shah269 0 #1 December 2, 2011 OK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUXLife through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #2 December 2, 2011 QuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX It's more sad that you think a comedy routine is 'news'.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #3 December 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX It's more sad that you think a comedy routine is 'news'. Many a true word is spoken in jest. www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #4 December 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX It's more sad that you think a comedy routine is 'news'. Many a true word is spoken in jest. www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html Yep. And the banks will once again get hammered while the corrupt government does not. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #5 December 2, 2011 QuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX Limburg lands in Paris!!! Whats new to you is not news to the world. That story is from 27 November. It isnt a bigger story because its not that surprising. This is how gov't' helps banks, nothing new. People have been upset about this from the beggining. Gov't loans money to banks and they loan it at a higher rate for profit. the story isnt that this happened but that the amount was not fully disclosed. You would have got that if you read the Bloomberg article as apposed to watching a fictional comedy program. Shah, you never cease to amaze me with how you think something you just learned is new. now change the subject as you always do. (i am smiling,fyi)"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,108 #6 December 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX Limburg lands in Paris!!! Whats new to you is not news to the world. That story is from 27 November. It isnt a bigger story because its not that surprising. It's 4 days old, still "NEWS". And apparently it DID suprise some people: The amount of money the central bank parceled out was surprising even to Gary H. Stern, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1985 to 2009, who says he “wasn’t aware of the magnitude.” It dwarfed the Treasury Department’s better-known $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. Add up guarantees and lending limits, and the Fed had committed $7.77 trillion as of March 2009 to rescuing the financial system, more than half the value of everything produced in the U.S. that year. “TARP at least had some strings attached,” says Brad Miller, a North Carolina Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, referring to the program’s executive-pay ceiling. “With the Fed programs, there was nothing.” Bankers didn’t disclose the extent of their borrowing. On Nov. 26, 2008, then-Bank of America (BAC) Corp. Chief Executive Officer Kenneth D. Lewis wrote to shareholders that he headed “one of the strongest and most stable major banks in the world.” He didn’t say that his Charlotte, North Carolina-based firm owed the central bank $86 billion that day.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #7 December 2, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuoteOK please defend the banks after this. http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-1-2011/america-s-next-tarp-model?xrs=share_copy Sad that you find this kind of news.....on CS and not on say CNN or FAUX Limburg lands in Paris!!! Whats new to you is not news to the world. That story is from 27 November. It isnt a bigger story because its not that surprising. It's 4 days old, still "NEWS". And apparently it DID suprise some people: The amount of money the central bank parceled out was surprising even to Gary H. Stern, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis from 1985 to 2009, who says he “wasn’t aware of the magnitude.” It dwarfed the Treasury Department’s better-known $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP. Add up guarantees and lending limits, and the Fed had committed $7.77 trillion as of March 2009 to rescuing the financial system, more than half the value of everything produced in the U.S. that year. “TARP at least had some strings attached,” says Brad Miller, a North Carolina Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, referring to the program’s executive-pay ceiling. “With the Fed programs, there was nothing.” Bankers didn’t disclose the extent of their borrowing. On Nov. 26, 2008, then-Bank of America (BAC) Corp. Chief Executive Officer Kenneth D. Lewis wrote to shareholders that he headed “one of the strongest and most stable major banks in the world.” He didn’t say that his Charlotte, North Carolina-based firm owed the central bank $86 billion that day. I dont know how to define "news". 4 days to me is old but i understand its all relative. My comments were to Shah. he has a habit of just learning of something and assuming its breaking. This story is not breaking, its 4 days old. That was my point. Ok, so i will concede that some people were surprised. IMO, they should not have."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #8 December 2, 2011 Quote Bankers didn’t disclose the extent of their borrowing. And the Fed didn’t disclose the amount of their lending. Question: who owes a duty to the American people? My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #9 December 2, 2011 Both do. The government, well that one is obvious. The banks do by taking massive amounts of the people's money to create profits for themselves and their owner's The banks do by taking a stance that as an industry they are too big to fail as an industry. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DougH 270 #10 December 2, 2011 Banks represent their shareholders interest, but depositors also have some skin in the game. Who here has no form of deposits with a banking or credit union type institution? Unless you keep your wealth 100% in gold you have some direct interest in the banking system not collapsing!"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall" =P Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
weekender 0 #11 December 2, 2011 QuoteQuote Bankers didn’t disclose the extent of their borrowing. And the Fed didn’t disclose the amount of their lending. Question: who owes a duty to the American people? both sides will say they did it to protect our society. if people actually knew the size of the problem it could have caused a panic. thats been the company line from the beggining. No one asked but i believe it would have. I've seen the markets tank on far less."The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird." John Frusciante Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #12 December 2, 2011 QuoteBoth do. The government, well that one is obvious. The banks do by taking massive amounts of the people's money to create profits for themselves and their owner's The banks do by taking a stance that as an industry they are too big to fail as an industry. As an aside, the Federal Reserve is not a governmental agency. It is a consortium of private banks operating with governmental authority. Think "economic privateers." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #13 December 2, 2011 QuoteThe banks do by taking massive amounts of the people's money to create profits for themselves and their owner's. why just the other day, I was walking around town and suddenly, WHAM!! lights out. when I came to - my wallet was missing and just a bank passbook was left in its place - some bank just took my money without my permission and how dare anyone organize a business for profit - the NERVE ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 186 #14 December 2, 2011 The banks get more than the welfare moms for doing nothing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,078 #15 December 2, 2011 >OK please defend the banks after this. No need. People like you will continue to support them - and that's all they need to continue doing whatever they like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ianmdrennan 2 #16 December 2, 2011 QuoteIt's more sad that you think a comedy routine is 'news'. I'd say it's worse that a comedy routine is, on average, more factually balanced than 'the news'.Performance Designs Factory Team Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 December 2, 2011 Quote Whats new to you is not news to the world. That story is from 27 November. It isnt a bigger story because its not that surprising. This is how gov't' helps banks, nothing new. People have been upset about this from the beggining. Gov't loans money to banks and they loan it at a higher rate for profit. the story isnt that this happened but that the amount was not fully disclosed. You would have got that if you read the Bloomberg article as apposed to watching a fictional comedy program. No, Stewart raised the most serious concerns. There's nothing fictional about Stewart or Colbert, though they'll freely admit that they're comedians. They also have an established history of mocking everyone, suffer a bit less bias than the "serious news shows." 1) the amount of money was twice the annual budget. How is this not inflationary? 2) a significant amount of this money lent out for free was then used to buy Treasuries. I'm going to suppose that the purpose of this was to prop up government lending - while typically US debt is considered rock solid and a safe harbor, in the climate of 2008 they may have feared this wouldn't be true and we would see the bond no buy days like we've been seeing in Europe. ----- Shah - your anger is misdirected. Should be bitching at DC, not at the banks for reluctantly accepting free money. How many microseconds would your brain spend before it accepts such as offer? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #18 December 2, 2011 Where did the money come from? Was it electronically created? Did it exist prior to being loaned out? James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SkyDekker 1,465 #19 December 2, 2011 In this case when I typed the people's money, I emant tax dollars, not deposits. I have no issue with banks making profits, I was responding to a (maybe rhetorical) question from Jerry. If you want to extrapolate additional meanings and motives from that, enjoy. Winsor, understood. Also think it makes for a flawed system, though very capitalist. Like privatising domestic financial policy. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #20 December 2, 2011 that makes better sense - though it generates less outrage and indignation - so less fun I think the bailouts were very stupid and I wanted the market to handle it without government intervention - pretty much like anything else I see so......since we agree on that......then....have a nice day for the children ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #21 December 2, 2011 QuoteIf you want to extrapolate additional meanings and motives from that, enjoy. THANKS I am completely against your position in this to use infants and puppies for chemical burn research ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
winsor 236 #22 December 3, 2011 QuoteIn this case when I typed the people's money, I emant tax dollars, not deposits. I have no issue with banks making profits, I was responding to a (maybe rhetorical) question from Jerry. If you want to extrapolate additional meanings and motives from that, enjoy. Winsor, understood. Also think it makes for a flawed system, though very capitalist. Like privatising domestic financial policy. The end result of how the Fed is structured is enabling an end run around Constitutional limitations imposed on the Treasury. The Treasury cannot simply print money of its own accord without something (gold or silver) to back it. The Treasury can, however, "borrow" money without anything backing it from a non-governmental entity, and print currency based on the "loan." The marvelous result of this arrangement is that there is NOTHING backing the US Dollar. Every bit of currency in circulation is on "loan" from the Fed. The fact that we use fiat currency, based solely on the faith and trust of the US Government is reminiscent of the old joke: How do you say "Fuck you!" in Yiddish? "Trust me!" Either that or Otter's observation to Flounder in Animal House: "You fucked up - you trusted us!" In any event, we have a tendency to focus on symptoms and overlook the overlying pathology. We could address a few specific issues, such as the Fed and Wall Street, and have a feel good moment. The reason why the Fed and Wall Street are such a problem, however, is the result of structural problems that will not be easily addressed - if they are at all addressable. The fact that the people ostensibly running the show are as clueless as is the electorate is a bad sign. If any of them were capable of figuring it out, they would not need it to be explained to them. The issue does not require higher math, since the picture is clear to anyone who understands grade school arithmetic. The bottom line is that, from an overall standpoint, we are doomed. It is not a question of "if" so much as "when and how bad." Enjoy yourself - it's later than you think. BSBD, Winsor Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shah269 0 #23 December 3, 2011 Quote>OK please defend the banks after this. No need. People like you will continue to support them - and that's all they need to continue doing whatever they like. As of next month I'll be 100% credit unionLife through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
