free farmers from predatory lenders, but conservative interests later took control and suppressed these commercial lending functions. The BND is now chiefly a "bankers' bank." It acts like a central bank, with functions similar to those of a branch of the Federal Reserve. It avoids rivalry with private banks by partnering with them. Most lending is originated by a local bank. The BND then comes in to participate in the loan, share risk and buy down the interest rate.

One of the BND's functions is to provide a secondary market for real estate loans, which it buys from local banks. Its residential loan portfolio is now $500 billion to $600 billion. This function has helped the state to avoid the credit crisis that afflicted Wall Street when the secondary market for loans collapsed in late 2007. Before that, investors routinely bought securitized loans (CDOs) from the banks, making room on the banks' books for more loans. But these "shadow lenders" disappeared when they realized that the derivatives called "credit default swaps" supposedly protecting their CDOs were a highly unreliable form of insurance. In North Dakota, this secondary real estate market is provided by the BND, which has invested conservatively, avoiding the speculative derivatives debacle.

Other services the BND provides include guarantees for entrepreneurial startups and student loans, the purchase of municipal bonds from public institutions and a well-funded disaster loan program. When the city of Fargo was struck by a massive flood recently, the disaster fund helped the city avoid the devastation suffered by New Orleans in similar circumstances; and when North Dakota failed to meet its state budget a few years ago, the BND met the shortfall. The BND has an account with the Federal Reserve Bank, but its deposits are not insured by the FDIC. Rather, they are guaranteed by the State of North Dakota itself - a prudent move today, when the FDIC is verging on bankruptcy.

The Commercial Banking Model: The Commonwealth Bank of Australia

The BND studiously avoids competition with private banks, but a publicly-owned bank could profitably engage in commercial lending. A successful model for that approach was the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, which served both central bank and commercial bank functions. For nearly a century, the publicly-owned Commonwealth Bank provided financing for housing, small business, and other enterprise, affording effective public competition that "kept the banks honest" and kept interest rates low. Commonwealth Bank put the needs of borrowers ahead of profits, ensuring that sound investment flows were maintained to farming and other essential areas; yet, the bank was always profitable, from 1911 until nearly the end of the century.

Indeed, it seems to have been too profitable, making it a takeover target. It was simply "too good not to be privatized." The bank was sold in the 1990s for a good deal of money, but it's proponents consider it's loss as a social and economic institution to be incalculable.

A State Bank of Florida?

Could the sort of commercial model tested by Commonwealth Bank work today in the United States? Economist Farid Khavari thinks so. A Democratic candidate for governor of Florida, he proposes a Bank of the State of Florida (BSF) that would make loans to Floridians at much lower interest rates than they are getting now, using the magic of fractional reserve lending. He explains:

"For $100 in deposits, a bank can create $900 in new money by making loans. So, the BSF can pay 6 percent for CDs, and make mortgage loans at 2 percent. For $6 per year in interest paid out, the BSF can earn $18 by lending $900 at 2 percent for mortgages."

The state would earn $15,000 per $100,000 of mortgage, at a cost of about $1,700, while the homeowner would save $88,000 in interest and pay for the home 15 years sooner. "Our bank will save people about seven years of their pay over the course of 30 years, just on interest costs," says Dr. Khavari. He also proposes 6 percent credit cards and 6 percent certificates of deposit.

The state could earn billions yearly on these loans, while saving hefty sums for consumers. It could also refinance its own debts and those of its municipal governments at very low interest rates. According to a German study, interest composes 30 percent to 50 percent of everything we buy. Slashing interest costs can make projects such as low-cost housing, alternative energy development, and infrastructure construction not only sustainable, but profitable for the state, while at the same time creating much-needed jobs.

--------

Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In "Web of Debt," her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust." She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from "the money trust." Her eleven books include "Forbidden Medicine, Nature's Pharmacy" (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker) and "The Key to Ultimate Health" (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her web sites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.

[cowboyangel]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-bro ... 49640.html


Ahhhhhh Goldman Sachs.......Made in Hell, Spawned on earth....

[can't sit still]

"According to a German study, interest composes 30 percent to 50 percent of everything we buy. Slashing interest costs can make projects such as low-cost housing"
The accepted number is 50% average. 19% for trash collection,,, 78% for public housing.
I guess it gets trashed pretty fast.
Canada is a perfect example where state credit worked wonders,,,, and politicians sold out to the bankers. I'd like to see state credit,,,,,, I'd also like to see the Rothschillds hung from the lampposts. We pay the politician's salaries but,,,, we get outbid eventually.

[cowboyangel]

add Blankfein, Geithner, Paulson, David Rockefeller, Larry Summers, damn the list will get pretty big.....

[can't sit still]

It's simple, there is NO incentive to be honest in GOV or business. You still get re-elected,,, you never do time. How many people develop real character? Here are some good quotes on character;
http://www.great-inspirational-quotes.c ... uotes.html
The world of the rich is ALL carrots and NO sticks. Why should we expect any better. Power attracts the corrupted. Anything less than the "French Solution" will always allow the immediate return of the jackals. Look at Romania.
The current problem is that the jackals have so much more power and control than in ages past.
GOV demands that individuals and small businesses are studiously honest. GOV and big business have no rules. Fuckers

[can't sit still]

Here's some predictions by a guy who's been pretty accurate;

2010 Predictions
24 Massive Unemployment > 25% in Spain Q1 2010 2008
25 Spain GDP down by >20% latest Q3 2010 2007
26 Unemployment Germany > 15% in 2010 2008
27 Cuts in Social welfare in Germany 2010 2008
28 Food stamps issued in Germany ? 2008
29 Tax increases in US ? Q3 2009
30 Tax increases in Germany 2010 2009
31 Dollar Devaluation continues 2010 Q4 2009
31a Gold appreciation. evtl. collapse of markets 2010 Q4 2009
32 Deflation causing further money creation 2010 Q4 2009
33 over 300 bank failures in US in 2010 2010 Q4 2009
34 new record number of unemployment in US >12% Q1 Q2 2010 Q4 2009
35 Inflation takes off Import prices up, Gasoline up 2010 Q4 2009
36 new record of bankruptcies & bond failures 2010 Q4 2009
37 Massive seizure safe deposit boxes in UK 2010 Q3 2009
38 US Deflault becomes an option 2010-2012 2009

http://www.berninger.de/Predictions.html

[Kinetik V]

An Open Letter:

Kivaspace, LLC
Lincoln, NE

Bank of America
Branch Manager - Belton, MO
Corporate Headquarters, Charlotte, NC

To the Branch Manager of the Belton branch:

Approximately 2 1/2 years ago I was a loyal BOA customer. I loved BOA's services, but thanks to a problem with your ATM machine not properly crediting deposits I ended up being assessed over $375 in what I considered excessive overdraft fees. When I came to the branch to try and discuss the situation I was told in a polite way that there was nothing I could do about the fees, and I learned on the spot that I was being hit with another $225 in fees. I ended up paying all those fees but once that was done, I made a very vocal exit making damn sure you knew that I refused to be financially raped by your bank anymore, and that one way or another, if it meant lobbying every single member of Congress, the Federal Reserve, and every banking regulator in every state your bank operated in that I would get my revenge. Your fees would be stopped cold. I got laughed at as I walked out the door....

Fast forward to today. The Federal Reserve has put the brakes on your excessive fees, meaning your financial raping of your customers is coming to an end. I did write to all of the officials I said I would, and I pushed hard to make today happen. This letter is to remind you that the guy with under $500,000 in his account deserves the same respect as the private banking customers, and that what I said going out the door is exactly what I did. Promise made, promise kept. He who laughs last...laughs best. And this morning...I'm laughing because I helped change the system. I won.

Payback is a bitch, ain't it?

Signed:
A former loyal BOA customer

[Ugly Dougly]

Do you still have a job?

Maybe a home, too?

[cowboyangel]

Thanks for dropping by Kinetic. One of my regrets about not attending the past two burns is the missed opportunity of running into you.

[can't sit still]

There are widespread claims that the banks are quietly going off a cliff.
http://www.hussmanfunds.com/wmc/wmc091116.htm
"foreclosure totals will more than triple over the coming 4 years, for a total of 8.1 million foreclosures.â€

[cowboyangel]

Geithner said that commercial real estate loans wouldn't be a prob...believe him?

[Ugly Dougly]

Geithner said that commercial real estate loans wouldn't be a prob...believe him?

No prob for him!

[can't sit still]

The banks have been pretty quiet on the subject of world financial conditions. Though they DID give themselves bonuses like there will be no tomorrow. Now, a big French bank has said that things look a bit rocky;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... lapse.html

[cowboyangel]

Notice how the slimy rat reacts like a stunned adolescent when grilled about his tenure as head of the New York Federal Reserve-the most important of all the Federal Reserve Banks. Geithner was also a big wheel in the death car known as Goldman Sachs. Would be great if more congressmen showed the courage to take these rotten bankers on head on....

[youtube][/youtube]

[can't sit still]

A couple quotes from The Daily Reckoning;
"Take Your Gains," says Forbes. And once you're out of stocks, stay out until the bear market is over...probably at around 3,000 - 5,000 on the Dow. When the price of gold equal the price of the Dow, it will be time to switch."
"The always-intriguing "Stock Cycles Forecast" is looking for an important top right in here. This bearish outlook stems from a quirky collection of indicators called "time and price squareouts." For example:

1) The big S & P low in October of 2002 was 769. If one adds 769 days to the grand top of Oct 11, 2007, it comes out to Nov 18, 2009.
2) Nov 18, 2009 is a "natural square" of the crash of 1929.
3) The Oct 2002 low of 769 on the S&P 500, converted to months is 25 and due west from 25 on the Gann Square of Nine points to an S&P target of 1,104. We are there.
4) We are 85 months from the low recorded on Oct 10, 2002 and due West from 85 on the Gann Square is 1,105, which coincides with the same S&P 500 target.
5) The low last March on the S&P 500 was 666. If we subtract that in days from the recent peak of 1,102, it equals 666 days, which would bring us back to the date of the Lehman bankruptcy - the event that started the crash."

"This year and next, major governments will need to raise $12 trillion to fund their debts and deficits. That is a huge increase to the world's supply of sovereign bonds. Colleague Porter Stansberry estimates that the US government alone will need to finance $4.5 trillion worth of bonds next year. That amount is twice the total capital of the world's biggest central bank - the Fed. Even if the Chinese took every penny they have in financial reserves and used it to buy US debt, there would still be about $2.3 trillion in bonds left unsold."
notice that he said NEXT year. My crystal ball sees a default.


"predicted by former OMB head David Stockman, the national debt will soar from $12 trillion to more than $20 trillion in about 5 years."
No problem, we'll just write a check.

Here's a very good synopsis of what GOV did wrong;
http://www.moneyandmarkets.com/the-bigg ... me-5-36544

[Ugly Dougly]

My crystal ball sees a default.

That sounds scientific.

My daemon tells me that we are all wealthier than we realize.

Now in its 10th anniversary year, The Daily Reckoning is the flagship e-letter of Baltimore-based financial research firm and publishing group Agora Financial, a subsidiary of Agora Inc.

Quid pro quo (From the Latin meaning "something for something") indicates a more-or-less equal exchange or substitution of goods or services. English speakers often use the term to mean "a favor for a favor" and the phrases with almost identical meaning include: "what for what," "give and take," "tit for tat", "this for that", and "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours".

[can't sit still]

Here's something that could piss you off;
"A growing number of bankrupt auto suppliers are seeking court approval to pay tens of millions of dollars in bonuses to key executives, as they shed employees and cut costs."

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot. ... k-100.html

[can't sit still]

This is an interesting article about bank loans to business,,, to consumers.
"As bank-credit and Elliott-wave expert Hamilton Bolton pointed out half a century ago (see Conquer the Crash, p.89), the biggest financial crises come from the unsustainable expansion of non-self-liquidating loans. " consumer loans
Business loans create / earn the money to repay themselves.
Consumer loans depend on wages.
One more good example of how the banks shot themselves in the foot.
http://www.elliottwave.com/features/def ... px?cat=pmp

[can't sit still]

Now, "they" are warning about another crisis;

"What really spooked me into my cash call was when I saw the IRX (13 week T-bill) drop below zero for a bit last week. This means at one point last week you actually paid to keep your money in treasuries! The last time we saw rates that low on the IRX was when the market crashed last fall.

This tells me that the big boys are really spooked. They would prefer to sit and actually lose money in treasuries versus investing in the equity market."
"The market basically doesn't want a recovery right now. It loves high unemployment and a bad economy because it allows the Fed to keep rates at zero which is highly profitable for Wall St via the games that I described above."
How nice for the rest of us.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/175060- ... sb_popular

[can't sit still]

Interesting article about Chinese banks. There has been talk all along about the Chinese GOV just ignoring hundreds of billions in bad loans. This article airs things out a bit. It's a few years old but, I expect that bad loans have increased;
http://seekingalpha.com/article/25956-t ... na-s-banks

[can't sit still]

We owe a LOT of money to the banks. Surprisingly, we're not at the top of the list.

"If its any comfort, in relation, the US is the world's 20th largest debtor in proportion to GNP. In other words, the same Illuminati families have their teeth into many other countries.

For example, the US deficit is estimated to be 94% of GDP. In Germany it's 178% ($63K per person); France is 236% (78K per person); and UK and Switzerland are 340% and 422% respectively ( $140K & $176 K per person.)

So you see, the Illuminati bankers have limitless wealth and all they lack is unlimited power, a problem which "world government" will address. Then, no Congress will even attempt the charade of challenging the Fed's "independence."
http://www.henrymakow.com/half_of_us_de ... o_fed.html

[can't sit still]

Bernanke is waiting for confirmation;
Senator Bunning to Bernanke

Alan Greenspan refused to look for bubbles or to do anything other than create them. Likewise it is clear from your statements over the last four years that you failed to spot the housing bubble despite many warnings.

Under your watch every one of the major banks failed or would have failed had you not bailed them out.

After taking over the Fed you did not seen any need for more substantial regulation of derivatives until it was clear that they were headed into the financial meltdown thanks in part to those products.

The Greenspan policy on transparency was to talk a lot, use plenty of numbers, but say nothing. You promised congress more transparency when you came to the job. You promised more transparency when you came begging for TARP. To be fair you have published more information than before but those efforts are inadequate and you still refuse to provide details on the Fed's bailout last year on all the toxic waste you have bought.

Chairman Greenspan sold the Fed's independence to Wall Street on the so called "Greenspan PUT". Whenever Wall Street needed a boost, Alan was there. But you went even farther than that when you bowed to the political pressure of the Bush and Obama Administrations, and turned the Fed into an arm of the Treasury.

Under your watch the "Bernanke PUT" became a bailout for all large financial institutions, including many foreign banks. Alan Greenspan refused to look for bubbles or to do anything other than create them. Likewise it is clear from your statements over the last four years that you failed to spot the housing bubble despite many warnings.

Under your watch every one of the major banks failed or would have failed had you not bailed them out.

After taking over the Fed you did not seen any need for more substantial regulation of derivatives until it was clear that they were headed into the financial meltdown thanks in part to those products.

The Greenspan policy on transparency was to talk a lot, use plenty of numbers, but say nothing. You promised congress more transparency when you came to the job. You promised more transparency when you came begging for TARP. To be fair you have published more information than before but those efforts are inadequate and you still refuse to provide details on the Fed's bailout last year on all the toxic waste you have bought.

Chairman Greenspan sold the Fed's independence to Wall Street on the so called "Greenspan PUT". Whenever Wall Street needed a boost, Alan was there. But you went even farther than that when you bowed to the political pressure of the Bush and Obama Administrations, and turned the Fed into an arm of the Treasury.

Under your watch the "Bernanke PUT" became a bailout for all large financial institutions, including many foreign banks.

And you put the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government's spending and hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street.

In short, you are the definition of a moral hazard.
Alan Greenspan refused to look for bubbles or to do anything other than create them. Likewise it is clear from your statements over the last four years that you failed to spot the housing bubble despite many warnings.

Under your watch every one of the major banks failed or would have failed had you not bailed them out.

After taking over the Fed you did not seen any need for more substantial regulation of derivatives until it was clear that they were headed into the financial meltdown thanks in part to those products.

The Greenspan policy on transparency was to talk a lot, use plenty of numbers, but say nothing. You promised congress more transparency when you came to the job. You promised more transparency when you came begging for TARP. To be fair you have published more information than before but those efforts are inadequate and you still refuse to provide details on the Fed's bailout last year on all the toxic waste you have bought.

Chairman Greenspan sold the Fed's independence to Wall Street on the so called "Greenspan PUT". Whenever Wall Street needed a boost, Alan was there. But you went even farther than that when you bowed to the political pressure of the Bush and Obama Administrations, and turned the Fed into an arm of the Treasury.

Under your watch the "Bernanke PUT" became a bailout for all large financial institutions, including many foreign banks.

And you put the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government's spending and hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street.

In short, you are the definition of a moral hazard.

You are repeating the same mistakes as Japan in the 1990's on a much larger scale while sowing the seeds for the next bubble.

The AIG bailout alone is reason enough to send you back to Princeton.

I will do everything I can to stop your nomination and drag out this process as long as I can. We must put an end to your and the Fed's failure and there is no better time than now.

Your Fed has become the creature from Jekyll Island.

It is hard to add to that. Senator Bunning states the facts as they are.

You are repeating the same mistakes as Japan in the 1990's on a much larger scale while sowing the seeds for the next bubble.

The AIG bailout alone is reason enough to send you back to Princeton.

I will do everything I can to stop your nomination and drag out this process as long as I can. We must put an end to your and the Fed's failure and there is no better time than now.

Your Fed has become the creature from Jekyll Island.

It is hard to add to that. Senator Bunning states the facts as they are.


And you put the printing presses into overdrive to fund the government's spending and hand out cheap money to your masters on Wall Street.

In short, you are the definition of a moral hazard.

You are repeating the same mistakes as Japan in the 1990's on a much larger scale while sowing the seeds for the next bubble.

The AIG bailout alone is reason enough to send you back to Princeton.

I will do everything I can to stop your nomination and drag out this process as long as I can. We must put an end to your and the Fed's failure and there is no better time than now.

Your Fed has become the creature from Jekyll Island.

It is hard to add to that. Senator Bunning states the facts as they are.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot. ... u-are.html