#1
Yup "When you owe the bank A trillion, and can't pay, the bank has a problem. Not you".
Posted by: Redneck Jim ||
08/22/2011 9:07 Comments ||
Top||
#2
Part of the reason for the big bubbles recently. There is no accountability. Fuck up? No big deal, the feds will bail your ass out. So keep doing it, there will be no consequences.
#4
This was in Bloomberg? Perhaps the financial media is starting to wake up or get wise to what's been going on all these years. My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks,Obama told a meeting of top bankers in April 2009.
#5
there will be no consequences That only applies to the oligarchy. There have been, are and will be many consequences for the rest of us, mostly bad ones. We can, however, take comfort in the fact that existing regulations are not being used.
#6
$1.2 trillion of public money, about the same amount U.S. homeowners currently owe on 6.5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages
Posted by: Water Modem ||
08/22/2011 13:40 Comments ||
Top||
#7
It wasnât just American finance. Almost half of the Fedâs top 30 borrowers, measured by peak balances, were European firms. They included Edinburgh-based Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, which took $84.5 billion, the most of any non-U.S. lender, and Zurich-based UBS AG (UBSN), which got $77.2 billion. Germanyâs Hypo Real Estate Holding AG borrowed $28.7 billion, an average of $21 million for each of its 1,366 employees.
The largest borrowers also included Dexia SA (DEXB), Belgiumâs biggest bank by assets, and Societe Generale SA
Posted by: Water Modem ||
08/22/2011 13:41 Comments ||
Top||
#8
Spengler last week published a different view on this issue.Households made more money than the bankers during every year of the bubble, and ended up better off than they were before the bubble, while the bankers got wiped...the destruction of institutional and personal wealth among the top tier of bankers exceeded the balance-sheet damage to American households. He compares the net value of household real estate to the net value of banks. I think his is not a valid comparison. My household's only value gain during the bubble was negative - my real estate assessment & taxes went up, while the interest I was able to earn on my retirement savings went down. I don't intend to sell my house or borrow on it any time soon, those are the only two ways I could benefit from the imaginary rise in its value. Now that the financial set has damaged age-old law regarding the ownership of real estate, I cannot even be sure I own the home I have paid off, and this situation promises to get worse. Yesterday in NY Times: Eric T. Schneiderman, the attorney general of New York, has come under increasing pressure from the Obama administration to drop his opposition to a wide-ranging state settlement with banks over dubious foreclosure practices,real estate title fraud, perjury, and frauds committed on state courts.To propose a national witch-hunt against "Wall Street gamblers" is a stupid and wicked thing to do. I must be getting stupid.
#10
I think the lending was probably the right thing to do but agree with this guy, with whom I frequently don't agree, that thge mistake was not to make the managers, owners and bondholders pay for their incompetence by reorganizing the banks. That was the real crony capitalism deal of the century.
#12
I agree with the limited benefit of higher house prices. I was surprised to read Spengler seeing that as important in the context of the housing bubble. He's smarter than that.
#13
From the reference to Ritholtz: Imagine if the government and the Federal Reserve were run not by knaves and fools and Wall Street sycophants, but instead, were run honestly for the benefit of the taxpaying voter. Imagine the goal was saving the banking system (not the banks), and the financial rescue was for the benefit of the taxpayers, not the bondholders.
What did happen was, what should have been private losses were instead assigned to the taxpayers aka bagholders.
#14
"We can, however, take comfort in the fact that existing regulations are not being used."
What regulations? Prez Bonzo deregulated the financial sector cuz he looked back at 1929 with nostalgia. So we can congratulate the ghost that was he for all the wonderful spinoffs of voodoo economics (double-digit unemployment, massive debt, kleptocracy on Wall Street, etc). The hens have come home to roost. Have a nice day...
#16
Yes, he did sign off a opening to the situation because the Donks and media were hammering the heartless old man (sarc) because they wanted to bailout the Savings and Loan industry debacle of the mid-80s so that the Donks patrons on Wall Street and the investment houses could get the assets of those institutions and the American taxpayer would absorb the loses. That the S&Ls were state chartered and (un)insured didn't matter when the images of poor old Mom and Pa Kettle were pasted over the nightly television, skipping of course that they had speculated in land/property and had lost.
#21
Publicly on a one for one basis release folks from the pen who are there for under $2K bad checks and replace them, in the cells they shared with big Mike.., with major bank CEOs and FED and Treasury officials.
Posted by: Water Modem ||
08/22/2011 23:36 Comments ||
Top||
#22
The hens have come home to roost
In English the idiom is "The chickens have come home to roost," Etienne/Trembling B4 God. But your English is considerably better than my Dutch, although Mama likes to say that Flemish isn't really proper Dutch.
Your manners, however, match your incomplete knowledge. Not a good way to convince this crowd, I'm afraid, some of whom actually do know what you think you're talking about.
There are so many outright gaffs and lies in this 100 second speech of his... I just had to post it. Ed points out several that the Republicans should use immediately as a campaign ad. No probs, but this is definitely 'seedy politician' category...
#1
Bill Clinton was a natural born liar. He did it effortlessly. Bammo has a different approach. He just reads what's on TOTUS. Since he has no idea one way or the other, he reads off the lies just as fluently as everything else.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
