more corrupt bank news

[fj1200]

Financial Speculation In the food prices ADDING to the Hike in food prices especially of the poorer in the world ie Egypt.

:facepalm:

[revelarts]

:facepalm:

not sure what you guys mean, but im guessing...

So FJ
Hedges funds, Futures speculation and Derivatives are only good for the economy? Making Food (and Housing) Prices cheaper?

Sorry to dismay folks by pointing out the darkside. just trying to ID some reality. food prices going up, multiple causes an all, just making sure everyone owns up to their contribution. Is that wrong?

Are there no such things as high finance rouges, are only the poor and middle class cold blooded crooks sometimes?

Are rich people always honest and care about what happens to people when they Hoard staple commodities or artificially jack up prices just to make a dollar. Adding ZERO to the real value of the commodity?

FJ will the free market work it all out?

double face palm

[fj1200]

not sure what you guys mean, but im guessing...

...

FJ will the free market work it all out?

double face palm

Tell me, is it simply an increase in price that has you railing against speculators, the rich, global banking conspiracies? Do you praise them once a commodity starts to fall? I mean if you cry foul on the way up then they're doing us all a favor on the way down by your logic.

In the other thread, where I posted a link that showed virtually every commodity rising at some point during the past 10 years was it all the work of speculators, etc.? When every commodity price declined after the inflation of the '70s, see Simon Ehrlich wager, were speculators just having a bad couple of decades?

If you're insistent on laying some blame at least lay it where it makes sense; I mean you already hate the Fed anyway right?

Oh, and to answer your last question... Yes.

[revelarts]

FJ your a true free market believer sir.

If you look at my post You'll notice that I qualified my statements.

I never said I hate free markets I'm just saying that there are Crooks among the rich just as much as other places in Market strata.

that's something that you seem to keep trying to block out of your very rosie picture of the Market. And Big Business Righteousness. It's like you think I'm attacking the the Pope or the WHOLE Church if i say some , --A bunch -- of the priest are stinking pedophiles.

You accuse me of not wanting the give the market credit when things are going well, but you never seem want to lay any blame on it practices when things go badly.

"It's not Speculation"
"It's Not the Banks "
"Its Not Big Oil"
"Bernie Madoff wasn't wrong it was the stupid investors and piss poor regulators that are REALLY the problem."
Ok I made that last one up, but it's not far from what I hear you saying.

Everytime I've mentioned a problem it's prety much included specific companies and actions. I don't have a blanket indictment for WALL st. or All banks. I do for Goldman Sack, Bank of America, CitiBank, AIG, etc...
i post links to specific wrong doing.
that you keep making excuses for or try to convince me aren't "technically" crimes though they may be slightly immoral.

I like the free market, I wish we had more of one in general.
But I don't like crooks, conmen, bullies and market kingpins.
Especially as they seem to get away with it Billions while other Businesses like cherry Growers can't even state the fact that cherry's are good against arthritis without threat of jail and fines. And we are Patted down at airports like criminals etc etc..

Offends my sometimes overblown sense of justice FJ.

I stand by my post, some high preist of Rome/WALL ST of the FREE MARKET CHURCH universal are pedophiles and they need to go to jail. Not be reverved as keepers of the of the Most Holy Free Market.

[fj1200]

FJ your a true free market believer sir.

If you look at my post You'll notice that I qualified my statements.

You qualified them? Barely.

I never said I hate free markets I'm just saying that there are Crooks among the rich just as much as other places in Market strata.

that's something that you seem to keep trying to block out of your very rosie picture of the Market. And Big Business Righteousness. It's like you think I'm attacking the the Pope or the WHOLE Church if i say some , --A bunch -- of the priest are stinking pedophiles.

When did I dispute that? If people break the law they should be prosecuted, I have no issue with that. You seem to throw out there that because prices go up, or because GS worked in their own interest, or because someone got rich then it's clear the system is broken; THAT I dispute.

You accuse me of not wanting the give the market credit when things are going well, but you never seem want to lay any blame on it practices when things go badly.

"It's not Speculation"
"It's Not the Banks "
"Its Not Big Oil"
"Bernie Madoff wasn't wrong it was the stupid investors and piss poor regulators that are REALLY the problem."
Ok I made that last one up, but it's not far from what I hear you saying.

I wasn't saying that you did or did not give credit only that you lose your evidence when prices get cheaper.

I don't lay blame on its "practices." You see what you did right there? You lumped speculators, banks, and oil in with Madoff. You attempt to confer guilt on them just by adding Madoff in at the end.

Everytime I've mentioned a problem it's prety much included specific companies and actions. I don't have a blanket indictment for WALL st. or All banks. I do for Goldman Sack, Bank of America, CitiBank, AIG, etc...
i post links to specific wrong doing.
that you keep making excuses for or try to convince me aren't "technically" crimes though they may be slightly immoral.

Can you find bad things done by banks? Of course you can but you attempt to paint the industry with the same guilty brush, that is where I think you haven't proven your point. So many people want someone, ANYONE, to go to jail over what happened in 2008 that they buy into the populist viewpoint that some individual somewhere did something wrong and they latch onto anything that will bolster their "evidence." What happened was a macro level event based on macro level conditions; "Because people got rich on the way up they must have been guilty" doesn't jibe with me.

I like the free market, I wish we had more of one in general.
But I don't like crooks, conmen, bullies and market kingpins.
Especially as they seem to get away with it Billions while other Businesses like cherry Growers can't even state the fact that cherry's are good against arthritis without threat of jail and fines. And we are Patted down at airports like criminals etc etc..

Offends my sometimes overblown sense of justice FJ.

You allege that "they" got away with something and list them with strawman examples. I don't buy into your premise.

I stand by my post, some high preist of Rome/WALL ST of the FREE MARKET CHURCH universal are pedophiles and they need to go to jail. Not be reverved as keepers of the of the Most Holy Free Market.

Pedophiles eh? Overstate much? The free market will do fine and the only "keepers" it requires are those who will keep the government from FURTHER corrupting it.

[revelarts]

video Matt Taibbi vs fj100's sister.
http://dailybail.com/home/video-matt...cardle-on.html

Goldman Sachs crooks

[fj1200]

video Matt Taibbi vs fj100's sister.
http://dailybail.com/home/video-matt...cardle-on.html

Goldman Sachs crooks

Megs (that's what I called her when we were growing up) did fine. Taibbi engages in petty hackery. I don't get detailed financial analysis from Rolling Stone.

I also worked to dump an asset for a client and was damn happy that someone took off of their hands... not on the order of billions though.

[fj1200]

video...

Is this the same Abacus deal we already went over?

[fj1200]

The Fine Print of Goldman's Subprime Bet

But upon further reporting - talking with executives at Goldman, who pointed me to other documents, and with officials in Washington, and then poring through the report, following the footnotes to the original sources and then cross-referencing them against other public records - I have come to a different and perhaps unsatisfying conclusion for those readers looking for a big scalp: Mr. Blankfein wasn't lying.

[revelarts]

FJ I'll look at this more closely later but what I gather so far is that it's less of lie. I could be wrong.

But this doesn't clear them from many other large issues.

[fj1200]

FJ I'll look at this more closely later but what I gather so far is that it's less of lie. I could be wrong.

As even Mr. Roach acknowledged, "It's about how you define 'massive' and 'large' - and I'm not trying to be cute."

What's massive to you and me is not massive to Goldman... especially when offset against long positions on the other side.

So when Mr. Blankfein contended that the firm was "not consistently or significantly net 'short the market' in residential mortgage-related products in 2007 and 2008" the numbers - if you believe them - are on his side.

But this doesn't clear them from many other large issues.

As suggested in the link.

That's not to suggest Goldman always behaved well. There are other assertions in the subcommittee's report that detail some pretty egregious activity by certain executives.

[revelarts]

Iceland Declares Independence from International Banks
this is great news. I hope they aren't named a terrorist nation who's leaders must be overthrown.

By Bill Wilson – Iceland is free. And it will remain so, so long as her people wish to remain autonomous of the foreign domination of her would-be masters — in this case, international bankers.

On April 9, the fiercely independent people of island-nation defeated a referendum that would have bailed out the UK and the Netherlands who had covered the deposits of British and Dutch investors who had lost funds in Icesave bank in 2008.

At the time of the bank’s failure, Iceland refused to cover the losses. But the UK and Netherlands nonetheless have demanded that Iceland repay them for the “loan” as a condition for admission into the European Union.

In response, the Icelandic people have told Europe to go pound sand. The final vote was 103,207 to 69,462, or 58.9 percent to 39.7 percent. “Taxpayers should not be responsible for paying the debts of a private institution,” said Sigriur Andersen, a spokeswoman for the Advice group that opposed the bailout.

A similar referendum in 2009 on the issue, although with harsher terms, found 93.2 percent of the Icelandic electorate rejecting a proposal to guarantee the deposits of foreign investors who had funds in the Icelandic bank. The referendum was invoked when President Olafur Ragnur Grimmson vetoed legislation the Althingi, Iceland’s parliament, had passed to pay back the British and Dutch.

Under the terms of the agreement, Iceland would have had to pay £2.35 billion to the UK, and €1.32 billion to the Netherlands by 2046 at a 3 percent interest rate. Its rejection for the second time by Iceland is a testament to its people, who feel they should bear no responsibility for the losses of foreigners endured in the financial crisis.

That opposition to bailouts led to Iceland’s decision to allow the bank to fail in 2008. Not that the taxpayers there could have afforded to. As noted by Bloomberg News, at the time the crisis hit in 2008, “the banks had debts equal to 10 times Iceland’s $12 billion GDP.”

“These were private banks and we didn’t pump money into them in order to keep them going; the state did not shoulder the responsibility of the failed private banks,” Iceland President Olafur Grimsson told Bloomberg Television.

The voters’ rejection came despite threats to isolate Iceland from funding in international financial institutions. Iceland’s national debt has already been downgraded by credit rating agencies, and now those same agencies have promised to do so once again as punishment for defying the will of international bankers.

This is just the latest in the long drama since 2008 of global institutions refusing to take losses in the financial crisis. Threats of a global economic depression and claims of being “too big to fail” have equated to a loaded gun to the heads of representative governments in the U.S. and Europe. Iceland is of particular interest because it did not bail out its banks like Ireland did, or foreign ones like the U.S. did.

If that fervor catches on amongst taxpayers worldwide, as it has in Iceland and with the tea party movement in America, the banks would have something to fear; that is, the inability to draw from limitless amounts of funding from gullible government officials and central banks. It appears that the root cause is government guarantees, whether explicit or implicit, on risk-taking by the banks.

Ultimately, such guarantees are not necessary to maintain full employment or even prop up an economy with growth, they are simply designed to allow these international institutions to overleverage and increase their profit margins in good times — and to avoid catastrophic losses in bad times.

The lesson here is instructive across the pond, but it is a chilling one. If the U.S. — or any sovereign for that matter — attempts to restructure their debts, or to force private investors to take a haircut on their own foolish gambles, these international institutions have promised the equivalent of economic war in response. However, the alternative is for representative governments to sacrifice their independence to a cadre of faceless bankers who share no allegiance to any nation.

It is the conflict that has already defined the beginning of the 21st Century. The question is whether free peoples will choose to remain free, as Iceland has, or to submit.

Bill Wilson is the President of Americans for Limited Government. You can follow Bill on Twitter at @BillWilsonALG.

Read more at NetRightDaily.com: http://netrightdaily.com/2011/04/ice...#ixzz1QrGLMupc

[fj1200]

Iceland Declares Independence from International Banks
this is great news. I hope they aren't named a terrorist nation who's leaders must be overthrown.

The voters’ rejection came despite threats to isolate Iceland from funding in international financial institutions. Iceland’s national debt has already been downgraded by credit rating agencies, and now those same agencies have promised to do so once again as punishment for defying the will of international bankers.
...
If that fervor catches on amongst taxpayers worldwide, as it has in Iceland and with the tea party movement in America, the banks would have something to fear; that is, the inability to draw from limitless amounts of funding from gullible government officials and central banks. It appears that the root cause is government guarantees, whether explicit or implicit, on risk-taking by the banks.

Good... I think.

It'll be interesting how Iceland can come out of this and how their economy will stabilize.

He definitely got that last part right though.

[revelarts]

maybe your right about me FJ,
Populasit bank hater,
have you seen this film?
If anyone has the time they should watch this.

history of central banks , commentary on the gold standard, and the causes of depressions.
amazing

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7qIhDdST27g?version=3&feature=player_detailpage">< param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7qIhDdST27g?version=3&feature=player_detailpage" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="360"></object>

[fj1200]

Geez rev. do you watch ANYTHING less than an hour long?