Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Defaulting banks - where will it stop?
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:It all rather begs the question:

These hundreds of billions of quantitatively eased (aka freshly printed) SDRs will be backed by precisely what?

Tulips, anyone? Confusedantaclaus:


No, Lupins.

If Lupins are good enough for Dennis Moore they're good enough for the IMF!

But, of course, armed with fictitious money that will ultimately be backed by global tax-payers sweat, blood and tears - via quiet agreements by men in suits - the IMF will be able to engage in buying nations lock, stock and barrel using the taxpayers (sweat backed SDRs) money of each nation it "saves" to do so. It will impose the harshest of harsh sanctions to ensure that the nation saved will be able to repay the fictitious money with real assets, whilst being kept into servitude in perpetuity.

The end result is the conjuror's sleight of hand trick. We pay to finance being plundered, as well as being plundered and enslaved.

Welcome to the banksters ultimate wet dream...
The shadow is a moral problem that challenges the whole ego-personality, for no one can become conscious of the shadow without considerable moral effort. To become conscious of it involves recognizing the dark aspects of the personality as present and real. This act is the essential condition for any kind of self-knowledge.
Carl Jung - Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.14
Reply
"Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws.”

—Mayer Amschel Bauer Rothschild (1744-1812), founder of the private International Banking House of Rothschild.

“The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin. Bankers own the Earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. But if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.”

—Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Rothschild Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s, speaking at the University of Texas in 1927.

“If the American people ever allow private banks to control issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”

—Thomas Jefferson in the debate over his opposition to the Re-charter of the Private Bank Bill (1809).

“I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies…”

—Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816.

“The Federal Reserve banks are one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever seen. There is not a man within the sound of my voice who does not know that this nation is run by the International Bankers.”

—Congressman Louis T. McFadden (Rep. Pa)

“The few who understand the system will either be so interested in its profits or be so dependent upon its favours that there will be no opposition from that class, while on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage that capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens without complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that the system is inimical to their interests.”

—The Rothschild brothers of London writing to associates in New York, 1863, laying the groundwork for the eventual passage of their catastrophic Federal Reserve Act on December 23, 1913

“… You are a den of vipers and thieves. I intend to rout you out, and by the grace of the Eternal God, I will rout you out.”

—President Andrew Jackson, upon evicting a delegation of International Bankers from the Oval Office

“The real truth of the matter is, and you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson. History depicts Andrew Jackson as the last truly honorable and incorruptible American president.”

—President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, November 23, 1933 in a letter to Colonel Edward Mandell House

“We have, in this country, one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board. This evil institution has impoverished the people of the United States and has practically bankrupted our government. It has done this through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.”

—Congressman Louis T. McFadden in 1932

“It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”

—Henry Ford inventor and founder of the Ford Motor Company.

“Some [most] people think the Federal Reserve Banks are U.S. government institutions. They are not … they are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the U.S. for the benefit of themselves and their foreign and domestic swindlers, and rich and predatory money lenders. The sack of the United States by the Fed is the greatest crime in history. Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers, but the truth is the Fed has usurped the government. It controls everything here and it controls all our foreign relations. It makes and breaks governments at will.”

—Congressional Record 12595-12603 — Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency (12 years) June 10, 1932

“History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance.”

—President James Madison

“… we conclude that the [Federal] Reserve Banks are not federal … but are independent, privately owned and locally controlled corporations … without day-to-day direction from the federal government..”

—9th Circuit Court in Lewis vs. United States, 680 F. 2d 1239 June 24, 1982
Reply
http://www.openthegovernment.org/article...eview/365/
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
http://www.deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/...php?t=1069

This is a real stealth move........even more criminal than some of the others, if possible...
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
More treason, typically well spotted by Karl Denninger over at Market Ticker.

I increasingly think that we're close to the moment when They have one last pig out at the trough and then play the Joker. Whatever that wildcard may be.... :elefant:

Quote:Tuesday, March 24. 2009
Posted by Karl Denninger in Federal Reserve at 08:25

Lawlessness Begets Lawlessness
Nice 7% rally yesterday eh?

A few minutes after the close, we got this:

Quote:WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Treasury and the Federal Reserve released a joint statement Monday that spells out the different responsibilities of the two agencies in dealing with the financial crisis. In the most noteworthy part of the agreement, Treasury said it would take over the Fed's holding of assets of Bear Stearns and American International Group. Treasury did not say how it would pay for these programs and said it would only make the move "in the longer term and as its authorities permit." The Fed's investments in the three funds, known as Maiden Lane, totaled $72.21 billion in the latest week, according to Fed statistics.

Yes, those three "Maiden Lane" equity investments that The Fed is not authorized to make at all, and which Ben Bernanke assured us as recently as January would not lose money.

The truth?

Quote:- Note: Maiden Lane fund hold Bear Stears and AIG assets. Additionally on 1/20, the WSJ noted that at the end of Sept, Maiden Lane had a value of $27B and the same article noted that analysts expect the value of the Maiden Lane assets to have dropped more in Q4. Furthermore on 3/17, it was disclosed that Maiden Lane III paid $62B to buy CDOs and thus settle derivative transactions for AIG with 16 investment banks in return for securities worth less than $30B.

Uh, the very same Fed that took an intentional $30 billion loss without appropriating the funds via The House (Congress) as required by The Constitution and now intends to pass that $30 billion loss directly to the Treasury (and the taxpayer), just a couple of months after telling us that they'd take no loss?

The Fed put this ditty out to go along with it:

.....

Quote:2. The Federal Reserve to avoid credit risk and credit allocation
The Federal Reserve's lender-of-last-resort responsibilities involve lending against collateral, secured to the satisfaction of the responsible Federal Reserve Bank. Actions taken by the Federal Reserve should also aim to improve financial or credit conditions broadly, not to allocate credit to narrowly-defined sectors or classes of borrowers. Government decisions to influence the allocation of credit are the province of the fiscal authorities.

This, of course, is why they entirely ignored that charter and took three separate equity positions including one of them in which they took an intentional loss while Ben Bernanke appears to have lied to Congress and The American People, stating that there had been and would not be, in his best judgment, any loss at all?

How do you square that with taking an intentional loss by overpaying for CDS on purpose that at the time of acquisition have less than half of the value you spend in dollars?

Let's be clear: Ben Bernanke has repeatedly stated that The Fed "only" makes fully-collateralized loans. THIS IS A LIE; the "Maiden Lane" facilities are equity ownership positions created and funded by The Fed! The fact of the matter is that The Fed has no authority under The Federal Reserve Act (or any other existing law) to do anything other than make fully-collateralized loans (even in "unusual and exigent circumstances"), yet they have in fact violated those restrictions with impunity since the failure of Bear Stearns.

Lying to Congress is already punishable, but we must go much further.

We need a special prosecutor - now - to investigate this and see if there are criminal sanctions that can be brought against Bernanke and the rest of The Federal Reserve Board, and while we're at it, Congress needs to revoke The Fed's charter or rewrite The Federal Reserve Act so as to provide for specific severe criminal penalties for actions that clearly exceed The Fed's charter.

Enough is enough.

http://market-ticker.org/archives/895-La...sness.html
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
AMY GOODMAN: The Obama administration and the Federal Reserve urged Congress yesterday to give the federal government unprecedented new powers to seize control of troubled financial firms beyond banks deemed too big to fail. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke proposed the idea in testimony before the House Financial Services Committee yesterday. Both men pointed to the troubled insurance giant American International Group, or AIG, as a prime example.

This is Treasury Secretary Geithner.

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: As we’ve seen with AIG, distress at large complex financial institutions can pose risks as dangerous as those that led the United States to establish a full framework of tools for dealing with banks. We need to extend those protections and authorities to cover the risks posed by our more diverse and complicated financial system today, and we are proposing legislation to provide those tools and look forward to working with this committee and the Congress to pass such legislation as quickly as possible.


AMY GOODMAN: The New York Times reports if Congress approves such a measure, it would represent one of the biggest permanent expansions of federal regulatory power in decades.

Federal Reserve Chair Ben Bernanke argued in his testimony, if the government had allowed AIG to fail, it would have jeopardized the entire financial system.

BEN BERNANKE: Conceivably, its failure could have resulted in a 1930s-style global financial and economic meltdown with catastrophic implications for production, income and jobs.


AMY GOODMAN: As Bernanke and Geithner made their pitch for new powers for the federal government, many House committee members grilled them over AIG’s decision to pay out over $165 million in bonuses to executives after receiving a $170 billion taxpayer bailout. Geithner, who has come under fire for not doing enough to block the bonuses, said he shared their anger.

TIMOTHY GEITHNER: Now, I share the anger and frustration of the American people, not just about the compensation practices at AIG and in other parts of our system, but that our financial system permitted a scale of risk taking that has caused grave damage to the lives of so many Americans.


AMY GOODMAN: Many view the massive losses at AIG as the result of corporate greed combined with lax government oversight and regulation. But in a new article in Rolling Stone Magazine that takes an in-depth look at the AIG story, journalist Matt Taibbi writes the financial crisis and the bailout that followed, quote, “cemented and formalized a political trend that has been snowballing for decades: the gradual takeover of the government by a small class of connected insiders, who used money to control elections, buy influence and systematically weaken financial regulations.”

Taibbi goes on to write, “The mistake most people make in looking at the financial crisis is thinking of it in terms of money, a habit that might lead you to look at the unfolding mess as a huge bonus-killing downer for the Wall Street class. But if you look at it in purely Machiavellian terms, what you see is a colossal power grab that threatens to turn the federal government into a kind of giant Enron—a huge, impenetrable black box filled with self-dealing insiders whose scheme is the securing of individual profits at the expense of an ocean of unwitting involuntary shareholders, previously known as taxpayers.”

Well, Matt Taibbi, contributing editor for Rolling Stone Magazine, joins us right now. His article is called “The Big Takeover.” He’s author of a number of books; his most recent, The Great Derangement: A Terrifying True Story of War, Politics, and Religion.

Welcome to Democracy Now!

MATT TAIBBI: Thanks for having me, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, start there. How did this big takeover happen? I think while a lot of people have heard the words and letters AIG, they don’t really know how this unfolded, how it gained its not only money, as you point out, its power.

MATT TAIBBI: Well, it’s an extraordinarily complex story, first of all, but it—you know, this is a process that’s been going on for a generation. And really, the reason we have all of these gigantic firms that are, quote/unquote, “too big to fail” now is because of a series of deregulatory moves that allowed insurance companies to merge with investment banks, investment banks to merge with commercial banks.

The biggest movement in that front was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, which repealed the Depression-era law called the Glass-Steagall Act, and that allowed all of these companies to merge together and create these enormous mega-companies, like Citi, like Bank of America and like AIG, which was once basically an insurance company but evolved to become, you know, a very complicated hedge fund, an investment bank and a variety of other things.

And under these new regulations, it was also allowed to choose its own regulator, and it chose the weakest and most impotent of the regulators, the Office of Thrift Supervision, which is one of the big reasons that it was allowed to sort of spin out of control.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, AIG chose OTS?

MATT TAIBBI: Under a new law at the end of the ’90s, you could—a bank holding company or, you know, a financial holding company could designate itself a thrift, and a “thrift” is just another word for savings and loan. All they had to do is open up a thrift in one state. And AIG opened up a thrift in Delaware, designated itself a thrift and then chose the Office of Thrift Supervision as its regulator. And the Office of Thrift Supervision is by far the smallest and least aggressive of the regulators. And, in fact, it only had one insurance expert on its entire staff. And this is a company—

AMY GOODMAN: OTS, the Office of Thrift Supervision.

MATT TAIBBI: OTS, yeah. And this is a company—this is an organization that’s supposedly regulating AIG, which was the eighteenth largest company in the world, Ameriprise and a series of other enormous, you know, gigantic insurance companies. So they had really very little expertise to deal with the situation.

AMY GOODMAN: Who is Patient Zero in your story, “The Big Takeover”?

MATT TAIBBI: We called Joseph Cassano “Patient Zero” of the situation. He was the head of a tiny unit within AIG called AIG Financial Products. AIG was a company that had over 150,000 employees. AIGFP is a small London-based bureau that had only 377 employees. And it’s incidentally this very unit that is getting those bonuses now.

And this tiny unit basically made a $500 billion bet with money they didn’t have, and when they lost that bet, when they were suddenly forced to post an enormous amount of money, that’s when the government had to step in and rescue AIG, because they had obligations that they had to meet.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean, they made this bet?

MATT TAIBBI: Again, this is very complicated, but they were dealing in these derivative instruments that are called credit-default swaps, and—

AMY GOODMAN: CDSs.

MATT TAIBBI: CDSs. And CDSs are—it’s a form of insurance. Actually, if you look at it a different way, it’s really just gambling. But it’s a situation where an outside company like AIG can offer to guarantee the investments of, you know, a bank like Goldman Sachs, for instance. And say a bank like Goldman Sachs invests an enormous amount of money in a housing market, but they want protection in case their investments default, unless some of those mortgages and loans that they’re investing in default, so they go to AIG, and they offer to pay them a premium every month, in exchange for which AIG will pay the entire amount of their mortgages in the case of default. So it’s sort of like an insurance policy against, you know, the investments of these investment banks.

AMY GOODMAN: So you have—Cassano sells $500 billion of CDS protection with at least $64 billion of that tied in the subprime mortgage market.

MATT TAIBBI: Right, and right. And because the CDSs were unregulated—and this is because of a specific law back in the year 2000 called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which was sponsored by Phil Gramm. These instruments were unregulated. They were designated outside the regulation of—they couldn’t be regulated as futures commodities or as gaming, so there were no rules about this. So you could sell as much CDS protection as you wanted, but you didn’t have to actually post any capital when you did it. You know, when you sell a bond, somebody actually has to—you know, a $100 bond, somebody actually has to have $100. Well, that’s not the case with CDSs. You could sell as much of the stuff as you wanted, and you didn’t have to have any money at all. And that’s why AIG got in so much trouble.

AMY GOODMAN: I want to ask you, when we come back from break, about Cassano, yes, being—you can’t say “fired,” because he was kept on—

MATT TAIBBI: Right.

AMY GOODMAN: —at the cost of a million dollars a month. And then we are going to talk about these bonuses and who these people are.

MATT TAIBBI: Sure.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi is contributing editor for Rolling Stone. His latest article, “The Big Takeover.” Stay with us.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi, our guest, contributing editor to Rolling Stone Magazine, latest article, “The Big Takeover.” I’m Amy Goodman, as we continue on this piece, where Matt Taibbi says, “The global economic crisis isn’t about money—it’s about power. How Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution.” What do you mean?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, you know, one of the things that happened when this whole mess exploded is that the financial community basically said to the government, “Look, we’re the only people who understand this stuff. You have to let us kind of work this out.” And so, the bailout was really just a conversation between Wall Street and a few very connected ex-Wall Street figures, like Hank Paulson and Timothy Geithner, and a lot of this was sort of done in secret, because the bailout facilities in the Federal Reserve are—you can’t audit—Congress is not allowed to audit any of these programs. So it’s really sort of—the bailout is just a giant dictatorially administered program by the Federal Reserve and partially by the Treasury, and it’s all done by ex-Wall Street people and current Wall Street people, and, you know, the ordinary people really don’t have any input into any of this.

And a great example of how Wall Street has actually risen in influence is this new program that Timothy Geithner introduced the other day, which is really just state-subsidized hedge fund profiteering. They’re actually—the government is actually going to be lending a trillion dollars to hedge funds so that they can invest in these securities, and they’re going to basically guarantee that they can’t really lose any money in these investments. It’s sort of a, you know, “heads, I win; tails, the taxpayer loses” situation. And, you know, it’s a really bad situation for ordinary people.

AMY GOODMAN: Socializing the debt and privatizing the profit.

MATT TAIBBI: Exactly, exactly.

AMY GOODMAN: You write in your piece, “In 1997 and 1998”—so like ten years ago—“the years leading up to the passage of Phil Gramm’s fateful act that gutted Glass-Steagall, the banking, brokerage and insurance industries spent $350 million on political contributions and lobbying. Gramm alone—then the chairman of the Senate Banking Committee—collected $2.6 million in [only] five years. The law passed”—not close—“90-8,” you say, “in the Senate, with the support of 38 Democrats, including some names that might surprise you:”—you write—“Joe Biden, John Kerry, Tom Daschle, Dick Durbin, even John Edwards.”

MATT TAIBBI: Right, right. I think one of the things that people don’t understand about this crisis is they—we always have this instinct in America to blame one side or the other for any political problem. You know, people on the left want to say, “Oh, George Bush did it,” and on the right they always want to say, “It was Clinton.” Well, this is as purely a bipartisan problem as we’ve ever had in this country. This was absolute unity on the part of both parties. They both were absolutely complicit in passing these deregulatory moves.

You know, in the instance of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, that was sponsored by Phil Gramm and by the Republicans, but it was very, very enthusiastically supported by Robert Rubin and Larry Summers, and it was signed into law by Bill Clinton and passed with the support of all those very powerful Democratic senators. And this continued to be the case throughout late ’90s and throughout this whole decade, and that’s why we’re in the situation that we are right now, because nobody is really, you know, representing the other side.

AMY GOODMAN: Goldman Sachs, it turns out, was Cassano’s largest customer?

MATT TAIBBI: That’s right.

AMY GOODMAN: What does that mean?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, the insurance policies, the things that Cassano was selling that are like insurance, Goldman Sachs actually had bought $20 billion worth of those guarantees, so that when we bailed out AIG, we were effectively bailing out Goldman Sachs, because AIG owed Goldman Sachs $20 billion.

And that’s significant, because who was the Treasury Secretary who engineered this bailout? It was Hank Paulson, who was the former head of Goldman Sachs. They ultimately ended up installing Ed Liddy as the CEO of AIG, and Liddy, himself, is a former Goldman employee. And now the top aide to Timothy Geithner, Mark Patterson, is a former Goldman executive. I mean, this whole situation is rife with Goldman Sachs employees.

AMY GOODMAN: So what happened to Cassano?

MATT TAIBBI: Cassano made $280 million. He was—when he was forced out of AIG last year, he was given a $34 million severance payment. He was allowed to stay on at a salary of a million dollars a month. And, in fact, he kept earning that salary, even after AIG was bailed out, for at least another month. And he’s now living in London. And as far as I know, that’s the consequence for Joe Cassano. He made almost $300 million, and now he’s living in a big lavish townhouse not far from Harrods in London. And that’s it. That’s the end of the story.

AMY GOODMAN: A friend was asking this question the other day. The House passed the legislation saying tax 90 percent of whatever these bonuses are, if they don’t return them. But, first of all, who are these people in the London office? Are they British? They wouldn’t be subjected to the IRS. And if they’re Americans, how does tax law work for Americans abroad?

MATT TAIBBI: You know, I don’t really know, honestly. I mean, AIGFP has two offices. They have one that’s in Greenwich, Connecticut, and one that’s in London. I’m assuming most of these employees are Americans.

But, you know, the key thing about that whole taxation issue is that it’s not even necessary. This is a situation where Timothy Geithner and Ben Bernanke could have called, you know, AIG’s CEO Ed Liddy on the phone and said, “Hey, look. Take those bonuses back, or you’re going to be floating face down in the Hudson River tomorrow.” We know it’s not necessary to go through a congressional act. The United States now owns 80 percent of AIG. We can basically do whatever we want. The fact that we had to resort to those measures is extraordinary in itself.

AMY GOODMAN: The head—the former CEO of AIG, Hank Greenberg, what did he understand of these credit default swaps? And how did AIG go from insurance to CDSs?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, from what I understand, Greenberg didn’t really understand these instruments at all. And that’s one of the big problems, is that nobody understood them. The only people who understood these CDSs and these derivative instruments was the people who were actually writing these contracts. And this is a tiny, tiny unit. Again, it’s 377 people within a company of over 150,000 employees.

And basically, they were making so much money that AIG senior management said, “Oh, you know, great! As long as you tell us everything’s fine, we’re cool with that.” And they never really did any aggressive accounting of AIGFP, and they never really questioned any of the math that Joe Cassano was sending upstairs.

AMY GOODMAN: You compare this whole thing to a casino. Lay out the analogy for us.

MATT TAIBBI: Well, you know, the biggest situation is, you know, a lot of these contracts, these CDS contracts, are like gambling, in the sense that—normally when you buy an insurance policy, you’re buying a policy on a house that you actually own. With these CDS contracts, you could actually bet on somebody else’s mortgage. AIG, for instance, could have gone to Goldman Sachs and said, you know, “We’d like to bet that the mortgages that were issued by JPMorgan Chase are going to default in the next ten years.” So these two parties that don’t have anything to do with the actual underlying loan could actually gamble on the outcome of that loan. So, this is—it’s really no different at all from gambling. And that’s why they had to seek a specific exemption from gaming laws in the year 2000, when they actually went forward with the deregulation of these instruments.

AMY GOODMAN: What do you mean?

MATT TAIBBI: In the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in the year 2000, they specifically exempted credit default swaps from being treated as gaming under any state laws. And they had to do that, because they were afraid that they were going to be regulated by, you know, state gaming agencies.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi, who won? Who lost?

MATT TAIBBI: Well, I think, you know, everybody loses in the financial crisis, and this is obviously an enormous downfall for everybody financially. But I think that the Wall Street crowd really actually won politically in the end, because what we’re seeing now is that they’re now having an influence over budgetary policy, and they’re able to get their hooks not only into our money but into the money of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury. And they’re really rising in influence because of that.

AMY GOODMAN: Is this about restoring Wall Street to the way it was? I mean, you say, “Wall Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution.” Are they succeeding?

MATT TAIBBI: I just think we’re entering into unprecedented territory. Because of the way the bailout was engineered, we’ve essentially created a giant holding company, with the government as senior management. We now own controlling stakes in an enormous variety of companies, a dying insurance giant in AIG. We’ve absorbed all these toxic instruments, so we’re now the world’s largest hedge fund and the world’s riskiest hedge fund. We’ve bought part of auto finance companies and credit card companies.

And so, we’ve created this enormous—an enormously complex holding company, and the only people who really understand how to administer that company are these Wall Street insiders and the ex-Wall Street insiders who are now in the administration. And because the rest of us don’t really understand this stuff, you know, they’ve essentially increased their political power, because they’ve created a political system that’s too complex for ordinary people to understand.

AMY GOODMAN: Should people really feel confident when they say Wall Street has rallied, like when Timothy Geithner yesterday announced his $1 trillion plan?

MATT TAIBBI: No, the only reason—

AMY GOODMAN: Does that help Main Street?

MATT TAIBBI: The only reason that Wall Street rallied yesterday was because this plan that Geithner administered is such an enormous giveaway to Wall Street. It’s essentially, you know—again, it’s state-subsidized hedge fund profiteering. And, of course, every hedge fund in the world was throwing a party at the news that Geithner came out with this plan yesterday.

AMY GOODMAN: Matt Taibbi, I want to thank you for being with us, contributing editor for Rolling Stone Magazine. His latest article, “The Big Takeover.” And he’s written a number of books; his latest, The Great Derangement: A Terrifying True Story of War, Politics, and Religion.
http://www.democracynow.org/2009/3/25/ai...eover_matt
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply
It's the first trick of magic. Get the audience looking at one hand, whilst performing the scam (sorry - magical trick) with the other. In full view, but unnoticed.

So, whilst MSM & politicians divert us with tales of fat cat bankers getting threatened for gobbling those taxpayer-funded bonuses, the bankers' coup d'etat continues unchecked.

With thanks for Karl Denninger for continuing to look at both of the magician's hands....

Quote:That Didn't Take Long (Gaming PPIP)
I told you so.....

Quote:The huge subsidy to banks hidden inside of Tim Geithner's public-private partnership program may already be leading banks to load up on securities they plan to sell at inflated prices.

According to the New York Post, Citi and Bank of America have been aggressively buying up Alt-A and ARM mortgage backed securities, sometimes paying more than the going rate of around 30 cents on the dollar.
....

Recently, securities rated AAA have changed hands for roughly 30 cents on the dollar, and most of the buyers have been hedge funds acting opportunistically on a bet that prices will rise over time. However, sources said Citi and BofA have trumped those bids.

There's nothing complicated about this at all.

Buy for 30 cents, sell to the PPIP for 50 cents, pocket a quick (and huge) profit immediately and nobody's the wiser.

Oops - now someone is the wiser.

Oh darn.

The reason ALT-A (liar loans) and Option ARM securities are trading at 20-30 cents on the dollar is that nearly all of those "loans" were either made to someone who lied about their income, couldn't afford the reset/recast payment and is underwater on their house (and thus can't refinance), or both.

When those loans default (and most of them eventually will, even if they're paying now) recovery is extraordinarily poor; 30 cents is likely just about right.

Get the BBQ Sauce.

http://market-ticker.org/archives/901-Th...-PPIP.html
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
Hmmm - a rare moment of insight from a politician.

My emphasis:

Quote:New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo subpoened American International Group Inc.’s credit- default swap data to see whether its customers including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Societe Generale SA and Deutsche Bank AG were improperly compensated with taxpayer dollars.

“Our investigation into corporate bonuses has led us to an investigation of the credit-default swap contracts at AIG,” Cuomo said in a statement. “CDS contracts were at the heart of AIG’s meltdown. The question is whether the contracts are being wound down properly and efficiently or whether they have become a vehicle for funneling billions in taxpayer dollars to capitalize banks all over the world.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2...refer=home

Cuomo had better trap it soon, or They'll tell MSM that he's using Spitzer's callgirls...

:2in1:
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
My heart bleeds for the poor dears....

Quote:Swiss banks ban travel over secrecy worries
By Richard Milne in Geneva

Published: March 27 2009 02:00 | Last updated: March 27 2009 02:00

Switzerland's private banks have started to ban their top executives from travelling abroad, even to neighbouring France and Germany, because of fears they will be detained as part of a global crackdown on bank secrecy.

The head of one leading private bank in Geneva said the growing determination of countries such as the US and Germany to tackle tax evasion and secrecy meant banks felt they had to take extra measures to protect employees.

"Some banks have taken this precaution," he said. "If today I go to Germany to visit two banks I deal with . . . German customs can take me in and question me."

The travel bans, which have not been brought in by all banks, have focused on those visiting the US, following the detention there last year of a senior private banker from UBS, Switzerland's biggest bank, as part of a federal tax investigation.

The head of the private bank, which itself has no travel restrictions, said: "Today if you are a banker from Switzerland going to the US you have to fear you will be taken in for questioning. I am thinking twice about going to America."

However, four people in the private banking industry in Geneva told the Financial Times of banks bringing in total travel bans for staff, even for adjoining European countries.

"Private bankers aren't even travelling to France. The partners are not leaving Geneva at all," said a senior industry figure close to several private banks. No bank contacted by the FT wanted to discuss the matter publicly.

The restrictions come ahead of next week's Group of 20 summit where a clampdown on tax havens is set to be discussed.

Under pressure from other countries, Switzerland, which is estimated to account for about a third of the world's $11,000bn (£7,600bn) in clandestine personal wealth, agreed this month to ease its bank secrecy laws and accept international standards on tax transparency.

From their discreet offices on a luxury goods shopping street overlooking Lake Geneva, private bankers in Geneva reacted this week with a mixture of intense anger, at what they see as an unjustified attack by big countries, and concern about the threat to their business model.

"It is not really about bank secrecy; it is about solving an internal problem [for the big countries] by finding an enemy outside to bash," said one senior banker.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3afec5b6-1a6e-...ck_check=1
"It means this War was never political at all, the politics was all theatre, all just to keep the people distracted...."
"Proverbs for Paranoids 4: You hide, They seek."
"They are in Love. Fuck the War."

Gravity's Rainbow, Thomas Pynchon

"Ccollanan Pachacamac ricuy auccacunac yahuarniy hichascancuta."
The last words of the last Inka, Tupac Amaru, led to the gallows by men of god & dogs of war
Reply
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:Hmmm - a rare moment of insight from a politician.

My emphasis:

Quote:New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo subpoened American International Group Inc.’s credit- default swap data to see whether its customers including Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Societe Generale SA and Deutsche Bank AG were improperly compensated with taxpayer dollars.

“Our investigation into corporate bonuses has led us to an investigation of the credit-default swap contracts at AIG,” Cuomo said in a statement. “CDS contracts were at the heart of AIG’s meltdown. The question is whether the contracts are being wound down properly and efficiently or whether they have become a vehicle for funneling billions in taxpayer dollars to capitalize banks all over the world.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=2...refer=home

Cuomo had better trap it soon, or They'll tell MSM that he's using Spitzer's callgirls...

:2in1:

Right, One can expect, even I'd predict, he will shortly be involved in a scandal or have an accident....either, manufactured [and insured by AIG].
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Western Banks, Terrorism and Isis: The Nihilism of Dark Finance Fuelling Global Insecurity Magda Hassan 0 3,408 19-11-2014, 11:49 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Unheralded report by Channel 4's economic editor on latest forex fraud by banks David Guyatt 1 3,329 15-11-2014, 01:04 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Banks fined for manipulating forex markets David Guyatt 1 3,423 13-11-2014, 08:54 AM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  Banks set aside billions for currency rigging David Guyatt 3 3,903 30-10-2014, 09:57 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Typos and banks who won't protect their customers David Guyatt 3 4,145 15-10-2014, 11:44 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  UK banks face competition inquiry --- maybe. When hell freezes over David Guyatt 1 2,677 18-07-2014, 10:25 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  Moscow Is Working on an Alternative to Visa and MasterCard After U.S. Sanctions Hit Russian Banks Magda Hassan 0 2,419 05-07-2014, 04:33 PM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  China's Demand for Gold Has Trapped The West's Central Banks Peter Presland 5 4,383 11-04-2014, 09:05 PM
Last Post: Paul Rigby
  Russia Is Dominated By Global Banks, Too David Healy 2 3,973 06-04-2014, 09:10 AM
Last Post: David Guyatt
  The Mega Banks' Most Devious Scam Yet Lauren Johnson 1 2,850 14-02-2014, 06:18 AM
Last Post: Lauren Johnson

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)