Lehman files! BoA buys Lynch! AIG begging Fed!

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby Fat Lady Singing » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:13 pm

isachar wrote:Given AIG's size and scope, the possible failure of the company appeared to pose a greater risk than the $85 billion loan, she said. But while Perino said the terms require taxpayers to be paid back first, when asked whether taxpayers may not get their money back at all, she said, "That is true."


Well, at least she's honest about it. Seems like the first time I've heard any official admit as much. Which kind of spooks me all the more, actually.

Our whole economic system seems utterly absurd and/or insane and/or evil to me. The last few days I've been working very hard to try to understand what's going on here. I'd like to thank all the RI folks who regularly post on financial matters for helping explain things.

But can anyone tell me this: Is there a limit to what the Fed or the government can buy/"lend"? Or do they have essentially unlimited resources?

Good lord -- I'm not a believer in any religion as such, but I just had this horrible vision of blood being spilled in war offered as a sacrifice to Mammon in order to keep the whole crazy system creaking along so the wealthiest few can keep filling their pockets. Ugh. You know, it wouldn't surprise me. (Shivers).
Last edited by Fat Lady Singing on Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Fat Lady Singing
 
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 9:15 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby 8bitagent » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:30 pm

nathan28 wrote:
8bitagent wrote:If WaMu is next, you know the shit is pretty much hitting the fan.


As one financial commentator wrote, "Bullish for America: Bankers Get Real Jobs." hey, three more bank collapses, and we'll have an economy again. it's not all bad.


Morgan Stanley about to belly up:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26753521/

Is WaMu and others next?

Man this is crazy stuff
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby isachar » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:41 pm

Recognizing the validity of Isachar's brilliant (duh, a monkey could do it) analysis - that being more bailouts AREN'T good news - the market takes a swig of reality and falls back to being down - 356 pts at 3:40, near its lows for the day.

Last 20 minutes could be a free fall. It's also when the PPT can get active, so, could still go either way.

Don'cha just love it when bushboy shoots hisself and the country in the foot. He should go bag himself a lawyer (or billionaire) or two.

Freefall. Dow down - 410 at 3:55 pm.

Rushing for the exits now - 430 at 3:57

Dow closes down - 450 for the day, with a headlong plunge of about 200 pts in the last hour of trading.

Glad to have not been in it.
Last edited by isachar on Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:11 pm, edited 5 times in total.
"The simplest evidence is the most unbearable." - Brentos 7/3/08
isachar
 
Posts: 950
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 2:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Luposapien » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:41 pm

Fat Lady Singing wrote:I'm not a believer in any religion as such, but I just had this horrible vision of blood being spilled in war offered as a sacrifice to Mammon in order to keep the whole crazy system creaking along so the wealthiest few can keep filling their pockets. Ugh. You know, it wouldn't surprise me. (Shivers).


That's as accurate a description of what's going on as any I've heard, and literally true, regardless of whether you consider Mammon to be a literal 'being' or not.

And I second the thanks to those of you who are much savvier than I when it comes to the intricacies of the economic system for your posts here. I know that it's something that I need to get a much better grip on if I ever want to really understand what the hell is going on in the world. It's almost as if the system was deliberately designed to be confusing.
If you can't laugh at yourself, then everyone else will.
User avatar
Luposapien
 
Posts: 428
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:24 pm
Location: Approximately Austin
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby vigilant » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:48 pm

A 1982 court ruling regarding the Federal Reserve Bank (LEWIS v. UNITED STATES, 680 F.2d 1239) came to this conclusion.

“Examining the organization and function of the Federal Reserve Banks, and applying the relevant factors, we conclude that the Federal Reserve Banks are not federal instrumentalities for purpose of the FTCA, but are independent, privately owned
and locally controlled corporations.

Nuff said.......




who was involved in setting up the Federal Reserve in 1913.

Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin (Rothschild and world economy)
Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By the Rockefeller Family Tree)


This here ain't there first rodeo either, they been at this a lonnnggg time....see below


Senator Louis T. McFadden spoke out against the Federal Reserve owners:

“Mr. Chairman, we have in this Country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks, hereinafter called the Fed. The Fed has cheated the Government of these United States and the people of the United States out of enough money to pay the Nation's debt. The depredations and iniquities of the Fed have cost enough money to pay the National debt several times over.

This evil institution has impoverished and ruined the people of these United States, has bankrupted itself, and has practically bankrupted our Government. It has done this through the defects of the law under which it operates, through the maladministration of that law by the Fed and through the corrupt practices of the moneyed vultures who control it.

Some people think that the Federal Reserve Banks are United States Government institutions. They are private monopolies which prey upon the people of these United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign customers; foreign and domestic speculators and swindlers; and rich and predatory money lenders.

In that dark crew of financial pirates there are those who would cut a man's throat to get a dollar out of his pocket; there are those who send money into states to buy votes to control our legislatures; there are those who maintain International propaganda for the purpose of deceiving us into granting of new concessions which will permit them to cover up their past misdeeds and set again in motion their gigantic train of crime.”
Last edited by vigilant on Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The whole world is a stage...will somebody turn the lights on please?....I have to go bang my head against the wall for a while and assimilate....
vigilant
 
Posts: 2210
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 9:53 pm
Location: Back stage...
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby jingofever » Wed Sep 17, 2008 3:54 pm

Falling glass at Bank of America tower. This is either a metaphor or it is being prepped for jumpers.
User avatar
jingofever
 
Posts: 2814
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2005 6:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Wed Sep 17, 2008 4:07 pm

jingofever wrote:Falling glass at Bank of America tower. This is either a metaphor or it is being prepped for jumpers.


:shock:
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby wintler2 » Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:44 am

isachar wrote:..Don'cha just love it when bushboy shoots hisself and the country in the foot. ..
Thats one of the silver linings about crash now rather than in say 12 months - Right Think rules in US (& incidentally in UK, Au, Italy, Germany, France..), and they fucked it up. This is a fabulous 'teaching moment' for the insanity and corruption of economic rationalism and neoliberalism, tell everyone you know that it was greedy wankers in suits not 'liars loans' that stole their retirement funds.

Another upside is that venture capital funds should have a whole lot less play money with which to buyout and liquidate your employer, and the likely freeze in property investment will save more than a few meadows on the edges of many cities. Could kill any chance of significant new clean energy investment, but then decentralised energy generation always deserved to win that race anyway.
"Wintler2, you are a disgusting example of a human being, the worst kind in existence on God's Earth. This is not just my personal judgement.." BenD

Research question: are all god botherers authoritarians?
User avatar
wintler2
 
Posts: 2884
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 3:43 am
Location: Inland SE Aus.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby chlamor » Fri Sep 19, 2008 8:32 pm

blue ox babe said:
As one who worked in the insurance trenches for over a decade, including time spent helping AIG acquire another insurance company, I can say this: if AIG was "in trouble," financially speaking, it was INTENTIONAL because AIG doesn't make moves lightly, nor does it "lose" money without a will to do so.

In other words, there is no doubt in my mind that Maurice "Hank" Greenberg orchestrated this big balloon of bucks for himself and his spoiled-brat sons who are titular executives with various AIG sub-entities yet do not a lick of work of their own.

This is the system one supports if one says we must vote for Obama or McCain.

This is the system one supports if one says we must "fix it from within" -- and it will resist ALL such intramural "fixing" by any ordinary citizen.

This is the system that will eat us all, alive and screaming, and laugh while it does so.


http://www.chris-floyd.com/content/view ... /#comments
Liberal thy name is hypocrisy. What's new?
chlamor
 
Posts: 2173
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 11:26 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby justdrew » Fri Sep 19, 2008 9:04 pm

Science unveils hidden drivers of stock bubbles and crashes
Many economists believe that investors make decisions rationally, weighing up corporate data and other pricing signals to evaluate gain or risk before buying or selling stocks.
But this keystone belief in how markets function is now under mounting attack after this month's global stocks crash, the latest in a string of financial shocks over the past two decades.

Proponents of rival concepts say that primitive emotions, herd mentality and raging hormones are among the invisible motors that help inflate an asset bubble and then prick it.

"In standard economic theory, the way that prices in all markets are meant to be set depends on people being rational and having access to all available information," says David Tuckett of the Psychoanalysis Unit at University College London.

"This way of looking at things is almost completely wrong," he said. "Markets are operated by human beings."

Investigators into the theories of behavioural or emotional finance say conscious decisions are only the surface of a river with deep and powerful undercurrents.

A boom-and-bust event can follow a distinct path, they say.

At first, investors are skeptical about dipping into a market.

When they perceive that neighbours or peers are getting rich by buying a given stock, they cautiously make a purchase and their confidence builds as the stock's value rises.

The gains fuel enthusiasm, which leads to the euphoric conviction, as the price spirals higher, that this is an easy way to wealth.

At this point -- when the bubble is most inflated -- the investor becomes indifferent to warning signs, such as share values or price-earnings ratios that are stratospherically high.

What happens when the market starts to tank? The initial response is dismissal, for the investor still believes that his stocks will come back up and there is no point in selling.

As prices slip further, denial cedes to fear and then, suddenly, to panic.

Traumatised by their loss, investors vow never to invest in stocks again -- a sentiment that can be durably enforced if many others have also been burned.

A famous example of this process was "Tulip Mania", which occurred in the 17th-century Netherlands.

Tulip bulbs, then a rarity in Europe, scaled extraordinary heights in the course of a mad year, only to fall just as abruptly.

At the Mania's peak in 1636, a single bulb of a particularly coveted strain, the Viceroy tulip, changed hands for the equivalent of more than 25,500 euros (36,720 dollars) today. When the bubble burst, there was a wave of moralising and calls for tighter controls against speculators.

Trond Andresen, who specialises in behavioural analysis at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, says investors may think less about the intrinsic value of a stock and more about the perception of its value.

This is an important distinction, he says.

"Short-term volatility is created when you have people running after each other," he argues.

"If people stopped chasing what they think the other person is thinking, rather than actually trying to value a stock on their own best terms without second-guessing people, the volatility would disappear."

John Coates, a Cambridge University researcher into biochemistry and behaviour, says market fluctuations are amplified by hormones.

In a past life, Coates traded at US investment house Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank in New York.

During the dot-com boom, he says, he was stunned to see male traders "displaying classic symptoms of mania," with symptoms of omnipotence, raging thoughts and diminished need for sleep.

Quitting finance and heading for Cambridge, Coates explored a hunch with Joe Herbert, a professor at the Cambridge Centre for Brain Repair.

They took saliva swabs from 17 male traders at a London stock-dealing firm twice a day and measured the samples for two hormones.

These were testosterone, which is associated with male aggressiveness and sexual behaviour, and cortisol, which is summoned by the body to deal with "fight or flight" emergencies.

When the traders were in profit, their testosterone levels surged. But when they were in loss, or in fluctuation, it was their cortisol that rose sharply.

Testosterone encourages confidence and risk-taking, and has an accumulative effect, which could explain winning streaks in sports teams, for instance.

But research in animals suggests that, over the long term, high doses of the hormone impair judgement and encourage excessive risks.

Similarly, cortisol has a beneficial, euphoric effect in the short term, but after two weeks of exposure to it at high levels, the hormone can turn negative, eroding confidence and magnifying fear of risk, Coates says.

"If you were to take an identical set of facts and present them to someone high on testosterone and someone who's got chronic cortisol, the first one would see opportunities everywhere and the second would see nothing but risks," he says.

In this light, says Coates, fund managers would be advised to get an "endocrinal mix" on the trading floor.

Women and older men would add a calmer, longer perspective to the headstrong, testosterone-driven actions of young male colleagues.

In 2007, Tuckett interviewed dozens of fund mangers at top investment banks around the world.

Under crushing pressure to perform, they blocked out the risk factor and convinced themselves, day in and day out, that they had had the keys others were groping for.

"The 'Master of the Universe' really does believe in his own invincibility," Tuckett said. "Even though many of the traders I interviewed told me 'this boom can't go on forever', they kept on investing in it."
User avatar
justdrew
 
Posts: 11966
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 7:57 pm
Location: unknown
Blog: View Blog (11)

Previous

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests