|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
visitorq
Joined: 11 Jan 2008
|
 Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:54 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Quote: |
| TOKYO -- Japanese brokerage firm Nomura Holdings Inc. kicked off a training session for new hires in April by separating the men and women. The women, including Harvard graduates hired by Lehman Brothers before it collapsed, were taught how to wear their hair, serve tea and choose their wardrobes according to the season, say executives who fielded a complaint about the session. |
I read a book called "The House of Nomura" awhile back, about that firm's rise to the power (at the time it was the most profitable and powerful brokerage on earth I believe), written by a Western author from the late 80's pre-bubble perspective, when Japan's economy was seen to be eclipsing the US's. An interesting read, takes you way back.
Basically, the Japanese business world is still as conservative now as it was then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Taibbi on GS again:
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/07/27/new-info-goldman-really-was-in-trouble/
GS is being hammered in public. Good stuff.
http://nymag.com/news/business/58094/
And a GS alum:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/former-goldman-managing-director-how-you-finance-goldman-sachs%E2%80%99-profits
Rate of unemployment month on month is increasing:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a00ym5Z6PYC0
And foreclosures are now being driven by unemployment:
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE56T0P020090730?sp=true
And foreclosures are up:
http://www.realtytrac.com/ContentManagement/PressRelease.aspx?channelid=9&ItemID=6802
So, yeah. Green Shoots all over the place.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/50179048-779f-11de-9713-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
| Quote: |
Brace for a decade of lower Chinese growth
Michael Pettis
Published: July 29 2009 23:27 | Last updated: July 29 2009 23:27
For 20 years, and especially in the past decade, rapidly rising debt has allowed America�s consumption growth to exceed economic growth, with a concomitant rise in the country�s trade deficit. One consequence of this too-rapid growth in American consumption has been that the non-US global economy was able to grow faster than non-US global consumption. This was especially true for Asia, the main beneficiary of the US consumption boom, and for China in particular.
While Chinese consumption was growing at an impressive 9 per cent a year over the past few years, Chinese gross domestic product growth substantially outpaced it, clocking in at 10 per cent to 13 per cent annually. China was able to do this in large part because as it poured resources and cheap financing into manufacturing, and in so doing produced many more goods than Chinese households and businesses were able to consume, the balance was exported abroad, where much of it was absorbed by US consumers.
But everything has changed. Willingly or unwillingly, US debt levels will decline over the next several years. As a result American consumption will grow substantially slower than the US economy, and so the trade deficit will decline. For the rest of the world, even ignoring the possibility of a decline in global investment, a contraction in the US trade deficit will bring with it a period in which economic growth will be less than consumption growth.
This matters, especially for China. If the Chinese economy was the biggest beneficiary of excess US consumption growth, it is likely also to be the biggest victim of a rising US savings rate. For now, China has been able to avoid the brunt of this reversal. Although Chinese exports have dropped, imports have declined even faster, so that China�s GDP continues to grow faster than its consumption, and China�s savings level, which is the inverse of consumption, continues to rise. But this has come at the expense of an unsustainable squeeze on China�s export competitors.
Eventually, and maybe this is already happening, the decline in the US trade deficit must result in a decline in China�s ability to export the difference between its growth in production and consumption. When this happens, China�s economy will grow more slowly than Chinese consumption, just as the opposite is happening in the US. Put another way, rather than act as the lower constraint for GDP growth as it has for the past two decades growth in Chinese consumption will become the upper constraint, as for the next several years Chinese consumption necessarily rises as a share of GDP, just as US consumption must decline as a share of US GDP.
If Chinese consumption growth is able to continue barrelling along at 9 per cent annually, the implications are that China�s GDP growth will fall from the heady 10-13 per cent levels of the past few years to something probably approaching 6-8 per cent, depending on the speed of the US adjustment and the share of the adjustment absorbed by China�s trade competitors. But there are reasons to doubt the ability of Chinese consumption to grow so quickly.
First, in an environment of much slower Chinese economic growth, it would not be surprising if consumption growth rates also declined. Just as rapidly rising income fed rapidly rising consumption on the way up, a sharp slowdown in income growth should cause consumption growth also to slow. Second, and more importantly, China�s fiscal stimulus consists mainly of a massive expansion in bank lending, which is almost certain to lead to a sharp rise in bad loans. Resolving these, which China will have to do in the next few years, will probably require the same policies used to resolve the banking crisis of the late 1990s, which will inevitably constrain consumption growth.
For now an extraordinary but inefficient expansion in new bank lending has powered the Chinese economy into growth rates that many thought unlikely even six months ago. But rapidly rising bank lending, especially if misallocated to nearly the same extent as in previous loan surges, cannot be a long-term solution for slowing Chinese growth.
Over the next five years or more Chinese economic growth is going to be constrained by growth in Chinese consumption. The massive but unsustainable investment in infrastructure and new production facilities that characterises the Chinese fiscal stimulus package will not be able to change this fact. From its dizzying heights during the past two decades, the world needs to prepare itself for a decade during which, if all goes well, China grows at a still respectable but much lower rate of 5-7 per cent. If the current fiscal stimulus package retards China�s adjustment process, as many analysts argue that it does, growth rates may be much lower. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
Google: "GDP Report" and you'll see that many of the MSM are just talking out of their arse.
1. GDP Report claims consumer spending is down 2-2.2% yet look here and you'll see that total revenues of the S&P 500 are down more than 15%. Why is there a such a discrepancy (7.5 times!)
2. Business investment is down
3. Official unemployment numbers suggest a 9.5% rate and growing.
4. Trade continues to plunge on both sides of the equation.
The punchline from Chris Martenson's blog post on the GDP data:
| Quote: |
The triple combination of stocks up(!), bonds up(!), and gold down(!) constitutes a "win-win-win" for government statisticians/politicians and the Federal Reserve, because such a result means that their efforts are being taken "the right way" by the markets.
Such a trifecta constitutes a vote of confidence in their suite of actions generally, and in paper wealth specifically.
Of course, curious minds might be interested in learning how such articles manage to come out within mere minutes of the GDP release, almost as if they were pre-written.
If they are (as many suspect), then this implies that the "market responses," as well, were already known in advance, implying that they are as fake as the report itself.
In the scheme of things, one might question whether a country that routinely lies to itself, and then accepts those lies, then reprints those lies, and ignores the obvious discrepancies, is really on a sustainable path to recovery, complete with green shoots, or whether it is merely leading itself astray.
But if one is like me, then no wondering is involved. Such self-deception is viewed as a prescription for failure. |
The stock markets are being inflated with easy credit and loose money thanks to the pump priming at the Fed. This stock market bubble will be pricked somehow someway eventually.
Chris Martenson's link |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
^ I naively believed that these shenanigans would stop with Hope and Change.
But you Americans have it good compared to us Canucks. At least there are organizations that challenge the government nonsense. There is no zerohedge for Canada. There is no shadow-stats for Canada. We have shockingly few dissenting voices screaming out about manufactured stats. When the BoC issues a forecast (as happened a week or so ago) it is not seen as a Goldman's exec propping up asset prices with words and low rates, but a good man from a good government sharing the good news. Though BNN did voice concern. They should have called 'bull'. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Also, when the stats are gamed we are completely unable to determine when the economy has bottomed. And that is an important thing to know, from a business investment perspective. Intelligent managers know that the data is political and are left to guess (and use odd measures like electricity consumption) at when they should begin stocking inventories etc in prep for a recovery. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2009/08/its-official.html
| Quote: |
Don Boudreaux, chair of the GMU econ department, comments on this sign of the times:
...Uncle Sam is on the verge of paying the City of Los Angeles $30 million to subsidize a ten-year run of Cirque du Soleil.
So it's finally come to pass - America has embarked on the same road down which ancient Rome marched to its ruin: Uncle Sam not only subsidizes bread (by subsidizing wheat production) but now also circuses. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
^ I naively believed that these shenanigans would stop with Hope and Change.
Also, when the stats are gamed we are completely unable to determine when the economy has bottomed.
|
I forget, have you watched The Wire? If you have, you should have known better about hope and change  .
And I think you were the one who posted the David Simon interview where he was talking about stats. Your point about stats sadly can be applied to everything, including education and crime. How do we truly know when crime is decreasing or education improving?
And I wouldn't be totally pessimistic. One just has to be a better analyzer of those stats, and seek out ones that seem like better indicators. Also, personal experience helps. For instance, I'll start giving more credence to those econ reports when my friends and colleagues become gainfully employed, and the ones already working get promoted, etc. I'm not holding my breath. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 6:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
^ I naively believed that these shenanigans would stop with Hope and Change.
Also, when the stats are gamed we are completely unable to determine when the economy has bottomed.
|
I forget, have you watched The Wire? If you have, you should have known better about hope and change .
And I think you were the one who posted the David Simon interview where he was talking about stats. Your point about stats sadly can be applied to everything, including education and crime. How do we truly know when crime is decreasing or education improving?
|
The Wire.. I still miss it. Without hyperbole, it was imo the most incredible media ever created.
Ok. Yeah. I was naive as all hell about Hope and Change. My bad. Never again. You're right about stats being "juked". I suspended judgement for a short time. Was drunk on platitudes.
| Quote: |
| And I wouldn't be totally pessimistic. One just has to be a better analyzer of those stats, and seek out ones that seem like better indicators. Also, personal experience helps. For instance, I'll start giving more credence to those econ reports when my friends and colleagues become gainfully employed, and the ones already working get promoted, etc. I'm not holding my breath. |
I strongly agree. And there are bright spots in North America and in Asia. All isn't total crap, just mostly. When my observations demand I become less "bearish" I'll change. Also I have a handful of forecasters/economists that I trust. Some are calling 'bottom' now. Though the bottom could last a long, long time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://reallyfuckedhomeowner.com/2009/08/03/a-new-measurement-for-house-price-declines/
| Quote: |
A New Measurement for House Price Declines
Given the severity of house price declines it only seems like it merits its own measurement as neither the English system (inches, feet, pounds, etc�) nor the Metric system (meters, kilometers, grams, etc�) can properly convey the magnitude of the fall. For this I propose a new measurement called the Greenspan which measures the distance between the value of your house at the peak of the market and what it will measure at the bottom of the market (whenever that occurs).
Why call it the Greenspan? Here are three very sound reasons:
* �Green� is, of course, the symbol (in the US) of money and wealth. For example �after the latest economic collapse I have a lot LESS green.�
* �Span� measure distance and often LARGE ones (like bridges and the distance from one side of the Grand Canyon to the other).
* �Greenspan� as in Alan Greenspan the person who is significantly responsible for this mess. It it is time he is honored for his role in this.
To baseline a single Greenspan is a 25% fall from peak. Given that the average US market will probably fall by as much as 2 Greenspans in total. Certain markets (like Vallejo, California) could see a drop of 3 Greenspans.
Remember real estate is local so your Greenspans may vary. |
I like it.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/chinas-usd-exit-instruction-manual
The T-bill party won't last. China is quietly moving out.
Speaking of China:
(Andy Xie)
http://www.my1510.cn/article.php?id=e3fc777cdd24720a
| Quote: |
| Chinese stock and property markets have bubbled up again. It was fueled by bank lending and inflation fear. I think that Chinese stocks and properties are 50-100% overvalued. |
The US has been a bubble/burst economy for 20 years now, and it's not been good. The Chinese will take the bubble-mania to a new level.
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/08/geithner-bullies-financial-regulators.html
| Quote: |
| The Wall Street Journal reports that Timothy Geithner tongue-lashed Federal financial services regulators over their bucking the Obama Administration initiative for the Fed to become The One Regulator to Rule Them All. This comes on the heels of Congressional testimony which showed rather clearly that the key actors were not singing from the same hymnal. |
Timmy didn't get his way. The Sith may not gain control of the Senate:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/geithner-loses-it-after-bair-refuses-yield-power-fed
| Quote: |
It seems the Secretary of the Treasury forgot to take his Xanax on Friday. The WSJ reports that "Timothy Geithner blasted top U.S. financial regulators in an expletive-laced critique last Friday as frustration grows over the Obama administration's faltering plan to overhaul U.S. financial regulation." Presumably the source of Geithner's ire was Sheila Bair's (and probably Mary Schapiro's) unwillingness to yield power over to Bernanke.
Among those gathered in the Treasury conference room were Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary Schapiro and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Sheila Bair.
Friday's roughly hourlong meeting was described as unusual, not only because of Mr. Geithner's repeated use of obscenities, but because of the aggressive posture he took with officials from federal agencies generally considered independent of the White House. Mr. Geithner reminded attendees that the administration and Congress set policy, not the regulatory agencies.
If Geithner gets so worked up over a couple of powerless agencies giving up their turf to an already overlordish Federal Reserve, one can only imagine how JPM's SPY traders must dread any caller ID starting with 202 on one of those rare down days or why Wen Jiabao knows never to allow indirect interest in Tsy auctions to drop below 50% going forward.
On a more serious note, this begs the question: is the SecTsy finally losing it and why? Or, in a Machiavellian ploy of sinister brilliance, did Larry Summers orchestrate all of this by turning off CNBC access at the U.S. Treasury, in hopes of creating a brief but deadly Western standoff between his adversaries (all of them)? If nothing else, it would explain the cable station's increasingly declining viewership. |
http://dailybail.com/home/guest-post-a-history-of-stimulus-funny-money-central-banking.html
Quote:
Guest Post: A History Of Stimulus, Funny Money & Central Banking
^ A good read. Too long to post.
And, we all know why this market is rallying. Right?
| Quote: |
Fed Laundering Money through the Big Banks Into the Stock Market
Best Financial Markets Analysis ArticleFed Chairman Ben Bernanke is a man who knows how Washington works and uses that knowledge to great effect. His appearances on Capital Hill are always worth watching. He sits politely with his hands folded in front of him playing the bashful professor while one one preening congressman after another makes a fool out of themself. In contrast, Bernanke looks like a modest and thoughtful academic faithfully upholding the public's trust. But things aren't always as they seem. The Fed chief is sticking it to the American people big-time and no one seems to have any idea of what's really going on. Former hedge fund manager Andy Kessler sums it up in a recent Wall Street Journal article, "The Bernanke Market".
"By buying U.S. Treasuries and mortgages to increase the monetary base by $1 trillion, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke didn't put money directly into the stock market but he didn't have to. With nowhere else to go, except maybe commodities, inflows into the stock market have been on a tear. Stock and bond funds saw net inflows of close to $150 billion since January. The dollars he cranked out didn't go into the hard economy, but instead into tradable assets. In other words, Ben Bernanke has been the market."
What does it mean?
It means the revered professor Bernanke figured out a way to circumvent Congress and dump more than a trillion dollars into the stock market by laundering the money through the big banks and other failing financial institutions. As Kessler suggests, Bernanke knew the liquidity would pop up in the equities market, thus, building the equity position of the banks so they wouldn't have to grovel to Congress for another TARP-like bailout. Bernanke's actions demonstrate his contempt for the democratic process. The Fed sees itself as a government-unto-itself.
|
At the time of the bailouts, I was ranting that this cash would inflate equity markets. Everybody knew. The "bailout" was a cover for pumping equity markets to prevent a pension collapse.
| Quote: |
Over at Zero Hedge, Tyler Durden did the math and figured that the recent 45% surge in the S&P 500 had nothing to do with the fictional economic "recovery", but was just more of the Fed's hanky panky. Durden noticed that the money that's been sluicing into stocks hasn't (correspondingly) depleted the money markets. That's the clue that led him to the truth about Bernanke's 6 month stock rally.
Zero Hedge: "Most interesting is the correlation between Money Market totals and the listed stock value since the March lows: a $2.7 trillion move in equities was accompanied by a less than $400 billion reduction in Money Market accounts!
Where, may we ask, did the balance of $2.3 trillion in purchasing power come from? Why the Federal Reserve of course, which directly and indirectly subsidized U.S. banks (and foreign ones through liquidity swaps) for roughly that amount. Apparently these banks promptly went on a buying spree to raise the all important equity market, so that the U.S. consumer who net equity was almost negative on March 31, could have some semblance of confidence back and would go ahead and max out his credit card. Alas, as one can see in the money multiplier and velocity of money metrics, U.S. consumers couldn't care less about leveraging themselves any more."
So, the magical "Green Shoots" stock market rally was fueled by a mere $400 billion from the money markets. The rest ($2.3 trillion) was main-lined into the market via Bernanke's quantitative easing (QE) program, of which Krugman and others speak so highly.
Wouldn't you like to know if Bernanke sat down with G-Sax and JPM executives and mapped out the details of this swindle before the printing presses ever started rolling?
So, how long can this kind of fakery go on before our creditors grow weary of dealing with chiselers and stop buying US Treasuries altogether? Here's a blurp from Friday's Wall Street Journal on that very topic:
"Shaky auctions of Treasury notes this week reignited concerns about whether the government can attract buyers from China and elsewhere to soak up trillions in new debt.
A fuse was lit this week when traders noted China's apparent absence from direct participation in two Treasury bond auctions. While China may have bought Treasurys just before the auctions, market participants read the country's actions as a worrying sign that China and other foreign investors may be ratcheting back purchases at a time when the U.S. is seeking to fund a $1.8 trillion budget deficit.
This week alone, the U.S. deluged the bond market with more than $200 billion in record-size sales. The U.S. has had little trouble finding buyers in recent months. But that demand is fading, and the Treasury market has become volatile."
Uncle Sam is goosing the bond market just like he is the stock market. Take a look at Treasury's latest bit of chicanery which was stuffed in the back pages of the Wall Street Journal back in June:
"The sudden increase in demand by foreign buyers for Treasurys, hailed as proof that the world's central banks are still willing to help absorb the avalanche of supply, mightn't be all that it seems.
When the government sells bonds, traders typically look at a group of buyers called indirect bidders, which includes foreign central banks, to divine overseas demand for U.S. debt. That demand has been rising recently, giving comfort to investors that foreign buyers will continue to finance the U.S.'s budget deficit.
But in a little-noticed switch on June 1, the Treasury changed the way it accounts for indirect bids, putting more buyers under that umbrella and boosting the portion of recent Treasury sales that the market perceived were being bought by foreigners." ("Is foreign Demand as Solid as it Looks, Min zeng)
Nice touch, eh? So, someone doesn't want you and me to know when foreign demand drops off a cliff, so they just bend-and-twist the definitions so they meet the Fed's requirements. How's that for transparency?. Apparently, Bernanke et al. don't believe the Chinese have translators who can make sense of all this subterfuge. That may be a miscalculation, however, given recent rumblings from the Orient.
By Mike Whitney |
Stand waaaayyyyy back when this explodes. A series of failed bond auctions that the Fed is unable to game and the US is completely unable to finance her deficit/roll over debt. That changes everything and brings the republic to two distinct paths: 1) Spend what you earn or 2) monetize the debt.
| Quote: |
| Too big to fail is generational rape. |
http://dailybail.com/home/the-bailouts-have-driven-dylan-ratigan-to-the-edge-of-insani.html
^ Good rant from MSNBC
Zero Hedge, an anonymous blog that started about 9 months ago has pushed the state to change public policy.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/breaking-news-sec-plans-ban-%E2%80%98flash-trades%E2%80%99-give-advance-info-certain-traders
Incredible.
Though, if the article is accurate and they go after 'dark pools' and high frequency trading, this market rally is over. If the change is sudden, the pull back will be severe and aggressive.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/why-should-gs-and-nyse-stocks-be-nervous-about-flash-ban
The SEC also banned "naked short selling", which is a bugaboo of financial blogs. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 9:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
The consequence of this all:
http://exiledonline.com/decline-fall-of-america-exhibit-514-broke-alabama-county-calls-in-national-guard-to-keep-order/
| Quote: |
Alabama�s most populous county, Jefferson County, is so broke it�s closing down courthouses and laying off so many cops that it�s now planning to call in the National Guard to maintain order:
BIRMINGHAM, Ala. � The sheriff in Alabama�s most populous county may call for the National Guard to help maintain order, a spokesman said Tuesday, after a judge cleared the way for cuts in the sheriff�s budget and hopes dimmed for a quick end to a budget crisis.
It�s all too fitting that the county is going broke because it can�t pay the $3.2 billion in sewer bonds that the country borrowed, on bad advice from what�s now the biggest bailed-out bank in the land. They sold Americans shit, and now Jefferson County is literally eating that shit.
The reason why the county is broke is because it took the advice of the same Wall Street villains who later bankrupted America. In this case, JPMorgan Chase, which was hired by the county to act as advisor, and wound up not only giving the worst advice imaginable, pawning toxic assets onto the gullible hicks, but also charging them six times the normal bank fees�that�s right, JPMorgan charged the county six times the going rate for advice that ruined the county, according to Bloomberg:
The county relied on advice from a bank, JPMorgan Chase & Co., to arrange its funding, rather than use competitive bidding.
The county paid banks $120 million in fees � six times the prevailing rate � for $5.8 billion in interest-rate swaps. That was supposed to protect the county from rising rates for their bonds. Lending rates went the wrong way, putting the county $277 million deeper into debt.
That means local officials now have to pay to banks money that otherwise might have been used to build schools, hospitals or public housing.
Why would a county do something that stupid, buying up toxic assets for 6 times the price? The answer is so obvious that the SEC and FBI even made a show of investigating, but the only thing that�s come of the investigation so far is that taxpayers were forced to bail out the Wall Street thieves who tricked them, while leaving citizens to *beep* off and die:
�It�s ironic that the Fed can do corporate welfare for the banks, but they can�t bail out a county that was victimized by these banks,� says Craig Greer, a Catholic chaplain at a Birmingham hospice.
The SEC and Justice Department are probing whether the banks that financed Jefferson County conspired nationwide to fix prices for derivatives, violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, according to target letters sent to bank employees.
That was a year ago. By May of this year, the SEC was still making its empty threats, but by then it had already given Bank of America, which sold similar bullshit swaps to sucker-counties around the country, complete amnesty:
Bank of America was granted amnesty by the Justice Department for its cooperation in the national antitrust probe. In exchange for voluntarily providing information and offering continuing cooperation, the federal government agreed not to bring criminal charges against the bank.
Brian Marchiony, a JPMorgan spokesman, declined to comment. The company said in yesterday�s filing that it is �engaged in discussions� with the SEC to reach a resolution before the agency files a civil complaint.
SEC spokesman John Heine declined to comment and Jefferson County Commissioner Jim Carns said he was unaware of any SEC moves against JPMorgan.
Right, so all BofA had to do was agree to snitch on everyone else�which is about as much a concession as telling a tapeworm that if it wants to continue thriving, it�s going to have to continue sucking on someone�s intestinal walls�or else!
Meanwhile, the gullible hicks are suffering�just like the whole country�while the Wall Street plutocrats laugh all the way to the taxpayer-subsidized bank. Sewage and water bills in the county were so high last year that some people had to choose between heat and water:
As nighttime temperatures plunged in Birmingham, Alabama, last October, Dora Bonner had a choice: either pay the gas bill so she could heat the home she shares with four grandchildren, or send the Birmingham Water Works a $250 check for her water and sewer bill.
Bonner, who is 73 and lives on Social Security, decided to keep the house from freezing.
`I couldn�t afford the water, so they shut it off,� she says.
Bonner�s sewer bills have risen more than fourfold in the past decade. So have those of others in Jefferson County, which has 659,000 residents and includes Birmingham, the state�s largest city.
So there you have it: life in the banana republic of norteamerica. The banks fleece the peasantry, and when they�ve been picked clean and can�t pay another red peso, the federal government calls in la guardia nacional to keep order. It�s a good thing�from the oligarchy�s view, that is�that the suckers only response is to crash townhall meetings demanding that they not be given free health care, while spending all their unemployed time searching for holes in Obama�s birth certificate rather than the holes in their own wallets.
|
Oakland is also laying off a large numbers of police. At some point, the banksters will be held accountable. Either by the state or the society. As Obama said, he (that is, his popularity) is the only thing standing in between the banksters and the pitchforks. The clock is ticking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 2:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Alright. AIG is imploding AGAIN?
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/31/after-rescue-new-weakness-seen-at-aig/
| Quote: |
are eager for the insurers to keep writing new business, because they see it as the best hope of paying back taxpayers.
In the months since A.I.G. received its $182 billion rescue from the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, state insurance regulators have said repeatedly that its core insurance operations were sound � that the financial disasterwas caused primarily by a small unit that dealt in exotic derivatives.
But state regulatory filings offer a different picture. They show that A.I.G.�s individual insurance companies have been doing an unusual volume of business with each other for many years � investing in each other�s stocks; borrowing from each other�s investment portfolios; and guaranteeing each other�s insurance policies, even when they have lacked the means to make good. Insurance examiners working for the states have occasionally flagged these activities, to little effect.
More ominously, many of A.I.G.�s insurance companies have reduced their own exposure by sending their risks to other companies, often under the same A.I.G. umbrella. |
What? So they have two sets of books? Well, that's illegal?!
| Quote: |
President George W. Bush has bestowed on his intelligence czar, John Negroponte, broad authority, in the name of national security, to excuse publicly traded companies from their usual accounting and securities-disclosure obligations. Notice of the development came in a brief entry in the Federal Register, dated May 5, 2006, that was opaque to the untrained eye.
AUTHORITY GRANTED. William McLucas, the Securities & Exchange Commission's former enforcement chief, suggested that the ability to conceal financial information in the name of national security could lead some companies "to play fast and loose with their numbers." McLucas, a partner at the law firm Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr in Washington, added: "It could be that you have a bunch of books and records out there that no one knows about." |
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may2006/nf20060523_2210.htm?campaign_id=search
Ah, right.
Actually, they didn't even need that. Off balance sheet accounting is how they do things, and has been for a long time. AIG, like the Fed and well, fractional reserve banking writ large, exists somewhere on a spectrum of ponzi schemes.
How bad is it out there? Argentina may have to cancel soccer this year. I doubt anybody down there will notice.
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/05/debt_halts_argentine_soccer_season
Argentine soccer stopped by debt
| Quote: |
| In June, I wrote about how many of the world's biggest soccer clubs are facing crippling debt. Over the summer, several individual clubs have faced disbandment over their debts, and now an entire league is facing a season being postponed, as Argentina's Football Association has been forced to suspend the beginning of its fall season. Many of the top division's clubs are have very large debts, including its most famous clubs, Buenos Aires-based River Plate and Boca Juniors. |
And America's best economic analyst is back:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v-twLAaMD9w& |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Is there anything to this idea that we are headed for doom soon after the fiscal year-end on Sept. 30th?
| Quote: |
"We are in a global economic breakdown," Lyndon LaRouche observed today, adding that those who disagree, like President Barack Obama, are living in a dreamworld which will soon be shattered by reality. LaRouche pointed to the days around Oct. 12 as a crucial turning point, and warned:
My estimate is that a complete breakdown of the global financial and economic system is highly likely around the 10th to 15th of October�say Oct. 12, after the end of the U.S. government's fiscal year. We're looking at a threatened potential, total, chain reaction breakdown of the U.S. and the world. Nobody is minding the store in Washington, or in the British Vampire!" |
http://www.mathaba.net/news/?x=621325 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
