Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: Cain on March 12, 2009, 09:14:45 AM

Title: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 12, 2009, 09:14:45 AM
To stop me from making new ones, since at this rate I'll be making three new threads a day:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/11/business/small.php

QuoteSmall businesses in Europe are failing for want of sums that, in terms of the huge stimulus and bailout packages now being offered by governments around the world, amount to small change.

Suzanne and Marwan Hemchaoui in the British market town of Newbury have a typical story. Their French-style bistro, Le Petit Square, did a good business all through the year-end holidays and through Valentine's Day in mid-February.

But their bank, where they were clients of 20 years' standing, canceled an overdraft facility of £20,000, or $27,480, for the bistro and another restaurant back in June — money that the two establishments need now to even out cash flow.

So Le Petit Square is now up for sale.

''They said with a recession looming we were a big risk and just withdrew it,'' Suzanne Hemchaoui said. ''It's disheartening that we were with the same bank for so long and that they were so cutthroat with us.''

Small businesses in Britain employ around 22.7 million people — well over half of the private sector work force — and annually generate some £2.8 trillion in revenue, according to the latest data supplied by the British Department for Business Enterprise & Regulatory Reform.

QuoteIn January, Britain introduced plans for its taxpayers to guarantee up to £21 billion of bank lending for small businesses to help firms put in danger by dwindling bank lending.

However, these promised lines of credit are not making their way through the system, according to a survey by the Federation of Small Businesses. Only 8 percent of small businesses said banks were making the loans available to them.


http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE52966Z20090310

QuoteNEW YORK (Reuters) - Private equity company Blackstone Group LP CEO Stephen Schwarzman said on Tuesday that up to 45 percent of the world's wealth has been destroyed by the global credit crisis.

"Between 40 and 45 percent of the world's wealth has been destroyed in little less than a year and a half," Schwarzman told an audience at the Japan Society. "This is absolutely unprecedented in our lifetime."
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 12, 2009, 01:00:27 PM
Ooh! I can sink my teeth into this thread....  :)

Quote from: Cain on March 12, 2009, 09:14:45 AM
QuoteNEW YORK (Reuters) - Private equity company Blackstone Group LP CEO Stephen Schwarzman said on Tuesday that up to 45 percent of the world's wealth has been destroyed by the global credit crisis.
"Between 40 and 45 percent of the world's wealth has been destroyed in little less than a year and a half," Schwarzman told an audience at the Japan Society. "This is absolutely unprecedented in our lifetime."

So this would be highly deflationary, but if it's just credit, rather than cash, and the only way to get the wheel going again is 'quantitative easing' as they are labeling it in your neck of the woods, don't you think we will be looking at hyperinflation PDQ?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 12, 2009, 02:27:22 PM
That's the worry. 

So far, Gilts (British government bonds) have risen in price since the start of the scheme, which suggests it is working...for the moment.  However, that is having its own knock-on effect.  More buyers means lower yields...and pensions are linked to those yields as well, so it could be the case that OAPs will start to suffer very soon.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 12, 2009, 02:46:13 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 12, 2009, 02:27:22 PM
That's the worry. 

So far, Gilts (British government bonds) have risen in price since the start of the scheme, which suggests it is working...for the moment.  However, that is having its own knock-on effect.  More buyers means lower yields...and pensions are linked to those yields as well, so it could be the case that OAPs will start to suffer very soon.

If/When the 'bond bubble' pops, I've heard it's 'look out below'.  People are piling into something that has negative real returns, and are being created in massive quantities to fund the bailouts?  I think they are going to eventually realize that the 'full faith and credit' of crumbling empires is not really solid ground....
harsh times ahead.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Idem on March 12, 2009, 02:52:51 PM
So are there any indications that India/China will be going in as much of a downward spiral?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 12, 2009, 03:01:32 PM
Quote from: Idem on March 12, 2009, 02:52:51 PM
So are there any indications that India/China will be going in as much of a downward spiral?

Sure.
http://www.thestar.com/News/World/article/597427
China's got probrems, too.

ETA: if our TBills lose too much appeal, China might feel forced to dump them, drowning us both as, the prices burn up faster than dryer lint. right now they're still buying hand over fist to keep them afloat, as i understand it
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 13, 2009, 06:52:41 PM
India has generally been tough on its own financial centres, when hints of crime and corruption and mismanagement have arrived, and has cut out lots of the financial dead wood.  Still, everyone has got hit.

China's "stimulus" seems to be funded by dodgy loans based on even dodgier stocks.  So expect that house of cards to come crashing down.  Although, China's imports have dropped even lower than their exports, so its not all terrible.

Russia is leaning on the Orthodox Church, it is so worried about social unrest.  Opiate of the people and all that.

For today's "you're fucked" links:

China's hooked on a drug called "export-led growth" and needs its supplier to make sure it has its shit together http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a6KTPb8k2koY&refer=home

Banks and companies did NOT pay FDIC premiums, which is why the FDIC is having major problems right now.  If you or I missed on paying our insurance premiums, we sure as fuck wouldn't get pay outs now, would we?  http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2009/03/11/now_needy_fdic_collected_little_in_premiums/?page=full?ref=fp1
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 13, 2009, 07:02:25 PM
"An important lesson going forward is we need to be building up these funds in good times so you can draw down upon them in bad times."



(http://media.comicvine.com/uploads/1/12018/664005-deadpool_commonsense_super.jpg)



Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 16, 2009, 10:00:31 AM
Wait, wha?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/mar/16/conservatives-criticise-job-centre-closures

QuoteThe government is under fire from the Tories and trade unions for continuing to close jobcentres while unemployment is soaring and expected to top two million when figures are released this week.

Three jobcentres in the south-east, in Brixton Hill, London, Orpington, Kent, and Feltham, Middlesex, are being closed, despite the work and pensions secretary James Purnell telling the Commons before Christmas he had introduced a moratorium to stop the programme which has seen 503 disappear since 2002.

John Horam, Conservative MP for Orpington, said yesterday: "Already the centre is not taking new claimants, who are having to go to Bromley, where they face hours having to queue before they can be seen. I shall be raising this with the secretary of state."

Purnell was attacked by both Theresa May, his Tory shadow, and Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services union, for pushing through earlier closures in areas where unemployment has since risen between 100 and 160%.

Serwotka said: "In some of these rural areas, people are having to spend all day trying to sign on as it involves a round-trip of 20 miles and some claimants have not got their own cars so have to rely on poor bus services. We need to be reopening more jobcentres, not closing them."
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 16, 2009, 10:37:56 AM
Daily Telegraph fail:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/4996305/We-need-more-risk-and-less-regulation-of-the-financial-sector.html

QuoteWe need more risk and less regulation of the financial sector

Um, OK?

QuoteCapitalism is based on innovation.

Adam Smith rang.  He said "did you even READ my fucking book?"

QuoteBut innovations are not always well understood when they first turn up. People buy too many of them and pay too much for them.

I just want to quote this as evidence the market does not always work perfectly.  This will become important in a minute.

QuoteThat is what happened in this crisis. People paid too much for financial products that they didn't understand.

And sold them for too much.  And floated an entire economy on the basis they would keep selling forever and would never drop in price.  Oh, and there was something about lying to investors and firing people who disagreed with that assessment, using things like evidence and projected trends.  So not so much a naive mistake and more like carefully calculated get rich schemes.

QuoteLeft to function alone, the market would have punished those that had invested in the companies that lost.

And everyone else, for good measure.  The market approves of collateral damage.

QuoteCompanies going bust and investors losing their money are not a "failure of capitalism".

Not even if they are making a yearly profit, yet go out of business due to a lack of credit during more quiet seasons?  Because that's what is happening.

QuoteIt is capitalism; and if you don't like it, then you don't like the system.

If you love Communism so much, why don't you live there?

QuoteThere was no need for the British government to bail out the banks last autumn.

Apart from that whole "turning into the next Somalia" thing, and everyone knows Somalia is a healthy and functioning market economy, with reported growth in such vital areas as piracy, terrorism, warlordism and mercenary work.

QuoteThe wrong policy response – the one adopted – was to reward investor error.

Yeah, those silly investors, believing banking CEOs.  They should have beat them until they told them the truth about the risks they were taking!  Jack Bauer would do no less.

QuoteIt saved the capitalists made rich at the expense of private capitalism.

If you hate that so much, why don't you move to Cuba or something, Che?

QuoteCalls for heavy-handed regulation to restrict the actions of banks are the flip-side of acting so as to undermine the market's means to punish poor decision-making.

Yeah, not allowing financially risky decisions with the threat of jail is totally not a punishment when compared to what The Market will do.

QuoteThis means there will be less risk-taking in the economy as a whole – less innovation and experimentation, less diversity and dynamism.

I cite the Open Source Movement as proof people cannot innovate without a profit motive.

QuoteWe will have an economy that grows more slowly and a society that is less tolerant, offering fewer opportunities for those who have no money but good ideas to get ahead.

Whereas a worldwide economic depression every couple of years won't make people more intolerant or offer fewer opportunities at all.

QuoteThe financial sector is unlikely to be able to return to sustained profitability without significant restructuring of a much more radical nature than the current favourites of creating "boring banks" and "bad banks". Governments are now the major shareholders in these institutions, and they should insist upon their restructuring.

Typical commie, looking to the government to solve all your problems.

QuoteImagine if, instead of all that, we had used £100 billion or £200 billion for tax cuts to stimulate the real economy.

Yeah, but imagine if we had used £300 billion to stimulate the Really Real Economy (for Realness).  Or £400 billion to titillate the Somewhat Less Empheral Economy.  Or, and I will admit we are pushing the boat out here, £500 billion for The One True Objective Economy That No Rational Person Can Deny?  What then, eh?  That's the problem with you Commies, your lack of innovative thinking.

Ye gods, that was the biggest pile of fail I have ever read.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 17, 2009, 01:21:01 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123724826580949187.html?mod=djemalertNEWS

QuoteIn response to expected bonus restrictions, officials at Citigroup Inc., Morgan Stanley and other financial institutions that got government aid are discussing increasing base salaries for some executives and other top-producing employees, people familiar with the situation said.....

The discussions are at an early stage, partly because the government hasn't yet issued specific rules on the bonus payments that will be allowed at companies that received TARP aid. The talks also are proceeding cautiously because of the political volatility of pay, bonuses and perks on Wall Street, including outrage over American International Group Inc.'s promise to pay $450 million in bonuses to employees in the insurer's financial-products unit.

[...]

As banks and securities firms wrestle with growing regulation of compensation practices, substantially increasing the base salaries of top employees could become a popular response, some industry officials say. A larger salary would reduce the relative importance of bonuses but also help financial companies increase those payments, since they usually are calculated as a percentage of total annual compensation.

IOW bonuses are entitlements, not rewards for a properly done job.



Also, bonus Buffet financial analysis

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29552618/

Gets interesting at around 6:05
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 17, 2009, 01:30:42 PM
Purnell has a plan to bring in a "workfare" system like the one in the US, which essentially means making the unemployed into a pool of cheap, serviceable labour for the corporate giants.  In his white paper on the topic, he suggested the government create partnerships with industry giants who would pay such workers (well) below minumum wage, and also get subsidies from the government for taking them off their hands.

My paranoid thinking is that by hyping the fear of an uprising of the unemployed over the summer, and the violence that will no doubt ensue, Parliament will use the emergency to push through such laws to get the poor "off the streets" and other such meaningless slogans which will expand government power and enrich the companies many MPs lobby for in their spare time.  If that is the case, shutting down job centres is necessary, to achieve the critical mass of unemployed people needed to cause such protests and violence.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 17, 2009, 01:44:27 PM
More doom:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/15/job-centres-unemployment-vacancies

QuoteStartling new figures have revealed that on average there are 10 jobseekers for every vacancy advertised in the UK. In one area of the south-east, 60 workers are available for each job.

Follow the money:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aPzu3EtQ99Jk&refer=home

Quote"I was happy to see that AIG finally handed over the counterparty information we've been requesting for months," said Representative Elijah Cummings, a Maryland Democrat on the House Oversight Committee. "However, I am deeply concerned that Goldman Sachs received so much money from AIG considering the relationships between the two companies. We will certainly be investigating this further to ensure that this is merely a coincidence."

Gangmasters are back in fashion:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/15/gangmasters-asylum-seekers

Quoten Southall, where most of the workers are of Indian, Pakistani or East African origin, some claimed they had fallen victim to sharp practices at the hands of gangmasters, but had no recourse because they were working illegally.

Balbir, a tall, turban-wearing Sikh with a grey beard, has sought work from this car park for the past four months after losing his meat-packing job. Last month, he was driven to a butcher in Harrow where he was told he would be given a day's "trial" as a meat packer.

"I worked for nine hours without a break. At the end of it, they told me I had not got the job and refused to pay me," he said.

Another Sikh regular, who admitted to working illegally, said that his wages of £4.50 an hour were docked because he did not have his own tools for working on a building site in Ealing.

"I was told that I had to hire my tools for £1 an hour. I couldn't argue. There was no point," he said.

Some, however, are only too pleased to have an opportunity to work, despite the poor wages and conditions. Sukki, 42, said that last week he was taken in a white van to a factory unit in Southall where he butters bread for sandwiches which are sent to shops and petrol stations up and down the country.

He worked an 11-hour shift for six days a week and earned just £2 an hour, little more than a third of the national minimum wage of £5.73.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Idem on March 17, 2009, 04:14:10 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 17, 2009, 01:44:27 PM


http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/15/gangmasters-asylum-seekers

WOW.   :horrormirth:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: NOVA on March 17, 2009, 04:21:34 PM
The government told us it would all be over!
Rejoice all around!

http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/chairman+recession+forecast+welcomed+markets/1395824/story.html
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 17, 2009, 05:55:43 PM
 Is that why I randomly had $800 in orders on Sunday? Because that was really confusing.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 18, 2009, 08:07:29 PM
Do you guys feel Quantitatively Eased?!  :eek:

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/090318/fed_interest_rates.html

ONE TRIIIILLLLLLION DOLLARS!
This isn't gonna be your grandpappy's Depression (deflationary), I don't think....

ironically announced on the same day as this:
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/600/42/375364.htm
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Honey on March 19, 2009, 02:13:05 PM
QuoteSubprime Bailout: Good Idea or 'Moral Hazard?'
by Eric Weiner

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=16734629

What might look like prudent financial first aid is, in reality, bad medicine. It's called "moral hazard," and it's a concept any parent of a 5-year-old can understand: Bail out someone who has engaged in risky behavior and you're likely to encourage that behavior in the future. Or, as The Wall Street Journal once put it, moral hazard is ''the distortions introduced by the prospect of not having to pay for your sins.''

We've Been Here Before & we'll be there again & again & again ...  Monkey see, monkey do. 

QuoteWe've Been Here Before

In the past, Congress and the Federal Reserve have shown a willingness to rescue ailing industries, and even individual companies. There was the Chrysler bailout of 1979, the savings and loan bailout of 1989, and the airline bailout of 2001, among others. In each of those cases, proponents of intervention argued that the bailouts were necessary to ensure the health of the economy as a whole.

That's the same argument made by some economists now, but not everyone is buying it. "The banking system is in difficulty, but it's not in danger of collapse by any means," says credit analyst Stracke. "It's not as if this is a true emergency."

In fact, the kind of bailout being discussed for the subprime lenders and borrowers is very different from the one that, say, was put together in the 1980s to rescue the failed savings and loan industry. That bailout involved taxpayer money; this one does not.    (I am confused here?   :?)

Rather, under discussion are changes to the bankruptcy laws, the rules that govern the Federal Housing Administration or action by the Federal Reserve. The central bank has already cut interest rates several times in the past few months. That spurs economic activity and softens the blow of the bad loans. Wall Street, and some economists, applauded the interest-rate cuts, but not everyone thinks it was a good idea.

"By encouraging risky behavior, he [Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke] was asking for trouble—and he'll probably get it," wrote William Bonner and Lila Rajiva, in The Washington Post. "Bad investments do not become good ones just because a central bank lends more money to the investors who made the rash choices."

What is different here in the current scheme, is that the American people seem to be more aware, i.e. we didn't just elect the father or brother of someone (Neil Bush) who just barely escaped criminal prosecution for his part in the Savings & Loan bailout or John McCain who had his hand slapped by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment."

QuoteLincoln Savings and Loan
The Lincoln Savings led to the Keating five political scandal, in which five U.S. senators were implicated in an influence-peddling scheme. It was named for Charles Keating, who headed Lincoln Savings and made $300,000 as political contributions to them in the 1980s. Three of those senators – Alan Cranston (D-CA), Don Riegle (D-MI), and Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ) – found their political careers cut short as a result. Two others – John Glenn (D-OH) and John McCain (R-AZ) – were rebuked by the Senate Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savings_and_loan_crisis

Why not a bailout for the American people (& others) who have been taken in (big time) by the Con Artists (bigger time)?  Hopefully history will correct this omission.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Xooxe on March 19, 2009, 02:41:42 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 18, 2009, 08:07:29 PM
Do you guys feel Quantitatively Eased?!  :eek:

It always sounds like Quantum Touch for banks.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 19, 2009, 02:46:31 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/business/economy/18leonhardt.html?_r=1  Someone is trying to play "heads I win, tails you lose" and the NYT is calling them on their bullshit.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2008/wp08224.pdf an IMF paper that, if read carefully, suggests the US and UK are going about this all wrong

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/03/on-feds-shock-and-awe.html Excellent analysis of what the Fed is actually doing
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: I_Kicked_Kennedy on March 19, 2009, 04:49:14 PM

Tell me you guys have seen Songs from the Second Floor?

So funny it'll make you drink bleach and mop the floor with your tears.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Honey on March 19, 2009, 04:52:18 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2009, 02:46:31 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/business/economy/18leonhardt.html?_r=1  Someone is trying to play "heads I win, tails you lose" and the NYT is calling them on their bullshit.

I found it interesting to listen to the below while reading the above.  "As above, so below."

Quote from: Cain on March 13, 2009, 06:35:48 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHRppvbiahM

Tigerhawk's anger at the proposed tax hike on people making more than $250,000 a year results in a remarkable video, in which he complains with frightening, quiet intensity that he and his rich friends "have worked harder and longer in their entire careers than most Americans understand and can even conceive." He himself has spent 100 hours in the office this week; "I wrote the notes for this video at three in the morning on a Sunday night, having been there all weekend."

If you can continue watching through your tears, you will see Tigerhawk explain that the rich "work harder than everyone else doing things that cannot be done by other people who have not earned the same skills because they did not expend the same effort" and "are both more productive with their time and more energetic than average people." And "they will never be romanticized by Hollywood... but they are far more important to the prosperity of the United States and a future worth living for than the people who are put on a pedestal" - by which he presumably means folks who are not rich but are still admired; I wished he'd taken time to tell us who these wastrels are. Schoolteachers, perhaps.

Also, Obama is a class traitor.

Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2009, 02:46:31 PM
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2008/wp08224.pdf an IMF paper that, if read carefully, suggests the US and UK are going about this all wrong

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/03/on-feds-shock-and-awe.html Excellent analysis of what the Fed is actually doing

Thanks for these, gonna read them when I have more time.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 23, 2009, 10:26:09 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/nyregion/20siege.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

AIG execs are being targeted by an increasingly angry public.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/print

Matt Tiabbi spells it out for the proles.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: fomenter on March 23, 2009, 03:06:02 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2009, 10:26:09 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/20/nyregion/20siege.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

AIG execs are being targeted by an increasingly angry public.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/26793903/the_big_takeover/print

Matt Tiabbi spells it out for the proles.

a good read, thanks cain
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 23, 2009, 03:11:13 PM
It is.  I've linked it twice, but it may deserve its own thread. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 23, 2009, 03:14:53 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2009, 03:11:13 PM
It is.  I've linked it twice, but it may deserve its own thread. 
Does it deserve to be copypastad for those of us behind nannywalls at work?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 23, 2009, 03:16:45 PM
Oh yes, most certainly.  Hold on, I'll give it its own thread in TFYS.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on March 23, 2009, 04:59:44 PM
Dow Jones currently up 313 points.  Oh wait... I'm in the wrong thread.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on March 23, 2009, 05:09:10 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 23, 2009, 04:59:44 PM
Dow Jones currently up 313 points.  Oh wait... I'm in the wrong thread.
give it a day or two.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 24, 2009, 10:16:18 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on March 23, 2009, 04:59:44 PM
Dow Jones currently up 313 points.  Oh wait... I'm in the wrong thread.

In other news, frat boys like free beer and get out of jail free cards.

If I was told I was gonna have a sugar daddy take care of my problems, I'd be gambling like crazy, too.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 26, 2009, 01:16:16 PM
ECONOMY FAIL

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aQGG.mWeZ4eU&refer=worldwide

Quotehe U.K. failed to find enough buyers for 1.75 billion pounds ($2.55 billion) of bonds for the first time in almost seven years as debt investors repudiated Prime Minister Gordon Brown's plan to stem the worst economic crisis in three decades.

Gilts slumped after the London-based Debt Management Office, which manages bond auctions on behalf of the Treasury, said investors bid for 1.63 billion pounds of the 40-year securities. The last time the U.K. government was unable to attract enough investors was in 2002 when it tried to sell 30- year inflation-protected bonds. The yield on the 4.25 percent gilt due 2049 rose 10 basis points to 4.55 percent.

Brown's government aims to sell a record 146.4 billion pounds of debt this fiscal year and as much as 147.9 billion pounds in 2010 as he tries to pull Europe's second-largest economy out of its worst recession since 1980. The prime minister's plan drew criticism yesterday when Bank of England Governor Mervyn King told lawmakers in Parliament in London the government should be "cautious" about spending and deficits.

"This is a warning signal investors are sending to the government," said Neil Mackinnon, chief economist at hedge fund ECU Group Plc in London, who helps manage about $1 billion in assets and is a former U.K. Treasury official. "Investors are giving the thumbs down to the gilt market."

Quote"This sinks Brown below the waterline," said Bill Jones, professor of politics at Liverpool Hope University. Brown's "whole strategy is based on borrowing and now he can't get anyone to buy his gilts. This means the prospect of going cap in hand to the IMF hovers increasingly into view."

Despite it being the Tory Libertarian wet dream, I do not want the IMF to undertake structural reform here.  Not after seeing the results of such reforms in South America and SE Asia.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Xooxe on March 26, 2009, 03:28:28 PM
Apparently they've now found the rest of that £1.75 billion, but it's in safer gilts that don't get buggered up by inflation.

In other news, China's central bank wants to get rid of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 03:34:19 PM
What, you don't want to owe debt to the emerging world government?

also, please expand on the 'Tory Libertarian wet dream" comment.  Why would they support the IMF?

wait.....
not terribly important, but does this make sense?
QuoteThe yield on the 4.25 percent gilt due 2049 rose 10 basis points to 4.55 percent.
that seems like 30 basis points, no?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 03:48:18 PM
also, don't worry too much... out bond auction was rather weak yesterday, as i understand it, too.
We're be right behind you...

hey, check this out:
US GDP down 6.3%, Profits decline 16.5%! but don't worry, the bottom is in! the FED and the great stimulator are making everything better!

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aemO.zzB7LlE&refer=home
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Idem on March 26, 2009, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on March 26, 2009, 03:28:28 PM
In other news, China's central bank wants to get rid of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
:lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 04:26:03 PM
So has Russia.  and Geitner said he's open to expanded use of IMF SDRs...
http://www.cnbc.com/id/29866259

Of course SDRs are just backed by the same currencies that are backed by shitty debt, so....

IMF head thinks the discussion is 'legitimate'
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/18/20090325/tbs-talks-on-new-world-reserve-currency-8cc5291.html

But, don't worry...
Obama said in a prime-time televised news conference on Tuesday: "I don't believe that there's a need for a global currency'', and noted that the dollar was "extraordinarily strong right now."
Is he looking at the same USDX chart i am? it's at 84 right now, and it would be lower still if the other nations weren't monetizing their debt, too, right?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: fomenter on March 26, 2009, 04:31:52 PM
more on the same http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Geithner_open_to_China_proposal.html?showall
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 26, 2009, 04:51:23 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 03:34:19 PM
What, you don't want to owe debt to the emerging world government?

also, please expand on the 'Tory Libertarian wet dream" comment.  Why would they support the IMF?

Because they know they cannot privatize everything via Parliament - that even if they controlled Parliament members of their own party, along with the opposition and practically everyone else would oppose it.  However, if was part of the conditions of getting money from the IMF, as part of its 'structural reform package' then they could shrug and go "well, that's our deal.  We certainly didn't want to do this, but, oh dear, it seems like we have no choice."

And of course, IMF privatization is like pretty much every other privatization scheme of the last thirty years, in that the same select groups of investors and companies would get first pick of the newly outsourced government services and to turn government monopolies into personal ones.

I keep an eye on the Tory blogosphere, especially among the more supposedly libertarian elements, and there have been a lot of statements essentially welcoming IMF economic dictatorship because of the above.  That's Tories for you - if they can't do something democratically, they'll find a non-democratic method of doing it, and say "fuck you" to anyone who disagrees or protests.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 05:18:37 PM
Ah. i see. they aren't really 'libertarian' in their thinking...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 26, 2009, 06:09:03 PM
Quote from: Idem on March 26, 2009, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on March 26, 2009, 03:28:28 PM
In other news, China's central bank wants to get rid of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
:lulz:

Isn't China the one that links their currency to ours to keep the trade deficit skewed to their favor, even when we've asked them not to?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: AFK on March 26, 2009, 06:14:04 PM
I heard the Russians might go along with it.  If so, look out. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 06:22:01 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2009, 06:09:03 PM
Quote from: Idem on March 26, 2009, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on March 26, 2009, 03:28:28 PM
In other news, China's central bank wants to get rid of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
:lulz:

Isn't China the one that links their currency to ours to keep the trade deficit skewed to their favor, even when we've asked them not to?

Yeah.  they had to do that to keep the balance of trade, but they're between a rock and a hard place being pegged to a sinking ship (and having a ton of $ denominated reserves)...
i suspect any rhetoric to the effect of making a different reserve currency is meant to spur action on our part to strengthen the dollar...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 26, 2009, 06:22:12 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 26, 2009, 06:09:03 PM
Quote from: Idem on March 26, 2009, 03:56:55 PM
Quote from: Xooxe on March 26, 2009, 03:28:28 PM
In other news, China's central bank wants to get rid of the dollar as the world's reserve currency.
:lulz:

Isn't China the one that links their currency to ours to keep the trade deficit skewed to their favor, even when we've asked them not to?

What makes you think the US asking is anything more than a song and dance for the rubes at home?  Argh, Yellow Peril, etc etc, look at those evil Chinamen, as we write a blank cheque for Goldman Sachs AIG...

http://jamesfallows.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/01/might_as_well_make_this_an_all.php Data on Chinese currency control and its effect on trade.  Seems to be negligible, by my reading.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 26, 2009, 06:25:23 PM
Also China is just reminding the Fed that if they get fucked over at the G-20, they have options.

They don't.  Not really.  They've bought $2000 billion in debt and they're going to have to put up with it for the forseeable future.  But they like to act crazy now and again to make sure people are paying attention.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Honey on March 27, 2009, 10:57:02 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 26, 2009, 04:51:23 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 26, 2009, 03:34:19 PM
What, you don't want to owe debt to the emerging world government?

also, please expand on the 'Tory Libertarian wet dream" comment.  Why would they support the IMF?

Because they know they cannot privatize everything via Parliament - that even if they controlled Parliament members of their own party, along with the opposition and practically everyone else would oppose it.  However, if was part of the conditions of getting money from the IMF, as part of its 'structural reform package' then they could shrug and go "well, that's our deal.  We certainly didn't want to do this, but, oh dear, it seems like we have no choice."

And of course, IMF privatization is like pretty much every other privatization scheme of the last thirty years, in that the same select groups of investors and companies would get first pick of the newly outsourced government services and to turn government monopolies into personal ones.

I keep an eye on the Tory blogosphere, especially among the more supposedly libertarian elements, and there have been a lot of statements essentially welcoming IMF economic dictatorship because of the above.  That's Tories for you - if they can't do something democratically, they'll find a non-democratic method of doing it, and say "fuck you" to anyone who disagrees or protests.

Oh the Shock & the Awe of those schemes!  In a short 30 years this *awsomeness* migrated from Chile to Bolivia, to Argentina, China, South Africa, Poland, Russia, UK (Falklands War) & so on & so forth & continues to the present day, like a "White Sale" for private investors only. 

However, have no Fear!  All those good ole boys have oh such good intentions, doncha know?  Y'see all you have to do is have Faith?  We can (if we're lucky) eat cake!   :x   
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 31, 2009, 11:56:11 PM
Dollar in decline in international trade...

Argentina and Brazil
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68880&sectionid=351020706 (http://"http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=68880&sectionid=351020706")

Russia, China, Belarus,
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601095&sid=aYaPzpEgF_BA (http://"http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601095&sid=aYaPzpEgF_BA")

South Korea, Japan and China
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=awJV0HGibVmw (http://"http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&refer=home&sid=awJV0HGibVmw")

China, Argentina
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/China-Argentina-settle-trade-yuan/story.aspx?guid={9229A1CC-3B26-4694-A82C-1D24927C4433} (http://"http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/China-Argentina-settle-trade-yuan/story.aspx?guid=%7B9229A1CC-3B26-4694-A82C-1D24927C4433%7D")

Southeast Asia, China, Japan, Korea
http://news.alibaba.com/article/detail/markets/100064249-1-south-korea%252C-indonesia-seek-cooperation.html (http://"http://news.alibaba.com/article/detail/markets/100064249-1-south-korea%252C-indonesia-seek-cooperation.html")
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on April 01, 2009, 04:57:23 AM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 01, 2009, 01:34:56 PM
Economic Intelligence Unit predicts

60% chance of stablization of the world economy
30% chance of worldwide depression
10% chance of worldwide depression with major social disruption

http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1016307.shtml

QuoteThe world economy is at grave risk of entering a depression, in which developed-world growth rates average less than 1% per annum between 2009 and 2013, according to a new report by the Economist Intelligence Unit. The depression scenario carries a 30% probability, while there is a 60% chance that the stimulus operations now underway will restore stability by 2010/11, albeit at lower growth levels than we've been accustomed to. A third scenario, in which failing confidence in the US economy leads to mass withdrawal from dollar-denominated assets and a collapse in the US currency, carries a 10% probability.

Depression would be characterised by mass bankruptcies and job losses. In a vicious cycle of debt deflation, the burden of debt would rise in real terms as collateral declined in value and incomes fell. As bad debts piled up, banks' balance-sheets would be weakened, resulting in forced asset sales. These would drive down prices further. Like banks and financial institutions, households and companies would "deleverage", disposing of assets at fire-sale prices to pay down debt.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on April 01, 2009, 03:06:18 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE5303F820090401
QuoteU.S. private sector axes 742,000 jobs in March
NEW YORK (Reuters) - Job losses in the U.S. private sector accelerated in March, more than economists' expectations, according to a report by ADP Employer Services on Wednesday.

Private employers cut jobs by a record 742,000 in March versus a 706,000 revised cut in February that was originally reported at 697,000 jobs, said ADP, which has been carrying out the survey since 2001.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: fomenter on April 02, 2009, 05:45:20 PM
"This was an article from the St. Petersburg Times Newspaper on Sunday. The Business Section asked readers for ideas on "How Would You Fix the Economy?"

Dear Mr.President,
Patriotic retirement:
There's about 40 million people over 50 in the work force; pay them $1 million apiece severance with stipulations:

1) They leave their jobs. Forty million job openings
     - Unemployment fixed.
2) They buy NEW American cars. Forty million cars ordered
     - Auto Industry fixed.
3) They either buy a house or pay off their mortgage
     - Housing Crisis fixed.  "


Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on April 02, 2009, 07:13:28 PM
Well, it would have been cheaper than the AIG bailouts.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on April 02, 2009, 09:48:18 PM
 :?
40*10^6 X 10^6 = 40 trillion dollars.
...not cheaper than AIG bailout...
plus AIG bailout is debt deflation at lofty eschelons, whereas 40 trillion dollars in Federal Reserve Notes floating around would make a quick impact on the price of a happy meal...
i've seen lots of 'obvious quick solutions' to this mess come through my mailbox, but people don't realize that it has taken decades of financial engineering to destroy the economy thusly, and centuries for the setup.  this problem won't be solved.
at all.















ever.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: fomenter on April 03, 2009, 05:42:47 PM
not to confident about the source, but i found the comparison between Americas new economic "plan" and those of fascists interesting, anybody know if they are accurate or valid comparisons?

http://spectator.org/archives/2009/04/02/il-duce-redux
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 03, 2009, 08:16:13 PM
Accurate, maybe (I have yet to read the link).  Valid?  Probably not:

Quote from: An Anatomy of Fascism by Robert PaxtonEven at its most radical, however, fascists' anticapitalist rhetoric was selective. While they denounced speculative international finance (along with all other forms of internationalism, cosmopolitanism, or globalization -- capitalist as well as socialist), they respected the property of national producers, who were to form the social base of the reinvigorated nation. When they denounced the bourgeoisie, it was for being too flabby and individualistic to make a nation strong, not for robbing workers of the value they added. What they criticized in capitalism was not its exploitation but its materialism, its indifference to the nation, its inability to stir souls. More deeply, fascists rejected the notion that economic forces are the prime movers of history. For fascists, the dysfunctional capitalism of the interwar period did not need fundamental reordering; its ills could be cured simply by applying sufficient political will to the creation of full employment and productivity. Once in power, fascist regimes confiscated property only from political opponents, foreigners, or Jews. None altered the social hierarchy, except to catapult a few adventurers into high places. At most, they replaced market forces with state economic management, but, in the trough of the Great Depression, most businessmen initially approved of that.

tl;dr version: fascists don't care about economics much, and when they do, they tend towards crass populism designed to keep the proles entertained while changing nothing much in reality.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on April 03, 2009, 08:18:41 PM
Reich would tend to agree.


LMNO
-lends too much weight to the opinions of books he's currently reading.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 03, 2009, 08:22:18 PM
Reich combined Marxist social analysis with Freudian psychoanalysis, as I recall.  It would be hard to find a single more antithetical school of thought to Fascism, especially its economically lacking theoretical base.

Not to say Reich's wrong, I think he certainly has a point, just to illustrate that this is one of several major points of depature between Marxist and Fascist theory and one he would seize upon to show the intellectual shallowness and lack of validity for the international fascist movement.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: fomenter on April 03, 2009, 08:59:00 PM
QuoteTrying to handle the crisis, the Fascist government nationalized the holdings of large banks which had accrued significant industrial securities. The government also issued new securities to provide a source of credit for the banks and began enlisting the help of various cartels.... The government offered recognition and support to these organizations in exchange for promises that they would manipulate prices in accordance with government priorities. A number of mixed entities were formed... whose purpose it was to bring together representatives of the government and of the major businesses.... This economic model based on a partnership between government and business was soon extended to the political sphere, in what came to be known as corporatism.... The Fascists began to impose significant tariffs and other trade barriers.... Various banking and industrial companies were financially supported by the state.... [The national leader] created the [New Governmental Entity]....[which soon] controlled 20% of [the nation's] industry through government-linked companies.... [The national leader] also adopted a Keynesian policy of government spending on public works to stimulate the economy.... Public works spending tripled to overtake defense spending as the largest item of government expenditure.

As much as that description sounds like U.S. government policy begun under George W. Bush and now greatly expanding under Barack Obama, the above passage of course describes the economics of fascist Italy in the 1930s, as summed up by Wikipedia. (A quick Google search produces plenty of similar summaries of "economic fascism.") Furthermore, "The Fascist conception of life," Mussolini wrote, "stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with the State. It is opposed to classical liberalism [which] denied the State in the name of the individual; Fascism reasserts the rights of the State as expressing the real essence of the individual."

Obama came close to those same sentiments in his most recent press conference: "But one of the most important lessons to learn from this crisis is that our economy only works if we recognize that we're all in this together, that we all have responsibilities to each other and to our country.... We'll recover from this recession, but it will take time, it will take patience, and it will take an understanding that, when we all work together, when each of us looks beyond our own short-term interest to the wider set of obligations we have toward each other, that's when we succeed, that's when we prosper, and that's what is needed right now."
first part of linked article, the comparison goes on from there and seems to get more wingnuty the closer you get to the bottom of the page...(page 2 is craptacular_)

also noted they are quoting wikipedia and claiming the existence of other sources for those that look (i haven't)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 03, 2009, 09:57:51 PM
Its worth noting that the G20 are seeking to continue free trade and punish protectionist tendencies, rendering "The Fascists began to impose significant tariffs and other trade barriers" as pointless to the discussion.

QuoteJust as Mussolini did (in slightly different words), Obama repeatedly talks about using government to "leverage" private investment for the greater good.

So did David Hume, who is now presumably a "classical liberal fascist", or something.  Besides, no matter what the President says, its going the other way, socializing the losses, to the detriment of society, in order to prop up the lifestyles of a far smaller amount of private figures.

QuoteMeanwhile, his close ally Barney Frank introduced a bill to give the Treasury Secretary the power to set all salary levels for all employees of any companies in which the government has a capital stake.

ZOMG MEDIOCRE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY = FASCISM.  For real?  If the government is the capital stakeholder, it can do anything up to and including give the entire company's liquid assets to Barack Obama's puppy as a birthday present.  And quite frankly, that has some appeal, if only for the novelty value.

QuoteAs George Will has written, Congress has delegated so much economic authority to the Treasury, the Fed, and the president that the Constitution itself has almost certainly been shredded in the panic.

Well its certainly a good thing George Will was around all those other times to scold panicking governments intent on shredding the Constitution.  Oh, wait.

QuoteMeanwhile, in Congress's rush to pass a huge expansion of "national service" programs, almost exactly as outlined by Obama in a 2007 speech, few congressman likely realized that the details  included "campuses" with "superintendents" of uniformed youth, formed into "cadres," and indoctrinated even in math and science classes in the ideals of "service learning" financed through a "social innovation fund" funneled through favored "community organizations." (ACORN, anyone?) Even elementary school students would be recruited for these government-sponsored efforts.

ACORN is, after all, the Illuminati, and since "[t]he quintessential liberal fascist isn't an SS storm trooper; it is a female grade-school teacher with an education degree from Brown or Swarthmore", it would make sense to bring the teachers in, too.  You wont be laughing when the Peace Corps break down your door and force you to watch Rachel Maddow re-runs and Michael Moore films 24/7, no siree (ironic aside: Neoconservative theorists have said as bold as day they intend to use war to brutalize the nation and turn it from its soft, decadent state into an imperial nation of blood and iron, and this is considered more fascist?  Puh-leeze).

QuoteAs the Washington Examiner editorialized, it all sounds like a "creepy authoritarianism" on the loose.

Plus ca change, as our fine French allies would no doubt snicker.

QuoteSince when was it government's role, as Obama claims, to "invest" in all sorts of new technologies

I mean, who uses this stupid fucking "internet" anyway?

QuoteThe stadium speeches in front of a Greek emperor's columns. The permanent campaign, the deliberate ubiquity. The "public service" radio ads with the president himself urging national service upon us. The iconic imagery on campaign materials. The millennial language about his own election as the moment when seas stopped rising and Earth started healing and about the need to "save the planet." The traveling abroad with an official entourage of 500 people (and a limo nicknamed "The Beast"). The fawning media. The simplistic slogans chanted over and over.

Yeah, Bush was kinda fascist, now you mention it.  What do you mean you were talking about someone else?

QuoteFinally, there is Obama's elevation of raw science to what he calls its "rightful place" as an end in itself, as if divorced from questions of morality. As Charles Krauthammer  wrote, "how anyone as sophisticated as Obama can believe this within living memory of Mengele and Tuskegee...is hard to fathom."

...Krauthammer said, as he urged on the nuclear holocaust of the state of Iran.

QuoteTo be clear, none of this is to even come close to equating the Obama administration with Nazism. The conflation of Nazism with fascism is a gross misunderstanding of history; the original fascism and Nazism are entirely different breeds of vipers, with the latter being far more deadly.

Sure.  He's a fascist, but you don't mean that in a bad, Hitler way.  Also, for real?   I guess Hitler being inspired by Mussolini and constantly drawing comparisons between Il Duce and himself and, I don't know, considering him an ideological ally with the same essential goals and beliefs sure sounds like a good case for a link between fascism and Nazism.  But, you know, I only spent 3 years studying Nazi Germany and European interwar history, so what would I know?

QuoteThe diminution of liberty, the enhanced state control, the indoctrination of youth, and the cult of the leader all violate basic tenets of the American experiment.

"Except when a Republican does it".

QuoteAlready, there is an organized movement afoot to repeal the 22nd Amendment that limits presidents to two terms.

Yeah, its a good thing previous leaders, like Bush, didn't harbour any dictatorial ambitions (http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:dKw4au4PwN4J:www.321books.co.uk/famous-quotes/quotes-from-george-w-bush.htm+bush+dictator+quote&cd=9&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk), isn't it?

The thing that most annoys me about the American right is their hypocrisy makes it impossible to take them seriously at all.  Because they are a bunch of hysterical, paranoid fantasists who spend their time projecting their own worst traits onto their enemies, I am inclined to disbelieve them from the outset - knowing full well that if their guy were the one doing such things, they would be enthusiastically cheerleading it on without so much as a worry in the world.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
(http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: wade on April 05, 2009, 06:29:51 PM
I don't understand this whole bull/bear thing....
I'm scared, but I have confidence in my stock market picks....
if I lose it all, meh. I'll still have a job so it's not too big of a deal, ..
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 05, 2009, 06:37:32 PM
Basically, bull market = good, bear market = bad.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the other anonymous on April 05, 2009, 10:05:24 PM
Quote from: wade on April 05, 2009, 06:29:51 PM
I don't understand this whole bull/bear thing....
I'm scared, but I have confidence in my stock market picks....
if I lose it all, meh. I'll still have a job so it's not too big of a deal, ..

Bull Market: Everybody buys into hyped-up bullshit.
Bear Market: Everybody's scared and hugging their teddy bears.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on April 06, 2009, 01:51:17 AM
I'd love to see the pair of mini-crashes in the late 80s add to that chart. Just for comparison.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:52:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
(http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png)

Iason's work.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:53:36 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.

That's what the black market is for.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 06, 2009, 01:55:46 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:53:36 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.

That's what the black market is for.

Heh. Just got back from the Res.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Iason Ouabache on April 06, 2009, 01:57:25 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:52:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png

Iason's work.
C'mon! I wasn't even alive for two of those!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:57:57 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 06, 2009, 01:55:46 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:53:36 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.

That's what the black market is for.

Heh. Just got back from the Res.

Which one? 

Won't help, though.  The new tax is federal.  Buy from Vito.  Things fall off of trucks around him a lot.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:58:10 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 06, 2009, 01:57:25 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:52:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png

Iason's work.
C'mon! I wasn't even alive for two of those!

A likely excuse.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: maphdet on April 06, 2009, 02:02:14 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:53:36 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.

That's what the black market is for.

yeah, ppl will always spend money on two items to matter what-drink and food -tobacco-maybe
just in the last couple of weeks i heard that alcohol sales have gone up-i havent done any research to back that up though but i believe it.

I also think there is a simple way to fix this whole economic mess (ofcourse nothing will work and it is doomed)
change the name of the dollar
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 06, 2009, 02:13:53 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:57:57 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 06, 2009, 01:55:46 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:53:36 AM
Quote from: NONE on April 03, 2009, 10:06:59 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 01, 2009, 04:12:18 AM
profit off the next economic collapse by investing in alcohol and tobacco companies.

Bad idea. They are in danger of being 'sin taxed' right out of business.

That's what the black market is for.

Heh. Just got back from the Res.

Which one?  

Won't help, though.  The new tax is federal.  Buy from Vito.  Things fall off of trucks around him a lot.

Still,  a carton. I can make my own whiskey.
*cough* family was moonshiners *cough*
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 06, 2009, 02:46:39 AM
the opinion from the Country sector.

The song starts at 3:10 into the video but the lead is in pretty good too.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXRibzKERpU
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 06, 2009, 09:16:49 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 06, 2009, 01:57:25 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:52:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png

Iason's work.
C'mon! I wasn't even alive for two of those!

Quantum.  Your actions now affect even past events.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on April 06, 2009, 03:30:10 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 06, 2009, 09:16:49 AM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 06, 2009, 01:57:25 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 06, 2009, 01:52:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2009, 01:48:04 PM
http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/3031/18085069.png

Iason's work.
C'mon! I wasn't even alive for two of those!

Quantum.  Your actions now affect even past events.

awesome.
hey, Iason.... invest in Microsoft.
In 1975.
i demand %10 finder's fee.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 06, 2009, 04:24:27 PM
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Recession-outlasts-even-apf-14852191.html/print

QuoteWASHINGTON (AP) -- In the coming weeks and months, hundreds of thousands of jobless Americans will exhaust their unemployment benefits, just when it's never been harder to find a job.

Congress extended unemployment aid twice last year, allowing people to draw a total of up to 59 weeks of benefits. Now, as the recession drags on, a rolling wave of people who were laid off early last year will lose them.

Precise figures are hard to determine, but Wayne Vroman, an economist at the Urban Institute, estimates that up to 700,000 people could exhaust their extended benefits by the second half of this year.

Some will find new jobs, but prospects will be grim: Layoffs are projected to go on, and many economists expect the jobless rate, already at 8.5 percent, to hit 10 percent by year's end.

"It's going to be a monstrous problem," Vroman said.

U.S. employers shed 663,000 jobs in March, and the jobless rate now stands at its highest in a quarter-century. Since the recession began in December 2007, a net total of 5.1 million jobs have disappeared.

Those who know that their unemployment aid is about to run out are counting the days, taking on odd jobs, moving in with relatives and fretting about the future.

This will possibly be the start of social disruption.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 06, 2009, 04:33:20 PM
Yeah, just a bit.  The pisser is a couple of things--like tax season (people are going to owe taxes on top of losing their jobs this year), the fact that housing and food have NOT gone down while the job market has tanked (so bottom line is even more unobtainable), and the stimulus package is being horded by state governments instead of going into jobs and infrastructure (state governments need to have HARSH federal penalties for this if the stimulus dollars are going to make a lick of difference--because at this point, the $'s being used to just pay down debt, just like, oh gee, BUSH'S stimulus from last year!).
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 06, 2009, 04:37:14 PM
Good thing Obama is standing between the pitchforks and the banks, eh?  Or, as I said elsewhere:

QuoteI just wish Obama was a little more...Machiavellian.  I know I couldn't stand having to kowtow to those idiots all day long, and the first thing I'd do in office would be to find a way to make them hurt.  Rule one of effective leadership - knife everyone who helped you to the top and who isn't dependent on you in the back.  Repeatedly, if necessary.  They'll only treat you as their tool otherwise.

Popular opinion should have hung these guys, politically.  In the UK, the only people trusted less than the bankers are politicians themselves, it would be a massive boost to go a little populist on them.  But, no.  Our leaders, so utterly ruthless in dealing with brown people, foreigners and the poor ie people without the wherewithal to fight back, are completely spineless when it comes to the banking industry and international finance.

Its almost enough to drive a man to Marxist class warfare analysis.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 06, 2009, 04:47:22 PM
I think he might be finding that his (so-called) "change" that he thought h(w)e could believe in is harder than he'd imagined to implement.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 06, 2009, 05:10:26 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 06, 2009, 04:24:27 PM
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Recession-outlasts-even-apf-14852191.html/print

QuoteWASHINGTON (AP) -- In the coming weeks and months, hundreds of thousands of jobless Americans will exhaust their unemployment benefits, just when it's never been harder to find a job.

Congress extended unemployment aid twice last year, allowing people to draw a total of up to 59 weeks of benefits. Now, as the recession drags on, a rolling wave of people who were laid off early last year will lose them.

Precise figures are hard to determine, but Wayne Vroman, an economist at the Urban Institute, estimates that up to 700,000 people could exhaust their extended benefits by the second half of this year.

Some will find new jobs, but prospects will be grim: Layoffs are projected to go on, and many economists expect the jobless rate, already at 8.5 percent, to hit 10 percent by year's end.

"It's going to be a monstrous problem," Vroman said.

U.S. employers shed 663,000 jobs in March, and the jobless rate now stands at its highest in a quarter-century. Since the recession began in December 2007, a net total of 5.1 million jobs have disappeared.

Those who know that their unemployment aid is about to run out are counting the days, taking on odd jobs, moving in with relatives and fretting about the future.

This will possibly be the start of social disruption.

I thought that's why they built the detention camps here in the US for.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 07, 2009, 04:32:42 PM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7987659.stm

QuoteThe Royal Bank of Scotland is to shed a further 9,000 jobs, half of them in the UK.

BBC Scotland understands the losses are to be in its back office operations.

These include document processing, information technology, procurement and bank property - a division known as Group Manufacturing.

The company would not say where the job losses would have most impact within the UK. Unions described the news as "truly devastating".

The cuts come on top of the 2,700 job losses already announced by RBS in Britain this year.

Group Manufacturing is the biggest single part of the troubled financial giant, employing a total of 45,000 people worldwide at a cost of £1.2bn last year. Of those staff, 27,000 work in Britain, so within the division, the job cuts represent one job in five.

http://ow.ly/2gHb

QuoteProtesters denouncing a Communist election victory in Moldova seized the president's offices on Tuesday and broke into parliament, where they hurled furniture and computers into the street. About 10,000 demonstrators in Europe's poorest country massed for the second straight day after the Communist Party scored a big victory in a weekend parliamentary election.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 08, 2009, 11:15:38 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/insolvent-banks-and-imaginary-fire-sales-2009-4

Quote* Many banks are now insolvent. "...many major US banks are now legitimately insolvent. This insolvency can no longer be viewed as an artifact of bank assets being marked to artificially depressed prices coming out of an illiquid market. It means that bank assets are being fairly priced at valuations that sum to less than bank liabilities."

* Supporting markets in toxic assets has no purpose other than transfering money from taxpayers to banks. "...any taxpayer dollars allocated to supporting these markets will simply transfer wealth to the current owners of these securities."

* We're making it worse. "...policies that attempt to prevent a widespread mark-down in the value of credit-sensitive assets are likely to only delay – and perhaps even worsen – the day of reckoning."

In short, the government cannot save the banks by improving liquidity or changing mark to market rules because the problem isn't illiquidity or accounting. The problem is that highly leveraged financial firms own assets that are worth far less than they thought they would be, and the firms are insolvent as a result. This is why the latest bailout plans secretly give huge subsidies to banks–because the only way to keep the insolvent zombies afloat is to transfer billions of dollars to banks, bank stockholders, and bank creditors. The alternative–allowing the insolvent banks to fail, seizing the assets, wiping our shareholders, giving bond holders a serious haircut–is still not on the official agenda.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 08, 2009, 11:18:45 AM
http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2009/04/the-green-shoots-are-weeds-growing-through-the-rubble-in-the-ruins-of-the-global-economy/

QuoteGovernments everywhere are doing the best they can to delay or prevent the lifting of the veil of uncertainty and disinformation that most banks have cast over their battered balance sheets. The banking establishment and the financial establishment representing the beneficial owners of the institutions exposed to the banks as unsecured creditors - pension funds, insurance companies, other banks, foreign investors including sovereign wealth funds - have captured the key governments, their central banks, their regulators, supervisors and accounting standard setters to a degree never seen before.

I used to believe this state capture took the form of cognitive capture, rather than financial capture. I still believe this to be the case for many, perhaps even most of the policy makers and officials involved, but it is becoming increasingly hard to deny the possibility that the extraordinary reluctance of our governments to force the unsecured creditors (and any remaining non-government shareholders) of the zombie banks to absorb the losses made by these banks, may be due to rather more primal forms of state capture....

Nothing more can be expected as regards a global fiscal stimulus. Indeed, the G20 delivered nothing in this regard. It would have been preferable to maintain the overall size of the planned (or rather, expected) global fiscal stimulus but to redistribute the aggregate (about $5 trillion over 2 years, as measured by the aggregated changes in the national fiscal deficits) in accordance with national fiscal spare capacity (I believe the World Bank calls this 'fiscal space'). This would mean a smaller fiscal stimulus for countries with weak fiscal fundamentals, including the US, Japan and the UK, and a larger fiscal stimulus for countries with strong fiscal fundamentals, including China, Germany, Brazil and, to a lesser degree, France.

Furthermore, a likely consequence of the fiscal stimuli we have already seen or are about to experience is a negative impact on the medium- and long-term growth potential of the global economy. The reason is that, if fiscal solvency is to be maintained, there will have to be some combination of an increase in the tax burden and a reduction in non-interest public spending in most countries when this contraction is over. The inevitable effect of the crisis and the contraction is a higher public debt burden and therefore a larger future required primary government surplus (as a share of GDP). Almost any increase in the tax burden will hurt potential output - just the level of the path of potential output if you are a classical growth groupie, both the level and the growth rate of the path of potential output if you are an adept of the endogenous growth school....

In a number of systemically important countries, notably the US and the UK, there is a material risk of a 'sudden stop' - an emerging-market style interruption of capital inflows to both the public and private sectors - prompted by financial market concerns about the sustainability of the fiscal-financial-monetary programmes proposed and implemented by the fiscal and monetary authorities in these countries. For both countries there is a material risk that the mind-boggling general government deficits (14% of GDP or over for the US and 12 % of GDP or over for the UK for the coming year) will either have to be monetised permanently, implying high inflation as soon as the real economy recovers, the output gap closes and the extraordinary fear-induced liquidity preference of the past year subsides, or lead to sovereign default.

Pointing to a non-negligible risk of sovereign default in the US and the UK does not, I fear, qualify me as a madman. The last time things got serious, during the Great Depression of the 1930s, both the US and the UK defaulted de facto, and possibly even de jure, on their sovereign debt.

In the case of the US, the sovereign default took the form of the abrogation of the gold clause when the US went off the gold standard (except for foreign exchange) in 1933. In 1933, Congress passed a joint resolution canceling all gold clauses in public and private contracts (including existing contracts). The Gold Reserve Act of 1934 abrogated the gold clause in government and private contracts and changed the value of the dollar in gold from $20.67 to $35 per ounce. These actions were upheld (by a 5 to 4 majority) by the Supreme Court in 1935.

In the case of the UK, the de facto sovereign default took the form of the conversion in 1932 of Britain's 5% War Loan Bonds (callable 1929-1947) into new 3½ % bonds (callable from 1952) on terms that were unambiguously unfavourable to the bond holders. Out of a total of £2,086,000,000 outstanding, £1,500,000,000, or something over 70%, was converted voluntarily by the end of 1932, thanks both to the government's ability to appeal to patriotism and joint burden sharing in the face of economic adversity and to ferocious arm-twisting and 'moral suasion'.

I believe both defaults were eminently justified. There is no case for letting the interests of the holders of sovereign debt override the interests of the rest of the community, regardless of the financial, economic, social and political costs involved. But to say that these were justifiable sovereign defaults does not mean that they were not sovereign defaults. Similar circumstances could arise again.

While I consider an inflationary solution to the public debt overhang problem (and indeed to the private debt overhang problem) to be more likely in the US and even in the UK than a sovereign default (or 'restructuring', 'conversion' or 'consolidation', as it would undoubtedly be referred to by the defaulting government), neither can be dismissed as out of the question, or even as extremely unlikely.

Central banks, with the notable exception of the procrastinating ECB, are doing as much as they can through quantitative easing and credit easing to deal with the immediate crisis. Unfortunately, some of them, notably the Fed, are providing these short-term financial stimuli in the worst possible way from the point of view of medium- and longer-term economic performance, by surrendering central bank independence to the fiscal authorities.

When the Fed lends on a non-recourse basis to the private sector with only a $100 bn Treasury guarantee for a possible $1 trillion dollar Fed exposure (as with the TALF), when the Fed purchases private securities outright with just a similar 10-cents-on-the-dollar Treasury guarantee or when the Fed is party to an arrangement that transfers tens of billions of dollars to AIG counterparties - money that is likely to be extracted ultimately from the beneficiaries of other public spending programmes or from the tax payer, either through explicit taxes or through the inflation tax - the Fed is acting like an off-balance sheet and off-budget special purpose vehicle of the US Treasury.

When the Chairman of the Fed stands shoulder-to-shoulder or sits side-by-side with the US Treasury Secretary to urge the passing of various budgetary proposals - involving matters both beyond the Fed's mandate and remit and beyond its competence - the Fed is politicised irretrievably. It becomes a partisan political player. This is likely to impair its ability to pursue its monetary policy mandate in the medium and long term.

The global stimulus associated with the increase in IMF resources agreed at the G20 meeting earlier this month will be negligible unless and until these resources actually materialise. The statements, declarations and communiqués of the G20, including the most recent ones highlight the gaps between dreams and deeds.... apart from the $240 bn (or perhaps only $200 bn) already flagged well before the G20 meeting, the only hard commitment to additional resources (or to resources that have any chance of being available for lending and spending during the current contraction) is the $6 bn worth of alms for the poor from the sale of IMF gold. That's what I call a bold approach!....

There are signs that the rate of contraction of real global economic activity may be slowing down. Straws in the wind in China, the UK and the US hint that things may be getting worse at a slower rate. An inflection point for real activity (the second derivative turns positive) is not the same as a turning point (the first derivative turns positive), however. And even if decline were to end, there is no guarantee that whatever growth we get will be enough to keep up with the growth of potential. We could have a growing economy with rising unemployment and growing excess capacity for quite a while.

The reason to fear a U-shaped recovery with a long, flat segment is that the financial system was effectively destroyed even before the Great Contraction started. By the time the negative feedback loops from declining activity to the balance sheet strenght of what's left of the financial sector will have made themselves felt in full, financial intermediation is likely to be severely impaired.

All contractions and recoveries are primarily investment-driven. High-frequency inventory decumulation causes activity to collapse rapidly. Since inventories cannot become negative, there is a strong self-correcting mechanism in an inventory disinvestment cycle. We may be getting to the stage in the UK and the US (possibly also in Japan) that inventories stop falling an begin to build up again.

An end to inventory decumulation is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for sustained economic recovery. That requires fixed investment to pick up. This includes household fixed investment - residential construction, spending on home improvement and purchases of new automobiles and other consumer durables. It also includes public sector capital formation. Given the likely duration of the contraction and the subsequent period of excess capacity, even public sector infrastructure spending subject to long implementation lags is likely to come in handy. A healthy, sustained recovery also requires business fixed investment to pick up.

At the moment, I can see not a single country where business fixed investment is likely to rise anytime soon. When the inventory investment accelerator goes into reverse and starts contributing to demand growth, and when the fiscal stimuli kick in, businesses wanting to invest will need access to external financing, since retained profits are, after a couple of years of declining output, likely to be few and far between. But with the banking system on its uppers and many key financial markets still disfunctional and out of commission, external financing will be scarce and costly. This is why sorting out the banks, or rather sorting out the substantive economic activities of new bank lending and funding, that is, sorting out banking , must be a top priority and an top claimant on scarce public resources.

Until the authorities are ready to draw a clear line between the existing banks in western Europe and the USA, - many or even most of which are surplus to requirements and have become parasitic entities feeding off the tax payer - and the substantive economic activity of bank lending to non-financial enterprises and households, there will not be a robust, sustained recovery.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on April 08, 2009, 12:34:58 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 06, 2009, 04:33:20 PM
Yeah, just a bit.  The pisser is a couple of things--like tax season (people are going to owe taxes on top of losing their jobs this year), the fact that housing and food have NOT gone down while the job market has tanked (so bottom line is even more unobtainable), and the stimulus package is being horded by state governments instead of going into jobs and infrastructure (state governments need to have HARSH federal penalties for this if the stimulus dollars are going to make a lick of difference--because at this point, the $'s being used to just pay down debt, just like, oh gee, BUSH'S stimulus from last year!).

Food has actually dropped a lot (according to NPRs economic report).

The grocery stores and food packages have responded to the price drops by raising the consumer prices, though admittedly, not as fast as they were raising them back when wholesale food prices were going up.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 08, 2009, 02:36:14 PM
Quote from: Requia on April 08, 2009, 12:34:58 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 06, 2009, 04:33:20 PM
Yeah, just a bit.  The pisser is a couple of things--like tax season (people are going to owe taxes on top of losing their jobs this year), the fact that housing and food have NOT gone down while the job market has tanked (so bottom line is even more unobtainable), and the stimulus package is being horded by state governments instead of going into jobs and infrastructure (state governments need to have HARSH federal penalties for this if the stimulus dollars are going to make a lick of difference--because at this point, the $'s being used to just pay down debt, just like, oh gee, BUSH'S stimulus from last year!).

Food has actually dropped a lot (according to NPRs economic report).

The grocery stores and food packages have responded to the price drops by raising the consumer prices, though admittedly, not as fast as they were raising them back when wholesale food prices were going up.

Oh yeah?  I didn't notice it dropping too much out here in San Diego--the only thing that has is meat, I believe.  Bread is through the roof (wtf? $3.50 for a loaf of bread?) and milk is also $$$.  Which means cheese and other dairy are also $$$.  But maybe that's spayshul to my area?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on April 08, 2009, 02:39:22 PM
Nope, thats normal, I wasn't clear apparently.

The farmers are getting payed less for food (including the the big factory farms), and grocery stores/food processors are charging the consumers more.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 08, 2009, 02:43:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 08, 2009, 11:18:45 AM
http://blogs.ft.com/maverecon/2009/04/the-green-shoots-are-weeds-growing-through-the-rubble-in-the-ruins-of-the-global-economy/


Chilling read.  Wow.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 08, 2009, 02:44:37 PM
Quote from: Requia on April 08, 2009, 02:39:22 PM
Nope, thats normal, I wasn't clear apparently.

The farmers are getting payed less for food (including the the big factory farms), and grocery stores/food processors are charging the consumers more.

I know out here, with the water shortage/drought for the last 3 years, farmers are being asked to implement "dry farming."  Revenues from farming will be dropping precipitously, and I'm betting we'll be importing more and more from down south as the Summer waxes.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 08, 2009, 07:26:54 PM
Our man in the media, Taleb, has a piece up in FT as well

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5d5aa24e-23a4-11de-996a-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1

You'll need registration to read in full, so if you cannot be bothered:

Quote1. What is fragile should break early while it is still small. Nothing should ever become too big to fail. Evolution in economic life helps those with the maximum amount of hidden risks – and hence the most fragile – become the biggest.

2. No socialisation of losses and privatisation of gains. Whatever may need to be bailed out should be nationalised; whatever does not need a bail-out should be free, small and risk-bearing. We have managed to combine the worst of capitalism and socialism. In France in the 1980s, the socialists took over the banks. In the US in the 2000s, the banks took over the government. This is surreal.

3. People who were driving a school bus blindfolded (and crashed it) should never be given a new bus. The economics establishment (universities, regulators, central bankers, government officials, various organisations staffed with economists) lost its legitimacy with the failure of the system. It is irresponsible and foolish to put our trust in the ability of such experts to get us out of this mess. Instead, find the smart people whose hands are clean.

4. Do not let someone making an "incentive" bonus manage a nuclear plant – or your financial risks. Odds are he would cut every corner on safety to show "profits" while claiming to be "conservative". Bonuses do not accommodate the hidden risks of blow-ups. It is the asymmetry of the bonus system that got us here. No incentives without disincentives: capitalism is about rewards and punishments, not just rewards.

5. Counter-balance complexity with simplicity. Complexity from globalisation and highly networked economic life needs to be countered by simplicity in financial products. The complex economy is already a form of leverage: the leverage of efficiency. Such systems survive thanks to slack and redundancy; adding debt produces wild and dangerous gyrations and leaves no room for error. Capitalism cannot avoid fads and bubbles: equity bubbles (as in 2000) have proved to be mild; debt bubbles are vicious.

6. Do not give children sticks of dynamite, even if they come with a warning . Complex derivatives need to be banned because nobody understands them and few are rational enough to know it. Citizens must be protected from themselves, from bankers selling them "hedging" products, and from gullible regulators who listen to economic theorists.

7. Only Ponzi schemes should depend on confidence. Governments should never need to "restore confidence". Cascading rumours are a product of complex systems. Governments cannot stop the rumours. Simply, we need to be in a position to shrug off rumours, be robust in the face of them.

8. Do not give an addict more drugs if he has withdrawal pains. Using leverage to cure the problems of too much leverage is not homeopathy, it is denial. The debt crisis is not a temporary problem, it is a structural one. We need rehab.

9. Citizens should not depend on financial assets or fallible "expert" advice for their retirement. Economic life should be definancialised. We should learn not to use markets as storehouses of value: they do not harbour the certainties that normal citizens require. Citizens should experience anxiety about their own businesses (which they control), not their investments (which they do not control).

10. Make an omelette with the broken eggs. Finally, this crisis cannot be fixed with makeshift repairs, no more than a boat with a rotten hull can be fixed with ad-hoc patches. We need to rebuild the hull with new (stronger) materials; we will have to remake the system before it does so itself. Let us move voluntarily into Capitalism 2.0 by helping what needs to be broken break on its own, converting debt into equity, marginalising the economics and business school establishments, shutting down the "Nobel" in economics, banning leveraged buyouts, putting bankers where they belong, clawing back the bonuses of those who got us here, and teaching people to navigate a world with fewer certainties.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on April 08, 2009, 07:33:37 PM
QuoteWe have managed to combine the worst of capitalism and socialism.


sha-ZAM!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 08, 2009, 07:44:18 PM
Although I'd like to point out that it would not be absurd until the capitalists bought out the socialists who took over the banks who took over the government, only to go bankrupt in making such a deal and having to rely on North Korea to bail them out.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: maphdet on April 09, 2009, 01:17:37 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 08, 2009, 07:44:18 PM
Although I'd like to point out that it would not be absurd until the capitalists bought out the socialists who took over the banks who took over the government, only to go bankrupt in making such a deal and having to rely on North Korea to bail them out.

(http://www.alison-jackson.com/books/shoe.jpg)

It just reminded me of the lady who lived in a shoe-sorry
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: wade on April 09, 2009, 01:51:42 AM
<---bought Ford @ $2.90

Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on April 09, 2009, 01:14:43 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 08, 2009, 02:44:37 PM
Quote from: Requia on April 08, 2009, 02:39:22 PM
Nope, thats normal, I wasn't clear apparently.

The farmers are getting payed less for food (including the the big factory farms), and grocery stores/food processors are charging the consumers more.

I know out here, with the water shortage/drought for the last 3 years, farmers are being asked to implement "dry farming."  Revenues from farming will be dropping precipitously, and I'm betting we'll be importing more and more from down south as the Summer waxes.

Does cali actually have water reserves to outlast the drought with, or are you just screwed?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 09, 2009, 02:32:26 PM
Quote from: Requia on April 09, 2009, 01:14:43 PM
Quote from: Jenne on April 08, 2009, 02:44:37 PM
Quote from: Requia on April 08, 2009, 02:39:22 PM
Nope, thats normal, I wasn't clear apparently.

The farmers are getting payed less for food (including the the big factory farms), and grocery stores/food processors are charging the consumers more.

I know out here, with the water shortage/drought for the last 3 years, farmers are being asked to implement "dry farming."  Revenues from farming will be dropping precipitously, and I'm betting we'll be importing more and more from down south as the Summer waxes.

Does cali actually have water reserves to outlast the drought with, or are you just screwed?

Depends on who you talk to.  I mean, looking at how much farming we do, we are either in the top tier for production with what we have, or are at the bottom for how little infrastructure we keep up with and maintain or improve.  :lol:  Again, we're run like a small country over here, not just a state or a principality of a main one.

The farmers are screwed, really, is what it comes down to.  Fire damage, weather and economic times have really really fucked over their bottom line.  But I think that these are the types of situations that create better solutions, so *shrug* I think it's possible to u-turn slightly out of it.  Price of avodados and tomatoes will just be fucking high all summer is all.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 09, 2009, 02:52:55 PM
All of the water in Colorado is in California.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 09, 2009, 03:13:13 PM
I'm not denying we're greedy buggers for other states' water.  Or are you just saying that it rains alot in CO?  :lol:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 09, 2009, 03:30:57 PM
Some Colo genius a few decades ago sold all the water rights to Cali.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Richter on April 09, 2009, 03:33:24 PM
I'm a petty, spiteful man.  I'd say take a dump in the river. 
(Fairly certain this has happened already though.)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 09, 2009, 03:39:46 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/09/business/09bank.html?ref=business

Also, the Federal Government has several bridges it would like to sell you...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 11, 2009, 05:44:09 PM
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NakedCapitalism/~3/CRFqcEPgFHU/socialism-gaining-ground-in-america.html

Socialism has unsurprisingly become more popular

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/11/business/economy/11bank.html?_r=1&hp

Well, we all know how this is going to play out...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Honey on April 11, 2009, 06:23:59 PM
Quote"What they did is wrong and fundamentally un-American," he said. "Even though the government told us to take this money to increase our lending, the extra charge meant we had less money to lend. It was the equivalent of a penalty for early withdrawal."

Whining about corporate welfare AGAIN!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 11, 2009, 10:48:52 PM
Also found this: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200905/imf-advice

Last page is the most relevant

QuoteIn my view, the U.S. faces two plausible scenarios. The first involves complicated bank-by-bank deals and a continual drumbeat of (repeated) bailouts, like the ones we saw in February with Citigroup and AIG. The administration will try to muddle through, and confusion will reign.

Boris Fyodorov, the late finance minister of Russia, struggled for much of the past 20 years against oligarchs, corruption, and abuse of authority in all its forms. He liked to say that confusion and chaos were very much in the interests of the powerful—letting them take things, legally and illegally, with impunity. When inflation is high, who can say what a piece of property is really worth? When the credit system is supported by byzantine government arrangements and backroom deals, how do you know that you aren't being fleeced?

Our future could be one in which continued tumult feeds the looting of the financial system, and we talk more and more about exactly how our oligarchs became bandits and how the economy just can't seem to get into gear.

The second scenario begins more bleakly, and might end that way too. But it does provide at least some hope that we'll be shaken out of our torpor. It goes like this: the global economy continues to deteriorate, the banking system in east-central Europe collapses, and—because eastern Europe's banks are mostly owned by western European banks—justifiable fears of government insolvency spread throughout the Continent. Creditors take further hits and confidence falls further. The Asian economies that export manufactured goods are devastated, and the commodity producers in Latin America and Africa are not much better off. A dramatic worsening of the global environment forces the U.S. economy, already staggering, down onto both knees. The baseline growth rates used in the administration's current budget are increasingly seen as unrealistic, and the rosy "stress scenario" that the U.S. Treasury is currently using to evaluate banks' balance sheets becomes a source of great embarrassment.

Under this kind of pressure, and faced with the prospect of a national and global collapse, minds may become more concentrated.

The conventional wisdom among the elite is still that the current slump "cannot be as bad as the Great Depression." This view is wrong. What we face now could, in fact, be worse than the Great Depression—because the world is now so much more interconnected and because the banking sector is now so big. We face a synchronized downturn in almost all countries, a weakening of confidence among individuals and firms, and major problems for government finances. If our leadership wakes up to the potential consequences, we may yet see dramatic action on the banking system and a breaking of the old elite. Let us hope it is not then too late.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:50:34 AM
This thread depresses me.

Will the post-economic America still have gun dealers, and what currency will I need to purchase a few dozen?

-toa,
the strategic brain behind America's next dictator
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Xooxe on April 12, 2009, 02:02:25 AM
Quote from: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:50:34 AM
Will the post-economic America still have gun dealers, and what currency will I need to purchase a few dozen?

Bullets?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 02:17:57 AM
Quote from: Xooxe on April 12, 2009, 02:02:25 AM
Quote from: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:50:34 AM
Will the post-economic America still have gun dealers, and what currency will I need to purchase a few dozen?

Bullets?

SHIT! Why does survival have to be so damned complicated!

Are the bullets the currency or for the guns?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Xooxe on April 12, 2009, 03:22:57 AM
Both.  :D
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 12, 2009, 05:23:45 AM
Quote from: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:50:34 AM
This thread depresses me.

Will the post-economic America still have gun dealers, and what currency will I need to purchase a few dozen?

-toa,
the strategic brain behind America's next dictator

You'll have to do it the good old fashioned biblical way and trade in two of your best cattle and your first born virgin daughter.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:39:40 PM
Quote from: Lyris_Nymphetamine on April 12, 2009, 05:23:45 AM
Quote from: the other anonymous on April 12, 2009, 01:50:34 AM
This thread depresses me.

Will the post-economic America still have gun dealers, and what currency will I need to purchase a few dozen?

-toa,
the strategic brain behind America's next dictator

You'll have to do it the good old fashioned biblical way and trade in two of your best cattle and your first born virgin daughter.

Oops. Ate her.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: wade on April 12, 2009, 05:52:59 PM
buy ford...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 14, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
Some US banks are reporting big profits for the 1st quarter.

Is this real or a trick of accounting? Wall Street is responding in a positive way.

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Goldman Sachs reported a much stronger-than-expected first-quarter profit Monday, bouncing back from its worst quarter as a public company.

Goldman (GS, Fortune 500) also set plans to raise $5 billion through a sale of stock, saying it wants to become the first big bank to repay the federal loans extended during last fall's financial sector meltdown.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/13/news/goldman.earnings.report.fortune/index.htm

Wells Fargo also reported 1st quarter profits.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the other anonymous on April 14, 2009, 04:03:45 PM
Quote from: Hawk on April 14, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
Some US banks are reporting big profits for the 1st quarter.

Is this real or a trick of accounting? Wall Street is responding in a positive way.

They're faking it. Remember: The economy is a matter of national security. The administration has ordered a good economy, to restore public faith in the president, making it easier to accumulate power and enact agendas.

All the world is a stage -- are you an actor or a director?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 14, 2009, 04:07:28 PM
Quote from: the other anonymous on April 14, 2009, 04:03:45 PM
Quote from: Hawk on April 14, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
Some US banks are reporting big profits for the 1st quarter.

Is this real or a trick of accounting? Wall Street is responding in a positive way.

They're faking it. Remember: The economy is a matter of national security. The administration has ordered a good economy, to restore public faith in the president, making it easier to accumulate power and enact agendas.

All the world is a stage -- are you an actor or a director?


Nevermind.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 14, 2009, 07:50:17 PM
Banks have to show they are "struggling" but still viable institutions to qualify for TARP funds.  So they've been desperately cooking the books in order to show they are doing better than expected, but not as good as previous.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: the last yatto on April 15, 2009, 07:34:51 PM
you know banking is on the ropes when the swiss is having problems
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7999352.stm
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on April 15, 2009, 11:21:33 PM
Quote from: Hawk on April 14, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
Some US banks are reporting big profits for the 1st quarter.

Is this real or a trick of accounting? Wall Street is responding in a positive way.

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Goldman Sachs reported a much stronger-than-expected first-quarter profit Monday, bouncing back from its worst quarter as a public company.

Goldman (GS, Fortune 500) also set plans to raise $5 billion through a sale of stock, saying it wants to become the first big bank to repay the federal loans extended during last fall's financial sector meltdown.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/13/news/goldman.earnings.report.fortune/index.htm

Wells Fargo also reported 1st quarter profits.

Funny if the black swan was an unexpected rapid economic recovery.

My beads are selling well. You would think that useless pieces of glass with a hole in them would be the last thing people want in a recession, but what the fuck do I know, I just make beads.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: bds on April 15, 2009, 11:23:13 PM
But they're so pretty...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on April 16, 2009, 02:02:07 AM
Quote from: The Borderline Simpleton on April 15, 2009, 11:23:13 PM
But they're so pretty...

:mrgreen:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 16, 2009, 02:52:07 AM
Quote from: Nigel on April 15, 2009, 11:21:33 PM
Quote from: Hawk on April 14, 2009, 01:09:12 PM
Some US banks are reporting big profits for the 1st quarter.

Is this real or a trick of accounting? Wall Street is responding in a positive way.

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- Goldman Sachs reported a much stronger-than-expected first-quarter profit Monday, bouncing back from its worst quarter as a public company.

Goldman (GS, Fortune 500) also set plans to raise $5 billion through a sale of stock, saying it wants to become the first big bank to repay the federal loans extended during last fall's financial sector meltdown.
http://money.cnn.com/2009/04/13/news/goldman.earnings.report.fortune/index.htm

Wells Fargo also reported 1st quarter profits.

Funny if the black swan was an unexpected rapid economic recovery.

My beads are selling well. You would think that useless pieces of glass with a hole in them would be the last thing people want in a recession, but what the fuck do I know, I just make beads.

I agree. The final factor is employment always lags behind recovery, but it just may be we have hit bottom.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 16, 2009, 10:48:35 AM
Doubt it.  There has been a recovery, but its unsustainable.

In fact, the bank stress tests, if revealed, are probably going to cause any progress that has been made to be wiped out.  Investors will dump the banks which are weakest, and cause another run on the stock market, and even more bailouts.  Goldman Sachs is pushing for more information to be released, probably precisely for those reasons (well, the last one, really).
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on April 16, 2009, 04:45:31 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 16, 2009, 10:48:35 AM
Doubt it.  There has been a recovery, but its unsustainable.

In fact, the bank stress tests, if revealed, are probably going to cause any progress that has been made to be wiped out.  Investors will dump the banks which are weakest, and cause another run on the stock market, and even more bailouts.  Goldman Sachs is pushing for more information to be released, probably precisely for those reasons (well, the last one, really).

Of course you doubt it. Absolutely nothing points to it. If it made sense/was predictable/seemed possible I wouldn't have referred to it as a black swan, nor would it be funny.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on April 16, 2009, 04:59:16 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 16, 2009, 10:48:35 AM
Doubt it.  There has been a recovery, but its unsustainable.

In fact, the bank stress tests, if revealed, are probably going to cause any progress that has been made to be wiped out.  Investors will dump the banks which are weakest, and cause another run on the stock market, and even more bailouts.  Goldman Sachs is pushing for more information to be released, probably precisely for those reasons (well, the last one, really).

I doubt the stress test will be publicized unless they are positive. Optimism is the new reality.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on April 16, 2009, 05:53:48 PM
(http://www.dowgoldzoom.com/images/howlowdow)
Lookie! it's a recovery!
news reports throughout the depression continuously denied the existence of the depression, as well as continuously calling the bottom.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on April 22, 2009, 07:38:57 PM
Whoopsie.

The CFO of Freddie Mac "killed himself". (http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20090422/US.Freddie.Mac.Official.Dead/?cid=NET_SZHeadlineRSSLinks&attr=article_news_general_US.Freddie.Mac.Official.Dead)

I was wondering when Obama would get his "Vince Foster" moment.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: on April 22, 2009, 07:52:34 PM
Conversation about the economy at work.

Him - "Man, I should go back to selling heroin."
Me - "I wouldnt, the price of Heroin Futures on the commodities market just fucking tanked."
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
dik
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: bds on April 23, 2009, 02:51:03 PM
Quote from: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
dik

:|
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:52:04 PM
Quote from: The Borderline Simpleton on April 23, 2009, 02:51:03 PM
Quote from: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
dik

:|

Dik tit wank lolroflamo on your face u n00b pwning n00b thing
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on April 23, 2009, 03:06:35 PM
Quote from: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:52:04 PM
Quote from: The Borderline Simpleton on April 23, 2009, 02:51:03 PM
Quote from: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
dik

:|

Dik tit wank lolroflamo on your face u n00b pwning n00b thing
:kingmeh:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on April 23, 2009, 03:08:16 PM
QuoteBut Johnson worries that the budget and staff cuts imposed on the IMF last year, which have not been restored, may hamper its ability to quickly implement programs to fight the crisis.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103388246

Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on April 23, 2009, 03:34:41 PM
Quote from: The Borderline Simpleton on April 23, 2009, 02:51:03 PM
Quote from: mcjof on April 23, 2009, 02:50:26 PM
dik

:|
dont talk to your alts.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: bds on April 23, 2009, 11:44:30 PM
You think he's my alt?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 18, 2009, 09:02:13 AM
I hadn't even heard about Colonial's collapse until yesterday, but AFAIK, that was considered well capitalised.  Not to mention my general scepticism towards Anglo-American efforts mean this article has more than the ring of truth about it:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/08/is-this-start-of-big-one.html

QuoteI don't believe in market calls, and trying to time turns is a perilous game. But most savvy people I know have been skeptical of this rally, beyond the initial strong bounce off the bottom. It has not had the characteristics of a bull market. Volumes have been underwhelming, no new leadership group has emerged, and as greybeards like to point out, comparatively short, large amplitude rallies are a bear market speciality.

In addition, this one has had some troubling features. Most notable has been the almost insistent media cheerleading, particularly from atypical venues for that sort of thing, like Bloomberg. Investors who are not at all the conspiracy-minded sort wonder if there has been an official hand in the "almost nary a bad word will be said" news posture. Tyler Durden has regularly claimed that major trading desks have been actively squeezing shorts. There have been far too many days with suspicious end of session rallies.

The fall in the markets overnight, particularly the 5.8% drop in Shanghai, seems significant in combination with other factors:

More bank woes. We may be two thirds of the way through the losses, but it could also be as little as half. And despite the stress test baloney, the banking system is undercapitalized by a large margin. Even if the remaining writedowns are smaller in absolute terms than what is, past, they dig deeper into depleted equity bases. Colonial Bank, a $25 billion bank taken out last Friday, was deemed well capitalized until recently. We noted its much bigger neighbor, $140 billion Regions Bank, similarly deemed to be well capitalized, has effectively said it is insolvent How many other banks are broke save thanks to overly permissive accounting? And as we have noted before, the IMF in a study of 124 banking crises, found that regulatory forbearance, which is econ speak for letting the halt and lame limp along rather than taking them out, is far more costly, both in terms of lost growth and size of the ultimate bank recapitalization, than earlier action.

Consumers tapped out. The lousy retail sales report was a reminder of a rather central fact most have chosen to forget.

Foreclosures set to rise. We are not having a housing bounce. Some markets may be close to a bottom, but foreclosures grind on. Even if some local markets are at their nadir, there is so much overhang, between continuing mortgage stress and pent up sales, that much appreciation near term is unlikely. The record of past severe financial crises is that real estate takes over five years to bottom.

Fed in a box. Some e-mail chat pointed out a key fact: the term structure of US funding has gotten very short term. We have become in some ways like a massive bank, borrowing short and lending long. This means the idea of allowing rates to rise on the short end, which has to happen unless we stay in Japanese ZIRP land indefinitely, will be more disruptive than the Fed seems to appreciate.

More AIG losses. I am told more AIG losses are in the offing. There is still unused money out of the total alloted to the rescue, so any eruptions here may not require further official action, but it would have a bad impact on the collective mood, and further taint any efforts to shore up the financial system.

Lack of political leadership. The health care fiasco is going to be a defining event for Obama, in a negative way. His inability to respond effectively to simply absurd distortions of his plan and of the record of public supported programs overseas (including that many are government funded but still privately run, for instance) may dispel the illusion that he is or can be an effective leader. His banking policy, which is vital to recovery, became hostage to Geithner and Summer's deep loyalty to the industry, and his lack or interest in rocking any boats. All Team Obama has done on the banking front is write a lot of blank checks, hold some bogus "stress tests" in lieu of doing the real thing, and raise a stink on a few symbolic issues to try to paper over the failure to embark on real and badly needed reforms.

Ed Harrison has called him a black Herbert Hoover. If the economy takes another down leg, it will further confirm his inability to do anything other than compromise and try to spin it as success. The confidence game worked when he was a new President, but nice talk and not much action is already wearing thin. We could use someone at the helm who is willing to plot a course and stick with it, and instead what we have is someone long on charisma and short on resolve.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 18, 2009, 02:24:31 PM
I'm sad and anxious

somebody cradle my head and say soothing words while I reload
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Kai on August 18, 2009, 02:55:07 PM
I hear conflicting prophesies all over.


One of my new flatmates is an economist. He said right out that economics is reactionary when it comes to new events (read: black swans), and that he has no clue how it's going to turn out; also, any economist that tells you otherwise is fooling themselves.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 18, 2009, 03:09:37 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on August 18, 2009, 02:24:31 PM
I'm sad and anxious

somebody cradle my head and say soothing words while I reload

BIKAW
    \
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3540/3773317235_5972a9babc_o.jpg)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 18, 2009, 03:16:06 PM
Also

http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2009/08/more-breakage.html

QuoteOver the last thirty years, the social compact that divided value produced by productivity improvements between workers and corporate/financial interests broke down.  All the value from improvements (they were mighty) in productivity went to corporations/finance.  Median incomes stagnated for 30 years and the illusion of growth was produced by the extension of cheap debt.  It was also the driver behind the ahistorical rise in the stock market and ultimately the recent financial meltdown. 

That would be bad enough, but it's getting worse.  Median incomes are now on a downward track to give corporations the ability to return to profitability through increases in productivity (a massive 6.4% rise in the last quarter). 

This could be an interesting trend line.  Rather than keep median wages at status quo levels (as we have over the last thirty years), this is one where corporate/financial interests claw back on the gains in median wages between the end of WW2 and the mid seventies.  In that direction lies complete and utter failure.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on August 18, 2009, 03:21:59 PM
Hasn't the median been falling for years now?  Since 2000 if I'm not mistaken.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 12, 2009, 03:17:58 PM
To stop me from making new ones all the time, I'll confine financial fuckery news and links ITT.

Anyway, AIG just threatened the government.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/51b26b2a-b68e-11de-8a28-00144feab49a.html

QuoteKenneth Feinberg, the "special master" for pay at companies that have received government support, has raised concerns inside and outside AIG by putting pressure on the company to alter some pay plans.

People close to the situation said regulators had expressed fears that a crackdown on AIG could impel executives to leave, further harming the company's prospects and the chances of taxpayers' money being repaid.

In other words, they're essentially holding taxpayer money hostage, and saying they wont pay it back if the government tries to cut pay plans.  Never mind they're not going to pay it back anyway, because the American taxpayer is a serf, who should feel honoured to help a successful company like AIG in a time of crisis.  I wish Obama had declared he would not negotiate with investment bankers, a la terrorists.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Halfbaked1 on October 13, 2009, 11:46:53 AM
I am gonna ask here since youse guys seem to be more in the know.

The stock market is up, as read by the DOW, so our dear beloved politicians tell us the recession is over.  But we have record unemployment across the country and people are having a hard enough time buying food, especially after wasting money on new cars cause it was SUCH a great deal.  My question is this, how does the market being up mean that the recession is over for us, the little people?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on October 13, 2009, 12:12:21 PM
Because unemployment is a lagging indicator.  In other words it comes down after the market goes up, rather than before.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 13, 2009, 02:59:36 PM
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 13, 2009, 11:46:53 AM
I am gonna ask here since youse guys seem to be more in the know.

The stock market is up, as read by the DOW, so our dear beloved politicians tell us the recession is over.  But we have record unemployment across the country and people are having a hard enough time buying food, especially after wasting money on new cars cause it was SUCH a great deal.  My question is this, how does the market being up mean that the recession is over for us, the little people?

It doesn't, in short.  The market is being kept afloat by cash infusions from the government and a whole lot of Clap Your Hands If You Believe (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ClapYourHandsIfYouBelieve), which is being aided by good feeling news stories about green roots, usually peddled by the same people who didn't believe a crash was in the making.

Japan had a "jobless recovery" 10 years ago, and it took them a decade to actually get anything near a proper recovery.  This just means things aren't getting much worse....that is, until the government stops throwing money at banks, or cuts back on social spending (the Tories in the UK have threatened to do both of these when they inevitably get voted in, and everyone with half a brain says it will plunge us into a longer and deeper recession the minute they do it).

Also, most of those toxic assets are still out there.  AIG is almost certainly hiding a ton of them, going by their recent actions.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on October 13, 2009, 04:17:05 PM
Presumably, it isn't actually jobless.  It just looks jobless because there's so much fuckery going on with the unemployment numbers to keep them low in the news.  As the recovery happens the numbers get less fucked with.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Halfbaked1 on October 14, 2009, 07:06:45 AM
From personal experience the jobless rate is actually pretty high.  As I have said before, I don't trust massive organizations, but i do trust my eyes and I see alot of people in my area that are unemployed that weren't prioor to the recession.  I am happy to say that the plant where I work has brought back alot of the people they laid off, but new hires are still frozen. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 19, 2009, 08:56:55 AM
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ports17-2009oct17,0,4849546.story

QuoteIn another sign of how deep the global recession has become, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach on Friday reported their worst combined import statistics for September in nine years.

September is often the busiest month at the nation's biggest port complex, making it one of the best barometers of the health of the economy and international trade.

The port of Los Angeles received 309,078 containers packed with imported goods in September, representing a decline of 16% from the same month last year and 27% from September 2006, L.A.'s best month ever for imports. Long Beach received 224,924 import containers in September, a drop of 19% from a year earlier and 32% from September 2007, the port's best September ever.

For the first nine months of the year, imports, exports and empty containers through the port of Los Angeles were down 16% at just under 5 million containers while the Long Beach port saw a decline of nearly 25% at just under 3.7 million containers, compared with the same period last year.

Most of the recovery that the shipment industry is having is being fuelled by inventory re-stocking rather than consumer demand, too.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 19, 2009, 09:00:13 AM
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/banking_and_finance/article6879558.ece

QuoteTHE state-owned Royal Bank of Scotland is planning to hand out record bonuses of up to £5m each in a snub to struggling taxpayers.

The average employee in its high-risk investment banking arm is likely to take home £240,000, with the top 20 staff in line for payments of between £1m and £5m.

The payouts by the investment banking division — from a total pay and bonus pot of £4 billion — would top the deals awarded at the peak of the financial boom in 2007 and are 66% higher than those paid last year.

RBS, then headed by Sir Fred Goodwin, had to be rescued from collapse by the Treasury last October with an initial injection of £20 billion. The taxpayer now has a 70% stake in the bank.

Any suggestion of bumper bonuses will put RBS on a collision course with UK Financial Investments, which oversees taxpayers' investments in banks. It would have to approve the payments.

The RBS plans are the latest sign that the bonus culture is returning to the City just a year after the financial system was saved from collapse. The banks that have survived the financial crisis are now making huge profits in areas such as debt and currency trading, where instability in the global economy has created opportunities.

Some traders in specialised areas are making bigger profits than before because of the chaos created by the collapse. After a series of forced mergers, there are also fewer competitors in a number of areas, allowing the banks to charge clients higher fees.

RBS is expected to lobby hard to be allowed to make the payments, claiming that dozens of its top performing executives have been poached by rivals offering even bigger pay deals. Almost a third of the bank's wealth management staff in Singapore walked out last week over fears they would receive lower than expected bonuses.

The bank has already provoked anger over a bonus package of nearly £10m for Stephen Hester, its chief executive, which he will earn if he turns round the bank. Hester has said in recent interviews that even his parents think he is paid too much.

The bank has also come under fire over recent "golden hello" deals. It offered an estimated £7m to Antonio Polverino, a bond trader; while Brian Hartzer, recently recruited to head the bank's network of branches, was handed 1.99m shares as part of his sign-on deal — worth about £1m at current share prices.

Paul Myners, the City minister, has written to the boards of all the banks operating in Britain and reminded them that they should hold on to their cash to build up reserves, rather than hand it over to their executives and traders.

There were claims last night that some cabinet ministers wanted a "windfall" tax on bank profits. However, the Treasury is resisting any move that might damage the health of the financial sector at a time when banks are still struggling to rebuild their balance sheets.

Lloyds Banking Group, which is 43% owned by taxpayers, has been working on plans for a multi-million-pound incentive programme for its top managers.

Barclays, which has not received direct state support, is expected to post record profits of about £10 billion this year, leaving senior executives including Bob Diamond, head of Barclays Capital, the group's investment banking arm, in line for multi-million-pound bonuses. Barclays Capital, which took over the remains of Lehman Brothers in the US, is expected to see its profits soar.

Last week Goldman Sachs, the American bank, which employs 5,500 people in London, announced that its staff would share about £13 billion in pay and bonuses. Its senior partners in London, such as Michael Sherwood, the vice-chairman, could be in line for payments running to tens of millions of pounds.

The record payouts across the City come despite political pledges to clamp down on bankers' pay, drafted at meetings of the G20 countries in both London and Pittsburgh this year.

Lord Oakeshott, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, said: "The masters of the universe in investment banking are taking away lorryloads of loot because they are the last men standing. They have a virtual monopoly, partly because governments chose to save some banks and let others fall . . . It's survival of the fattest."

He added: "All this raises serious issues about competition and monopolies. The government must get a grip and look at this now — and not hide behind G20 principles which are mushy and meaningless."

None of the banks will decide final bonus payouts until the end of the year at the earliest, but the US banks have already set aside large sums to make the payments.

JP Morgan Chase revealed last week that it was preparing to pay almost £18 billion to cover salaries and bonuses for its staff, after posting profits of £2.2 billion for the past three months.

Even banks that have lost money are believed to be considering enormous payouts to some of their senior investment bankers. Bank of America Merrill Lynch, which revealed a quarterly loss of more than £600m last week, is believed to be preparing to make big bonus payouts to staff in its London operations.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 19, 2009, 09:06:09 AM
Speaking of Barclay's, maybe there is a reason the bank didn't need direct financial assistance from the UK government

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/rare-glimpse-feds-discount-window-courtesy-brewing-lehman-barclays-scandal

QuoteIt is becoming increasingly likely that Barclays will have to pay a cool $5 billion (at least) in additional consideration to the Lehman estate, after the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors came out yesterday with a hefty joinder piece to the debtor's motion that Barclays materially misrepresented and, in essence, stole $5 billion or more from under the noses of both Lehman Brothers Holdings and its Creditors, all as the megalomaniacal Judge Peck was trying to ram the largest prearranged stalking horse bankruptcy through, in the shortest (im)possible amount of time, just so he could print "Judge Peck  - Greatest Restructuring Judge in the World" t-shirts at the Bowling Green sweat shop just off NY Southern Bankruptcy court.

QuoteBasically, Barclays tried to rip JPMorgan off by collecting not just on the Lehman collateral which was part of the Barclays APA, but pretty much all the collateral in the tri-party repo, backed and funded by the NY Fed and JPMorgan. But the bottom line is that chaos ruled: tens of billions of dollars were flying on the wires at any given minute, in order to give the impression that with Lehman's collateral now on Barclays' books everything was magically better.

In this firestorm of wire transfers, the Fed's direct Lehman exposure was made obvious. From the Jamie Dimon letter, one can see that in the days after Lehman's bankruptcy, over $50 billion in securities had been assumed by the Fed via FRB and DTCC programs, which also included anywhere between $3 billion and $4.5 billion in equities. It was Barclays' onus to shift this entire collateral exposure to its own balance sheet (while paying both the Fed and JPM off).

QuoteComing full circle, the major question we have is what, if any, considerations did the Fed use when determining how much of Lehman's collateral pool it would be willing to onboard in the discount window. And if back then it was willing to accept securities of bankrupt companies as value pledges to US taxpayers, why would one assume that anything has changed? The next time there is a "risk-flaring" event (and with bankrupt companies presumably still on the Fed's balance sheet, it is merely a matter of time), how much more leeway will be given to toxic assets? Will the Fed now allow for a 10% haircut instead of 20%? Or how about 5%? Or maybe it will actually say the securities deserve a premium, since all that money Bernanke is printing has to go somewhere. We hope that the over 300 members of Congress who already support Ron Paul's "Audit the Fed" Initiative consider the implications of what the Lehman fiasco has taught us, and how this unique look into the Fed's balance sheet should be a very critical reminder of just how much risk the Fed is willing to take on with taxpayer capital when bailing out a financial system that, absent ongoing accounting gimmickry and endless Reserve Banking System subsidies, is still rotten to its core.

Those are the highlights, I suggest reading the whole thing
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 19, 2009, 09:12:26 AM
Oh, OK, just one more then:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/18/opinion/18rich.html?_r=1

QuoteIt was hard not to think of Rockefeller's old P.R. playbook while watching Goldman Sachs's behavior when the Dow hit 10,000 last week. As leader of the Wall Street pack, Goldman declared surging profits, keeping it on track to dispense a record $23 billion in bonuses for 2009. But most Americans know all too well that only the intervention of billions of dollars in taxpayer bailout money saved Goldman from the dire fate of its less well-connected competitors. The growing ranks of under-and-unemployed Americans, meanwhile, are waiting with increasing desperation for a recovery of their own.

Goldman is this century's octopus — almost literally so. The most-quoted sentence in financial journalism this year, by Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone, describes the company as a "great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money." That's why Goldman's chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, recycled Rockefeller's stunt last week: The announcement of Goldman's spectacular third-quarter earnings ($3.19 billion) was paired with the news that the company was donating $200 million to its own foundation, which promotes education. In Goldman dollars, that largess is roughly comparable to the nickels John D. handed out to children a century ago. At least those kids could spend the spare change on candy.

Teddy Roosevelt's trust-busting crusade ultimately broke up Standard Oil. Though Goldman did outlast three of its four major rival firms during last fall's meltdown, it is not a monopoly. And there is one other significant way that our 21st-century vampire squid differs from Rockefeller's 20th-century octopus. Americans knew what oil was, and they understood how Standard Oil's manipulations directly affected their pocketbooks. Even now many Americans don't know what Goldman's products are or how it makes its money. The less we know, the easier it is for reckless gambling to return to capitalism's casino, and for Washington to look the other way as a new financial bubble inflates.

As Wall Street was celebrating last week, Congress was having a big week of its own, arousing itself to belatedly battle some of the corporate suspects that have helped drive America into its fiscal ditch. The big action was at the Senate Finance Committee, which finally produced a health care bill that, however gingerly, bids to reform industries that have feasted on the nation's Rube Goldberg medical system. At least health care, like oil, is palpable, so we will be able to keep score of how reform fares — win, lose or draw. But the business of Wall Street, while also at center stage in a Congressional committee last week, is so esoteric that the public is understandably clueless as to what, if anything, the lawmakers were up to, if anyone even noticed at all.

The first stab at corrective legislation emerging from Barney Frank's Financial Services Committee in the House is porous. While unregulated derivatives remain the biggest potential systemic threat to the world's economy, Frank said that "the great majority" of businesses that use derivatives would not be covered under his committee's much-amended bill. It's also an open question whether the administration's proposed consumer agency to protect Americans from mortgage and credit-card outrages will survive the banking lobby's attempts to eviscerate it. As that bill stands now, more than 98 percent of America's banks — mainly community banks, representing 20 percent of deposits — would be shielded from the new agency's supervision.

If it's too early to pronounce these embryonic efforts at financial reform a failure, it's hard to muster great hope. As the economics commentator Jeff Madrick points out in The New York Review of Books, the American public is still owed "a clear account of the financial events of the last two years and of who, if anyone, is seriously to blame." Without that, there will be neither the comprehensive policy framework nor the political will to change anything.

The only investigation in town is a bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission created by Congress in May. It is still hiring staff. Its 10 members are dispersed throughout the country, and, according to a spokeswoman, have contemplated only a half-dozen public sessions over the next year. Such a panel, led by the former California state treasurer Phil Angelides, seems highly unlikely to match Congress's Depression-era Pecora commission. That investigation was driven by a prosecutor whose relentless fact-finding riveted the country and gave birth to the Securities and Exchange Commission, among other New Deal reforms. Last week, we learned that the current S.E.C. has hired a former Goldman hand as the chief operating officer of its enforcement unit.

Even as we wait for Congress and its inquiry to produce results, the cultural toxins revealed by our economic crisis remain unaddressed by the leaders in the private and public sectors who might make a difference now. Blankfein may be giving $200 million to "education," but Goldman is back to business as usual: making money by high-risk gambling, with all the advantages that the best connections, cheap loans from the Fed and high-speed trading algorithms can bring. As the Reuters columnist Rolfe Winkler wrote last week, "Main Street still owns much of the risk while Wall Street gets all of the profit."

The idea of investing in the real economy — the one that might create jobs for Americans — remains outré in this culture. Credit to small businesses remains tight. The holy capitalist grail is still the speculative buying and selling of companies and the concoction of ever more esoteric financial "instruments." The tragic tale of Simmons Bedding recently told in The Times is a role model. This successful 133-year-old manufacturing enterprise was flipped seven times in two decades by private equity firms. Investors made more than $750 million in profits even as the pile-up of debt pushed Simmons into bankruptcy, costing a quarter of its loyal workers their jobs so far.

Most leaders in America are against this kind of ethos in principle. Last month the president of Harvard, Drew Gilpin Faust, contributed a stirring essay to The Times regretting that educational institutions did not make stronger efforts to assert the fundamental values of pure intellectual inquiry while "the world indulged in a bubble of false prosperity and excessive materialism." She rued the rise of business as the most popular undergraduate major, an implicit reference to the go-go atmosphere during the reign of her predecessor, Lawrence Summers, now President Obama's chief economic adviser.

What went unsaid, of course, is that some of Harvard's most prominent alumni of the pre-Faust era — Summers, Blankfein, Robert Rubin et al. — were major players during the last two bubbles. As coincidence would have it, the same edition of The Times that published Faust's essay also included an article about how Harvard was scrounging for bucks by licensing a line of overpriced preppy clothing under the brand Harvard Yard. This sop to excessive materialism will be a scant recompense for the $11 billion Harvard's endowment managers lost in their own bad gamble on interest-rate swaps.

Obama has also passed through Harvard. (Disclosure: so did I.) He too has consistently said all the right things about the "money culture" of "quick kills and bloated bonuses," of "reckless behavior and unchecked excess." But the air of entitlement that continues to waft from his administration sends another message.

In particular, the tone-deaf Treasury secretary, Timothy Geithner, never ceases to amaze. His daily calendars reveal that most of his contacts with the financial sector in the first seven months of 2009 were limited to the trinity of Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and JPMorgan. And last week Bloomberg News reported that his inner circle of "counselors" — key advisers who, conveniently enough, do not require Senate confirmation — are largely drawn from the same club. It's hard to see how any public official can challenge a culture that he is marinating in, night and day.

Those Obama fans who are disappointed keep looking for explanations. Is he too impressed by the elite he met in Cambridge, too eager to split the difference between left and right, too willing to compromise? As he pursues legislation, why does he keep deferring to others — whether to his party's Congressional leaders or the Congressional Budget Office or to this month's acting president, Olympia Snowe? Why doesn't he ever draw a line in the sand? "We know Obama has good values," Jeff Madrick said to me last week, "but we don't know if he has convictions."

What we also know is that if Teddy Roosevelt palled around with John D. Rockefeller as today's political class does with Wall Street's titans and lobbyists, the tentacles of the original octopus would still be coiled tightly around America's neck.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 27, 2009, 10:02:55 AM
The debtors revolt is starting

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/25/business/economy/25gret.html

QuoteFor decades, when troubled homeowners and banks battled over delinquent mortgages, it wasn't a contest. Homes went into foreclosure, and lenders took control of the property.

On top of that, courts rubber-stamped the array of foreclosure charges that lenders heaped onto borrowers and took banks at their word when the lenders said they owned the mortgage notes underlying troubled properties.

In other words, with lenders in the driver's seat, borrowers were run over, more often than not...

But some judges are starting to scrutinize the rules-don't-matter methods used by lenders and their lawyers in the recent foreclosure wave. On occasion, lenders are even getting slapped around a bit.

One surprising smackdown occurred on Oct. 9 in federal bankruptcy court in the Southern District of New York. Ruling that a lender, PHH Mortgage, hadn't proved its claim to a delinquent borrower's home in White Plains, Judge Robert D. Drain wiped out a $461,263 mortgage debt on the property. That's right: the mortgage debt disappeared, via a court order.

Just a reminder of some basic facts

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b82d2b96-bc02-11de-9426-00144feab49a.html

QuoteOnce perceptions of rising inflation return, central banks might be forced to switch towards a much more aggressive monetary policy relatively quickly – much quicker than during the previous cycle. A short inflationary boom could be followed by another recession, another banking crisis, and perhaps deflation. We should not see inflation and deflation as opposite scenarios, but as sequential ones. We could be in for a period of extreme price instability, in both directions, as central banks lose control.

This is exactly what the economist Hyman Minsky predicted in his financial instability hypothesis.  He postulated that a world with a large financial sector and an excessive emphasis on the production of investment goods creates instability both in terms of output and prices.

While, according to Minsky, these are the deep causes of instability, the mechanism through which instability comes about is the way governments and central banks respond to crises. The state has potent means to end a recession, but the policies it uses give rise to the next phase of instabiliy....The world has witnessed a proliferation of financial bubbles and extreme economic instability that cannot be explained by any of the established macroeconomic models. Minsky is about all we have.

His policy conclusions are disturbing, especially if contrasted with what is actually happening. In their crisis response, world leaders have focused on bonuses and other irrelevant side-issues. But they have failed to address the financial sector's overall size. So if Minsky is right, instability should continue and get worse.

Our present situation can give rise to two scenarios – or some combination of the two. The first is that central banks start exiting at some point in 2010, triggering another fall in the prices of risky assets. In the UK, for example, any return to a normal monetary policy will almost inevitably imply another fall in the housing market, which is currently propped up by ultra-cheap mortgages.

Alternatively, central banks might prioritise financial stability over price stability and keep the monetary floodgates open for as long as possible. This, I believe, would cause the mother of all financial market crises – a bond market crash – to be followed by depression and deflation.

In other words, there is danger no matter how the central banks react. Successful monetary policy could be like walking along a perilous ridge, on either side of which lies a precipice of instability.

For all we know, there may not be a safe way down.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/overview-feds-intervention-equity-markets-primary-dealer-credit-facility

QuoteRecently, Zero Hedge presented a snapshot analysis of the various securities that made up the triparty repo agreement involving JPM, Lehman and the Fed. We uncovered numerous bankrupt companies' equities that were being pledged as collateral for what ultimately was taxpayer exposure. To our surprise, this discovery is not an exception, and in fact in the days immediately preceding the collapse of Bear Stearns first, and subsequently, Lehman Brothers, the Federal Reserve established and refined a program that permitted banks to pledge virtually any security as collateral, including not just investment grade bonds and higher ranked securities, but also stocks of companies, the riskiest investment possible, and a guaranteed way for taxpayer capital to evaporate in the context of a disintegrating financial system, all with the purpose of bailing out Wall Street's major institutions. On two occasions last year: on March 16, 2008, and subsequently on September 14, 2008, the Federal Reserve first established what is known as the Primary Dealer Credit Facility (PDCF), and subsequently amended it, so that the Fed, in becoming the lender of last resort, would allow any collateral, up to and including stocks, to be funded by the Federal Reserve's credit facility, in order to prevent the $4.5 trillion repo financing system from imploding. By doing so, the Federal Reserve effectively gave a Carte Blanche to primary dealers to purchase any and all equities they so desired, with such purchases immediately being funded by the US taxpayer, via the PDCF. In essence, this was equivalent to the Fed purchasing equities by itself through a Primary Dealer agent.

Readers who have been concerned with the moral hazard provided by the Fed's monetization of Treasury and Mortgage debt, should be doubly concerned by this Fed action which sent three key messages to Wall Street: i) it made sure that Primary Dealers would generate massive profits on risky assets as the Fed would provide the funding to acquire any and all stocks (keep in mind the cost of funding of the PDCF to primary dealers was negligible); ii) it tipped its hand as to the existence and modus operandi of the rumored "plunge protection team," iii) and it made clear that the much maligned, by none other than Chairman Bernanke, concept of "moral hazard" is the one and only systemically relevant doctrine as long as the Fed's Chairman is in control, and not subject to any auditing auspices. The fact that PDs used over $140 billion of taxpayer money within a few weeks of the program's expansion in September to fund what one can assume were exclusively equity purchases, demonstrates that the American financial system got the message.

http://pong.tamu.edu/wp/?p=298

Exactly right:

QuoteSo what is the Dow Jones Industrial Average, a number that even those bomb-throwing ultraliberals at NPR worship on a daily basis? It's a stock market index based on the stock prices of 30 publicly held companies in the U.S. So who's in it and how did they get there? The wikipedia entry tells us that "the individual components of the DJIA are occasionally changed as market conditions warrant." The accompanying table shows us that the oldest company in the current DJIA (General Electric) has been a member since 1907, with the newest companies (Cisco and Travelers) joining in June of this year. To put it another way, the DJIA is an arbitrary number based on the arbitrary choice of 30 publicly owned companies out of thousands that exist at any given time. The losers are booted out - Cisco and Travelers replaced GM and Citigroup, for instance - and the winning flavors of the month get their invitation to the cigar and brandy club. If GM and Citigroup hadn't been given the bum's rush, the DJIA would almost certainly not have gone over 10,000 a couple of days ago, and we would have been spared the triumphalist sights and sounds of the usual army of hucksters, halfwits and whores employed to endlessly chant "buy stocks."

It is left as an exercise for the reader to figure out how many of the current DJIA cabal are  members of the FIRE (finance, insurance, real estate) sector, and also which ones can be construed to be "Industrial" (ignoring for now the location of the industries vis a vis the continental U.S.).  To be brief and perhaps flippant, the DJIA shows us that we charge each other rent, take a lot of drugs  (3 pharmaceutical companies), buy a lot of shoddy merchandise and software, buy a lot of military hardware (Boeing, Caterpillar, General Electric and United Technologies), and really like our cartoons.  Quite a change from the historical components of the DJIA.

And finally

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NakedCapitalism/~3/vKiiGyJrWH4/pay-czar-decides-to-collect-a-few-scalps-a-sign-of-weakness.html

QuoteThe Wall Street Journal reports that the pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg, is going to cut executive comp at 7 TARP recipients for the 25 most highly paid employees.

Does this really mean anything? The press will noise it up as significant (and some outlets will no doubt finger wag at this "interference") but the short answer is no.

First, recall Feinberg's hollow mandate. He is limited to only TARP recipients, not the beneficiaries of other forms of government largesse. And as anyone who has an operating brain cell knows, the number of firms on the dole and the degree of subsidies is much greater than the TARP. Have a look at the Fed's balance sheet for a reality check.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on October 27, 2009, 12:40:01 PM
As far as the mortgage thing goes, was it here we were discussing a case where, since the whole derivitives and mortgage buying/selling, credit-default-swapping, slicing up mortages thing went down, nobody knows exactly who owns the mortgage, and some people are trying to get court precidents stating that unless you can track the paper trail of the mortgage precisely, the banks can't make a claim on it?


Wow, that was really convoluted.


I think I mean to say, if the mortgage has been repeatedly bought, sold, and sliced, the bank can't make a claim on it unless they can show exactly who owns what part of it; meaning they can't forclose.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on October 27, 2009, 01:47:55 PM
That would be nice.  Let's see how far it sticks and how quickly they can generate the paper to undo it, however.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on October 27, 2009, 09:54:40 PM
Quote from: LMNO on October 27, 2009, 12:40:01 PM
As far as the mortgage thing goes, was it here we were discussing a case where, since the whole derivitives and mortgage buying/selling, credit-default-swapping, slicing up mortages thing went down, nobody knows exactly who owns the mortgage, and some people are trying to get court precidents stating that unless you can track the paper trail of the mortgage precisely, the banks can't make a claim on it?


Wow, that was really convoluted.


I think I mean to say, if the mortgage has been repeatedly bought, sold, and sliced, the bank can't make a claim on it unless they can show exactly who owns what part of it; meaning they can't forclose.

Its been discussed here, and by now there's a *ton* of precedent (including one ruling that invalidates something like 60% of the mortgages in one state).  There are also explicit laws about the bank needing paperwork in a lot of states.

Something that should be pointed out to people, is that even if you lose, without the paperwork trail it'd be possible to keep your house the entire time its in trial, and the system isn't exactly fast.

Also, watch em settle out of court *really* fast if you appeal and risk creating binding precedent for the state/district you live in.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Halfbaked1 on October 28, 2009, 08:20:03 AM
So I read this article and was wondering what you lot thought of the general gist that the government run thing is going to end up costing us bad.  I think this guy is pretty much spot on.  I do not have insurance, I would like to have it though, and if the government has a cheap option that helps me I would be willing to participate.  But I do not like the idea that whether I wanted to participate or not I am expected to carry part of the burden.

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/this-health-care-reform-might-tax-us-to-death/?hpadref=1
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 28, 2009, 09:51:06 AM
Not so much financial fuckery as "lol pwned", from all the way back in 2007

http://archive.redstate.com/stories/liberals/finally_a_good_idea_from_greenpeace_on_global_warming

QuoteI firmly believe that Anthrogenic Global Warming™ has jumped the shark. Dr. Gore's Academy award has cemented AGW's position as an established tenet of secular faith, along with inner-city children dropping like flies, the eeee-vil of Christianity, and the coming subprime-mortgage-induced recession.

Yeah, good thing that never materialized.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on October 28, 2009, 12:43:19 PM
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 28, 2009, 08:20:03 AM
So I read this article and was wondering what you lot thought of the general gist that the government run thing is going to end up costing us bad.  I think this guy is pretty much spot on.  I do not have insurance, I would like to have it though, and if the government has a cheap option that helps me I would be willing to participate.  But I do not like the idea that whether I wanted to participate or not I am expected to carry part of the burden.

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/this-health-care-reform-might-tax-us-to-death/?hpadref=1

1) If you make more that $280,000 a year and can't pay an extra $7 a day for the increased tax (the "1% surcharge"), you're doing something wrong.

2) The majority of "working class Joes" already have health insurance. 

3) The "top marginal" tax rate affects approximately 0.5% of the country.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Halfbaked1 on October 28, 2009, 11:23:15 PM
Okay, I still don't much care for not having a choice.  The reason I do not have health insurance is that I currently cannot afford the crappy coverage that the company I work for offers.  But under the reform I will purchase health insurance or pay an excise tax.  So I end up looking at what will cost me less the tax or the insurance.  I still haven't seen what the public option will look like and I know from experience how Medicare works, and doesn't.  The house shot down a measure that would protect doctors from decreased compensation, a prime reason why many doctors do not take Medicare, so that will probably result in more doctors declining Medicare.  I point that out because if reid doesn't back down from the public option then I only have medicare to look at as a model for government run healthcare.  I do not see the value in buying an insurance policy that is not accepted by many doctors and will not pay for my medications.  I may as well stay uninsured if my doctors and my meds are not covered.  My wife has Medicare and has to pay EXTRA for a supplemental insurance to cover most of her medications.  Again, this does not seem like an economical idea, more like another political fuck you from the government.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 02, 2009, 10:20:22 PM
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/10/30/forget-galleon-what-about-goldmans-ex-boss/

QuoteIt's impossible to grasp the totality of Friedman/Goldman's grossness with regard to the AIG story without a little context. Remember the basic timeline. In the middle of the mortgage bubble, Goldman Sachs found a patsy-buffoon named Joe Cassano at a little corner of AIG called AIG Financial Products, or AIGFP. Cassano was recklessly writing hundreds of billions of dollars worth of credit default swaps for banks like Goldman and Deutsche, essentially insuring certain investments for these banks, including extremely risky mortgage-backed deals.

Goldman took out billions of these CDS positions with Cassano, who had written upwards of $440 billion of these CDS without having even a fraction of the money he would have needed to cover that bet in the event of a disaster of the type that actually ended up taking place, specifically a downgrade of AIG's credit rating that forced Cassano to pony up wads of cash to cover those positions.

The important thing to remember about all of this is that just because Goldman was buying "insurance" from Cassano, that doesn't mean they were being responsible. On the contrary: Goldman was creating well over ten billion dollars worth of exposure to a guy that they must have known was an absolute idiot. Now, in a world where actual capitalism existed, Goldman should then have been highly invested in making sure that AIG did not go under. A dead and bankrupt AIG should not have been good news to a company like Goldman Sachs, which had billions of dollars riding on AIG's financial health.

But if anything Goldman behaved throughout the runup to AIG's collapse like it couldn't care less if the company died. In fact Goldman accelerated AIG's demise by making margin calls against AIG, for both the CDS deals and for deals it had done with Win Neuger, who was running AIG's securities lending business. What really sank AIG was the fact that the downgrade of its credit rating permitted companies like Goldman to demand large sums of money from AIG in the form of these margin calls, and AIG could not get its hands on enough cash to meet its demands, resulting in the death spiral situation we all witnessed last September. Of all the firms making such demands against AIG, Goldman was the most aggressive (I have more on this coming out in a forthcoming book) and my sources who were involved in the AIG bailout bunker scene of a year ago almost to a man report that Goldman and its chief Lloyd Blankfein took an extremely hard line with AIG.

Why would it act like that? Well, in a normal capitalistic situation, it wouldn't. But Goldman, it turned out, had an ace in the hole. It seems that when the state stepped in and decided to bail AIG out, its former director, Stephen Friedman, was among those making the decision that AIG's counterparties should be paid 100 cents on the dollar for its CDS debts. It never made sense that AIG/AIGFP would decide on its own to pay its creditors 100 cents on the dollar for its debts, but now we know, thanks to reporting from Bloomberg, that it wasn't AIGFP and its CFO Elias Habayeb who was making that decision.

It was, instead, a group of people from the New York Fed who gave that order a group that included Tim Geithner and Friedman. Goldman ended up getting almost $14 billion from AIG after the bailout. And Friedman, we later found out, bought 50,000 shares of Goldman stock after this deal was struck. He resigned in May from the Fed, a few days after the Wall Street Journal broke the story about Friedman's stock purchases.

Friedman surely had information about key moves involving the bank — like Goldman getting paid off at par in the AIG bailout, or Goldman getting a federal bank charter overnight so that a mountain of cheap Fed money could save it from bankruptcy — before the market got it. That he bought 50,000 shares in Goldman after the AIG bailout and is not in jail right now is sort of amazing, until you consider that it will be a cold day in hell before a former head of Goldman Sachs is arrested for insider trading, even when he gets caught doing it red-handed.

All of this matters for two reasons. One, it's yet another example of how Goldman's success isn't attributable to how "smart" the bank and its employees are.

Instead of working something out with a company it had stupidly become overexposed to, Goldman instead hastened AIG's demise because it was, perhaps, the one way it could cash in fully on its reckless deals — by forcing it into the arms of the government and getting the taxpayer to pony up for Cassano's dumb calls.

Had AIG proceeded to an ordinary bankruptcy, had the company's downfall happened via normal market procedures, Goldman might have gotten 40, 50, maybe 60 cents on the dollar. If that! Instead it got completely paid off, among other things because its connections to the government actually incentivized it to cripple a company to which it was exposed to the tune of billions.

Second, the non-punishment of Friedman just stands out like a hairy, golf-ball-sized mole on the face of the American capital markets. No question about it, it's interesting that Galleon and Raj Rajaratnam are getting perp-walked by the FBI (note that it's the FBI, and not the castrated and seemingly completely captive SEC, that's going to be pushing these enforcement actions). Galleon isn't small potatoes and from what I understand there are other hedge funds with even higher profiles that may fall later on. These are surprising and meaningful moves and and it suggests that the enforcement community is not yet completely corrupted.

Emphasis mine, words Matt Taibbi's and complete and utter lack of shame, all Goldman Sachs.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 02, 2009, 11:47:27 PM
We're gonna have to eat these people, one fine day.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 03, 2009, 09:11:04 AM
It also turns out that Goldman Sachs was betting on a housing market collapse before the crisis really set in, and made a major killing on this "guess".  I'll find the link in a bit.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 22, 2009, 04:54:42 PM
Bleh, I lost the link  :sad:

BUT!

Green shoots are showing in Arizona's 15th Congressional District.  Shame it doesn't exist (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/jobs-saved-created-congressional-districts-exist/story?id=9097853).

QuoteHere's a stimulus success story: In Arizona's 15th congressional district, 30 jobs have been saved or created with just $761,420 in federal stimulus spending. At least that's what the Web site set up by the Obama administration to track the $787 billion stimulus says.

There's one problem, though: There is no 15th congressional district in Arizona; the state has only eight districts.

And ABC News has found many more entries for projects like this in places that are incorrectly identified.

Late Monday, officials with the Recovery Board created to track the stimulus spending, said the mistakes in crediting nonexistent congressional districts were caused by human error.

Bankruptcies soar in Canadia (http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2009/11/20/bankruptcy-statistics-september.html):

QuoteThe number of bankruptcies across the country was 43 per cent higher in September than at the same point a year ago, government data shows.

The latest figures provided by the Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada show the increase is disproportionately slanted towards consumer bankruptcies over business insolvencies. The September figure for the former was up by 45.5 per cent in the last year; the latter by only 1.6 per cent.

One in Seven U.S. Mortgages Foreclosing or Delinquent (http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN1937065020091119):

QuoteA record one in seven U.S. mortgages were in foreclosure or at least one payment past due in the third quarter, according to fresh data signaling the recovery in the housing market will be tepid at best.

U.S. mortgage delinquency rates and the percentage of loans that entered the foreclosure process also jumped to records from July to September, the Mortgage Bankers Association said on Thursday.

Rising job losses were behind the increasingly bleak portrait of the housing market in a trend that will continue into next year, the group said in data that adds to recent evidence of a still-struggling housing market.

Housing and related business account for about 20 percent of the economy and recovery is essential to bring unemployment down from a 26-1/2-year high and kick-start economic growth.

Yet record foreclosures will add to the growing supply of unsold homes, sapping the housing market as it attempts to recover from the worst slump since the Great Depression.

The MBA said the percentage of loans in foreclosure rose to 1.42 percent, from 1.36 percent in the second quarter and 1.07 percent in the third quarter of 2008.

"Foreclosures remain the biggest hurdle to the housing recovery," said Michelle Meyer, economist at Barclays Capital in New York.

"Foreclosures will be worse in the first part of 2010 and we do not see a peak in foreclosures until the middle of next year."

Bank of America, UBS, JPMorgan Sued Over Derivatives (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aBMy4gnnFIk4&pos=7):

QuoteBank of America Corp., UBS AG and JPMorgan Chase & Co. were sued by a California public utility over claims they rigged sales of municipal derivatives and shared illegal profits through kickbacks.

The lawsuit, filed by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District, is based on federal and state antitrust claims. It alleges Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America and more than a dozen other banks conspired to pre-select winners of municipal derivative auctions, coordinated their pricing, and accepted kickbacks disguised as fees from co-conspirators.

The allegations resemble those made by a U.S. grand jury in New York last month, according to the lawsuit filed Nov. 12 in federal court in Sacramento. CDR Financial Products Inc. founder David Rubin and two employees of the Beverly Hills, California- based company were indicted for allegedly accepting kickbacks on investments sold to local governments. CDR is also named as a defendant in the Sacramento case.

The banks engaged in "allocating customers and markets for municipal derivatives, rigging the bidding process by which municipal bond issuers acquire municipal derivatives, and conspiring to manipulate the terms that issuers received," according to the lawsuit.

The charges against Rubin and the CDR employees were the first to result from a more than three-year investigation into bid-rigging in the municipal bond market. The probe is continuing and has already drawn in some two dozen banks, insurers and local government advisers.

U.S. Posts $176.36 Billion Deficit for October (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125805524231245829.html):

QuoteThe federal government kicked off fiscal year 2010 by posting its widest-ever October budget deficit, the Treasury Department said Thursday.

The $176.36 billion gap is more than $20 billion wider than the shortfall recorded in October 2008, driven up by lower tax receipts, stimulus-related revenue reductions and consistently high government outlays.

Treasury's monthly budget statement shows receipts were $135.33 billion in October, down 18% from a year earlier and at the lowest level since October 2002. Meanwhile, outlays were $311.69 billion, down 3% from a year earlier and at their second-highest monthly level on record.

The October deficit figure is wider than the Congressional Budget Office's estimate for a $175 billion deficit in the month and wider than the $165.9 billion expected by analysts surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires.

The Treasury on Thursday also revised September's deficit to a slightly narrower $46.57 billion, from a previously reported $46.61 billion. Even with the revision, the U.S. in fiscal year 2009 posted a record total budget deficit of near $1.4 trillion — three times its previous record.

At the equivalent of 9.9% of gross domestic product, the figure is the widest U.S. deficit as a share of GDP since 1945.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 30, 2009, 09:36:54 AM
So, who wants to invest in Dubai?

Incidentally, this one is going to hit Europe harder than the US.  A lot harder.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 30, 2009, 03:05:02 PM
I read somewhere recently that house prices were actually rising again, based on risky speculation.  Which is even worse than your scenario.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!

wait...
why would a loan get called simply because the property is upside down?
that doesn't make sense at all...  why would they put a clause in for that scenario?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:35:04 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!

wait...
why would a loan get called simply because the property is upside down?
that doesn't make sense at all...  why would they put a clause in for that scenario?

They don't.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 08:38:17 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:35:04 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!

wait...
why would a loan get called simply because the property is upside down?
that doesn't make sense at all...  why would they put a clause in for that scenario?

They don't.

They can and do call loans for that reason.  At the moment, all I have is anecdotes, but tonight I will do a little digging, when I'm not on a computer loaded with Websense filtering garbage.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:49:41 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 08:38:17 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:35:04 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!

wait...
why would a loan get called simply because the property is upside down?
that doesn't make sense at all...  why would they put a clause in for that scenario?

They don't.

They can and do call loans for that reason.  At the moment, all I have is anecdotes, but tonight I will do a little digging, when I'm not on a computer loaded with Websense filtering garbage.

You'll find you're mistaken. If the borrower continues to make payments on time, the lender cannot recall the mortgage.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 09:21:04 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:49:41 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 08:38:17 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on November 30, 2009, 08:35:04 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 03:33:02 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on November 30, 2009, 01:38:02 PM
1 in 7 mortgages delinquent or in foreclosure.

So housing prices drop FURTHER, and anyone with a new (5 years or less) mortgage will go upside down, even if they're making their payments.  Their loans will be called, making housing prices drop even further.  Rinse, repeat.

Ho ho!  The ship is capsizing!  Strike up the band!

wait...
why would a loan get called simply because the property is upside down?
that doesn't make sense at all...  why would they put a clause in for that scenario?

They don't.

They can and do call loans for that reason.  At the moment, all I have is anecdotes, but tonight I will do a little digging, when I'm not on a computer loaded with Websense filtering garbage.

You'll find you're mistaken. If the borrower continues to make payments on time, the lender cannot recall the mortgage.

I may very well be mistaken.  I will look when I get to my home computer, one that doesn't filter out the entire friggin' interbutts.  Grumble, grumble, fucking Websense, grumble.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 09:30:00 PM
yea. we've got 'eSafe' and it sucks ass too.... i feel your pain.

it seems to me that it would be self defeating to put an 'under water' statement in the acceleration clause....
if the person is making payments on a loan that is more than the value of the house, the lender is getting mo money than they would if they called the loan and likely forced the person into foreclosure...  then they would be able to get, at most, the market value of the house, which is already established to be less than the loan amount that they are currently raking in.  The only motivation i can think of is that, being underwater, they may be likely to start screwing up and eventually won't be able to make payments and go into tits up anyways, so the lender can call the loan and hopefully force them to refi (rather than foreclose), but that doesn't reflect the reality of the situation we are in where there aren't lenders raining from the sky anymore...
TGRR, what are you hearing is the motivation for the lenders to do this?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 01, 2009, 10:01:42 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 09:30:00 PM
yea. we've got 'eSafe' and it sucks ass too.... i feel your pain.

it seems to me that it would be self defeating to put an 'under water' statement in the acceleration clause....
if the person is making payments on a loan that is more than the value of the house, the lender is getting mo money than they would if they called the loan and likely forced the person into foreclosure...  then they would be able to get, at most, the market value of the house, which is already established to be less than the loan amount that they are currently raking in.  The only motivation i can think of is that, being underwater, they may be likely to start screwing up and eventually won't be able to make payments and go into tits up anyways, so the lender can call the loan and hopefully force them to refi (rather than foreclose), but that doesn't reflect the reality of the situation we are in where there aren't lenders raining from the sky anymore...
TGRR, what are you hearing is the motivation for the lenders to do this?


You can't refinance an upside down loan unless you go through the Home Affordable program.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 10:02:30 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 01, 2009, 10:01:42 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 09:30:00 PM
yea. we've got 'eSafe' and it sucks ass too.... i feel your pain.

it seems to me that it would be self defeating to put an 'under water' statement in the acceleration clause....
if the person is making payments on a loan that is more than the value of the house, the lender is getting mo money than they would if they called the loan and likely forced the person into foreclosure...  then they would be able to get, at most, the market value of the house, which is already established to be less than the loan amount that they are currently raking in.  The only motivation i can think of is that, being underwater, they may be likely to start screwing up and eventually won't be able to make payments and go into tits up anyways, so the lender can call the loan and hopefully force them to refi (rather than foreclose), but that doesn't reflect the reality of the situation we are in where there aren't lenders raining from the sky anymore...
TGRR, what are you hearing is the motivation for the lenders to do this?


You can't refinance an upside down loan unless you go through the Home Affordable program.

Fuck.  I got distracted by bewbs and never looked that shit up.

Tonight.  If I am not assaulted.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 10:03:59 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 30, 2009, 09:30:00 PM
yea. we've got 'eSafe' and it sucks ass too.... i feel your pain.

it seems to me that it would be self defeating to put an 'under water' statement in the acceleration clause....
if the person is making payments on a loan that is more than the value of the house, the lender is getting mo money than they would if they called the loan and likely forced the person into foreclosure...  then they would be able to get, at most, the market value of the house, which is already established to be less than the loan amount that they are currently raking in.  The only motivation i can think of is that, being underwater, they may be likely to start screwing up and eventually won't be able to make payments and go into tits up anyways, so the lender can call the loan and hopefully force them to refi (rather than foreclose), but that doesn't reflect the reality of the situation we are in where there aren't lenders raining from the sky anymore...
TGRR, what are you hearing is the motivation for the lenders to do this?


In the (very) short term, foreclosures make perfect sense, if you're a bank CEO out to make a BIG increase on the books, then leave for a better job before reality sets in.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 11:25:26 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 10:03:59 PM
In the (very) short term, foreclosures make perfect sense, if you're a bank CEO out to make a BIG increase on the books, then leave for a better job before reality sets in.

why would that increase the books?
if you own the debt that shows on the books as the value of the debt, plus interest.  if you foreclose on them you have a house that you have to mark to the market, right?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on December 01, 2009, 11:51:25 PM
Because you have a credit default swap with AIG, so if you call in the loan (or more commonly, raise the interest rate), forcing a foreclosure,  AIG pays out the balance lost on the auction of the house.  So you get all that money today instead of over the next 30 years (plus the added value from the unpayably high interest rate).

Also, they changed the rules so that banks can sit on foreclosed property indefinitely, which means the bank can keep the value on the books of the house the last time it was appraised.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 02, 2009, 01:21:39 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 01, 2009, 11:51:25 PM
Because you have a credit default swap with AIG, so if you call in the loan (or more commonly, raise the interest rate), forcing a foreclosure,  AIG pays out the balance lost on the auction of the house.  So you get all that money today instead of over the next 30 years (plus the added value from the unpayably high interest rate).

Also, they changed the rules so that banks can sit on foreclosed property indefinitely, which means the bank can keep the value on the books of the house the last time it was appraised.

This.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 02, 2009, 01:41:39 AM
Okay, Nigel, I looked it up and here's the facts as far as I can tell:

1.  A bank cannot call a loan simply because the property is upside down.  They could in the 20s, but the Glass-Steagal Act ended that.  It is one of the few things NOT repealed by the Gramm/Leech/Bliley Act of 1998.

2.  However, the bank CAN call a "balloon loan" if the mortgage is structured as a shorter loan (ie, amortized over 30 years, but due in 20), they are not required to renew the loan (this used to be common practice, now they seem to foreclose immediately).

3.  The big fear seems to be that, rather than the bank foreclosing, masses will walk on their upside down loans.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 02, 2009, 02:14:55 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 02, 2009, 01:41:39 AM
Okay, Nigel, I looked it up and here's the facts as far as I can tell:

1.  A bank cannot call a loan simply because the property is upside down.  They could in the 20s, but the Glass-Steagal Act ended that.  It is one of the few things NOT repealed by the Gramm/Leech/Bliley Act of 1998.

2.  However, the bank CAN call a "balloon loan" if the mortgage is structured as a shorter loan (ie, amortized over 30 years, but due in 20), they are not required to renew the loan (this used to be common practice, now they seem to foreclose immediately).

3.  The big fear seems to be that, rather than the bank foreclosing, masses will walk on their upside down loans.

The balloon loan thing happened with my sister. My sister was an idiot from the get-go and made things vastly worse for herself by ruining the house, though.

People are, indeed, walking away from their loans, and it's amazing. AMAZING. It will be sheer disaster. I intend to keep paying mine as long as I can, even if it goes upside-down.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 02, 2009, 02:15:37 AM
It cracks me up that my house was, at one point, "worth" nearly half a million dollars. I'm really glad we didn't try to cash out equity.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 04:06:10 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 01, 2009, 11:51:25 PM
Because you have a credit default swap with AIG, so if you call in the loan (or more commonly, raise the interest rate), forcing a foreclosure,  AIG pays out the balance lost on the auction of the house.  So you get all that money today instead of over the next 30 years (plus the added value from the unpayably high interest rate).

Also, they changed the rules so that banks can sit on foreclosed property indefinitely, which means the bank can keep the value on the books of the house the last time it was appraised.

hm. interesting...
so under what clause do they call the loan?  Do you know what the status of AIG is after it's bailout in regards to it's ability to honor all the CDS derivatives?  are they likely to require more bailout?

as far as sitting on foreclosed property just so they can keep the artificially high appraisal on the books, that would just be a biding time strategy, right? since the value of the house is lower, and probably going to continue going south? (esp. after the next wave of rate resets hits next year on the option arms...)  They would presumably only do that if they didn't have a CDS on the mortgage asset that would payout immediately, right?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on December 02, 2009, 10:02:26 AM
See Roger for calling the loans (apparently its rare circumstances, and another killer contract clause).

It would be a time biding strategy, except the bit where entire neighborhoods (and in a few extreme cases, entire suburb towns) are going down, as more houses end up abandoned and local economies turn to absolute shit, those house prices are just going to fall even further.

Also, according to my various contacts inside the investment machines, the most likely outcome of all this will be that overall housing prices stay low for a while, since the price won't be allowed by investors to drop as low as the market needs it to be, so it has to wait for inflation to catch up.  Also couple this with the slow flood of houses coming off the foreclosure line.  It's currently estimated the banks are holding enough houses to cover every new home purchase for the next 10 years.  Not much room for prices to go up once they start selling.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 02, 2009, 05:25:09 PM
No, srsly.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ahD2WoDAL9h0

Quote"I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit," said a friend, who told me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank.

I called Goldman Sachs spokesman Lucas van Praag to ask whether it's true that Goldman partners feel they need handguns to protect themselves from the angry proletariat. He didn't call me back. The New York Police Department has told me that "as a preliminary matter" it believes some of the bankers I inquired about do have pistol permits. The NYPD also said it will be a while before it can name names.

While we wait, Goldman has wrapped itself in the flag of Warren Buffett, with whom it will jointly donate $500 million, part of an effort to burnish its image -- and gain new Goldman clients. Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein also reversed himself after having previously called Goldman's greed "God's work" and apologized earlier this month for having participated in things that were "clearly wrong."

Has it really come to this? Imagine what emotions must be billowing through the halls of Goldman Sachs to provoke the firm into an apology. Talk that Goldman bankers might have armed themselves in self-defense would sound ludicrous, were it not so apt a metaphor for the way that the most successful people on Wall Street have become a target for public rage.

Pistol Ready

Common sense tells you a handgun is probably not even all that useful. Suppose an intruder sneaks past the doorman or jumps the security fence at night. By the time you pull the pistol out of your wife's jewelry safe, find the ammunition, and load your weapon, Fifi the Pomeranian has already been taken hostage and the gun won't do you any good. As for carrying a loaded pistol when you venture outside, dream on. Concealed gun permits are almost impossible for ordinary citizens to obtain in New York or nearby states.

In other words, a little humility and contrition are probably the better route.

Until a couple of weeks ago, that was obvious to everyone but Goldman, a firm famous for both prescience and arrogance. In a display of both, Blankfein began to raise his personal- security threat level early in the financial crisis. He keeps a summer home near the Hamptons, where unrestricted public access would put him at risk if the angry mobs rose up and marched to the East End of Long Island.

To the Barricades

He tried to buy a house elsewhere without attracting attention as the financial crisis unfolded in 2007, a move that was foiled by the New York Post. Then, Blankfein got permission from the local authorities to install a security gate at his house two months before Bear Stearns Cos. collapsed.

This is the kind of foresight that Goldman Sachs is justly famous for. Blankfein somehow anticipated the persecution complex his fellow bankers would soon suffer. Surely, though, this man who can afford to surround himself with a private army of security guards isn't sleeping with the key to a gun safe under his pillow. The thought is just too bizarre to be true.

So maybe other senior people at Goldman Sachs have gone out and bought guns, and they know something. But what?

Henry Paulson, U.S. Treasury secretary during the bailout and a former Goldman Sachs CEO, let it slip during testimony to Congress last summer when he explained why it was so critical to bail out Goldman Sachs, and -- oh yes -- the other banks. People "were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system."

Torn Curtain

There you have it. The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm's revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses.

This slip-up let the other bailed-out banks happily hand off public blame to Goldman, which is unpopular among its peers because it always seems to win at everyone's expense.

Plenty of Wall Streeters worry about the big discrepancies in wealth, and think the rise of a financial industry-led plutocracy is unjust. That doesn't mean any of them plan to move into a double-wide mobile home as a show of solidarity with the little people, though.

Cool Hand Lloyd

No, talk of Goldman and guns plays right into the way Wall- Streeters like to think of themselves. Even those who were bailed out believe they are tough, macho Clint Eastwoods of the financial frontier, protecting the fistful of dollars in one hand with the Glock in the other. The last thing they want is to be so reasonably paid that the peasants have no interest in lynching them.

And if the proles really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms. If nothing else, that pistol permit might go part way toward explaining why they won't be standing outside with the rest of the crowd, broke and humiliated, saying, "Damn, I was on the wrong side of a trade with Goldman again."
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 04:06:10 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on December 01, 2009, 11:51:25 PM
Because you have a credit default swap with AIG, so if you call in the loan (or more commonly, raise the interest rate), forcing a foreclosure,  AIG pays out the balance lost on the auction of the house.  So you get all that money today instead of over the next 30 years (plus the added value from the unpayably high interest rate).

Also, they changed the rules so that banks can sit on foreclosed property indefinitely, which means the bank can keep the value on the books of the house the last time it was appraised.

hm. interesting...
so under what clause do they call the loan?  Do you know what the status of AIG is after it's bailout in regards to it's ability to honor all the CDS derivatives?  are they likely to require more bailout?

as far as sitting on foreclosed property just so they can keep the artificially high appraisal on the books, that would just be a biding time strategy, right? since the value of the house is lower, and probably going to continue going south? (esp. after the next wave of rate resets hits next year on the option arms...)  They would presumably only do that if they didn't have a CDS on the mortgage asset that would payout immediately, right?

Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.

Right.   I was assuming that when he referred to the last appraisal, it was the last appraisal that the lender did/ordered.  otherwise it would get marked down each year by the property tax appraisal, so there's no advantage...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 02, 2009, 06:20:58 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.

Right.   I was assuming that when he referred to the last appraisal, it was the last appraisal that the lender did/ordered.  otherwise it would get marked down each year by the property tax appraisal, so there's no advantage...

The property tax assessments are generally adjusted to the last bank appraisal/sale price, and then increase at a percentage annually after that. You can appeal your assessment, but it usually doesn't do a whole lot of good so most people don't.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:30:45 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 06:20:58 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.

Right.   I was assuming that when he referred to the last appraisal, it was the last appraisal that the lender did/ordered.  otherwise it would get marked down each year by the property tax appraisal, so there's no advantage...
oh that's true... they're still increasing tax assessment appraisals...  :lol:

The property tax assessments are generally adjusted to the last bank appraisal/sale price, and then increase at a percentage annually after that. You can appeal your assessment, but it usually doesn't do a whole lot of good so most people don't.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on December 02, 2009, 07:19:09 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 02, 2009, 05:25:09 PM
if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system.

Dare to dream.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on December 03, 2009, 09:01:14 AM
Wow, this is beautiful. If anything, we should amp up these rumours about the bankers and the traders arming up to defend against a prole uprising. For the same reason talk of assassination was shunned during election times, for fear of talking about it making it more likely.
Would that work? Even if it doesn't cause people to go postal on bankers [think security guard that just lost his house?], spreading the rumours would make some bankers shit themselves?
Just make sure they know we know it's not just Goldman Sachs but all of those fuckers.

Quote from: Cain on December 02, 2009, 05:25:09 PMhttp://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=ahD2WoDAL9h0

Quote“I just wrote my first reference for a gun permit,” said a friend, who told me of swearing to the good character of a Goldman Sachs Group Inc. banker who applied to the local police for a permit to buy a pistol. The banker had told this friend of mine that senior Goldman people have loaded up on firearms and are now equipped to defend themselves if there is a populist uprising against the bank.

I called Goldman Sachs spokesman Lucas van Praag to ask whether it’s true that Goldman partners feel they need handguns to protect themselves from the angry proletariat. He didn’t call me back. The New York Police Department has told me that “as a preliminary matter” it believes some of the bankers I inquired about do have pistol permits. The NYPD also said it will be a while before it can name names.

While we wait, Goldman has wrapped itself in the flag of Warren Buffett, with whom it will jointly donate $500 million, part of an effort to burnish its image -- and gain new Goldman clients. Goldman Sachs Chief Executive Officer Lloyd Blankfein also reversed himself after having previously called Goldman’s greed “God’s work” and apologized earlier this month for having participated in things that were “clearly wrong.”

Has it really come to this? Imagine what emotions must be billowing through the halls of Goldman Sachs to provoke the firm into an apology. Talk that Goldman bankers might have armed themselves in self-defense would sound ludicrous, were it not so apt a metaphor for the way that the most successful people on Wall Street have become a target for public rage.

Pistol Ready

Common sense tells you a handgun is probably not even all that useful. Suppose an intruder sneaks past the doorman or jumps the security fence at night. By the time you pull the pistol out of your wife’s jewelry safe, find the ammunition, and load your weapon, Fifi the Pomeranian has already been taken hostage and the gun won’t do you any good. As for carrying a loaded pistol when you venture outside, dream on. Concealed gun permits are almost impossible for ordinary citizens to obtain in New York or nearby states.

In other words, a little humility and contrition are probably the better route.

Until a couple of weeks ago, that was obvious to everyone but Goldman, a firm famous for both prescience and arrogance. In a display of both, Blankfein began to raise his personal- security threat level early in the financial crisis. He keeps a summer home near the Hamptons, where unrestricted public access would put him at risk if the angry mobs rose up and marched to the East End of Long Island.

To the Barricades

He tried to buy a house elsewhere without attracting attention as the financial crisis unfolded in 2007, a move that was foiled by the New York Post. Then, Blankfein got permission from the local authorities to install a security gate at his house two months before Bear Stearns Cos. collapsed.

This is the kind of foresight that Goldman Sachs is justly famous for. Blankfein somehow anticipated the persecution complex his fellow bankers would soon suffer. Surely, though, this man who can afford to surround himself with a private army of security guards isn’t sleeping with the key to a gun safe under his pillow. The thought is just too bizarre to be true.

So maybe other senior people at Goldman Sachs have gone out and bought guns, and they know something. But what?

Henry Paulson, U.S. Treasury secretary during the bailout and a former Goldman Sachs CEO, let it slip during testimony to Congress last summer when he explained why it was so critical to bail out Goldman Sachs, and -- oh yes -- the other banks. People “were unhappy with the big discrepancies in wealth, but they at least believed in the system and in some form of market-driven capitalism. But if we had a complete meltdown, it could lead to people questioning the basis of the system.”

Torn Curtain

There you have it. The bailout was meant to keep the curtain drawn on the way the rich make money, not from the free market, but from the lack of one. Goldman Sachs blew its cover when the firm’s revenue from trading reached a record $27 billion in the first nine months of this year, and a public that was writhing in financial agony caught on that the profits earned on taxpayer capital were going to pay employee bonuses.

This slip-up let the other bailed-out banks happily hand off public blame to Goldman, which is unpopular among its peers because it always seems to win at everyone’s expense.

Plenty of Wall Streeters worry about the big discrepancies in wealth, and think the rise of a financial industry-led plutocracy is unjust. That doesn’t mean any of them plan to move into a double-wide mobile home as a show of solidarity with the little people, though.

Cool Hand Lloyd

No, talk of Goldman and guns plays right into the way Wall- Streeters like to think of themselves. Even those who were bailed out believe they are tough, macho Clint Eastwoods of the financial frontier, protecting the fistful of dollars in one hand with the Glock in the other. The last thing they want is to be so reasonably paid that the peasants have no interest in lynching them.

And if the proles really do appear brandishing pitchforks at the doors of Park Avenue and the gates of Round Hill Road, you can be sure that the Goldman guys and their families will be holed up in their safe rooms with their firearms. If nothing else, that pistol permit might go part way toward explaining why they won’t be standing outside with the rest of the crowd, broke and humiliated, saying, “Damn, I was on the wrong side of a trade with Goldman again.”
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 03, 2009, 03:01:56 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 03, 2009, 09:01:14 AM
Wow, this is beautiful. If anything, we should amp up these rumours about the bankers and the traders arming up to defend against a prole uprising. For the same reason talk of assassination was shunned during election times, for fear of talking about it making it more likely.
Would that work? Even if it doesn't cause people to go postal on bankers [think security guard that just lost his house?], spreading the rumours would make some bankers shit themselves?
Just make sure they know we know it's not just Goldman Sachs but all of those fuckers.

I totally support that.
Do you have any ideas regarding how best to spread these rumors among the 'proles'?
There needs to be more news stories that report this as corroboration...
Various flavors of chain emails that would appeal to the various sectors of the demographic to spread them....
Also, although GS isn't alone, they are heads and shoulders above the others from what I have read.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on December 03, 2009, 03:06:49 PM
this is a really strong angle for disinformation.

the "just uprising of the people" meme is gaining force, AIG and GS employees are a visible evil, and the rumor feeds these dark emotions people have re: DOING SOMETHING about the system being so broken. Doing something HARSH.

The whole concept is emotionally evocative.

I was reading an article about Crowdsourcing a few weeks ago, and somebody had suggested that there should be a database of AIG and GS employee addresses. And then the crowd would determine what it wants to do with those data. The implication was violent.

will think more about this


it may just be the angle we've been waiting for
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 03, 2009, 06:16:49 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on December 03, 2009, 03:06:49 PM
this is a really strong angle for disinformation.

the "just uprising of the people" meme is gaining force, AIG and GS employees are a visible evil, and the rumor feeds these dark emotions people have re: DOING SOMETHING about the system being so broken. Doing something HARSH.

The whole concept is emotionally evocative.

I was reading an article about Crowdsourcing a few weeks ago, and somebody had suggested that there should be a database of AIG and GS employee addresses. And then the crowd would determine what it wants to do with those data. The implication was violent.

will think more about this


it may just be the angle we've been waiting for

I've been mentioning the idea that AIG/GS employees are buying firearms, alongside market indications that the whole mess will drop into the pot in February/March, at every board I go to.

And IRL.

Just for fun.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on December 03, 2009, 08:44:54 PM
well for starters, spreading that link. this is the faster-loading, no ads and crap print-page link btw:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20670001&sid=ahD2WoDAL9h0

continuing on that line, perhaps an AWS spoof article about people harassing bankers? Just, it need to be only high ranking management bankers, not the clerks behind the counter of course. That would have the opposite effect because the clerks are "one of us" (us being "the little people"). Which might cause sympathy and therefore resistance to the idea of harassing the bankers.

And what Roger said. I will certainly tell my friends.

Oh and I'll just tweet that link right now, too. Anyone got a good line to go with it? "Bankers arming up to defend from people uprising" is the first I can come up with. Needs more catchy.

Lemme check that SEO list of "catchy headline formats"

how about "Why are bankers arming themselves to defend from *** ?" <--- need a good phrase there. but the idea is by asking why, you step past the question whether they are or not.

should send this to @dangerousmeme too, he'd love that stuff, and gets a shitload of readers.

what about

"The number One reason why bankers are arming themselves"

(it doesn't really need to relate directly to the topic of the article, tangentially is also fine, as long as it's provoking.)

maybe

"Public outrage: Should bankers be watching their backs, or worse?"
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 03, 2009, 10:27:16 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 06:20:58 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.

Right.   I was assuming that when he referred to the last appraisal, it was the last appraisal that the lender did/ordered.  otherwise it would get marked down each year by the property tax appraisal, so there's no advantage...

The property tax assessments are generally adjusted to the last bank appraisal/sale price, and then increase at a percentage annually after that. You can appeal your assessment, but it usually doesn't do a whole lot of good so most people don't.

I DID acknowledge that I was mistaken, right?

Nigel was correct.  Banks cannot call a loan simply because it is upside down.

DAMMIT, JIM, I'M A HOLY MAN™, NOT AN ECONOMIST! (And I should remember that in the future.)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 03, 2009, 11:37:35 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 03, 2009, 10:27:16 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 06:20:58 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 06:16:07 PM
Quote from: The Right Reverend Nigel on December 02, 2009, 05:45:13 PM
Just to point out that strategy wouldn't work with houses that were confirmed to be upside-down via an appraisal because it would show as a loss on the books.

Right.   I was assuming that when he referred to the last appraisal, it was the last appraisal that the lender did/ordered.  otherwise it would get marked down each year by the property tax appraisal, so there's no advantage...

The property tax assessments are generally adjusted to the last bank appraisal/sale price, and then increase at a percentage annually after that. You can appeal your assessment, but it usually doesn't do a whole lot of good so most people don't.

I DID acknowledge that I was mistaken, right?

Nigel was correct.  Banks cannot call a loan simply because it is upside down.

DAMMIT, JIM, I'M A HOLY MAN™, NOT AN ECONOMIST! (And I should remember that in the future.)

Yes, you did, and graciously at that. :)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 04, 2009, 09:18:56 AM
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/11/30/goldman-sachs-arms-itself/

QuoteI'm reading this article on Goldman executives applying en masse for gun permits and I'm trying to decide exactly how funny it is on a scale of 1 to 10. Reader assistance here is definitely appreciated.

On the unfunny side: it's never good when anyone buys guns, particularly not rich weenies with persecution complexes. Also, it might possibly be true that people have threatened Goldman bankers physically, which would really not be all that funny and would make me personally feel somewhat uncomfortable, although it would probably never be very high on the list of things I have to lose sleep over.

On the funny side, there are several things to consider. There's the image of Goldman guys walking into Dean and DeLuca's nervously grabbing at their holstered nines as they buy espresso and soy waffles. There's the idea that some of these dorks might actually think that they're going to forestall proletarian rebellion by keeping guns in their Hamptons beach houses. There's even the impossible-to-resist image of a future accidental shooting of some innocent hot dog vendor on Park Avenue, followed by the inevitable p.r. response from Goldman in which the bank claims that the only thing its employees are guilty of is "being really good at shooting people."

Certainly, there are things to ponder on both sides. Right now I'm leaning toward making this a seven on the funny scale, trending toward eight. Advice more than welcome.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on December 08, 2009, 10:49:53 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 03, 2009, 08:44:54 PM

Lemme check that SEO list of "catchy headline formats"

how about "Why are bankers arming themselves to defend from *** ?" <--- need a good phrase there. but the idea is by asking why, you step past the question whether they are or not.




"Are bankers arming themselves to defend against us?"
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2009, 09:14:15 AM
I can't wait until a bank hires Blackwater to defend its upper management.

It will be like a perfect storm of entitled fuckups who should be in jail.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2009, 09:27:24 AM
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/grayson-rips-bernanke-over-latest-aig-bailout-insinuates-attempted-irs-fraud-grossly-illegal

Is AIG attempting fraud on the IRS?  Alan Grayson thinks so.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article6945979.ece

UK government runs out of the imaginary money it magics out of thin air

http://www.pivotcapital.com/research.html

Is China's spending bubble about to collapse?  Looks possible.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/225781

Surprise!  Goldman Sachs wrote 9 pages of proposed changes to derivatives legislation.

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/InfectiousGreed/~3/PYP6oMSVjG0/the_trouble_wit_61.html

And Paul Kedrosky has written a haiku about the financial crisis:

AIG bankrupt;
your taxes gone to Greenwich;
no one hears your screams
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 11, 2009, 09:21:55 AM
http://www.ajc.com/business/house-scales-back-proposed-236793.html

QuoteWASHINGTON — House Democrats head into the final stretch on a long-awaited Wall Street regulation bill with two crucial and contentious votes looming before they can declare victory on one of President Barack Obama's legislative priorities.

The sweeping regulatory overhaul aims to address the myriad conditions that led to last year's financial crisis.

Test votes during two days of debate indicate that Democratic support for the underlying legislation will hold in final passage. Prodded by moderates, however, nearly half the Democrats teamed up with Republicans late Thursday to loosen restrictions on derivatives and reject tougher regulations.

[...]

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has been an aggressive opponent of the legislation, running television ads against the proposed consumer agency and pressuring lawmakers to vote to eliminate it and to ease the derivatives regulations.

The legislation still imposes restrictions on derivatives, aiming to prevent manipulation in and bring transparency to a $600 trillion global market. An amendment by New York Democrat Scott Murphy, adopted 304-124 Thursday night, exempted businesses that trade in derivatives, not as financial speculators, but to hedge against market fluctuations such as currency rates or gasoline prices. The amendment also provided an exception for businesses that are not considered too big to be a risk to the financial system.

A Democratic effort to make more companies subject to derivatives regulation failed 279-150.

Let's party like its 1999!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 11, 2009, 09:55:40 PM
Not entirely related, in that its an anecdote about a personal experience posted on another board rather than a story about the fuckers in charge at the banks, but funny none the less...

QuoteHave a friend that is having some problems right now. He was laid off from his job and is on unemployment.

As are most he lives paycheck to paycheck and has a significant amount of consumer debt. He lacks the ability to pay anything other than his mortgage. Has not made any payments on credit cards for about 3 months now.

Capital One called him today and as usual he gave them the story of his inability to make any payments at this time. Caller asked him to hold for a supervisor. Turns out the supervisor was basically a solution provider.

They started out by suggesting he work with his utility company to get on a hardship plan and try reworking some auto loans. Supposedly, this was to free up other obligations so he could pay Capital One a little bit to keep his accounts from going to charge off status.

This is where it gets good. The next thing the lady from Capital One asked was if he was in good health. He responded with a yes. She then suggested that he could sell blood to a plasma bank and for that he would be able to get $200 a month by doing that on a regular basis and that would help him to get back on track.

I couldn't believe it when he told me that. He has assured me that it is 100% accurate as to how the whole thing went down.

By the way, I advised him to just ignore all requests for payment and let them go to collections as their is not much else he can do. If he gets back on his feet maybe he can rework something then.

Has anybody here heard that these credit card companies are actually doing this as a common practice?

perhaps a red flag should have come up when his loan officer introduced himself as Shylock!  :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 12, 2009, 12:06:11 PM
Wow.

How long before they accept organ donations?  I'm giving it a year.  I reckon if I sell a kidney and part of my liver, I could probably pay off all my student debt.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 14, 2009, 12:26:55 AM
another tertiarily related note:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/8410453.stm
Guy with a Whack-a-mole game in his Suffolk arcade turns it into a whack-a-banker game. proves to be popular....
this should be done with realistic bankers images and every so often one should pop up with a little pistol in his hand and if you whack it, receive a penalty.  some mention of prole uprising should be mentioned.
(http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/46910000/jpg/_46910195_banker2226.jpg)
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 14, 2009, 08:31:51 AM
Six months and a couple of geeks and you could easily rewrite that Kill George W Bush Game that Al-Qaeda put out (seriously, look it up) with bankers, and set it in New York and London instead of Iraq.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 05, 2010, 11:11:57 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=a48c8UpUMxKQ

Quote[Barney Frank's bill, H.R. 4173] supports the biggest banks. It authorizes Federal Reserve banks to provide as much as $4 trillion in emergency funding the next time Wall Street crashes. So much for "no-more-bailouts" talk. That is more than twice what the Fed pumped into markets this time around.

Best of all, the bill contains a provision that, in the event of another government request for emergency aid to prop up the financial system, debate in Congress be limited to just 10 hours.

The next crisis is around the corner, and this is the financial equivalent of buying a Honda full of silver and an AK-47.  Someone is going to be left footing the bill, but it sure as hell aint going to be the biggest banks and financial service providers.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 01:44:57 PM
Commas and Zeros
commas and zeros
they casually slip in orders of magnitude while we are still reeling from the shock of innumeracy brought on by the previous insult to us.

It works. i fail to be shocked by this newsbit.
in the midst of the last crisis the rally cry was denial, only after the delta minuses started looking around and saying that we're fucked did they let slip to term "recession", then they screamed economic doom if we don't polish the crooks knobs.
rinse, repeat.
green shoots.
saved the day.
pat on the back, Geithner.
anyone who's following this shit knows that we've got another lump coming up, looking significantly larger than the last.  So now they lay the groundwork for more shock doctrine robbery... 

Jesus christ...
i gotta step up the preps.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 05, 2010, 02:46:37 PM
The only reason America hasn't already flamed out is because the rest of the world is doing its best to stop an American collapse. If you do a comparison between the US economy now and the Argentinian economy before the crash, Argentina was actually performing better.  I think just the other day, the US suggested China buy more US dollar reserves and China said it had bought everything it could find. 

Speaking of which, funny how just a day or two after that, a report came out blaming China for the global economic crisis.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 03:00:32 PM
heh... yeppa.
the Argentine peso wasn't the worlds reserve currency, so it collapsed unsupported.
We can export our inflation, though, so the rest of the world has to suck down our incompetence and hubris until they are full up before we collapse. (which doesn't look too far off)
Regional currencies are on the rise, and central banks are buying gold like its vaporizing despite the record prices. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 07:22:05 PM
Cain,
Curious what you think.  A member at my other pet forum posted this:

To foretell the future, think like a banker
________________________________________
To extort the maximum value from a population, when one has control of monetary system, leverage the laws of supply and demand. Use deflation, inflation, and hyperinflation all as tools to transfer wealth. All have a place and a purpose.

The banker's guide to owning it all
1.   Become majority lender in an economy of people with assets you want.
2.   Encourage indebtedness by loaning generously while securing on assets of interest.
3.   Loosen lending standards until the assets you seek to capture are attached.
(this makes the economy debt dependent)
4.   Once debts are significant for the bulk of the population, sharply tighten lending standards. <-- Economic shock - Onset of deflation
5.   Backstop losses with public guarantees if possible. This is gravy if one can get it.
(Fannie and Freddie guarantees, for example)
6.   Permit default 'without risk' on the assets you wish to sieze to maximize wealth transfer.
(stall foreclosure, stay repossession orders etc)
7.   Stall the economy to maximize default positions and deplete private liquidity. <-- We are here
8.   Successively ratchet the economy downhill, while bettering secured positions.
9.   In a series of large actions, sieze all security for default. Target the assets of greatest interest first.
(This deals a heavy economic blow and can help cause the ratcheting required for step 8.)
10.   Transfer asset ownership, but retain prior owners as renters where possible.
(This reduces public lashback and helps maintain the asset for resale)
11.   Once the bulk of assets of transferred, write them down to leverage the public financial backstop.
12.   Buy up as many remaining assets on the cheap as possible. Hide this action.
13.   Hyperinflate to destroy the external claims on wealth. <-- Onset of hyperinflation
(This destroys treasuries, gov't bonds, currency. Ensures free title on new assets. May cause war.)
14.   Stabilize the currency or devise a new one, resume lending at a reasonable pace. Sell the assets back, secured of course, at your chosen price in new currency.

Hyperinflation is only a risk to the wealthy if the population has the assets.
Make note of that statement. It is key to timing the shift from deflation to hyperinflation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------



It echos a quote that is a favorite of that forum:
QuoteThomas Jefferson;

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 05, 2010, 08:09:42 PM
9 is actually starting to happen, to a degree.

Overall, while I am not an economist, politically it makes perfect sense.  I'm not sure about the curreny destruction part, but the rest all seems plausible enough.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 08:23:22 PM
What large security grabs have you seen?
i think we haven't seen anything yet.  just a trickle.  Commercial real estate and second wave of residential real estate crapout is going to hit this year...
there will be big grabs then maybe...

incidentally, if you want to take a good position in this ride, one should clear any secured debt and build up a cash position in anticipation of step 12 or so, when things are bargain basement.
better we buy them than the bankers....
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 05, 2010, 08:29:52 PM
Well, they haven't been large ones, but I've been hearing about JP Morgan and others starting to purchase outright financial brokers (like their deal with Cazenove last month) so I presume this would be the next step.  I will admit I don't follow the minutiae of the finance world and this single example may be skewing my perceptions.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on January 05, 2010, 09:55:56 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 08:23:22 PM
What large security grabs have you seen?
i think we haven't seen anything yet.  just a trickle.  Commercial real estate and second wave of residential real estate crapout is going to hit this year...
there will be big grabs then maybe...

incidentally, if you want to take a good position in this ride, one should clear any secured debt and build up a cash position in anticipation of step 12 or so, when things are bargain basement.
better we buy them than the bankers....


Only problem with that is that inflation makes cash reserves much less valuable.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 10:07:25 PM
We've been steadily inflating for decades.  Right now the environment is deflationary.  This guys model says that deflation will crap out the economy and then you can buy assets at rock bottom prices then they hyperinflate to extinguish their debts when they have secured the assets...
So you buy before they do that.
Or if you're already in debt, you should liquidate your assets and put them into something you can hide from the banks that will retain value.  Ride out the storm and then payoff your debts with proceeds from your hidden wealth in hyperinflated currency.
There's like this huge argument in the inflation vs. deflation camps of economic doom n gloomers.  And partly that is due to loose definitions, I think
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 09, 2010, 03:21:39 PM
Wolfgang Manchau at the Financial Times seems to think it will be massive deflation followed by hyperinflation, and anyone arguing for merely one side or another is a bit simple.

Also, fuck you, banks

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/caffc078-fc97-11de-bc51-00144feab49a.html

QuoteCity bankers will suffer little or no impact from the bonus supertax imposed by the government last month, according to a Financial Times poll of leading investment banks.

Most banks, polled in an anonymised survey, said they would absorb all or part of the cost of the one-off 50 per cent tax by inflating their bonus pools, even at the risk of irritating the government and their own shareholders.

This is just staggering.  Also, the bit about "government and their own shareholders" should just read "government" now.  They threw tantrums about leaving the country, about witholding loans, and now they're just going to inflate their bonuses to where they're comfortable with so the tax doesn't get them.

I dread how much shit they are going to pull over the summer (Parliamentary recess) and once the Tories are in power.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on January 09, 2010, 09:06:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 09, 2010, 03:21:39 PM
Wolfgang Manchau at the Financial Times seems to think it will be massive deflation followed by hyperinflation, and anyone arguing for merely one side or another is a bit simple.

Also, fuck you, banks

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/caffc078-fc97-11de-bc51-00144feab49a.html

QuoteCity bankers will suffer little or no impact from the bonus supertax imposed by the government last month, according to a Financial Times poll of leading investment banks.

Most banks, polled in an anonymised survey, said they would absorb all or part of the cost of the one-off 50 per cent tax by inflating their bonus pools, even at the risk of irritating the government and their own shareholders.

This is just staggering.  Also, the bit about "government and their own shareholders" should just read "government" now.  They threw tantrums about leaving the country, about witholding loans, and now they're just going to inflate their bonuses to where they're comfortable with so the tax doesn't get them.

I dread how much shit they are going to pull over the summer (Parliamentary recess) and once the Tories are in power.

I dunno, if I were a shareholder I'd be pretty pissed.  Basically it means they are doubling the bonus size, thus also doubling the amount of tax they are paying.  I can see the government actually being pretty happy about that.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 10, 2010, 04:16:06 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on January 05, 2010, 09:55:56 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on January 05, 2010, 08:23:22 PM
What large security grabs have you seen?
i think we haven't seen anything yet.  just a trickle.  Commercial real estate and second wave of residential real estate crapout is going to hit this year...
there will be big grabs then maybe...

incidentally, if you want to take a good position in this ride, one should clear any secured debt and build up a cash position in anticipation of step 12 or so, when things are bargain basement.
better we buy them than the bankers....


Only problem with that is that inflation makes cash reserves much less valuable.

Yes, inflation is great for people with mass debt, terrible for people with mass cash.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 03, 2010, 11:09:05 AM
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/wireStory?id=9709670

QuoteThe government's response to the financial meltdown has made it more likely the United States will face a deeper crisis in the future, an independent watchdog at the Treasury Department warned.

The problems that led to the last crisis have not yet been addressed, and in some cases have grown worse, says Neil Barofsky, the special inspector general for the trouble asset relief program, or TARP. The quarterly report to Congress was released Sunday.

"Even if TARP saved our financial system from driving off a cliff back in 2008, absent meaningful reform, we are still driving on the same winding mountain road, but this time in a faster car," Barofsky wrote.

Since Congress passed $700 billion financial bailout, the remaining institutions considered "too big to fail" have grown larger and failed to restrain the lavish pay for their executives, Barofsky wrote. He said the banks still have an incentive to take on risk because they know the government will save them rather than bring down the financial system.

Barofsky also said his office is investigating 77 cases of possible criminal and civil fraud, including crimes of tax evasion, insider trading, mortgage lending and payment collection, false statements and public corruption.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 07, 2010, 12:47:54 AM
Source seems a little suspect, but I'm sure you can all tell me if the economics are sound or not

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/it-is-now-mathematically-impossible-to-pay-off-the-u-s-national-debt

QuoteA lot of people are very upset about the rapidly increasing U.S. national debt these days and they are  demanding a solution. What they don't realize is that there simply is not a solution under the current U.S. financial system. It is now mathematically impossible for the U.S. government to pay off the U.S. national debt. You see, the truth is that the U.S. government now owes more dollars than actually exist. If the U.S. government went out today and took every single penny from every single American bank, business and taxpayer, they still would not be able to pay off the national debt. And if they did that, obviously American society would stop functioning because nobody would have any money to buy or sell anything.

And the U.S. government would still be massively in debt.

So why doesn't the U.S. government just fire up the printing presses and print a bunch of money to pay off the debt?

Well, for one very simple reason.

That is not the way our system works.

You see, for more dollars to enter the system, the U.S. government has to go into more debt.

The U.S. government does not issue U.S. currency - the Federal Reserve does.

The Federal Reserve is a private bank owned and operated for profit by a very powerful group of elite international bankers.

If you will pull a dollar bill out and take a look at it, you will notice that it says "Federal Reserve Note" at the top.

It belongs to the Federal Reserve.

The U.S. government cannot simply go out and create new money whenever it wants under our current system.

Instead, it must get it from the Federal Reserve.

So, when the U.S. government needs to borrow more money (which happens a lot these days) it goes over to the Federal Reserve and asks them for some more green pieces of paper called Federal Reserve Notes.   

The Federal Reserve swaps these green pieces of paper for pink pieces of paper called U.S. Treasury bonds. The Federal Reserve either sells these U.S. Treasury bonds or they keep the bonds for themselves (which happens a lot these days).

So that is how the U.S. government gets more green pieces of paper called "U.S. dollars" to put into circulation. But by doing so, they get themselves into even more debt which they will owe even more interest on.

So every time the U.S. government does this, the national debt gets even bigger and the interest on that debt gets even bigger.

Are you starting to get the picture?

As you read this, the U.S. national debt is approximately 12 trillion dollars, although it is going up so rapidly that it is really hard to pin down an exact figure.

So how much money actually exists in the United States today?

Well, there are several ways to measure this.

The "M0" money supply is the total of all physical bills and currency, plus the money on hand in bank vaults and all of the deposits those banks have at reserve banks.  As of mid-2009, the Federal Reserve said that this amount was about 908 billion dollars.

The "M1" money supply includes all of the currency in the "M0" money supply, along with all of the money held in checking accounts and other checkable accounts at banks, as well as all money contained in travelers' checks.  According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 1.7 trillion dollars in December 2009, but not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.

The "M2" money supply includes everything in the "M1" money supply plus most other savings accounts, money market accounts, retail money market mutual funds, and small denomination time deposits (certificates of deposit of under $100,000).  According to the Federal Reserve, this totaled approximately 8.5 trillion dollars in December 2009, but once again, not all of this money actually "exists" as we will see in a moment.

The "M3" money supply includes everything in the "M2" money supply plus all other CDs (large time deposits and institutional money market mutual fund balances), deposits of eurodollars and repurchase agreements.  The Federal Reserve does not keep track of M3 anymore, but according to ShadowStats.com it is currently somewhere in the neighborhood of 14 trillion dollars.  But again, not all of this "money" actually "exists" either.

So why doesn't it exist?

It is because our financial system is based on something called fractional reserve banking.

When you go over to your local bank and deposit $100, they do not keep your $100 in the bank.  Instead, they keep only a small fraction of your money there at the bank and they lend out the rest to someone else.  Then, if that person deposits the money that was just borrowed at the same bank, that bank can loan out most of that money once again.  In this way, the amount of "money" quickly gets multiplied.  But in reality, only $100 actually exists.  The system works because we do not all run down to the bank and demand all of our money at the same time.

According to the New York Federal Reserve Bank, fractional reserve banking can be explained this way....

"If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000)."

So much of the "money" out there today is basically made up out of thin air.

In fact, most banks have no reserve requirements at all on savings deposits, CDs and certain kinds of money market accounts.  Primarily, reserve requirements apply only to "transactions deposits" – essentially checking accounts.

The truth is that banks are freer today to dramatically "multiply" the amounts deposited with them than ever before.  But all of this "multiplied" money is only on paper - it doesn't actually exist.

The point is that the broadest measures of the money supply (M2 and M3) vastly overstate how much "real money" actually exists in the system.

So if the U.S. government went out today and demanded every single dollar from all banks, businesses and individuals in the United States it would not be able to collect 14 trillion dollars (M3) or even 8.5 trillion dollars (M2) because those amounts are based on fractional reserve banking.

So the bottom line is this....

#1) If all money owned by all American banks, businesses and individuals was gathered up today and sent to the U.S. government, there would not be enough to pay off the U.S. national debt.

#2) The only way to create more money is to go into even more debt which makes the problem even worse.

You see, this is what the whole Federal Reserve System was designed to do.  It was designed to slowly drain the massive wealth of the American people and transfer it to the elite international bankers.

It is a game that is designed so that the U.S. government cannot win.  As soon as they create more money by borrowing it, the U.S. government owes more than what was created because of interest.

If you owe more money than ever was created you can never pay it back.

That means perpetual debt for as long as the system exists.

It is a system designed to force the U.S. government into ever-increasing amounts of debt because there is no escape.

We could solve this problem by shutting down the Federal Reserve and restoring the power to issue U.S. currency to the U.S. Congress (which is what the U.S. Constitution calls for).  But the politicians in Washington D.C. are not about to do that.

So unless you are willing to fundamentally change the current system, you might as well quit complaining about the U.S. national debt because it is now mathematically impossible to pay it off.

***UPDATE***

It has been suggested that the same dollar can be used to pay off debt over and over - this is theoretically true as long as the dollar remains in the system.

For example, if the U.S. government gives China a dollar to pay off a debt, there is a good chance that the U.S. government will be able to acquire that dollar again and use it to pay off another debt.

However, this is not true when debt is retired with the Federal Reserve.  In that case, money is actually removed from the system.  In fact, because of the "money multiplier", when debt is retired with the Federal Reserve it can remove ten times that amount of money (and actually more, but let's not get too technical) from the system.

You see, fractional reserve banking works both ways.  When $100 is introduced into the system, it can theoretically create $1000 as the example in the article above demonstrates.  However, when that $100 is removed, it can have the opposite impact.

And considering the fact that the Federal Reserve "purchased" the vast majority of new U.S. government debt last year, we have got a real mess on our hands.

Even if a way could be figured out how to pay off all the debt we owe to foreign nations (such as China, Japan, etc.) it would still be mathematically impossible to pay off the debt that we owe to the Federal Reserve which is exploding so fast that it is hard to even keep track of.

Of course we could repudiate that debt and shut down the Federal Reserve, but very few in Washington D.C. have any interest in doing that.

It has also been suggested that instead of just using dollars to pay off the U.S. national debt, we could use the assets of the U.S. government to pay it off.

That is rather extreme, but let us consider that for a moment.

That total value of all physical assets in the United States, both publicly and privately owned, is somewhere in the neighborhood of 45 to 50 trillion dollars.  Of course the idea of the U.S. government "owning" every single asset of the American people is repugnant to our entire way of life, but let's assume that for a moment.

According to the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, which is an official United States government report, the total liabilities of the United States government, including future social security and medicare payments that the U.S. government is already committed to pay out, now exceed 65 TRILLION dollars.  This amount is more than the entire GDP of the whole world.

In fact, there are other authors who have written that the actual figure for the future liabilities of the U.S. government should be much higher, but let's be conservative and go with 65 trillion for now.

So, if the U.S. government took control of all physical assets in the United States and sold them off, it could not even make enough money to pay for everything that the U.S. government is already on the hook for.

Ouch.

If you have not read the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government, you really should.  Actually the 2009 report should be available very soon if it isn't already.  If anyone knows if it is available, please let us know.

The truth is that the U.S. government is in much bigger financial trouble than we have been led to believe.

For example, according to the report (which remember is an official U.S. government report) the real U.S. budget deficit for 2008 was not 455 billion dollars.  It was actually 5.1 trillion dollars.

So why the difference?

The CBO's 455 billion figure is based on cash accounting, while the 5.1 trillion figure in the 2008 Financial Report of the United States Government is based on GAAP accounting. GAAP accounting is what is used by all the major firms on Wall Street and it is regarded as a much more accurate reflection of financial reality.

So needless to say, the United States is in a financial mess of unprecedented magnitude.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on February 07, 2010, 12:52:42 AM
 I can't wait :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 08, 2010, 06:32:45 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/08/us/politics/08lobby.html?hp

QuoteRepublicans are rushing to capitalize on what they call Wall Street's "buyer's remorse" with the Democrats. And industry executives and lobbyists are warning Democrats that if Mr. Obama keeps attacking Wall Street "fat cats," they may fight back by withholding their cash. "If the president doesn't become a little more balanced and centrist in his approach, then he will likely lose that support," said Kelly S. King, the chairman and chief executive of BB&T. Mr. King is a board member of the Financial Services Roundtable, which lobbies for the biggest banks, and last month he helped represent the industry at a private dinner at the Treasury Department. "I understand the public outcry," he continued. "We have a 17 percent real unemployment rate, people are hurting, and they want to see punishment. But the political rhetoric just incites more animosity and gets people riled up" . . . "If the president wanted to turn every Democrat on Wall Street into a Republican," one industry lobbyist said, "he is doing everything right."

See kids, name-calling does have consequences.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 17, 2010, 05:58:18 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/feb/17/china-sells-us-treasury-bonds?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

QuoteChina sold $34bn (£21.5bn) worth of US government bonds in December, raising fears that ­Beijing is using its financial ­muscle to signal that it has lost confidence in American economic policy.

US treasury figures for the period ending in December 2009 show that, following the sale, China is no longer the largest overseas holder of US treasury bonds. Beijing ended the year sitting on $755.4bn worth of US government debt, compared to Japan's $768.8bn.

Since the sub-prime crisis that began on Main Street USA grew to engulf the global economy, China's leaders have repeatedly expressed concerns about US policy. December's $34bn sell-off made only a tiny dent in Beijing's total holdings of US assets, which amount to well over $1tn when stakes in American companies, as well as treasury bills, are taken into account.

But the news intensified concerns about China's appetite for bankrolling ever-widening American deficits. Premier Wen Jiabao told reporters last year: "We have made a huge amount of loans to the United States. Of course we are concerned about the safety of our assets. To be honest, I'm a little bit worried."

When Timothy Geithner, the US treasury secretary, visited China last summer, he sought to reassure his hosts, using a speech to promise that "the United States is committed to a strong and stable international financial system. The Obama administration fully recognises that the United States has a special responsibility to play in this regard, and we fully appreciate that exercising this special responsibility begins at home."

But Allan Meltzer, an economics professor at Carnegie Mellon University, said China's bond sales should be a wake-up call for Washington. "The Chinese are worried that we have unsustainable debt levels, and we do not have a policy for dealing with it," he said.

China's sales contributed to a record drop in foreign holdings of short-term treasury bills in December: in all, net overseas holdings of short-term bills fell by $53bn. The previous record was $44.5bn in April last year.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 17, 2010, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 07, 2010, 12:47:54 AM
Source seems a little suspect, but I'm sure you can all tell me if the economics are sound or not

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/it-is-now-mathematically-impossible-to-pay-off-the-u-s-national-debt

I don't think this article is entirely accurate....

The Federal Reserve is not a 'for profit' private bank.  It is a quasi-federal, private enterprise that has the best of both worlds.  Government power and private autonomy.  It does run a profit, but all profits are returned to the US Treasury.  Of course, the fact that the FED is run by Big Private Bank alumni should not be overlooked.  They forge monetary policy and determine who get the shaft and who gets their knobs polished....  The Fed Reserve stocks are owned by the member banks (which are private).

The Federal Reserve does not buy treasuries from the Treasury.  It must buy them on the open market.  That's why you hear in the news about 'treasury auctions' in the context of the general market, because the treasury has to auction them to private investors, and if there's weak demand for them, then the bond prices go down, the dollar goes down, and people get in a tizzy.  It is only after they are on the open market that the Fed can buy them.  Of course, the fact that when there is weakness in the auctions, there are little islands in the Caribbean which all of a sudden buy shitloads of them, and then the Fed buys them up from these 'private investors' should not be overlooked...

Also, I would take exception with how he says the money that is created as credit by means of the fractional reserve system is not 'real money'.... It is true that it is not 'real' in the sense that as the debt is repaid, the digits that represent the money vaporize, but until that debt is repaid, it is 'real money' in that it circulates and is spent on goods and services and effects the supply and demand with the concomitant price adjustments.  For example, if they dropped the reserve requirement to zero, (which is not entirely unprecedented) and there was willingness to build up debt massively by the public, the credit accounted for in the M3 would definitely have an impact on the price of your happy meal.  That makes it 'real money'....

I do agree with this:
QuoteYou see, this is what the whole Federal Reserve System was designed to do.  It was designed to slowly drain the massive wealth of the American people and transfer it to the elite international bankers.
But I do not agree with this:
QuoteIf you owe more money than ever was created you can never pay it back.
You can pay it back.... With your sweat.  With your time. With your life.
That's what they're after.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Requia ☣ on March 05, 2010, 05:51:15 AM
QuoteStop! Hold the phone. What this statement indicates is that Fannie Mae, the largest mortgage company in the entire world, was holding eight times the amount of mortgages off-book than it had on-book.

Thus despite the fact that it is losing tens of billions of dollars every quarter, and has borrowed $76.2 billion so far, it was actually hiding the vast majority of its worst performing mortgages off-book. The only reason you move assets off-book is if they are illiquid. And that's not even taking into account Freddie Mac, which has borrowed another $50 Billion from the taxpayers so far.
How bad are those assets? It's hard to say for certain, but after moving $2.4 Trillion dollars worth of assets, the net worth of Fannie Mae only improved by $2 Billion, or 0.083% of the assets.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/enron-fun-fannie-and-freddie
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on March 05, 2010, 06:48:43 AM
Holy shit.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jasper on March 05, 2010, 07:12:44 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 05, 2010, 05:51:15 AM
QuoteStop! Hold the phone. What this statement indicates is that Fannie Mae, the largest mortgage company in the entire world, was holding eight times the amount of mortgages off-book than it had on-book.

Thus despite the fact that it is losing tens of billions of dollars every quarter, and has borrowed $76.2 billion so far, it was actually hiding the vast majority of its worst performing mortgages off-book. The only reason you move assets off-book is if they are illiquid. And that's not even taking into account Freddie Mac, which has borrowed another $50 Billion from the taxpayers so far.
How bad are those assets? It's hard to say for certain, but after moving $2.4 Trillion dollars worth of assets, the net worth of Fannie Mae only improved by $2 Billion, or 0.083% of the assets.

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/enron-fun-fannie-and-freddie

That is like 2.4 teradollars.  Fucking whoa.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 10, 2010, 10:04:44 PM
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35772179/ns/business-answer_desk/

QuoteAs Congress this week inches toward a new set of rules to avert another global financial collapse, it is focused on two conflicting goals: reforming the banking system to protect consumers while still giving lenders the freedom to take risks.

So far the score looks like: Bankers 1, Consumers 0.

More than a year after a wave of risky mortgage bets brought Wall Street to its knees, banks and other financial institutions are still playing by the same rules that got them into the mess.

[...]

The banking industry initially lobbied hard to make sure that any new consumer protections were housed within existing bank regulators, such as the Office of the Controller of the Currency or the FDIC.

Analysts who have followed the turf war say the latest proposal gives bankers most of what they wanted.

"This is a bill the industry will love," said Greg Valliere, chief policy strategist for Soleil Securities.

IOW, prepare for the second crash.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jasper on March 12, 2010, 12:59:33 AM
>still giving lenders the freedom to take risks


Wh-why?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Remington on March 12, 2010, 01:28:54 AM
Because as a society, we have a short-term memory equivalent to that of a goldfish?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 12, 2010, 03:03:10 AM
Quote from: Sigmatic on March 12, 2010, 12:59:33 AM
>still giving lenders the freedom to take risks


Wh-why?

the freedom to take risks is not the issue.
having the govt. backstop the losses is the problem...
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 12, 2010, 04:54:02 PM
I would suggest both are an issue, if only due to the incestuous nature of the international financial system, where one collapse can, theoretically, bring the whole thing tumbling down.  The moral hazard naked theft of public funds to prop up ventures that have failed certainly doesn't help matters though.

Anyway, NEWS!

http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/2070-EXPLOSIVE-Lehman-Where-Are-The-Cops.html

QuoteLehman regularly increased its use of Repo 105 transactions in the days prior to reporting periods to reduce its publicly reported net leverage and balance sheet.2850 Lehman's periodic reports did not disclose the cash borrowing from the Repo 105 transaction – i.e., although Lehman had in effect borrowed tens of billions of dollars in these transactions, Lehman did not disclose the known obligation to repay the debt.2851 Lehman used the cash from the Repo 105 transaction to pay down other liabilities, thereby reducing both the total liabilities and the total assets reported on its balance sheet and lowering its leverage ratios.

The most interesting part of this is that while Lehman tried to pull one over on the public about its accounting practices, the SEC and and Fed knew it was lying, and went along with it anyway.

QuoteAfter March 2008 when the SEC and FRBNY began onsite daily monitoring of Lehman, the SEC deferred to the FRBNY to devise more rigorous stress‐testing scenarios to test Lehman's ability to withstand a run or potential run on the bank.5753 The FRBNY developed two new stress scenarios: "Bear Stearns" and "Bear Stearns Light."5754 Lehman failed both tests.5755 The FRBNY then developed a new set of assumptions for an additional round of stress tests, which Lehman also failed.5756 However, Lehman ran stress tests of its own, modeled on similar assumptions, and passed.5757 It does not appear that any agency required any action of Lehman in response to the results of the stress testing.

Yes, thats right, the Fed allowed Lehman not only to mark its own papers, but to set the questions to ensure a pass.  They knew it was fucked, and wanted to let it pass the "stress tests" regardless.
Title: LEAVE WALL STREET ALONE!
Post by: Cain on March 20, 2010, 07:59:13 PM
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-year-more-of-bank-reform-debate-likely-boehner-2010-03-17?reflink=MW_news_stmp

QuoteBoehner's comments come as bankers prepare to descend upon Capitol Hill to press for changes to the bank-reform legislation, which they wouldn't support in its present form. Boehner said he urged bankers not to be shy when meeting with the lawmaker staff members and to send a message that new regulations and taxes translates to into banks having less available for lending.

"Don't let those little punk staffers take advantage of you and stand up for yourselves," Boehner said.

I say we wait outside the meeting and shake down the bankers and staffers for their lunch money, when they finally come out.
Title: The FUCK?!?!
Post by: Cain on March 21, 2010, 10:27:04 PM
http://www.levy.org/pubs/wp_587.pdf

The derivative exposure of Goldman Sachs in 2009 was 33,823%.

33,823%
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on March 21, 2010, 10:56:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 21, 2010, 10:27:04 PM
http://www.levy.org/pubs/wp_587.pdf

The derivative exposure of Goldman Sachs in 2009 was 33,823%.

33,823%

Could you put that in english for economitards?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 21, 2010, 11:04:09 PM
Sorry, I should have added "of its assets" at the end, it helps it make more sense.

Essentially, the sum of the total value of derivatives Goldman Sachs is responsible for is that many times as large as what they actually have in the bank.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 21, 2010, 11:50:28 PM
must be nice to make a fuck ton of money like that when things are panning out, and then have your GS alum buddies in the fed and treasury tell the american public that they are responsible for bailing you out when the deal goes belly up....

goddamn, that's crazy.

i think this is the decade of slapstick quantities.
we're innumerate enough as a society without this kind of shit prompting us to just throw up our hands....
Title: Re: UNLIMITED financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 24, 2010, 09:03:33 PM
Also, China looks like it might be the bubble which will set off the next round of the recession

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-03-16/china-in-greatest-bubble-in-history-ex-ltcm-s-rickards-says.html

QuoteChina is in the midst of "the greatest bubble in history," said James Rickards, former general counsel of hedge fund Long-Term Capital Management LP.

The Chinese central bank's balance sheet resembles that of a hedge fund buying dollars and short-selling the yuan, said Rickards, now the senior managing director for market intelligence at McLean, Virginia-based consulting firm Omnis Inc.

"As I see it, it is the greatest bubble in history with the most massive misallocation of wealth," Rickards said at the Asset Allocation Summit Asia 2010 organized by Terrapinn Pte in Hong Kong yesterday. China "is a bubble waiting to burst."

Rickards joins hedge fund manager Jim Chanos, Gloom, Boom & Doom publisher Marc Faber and Harvard University professor Kenneth Rogoff in warning of an overheating and potential crash in China's economy following a rally in stocks and property prices. The government has raised lenders' reserve requirements twice this year to cool an economy that grew at the fastest pace since 2007 in the fourth quarter.

Leveraged speculation in the stock market, wasteful allocation of resources by state-owned enterprises, off-balance- sheet debt through regional governments and the country's human rights record are concerns, said Rickards, who worked for LTCM between 1994 and 1999, helping negotiate a $3.6 billion rescue after the hedge fund lost $4 billion in a few weeks in 1998.

"Take Russia and China together, neither of them is really deserving any investment" except for short-term speculation, Rickards said. India and Brazil are two of the "real economies" among the developing countries, he said.

More worries about the Chinese economy can be found

http://english.caing.com/2010-03-22/100128789.html
http://article.wn.com/view/2010/03/09/roach_in_china_bildet_sich_keine_blase_an_den_m_rkten/
http://www.creditwritedowns.com/2009/11/goldilocks-is-not-sleeping-in-america-anymore-shes-now-in-china.html
http://immobilienblasen.blogspot.com/2010/01/enron-esque-characteristics-hiding-even.html
Title: UK spending cuts to be deeper than Thatcher's
Post by: Cain on March 25, 2010, 08:20:09 PM
Boy, it sure is a good thing Labour aren't like those nasty Tories   :lulz:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8587877.stm

QuoteAlistair Darling has conceded that if Labour is re-elected public spending cuts will be "tougher and deeper" than those implemented by Margaret Thatcher.

Asked in a BBC interview to spell out how far-reaching future cuts could be, Mr Darling did not reject a comparison with measures taken in the early 1980s.

The Tories have said they would cut even more from spending than Labour.

Shadow chancellor George Osborne said the comments had "blown apart" Labour's claims that it could "go on spending".

Experts say Mr Darling has postponed the major decisions on departmental spending, and what is widely expected to be substantial cuts in many areas, to a spending review expected in the autumn.

The chancellor warned in his Budget speech that this review would be the "toughest in decades".

'Non-negotiable'

Asked by the BBC's Political Editor Nick Robinson to accept the Treasury's own figures suggest deeper, tougher cuts than those implemented by the Thatcher government in the 1980s, Mr Darling replied: "They will be deeper and tougher - where we make the precise comparison I think is secondary to fact is an acknowledgement that these reductions will be tough".

He added: "There may be things that we don't do, that we cut in the future. We will have to decide what precisely we can do within the [spending] envelope I set."

"What is non-negotiable is that borrowing is coming down by half over a four-year period."

The Institute for Fiscal Studies, an independent think tank, has noted that total public spending increased by an average of 1.1% a year in real terms over the Thatcher era, at a time when inflation was higher than it is today.

This is almost three times the increase of 0.4% a year that Mr Darling has pencilled in for the next Parliament.

The IFS went on to observe that "if we subtract spending on welfare and debt interest then we estimate that the rest of public spending would be cut in real terms by an average of 1.4% a year compared to an average increase of 0.7% in the Thatcher era. We have not seen five years with an average annual real cut as big as this since the mid-1970s".

As the Conservatives wish to make bigger spending cuts than Labour they have already accepted that they would have to be tougher than Margaret Thatcher.

All this does is make me want to vote Tory more.  Fuck it, if we're going to plunge the country back into a recession, I say we really do a proper job of it.  I want armageddon tomorrow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 26, 2010, 12:35:06 PM
Is it just me, or does that sound like they're saying, "The country's fucked, so let's just fuck it harder"?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 26, 2010, 02:55:11 PM
As far as I can see, their logic is if they fuck the country hard enough, we can avoid losing our Triple A credit rating, which would cause runaway inflation and kill the economy.  The problem with that is, if we stop public spending, with the banks not lending money, consumer purchases go down and we end up killing the economy regardless.

I'd rather the Tories did it though, because I want to see that smug expression wiped off George Osborne's face, and because Labour are already a discredited party, meaning someone else should take the fall for this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 12, 2010, 03:38:39 PM
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6380MU20100409

QuoteMajor U.S. banks temporarily lowered their debt levels just before reporting in the past five quarters, making it appear their balance sheets were less risky, the Wall Street Journal said, citing data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

The paper said on Friday 18 banks, including Goldman Sachs Group, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase Bank of of America and Citigroup, understated the debt levels used to fund securities trades by lowering them an average of 42 percent at the end of each period.

The banks had increased their debt in the middle of successive quarters, it said.

Citi, Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley were not immediately available for comment when contacted by Reuters outside regular U.S. business hours.

Excessive leverage by the banks was one of the causes that led to the global financial crisis in 2008.

Due to the credit crisis, banks have become more sensitive about showing high levels of debt and risk, worried their stocks and credit ratings could be punished, the Journal said.

Federal Reserve Bank of New York could not be immediately reached for comment by Reuters.

Heh
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Thurnez Isa on April 12, 2010, 03:46:55 PM
That's a light in the distance right, not an iceberg?
:lulz:
FULL STEAM AHEAD!!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Diseris on April 12, 2010, 06:58:20 PM
More good news:

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/metal_are_in_the_pits_2arTlGNbMK7mb1uJeVHb0O

QuoteChristian said that the LBMA -- the same market Maguire trades in -- has leverage of about 100-1 on the gold bars settled on the exchange. In layman's terms, that means if 100 clients requested their bullion bars be delivered, the exchange could only give one client the precious metal.

Its the Post, any outside verification?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on April 14, 2010, 02:42:59 PM
They're now saying WaMu basically perpetrated MAJORLY illegal acts in order to sell bad mortgage deals...they also reported on NPR some WaMu fuck saying that if left alone long enough, WaMu would've recovered.

ORLY?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2010, 01:23:13 PM
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0ae8415c-9e5e-11df-a5a4-00144feab49a.html

QuoteAt the US Embassy in London, there is a waiting list that none of the officials likes to discuss. On the list are Americans hoping to give up their citizenship, as they seek shelter from the Internal Revenue Service.

...

The backlog at the US Embassy, where no appointments are available until February, stems from a rise in the number of American expatriates living in the UK who have been seeking to escape paying US tax on their worldwide income and capital gains since the simplification of US tax laws in 2008.

I was going to point out that in the UK taxes are likely even higher than the USA...but then I remembered that was only for little people.  Hell, the chief financial backer of the Conservatives hasn't paid tax in...how many years again?  I forget, but it's at least a decade.

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/08/03/2127213/russian-wheat-crop-in-dire-straits.html

QuoteDrought and raging wildfires have destroyed one-fifth of the wheat crop in Russia and sent wheat prices soaring around the world.

The fear that Russia, a major wheat producer, will have to cut exports by at least 30 percent is good news for U.S. farmers, who now are getting more money to go along with a bumper crop this year.

That big harvest, analysts point out, should spare U.S. consumers much increase in the prices of bread and other wheat-based foods despite the problems in Russia.

Any price increases will hit consumers hardest in wheat-deficient areas such as the Middle East, Africa and parts of Asia.

The severe drought in Russia is thought to be the country's worst in 130 years. Most of the damage to the wheat crop has been caused by the drought, but now wildfires are sweeping farmlands in western Russia.

The Associated Press reported that the director of a small state farm outside Moscow said fire destroyed its entire wheat crop one night before the harvest.

"The fruits of the year's labor of the farm went up in smoke. This is very painful," Pavel Grudinin, director of Lenin State Farm, said on Russian television.

The drought is also affecting harvests in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, Russia's neighboring wheat-producing countries.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704532204575397543634034112.html

QuoteGangsters, drug dealers and money launderers appear to be playing their part in helping shore up the financial stability of the euro zone.

That's thanks to their demand, according to European authorities, for high-denomination euro bank notes, in particular the €200 and €500 bills. The European Central Bank issues these notes for a hefty profit that is welcome at a time when its response to the financial crisis has called its financial strength into question.

The high-value bills are increasingly "making the euro the currency of choice for underground and black economies, and for all those who value anonymity in their financial transactions and investments," wrote Willem Buiter, chief economist at Citigroup, in a recent research report. The business of issuing euro notes, produced at almost zero cost, is "wildly profitable" for the ECB, Mr. Buiter wrote.

...

The ECB and its member governments are beneficiaries of the demand.

The profit a central bank gains from issuing currency—as well as from other privileges of a central bank, such as being able to demand no-cost or low-cost deposits from banks—is known as seigniorage. It normally accrues to national treasuries once the central banks account for their own costs.

The ECB's gains from seigniorage are becoming increasingly important this year.

The ECB has taken hundreds of billions of euros of assets of unknown quality on to its balance sheet as it has reacted to the global financial crisis.

It holds more than €600 billion in collateral from banks to which it has made loans, and more than €400 billion in securities it holds outright, including government bonds.

Overall, the ECB's balance sheet has grown to almost €2 trillion. It has a capital base of €78 billion. That creates leverage that makes it look like a "hedge fund on steroids," Mr. Buiter wrote. It wouldn't need to lose much on these assets to wipe out its thin cushion of capital.

That's where seigniorage comes in.

In recent years, the profits on its issue of new paper currency have been running at €50 billion. In 2008, the year of the Lehman Brothers crisis, it was €80 billion.

Even with conservative assumptions about future growth of currency in circulation—at, say, 4% a year, which is in line with the ECB's 2% inflation target plus a margin for economic growth—Mr. Buiter estimates future seigniorage profits for the central bank between €2 trillion and €6.9 trillion.

Thanks to seigniorage, he says, the ECB is "super solvent."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 21, 2010, 05:59:10 PM
Can't say I'm in any way surprised at this

http://www.news.com.au/business/breaking-news/us-government-hiding-true-amount-of-debt/story-e6frfkur-1225926567256

QuoteTHE actual figure of the US' national debt is much higher than the official sum of $US13.4 trillion ($14.3 trillion) given by the Congressional Budget Office, according to analysts cited on Sunday by the New York Post.

"The Government is lying about the amount of debt. It is engaging in Enron accounting," said Laurence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University and co-author of The Coming Generational Storm: What You Need to Know about America's Economic Future.

"The problem is we're seeing an explosion in spending," added Andrew Moylan, director of government affairs for the National Taxpayers Union.

In 1980, the debt - the accumulated red ink incurred by the Federal Government - was $US909 billion.

This represented some 33 per cent of gross domestic product, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

Thirty years later, based on this year's second-quarter numbers, the CBO said the debt was $US13.4 trillion, or 92 per cent of GDP.

Start of sidebar. Skip to end of sidebar.

End of sidebar. Return to start of sidebar.

The CBO estimates the debt will be at $US16.5 trillion in two years, or 100.6 per cent of GDP.

But these numbers are incomplete.

They do not count off-budget obligations such as required spending for Social Security and Medicare, whose programs represent a balloon payment for the Government as more Americans retire and collect benefits.

In the case of Social Security, beginning in 2016, the US Government will be paying out more than it is collecting in taxes.

Without basic measures - such as payment cuts or higher payroll taxes - the system could be on the road to bankruptcy, according to officials.

"Without changes," wrote Social Security Commissioner Michael Astrue, "by 2037 the Social Security Trust Fund will be exhausted. There will be enough money only to pay about $US0.76 for each dollar of benefits."

Mr Kotlikoff and Mr Moylan agree US national debt is much more than the official $US13.4 trillion number, but they disagree over how to add up the exact number.

Mr Kotlikoff says the debt is actually $US200 trillion.

Mr Moylan says the number is likely about $US60 trillion.

That is close to the figure quoted by David Walker, the US Comptroller General from 1998 to 2008.

He launched a campaign to convince Americans that the federal spending and debt is a greater threat than terrorism.

But whichever figure is accurate, all three agree that the problem has worsened in the last few years.

They say it is because Congress and the Administration, whether Republican or Democrat, consistently overspend.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 21, 2010, 07:16:41 PM
200 seems a bit high...
Walker was using the 50 trillion number a couple years ago when I was still starry eyed about dr Paul, so 60 would seem reasonable now....

Attempting to 'fix' the issue seems to be polishing knobs on the titanic, IMO.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 21, 2010, 08:50:10 PM
It does, but with even professional economists, who are not exactly the most out of the box thinkers now openly declaring the US's reported debt to be a sham and testament to fake accounting...well, that outcome is pleasing in and of itself.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 21, 2010, 09:09:16 PM
David Walker has been touring the country trying to warn everybody that we're totally fucked and that it's all a sham for a few years now.
and he was head of the GAO.
nobody has payed him much mind.

we're fucked.
previously i thought that we could fix things.
then i decided that preparing for our shitty upcoming future should take priority.
now, i'm just taking the opportunity to enjoy how awesome things are right now, so that when things turn to shit and toil, i can remember these magical times before the ground drops out from under us....
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2010, 01:21:21 PM
Emerging markets bubble!

QuoteSo, it seems increasingly likely that the Fed will push ahead with a new bout of quantitative easing – or 'QE2', as the markets have nicknamed it.

With the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan also likely to be pumping out liquidity – and the prospect of the ECB joining in at some point, even if only in belated response to the consequences of standing pat for the euro – there is growing attention on what this might mean not just for the economies directly involved, but also for emerging markets. There's the likelihood of a new wave of capital flows into emerging markets, the possibility of an emerging markets bubble, and the chance of the final destruction of what's become known as Bretton Woods 2.
 
Of course, the existing differences in growth performance and outlook, interest rates, and market performance between developed and emerging economies have already seen investors busy re-allocating their portfolios towards the latter, especially to countries in East Asia and Latin America. And even back at the start of this year, analysts were debating whether a new asset bubble was appearing in emerging economies.

Since then, inflows have continued to grow: according to its latest report on capital flows, the Institute for International Finance reckons net private capital flows to emerging markets will rebound to US$825 billion this year, up from US$581 billion last year. While this would still be below the peak of US$1285 billion reached in 2007, it would nevertheless be the second highest result in dollar terms recorded over the past decade.

Managing these inflows is now a major policy headache, with policymakers in recipient economies facing the choice of allowing their nominal exchange rates to appreciate (but risking exchange rates overshooting and increased volatility as well); of intervening to cap nominal appreciation (but then having to deal with some combination of sterilisation costs and rising domestic liquidity – which seeps into domestic asset prices and inflation); or of adopting controls on inflows and the distortions they entail (Thailand is the latest country to follow this route).

For investors, then, the prospect of QE2 looks like another good reason to expect even more emerging market currency appreciation, or domestic asset appreciation, or a mix of the two: in other words, another good reason to send more money towards emerging markets.

Some of this money will be put to good use. But anyone who can remember the run-up to the 1997-98 financial crises, or indeed the prelude to the Mexican Tequila crisis before that, will be aware of the risks involved in a prolonged period of capital inflows to still relatively under-developed financial markets. Emerging-market policymakers will want to be sure that they can avoid the pitfalls of past experiences of large inflows: in being taken for a ride on the QE2, they don't want to end up like the Titanic.

http://www.lowyinterpreter.org/post/2010/10/14/Emerging-markets-QE2-or-Titanic.aspx
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 14, 2010, 01:30:57 PM
Oh fuck you Larry Summers, you ruined what was going to be the only fun part of this whole financial mess, you massive fucking dildo

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/10/rattner_this_is_how_congress_k.html

QuoteI don't believe the president has any obligation in any policy area to create a team of rivals spanning the policy spectrum. He was elected based on a set of views he articulated quite clearly, and he's entitled to have people who reflect his views. You might say they're all centrists, but that's what he's comfortable with. He had no obligation to create the Oxford Union in the West Wing. All these people who say his economic team was terrible, what did they want him to do? We had a stimulus bill. Some say it was too small, some say it was too large. Tim Geithner saved the financial system. Larry Summers did a great job in making sure the administration didn't cave in to the flavor of the moment, nationalizing banks and shooting CEOs. I'd love somebody sensible to tell me, given the constraints of Congress and the environments, what we should have done differently.

Seriously, what a gigantic arsehole.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on October 15, 2010, 02:00:15 PM
I liked this guys blog post about the Mortgage problem and thought I'd share.  REALLY long, but a decent assesment.

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/10/second-leg-down-of-americas-death.html#more



QuoteThe Second Leg Down of America's Death Spiral
I swear to God Almighty: Mortgage Backed Securities are America's Herpes—the gift that keeps on oozing.
 
Last Friday, Bank of America announced that it was suspending all foreclosure proceedings, presumably until further notice. Other banks have already suspended foreclosures in a whole truckload of states. A nationwide moratorium on foreclosures might soon happen—which would be a big deal: Global Financial Crisis, Part II—Longer, Wider and Uncut.
 
"It's oozing from where?"
"Man, you guys are fucked."
But the mainstream media—surprise-surprise—has downplayed the whole shebang. They're throwing terms out there into the ether, but devoid of context or explanation: "Robo-signings", "foreclosure mills", forged signatures, "double booking", MERS—it's confusing as all get-out.
 
So the mainstream media just mentions it casually—"and in other news tonight . . ."—like it's no big deal: A couple-three lines, lots of complicated, unfamiliar terms, an attitude like it's a brouhaha over paperwork of all things!—and then zappo-presto-change-o!: They're showing video footage of a cute koala nursing in the arms of a San Diego zookeeper.
 
But even the koalas know that something awful is heading America's way. Smart little critters, they're heading for the treetops, to get away from this mess.
 
So what the hell is going on with the God forsaken mortgage mess in the United States?
 
It's got a lot of bells and whistles, but it's basically quite simple: It's all about the fucking Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS). Again.
 
So this is what happened, more or less—the short version:

In the crazed frenzy to get as many mortgages securitized during the Oughts, banks took shortcuts with the paperwork necessary for the Mortgage Backed Securities. The reason was because everyone in the chain of this securitization mania got a little piece of the action—a little slice of the MBS pie in the shape of commissions.
 
So in the name of "improved efficiencies" (and how many horror stories are we finding out, carried out in the name of "improved efficiencies"), banks digitized the mortgage notes—they didn't physically endorse them, like they were supposed to by the various state and Federal laws.
 
Plus—once the wave of foreclosures broke, and the holes in this bureaucratic paperwork became evident and relevant—some of the big law firms handling the foreclosures for the banks started doing some document fabrication and signature forgery, in order to cover up the mistakes—which is definitely illegal.
 
Long story short (since this is the short version): A lot of the foreclosed properties might not have been foreclosed legally. The people evicted might still have a right to their old houses. The new buyers might not actually own the REO's they bought off the banks. The banks could be on the hook for trillions of dollars, and in the sights of literally millions of lawsuits.
 
In short: This could become another massive oozing sore, complete with yellow-green pus drip-drip-dripping out of some unmentionable places on the Body Economic.
 
Now—the long version:
 
Homeowners can only be foreclosed and evicted from their homes by the person or institution who actually has the loan paper—only the note-holder has legal standing to ask a court to foreclose and evict. Not the mortgage—the note, which is the actual IOU that people sign, promising to pay back the mortgage loan.
 
Before Mortgage Backed Securities, most mortgage loans were issued by the local Savings & Loan. So the note usually didn't go anywhere: It stayed in the offices of the S&L down the street.
 
But once mortgage loan securitization happened, things got sloppy—they got sloppy by the very nature of Mortgage Backed Securities.
 
The whole purpose of MBS's was for different investors to have their different risk appetites satiated with different bonds. Some bond customers wanted super-safe bonds with low returns, some others wanted riskier bonds with therefore higher rates of return.
 
Therefore, as everyone knows, the loans were "bundled" into REMIC's (Real-Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits, a special vehicle designed to hold the loans for tax purposes), and then "sliced & diced"—split up and put into tranches, according to their likelihood of default, their interest rates, and other characteristics.
 
This slicing and dicing created "senior tranches", where the loans would likely be paid in full, if past history of mortgage loan statistics was to be believed. And it also created "junior tranches", where the loans might well default, again according to past history and statistics. (A whole range of tranches were created, of course, but for purposes of this discussion, we can ignore all those countless other variations.)
 
These various tranches were sold to different investors, according to their risk appetite. That's why some of the MBS bonds were rated as safe as Treasury bonds, and others were rated by the ratings agencies as risky as junk bonds.
 
But here's the key issue: When an MBS was first created, all the mortgages were pristine—none had defaulted yet, because they were all brand new loans. Statistically, some would default and some others would be paid back in full—but which ones specifically would default? No one knew, of course. If I toss a coin 1,000 times, statistically, 500 tosses the coin will land heads—but what will the result be of, say, the 723rd toss specifically? I dunno.
 
Same with mortgages.
 
So in fact, it wasn't that the riskier loans were in junior tranches and the safer mortgage loans were in the senior tranches: Rather, all the loans were in all the tranches, and if and when a mortgage in a given bundle of mortgages defaulted, the junior tranche holders would take the losses first, and the senior tranche holder take the loss last.
 
But who was the owner of the junior tranche bond and the senior tranche bond? Two different people. Therefore, the mortgage note was not actually signed over to the bond holder. In fact, it couldn't be signed over. Because, again, since no one knew which mortgage would default first, it was impossible to assign a specific mortgage to a specific bond.
 
Therefore, how to make sure the safe mortgage loan stayed with the safe MBS tranche, and the risky and/or defaulting mortgage went to the riskier MBS tranche?
 
Enter stage right, the famed MERS—the Mortgage Electronic Registration System.
 
MERS was the repository of these digitized mortgage notes that the banks originated from the actual mortgage loans signed by homebuyers. MERS was jointly owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (yes, those two, again, I know, I know: Like the chlamydia and the gonorrhea of the financial world—you cure 'em, but they just keep coming back).
 
The purpose of MERS was to help in the securitization process. Basically, MERS directed defaulting mortgages to the appropriate tranches of mortgage bonds. MERS was essentially the operating table where the digitized mortgage notes were sliced and diced and rearranged so as to create the Mortgage Backed Securities. Think of MERS as Dr. Frankenstein's operating table, where the beast got put together.
 
However, legally—and this is the important part—MERS didn't hold any mortgage note: The true owner of the mortgage notes should have been the REMIC's.
 
But the REMIC's didn't own the note either, because of a fluke of the ratings agencies: The REMIC's had to be "bankruptcy remote", in order to get the precious ratings needed to peddle Mortgage Backed Securities to insitutional investors.
 
So somewhere between the REMIC's and the MERS, the chain of title was broken.
 
Now, what does "broken chain of title" mean? Simple: When a homebuyer signs a mortgage, the key document is the note. As I said before, it's the actual IOU. In order for the mortgage note to be sold or transferred to someone else (and therefore turned into a Mortgage Backed Security), this document has to be physically endorsed to the next person. All of these signatures on the note are called the "chain of title".
 
You can endorse the note as many times as you please—but you have to have a clear chain of title right on the actual note: I sold the note to Moe, who sold it to Larry, who sold it to Curly, and all our notarized signatures are actually, physically on the note, one after the other.
 
If for whatever reason, any of these signatures is skipped, then the chain of title is said to be broken. Therefore, legally, the mortgage note is no longer valid. That is, the person who took out the mortgage loan to pay for the house no longer owes the loan, because he no longer knows whom to pay.
 
To repeat: If the chain of title of the note is broken, then the borrower no longer owes any money on the loan.
 
Read that last sentence again, please. Don't worry, I'll wait.
 
You read it again? Good: Now you see the can of worms that's opening up.
 
The broken chain of title wouldn't have been an issue if there hadn't been an unusual number of foreclosures. Before the housing bubble collapse, the people who defaulted on their mortgages wouldn't have bothered to check to see that the paperwork was in order.
 
But as everyone knows, following the housing collapse of 2007–'10-and-counting, there's been a boatload of foreclosures—and foreclosures on a lot of people who weren't sloppy bums who skipped out on their mortgage payments, but smart and cautious people who got squeezed by circumstances.
 
These people started contesting their foreclosures and evictions, and so started looking into the chain of title issue . . . and that's when the paperwork became important. So the chain of title became important. So the botched paperwork became a non-trivial issue.
 
Now, the banks had hired "foreclosure mills"—law firms that specialized in foreclosures—in order to handle the massive volume of foreclosures and evictions that occurred because of the Housing Crisis. The foreclosure mills, as one would expect, were the first to spot the broken chain of titles.
 
Well, hell, whaddaya know—turns out that these foreclosure mills might have faked and falsified documentation, so as to fraudulently repair the chain-of-title issue, thereby "proving" that the banks had judicial standing to foreclose on a delinquent mortgage. These foreclosure mills might have even forged the loan note itself—
 
—wait, why am I hedging? The foreclosure mills actually, deliberately and categorically faked and falsified documents, in order to expedite these foreclosures and evictions. Yves Smith at naked capitalism, who has been all over this story, put up a price list for this "service" from a company called DocX—yes, a price list for forged documents. Talk about your one-stop shopping!
 
So in other words, a massive fraud was carried out, with the inevitable innocent bystander getting caught up in this fraud: The guy who got foreclosed and evicted from his home in Florida, even though he didn't actually have a mortgage, and in fact owned his house free-and-clear. The family that was foreclosed and evicted, even though they had a perfect mortgage payment record. Et cetera, depressing et cetera.
 
Now, the reason this all came to light is not because enough people were getting screwed that the banks or the government or someone with power saw what was going on, and decided to put a stop to it—that would have been nice, to see a shining knight in armor, riding on a white horse.
 
But that's not how America works nowadays.
 
No, alarm bells started going off when the title insurance companies started to refuse to insure the title.
 
In every sale, a title insurance company insures that the title is free-and-clear: That the prospective buyer is in fact buying a properly vetted house, with its title issues all in order. Title insurance companies stopped providing their service because—of course—they didn't want to expose themselves to the risk that the chain-of-title had been broken, and that the bank had illegally foreclosed on the previous owner.
 
That's when things started gettin' innerestin': That's when the Attorneys General of various states started snooping around and making noises (elections are coming up, after all).
 
The fact that Ally Financial (formerly GMAC), JP Morgan Chase, and now Bank of America have suspended foreclosures signals that this is a serious problem—obviously. Banks that size, with that much exposure to foreclosed properties, don't suspend foreclosures just because they're good corporate citizens who want to do the right thing, with all the paperwork in strict order—they're halting their foreclosures for a reason.
 
The move by the United States Congress last week, to sneak by the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act? That was all the banking lobby—they wanted to shove down that law, so that their foreclosure mills' forged and fraudulent documents would not be scrutinized by out-of-state judges. (The spineless cowards in the Senate carried out their Master's will by a voice vote—so that there'd be no registry of who had voted for it, and therefore no accountability, the corrupt pricks.)
 
And President Obama's pocket veto of the measure? He had to veto it—if he'd signed it, there would have been political hell to pay, plus it would have been challenged almost immediately, and likely overturned as un-Constitutional in short order. (The jug-eared milquetoast didn't even have the gumption to veto it—he pocket vetoed it.)
 
As soon as the White House announced the pocket veto—the very next day!—Bank of America halted all foreclosures, nationwide.
 
Why do you think that happened? Because the banks are screwed—again. By the same fucking thing as the last time—the fucking Mortgage Backed Securities!
 
The reason the banks are fucked again is, if they've been foreclosing on people they didn't have the legal right to foreclose on, then those people have the right to get their houses back. And the people who bought those foreclosed houses from the bank might not actually own the houses they paid for.
 
And it won't matter if a particular case—or even most cases—were on the up-and-up: It won't matter if most of the foreclosures and evictions were truly because the homeowner failed to pay his mortgage. The fraud committed by the foreclosure mills casts enough doubt that now, all foreclosures come into question. Not only that, all mortgages come into question.
 
People still haven't figured out what this all means—but I'll tell you: If enough mortgage-paying homeowners realize that they may be able to get out of their mortgage loan and keep their house, scott-free? Shit, that's basically a license to halt payments right the fuck now. That's basically a license to tell the banks to fuck off.
 
What are the banks gonna do—try to foreclose and then evict you? Show me the paper, motherfucker, will be all you need to say.
 
This is a major, major crisis. This makes Lehman's bankruptcy look like a spring rain, compared to this hurricane. And if this isn't handled right—and handled right quick, in the next couple of weeks on the outside—this crisis could also spell the end of the mortgage business altogether. Of banking altogether. Hell, of civil society. What do you think happens in a country when the citizens realize they don't need to pay their debts?
 
If this isn't handled right, then this will be the second leg down, in the American Death Spiral.

   Oh dear Lord, he said, calm yet despondent. Look at it, he said. I mean just look at it! Have you ever seen anything like it?!?

   No, said the koala—truthfully. And you know, uh . . . it's . . . It's pretty disgusting, actually. So would you mind putting that thing away?

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on October 15, 2010, 07:32:25 PM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 15, 2010, 02:00:15 PM
I liked this guys blog post about the Mortgage problem and thought I'd share.  REALLY long, but a decent assesment.

http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/10/second-leg-down-of-americas-death.html#more



QuoteThe Second Leg Down of America's Death Spiral
I swear to God Almighty: Mortgage Backed Securities are America's Herpes—the gift that keeps on oozing.
 
Last Friday, Bank of America announced that it was suspending all foreclosure proceedings, presumably until further notice. Other banks have already suspended foreclosures in a whole truckload of states. A nationwide moratorium on foreclosures might soon happen—which would be a big deal: Global Financial Crisis, Part II—Longer, Wider and Uncut.
 
"It's oozing from where?"
"Man, you guys are fucked."
But the mainstream media—surprise-surprise—has downplayed the whole shebang. They're throwing terms out there into the ether, but devoid of context or explanation: "Robo-signings", "foreclosure mills", forged signatures, "double booking", MERS—it's confusing as all get-out.
 
So the mainstream media just mentions it casually—"and in other news tonight . . ."—like it's no big deal: A couple-three lines, lots of complicated, unfamiliar terms, an attitude like it's a brouhaha over paperwork of all things!—and then zappo-presto-change-o!: They're showing video footage of a cute koala nursing in the arms of a San Diego zookeeper.
 
But even the koalas know that something awful is heading America's way. Smart little critters, they're heading for the treetops, to get away from this mess.
 
So what the hell is going on with the God forsaken mortgage mess in the United States?
 
It's got a lot of bells and whistles, but it's basically quite simple: It's all about the fucking Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS). Again.
 
So this is what happened, more or less—the short version:

In the crazed frenzy to get as many mortgages securitized during the Oughts, banks took shortcuts with the paperwork necessary for the Mortgage Backed Securities. The reason was because everyone in the chain of this securitization mania got a little piece of the action—a little slice of the MBS pie in the shape of commissions.
 
So in the name of "improved efficiencies" (and how many horror stories are we finding out, carried out in the name of "improved efficiencies"), banks digitized the mortgage notes—they didn't physically endorse them, like they were supposed to by the various state and Federal laws.
 
Plus—once the wave of foreclosures broke, and the holes in this bureaucratic paperwork became evident and relevant—some of the big law firms handling the foreclosures for the banks started doing some document fabrication and signature forgery, in order to cover up the mistakes—which is definitely illegal.
 
Long story short (since this is the short version): A lot of the foreclosed properties might not have been foreclosed legally. The people evicted might still have a right to their old houses. The new buyers might not actually own the REO's they bought off the banks. The banks could be on the hook for trillions of dollars, and in the sights of literally millions of lawsuits.
 
In short: This could become another massive oozing sore, complete with yellow-green pus drip-drip-dripping out of some unmentionable places on the Body Economic.
 
Now—the long version:
 
Homeowners can only be foreclosed and evicted from their homes by the person or institution who actually has the loan paper—only the note-holder has legal standing to ask a court to foreclose and evict. Not the mortgage—the note, which is the actual IOU that people sign, promising to pay back the mortgage loan.
 
Before Mortgage Backed Securities, most mortgage loans were issued by the local Savings & Loan. So the note usually didn't go anywhere: It stayed in the offices of the S&L down the street.
 
But once mortgage loan securitization happened, things got sloppy—they got sloppy by the very nature of Mortgage Backed Securities.
 
The whole purpose of MBS's was for different investors to have their different risk appetites satiated with different bonds. Some bond customers wanted super-safe bonds with low returns, some others wanted riskier bonds with therefore higher rates of return.
 
Therefore, as everyone knows, the loans were "bundled" into REMIC's (Real-Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits, a special vehicle designed to hold the loans for tax purposes), and then "sliced & diced"—split up and put into tranches, according to their likelihood of default, their interest rates, and other characteristics.
 
This slicing and dicing created "senior tranches", where the loans would likely be paid in full, if past history of mortgage loan statistics was to be believed. And it also created "junior tranches", where the loans might well default, again according to past history and statistics. (A whole range of tranches were created, of course, but for purposes of this discussion, we can ignore all those countless other variations.)
 
These various tranches were sold to different investors, according to their risk appetite. That's why some of the MBS bonds were rated as safe as Treasury bonds, and others were rated by the ratings agencies as risky as junk bonds.
 
But here's the key issue: When an MBS was first created, all the mortgages were pristine—none had defaulted yet, because they were all brand new loans. Statistically, some would default and some others would be paid back in full—but which ones specifically would default? No one knew, of course. If I toss a coin 1,000 times, statistically, 500 tosses the coin will land heads—but what will the result be of, say, the 723rd toss specifically? I dunno.
 
Same with mortgages.
 
So in fact, it wasn't that the riskier loans were in junior tranches and the safer mortgage loans were in the senior tranches: Rather, all the loans were in all the tranches, and if and when a mortgage in a given bundle of mortgages defaulted, the junior tranche holders would take the losses first, and the senior tranche holder take the loss last.
 
But who was the owner of the junior tranche bond and the senior tranche bond? Two different people. Therefore, the mortgage note was not actually signed over to the bond holder. In fact, it couldn't be signed over. Because, again, since no one knew which mortgage would default first, it was impossible to assign a specific mortgage to a specific bond.
 
Therefore, how to make sure the safe mortgage loan stayed with the safe MBS tranche, and the risky and/or defaulting mortgage went to the riskier MBS tranche?
 
Enter stage right, the famed MERS—the Mortgage Electronic Registration System.
 
MERS was the repository of these digitized mortgage notes that the banks originated from the actual mortgage loans signed by homebuyers. MERS was jointly owned by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (yes, those two, again, I know, I know: Like the chlamydia and the gonorrhea of the financial world—you cure 'em, but they just keep coming back).
 
The purpose of MERS was to help in the securitization process. Basically, MERS directed defaulting mortgages to the appropriate tranches of mortgage bonds. MERS was essentially the operating table where the digitized mortgage notes were sliced and diced and rearranged so as to create the Mortgage Backed Securities. Think of MERS as Dr. Frankenstein's operating table, where the beast got put together.
 
However, legally—and this is the important part—MERS didn't hold any mortgage note: The true owner of the mortgage notes should have been the REMIC's.
 
But the REMIC's didn't own the note either, because of a fluke of the ratings agencies: The REMIC's had to be "bankruptcy remote", in order to get the precious ratings needed to peddle Mortgage Backed Securities to insitutional investors.
 
So somewhere between the REMIC's and the MERS, the chain of title was broken.
 
Now, what does "broken chain of title" mean? Simple: When a homebuyer signs a mortgage, the key document is the note. As I said before, it's the actual IOU. In order for the mortgage note to be sold or transferred to someone else (and therefore turned into a Mortgage Backed Security), this document has to be physically endorsed to the next person. All of these signatures on the note are called the "chain of title".
 
You can endorse the note as many times as you please—but you have to have a clear chain of title right on the actual note: I sold the note to Moe, who sold it to Larry, who sold it to Curly, and all our notarized signatures are actually, physically on the note, one after the other.
 
If for whatever reason, any of these signatures is skipped, then the chain of title is said to be broken. Therefore, legally, the mortgage note is no longer valid. That is, the person who took out the mortgage loan to pay for the house no longer owes the loan, because he no longer knows whom to pay.
 
To repeat: If the chain of title of the note is broken, then the borrower no longer owes any money on the loan.
 
Read that last sentence again, please. Don't worry, I'll wait.
 
You read it again? Good: Now you see the can of worms that's opening up.
 
The broken chain of title wouldn't have been an issue if there hadn't been an unusual number of foreclosures. Before the housing bubble collapse, the people who defaulted on their mortgages wouldn't have bothered to check to see that the paperwork was in order.
 
But as everyone knows, following the housing collapse of 2007–'10-and-counting, there's been a boatload of foreclosures—and foreclosures on a lot of people who weren't sloppy bums who skipped out on their mortgage payments, but smart and cautious people who got squeezed by circumstances.
 
These people started contesting their foreclosures and evictions, and so started looking into the chain of title issue . . . and that's when the paperwork became important. So the chain of title became important. So the botched paperwork became a non-trivial issue.
 
Now, the banks had hired "foreclosure mills"—law firms that specialized in foreclosures—in order to handle the massive volume of foreclosures and evictions that occurred because of the Housing Crisis. The foreclosure mills, as one would expect, were the first to spot the broken chain of titles.
 
Well, hell, whaddaya know—turns out that these foreclosure mills might have faked and falsified documentation, so as to fraudulently repair the chain-of-title issue, thereby "proving" that the banks had judicial standing to foreclose on a delinquent mortgage. These foreclosure mills might have even forged the loan note itself—
 
—wait, why am I hedging? The foreclosure mills actually, deliberately and categorically faked and falsified documents, in order to expedite these foreclosures and evictions. Yves Smith at naked capitalism, who has been all over this story, put up a price list for this "service" from a company called DocX—yes, a price list for forged documents. Talk about your one-stop shopping!
 
So in other words, a massive fraud was carried out, with the inevitable innocent bystander getting caught up in this fraud: The guy who got foreclosed and evicted from his home in Florida, even though he didn't actually have a mortgage, and in fact owned his house free-and-clear. The family that was foreclosed and evicted, even though they had a perfect mortgage payment record. Et cetera, depressing et cetera.
 
Now, the reason this all came to light is not because enough people were getting screwed that the banks or the government or someone with power saw what was going on, and decided to put a stop to it—that would have been nice, to see a shining knight in armor, riding on a white horse.
 
But that's not how America works nowadays.
 
No, alarm bells started going off when the title insurance companies started to refuse to insure the title.
 
In every sale, a title insurance company insures that the title is free-and-clear: That the prospective buyer is in fact buying a properly vetted house, with its title issues all in order. Title insurance companies stopped providing their service because—of course—they didn't want to expose themselves to the risk that the chain-of-title had been broken, and that the bank had illegally foreclosed on the previous owner.
 
That's when things started gettin' innerestin': That's when the Attorneys General of various states started snooping around and making noises (elections are coming up, after all).
 
The fact that Ally Financial (formerly GMAC), JP Morgan Chase, and now Bank of America have suspended foreclosures signals that this is a serious problem—obviously. Banks that size, with that much exposure to foreclosed properties, don't suspend foreclosures just because they're good corporate citizens who want to do the right thing, with all the paperwork in strict order—they're halting their foreclosures for a reason.
 
The move by the United States Congress last week, to sneak by the Interstate Recognition of Notarizations Act? That was all the banking lobby—they wanted to shove down that law, so that their foreclosure mills' forged and fraudulent documents would not be scrutinized by out-of-state judges. (The spineless cowards in the Senate carried out their Master's will by a voice vote—so that there'd be no registry of who had voted for it, and therefore no accountability, the corrupt pricks.)
 
And President Obama's pocket veto of the measure? He had to veto it—if he'd signed it, there would have been political hell to pay, plus it would have been challenged almost immediately, and likely overturned as un-Constitutional in short order. (The jug-eared milquetoast didn't even have the gumption to veto it—he pocket vetoed it.)
 
As soon as the White House announced the pocket veto—the very next day!—Bank of America halted all foreclosures, nationwide.
 
Why do you think that happened? Because the banks are screwed—again. By the same fucking thing as the last time—the fucking Mortgage Backed Securities!
 
The reason the banks are fucked again is, if they've been foreclosing on people they didn't have the legal right to foreclose on, then those people have the right to get their houses back. And the people who bought those foreclosed houses from the bank might not actually own the houses they paid for.
 
And it won't matter if a particular case—or even most cases—were on the up-and-up: It won't matter if most of the foreclosures and evictions were truly because the homeowner failed to pay his mortgage. The fraud committed by the foreclosure mills casts enough doubt that now, all foreclosures come into question. Not only that, all mortgages come into question.
 
People still haven't figured out what this all means—but I'll tell you: If enough mortgage-paying homeowners realize that they may be able to get out of their mortgage loan and keep their house, scott-free? Shit, that's basically a license to halt payments right the fuck now. That's basically a license to tell the banks to fuck off.
 
What are the banks gonna do—try to foreclose and then evict you? Show me the paper, motherfucker, will be all you need to say.
 
This is a major, major crisis. This makes Lehman's bankruptcy look like a spring rain, compared to this hurricane. And if this isn't handled right—and handled right quick, in the next couple of weeks on the outside—this crisis could also spell the end of the mortgage business altogether. Of banking altogether. Hell, of civil society. What do you think happens in a country when the citizens realize they don't need to pay their debts?
 
If this isn't handled right, then this will be the second leg down, in the American Death Spiral.

   Oh dear Lord, he said, calm yet despondent. Look at it, he said. I mean just look at it! Have you ever seen anything like it?!?

   No, said the koala—truthfully. And you know, uh . . . it's . . . It's pretty disgusting, actually. So would you mind putting that thing away?


So, my father in law has a mortgage which he owes a lot of money on.  Might there be a way to find out if it has been improperly transferred?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 15, 2010, 08:44:15 PM
The banks are, apparently, starting a fightback against this attempt to stop foreclosure.  They're deeply, deeply worried about the whole business of this, as they've been massively irresponsible in actually keeping track of the ownership of mortgages they sold.  Banks are starting to lean on Judges ruling against them, and giving money to the opposition politicians who do not support the judges (no link on this, relying on personal sources).

The markets are now apparently starting to punish them (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/foreclosure-crisis-finally-hitting-banks-where-it-hurts-their-stock-prices.html) over this.  

We also know now the "moratoriums" on foreclosure are largely bullshit (http://www.news-press.com/article/20101013/RE/101012064/1075/Lee-County-foreclosures-continue).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on October 15, 2010, 09:19:00 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on October 15, 2010, 07:32:25 PM


So, my father in law has a mortgage which he owes a lot of money on.  Might there be a way to find out if it has been improperly transferred?

My sister, who works for BoA, said the most damning thing you can do to hold off a foreclosure is tell them to "produce the note"

You cannot be foreclosed on unless they can prove ownership of the house.  I know a few people doing this right now.

they got traded so many times a lot of the time no one knows where the damn note is.

It could help give him time to catch up.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on October 15, 2010, 09:45:49 PM
Quote from: The Dancing Pickle on October 15, 2010, 09:19:00 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on October 15, 2010, 07:32:25 PM


So, my father in law has a mortgage which he owes a lot of money on.  Might there be a way to find out if it has been improperly transferred?

My sister, who works for BoA, said the most damning thing you can do to hold off a foreclosure is tell them to "produce the note"

You cannot be foreclosed on unless they can prove ownership of the house.  I know a few people doing this right now.

they got traded so many times a lot of the time no one knows where the damn note is.

It could help give him time to catch up.

There's no danger of foreclosure at the moment.  He's terribly responsible about it all.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 17, 2010, 01:03:05 PM
More on QE2, from Matt Taibbi

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/matt-taibbi/blogs/TaibbiData_May2010/217520/83512

QuoteIt's amazing, given the attention the Tea Party allegedly is paying to government waste and government spending, that there hasn't been more controversy about the now-seemingly-inevitable arrival of "QE2" – a second massive round of money-printing cooked up by the Fed to prop up both the government and certain sectors of the economy. A more overtly anticapitalist and oligarchical pattern of behavior than the Fed's "Quantitative Easing" program could not possibly be imagined, but the country is strangely silent on the issue.

What is "QE"? The first round of "quantitative easing" was a program announced by Ben Bernanke last March in response to the financial crisis, ending in March of this year. In what will soon be known as "QE1"(i.e. once QE2 is announced), Bernanke printed over a trillion dollars out of thin air, then used that money to buy, among other things, mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and Treasury Bonds. In other words, the government was printing money to a) lend to itself and b) prop up the housing market, with Wall Street stepping in to take a big cut.

That was QE1. There has long been speculation that another trillion-plus money-printing program called QE2 is coming, but only recently have there been concrete hints from the Fed along those lines. Among other things, New York Fed Vice President Brian Sack just this week squeaked out a comment about how, "In terms of the benefits, balance-sheet expansion appears to push financial conditions in the right direction." Translating into English, "balance-sheet expansion" means the Fed adding to its balance sheet, i.e. printing money to buy stuff – i.e. QE2.

Thanks to that and other hints, most everyone now expects the Fed to announce a new QE program in November. The big banks have now openly begun to predict this, with JP Morgan Chase among others raising its odds of the Fed buying mortgages in the next 6 months from 10% to 50%. Another effect we're seeing is that mortgage originators are hiring again, in anticipation of being able to fork out QE-funded mortgages.

QE is difficult to understand and the average person could listen to a Fed official talk about it for two hours right to his face and not understand even the basic gist of his speech. The ostensible justification for QE is to use a kind of financial shock-and-awe approach to jump-starting the economy, but its effects for ordinary people are hard to calculate. Theoretically the entire country has some sort of stake in this program, as (among other things) U the Homeowner may see your home value stay stable or fall less than it would have thanks to this artificial stimulus. You also may be able to buy a house when you wouldn't before, thanks to declining mortgage rates.

And jobs, I suppose, may theoretically be created by all this dollar meth being injected into the financial bloodstream – although the inflationary effect of printing trillions upon trillions of new dollars would probably wipe out the value of the money you make at that job. When it comes to calculating what QE actually does for you, or how much it harms you, that question is just very hard to answer.

But one thing we know for sure is that big banks and Wall Street speculators are real, immediate beneficiaries of the program, as they suddenly have trillions of printed dollars flowing through the financial system, with endless ways to profit on the new chips entering the casino.

And by an amazing coincidence, many of the biggest players in the financial services industry have a habit of buying up MBS or Treasuries just before these magical money-printing programs of the Fed send their respective values soaring. If you own a big fund, for instance, and you know that the Fed is about to buy a trillion dollars of mortgage-backed-securities through a new Quantitative Easing program, buying a buttload of MBS a few weeks early is a pretty easy way to make a risk-free fortune. One of the worst-kept secrets on Wall Street is that the big bankers and fund managers get signals about the Fed's intentions about things like QE well before they are announced to the rest of us losers in the public.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 30, 2010, 03:14:12 PM
Your friends died and had debts?  You may now be responsible for them

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2010/11/22/FTC-tightens-debt-collections-post-mortem/UPI-70761290455960/

QuoteWASHINGTON, Nov. 22 (UPI) -- Consumer advocates say the U.S. Federal Trade Commission has asked for trouble by revising rules for collectors chasing debt from people who have died.

The new rules allow for a wider circle of people to be contacted, beyond family members and the legal executor of the estate. There is also the term "spouse" that some advocates say is inaccurate as a marriage ends when one of the partners dies. The Washington Post reported Monday.

Some advocates warn that some debt collectors will press even friends to pay the debts of someone who has died, using a "moral obligation" argument, the Post said.

Robert Hobbs, an attorney with the National Consumer Law Center said the FTC should "strengthen protections for grieving families and friends, not open the door to debt-collection efforts."

"Presumably we're dealing with elderly people at the most vulnerable time that you could imagine," said attorney Richard Rubin, a consumer rights advocate in New Mexico.

"The debt doesn't disappear when the person dies. It's still a valid debt, and the collector can still collect it," said Joel Winston, FTC associate director of financial practices, the Post reported.

"We are determined to ensure that the collectors play by the rules," he said.

The FTC has extended the deadline to Dec. 1 for the public to comment on proposed rule changes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: AFK on November 30, 2010, 03:21:13 PM
:asplode:

I can see it now.  A new dating site where you are matched to your ideal mate by credit score. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 08, 2011, 04:52:08 PM
The US government has been taking accounting lessons from Arthur Anderson

http://www.economist.com/node/18618589

QuoteThe definition used in Washington, DC, is "federal government debt held by the public", which stood at 62% of GDP at the end of 2010. But if you instead use Europe's preferred measure—general government gross debt, which also includes the borrowing of state and local governments and Treasury securities held by other government bodies, such as the Social Security Trust Fund—it jumps to 92% of GDP (see left-hand chart). That is on a par with Portugal's level of public debt. Likewise, America's budget deficit of 8.9% of GDP last year would have been 10.6% using Europe's preferred measure.

Emphasis mine.  And there is more

QuoteOfficial figures also flatter America's relative performance on productivity growth. The headline figures compiled by America's Bureau of Labour Statistics are based on output per man-hour in the non-farm business sector. The European Central Bank tracks GDP per worker across the whole economy. By excluding the less efficient public sector, America's productivity growth is bumped up. And by taking output per worker rather than output per hour, Europe's measured productivity growth is reduced because average hours worked have fallen. Between 1995 and 2010 America's real GDP per hour worked rose by an annual average of 2.1%, considerably less than the 2.7% rate in the non-farm business sector although still faster than the 1.1% pace in the euro area.

And even more

QuoteEuropean press releases give the increase in GDP during the latest quarter—a rise of 0.9%, say. But Americans annualise quarterly growth, so an identical increase would be announced as a more impressive-sounding growth rate of 3.6%. Much more important, European economies' initial estimates of GDP growth tend to be more cautious than those in America. Kevin Daly, an economist at Goldman Sachs, estimates that during the ten years to 2008, America's quarterly GDP growth rate was, on average, revised down between the first and final published estimates by an annualised 0.5 percentage points. In contrast, GDP figures in the euro area were revised up by an average of 0.3 points. This matters because financial markets and the media focus heavily on the first estimate, but largely ignore revisions several years later.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 11, 2011, 02:23:07 PM
More bad news

http://crookedtimber.org/2011/06/11/when-will-us-debt-be-downgraded-by-how-much/

QuoteThe once unthinkable prospect that US government debt might lose its AAA rating has suddenly become a real possibility. In fact, it now seems about as likely as not. The problem is not so much "can't pay" but "won't pay". The US, like quite a few other countries, has some fairly serious fiscal imbalances, but they aren't pressing in the short run, and there is plenty of capacity to raise additional revenue or cut spending so as to stabilise the ratio of debt to GDP at a sustainable level.

The problem is that the total value of outstanding debt keeps growing (this would happen even with a stable debt/GDP ratio) and the US Congress requires periodic votes to approve this. They are usually the occasion for some grandstanding, but this time the Republican majority of the House of Representatives is seriously threatening a refusal, unless the Democrats agree to massive (and still unspecified) spending cuts. The due date for raising the debt ceiling passed a while ago, but an actual default is being staved off by some sharp accounting tricks, which will apparently work until 2 August. The other day, to prove they are serious, the Repubs introduced a motion for an unconditional increase in the debt ceiling, with the express purpose of voting unanimously against it, which they did.

At this point, loud alarm bells have started ringing for the big ratings agencies, Standard&Poors and Moodys. They will have to decide, well before August, whether to downgrade US government debt and if so by how much.


The agencies' problem is essentially political. For anyone who is following the news, the possibility that the US might default is obvious, and there is no reason (especially in view of their appalling performance leading up to the GFC) to think that the ratings agencies have any insights unavailable to the rest of us. But they have to make a choice and that choice will have significant financial, economic and political implications.

If the standard treatment applied to other governments were followed in this case, the downgrade would already have taken place. While it's still more likely than not that some way of avoiding default will be found, the stated positions of the two sides are so far apart that there must be a significant probability, say 10 per cent, that they will fail to agree. A security with a 10 per cent chance of defaulting in the next few months would normally be rated among the worst of junk bonds.

That's not the whole story of course. Most of the time, when bond issuers default, part or all of the bondholders' money is lost for good. It seems nearly certain that even if default took place, the period in default would be short, and the US would pay interest and principal in full. Nevertheless, nearly certain isn't certain, and once something as unprecedented as a default took place, the consequences are impossible to predict.

More importantly, the US government isn't "other governments". The ratings agencies are US firms operating in a US political context, and their actions will be governed by a mixture of concerns, starting with self-preservation, but also including a desire to influence US policy in a way favorable to bondholders as a group. In the medium term, that means support for a rapid return to budget balance or surplus, ideally through cuts in spending on the poor and middle class, but including tax increases if necessary.

The short run picture is more complicated. Avoiding default is presumably the main concern, but if that could be achieved by a Dem capitulation to demands for large spending cuts, so much the better. On the other hand, maintaining any kind of credibility requires a downgrade well before default actually takes place, and probably a series of downgrades as the deadline approaches. Even a single downgrade would throw financial markets into disarray (among other things, investors who are required to hold AAA assets would have to dump Treasuries and, presumably, buy the bonds of other governments). That in turn would place huge pressure on the Republicans. While the idea of "not raising the debt ceiling" polls pretty well, the reality of "destroying the US credit rating" probably won't.

The most likely response seems to be an increasingly loud set of alarms about the need for a short-term agreement on the debt ceiling, combined (both becuase the agencies want it and because they need to placate the Repubs) with warnings about the need for a rapid return to fiscal rectitude. That's not in fact what is needed (rather the US needs more stimulus now combined with a substantial increase in tax revenue in the long term), but it's a message that will play well among the Serious People in Washington.

We're already seeing this, with mid-July mentioned as crunch time. The problem is that the warnings may well not be enough. There's no sign that the Repubs are willing to give an inch on tax increases. Agreeing to the cuts they want, with no tax increases would be politically suicidal for the Dems, which is not to say they won't do it, but must raise the possibility of a breakdown.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on June 12, 2011, 03:26:02 AM
What specifically does that mean for the US? I looked up on it a bit, but I don't think that Argentina's situation is going to mirror ours, is it?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 14, 2011, 01:59:48 AM
It means the debt the US has already accumulated will go up in interest rates and the US will not be able to borrow more money - meaning cuts will be needed instead.

Also, speaking of downgraded debts, Greece's credit rating just became CCC, putting it on a par with Ukraine and Madagascar in terms of finance.  I expect Athens will have been burnt to the ground by tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 18, 2011, 05:15:16 PM
Just looked at European bank exposure to Greece.

This is bad.

Germany is the most exposed, of course, but the UK has £10 billion in private investment on the line (plus £6 billion in public money) and France is twice as exposed as the UK.  The longer a bailout is drawn out, the more likely some French and German banks will collapse.  If the firewall around Spain then also goes down the drain....well then, we're looking at a second global economic collapse.

This could all have been avoided if Greece had nukes (http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/06/17/if_greece_had_nukes_they_would_be_bailed_out_by_now).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 18, 2011, 11:10:48 PM
Well, he's right.  What the Greeks are and do is basically hold historical relevance and a nice sunny place to go on vacation.  And really great olives.

IF you're going to be a country that relies upon the wealth of others to get yourself going and sustain your people, you best be important to those others.  It makes sense to me, though I do feel bad for the Greek citizens caught up in all this. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 23, 2011, 02:15:48 AM
Once again, Cain is 2 weeks ahead:

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/fed-wont-act-soon-weak-economy-041145552.html
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 07:09:57 AM
It's interesting to note that the Fed doesn't seem to be worried about systemic financial collapse from Greece defaulting.

Interesting because we've been sold a parade of stories in Europe over the past two weeks how if Greece defaults its Lehman Brothers all over again, plagues of locusts, cats living with dogs oh my.

It could just be the Fed are blissfully unconcerned with that due to gross stupidity (a factor I cannot discount), but at the same time, a nation defaulting is not the same as a company collapsing.  Greece will still exist the day after it defaults (lots of it on fire, but nevertheless).  It could be the risk of contagion has been overestimated by certain shrill bailout/austerity supporters, precisely to get people to support their policies.  Equally, it is not like you hear about how London bailing out Northern Ireland is going to ruin the economy, the function of a nation-state is to transfer wealth in order to promote stability.  The problem is the EU refuses to think of itself as a nation-state, for various reasons.

It will be bad for the Eurozone, regardless.  Greece will probably have to leave the Euro and there is no clearly established procedure for doing that.  We're already seeing potential fallout in Turkey, with the recently re-elected government there saying it will take EU criticisms on board, but will not feel beholden to agreeing to them, since membership has been blocked so many times and anyway they're not sure if they want to join the club now.  And once Greece bails, it opens the door to further defections or expulsions.  All of the PIIGS might get thrown out, and I can see the Baltic states being thrown under a bus as well.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 02:43:26 PM
I was going to say--I'm wondering how Turkey and the Baltics will take this--and waitaminnit--Greece is "leaving" or "being thrown out"?  Which is it?

Am not understanding...

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 02:48:07 PM
Could be either.  There is no set procedure for leaving the EU currently.  They may fall, be pushed, or decide to jump.

So far though, I'm thinking the risk of a default is higher than that, and the Greeks getting their bailout higher than that again. 

Croatia is still looking to join the EU, but Croatia is a fucking backwater anyway (consistently underrated football team, though).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 02:50:54 PM
Huh.  So perhaps a "mutually agreed upon exit"?  I can't imagine THAT is going to go down a treat.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 02:54:41 PM
Perhaps.  Or the Big Three shoving Greece out of the treehouse club.  Or Germany picking up it's ball and going home.  Or the Euro being dissolved and national currencies being restored.  Or full political-economic integration.  Or the EU being disbanded.  Or even the UK joining the Euro to boost investor confidence.

All of these rumours are currently circulating, by the way.  In roughly that order of credibility.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 03:12:59 PM
It'd be intriguing to watch the last 4 happen, but the first 2 are more likely.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 03:20:14 PM
I'm all for full political-economic-military integration, with a heavy dose of military Keynesianism to offset the financial crisis. 

But no-one ever listens to me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 03:24:42 PM
:lulz:  Well, little wonder as to why.  :lulz:

But seriously, how very sad if the endgame here is the destruction of the EU.  Pretty sure that spells doom for Eurozone's prospects globally, and a gee, the market's now well and FUCKED everywhere else.  Especially here. 

I think my headache just got worse.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 03:27:04 PM
The EU's the largest market in the world. 

If it goes down, there is no telling what will follow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on June 23, 2011, 03:45:03 PM
I'm going to keep my fingers crossed for the UK integrating into the Euro.

Not because I necessarily think it is a good idea, or because I think it is even likely to happen, but purely because I want to see my Thatcherite father's head explode.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 04:07:44 PM
...that's one of the less-likely scenarios to my mind.  The UK would become like Germany.  They really do NOT want the headaches and the choices that Germany faces since it started this whole thing.

Personally, I think it'd make the UK stronger.  But autonomy's at a premium these days, I guess.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 23, 2011, 10:03:37 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-13896201

QuoteDavid Cameron has told European Union leaders that the UK will oppose using EU-wide money to bail-out Greece.

The current 110bn euros ($156bn; £98bn) Greek rescue package is a combination of funds from fellow eurozone nations and the International Monetary Fund.

Yet, after eurozone countries agreed in principle to give Greece an extra 120bn euros, there is a suggestion that cash from EU-wide funds may be used.

The prime minister said such funds should not be used in any way.
Key vote

Mr Cameron made the comments at the summit of EU leaders in Brussels. They reiterate previous statements by Chancellor George Osborne.

At present the UK government has contributed to the existing bail-out for Greece through the funds it gives the IMF.

The eurozone money being given to Greece currently comes from the European Financial Stability Facility, to which only the 17 eurozone nations contribute.

The UK contributes to the wider European Financial Stabilisation Mechanism, which covers the whole of the EU.

The Greek parliament will vote next week on the government's latest round of spending cuts.

If the vote goes through, then Greece will get the next 12bn euros instalment of the current 110bn euros of eurozone and IMF funds.

Greece needs this month by 15 July, or else it will default on its loan payments.

However, many economists think that even if Greece gets the latest 12bn euros it will still default at some time in the future.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on June 23, 2011, 11:34:54 PM
This part was interesting to me:

QuoteWhile Greece's continuing debt woes are dominating the EU summit, the question of who exactly contributes to any second giant Greek bail-out fund later in the year is unlikely to be decided.

Instead, the 27 EU leaders are expected to reaffirm their more general determination to help Greece sort out its problems, while defending the single currency.

How exactly they propose to do that will be interesting.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 24, 2011, 07:21:50 AM
QuoteDavid Cameron has won his battle to limit the amount of money the UK will have to contribute towards a second financial bail-out for Greece.

The current 110bn euros ($156bn; £98bn) Greek rescue package is a combination of funds from fellow eurozone nations and the International Monetary Fund.

With a second bail-out due in the autumn, there had been a suggestion cash from EU-wide funds may be used.

This will now not happen, but the UK will still contribute via the IMF.

"This is the right outcome for the British taxpayer," a Downing Street source told the BBC after the vote.

The confirmation that the European contribution to the second Greek rescue package will again be limited to eurozone countries - those that use the single currency - was made in Brussels by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy.

That aside, the most amusing thing about all of this is watching one of the great debtor nations of the 20th century, in fact the industrialised country which has defaulted the most, EVER, and manipulated it's own currency just before the introduction of the Euro to turn itself into an exporting nation with other EU countries expected to import its goods (and stimulate economic growth but stall wage increases), bitch out Greece concerning economic management.

Credibility knocking, we'd like to remind you 100 years of German economic fuckups.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Rumckle on June 25, 2011, 06:24:18 AM
Quote from: Cain on June 23, 2011, 02:48:07 PM
Croatia is still looking to join the EU, but Croatia is a fucking backwater anyway (consistently underrated football team, though).

Wait, isn't football performance how you measure economies in Europe?


Anyway, I found this article  (http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/pigs-wont-fly-but-germany-should-20110619-1ga2d.html) interesting, suggesting that Germany should leave the EU. The reasoning is that a slightly weakened EU economy, is better than a rather unequal economy, plus it may be easier to get Germany to leave than getting PIGS to leave. What are your thoughts on this? It seems kind of reasonable to me, but I think the author is underestimating how screwed up some of those countries are.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 25, 2011, 07:50:50 AM
There's an element of logic to what he says.  It doesn't solve the immediate, underlying problem with the PIIGS, but it removes aspects of the Euro which make it so vulnerable to this kind of systemic risk.  And a devalue is needed to help those countries, and cannot be achieved without Germany.

This also ties into German currency/productivity manipulation in the lead up to the introduction of the Euro, although that is an insanely complicated topic.  Suffice to say, some of the German productivity boom is due to devaluing the D-mark in the lead up to the introduction of the Euro, allowing wages to stagnate while improving prospects for export.  Because of the complicated way in which Euro values were determined, this manipulation ran over once the currency changed.  But as German productivity rose, the value of the Euro rose in line with it, leaving lesser economies high and dry.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Rumckle on June 27, 2011, 09:32:53 AM
I was just looking at some data about Greece from the World Bank's website, here are a couple of interesting graphs (I added in US, UK and Aus for comparison):

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.TLF.CACT.ZS/countries/GR-US-AU-GB?display=graph

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.LTRM.ZS/countries/GR-US-AU-GB?display=graph

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.0014.TO.ZS/countries/GR-US-AU-GB?display=graph

http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.65UP.TO.ZS/countries/GR-US-AU-GB?display=graph

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 11, 2011, 05:45:03 PM
A bit more Krugman:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/11/monetary-rage/

(Edited)

QuoteThere's something about money, it turns out, that sends many people into blind rage — usually of the kind... described as "Ron Paul plus"...

So what is it about money? I don't have a full explanation, but here's a thought: monetary economics is inherently about market imperfections. In a frictionless, perfect-information, costless-calculation world we wouldn't need money, and it wouldn't matter how prices were listed.

Monetary theory — and monetary policy — are, then, all about dealing with an imperfect, frictional world. As a consequence, sensible policy is based around trying to figure how to reduce the costs of these frictions and imperfections.

So why the rage? I suspect that it's because a certain sort of person wants more purity than the real world is willing to supply. They want to believe in perfect markets, delivering perfect outcomes if only the government would stay out of the way. And so they want to believe that money too can be perfect if only we take it out of human hands, and make it good as gold, literally.

And when you point out that it doesn't work that way, that money is a social convention meant to deal with an imperfect world, and that dealing with that imperfect world sometimes means that central banks need to take exceptional action, they fly into a rage.

That is to say, they aren't doing enough SCIENCE.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 14, 2011, 04:19:02 PM
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/obama-moderate-republican/

QuoteNate looks at polling, and extracts the following implied preferences for the mix between tax increases and spending cuts in a debt deal:

What Obama has offered — and Republicans have refused to accept — is a deal in which less than 20 percent of the deficit reduction comes from new revenues. This puts him slightly to the right of the average Republican voter.


Overton Window, much?
Title: Lehman Bros Global Risk Officer now working for the World Bank
Post by: Cain on July 20, 2011, 02:20:15 AM
Well, I certainly feel much safer now

http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/07/17/271218/what-could-go-wrong/

Madelyn Antoncic moved from the above named position to Vice President and Treasurer for the World Bank.
Title: Debt ceiling talks collapse
Post by: Cain on July 23, 2011, 06:01:26 PM
Bohener tells Obama to go suck one, and storms out.  Obama made the reasonable proposal that taxes would need to be increased, on top of spending cuts (of which there were many - several were designed as key concessions to the Republicans).

August 3rd is looming close.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on July 23, 2011, 06:15:09 PM
I don't know what all those spending cuts were, but I do know that if I asked and found out, I would need a couple of drinks to make it through the day.

Bleh.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 24, 2011, 03:14:35 AM
Quote from: Jenkem and SPACE/TIME on July 23, 2011, 06:15:09 PM
I don't know what all those spending cuts were, but I do know that if I asked and found out, I would need a couple of drinks to make it through the day.

Bleh.

I'd like to know personally.  I am sure a good chunk of them are going to be regulatory agencies and I'd like to know what I can now get away with.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 24, 2011, 03:33:11 AM
The most contentious were Medicaid and Social Security cuts.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 24, 2011, 04:09:24 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 24, 2011, 03:33:11 AM
The most contentious were Medicaid and Social Security cuts.

That I kind of assumed.  That's going to be a big hassle for me because my father in law helps us out a lot and he is on social security.

The AARP is fairly politically powerful.  I hope they roast the teabaggers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 24, 2011, 04:12:56 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14263644

QuoteUS President Barack Obama has held an emergency meeting with congressional leaders in a last-ditch bid to avert an economically catastrophic debt default.

Mr Obama called the meeting after talks with Republican House Speaker John Boehner broke down on Friday.

Both Democrats and Republicans are divided on how to control future spending.

Congress must approve a plan to raise America's debt ceiling before the 2 August default deadline.

If the US fails to meet the deadline to raise the $14.3tn limit on US borrowing, the Treasury could run out of money to pay all of its bills - which could lead to interest rate rises, threaten the US economic recovery and in turn the global recovery.

Mr Obama was joined at the negotiating table on Saturday by his Vice-President Joe Biden, Mr Boehner, House Minority leader Nancy Pelosi, Democratic Senate Majority leader Harry Reid and Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell.

The Associated Press reported that they were unsmiling as the meeting began and most of them avoided reporters when they left the White House.

The White House afterwards urged Congress to "refrain from playing reckless political games with our economy... and do its job, avoiding default and cutting the deficit".

Both Mr McConnell and Mr Boehner issued statements saying they intended "to find a bipartisan solution to significantly reduce Washington spending and preserve the full faith and credit of the United States".

Aides said they expected to work through the weekend to come up with bill that would be acceptable to both sides for Monday.

On Friday, Mr Boehner accused the president of moving "the goal posts", saying they had been close to a deal until Mr Obama demanded $400bn in tax increases on top of about $800bn in revenues that would have been reaped through a comprehensive rewrite of the tax code.

Mr Obama had declared his deal as "extraordinarily fair", offering to cut $650bn from Medicare, Medicaid and other entitlements, as well as slashing $1tr in discretionary spending.

Republicans have been unwilling to consider raising new taxes to counter the growing budget deficits.

The Democrats have been opposed to cutting popular healthcare and welfare programmes for pensioners and the poor.

The Republicans are playing a very dangerous game here. It's almost worth seeing the world economy collapse again, just to see them get burnt for it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 24, 2011, 04:41:48 AM
Are you sure they would? Because I think Tea Baggers on the street would blame the Democrats.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 24, 2011, 04:43:17 AM
The Teabaggers will blame the Democrats regardless.  However, I think the obstructionist nature of the GOP here is fairly obvious now, and should economic shocks follow from their pig-headedness, they will take the blame.  Obama's deal is a very good one.  They're just too greedy for a better one.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on July 24, 2011, 05:00:45 AM
Quote"to find a bipartisan solution to significantly reduce
Washington spending and preserve the full faith and credit of the
United States"
.

This makes me feel queasy. Like there's a gaping hole and where sense should provide some form of safety and structure faith does so instead.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 24, 2011, 06:42:42 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14267091

QuoteVince Cable has attacked leading US Republican politicians for holding up a deal to reduce US government debt.

Speaking on the BBC's Andrew Marr Show, the business secretary called them "a few right-wing nutters in the American Congress".

Unless a deal on Capitol Hill is agreed before 2 August, the US Treasury could run out of money to pay its bills.

Mr Cable said it presented a bigger risk to the global markets than the continuing debt woes in the eurozone.
'Unthinkable' default

President Barack Obama wants to cut US debts by both reducing government spending and raising taxes.

Republicans in Congress are strongly opposed to the tax rises.

The two sides have to come to an agreement before the current $14.3tn (£8.7tn) limit on US borrowing can be raised.

An emergency meeting between President Obama and congressional leaders on Saturday failed to make a breakthrough.

However, US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on Sunday that he still expected a deal to be reached.

Mr Geithner told CNN: "It's unthinkable that this country will not meet its obligations on time.

"It's just unthinkable we'd ever do that. It's not going to happen."

Yet he added that a Republican proposal to first raise the debt limit and then negotiate the spending cuts was "irresponsible" and would not be agreed by Democrats.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 25, 2011, 05:36:02 AM
Why aren't the democrats allowing for the debt ceiling to be raised first and then for negotiations to continue?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 06:14:41 AM
Politics.  Pure and simple.  They know they won't face "common" scrutiny here as much as the GOP at this point.

Hence why the GOP will finally cut a deal, but say in the end they "saved the economy by compromising."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 25, 2011, 06:45:38 AM
Quote from: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 06:14:41 AM
Politics.  Pure and simple.  They know they won't face "common" scrutiny here as much as the GOP at this point.

Hence why the GOP will finally cut a deal, but say in the end they "saved the economy by compromising."

If the GOP roll over and accept what Obama offered, wholesale,  anyone with a liberal agenda gets FUCKED (plus a lot of poor people).  I'd think the Dems would be in favor of continuing business as usual as long as possible.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 03:50:54 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on July 25, 2011, 06:45:38 AM
Quote from: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 06:14:41 AM
Politics.  Pure and simple.  They know they won't face "common" scrutiny here as much as the GOP at this point.

Hence why the GOP will finally cut a deal, but say in the end they "saved the economy by compromising."

If the GOP roll over and accept what Obama offered, wholesale,  anyone with a liberal agenda gets FUCKED (plus a lot of poor people).  I'd think the Dems would be in favor of continuing business as usual as long as possible.

Well, so far, Obama's the only one playing any real "ball" and like I said--the GOP was right here--he's trying to make them look like the bad guys they are in this scenario.  Not that the Dems are smelling like roses by ANY means, of course.

The GOP is just having a bad media moment--because now that Murdoch's empire is seemingly without clothes, so to speak, no one's giving Fux News any more than their usual due.  Media all over are pegging Boehner et al as a buncha whiney fuckwits hellbent on sacrificing the nation for their cause, while idiots like Bachmann screech that the economists are a bunch of ninnies for even SUGGESTING that this is a big deal.

:lulz:

The only thing making this totally hilarious to me is the fact they're getting folks like GEORGE WILL to repeat the same swill Bachmann and her teabaggin' posse have been yammering on about.  And George Will DEFINITELY fucking knows better.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 25, 2011, 05:51:47 PM
Even the likes of David Brooks are realizing, as a result of this, how fucked in the head the GOP are.  Which is bloody miraculous.

It wont last, of course, but it is putting significant pressure on them.  Like I said...I think if they screw around, this time they will take the full blame for it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 06:50:34 PM
...it's certainly close to the wire.  I mean, lookit, they have caught Mitch McConnell saying over and over that in an election year, he's not going to hand Obama his second term by rescuing the economy.

And of course the public is reading this the right way:  he'll screw over the American economy and NOT DO HIS FUCKING JOB, even going so far as OBSTRUCTING OTHERS WHO WANT TO DO THEIR JOBS, all for the joy of flipping Obama off and making him fail.

And no one in the Teabagger sector is decrying this AT ALL.  I thought that party was created to "clean up" Washington DC?  All it's doing is creating more boils on the ass of Congress, as far as I can tell.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 26, 2011, 07:49:01 AM
8 days until Debtageddon.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on July 26, 2011, 10:42:14 AM
The FISCALYPSE!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on July 26, 2011, 11:20:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 26, 2011, 07:49:01 AM
8 days until Debtageddon.

This is the big one now isn't it? When the crunch comes it's going to have a knock on effect which will almost certainly send the banks into a spiral again.

:(
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on July 26, 2011, 11:29:21 AM
Ah.

"We can't figure out any other way to impeach him, so we'll force him to default on the debt, THEN impeach him!"

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/07/25/277893/rep-king-says-obama-will-be-impeached-if-government-defaults/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 02:30:25 PM
Stuff and nonsense.  NO ONE will impeach a president who's worked at getting both assholes to the table, not his fault all they do is fart.

Posturing is soooo getting old on both sides.  Fer chrissakes.

This standoff they have going between the two houses of Congress also seems mightily staged to me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on July 26, 2011, 02:35:25 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 02:30:25 PM
...
This standoff they have going between the two houses of Congress also seems mightily staged to me.

Doesn't it, though?
this whole thing smells like a setup.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 02:40:34 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on July 26, 2011, 02:35:25 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 02:30:25 PM
...
This standoff they have going between the two houses of Congress also seems mightily staged to me.

Doesn't it, though?
this whole thing smells like a setup.

Yup.  As Roger says, we are getting the government we deserve.  :x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 03:23:09 PM
What do you think of Reid's proposed budget plan?  It looks like it cuts more than Boehner's plan while protecting social security, medicare and medicaid and not raising taxes.  I am curious what he is cutting, I haven't been able to find any info on that yet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 03:33:53 PM
...personally, I think it's a low-ball yet desperate attempt to pass something, ANYthing, as long as medicare and medicaid are not touched.  It's assinine to not fix loopholes and raise taxes at this point, but whatchagonnado? 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 03:43:23 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 03:33:53 PM
...personally, I think it's a low-ball yet desperate attempt to pass something, ANYthing, as long as medicare and medicaid are not touched.  It's assinine to not fix loopholes and raise taxes at this point, but whatchagonnado? 

I'm personally concerned about food stamps, medicaid, and military disability pay because either myself or people that I depend on/depend on me receive one or more of these, but I am also curious where other cuts would end up coming from.  I was able to find some fairly vague info mostly having to do with the housing mortgage authorities.

I agree that not raising revenues is an absurd response.  Boehner's speech made no sense to me when he said that a small business, when faced with more expenses than revenue would cut expenses.  What any small business that could would do is increase revenues and cut expenses only if sufficient revenue couldn't be raised.  Nobody wants to fire people, or cut back on advertising, or quality, or any other sensible business expense.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
The GOP are a bunch of fuckin' liars.  They don't want to raise taxes on the big corps...this has nothing to do with small business owners.  Because that's ONE loophole they can make that folks would agree with.  But their corporate sponsors and their campaign money won't let them.

"You can't tax the job creators."  They're not even CORPORATIONS anymore--they're fucking "Job Creators."  

All this when we have a hugeass unemployment rate.  So we're supposed to believe that not taxing them leads to more jobs, just like bailing out all those banks meant more people would get loans.

So much for the emperor and his invisible clothes, assholes!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 04:05:53 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
The GOP are a bunch of fuckin' liars.  They don't want to raise taxes on the big corps...this has nothing to do with small business owners.  Because that's ONE loophole they can make that folks would agree with.  But their corporate sponsors and their campaign money won't let them.

"You can't tax the job creators."  They're not even CORPORATIONS anymore--they're fucking "Job Creators."  

All this when we have a hugeass unemployment rate.  So we're supposed to believe that not taxing them leads to more jobs, just like bailing out all those banks meant more people would get loans.

So much for the emperor and his invisible clothes, assholes!

Did you see his speech?  What I took from it wasn't that he was talking about tax increases (or the lack of them) on small businesses, but that he was trying to say that his experience as a small business owner informed his decision, as a politician to cut expenses.  That any sane small business owner would choose to cut expenses if they were larger than revenue.  Basically using a small business as a metaphor for government.  It's a flawed metaphor anyway, but even remaining within it his solution makes no sense.

Also, Boehner looks like a cartoon to me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:06:20 PM
Quote from: Faust on July 26, 2011, 11:20:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 26, 2011, 07:49:01 AM
8 days until Debtageddon.

This is the big one now isn't it? When the crunch comes it's going to have a knock on effect which will almost certainly send the banks into a spiral again.

:(

Well, that's what Bachmann et al are hoping everyone WORLDWIDE will just sit back and ignore.  I mean, truth be known, I think the international community should be calling OFF THE FUCKING HOOK and spamming up the White House and Congress emails and faxes telling them to knock this shit off and quit fucking with the world economy.

Although, I probably give Bachmann too much credit, thar...she probably truly doesn't GET the fact that this shit is real and will hurt, all the globe over.

Except perhaps Australia.  Damn but they've made some really tasty choices lately (read: last decade) and are coming out lately smelling like fucking roses economy-wise.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 26, 2011, 04:06:22 PM
Quote from: Faust on July 26, 2011, 11:20:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 26, 2011, 07:49:01 AM
8 days until Debtageddon.

This is the big one now isn't it? When the crunch comes it's going to have a knock on effect which will almost certainly send the banks into a spiral again.

:(

If it did happen, yes.  It'd be Greece, but with America's global reach.

I don't know what to think yet.  Markets in Asia are very nervous right now.  I'm not sure they know what to think, either.  There was chatter, late on the BBC last night, when they did a link-up with a Singapore news station, that the mere suggestion of a US default and downgrade had led to an increase in the use of the Yen and Renminbi as a reserve currency in the region.

It could be a set-up to a shafting, as suggested above.  But I'm not willing to discount that Boehner is under genuine pressure to let a default happen, because he is.  And like Mitch McConnell and the rest said, they're not just going to hand Obama a second term without extracting major confessions.

They've got him over a barrel.  And he knows it.  His proposals were more than fair, more than reasonable, but the GOP are neither.  His Goldilocks strategy will not help now.  The GOP want to humiliate him, want their pound of flesh.  And for those who think they would not let the nation suffer for it, I only have to point to the fate of New Orleans.

It'd also make great agitprop for impeachment because it would be the first time the US has ever defaulted on debt.  Even if not, you could expect to hear for the next thirty years about how "Democrats caused the US to default on its debt", much as you hear today from conservative writers about the endless caprice of the hippie and peace movements of the 60s.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:09:06 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 04:05:53 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
The GOP are a bunch of fuckin' liars.  They don't want to raise taxes on the big corps...this has nothing to do with small business owners.  Because that's ONE loophole they can make that folks would agree with.  But their corporate sponsors and their campaign money won't let them.

"You can't tax the job creators."  They're not even CORPORATIONS anymore--they're fucking "Job Creators." 

All this when we have a hugeass unemployment rate.  So we're supposed to believe that not taxing them leads to more jobs, just like bailing out all those banks meant more people would get loans.

So much for the emperor and his invisible clothes, assholes!

Did you see his speech?  What I took from it wasn't that he was talking about tax increases (or the lack of them) on small businesses, but that he was trying to say that his experience as a small business owner informed his decision, as a politician to cut expenses.  That any sane small business owner would choose to cut expenses if they were larger than revenue.  Basically using a small business as a metaphor for government.  It's a flawed metaphor anyway, but even remaining within it his solution makes no sense.

Also, Boehner looks like a cartoon to me.

I try not to listen to the Orange Boner if I can help it--I get an instantaneous Tourrett's syndrome effect that doesn't wear off for hours when I do.

It's all just so much bullshit, brochure and rhetoric to excuse him and his posse from not doing what they were *sob, sniff, sob* SENT TO WASHINGTON TO DO *sob, sniff, sob*.  Which is WHAT exactly?  Oh yeah...work in bipartisan fashion to compromise and fix shit.

Great job, America.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 04:31:42 PM
I don't usually watch political speeches, but watching Obama selling us a rack of shit with a smile, and then Boehner sprinkle a bunch of powdered smallpox on top and pick all the corn out and act like that improved things gave me an excellent rage fix.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 05:08:10 PM
I really just listen to half an ear to Obama...his rhetoric is just too thick when it comes to the signal to noise ratio anymore.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on July 26, 2011, 06:31:08 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 25, 2011, 06:50:34 PM
...it's certainly close to the wire.  I mean, lookit, they have caught Mitch McConnell saying over and over that in an election year, he's not going to hand Obama his second term by rescuing the economy.

This is the best government that America is capable of producing.

Isn't that just the funniest fucking thing you've ever heard?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: whenhellfreezes on July 26, 2011, 07:14:17 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on July 26, 2011, 04:05:53 PM
Quote from: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 04:00:33 PM
The GOP are a bunch of fuckin' liars.  They don't want to raise taxes on the big corps...this has nothing to do with small business owners.  Because that's ONE loophole they can make that folks would agree with.  But their corporate sponsors and their campaign money won't let them.

"You can't tax the job creators."  They're not even CORPORATIONS anymore--they're fucking "Job Creators." 

All this when we have a hugeass unemployment rate.  So we're supposed to believe that not taxing them leads to more jobs, just like bailing out all those banks meant more people would get loans.

So much for the emperor and his invisible clothes, assholes!

Did you see his speech?  What I took from it wasn't that he was talking about tax increases (or the lack of them) on small businesses, but that he was trying to say that his experience as a small business owner informed his decision, as a politician to cut expenses.  That any sane small business owner would choose to cut expenses if they were larger than revenue.  Basically using a small business as a metaphor for government.  It's a flawed metaphor anyway, but even remaining within it his solution makes no sense.

Also, Boehner looks like a cartoon to me.

I really hate how the whole small business thing works. Small businesses are supposed to be some holy savior of the economy. And they are often claimed to be whats hurt by the taxes on the rich. As if your supposed to forget that there is such a thing as huge corporations. This shit combined with the whole "Job Creators" thing is some of the most horrendous yet effective spin ever.

They are trying to create as much sympathy for these corporations as possible. Next thing you know we are going to start personifying them... oh wait.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on July 26, 2011, 07:26:42 PM
https://www.tsp.gov/PDF/formspubs/GAO-AIMD-96-130.pdf

The GAO report on the same god damn thing from 1995-96. (remember that?)

We didn't default and there was no reason to think we WOULD because Treasury has authority to pay obligations by other means until an agreement on raising the ceiling can be reached.  The obligations are to publicly held debt (held mostly by private US citizens and trust funds)

All obligations (interest on the debt owed to the holders of Treasuries and Trust fund expenses) were handled through normal means for 12 of the 15 major trust funds.  The other 3 were used to provide the liquidity necessary to do this without exceeding the debt ceiling.  

Money that was not reinvested was used along with cash on hand.  All of those moneys were repaid to the funds after the debt ceiling was raised and the only loss in interest from funds not reinvested was the Exchange Stabilization Fund, approximately $1.2 million in interest from not reinvesting the treasuries used to fund our obligations.

Both of the other funds were compensated once the ceiling was raised.  The Exchange Stabilization Fund could not be because there was no legislation authorizing Treasury to do so.

Certain government employees had to go without a paycheck for a few weeks during the shutdown but those wages were eventually paid.

At 44 pages it's a pretty dry read but everyone should read it.  

"Not knowing what the fuck you're talking about" is running rampant in both parties on this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 07:42:15 PM
I remember that--but I don't remember the GLOBAL securities issue being so forefront at the time, either. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 26, 2011, 07:47:45 PM
The overall economic situation was a lot rosier in 1995, though.  And markets are lot more anxious now, and a lot more likely to respond in a dramatic manner to any refusal to raise the debt ceiling.

Deutche Bank did the analysis, and suggests that the US government could not hold on anywhere near as long this time around

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/10/12/77181/debt-and-the-dollars-demise-a-compendium-of-concerns/

QuoteOne concern is that these same accounting maneuvers, when applied today, will not be able to stave off a government shutdown (or possible suspension of bond payments) for long. Today, the financing needs of the government are so much higher, that diversion of these funds would not last more than a couple of months, and probably far less. Total debt raised, marketable and nonmarketable, including intra-government issuance, has been running at about $130 bn/month for the last 6 months. Most of this amount, $125 bn, has been for marketable issuance to the public. In this context, the traditional measures are only brief delaying actions. For example, SLGS gross issuance was only $53 bn for all of FY2009, and in fact there was a net paydown in SLGS of some $44 bn; thus stopping the issuance of SLGS would have little impact in the larger picture. About $200 bn of non-marketable Government Account Series bonds are rolled over daily, but it's unclear to us how much of these issues the Treasury Secretary could suspend from rolling over.

There would also likely be a run on US Treasury bonds, making the overall debt situation even worse.  Interest payments would spike, and this would have massive international repurcussions.

The Financial Times paints a far less rosy picture than your analysis, as well http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/19ec4688-2015-11e0-a6fb-00144feab49a.html

QuoteBack in late 1995 and early 1996 the federal government faced a partial shutdown as congressional Republicans, emboldened by a sweeping midterm election victory, refused to back down until the Democratic occupant of the White House changed his profligate ways. Sound familiar?

Pledges of fiscal prudence were made and disaster averted, but not before Treasury investors were spooked and rating agencies mulled a US debt downgrade. The deficit in 1995 was a positively quaint $104bn, around 2010's monthly average, and the debt ceiling just a third of today's $14,300bn
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 26, 2011, 07:51:55 PM
...that's what I thought.  Also, isn't there just MOAR MONEY in the system now, than there was before (meaning, countries in the mix are slightly richer, but that's also due to borrowing more...)?  That means there's MORE TO LOSE than ever before, as well.

It's all a clusterfuck.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on July 26, 2011, 07:54:11 PM
I should have mentioned the difference in the actual SIZE from then till now.  Pretty damn ridiculous to do that in only 15 years.

All the more reason for both sides to stop holding onto their "untouchables" and get the god damn thing under control.  It's unsustainable to keep it increasing like that.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 26, 2011, 08:06:11 PM
Oh, it definitely needs to be dealt with.  However, now is definitely not the time for it.  All it achieves is capping the available economic resources the US can draw on to help promote growth-creating, job making economic activity.

Not that this seems to be a big priority for either party, but in an ideal world, it would be a major concern.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 27, 2011, 05:44:50 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14303325

QuoteThe White House has warned that President Obama could veto a debt limit plan proposed by top House Republicans.

Meanwhile, Speaker John Boehner's plan to trim public spending and raise the limit met with resistance from rank-and-file members of his own party.

A House of Representatives vote on the plan was delayed from Wednesday after doubts arose over the cuts it proposed.

Washington remains deadlocked as a deadline to increase the government's borrowing authority looms on 2 August.

The US runs a budget deficit that topped $1.5tn (£920bn) this year, and has amassed a national debt of $14.3tn.

The government's authority to borrow more money has expired, and the US risks a first-ever default on its debt obligations if congressional and White House negotiators are unable to agree on a plan to increase the debt limit by 2 August.

The debt limit has been raised dozens of times in recent decades, mostly without partisan debate.

This year, though, conservative Republicans refused to allow an increase unaccompanied by dramatic cuts to the US budget deficit.

You know, stupid shit like this, Washington's various international crusades, inconsistent moral lecturing and putting Palin in a position where she could have potentially been one old man's heart attack away from the presidency is why Chinese hegemony is going to be welcomed with relief in many corners of the globe.  The Chinese care about exactly two things: making money and stability.  Practically everyone can get on board that program.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on July 27, 2011, 06:01:13 AM
Well, THIS thread certainly brightened my day. 

Why did I ever wake up. :(  I was HAPPY when I was a stupid monkey. 

God fucking dammit. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on July 27, 2011, 10:05:59 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 27, 2011, 05:44:50 AM
The Chinese care about exactly two things: making money and stability.  Practically everyone can get on board that program.

Sounds like a plan.

CHINA FOR PRESIDENT 2012

So they don't even care about subjugating the rest of the world to their censorship programs? Except for their stubborn incapableness in combating desertification, what's the downside again? :)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 27, 2011, 12:31:23 PM
Well, the censorship is mostly for internal stability.  They don't care if you want to internally censor stuff or not, so long as you pay your bills on time.

At the same time, don't expect them to sign up to any treaties about human rights or which could potentially violate their sovereignty.  Even more so than the USA.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 27, 2011, 02:29:51 PM
...apparently the monkey cages are finally rattling.  Several news agencies are reporting that people are calling in and faxing/emailing constantly telling Congress to suck it up and compromise.  80% "fuck you" factor going on in the polling, with only 9% (according to PBS) blaming the Democrats.

Yolk's on you, GOP.  

And yet still, Boehner's (who from here on out is now "Boner" to me) approval amongst his own party went up.  Apparently, his posturing is WORKing on his own TeaBaggered portion of his party.  They now clap him on the back and have effectively stopped the whisper campaign that he's a shill for the White House.

The Orange BonerTM has gotten some street cred by shoving a stick up the economy's ass and refusing to take it out when America squeals in protest.


Good one, USandA!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 27, 2011, 02:41:29 PM
GOP have been out of touch with mainstream public opinion for years.

Maybe the media will suck it up and recognize it, at last.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 27, 2011, 04:01:53 PM
...I WANT to believe they will.  I also want to believe that there's additional egg on Fux News's face as one of the many portions of the Murdoch News Empire that controls lamestream media in the US...which might have an effect at least on the more moderate section of the population (what's left of them, anyway).

But there are a lot of things that I want to believe that just aren't that good for me, anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 27, 2011, 04:10:03 PM
I watched the speeches on Fox and they did not sound particularly sympathetic to Boehner.  Kind of surprised me actually.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 27, 2011, 04:14:53 PM
Well, here's the thing--his is a SHORT-TERM plan with REVENUE INCREASES.

The TWO things the TeaBaggers and their freshman congressional idiocracy are dead-set against!

And Reid's plan is the opposite--cuts funding to programs that are Democratic sacred cows, but has no revenue increases.

Add to this the fact that the freshman fuckeroos want a fucking goddamned constitutional amendment or THEY WON'T VOTE NUH-UH, YOU CAN'T MAKE THEM!

Yeah...so guess which SIDE of this Fux News is on?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 28, 2011, 10:41:06 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14328183

QuoteA Republican bill to raise the US debt ceiling, cut spending and avert default on US debt is set for back-to-back votes in the House and Senate.

But House Speaker John Boehner's bill faces a conservative revolt, unanimous opposition by Senate Democrats and a White House veto threat.

Ahead of the votes, Republicans challenged Democrats to back the bill or take political blame for default.

Congress must raise the US debt limit by a deadline of next Tuesday.
'Untenable situation'

The US Treasury has warned the government will run out of money to pay all its bills unless a $14.3tn (£8.7tn) borrowing limit is increased by next Tuesday.

A vote on Mr Boehner's bill was tentatively scheduled for 17:45 local time (21:45 GMT). Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he would hold a vote in the Senate as soon as the House voted.

He predicted it would fail to pass the Senate, where Democrats and independents voting together hold 53 of 100 votes.

Republicans hold 240 of the 433 votes to be cast in the House, and need 217 of their members to back the bill to pass it.

Mr Boehner and his lieutenants have been whipping restive members of the House rank and file - including some who oppose lifting the debt limit under any circumstances - to support the plan.

Mr Boehner's plan would trim $917bn from the US budget deficit over 10 years and raise the debt limit by up to $900bn.

President Barack Obama supports another plan by top Senate Democrat Harry Reid, which would cut $2.2tn from deficits, and raise the debt ceiling by $2.7tn.

But that is thought unlikely in its current form to pass the Republican-controlled House.

The Boehner and Reid plans overlap in key ways - trimming spending over 10 years, shunning President Obama's call for tax increases on the wealthy and creating special lawmaker committees to craft future cuts.

But Mr Boehner's approach would force another debt-limit showdown during next year's presidential campaign, something Mr Obama has fiercely opposed.

Just in case anyone had the mistaken thought Boehner had the good of the nation at heart, read the final line.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 29, 2011, 12:00:39 AM
 :facepalm:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 29, 2011, 12:04:06 AM
And oh, my congressman is siding with Boehner. Of fucking course.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on July 29, 2011, 03:20:45 AM
Quote from: Hover Cat on July 29, 2011, 12:04:06 AM
And oh, my congressman is siding with Boehner. Of fucking course.

Write him a nice letter.  Explain that the fuckery does NOT amuse you, and you will be casting your vote in the next election accordingly... and if he keeps up with the fuckery, you will get off your ass and actively campaign AGAINST him.

Just came across this link, by the way:

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/06/27/eric_cantor_conflict_of_interest

QuoteWhen Eric Cantor shut down debt ceiling negotiations last week, it did more than just rekindle fears that the U.S. government might soon default on its debt obligations -- it also brought him closer to reaping a small financial windfall from his investment in a mutual fund whose performance is directly affected by debt ceiling brinkmanship.

Last year the Wall Street Journal reported that Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, had between $1,000 and $15,000 invested in ProShares Trust Ultrashort 20+ Year Treasury EFT. The fund aggressively "shorts" long-term U.S. Treasury bonds, meaning that it performs well when U.S. debt is undesirable.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 29, 2011, 04:02:49 AM
I intend to and I'll be overnighting that sucker bright and early tomorrow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 29, 2011, 06:56:48 AM
On a more lighthearted note/tangent:
http://gawker.com/5825826/stephen-colbert-expands-on-john-mccains-tea-party-hobbits-metaphor
:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:27:40 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14328183

QuoteA vote on a Republican bill to raise the US debt ceiling, cut spending and avert default has been delayed in the face of conservative resistance.

House Speaker John Boehner and Republican leaders were struggling on Thursday to convince rank and file lawmakers to vote for his bill.

The plan, however, is almost certain to fail in the Democratic-led Senate, and the White House has warned of a veto.

Congress must raise the US debt limit by a deadline of next Tuesday.

The US Treasury has warned the government will run out of money to pay all its bills unless a $14.3tn (£8.7tn) borrowing limit is increased by next Tuesday.
'Untenable situation'

A vote on Mr Boehner's bill was postponed for a few hours late on Thursday, as Mr Boehner and his lieutenants endeavoured to win support among rank and file conservative Republicans.

But eventually Republican Representative Kevin McCarthy announced that there would be no vote on Thursday evening.

Some Republicans - including Tea Party supporters who won House seats in 2010 and oppose raising the debt limit under any circumstance - feel the bill did not cut enough from the US budget.

Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid predicted that even if the bill passes in the House, it will fail to pass the Senate, where Democrats and independents voting together hold 53 of 100 votes.

Republicans hold 240 of the 433 votes to be cast in the House, and need 216 of their members - plus Speaker Boehner in the event of a tie - to back the bill to pass it.

Meanwhile, International Monetary Fund chief Christine Lagarde warned that if the debt ceiling was not increased there could be an impact on the US dollar.

"One of the consequences could be a decline of the dollar as a reserve currency and a dent in people's confidence in the dollar," she said.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on July 29, 2011, 10:34:59 AM
I assume no one is going to be working on this at the weekend, so that basically leaves Monday to make the deal...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:38:24 AM
I think they are, surprisingly enough.  BBC seemed to imply it, anyway.  Still, 4 days....it don't look good.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on July 29, 2011, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:38:24 AM
I think they are, surprisingly enough.  BBC seemed to imply it, anyway.  Still, 4 days....it don't look good.

I'm shocked, politicians putting work before their weekend?

Our economy isn't all that far from what greece's was and our government doesn't convene again until after the summer holidays (I think we are the only country that the government do this in).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on July 29, 2011, 10:55:12 AM
Quote from: Faust on July 29, 2011, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:38:24 AM
I think they are, surprisingly enough.  BBC seemed to imply it, anyway.  Still, 4 days....it don't look good.

I'm shocked, politicians putting work before their weekend?

Our economy isn't all that far from what greece's was and our government doesn't convene again until after the summer holidays (I think we are the only country that the government do this in).

summer recess? we have that too.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on July 29, 2011, 10:58:05 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on July 29, 2011, 10:55:12 AM
Quote from: Faust on July 29, 2011, 10:41:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:38:24 AM
I think they are, surprisingly enough.  BBC seemed to imply it, anyway.  Still, 4 days....it don't look good.

I'm shocked, politicians putting work before their weekend?

Our economy isn't all that far from what greece's was and our government doesn't convene again until after the summer holidays (I think we are the only country that the government do this in).

summer recess? we have that too.

Ah right, I imagined only we could be that lazy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 29, 2011, 11:08:21 AM
Ours have a long summer break as well.  From July until September, pretty much.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on July 29, 2011, 02:46:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on July 29, 2011, 10:38:24 AM
I think they are, surprisingly enough.  BBC seemed to imply it, anyway.  Still, 4 days....it don't look good.

cats on NPR this morning said they expected it to be a weekend of colorful political theater
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on July 29, 2011, 04:27:42 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on July 29, 2011, 06:56:48 AM
On a more lighthearted note/tangent:
http://gawker.com/5825826/stephen-colbert-expands-on-john-mccains-tea-party-hobbits-metaphor
:lulz:

You know, I would have thought the teabaggers would have chosen Saruman instead of Sauron.  The one that seemed like an ally and a leader and turned out to be evil.
Title: Apple now has more cash than the USA
Post by: Cain on July 29, 2011, 07:40:14 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14340470

QuoteApple now has more cash to spend than the United States government.

Latest figures from the US Treasury Department show that the country has an operating cash balance of $73.7bn (£45.3bn).

Apple's most recent financial results put its reserves at $76.4bn.

Obviously, the solution is to nationalize and liquidize Steve Jobs.

Anyway

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14344411

QuoteUS President Barack Obama has said Democrats and Republicans must compromise to cut the US budget deficit and raise the debt limit.

He warned time had almost run out, as Republican leaders scrambled to save their deficit-cutting bill amid a House of Representatives conservative revolt.

The Democrats meanwhile announced they would put their plan to the Senate.

The fiscal fiasco leaves the US inching closer to a potentially catastrophic default on federal debt next Tuesday.

The US government will start running out of money to pay all its bills unless a $14.3tn (£8.7tn) borrowing limit is increased by 2 August.

'Last train leaving'

At the White House, Mr Obama accused House Republicans of pursuing a partisan bill that would force Washington into another debt limit fight within months.

He said: "There are plenty of ways out of this mess, but we are almost out of time."

"The time for putting party first is over," he added. "The time for compromise on behalf of the American people is now."

In Congress, the arm-twisting continued on Friday.

House Speaker John Boehner and his lieutenants were working to whip Republicans into line behind their plan to cut the budget while raising the debt limit.

A vote on that bill was called off on Thursday night when it became clear Mr Boehner lacked support within his own party.

Senior Senate Democrats said the upper chamber would vote on a proposal at the weekend, and invited Republican Leader Mitch McConnell for compromise talks.

"Too much is at stake to waste even one more minute - the last train is leaving the station," Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid said.

But Mr McConnell accused Democrats of wasting precious time and obstructing a deal by vowing to block Mr Boehner's bill, should it be passed in the House.

"Republicans have been doing the hard work of governing this week," he said.

Mr Boehner convened a closed meeting of all 240 House Republicans on Friday morning to outline tweaks he has made overnight to the legislation.

Mr Boehner and other Republican leaders spent all day Thursday arm-twisting dissident lawmakers, but they were unable to win over enough conservative hardliners.

Some Republicans - including Tea Party supporters who won House seats last year and oppose raising the debt limit under any circumstance - feel the Boehner bill would not cut enough from the US budget.

Mr Boehner's plan faces certain rejection by the Democratic-controlled Senate, as well as a White House veto threat, but could form the basis of an eventual compromise.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on July 29, 2011, 07:48:38 PM
Is it me, or are the senate people starting to feel like they're a bit panicked, too? Like, things aren't working out The Way They Were Supposed To, so they're getting a teensy bit desperate because they might lose their jobs?

Or is that just me wishing they knew and cared how badly the rest of us down here are going to get fucked?  I realize that they DON'T care, I do, really.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on July 29, 2011, 08:10:25 PM
I think some are on board with the "gameplanplay" of perpetual stalemate, and some are actually NOT pleased with how this is going down.  Because SOME have to run campaigns for re-election, whereas next year, SOME get to sit back and just point fingers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on July 30, 2011, 12:14:58 AM
Off the top of my head:

1) End the Bush tax cuts in their entirety.

2) Work to close loopholes in current tax code that let the wealthy and billion dollar corporations not pay their fair share of taxes.

3) End farm and oil subsidies (this includes the waste of time and money ethanol production currently is).

4) Leave Iraq. I'm not entirely sure why we went there but Saddam Hussein is dead so I imagine our goal is achieved. Let the people of Iraq figure out what kind of government they want.*

5) Leave Afghanistan. We went to war in Afghanistan because they were hiding Osama Bin Laden from justice. He's dead, mission accomplished. Let the people of Afghanistan figure out what kind of government they want.*

6) Over and above #s 4 & 5 cut military spending by 10-15%. The USA spends almost as much on its defense budget as all the other nations in the world combined. I think we can tone that down a bit.

*They can do this through diplomacy or shooting each other. Lets see how badly they want democracy.

Haven't given thought or examined what may be wrong with this solution.  I'm leaving that up to the Internet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on July 30, 2011, 07:11:10 AM
So, some jackhole told me that everything would run as normal if the US can't pay it's bills in a couple of days, nothing would change.

How inaccurate is that? What actually happens if these fuckers don't do something on time?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on July 30, 2011, 07:24:50 AM
Quote from: Alty on July 30, 2011, 07:11:10 AM
So, some jackhole told me that everything would run as normal if the US can't pay it's bills in a couple of days, nothing would change.

How inaccurate is that? What actually happens if these fuckers don't do something on time?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/what-happens-if-we-dont-raise-the-debt-ceiling/242728/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 30, 2011, 07:43:41 AM
Wonderful.  :|

Quote from: PopeTom on July 30, 2011, 12:14:58 AM
Off the top of my head:

1) End the Bush tax cuts in their entirety.

2) Work to close loopholes in current tax code that let the wealthy and billion dollar corporations not pay their fair share of taxes.

3) End farm and oil subsidies (this includes the waste of time and money ethanol production currently is).

4) Leave Iraq. I'm not entirely sure why we went there but Saddam Hussein is dead so I imagine our goal is achieved. Let the people of Iraq figure out what kind of government they want.*

5) Leave Afghanistan. We went to war in Afghanistan because they were hiding Osama Bin Laden from justice. He's dead, mission accomplished. Let the people of Afghanistan figure out what kind of government they want.*

6) Over and above #s 4 & 5 cut military spending by 10-15%. The USA spends almost as much on its defense budget as all the other nations in the world combined. I think we can tone that down a bit.

*They can do this through diplomacy or shooting each other. Lets see how badly they want democracy.

Haven't given thought or examined what may be wrong with this solution.  I'm leaving that up to the Internet.
As I understand it, if everything goes to shit in Afghanistan, then Pakistan has a good chance at following. Pakistan also has nukes, which they do attempt to protect (ie, from what I read, the only military folk with the key [or whatever it is] are from the eastern border, who are less likely to have ties to crazies from the west border), but everything's shot to shit, it's hard to control who gets what. I don't know enough about Iraq's current situation to say anything, but one through three and six, I totally agree with.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on July 30, 2011, 07:47:47 AM
Quote from: Luna on July 30, 2011, 07:24:50 AM
Quote from: Alty on July 30, 2011, 07:11:10 AM
So, some jackhole told me that everything would run as normal if the US can't pay it's bills in a couple of days, nothing would change.

How inaccurate is that? What actually happens if these fuckers don't do something on time?

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/07/what-happens-if-we-dont-raise-the-debt-ceiling/242728/

AH. So, in very pragmatic terms, we'll still be able to buy beer, it'll just cost a helluvalot more and the guy at the booze shop will give out money a dirty look, if he accepts it at all.

SWELL.

Well, swollen anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2011, 08:10:15 AM
Quote from: Hover Cat on July 30, 2011, 07:43:41 AM
Wonderful.  :|

Quote from: PopeTom on July 30, 2011, 12:14:58 AM
Off the top of my head:

1) End the Bush tax cuts in their entirety.

2) Work to close loopholes in current tax code that let the wealthy and billion dollar corporations not pay their fair share of taxes.

3) End farm and oil subsidies (this includes the waste of time and money ethanol production currently is).

4) Leave Iraq. I'm not entirely sure why we went there but Saddam Hussein is dead so I imagine our goal is achieved. Let the people of Iraq figure out what kind of government they want.*

5) Leave Afghanistan. We went to war in Afghanistan because they were hiding Osama Bin Laden from justice. He's dead, mission accomplished. Let the people of Afghanistan figure out what kind of government they want.*

6) Over and above #s 4 & 5 cut military spending by 10-15%. The USA spends almost as much on its defense budget as all the other nations in the world combined. I think we can tone that down a bit.

*They can do this through diplomacy or shooting each other. Lets see how badly they want democracy.

Haven't given thought or examined what may be wrong with this solution.  I'm leaving that up to the Internet.
As I understand it, if everything goes to shit in Afghanistan, then Pakistan has a good chance at following. Pakistan also has nukes, which they do attempt to protect (ie, from what I read, the only military folk with the key [or whatever it is] are from the eastern border, who are less likely to have ties to crazies from the west border), but everything's shot to shit, it's hard to control who gets what. I don't know enough about Iraq's current situation to say anything, but one through three and six, I totally agree with.

Pakistan has already gone to shit.

In fact, Pakistan is destabilizing Afghanistan, not the other way around.  And that destabilization is, in part, due to the presence of foreign soldiers and the loss of Afghanistan's "strategic depth" so long as it remains friendly with the USA and India.

If we had really wanted to fight a war on terror, the first place we should have visited was the offices of the ISI, and hanged the bastards.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on July 30, 2011, 09:38:11 AM
I stand corrected, apparently.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on July 30, 2011, 01:23:41 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on July 30, 2011, 07:43:41 AM
As I understand it, if everything goes to shit in Afghanistan, then Pakistan has a good chance at following. Pakistan also has nukes, which they do attempt to protect (ie, from what I read, the only military folk with the key [or whatever it is] are from the eastern border, who are less likely to have ties to crazies from the west border), but everything's shot to shit, it's hard to control who gets what. I don't know enough about Iraq's current situation to say anything, but one through three and six, I totally agree with.

As a democratic nation I think Pakistan is always just one election away from the crazies is office.  For an example see the US House of Representatives.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 30, 2011, 09:06:52 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14354088

QuoteThe Democrat-controlled US Senate is seeking a vote on its plan to raise the nation's $14.3tn (£8.7tn) debt limit, which could determine whether a deal to avoid government default is possible.

Senate leaders want a prompt vote so the plan can be passed on Sunday.

But the House of Representatives pre-empted the Senate vote and rejected the bill on Saturday afternoon.

President Obama has urged Congress to get its house in order. The US risks default without a deal by 2 August.

The moves come a day after the Senate rejected a rival Republican bill passed in the House of Representatives.

The president backs Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's proposal, which would cut $2.2tn from deficits and raise the debt ceiling by $2.7tn.

The Senate plan envisages raising the debt ceiling until after the 2012 elections. Republicans have sought a plan which raises the ceiling for just a few months.

The BBC's Paul Adams in Washington says the Treasury is already drawing up emergency plans in case a deal is not reached.

It is a measure of how the anxiety is spreading that troops in Afghanistan saw fit to ask Adm Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, whether they would be paid this month, he adds.

Democrat leaders in the Senate are said to be seeking agreement with Republicans to avoid procedural obstacles which could delay the Senate vote until Monday.

Mr Reid accused the Republicans of seeking to filibuster, or delay, proceedings.

"Unless there is a compromise, or they accept my bill, we're heading for economic disaster," he said.

Minority Leader Mitch McConnell accused the Democrats of stirring up opposition, but said he eagerly awaited Mr Reid's plan.

In a weekly radio address, Mr Obama reiterated that any solution on a default had to be bipartisan.

"There are multiple ways to resolve this problem," he said.

"Congress must find common ground on a plan that can get support from both parties in the House and in the Senate. And it has to be a plan that I can sign by Tuesday."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 31, 2011, 07:52:44 AM
BIPARTISAN CONSENSUS-GASM!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14354088

QuoteDemocrats and Republicans have expressed cautious optimism about the chances of raising the US debt limit by Tuesday and averting possible default.

Republican Senate leader Mitch McConnell said there was "a level of seriousness with the right people at the table" as talks continued.

Senior Senate Democrat Richard Durban spoke of "a more positive feeling".

In a sign of the level of anxiety over the issue, troops in Afghanistan asked Adm Mike Mullen if they would be paid.

The admiral, who as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is on a visit to southern Afghanistan, said he did not know whether that would be the case if the US fails to raise the $14.3tn (£8.7tn) limit by 2 August.

Democrats and Republicans have so far rejected each others' proposals for cutting spending and raising the debt limit.

President Barack Obama backs Democratic Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid's proposal, which would cut $2.2tn from deficits and raise the debt ceiling by $2.7tn, meaning the issue would not have to be revisited until after the 2012 elections.

Late on Saturday, Mr Reid said he was postponing a planned procedural vote on his bill in the Senate - the latest stage in a series of Congressional stand-offs between the two parties.

"There are negotiations going on at the White House to avert a catastrophic default on the nation's debt. There are many elements to be finalised and there is still a distance to go," he said.

The vote, which had been expected at 0100 (0500 GMT) on Sunday, will now be held at 1300 (1700 GMT), he added.

Mr Reid's deputy, Richard Durban, said: "We're a long way from any kind of a negotiated agreement, but there is certainly a more positive feeling about reaching an agreement this evening than I've felt in a long time."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on July 31, 2011, 12:08:16 PM
http://www.angryblacklady.com/2011/07/26/ahem-speaker-boehner-a-word-please/

QuoteUm, Speaker Boehner? Sir? About that press conference of yours last night? I'd like to correct a few misstatements lies, if you don't mind.

QuoteThese are difficult times in the life of our nation. Millions are looking for work, have been for some time, and the spending binge going on in Washington is a big part of the reason why.

People aren't struggling because of this mythical "spending binge" you talk about. They are struggling because YOUR party's president crashed our economy a few years back, sir.

Possibly one of the most polite ass-reamings I've read in awhile, there.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 31, 2011, 01:24:13 PM
I'm going to make a confession here: I actually can't stand ABL.

Not because she's a blatant Democratic shill (though that is certainly part of it) but because of her constant humourless need to stick to her persona whenever mocked.  Which is pretty much every day.  She's pretty much the poster child for "Yeah, fuckface! Get ready to be beaten down. Grrr! Internet ain't so safe now is it motherfucker! Shit just got real! Bam!"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 31, 2011, 06:22:55 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/1KlSa.gif)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on July 31, 2011, 09:24:32 PM
YAY DOOM!!!!

Things like this make me long for the olden day of politics where you opponent was just as likely to have you assassinated as to compromise with you.   
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on August 03, 2011, 02:58:02 PM
Every day, I am reminded that having a democracy in an under-educated country is a horrible, horrible thing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 03, 2011, 03:21:00 PM
ahhh stewart

part 1: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-1-2011/dealageddon----a-compromise-without-revenues
part 2: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-1-2011/dealageddon----angry-tea-party

In segment 1, Jon laments over how the president managed to completely cave and then act like he owns it
In segment 2 (the better of the two IMO), Jon points out how the tea party got everything they wanted and are still voting against the bill. It ramps up to a big frustrated rant about the tea party.

"Government isn't perfect, but some people wish it was better, not gone.

You're in a bank and it's a negotiation where you've got some hostages, and after getting everything you wanted, you're still making demands -- "I can still kill the hostages, right?""


:horrormirth:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 04, 2011, 03:57:10 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14396557

QuoteDebt-laden Italy is likely to default, but Spain might just avoid it, according to the British think tank, the Centre for Economics and Business Research.

With the countries weighed down by debt, the think tank modelled "good" and "bad" economic scenarios for both.

It found that Italy will not avoid default unless it sees an unlikely big jump in economic growth.

However, it said, "there is a real chance that Spain may avoid default".

Even though Italy has managed to run tight budgets, and has vowed to eliminate its deficit by 2014, the economy needs a significant boost in growth.

But its economy grew by just 0.1% in the first quarter of 2011 and further growth is expected to remain sluggish.

On Wednesday, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi addressed parliament, saying the economy was "strong" and the nation's banks "solvent".

But many economists believe that the eurozone's third largest economy risks being engulfed in the debt crisis.

In a report published on Thursday, the CEBR calculated that Italy's debt would rise from 128% of annual output to 150% by 2017 if bond yields stay above the current 6% and growth remains stagnant.

"Even if the cost of borrowing goes back down to 4%, the growth rate is so anaemic that we see the debt-GDP ratio remaining at 123% in 2018," said Doug McWilliams, the CEBR's chief executive.

The conditions in Spain are better because its debt is much lower. Even under the "bad" scenario, Madrid's debt ratio would climb to no higher than 75% of national output.

"Fingers crossed but there is a real chance that Spain may avoid default and debt restructuring, unless it gets dragged down by contagion," Mr McWilliams said.

"Realistically, Italy is bound to default, but Spain may just get away without having to do so," he said.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 04, 2011, 07:23:07 PM
There is talk on the BBC about the possible collapse of the Euro should Italy default.

In other words, if Italy goes down, the entire Eurozone follows.  And the Eurozone is the world's largest market...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Fast Eddy on August 05, 2011, 12:37:58 AM
 :kingmeh:

We're not getting out of this without a second Great Depression, are we?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 05, 2011, 01:22:58 AM
Aw, but euros is what I use to buy all my stuff ... :(
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Rumckle on August 05, 2011, 01:24:06 AM
Perhaps you should diversify, I hear tulips are a safe investment.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Eater of Clowns on August 05, 2011, 01:29:48 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on August 05, 2011, 01:22:58 AM
Aw, but euros is what I use to buy all my stuff ... :(

Quote from: Rumckle on August 05, 2011, 01:24:06 AM
Perhaps you should diversify, I hear tulips are a safe investment.

:lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 05, 2011, 02:16:34 AM
:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 04:55:25 PM
Very strange happenings on the stock market today.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14423297

QuoteInstability on the stock markets has continued, despite better-than-expected US jobs figures.

There have been sharp falls in the past 24 hours amid a crisis of confidence due to the eurozone debt crisis and concerns about weak economic recovery in the US and Europe.

A fall in the US jobless rate caused the US markets to open higher and gave temporary relief to European indexes.

But London's FTSE and Frankfurt's Dax were soon down about 2% again.

European markets had been down as much as 4% in the morning, before recovering, and then lurching back down again by mid-afternoon.

Earlier, the EU's Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said he thought the movements were "incomprehensible" and "not justified by the economic fundamentals", particularly in Italy and Spain, the latest focus of investors' concerns.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 05:01:07 PM
Yeah, I'm watching the hell out of this.  Hindsight being what it is it would have been best to move everything to cash yesterday but it's still not too late to cut my losses and bolt to treasuries for the rest of the year.

Probably make a decision after 2 when lunch has settled.  I'm still young and dumb enough to be fairly risky with my investments but I really don't want to take another beating like '08 if I can help it.



Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 05:03:36 PM
Robert Peston, BBC's Finance Editor and Fifth Horseman of the Apocalypse, made a direct parallel between todays stock market instability and that of August 2007, when the credit crunch started.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 05:04:43 PM
£38 billion wiped off the top 100 UK companies today, alone.  £148 billion in the last week.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on August 05, 2011, 05:06:34 PM
I've got a share account set up now, I've been looking at pretrochemicals and gold but I'm going to hold on because the next week could drive everything down a lot further.

I'm a newb to this so if anyone has any suggestions I'm listening.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 05:16:52 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 05, 2011, 05:06:34 PM
I've got a share account set up now, I've been looking at pretrochemicals and gold but I'm going to hold on because the next week could drive everything down a lot further.

I'm a newb to this so if anyone has any suggestions I'm listening.

buy low, sell high  :D

seriously though, I listen to a few different guys and what they're doing and then make decisions based on how much I'm willing to be risky that day.  I don't move things around often, sometimes only once a year to reinvest when I'm getting top heavy in one area.

Naturally, the people I listen to are Austrian school, libertarian types.  If your personal politics make you shy away from taking financial ques from those types well then..  you probably shouldn't be in the market.  Hate em or love em, they're watching this shit close and have a stake in making the right moves, or at least ones that wont have them jumping from skyscrapers by close of business day.

I'll dig up some links over lunch break.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
QuoteEarlier, the EU's Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said he thought the movements were "incomprehensible" and "not justified by the economic fundamentals", particularly in Italy and Spain, the latest focus of investors' concerns.

This is an interesting way of saying the pilot's dead and nobody else knows how to land the plane.

ETA:  Or the pilot has been tied up and put in the bathroom by some dodgy-looking bankers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 05:25:44 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
QuoteEarlier, the EU's Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said he thought the movements were "incomprehensible" and "not justified by the economic fundamentals", particularly in Italy and Spain, the latest focus of investors' concerns.

This is an interesting way of saying the pilot's dead and nobody else knows how to land the plane.

ETA:  Or the pilot has been tied up and put in the bathroom by some dodgy-looking bankers.

I suspect the latter.  Channel 5 news over here just had a stockbroker on, asking for more "quantative easing".

They want some cheap money to re-inflate the bubble.  Which is the same response we've had to every economic crisis since the 80s, and so, obviously, will work fantastic.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 05:25:44 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
QuoteEarlier, the EU's Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said he thought the movements were "incomprehensible" and "not justified by the economic fundamentals", particularly in Italy and Spain, the latest focus of investors' concerns.

This is an interesting way of saying the pilot's dead and nobody else knows how to land the plane.

ETA:  Or the pilot has been tied up and put in the bathroom by some dodgy-looking bankers.

I suspect the latter.  Channel 5 news over here just had a stockbroker on, asking for more "quantative easing".

They want some cheap money to re-inflate the bubble.  Which is the same response we've had to every economic crisis since the 80s, and so, obviously, will work fantastic.

Two years ago, I mentioned the need to eat these people.

Nobody listened.   :sad:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 05:36:11 PM
http://www.schiffradio.com/

Peter Schiff is one I've listened to for a few years.  

Jim Rogers and his Rogers International Commodity Index ( RICI )
http://jimrogers-investments.blogspot.com/

When Jim Rogers is suggesting something, I tend to take his advice.  I listen to him probably more than any other investor out there.

I have quite a bit invested across several Blackrock funds and find they have done a decent job managing.  Any losses I took over the last two years in a poorer performing area was easily offset by gains in others.  They're currently taking the same beating everyone else is at the moment but I've made a lot of money with them over the last few years.

http://www2.blackrock.com/global/home/InvestorRelations/index.htm

http://libertarianinvestments.blogspot.com/ is hit and miss for usefulness.

Of course you should read a lot from here: http://www.forbes.com/

I'm a bit leery right now of recommending gold.  It's at historic highs and looks a lot like a bubble.  Silver is great as long as you're willing to see a dump like it took yesterday every now and again, or be prepared to snatch it up when it does.  Iptuous could probably provide some good advice on Silver and Gold and I was hoping he'd check in today and give his thoughts.  Gold, to me, is the sort of thing you buy when you can afford it, and then just hold it.  Preferably the real stuff that you can get your hands on, but there's some decent funds out there as well.

I use this place pretty heavily for news on metals:  http://www.monex.com/

For currencies I go here: http://www.smartmoney.com

and they had a great article yesterday: http://www.smartmoney.com/invest/currencies/new-tool-for-currency-traders-mimicry-1312324538631/?link=sm_pfspend_rss

on a new tool for piggy backing on major currency skimmers' moves.  Apparently, if their numbers are right:

QuoteAccording to a new report by the Aite Group, a financial services consulting firm, as many as 50% of traders using websites and trading platforms that allow them to copy other investors' trades are making a profit. That's far more than the one-third of retail traders overall who make money in any given quarter, according to data from major forex dealers.

which is pretty damn astounding.

more later.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on August 05, 2011, 05:41:43 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 05:36:11 PM
http://www.schiffradio.com/

Peter Schiff is one I've listened to for a few years.  

Jim Rogers and his Rogers International Commodity Index ( RICI )
http://jimrogers-investments.blogspot.com/

When Jim Rogers is suggesting something, I tend to take his advice.  I listen to him probably more than any other investor out there.

I have quite a bit invested across several Blackrock funds and find they have done a decent job managing.  Any losses I took over the last two years in a poorer performing area was easily offset by gains in others.  They're currently taking the same beating everyone else is at the moment but I've made a lot of money with them over the last few years.

http://www2.blackrock.com/global/home/InvestorRelations/index.htm

http://libertarianinvestments.blogspot.com/ is hit and miss for usefulness.

Of course you should read a lot from here: http://www.forbes.com/

I'm a bit leery right now of recommending gold.  It's at historic highs and looks a lot like a bubble.  Silver is great as long as you're willing to see a dump like it took yesterday every now and again, or be prepared to snatch it up when it does.  Iptuous could probably provide some good advice on Silver and Gold and I was hoping he'd check in today and give his thoughts.  Gold, to me, is the sort of thing you buy when you can afford it, and then just hold it.  Preferably the real stuff that you can get your hands on, but there's some decent funds out there as well.

I use this place pretty heavily for news on metals:  http://www.monex.com/

For currencies I go here: http://www.smartmoney.com

and they had a great article yesterday: http://www.smartmoney.com/invest/currencies/new-tool-for-currency-traders-mimicry-1312324538631/?link=sm_pfspend_rss

on a new tool for piggy backing on major currency skimmers' moves.  Apparently, if their numbers are right:

QuoteAccording to a new report by the Aite Group, a financial services consulting firm, as many as 50% of traders using websites and trading platforms that allow them to copy other investors' trades are making a profit. That's far more than the one-third of retail traders overall who make money in any given quarter, according to data from major forex dealers.

which is pretty damn astounding.

more later.

Awesome, I'll start having a snoop around these.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on August 05, 2011, 05:52:07 PM
Kieth Olbermann is pissed.

I don't know if his suggestion is a good one, I think protests may be pointless now, but I agree with his sentiment.

http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/special-comment-the-four-great-hypocrisies-of-the-debt-deal (http://current.com/shows/countdown/videos/special-comment-the-four-great-hypocrisies-of-the-debt-deal)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 06:08:08 PM
I can't stand the guy, personally, but it does always amuse me when lefty pundits talk about "Republicans and their corporate masters"

I guess you only have U.S. treasury bonds in your portfolio, hu Olberman?

Democrats must not buy corporate stock or hold 401k's with investments in those same companies they bitch about so much.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:18:40 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:26:41 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 05:25:44 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 05:23:17 PM
QuoteEarlier, the EU's Economic and Monetary Affairs Commissioner, Olli Rehn, said he thought the movements were "incomprehensible" and "not justified by the economic fundamentals", particularly in Italy and Spain, the latest focus of investors' concerns.

This is an interesting way of saying the pilot's dead and nobody else knows how to land the plane.

ETA:  Or the pilot has been tied up and put in the bathroom by some dodgy-looking bankers.

I suspect the latter.  Channel 5 news over here just had a stockbroker on, asking for more "quantative easing".

They want some cheap money to re-inflate the bubble.  Which is the same response we've had to every economic crisis since the 80s, and so, obviously, will work fantastic.

Two years ago, I mentioned the need to eat these people.

Nobody listened.   :sad:

The Greeks did attack their own finance ministry, and hacktivists do seem to be targeting banks and corporate monopolies a lot more now.

But yeah.  Ian Welsh, who I occasionally read, said it best (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/IanWelsh/~3/OITiXNybrOA/):

QuoteI feel bad for the Anonymous hackers who were arrested today, but it's also a good thing, in that it will radicalize the hacker community even further and force them to adapt and change their tactics.  They are the bleeding edge of real resistance, and they have moved far from their libertarian roots and become left wing in their sympathies (targeting a city for refusing to allow the homeless to be fed is as left wing as you can get.)

Since, of course, the DOJ has shown no interest in pursuing those who did DDOS attacks against Wikileaks, it is yet another confirmation that the law, as it exists now, is used as a bludgeon against people the government doesn't like, while those who the government does like are left alone, and crimes against the government's "enemies" aren't investigated.  Laws which do not have at least the appearance of being evenly applied are not just, are not perceived as just, and become legitimate targets for breaking.

Meanwhile in England, the Cameron government's massive slashes to education hit virtually all at once, making an entire cohort of young people know exactly who just did their level best to destroy their lives.  This is important, to put it bluntly, young males who don't have enough money to settle down with a young female are extraordinarily dangerous to the state.

What is interesting about both of these things, and many others recently, such as the austerity bills and various legal rulings from the Supreme Court which don't even pretend to follow precedent, is how the velvet glove has come off the iron fist of state and corporate repression.  The elites think that there is nothing ordinary people can do. Whatever the elites do, no matter how harsh, the hoi polloi can only submit.  And if they don't, well, so much the worse for them.

And yet the system is cracking up. A large part of why all of this is being done is to create ever bigger corporations and ever richer western billionaires, so they can compete with the oilarchies.  But recently Russia has come to have more billionaires than the US.  It's really hard to state how startling that is.  America's rich have done everything they can to rig the game so they will get richer, they have a bigger base economy to work off of, and they're still losing the Red Queen's race.  No matter how much they repress their own population, they can't keep up with the folks who have the real gold of the modern economy: black gold.

Unfortunately, as stupid, venal and brutal as our enemies are (and if they aren't your enemies you're a fool or getting a pay check, or I hope you are), our leadership is even more stupid, venal and cowardly.  This entire generation of leadership on what passes for the left is beyond contemptible.  If they are not outright sell outs of the interests of those they claim to champion, then they are willing to betray anyone but their members, and if with rare exceptions (in the US, basically, the gay leadership) they are cowards, unwilling to risk themselves in any way, unwilling to actually fight.  They cavill and moan and condemn anyone who actually fights back. Watching fools demanding that the man who threw a pie at Murdoch be condemned for violence was beyond sad, it was a farce.  Violence?  It reminded me of all the hand wringing when an Iraqi threw a shoe at George Bush, a war criminal and mass murderer.  Oh dear.

And so, while the young are being radicalized, the leaders of the left are unable to provide leadership.  They have been selected to be weak and cowardly, to be unwilling to fight, to be compromisers trying to get the best deal possible as long as that deal doesn't upset the status quo in any real way.

This varies by country.  I have more hope, say, for Greece (after they set the finance ministry alight) than I do for the US.  But the first job of the left in most countries is not to fight the right, it is to destroy the leadership of the left.  To drive them out of power and into the wilderness and either to replace them or to create new forms of organization.  And it is to understand that class war is like war, there will be casualties.  People will be beaten, people will be killed, people will go to jail.  That is what will happen.  It can be avoided in only one way, surrender.  Suffer exactly what the oligarchs want you to suffer and you will be allowed to live and die in what passes for peace.  It will be a peace filled with suffering, hunger, deprivation, and violence not primarily from the authorities but from each other, but if that's what you want, it's available.  Always understanding, of course, that anyone who won't fight will have to accept anything the oligarchs do.  Anything.  When you won't fight, you only get even scraps if it is someone else's interest.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 06:36:11 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:18:40 PM


What is interesting about both of these things, and many others recently, such as the austerity bills and various legal rulings from the Supreme Court which don't even pretend to follow precedent, is how the velvet glove has come off the iron fist of state and corporate repression.  The elites think that there is nothing ordinary people can do. Whatever the elites do, no matter how harsh, the hoi polloi can only submit.  And if they don't, well, so much the worse for them.


at the risk of taking a really REALLY good thread in a different direction for a bit I wanted some input from you guys on the bolded part. 

In the circles I travel I don't run into this term much.  A lot of you guys on here fall way left of me politically and you're really informed, part of the reason I like it here even though we wouldn't agree on a lot of things over a few beers and politic. 

Would one of you elaborate on this concept in the modern world?  Maybe I should narrow the scope to modern 1st world.  I'm very aware of the sort of atrocities that are carried out for diamonds, precious metals and the like in countries most of us will never visit, but I'm not sure that's what the author is talking about.

I mean there is no Shinra Corp.  This is not (yet) Ghost in the Shell or Shadowrun.

You have my ears.  Teach me and show me where I am wrong because from where I sit, it's in my and my families and friend's best interests for corporations to grow and make money as it offers me at least a chance of a comfortable old age, not having to wonder how I'm going to feed myself when I can no longer work, and I've never once felt oppressed by a corporation. 

Except maybe insurance companies of all kind.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cuddlefish on August 05, 2011, 06:44:06 PM
I've been following this thread for a while. A genuine concern for the future of America and the world has kept me, more or less, glued to these forums and other news sources. I feel that I, despite a proper background in economics, more or less, "get" what's going on.

My default optimism, however, has changed to doubt. Before I leave optimism behind, and start stockpiling gas, food, batteries, and medical supplies, I was wondering if anyone here, that's better versed in this area, could tell me if there is a silver lining to this shit tornado. I'd like to beleive there is, but I have yet to identify one myself.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:52:22 PM
Pickles,

Large corporations now form an integral part of the US police state, which is directed more at internal political dissidents and hackers than at, say, detecting terrorist threats.  See, well, pretty much every entry on http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com for good examples.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 05, 2011, 06:57:16 PM
This particular bit especially stood out to me. It keeps coming back to me to wonder about, and then I forget it again [when I think of the less ethical things LulzSec and Anon did] until it is somehow brought back to my attention ... very Spider-esque.

Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:18:40 PM
But yeah.  Ian Welsh, who I occasionally read, said it best (http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/IanWelsh/~3/OITiXNybrOA/):

Quote[...]

Since, of course, the DOJ has shown no interest in pursuing those who did DDOS attacks against Wikileaks, it is yet another confirmation that the law, as it exists now, is used as a bludgeon against people the government doesn't like, while those who the government does like are left alone, and crimes against the government's "enemies" aren't investigated.  Laws which do not have at least the appearance of being evenly applied are not just, are not perceived as just, and become legitimate targets for breaking.

[...]
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 07:12:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:52:22 PM
Pickles,

Large corporations now form an integral part of the US police state, which is directed more at internal political dissidents and hackers than at, say, detecting terrorist threats.  See, well, pretty much every entry on http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com for good examples.



Got it.  Taken in the context of the article, which I clearly ignored, yeah.  Mercenary corporations being used in place of National Guard, Black Hatters going White as "consultants" for DoD and DHS (the "hey, it's a paycheck" mentality he mentions) and digging up docs on Anon's.  That list is getting larger and larger. 

I'm a bit on the fence between supporting some of Anon's recent antics, depending on the target, and thinking that their energy would be better spent actually DOING something rather than these symbolic shows that really only prove what we already know, that the global botnets are pretty fucking annoying when directed at websites.

And dumping docs on innocent consumers of say, Sony's services I will never be able to get behind.

Much more clear in that context the article mentions though. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 05, 2011, 08:08:15 PM
Quote from: Cuddlefingers on August 05, 2011, 06:44:06 PM
I've been following this thread for a while. A genuine concern for the future of America and the world has kept me, more or less, glued to these forums and other news sources. I feel that I, despite a proper background in economics, more or less, "get" what's going on.

My default optimism, however, has changed to doubt. Before I leave optimism behind, and start stockpiling gas, food, batteries, and medical supplies, I was wondering if anyone here, that's better versed in this area, could tell me if there is a silver lining to this shit tornado. I'd like to believe there is, but I have yet to identify one myself.

I take the long view on these things.  I was too young to actually know what was going on in the last great recession of the 70's and 80's, but I damn sure felt its after shocks growing up.  

These things (unemployment, Real Gross Domestic Product (GDPCA)) have historically cycled.  If you look at graphs going back to the 50's with a few notable exceptions, GDP in the US (my frame of reference, not sure where you are) has been in the black for most of that time period.  Employment has been much more volatile and charts show it swinging from from trough to peak in nearly exactly 10 year cycles with the occasional double dip like happened in the 80's and like what is conceivably happening now.

While it will never be a bad idea to be prepared for any eventuality and to stock up on supplies, rotate out canned food, old water and things of that nature, I can't in good faith get on board with the survivalist types that preach doom and gloom all over the internets.  And on some of the boards I frequent, that shit is EVERYWHERE.  Doesn't make them right, but planning like that can't ever be said to be a BAD thing.  I just don't see everything collapsing like that in my lifetime.  

If you've got money in the global market, keep an eye on it and consider either cashing it out and sitting on it for awhile (if that's what you think you should do) or at least consider being more conservative in where it's invested.  The time for risk is on an uptick and I don't believe we're there yet, but I do believe things will recover.  It's in all of our interests that they do, and they always have before.

--Pickle, 2 cents from a die hard optimist

[ETA]  Those same charts DO show Real GDP never rising higher than the last peak over time, something that I would say definitely should be worrysome, but then I've been saying we need a real correction for awhile now since we've never really had one so long as the Fed pumps money back in to inflate prices every time we have a recession.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 05, 2011, 08:43:05 PM
Despite his unfortunate name, Mr Welsh is right on the fucking money.

The law no longer serves freedom or the individual to any degree whatsoever.  This is unacceptable.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:03:10 AM
This probably deserves it's own thread but S&P just downgraded the US from AAA

http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/05/news/economy/downgrade_rumors/index.htm?iid=Lead

QuoteNEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Credit rating agency Standard & Poor's on Friday downgraded the credit rating of the United States, stripping the world's largest economy of its prized AAA status.
In July, S&P placed the United States' rating on "CreditWatch with negative implications" as the debt ceiling debate devolved into partisan bickering.

To avoid a downgrade, S&P said the United States needed to not only raise the debt ceiling, but also develop a "credible" plan to tackle the nation's long-term debt.
In its report Friday, S&P ruled that the U.S. fell short: "The downgrade reflects our opinion that the ... plan that Congress and the Administration recently agreed to falls short of what, in our view, would be necessary to stabilize the government's medium-term debt dynamics."
S&P also cited dysfunctional policymaking in Washington as a factor in the downgrade. "The effectiveness, stability, and predictability of American policymaking and political institutions have weakened at a time of ongoing fiscal and economic challenges."

The safest bets are stamped AAA. That's where U.S. debt has stood for years. Moody's first assigned the United States a AAA rating in 1917.
In the days after lawmakers managed to strike a debt-ceiling deal, the two other major rating agencies have both said the deficit reduction actions taken by Congress were a step in the right direction.
On Tuesday, Moody's said the United States will keep its sterling AAA credit rating, but lowered its outlook on U.S. debt to "negative."
Even if a downgrade were to occur, the United States will likely still be able to pay its bills for years to come and remains a good credit risk.
Investors have limited options for making safe investments, and Treasuries are effectively as liquid as cash. And other big countries have been downgraded and were still able to borrow at low rates.
At the same time, some experts warn that a downgrade could gum up the banking system and ripple out onto Main Street. Treasuries are used as collateral in many transactions between financial institutions and grease the skids of lending.
Consumers and investors could feel the impact of a downgrade. Interest rates on bonds could rise, and rates on mortgages and other types of loans along with them.
Government-backed agencies like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may also be downgraded. It's also possible that some state and local governments could also face a downgrade.
And investment decisions would become complicated for large institutional investors that are required to hold highly-rated securities.

fuck.

this shit will echo.

[ETA] the last 2 day sell off REEKS of insider info.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on August 06, 2011, 02:24:05 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 05, 2011, 06:52:22 PM
Pickles,

Large corporations now form an integral part of the US police state, which is directed more at internal political dissidents and hackers than at, say, detecting terrorist threats.  See, well, pretty much every entry on http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com for good examples.



I'd like to add to this that Corporations don't have the same restrictions as Gov Agencies (i.e. they can trample your privacy rights as a condition of employment, something which has been ruled Unconstitutional if a State Agency tried it).

This might not seem like a big deal, until you realize HOW MUCH of government function has been "privatized".

And dude.... Blackwater 'successfully' swapped masks and costumes to be reborn as Xe, and they're still making money.. So yeah.. It's Shadowrun, but the "Dragons" are the Oil Companies.....
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 06, 2011, 02:38:56 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:03:10 AMthe last 2 day sell off REEKS of insider info.
It's amazing how the market always seems to correctly anticipate news such as this.  No news is ever publicly announced before it has already been completely priced into the market.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:54:20 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 06, 2011, 02:38:56 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:03:10 AMthe last 2 day sell off REEKS of insider info.
It's amazing how the market always seems to correctly anticipate news such as this.  No news is ever publicly announced before it has already been completely priced into the market.

If I'm being honest, I should have gotten out of stocks the moment they passed the debt deal.  A lot of big money did Thursday morning if you look at the index charts.  It was one giant sell off right at opening bell and like penguins jumping off an ice flow, the rest followed.


though maybe lemmings is a more appropriate simile.

My knee jerk reaction is "insider info" but really if you look at the numbers it's been headed down a slope since at least Monday.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 06, 2011, 07:52:41 AM
Yeah, I have to admit, my initial reaction was the same, but as you say, the US has been bleeding since the debt deal (and the Eurozone is like a guy with lacerations hooked up to an unlimited supply of blood - that fucker is going to bleed and bleed and bleed).

On the other hand, Friday was sufficiently unusual, even by that week's standards, that insider trading cannot be entirely ruled out.
Title: CHINA IS ANGRY!
Post by: Cain on August 06, 2011, 04:08:59 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14430598

QuoteChina has scolded the US over its "addiction to debt" after rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the US' top-notch AAA rating to AA+.

State news agency Xinhua said unless the US cut its "gigantic military expenditure and bloated welfare costs," another downgrade would be inevitable.

But other countries, such as Australia, France and Japan, said they retained their faith in US bonds.

The downgrade ended a week of growing uncertainty for the world economy.

Fears that the US might be headed for a double-dip recession and the eurozone's debt problems were set to spread to Italy and Spain saw stock market sell-offs around the world.

The downgrade is a major embarrassment for the administration of President Barack Obama and could raise the cost of US government borrowing.

This in turn could trickle down to higher interest rates for local governments and individuals.

One initial estimate says that could add an extra $75bn (£46bn) to the US annual interest rate bill at a time when its debt levels are already high.

The other two major credit rating agencies, Moody's and Fitch, said they had no immediate plans to follow S&P in taking the US off their lists of risk-free borrowers.
Title: Re: CHINA IS ANGRY!
Post by: Adios on August 06, 2011, 04:13:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 06, 2011, 04:08:59 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14430598

QuoteChina has scolded the US over its "addiction to debt" after rating agency Standard & Poor's downgraded the US' top-notch AAA rating to AA+.

State news agency Xinhua said unless the US cut its "gigantic military expenditure and bloated welfare costs," another downgrade would be inevitable.

But other countries, such as Australia, France and Japan, said they retained their faith in US bonds.

The downgrade ended a week of growing uncertainty for the world economy.

Fears that the US might be headed for a double-dip recession and the eurozone's debt problems were set to spread to Italy and Spain saw stock market sell-offs around the world.

The downgrade is a major embarrassment for the administration of President Barack Obama and could raise the cost of US government borrowing.

This in turn could trickle down to higher interest rates for local governments and individuals.

One initial estimate says that could add an extra $75bn (£46bn) to the US annual interest rate bill at a time when its debt levels are already high.

The other two major credit rating agencies, Moody's and Fitch, said they had no immediate plans to follow S&P in taking the US off their lists of risk-free borrowers.

It reminds me of a tent revival meeting where a guy in a white suit is expected to come on stage in the middle of a big musical production and make everything okay.

PROTIP; the hero is dead and has been for decades, he was shot in the back by snake oil salesmen. And we bought it.

This problem has been building for decades. It very well may take decades to fix completely. In order to do that however, all players involved are going to have to forget about the R or the D that comes with their title. may I suggest we replace them with an A? For American, a forgotten breed that used to be upstanding, courageous, bold and involved.

There is hard work ahead, work, not political screeching. Real work and tough choices. Personally, I don't see how we can avoid affecting every single American to one degree or another. We have allowed ourselves to end up in a pretty deep ditch with no visible way out, except by working together and cutting a set of steps in the bank.

As a nation we need to curtail the billions or trillions we spend in other countries who decide to do what we want in exchange for our cash. We are out of cash. We need to stop exporting war, yesterday. Things like the Arts, PBS, etc should have to rely on private donations, not the government.

There are hundreds of things that can be done without negatively impacting us here, and those things should be on the table first. Then we move to the second layer, then the third...

Things need to be done in a business like manner, leaving emotions and pet projects outside the room.

Junkets, Air Force 1, private government helicopters, all of these things only help to isolate the decision makers from the reality that those of us trying to get by must face on a daily basis. I want the decision makers to be out here with us, serving instead of ruling. They are not our overlords, they work for us, the American people. As such we are their bosses, not their servants.

Hell, we have a program that is so big that we don't even know how much it costs us, the HLS, the TPA and domestic spying. A hot sharp knife to its scrotum may pay some huge dividends. Why is it a sacred cow?

Point is, there are things that can and should be done first, and they should be done soon, before the end of the year.

American is crumbling folks, and not just our national infrastructure, but perhaps more importantly, our national sense of who we are.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 07, 2011, 01:34:12 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14434831

QuoteThe European Central Bank is due to hold emergency talks on whether to start buying Italian debt to contain spreading turmoil on financial markets.

The BBC's Business Editor Robert Peston says the ECB is split on the move.

Growing worries over debt in the eurozone and the US caused sharp falls on world stock markets last week.

Finance ministers from the G7 major economic powers are also to hold emergency talks on how to calm the markets before they reopen on Monday.

The governing council of the ECB, which includes the central bank governors of all 17 eurozone countries, will hold a telephone conference on Sunday afternoon, the BBC has learned.

According to an ECB source cited by Reuters news agency, the bank's president Jean-Claude Trichet wants a final decision on whether to buy Italian debt to be made at the meeting.

Middle East markets, which are open for trading on Sunday, lost ground, with Israel's main exchange dropping by more than 6%.

There are fears that unless leaders can announce a decisive plan of action before Asian and European markets open on Monday, global shares could plunge even further.

I think fears of a Spanish default are overstated, but Italy is most certainly fucked.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 07, 2011, 02:47:31 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 06, 2011, 02:38:56 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:03:10 AMthe last 2 day sell off REEKS of insider info.
It's amazing how the market always seems to correctly anticipate news such as this.  No news is ever publicly announced before it has already been completely priced into the market.

S&P has been flapping their noise hole since at least mid-July that they were likely to downgrade the USA's credit rating if there were not at least $4t in cuts in any debt deal.  So I think this is more a case of really obvious foreshadowing rather than insider trading.

I myself rearranged my meager portfolio in anticipation of a default/downgrade back on the 27th.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 07, 2011, 02:55:48 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 06, 2011, 02:54:20 AM

though maybe lemmings is a more appropriate simile.


It wasn't suicide, the lemmings were pushed!!!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 02:05:00 AM
Asian stock markets are going berserk, and the dollar is doing the lead balloon thing.

Interesting 2 weeks coming up, I think.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 02:07:56 AM
(http://www.zewp.com/dump/photo/madmax.jpg)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:28:55 AM
Israel's market, which was open today, took a shit.

Monday morning is looking pretty bad atm.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:35:36 AM
New Zealand's market lost 3% in the first 20 minutes this morning.

Australia was right behind them.

So much for getting a good nights sleep tonight. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 03:35:27 AM
Might get downgraded some more:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44050983/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 11:25:51 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:28:55 AM
Israel's market, which was open today, took a shit.

Monday morning is looking pretty bad atm.

Wasn't the Israeli market due to Arab economies?  I know inflation there is pretty bad right now, they had a protest on the weekend, but I heard the drop had something to do with regional issues.  If you know more, I'd be interested.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 11:58:40 AM
Also, the more I look, the more I'm convinced the USA (and the UK, for that matter) deserve to be downgraded.

The process is hopelessly politicized, though.  Russia, for example, just finished paying off its Soviet-era debt, and has fantastic economic growth (4% since 2008), and is rated at Baa1, because of "commodity prices".  As if commodity prices aren't out of control in western Europe, America or Australia.  That rating is one point above Turkey.  China is in a similar boat.  But both pay off their debts promptly, and have growing economies, startling growth when compared with western democracies.

Sure, being downgraded hardly helps when most of us live in those two countries.  But really, credit rating is a highly ideological concept, linked strongly to the neo-liberal consensus, which both Russia and China partly buck.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 12:12:52 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14441453

Markets do not approve of the ECB's moves, but it is reducing the yield on Spanish and Italian bonds.  Which was the point.  Gold is still rising in cost, and oil is dropping.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 12:49:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 08, 2011, 11:25:51 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:28:55 AM
Israel's market, which was open today, took a shit.

Monday morning is looking pretty bad atm.

Wasn't the Israeli market due to Arab economies?  I know inflation there is pretty bad right now, they had a protest on the weekend, but I heard the drop had something to do with regional issues.  If you know more, I'd be interested.

News reports on "reasons" for stock market ups and downs always amused me because really, who the hell knows the real reasons any crowd panics?  Often it's a combination of things that provide fuel for a fire.  You have indicators, trends, not often one concrete and tangible "thing" you can point to and say "that was what caused the gains/losses"

That being said, I saw that Israel had protests this week and while they can't be ruled out as contributing to a sense of unease in investors, I believe there was probably quite a  bit of "getting the hell out early" involved in Sunday trading.  They even delayed opening for 45 minutes in a vain attempt to calm opening bell jitters.  Didn't work.

I'm finding it hard myself to not say fuck it and move everything into bonds and cash.  I've still got a few hours to consider it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 01:09:14 PM
Nassim Nicholas Taleb suggests 85% government bonds and 15% high-risk, high return investments, as I recall.  That always struck me as a fairly sensible method of financial min-maxing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 01:22:20 PM
He's definitely a guy to listen to.  That's just about what I've done this morning.  Black Swan protect my principal from what I'm now predicting to be an inevitably turbulent Monday.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 02:14:07 PM
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/marshall-auerback-a-beers-hall-putsch-from-the-rentiers.html

QuoteSo the ratings agencies have reared their ugly heads again. David Beers, head of S&P's government debt rating unit, announced Friday night that S&P has downgraded the U.S. credit rating for the first time, from AAA to AA+. It's a sham: S&P's whole analytical framework reflects ignorance about modern money. If the US government, Treasury, and the Federal Reserve, capitulate to this outrageous act of economic extortion, it will effectively be sanctioning a beer hall putsch by the rentier class.

Justifying its decision, Standard and Poor said "political brinkmanship" in the debate over the debt had made the U.S. government's ability to manage its finances "less stable, less effective and less predictable." It said the bipartisan agreement reached this week to find at least $2.1 trillion in budget savings "fell short" of what was necessary to tame the nation's debt over time and predicted that leaders would not be likely to achieve more savings in the future.

"It's always possible the rating will come back, but we don't think it's coming back anytime soon," said Beers.

Of course, the response from Treasury was equally inane: "A judgment flawed by a $2 trillion error speaks for itself," a Treasury spokesman said last Friday.

$2 trillion, $4 trillion, who cares if the S&P is math-challenged? It's irrelevant! The notion that the US can arbitrarily summon up the ability to register $4 trillion in "savings" demanded by Standard & Poor as the price for upholding America's AAA rating is nonsensical, as it ignores the impact that the withdrawal of income will have on the overall economy and, by extension, the size of the government deficits that the ratings agencies regularly decry. Credit ratings are based on ability to pay and willingness to pay. A sovereign issuer of its currency, which issues debt in said currency – like the US – always has the ability to make US dollar payments. Whether it chooses to do so is another matter. But that's a matter of politics, not economics.

The Obama Administration would have been on much stronger ground if they challenged the constitutionality of the debt ceiling because, if successful, it would have eliminated this threat to the US AAA credit rating once and for all in terms of precluding an UNWILLINGNESS to pay. You wouldn't have a bunch of extremists threatening a default on funds which were already appropriated and spent. The ballot box, not the debt ceiling is the way to solve this kind of dispute.

There is, therefore, an opening for Moody's to gain a competitive advantage over S&P. Moody's can announce that whereas any issuer of its own currency can always make nominal payment on a timely basis, ability to pay is absolute and beyond question for the US government.
Therefore, when reviewing the US government's credit rating, only willingness to pay is a consideration. And given the recent Congressional proceedings regarding the debt ceiling, an entirely self imposed constraint.

Moody's could therefore put the US on notice with regard to willingness to pay and ignore the flawed economic reasoning which characterized the rest of S&P's rationale for the downgrade.

To be fair to Mr. Beers, his agency did specifically cite the political brinkmanship of a number of US Congressmen, who seemed far too inclined to contemplate the option of default as a means of securing greater spending cuts on the part of the US government. But that wasn't the full story. S&P placed particular emphasis on the size of the cuts, implicitly suggesting that larger cuts would have superseded the political questions. That's intellectual dishonesty at its worst.

Not that it matters here, but for the record, the S&P (along with Moody's and Fitch) covered themselves with glory during the housing bubble, rating toxic subprime junk as AAA rated paper. Not only were the agencies politically corrupted by virtue of their incestuous ties to Wall Street, but criminally incompetent as well. Yves Smith gives a perfect illustration of the latter:

QuoteThe biggest proof of criminal incompetence was their downgrades of RMBS versus CDOs made pretty much entirely of the same RMBS. They started downgrading RMBS en masse in July 2007. They didn't start marking down CDOs until six month later, and the process took another six months. Yet it should have been impossible to downgrade the RMBS and not the CDOs at the same time. The downgrades were based on the failures of the underlying loans. You can't have it show up in one product and not the other.

And S&P continues to screw up MBS ratings in the wake of heightened scrutiny.

Here are a few questions the S&P ought to have considered before it issued its debt downgrade:

Is government spending so high that it is competing with private sector spending plans? Certainly not – substantial amounts of plant and equipment remain idle, unemployment remains at depression like levels, and there is ample capacity for firms to expand if they want to do so.

Businesses, however, are constrained by inadequate demand for their output, a phenomenon which would become even worse if the US were to follow the prescribed level of cuts advocated by S&P to retain its AAA rating with these economic blackmailers. That is a real cost (and it also drives those "horrible" government deficits higher, as tax revenues plunge and social welfare expenditures via the automatic stabilizers rise).

Is government issuing so much debt that it is causing interest rates to skyrocket? Not in the slightest. Rates have actually gone NEGATIVE in term yields under 12 months over the past few weeks (so much for the notion that the end of QE2 would drive rates sky-high). We have a deflation problem, not inflation. And the political dysfunction that Mr. Beers describes could have easily been avoided through a number of options which would not have left the country in the hands of irrational deficit terrorists. As Joe Firestone notes:

QuoteTreasury can cease issuing long-term bonds, and sell only three-month bonds. Three-month bond interest rates are generally controlled by overnight rates for bank reserves, and overnight rates can be driven down to near zero by flooding the banks with excess reserves. That's basically how the Japanese keep their bond interest rates near zero, and that's how we can do the same.

Firestone is right: A sovereign government like the US only sells securities in order to drain excess reserves to hit its interest rate target. It could always choose to simply leave excess reserves in the banking system, in which case the overnight rate would fall toward whatever rate the central bank offers to pay commercial banks for excess overnight reserves.

As far as the short term impact goes, yes, US bonds are down in response to the news of the downgrade. How long lasting is this likely to be? For historical comparison, consider the case of Japan (thanks to Bill Mitchell): In November 1998, the day after the Japanese Government announced a large-scale fiscal stimulus to its ailing economy, Moody's Investors Service began the first of a series of downgradings of the Japanese Government's yen-denominated bonds, by taking the Aaa (triple A) rating away. The next major Moody's downgrade occurred on September 8, 2000.

Then, in December 2001, Moody's further downgraded the Japan Governments yen-denominated bond rating to Aa3 from Aa2. On May 31, 2002, Moody's Investors Service cut Japan's long-term credit rating by a further two grades to A2, or below that given to Botswana, Chile and Hungary. This at a time when the Japanese economy was then almost 1,000 times the size of Botswana's, had the world's largest foreign reserves, $446 billion; the world's largest domestic savings, $11.4 trillion; and about $1 trillion in overseas investments.

In a statement at the time, Moody's said that its decision "reflects the conclusion that the Japanese government's current and anticipated economic policies will be insufficient to prevent continued deterioration in Japan's domestic debt position ... Japan's general government indebtedness, however measured, will approach levels unprecedented in the postwar era in the developed world, and as such Japan will be entering 'uncharted territory'."

"Uncharted territory" – well, the last time anybody looked, the Japanese government was still comfortably issuing 10 year government debt at around 1%. That Japan's debt is largely domestically held is irrelevant: the denomination of the debt, NOT the debt holder is the key consideration.

There are only two sectors to issue bonds to, the domestic private and international. US and Japan are on opposite ends of the spectrum, with the US issuing a lot to the latter (though still more domestically in fact), and Japan issuing a lot to the former. The interesting thing is that this hasn't mattered at all in the determination of rates–the key difference affecting relative interest rates between the US/Japan and, say, the periphery countries of the euro zone, has been the nature of the monetary system–the US/Japan are currency issuers under flexible foreign exchange, whilst the member states of the European Monetary Union are not. As Professor Scott Fullwiler indicated to me in a recent email exchange, "For the former, rates follow monetary policy; for the latter, rates follow markets' perceptions of default risk. This is why for the former credit rating downgrades are complete monetary non-events, like QE. Note further that if the int'l sector were to stop buying US debt, this just means that the US trade balance improves and the breakdown of governmnet debt sales starts to look more like Japan's."

To argue otherwise is to ignore the actual causation of the transaction, which is that China exports something to the US in exchange for dollars, and then that money goes into their checking account at the Federal Reserve. It's called a reserve account because it's the Federal Reserve, and they give it a fancy name. But in reality it is a checking account, just like you or I use. Now China has 3 choices with what they can do with the money in their checking account. They could spend it and buy real assets in the US, which would be great for our economy, or they can put it into another currency (say, euros), in which case the dollar declines, which enhances our export position, or they can put it in another account at the Federal Reserve called a Treasury security, which is nothing more than a savings account. In other words, the bond purchase, if it occurs, comes at the end of the transaction and actually 'funds' nothing.

Economist Warren Mosler has noted on numerous occasions that China and others buy US Treasury securities primarily to support the dollar versus their own currencies, and thereby drive exports to the US, and not because they are looking for safe investments per se. That is, it's a consequence of their drive for 'competitiveness' and their desire to net save in US dollars. It takes two to tango. And with no Treasury securities China would be forced to buy state debt, corporate debt, euro debt (say, Greek bonds?), equities, etc. which is highly problematic for them for a variety of reasons.

A final question for Mr. Beers: Is government spending so high that the dollar is crashing in international exchange markets? No. Certainly the dollar has its ups and downs — we've got a floating exchange rate and it is supposed to go up and down. So let's assume that our dollar falls because China no longer wishes to net save in greenbacks. In fact, this has been occurring over the past several months and the bond market has gone up during this period. If this were to go on long enough, the ultimate impact would be that our external balances improve significantly (as does the likely desire of foreigners to accumulate cheap US assets via FDI), because our exports increase, which means the current account deficit goes down and less bonds are available for China to 'fund' us".

Now that's not the way I would go as a growth strategy, as it entails a "race to the bottom" as far as wages go. Moreover, if budget deficits are not allowed to grow large enough to enable private domestic agents reduce their overall debt levels, then the economy will remain mired in its stagnant state. With austerity being pursued everywhere it is a fool's hope to think that net exports are going to swing enough to save the day. But from a straight sectoral balances point of view, IF we did export more, these increased exports would mitigate the ability of countries like Japan or China to net save in our currency. By definition, this would also correspondingly reduce their holdings in US Treasuries.

Floating rates float. This is not synonymous with economic and financial degeneracy, as our economic moralists, or the gold bugs seem to imply. Over the past 10 years, the Australian dollar has fluctuated between 50 cents to $1.08 against the greenback. The last time I looked Australia was still surviving and thriving. One can also consider the more extreme case of Russia in 1998, during which its entire financial system imploded and the ruble lost two thirds of its external value against the dollar. Yet the currency itself did not "evaporate" and the ruble remains Russia's currency unit of account today.

And for those who argue that "markets rule", it's interesting to see the initial response: money flooding into the yen, despite the fact that Japan has a credit rating lower than the US (remember, neither Moody's, nor Fitch, followed the S&P downgrade) , in a country which has a public debt to GDP ratio twice that of the US (not that we think that's a horrible thing per se). As for the Swiss franc, the other beneficiary of this move, it is worth recalling that but for the Fed opening up dollar swap facilities with the SNB in 2009, the Swiss franc wouldn't be worth the value of a piece of toilet paper that you scrape off your shoe in Grand Central Station.

It is questionable how much of the furor surrounding the downgrade is ideological and how much is really a misunderstanding (an "innocent fraud" in the words of John Kenneth Galbraith).

Governments around the world have been led to believe that they need to issue bonds and collect taxes to finance government spending, and that good policies should be judged by their ability to enforce fiscal austerity. Mainstream economists and ratings agencies such as S&P have guided policymakers into imposing artificial constraints on fiscal policy and government finances, such as issuing bonds when running deficits, debt ceilings, forbidding the central bank to directly buy treasury debt, allowing the markets to set interest rates on government bonds, etc. While last Friday's downgrade per se probably won't do much, if anything, to interest rates, growth, and employment, ratings agencies like the S&P reinforce the current deflationary state of affairs because their perverse rating actions simply reinforce efforts for further substantial deficit reduction and a balanced budget amendment. Ironically, if the siren songs of "sound finance" are followed, we will get exactly the outcome now predicted by the likes of Michelle Bachmann: the US WILL become like Greece.

I keep forgetting one of my own rules: there is no crisis.  If I think there is a crisis, it is because I do not sufficiently understand the situation.  If you don't know who the sucker is in a game of poker, it is you.

If the White House had wanted to, they could've applied lots of political pressure to avoid a downgrade.  S&P are certainly guilty of fraud during the subprime mortgage crisis, as they inflated the worth of certain countries' credit ratings, when they did not warrant such a rating.  A competent president who wanted to prevent a downgrade could've destroyed S&P by launching an investigation and using RICO statutes to seize their assets.  Obama is not incompetent.  Furthermore, US gold reserves and owned land are ridiculously undervalued, and there is still much scope for taxation, if the political will could be found.

This could have been prevented.  It was not because the President, Senate and their financial backers benefit from it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:39:58 PM
200 points down in the first few minutes.

http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 02:40:53 PM
Damn.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 02:46:32 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 02:39:58 PM
200 points down in the first few minutes.

http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/


Let's see what it looks like at the end of the day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 08, 2011, 02:54:22 PM
it hasn't been that low since .... noon on Friday!  :lol:

(http://the305.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/luda.jpg)

:ronpaul:  :ronpaul:  :ronpaul:  :ronpaul:  :ronpaul:

anybody want to take bets on where it'll be by the end of the day?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 03:04:46 PM
Can't say for the day...but by the end of the week they may need longer charts.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 04:42:03 PM
When I first heard about the downgrade, I knew it was a political wristslap and said as much to the folks sitting at my lunch table in NJ.  However, as to the longevity of this downgrade...at first I thought it'd be shortlived.  Now I'm not so sure.  I'm also not sure how the political backblow is going to go if S&P et al are NAMING NAMES of the "incaclitrant" perps.

It's interesting to watch, though.  And maddening if you allow yourself to get caught up in it.  I'm trying my damnedest not to.  I have a spouse ready to jump ship, and it's all I can do to hold him back from seeking to become a Canuck.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 04:43:26 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 04:42:03 PM
When I first heard about the downgrade, I knew it was a political wristslap and said as much to the folks sitting at my lunch table in NJ.  However, as to the longevity of this downgrade...at first I thought it'd be shortlived.  Now I'm not so sure.  I'm also not sure how the political backblow is going to go if S&P et al are NAMING NAMES of the "incaclitrant" perps.

It's interesting to watch, though.  And maddening if you allow yourself to get caught up in it.  I'm trying my damnedest not to.  I have a spouse ready to jump ship, and it's all I can do to hold him back from seeking to become a Canuck.

Why would you hold him back?  Get the fuck out while you can.

I mean, Canada's going down the same road, but they haven't reached the point of no return, yet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 04:43:26 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 04:42:03 PM
When I first heard about the downgrade, I knew it was a political wristslap and said as much to the folks sitting at my lunch table in NJ.  However, as to the longevity of this downgrade...at first I thought it'd be shortlived.  Now I'm not so sure.  I'm also not sure how the political backblow is going to go if S&P et al are NAMING NAMES of the "incaclitrant" perps.

It's interesting to watch, though.  And maddening if you allow yourself to get caught up in it.  I'm trying my damnedest not to.  I have a spouse ready to jump ship, and it's all I can do to hold him back from seeking to become a Canuck.

Why would you hold him back?  Get the fuck out while you can.

I mean, Canada's going down the same road, but they haven't reached the point of no return, yet.

I told him that.  Besides, he's more worried about his brown hide and his kids' future than his own finances (he's a doctor, for chrissakes).

But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really.  I don't want to leave.  But I don't want to watch it all go to fuck and back, either. 

I called his bluff and said I'd go.

And told him the only "thriving" Western economy these days seems to be Australia.  Which seems to have come about from an odd combo of luck and savvy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:08:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really. 

Their beer isn't that bad, Jenne.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:14:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:08:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really.

Their beer isn't that bad, Jenne.

YOU know me WAY too well, m'dear.  :lulz:

It's not that.  I think I'm scared to be an immigrant.  I'm weak. :)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:15:21 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:14:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:08:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really.

Their beer isn't that bad, Jenne.

YOU know me WAY too well, m'dear.  :lulz:

It's not that.  I think I'm scared to be an immigrant.  I'm weak. :)

Um, this is CANADA.  It's like immigrating to a nation full of rather pleasant knitting circle ladies.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:20:53 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:15:21 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:14:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:08:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really.

Their beer isn't that bad, Jenne.

YOU know me WAY too well, m'dear.  :lulz:

It's not that.  I think I'm scared to be an immigrant.  I'm weak. :)

Um, this is CANADA.  It's like immigrating to a nation full of rather pleasant knitting circle ladies.

I KNOW. 

...didn't claim it was a RATIONAL fear.  And it's not "Canada" per se.  It's anyfuckingwhere.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:23:30 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:20:53 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:15:21 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:14:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:08:47 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:05:37 PM
But I don't want to be a Canadian, not really.

Their beer isn't that bad, Jenne.

YOU know me WAY too well, m'dear.  :lulz:

It's not that.  I think I'm scared to be an immigrant.  I'm weak. :)

Um, this is CANADA.  It's like immigrating to a nation full of rather pleasant knitting circle ladies.

I KNOW. 

...didn't claim it was a RATIONAL fear.  And it's not "Canada" per se.  It's anyfuckingwhere.

Yeah, I'm guessing that sentiment was pretty rife among a certain demographic in Munich in 1930.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:24:33 PM
:x  Quit handing out the JOYNUGGETS today.  :x

(just kidding, it's good medicine...)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:25:41 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:24:33 PM
:x  Quit handing out the JOYNUGGETS today.  :x

(just kidding, it's good medicine...)

I'm just full of those things today, and I want to share them.

Oddly enough, the teabaggers on CG didn't want any.   :?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:28:46 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 05:25:41 PM
Quote from: Jenne on August 08, 2011, 05:24:33 PM
:x  Quit handing out the JOYNUGGETS today.  :x

(just kidding, it's good medicine...)

I'm just full of those things today, and I want to share them.

Oddly enough, the teabaggers on CG didn't want any.   :?

Ungrateful fuckbunnies.

I'd just keep handing them out.  They'll appreciate them when they least expect to.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 08, 2011, 07:15:16 PM
The part that pisses me off.

If I made $250,000 a year I could:

Almost double my state income tax contribution to 10% of gross income
Then increase by federal income tax contribution to 50% of gross income

and still take home more than DOUBLE what I make now before taxes.

America's problems aren't gay marriage and abortions.  It's the sin of greed.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 07:19:26 PM
From The Because We Said So Department:

QuoteSpeaking on the downgrade issue at the White House Monday, President Barack Obama said the U.S. will always be a AAA-rated country despite what rating agencies say, and he urged lawmakers to work together to tackle the nation's deficit.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44059948/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 07:21:13 PM
He's right.  So long as one major European country remains AAA, the USA can act as a AAA credit nation through the IMF, where it has effectively unlimited withdrawal.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on August 08, 2011, 07:22:41 PM
 :horrormirth: So this is theatre... I wonder who the target audience is...?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 07:27:11 PM
If the cost of borrowing goes up without the real risk of default, who wins?  Those who lend the money...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 08, 2011, 07:30:24 PM
Dow Hovering around 11,000, with a 500pt drop since opening this morning.  Without a significant rally in the next two hours before closing, it will mark over 1,000 pt loss from last Monday to today and last time closing below 11,000 since November of last year.

Would be a good time to buy stronger companies that are well capitalized but seeing downward price pressure from the broader sell off.

2 hours to go.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 08, 2011, 10:05:43 PM
I'm in a debate with somebody about the financial brou-haha

he is attributing the financial crisis to "stupidity and laziness"... that the people who got taken for a ride by predatory subprime lending created the crisis. He's essentially saying that we're watching natural selection in progress.

Can somebody hit me with a bullet point about why the poor aren't to blame? I know there's a million good reasons I'm just having trouble organizing
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 08, 2011, 10:50:26 PM
Well, the billions of dollars in failed mortgages didn't cause the problem.  It was the trillions of dollars in CDO's that went kablooie that did it.  So it was the insurance companies that got taken for a ride by predatory investment banks that caused the real damage.  We would be watching natural selection in progress, but for the bailouts.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 08, 2011, 10:55:27 PM
Yup.  Furthermore, bankers have a moral obligation not to lend money to someone who cannot be reasonably expected to pay it back.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 08, 2011, 11:03:22 PM
 :lulz:

Obama totally caved and gave the Republicans everything they wanted last week, so now the resulting market crash and S&P downgrade happened because Obama "failed to show leadership". That's true, but it's hilarious to hear Republicans say it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-goes-after-obama-in-wake-of-credit-rating-downgrade/2011/08/08/gIQAMerW2I_story.html

QuoteMitt Romney says the nation's credit problem arose because President Barack Obama has failed to show leadership on the economy.

Things wouldn't be so bad now if Obama had shown some backbone
   and stood up to us instead of giving in to all our kooky demands.
                                              /
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_35igJnloijA/RxtEFAWEb1I/AAAAAAAABcA/ZpGgiTSSmVs/s400/Romney+angry+a.JPG)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 08, 2011, 11:22:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 08, 2011, 10:55:27 PM
Yup.  Furthermore, bankers have a moral obligation not to lend money to someone who cannot be reasonably expected to pay it back.

Shouldn't that be refined to say that bankers have a fiscal responsibility not to lend money to risky borrowers that only turns into a moral responsibility in the context of a government that will backstop their shitty investments?

I mean if they were made to sleep in the beds they made, then i would have no problem with them making the decisions they did, other than an obligatory facepalm...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 11:53:12 PM
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/aug/8/michael-moore-obama-show-some-guts-arrest-sp-head/print/

HAW HAW!

THIS IS THE BEST DECADE EVER!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 08, 2011, 11:56:04 PM
 :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 11:59:09 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 08, 2011, 11:56:04 PM
:lulz:

I think someone needs to remind fat boy that this isn't the 1930s.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on August 09, 2011, 12:00:20 AM
oh, that's gooood....
:lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 09, 2011, 12:02:08 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on August 08, 2011, 11:59:09 PM
Quote from: Charley Brown on August 08, 2011, 11:56:04 PM
:lulz:

I think someone needs to remind fat boy that this isn't the 1930s.

Oh, hell no, I want moar!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on August 09, 2011, 03:31:25 AM
The Asian markets are in complete free fall, worse than 911.

Korea has actually closed trading.

Hooooboy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 09, 2011, 11:41:51 AM
Shit, South Korea's a relative heavyweight, as well.  London aint gonna help matters any, either.  Dow Jones is down 5.50% and the Nasdaq is down 6.90%.

Bank of America needs to be put on death-watch, it's down 20%.  Spanish and Italian bonds are improving, though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on August 09, 2011, 12:30:55 PM
The petrochemical I was going to invest in yesterday but forgot is up 30% :( missed the boat.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 09, 2011, 01:21:12 PM
I warned a friend a week ago, right on august 2nd, he's got some kind of savings he can manage by basically choosing higher or lower risk investments (the higher give more potential interest, but it doesn't deal with actual stocks afaik), that right now would probably be a good time to switch it down as far to low-risk as it goes. But he was busy with work etc (hey, it's only your savings), so I think he missed the boat as well and took or will take a hit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 09, 2011, 01:23:12 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 09, 2011, 12:30:55 PM
The petrochemical I was going to invest in yesterday but forgot is up 30% :( missed the boat.



I think petrochems are going to be bouncing around a bit.  As the risk of recession grows, they'll drop in price again, so you may not have to wait long.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on August 09, 2011, 01:24:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 09, 2011, 01:23:12 PM
Quote from: Faust on August 09, 2011, 12:30:55 PM
The petrochemical I was going to invest in yesterday but forgot is up 30% :( missed the boat.



I think petrochems are going to be bouncing around a bit.  As the risk of recession grows, they'll drop in price again, so you may not have to wait long.

And then when we stumble into the next crisis in six months time it will shoot up again and I can sell it off.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 09, 2011, 01:32:20 PM
Well, depending on exactly what it is, most oil companies and related do better when the economy looks to be growing.  Oil prices take a hit when the economy looks to be shrinking because, of course, there is less demand for them when less people are going to work, factories are producing less etc etc.

Which is why today's jump in price is kinda surprising.  It could be some new development is underway in Central Asia or China or something and I haven't been looking (very possible, in fact, since I haven't looked at all).

Just looking now, these may in part explain it

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41922527/ns/world_news-africa/
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/17bdbda0-c188-11e0-acb3-00144feabdc0.html
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2011/Aug-08/Kuwait-to-build-port-despite-threat.ashx
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/news/business/news/article_1655616.php/Norway-s-Statoil-announces-promising-oil-find-in-North-Sea
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-05/u-s-debt-deal-kills-off-prospects-of-renewable-power-support.html
http://www.greenprophet.com/2011/08/glasspoint-solar-wins-huge-middle-east-oil-field-contract/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 10, 2011, 04:56:08 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Z1XOBDbIy0&feature=share

This video got my attention because it was posted to FB by both my extremely liberal and extremely conservative friends. Ratigan starts to have a conversation about the economy, then his head explodes and he spends the next 6 minutes shouting at the camera about how neither the left nor right wing solutions actually address the real financial problem. He says the real problem is money in politics - politicians who can be effectively fired by defunding them. Everybody at the table seems to agree.

it's a prety good Howard Beale impression

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a9/Network12.jpg)

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 10, 2011, 05:02:13 PM
The markets seem to be improving...but I haven't paid much attention, to be honest.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on August 10, 2011, 05:06:13 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 10, 2011, 05:02:13 PM
The markets seem to be improving...but I haven't paid much attention, to be honest.
Sudden huge drop again in the last hour.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 10, 2011, 05:15:49 PM
Well, that recovery certainly lasted  :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 10, 2011, 05:27:28 PM
I've been watching it less closely since I decided to bounce nearly everything into the bond market.  Yields are shit, but since the Fed is going to sit on their hands on rates, it's the safest thing I could do.  I left 10% that I'm ok with gambling in an aggressive spread of funds, and if prices continue to come down I will probably shift that up to buy some cheap stock in good companies that likely aren't going anywhere.

Dow is hovering around 10,800.  It would take one more good sell off to see it hit 10,500 again. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 10, 2011, 06:01:32 PM
I've take this opportunity to short my first stock (Bank of America).

While I seem to be making money on that decision having actually done it I see the downside.  My profit has a maximum limit (ie company goes out of business and buying to cover costs $0) but limitless potential for loss.

Unfortunately I'm not allowed to do options trading yet beyond selling options for stocks I already own.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 10, 2011, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: PopeTom on August 10, 2011, 06:01:32 PM
I've take this opportunity to short my first stock (Bank of America).

While I seem to be making money on that decision having actually done it I see the downside.  My profit has a maximum limit (ie company goes out of business and buying to cover costs $0) but limitless potential for loss.

Unfortunately I'm not allowed to do options trading yet beyond selling options for stocks I already own.
That sucks.  Weird that they will let you do something as risky as shortselling but won't let you buy a put.  If you could buy a cheap way-out-of-the-money call, then you could at least limit your potential loss if BAC turns around and goes to the moon.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 10, 2011, 08:10:14 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 10, 2011, 07:02:56 PM
Quote from: PopeTom on August 10, 2011, 06:01:32 PM
I've take this opportunity to short my first stock (Bank of America).

While I seem to be making money on that decision having actually done it I see the downside.  My profit has a maximum limit (ie company goes out of business and buying to cover costs $0) but limitless potential for loss.

Unfortunately I'm not allowed to do options trading yet beyond selling options for stocks I already own.
That sucks.  Weird that they will let you do something as risky as shortselling but won't let you buy a put.  If you could buy a cheap way-out-of-the-money call, then you could at least limit your potential loss if BAC turns around and goes to the moon.



I use E*Trade and they have four levels of options trading.  I'm at level 1.

I had to apply to be able to do any at all (I also had to apply to short sell).  But that was my initial idea.  Short the stock then purchase a call option to cover myself in the event that BoA increases in value. 

Thankfully the current state of the market along with BoA's own problems makes that seem unlikely at the moment.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 10, 2011, 11:03:53 PM
Yeah, shorting BoA seems like a good idea right now...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 11, 2011, 04:04:11 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 10, 2011, 11:03:53 PM
Yeah, shorting BoA seems like a good idea right now...
Protecting yourself from unexpected upside also seems like a good idea.  You never know who is going to get a bailout at any given moment, and my congressman (Mel Watt) is a ranking member on the banking committee and is 100% owned by BofA.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 11, 2011, 04:08:45 AM
Oh, eventually, sure, something will be done.  But the relative transparency of the American system means you'll see it coming and so can react accordingly.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 11, 2011, 05:45:41 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 11, 2011, 04:04:11 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 10, 2011, 11:03:53 PM
Yeah, shorting BoA seems like a good idea right now...
Protecting yourself from unexpected upside also seems like a good idea.  You never know who is going to get a bailout at any given moment, and my congressman (Mel Watt) is a ranking member on the banking committee and is 100% owned by BofA.

As of the end of the day 8/10/2011 my shorting BoA has netted my a 30% return.  I'll probably bail soon as 30% seems pretty good to me.
It's now a matter of figuring out where to go next.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on August 11, 2011, 06:39:17 AM
Quote from: PopeTom on August 11, 2011, 05:45:41 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 11, 2011, 04:04:11 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 10, 2011, 11:03:53 PM
Yeah, shorting BoA seems like a good idea right now...
Protecting yourself from unexpected upside also seems like a good idea.  You never know who is going to get a bailout at any given moment, and my congressman (Mel Watt) is a ranking member on the banking committee and is 100% owned by BofA.

As of the end of the day 8/10/2011 my shorting BoA has netted my a 30% return.  I'll probably bail soon as 30% seems pretty good to me.
It's now a matter of figuring out where to go next.

bitcoins!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 11, 2011, 06:50:00 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on August 11, 2011, 06:39:17 AM
Quote from: PopeTom on August 11, 2011, 05:45:41 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 11, 2011, 04:04:11 AM
Quote from: Cain on August 10, 2011, 11:03:53 PM
Yeah, shorting BoA seems like a good idea right now...
Protecting yourself from unexpected upside also seems like a good idea.  You never know who is going to get a bailout at any given moment, and my congressman (Mel Watt) is a ranking member on the banking committee and is 100% owned by BofA.

As of the end of the day 8/10/2011 my shorting BoA has netted my a 30% return.  I'll probably bail soon as 30% seems pretty good to me.
It's now a matter of figuring out where to go next.

bitcoins!

Bitcoins seem too much like an elaborate joke being played on tech savvy (but not anything else savvy) Libertarians.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 11, 2011, 05:12:47 PM
Markets are up again today.  :?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 11, 2011, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 11, 2011, 05:12:47 PM
Markets are up again today.  :?

it hit 10,700 over night and with the people that would naturally step in and buy at that level to scrape a profit, Cisco also put out good news.

It's still only hovering around 11,000 which is about where it was on Monday.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 11, 2011, 05:27:26 PM
I'm watching my CitiGroup stocks play yo-yo in just a $7.00 range. Over $30 a share right now. Glad I bought them at $2.60 a share.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 11, 2011, 05:53:43 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 11, 2011, 05:22:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 11, 2011, 05:12:47 PM
Markets are up again today.  :?

it hit 10,700 over night and with the people that would naturally step in and buy at that level to scrape a profit, Cisco also put out good news.

It's still only hovering around 11,000 which is about where it was on Monday.

Yeah, it didn't seem a huge rise.  Still, shows the market is fairly volatile at the moment.

Also http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14489077

QuoteTrading in seven stocks listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange was suspended on Wednesday after a hacking attack.

The attack was aimed at a website run by the exchange used to tell traders about company announcements.

The site was shut and trading in seven firms due to make announcements via the website was suspended for half a day.

Shares in HSBC, Cathay Pacific, China Power International and the Hong Kong exchange itself were among those suspended.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 11, 2011, 05:59:46 PM
Funny HSBC would be in on that.  Last news I read about them, they weren't looking so hot, even if they did just offload their US credit card business to Capital One.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 14, 2011, 01:39:43 AM
Good commentary on Standard and Poors from my favourite dead French conspirator (after Talleyrand):

http://fearhonorinterest.wordpress.com/2011/08/10/how-many-divisions-does-standard-and-poors-have/

QuoteElective power is the power a political community can voluntarily choose to use. The United States of America has a national debt for S&P to fret over because it elects to have a national debt. The United States elects to keep a national debt because it finds it convenient for nourishing a rentier class. The United States elects to spend money on its peculiar version of the Bismarckian welfare state because its designed popularity with its beneficiaries largely insulates it from its rentier critics. The United States elects to keep taxes low while spending at an ambitious clip because of the contingent collision of a sound bite and its political fallout.

Nothing about its national debt constrains the intrinsic power of the United States. While the passive frown against debt default embedded in America's English heritage mitigates against it, nothing about our national debt constrains the realizable power of the United States. This nation could, at any time, elect to fully or selectively default on its debt. It could do something peculiar like minting a 14 trillion dollar coin to pay down its debt. America's current creditors (foreign and domestic) lack the intrinsic or realizable power to force the United States to pay them the face value of their Treasuries.

If the U.S. chose to become a deadbeat, it'd become a deadbeat with nuclear weapons. Russia was a deadbeat with nuclear weapons in 1998. One a more rentier friendly investment climate was ushered in through Putin's "dictatorship of law" ("Even when you're trying to be good you're evil!", Lisa Simpson complained to Mr. Burns). Russia even went through the ritual of "paying off its debt". Investor money flooded back in. There's nothing as irrational as an investor looking for yield, as Latin American countries repeated cycles of borrowing, default, forgiveness, and borrowing again reveals.

S&P's divisions are those of the imagination. Their power to conquer exits only inasmuch as the American political community elects to give them the power to conquer. If you stop believing in ratings agencies, they fade away, like fairies, Smurfs, or the Matrix sequels.

Make no mistake. Government is violence. Money is a claim on a share of the spoils of current government violence. Bonds are a claim on a share of the spoils of future government violence. As long as the United States of America has the power to wheedle (at best) or coerce (at worst) the spoils of realizable power from members of its political community, it can't go bankrupt and it can't be driven into austerity against its will. If the United States chooses to keep its magical printing press, it cannot run out of money: its currency is backed by the full faith and credit of the threat and use of violence.

There is no comparison between a household balance sheet and the "balance sheet" of a truly sovereign political community. If you're not a ruling dynasty, Mafia family, or family dominated corporate board, your family will rarely have the ability to coerce funds from your neighbors. If you can shake down the Joneses next door, congratulations. You have the makings of a sovereign state. Install a printing press in your basement and enjoy the blessings of your own currency. You can't compare apples and oranges when the apple is a fire-breathing Great White shark with high voltage razor-sharp teeth.

The balance sheet of the United States is a elective and self-imposed accounting identity, not an external and material check on its power. There may be utility in maintaining rituals and pieties that mask the ugly reality that government is ultimately based on command of a preponderance of violence within a discrete chunk of territory. However, the consent of the governed is based on the governed's ability to coerce their rulers, whether by active resistance or (more realistically) triggering an élite split that leads one faction of a ruling élite to sick its share of a political communities means of coercion against another faction.

The naïve realist follows the mythical Galileo in choosing to bow down before the reality of the world and feel its power with his bare outstretched palms. But he differs from Galileo in declaring that power does not move. It remains stationary at the center of the universe of human action. Here the naïve realist shows his true colors, those of an absolutist for the status quo.

And yet it does move.

Human power does rotate on its axis. Man, a technology-mediated monkey whose biological and cultural evolution is enabled and constrained by the power of his tools, is a protean creature just a little lower than the angels. His elective power can shift realizable power and his realizable power can shift intrinsic power. Intrinsic power fences his realizable power and gelds his elective power but fencing and gelding can shift, for good and for ill. The shift can be long, drawn out, and indiscernible. It can be short, sudden, and violently overt.

Stability is a virtue but not if it allows kindling to imperceptibly build in the shadows of the current world order, kindling that only awaits the right spark to burst into flames. Rearranging chairs on the world scene to try band-aid the ever-expanding gash in its hull only brings the day of inferno closer. In one world S&P is a power. In another world it's low yield fuel for the flames. Ratings downgrades that merely needle the rough beast, its hour come at last, only annoy it as it slouches toward Bethlehem to be born.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 14, 2011, 03:36:17 AM
US is investigating Standard and Poors, according to a headline on Russia Today.

Looking for more information....

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/financialcrisis/8699245/SandP-faces-inquiry-over-US-downgrade.html

QuoteRegulators are examining the models used by Standard & Poor's after the US government accused the ratings agency of a $2 trillion (£1.2 trillion) error when it downgraded America.

The SEC is also said to be looking at who knew about the decision to cut the rating before it was made public.

The inquiry is reported to be part of a broader look at McGraw-Hill, S&P's parent company, by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

S&P's decision to strip the US of its AAA rating late on the evening of August 5 prompted a furious exchange between the US Treasury and the agency.

The Treasury, which had been sent S&P's press release on the afternoon of the 5th before it was due to be released later that day, accused analysts at S&P of a "basic math error" that led to the downgrade.

The SEC is also said to be looking at who knew about the decision to cut the rating before it was made public amid speculation that it was leaked earlier in the day.

A spokesman for S&P said the company's policies "prohibit analysts or rating-committee members from trading and holding securities or options of the companies or governments they rate".

Although many investors had expected S&P to cut its rating, the decision contributed to a second week of volatile trading in stock markets across the world. It also led to speculation that other countries could follow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 21, 2011, 12:55:51 PM
http://rt.com/news/finance-war-usa-banks/

QuoteFollowing the loss of the US's triple-A credit score which sparked sell-offs on global markets, a new war using financial derivatives has been waged, which by no means can bear the name of WWIII, financial analyst Max Keiser told RT.

­Investors however remain unconvinced the country's finances are solid enough. Problems in the Eurozone will be up for discussion by the French and German leaders next week.

Max Keiser, financial analyst and host of the Keiser Report on RT, said French banks are now loaded with toxic derivatives that were sold to them by US investment banks.

"The US investment banks and the rating agencies are now attacking these French banks. They know where the bodies are buried, and they are using the weapons they sold them to attack them," he said. "The rating will be downgraded again. This is part of a new era on Wall Street – they go after sovereign debt. Wall Street and rating agencies are working together to destabilize the sovereign debt of these countries," he added.

Emphasis mine.  If the SEC investigation above does get anywhere, I bet if you look at the patterns of behaviour in relation to other sovereign debt downgrades, you would likely find similar instances of "insider trading".

Wall Street and the ratings agencies worked hand in hand to sell the world toxic subprime debts, so why should they stop doing so now?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 21, 2011, 01:00:16 PM
No comment needed on this:

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/08/18/298485/exclusive-goldman-sachs-vp-changed-his-name-now-advances-goldman-lobbying-interests-as-a-top-staffer-to-darrell-issa/

QuoteHas Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) turned the House Oversight Committee into a bank lobbying firm with the power to subpoena and pressure government regulators? ThinkProgress has found that a Goldman Sachs vice president changed his name, then later went to work for Issa to coordinate his effort to thwart regulations that affect Goldman Sachs' bottom line.

In July, Issa sent a letter to top government regulators demanding that they back off and provide more justification for new margin requirements for financial firms dealing in derivatives. A standard practice on Capitol Hill is to end a letter to a government agency with contact information for the congressional staffer responsible for working on the issue for the committee. In most cases, the contact staffer is the one who actually writes such letters. With this in mind, it is important to note that the Issa letter ended with contact information for Peter Haller, a staffer hired this year to work for Issa on the Oversight Committee.

Issa's demand to regulators is exactly what banks have been wishing for. Indeed, Goldman Sachs has spent millions this year trying to slow down the implementation of the new rules. In the letter, Issa explicitly mentions that the new derivative regulations might hurt brokers "such as Goldman Sachs."

Haller, as he is now known, went by the name Peter Simonyi until three years ago. Simonyi adopted his mother's maiden name Haller in 2008 shortly after leaving Goldman Sachs as a vice president of the bank's commodity compliance group. In a few short years, Haller went from being in charge of dealing with regulators for Goldman Sachs to working for Congress in a position where he made official demands from regulators overseeing his old firm.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 21, 2011, 01:02:22 PM
More ratings agencies shennanigans...this time at Moody's:

http://www.businessinsider.com/moodys-analyst-conflicts-corruption-and-greed-2011-8

QuoteA former senior analyst at Moody's has gone public with his story of how one of the country's most important rating agencies is corrupted to the core.

The analyst, William J. Harrington, worked for Moody's for 11 years, from 1999 until his resignation last year.

From 2006 to 2010, Harrington was a Senior Vice President in the derivative products group, which was responsible for producing many of the disastrous ratings Moody's issued during the housing bubble.

Harrington has made his story public in the form of a 78-page "comment" to the SEC's proposed rules about rating agency reform, which he submitted to the agency on August 8th. The comment is a scathing indictment of Moody's processes, conflicts of interests, and management, and it will likely make Harrington a star witness at any future litigation or hearings on this topic.

The primary conflict of interest at Moody's is well known: The company is paid by the same "issuers" (banks and companies) whose securities it is supposed to objectively rate. This conflict pervades every aspect of Moody's operations, Harrington says. It incentivizes everyone at the company, including analysts, to give Moody's clients the ratings they want, lest the clients fire Moody's and take their business to other ratings agencies.

Moody's analysts whose conclusions prevent Moody's clients from getting what they want, Harrington says, are viewed as "impeding deals" and, thus, harming Moody's business. These analysts are often transferred, disciplined, "harassed," or fired.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 21, 2011, 02:03:48 PM
More on Issa's staffer and his family background

http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-dc-update-transylvania-goes-to-dc-and-lies-its-head-off/

QuoteHere's what Simonyi/Haller said when they pressed him on the name change:

Quote"My mother, whose maiden name is Theodora Maria Theresia haller-koi gr Haller (in the U.S., Dora Haller), married Imre Gabor Simonyi and took his name. Her father Alfred haller-koi gr Haller was killed in Budapest in 1944 by fascists as he attempted to prevent children from being conscripted into the military. Prior to his return to Hungary in 1944, he served under Regent Miklos Horthy, as a Hungarian diplomat stationed in England supporting the British in opposition to Germany. His last request was that if Theodora marries, her husband and children would carry on the Haller name."

There are a lot of funny bits in that little one-paragraph melodrama Peter wrote, but the funniest of all is this line: "...He served under Regent Miklos Horthy, as a Hungarian diplomat stationed in England supporting the British in opposition to Germany." That is what is technically called a flat-out lie. One thing you can tell about Peter from this story: He thinks Americans don't know a thing about European history. And he's probably right, since a lot of the reader comments to this big lie called it "a touching family story." Whoo-ee! It's a story, all right. About as accurate as Rambo's version of Nam.

Miklos Horthy was "Regent" of Hungary from 1919 to 1944. If he was "supporting the British," it was a well-kept secret. If only Hitler had known that about his pal Miklos, he might not have posed with him in quite as many photo ops, where you can see the Fuhrer and the Regent shaking hands, strolling together, taking a little ride in a convertible together, just generally lovin' up a storm, as Jerry Lee would say.

I don't even know where Peter came up with that "pro-British" lie of his. The British weren't even a factor in that messed-up, landlocked multi-ethnic gangfight. South-Central Europe between the wars—well, it's a lot like South-Central LA back in the day, except a whole lot bloodier and more confusing. Basically it's pretty much the way Eastwood describes his killer past in Unforgiven: Nobody remembers much of it, they were drunk most of the time–the main ingredient for a war in those parts is slivovitz, or anything else if you can't get that, including hair oil and wood alcohol—and they shot a lot of people. And hanged a lot of people. And raped a lot of people. Hungarians, Germans, Slovaks, Rumanians, Croats, Serbs, Ukranians, with the Jews and Gypsies hiding in the bushes trying to sell a little booze and not get lynched—Did I leave anybody out? If so, they're lucky, because nobody was a hero in that mess. Primitive warfare with superb German or Czech weapons; you can imagine how that went. Killing everyone in the village before you leave—standard practice. Avoiding combat, torturing civilians until they tell you where their last side of bacon is—a day at the office. Raping every female before you bayonet them and go—part of the job. .

When the totally worthless, sleaze-ridden Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed after Germany surrendered, some ethnic gangs rose in the rankings and others sank. The Hungarians lost out big, because as the second-meanest and biggest gang in the Empire (after the Germans), they'd had a sort of little-brother status that allowed them to beat up all the other ethnics lower than them. By local standards, believe me, that was a good deal.

But their big brothers, the Germans, lost out, so they lost too. In 1920, thanks to the Treaty of Trianon, which was the B-League version of the Treaty of Versailles that did such a good job of pacifying Europe, Hungary had lost three-quarters of its old territory and about two-thirds of its population. What was left was a core area, a Hungarians-only district—and that's what's now "Hungary" on the map.

You'd think that'd be fine, since those tribes couldn't live with each other. Why not split up? Well, remember the Balkans in the 1990s. A bunch of Hungarians got left behind in the parts that were grabbed by all the other ethnic gangs, and that drove the homeland Hungarians crazy. Crazier than before, I mean, because the truth about Europe before 1945, the one key truth nobody wants to hear, is that they were all, and I mean all, from London to Moscow, bloodthirsty creeps, totally out of their minds. The only difference is that they weren't all as good at war, or not at the same time anyway, and the ones who were more in the mood grabbed what they could, when they could.

The Goldman Sachs-turned-Darrell-Issa-staffer Peter Simonyi/Haller's hero, Miklos Horthy, was a classic specimen of South-Central European strongman between the wars. A fascist, absolutely. Not the worst of them, but a fascist all the way, in that half-comedy way the smaller European dictators had, from Mussolini on down. His title was a punchline in itself: "Admiral Miklos Horthy." Admiral? Take another look at Hungary on the map; Admiral of what? Turns out Horthy had been an Admiral in the Austro-Hungarian navy, which was another punchline in itself.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 22, 2011, 11:41:56 AM
Can't believe no-one has decided any of the previous stories are worth commenting on, but I'm going to continue to plug away at "ratings agencies and Wall Street favourites in collusion over downgrades of sovereign debt and insider trading" with this piece.

http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com/2011/08/new-leaks-reveal-insider-tips-on-s-us.html

QuoteLast week, AntiSec cyber-guerrillas (a loose alliance amongst individuals affiliated with LulzSec and Anonymous) released a 1GB cache of emails filched from security contractor Vanguard Defense Industries (VDI).

Previously Anonymous and LulzSec have wrapped their keyboards around defense grifters Booz Allen Hamilton, ManTech International, NATO, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, InfraGard (a "public-private" security alliance amongst corporate heavy-hitters and the Bureau), the CIA, the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the Arizona Counter Terrorism Information Center (a so-called "fusion center" staffed by cops, federal agents, private contractors and the U.S. military), the Bay Area Rapid Transit agency (BART), Britain's Serious Organised Crime Agency, PBS, Fox News, and repressive governments such as Egypt, Tunisia and Zimbabwe.

Their latest campaign targeted VDI, a Texas-based firm, which specializes in the "development and deployment" of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS, killer drones). VDI "draws on specialized experience of senior aerospace engineers, former military special operations officers, military instructor pilots as well as retired Senior Executive Service Federal Agents," claiming their "background and operational knowledge has afforded us the unique vision to provide a platform that will extend the security and response capabilities of any organization," according to a blurb on their web site.

While VDI touts their ability to offer "support" to the "military, local, state and federal law enforcement as well as the private sector," the firm also offers "a full scope of consulting services independent of our aerial technology."

That "unique vision" however, didn't prevent AntiSec from spiriting away thousands of emails from VDI's Senior Vice President Richard T. Garcia, a former FBI Assistant Director in Los Angeles who recently left a well-paid position as Global Security Manager for the environment-killing Shell Oil Corporation (can you say Niger Delta?) for "greener" pastures.

A press statement from AntiSec announced that the leak "contains internal meeting notes and contracts, schematics, non-disclosure agreements, personal information about other VDI employees, and several dozen 'counter-terrorism' documents classified as 'law enforcement sensitive' and 'for official use only'."

"Vanguard Defense Industries," AntiSec writes, "manufactures unmanned 'ShadowHawk' drones which cost $640,000 and are equipped with grenade launchers and shotguns. ShadowHawks are currently in use by law enforcement, military, and private corporations deploying them in the US, the Horn of Africa, Panama, Columbia [sic], and US-Mexico border patrol operations. These emails contain contracts, schematics, non-disclosure agreements, and more. Additionally we found evidence of a Merrill Lynch wealth management advisor giving private advance notice to Garcia about upcoming S&P US credit rating downgrades."

Improper Disclosures

In an April 25, 2011 email from Garcia to Gloria Newport, Cindy Cook, a Wealth Management Advisor with Bank of America-owned Merrill Lynch "advised that Standard and Poors, may lower the credit rating of the US Government which could cause a run on US Banks that will affect the Federal Reserve. They give the US Govt. 2 years to correct the current situation, which they believe both the Republican and Democratic solutions do not do enough and both parties may make this a political situation for the 2012 Presidential election and never come up with a answer to correct the situation within the two years set by Standard and Poors. She did not see any real Cyber issue that could change the situation."

Investigative journalist Steve Ragan, writing at The Tech Herald (the publication that broke the story on Anonymous's HBGary hack) informs us that "the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission was investigating whether there was any sort of insider trading done by S&P employees before the downgrade was official. The story hinged on comments made to the paper by sources close to the investigation itself."

"On the day S&P cut the U.S.'s credit rating" Ragan writes, "Wall Street was flooded with downgrade rumors. These rumors started earlier in the day while trading was active. It turned out they were true."

According to Bloomberg News the SEC "is scrutinizing the method Standard & Poor's used to cut the U.S.'s credit rating and whether the firm properly protected the confidential decision, according to a person with direct knowledge of the matter."

Reporter Joshua Gallu wrote August 14 that SEC staff are "looking into whether certain market participants learned of the downgrade before its announcement."

Downplaying speculation that S&P employees may have breached SEC rules by leaking sensitive information to privileged clients, The New York Times, as is their wont, claimed "it is arguable whether S.&P.'s announcement on Aug. 5 of the rating change was all that confidential, given the speculation about it."

"Assuming information about the downgrade was confidential," the Times pontificates, "it must also be material, which means a reasonable investor would consider it important. This seems to be an easy element to establish because the wild gyrations in the market on the first trading day after the downgrade shows how investors viewed it."

But Cook's email to Garcia didn't arrive in his in-box "on the first trading day after the downgrade" but nearly four months earlier, long before July's political shenanigans over raising the federal debt ceiling, the ostensible reason why S&P downgraded America's credit worthiness.

Maxine Waters (D-CA), wrote to SEC chairwoman, cover-up specialist Mary Schapiro, demanding that the commission "conduct an investigation into whether S.&P. selectively disclosed information related to the U.S. government debt downgrade to any financial institutions, and whether any institutions that had that nonpublic information traded on that information prior to the official announcement."

It appears that Cook's email to Garcia would confirm that S&P insiders did just that, providing information to Merrill Lynch and one can assume other financial firms.

Throwing cold water on charges that the rating's agency acted improperly, the Times argues that "even if if the S.E.C. finds that the information was improperly disclosed, proving insider trading will be difficult."

Why might that be?

According to the Times, "while S.&P. and other credit rating agencies are required to adopt policies to prevent such disclosure, it is questionable whether just leaking information violates any federal regulations, even if it breaches a corporate confidentiality policy."

In case anyone is still naive to believe anyone involved in high finance would never commit such crimes

http://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/Report-Deutsche-Bank-capress-4040264273.html?x=0

QuoteSEOUL, South Korea - A report says four employees of Deutsche Bank AG and its South Korean brokerage unit have been indicted on charges of manipulating stock prices and unfair trading.

Yonhap news agency reported Sunday that the alleged improper trading triggered a sudden plunge in Seoul's benchmark stock index last November and resulted in illegal profits of about $41 million.

Yonhap says prosecutors indicted three employees with the bank's Hong Kong office and a fourth with Deutsche Securities Korea.

Yonhap cited the German bank as saying its South Korean brokerage unit didn't authorize or condone any violation of market regulations.

Seoul prosecutors said they could not immediately confirm the report.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 22, 2011, 11:49:08 AM
I may not be commenting on these, but be assured that I am reading every one of them. I think this has now gone way beyond conspiracy theory to hard reality.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on August 22, 2011, 02:19:50 PM
I'm new here, but I've been reading this for a while as well. 

Maybe it's too early for my brain - does this bit here:

Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2011, 11:41:56 AM

In an April 25, 2011 email from Garcia to Gloria Newport, Cindy Cook, a Wealth Management Advisor with Bank of America-owned Merrill Lynch "advised that Standard and Poors, may lower the credit rating of the US Government which could cause a run on US Banks that will affect the Federal Reserve. They give the US Govt. 2 years to correct the current situation, which they believe both the Republican and Democratic solutions do not do enough and both parties may make this a political situation for the 2012 Presidential election and never come up with a answer to correct the situation within the two years set by Standard and Poors. She did not see any real Cyber issue that could change the situation."


mean that not only did S&P decide 4 months ago to downgrade the US, but that they already plan to downgrade us again in 2012?  (I also love the arrogance of S&P, that we have to come up with a deficit solution according to their schedule, but I suppose that shouldn't surprise me.)

Also, a side question: could someone more weapons-savvy than me tell me why you'd mount a shotgun on an aerial drone?  I always had the impression that shotguns were more a close-combat weapon.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on August 22, 2011, 02:36:35 PM
been following closely as well.. I don't know what to say other than *sigh*.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on August 22, 2011, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: deadfong on August 22, 2011, 02:19:50 PM
Also, a side question: could someone more weapons-savvy than me tell me why you'd mount a shotgun on an aerial drone?  I always had the impression that shotguns were more a close-combat weapon.

For urban control. Shotguns can also fire less-lethal beanbags and other such rounds for riot control.

Or stun-batons.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 22, 2011, 04:39:30 PM
Quote from: Donald Coyote on August 22, 2011, 04:16:17 PM
Quote from: deadfong on August 22, 2011, 02:19:50 PM
Also, a side question: could someone more weapons-savvy than me tell me why you'd mount a shotgun on an aerial drone?  I always had the impression that shotguns were more a close-combat weapon.

For urban control. Shotguns can also fire less-lethal beanbags rock salt and other such rounds for riot control.

Or stun-batons.

Fixed.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 22, 2011, 04:47:01 PM
...it's gotten to where...even the political posturing is all just so much orchestration.  The cynical, jaded part of me just doesn't see any of it as real anymore, other than the fact that people are losing ground financially in their daily lives that don't have the sheer luck to be tied to the backs of the bankers and the finance industry.

There's no end to the bullshit.

...and there probably never WAS...we were just all duped into thinking there was.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on August 22, 2011, 09:05:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2011, 11:41:56 AM
Can't believe no-one has decided any of the previous stories are worth commenting on, but I'm going to continue to plug away at "ratings agencies and Wall Street favourites in collusion over downgrades of sovereign debt and insider trading" with this piece.

Please do! Like others said, I really don't know what to comment about them, but I've read it all and it's been very good. I don't get this kind of info via my usual news sources.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on August 23, 2011, 12:53:58 AM
Chiming in, I have been reading, just don't feel I have anything to add, please continue!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 23, 2011, 07:26:36 PM
Quote from: deadfong on August 22, 2011, 02:19:50 PM
Maybe it's too early for my brain - does this bit here:

Quote from: Cain on August 22, 2011, 11:41:56 AM

In an April 25, 2011 email from Garcia to Gloria Newport, Cindy Cook, a Wealth Management Advisor with Bank of America-owned Merrill Lynch "advised that Standard and Poors, may lower the credit rating of the US Government which could cause a run on US Banks that will affect the Federal Reserve. They give the US Govt. 2 years to correct the current situation, which they believe both the Republican and Democratic solutions do not do enough and both parties may make this a political situation for the 2012 Presidential election and never come up with a answer to correct the situation within the two years set by Standard and Poors. She did not see any real Cyber issue that could change the situation."


mean that not only did S&P decide 4 months ago to downgrade the US, but that they already plan to downgrade us again in 2012?  (I also love the arrogance of S&P, that we have to come up with a deficit solution according to their schedule, but I suppose that shouldn't surprise me.)

That is what it sounds like to me.  A downgrade in response to the policies of one party or another could decide the election. 

Who wants to play kingmaker?  Who's willing to bend over the most to accomodate the ratings agencies and Wall Street?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 23, 2011, 07:30:06 PM
Obama is, apparently

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/22/business/schneiderman-is-said-to-face-pressure-to-back-bank-deal.html?_r=1&ref=business&pagewanted=all

QuoteEric 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, according to people briefed on discussions about the deal.

In recent weeks, Shaun Donovan, the secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and high-level Justice Department officials have been waging an intensifying campaign to try to persuade the attorney general to support the settlement, said the people briefed on the talks.

Mr. Schneiderman and top prosecutors in some other states have objected to the proposed settlement with major banks, saying it would restrict their ability to investigate and prosecute wrongdoing in a variety of areas, including the bundling of loans in mortgage securities.

But Mr. Donovan and others in the administration have been contacting not only Mr. Schneiderman but his allies, including consumer groups and advocates for borrowers, seeking help to secure the attorney general's participation in the deal, these people said. One recipient described the calls from Mr. Donovan, but asked not to be identified for fear of retaliation.

Not surprising, the large banks, which are eager to reach a settlement, have grown increasingly frustrated with Mr. Schneiderman. Bank officials recently discussed asking Mr. Donovan for help in changing the attorney general's mind, according to a person briefed on those talks.

Schneiderman is the man all the big investment banks are afraid of, right now.  He has stated there was fraud, there was corruption and he intends to prosecute - and he doesn't care how many politically connected friends they may have.

That the Obama administration is taking the banks side against Schneiderman tells you everything you need to know about the Obama administration.

Yves Smith says it best

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/corrupt-obama-administration-pressuring-new-york-attorney-general-to-support-mortgage-whitewash.html

QuoteIt is high time to describe the Obama Administration by its proper name: corrupt.

Admittedly, corruption among our elites generally and in Washington in particular has become so widespread and blatant as to fall into the "dog bites man" category. But the nauseating gap between the Administration's propaganda and the many and varied ways it sells out average Americans on behalf of its favored backers, in this case the too big to fail banks, has become so noisome that it has become impossible to ignore the fetid smell.

The Administration has now taken to pressuring parties that are not part of the machinery reporting to the President to fall in and do his bidding. We've gotten so used to the US attorney general being conveniently missing in action that we have forgotten that regulators and the AG are supposed to be independent.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on August 23, 2011, 08:34:29 PM
The implications behind this are much more far reaching than just the financial sector, aren't they?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 23, 2011, 08:35:46 PM
Yep.  The last downgrade cost the US more than the damage from all Al-Qaeda attacks on US installations and sites combined.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 23, 2011, 08:46:56 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 23, 2011, 08:35:46 PM
Yep.  The last downgrade cost the US more than the damage from all Al-Qaeda attacks on US installations and sites combined.

Yeah, tell THAT to the Tea Baggers, though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 25, 2011, 03:06:03 PM
Warren Buffet knows something we don't know. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/44269375)

QuoteBank of America [BAC  6.99] soared 20 percent after Berkshire Hathaway [BRK.A  106350.00  ---  UNCH] said it will invest $5 billion in the bank.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 25, 2011, 03:16:29 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 25, 2011, 03:06:03 PM
Warren Buffet knows something we don't know. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/44269375)

QuoteBank of America [BAC  6.99] soared 20 percent after Berkshire Hathaway [BRK.A  106350.00  ---  UNCH] said it will invest $5 billion in the bank.

not digging back through the thread, but wasn't there someone here that shorted it?

hope you covered that ages ago
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 25, 2011, 08:24:54 PM
Oh, wait, nevermind.  Buffet invested in BofA because he was bribed.  :lulz:

QuoteBank of America Corp. (BAC), seeking to snap this year's stock plunge, will pay billionaire Warren Buffett $300 million annually to do what he did for Goldman Sachs Group Inc. during the credit crisis: bolster confidence.

The $5 billion sale of preferred equity, which initially sent the shares up 26 percent, may improve investor perceptions without meaningfully affecting the source of their concern, the bank's capital, according to analysts including William Tanona at UBS AG. The deal gives Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A) warrants that could make it the lender's largest stockholder.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2011, 08:51:30 PM
Gonna say, 5 billion is a drop in the ocean when it comes to BoA's supposed exposure.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on August 25, 2011, 10:19:03 PM
...that's what it sounded like to me on NPR this morning.  They wanted someone to put some good ol' CONFIDENCE back into the American economy.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 25, 2011, 10:56:06 PM
I've said it once and I've said it before, the American economy is out of fuel, it is running on fumes and a whole lot of Clap Your Hands If You Believe.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 26, 2011, 03:34:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 25, 2011, 10:56:06 PM
I've said it once and I've said it before, the American economy is out of fuel, it is running on fumes and a whole lot of Clap Your Hands If You Believe.

Bernanke is supposed to be speaking later.  The US exchange is already selling off in anticipation.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 26, 2011, 03:52:21 PM
Rumour is its going to be another round of quantative easing.  More free money to inflate the bubble!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 26, 2011, 04:01:47 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 26, 2011, 03:52:21 PM
Rumour is its going to be another round of quantative easing.  More free money to inflate the bubble!

:horrormirth:

Wouldn't surprise me at all.  It's the only thing they have that they can do.

Just for once I wish he'd come out and say "Look, we don't know what we're doing and we have to admit, finally, that we're largely to blame for all of this mess (and the one in the 70's, and more going back) and printing more money is only going to delay this so we're Volkerizing the interest rate for a few years to try and help get this shit over with.  Oh, and I'm finally beginning to think Keynesian economic policies are teh sux0r."

Even if I'd loose my ass on the bonds I'm holding, at least I'd be surprised.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 27, 2011, 07:09:13 PM
We have a system now which combines the worst of Keynesianism, Monetarism and Feudalism, with none of their virtues, which deserves some kind of recognition, I believe.

I'd also like to remind everyone we've been, essentially, in a recession since 1973.  The appearance of economic growth has been due to financialization of the economy, dealing in phantom sums of cash, and through the lowering of tax burdens on transnational corporations.  Every single instance of apparent economic progress since this time has been a bubble, which has burst five to eight years later.

We've also essentially moved back to a pre-18th century model of taxation now.  Historically, the right to taxation was sold to unscrupulous individuals, who would then use that money in risky financial speculation.  Now we just use public servants to hand the money over to the speculators in question.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 27, 2011, 10:18:19 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 27, 2011, 07:09:13 PM
We have a system now which combines the worst of Keynesianism, Monetarism and Feudalism, with none of their virtues, which deserves some kind of recognition, I believe.

I'd also like to remind everyone we've been, essentially, in a recession since 1973.  The appearance of economic growth has been due to financialization of the economy, dealing in phantom sums of cash, and through the lowering of tax burdens on transnational corporations.  Every single instance of apparent economic progress since this time has been a bubble, which has burst five to eight years later.

We've also essentially moved back to a pre-18th century model of taxation now.  Historically, the right to taxation was sold to unscrupulous individuals, who would then use that money in risky financial speculation.  Now we just use public servants to hand the money over to the speculators in question.

You forgot to blame it first on Nixon, then Gerald Ford, then Jimmy Carter, then heap a giant pile of blame on Reagan followed by a serving for HW Bush.  Clinton gets a pass.  Always.  I mean, right?  Then the biggest contributors in the public mind: Bush II followed by Obama.

That's about as far back as the memories go for almost anyone I talk with about it.  They always skew away from their own party's president when discussing it.

They almost universally think that a sitting president has anything to do with monetary policy, and has the "Mighty Pen" he can use to either raise or cut taxes, all by his executive branch self.

I find myself increasingly more worried about the people we DON'T elect than I do the ones we do.  The people who just go find some consulting work in D.C. for 4 - 8 years and then come right back to doing what they were doing.

Different face, same agendas.

Lol elections.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 27, 2011, 10:27:38 PM
Well, Nixon did decide to trash Bretton Woods, which kinda led to the current situation (as I understand it, he thought the US would be the best placed to take advantage of the post-Bretton chaos.  He thought wrong), so he deserves a lot more blame than he currently gets, as does the OPEC cartel.

As for Clinton, the major thing I can recall from under him was NAFTA, aka Not A Free Trade Agreement, the 1998 "Asian" financial crisis, helping inflate the dotcom bubble...  I can think of a few things, anyway.

But yeah.  Lots of anonymous faces in the SEC, Treasury...not to mention the revolving door between those and the investment banks and major hedge funds, they're power brokers on a par with sitting politicians.  Another factor that cannot be discarded is the academic economics angle... Larry Summers and the rest.

It's times like this that I think bombing the Harvard Business School and banning its alumni from managing anything more than a McDonald's store would, if not actually solve a lot of problems, at least stop any more from happening.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on August 27, 2011, 10:56:20 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 27, 2011, 10:27:38 PM
Well, Nixon did decide to trash Bretton Woods, which kinda led to the current situation (as I understand it, he thought the US would be the best placed to take advantage of the post-Bretton chaos.  He thought wrong), so he deserves a lot more blame than he currently gets, as does the OPEC cartel.

As for Clinton, the major thing I can recall from under him was NAFTA, aka Not A Free Trade Agreement, the 1998 "Asian" financial crisis, helping inflate the dotcom bubble...  I can think of a few things, anyway.

But yeah.  Lots of anonymous faces in the SEC, Treasury...not to mention the revolving door between those and the investment banks and major hedge funds, they're power brokers on a par with sitting politicians.  Another factor that cannot be discarded is the academic economics angle... Larry Summers and the rest.

It's times like this that I think [EDIT: replacing the Harvard Business School with a Clown College] just looking out for you man.  I'm not paranoid, but I also don't take unnecessary risks to get a point across and banning its alumni from managing anything more than a McDonald's store would, if not actually solve a lot of problems, at least stop any more from happening.

I give Nixon a pass on Bretton-Woods.  He didn't put it in place and he had nothing to do with the run on the US by foreign governments to cash in the dollars to gold.  They were printing money and it was, possibly for the last time, OBVIOUS and any sitting President in his place would have been pressured to do the same thing by the cost of the Vietnam War, a war I will never agree was necessary, and precipitated the collapse of Bretton-Woods.  If anyone, I blame LBJ for stepping up that war and lying about it, causing the increase in spending necessary to perpetuate it.

Clinton supporters amaze me for their ability to completely blank out when NAFTA is brought up, especially considering how protectionist and Union supporting a large number are.  I know it was in the works long before he signed it into law but man the glazed eyes and "BUT NO IT WAS BUSH I AND II" talk I hear when you mention Clinton and NAFTA.

As you said, the sharks are the back door guys that get "appointed" to one administration, (usually after taking a fat severance from a major financial institution so they can bring in new Harvard meat" and when that one gets voted out, they just go to work for one of their buddies in D.C. until "their guy" gets back in.  

I'm not even sure that Academic Economics should even be a term anymore.  It certainly cannot, looking back over the last 50 years, be in any way considered a Science.  Despite blatant evidence and the numbers to back it going on 40 years, they continue to use the same exact medicine that was taught by Keynes.  The end result is that we all suffer, because the "growth" was really only an illusion of growth, and since deflation is seen as worse than inflation, to be avoided at all costs, even at the risk of stagflation, we all become more poor as the decades grind on.

[EDIT CONCERNING THE ABOVE BOLDED]  I keep forgetting, considering your areas of expertise, you're likely used to having a knock at your door to discuss those sorts of things.  Just meant that spiders look for that sort of thing.  Something you must already know as well.  Never mind then.  Continue on.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on August 28, 2011, 02:54:20 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 25, 2011, 03:16:29 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on August 25, 2011, 03:06:03 PM
Warren Buffet knows something we don't know. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/44269375)

QuoteBank of America [BAC  6.99] soared 20 percent after Berkshire Hathaway [BRK.A  106350.00  ---  UNCH] said it will invest $5 billion in the bank.

not digging back through the thread, but wasn't there someone here that shorted it?

hope you covered that ages ago

That would have been me and yes I did.  Never intended to hold it for long and it's unlikely I'll short a stock again anytime soon.  At least until I can get upgraded in my options trading on E*Trade.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 31, 2011, 02:29:27 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on August 27, 2011, 10:56:20 PM
I give Nixon a pass on Bretton-Woods.  He didn't put it in place and he had nothing to do with the run on the US by foreign governments to cash in the dollars to gold.  They were printing money and it was, possibly for the last time, OBVIOUS and any sitting President in his place would have been pressured to do the same thing by the cost of the Vietnam War, a war I will never agree was necessary, and precipitated the collapse of Bretton-Woods.  If anyone, I blame LBJ for stepping up that war and lying about it, causing the increase in spending necessary to perpetuate it.

Clinton supporters amaze me for their ability to completely blank out when NAFTA is brought up, especially considering how protectionist and Union supporting a large number are.  I know it was in the works long before he signed it into law but man the glazed eyes and "BUT NO IT WAS BUSH I AND II" talk I hear when you mention Clinton and NAFTA.

As you said, the sharks are the back door guys that get "appointed" to one administration, (usually after taking a fat severance from a major financial institution so they can bring in new Harvard meat" and when that one gets voted out, they just go to work for one of their buddies in D.C. until "their guy" gets back in.  

I'm not even sure that Academic Economics should even be a term anymore.  It certainly cannot, looking back over the last 50 years, be in any way considered a Science.  Despite blatant evidence and the numbers to back it going on 40 years, they continue to use the same exact medicine that was taught by Keynes.  The end result is that we all suffer, because the "growth" was really only an illusion of growth, and since deflation is seen as worse than inflation, to be avoided at all costs, even at the risk of stagflation, we all become more poor as the decades grind on.

[EDIT CONCERNING THE ABOVE BOLDED]  I keep forgetting, considering your areas of expertise, you're likely used to having a knock at your door to discuss those sorts of things.  Just meant that spiders look for that sort of thing.  Something you must already know as well.  Never mind then.  Continue on.

Nixon also followed policies which further heightened the war, though, increasing the costs in money (as well as in human terms).  Sure, he wasn't entirely to blame, but he was the man in the seat during the events, and it was his choices which helped shape the post-Bretton system, and therefore there is a significant measure of responsibility, which of course does not excuse those who followed on after him.  But if you ask the average person in the street, or even pundit, you'd probably get a puzzled look for even mentioning Bretton Woods, unless they're economists or Fareed Zakaria (maybe).

Well, Clinton supporters are dumbfucks.  As are Democrats in general.  This explains a lot about them.   The real question is who is more stupid, the union-supporting protectionist types who voted for him in spite of his record on such issues, or the neoliberal "Washington Consensus" types who helped drive the US economy into the ground.  I mean, it's almost certainly the latter, but then again, they convinced the former to vote for their guys time and time again...so like I say, hard call.

Academic Economics hasn't been a science since about the time of Ricardo, and even then that is being generous.  I wouldn't necessarily blame Keynes though.  Or at least, not just Keynes.  There has been consistent failure in the face of expert advice pretty much since economics was first considered an academic subject, but especially in the past 30 years.  The core assumptions of economics are basically untenable and unprovable, rendering it even less of a "science" than psychology, sociology or political science.  In fact, almost every system of economics shares a certain abstract, a priori approach favoured by technocratic wonks the world over, and is almost always useless, utterly wrong and unable to admit its own failings.

I'm not saying anything a certain former Canadian ambassador has suggested, so I have no fear of that.  Besides, the best thing about pissing off Harvard Business School alumni is you're already picking on a target population noted for magical thinking, inability to plan and rote repetition of jargon and buzz phrases as substitution for thought.  It's like picking on retards, only at least retards know they are retards and so have a reasonable understanding of their limitations.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 31, 2011, 02:31:36 PM
UK home ownership is projected to fall from 72% to 64%.

Meanwhile, government signals its intent to keep house prices artificially high through the blatant manipulation of the green field zones, limiting the land available for building projects and forcing companies to work on inferior "brown field" sites with additional hidden costs, which investors are loathe to support.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 03, 2011, 02:22:46 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14771936

QuoteUS authorities are to sue 17 major banks for losses on mortgage-backed investments that cost taxpayers tens of billions of dollars.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency said it was taking action against banks including Goldman Sachs, Barclays, Bank of America, Deutsche Bank, and HSBC.

The agency says they misrepresented the quality of the mortgages they sold during the housing bubble.

The values plunged as the US was engulfed in the financial crisis.

The FHFA oversees mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The two firms lost more than $30bn (£18.5bn), partly because of their investments in the subprime mortgages, and were bailed out by the US government.

Since the rescues, US taxpayers have spent more than $140bn to keep the firms afloat.

Other banks facing action include Royal Bank of Scotland, Nomura, Citigroup, and Societe Generale.

About bloody time.  The case for fraud is clear...even in spite of the SEC's malicious data deletion.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 03, 2011, 04:32:42 PM
I guess I would be surprised if anything more than a slap on the wrist came from all of this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 03, 2011, 05:04:28 PM
Quote from: Pancho on September 03, 2011, 04:32:42 PM
I guess I would be surprised if anything more than a slap on the wrist came from all of this.
Even if the government wins, the suit only aims to recover a small fraction of the trillions in bailout money given to those same banks, so yeah, exactly.  They are suing to give them a slap on the wrist, but the case will settled for a stern look.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on September 04, 2011, 04:44:52 PM
Federal agency sues banks for fraud and wins.

Settlement & penalties cause banks to be at risk for failure.

Many of these banks already having been deemed 'too big to fail' are then bailed out (again) by the federal Government.

lolz
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 04, 2011, 05:10:23 PM
Cost to bail out (again) > proceeds from settlement & penalties, resulting in net loss to taxpayers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 05, 2011, 10:59:59 AM
Nassim Nicholas Taleb, on the Great Bank Robbery:

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/taleb1/English
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 07, 2011, 06:13:32 PM
Weenies at Chase bank feel threatened by an artist

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-bank-painting-20110828,0,4395501.story

QuoteAlex Schaefer's depiction of a Chase branch going up in flames drew the attention of L.A. police, who asked if he was a terrorist. He said the work was a metaphor for the havoc banking practices have caused the economy.

Standing before an easel on a Van Nuys sidewalk, Alex Schaefer dabbed paint onto a canvas.

"There you have it," he said. "Inflammatory art."

The 22-by-28-inch en plein air oil painting is certainly hot enough to inflame Los Angeles police.

Twice they've come to investigate why the 41-year-old Eagle Rock artist is painting an image of a bank building going up in flames.

Schaefer had barely added the orange-and-yellow depiction of fire shooting from the roof of a Chase Bank branch when police rolled up to the corner of Van Nuys Boulevard and Sylvan Street on July 30.

"They told me that somebody had called and said they felt threatened by my painting," Schaefer said.

"They said they had to find out my intention. They asked if I was a terrorist and was I going to follow through and do what I was painting."

No, Schaefer said. He explained that the artwork was intended to be a visual metaphor for the havoc that banking practices have caused to the economy.

A terrorist certainly would not spend hours on a public sidewalk creating an oil painting of his intended target, he told the officers.

The police took down his name, address and telephone number on a form — Schaefer declined to provide his Social Security number — and departed.

"They were friendly. They weren't intimidating," he said. "I figured that when they left, they probably decided the episode was stupid and they'd just wad up the form and throw it away."

Wrong. On Tuesday, two more officers showed up at Schaefer's home. This time they were plainclothes detectives.

"One of them asked me, 'Do you hate banks? Do you plan to do that to the bank?' " Schaefer again explained what his painting symbolizes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 07, 2011, 06:18:46 PM
Good god. Smells like they are trying to use the law to place themselves above accountability.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 06:34:09 PM
alright, playing devil's advocate a bit here, but if I worked in a building and there was a guy across the street painting a picture of it burning, without knowing the guy at all, I could see how that might seem a bit intimidating. 

Personally, I'd be inclined to walk over and ask him what the hell he's thinking and that does he know that if he wasn't on the list before, he most certainly will be now.  Not everyone would just strike up a convo though and quite a few people would probably call the cops, being the post twin towers world that it is.

And if it's called in and the cops don't check it out and run it down and be absolutely fucking SURE this guy is just a painter, when a bank comes down and it's found to be him (come on now, that's not too damn far fetched) then people will ask why the hell didn't the cops do their job and feel this guy out.

Great publicity for the guy as a painter though. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 06:35:10 PM
 :horrormirth:
great piece of horrormirth there

It tells a story about the times we live in. An absurd story.

It's a story about how legitimate resistance to abuses of power are interpreted as Working For The Enemy.  It's a story about how we only have free speech if we're spouting the party line. And most importantly, it's a story about the relationship between banks, private citizens, and the law.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 06:42:40 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 06:34:09 PM
alright, playing devil's advocate a bit here, but if I worked in a building and there was a guy across the street painting a picture of it burning, without knowing the guy at all, I could see how that might seem a bit intimidating. 

Yes, intimidating. But a legitimate expression, protected by the first amendment. Your right to express yourself doesn't stop as soon as it makes some people uncomfortable.

QuotePersonally, I'd be inclined to walk over and ask him what the hell he's thinking and that does he know that if he wasn't on the list before, he most certainly will be now. 

So essentially, you'd try to dissuade him from painting a picture by warning him that if you make too much noise, the jailers will hear him.

QuoteAnd if it's called in and the cops don't check it out and run it down and be absolutely fucking SURE this guy is just a painter, when a bank comes down and it's found to be him (come on now, that's not too damn far fetched) then people will ask why the hell didn't the cops do their job and feel this guy out.

How do you confirm that somebody is "just a painter?" You run a background check? You ask to see his portfolio and count the bowls of fruit?

The guy isn't doing anything illegal. It may make some people that work at banks uncomfortable, but fuck, he's an artist, what is he supposed to do, write them a polite letter and ask them to stop?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on September 07, 2011, 06:52:18 PM
Ok, sorry to be the rationalist here, but there's one more thing this could be a sign of:

Bureaucracy and established police procedure.

It goes like this: A call comes into a police station that a person is concerned about a guy acting suspicious outside Chase Bank.  Yes, I know that's not what he was doing, and I don't have access to the call that came into the station.  This is a hypothetical.  I would imagine that would immediately trigger two beat cops to go to that location and assess the situation.  They see no immediate threat so the guy isn't arrested.  However, determining whether or not he poses a future threat is above their pay grade.  So, they take the guy's info, and at the end of their shift file a report.  The report then triggers an automatic response for two detectives to visit the guy so they can fully write him off as a non-threat.

It all looks insidious, and it can absolutely be corrupted and abused, but this simply looks to me like they were following SOP and best practices.  If you want to blame someone, blame the asshat who got scared by a painting and called the cops.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 07, 2011, 06:57:01 PM
LMNO, well, yeah.

The first image that came to my mind was the weenies at Goldman Sachs, clutching their man-bags and then touching their covert firearms for reassurance, only in the Chase bank in LA.

Still hilarious though.  "Are you a terrorist?"  "Yes, yes I am.  I expect this picture to inspire fear and despair in the heart of the hated Banksters everywhere.  Viva la revolucion!"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:01:45 PM
Do you think everybody who the LAPD questions gets a followup interview from a pair of plainclothes detectives?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
don't get me wrong, I hear what you're saying LMNO and agree that it's likely the case. But I can't figure out how I'd distinguish between unobjectional SOP and the cops trying to discourage people from expressing populist rage towards banks.

If Chase Bank were painting a picture of me on fire, I'd hope some plainclothes detectives followed up on it.  :p
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 07, 2011, 07:12:25 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
don't get me wrong, I hear what you're saying LMNO and agree that it's likely the case. But I can't figure out how I'd distinguish between unobjectional SOP and the cops trying to discourage people from expressing populist rage towards banks.

If Chase Bank were painting a picture of me on fire, I'd hope some plainclothes detectives followed up on it.  :p

They painted a picture of you homeless and standing in a soup line. No one investigated.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:15:36 PM
I had a reply typed up to each of the places you quoted and replied Cram but I lost it to electrons somehow.  Basically, what LMNO said.  

I know we're all "the police are always the bad guys" here in Discordia but if it's called in by another citizen, it's their job to check it out.  If it throws up certain flags, it's their job to forward it on for a follow up.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Eater of Clowns on September 07, 2011, 07:19:06 PM
In other news, Pulitzer Prize winning author Cormac McCarthy was visited by the LAPD today after one of their detectives read his 2005 novel The Road.

The Road depicts a cataclysmic post-United States North America wherein a young boy and his father attempt to survive.

Police arrived at the reclusive author's southwest residence to ask whether he intended to produce a cataclysmic event or other terrorist activities.  The author calmly explained that a world where a fucking painting of a building is alarming is probably too alarmist, and whoever didn't laugh the call off entirely needs to seriously re-evaluate their ability to make a solid judgment.

Detectives following up with Mr. McCarthy promptly shot him for his radical views.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on September 07, 2011, 07:20:15 PM
I just wanted to make it clear that I do not support this kind of mindless bureaucracy; it's plainly obvious that this man was no threat, and a follow up was not needed.  Understanding why the did what they did is not the same as agreeing with it.

The beat cops should have talked to the guy, chuckled, and then arrested the accuser for harassment.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 07, 2011, 07:20:43 PM
Quote from: Eater of Clowns on September 07, 2011, 07:19:06 PM
In other news, Pulitzer Prize winning author Cormac McCarthy was visited by the LAPD today after one of their detectives read his 2005 novel The Road.

The Road depicts a cataclysmic post-United States North America wherein a young boy and his father attempt to survive.

Police arrived at the reclusive author's southwest residence to ask whether he intended to produce a cataclysmic event or other terrorist activities.  The author calmly explained that a world where a fucking painting of a building is alarming is probably too alarmist, and whoever didn't laugh the call off entirely needs to seriously re-evaluate their ability to make a solid judgment.

Detectives following up with Mr. McCarthy promptly shot him for his radical views.


:mittens:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:26:26 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:15:36 PM
I had a reply typed up to each of the places you quoted and replied Cram but I lost it to electrons somehow.  Basically, what LMNO said. 

I know we're all "the police are always the bad guys" here in Discordia but if it's called in by another citizen, it's their job to check it out.  If it throws up certain flags, it's their job to forward it on for a follow up.


uhh I am definitely not in the "police are always the bad guys" camp.

One of my best friends is a cop. That's part of what makes me sensitive to shit like this. ((A few months ago he pulled over a guy "because it was my birthday and he had a really nice car and I was like what the fuck, I drive a piece of shit, whats his deal?"))

If you're protesting something, a lot of cops don't really care what the issue is... they've already put you in the same mental category as those annoying college kids they love throwing on the pavement.

I think we need law, I'm glad it's there, but I also think we have to be extra sensitive to the chilling effect it can have on free speech and democracy. I mean, in lots of countries they prevent real protests by having a bunch of cops show at the up first. The cops don't need to beat anybody or anything. People show up and they know what side everybody's on.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 07, 2011, 07:28:22 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:26:26 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:15:36 PM
I had a reply typed up to each of the places you quoted and replied Cram but I lost it to electrons somehow.  Basically, what LMNO said. 

I know we're all "the police are always the bad guys" here in Discordia but if it's called in by another citizen, it's their job to check it out.  If it throws up certain flags, it's their job to forward it on for a follow up.


uhh I am definitely not in the "police are always the bad guys" camp.

One of my best friends is a cop. That's part of what makes me sensitive to shit like this. ((A few months ago he pulled over a guy "because it was my birthday and he had a really nice car and I was like what the fuck, I drive a piece of shit, whats his deal?"))

If you're protesting something, a lot of cops don't really care what the issue is... they've already put you in the same mental category as those annoying college kids they love throwing on the pavement.

I think we need law, I'm glad it's there, but I also think we have to be extra sensitive to the chilling effect it can have on free speech and democracy. I mean, in lots of countries they prevent real protests by having a bunch of cops show at the up first. The cops don't need to beat anybody or anything. People show up and they know what side everybody's on.

Yeah, that was a pretty broad brush stroke. I'm not in that camp either.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:28:51 PM
Wasn't there a story recently about a guy who wrote a book about a murder, it made NY Times list, got the attention of someone who familiar with a cold case that resembled it and it turns out the guy was the murderer and the book explained it all?

Can't for the life of me remember who the guy was.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 07, 2011, 07:30:52 PM
I think that was a movie on SyFy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:31:48 PM
Yeah.  Unfair broad brush.

A healthy questioning of executive authority is actually great and necessary.  
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 07:32:17 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 06:42:40 PM
QuotePersonally, I'd be inclined to walk over and ask him what the hell he's thinking and that does he know that if he wasn't on the list before, he most certainly will be now. 

So essentially, you'd try to dissuade him from painting a picture by warning him that if you make too much noise, the jailers will hear him.

I'm trying to imagine this. I'm working in an office, and during my lunch break I see a guy with a painter's easel, painting my office building, except it's on fire.

I'd definitely be intrigued. I'd strike up a conversation, but not only out of interest, but definitely also to gauge how crazy this guy actually is and whether he's a threat. I mean, it's unlikely, but not unimaginable.

If, for some reason, I'd feel threatened, I don't think it's unreasonable to, like, ask him to make some sketches and perhaps finish off the burning part in his own studio at home. He'd be under no obligation to comply of course, due to free speech and all, but you can always ask, right?

It's just that, he'd basically just need to be good-natured and friendly about it, and I'd not feel threatened at all.

Not even if he'd be painting photorealistic imagery of everybody walking in and out of the building getting assraped by multi-dicked interdimensional tentacle demons.

QuoteAnd if it's called in and the cops don't check it out and run it down and be absolutely fucking SURE this guy is just a painter, when a bank comes down and it's found to be him (come on now, that's not too damn far fetched) then people will ask why the hell didn't the cops do their job and feel this guy out.

How do you confirm that somebody is "just a painter?" You run a background check? You ask to see his portfolio and count the bowls of fruit?

The guy isn't doing anything illegal. It may make some people that work at banks uncomfortable, but fuck, he's an artist, what is he supposed to do, write them a polite letter and ask them to stop?[/quote]

This is a good point. I hadn't really considered it before I read your post.

Basically the "God Hates Fags" people and numerous other idiots employ their right to free speech for much worse, much more threatening and ugly purposes.

Somebody painting banking office buildings hardly registers on that chart.

I still think it's reasonable to ask somebody to stop exercising their free speech if it really bothers you, and additionally for people to personally consider them dicks if they continue regardless or even amp up their efforts (compare to the "god hates fags" idiots).


That said, I also understand LMNO's reasoning, as well as share his not-being-in-support-of-this-kind-of-mindless-bureaucracy.



Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:15:36 PMI know we're all "the police are always the bad guys" here in Discordia

Hey fuck you that is SUCH BULLSHIT.

Discordia is not anarchists, you know that very well.

I happen to really like my local police, because they do a pretty damn good job and are even more impressive at communicating with the neighbourhood (via Twitter and mailinglists and even Youtube, pretty awesome).

On the OTHER hand when I hear about the bullshit that caused the London Riots. Or whatever retarded story happened this week in the US, I think they're a bunch of cunts.

GUess what? Unlike YOU, I realize that they are not the same police, so your stupid drooling generalisation of "here in Discordia" that the police are "ALWAYS the bad guys" is the retarded and uninformed position, not mine ("here in Discordia").
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:32:27 PM
Quote from: Hawk on September 07, 2011, 07:30:52 PM
I think that was a movie on SyFy.

No, this shit was RL.  I'll try and track it down in a bit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on September 07, 2011, 07:32:38 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:28:51 PM
Wasn't there a story recently about a guy who wrote a book about a murder, it made NY Times list, got the attention of someone who familiar with a cold case that resembled it and it turns out the guy was the murderer and the book explained it all?

Can't for the life of me remember who the guy was.

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/If_I_did_It_2.png)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 07:33:11 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 07, 2011, 07:31:48 PM
Yeah.  Unfair broad brush.

A healthy questioning of executive authority is actually great and necessary.  

Oh okay good. Maybe, you know, *think* before you post next time.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Dysfunctional Cunt on September 07, 2011, 08:04:30 PM
I think there are probably about half as many honest, want to help people, want to make the world a safer better place cops as there are those who either joined for the power trip, have since joining gone on a power trip or just wanted an excuse to be an asshole and a badge to hide behind.

In any event, they are people and like any other monkey out there they can be anything on the line between awesome to asshole and everything in between.

I have friends who are police and there are also some officers out there I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire.  
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 08:11:06 PM
I also think your ratio of "half" depends heavily on police training and police and society culture.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Dysfunctional Cunt on September 07, 2011, 08:30:16 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 08:11:06 PM
I also think your ratio of "half" depends heavily on police training and police and society culture.

Or possibly personal experience? 

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 08:42:49 PM
Oh of course, that too! :)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Dysfunctional Cunt on September 07, 2011, 09:38:21 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 08:42:49 PM
Oh of course, that too! :)

Unfortunately, thru no fault of my own other than really bad judgment in who I marry, my police experience is rather extensive.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 09:45:42 PM
a friend of mine got "rescued" by the police from a small gang of fuckheads, got a knife cut in his arm, next time he was held up by the police for not having a light on his bicycle, he was all about how great work they do and he wanted to tip her :-P :-P

(my friend's a bit crazy sometimes)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Dysfunctional Cunt on September 07, 2011, 09:50:46 PM
 :lulz:

Can you imagine tipping a cop after they write you a ticket?

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 09:53:29 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 07, 2011, 09:45:42 PM
(my friend's a bit crazy sometimes)

but, yeah :lulz:


I think it was an awesome move, though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Eater of Clowns on September 07, 2011, 11:56:41 PM
Especially when they beat your ass down for attempting to bribe them.

FUCK THA POLICE, VIVA DISCORDIA
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on September 08, 2011, 12:08:17 AM
Quote from: Hawk on September 07, 2011, 07:12:25 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 07, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
don't get me wrong, I hear what you're saying LMNO and agree that it's likely the case. But I can't figure out how I'd distinguish between unobjectional SOP and the cops trying to discourage people from expressing populist rage towards banks.

If Chase Bank were painting a picture of me on fire, I'd hope some plainclothes detectives followed up on it.  :p

They painted a picture of you homeless and standing in a soup line. No one investigated.

:mittens:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on September 08, 2011, 12:26:20 AM
There was a guy who wrote a book about school shootings a couple of years ago who said everybody has it all wrong with all this zero tolerance for shit like black clothing and metal music and empty threats. He said these kids are always raised in very conservative families and when the illusion of the Reagan Christ Way starts to wear thin and their whole reality is threatened and they see that they have no future, they flip. I can't remember the guy's name, dammit, maybe somebody here knows? It might have even been Cain who posted about it originally.

Artists who paint burning banks don't have Reagan bubbles to burst, I would think.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Placid Dingo on September 08, 2011, 07:38:16 AM
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on September 08, 2011, 12:26:20 AM
There was a guy who wrote a book about school shootings a couple of years ago who said everybody has it all wrong with all this zero tolerance for shit like black clothing and metal music and empty threats. He said these kids are always raised in very conservative families and when the illusion of the Reagan Christ Way starts to wear thin and their whole reality is threatened and they see that they have no future, they flip. I can't remember the guy's name, dammit, maybe somebody here knows? It might have even been Cain who posted about it originally.

Artists who paint burning banks don't have Reagan bubbles to burst, I would think.

Although you'd then have cause to wonder why children of hippies don't have the same bubble pop explosion of rage and despair.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2011, 02:44:01 PM
Concerning the first ammendment, it is actually legal to advocate the violent overthrow of the American government, as established in case law (and to the contrary of the likes of Obama and Holder, who considers it treason).  Therefore, even if the painter was advocating people to burn down the Chase bank, he was well within his rights.

However, this is a financial fuckery thread, not a constitutional fuckery thread, so on with the economic news!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14839649

QuoteThe carmaker Saab's application for protection from its creditors to help it avoid being pushed into bankruptcy has been rejected by a Swedish court.

In response, Swedish trade unions said they could demand that Saab be declared bankrupt within days.

Saab had applied for protection while trying to secure additional funding.

Saab had to suspend production in April when its suppliers stopped deliveries after not being paid. Its workers have also had their pay delayed.

Vanersborg district court rejected Saab's application because it did not believe it would work.

Blue-collar union IF Metall's leader, Stefan Lofven, said: "We will now thoroughly analyse the new situation. If the company doesn't find another solution or file a bankruptcy request themselves, we may be forced to do that in the next few days."

White-collar union Unionen's chief lawyer, Martin Wastfelt, said it might make a similar decision imminently.

"It's all about minimising the risks to secure our members' money," he said.

On Wednesday, Victor Muller, chief executive of Saab's owner, Swedish Automobile, said Saab's suppliers were owed some 150m euros ($210m; £131m).

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14835950

QuoteMajor economies are likely to slow by the end of the year, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has warned.

The OECD expects 0.3% growth in the UK in the last three months of the year, but said the economy could contract by as much as 1% amid high uncertainty over its projections.

It predicts the Group of Seven largest economies will grow by just 0.2%.

The OECD said Germany could be most affected by a downturn in global trade.

It estimated the German economy would contract by 1.4% in the last quarter of 2011.

The OECD's GDP figures are both seasonally adjusted and account for inflation.

They also have a wide margin of error - for example, it said its German estimate may be out by up to 2.1 percentage points either way.

It said: "Consumer and business confidence fell in major OECD economies on the back of weak incoming data, gridlock over fiscal policy in the US, the euro area sovereign debt crisis and growing concern that there is less policy ammunition to offset further weaknesses."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-14823042

QuoteNearly a quarter of UK engineering graduates are working in non-graduate jobs or unskilled work such as waiting and shop work, a report suggests.

The study says it is "not easy or automatic" for qualified engineers to find related employment in the UK.

Employers and industry leaders have repeatedly raised concerns about a lack of good quality science and engineering graduates.

But research from Birmingham University research challenges this viewpoint.

The report - entitled Is there a shortage of scientists? - is being presented to the British Educational Research Association (Bera) annual conference in London on Thursday.

It analysed figures from 1986 to 2009 from the Higher Education Statistical Agency on the proportions of engineering students entering related jobs, other professions or work that did not require a degree in 2009.

The findings suggest that less than half (about 46%) of 2009 engineering graduates were in jobs directly related to their degree subject six months after leaving university.

About one in five (20%) were employed in roles that were not directly related to their degree and about one in four (24%) were in "non-graduate" employment, for example working as waiters or in shops.

The report says: "Perhaps, because of recent initiatives, there seem to be too many people studying science for the labour market to cope with, or perhaps graduates are no longer of sufficient quality.

"It is more likely, however, that all of these scientists are without relevant employment every year because the shortage thesis is wrong and there are no jobs waiting for all of them or because they are 'dropping out' having learnt that they do not enjoy their subject areas."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14827742

QuoteItaly and Spain have passed new austerity measures as they battle to control their debts.

Italy's upper house of parliament approved an austerity package which should cut its deficit by some 54bn euros ($70bn, £44bn) over three years.

Spain's Senate gave final approval to a "golden rule" in its constitution to keep future budget deficits to a strict limit.

On Wednesday, Greece also stepped up its austerity plans.

The Italian Senate voted 165-141 with three abstentions to approve the package, which was put to a confidence vote to make sure Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's allies united behind the government after weeks of argument.

The package now goes to the lower Chamber of Deputies, where Mr Berlusconi also has a majority.

Tens of thousands of Italians took to the streets on Wednesday for a day-long strike against the measures, which include a rise in sales taxes and a revised wealth tax.

Meanwhile, Spain's vote for a "golden rule" makes it the only country apart from Germany to have such a limit.

Under the change, Spain must stick to a long-term deficit cap except in times of natural disaster, recession, or extraordinary emergencies.

The moves come amid a mood of increasing urgency within the eurozone to act to solve the debt crisis.

Also on Wednesday, Greece stepped up its deficit reduction plans in the face of accusations it was stalling and France approved a 12bn euro package of budget savings, largely by clamping down on tax breaks.

And in another sign of movement, Germany's highest court ruled that aid for Greece and other rescue packages is legal.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 03:23:18 PM
I was just discussing something with my old boss (who's now in a different position here) about how he and the guys he's worked with and around for the last 30 years are looking at the current state of things, their own positions and plans for retirement, their ability to fund their retirement.  They're looking at it and deciding not to retire when people their age would have historically.  They're staying in their jobs and holding onto them any way they can.  These are industry professionals, guys who've been in their field since their 20's.  Engineers, Electricians, Plant Managers and the like.

It occurred to me that this one simple thing, that the largest generation of people in the work force, the baby boomers, deciding not to retire "on time" can be a potential catastrophic ripple for the next 20 years.

If the boomers are systematically delaying their retirement from these jobs then no new positions are opening up to the people who came in after them.  There is no upward mobility in these major and minor industry jobs.  The guy who came in as an apprentice 10 or 20 years ago will stay there for another 20 and his position will not be vacant for a younger person, out of college, to move into.

In a boom time this would not likely be as much of a problem.  New companies would sprout up in answer to demand for employment, products, services, know-how and competition in pricing and delivery.  

It's most certainly NOT a boom time, but a recession with no hope on the horizon of it abating anytime soon, combined with the boomers retirement decade beginning.  I think that one thing, the decision not to retire for another 10 years or until their health prevents them from working will have a major effect on when we're able to pull the nose of this plane back to a level horizon.

Thoughts on this are more than welcome.  I hadn't really considered it before he brought it up.  My thoughts were always toward the drain that will happen when the greatest generation DOES retire and pull their money from the markets and begin collection SS en mass.  After some consideration, I believe this would produce the worse of the two outcomes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2011, 03:30:15 PM
I actually read something about this the other day.  It was from someone who had been planning on retiring, but because his pension plan had been gambled away by...well, someone, he wouldn't be able to live on what he was going to actually get, and so had decided to stay on and work for a few more years.

And he said the consequences would be exactly the same as you outlined.  No upward mobility in jobs, less vacant positions and, when they do retire, due to the demographics and the current economic crisis, a huge strain on government resources. 

It's a depressing thought.  I'm just glad I've escaped all that, for now, and finally landed on my feet.  Many others will not be so lucky.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 08, 2011, 03:38:34 PM
And at the same time the right wingers claim that all the retiring Boomers will overload the Social Security system and that because of this it should be shut down.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 03:54:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on September 08, 2011, 03:38:34 PM
And at the same time the right wingers claim that all the retiring Boomers will overload the Social Security system and that because of this it should be shut down.

And the left wingers are in denial that it can be kept liquid throughout the next 30 years while still increasing the amount paid out per person.

It's clear SOMETHING has to be done, and that something should not include, IMO, pushing the tax burden onto the current generations of workers.  We're strapped as it is, the ones of us who HAVE jobs and are holding onto them with two hands and our teeth.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 08, 2011, 03:57:06 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 03:54:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on September 08, 2011, 03:38:34 PM
And at the same time the right wingers claim that all the retiring Boomers will overload the Social Security system and that because of this it should be shut down.

And the left wingers are in denial that it can be kept liquid throughout the next 30 years while still increasing the amount paid out per person.

It's clear SOMETHING has to be done, and that something should not include, IMO, pushing the tax burden onto the current generations of workers.  We're strapped as it is, the ones of us who HAVE jobs and are holding onto them with two hands and our teeth.


I don't know that this discussion belongs in this thread, but I will be happy to discuss it with you in another thread.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 04:01:06 PM
Quote from: Hawk on September 08, 2011, 03:57:06 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 03:54:57 PM
Quote from: Hawk on September 08, 2011, 03:38:34 PM
And at the same time the right wingers claim that all the retiring Boomers will overload the Social Security system and that because of this it should be shut down.

And the left wingers are in denial that it can be kept liquid throughout the next 30 years while still increasing the amount paid out per person.

It's clear SOMETHING has to be done, and that something should not include, IMO, pushing the tax burden onto the current generations of workers.  We're strapped as it is, the ones of us who HAVE jobs and are holding onto them with two hands and our teeth.


I don't know that this discussion belongs in this thread, but I will be happy to discuss it with you in another thread.

Yeah I was actually going to write a foot note to that post along the lines of not wanting to muck up the thread in a SS discussion with you.  I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on it.  Not sure where though or how much time I can spend today talking about it.  I'm a bit swamped at the moment and have about filled up my "fuck off online" tank for the day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 08, 2011, 04:18:05 PM
The American banking sector apparently is going to be vastly different when it finally emerges from the financial crisis that took hold more than three years ago. It is going to be significantly smaller, and the domination of a relative handful of behemoth institutions is going to increase.

At the end of June, there were 7,522 commercial banks, down from 8,542 on Dec. 31, 2007. That is a decline of nearly 12 percent in just three and a half years. Of the more than 1,000 banks that disappeared, about 370 failed. But the rest of the decrease came through mergers and acquisitions as a decades-long pattern of consolidation continued.

Most banks in the United States still are fairly small. The median size of a bank at the end of June, according to an analysis of statistics from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was about $155 million in assets. That's about an 18 percent increase since the end of 2007.

But those numbers seriously skew the nature of the industry. Of the more than $13.6 trillion in assets held by banks at the end of June, nearly $9.4 trillion is in the hands of just 37 institutions, each with more than $50 billion in assets. And of that, $5.5 trillion is held by just four banks: JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank and Wells Fargo. Each of those have more than $1 trillion in assets. In other words, the U.S. banking industry resembles a tall cake, with a very thick layer of icing on top.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44426180/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/#.Tmjbi-zlhQ0



Well this isn't good at all. That is an immense amount of power in the hands of very few.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2011, 04:42:23 PM
Bloomberg is reporting that Standard & Poors is giving subprime mortgages a AAA rating...in other words, the junk loans which helped cause the financial crisis are, according to S&P, a better investment than US government bonds  :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 08, 2011, 04:45:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 08, 2011, 04:42:23 PM
Bloomberg is reporting that Standard & Poors is giving subprime mortgages a AAA rating...in other words, the junk loans which helped cause the financial crisis are, according to S&P, a better investment than US government bonds  :lol:

Isn't that a case of them protecting their own?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2011, 06:02:58 PM
It shows S&P's calculators are fucked up.

Also, this is depressing

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/roubini41/English

QuoteNor could monetary policy help very much. Quantitative easing is constrained by above-target inflation in the eurozone and UK. The US Federal Reserve will likely start a third round of quantitative easing (QE3), but it will be too little too late. Last year's $600 billion QE2 and $1 trillion in tax cuts and transfers delivered growth of barely 3% for one quarter. Then growth slumped to below 1% in the first half of 2011. QE3 will be much smaller, and will do much less to reflate asset prices and restore growth.

Currency depreciation is not a feasible option for all advanced economies: they all need a weaker currency and better trade balance to restore growth, but they all cannot have it at the same time. So relying on exchange rates to influence trade balances is a zero-sum game. Currency wars are thus on the horizon, with Japan and Switzerland engaging in early battles to weaken their exchange rates. Others will soon follow.

Race

to

the

bottom
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 08, 2011, 06:05:21 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 08, 2011, 06:02:58 PM
It shows S&P's calculators are fucked up.

Also, this is depressing

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/roubini41/English

QuoteNor could monetary policy help very much. Quantitative easing is constrained by above-target inflation in the eurozone and UK. The US Federal Reserve will likely start a third round of quantitative easing (QE3), but it will be too little too late. Last year's $600 billion QE2 and $1 trillion in tax cuts and transfers delivered growth of barely 3% for one quarter. Then growth slumped to below 1% in the first half of 2011. QE3 will be much smaller, and will do much less to reflate asset prices and restore growth.

Currency depreciation is not a feasible option for all advanced economies: they all need a weaker currency and better trade balance to restore growth, but they all cannot have it at the same time. So relying on exchange rates to influence trade balances is a zero-sum game. Currency wars are thus on the horizon, with Japan and Switzerland engaging in early battles to weaken their exchange rates. Others will soon follow.

Race

to

the

bottom

Like an elevator in a 30 story free fall.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 06:20:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 08, 2011, 06:02:58 PM
It shows S&P's calculators are fucked up.

Also, this is depressing

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/roubini41/English

QuoteNor could monetary policy help very much. Quantitative easing is constrained by above-target inflation in the eurozone and UK. The US Federal Reserve will likely start a third round of quantitative easing (QE3), but it will be too little too late. Last year's $600 billion QE2 and $1 trillion in tax cuts and transfers delivered growth of barely 3% for one quarter. Then growth slumped to below 1% in the first half of 2011. QE3 will be much smaller, and will do much less to reflate asset prices and restore growth.

Currency depreciation is not a feasible option for all advanced economies: they all need a weaker currency and better trade balance to restore growth, but they all cannot have it at the same time. So relying on exchange rates to influence trade balances is a zero-sum game. Currency wars are thus on the horizon, with Japan and Switzerland engaging in early battles to weaken their exchange rates. Others will soon follow.

Race

to

the

bottom

While the reasons he gives for depreciation not being feasible are spot on and currency wars have been in the making for some time, deflation is still exactly the bitter pill the we are going to have to swallow before we'll ever dig out of this.

The idea that deflation is to always be avoided, even at the cost of artificial inflation is, IMO, a seriously flawed monetary policy position. 

Of course, wages would have to remain level but since wages have never even come close to matching the inflation created since Bretton-Woods fell apart I'd say a healthy bout of deflation to return property value and commodities back to prices that are realistically within range of your average person being able to purchase them can only be for the good as you'll see the surplus housing begin to be bought up and people re-enter the market because of the buying power they'll see return to their monthly balance sheet.


Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 08, 2011, 06:34:51 PM
Agreed.  It's the currency war aspect that worries me most...that has a potential to get out of hand very quickly.  A good bout of deflation certainly will help, so long as wages relatively rise against it, but I can just see someone deciding to go overboard with it and ruining the whole system for everyone.

Probably Germany, the way things are going.  Fucking Germans.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 08, 2011, 06:46:48 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 08, 2011, 06:34:51 PM
Agreed.  It's the currency war aspect that worries me most...that has a potential to get out of hand very quickly.  A good bout of deflation certainly will help, so long as wages relatively rise against it, but I can just see someone deciding to go overboard with it and ruining the whole system for everyone.

Probably Germany, the way things are going.  Fucking Germans.

:lulz:

Pickle: only 2 generations removed from Prussia.

But regarding that possibility, with what is already a very hot economy and discussions about abandoning the Euro, they'd start seeing white hot inflation worse than China is seeing and be forced to cool it with interest rates and deflation of their own or see their own (potential) currency begin to resemble Weimar's. 

That'd learn 'em. 


Maybe.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 09, 2011, 09:23:27 AM
Given Germany's atrocious step backwards in race relations recently, I would say Germany is determined not to heed the lessons of the 1920s, on any level.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 10, 2011, 11:40:11 AM
Share of Income Gains by Quintile - Great Depression til Now (http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html?ref=sunday)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 12, 2011, 05:32:17 PM
Finally, some fucking bank reforms.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/09/12/us-britain-banks-idUSTRE78B12420110912

UK Banks are going to be required to separate their retail banking (banking for individuals and corporations) from their risky gambling adventures.
It also looks like multinational banks will have to adopt this structure to trade in the UK.


Fuck yeah.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 12, 2011, 05:53:42 PM
Wont fly until 2015, though.

By which point we will probably have suffered through yet another economic crash.

It is good news, don't get me wrong, I just worry that, because a Tory government was heavily involved in this, and certain high-ranking Tories were engaged in helping to flog subprime loans, that there will be loopholes and exceptions.  I'll read up more on it, however, before saying anything for sure.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 09:43:32 AM
The real joke is the amount of fuss being made over securing retail banking by the banks. It'll destroy our ability to compete! We need that money! Bla bla bla.

The FT are running an article this morning which praises the banking reform (alongside one by their banking editor which says it is a waste of time, weirdly). The bit which really jumped out at me was this:

"The ICB puts the annual cost to banks around £6bn. This is modest as a share of banks' assets (0.1 per cent)."

I was talking about this with friends the other week and guessed that retail banking would make up less than one per cent of the banks assets, because the numbers involved in investment banking were so huge. My friend thought I was being hopelessly harsh on them; surely it'd be at least 10% of the bank. And that could really hurt to have to secure!

:lulz:

I've downloaded the Vickers report... seems like it'll be heavy reading, but it also sounds like the vast majority of really good reforms just aren't being reported in the media. Which isn't surprising; it is a 350+ page document.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 11:57:54 AM
Also, French banks are tumbling - BNP Paribas (which is the biggest, apparently) lost 12% of their share price yesterday and 6% this morning because Greece is now expected to default, and people think that the bank will be unable to finance themselves should Greece renege on their debt. Other French banks lost some (Societe General lost almost 3% and Credit Agricole 0.6%), with more losses expected.

I'm not so up on the French economic situation or what they had to do the last time around, but when Greece goes down, it looks likely (to my inexpert eye) that the French government - or some other agency - will need to step in to bail out BNP Paribas. If they don't, it will go bust... and I suspect that'll start the house of cards falling, because my understanding is that all the banks are incestuously linked through debts to each other, and if the biggest French bank goes, others will go with it... some will only be weakened by the initial collapse, but as more go, it'll add up and up and...!

Exciting times! Greece is expected to collapse at the end of the month, though they claim they can hold out to October. It'll be fascinating to see how this all winds up.

As an interesting point, some of my colleagues at work asked exactly what would happen if Greece defaults. I explained that they wouldn't be able to make pay for their public sector, pensions etc... but I'm not exactly certain what happens with other things. The infrastructure still exists. Presumably the government will try to carry on as much as possible. If the bank you borrowed to buy your house from goes under, presumably that debt is written off? I can't see anyone turfing Greek citizens out of their homes so that they can become the property of whoever was owed money by the prior bank, though I can see that being what may be meant to happen.

I've been trying to find out what exactly the process is. I understand that European officials are going in today to help prepare for a 'controlled default' so maybe we'll hear more about what that entails over the next few days.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 12:38:50 PM
Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is being apocalyptic in the Telegraph again; though to be fair he is being much less heated in his rhetotic than German EU officials:

QuoteGermany's EU commissioner Günther Oettinger said Europe should send blue helmets to take control of Greek tax collection and liquidate state assets. They had better be well armed. The headlines in the Greek press have been "Unconditional Capitulation", and "Terrorization of Greeks", and even "Fourth Reich".

This is utterly insane.  There are two and only two options for the EU: unite as a single state, at the very least on financial terms, and undertake the necessary measures of job stimulus, bank breakups and sovereign debt consolidation (which will of course necessitate a larger pool of funds for the EU to draw from) or break the EMU up entirely and set back EU relations by 20 years, at least.

Just imagine the reaction in America if one of Obama's economic advisors recommended sending in troops to, say, California, to enforce austerity.  This is the level of insanity being proposed by Oettinger.

And BNP Paribas' woes can be tied directly to German insanity towards Greece.  Apparently, Germany is acting in precisely this way in order to make Greece submit to even further demands for austerity.  Its destabilizing entire global markets to try and coerce the Greeks into a financial plan which wont work anyway and makes their default even more likely.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 01:10:55 PM
There won't be popular support for closer integration. The publics of the various European countries are basically still locked in an Us vs Them mentality when it comes to everyone else. Particularly the UK and... well, everyone. French bans on UK product and tabloid screaming about British Jobs for British Workers spring to mind.

So... that leaves breaking up and the collapse of relations. But that doesn't help the situation; that's just a consequence. The international banks are all so tied into these markets that European countries allowing their neighbors to collapse just means that they drift closer to it themselves. People are already saying that France is probably going to have to recapitalize their banks when Greece falls. Greece is comparatively tiny. What is going to happen when it looks like Italy is going?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 13, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
Then there is the option of the schizm...

Any country wealthy enough, or with enough resources & political sway become the new EU, Germany France England would be a given, ireland would probably make it in despite its weak economy because we have proven to be useful in diplomatic relations where GFE would otherwise have a door slammed in their face.

Then it creates a lower tier EU with failing debts and its own currancy, they will try and sell it as countries working towards having the economic strength to sit at the big boys table, all the while meaning we exploit their resources like we did to poland and slovakia until they become too expensive to use any more.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 01:52:35 PM
I can't see the UK giving up the pound.

It isn't doing great, but we have no incentive to give up control of our own currency, and very little to unite our economy with that of other countries; that is what has gotten them into this mess! They are different economies with different needs, united with a single currency, but without the political integration needed to function properly.

I saw the notion of a 'strong' and 'weak' Euro floated on the FT a couple of weeks back, where the strong nations break away from the weaker nations, but it is still just a temporary measure. As long as the constituent countries continue to act as individual countries rather than united as a single nation, their economies will need different measures taken at different times, and any attempt at a single currency will fail. There simply isn't the desire in Europe for all our different nations to be subsumed into a singular state.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 13, 2011, 02:07:32 PM
It's not something Ireland would be interested in anyway, we refuse to give up our nutrality and if we were part of one state making military decisions that ceases to exist by default.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 02:33:51 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 13, 2011, 01:10:55 PM
There won't be popular support for closer integration. The publics of the various European countries are basically still locked in an Us vs Them mentality when it comes to everyone else. Particularly the UK and... well, everyone. French bans on UK product and tabloid screaming about British Jobs for British Workers spring to mind.

So... that leaves breaking up and the collapse of relations. But that doesn't help the situation; that's just a consequence. The international banks are all so tied into these markets that European countries allowing their neighbors to collapse just means that they drift closer to it themselves. People are already saying that France is probably going to have to recapitalize their banks when Greece falls. Greece is comparatively tiny. What is going to happen when it looks like Italy is going?

That parochial attitude has been allowed to fester by European elites, who basically belittled and condescended to those opposed to the larger EU projects on nationalistic grounds.  I'm fairly in favour of intergration in principal, and even I'd concede that the response to nationalists has been along the lines of "bitter people clinging to guns and god flags and history".

The message that should've been sent is this: the countries that are going to dominate the future are large.  Very large.  China, India, USA and Russia large (theoretically Indonesia too, in the far future).  No European country, on its own, can compete with that.  The largest state in Europe is Germany, and that is not even half the population size of Russia, a massively underpopulated country that also has the advantage of owning territory from the Baltic through to the Pacific.  Now, if we want to have a say in the future, and not merely be historical amusement parks and vassals to these emerging powers, we have one simple choice: unite.  It's unite or submit to de facto foreign control.  Yes, all European countries will, as a result, have less autonomy among themselves, less control over their own futures, be tied permamently to the fortunes of other states.  But it's better to have a portion of a say in Brussels, than have no say in policies from Beijing, Moscow and Washington.

But I suspect that it is far too late for this kind of argument now.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 02:36:03 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 13, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
Then there is the option of the schizm...

Any country wealthy enough, or with enough resources & political sway become the new EU, Germany France England would be a given, ireland would probably make it in despite its weak economy because we have proven to be useful in diplomatic relations where GFE would otherwise have a door slammed in their face.

Then it creates a lower tier EU with failing debts and its own currancy, they will try and sell it as countries working towards having the economic strength to sit at the big boys table, all the while meaning we exploit their resources like we did to poland and slovakia until they become too expensive to use any more.

In the long run, I see any kind of schism eventually going all the way down, to the nation-state level.

It may take a couple of decades, but I can only see a two-tier level as a temporary stage, so long as national interests trump cooperation.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on September 13, 2011, 02:38:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 13, 2011, 02:36:03 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 13, 2011, 01:46:06 PM
Then there is the option of the schizm...

Any country wealthy enough, or with enough resources & political sway become the new EU, Germany France England would be a given, ireland would probably make it in despite its weak economy because we have proven to be useful in diplomatic relations where GFE would otherwise have a door slammed in their face.

Then it creates a lower tier EU with failing debts and its own currancy, they will try and sell it as countries working towards having the economic strength to sit at the big boys table, all the while meaning we exploit their resources like we did to poland and slovakia until they become too expensive to use any more.

In the long run, I see any kind of schism eventually going all the way down, to the nation-state level.

It may take a couple of decades, but I can only see a two-tier level as a temporary stage, so long as national interests trump cooperation.

We always go nationalistic at the beginning of a century.  You can set your fucking watch to it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 02:45:08 PM
Quote from: CainThat parochial attitude has been allowed to fester by European elites, who basically belittled and condescended to those opposed to the larger EU projects on nationalistic grounds.  I'm fairly in favour of intergration in principal, and even I'd concede that the response to nationalists has been along the lines of "bitter people clinging to guns and god flags and history".

The message that should've been sent is this: the countries that are going to dominate the future are large.  Very large.  China, India, USA and Russia large (theoretically Indonesia too, in the far future).  No European country, on its own, can compete with that.  The largest state in Europe is Germany, and that is not even half the population size of Russia, a massively underpopulated country that also has the advantage of owning territory from the Baltic through to the Pacific.  Now, if we want to have a say in the future, and not merely be historical amusement parks and vassals to these emerging powers, we have one simple choice: unite.  It's unite or submit to de facto foreign control.  Yes, all European countries will, as a result, have less autonomy among themselves, less control over their own futures, be tied permamently to the fortunes of other states.  But it's better to have a portion of a say in Brussels, than have no say in policies from Beijing, Moscow and Washington.

But I suspect that it is far too late for this kind of argument now.

Yeah, sorry if I wasn't clear - I would personally be in favour of a united Europe. Partly because I would like to see Nick Farrage's head explode, but mostly because I think it is the most sensible way to combat the major issues of the day. We need to completely restructure the global economy and fight climate change - two things which need the world (or at least, most of it) to act in unison, which would be much easier with a united Europe.

But like you say, and I agree, it is almost certainly too late for that. Individual European countries see each other as competitors at best, enemies at worst. The EU is a massively bureaucratic, corrupt and entangled mess ... and we don't have any credible politicians standing up to make the case for a united Europe, or any plan as to how to get there.

I think politicians tried to sneak it in by the back door, incrementally. I really don't think it has helped at all. We're going to eat each other, I think, over the next couple of years... and in about ten years time, the nationalists will be looking around at the ruin of what was Britain... and probably trying to find a way to blame it on the Europeans.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 02:52:39 PM
I thought you would agree.  I just had to vent - between idiotic elites and short-sighted nationalists, we're fucking our only decent chance to have any say in future global affairs.  It's not like the UK is going to resurrect the empire anytime soon, is it?  Why else should anyone listen to us?  Because of our vast, impressive, half-mythological history?  Because we consider ourselves to be so important?  Hah, hardly.  The Chinese will buy our castles, the Indians will write our history (and probably more accurately than we do), the Americans will control our military and the Russians will control our energy resources.

We're fucked from several dozen different directions, and those who are supposedly the most "patriotic" and concerned about national prestige are doing their utmost to consign us to the dustbin of history.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 02:57:08 PM
Yeah.

About three years ago we had a discussion about this in one of my classes. It was interesting. The only reason we could come up with for why the UK is important is the size of our economy - we're far larger than we should be per capita and that lets us punch above our weight. We put our faith in the ability of the noble British entrepreneur to keep that alive.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 03:14:24 PM
I'd go a little further - size of economy, nukes and UNSC council seat.

Here are the problems though:

The UK economy is substansially bolstered by a massively outsized financial sector which is far larger for our GDP and population in comparison with almost every other developed country.  I'm fairly certain that in this case, correlation is causation, and that an outsized financial sector led to our improved economic standing - however, that standing was largely an illusion built on free credit and bad loans, as we've subsequently discovered, and increases our exposure to systemic risks in the international financial system, which is possibly the most complex man-made system in existence, and so prone to distressing and unpredictable interactions.

The United Nations was effectively gutted in 2003, when two UNSC members showed they could defy the other three without repurcussions.  It had been limping along for a while before that, but was effectively rendered impotent by this reckless display of power.  That the UK was one of the two involved in that only makes the irony delicious.  UK diplomacy is massively distrusted, and the Libyan debacle has only reinforced this opinion in Russia and China, who regretted giving the UK and France the benefit of the doubt when they did.

Our nuclear weapons are basically too expensive, especially since we don't even have an independent program (America retains the ultimate controls on at least part of our arsenal).  There is also an increasing consensus among national-security specialists, especially Cold Warriors like Henry Kissinger(!) that the risks of nuclear weapons are starting to outweigh the benefits, and that stockpiles must be reduced, and immediate response capacities taken off-line, among the UNSC Five at the very least.  In conjunction with controls on fissile material that are being floated, I see nuclear weapons becoming an outmoded method of gaining prestige, much in the way imperialism failed to confer prestige in the post-WWII world.

Our only other strategic advantage was being in the EU but not overly commited to the cause.  This was only useful so long as the USA could use the UK as a trojan horse, to make EU policies benefit the UK and America without allowing the appearance of a potential political bloc with enough power to challenge American policies on the world stage (ie a politically unified Europe).  Now America is too broke to care, and the EU will likely cease to exist.  Which leaves the UK up shit creek with no paddle. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 13, 2011, 03:17:27 PM
Wow... yeah. The other points were raised then too; I just forgot. But, seeing it spelled out like that...

Damn.

Thanks for the analysis Cain.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 03:19:29 PM
I could go further and talk about our descent into a counterintelligence state of the kind that would make East Germany blush, our failing energy infrastructure and the North Sea oil running out, increased costs from environmental disasters due to drastically underfunding flood defence....but I think the above spells it out.

We need a unified Europe.  Otherwise we're just Belarus with ipads.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 13, 2011, 04:06:52 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 13, 2011, 11:57:54 AMIf the bank you borrowed to buy your house from goes under, presumably that debt is written off?
Your loan would be sold and the proceeds would be used to help settle the bank's debts.  You would continue making your monthly payments to the new loan holder.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on September 13, 2011, 06:36:10 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 13, 2011, 04:06:52 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 13, 2011, 11:57:54 AMIf the bank you borrowed to buy your house from goes under, presumably that debt is written off?
Your loan would be sold and the proceeds would be used to help settle the bank's debts.  You would continue making your monthly payments to the new loan holder.

You will never be let off the hook.  When you die the hook will be passed along to your heirs.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 13, 2011, 06:52:00 PM
Or your friends.

Check about 20 pages back, there is even a link for it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 15, 2011, 12:33:28 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14927432

QuotePolice in London have arrested a 31-year-old man in connection with allegations of unauthorised trading which has cost Swiss banking group UBS an estimated $2bn (£1.3bn).

He was detained in the early hours of Thursday and remains in custody.

UBS shares fell 8% after it announced it was investigating rogue trades which would mean the bank making a loss for the third quarter of 2011.

The Swiss bank said no customer accounts were affected.

A spokesman for City of London Police, which is responsible for the city's financial district, said: "We can confirm we arrested a 31-year-old man at 3:30am on suspicion of fraud by abuse of position."

In a letter to its 65,000 staff, UBS said: "The matter is still being investigated, but UBS's current estimate of the loss on the trades is in the range of $2bn.

"It is possible that this could lead UBS to report a loss for the third quarter of 2011. No client positions were affected.

"While the news is distressing, it will not change the fundamental strength of our firm.

"We urge you to stay focused on your clients, who are counting on you to guide them through these uncertain times," the bank said.

ZKB trading analyst Claude Zehnder said the news would damage confidence in UBS. "They obviously have a problem with risk management.

"With this they are losing a lot of credit that they had regained with effort."

UBS was rescued by the Swiss state in 2008 following huge losses on toxic assets held by its investment bank.

It then became embroiled in a serious tax evasion dispute with US authorities and was forced to hand over 300 client names and pay a $780m fine. There was then a second case in which it agreed to hand over data on 4,450 American clients.

UBS declined to say in which department, or country, the rogue trader operated. However, there is already speculation that the losses may have occurred in foreign exchange trades.

Earlier this month, the Swiss Central Bank shocked the markets by capping the franc against the euro at 1.20 francs. The move sent the franc-euro exchange rate up 10%, and it is rumoured that some traders lost money.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 15, 2011, 12:38:01 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14930126

QuoteThe European Commission has predicted that economic growth in the eurozone will come "to a virtual standstill" in the second half of 2011.

It halved its forecast for July to September to growth of just 0.2%, while the forecast for the last three months of the year is down from 0.4% to 0.1%.

The commission blamed financial market problems over the summer as well as weakening demand from outside Europe.

But it remained confident that there would not be a return to recession.

"Recoveries from financial crises are often slow and bumpy. Moreover, the EU economy is affected by a more difficult external environment, while domestic demand remains subdued," EU Economic Affairs Commissioner Olli Rehn said at a news conference to unveil the report.

"The sovereign debt crisis has worsened, and the financial market turmoil is set to dampen the real economy."
'Integral part'

The report predicted that member states having to cut back on their spending to reduce their debt would also hit growth.

One of the countries currently cutting back its spending is Greece, which reiterated on Wednesday that it was determined to meet all the deficit reduction plans it has agreed to in exchange for its two bailouts.

There were supportive comments from eurozone leaders towards Greece on Wednesday, which boosted the stock markets on Thursday.

Eurozone leaders said Greece was an "integral" part of the eurozone.

Greece is set to receive the next loan from its initial EU and International Monetary Fund bailout later this month, but it will get this only if inspectors from the EU, European Central Bank and IMF agree that it is keeping up with its spending cut targets.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Adios on September 15, 2011, 02:19:00 PM
Global economics still appear to be built on a mountain of ice, and still sliding towards the bottom.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 15, 2011, 05:12:38 PM
That UBS trader guy was dumb.  If, rather than costing UBS money while not affecting client accounts, he had made UBS money while trashing client accounts, he probably have been promoted rather than arrested.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 16, 2011, 07:14:11 PM
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000046094

Transcript of the video below, I added occasional line breaks to make it easier to read.

This thing's about to fall apart.

Quotelet's go to cnbc's michelle caruso-cabrera who's in  southwestern poland where treasury secretary tim geithner is meeting with european finance ministers. 

reporter: we heard earlier that during the news conference that the next tranche of the greek bailout would happen sometime in october if greece met all the requirements for the  lenders of last resort. we've just seen on the dow jones news wires, they are quoting an anonymous greek official speaking somewhere on the sidelines that apparently that is a bit late for the greeks and  that they may need to tap an emergency stability fund early because they are running short of cash.

they'd already said they would be running short of cash by  early october. let me show you why. from january to august of this  year, greece has actually run a bigger deficit than they did last year, 18.1 billion euro this is year compared to a year ago at this time, they only had a deficit, only, of 14.8 euros.  why? because they're spending in that time period, believe it or not, has gone up by 8.1%.

last year at this time, they'd only spent roughly 44 billion. by now, they have spent 47 billion this year. in the meantime, because of year  three of the recession, their revenues are down. i've done these calculations. they're spending roughly 1.35 billion a week. but they only bring in .87 billion of revenue a week. so they are always running about a half billion short every week. they're saying if they don't get  this next tranche, they're going to have to tap some emergency fund because they are literally going to struggle to make payroll. 

the precipitating event that would lead to a default, probably not until december when they have a next big installment. but they do have on september 23rd, for example, a 2 billion euro rollover which imagine that everybody would let all of this fall apart over just 2 billion euros. but that's the situation right now. guys, back to you. thank you very much, michelle. stick around.

we're going to talk more about this poland summit, what it means for investors around the world. joining us is louise cooper, market analyst at bgc partners in london. and at the new york stock exchange, simon hobbs of cnbc. and we're joined in the studio here by steve liesman. louise, the markets seem to have been signaling, the equity markets, at least, this week that the worst is unlikely to eventuate. they seem cheered by what they see and even today that way. do you feel that way?

no.  i'm afraid i don't. we have that big central bank intervention yesterday where they said, we're going to act together to help banks borrow short-term dollar money. so the equity markets went, hey! if you go to one of the wholesale dealing desks here,  you'll find out it's made no difference and the interbank lending rate in europe increased this morning and was a higher level than yesterday. so it is good news that all the central bankers around the world are acting together.  that is a good thing. but the terms of the deal -- if you need to almost borrow this kind of levels, the dollar levels they were suggesting, you almost are in a very difficult position.

it hasn't actually helped the funding market here in europe to be brutally frank. steve s that your take? well, i think ultimately what this dollar funding will do, melissa, is it will solve one of the problems that's out there, which is a scarcity of dollar funding either because it's not available in dollars or because there's not sufficient dollar collateral for the dollars that are needed. and i think ultimately these things have tended to help the situation rather than make them  worse. but it would be wrong to see it as the fix-all because there are many, many other things that  need to be done. this is kind of like fixing one of the shorter-term problems that's out there.  but it's not nearly the fix for the larger-term problem, which is the sovereign debt problems and the related banking issues.

michelle, how is secretary geithner received in this council in poland? 

reporter: i'm told they snicker behind his back, that he said he was invited but actually he kind of invited himself. there's a lot of back and forth. there are some members of the european union saying, why is the u.s. tell us how to run their business, look at what they did with the debt ceiling mess, they're not one to talk. he was self-deprecating in that fashion in some comments that he did make. but i wouldn't say it was a warm welcome.


michelle, i just want to get rid of one of the myths that's out there, which is that geithner is going over there presenting this idea of leveraging the efsf. in fact, i was told by a g-7 official, this issue came up and was presented to the leading european economies at the recent g-7 finance ministers meeting. it's been out there for six weeks.  if anything, the role geithner is playing would be informational.  but this issue has been out there and presented. and geithner's not going over there selling this. and i want to bring simon into this.

reporter: i think the reason people here thought that was going to happen is because the spanish finance minister said she expected to hear about leverage from tim geithner when she arrived this morning. maybe that's why people got that  impression. simon, are you surprised that tim geithner would not be warmly welcomed? these are polite people. i would be very surprised if they were rude to tim geithner. that's really not where they are. they don't see it in this kind of america versus europe in a way, from my experience.  but i want to say something very important here. let me preface it by saying this is a two-day meeting.

what's coming out now is not  necessarily where we end up by the end of the weekend. however, these are very worrying signs that are coming out because to solve the situation,  we need political will, we need coordination and we are on now three levels not getting that. the first is that as a result of the conference call between the french, the germans and the greeks on wednesday night, we thought that they were going to prevent grooek greece from  defaulting, they would give them the $8 billion euros and that they would do that relatively quickly on a wink and a nudge. that is not the case. they will run out of money, they have told us, next month.

now they're saying, we will not  make a judgment on that 8 billion until october. so they're deliberately leading a funding gap and they're trying to see other ways they could tap money. that is not a good sign. today we're supposed to have a deal on the collateral issue where the fins say, for the greek money, we want collateral.  the fins are saying, there is no deal on the table. without a deal on collateral, you can't write the legislation that goes before the germans  over the next two weeks.

finally in german you have now the cabinet not discussing crucial elements of that plan and therefore, again, it is delayed and cannot go before the german parliament. so the whole timetable for bailing out greece and the efsf is beginning to slip. the greatest irony of all of this is it was created so europe could stand shoulder to shoulder as importantly as america. and now we see obama is going to call them all in to try to bang heads together. the americans trying to get the europeans to sort out this mess. this mess is worse now than it was 12 hours ago, frankly. interesting. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:20:21 PM
Wow, european finance minsters are dicks...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on September 16, 2011, 07:24:33 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:20:21 PM
Wow, european finance minsters are dicks...

Yeah, maybe.  But anyone who takes advice from Geithner is an idiot.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:30:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 16, 2011, 07:24:33 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:20:21 PM
Wow, european finance minsters are dicks...

Yeah, maybe.  But anyone who takes advice from Geithner is an idiot.

Maybe, but most of them aren't much better. Their policy of trying to fill the money black hole with endless bailouts is reaching its expected conclusion with Italy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on September 16, 2011, 07:31:22 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:30:05 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on September 16, 2011, 07:24:33 PM
Quote from: Faust on September 16, 2011, 07:20:21 PM
Wow, european finance minsters are dicks...

Yeah, maybe.  But anyone who takes advice from Geithner is an idiot.

Maybe, but most of them aren't much better. Their policy of trying to fill the money black hole with endless bailouts is reaching its expected conclusion with Italy.

Have any of them colluded in causing and worsening the black hole in the first place?

Because Geithner did, to line his friends' pockets over at G/S.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 16, 2011, 07:45:49 PM
Harder to say.  A lot of them are lower profile, privacy laws tend to be stronger here and you're looking over several different jurisdictions, with a lot more banks.

In some ways, the US press is much better at picking up the activities of their various officials, even in this day and age.  A lot more of your covert ops get into the press, and so do your corporate-political links.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on September 18, 2011, 11:13:50 PM
Quote from: Placid Dingo on September 08, 2011, 07:38:16 AM
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on September 08, 2011, 12:26:20 AM
There was a guy who wrote a book about school shootings a couple of years ago who said everybody has it all wrong with all this zero tolerance for shit like black clothing and metal music and empty threats. He said these kids are always raised in very conservative families and when the illusion of the Reagan Christ Way starts to wear thin and their whole reality is threatened and they see that they have no future, they flip. I can't remember the guy's name, dammit, maybe somebody here knows? It might have even been Cain who posted about it originally.

Artists who paint burning banks don't have Reagan bubbles to burst, I would think.

Although you'd then have cause to wonder why children of hippies don't have the same bubble pop explosion of rage and despair.


Simple. They've had weed in their system since the fetal stage.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 19, 2011, 10:41:21 AM
The FT is reporting this morning that the (UK) government is performing worse than expected in cutting the deficit, and that an additional £12 billion loss has been found when they ran the numbers themselves. Not going to quote the article, because doing so brings up a warning not to post on the internet. If you want to register to see it though, it is here: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f5981c68-dee0-11e0-9130-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1YOBXuNEw

The number which leapt out at me was that in order to fix the deficit, they'd need to raise VAT from 20% to 22.5%. That's almost one quarter of the cost of nearly everything spent, going into the government on top of other 'stealth' taxes (like fuel duty), and regular taxation. At the same time, retailers have been dying off because they simply can't make money. ANOTHER rise of 2.5% (though I think that was just said for comparison, and nobody is suggesting it yet) would tank that even further.

At the same time, minimum wage hasn't been rising, people are working less hours on average, inflation stands at 5.1% with more 'quantitative easing' en route to bump that up further...

Our transport infrastructure is a joke, and we're going to waste billions on a high speed rail line to chew up vast areas of green belt land and shave 30 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham. Not that you'll be able to move in London next year anyway; we're hosting the Olympic games (which is also costing us billions) and what passes for public transport is going to simply collapse, given that whole sections of the underground fail every other day already.

Even after all these 'tough decisions' and austerity measures, we're still fucked.

Oh... yeah. £12 billion is roughly one quarter of the total deficit. Last week, I forget if I mentioned this, but:

"The ICB puts the annual cost to banks around £6bn. This is modest as a share of banks' assets (0.1 per cent)."

So if the government seized one per cent of the banks' assets, banks that we largely own and have bailed out, we could simply wash all this away and have billions left to spare to assist with things like transport, education, healthcare, pensions... we could even cut some of our ridiculous levels of taxation! Hey, seize TEN per cent! We bailed them out, why can't they bail us out?

Not that I expect anyone to even ask.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 19, 2011, 01:14:07 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 19, 2011, 10:41:21 AMSo if the government seized one per cent of the banks' assets, banks that we largely own and have bailed out, we could simply wash all this away and have billions left to spare to assist with things like transport, education, healthcare, pensions... we could even cut some of our ridiculous levels of taxation! Hey, seize TEN per cent! We bailed them out, why can't they bail us out?

Not that I expect anyone to even ask.

I support this idea.

There's probably a reason why it couldn't work.

But let's do it anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 19, 2011, 01:47:32 PM
The problem with doing it seriously is twofold.

The first is that it is an ongoing cost. A one-time alleviation would probably help a lot in the short term, but say you go ahead and take one per cent to fund your cost this year... next year, you're still in the same position. Unless your 12 billion in tax cuts has suddenly made your economy the most awesome in the world, you're going to need to do it again.

The second is that it wouldn't help the economy. Seizing control of the banks assets, even a small fraction of them rather than 'all of them', would destroy the financial services sector, and probably the banking system as businesses fled. We're still pretty reliant on financial services, even if the sector has taken some major hits, so overall taxable income may be reduced. I imagine if you seized everything you could, and you managed to get it all, that would help, but you aren't going to be able to restructure the entire economy using that, and maintain employment, services etc.

It'd sure be cathartic though.


Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 19, 2011, 02:07:10 PM
Surely as majority stakeholders in HBOS and the Bank of Scotland, we actually have even more latitude for action than just outright seizing funds. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 19, 2011, 02:15:51 PM
Yeah, but HBOS and Bank of Scotland would probably suffer much more for that money; I believe the 0.1% figure was taking the entire banking industry in the UK as a whole.

... I'm going to be honest though, I don't really know. My dad has been working on a project to unite two major high street banks for the past year, and from the stories he's been sharing with me, they don't really know what assets they have. The data he was working with had something like a 1/1000 error rate; roughly one out of every thousand entries was critically flawed in some way. Each entry being a loan, mortgage, or in some cases actual bank accounts.

I suspect this is tied into things like swiss banks suddenly finding one man has cost them $2 billion. I don't think any group really has an accurate picture of who owns what.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 19, 2011, 02:18:39 PM
Sounds entirely plausible.  That is, after all, at the roots of the subprime crisis - no-one knows who actually owns the toxic loans, and so banks are not keen to lend.  It could turn out a ton of banks own much less than they are lending, and so easily fall to any kind of economic crisis.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 19, 2011, 02:32:33 PM
The more I think about it, the more convinced I become that the only way to actually solve the crisis, which is going to be necessary if we're going to crawl out of recession, is to work towards a debt amnesty. I think you wrote about it a few months ago, Cain. Call it quits, let the banks collapse if they can't keep going when their debts are written off, and start all over again. I suspect that the majority of individuals would benefit in the long run, although the short term could be chaotic and painful.

I'm also fairly certain that it isn't in the interests of anyone in the current establishment, politician, banker or corporation, to allow the crisis to be solved. The longer they allow it to drag on, the longer they have to personally profit. In the case of banks and corporations, a debt amnesty is a direct threat to their position, in the case of politicians, it'd require going up against the interests of the other two.

On the other hand, the recession isn't pleasant for any of these groups, but the elites in charge are somewhat insulated from the actual pain of it. They likely believe that sooner or later, the whole thing will turn around anyway if they just keep on the same track.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 19, 2011, 02:41:03 PM
When you have unsustainable levels of debt, an amnesty is the only viable option.

The third world has been kept in debt for generations, paying off the loans of dictators.  That's an economic dead weight on the global economy.  If we follow the same route, we'll be stuck in much the same position.  Paying off loans is not economically productive activity.  It doesn't make the economy grow, it doesn't create jobs, it actually has the opposite effect and is a drain on society as a whole.  Debt stops people spending money, from being able to hire more people, from being able to fund new and innovative ventures.

Basically, debt sucks.  But we, as humans, invented debt.  It's not a natural law, written into the nature of the Universe.  We can cancel it, and we should, when it becomes unreasonable to expect payment, when trying to do so damages too much.

Anything else is simply lining the pockets of rentiers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 19, 2011, 03:43:47 PM
i encountered some folks a couple years ago online that were part of some effort to promote a general debt amnesty under the auspices of 'Jubilee' as described in the Leviticus, where all debts are forgiven. (these folks weren't pushing for the forgiveness and pardoning of criminals, however  :lol:)

i haven't heard hide nor hair of their attempts since then, so they were obviously unsuccessful in spreading the meme, but I wonder if the time is ripe to spread this notion through the religious right?  What would the republican leaders do if it became a statement of christian faith to support a debt amnesty as prescribed in the good book?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on September 20, 2011, 07:25:03 AM
I recently signed a petition to forgive student loans. Not that I expect that will happen, what with the Fed Gov suing other banks on behalf of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.....


Great idea, tho.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cramulus on September 20, 2011, 02:33:55 PM
Dear Coke Talk - On occupying wall street.

Coquette, I need to hear your take on the occupy wall street shit going on right now.


Please. It's just a bunch of fuzzy-headed antiglobalization dorks loitering around lower Manhattan confusing their own vegan farts for a whiff of revolution.

Those ineffectual douchenozzles wouldn't know how to jam culture if Robespierre's ghost showed up at Goldman Sachs with a guillotine.

Call me when there's blood in the streets and investment bankers are fleeing the country in exile. Until then, don't bore me with freshman bullshit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 20, 2011, 03:13:55 PM
god I love her.

Am IN love with her.

I need a woman like that in my life.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 20, 2011, 06:28:45 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 20, 2011, 02:33:55 PM
Dear Coke Talk - On occupying wall street.

Coquette, I need to hear your take on the occupy wall street shit going on right now.


Please. It's just a bunch of fuzzy-headed antiglobalization dorks loitering around lower Manhattan confusing their own vegan farts for a whiff of revolution.

Those ineffectual douchenozzles wouldn't know how to jam culture if Robespierre's ghost showed up at Goldman Sachs with a guillotine.

Call me when there's blood in the streets and investment bankers are fleeing the country in exile. Until then, don't bore me with freshman bullshit.

ZING!  :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on September 20, 2011, 06:29:41 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on September 20, 2011, 02:33:55 PM
Dear Coke Talk - On occupying wall street.

Coquette, I need to hear your take on the occupy wall street shit going on right now.


Please. It's just a bunch of fuzzy-headed antiglobalization dorks loitering around lower Manhattan confusing their own vegan farts for a whiff of revolution.

Those ineffectual douchenozzles wouldn't know how to jam culture if Robespierre's ghost showed up at Goldman Sachs with a guillotine.

Call me when there's blood in the streets and investment bankers are fleeing the country in exile. Until then, don't bore me with freshman bullshit.

:mittens:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on September 20, 2011, 11:34:45 PM
 :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 21, 2011, 09:46:50 PM
I generally find Chan Akya to be a lucid and engaging writer on global financial issues

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/MI22Dj01.html

QuoteThree years ago at the height of the liquidity crisis in 2008 I wrote a series of articles on the outcome of various interventions (see "Related Articles"). It is with grim satisfaction that I note many of the predictions have indeed come through; some of which were:

1. Asia would need to focus on physical assets to maintain purchasing power;
2. European sovereign debt would erupt if governments tried to save their banks (See: Europe - into the end game, Asia Times Online, September 15, 2011);
3. Anyone who purchased bank shares at the 2008 "lows" would regret their decision.

Over the past 10 days or so, a number of headlines have popped up which take my "banks are not trustworthy" thesis well past its logical end point and into entirely uncharted territory. That point would be the otherwise-unmentionable notion (and that is all it is for now) that the global financial system may have reached its breaking point, and perhaps even its sell-by date.

Before delving into that conclusion though let us look at recent developments:

# Firstly, there is the discovery of the trifling US$2.3 billion in losses due to unauthorized trading by UBS in its London operations. That such a loss could happen in a bank that was rescued barely three years ago by the Swiss central bank is bad enough; revelations that the loss pattern (ie the mechanism that keeps the dangerous trades hidden from review and proper risk management) took hold in 2008 and went undiscovered for three years made it a whole lot worse. Singapore's Government Investment Corporation, which is nursing a multi-billion dollar loss on its investment in UBS, issued a terse statement earlier in the week expressing its disappointment. Where is Singapore-style corporal punishment (remember Michael Fay - the young American sentenced to caning in 1994 for theft and vandalism) when you really need it?

# European newspapers are reporting that large companies in the region, including household names like Siemens and others, have cut their deposits with banks and placed funds directly with the European Central Bank (ECB). This helps them to circumvent credit risk altogether but does bring into question what the role of banks as deposit taking institutions would be.

# The UK released its much-anticipated "Vickers report" that calls for a split between real banking and its casino counterpart through capital barriers and avoiding all manner of cross-funding. What was a good idea, though, fell on its face during the execution as the report called for an eight-year implementation timeframe (2019); if all other reforms are any indication, then one should expect that the real deadline is "never". This kind of shameless lobbying shouldn't be possible by any industry, let alone one that essentially survives on the public whim.

# Reports out of the US that Bank of America was considering an idea to place its troubled Countrywide subsidiary into bankruptcy (even if the rumor was strenuously denied) helped to bring forward awkward questions about the rest of the bank and its solidity.

# The downgrade of French banks has been followed by reports of Asian (mainly Chinese) banks have been pulling swap lines and terminated foreign exchange (FX) trading relationships with the banks.

# A number of French banks were reported to have put out large portfolios of assets for sale - one bank put up $70 billion for sale on its own. Alarmed by the possibility of European liquidity events driving down prices of American fixed-income assets (deservedly in my opinion, but that is absolutely not the main point here), the US Federal Reserve provided a swap facility to the ECB under which the latter could provide US dollar funding to European banks in return for European (ie euro-denominated) collateral. Considering that the ECB accepts all manner of collateral including Greek debt, in effect the Federal Reserve (and ultimately US taxpayers) are now lending money against Greek bonds. If the regulatory and central banking authorities have to resort to such morally bankrupt measures three years after effecting a wide-ranging rescue of the banks, then we all truly have to wonder quite how bad things are below the surface.

# Bank earnings for the third quarter of 2011 - set to be released in less than a month - are expected to reveal falling profitability due to declining revenues from fixed-income trading as also continued rises in actual defaults by borrowers, particularly in areas such as individual and mortgage borrowers in the US.

# On the issue of Greece, press reports continue to highlight the gaps in banks' provisions for the country. Recent reports have shown that two state-owned "bad" banks in Germany own almost half of the country's total exposure to Greece. This is a good thing - considering that in various other European countries exposures are more widely spread and far less provisioned. In every possible way, a nightmare for regulators.

# The really bad part is that I have so many other stories to add here but will not in the interests of space: the little scandals dotting Italian banks, the bigger problems being faced by American banks on their accounting for dodgy assets, rising loan losses in Japan, irrational lending in China, corruption in Indian banks and so on.

When you step back and think this through, it is apparent that the banking system is failing in its basic functions of taking deposits, making loans and even in terms of transferring payments (as happens when Chinese banks no longer want to face their French counterparts) across borders.

Well, isn't that depressing.  Banks can't even do basic financial services right anymore, let alone be trusted with the global economy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 21, 2011, 09:54:20 PM
thanks for the tip, hadn't picked up on him (her?) yet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 21, 2011, 11:46:48 PM
Asia Times is a good one.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 24, 2011, 01:08:46 PM
Geither has made new and bold advances in the field of gross hypocrisy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15044357

QuoteUS Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has called on European leaders at the G20 in Washington to send a "decisive signal" that they have a strategy for tackling the debt crisis.

Mr Geithner said there had been an erosion of confidence and that there was a "huge premium" on early action.

Eurozone sovereign debt:  € 9,828.2 billion (80% of GDP)
USA sovereign debt: $14.72 trillion (98% of GDP)

And the EU budget is a lot smaller than the combined budgets of all the governments that make up the Eurozone.  Whereas, in the USA...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 24, 2011, 02:16:30 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 13, 2011, 02:45:08 PM
Quote from: CainThat parochial attitude has been allowed to fester by European elites, who basically belittled and condescended to those opposed to the larger EU projects on nationalistic grounds.  I'm fairly in favour of intergration in principal, and even I'd concede that the response to nationalists has been along the lines of "bitter people clinging to guns and god flags and history".

The message that should've been sent is this: the countries that are going to dominate the future are large.  Very large.  China, India, USA and Russia large (theoretically Indonesia too, in the far future).  No European country, on its own, can compete with that.  The largest state in Europe is Germany, and that is not even half the population size of Russia, a massively underpopulated country that also has the advantage of owning territory from the Baltic through to the Pacific.  Now, if we want to have a say in the future, and not merely be historical amusement parks and vassals to these emerging powers, we have one simple choice: unite.  It's unite or submit to de facto foreign control.  Yes, all European countries will, as a result, have less autonomy among themselves, less control over their own futures, be tied permamently to the fortunes of other states.  But it's better to have a portion of a say in Brussels, than have no say in policies from Beijing, Moscow and Washington.

But I suspect that it is far too late for this kind of argument now.

Yeah, sorry if I wasn't clear - I would personally be in favour of a united Europe. Partly because I would like to see Nick Farrage's head explode, but mostly because I think it is the most sensible way to combat the major issues of the day. We need to completely restructure the global economy and fight climate change - two things which need the world (or at least, most of it) to act in unison, which would be much easier with a united Europe.

But like you say, and I agree, it is almost certainly too late for that. Individual European countries see each other as competitors at best, enemies at worst. The EU is a massively bureaucratic, corrupt and entangled mess ... and we don't have any credible politicians standing up to make the case for a united Europe, or any plan as to how to get there.

I think politicians tried to sneak it in by the back door, incrementally. I really don't think it has helped at all. We're going to eat each other, I think, over the next couple of years... and in about ten years time, the nationalists will be looking around at the ruin of what was Britain... and probably trying to find a way to blame it on the Europeans.

Here is another person who comes to a rather similar conclusion:

http://fabiusmaximus.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/27796/

QuoteUS conservatives often describe Europe's unification as quixotic or a leftist plot.  It's neither, but something America refuses to do:  prepare for the 21st century.


Europe`s leaders have worked to unify Europe since WWII (Of course, that's an over-simplification.  They are not a unitary element, and many oppose unification).  Success would bring a host of economic benefits.  Failure would make them small powers kicked around by the 21st century's great powers (e.g., USA, China, Russia, Brazil).  Germany, France, and Britain have done it to others for centuries; they do not want it done to them.  But e pluribus unum takes time, effort, and often war.

Due to our long English heritage, we often forget the short history of Europe`s nations.  Belgium began in 1839 (on weakly together even today); Germany and Italy a few decades later.  Going from young nations to a supra-national state so quickly has few or no historical precedents.

Nor was it easy.  Italy and Germany unified smoothly in the 19th century — compared to some.  America and France overcome regional differences far smaller than across Europe, in nations already unified, only through wars (Napoleonic and Civil).  America's regions despised one another until the late 1800′s, forged into a strong union by the Civil War.  Only about 1 of 8 Frenchman spoke proper French in 1800; most spoke somewhat mutually incomprehensible regional dialects.

Europe's leaders slowly brought Europe together after 1945.  Then they gambled, attempting a currency union before political union.  Success will bring applause from future historians for their boldness; failure will bring mockery at their foolishness. It might have worked if they had more time before a recession induced massive strains in the EMU fabric.  But the recession arrived, and revealed the primary failure in the project:  Europe's peoples do not support it.

Europe has come so far, and I`ll bet they will join together. Eventually.  But the current phase of the process looks likely to end badly, setting it back decades or generations.

There is also some good summaries of potential future scenarios, such as:

QuoteAny member of the EMU can abort the process, not just Greece and Germany (e.g., Netherland's and Finland's demand for collateral on future loans to Greece).

This becomes more likely as public support continues to decline in both creditor and debtor nations. Hence partisan maneuvering, legislative votes, and  elections can have outsize effects — or even spark the endgame. Like Berlin State election on 18 September, or the September 29 Bundestag vote on the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF).  A trial vote did not go well (see Reuters).

The ECB and IMF might impose such tight conditions that Greece bolts (They are unlikely on their own to end the bailouts).

An economic slowdown or recession in Europe probably destroys the enthusiasm for bailout and austerity programs.

A loss of confidence by bank investors might spark a run on Europe's banks (EU banks are weak; a slow run has been happening in Greece; perhaps one starting in France), by sovereign bond investors might destabilize government finances.

Speculators' hot money might destabilize the situation (much as its driven the Swiss Franc to crazy levels).  So far they're pushing down the Euro, boosting Europe's exports.

The high-growth emerging nations fighting inflation (e.g., China) are depressing global growth, hurting Europe's exports.  Ditto for the slowing America and Japanese economies.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 25, 2011, 12:20:05 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15039515

QuoteA US partial government shutdown is looming amid the latest spending dispute to cripple Congress - over two provisions in a federal funding bill.

The Democratic-led Senate has blocked legislation passed by the Republican-controlled House of Representatives.

The Democrats oppose Republican demands that funding for victims of hurricanes and wildfires be offset with cuts to clean energy programmes.

The stopgap spending bill is to fund the government beyond September's end.

Lawmakers from both sides have said disaster relief should not be a matter of controversy.

But with Congress' approval ratings in the basement, analysts say the dispute is just another sign of how partisan rancour is hampering US lawmakers' ability to pass even the most basic legislation.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2011, 12:59:46 AM
Methinks the Democrats are just all to happy to have THEIR turn at the "fucking up the works" of government wheel.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 25, 2011, 04:26:47 AM
This is actually really good news.  Unless you're holding gold, that is.  But even if you are, and you didn't buy it recently, you're probably still way up.

http://money.cnn.com/2011/09/23/markets/gold_prices/index.htm?iid=Popular

QuoteNEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Gold prices continued to plunge Friday, despite the market turmoil that often drives investors to the traditional safe haven.
Gold tumbled $101.90, or 5.9%, in regular trading to $1,639.80 an ounce. It's the second straight day of steep declines for the precious metal.

According to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Friday marked the first $100 daily price drop since Jan. 22, 1980, when gold plunged $143.50 to $682 the day after having spiked to a record high.
Keith Springer, president of Springer Financial Advisors, said that while gold has benefited from economic uncertainty in recent months and years, it's primarily been a hedge against inflation.
But the growing worries about a global economic slowdown have raised new fears that there could be a period of deflation, or falling prices, in the months ahead.
"People are quickly coming to the realization that gold does very bad in a deflationary environment," he said.
Gold isn't the only commodity to be hit by concerns about the global economy. Silver suffered its worst trading day in decades losing $6.48, or 17.7%, to close at $30.10.
Copper and platinum also both lost nearly 6%. But those metals have far more industrial uses than gold, Springer said, so fears of a recession should drive down those prices.

The damn bottom is dropping out on copper, which is also a very good thing.  It's been a bubble for awhile and drives up costs in a lot of other industries, my own being a big example.

If deflation is happening in spite of the central bank keeping the funds and prime rate the lowest in history, it could mean that despite the meddling and artificial inflation of prices, the money is drying up out of sheer necessity.

It took Volker to make the unpopular decision to raise rates and help correct the 70's and 80's recession.

http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/FEDFUNDS.txt

Listing of the funds rate since '54.  It spiked in the late 70's/early80's.  It's been on a downward track ever since.  Fucking Keynesians. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Prince Glittersnatch III on September 25, 2011, 05:17:16 AM
Brb posting this on every Survivalist, Teabagger, Libretarian and Ron Paul forum I can find.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 25, 2011, 05:28:58 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on September 25, 2011, 05:17:16 AM
Brb posting this on every Survivalist, Teabagger, Libretarian and Ron Paul forum I can find.

Won't matter.   The smart ones (lol, right?  I mean, right?) got into it years ago and are still way up.  It's not so good news for jewelers, especially the ones who got into the gold party business like a friend of mine did, but they'll likely weather it.  If you got into gold more than 3 years ago, the plunge it took still wouldn't have you down, yet.

The biggest story is really the copper price plunge.  That's huge and very, very good news.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2011, 06:12:02 AM
Ah, good, hopefully folks will hear about the damned copper going kablooey and stop doing shit like stealing a whole village's internet through ganking the underground copper wire.

There was somewhere in Europe this happened recently--damn near the whole country lost their internet because same asshat thief stole an underground copper wire holding the whole shebang together.  HI-larious.  And a teaching moment, of course.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 25, 2011, 09:59:50 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 25, 2011, 05:28:58 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on September 25, 2011, 05:17:16 AM
Brb posting this on every Survivalist, Teabagger, Libretarian and Ron Paul forum I can find.

Won't matter.   The smart ones (lol, right?  I mean, right?) got into it years ago and are still way up.  It's not so good news for jewelers, especially the ones who got into the gold party business like a friend of mine did, but they'll likely weather it.  If you got into gold more than 3 years ago, the plunge it took still wouldn't have you down, yet.

The biggest story is really the copper price plunge.  That's huge and very, very good news.

Both gold and copper will rapidly recover though won't they, out of sheer demand? Would a few weeks time be a good time to aim for a bottom and buy a bit?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2011, 05:12:11 PM
Jewelers are fucking thrilled, at least the ones I know. Gold, silver, and copper have skyrocketed at an alarming rate over the last few years, at the same time the economy has been depressed and the market for luxury goods like jewelry has declined... making their work more expensive to produce and more difficult to sell.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 25, 2011, 05:15:10 PM
It's good news for glassworkers, too, as we rely on gold for pinks and purple, silver for blues, and copper for greens.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 25, 2011, 06:54:37 PM
THAT is something that I hadn't thought of, Nigel, but it makes total sense.  I'm sure there's many many industries that have had to cut back on production because of rising copper and gold prices.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 03:02:59 AM
Quote from: Faust on September 25, 2011, 09:59:50 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 25, 2011, 05:28:58 AM
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on September 25, 2011, 05:17:16 AM
Brb posting this on every Survivalist, Teabagger, Libretarian and Ron Paul forum I can find.

Won't matter.   The smart ones (lol, right?  I mean, right?) got into it years ago and are still way up.  It's not so good news for jewelers, especially the ones who got into the gold party business like a friend of mine did, but they'll likely weather it.  If you got into gold more than 3 years ago, the plunge it took still wouldn't have you down, yet.

The biggest story is really the copper price plunge.  That's huge and very, very good news.

Both gold and copper will rapidly recover though won't they, out of sheer demand? Would a few weeks time be a good time to aim for a bottom and buy a bit?


That's hard to say with certainty, but there's been a lot of talk about gold being a bubble for some time due to a run from inflation, and Central Banks making moves to buy large amounts of gold this year:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-29/gold-buying-central-banks-may-signal-bullion-extending-record-price-rally.html

That has legs, considering the amount of cash in the system right now.  But since stocks have taken a hell of a beating the last month and a half, big movers may be predicting a top out on metals and oil and selling to recapitalize and buy low priced but strong and very well positioned blue chips, which is a damn good idea.  The fact that copper and silver were trending downward before this gold dump should have been a big red sign to anyone watching. 

As to demand being an upward driver and gold regaining it's biggest loss in 30 years, my personal view is that gold and copper as well as oil have been artificially overpriced for the last two years at least.  Oil in particular, and it's push on gasoline prices have, in my estimation, been entirely artificial.  With unemployment still hovering at around 9% (as it's reported) I can't see any reason the price of gasoline should be any higher than it was this time last year, much less dancing close to what it was in 2008, before the crash. 

And if you'll look, gas prices are also correcting for real demand vs what I think is a flood of money looking for somewhere to go other than the dollar.

Copper prices, despite it's recent dump, are still around the same price they were at this time last year, but they haven't dumped this far, this fast since the 08 recession really set in.

http://www.kitcometals.com/charts/copper_historical_large.html

see about half way down on the 5 year copper spot chart.

I think the biggest thing to know is that Bernanke came out and actually announced when the Fed was going to raise interest rates.  Telegraphing a move like that is possibly the stupidest decision in a long history of stupid decision by central bankers.  I would say that if you are holding metals right now, consider it a top and sell.

Ever since that meeting, the trend has really been down.  I don't see that changing in the long view and I would say if you're looking for a bottom, look for it in 2013, and have the cash on hand then to get back in.

At least, that's what I'm doing. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 03:06:36 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 25, 2011, 05:12:11 PM
Jewelers are fucking thrilled, at least the ones I know. Gold, silver, and copper have skyrocketed at an alarming rate over the last few years, at the same time the economy has been depressed and the market for luxury goods like jewelry has declined... making their work more expensive to produce and more difficult to sell.

Jewelers that only buy as they need and try and sell quickly.  For them it's great that prices are down.  My friend's family business has been buying since 08 and melting down and sitting on a lot of it, so the good news will hopefully be, as you say, that people will begin buying luxury's once prices are down, but hopefully not down below what they've paid the last few years.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:16:34 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 03:06:36 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 25, 2011, 05:12:11 PM
Jewelers are fucking thrilled, at least the ones I know. Gold, silver, and copper have skyrocketed at an alarming rate over the last few years, at the same time the economy has been depressed and the market for luxury goods like jewelry has declined... making their work more expensive to produce and more difficult to sell.

Jewelers that only buy as they need and try and sell quickly.  For them it's great that prices are down.  My friend's family business has been buying since 08 and melting down and sitting on a lot of it, so the good news will hopefully be, as you say, that people will begin buying luxury's once prices are down, but hopefully not down below what they've paid the last few years.



Yep... people who USE it are thrilled, people who have INVESTED in it are shitting themselves.

But the very first law of manufacturing that I learned is that sitting on raw materials is a liability even if the values increase. The reason for this is that you are tying up manufacturing capital that could be turning a profit. I learned that you should buy no more than you can reasonably use in a calendar year. It's a similar principle in retail; stores strive to have as little unturned inventory as possible each year. Stockpiling can be a very good idea for some reasons; if, for instance, you are stockpiling in case of a future shortage. In that case, it isn't as relevant whether the value increases or decreases, as the stock is on hand not for profit, but as a buffer against losing the ability to manufacture.

For example, nations used to stockpile grain. It wasn't to turn a future profit when grain prices were high, but to be able to continue to feed their citizens in case there was a drought or a blight or other unforeseen (yet reasonably foreseeable) disaster.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:19:49 AM
Also, for the love of common sense, it's a terrible idea to speculate in the same raw materials your business relies on for manufacturing. WTF?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 26, 2011, 11:32:52 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:16:34 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 03:06:36 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 25, 2011, 05:12:11 PM
Gold, silver, and copper
Jears.
Yep... :) disaster.
26th_NAVYyeah DP People Do believe G.S.C price when UP since
08 never mind
listen in order for those ( i mean THese 3 to work} U must rethink
how much does it take to keep the Earth in Orbit
i hear 13T comming out {per year i guess) thats US
Glow ball may be 7x that oR more say 100T (ok)
thus devide 100 into three piles Rich (AU) Midies(Ag) & Pour(CU) QT
say 80 20 .1 so 80T in gold say 8e8 total sitt'n thus AU /-/p=8e13/8e8
8e5/Oz got it not 2,000 (what a joke} Same song for Au & CU too
get over this Would U
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 12:30:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:19:49 AM
Also, for the love of common sense, it's a terrible idea to speculate in the same raw materials your business relies on for manufacturing. WTF?

I was talking to him last night about it and it's exactly as you said in the post previous to this.  They weren't/aren't speculating so much as buying on the expectation that the price was going up, which it was, because when they need gold on hand for new jewelery or to repair, they don't have to buy it at the inflated price.  They've already got it in stock.  They've also been considering moving into doing their own custom design and manufacturing.  He did say they're probably still sitting on more than they would move in several years, but they're not worried about it because it will move eventually.  This business is 3 generations old and they're well capitalized enough to take a correction in the price.

Quote from: hirley0 on September 26, 2011, 11:32:52 AM

26th_NAVYyeah DP People Do believe G.S.C price when UP since
08 never mind
listen in order for those ( i mean THese 3 to work} U must rethink
how much does it take to keep the Earth in Orbit
i hear 13T comming out {per year i guess) thats US
Glow ball may be 7x that oR more say 100T (ok)
thus devide 100 into three piles Rich (AU) Midies(Ag) & Pour(CU) QT
say 80 20 .1 so 80T in gold say 8e8 total sitt'n thus AU /-/p=8e13/8e8
8e5/Oz got it not 2,000 (what a joke} Same song for Au & CU too
get over this Would U

hirley0, I understood that entire post.  Which makes me want to go back and reread some of your others.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 26, 2011, 01:45:10 PM
4:44:44.444
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 04:52:01 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 12:30:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:19:49 AM
Also, for the love of common sense, it's a terrible idea to speculate in the same raw materials your business relies on for manufacturing. WTF?

I was talking to him last night about it and it's exactly as you said in the post previous to this.  They weren't/aren't speculating so much as buying on the expectation that the price was going up, which it was, because when they need gold on hand for new jewelery or to repair, they don't have to buy it at the inflated price.  They've already got it in stock.  They've also been considering moving into doing their own custom design and manufacturing.  He did say they're probably still sitting on more than they would move in several years, but they're not worried about it because it will move eventually.  This business is 3 generations old and they're well capitalized enough to take a correction in the price.


Then the price drop isn't hurting them, is it? Like I said, it's a boon for jewelers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 05:01:05 PM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 04:52:01 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 12:30:25 PM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:19:49 AM
Also, for the love of common sense, it's a terrible idea to speculate in the same raw materials your business relies on for manufacturing. WTF?

I was talking to him last night about it and it's exactly as you said in the post previous to this.  They weren't/aren't speculating so much as buying on the expectation that the price was going up, which it was, because when they need gold on hand for new jewelery or to repair, they don't have to buy it at the inflated price.  They've already got it in stock.  They've also been considering moving into doing their own custom design and manufacturing.  He did say they're probably still sitting on more than they would move in several years, but they're not worried about it because it will move eventually.  This business is 3 generations old and they're well capitalized enough to take a correction in the price.


Then the price drop isn't hurting them, is it? Like I said, it's a boon for jewelers.

Nope, at least not unless it goes back to 2008 prices.  He explained their reasoning for getting into the gold party craze over the last few years and that was it, to have stock in house for melting down.  Clarified it for me and changed my mind to your view on jewelers being on the winning end. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 05:49:02 PM
Righteous.  :mrgreen:

It's funny, because there are quite a few people spazzing on the glass/jewelry forum I'm on, and they're ALL amateurs who've been stockpiling as an investment. The pros are all "OMG THIS IS AWESOME" with the exception of a few who are like "darn, I should have sent my scrap in last week, oh well".

There was actually a thread with people watching and reporting on the spot prices dropping last night. I haven't checked today, but last night when I went to bed silver was at $27.51, which is still RICOCKULOUSLY FUCKING HIGH considering where it was just five years ago, but is quite a nice drop from $36.

And, of course, the vague intentions I was entertaining of selling my couple of ounces of spare gold are now less motivated.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 06:01:09 PM
DP, do you have a buy level set for Ag/Au?  i hadn't considered buying in a couple years, but this is tempting...
(if there is any to be had without premiums covering the drop in spot!  have to see what the local stores are selling at.)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 06:29:45 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 06:01:09 PM
DP, do you have a buy level set for Ag/Au?  i hadn't considered buying in a couple years, but this is tempting...
(if there is any to be had without premiums covering the drop in spot!  have to see what the local stores are selling at.)

Nope, I'm out of them for the foreseeable future.  I've made a good bit since 08, but half of the Fed board has voted against the "0% interest rates until 2013" pledge, which signals to me that the hawks are turning against monetizing our way out of this thing.  I don't want to be left holding the bag of nuggets when they do.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 06:41:10 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 06:29:45 PM
...but half of the Fed board has voted against the "0% interest rates until 2013" pledge, which signals to me that the hawks are turning against monetizing our way out of this thing...

what are the alternatives that they are considering?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 06:47:32 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 06:01:09 PM
DP, do you have a buy level set for Ag/Au?  i hadn't considered buying in a couple years, but this is tempting...
(if there is any to be had without premiums covering the drop in spot!  have to see what the local stores are selling at.)

Why don't you just buy casting grain from Monsterslayer or Rio Grande?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 06:55:00 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 06:41:10 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 26, 2011, 06:29:45 PM
...but half of the Fed board has voted against the "0% interest rates until 2013" pledge, which signals to me that the hawks are turning against monetizing our way out of this thing...

what are the alternatives that they are considering?

I can't be sure about that, but what other alternatives are there?  We couldn't monetize our way out of the 70's recession and actually made things worse with stagflation.  Those rates weren't anywhere as low as they are now.  If they keep it up for another few years we'll be right back where we were then.

I just got a raise, and I'm planning on asking for another $6/hr in 6 months, as a performance pay/cost of living increase.  I expect to get it.  If I'm thinking that way, others with jobs are as well.  It helps foster a similar environment that existed then: high unemployment, with existing job holders demanding higher wages to help offset inflation.  

They can say what they want about inflation being "on target," it's fucking with my food and energy budget.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 07:03:28 PM
Nigel, it appears i could still buy Ag cheaper by going with 90% coinage, which i would prefer.

DP, I don't know if they will temper their monetization from fears of inflation.  the people in charge of that decision aren't as effected by it, no? I've been under the impression that global monetization looks baked in the cake...

ETA: Thanks for the links, Nigel!  will keep them on file.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 07:27:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 07:03:28 PM
Nigel, it appears i could still buy Ag cheaper by going with 90% coinage, which i would prefer.

DP, I don't know if they will temper their monetization from fears of inflation.  the people in charge of that decision aren't as effected by it, no? I've been under the impression that global monetization looks baked in the cake...

ETA: Thanks for the links, Nigel!  will keep them on file.

How much cheaper, and where? Because Rio and MS sell at spot price as of the minute you complete your order. If you're looking as casting grain prices on the website, you're looking at approximate prices as of the last update. If you're ordering a milled product, of course, it's something like spot + 10%.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 07:33:50 PM
ah...  they just had prices from an bit ago before they continued plummeting, then.  :lol:
they always sell .999 at spot? (for large orders)  that's awesome.  i may make use of them if the premiums on recognizable stuff is too rich.
accumulating as long term insurance it would be fine to have shot.  for quick liquidability, something like junk silver is worth a bit more, to me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 26, 2011, 07:46:48 PM
I personally think stockpiling silver as an investment is quite foolish, but it's better than stockpiling cash.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 01:04:03 AM
relevant:
Attention metal thieves: Buy BT, get 75 million miles of copper (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/09/22/bt_copper_cable_theft/)

:)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on September 27, 2011, 01:54:22 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 07:46:48 PM
I personally think stockpiling silver as an investment is quite foolish, but it's better than stockpiling cash.

Bullets are a better investment.  Everyone likes bullets.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 27, 2011, 02:16:15 AM
i've put about equal amounts into both, i'm guessing.
bullets haven't gone up as much in nominal terms, but when the event occurs, they will be much more valuable, i think.
hm...
i could load up some shot shells with silver dimes, and get the best of both worlds!  and i'm protected against lycanthropes, misanthropes, and runaway inflation!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on September 27, 2011, 06:48:55 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 27, 2011, 02:16:15 AM
i've put about equal amounts into both, i'm guessing.
bullets haven't gone up as much in nominal terms, but when the event occurs, they will be much more valuable, i think.
hm...
i could load up some shot shells with silver dimes, and get the best of both worlds!  and i'm protected against lycanthropes, misanthropes, and runaway inflation!

:lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 27, 2011, 07:59:31 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15057859

QuoteEuropean bank shares have risen as investors react to the latest attempts to stabilise the eurozone debt crisis.

A number of measures are being discussed according to reports from the weekend's international meeting in Washington.

They are expected to involve a 50% write-down of Greece's massive government debt, the BBC's business editor Robert Peston says.

French and German bank shares were up 10% at one stage in Monday trading.

European governments hope to have measures agreed in five to six weeks, in time for a meeting of the leaders of the G20 group in Cannes at the beginning of November.

But EU officials in Brussels stress that they should not be seen as "a single grand plan", the BBC's correspondent Chris Morris says.

Quotethe BBC's correspondent Chris Morris says.

QuoteChris Morris

This explains oh so very much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Morris_%28satirist%29).  We are living in a real life version of Brass Eye (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 27, 2011, 11:40:57 AM
Quote from: Nigel on September 26, 2011, 07:27:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 26, 2011, 07:03:28 PM
Nigel, it appears i could still buy Ag cheaper by going with 90% coinage, which i would prefer.

DP, I don't know if they will temper their monetization from fears of inflation.  the people in charge of that decision aren't as effected by it, no? I've been under the impression that global monetization looks baked in the cake...

ETA: Thanks for the links, Nigel!  will keep them on file.

How much cheaper, and where? Because Rio and MS sell at spot price as of the minute you complete your order. If you're looking as casting grain prices on the website, you're looking at approximate prices as of the last update. If you're ordering a milled product, of course, it's something like spot + 10%.
T27 u MIGHT TRY 310 SW Wasington Link Later Maybe:

Same Board Game as these Tigard #'$ "DOWNTOWN' (http://www.ajpm.com) Silver    $32.64    $32.74      up      1.89
um MAYBE the address is 340 {i forget) on the South Side of the Street though
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 27, 2011, 11:51:08 AM
http://www.equibase.com/static/chart/quick/index.html?SAP=TN
2:55am the address was 304 Washington {My 4get 'EM . Today at 02:55:22 AM
3:21 bid
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 04:16:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 27, 2011, 07:59:31 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15057859

QuoteEuropean bank shares have risen as investors react to the latest attempts to stabilise the eurozone debt crisis.

A number of measures are being discussed according to reports from the weekend's international meeting in Washington.

They are expected to involve a 50% write-down of Greece's massive government debt, the BBC's business editor Robert Peston says.

French and German bank shares were up 10% at one stage in Monday trading.

European governments hope to have measures agreed in five to six weeks, in time for a meeting of the leaders of the G20 group in Cannes at the beginning of November.

But EU officials in Brussels stress that they should not be seen as "a single grand plan", the BBC's correspondent Chris Morris says.

Quotethe BBC's correspondent Chris Morris says.

QuoteChris Morris

This explains oh so very much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Morris_%28satirist%29).  We are living in a real life version of Brass Eye (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye).

This explains EVERYTHING !!! :lulz:

Right up to the graphs and statistics!

did you know a banker actually shares 95% of its DNA with the Sea Crab ?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 27, 2011, 04:24:02 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 27, 2011, 07:59:31 AM

QuoteChris Morris

This explains oh so very much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Morris_%28satirist%29).  We are living in a real life version of Brass Eye (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye).
:ohnotache:
woah....
that just crinkled my head thinking about the economic crisis as a global candid camera.

also, they're kicking around measures that would include a 50% write down of Greece's debt?
I was under the impression that, although the Greeks thought it was inevitable, everyone wanted to do anything they could to avoid default because it could fucking the whole thing....
so, a 50% write down seems like it would still be a huge issue, i would think.  have they simply calculated that it wouldn't likely tip the first domino at that level of reneging?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 27, 2011, 07:41:42 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 27, 2011, 04:24:02 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 27, 2011, 07:59:31 AM

QuoteChris Morris

This explains oh so very much (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Morris_%28satirist%29).  We are living in a real life version of Brass Eye (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brass_Eye).
:ohnotache:
woah....
that just crinkled my head thinking about the economic crisis as a global candid camera.

also, they're kicking around measures that would include a 50% write down of Greece's debt?
I was under the impression that, although the Greeks thought it was inevitable, everyone wanted to do anything they could to avoid default because it could fucking the whole thing....
so, a 50% write down seems like it would still be a huge issue, i would think.  have they simply calculated that it wouldn't likely tip the first domino at that level of reneging?
If they cancel their debts to the rest of europe but not to the rest of the world?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on September 27, 2011, 09:26:44 PM
i thought that would fuck some large French banks?  and that that would cascade...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 11:34:55 PM
xpost:

Quote from: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 11:15:52 PM
Quote from: BadBeast on September 27, 2011, 11:04:50 PM
A Financial Trader, on the News, telling even a little bit of the ugly truth does not bode well for the rest of us.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15078419

Link to the video clip the article talks about:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15059135

(for some reason I couldnt find it in your article, but I only just read about it on HN)

WOW I saw the link, hadn't seen the video, that's a fucking hefty elephant dose of TROOF on the BBC right there.




btw I don't really get one thing, he says, "in 12 months people's savings gonna disappear". I have some savings (leftover from insurance money when my apt burnt down 2.5y ago), and they're on my bank account. Not my main every-day paying account, but a sub-account that collects a (tiny) amount of interest (like 2% or so).

How's that going to disappear? They can't just empty out my bank account or anything can they?

Or is it more like that the euros in that account in 12 months will suddenly be able to buy much less than they do now?

In which case I'd need to transform them into assets that do keep their value. Not being a corporation or doing tricky things with stocks and bonds, that would basically mean spending that money to buy physical things, no?

I've been thinking about this and Two "physical" things came to mind, getting my eyes lasered and getting a driver's license (which are kinda expensive in NL, and it's stupid weird that I'm 31 and don't have one). Total that's about EUR 3-4k worth of "thing" to have which is not going to change in value (for me) whether the euro goes up or down or whatever, in fact it's even still exactly as valuable WTSHTF.

Is that the right sort of idea I should be thinking about? Or am I completely looking in the wrong direction? I'm not necessarily wanting to make insane profits or anything, it's just that right now I feel pretty secure and want to keep it that way.


[and I'm still kinda wondering whether I should dump them into paying off my students debt
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 28, 2011, 12:44:07 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 11:34:55 PMbtw I don't really get one thing, he says, "in 12 months people's savings gonna disappear". I have some savings (leftover from insurance money when my apt burnt down 2.5y ago), and they're on my bank account. Not my main every-day paying account, but a sub-account that collects a (tiny) amount of interest (like 2% or so).

How's that going to disappear? They can't just empty out my bank account or anything can they?
It disappears if the bank goes bankrupt and can't repay its depositors.  We have the FDIC in the US, which guarantees deposits up to $100,000 in the event of bank failure.  Do your banks have something similar?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 28, 2011, 08:03:47 AM
Under EU law, similar rules apply, and they are backed directly by government, not via a third party corporate-government entity.  So long as the goverment has money, basic savings are assured.

I suspect he means pensions, savings related to various stocks etc
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 28, 2011, 08:08:30 AM
Oh, I remember this guy!  I actually saw him live on BBC 24.  On the one hand, he came across as kind of a douchebag.  But on the other, he said a lot of things which are, well, right.  People did make a killing in the Depression.  As did people in the last recession.  And, like he said, "governments don't rule the world, Goldman Sachs rules the world".  That was the part that made me wonder "who is this guy?  He's being remarkably candid about all of this".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 28, 2011, 03:07:26 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on September 28, 2011, 12:44:07 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on September 27, 2011, 11:34:55 PMbtw I don't really get one thing, he says, "in 12 months people's savings gonna disappear". I have some savings (leftover from insurance money when my apt burnt down 2.5y ago), and they're on my bank account. Not my main every-day paying account, but a sub-account that collects a (tiny) amount of interest (like 2% or so).

How's that going to disappear? They can't just empty out my bank account or anything can they?
It disappears if the bank goes bankrupt and can't repay its depositors.  We have the FDIC in the US, which guarantees deposits up to $100,000 in the event of bank failure.  Do your banks have something similar?

yes. It's something similar and my personal savings are much less than that, so I should be fine :)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 28, 2011, 06:34:04 PM
4:20PM http://www.foodista.com/food/X6576LDB/wisteria at 03:21:42 PM

/-/U?charts_pupU?*2
1 1800(+120) 2 1920(+54) 4 1974(+46) 8 2020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
(http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/member/6/0/9/c/highres_25404732.jpeg)
http://goldprice.org/bob/2006/08/100-and-25-year-gold-price-charts.html

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04/case-shiller-100-year-chart-2011-update/

http://www.tuttleassetmanagement.com/100year/Buy_100_Year_Dow_Chart.aspx


As sometime i REMember prices (of comodities {corn cattle copper)
double / ever 20 years THUS in -60 years 150 75 37 18 $/ca some thin like this
it amazes me how Earththings are so laX in the study of the #'$ actually
pop doubles(*2) pr.con 20 40 80 160 (*8){2^3} get over it _- ^ $/Au tbd Later
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on September 29, 2011, 02:09:35 AM
Traders more reckless than psychopaths

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,788462,00.html (http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,788462,00.html)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 05:13:35 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on September 28, 2011, 06:34:04 PM
4:20PM http://www.foodista.com/food/X6576LDB/wisteria at 03:21:42 PM

/-/U?charts_pupU?*2
1 1800(+120) 2 1920(+54) 4 1974(+46) 8 2020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
(http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/member/6/0/9/c/highres_25404732.jpeg)
http://goldprice.org/bob/2006/08/100-and-25-year-gold-price-charts.html

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04/case-shiller-100-year-chart-2011-update/

http://www.tuttleassetmanagement.com/100year/Buy_100_Year_Dow_Chart.aspx


As sometime i REMember prices (of comodities {corn cattle copper)
double / ever 20 years THUS in -60 years 150 75 37 18 $/ca some thin like this
it amazes me how Earththings are so laX in the study of the #'$ actually
pop doubles(*2) pr.con 20 40 80 160 (*8){2^3} get over it _- ^ $/Au tbd Later

It took me a few minutes, but I understood all of that post as well, eventually.
I really wish it wasn't so hard to decipher what you have to say, because it's very clear the things you understand and know are on a higher order than my own.

That's your thing. OK.  I get it.

Let me guess, mathematician?  (that was a stretch, right?)

Challenge accepted. 
I am glad you're posting more.  I like a good challenge.

Nice you meat you hir.  I'm just a pickle with a leisure suit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on September 29, 2011, 12:39:55 PM
Financial fuckery:

http://radian.org/notebook/porsche

interesting and entertaining story as Porsche ripped the hedgers several billions of new assholes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 29, 2011, 12:50:40 PM
OK, that is pretty funny (barring the suicide thing).

To use a HP&MoR phrase, the hedge funds were playing a level one game, and Porsche were playing a level two game. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 01:01:10 PM
This comment cleared up some questions I had about this regarding disclosure.  Still, good story.

Quote
Volker Hirsch said,

January 10, 2009 @ 1:05 pm

Ivan, this is a very nice account of how shorting works (or, incidentally, does not work). However, you are simplifying things a little: Under German law, a takeover offer has to be made whenever a the shareholding exceeds 30% of the shares of the target. This was the case in late March 2007, and Porsche made a mandatory offer on 28 March 2007 (they also made an offer for all shares in Audi on 16 September 2008). I do believe – and I think this is identical even in the US – that options (not to be confused with executive options) for shares trigger (additional?) mandatory takeover offers or indeed disclosure requirements (unless you are an executive of the company in question), and this is because you can not actually exercise corporate control in any way when you are merely an options holder. It is therefore not nearly as dark and wild-west as you made it appear (although the German public did indeed act very, very surprised over all this).

I also think that some background could have been added: Ferdinand Piech, a member of the Porsche dynasty, used to be VW's CEO and then their non-executive Chairman of the Board. However, there seemed to have been a little bit of a family feud between two strands of the Porsche family...

There are two more aspects that deserve noting, namely:

a) the 20% holding of Lower Saxony. There is a law in place (probably illegal and constantly challenged by the European Commission) whereunder no one can hold more than X% of the voting rights as long as Lower Saxony (the German state where VW's HQ and biggest German plants are based) has a shareholding, effectively preventing the acquisition of full control. Porsche did not like that law but will have impacted short-term corporate control.

b) the history of Porsche and the Porsche family in relation to VW as well as the old-fashioned German industrial culture; for decades, the takeover of large German companies was virtually impossible due to solid cross-shareholding blocks regularly involving Deutsche Bank (Daimler Benz), Allianz Insurance and a number of families and concerns. This was not, however, due to profit maximization or greed, etc but an old-fashioned closed-shop attitude coupled with a sense of entrepreneurial responsibility for the affairs of the state. I doubt that the Porsche board had really been scheming this in order to make a mint through a short squeeze. They were after more! They were after control of the German car industry (Porsche, VW, Audi; bear in mind that the latter two also own Bentley, Lamborghini, Bugatti, etc). Only BMW and Mercedes-Benz are left now that Opel (GM-owned) and Ford are struggling under the woes of their US holding companies.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 29, 2011, 02:35:35 PM
U29 Si' (Comprenda' ! & thanks
don't care much for switching languages at an mS rate
however the sequence seams to have been set ?/? Pueblo, ChalkTalk,
& Navaho (probably NOT Salt {read rights to Left 5:30AM B
OK? where was I? {{ Fountain Lobby 1-3PM Tuesday }} it Thursday
& ReBooT week so yeah?no No doubt the Races begin this Month ..
here in town | http://www.portlandmeadows.com/Entries/Entries/


Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 05:13:35 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on September 28, 2011, 06:34:04 PM
4:20PM http://www.foodista.com/food/X6576LDB/wisteria at 03:21:42 PM

/-/U?charts_pupU?*2
1 1800(+120) 2 1920(+54) 4 1974(+46) 8 2020
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_population
(http://photos1.meetupstatic.com/photos/member/6/0/9/c/highres_25404732.jpeg)
http://goldprice.org/bob/2006/08/100-and-25-year-gold-price-charts.html

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/04/case-shiller-100-year-chart-2011-update/

http://www.tuttleassetmanagement.com/100year/Buy_100_Year_Dow_Chart.aspx


As sometime i REMember prices (of comodities {corn cattle copper)
double / ever 20 years THUS in -60 years 150 75 37 18 $/ca some thin like this
it amazes me how Earththings are so laX in the study of the #'$ actually
pop doubles(*2) pr.con 20 40 80 160 (*8){2^3} get over it _- ^ $/Au tbd Later

It took me a few minutes, but I understood all of that post as well, eventually.
I really wish it wasn't so hard to decipher what you have to say, because it's very clear the things you understand and know are on a higher order than my own.

That's your thing. OK.  I get it.

Let me guess, mathematician?  (that was a stretch, right?)

Challenge accepted. 
I am glad you're posting more.  I like a good challenge.

Nice you meat you hir.  I'm just a pickle with a leisure suit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on September 29, 2011, 05:58:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 29, 2011, 12:50:40 PM
OK, that is pretty funny (barring the suicide thing).

To use a HP&MoR phrase, the hedge funds were playing a level one game, and Porsche were playing a level two game. 

Personally I'd like to see more wealthy people commiting suicide.  If he'd been an American he would most likely have been bailed out.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on September 29, 2011, 08:42:59 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on September 29, 2011, 05:58:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 29, 2011, 12:50:40 PM
OK, that is pretty funny (barring the suicide thing).

To use a HP&MoR phrase, the hedge funds were playing a level one game, and Porsche were playing a level two game. 

Personally I'd like to see more wealthy people commiting suicide.  If he'd been an American he would most likely have been bailed out.

Hey, guess what?  Fuck you.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 29, 2011, 09:03:10 PM
Former member of the Bush Economic Team, Phillipa Malmgren (http://www.pippamalmgren.com/75.html), is predicting Germany is going to reintroduce the Deutsche Mark:

http://www.pippamalmgren.com/77.html

QuoteNews to expect in the coming days and weeks:

    * Greece defaults
    * Germany protects German banks but other countries cannot do the same thus quickly provoking multiple sovereign defaults and or bank failures, all of which may easily lead to a payments crisis in the global banking system. Derivatives are particularly at risk in terms of operation and execution.
    * The Euro falls in value especially against the US dollar
    * The Germans announce they are re-introducing the Deutschmark. They have already ordered the new currency and asked that the printers hurry up.
    * The Euro falls even more on any news that Germany is withdrawing from the Euro.
    *  Legal wrangling begins as to the legality of Germany's decision. Resolution takes years.
    * Germany insists that the Euro continues to exist even they do not use it any longer. They emphasize that European unification will continue and suggest new legal instruments to strengthen European Unification including new EU Treaties.

If true....woah.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on September 29, 2011, 09:22:13 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on September 29, 2011, 05:58:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 29, 2011, 12:50:40 PM
OK, that is pretty funny (barring the suicide thing).

To use a HP&MoR phrase, the hedge funds were playing a level one game, and Porsche were playing a level two game.  

Personally I'd like to see more wealthy people commiting suicide.  If he'd been an American he would most likely have been bailed out.

I'm wealthy and I hope you commit suicide, it would make me feel more wealthy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 29, 2011, 09:24:48 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on September 29, 2011, 05:58:00 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 29, 2011, 12:50:40 PM
OK, that is pretty funny (barring the suicide thing).

To use a HP&MoR phrase, the hedge funds were playing a level one game, and Porsche were playing a level two game. 

Personally I'd like to see more wealthy people commiting suicide.  If he'd been an American he would most likely have been bailed out.

Personally, I'd like to see more people on welfare committing suicide.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 29, 2011, 09:25:44 PM
Of course, we have to take into consideration that the main reason he wants to see people commit suicide is so he can get his rocks off.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 29, 2011, 10:52:27 PM
I thought it was because making stupid, inflammatory statements gets people to respond to him.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 29, 2011, 10:59:55 PM


2











Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 11:04:24 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on September 29, 2011, 10:59:55 PM


2

I meant the important ones hir.









Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2011, 11:33:54 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-30/morgan-stanley-seen-as-risky-as-italian-banks-in-swaps-market.html

QuoteMorgan Stanley (MS), which owns the world's largest retail brokerage, is being priced in the credit- default swaps market as less creditworthy than most U.S., U.K. and French banks and as risky as Italy's biggest lenders.

The cost of buying the swaps, or CDS, which offer protection against a default of New York-based Morgan Stanley's debt for five years, has surged to 456 basis points, or $456,000, for every $10 million of debt insured, from 305 basis points on Sept. 15, according to prices provided by London-based CMA. Italy's Intesa Sanpaolo SpA (ISP) has CDS trading at 405 basis points, and UniCredit SpA (UCG) at 424, the data show. A basis point is one-hundredth of a percent.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 30, 2011, 12:37:47 PM


ok Lemme get back to political realALity
from the '96 eLection (in Oregon) REMember in OUght eLeven/TWELVE
IZ RUNNING for Dictator. it started years ago in Portland Or.
the outgoing Mayor opened the Political process and 19people ran
it cost $40 to sign on so i paid $40  what ever year it was & got my .pic
in the Oregonian, the local NEws PAPER i got 40 votes according to eLections
ploting the votes counted vs $ SPENT it was a straight line UP from 40V/40$
to the top, the top two EarL & K* were not installed & Margret was put in
END of $ Dime after that i never bothered with the Media $ and every eLection
ran for one office or another (via Talk radio) pre Computers & on Computers
once that was possible (by '96) in 96 i ran against Hatfield because i did
think sending all of Oregons Forest to Japan for tha Maid in Japan TV docQue
drama anti HiR about NewClear power was wrong
So anyway wanting to make sure you UNderstood this instead of running
against just the one up for reeLection i took a Zerox copy of the LegaL
paper the go Mint had requested to both senators office. they both resigned
& THAT is the way it was. boo2u2  never heard a PeeP

Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on September 30, 2011, 02:09:50 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on September 30, 2011, 12:37:47 PM


ok Lemme get back to political realALity
from the '96 eLection (in Oregon) REMember in OUght eLeven/TWELVE
IZ RUNNING for Dictator. it started years ago in Portland Or.
the outgoing Mayor opened the Political process and 19people ran
it cost $40 to sign on so i paid $40  what ever year it was & got my .pic
in the Oregonian, the local NEws PAPER i got 40 votes according to eLections
ploting the votes counted vs $ SPENT it was a straight line UP from 40V/40$
to the top, the top two EarL & K* were not installed & Margret was put in
END of $ Dime after that i never bothered with the Media $ and every eLection
ran for one office or another (via Talk radio) pre Computers & on Computers
once that was possible (by '96) in 96 i ran against Hatfield because i did
think sending all of Oregons Forest to Japan for tha Maid in Japan TV docQue
drama anti HiR about NewClear power was wrong
So anyway wanting to make sure you UNderstood this instead of running
against just the one up for reeLection i took a Zerox copy of the LegaL
paper the go Mint had requested to both senators office. they both resigned
& THAT is the way it was. boo2u2  never heard a PeeP

Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.

I'm completely lost on this in relation to the topic.  I'll try again after I mainline some more caffeine.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 30, 2011, 02:28:17 PM
This summed up a lot for me:

"Patience is running out in the international community," Osborne said. "The eurozone has six weeks to resolve this political crisis."

SIX WEEKS!

We've been talking about how to resolve this crisis for two months. More, really! Part of what has the markets shitting bricks is the fact that nothing actually seems to be happening! People talk and talk and talk but there have been very few and very stilted measures put in place to try and fix anything.

This kind of statement really makes it hard to imagine politicians are actually taking this seriously. Six weeks is a hell of a long time, and even if that is seen as the timetable, he should be saying that it needs to be resolved as soon as possible, not saying there's probably at least another six weeks of bibble ahead.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2011, 02:32:07 PM
I thought that statement was a perfect example of Osbourne's childishness and lack of political experience.

I expect the ECB said "yes, George dear", patted him on the head, burped him and put him to bed, then went back to their discussions.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 30, 2011, 03:29:43 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on September 29, 2011, 08:47:25 PM
I had written up a wordy, not very nice reply to that over lunch and deleted it because it was pissing me off and I'm in a pretty damn good mood today and don't want to change that.

But yeah, LMNO.  Sometimes 2 words is more than enough.

I did the same.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 30, 2011, 03:47:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 30, 2011, 02:32:07 PM
I thought that statement was a perfect example of Osbourne's childishness and lack of political experience.

I expect the ECB said "yes, George dear", patted him on the head, burped him and put him to bed, then went back to their discussions.

:lulz:

And I think that "six weeks" is probably contingent on some policy or other running out or expiring at that point in time?  I thought it was policy-related, that time frame...or maybe I heard the NPR report wrong, I disremember.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2011, 03:48:32 PM
I believe six weeks from when he said it is the end of October...when Greece runs out of money, without another tranche of the bailout cash being provided.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 30, 2011, 03:51:04 PM
It was the deadline for when leaders of the G20 group will next meet IIRC. I think it was only said a few days ago... could be mistaken though, there's a lot of stupid pouring out of financial news.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Jenne on September 30, 2011, 03:55:56 PM
THAT's what it was.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 30, 2011, 05:17:27 PM
If that is the reasoning, Osborne's even more of a neophyte than I previously thought.

G20 = utterly useless talking shop, whose only purpose is to make the EU decision-making process look speedy and efficient.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on September 30, 2011, 05:20:33 PM
Every word out of Osbourne's mouth makes me wish Vince Cable had somehow wrested the job from him.

Possibly in some sort of cage match. Cable might be old, but he's also a survivor, and I think Osbourne would faint at the sight of his own blood.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on October 01, 2011, 02:40:16 AM
Quote from: Cain on September 29, 2011, 09:03:10 PM
Former member of the Bush Economic Team, Phillipa Malmgren (http://www.pippamalmgren.com/75.html), is predicting Germany is going to reintroduce the Deutsche Mark:

http://www.pippamalmgren.com/77.html

QuoteNews to expect in the coming days and weeks:

    * Greece defaults
    * Germany protects German banks but other countries cannot do the same thus quickly provoking multiple sovereign defaults and or bank failures, all of which may easily lead to a payments crisis in the global banking system. Derivatives are particularly at risk in terms of operation and execution.
    * The Euro falls in value especially against the US dollar
    * The Germans announce they are re-introducing the Deutschmark. They have already ordered the new currency and asked that the printers hurry up.
    * The Euro falls even more on any news that Germany is withdrawing from the Euro.
    *  Legal wrangling begins as to the legality of Germany's decision. Resolution takes years.
    * Germany insists that the Euro continues to exist even they do not use it any longer. They emphasize that European unification will continue and suggest new legal instruments to strengthen European Unification including new EU Treaties.

If true....woah.

Looking through her article, all I could find was this:
QuoteHis [meaning the German finance minister] reference to "monetary reform" is telling. He did not say "fiscal reform". Fiscal reform would potentially cure the problem. Instead he says "monetary reform" meaning Germany pulls out of the Euro and prints DMarks again.

I'm not savvy enough on economic terminology - is that really how economists would read the difference  between "fiscal" and "monetary?"

Also, I may have missed it, but I couldn't find a reference to Germany having already ordered the new currency anywhere in her article.  Seems like if it's true, that's not the sort of move that would be easy to hide, and if it is the case, why hasn't the shit hit the fan already?
Title: Re: Financi 1st WEEK / Oct
Post by: hirley0 on October 01, 2011, 04:58:01 PM
Sat 10/1 Gold Silver & Copper wiLL be reMonitized (revalued)
as happens prior to most RIF (Reductions in Force) TBC
ALSO Old Oregon FOREST tree WOOD contaminated by Japanese ACTIVITY wiLL be too
= = = ===
S2 Listen? its ReBooT week eXpect NOTHing links to 35$ gold T
M3 YEAH THERE aRe links somewhere & C Me's 2 Not today?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on October 01, 2011, 05:46:25 PM
Quote from: deadfong on October 01, 2011, 02:40:16 AM
Also, I may have missed it, but I couldn't find a reference to Germany having already ordered the new currency anywhere in her article.  Seems like if it's true, that's not the sort of move that would be easy to hide, and if it is the case, why hasn't the shit hit the fan already?

Yes, I wondered about that as well.

I scanned the article and couldn't find it either, except the statement Cain quotes. All the rest is a lot of very technical financial arguments, so I can't judge a lot about the validity of those, but if Germany has already ordered and urging the printers to hurry up, that's a very clear signal.

Asking my gf (who's German) she said there's only a tiny minority party (less than 1%) in Germany that wants to get rid of the Euro, though I don't know the details of that either. And it could very well be that some major parties would go along as soon as the financial institutions say it's the only way.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 01, 2011, 06:12:06 PM
It should be pointed out, the person I quoted is a political analyst for a financial consulting firm - their job is to outguess the headlines, and before they become headlines.

She seems to be a fairly credible person, her association with the Bush administration nonwithstanding - therefore while I'm sceptical of such a claim, I cannot completely dismiss it.  I would imagine, if Germany were looking to reintroduce the Mark, it would initially be under circumstances of great secrecy, with only the very politically connected able to find out what is going on.

If that is indeed the case.  There are...vested interests in seeing the Euro destroyed, after all, and such news could be disinformation, calculated to spread dissension in European Union ranks.  Either way, it is worth keeping an eye on...just in case.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 02, 2011, 01:05:21 PM
Nice to see that economic reform is strengthening the UK economy http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/oct/01/sharp-rise-demand-food-handouts

QuoteBritain has seen a sharp increase in the number of people unable to afford to feed themselves at the most basic level, thanks to the worsening economic climate and changes to the benefit system, according to a survey by a leading food charity.

In the past year FareShare, which redistributes waste food from major food manufacturers and supermarkets to social care charities, has seen a 20% rise in the number of people it is feeding – from 29,500 a year to 35,000.

And many of those, blighted by rising unemployment and business failures, are coming from the sorts of stable family backgrounds once considered immune to the worst effects of recession.

Something is going to have to give, eventually.  Sadly, I think it is more likely to be these poor saps than somone more deserving of such a fate.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 08:15:59 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15176947

QuoteThe Italian government's credit rating has been slashed by Moody's from Aa2 to A2 with a negative outlook.

The ratings agency blamed a "material increase in long-term funding risks for the euro area", due to lost confidence in eurozone government debts.

Despite Rome's low current borrowing needs, and low private-sector debt levels in Italy, Moody's said market sentiment had turned against the euro.

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi said the decision was expected.

QuoteAnalysts say Italy's downgrade is likely to be followed by similar cuts in the credit rating of Italy's banks, which would put severe pressure on their ability to borrow.

"This downgrade will make it even harder for Italy to borrow," says BBC business editor Robert Peston. "However, that is not the worst of it.

"If Italy is looking like a more risky place to lend, its banks... will find it harder and more expensive to borrow. The [eurozone] banking crisis will be exacerbated."

The rationale for Moody's downgrade will also be worrying for other eurozone governments, such as Spain, whose borrowing costs have also risen like Italy's as markets have lost confidence in their creditworthiness.

Moody's also raised warnings about Italy's growth outlook, citing structural economic problems in Italy, as well as the global economic slowdown.

Another problem noted by the rating agency was what it called political and economic "implementation risks".

"The question is, if [eurozone governments] will move fast enough... to really put in place a credible solution," says Robert Peston.

QuoteThe Italian government has for several years earned more in tax revenues than it spends. However, the government also has a large outstanding debt - equivalent to nearly 120% of GDP.

The government relies heavily on the markets' willingness to relend these debts as they come due, and to lend it the cost of meeting its interest payments.

Moody's said that Italy could be further downgraded to "substantially lower rating levels" if a further deterioration in investor sentiment made it even harder for the country to raise cash from the markets.

Italy's cost of borrowing rose sharply over the summer on market fears that a slowdown in Italian growth could make existing debts unsustainable.

That prompted the European Central Bank to intervene by buying up Italy's debts - a controversial policy in Germany. But despite the ECB's action, Italian borrowing costs have begun to creep up again in recent weeks.

Fuck
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 05, 2011, 08:52:37 AM
Things are going to move faster now. There was going to be a bit of time between Greece's inevitable bailout and Italy going broke but now we're probably going to go straight from one to then next, if If not before... Having to deal with Greece and Italy at the same time would be disastrous.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 09:11:07 AM
One of the many problems with the EU is that, while it recognizes it has a serious problem when it comes to crisis decision-making, historically it has only recognized a need for crisis decision-making in terms of military-conflict zones, such as the Bosnian and Kosovo Crisis.  In other words, it has worked to overcome its institutional paralysis, but only when it comes to those issues.  It was never considered that crisis mechanisms might be required for economic decision-making.

Probably because the EU was built during a time when the ratings agencies weren't acting like marauding bandits, destabilizing national economies for fun and profit.

To be honest, I am surprised they are even managing to cope with the Greece crisis.  If an Italian crisis does hit at the same time...as you say, it would be disastrous.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 09:44:49 AM
David Cameron, economic genius:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15171917

QuoteDavid Cameron is expected to tell UK households to pay off their credit and store card debts in his keynote speech to the Conservative conference later.

The prime minister will argue that the debt crisis was caused by individuals - as well as businesses, banks and government - borrowing too much.

Pay it off with what?  I'm in a privileged position here, I admit, the only debt I have to pay off is my student loan, and depending on exactly how quickly I want rid of it, I could do that in two years.  Most people, however, are not in my position.  They are suffering wage freezes, job uncertainty and rising commodity prices.  They are lucky to be breaking even, and a lot of people are living a couple of paychecks away from bankruptcy.

And the debt crisis was caused by individuals - but not the ones with too much debt on their credit cards.  More like individuals in charge of the investment arms of Barclay's Bank - who played a very worrying role in the collapse of Lehman Brothers, those who decided to offer loans without even minimal checks on ability of their customers to pay, and those who gave such loans triple A credit ratings.  Oh, and those who then bunched together those loans into CDOs and sold them far and wide, those banks who forged ahead purposefully with a policy of maximum exposure (so they would be "too big to fail") etc etc

Private, individual debt is only a problem because the banks and the government insist on using the taxpayers as lenders of first resort and there isn't enough in the coffers to keep that kind of game going on for too long.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 05, 2011, 09:47:54 AM
Christ, what an asshole.

The Conservatives really are determined to prove they have no fucking clue what the situation of the vast majority of people actually is.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 05, 2011, 09:51:58 AM
If all these awful poor people would pay off their credit cards we wouldn't be in this mess.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:02:37 AM
The Conservative Conference (and the media reaction to it) has been a steady source of lail for the past few days.

In Chateau Cain, many laughs were had at the Guardian writers who kept on insisting Iain Duncan-Smith was the moral, progressive and compassionate heart of the coalition government.  He of the "get on a bus" to find work and "work for free and maybe you'll get hired eventually" fame, and of constant lying on his CV does not strike us as very compassionate or moral.

Not to mention Teresa May's now infamous lying about the ECHR, deportation and cats.  Even the media could not pretend to soberly assess so utterly obvious a lie.

Praising Boris Johnson's well practised approach of public idiocy - completely missing the point that he does it precisely so the papers wont take him seriously, nor punish him unduly for his incompetence and bizarre policy choices.

But back to the economics.  There is a general strike in Greece today.  I'm not sure how that differs from the 20 or so other general strikes since 2008, but I thought you'd all like to know.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:40:27 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/04/financial-crisis-welcome-to-new-normal

QuotePanic on markets reflects a growing mood that Greece will inevitably default, triggering another Great Depression

Welcome to the new normal. Billions of pounds were wiped off the value of shares in London on Tuesday 4 October. Dexia, a bank jointly owned by the French and the Belgians, teetered on the brink of collapse. One of the main barometers of Wall Street sentiment slid into bear-market territory. An emergency press conference called by Greece's finance minister was delayed because the building was being picketed by civil servants.

The UK construction sector looked like it was heading for recession as public sector projects dry up and in Spain more than one in five are out of work. The French and Belgian governments were forced to pledge that no depositor in Dexia would lose a cent let alone a euro as they tried to avoid a Northern Rock-style run on the bank. Traders, unsurprisingly, were scrabbling for their tin hats.

The turmoil overshadowed the Conservative party conference in Manchester just as it did three years ago in Birmingham when the shock waves from the collapse of Lehman Brothers diverted attention from David Cameron's attempts to portray himself as a prime minister in waiting. Coalition ministers know now, as Gordon Brown as his team knew then, that the global economy is teetering on the brink of recession. Jean Claude-Trichet, in his last few days as president of the European Central Bank, said: "We are experiencing the worst crisis since world war two."

The man in charge of America's central bank, Ben Bernanke, said the Federal Reserve would do whatever it takes to get the US economy moving again. His comments helped lighten the mood on Wall Street and limit the fall in London's FTSE 100 to 131 points.

Even so, the FTSE closed below 5000 for the first time since July 2010.

For those who believe that history repeats itself, Dexia plays the role of Bear Stearns in this unfolding tragedy. The US government found a buyer for the Bear in the spring of 2008 but failed to do the same for Lehmans six months later. Dexia will be saved courtesy of French and Belgian taxpayers. Next up is Greece, and there the endgame is now inevitably going to be default.

The panic-stricken reaction of the markets over the past few days reflects a growing mood in the financial markets that the default will not be managed and orderly but messy, with knock-on effects not just for the rest of the eurozone but for the entire world economy.

Banks will go bust, credit will dry up, trade will wither, jobs will be shed. Greece, Lehman Brothers 2.0, will be the prelude to the second Great Depression, something policy-makers were congratulating themselves on avoiding only a few months ago.

http://www.dsnews.com/articles/job-loss-could-put-one-in-three-homeowners-out-of-their-home-2011-09-30

QuoteDespite being more affluent, the poll found that even those with higher annual household incomes indicate they are not guaranteed to make their next housing payment if they lost their source of income.

Ten percent of survey respondents earning $100K or more a year say they would immediately miss a payment....

Sixty-one percent of those surveyed said if they were handed a pink slip, they would not be able to continue to make their mortgage or rent payment longer than five months.

http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/09/the-federal-reserve-seeks-social-media-monitoring-program.php?ref=fpc

QuoteThe Federal Reserve Bank of New York wants to know what you are Tweeting, Facebooking and YouTubing. Apparently, a simple Google search for posts about the Fed doesn't suffice, as the bank has issued a request for proposal soliciting the creation of a "Sentiment Analysis And Social Media Monitoring Solution," which would allow it to gather all of the comments posted about it online and distinguish between positive and negative commentary.

The RFP, uncovered by the blog Zero Hedge on Sunday, calls for a far-reaching, customizable social dashboard that "must be able to gather data from the primary social media platforms -Facebook, Twitter, Blogs, Forums and YouTube. It should also be able to aggregate data from various media outlets such as: CNN, WSJ, Factiva etc."

It also specifies that the solution should "monitor billions of conversations and generate text analytics based on predefined criteria...also determine the sentiment of a speaker or writer with respect to some topic or document."

Fuck
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 05, 2011, 10:53:04 AM
Is there any good way to brace for impact for whats coming? In a panic people dive on gold but over the last couple of weeks I'm not so sure as to its saftey.
people are diving on the Swiss franc but they devalued it to stop people raising it.
Canada and australia seemed to do ok in 2008, would there currancies be stable enough to keep a nest egg in either of them?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Australia is looking more unsteady now than it was in 2008 - unsure as to exactly why, however.  Canada...well, there I have no clue, though I have some ideas of where to look to get one.

I'll try and get back to you on that, though I may need to sleep before doing so.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 05, 2011, 10:58:04 AM
Australia is tied to China economically IIRC - they have massive trade links, so where the Chinese market goes, so too goes the Australian market.

As it looks like the demand for Chinese exports is going to plummet through the floor, the Chinese are likely to drag Australia down with them.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 05, 2011, 11:02:00 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Australia is looking more unsteady now than it was in 2008 - unsure as to exactly why, however.  Canada...well, there I have no clue, though I have some ideas of where to look to get one.

I'll try and get back to you on that, though I may need to sleep before doing so.

Sorry Cain, I just assumed you'd know, didn't mean to send you off on a research mission.

Squid, that sounds about right.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2011, 11:09:12 AM
Quote from: Faust on October 05, 2011, 11:02:00 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Australia is looking more unsteady now than it was in 2008 - unsure as to exactly why, however.  Canada...well, there I have no clue, though I have some ideas of where to look to get one.

I'll try and get back to you on that, though I may need to sleep before doing so.

Sorry Cain, I just assumed you'd know, didn't mean to send you off on a research mission.

Squid, that sounds about right.

It's alright.  I had heard the Canadian banks fared better than most in the financial crisis, so I am interested as well.  I suspect lack of demand may be hitting them hard though, as well as reduced energy prices.

And DS has the money on Australia's main trading partner.  Japan is also a very big market for Australia, too.  Bigger than the whole Eurozone, for example.  After that, it's India and South Korea.

Australia still exports more than it imports, which is a good sign.  However, Australian imports have gone up from last year, by 7%.  That doesn't look too healthy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Rumckle on October 05, 2011, 11:23:28 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 05, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Australia is looking more unsteady now than it was in 2008 - unsure as to exactly why, however.

At a guess I would put it to a couple of reasons:

- The possibly upcoming carbon tax, and the great deal of uncertainty surrounding it (neither the government or the opposition has complete control of the house of reps at the moment, so passing any legislation is very difficult)

- Our manufacturing industry is suffering atm, though that has been steadily decreasing for a while I believe.

- There is also shaky consumer confidence, but that is the same everywhere in the world, so I doubt that has much impact
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 05, 2011, 12:38:24 PM
The UK recovery has been exposed as weaker than reported, and the recession deeper - growth between April and June was 0.1 rather than 0.2, growth for the previous quarter was reduced to 0.1 per cent. GDP fell 7.1% rather than the previous 6.4% estimate, over the course of the recession. All data comes from the ONS.

This means that GDP has essentially not grown for 9 months now. Household spending has been consistently dropping along with the price of essentials - such as food and clothing - rising at a faster than expected rate. The growth has primarily been in the services sector. The Bank of England had been expecting the figures to be revised up rather than down, and the fact it went down is another blow to the government's growth strategy.

So as the rest of the world starts to decline, our growth has also been nonexistent, and the government is determined to 'stay the course' 'sail through these rough water' and other such metaphors. Whilst placing the blame on individual citizens rather than institutions and irresponsible bankers.

As an aside, it really bugs me how these forecasts are always described as 'gloomy'. As though they are upset and need cheering up. Maybe we could perk the economy up by giving the forecasters a lollipop or something.
Title: Re: Financi 1st WEEK / Oct
Post by: hirley0 on October 05, 2011, 03:07:45 PM
s8 Shirley? ida rather the FIB's had not taken TOPPER nO I DONT WANT IT RETURNED
F7 >>>>

U6
2011 10/05  09:11 AM pdT FOR POSTING TOMORROW?
-
there has been A Question Raised about the generator?
= =
So? REMember My approach ? i was REMoved from the U for writing E-Mail
among other eXplinations They would give you { never mind that tail
: : :
My point is i was schooled by E.C.Snyder whom among other things
Named eLement 110 after me (My Birth Month) JanuaryIUm |E.C. Left
Menlo (T. Edison) because T.E. did "NOT" believe in Radio. EC did
? ? ? ?
thus i'v A western (Native view of this subject}? Not Eastern ..
OK the above was in the 60's Many years prior to the German Town Name
Never Mind Chemistry EC was an ASSsayer. As far as the Prime Mover
of the GRID (RuRal eL(Boniville P}I ate at that Table| Peach cobler
/TilT\
So yes: i've an 0-Pinion about this: eLectricty should be rationed.
Look for years & years the main source has been about the same
MOVE (A copper Wire}? thru a magnetic field (Watch A wind Turbine)
AM opposed {ASSsetically){never mind)(Recently Electrons have been?
~bt~
d'rived by other Means ( i favor others = indiaN's ways & Means2 }
However some consideration needs to be given to the (i'LL call it)
the Tesla problem ?/? 'poise a very large (Sphere}? is pumped fuLL
of Electrons ?{Right}? those come from somewhere
.BB.
the consideration may be (what hapens to the source}? the sink(sphere)
becomes charged (-) thus the sorce (having lost eLectron}? may be
becoming positivly charge. & what happens to Earth once it does do
this. I asK You Tom. does it simply fall apart and turn to dust ?/?


20111005 'india-N'
W5 (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=30433.0)  

M3 YEAH THERE aRe links somewhere & C Me's 2 Not today?

S2 Listen? its ReBooT week eXpect NOTHing links to 35$ gold T

Quote from: hirley0 on October 01, 2011, 04:58:01 PM
Sat 10/1 Gold Silver & Copper wiLL be reMonitized (revalued)
as happens prior to most RIF (Reductions in Force) TBC
ALSO Old Oregon FOREST tree WOOD contaminated by Japanese ACTIVITY wiLL be too

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 07, 2011, 09:45:31 AM
http://rt.com/news/finance-war-usa-banks/ on 12/08/2011

QuoteMax Keiser, financial analyst and host of the Keiser Report on RT, said French banks are now loaded with toxic derivatives that were sold to them by US investment banks.

"The US investment banks and the rating agencies are now attacking these French banks. They know where the bodies are buried, and they are using the weapons they sold them to attack them," he said. "The rating will be downgraded again. This is part of a new era on Wall Street – they go after sovereign debt. Wall Street and rating agencies are working together to destabilize the sovereign debt of these countries," he added.

Today

http://www.businessinsider.com/imf-advisor-could-see-eurozone-meltdown-in-2-or-3-weeks-2011-10

QuoteIn an interview on the BBC (via ZeroHedge), IMF advisor Robert Shapiro said some incredibly alarmist things.

He tells broadcasters that if eurozone leaders don't address the crisis properly we will see a meltdown as soon as later this month.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15211230

QuoteMoody's has downgraded the credit rating of 12 UK financial firms including Lloyds TSB, RBS, Nationwide and Santander UK.

Moody's said it now believed the UK government was less likely to support some firms if they got into trouble.

However, the firm emphasised that the downgrades did not "reflect a deterioration in the financial strength of the banking system".

Bank shares fell initially, with RBS 3.8% down and Lloyds 3.4% off.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15210112

QuoteBank of England governor Mervyn King has said this financial crisis could be the worst the UK has ever seen.

His comments came after the Bank authorised the injection of a further £75bn into the economy through quantitative easing (QE).

Explaining the move Sir Mervyn told Sky News: "This is the most serious financial crisis we've seen at least since the 1930s, if not ever."

The Bank has already pumped £200bn into the economy.

It has done this by buying assets such as government bonds, in an attempt to boost lending by commercial banks.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/07/us-dexia-ratings-idUSTRE79608J20111007

Quote(Reuters) - Standard and Poor's on Friday downgraded the core banks of Franco-Belgian financial group Dexia (DEXI.BR) by one notch, citing difficulties in securing wholesale funding and the need for increased collateral.

The ratings agency also said it could take further action, including further downgrades or even an upgrade, depending on how a proposed restructuring panned out.

The board of Dexia, whose shares are suspended, will meet in Paris on Saturday to vote on a break-up plan after Belgium and France pledged to guarantee its financing in the face of a share-price slide.

"We expect to resolve the CreditWatch placement once we have more information about what the restructuring means for Dexia's operating banks and more details about accompanying support that the French and Belgian governments could provide," S&P said in a statement.

S&P said it had lowered ratings by one notch to 'A-/A-2' on Dexia Credit Local, Dexia Bank and Dexia Banque Internationale a Luxembourg, which together represented over 90 percent of the group's consolidated assets.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-04/ocbc-reports-luring-clients-from-french-banks-amid-debt-crisis.html

QuoteOversea-Chinese Banking Corp. said it is attracting assets from the Singapore branches of French banks as the euro region's debt crisis spooks wealthy clients.

"There's a lot of outflows from French banks because of the European debt crisis," Renato de Guzman, chief executive officer of Oversea-Chinese's private-banking unit, said in an interview. "Investors are panicking at the moment."

Defections from French banks, including BNP Paribas (BNP) SA, helped generate net new money of about $4 billion for Bank of Singapore this year, Guzman said. The private bank had $29.6 billion of assets under management at the end of June, less than 9 percent of the total at BNP Paribas's wealth management unit.

Just saying.  Keiser's delivery is typically overblown, if you ever watch his show, but it's hard to deny the analysis underpinning his assertion above.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 08, 2011, 05:30:58 PM
https://my.pdx.edu/cp/home/check/pre
Firefox has detected that the server is redirecting
the request for this address in a way that will never complete.
==============================================
S9 SO? YEAH: because S is odd  ^BOTTOMS UP WEEK^ aLL week Long
M10 yeah But FFt is top down anyway (Right}?
T11 4:58:26 AM  TEAL {
W12 8:13:08 YEAH APPEARENTLY   :fnord:  DD (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=30510.msg1104638#msg1104638)
U13 Can I drop THIS thread aT the end of the weeK?
F14 5:19:38   :fnord:Maybe  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.msg1104314#msg1104314)  its clear i nead a triangle pointing down v
S15 EoP {SHIRLEY  EoT { Prpbabley
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 10, 2011, 01:45:32 PM
Oh, well, we know Sarkozy and Merkel are taking things seriously.  They're going to discuss their agreed on plan at the end of the month.

Never mind there may not be a Eurozone worth saving by the end of this month.  Good to see a sense of urgency at the top of government.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on October 10, 2011, 03:40:43 PM
No doubt unimportant, and will not be convincing to libertarians, but this is a quote from Adam Smith:

"Such [banking] regulations may, no doubt, be considered as in some respect a violation of natural liberty. But those exertions of the natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments; of the most free, as well as or the most despotical. The obligation of building party walls, in order to prevent the communication of fire, is a violation of natural liberty, exactly of the same kind with the regulations of the banking trade which are here proposed."

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pope Pixie Pickle on October 11, 2011, 08:40:38 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/oct/11/goldman-sachs-interest-tax-avoidance?fb=native&CMP=FBCNETTXT9038

Goldman Sachs owes the HMRC £40 million in tax
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: kingyak on October 11, 2011, 08:50:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 10, 2011, 03:40:43 PM
No doubt unimportant, and will not be convincing to libertarians, but this is a quote from Adam Smith:

"Such [banking] regulations may, no doubt, be considered as in some respect a violation of natural liberty. But those exertions of the natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments; of the most free, as well as or the most despotical. The obligation of building party walls, in order to prevent the communication of fire, is a violation of natural liberty, exactly of the same kind with the regulations of the banking trade which are here proposed."



I like the opposite-of-often quoted thing about how providing subsidies for fishing results in more people catching subsidies than fish. (Smith said it much better, of course).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 12, 2011, 11:49:55 AM
Quote from: BBCThe unemployment total for 16-24 year olds hit a record high of 991,000 in the quarter, a jobless rate of 21.3%.

The number of people out of work and claiming benefits rose 17,500 to 1.6 million in September.

Other figures showed a record cut in the number of part-time workers, down by 175,000, and there was also a record reduction of 74,000 in the number of over-65s in employment.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15271800

1/5 unemployment for 16-24 year olds! A total unemployment rate of 8.1% (so still better than EU and USA, which means that Cameron can keep bleating about how his austerity measures are clearly the superior response), and most of the losses were in part time employment - the type that people have been taking in order to have any job at all, and which some have argued has been keeping the 'real' unemployment figures way down.

The cuts are only going to get deeper here, despite these figures. Which is only going to make matters worse for us new entrants to the job market, as people with more experience go for the same entry-level positions just to be able to keep putting food on the table.

It makes me laugh that the 'noughties' are going to be the 'lost' generation. There's some nice symmetry there.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 12, 2011, 11:58:07 AM
Don't forget, people are going to continue working past 65, as well.  I generally disagreed with mandatory retirement anyway, on principle, but it could be said in its favour, it meant there was always a steady flow of people leaving work, and so, as people got promoted to fill new positions, opened up lower level positions to entrants.

Not any more!  Pensions are fucked and prices are rising so fast, retiring now is lunacy.  So in addition to more experienced people coming onto the job market, there will be less places overall, and much less chances for promotion.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Placid Dingo on October 12, 2011, 12:02:45 PM
Quote from: kingyak on October 11, 2011, 08:50:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on October 10, 2011, 03:40:43 PM
No doubt unimportant, and will not be convincing to libertarians, but this is a quote from Adam Smith:

"Such [banking] regulations may, no doubt, be considered as in some respect a violation of natural liberty. But those exertions of the natural liberty of a few individuals, which might endanger the security of the whole society, are, and ought to be, restrained by the laws of all governments; of the most free, as well as or the most despotical. The obligation of building party walls, in order to prevent the communication of fire, is a violation of natural liberty, exactly of the same kind with the regulations of the banking trade which are here proposed."



I like the opposite-of-often quoted thing about how providing subsidies for fishing results in more people catching subsidies than fish. (Smith said it much better, of course).


I started reading Smith a while back. Before his work, the only time I'd heard him was as a kind of anti-Christ figure in Adbusters. I was stunned at how often he pointed out the need for regulation in various areas.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 18, 2011, 03:05:48 PM
Quote
While France had "ample capacity to absorb shocks" but "global financial and economic crisis has led to a deterioration in French government debt metrics – which are now among the weakest of France's triple-A peers", the US-based agency said in a report.

Quote from: Globe and MailFrançois Baroin, the finance minister, told France 2 television that the centre-right government's projection of a 1.75 per cent increase in gross domestic product for 2012 was "probably too high". The growth level is critical to France meeting its target of reducing its budget deficit to 3 per cent of GDP by 2013 and thus controlling its public debt, which is set to exceed 87 per cent of GDP next year.

Moody's pointed out that French government debt metrics "are now among the weakest of France's triple A peers."

Mr. Baroin said it was "indisputable" that the government would have to adapt the growth figure, but said its budget projections would not need adjusting if growth was between 1.5 per cent and 1.75 per cent. Consensus private sector projections expect a figure of 1 per cent.

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/international-news/france-pledges-to-defend-triple-a-rating/article2204597/?service=mobile

So Moody's are clamouring to bring down France next. As France/UK/Germany are traditionally seen as the big three economic forces in Europe, this is very worrying. It seems like the rating agencies are determined to kneecap any confidence at all in Europe right now. Just as we start to hear reports coming in that Europe and the US 'might' be in recession again, and that UK inflation has hit 5.2% (highest recorded level since records began in 1997). And Goldman Sachs has taken a massive hit.

France isn't like Greece or even Italy. France is one of the key pillars in the EU. How this unfolds over the next week or two is likely to have massive implications across all markets. From what I understand, if France is downgraded and seriously implied to be less than solid, the entirety of Europe may as well be built on quicksand and it'll only be a matter of time before we're all dragged into a far deeper and far more bitter credit crunch than the last one.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 18, 2011, 03:07:24 PM
It'll be like that week after Lehman Brother's collapsed...only it will be much, much longer than a week.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 18, 2011, 03:15:55 PM
There's a great video on the FT which talks about how they are being so 'softly softly' in trying not to cast doubt over the rating...

... but at the same time, they admit that basically the markets are so panicky right now that any implication at all is immediately taken as a statement of intent. In fact, they said that by being so overcautious, it may worry the markets more than if they just came out and said what they honestly thought.

I don't believe that this is anything but deliberate, though. The ratings agencies seem determined to shake Europe apart.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 18, 2011, 03:22:36 PM
I'm inclined to agree.

I'm sure I remember Zapatero saying a while back something about the ratings agencies being too open to American political pressure, and certain vested American interests wanted to see the Euro fail.  I only skimmed it the first time around, and now I'm looking for it again, I can't find it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Rev on October 18, 2011, 03:49:24 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 18, 2011, 03:22:36 PM
I'm inclined to agree.

I'm sure I remember Zapatero saying a while back something about the ratings agencies being too open to American political pressure, and certain vested American interests wanted to see the Euro fail.  I only skimmed it the first time around, and now I'm looking for it again, I can't find it.

Would that make the dollar stronger? I can't imagine any other reason the U.S. would want to torpedo the EU
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 18, 2011, 04:16:15 PM
It is difficult to discuss this stuff without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, however... in theory...

The Sovereign Debt Crisis is likely to resolve in one of two ways; either Europe will pull together and become far more united as almost a 'United States of Europe'. This is unpopular amongst the people, so is unlikely to actually happen, but it is definitely a possibility that has been bandied around a lot in debate by commentators. A strong political and fiscal union is the sensible way to address the issues that need to be faced.

It would also be a major threat to the U.S for many reasons. Firstly, the EU is the world's largest market, it is no slouch militarily (though still far behind the US, this has to be borne in mind), it has a lot of resources and a great deal of potential that has never really been unlocked. Basically, Europe would become at the least a superpower and would be rising at a time when the U.S and much of the rest of the world would be declining. At least, that's the theory. Right now, the last thing the U.S needs is more competition.

The second way things are likely to resolve is through retrenchment, the pursuit of narrow self-interest by the constituent states, and this would lead to some states simply collapsing as they do not have the means to grow out of their debt. The European Experiment would fail, in short. There's a very real possibility that the Euro could break up back to national currencies - which would seriously damage Germany's ability to compete as a manufacturer (at the moment, Germany is greatly boosted by a relatively low Euro, far lower than the Mark used to be). This is also likely to flare old resentments and hostilities throughout Europe, and essentially resign the European nations to the background for the foreseeable future. Individually, we simply do not have the means to compete on the global stage with powers like the U.S and China, or rising India/Russia etc.

That latter result is far more beneficial to a certain school of thought in the U.S. Neglecting the fact that the U.S may very well be brought down itself if our banking systems go (what with them all being an entangled mess), and the fact that there is no reason the U.S needs to be a competitor in the strictest sense with Europe.




I'm sure there are other possible explanations too of course; the ratings agencies are a for-profit organization, and have experienced their most profitable decade recently. They could simply be trying to terrify nations away from regulating the industries which allowed them to become so strong. But I'm not informed enough to make a real analysis of how ratings agencies earn money and how they may profit more from downgrading nation states. The above is the best explanation I can come up with... with the caveat that, even to me, it sounds a bit too outrageous to be true.

Regardless of the motivation, however, the actual intent seems transparent. I can see no other reason for the way they have behaved.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Rev on October 18, 2011, 04:27:12 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on October 18, 2011, 04:16:15 PM
It is difficult to discuss this stuff without sounding like a conspiracy theorist, however... in theory...

The Sovereign Debt Crisis is likely to resolve in one of two ways; either Europe will pull together and become far more united as almost a 'United States of Europe'. This is unpopular amongst the people, so is unlikely to actually happen, but it is definitely a possibility that has been bandied around a lot in debate by commentators. A strong political and fiscal union is the sensible way to address the issues that need to be faced.

It would also be a major threat to the U.S for many reasons. Firstly, the EU is the world's largest market, it is no slouch militarily (though still far behind the US, this has to be borne in mind), it has a lot of resources and a great deal of potential that has never really been unlocked. Basically, Europe would become at the least a superpower and would be rising at a time when the U.S and much of the rest of the world would be declining. At least, that's the theory. Right now, the last thing the U.S needs is more competition.

The second way things are likely to resolve is through retrenchment, the pursuit of narrow self-interest by the constituent states, and this would lead to some states simply collapsing as they do not have the means to grow out of their debt. The European Experiment would fail, in short. There's a very real possibility that the Euro could break up back to national currencies - which would seriously damage Germany's ability to compete as a manufacturer (at the moment, Germany is greatly boosted by a relatively low Euro, far lower than the Mark used to be). This is also likely to flare old resentments and hostilities throughout Europe, and essentially resign the European nations to the background for the foreseeable future. Individually, we simply do not have the means to compete on the global stage with powers like the U.S and China, or rising India/Russia etc.

That latter result is far more beneficial to a certain school of thought in the U.S. Neglecting the fact that the U.S may very well be brought down itself if our banking systems go (what with them all being an entangled mess), and the fact that there is no reason the U.S needs to be a competitor in the strictest sense with Europe.




I'm sure there are other possible explanations too of course; the ratings agencies are a for-profit organization, and have experienced their most profitable decade recently. They could simply be trying to terrify nations away from regulating the industries which allowed them to become so strong. But I'm not informed enough to make a real analysis of how ratings agencies earn money and how they may profit more from downgrading nation states. The above is the best explanation I can come up with... with the caveat that, even to me, it sounds a bit too outrageous to be true.

Regardless of the motivation, however, the actual intent seems transparent. I can see no other reason for the way they have behaved.

This actually makes sense. The U.S. has a long standing habit of seeing or inventing boogeymen behind every bush and tree. Washington has always thought they know better than everyone else.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 20, 2011, 11:17:30 AM
The USA likes EU expansion.  However, it hates EU integration.

Anyway, news!

http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/2011/1019/A-long-steep-drop-for-Americans-standard-of-living

QuoteThink life is not as good as it used to be, at least in terms of your wallet? You'd be right about that. The standard of living for Americans has fallen longer and more steeply over the past three years than at any time since the US government began recording it five decades ago.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-18/bofa-said-to-split-regulators-over-moving-merrill-derivatives-to-bank-unit.html

QuoteBank of America Corp. (BAC), hit by a credit downgrade last month, has moved derivatives from its Merrill Lynch unit to a subsidiary flush with insured deposits, according to people with direct knowledge of the situation...

Bank of America's holding company — the parent of both the retail bank and the Merrill Lynch securities unit — held almost $75 trillion of derivatives at the end of June, according to data compiled by the OCC. About $53 trillion, or 71 percent, were within Bank of America NA, according to the data, which represent the notional values of the trades.

That compares with JPMorgan's deposit-taking entity, JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, which contained 99 percent of the New York-based firm's $79 trillion of notional derivatives, the OCC data show.

In other words, the Bank of America is in deep shit.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d433fe8e-fa74-11e0-8fe7-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1bIme96ei

QuoteThe European Union's estimate of the necessary recapitalisation effort compares with a recent Inernational Monetary Fund report that identified a €200bn hole in banks' balance sheets stemming from sovereign debt writedowns. It also falls far short of analyst estimates that banks might have a capital deficit of up to €275bn.

People familiar with the outcome of an emergency stress test of Europe's banks said the European Banking Authority, which ran the exercise, had suggested that about €80bn should be raised.

The stress tests were phony as fuck.  No-one should be taking them seriously, not at least the EBA.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/71981ab6-fa43-11e0-8e7e-00144feab49a.html#ixzz1bIqgIQju

QuoteTo meet the challenge, Europe's leaders are trying to solve three simultaneous problems by Sunday night: putting Greece on a solid foundation through a second bail-out; re-establishing confidence in Europe's largest banks by ordering them to raise capital; and giving the newly empowered €440bn eurozone rescue fund more firepower so it can ensure Greek difficulties do not spread to Italy and larger financial institutions.

But as the summit gets closer, senior European officials are warning that the complexity of the three interlinked problems are so enormous, the differences between Paris and Berlin so large, and the time so short that a credible deal may prove out of reach.

One senior European official, noting that Berlin has begun playing down expectations, says: "They'd rather talk it down now than explain why there's a disaster on Sunday."

In other words, expect a market crash on Monday morning.

http://sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/d1218%20(2).pdf

QuoteThe GAO identified 18 former and current members of the Federal Reserve's board affiliated with banks and companies that received emergency loans from the Federal Reserve during the financial crisis including General Electric, JP Morgan Chase, and Lehman Brothers.

There are no restrictions on directors of the Federal Reserve Board from communicating concerns about their respective banks to the staff of the Federal Reserve.

Many of the Federal Reserve's board of directors own stock or work directly for banks that are supervised and regulated by the Federal Reserve. These board members oversee the Federal Reserve's operations including salary and personnel decisions.

Under current regulations, Fed directors who are employed by the banking industry or own stock in financial institutions can participate in decisions involving how much interest to charge to financial institutions receiving Fed loans; and the approval or disapproval of Federal Reserve credit to healthy banks and banks in "hazardous" condition.

The Federal Reserve does not publicly disclose its conflict of interest regulations or when it grants waivers to its conflict of interest regulations.

The Federal Reserve is a bunch of well connected, banking aristocracy insiders.  Surprise!

And some light relief:

(http://i.imgur.com/Qpe1U.jpg)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on October 20, 2011, 07:22:10 PM
Just in case anyone was wondering about that whole "debt forgiveness" thing...

http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/10/19/student_loans_federal_reserve_bank_of_new_york_data_shows_studen.html

QuoteTo put the $1-trillion figure into some perspective, that total means that Americans now owe more in student loans than they do on their credit cards.

Even when adjusting for inflation, students are borrowing at roughly twice what they did a decade ago, and total outstanding debt has doubled in the past five years alone, the data shows. Full-time undergrads borrowed an average of $4,953 in 2010, a 63-percent jump from the previous decade even when inflation is factored in.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on October 20, 2011, 09:07:07 PM
World Economy Collapse explained in 3 minutes - Mind Blowing!!!!!
It may seemed hilarious but this is actually what's happening. The real truth behind Euro crisis.

https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=10150860012110261

:lulz:  :lulz:  :horrormirth:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: PopeTom on October 20, 2011, 11:23:20 PM
What direction are the barbarians going to come from this time around?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on October 20, 2011, 11:45:53 PM
So, in the year 2000, apparently they were afraid they would have too little debt:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/10/20/141510617/what-if-we-paid-off-the-debt-the-secret-government-report
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on October 21, 2011, 12:39:47 AM
Quote from: Triple Zero on October 20, 2011, 11:45:53 PM
So, in the year 2000, apparently they were afraid they would have too little debt:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2011/10/20/141510617/what-if-we-paid-off-the-debt-the-secret-government-report

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 22, 2011, 01:46:47 PM
Two good pieces from Naked Capitalism

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/marx-versus-capitalism-versus-you.html

QuoteIt is a measure of how un-self critical modern economics has been, that the Marxists are starting to appear to be making the most sense of the current crises. The supine acceptance that "the market is always right" — a truism only to traders and vested interests — means that there has been precious little understanding developed about how markets can go wrong. Or what is wrong, as well as right, with markets and the modern practices of capitalism. An article in the London Review of Books came to my attention recently by Benjamin Kunkel that shows how Marxist analysis is actually looking quite pertinent to the current mess.

In particular, it highlights the imbalance between capital and labour, a perennial obsession of the Marxists, of course:

QuoteThe full cash value of today's product can therefore be realised only with the assistance of money advanced against commodity values yet to be produced. 'The surplus value created at one point requires the creation of surplus value at another point,' as Marx put it in the Grundrisse. How are these points, separated in space and time, to be linked? In a word, through the credit system, which involves 'the creation of what Marx calls "fictitious capital" – money that is thrown into circulation as capital without any material basis in commodities or productive activity'. Money values backed by tomorrow's as yet unproduced goods and services, to be exchanged against those already produced today: this is credit or bank money, an anticipation of future value without which the creation of present value stalls. Realisation (or the transformation of surplus value into its money equivalent, as profit) thus depends on the 'fictitious'.

There has certainly been an excess of "fictitious" capital created over the last two decades, far more than Marx, or anyone else, could have anticipated. Money made out of the money made out of money. $600 trillion of derivatives. High frequency trading insanity with trades reduced to micro-seconds. As Adam Curtis observes in his excellent documentary "All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace", the heart of the insanity has been the belief that systems run by machines are inherently more stable than systems with humans at the centre. This has greatly skewed the system towards the egregious self interests of capital, as against labour. Curtis lays much of this greed at the feet of Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan.

Now before I get a knock on the door from grey suited men asking me "Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the Communist Party?" I should explain that I regard Marxism as wicked, directly responsible for some of the worst horrors of the twentieth century. I have many other objections to it, which I will come to later. There is, however, a difference between Marxism and what Marx wrote. And there is a difference between Marx's critique of capitalism, which has some prescience and relevance, and Marx's political prescriptions and revolutionary impulses, which were riddled with contradictions and, in practice, wholly pernicious.

The value of applying what Marx wrote is an identification of an imbalance between capital and labour:

QuoteSo, as The Limits to Capital implies without quite stating, the special allure and danger of an elaborate credit system lie in its relationship to class society. If more capital has been accumulated than can be realised as a profit through exchange, owing perhaps to 'the poverty and restricted consumption of the masses' that Marx at one point declared 'the ultimate reason for all real crises', this condition can be temporarily concealed, and its consequences postponed, by the confection of fictitious values in excess of any real values on the verge of production. In this way, growth and profitability in the financial system can substitute for the impaired growth and profitability of the class-ridden system of actual production. By adding over-financialisation, as it were, to his model of overaccumulation, Harvey means to show how an initial contradiction between production and realisation later 'becomes, via the agency of the credit system, an outright antagonism' between the financial system of fictitious values and its monetary base, founded on commodity values. This antagonism then 'forms the rock on which accumulation ultimately founders'. In social terms, this will take the form of a contest between creditors and debtors over who is to suffer more devaluation.

This is basically what is wrong in the developed world. There needs to be a balance between wages and investment returns for the system to function well. Henry Ford paid his workers well not because he was a generous man, but because then they could buy Fords. Globalisation has, of course, undone this compact, and although it has led to some productivity improvements, it is also having the effect of gutting the middle classes in the developed world. In Europe it is seen in the shape of unemployment, in America, the same as well as in the shape of rising poverty and the evaporation of the middle class.

And http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/eurozone-rescue-going-off-the-rails.html

QuoteIn the runup to the crisis, it was striking to read the undertone of worry in quite a few of the articles in the Financial Times, and I don't mean only Gillian Tett's fixation on collateralized debt obligations. It was palatable that a lot of writers were uncomfortable with how frothy the markets were, yet couldn't say anything too much at odds with what their largely cheerleading sources were telling them.

Even though the overall mood at this juncture is far more downbeat, there is again a reporting gap between the pink paper and the two major US print business outlets, the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times on the expected crisis nexus, the Eurozone. Both US media outlets have a prominent article on the latest Euro exercise in rescue brinksmanship. And they are almost the same story; indeed, at this hour, they perversely use identical photos of Merkel and Sarkozy conferring. They present the formerly aligned core nation leaders as being at odds, then widen the frame to explain the divisive issues. First,, the Germans want a deeper but voluntary haircut of at most 50% of Greek debt; the French do not want to go beyond the 21% reduction structured last July. The steeper writeoff would, of course, lead to a bigger hit to French banks. Second France (effectively) wants the ECB to provide further leverage to the EFSF directly, while Germany and the ECB itself are decidedly opposed (Germany wants individual states to be responsible for their banks, with the ECB acting as a guarantor). The Journal was thinner on details and focused on the hardening political stances, not just between France and Germany, but other states as well. Per the Journal:

QuotePeople familiar with the negotiations said Germany and France remain so far apart on key issues that Ms. Merkel couldn't get a green light to sign a deal from her increasingly assertive parliamentarians.

If you rated these articles as sobering, the far more detailed coverage at the Financial Times has an undertone of despair. And one story emphasizes an issue absent from the times and mentioned only in passing in the Journal: the experiment in Greece in radical austerity is killing the patient. From the Financial Times:

QuoteGreece's economy has deteriorated so severely in the last three months that international lenders would have to find €252bn in bail-out loans through the end of the decade unless Greek bondholders are forced to accept severe cuts in their debt repayments.

The dire analysis, contained in a "strictly confidential" report by international lenders and obtained by the Financial Times, is more than double the €109bn in European Union and International Monetary Fund aid agreed just three months ago.

Under a more severe test run by economists for the so-called "troika" of lenders – the IMF, European Central Bank and European Commission – Greece's bail-out needs could balloon to €444bn, the study said.

Now before you attribute this shortfall to civil disobedience, which has been a contributor, an even bigger factor seems to be a major breakdown of a wide range of critical operations, such as power and garbage collection. And the bailout plan had some absurd assumptions, such as forecasting proceeds from infrastructure sales that were three times the level private sources expected them to fetch.

A must-read set of on-the-ground accounts in the Guardian (hat tip reader FlyingKiwi) gives a sense of how bad things are:

QuoteThe poor and middle classes are being asked to pick up the bill for the excesses of the rich and corrupt; those who have declared their taxes correctly continue to be taxed more than those who don't; and in a country with one of the highest cost of living, wages are being cut and taxes being raised....

I live in chaos. Chaos is a Greek word and aptly describes life in this country. I have been a good citizen of this country and have worked hard in the 25 years that I have lived here. I work from 2pm to 10pm daily. I put in 40 teaching hours per week. If you add the lesson planning and marking it's nearly 50 hours per week. I only see my husband for half an hour a day as he teaches in a state school in the morning but because his salary is so low he needs to supplement his income in the evenings. How many of our European colleagues work so many hours?...

I can't get to work easily most days because public transport is usually on strike three days every week. The streets are piled high with rubbish...

I work with a local council in Crete. There is an increasing sense of the country having fallen apart. All temporary contracts have been arbitrarily cancelled so we can't run any sports or arts programmes, even those which are profit-making. No one answers the phones in the central offices in Athens because of the sit-ins, so we can't work our way round the red tape.

The town hall itself has been occupied by strikers for the last week. The rubbish hasn't been collected for three weeks. Standard processes are paralysed. This includes the payment of staff – many are owed over six months.

Now remember the earlier prevailing assumptions. Even though Greece was widely understood last year to be deeply underwater and independent observers all said a bond writedowns of at least 50% were in order, it was also assumed that Greece alone was a manageable problem. The danger was seen as contagion to bigger economies, particularly Spain and Italy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:01:31 PM
Ha ha ha

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?c=SEA&s=TOP&i=7988787

QuoteGerman industry and politicians have attacked a proposed French warship deal with the near-bankrupt Greek government, according to the magazine Spiegel.

State-owned French naval shipyard DCNS is offering to deliver up to four new stealth frigates to the Greek Navy but defer the 300 million euro ($412 million) payments for five years and even allow the Greeks to hand the warships back, the German magazine reported Oct. 17. Under the deal, Greece will have the option of paying up after five years with a 100 million-euro discount, or even returning the warships to be used by the French Navy, the magazine says.

What Greece really needs right now is stealth frigates.  No, really.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on October 22, 2011, 11:04:06 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:01:31 PM
Ha ha ha

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?c=SEA&s=TOP&i=7988787

QuoteGerman industry and politicians have attacked a proposed French warship deal with the near-bankrupt Greek government, according to the magazine Spiegel.

State-owned French naval shipyard DCNS is offering to deliver up to four new stealth frigates to the Greek Navy but defer the 300 million euro ($412 million) payments for five years and even allow the Greeks to hand the warships back, the German magazine reported Oct. 17. Under the deal, Greece will have the option of paying up after five years with a 100 million-euro discount, or even returning the warships to be used by the French Navy, the magazine says.

What Greece really needs right now is stealth frigates.  No, really.

Two words:

Ninja Pirates
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:13:15 PM
Two words: bankrupt nation.

Eight more words: being made to buy super expensive military hardware.

We've successfully turned an EU nation into a corrupt, third world client state, a banana republic.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 23, 2011, 12:00:21 AM
Quote from: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:13:15 PM
Two words: bankrupt nation.

Eight more words: being made to buy super expensive military hardware.

We've successfully turned an EU nation into a corrupt, third world client state, a banana republic.

With Greeces military history I doubt it took much of a push.

What do you think of the iceberg they hid on the next bailout they will need? They pretended the problem wasn't as bad as it looked and now it looks like they need an 80% write down which makes a French banking collapse a certainty.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 23, 2011, 01:53:49 PM
True, re: Greece's military, but it still leaves a bad taste in the mouth.  "Greece must accept punitive measures.  Not a penny on anything less than essential.  Slash spending everywhere.  Oh, but you have to buy these, top of the range, hi-tech military boats, too.  You know, in case Turkey decides to invade."  Given one of Greece's major problems is its bloated military spending, it is hardly helping.

I think we're heading for a default, to be perfectly honest.  I think European finance elites will resist this until it becomes the only possible option, but that is where this is all ultimately heading.  Of course, a default is not necessarily as bad as they would have us believe (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/10/the-verboten-story-of-argentinas-economic-success.html).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on October 24, 2011, 03:35:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:01:31 PM
Ha ha ha

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?c=SEA&s=TOP&i=7988787

QuoteGerman industry and politicians have attacked a proposed French warship deal with the near-bankrupt Greek government, according to the magazine Spiegel.

State-owned French naval shipyard DCNS is offering to deliver up to four new stealth frigates to the Greek Navy but defer the 300 million euro ($412 million) payments for five years and even allow the Greeks to hand the warships back, the German magazine reported Oct. 17. Under the deal, Greece will have the option of paying up after five years with a 100 million-euro discount, or even returning the warships to be used by the French Navy, the magazine says.

What Greece really needs right now is stealth frigates.  No, really.

It could work out okay for them, if Greece uses the stealth frigates to pirate French shipping in order to pay for the stealth frigates that the French require them to buy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 24, 2011, 03:58:03 PM
Quote from: deadfong on October 24, 2011, 03:35:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 22, 2011, 11:01:31 PM
Ha ha ha

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?c=SEA&s=TOP&i=7988787

QuoteGerman industry and politicians have attacked a proposed French warship deal with the near-bankrupt Greek government, according to the magazine Spiegel.

State-owned French naval shipyard DCNS is offering to deliver up to four new stealth frigates to the Greek Navy but defer the 300 million euro ($412 million) payments for five years and even allow the Greeks to hand the warships back, the German magazine reported Oct. 17. Under the deal, Greece will have the option of paying up after five years with a 100 million-euro discount, or even returning the warships to be used by the French Navy, the magazine says.

What Greece really needs right now is stealth frigates.  No, really.

It could work out okay for them, if Greece uses the stealth frigates to pirate French shipping in order to pay for the stealth frigates that the French require them to buy.

They should really get those delivered before they default, or you know, they might actually have to pay for them one day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 25, 2011, 04:37:38 PM
Greek debt holders are being asked to take a 60% loss.

According to Olivier Sarkozy, head of the Global Financial Services group, European banks need to raise $800 bn in cash each month to meet current obligation on debt. Which is a fairly terrifying figure. If you want to prevent a run on the banks, extrapolating from the US model when it was in a similar situation, the Eurozone would need to spend $2,000 bn - at the moment they are considering less than $500 bn. And that would be to bail out rotten banks in the same kind of way the US government did.

That's going to be a much harder sell given that people have seen what the results of that have been once before.

The alternative seems to be banking collapse...

Oh, a lot of banks have also used dodgy accounting practices to make it seem like they've achieved far greater profits in the past month or two than they actually have.

I can scour the internet for links for these things if people like. Otherwise, I'm retreating to my bunker.  :scared:



Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2011, 04:40:56 PM
EU talks on financial reform have been delayed.

Also, the talk was of building a reserve of two trillion Euros for the EFSF.  Obviously, that aint anywhere near large enough, going by the above figures.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on October 25, 2011, 04:43:26 PM
Here comes the default, I better buy anything I want from outside europe now before my currency becomes worth nothing on the exchange.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on October 25, 2011, 04:48:18 PM
I've also noticed that the comments in the FT have been taking a much harder stance, with more and more people essentially saying 'Let the corrupt banks fall and lets all get on with our lives'.

My gut says that this is going to be a very, very tough Christmas. If the banks go down, they'll take companies and jobs with them. If they don't, they're running towards another credit crunch because they want to hold on to as much money as they can in case someone calls their bluff and they are made to pay up for the stupid amount of risks they've been gambling. Which will also hurt companies, and jobs.

With the Occupy protests getting people pissed off, and government cuts starting to bite on top of that, adding more people to the queue for jobs that don't exist...

Yeah. This year has sucked, but I think by the time the new year rolls around, we're going to be in an even worse position. Nobody at all seems to expect that the EU will actually get a programme together to deal with this crisis. Even EU officials themselves are talking about trying to prevent another immediate 'credit event' rather than deal with the long-term issues and address the problem.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 25, 2011, 04:54:26 PM
Ah, but the markets are positive!

Which, if anything, should tell you just how much markets are to be trusted with day to day decision-making.

I'm just glad I'm living in a bubble which involves catering to foreign elites.  Most of my student's families wealth should stay intact, regardless of what happens to the Eurozone.  In theory.

But yeah, bad times are coming.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 28, 2011, 10:31:46 AM
China to the rescue

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7505d210-00ba-11e1-8590-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1bnrwip9T

QuoteAny Chinese support would depend on contributions from other countries and Beijing must be given strong guarantees on the safety of its investment, according to Li Daokui, an academic member of China's central bank monetary policy committee, and Yu Yongding, a former member of that committee.

"It is in China's long-term and intrinsic interest to help Europe because they are our biggest trading partner but the chief concern of the Chinese government is how to explain this decision to our own people," said Professor Li. "The last thing China wants is to throw away the country's wealth and be seen as just a source of dumb money."

He added that Beijing might also ask European leaders to refrain from criticising China's currency policy, a frequent source of tension with trade partners. The US argues that an intentionally undervalued renminbi unfairly supports Chinese exports.

To be fair, I am sympathetic to Chinese concerns.  China is in favour of EU integration and cohesion, and so is invariably upset when it turns out the EU is being used by member states to advance their own interests (ie; roughly 80% of the time).  China wants to make sure its investment is protected against what it sees as a weak and institutionally untrustworthy body.

On the plus side, Chinese pressure may aid European integration and promote its importance at the elite-political level.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 28, 2011, 06:39:04 PM
More speculation about Germany reintroducing the deutsche mark

http://seekingalpha.com/article/302290-germany-is-already-printing-money-deutsche-marks

QuoteIf this is true, and Malmgren is correct, then the euro will absolutely implode. Germany is widely held to have the strongest balance sheet in the EU (though even the Head of its Central Bank admits that the country's real Debt to GDP is over 200%).

However, compared to the PIIGS, Germany is relatively rock solid from a fiscal point of view. It's also the largest economy in the EU. So if the Germany pulls out (70% of Germans believe the euro has no future) then Europe will experience a wave of defaults starting with Greece and spreading throughout the PIIGS.

We're already seeing hints of this occurring. Germany Vice Chancellor, Philip Roesler said on September 11 that Germany won't participate in any more bailouts and that any German politicians who approve more bailouts is committing political suicide.

We also have reports of Sarkozy and Merkel screaming at each other in recent meetings. France has announced plans to possibly nationalize several banks just "in case." And Germany has dropped more than a few hints that it's fed up with the situation.

Heck, even mainstream "thinkers" like Alan Greenspan says the euro is "doomed" to fail.

Something very bad is brewing behind the scenes. The Sarkozy- Merkel talks, the short-selling bans, the halted stocks, the leveraged EFSF, the hints of QE 3, all of this is telling us that the financial system is on DEFCON 1 Red Alert.

Ignore stocks, they're always the last to "get it." The credit markets are jamming up just like they did in 2008. The banking system is flashing all the same signals as well.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 31, 2011, 07:45:49 AM
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/e1a2c6b2-02fe-11e1-899a-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1cL3CySX4

Wolfgang Schäuble, a heavy hitter in German financial circles, is calling for the introduction of a Tobin Tax.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 01, 2011, 02:36:09 PM
Greece has been promised a referendum on the bailout proposals by its PM http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15526719

Quote from: BBCOpinion polls in Greece show that most people do not support the austerity deal.

Mr Papandreou told a meeting of his governing Socialist party that Greek people would have the final say on the package, which is designed to reduce Greek debt by about 100bn euros.

"The command of the Greek people will bind us", he was quoted as saying by AFP news agency.

Markets are panicking all over again, and the FT is hilariously reporting that this strikes at one of the core strengths of the Eurozone; its fundamentally undemocratic nature.

After all, if the Greeks get to vote on it, why shouldn't the Germans, who are going to be paying the majority of the cost? And everyone else? And then it all becomes a horrible mess and everything collapses.

The news has also damaged the Italian economy, and they have hit the danger level mark used by some clearing houses; this apparently made matters infinitely worse in Portugal and Ireland, as this is the level at which other people just stop buying government debt.

Portgual, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain are all going to be coming under far more pressure in the next few weeks. I wouldn't be surprised if some, or all, of these countries are forced out of the Eurozone, as some people have been clamouring for for a while, and possibly out of the EU as well. Especially if this referendum goes ahead and is voted down, as people seem to be expecting to happen.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 01, 2011, 05:02:14 PM
It is very unlikely that Ireland will be forced out, we've been jumping through the hoops set by the eu and the IMF and they have too much invested in us.

If Greece rejects this it will just be changed slightly and pushed through.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 01, 2011, 05:12:50 PM
If Greece rejects this, the French banks will go under. France will be forced to do another bailout, and the populations of the 'healthy' countries will be even more pissed off that they seem to be paying for something that nobody else wants.

As a result, the Eurozone is likely to break up. The PIIGS will be casualties because they are still likely to require further investment and are in a completely different economic bracket to the 'healthy' economies.

Even though Ireland has been jumping through hoops, this isn't going to be a managed and nuanced breakup. In general the EU is becoming rapidly unpopular amongst the populations of its constituent nations, and it is likely that if the politicians are forced to listen to them, the message they are going to receive is one which involves retrenchment, nationalism, and protectionist policies - can you really see politicians motivated by that bringing Ireland back into the fold just because it has been cooperative compared with Greece, when to most people the whole lot are bundled together as one category?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 01, 2011, 05:40:29 PM
Only if the PIIGS default could that occur and Ireland is no longer in an unstable position, we've had three qualters unexpected growth as opposed to stagnation or recession. Our banks don't have anything imbedded in Greek or French banks because if anything they have become insular with no money to throw around.

I could see countries restoring their own currencies but not breaking up, not this late in the game.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 01, 2011, 05:42:18 PM
'Restoring their own currencies' is pretty much what I mean by a breakup of the eurozone. Though I expect that such a measure will be followed by the countries seizing control over their own trading policy again, and becoming more protectionist.

What do you mean by breakup?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 01, 2011, 06:08:44 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on November 01, 2011, 05:42:18 PM
'Restoring their own currencies' is pretty much what I mean by a breakup of the eurozone. Though I expect that such a measure will be followed by the countries seizing control over their own trading policy again, and becoming more protectionist.

What do you mean by breakup?

Free travel, right to work and property ownership. Basically The eu a decade ago. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 01, 2011, 07:35:29 PM
It's hard to call.  If we go back to a 1999 position, then that would be...well, still pretty bad, it flushes nearly a decade of economic policy down the drain, and probably adds another two decades worth of trouble onto any future full financial union.  But it can be recovered from.

The thing is, I can see a further process taking part.  As anti-EU rhetoric becomes increasingly popular, and becomes even easier to be against the Euro, Eurosceptic parties will both toughen their rhetoric and gain unprecedented support.  It could quickly snowball out of control.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 01, 2011, 11:58:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 01, 2011, 07:35:29 PMThe thing is, I can see a further process taking part.  As anti-EU rhetoric becomes increasingly popular, and becomes even easier to be against the Euro, Eurosceptic parties will both toughen their rhetoric and gain unprecedented support.  It could quickly snowball out of control.

And with that, their right-wing extremism, you mean?

Although our (barely-not-extremist) left wing Socialist Party is also against the Euro/EU. I even voted for them once. Not because of the EU but because their top guy seemed pretty smart, especially confronting populist idiots like Fortuyn and Wilders (unfortunately he stepped back after the previous elections).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 02, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
Yes.

Somehow, I don't see Left Euro-scepticism gaining ground in such a climate.

Also, is it just me, or is the media really glossing over how the Greek top military brass all got fired just before the referendum was announced?  I mean, it may have been a simply pre-emptive measure...but that's a very serious step to take, regardless.  Were there rumours of a coup being planned? 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 02, 2011, 05:36:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 02, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
Yes.

Somehow, I don't see Left Euro-scepticism gaining ground in such a climate.

Also, is it just me, or is the media really glossing over how the Greek top military brass all got fired just before the referendum was announced?  I mean, it may have been a simply pre-emptive measure...but that's a very serious step to take, regardless.  Were there rumours of a coup being planned? 

Holy shit. That is actually a really really good sign, lets hope they stay gone. This wasn't reported on any of the news feeds I follow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 02, 2011, 05:42:47 PM
Quote from: Faust on November 02, 2011, 05:36:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 02, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
Yes.

Somehow, I don't see Left Euro-scepticism gaining ground in such a climate.

Also, is it just me, or is the media really glossing over how the Greek top military brass all got fired just before the referendum was announced?  I mean, it may have been a simply pre-emptive measure...but that's a very serious step to take, regardless.  Were there rumours of a coup being planned? 

Holy shit. That is actually a really really good sign, lets hope they stay gone. This wasn't reported on any of the news feeds I follow.

I found it on global guerrillas, but the article in the Athens times that was linked from there has been pulled.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 03, 2011, 01:12:22 PM
A google news search for "Greek military coup 2011" comes up with a disturbing number of articles.

However, it seems things have changed overnight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15575198

QuoteGreek Prime Minister George Papandreou is expected to offer his resignation within the next half-hour, sources in Athens have told the BBC.

Mr Papandreou will meet Greek President Karolos Papoulias immediately after an emergency cabinet meeting has finished.

He is expected to offer a coalition government, with former Greek central banker Lucas Papademos at the helm.

Mr Papandreou himself would stand down, the BBC understands.

The Greek government was on the verge of collapse after several ministers said they did not support Mr Papandreou's plan for a referendum on the EU bailout.

The bailout would give the heavily indebted Greek government 130bn euros (£111bn; $178bn) and a 50% write-off of its debts, in return for deeply unpopular austerity measures.

On Thursday, main opposition leader Antonis Samaras of the centre-right New Democracy party called for a caretaker government to safeguard the EU deal.
Shadow over G20

Mr Papandreou had called a vote of confidence for Friday. His Pasok party holds a slim majority, 152 out of 300 seats.

However, he was faced with a parliamentary revolt after several of his MPs withheld their backing. Some called for early elections or a government of national unity instead.

One Pasok rebel MP, Eva Kaili, told the BBC: ''I think now the only solution is to have a new government of national rescue and co-operation led by a person that is recognised by the majority [as] prime minister and tries to uphold the agreement [on the EU bailout] of 26 October."

The row threatens to overshadow a meeting of the G20 in Cannes, where leading industrialised nations are to discuss the eurozone debt crisis.

Mr Papandreou told reporters in Cannes his referendum would in effect be a vote on whether Greece should remain in the euro.

But the European Commission said if Greece left the European single currency, it would have to leave the European Union as well.

Taking away the possibility of referendum via parliamentary revolt may well be worse than had they just never mentioned it in the first place.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 03, 2011, 02:54:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 03, 2011, 01:12:22 PM
A google news search for "Greek military coup 2011" comes up with a disturbing number of articles.

However, it seems things have changed overnight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15575198

QuoteGreek Prime Minister George Papandreou is expected to offer his resignation within the next half-hour, sources in Athens have told the BBC.

Mr Papandreou will meet Greek President Karolos Papoulias immediately after an emergency cabinet meeting has finished.

He is expected to offer a coalition government, with former Greek central banker Lucas Papademos at the helm.

Mr Papandreou himself would stand down, the BBC understands.

The Greek government was on the verge of collapse after several ministers said they did not support Mr Papandreou's plan for a referendum on the EU bailout.

The bailout would give the heavily indebted Greek government 130bn euros (£111bn; $178bn) and a 50% write-off of its debts, in return for deeply unpopular austerity measures.

On Thursday, main opposition leader Antonis Samaras of the centre-right New Democracy party called for a caretaker government to safeguard the EU deal.
Shadow over G20

Mr Papandreou had called a vote of confidence for Friday. His Pasok party holds a slim majority, 152 out of 300 seats.

However, he was faced with a parliamentary revolt after several of his MPs withheld their backing. Some called for early elections or a government of national unity instead.

One Pasok rebel MP, Eva Kaili, told the BBC: ''I think now the only solution is to have a new government of national rescue and co-operation led by a person that is recognised by the majority [as] prime minister and tries to uphold the agreement [on the EU bailout] of 26 October."

The row threatens to overshadow a meeting of the G20 in Cannes, where leading industrialised nations are to discuss the eurozone debt crisis.

Mr Papandreou told reporters in Cannes his referendum would in effect be a vote on whether Greece should remain in the euro.

But the European Commission said if Greece left the European single currency, it would have to leave the European Union as well.

Taking away the possibility of referendum via parliamentary revolt may well be worse than had they just never mentioned it in the first place.

That depends entirely on who is at the helm. Oh christ, this could be the tipping point not just for a coup or default but full on civil war.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 03, 2011, 03:11:42 PM
Looks like the BBC got played

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-15575198

QuoteGreek PM George Papandreou is facing calls from senior members of his own party to resign, amid uncertainty about a eurozone bailout deal.

Four ministers, including influential Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos, said they opposed Mr Papandreou's plan to hold a referendum on the EU deal.

Earlier the BBC reported that the PM was preparing to resign but state TV said he had ruled this out.

So, question is: who leaked that he was to the BBC?  And was it leaked because it was genuinely thought to be an option, or because it was felt it would add pressure to the calls for resignation?

No surprise to see New Democracy are offering coalition government, but only with Papandreou out of the picture.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 03, 2011, 07:36:58 PM
Referendum has been shelved.

PASOK's finance minister is quickly emerging as one of the key players in all of this.  If Papandreou falls, expect him to take charge, in one sense or another.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2011, 10:52:35 AM
Calling it now.  Papendreou fails the confidence vote, Evangelos Venizelos is made the leader of Pasok, he gives in to the New Democracy calls for a snap election.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:13:23 PM
Quote from: Faust on November 02, 2011, 05:36:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 02, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
Yes.

Somehow, I don't see Left Euro-scepticism gaining ground in such a climate.

Also, is it just me, or is the media really glossing over how the Greek top military brass all got fired just before the referendum was announced?  I mean, it may have been a simply pre-emptive measure...but that's a very serious step to take, regardless.  Were there rumours of a coup being planned? 

Holy shit. That is actually a really really good sign, lets hope they stay gone. This wasn't reported on any of the news feeds I follow.

Bump to remind everyone WE POTENTIALLY HAD A MILITARY COUP PLANNED FOR A FIRST WORLD NATION.

But, you know, I'm sure there are more important things to discuss than a possible military coup planned to further the benefits of the Eurozone and global financial elites agendas, and what that reveals about how dangerous things are getting and who the main players might be.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 04, 2011, 04:15:23 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:13:23 PM
Quote from: Faust on November 02, 2011, 05:36:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 02, 2011, 03:24:34 PM
Yes.

Somehow, I don't see Left Euro-scepticism gaining ground in such a climate.

Also, is it just me, or is the media really glossing over how the Greek top military brass all got fired just before the referendum was announced?  I mean, it may have been a simply pre-emptive measure...but that's a very serious step to take, regardless.  Were there rumours of a coup being planned? 

Holy shit. That is actually a really really good sign, lets hope they stay gone. This wasn't reported on any of the news feeds I follow.

Bump to remind everyone WE POTENTIALLY HAD A MILITARY COUP PLANNED FOR A FIRST WORLD NATION.

But, you know, I'm sure there are more important things to discuss than a possible military coup planned to further the benefits of the Eurozone and global financial elites agendas, and what that reveals about how dangerous things are getting and who the main players might be.

I always kind of lumped Greece in with Argentina.  You know, they pretty much schedule this sort of thing. 

And frankly, I don't see the situation there doing anything but degrading, because the players won't allow it to improve.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:23:13 PM
Greece is also the country where there has been the most opposition to austerity measures in the western world, aside from Iceland (which has no military in the first place).

While Greece does have a more recent history of military rule than most of Europe, it says to me that military juntas are not being ruled out as an option.  In Italy, the military made up part of the parallel governmental structure that ruled during the Cold War.  And Spain and Portugal both had fascist governments in the 1970s.  Ignoring Ireland, that means most of the PIIGS are nations where there is still a history of autocratic rule, and people who grew up and served that system still have access to mechanisms of power.

What if resistance to austerity measures reaches Greek levels in France, or the UK?  Or even, though highly unlikely, in the USA itself?  A few more Oaklands could be enough to set people off, and god knows the police there are militarized enough to carry them out.

We're entering a whole new and dangerous phase here.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 04, 2011, 04:24:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:23:13 PM
Greece is also the country where there has been the most opposition to austerity measures in the western world, aside from Iceland (which has no military in the first place).

While Greece does have a more recent history of military rule than most of Europe, it says to me that military juntas are not being ruled out as an option.  In Italy, the military made up part of the parallel governmental structure that ruled during the Cold War.  And Spain and Portugal both had fascist governments in the 1970s.  Ignoring Ireland, that means most of the PIIGS are nations where there is still a history of autocratic rule, and people who grew up and served that system still have access to mechanisms of power.

What if resistance to austerity measures reaches Greek levels in France, or the UK?  Or even, though highly unlikely, in the USA itself?  A few more Oaklands could be enough to set people off, and god knows the police there are militarized enough to carry them out.

We're entering a whole new and dangerous phase here.

Yep.  But they're gonna fuck us all anyway, Cain.  At least in places like Oakland and Athens, people are trying to get a few licks in first.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 04, 2011, 05:17:24 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:23:13 PM
Greece is also the country where there has been the most opposition to austerity measures in the western world, aside from Iceland (which has no military in the first place).

While Greece does have a more recent history of military rule than most of Europe, it says to me that military juntas are not being ruled out as an option.  In Italy, the military made up part of the parallel governmental structure that ruled during the Cold War.  And Spain and Portugal both had fascist governments in the 1970s.  Ignoring Ireland, that means most of the PIIGS are nations where there is still a history of autocratic rule, and people who grew up and served that system still have access to mechanisms of power.

What if resistance to austerity measures reaches Greek levels in France, or the UK?  Or even, though highly unlikely, in the USA itself?  A few more Oaklands could be enough to set people off, and god knows the police there are militarized enough to carry them out.

We're entering a whole new and dangerous phase here.

So, what does that mean exactly? Totalitarian police states everywhere? Or violent civil wars that may end up god knows where or how?

Or something different completely, sorry if it's a stupid question but to me this is very complex matters.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 04, 2011, 05:24:08 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on November 04, 2011, 05:17:24 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 04, 2011, 04:23:13 PM
Greece is also the country where there has been the most opposition to austerity measures in the western world, aside from Iceland (which has no military in the first place).

While Greece does have a more recent history of military rule than most of Europe, it says to me that military juntas are not being ruled out as an option.  In Italy, the military made up part of the parallel governmental structure that ruled during the Cold War.  And Spain and Portugal both had fascist governments in the 1970s.  Ignoring Ireland, that means most of the PIIGS are nations where there is still a history of autocratic rule, and people who grew up and served that system still have access to mechanisms of power.

What if resistance to austerity measures reaches Greek levels in France, or the UK?  Or even, though highly unlikely, in the USA itself?  A few more Oaklands could be enough to set people off, and god knows the police there are militarized enough to carry them out.

We're entering a whole new and dangerous phase here.

So, what does that mean exactly? Totalitarian police states everywhere? Or violent civil wars that may end up god knows where or how?

Or something different completely, sorry if it's a stupid question but to me this is very complex matters.

Yeah, but not like your granddaddy's totalitarian states.  There's no ideology here, Trip, no grand evil plan to make the world a better place.

It's basically what I've been screeching about in the Coney Island thing.  The mob runs everything there, and a classier mob is doing the same thing to the world in general.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2011, 11:50:20 AM
Yeah.

The way I see it, the threat of the military coup will be sufficient in most places.  Some people would be surprised that Papendreou, in this case, had the balls to pre-empt any attempt, but then you look at his father and his grandfather and that conclusion becomes a lot less certain.  We'll see a lot more Operation Piano Solo's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piano_Solo) in our future.  Note the bottom part:

QuoteThe Financial Times posed the possibility that the paper coup was simply used as a way to sway coalition talks between the Christian Democrats and Socialists. President Antonio Segni was apparently running out of patience with the demands from Pietro Nenni.

However, I wouldn't be surprised if that turned into an actual military junta in a couple of places, the better to encourage the others.

As popular opinion turns against the banks and unemployment continues, expect a general radicalization of politics.  And expect this as the response.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2011, 11:51:54 AM
Also, amazingly, Papendreou survived the vote of no-confidence.  I guess a few people realized more political instability now would be very, very bad.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2011, 11:54:20 AM
Also also, speaking of Colonels and Greece, here is a blog post by Adam Curtis

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2011/11/the_ghost_of_the_colonels.html

QuoteIn the present crisis over Greece there is a furious argument about whether the Greek people should be allowed to vote on the proposed solution. Many of the voices against this come from the world of finance and economics. They say that the crisis is too dangerous to leave to the will of the people.

I just wanted to show why some Greek politicians - and especially George Papandreou, even though he may have retreated from a referendum - might think it important to allow the people a voice.

I have discovered a film in the archives that dramatically tells you why. It was made in 1974 and is an engrossing history of the Colonels' coup in Greece in 1967 - and what life was then like for the Greek people under the military dictatorship that held power for seven years.

As you watch it you realise, given what the Greeks have been through, it is no wonder that politicians, especially Papandreou, think the mandate of the people is important.

The present language of the finance technocrats, and their supporters in the media, portray the Greek people as just another group of lazy southern Europeans who have fed too long at the trough of state money. A bit like us - but more crap.

What is forgotten is that from 1967 to 1974 the Greek people lived under a harsh and violent dictatorship that tortured and murdered thousands of ordinary people. The Colonels also corrupted the society by handing out vast loans to individuals in towns and villages across the country - to buy their loyalty. At the same time the repression and torture bred a powerful resistance that finally burst out in incredible bravery in 1973.

This is the strange and twisted society that the present Prime Minister's father, Andreas Papandreou, inherited when he became the newly elected leader in 1981. He was faced by the task of rebuilding the peoples' trust in democracy and the state. Partly he did it through state spending - and in that policy lie many of the roots of today's crisis.

The discussion of Greece today in the press and the political offices of Europe is almost completely ahistorical - everything is couched in utilitarian terms of economic management. I just think it is important to put the present crisis in a wider historical context. Above all the extraordinary history of the military dictatorship and the savage effects it had on the whole of Greek society.

Emphasis mine.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 05, 2011, 03:53:43 PM
Le Monde Diplomatique made a similar point to the one I made above, as an aside in a larger article about the European left today

http://mondediplo.com/2011/11/01left

QuoteThe risks of striking out isolation, inflation, downgrading are dinned into us. But what about the risks of toeing the line? Reviewing Europe's situation in the 1930s, historian Karl Polanyi recalled that "the impasse reached by liberal capitalism" had led in some countries to "a reform of market economy achieved at the price of the extirpation of all democratic institutions". Even Michel Rocard, a most moderate socialist, is alarmed at that prospect: imposing harder conditions on the Greeks could mean the end of Greek democracy. "Given the anger that the people will feel," he wrote last month, "it is doubtful whether any Greek government can hold on without the support of the army. This sad observation probably applies equally to Portugal and/or Ireland, and/or other, larger, countries. How far will it go?"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 06, 2011, 10:52:20 PM
Papendreou just got ousted, despite surviving the vote.

A new coalition government will be taking charge, between Pasok and New Democracy.  And guess who is hotly tipped to take Papendreou's place?  Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos.

I should've trusted my instincts on this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:56:19 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237

QuoteThe jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America's unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.

Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America's 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.

Congress is expected to decide by year's end whether to continue providing emergency unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks in the hardest-hit states. If the emergency benefits expire, the proportion of the unemployed receiving aid would fall further.

The ranks of the poor would also rise. The Census Bureau says unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million people from slipping into poverty last year. It defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on November 07, 2011, 09:06:45 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:56:19 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237

QuoteThe jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America's unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.

Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America's 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.

Congress is expected to decide by year's end whether to continue providing emergency unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks in the hardest-hit states. If the emergency benefits expire, the proportion of the unemployed receiving aid would fall further.

The ranks of the poor would also rise. The Census Bureau says unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million people from slipping into poverty last year. It defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.

But if we extend their benefits, then they'll have no incentive to continue looking for work.
              /
:mullet:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 07, 2011, 09:38:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:56:19 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237

QuoteIt defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.
huh... an oddly specific number.
also, really low!  i'd consider my self 'poor' if i slipped down to a number significantly higher than that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2011, 09:50:04 PM
I thought the exact same thing.  That's about £14,000...which is definitely below the UK defined income poverty line for a family of four, as far as I can tell (the UK, for some reason, uses weekly income).  Of course, the cost of living is more expensive over here anyway...

Either way, while £14,000 certainly looked good about a year ago, I wouldn't even be able to afford to live in London on that much alone.  Rent alone would take up all of that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 07, 2011, 10:09:28 PM
I'm currently on £9,000. If I get bumped up to £18,000 I should be able to move into London. Not a very nice part of London, and probably in a flatshare, but it should be possible.

I am, however, not a family of four. I would hate to even contemplate how much that would cost.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:22:07 PM
In my area of London, which is admittedly expensive, I think you'd be looking at about £700 per week in rent, probably more, for a four person apartment or house.  Through in insurance, heating costs, internet bills etc and you're certainly looking at over £2500 a month.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on November 08, 2011, 01:15:11 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 07, 2011, 09:38:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:56:19 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237

QuoteIt defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.
huh... an oddly specific number.
also, really low!  i'd consider my self 'poor' if i slipped down to a number significantly higher than that.
I think it started out as a round number, but they adjust it for inflation every year.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 08, 2011, 03:20:08 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on November 08, 2011, 01:15:11 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on November 07, 2011, 09:38:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 07, 2011, 10:56:19 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45174237

QuoteIt defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.
huh... an oddly specific number.
also, really low!  i'd consider my self 'poor' if i slipped down to a number significantly higher than that.
I think it started out as a round number, but they adjust it for inflation every year.

with the fudge that they include in the inflation estimate, i would think they could at least round it off to a fiver, no?  i mean, even poor people hate dealing with small change...
:lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 08, 2011, 08:13:37 AM
China's housing bubble just burst.

Is this the end of the world?  Potentially, but probably not.  Why?  China has managed extraordinary rates of economic growth over the past couple of decades.  The main reason for this is that Chinese economists listen to what the IMF and World Bank say to do, and then categorically reject that advice as a plan of action, and do something else.

China will probably engage in some deficit spending, play around with it's currency a bit and avoid the temptation to go all "austerity" on everyone.  It's not guaranteed to work, but it's also not guaranteed to fail, like any austerity plan would.  As such, I expect the fallout of the bubble bursting to be less damaging than most people are predicting.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 08, 2011, 08:43:16 AM
Hmm, very interesting!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 08, 2011, 08:50:16 AM
Never do what the IMF wants.  Ever.

China was the only country to ignore IMF advice in 1998, during the Asian financial crisis.  China was also the first economy to recover in that period, quickly followed by the other countries who started to do the same.

Greece is doing what the IMF wants.  So is the UK.  So is Ireland.  And look how that is turning out - anemic growth (if not outright contraction), sluggish demand and high unemployment.  It's almost as if they want those conditions, but I'm just going to go along with the theory that they're stupid and don't know what they're doing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 08, 2011, 08:58:48 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 08, 2011, 08:50:16 AM
Never do what the IMF wants.  Ever.

China was the only country to ignore IMF advice in 1998, during the Asian financial crisis.  China was also the first economy to recover in that period, quickly followed by the other countries who started to do the same.

Greece is doing what the IMF wants.  So is the UK.  So is Ireland.  And look how that is turning out - anemic growth (if not outright contraction), sluggish demand and high unemployment.  It's almost as if they want those conditions, but I'm just going to go along with the theory that they're stupid and don't know what they're doing.

That is probably a wise assumption to make with most bureaucratic agencies.

Also, Hanlon's Razor.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 08, 2011, 09:13:26 AM
MPs are calling for the Bank of England to be brought under tighter parliamentary control.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2058686/MPs-Bank-England-overhaul-limit-power-Governor-Sir-Mervyn-Kings-sucessor.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

QuoteThe Commons Treasury select committee wants Sir Mervyn King's successor to be limited to one eight-year term of office, with the committee given the power of veto over appointment and dismissal of future Governors.

Additionally, the MPs have called for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to be handed 'temporary and limited power to direct the Bank' during times of crisis when taxpayer money is on the line, according to the report.

I'm torn on this. On the one hand, theoretically, it is hard to be against making the national bank more accountable to Parliament. On the other hand, in practice, I think that having the bank managed by an external authority that does not need to worry about the short-term interests of politicians is more useful. Plus, this is a fairly clear grab by George Osbourne for more power, and the idea of him having any at all genuinely terrifies me.

The man looks like a constipated waxwork of himself.

(http://www.08direct.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/George-Osbourne-pic.jpg)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 08, 2011, 09:15:12 AM
I'm not opposed to more Parliamentary control in principle....I'm just violently opposed to that inbred streak of wank Osbourne having any more say over the economy than he currently does.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 08, 2011, 09:44:05 AM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/8873041/Europes-rescue-fiasco-leaves-Italy-defenceless.html

QuoteAs of late Friday, the yield spread on Italian 10-year bonds over German Bunds was a post-EMU record of 458 basis points. This is dangerously close to the point where cascade-selling begins and matters spiral out of control.

The European Central Bank has so far bought time by holding a series of retreating lines but either it has reached its intervention limits after accumulating nearly €80bn of Italian debt, or it is holding fire to force Silvio Berlusconi to resign – if so, a foolish game.

The ECB's hands are tied. A German veto and EU treaty constraints stop it intervening with overwhelming force as a genuine lender of last resort. The bank is itself at risk of massive over-extension without an EU treasury and single sovereign entity to back it up.

This lack of a back-stop guarantor is an unforgivable failing in the institutional structure of monetary union....

The spreads on EFSF 5-year bonds have already tripled to 151 above German debt, leaving Japan and other early buyers nursing a big loss. The fund suffered a failed auction last week, cutting the issue from €5bn to €3bn on lack of demand.

Gary Jenkins from Evolution Securities said the "frightening" development is that the EFSF is itself being shut out of the capital markets. "If it continues to perform like that then the bailout fund might need a bail out," he said.

Europe's attempt to widen the creditor net by drawing in the world's reserve states evoked near universal scorn in Cannes and a damning put-down by Brazil's Dilma Rousseff. "I have not the slightest intention of contributing directly to the EFSF; if they are not willing to do it, why should I?"

Europe is resorting to such antics because its richer states – above all Germany -- still refuse to face up to the shattering implications of a currency that they themselves created, and ran destructively by flooding the vulnerable half of monetary union with cheap capital.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/304761-simon-johnson-we-are-looking-straight-into-the-face-of-a-great-depression

QuoteMIT Sloan School of Management professor Simon Johnson didn't equivocate on the perils of the current global economic environment. "We have built a dangerous financial system in the United States and Europe," said the former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund. "We must step back and reform the system."

Professor Johnson cited alarming parallels with October 1931, when "people thought the worst was behind them, but the smart people were wrong and instead the crisis just broadened."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 08, 2011, 10:22:24 PM
Berlusconi has said he is going to step down.

QuoteItalian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has confirmed he intends to resign after key economic reforms have been approved.

His announcement follows a vote in parliament on the budget in which he appeared to lose his majority.

Both allies and opponents have been urging Mr Berlusconi to step down as Italy's debt crisis grows.

Borrowing rates have shot up in recent days, raising concerns over whether Italy can service its debts.

While Italy's deficit is relatively low, investors are concerned that the combination of Italy's low growth rate and 1.9tn euro (£1.63tn; $2.6tn) debt could make it the next country to fall in the eurozone debt crisis.

Who will replace him?  A small bet on Umberto Bossi probably wouldn't be amiss.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 10, 2011, 02:01:36 AM
Paul Ryan now apparently supports reinstating Glass-Steagal

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/09/365419/paul-ryan-reinstate-glass-steagall/
Title: Financepocalypse Now
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2011, 02:09:40 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/09/european-debt-crisis-eurozone-breakup

QuoteFears that Europe's sovereign debt crisis was spiralling out of control have intensified as political chaos in Athens and Rome, and looming recession, created panic on world markets.

Reports emerging from Brussels said that Germany and France had begun preliminary talks on a break-up of the eurozone, amid fears that Italy would be too big to rescue.

Despite Silvio Berlusconi's announcement that he would step down as prime minister once austerity measures were pushed through parliament, a collapse of investor confidence in the eurozone's third-biggest economy sent interest rates in Italy to the levels that triggered bailouts in Portugal, Greece and Ireland.

Italian bond yields surged through the critical 7% mark, at one point hitting 7.5%, amid concern that the deteriorating situation had moved the crisis into a dangerous new phase.

In Athens talks to appoint a prime minister to succeed George Papandreou were in deadlock, and will resume on Thursday morning. The Italian president, Giorgio Napolitano, sought to reassure the markets by promising that Berlusconi would be leaving office soon.

QuoteSenior policymakers in Paris, Berlin and Brussels are reported to have discussed the possibility of one or more countries leaving the eurozone, while the remaining core pushes on toward deeper economic integration, including on tax and fiscal policy. "France and Germany have had intense consultations on this issue over the last months, at all levels," a senior EU official in Brussels told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the discussions.

Financial regulators across Europe were last night carefully monitoring the health of their heavily exposed banks, amid concern that the turmoil could lead to a debt default, or even the break-up of the euro.

Shit's hitting the fan
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Phox on November 10, 2011, 02:48:39 AM
Wow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: East Coast Hustle on November 10, 2011, 03:08:42 AM
Yikes. What are the likely repercussions of all of this to the US economy?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 10, 2011, 03:15:29 AM
Bad.  This is as uncharted territory as the original Euro was...if any of this is true, the markets are going to freak, then look around to see what everyone else is doing, and freak some more. 

In the long run, it might actually work.  But long-term financial planning is rarely rewarded by the ratings agencies.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 10, 2011, 04:41:51 AM
Wowwwwww.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 11, 2011, 07:10:09 PM
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/finally-a-judge-stands-up-to-wall-street-20111110

One judge actually seems to be taking the fraud more seriously than most.  he's not pushing for prison time or revoking the corporate, so I don't think he's taking it THAT seriously, but it's still better than the others.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2011, 11:10:51 AM
More authoritarian capitalism watch

http://chinamatters.blogspot.com/2011/11/communist-china-and-western.html

QuoteIt's finally become clear to everyone the key problem in the current Eurozone crisis is just too much democracy.

Pesky voters opposed to austerity measures get in the way of efforts to cut government expenditures in order to reduce deficits and make repayment of national debts more likely.

QuoteChina's Global Times on Greece, November 2:

Greece's oldest legacy may be its downfall

[E]ven at this critical moment now, the government may still be wavering between the public's demand and the country's long-term future.

...
At a time of economic difficulty, the government needs to demonstrate more determination to go against popular will.

Exactly one week later, Megan McArdle (via Kevin Drum) has her own authoritarian epiphany: democracy makes even the most advanced, free-est, smartest, most pundit-blessed, whitest countries incapable of doing "the right thing":

QuoteI used to write about developing countries a fair amount. Time and again they would make these bizarre and pointless moves, like suddenly and for no apparent reason defaulting on a bunch of debt....And the other journalists and I would cluck our tongues and say "Why can't they do the right thing when it's so . . . bleeding . . . obvious?"

Then we had our own financial crisis and it became suddenly, vividly clear: democratic governments cannot do even obvious right things if the public will not tolerate it.

Just one week! The gap between elite attitudes in China and the United States is really not that great.

And I'm not joking here.

Count the voters of Greece and Italy cowed, if not entirely convinced by media handwringing on behalf of the vengeful gods of the bond market.

Note, not many Greeks/Italians/Irish/Icelanders voted for an orgy of deregulated oligarchic greed and stupidity, followed by an economic collapse and dictatorship via the IMF.   Also, it finally took the vengeful gods of the bond markets to do what the entire Italian political and judiciary system seemed unable to, and unseat Berlusconi.

I tend to believe, in a Schmittian way, that sovereignty is located in whenever the exception to the rule of law can be forcibly made to stick.  In other words, the people who truly rule, they are the ones who can declare "exceptions" to the normal state of affairs and override the laws of the state due to some kind of emergency or other.

In an international context, then, who are the people with sovereignty?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 12, 2011, 11:15:08 AM
I suppose the corporate and financial bigshots that get away with everything?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2011, 11:21:33 AM
That's what I'd say.

It is nice, though, that Chinese and American pundits can now finally agree on something else, rather than just "torture, is it really as bad as people make out?"  It's now "financial considerations must trump democracy".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 12, 2011, 12:15:24 PM
Woah...I was literally just writing about this for one of my pieces of research.  That's the only reason I saw the news, because I was googling for it as a theoretical possibility

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/nov/12/chins-threatens-us-with-new-debt-downgrade

QuoteThe head of China's biggest ratings agency, Dagong Global Credit Rating, is warning that it may downgrade the US's sovereign debt rating again because of Washington's failure to tackle the federal budget deficit.

The remarks by Dagong's chairman, Guan Jianzhong, to be broadcast in an interview with al-Jazeera on Saturday morning, come at the end of another week of deep turmoil for the world economy.

Dagong, which has maintained a pessimistic outlook on US fiscal policy, has been leading the charge to downgrade US debt over the last 12 months, lowering the US rating from AA to A+ a year ago.

In August it downgraded US debt again, to A. Days later, Standard & Poor's followed in its wake, becoming the first western agency to downgrade US debt after the threat of a default was narrowly avoided following weeks of political squabbling in Washington over whether President Obama should be allowed to raise the US debt ceiling.

Guan's intervention comes as another embarrassing political standoff over budget policy looms in Washington. The cross-party "supercommittee" given the job of finding ways to cut the budget deficit is reportedly deadlocked, with Republicans refusing to countenance the tax rises being suggested by Democrats. The committee is due to report by 23 November, but there are fears they could fail to reach agreement, prompting a new crisis.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 16, 2011, 02:51:27 PM
1.02 million 16-24 year olds out of work.  Unemployment at 2.62 million.

That's 8.3% unemployment.  20.4% unemployment for the 16-24 year old bracket.  We're still beating the EU average, but given Spain is, for example, at 45%, and Greece 43% for youth unemployment, that is hardly a reassuring thing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 16, 2011, 02:57:37 PM
The number jumps by another 300,000 if you go up to 25, and almost by another percentage point to 21.3% out of work...

It kind of disgusts me that the government response to this is to foist it onto the Eurozone crisis as well, rather than take ownership of the problem; which is largely that employers have a very large pool of very experienced, older individuals to recruit from and they have been filling entry level apprenticeships with them rather than the younger generation, because they don't want to take the risk.

Part of this is bad because it means apprenticeships aren't meeting their goal. Part of it is bad because of the amount of people who are 26+ who are so desperate for work they'll take an apprenticeship over anything else. All of it is the government's fault, with the Eurozone crisis very much being a secondary cause, IMO.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on November 16, 2011, 02:58:40 PM
I know the phrase, "how did this happen" is a small question with enromously complex answers, but... damn.

Was the Wall Street crash the straw that broke it, or was it just another symptom of an unsustainable system?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 18, 2011, 08:25:35 AM
Well, the subsequent lack of lending post 2008 has really crippled businesses, as has the lack of demand and consumer confidence.

Also, it turns out the German government knows more about Irish economic policy than the Irish public or government

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2011/1118/1224307767242.html

QuoteTHE GOVERNMENT has complained to the European Commission over the release in Germany of a document disclosing confidential details about new taxes to be introduced in Ireland over the next two years. In a deeply embarrassing development the document – identifying austerity measures of €3.8 billion in next month's budget and €3.5 billion in budget 2013 – was made public after being shown to the finance committee of the German Bundestag yesterday. ... Germany's federal finance ministry confirmed yesterday that it had forwarded troika documents to the 41 member Bundestag budgetary committee in line with its legal obligation under European Financial Stability Facility guidelines. ... Taoiseach Enda Kenny said last night he had "no idea" how details of the forthcoming budget ended up being discussed in the Bundestag in Germany. "Let me confirm something to you, the Cabinet has made no decision in regard to the budget which is on December 6th," he said, referring to the documents [sic] specific references to the budget.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 18, 2011, 08:56:21 AM
Funny how that comes out less then 24 hours after Enda "The Waff" Kenny insulted Merkle and the ECB.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 20, 2011, 10:29:20 PM
Spain just jumped on the austerity bandwagon.  To be fair, what they were doing is obviously not working.  At the same time, how's austerity working out for Greece, Ireland, Italy and the rest?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 21, 2011, 08:21:50 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 20, 2011, 10:29:20 PM
Spain just jumped on the austerity bandwagon.  To be fair, what they were doing is obviously not working.  At the same time, how's austerity working out for Greece, Ireland, Italy and the rest?

Its working in Ireland but any outside interruption will set us back immediately.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 21, 2011, 08:31:32 AM
Well, the problem with that is, outside interference in an economy is a given.  Irish FDI accounted for nearly 80% of the entire budget.  Meanwhile, it's been consumer demand at home, rather than trade abroad that is driving the economy.  Given a major part of the Irish plan is "wage constraint", that is going to put a definite limit on any long term growth.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 21, 2011, 09:30:20 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 21, 2011, 08:31:32 AM
Well, the problem with that is, outside interference in an economy is a given.  Irish FDI accounted for nearly 80% of the entire budget.  Meanwhile, it's been consumer demand at home, rather than trade abroad that is driving the economy.  Given a major part of the Irish plan is "wage constraint", that is going to put a definite limit on any long term growth.

They are upping vat and leaving the rest the same, vat is a form of wage control but the person has more control where the spending goes. We are bringing a lot of money in through education fees paid by foreign nationals as well, We've allowed more indian medical students in this year than ever before.
But still, all it would take is a single default on the likes of greece and we're fucked.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 21, 2011, 10:17:58 AM
That's definitely smarter than what we're doing, though that would not be hard.  We've essentially made it impossible to be a foreign student here, which is, in addition to signficantly hampering my dating pool, is also massively underming our education system and benefits thereof (students staying here over the summer to work, etc).

It's days like this I find myself yearning for the vaguely competent, authoritarian fist of Chinese hegemony.  Yes, they're bastards, but they're bastards who at least know what they're doing. 

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 21, 2011, 10:26:44 AM
Derivatives trader and author, Satyajit Das:

QuoteTo understand the US financial position, just remove 8 zeros and pretend it's a household budget:

Annual family income: $21,700

Money the family spent: $38,200

New debt on the credit card: $16,500

Outstanding balance on the credit card: $142,710

The US is trying to bring their budget under control. This year they implemented total budget cuts of $385. Assuming they don't spend more than they raise in taxes, it will take them 370 years to pay back this debt. The bi-partisan US Super Committee is currently discussing proposals to cut spending by $12,000 over 10 years. At $1,200 in saving per year and assuming they balance the budget, it will then take them a mere 119 year to pay back the debt.

That should clarify the position.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 21, 2011, 07:09:46 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15820601

QuoteAccording to the consulting firm, by the end of March this year, the aggregate indebtedness of the UK - that's the sum of household debts, company debts, government debts and bank debts - had risen to 492% of GDP, or almost five times the value of everything we produce in a single year.

That compares with 481% at the end of 2008.

So the UK's total indebtedness has increased, and is still the biggest relative to GDP of any of the big economies. That said, Japanese indebtedness is pretty much the same size - at the end of 2010, as opposed to the end of March 2011, Mckinsey says Japan's debts were also 492% of GDP.

US indebtedness is less, at 282% of GDP by the middle of this year, down from 296% in December 2008.

In the case of America, government debt is on a steeply rising trend, jumping from 61% of GDP to 80% over the past two and a half years.

But household debts have fallen from 98% of GDP to 87% of GDP, as homeowners have handed back the keys of their houses to lenders and reneged on the debts (which is possible in much of the US, but almost impossible in the UK).

So what's going on? Why are UK debts still going up?

Well partly it's to do with a phenomenon I've discussed here many times, that debt has been shuffled from the private sector to the public sector.

When banks stopped lending, and private-sector spending and investing collapsed, governments continued to spend, even though tax revenues were falling. So public-sector borrowing exploded.

To be clear, if governments had not continued to spend, our recession might well have become something much worse, a 1930s-style depression.

But it is fair to say that a consequence of banks, households and businesses trying to repay their debts has been a big increase in government borrowing.

Here are the numbers. From the end of 2008 to the spring of this year - so during the course of a bit more than two years - the debt of British companies fell from 122% of GDP to 109%, and the debt of households fell rather less, from 102% of GDP to 97% of GDP.

Most would say those are positive trends, although the pace of debt repayment by households is pretty sluggish and our personal debts (at close to 100% of GDP) remain substantial (and a worrying burden) by historical standards.

By contrast, government debt has risen from 52% of GDP, which at the time was pretty low by international standards, to 76% of GDP, which is more or less standard for the rich west.

But as you'll know, UK government debt remains on a fairly sharply rising path (the government's deficit is some distance from being closed).

One other slightly surprising and - perhaps - disturbing trend is that the debt of financial institutions has risen, from 205% of GDP to 210% of GDP.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on November 21, 2011, 07:15:33 PM
Fucking hell.  How soon until total collapse?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 21, 2011, 07:17:25 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on November 21, 2011, 07:15:33 PM
Fucking hell.  How soon until total collapse?

You should be so fucking lucky.  This isn't a traumatic amputation, it's gangrene.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 22, 2011, 08:38:05 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15830176

QuoteA US congressional committee tasked with reducing the deficit by $1.2tn (£762bn) has failed to come to an agreement.

The panel of six Republicans and six Democrats confirmed after the New York Stock Exchange had closed that its work had ended without a deal.

The outcome means automatic cuts outlined in the bill that created the committee should take effect from 2013.

The US national debt has just risen above $15tn.

The panel was set up in August, the result of a last-minute deal between the two sides in Congress to raise the debt ceiling and avert a default on US debt payments.

QuotePresident Obama said he would veto any attempt to reverse the automatic cuts to government spending.

They are to be applied over the next 10 years, split between defence and domestic budgets. A few programmes are to be protected, including Social Security and Medicaid.

Republicans said Democrats had never been serious about making cuts to entitlement programmes for the elderly and the poor.

Senator Pat Toomey said: "Unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues refused to agree to any meaningful deficit reduction without $1 trillion in job-crushing tax increases."

But Democrats said the Republicans were solely to blame for the failure - because they ruled out tax rises for the wealthiest Americans.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Republicans had "never found the courage to ignore the tea party extremists" and "never came close to meeting us half way".

US voters are already deeply disillusioned with Washington.

The BBC's Steve Kingstone in Washington says the political finger-pointing is likely to continue through to next November's congressional and presidential elections.

Congressional approval ratings in recent polls have been at historic lows.

As the reductions triggered by Monday's announcement are not set to take effect until January 2013, lawmakers have the time to change or repeal the automatic cuts.

Republican senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are already working on legislation that would undo the automatic defence reduction, replacing it with cuts across the federal government.

So that'll be fun.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Phox on November 22, 2011, 08:43:26 AM
Fun indeed.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on November 22, 2011, 09:07:46 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 22, 2011, 08:38:05 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15830176

QuoteA US congressional committee tasked with reducing the deficit by $1.2tn (£762bn) has failed to come to an agreement.

The panel of six Republicans and six Democrats confirmed after the New York Stock Exchange had closed that its work had ended without a deal.

The outcome means automatic cuts outlined in the bill that created the committee should take effect from 2013.

The US national debt has just risen above $15tn.

The panel was set up in August, the result of a last-minute deal between the two sides in Congress to raise the debt ceiling and avert a default on US debt payments.

QuotePresident Obama said he would veto any attempt to reverse the automatic cuts to government spending.

They are to be applied over the next 10 years, split between defence and domestic budgets. A few programmes are to be protected, including Social Security and Medicaid.

Republicans said Democrats had never been serious about making cuts to entitlement programmes for the elderly and the poor.

Senator Pat Toomey said: "Unfortunately, our Democratic colleagues refused to agree to any meaningful deficit reduction without $1 trillion in job-crushing tax increases."

But Democrats said the Republicans were solely to blame for the failure - because they ruled out tax rises for the wealthiest Americans.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Republicans had "never found the courage to ignore the tea party extremists" and "never came close to meeting us half way".

US voters are already deeply disillusioned with Washington.

The BBC's Steve Kingstone in Washington says the political finger-pointing is likely to continue through to next November's congressional and presidential elections.

Congressional approval ratings in recent polls have been at historic lows.

As the reductions triggered by Monday's announcement are not set to take effect until January 2013, lawmakers have the time to change or repeal the automatic cuts.

Republican senators John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina are already working on legislation that would undo the automatic defence reduction, replacing it with cuts across the federal government.

So that'll be fun.

That's good isn't it? The automatic cuts sound more reasonable than anything they could come up with.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 22, 2011, 10:20:42 AM
It is better than any Republican proposal, yes.  But then, so is practically anything the Democrats propose.

Without tax increases, the US is screwed.  The US can cut and cut all it likes, but discretionary military spending for foreign conflicts will never be reduced and, in fact, will likely increase to make up for whatever cuts do take place in spending there.  The US needs to raise revenue, and the only way that will happen will be to return to pre-Reagan progressive taxation.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on November 22, 2011, 12:18:28 PM
So, Cain...  When things go tits-up over here...  Which country would it be easiest to take refuge in?  Or would it be less trouble just to stay put and watch it burn from ringside?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 22, 2011, 12:44:57 PM
Global economic crisis equals global problems.

Might as well go somewhere with a beach.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 22, 2011, 12:54:24 PM
I'm not sure exactly how this ends.

It seems unlikely that we're going to get the clearing of debt that it is now painfully obvious we need- nobody in any position of influence is arguing for it, despite the lurching crisis that has dragged on now for months and months. Instead we're tied to this insane position where only austerity and taxes can 'fix' the situation. At the same time, politicians are talking about trying to force the markets to pay and do as they are told, but there's no teeth to it. How could there be? Whilst governments are forced to borrow huge amounts of money just to pay back the interest on the money that they've already borrowed, the lenders have them over a barrel. Nobody wants to be the first one to go down (although Greece and Italy are now looking weak, and I'm starting to notice more grumbling about the UK too, hilariously), and everyone is clinging to the idea that they can get through this with the magic of positive thinking and austerity. As though this is some kind of hard-man competition where the first nation to give in to the 'pain' loses forever.

Meanwhile, the average person is getting more and more angry and determined to do something, but nobody has any idea what should be done. The situation is highly complex, no doubt, but there's some kind of massive stigma towards attaching blame to the people who leant the money, and demanding that we take that out of their hide. The protesters don't want to get violently - understandably - but nobody is really managing to capture the public imagination with even financial violence. Perhaps if governments simply seized all banking assets of their various nations, that would be a credible first step towards sorting out the tangled mess that is the world financial system. It'd fuck the people who profit from the current system, but that is exactly the kind of thing we should be looking to do.

Instead, my prediction is now that we'll lurch on in our current state. More countries will be forced to institute painful austerity measures and raise taxes, neither of which will help them outgrow the spiralling cost of their debt at a rapid enough rate. Growth will stagnate and probably recede over the next 3-5 years, joblessness and the social impact of long term unemployment (depression, crime etc) will further strain already overburdened public services.

Public discontent will rise along with these social issues and the apparent inability of the politicians to deal with the root cause of the problem. Nationalism and protectionism will rise as a result, pandering to the idea that all of our countries can blame the laziness, selfishness and indulgence of all of the other countries, not like We Good English/Italian/French/American/German/WTFever. People will lap this up, and blame the victims for what has been inflicted on them because it is more comforting to believe that is the case, rather than the class warfare which is being perpetrated by the rich on everyone else.

In short; things will fall apart, and nobody will do much of anything.

And I don't think there is anywhere in the world that this axiom will not hold true.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 22, 2011, 01:19:15 PM
Except maybe China, Malaysia and Argentina, who had early brushes with this kind of problem in the 1998 Asian Crisis or early 2000s, and threw out the IMF rulebook and actually staged quick, sustainable recoveries and, indeed, seem to be weathering the current crisis fairly well (though keep an eye on the Chinese property bubble, especially come January, when debts are typically called in).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 22, 2011, 01:33:32 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 22, 2011, 01:19:15 PM
Except maybe China, Malaysia and Argentina, who had early brushes with this kind of problem in the 1998 Asian Crisis or early 2000s, and threw out the IMF rulebook and actually staged quick, sustainable recoveries and, indeed, seem to be weathering the current crisis fairly well (though keep an eye on the Chinese property bubble, especially come January, when debts are typically called in).

I admit, I'm no expert on any of those economies - my understanding, though, was that China needed to keep high growth targets going in order to meet their own debt obligations, and that as the US collapses they are likely to be dragged down too.

It is bizarre that economists haven't looked at those situations and tried to argue for similar measures there. I've not heard Malaysia or Argentina mentioned at all until now (and usually the assumption seems to be that China will go down in flames if everyone else goes into a depression).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 22, 2011, 02:13:24 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 22, 2011, 12:44:57 PM
Global economic crisis equals global problems.

Might as well go somewhere with a beach.

Good. I don't really like beaches, so I can just right here!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Luna on November 22, 2011, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 22, 2011, 12:44:57 PM
Global economic crisis equals global problems.

Might as well go somewhere with a beach.

Maybe I'll descend on my uncle.  He has a farm.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 22, 2011, 02:54:11 PM
Quote from: Demolition SquidPublic discontent will rise along with these social issues and the apparent inability of the politicians to deal with the root cause of the problem. Nationalism and protectionism will rise as a result, pandering to the idea that all of our countries can blame the laziness, selfishness and indulgence of all of the other countries, not like We Good English/Italian/French/American/German/WTFever. People will lap this up, and blame the victims for what has been inflicted on them because it is more comforting to believe that is the case, rather than the class warfare which is being perpetrated by the rich on everyone else.

Hey exactly.

I've heard some otherwise very intelligent friends already comment in this fashion of "well yeah but the Greeks kinda have it coming, the way they were running their economy".

Any good arguments against this line of reasoning? that, indeed will lead to creeping nationalism as things get worse

So far I've been asking them:

"who exactly have it coming? who are responsible? [govmt, big finance, etc] and who exactly are going to 'get it'? [the people of Greece, due to austerity], now are those the same people? even some partial overlap? and who again are probably going to get away with it, who have the means to make sure they can remain living very comfortably? [again the rich, big finance, etc]"

I mean that's probably as good a reason as any.

But I do wonder, I get the feeling this is just one side of the scenario.

Why is the Netherlands doing so much better than Greece? Is it really because we were running a more responsible economy than they? Maybe, there's probably some difference, in favour of NL. But is that the whole story? Because haven't our (Dutch) bankers and stock brokers and whatnot been running the same scams all those years here just as well? Okay maybe we don't have a lot of subprime lending going on, just some but not huge problems with poor people racking up huge debts from loans or credit cards, apart from mortgages on our houses the Dutch don't like living on credit. But I still don't believe this is the whole story.

And now I'm speculating, because lacking knowledge about big international finance, sometimes things that seem like a good thing can actually be a bad thing and vice versa, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

But I'm looking at, say, IKEA putting their financial headquarters in the Netherlands. So does Yandex, the "Russian Google", and many other big companies have some sort of financial incorporation here. Speaking of Google, I recently posted about them using a tax-evasion construction for AdSense called the "double Irish / Dutch sandwich". Well the Irish authorities never "see" those revenues and cannot tax them, but what about the Netherlands? (I dont know btw maybe we also dont see a dime) And then I see these huge offices of financial law accounting firms such as Price Waterhouse Cooper, these are the guys that get paid millions of bucks to start a "project" and collect and request all the paperwork and licenses and things to create these incredible tax evasion constructions.

So I'm thinking, and again maybe I'm completely barking up the wrong tree here:

Either the countries that are not yet hit by this global economic crisis have so far managed to "stay on top" because they're "exploiting", in a financial sense, through convoluted loopholes, these countries that are now down in the dumps, the "PIIGS". OR, it's not the richer countries doing this, but Big International Finance, acting as a sort of "transnational superpower" by moving money [through loopholes and legislations] around deciding which countries get fucked and which ones stay on top. And then I wonder why? Is there any particular reason why the Netherlands is getting the good end of the stick and Spain is not? Or is it just that that's the way things happened to go and you gotta have winners and losers even when there's no intentional/purposeful reason for one not being the other.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on November 22, 2011, 06:13:07 PM
I always figured it was because of the poldermodel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polder_Model)
QuoteNo single political party has ever had anything approaching an overall majority in parliament, so coalition government is inevitable. This makes parties extremely cautious, today's enemy may be tomorrow's ally.
A cautious organization is one that keeps oodles and oodles of reserves ready at all times.

Plurality has made our groups/organizations fearful.
Fear has made them cautious.
Caution has made them seek security through redundancy.
Redundancy has made them robust.

Now bad things are happening it's the efficient economies that go belly-up first and the robust economies survive a bit longer.
Finland has a similar policy according to wikipedia so that and The Netherlands will be the last bastions of civilization in the coming Eschaton.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 22, 2011, 07:06:47 PM
Isn't Germany run on that model as well?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Phox on November 22, 2011, 07:37:06 PM
Quote from: Luna on November 22, 2011, 02:23:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 22, 2011, 12:44:57 PM
Global economic crisis equals global problems.

Might as well go somewhere with a beach.

Maybe I'll descend on my uncle.  He has a farm.
Fuck that, Imma turn the Midwest into a Road Warrior-esque wasteland. You should totally come and join my band of renegades. It'll be fun. We can have picnics.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Golden Applesauce on November 23, 2011, 02:07:12 AM
Okay - I know basically nothing about global finance - but I don't understand why governments defaulting on some of their debt is such a terrible idea.  Obviously it will make banks less willing to lend money to gov'ts in the future, but can the banks afford to boycott the US + EU if it really came down to it?  If anything was too big to fail, it'd be something like the North Atlantic economic zone.  (hopefully?)

We've tried giving banks free money, and they still didn't lend it out properly - it seems like the next thing to try would be not giving the banks any money, since they aren't using their resources to help the global economy anyway.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 23, 2011, 01:22:08 PM
Quote from: Golden Applesauce on November 23, 2011, 02:07:12 AM
Okay - I know basically nothing about global finance - but I don't understand why governments defaulting on some of their debt is such a terrible idea.  Obviously it will make banks less willing to lend money to gov'ts in the future, but can the banks afford to boycott the US + EU if it really came down to it?  If anything was too big to fail, it'd be something like the North Atlantic economic zone.  (hopefully?)

We've tried giving banks free money, and they still didn't lend it out properly - it seems like the next thing to try would be not giving the banks any money, since they aren't using their resources to help the global economy anyway.

If a government defaults, the foreign banks who have bought their debt no longer have that theoretical money - they lose it, and it is probably more than they have in reserves.

If one bank goes under, all of the debt they have given out to others is also claimed - the banks have leant money to each other, so it rapidly becomes a cascading domino effect. Governments then have to step in to secure the banks again, because if they don't, then homeowners lose houses and individuals lose their savings. Pension funds are also likely to be badly effected, if not totally wiped out, and businesses who rely on loans to make payrole (most of the big ones) would be unable to get that money without a functional banking system; it would be the credit crunch again writ large.

It isn't really a matter of the banks not using their money to 'lend it out properly' - no bank knows who to lend the money to, because no bank knows whether they need the money to survive when someone goes bust. Government bonds are also suffering at the moment because the possibility of the government going bust and everyone losing money is there - it would actually be pretty irresponsible for anyone to buy sovereign debt knowing that there's an 80% chance that they are throwing their money into a black pit.

I think it has come up two or three times so far - the only real way to 'solve' this problem is to stop everyone trying to jostle for position and punish the entire system by wiping out all debt and starting again. This won't happen, though, because the people who hold the majority of the debt are not the ones who will suffer when countries start to collapse.

Also, when a government goes down, it cannot finance its services. Almost all governments are running at a massive deficit, which means that they need to continue to borrow money in order to pay for the activities they are undertaking now. If a countries goes into an unstructured default, it simply cannot pay its staff. Which includes, amongst teachers doctors nurses etc, whatever armed services those countries have.

So yeah. It isn't in anybody's interest to let unstructured default happen, and it isn't in the interest of the people at the top of our collective pyramid to even allow the discussion on how to wipe out all debt to take place.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on November 23, 2011, 01:35:04 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on November 22, 2011, 02:54:11 PM
Quote from: Demolition SquidPublic discontent will rise along with these social issues and the apparent inability of the politicians to deal with the root cause of the problem. Nationalism and protectionism will rise as a result, pandering to the idea that all of our countries can blame the laziness, selfishness and indulgence of all of the other countries, not like We Good English/Italian/French/American/German/WTFever. People will lap this up, and blame the victims for what has been inflicted on them because it is more comforting to believe that is the case, rather than the class warfare which is being perpetrated by the rich on everyone else.

Hey exactly.

I've heard some otherwise very intelligent friends already comment in this fashion of "well yeah but the Greeks kinda have it coming, the way they were running their economy".

Any good arguments against this line of reasoning? that, indeed will lead to creeping nationalism as things get worse

So far I've been asking them:

"who exactly have it coming? who are responsible? [govmt, big finance, etc] and who exactly are going to 'get it'? [the people of Greece, due to austerity], now are those the same people? even some partial overlap? and who again are probably going to get away with it, who have the means to make sure they can remain living very comfortably? [again the rich, big finance, etc]"

I mean that's probably as good a reason as any.

But I do wonder, I get the feeling this is just one side of the scenario.

Why is the Netherlands doing so much better than Greece? Is it really because we were running a more responsible economy than they? Maybe, there's probably some difference, in favour of NL. But is that the whole story? Because haven't our (Dutch) bankers and stock brokers and whatnot been running the same scams all those years here just as well? Okay maybe we don't have a lot of subprime lending going on, just some but not huge problems with poor people racking up huge debts from loans or credit cards, apart from mortgages on our houses the Dutch don't like living on credit. But I still don't believe this is the whole story.

And now I'm speculating, because lacking knowledge about big international finance, sometimes things that seem like a good thing can actually be a bad thing and vice versa, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

But I'm looking at, say, IKEA putting their financial headquarters in the Netherlands. So does Yandex, the "Russian Google", and many other big companies have some sort of financial incorporation here. Speaking of Google, I recently posted about them using a tax-evasion construction for AdSense called the "double Irish / Dutch sandwich". Well the Irish authorities never "see" those revenues and cannot tax them, but what about the Netherlands? (I dont know btw maybe we also dont see a dime) And then I see these huge offices of financial law accounting firms such as Price Waterhouse Cooper, these are the guys that get paid millions of bucks to start a "project" and collect and request all the paperwork and licenses and things to create these incredible tax evasion constructions.

So I'm thinking, and again maybe I'm completely barking up the wrong tree here:

Either the countries that are not yet hit by this global economic crisis have so far managed to "stay on top" because they're "exploiting", in a financial sense, through convoluted loopholes, these countries that are now down in the dumps, the "PIIGS". OR, it's not the richer countries doing this, but Big International Finance, acting as a sort of "transnational superpower" by moving money [through loopholes and legislations] around deciding which countries get fucked and which ones stay on top. And then I wonder why? Is there any particular reason why the Netherlands is getting the good end of the stick and Spain is not? Or is it just that that's the way things happened to go and you gotta have winners and losers even when there's no intentional/purposeful reason for one not being the other.



Also, sorry I missed this.

I don't know enough about european finance to really answer the second part, or provide any insight into why they might go there rather than elsewhere. I'm surprised more companies don't locate in places like the Czech Republic or Turkey where corporate taxes are tiny or non-existent, but I think it comes down partway to complex interplay between taxcodes and partly towards offices where it is prestigious to have them.

On the line of reasoning though...

The real argument is that fundamentally, yes, you have to accept that Greece acted badly. Everyone acted badly to some extent. The trouble is, punishing these countries for doing so is also going to hurt you in the long run; it is a global problem that needs a global solution, not even one limited to just Europe. Globalization (although I hate that buzzword) has led to an interconnected system in which the actions of one place impact everyone else. Forcing Greece into massive depression because they 'deserve' it just hurts the international economy as a whole - it is really a 'cutting off your nose to spite your face' position.

This line or reasoning won't work on everyone. My father, for instance, firmly believes that we should actively work to fuck everyone else over, because he thinks that Britain will come out comparatively on top. This is because he is a deluded idiot, but if you are strongly dog-eat-dog then you may say it is better to reign in hell than serve in heaven. I don't think it makes much sense myself, but that's what happens when you treat the global economy as a zero sum game.
Title: Fascism and Greece's new technocrat government
Post by: Cain on November 26, 2011, 03:08:31 PM
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/11/mark-ames-austerity-fascism-in-greece-%E2%80%93-the-real-1-doctrine.html

QuoteSee the guy in the photo there, dangling an ax from his left hand? That's Greece's new "Minister of Infrastructure, Transport and Networks" Makis Voridis captured back in the 1980s, when he led a fascist student group called "Student Alternative" at the University of Athens law school. It's 1985, and Minister Voridis, dressed like some Kajagoogoo Nazi, is caught on camera patrolling the campus with his fellow fascists, hunting for suspected leftist students to bash. Voridis was booted out of law school that year, and sued by Greece's National Association of Students for taking part in violent attacks on non-fascist law students.

With all the propaganda we've been fed about Greece's new "austerity" government being staffed by non-ideological "technocrats," it may come as a surprise that fascists are now considered "technocrats" to the mainstream media and Western banking interests. Then again, history shows that fascists have always been favored by the 1-percenters to deliver the austerity medicine.

This rather disturbing definition of what counts as "non-ideological" or "technocratic" in 2011 is something most folks are trying hard to ignore, which might explain why there's been almost nothing about how Greece's new EU-imposed austerity government includes neo-Nazis from the LAOS Party (LAOS is the acronym for Greece's fascist political party, not the Southeast Asian paradise).

Which brings me back to the new Minister of Infrastructure, Makis Voridis. Before he was an ax-wielding law student, Voridis led another fascist youth group that supported the jailed leader of Greece's 1967 military coup. Greece has been down this fascism route before, all under the guise of saving the nation and complaints about alleged parliamentary weakness. In 1967, the military overthrew democracy, imposed a fascist junta, jailed and tortured suspected leftist dissidents, and ran the country into the ground until the junta was overthrown by popular protest in 1974.

That military junta—and the United States support for it (for which Clinton apologized in 1999)—is a raw and painful memory for Greeks. Most Greeks, anyway. As far as today's Infrastructure Minister, Makis Voridis, was concerned, the only bad thing about the junta was that it was overthrown by democracy demonstrators. A fascist party was set up in the early 1980s in support of the jailed coup leader, and Voridis headed up that party's youth wing. That's when he earned the nickname "Hammer." You can probably guess by now why Greece's Infrastructure Minister was given the nickname "Hammer": Voridis's favorite sport was hunting down leftist youths and beating them with, yes, a hammer.

Also lots of good information on the possibility of a military coup being considered by the USA and France.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 26, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
from Cain's link

Quote
After the hammer, he graduated to law school– and the ax; was expelled from law school; and worked his way up the adult world of Greek fascist politics, his ax tucked under the bed somewhere. In 1994, Voridis helped found a new far-right party, The Hellenic Front. In 2004's elections, Voridis's "Hellenic Front Party" formed a bloc with the neo-Nazi "Front Party," headed by Greece's most notorious Holocaust denier, Konstantinos Plevis, a former fascist terrorist whose book, "Jews: The Whole Truth," praised Adolph Hitler and called for the extermination of Jews. Plevis was charged and found guilty of "inciting racial hatred" in 2007, but his sentence was overturned on appeal in 2009.


This doesn't make sense to me.  if he likes Nazis, and is in favor of eliminating Jews, why would he claim that the Nazis did not try to do exactly that?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on November 26, 2011, 07:56:39 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on November 26, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
from Cain's link

Quote
After the hammer, he graduated to law school– and the ax; was expelled from law school; and worked his way up the adult world of Greek fascist politics, his ax tucked under the bed somewhere. In 1994, Voridis helped found a new far-right party, The Hellenic Front. In 2004's elections, Voridis's "Hellenic Front Party" formed a bloc with the neo-Nazi "Front Party," headed by Greece's most notorious Holocaust denier, Konstantinos Plevis, a former fascist terrorist whose book, "Jews: The Whole Truth," praised Adolph Hitler and called for the extermination of Jews. Plevis was charged and found guilty of "inciting racial hatred" in 2007, but his sentence was overturned on appeal in 2009.


This doesn't make sense to me.  if he likes Nazis, and is in favor of eliminating Jews, why would he claim that the Nazis did not try to do exactly that?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=holocaust+denial+antisemitism
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on November 26, 2011, 08:10:49 PM
Quote from: Net on November 26, 2011, 07:56:39 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on November 26, 2011, 07:00:15 PM
from Cain's link

Quote
After the hammer, he graduated to law school– and the ax; was expelled from law school; and worked his way up the adult world of Greek fascist politics, his ax tucked under the bed somewhere. In 1994, Voridis helped found a new far-right party, The Hellenic Front. In 2004's elections, Voridis's "Hellenic Front Party" formed a bloc with the neo-Nazi "Front Party," headed by Greece's most notorious Holocaust denier, Konstantinos Plevis, a former fascist terrorist whose book, "Jews: The Whole Truth," praised Adolph Hitler and called for the extermination of Jews. Plevis was charged and found guilty of "inciting racial hatred" in 2007, but his sentence was overturned on appeal in 2009.


This doesn't make sense to me.  if he likes Nazis, and is in favor of eliminating Jews, why would he claim that the Nazis did not try to do exactly that?

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=holocaust+denial+antisemitism

herp derp

yeah, but most holocaust deniers claim that the Nazis never intended to eliminate the Jews.  They're usually vocally in favor of second class citizenship or slave status for Jews.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on November 26, 2011, 08:39:39 PM
http://www.economist.com/node/21540259?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/bewareoffallingmasonry
Beware of falling masonry - The crisis in the euro area is turning into a panic and dragging the zone into recession. The risk that the currency disintegrates within weeks is alarmingly high. (http://www.economist.com/node/21540259?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/bewareoffallingmasonry)

"disintegrates" ? What, like inflations and my euros on my bank account will suddenly be worth zilch? :eek:

Should've spent my savings on eye laser surgery sooner, I suppose. OTOH my student debt, which is more, will also be worth less. Hm.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 26, 2011, 11:33:53 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on November 26, 2011, 08:39:39 PM
http://www.economist.com/node/21540259?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/bewareoffallingmasonry
Beware of falling masonry - The crisis in the euro area is turning into a panic and dragging the zone into recession. The risk that the currency disintegrates within weeks is alarmingly high. (http://www.economist.com/node/21540259?fsrc=scn/tw/te/ar/bewareoffallingmasonry)

"disintegrates" ? What, like inflations and my euros on my bank account will suddenly be worth zilch? :eek:

Should've spent my savings on eye laser surgery sooner, I suppose. OTOH my student debt, which is more, will also be worth less. Hm.

That's one thing for me to be glad of about inflation. The less the dollar is worth, the smaller my debt becomes in proportion to my income, although that's only helpful if inflation also means I am able to demand more dollars per hour of work.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on November 26, 2011, 11:37:23 PM
Also, recessions in other countries scare me more than the recession here, because if the Euro plummets I'll lose all my European customers who were buying because the dollar is so weak against the Euro.

Global economies really suck donkey balls, because it means that in a recession NO ONE has greater buying power and there is no way for manufacturers to take advantage of their currency's relative weakness by exporting goods.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 28, 2011, 08:45:17 AM
UK's going to relax rules on pension funds being able to invest in projects in the UK.

Because, historically speaking, pension funds have shown great business acumen (http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2005/aug/17/business.pensions1).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Placid Dingo on November 28, 2011, 11:40:46 AM
Heard a great interview on my local ABC News Radio with John Christianson who founded the Tax Justice Network. (http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/front_content.php?idcatart=2&lang=1)

He worked as an economic advisor in Jersey, a Tax Haven (though he refers to these as Secrecy Jurisdictions) as well as several other areas which helped him identify how these structures work.

The big issue shutting down SJs is that they are often perceived as small island nations, but in reality fly bigger flags; Jersey is under a British Flag, and Britain likes it that way because it essentially means money from India, Africa etc gets funnelled into London. Switzerland is another area, as is, surprisingly, USA (or at least parts; he mentions Nevada and Wyoming specifically).

He specifically blames the downfall of Greece and instability of Italy largely on the government failing to be able to collect its own tax effectively.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 28, 2011, 11:50:31 AM
He's right, at least in part, it is an issue of revenue as much as anything else. 

This one area where international agreements and treaties work, if you can get everyone to agree.  Ensuring a level playing field across the board and heavy penalties for transgressors, under an independent international body, would likely close many of these loopholes, if you could convince the major transgressors to agree and ensure the benefits of cooperation outweigh those of defection.

And there, as they say, lies the rub...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 29, 2011, 08:37:26 AM
Rumour mill has gone crazy with suggestions of a French, Austrian (and consequently Hungarian and Romanian) and Japanese downgrade by Standard and Poors, the people who brought us the US downgrade this summer.

Not saying it's definite, only that's what I'm hearing.  S&P seem especially keen to downgrade...I'd love a list of their financial records for the past few years, I'm betting it's insider trading galore over there.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 30, 2011, 12:01:03 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-28/secret-fed-loans-undisclosed-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income.html

QuoteThe Federal Reserve and the big banks fought for more than two years to keep details of the largest bailout in U.S. history a secret. Now, the rest of the world can see what it was missing.

The Fed didn't tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn't mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed's below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.

Saved by the bailout, bankers lobbied against government regulations, a job made easier by the Fed, which never disclosed the details of the rescue to lawmakers even as Congress doled out more money and debated new rules aimed at preventing the next collapse.

A fresh narrative of the financial crisis of 2007 to 2009 emerges from 29,000 pages of Fed documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and central bank records of more than 21,000 transactions. While Fed officials say that almost all of the loans were repaid and there have been no losses, details suggest taxpayers paid a price beyond dollars as the secret funding helped preserve a broken status quo and enabled the biggest banks to grow even bigger.
'Change Their Votes'

"When you see the dollars the banks got, it's hard to make the case these were successful institutions," says Sherrod Brown, a Democratic Senator from Ohio who in 2010 introduced an unsuccessful bill to limit bank size. "This is an issue that can unite the Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street. There are lawmakers in both parties who would change their votes now."

The size of the bailout came to light after Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News, won a court case against the Fed and a group of the biggest U.S. banks called Clearing House Association LLC to force lending details into the open.

The Fed, headed by Chairman Ben S. Bernanke, argued that revealing borrower details would create a stigma -- investors and counterparties would shun firms that used the central bank as lender of last resort -- and that needy institutions would be reluctant to borrow in the next crisis. Clearing House Association fought Bloomberg's lawsuit up to the U.S. Supreme Court, which declined to hear the banks' appeal in March 2011.

$7.77 Trillion

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."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 30, 2011, 12:09:13 AM
Bonus fun from 2008

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/11/29/hank-paulsons-inside-jobs/

QuoteWhat on earth did Hank Paulson think his job was in the summer of 2008? As far as most of us were concerned, he was secretary of the US Treasury, answerable to the US people and to the president. But at the same time, in secret meetings, Paulson was hanging out with his old Goldman Sachs buddies, giving them invaluable information about what he was thinking in his new job.

The first news of this behavior came in October 2009, when Andrew Ross Sorkin revealed that Paulson had met with the entire board of Goldman Sachs in a Moscow hotel suite for an hour at the end of June 2008. He told them his views of the US and global economies, he previewed a market-moving speech he was about to give, and he even talked about the possibility that Lehman Brothers might blow up. Maybe it's not so surprising that Goldman Sachs turned out to be so well positioned when Lehman did indeed do just that a few months later.

Today we learn that the Goldman meeting in Moscow was not some kind of aberration. A few weeks later, on July 28 2008, Paulson met with a who's who of the hedge-fund world in the headquarters of Eton Park Capital Management — a fund founded by former Goldman superstar Eric Mindich.

QuoteThe secretary, then 62, went on to describe a possible scenario for placing Fannie and Freddie into "conservatorship" — a government seizure designed to allow the firms to continue operations despite heavy losses in the mortgage markets...

    Paulson explained that under this scenario, the common stock of the two government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, would be effectively wiped out...

    The fund manager who described the meeting left after coffee and called his lawyer. The attorney's quick conclusion: Paulson's talk was material nonpublic information, and his client should immediately stop trading the shares of Washington- based Fannie and McLean, Virginia-based Freddie.

When we found out about the Moscow meeting, I asked how on earth Paulson thought such behavior was OK. But now I think he was downright pathological in giving inside information to his old Wall Street buddies. And the crazy thing is that we have no idea how many of these meetings there were, or how long they went on for — the only way that we ever find out about them is when reporters like Sorkin or Bloomberg's Richard Teitelbaum manage to find a source who was in the meeting and is willing to talk about what happened.

Given that it's taken two years since the release of Sorkin's book for the Eton Park meeting to be made public, it's fair to assume that there were other meetings, too — possibly many others. Paulson was giving inside tips to Wall Street in general, and to Goldman types in particular: exactly the kind of behavior that "Government Sachs" conspiracy theorists have been speculating about for years. Turns out, they were right.

Paulson, says Teitelbaum, "is now a distinguished senior fellow at the University of Chicago, where he's starting the Paulson Institute, a think tank focused on U.S.-Chinese relations". I'd take issue with the "distinguished" bit. Unless it means "distinguished by an astonishing black hole where his ethics ought to be".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on November 30, 2011, 12:16:12 AM
Jesus. Jesus fucking Christ.

The next person that blathers on about one world government bullshit around me is going to get a smack in the mouth. This isn't the work of sinister overlords, it's the work of goonish, greedy assholes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 02, 2011, 04:28:38 PM
US unemployment figures are down to 8.6% which is much less than the 9% forecasters predicted. A lot of people seem to be taking this as an amazing and brilliant event... The FT said it confirms the US as "The bright spot" in an ailing economic situation.

But the economy added only 120,000 jobs compared to the 125,000 that the median of forecasters predicted, and about half of the fall in unemployment is because 315,000 people left the workforce, accounting for 0.2% of the drop. And this is a time of year where stores will be hiring more staff for the holidays.

So... the situation is actually worse than expected, as far as I can tell? Yes, there's less 'unemployment' than expected strictly, but that's as a measure of people looking for work. The percentage of people searching for work who are able to find it is actually higher than expectations were hoping (only by 5000 across the entire country but still?)  :?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 04, 2011, 11:16:46 AM
The way the US calculates unemployment is so hilariously inaccurate it could only have been designed to obscure the real rate of unemployment.

Also, this is not at all suspicious:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9099162-foreclosure-fraud-whistleblower-found-dead

QuoteA notary public who signed tens of thousands of false documents in a massive foreclosure scam before blowing the whistle on the scandal has been found dead in her Las Vegas home.

NBC station KSNV of Las Vegas reported that the woman, Tracy Lawrence, 43, was scheduled to be sentenced Monday morning after she pleaded guilty this month to notarizing the signature of an individual not in her presence. She failed to show up for her hearing, and police found her body at her home later in the day.

It could not immediately be determined whether Lawrence, who faced up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000, died of susicide or of natural causes, KSNV reported. Detectives said they had ruled out homicide.

Yeah, she just happaned to have a fatal accident and/or commit suicide on the same day she was due to show up to a court hearing about massive foreclosure fraud.  But it's definitely not murder!

Here's a fun game: try to think of a scenario where it is immediately clear that she was not murdered, but it is not clear if she committed suicide or died by accident.  Having trouble?  So am I.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 04, 2011, 06:11:38 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 04, 2011, 11:16:46 AM
The way the US calculates unemployment is so hilariously inaccurate it could only have been designed to obscure the real rate of unemployment.

Also, this is not at all suspicious:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9099162-foreclosure-fraud-whistleblower-found-dead

QuoteA notary public who signed tens of thousands of false documents in a massive foreclosure scam before blowing the whistle on the scandal has been found dead in her Las Vegas home.

NBC station KSNV of Las Vegas reported that the woman, Tracy Lawrence, 43, was scheduled to be sentenced Monday morning after she pleaded guilty this month to notarizing the signature of an individual not in her presence. She failed to show up for her hearing, and police found her body at her home later in the day.

It could not immediately be determined whether Lawrence, who faced up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000, died of susicide or of natural causes, KSNV reported. Detectives said they had ruled out homicide.

Yeah, she just happaned to have a fatal accident and/or commit suicide on the same day she was due to show up to a court hearing about massive foreclosure fraud.  But it's definitely not murder!

Here's a fun game: try to think of a scenario where it is immediately clear that she was not murdered, but it is not clear if she committed suicide or died by accident.  Having trouble?  So am I.

Ummmmm yeah.

:x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on December 04, 2011, 06:25:35 PM
 :x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on December 05, 2011, 01:14:16 AM
Quote from: Cain on December 04, 2011, 11:16:46 AM
The way the US calculates unemployment is so hilariously inaccurate it could only have been designed to obscure the real rate of unemployment.

Also, this is not at all suspicious:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/11/29/9099162-foreclosure-fraud-whistleblower-found-dead

QuoteA notary public who signed tens of thousands of false documents in a massive foreclosure scam before blowing the whistle on the scandal has been found dead in her Las Vegas home.

NBC station KSNV of Las Vegas reported that the woman, Tracy Lawrence, 43, was scheduled to be sentenced Monday morning after she pleaded guilty this month to notarizing the signature of an individual not in her presence. She failed to show up for her hearing, and police found her body at her home later in the day.

It could not immediately be determined whether Lawrence, who faced up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,000, died of susicide or of natural causes, KSNV reported. Detectives said they had ruled out homicide.

Yeah, she just happaned to have a fatal accident and/or commit suicide on the same day she was due to show up to a court hearing about massive foreclosure fraud.  But it's definitely not murder!

Here's a fun game: try to think of a scenario where it is immediately clear that she was not murdered, but it is not clear if she committed suicide or died by accident.  Having trouble?  So am I.

I'm guessing all the interior locks were bolted and there was no sign of forced entry, but even then....how could you rule out murder so quickly in these circumstances?

It seems as though whoever was involved with the murder of this woman, wants you to know they have cops in their pocket.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 06, 2011, 11:14:58 AM
OK.  So, Germany wants EU fiscal union, which I can agree with, in theory.

However, in practice, what this will lead to is semi-permament austerity for the European periphery.

The amusing thing is this will eventually bite in the Germans in the arse, as they will no longer be able to find markets for their high-priced consumer goods within Europe.  However, by the time we reach that point, I doubt anyone will be in much of a mood to appreciate the irony.

The thing that really gets me is how Germany is proposing something which they themselves did not do during the financial crisis.  Instead, Germany increased government spending by 5%.  But, you know, rules are for little people, or as the German financial industry might say, "untermenschen".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 07, 2011, 10:59:31 AM
S&P continue their assault on European sovereign debt:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-05/s-p-said-to-place-all-17-euro-nations-on-downgrade-watch-over-debt-crisis.html

QuoteStandard & Poor's said Germany and France may be stripped of their AAA credit ratings as the debt crisis prompts 15 euro nations to be put on review for possible downgrade.

The euro area's six AAA rated countries are among the nations to be placed on a negative outlook, and their credit ratings may be cut depending on the result of a summit of European Union leaders on Dec. 9, S&P said today in a statement. The euro reversed its gains and U.S. Treasuries rose earlier today after the Financial Times reported that the credit-ranking firm planned to reduce six AAA outlooks.

"Systemic stress in the eurozone has risen in recent weeks and reached such a level that a review of all eurozone sovereign ratings is warranted," S&P said in a statement.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on December 07, 2011, 01:37:04 PM
So, what I'm hearing is that, apart from the bread riots, it might actually be fairly cheap to vacation in Europe next year?
Title: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
Perhaps.  I'm hoping the process can be sped up for this summer.

Meanwhile, the farce of Britain's involvement in the latest round of EU talks goes on.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16104275

QuoteDavid Cameron has refused to join an EU financial crisis accord after 10 hours of negotiations in Brussels.

Mr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

But France's President Sarkozy said his "unacceptable" demands for exemptions over financial services
blocked the chance of a full treaty.

Of the 27 EU members Britain and Hungary look set to stay outside the accord, with Sweden and the Czech Republic having to consult on it.

A full accord of "wasn't possible, given the position of our British friends," President Sarkozy said.

The BBC's political editor Nick Robinson said the consequences "could scarcely be greater for Europe and for Britain's relationship with Europe".

Mr Sarkozy said the eurozone countries would sign an intergovernmental accord aimed at stabilising the currency in the face of the debt crisis, plus any other EU members that wanted to join.

Speaking in a press conference following the meeting he said: "The countries that have remained outside are Hungary and Britain, and the countries that have to consult with their parliaments are the Czechs and the Swedes."

Mr Cameron told a press conference: "We want the Eurozone countries to come together and solve their problems. But we should only allow that to happen within the EU treaties if there are proper protections for the single market, for other key British interests.

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party. A transaction tax is essential to discourage multiple speculative transactions and other banking practices which have shown they can wreck entire national economies. Yet all you will hear in the press is xenophobic bullshit about Cameron showing "bulldog spirit" and refusing to be "bullied" by the effete, evil, foreigners, led chiefly by France (boo) and Germany (boo!).

Because, as my previous thread on British attitidues shows, people here are retarded.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Lenin McCarthy on December 09, 2011, 11:56:06 AM
Just read this on Facebook:
Quote from: Norwegian who is studying in EnglandKick Britain out of the European Union! Ideal situation for Europe? Britain remaining in the European Economic Area (Common Market), like Norway and Iceland, but also losing its voice and voting rights, like Norway and Iceland. Then Europe can move forward without dragging the British by their feet. I'm sure the British would be utterly convinced they had somehow gained from it too.

Could this actually work?

Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?
Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Scribbly on December 09, 2011, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?

The media narrative is that it is the fault of individuals taking huge amounts of overdraft and mortgages they can't afford which has dumped us in the mess; not the irresponsible banking practices and fraud which is really at the root of it.

There's some documentaries I've seen which break this narrative, but by and large people on the news always seem to talk about how it is 'our' fault and shift the blame to the poor. There's a lot of anger directed towards bankers, but this largely seems to be based on the fact they keep getting their bonuses when their businesses are collapsing, not because they committed criminal acts which destroyed the economy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 02:09:59 PM
Quote from: Lenin McCarthy on December 09, 2011, 11:56:06 AM
Just read this on Facebook:
Quote from: Norwegian who is studying in EnglandKick Britain out of the European Union! Ideal situation for Europe? Britain remaining in the European Economic Area (Common Market), like Norway and Iceland, but also losing its voice and voting rights, like Norway and Iceland. Then Europe can move forward without dragging the British by their feet. I'm sure the British would be utterly convinced they had somehow gained from it too.

Could this actually work?



That would actually be probably the best way of dealing with the UK.

The only two major losers in such a situation would be the UK hard right (for whom the EU is an excellent foil) and the USA (who uses the UK as a proxy within the EU to prevent closer integration).  Without the EU to struggle against, the entire UKIP group would dissolve overnight, and the Tory right would have to go back to bitching about bringing back capital death and banning gays and allowing teachers to eviscerate truant pupils and so on.
Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 02:16:33 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?

I'm not so sure about the class aspects of it, but politically speaking, all our major three parties broadly agree on economic issues.  Our last election, for example, was a debate over how fast and how deep cuts should be, not whether cuts were necessarily the best solution.  Ed Miliband, the current leader of the Labour Party, has talked about a fairer UK, and made broadly supportive noises about OWS.  However, at the same time he has not supported UK public sector strikes and, well, Labour was in power for the last 13 years, so it's a bit early to ask people to trust them again.

There was an Occupy London Stock Exchange group, but they were hilariously inept, and got shunted out to camp on the gates of St Paul's Cathedral - not known for being a major player in the financial crisis.  They're also supported by UK Uncut, which, as I understand it, is the same gaggle of union workers, SWP activists, peace protestors and anti-glablization groups that so successfully worked against the Iraq War /sarcasm.
Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 02:17:55 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on December 09, 2011, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?

The media narrative is that it is the fault of individuals taking huge amounts of overdraft and mortgages they can't afford which has dumped us in the mess; not the irresponsible banking practices and fraud which is really at the root of it.

There's some documentaries I've seen which break this narrative, but by and large people on the news always seem to talk about how it is 'our' fault and shift the blame to the poor. There's a lot of anger directed towards bankers, but this largely seems to be based on the fact they keep getting their bonuses when their businesses are collapsing, not because they committed criminal acts which destroyed the economy.

Also New Labour.  They spent all our money on immigrants and terrorists and minorities and the poor, which left nothing for anyone else.
Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 03:17:02 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on December 09, 2011, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?

The media narrative is that it is the fault of individuals taking huge amounts of overdraft and mortgages they can't afford which has dumped us in the mess; not the irresponsible banking practices and fraud which is really at the root of it.

Yeah okay, but what I meant is actually separate from the "whose fault is it" debate, but rather at the solutions/damage control end:

Namely, Cameron "not signing up for it" claiming that it's not in Britain's interest, when it actually is. When he's at the EU negotiations he's supposed to represent Britain, not just the financial sector that owns his party. That should be a pretty big deal.
In the Netherlands there's currently all sorts of shit going on with politicians and financial people being questioned about whether they might have bailed banks out too much a few years ago, even though I kind of have the idea that they're barking up the wrong tree.
Title: Re: UK interests = banking interests
Post by: Scribbly on December 09, 2011, 05:25:05 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 03:17:02 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on December 09, 2011, 02:09:25 PM
Quote from: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 01:36:05 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:09:55 AM
QuoteMr Cameron said it was not in Britain's interest "so I didn't sign up to it".

Cameron is not defending Britain. He is defending the financial sector that owns his party.

I understand that this must be the case. It's the same financial sector cover-your-ass politics that got us here, about which I thought the cards were sort of on the table now, but not yet entirely it seems? Aren't there any groups or organisations in Britain that would love to talk about this "little" fact in the medias far and wide? I mean basically, this sort of thing, "selling out the 99%", is what everybody should be keeping a damn close eye on, if we want to minimize the amount of them-getting-away-with-it. Is this sort of thing perhaps also stronger in Britain because of the class society?

The media narrative is that it is the fault of individuals taking huge amounts of overdraft and mortgages they can't afford which has dumped us in the mess; not the irresponsible banking practices and fraud which is really at the root of it.

Yeah okay, but what I meant is actually separate from the "whose fault is it" debate, but rather at the solutions/damage control end:

Namely, Cameron "not signing up for it" claiming that it's not in Britain's interest, when it actually is. When he's at the EU negotiations he's supposed to represent Britain, not just the financial sector that owns his party. That should be a pretty big deal.
In the Netherlands there's currently all sorts of shit going on with politicians and financial people being questioned about whether they might have bailed banks out too much a few years ago, even though I kind of have the idea that they're barking up the wrong tree.

Oh, the argument there is pretty simple.

The UK still has a strong financial services industry; in fact, it is about the only industry we've got that performs well competitively on an international stage. The argument therefore continues that we can't allow major reforms, because they'll flee to other countries instead. If we had a transactions tax and the US didn't, for instance, they might just go to America instead.

Cameron HAS said that we need to diversify our economy, which is true. Unfortunately, his initiatives for doing this are lackluster at best. We've got a Green Bank coming in next year to provide loans to the green energy sector (good, but that is a very small sector still), and we've got Enterprise Zones. These are nebulous areas where tax incentives (which vary from zone to zone) are put in place to encourage investors to go and build facilities there.

As someone who has had to try and get to grips with the Enterprise Zone scheme, it really is a horrible mess. There's no oversight, even the regional development agencies (who administer the zones) often aren't clear on what they are actually going to mean, or how quickly they might be established. It is also an incentive based on tax cuts, which isn't going to do a lot to bolster waning manufacturing or industrial sectors; there's no demand in the economy, so it isn't a good time to be looking at building a factory.

So whilst he accepts this is something he needs to change, what it basically can be summed up as is; the financial services sector has us by the balls. At least he's acknowledging that, but he couches it in language which tends to obscure the point. Instead, he talks about competitiveness and best interests. To some extent he may be right; if the UK doesn't have this tax, we may get a flood of investment bankers and hedge fund managers from the continent eager to continue their dodgy practices here and avoid EU taxes.

Because that's exactly what we want, right?

... Right?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 06:14:47 PM
I personally find the bank threat to move overseas hilarious.  Especially in this case, because if a full Eurozone agreement goes into effect, then to do business in the Eurozone they're going to have to pay the tax anyway.  It's not like the banks could flee to Greece or Italy, because they would be bound by the same rules.

This is, of course, why we have international agreements in the first place, to prevent beggar thy neighbour economic policies by providing a fairly level international playing field in the area of regulation.  We just chose to forget that, because we've spent the last 40 years ripping up those treaties in order to...well, carry out those very same policies the original drafters were aiming to prevent.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 06:49:04 PM
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/6cf8ce18-2042-11e1-9878-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1fxjOZ9no

QuoteDisorderly sovereign defaults and eurozone exits by all five periphery states would drag down not just the European banking system but also the north Atlantic financial system and the internationally exposed parts of the rest of the global banking system. The resulting financial crisis would trigger a global depression that would last for years, with GDP likely falling by more than 10 per cent and unemployment in the West reaching 20 per cent or more. Emerging markets would be dragged down too.

Apparently, Cameron is cool with this, going by his recent activities.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on December 09, 2011, 08:21:50 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 09, 2011, 02:09:59 PM
Quote from: Lenin McCarthy on December 09, 2011, 11:56:06 AM
Just read this on Facebook:
Quote from: Norwegian who is studying in EnglandKick Britain out of the European Union! Ideal situation for Europe? Britain remaining in the European Economic Area (Common Market), like Norway and Iceland, but also losing its voice and voting rights, like Norway and Iceland. Then Europe can move forward without dragging the British by their feet. I'm sure the British would be utterly convinced they had somehow gained from it too.

Could this actually work?

That would actually be probably the best way of dealing with the UK.

The only two major losers in such a situation would be the UK hard right (for whom the EU is an excellent foil) and the USA (who uses the UK as a proxy within the EU to prevent closer integration).  Without the EU to struggle against, the entire UKIP group would dissolve overnight, and the Tory right would have to go back to bitching about bringing back capital death and banning gays and allowing teachers to eviscerate truant pupils and so on.

So did this sort of start to happen tonight? I saw on the news that there was this negotiation and Sarkozy and Merkel said they'd go on without Britain because Cameron was being so exceedingly difficult. Didn't quite catch the details, it was about stricter regulations on national debt.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 09, 2011, 08:34:25 PM
As with everything to do with the EU, it is not entirely clear.

This represents a quite unprecedented shift, the EU is doing something despite a lack of complete consensus.  It looks like the EU is going to go ahead with the deal, with the UK staying as it is, outside of the agreement.  But UKIP are arguing that is not necessarily the case, and that Cameron's refusal to negotiate has left the City less well-defended than had he actually sought some agreement with Berlin and Paris.  Meanwhile, Labour are taking a longer view version of the same argument, suggesting Cameron's petulant display meant he did not get the best possible deal for Britain and that the UK will likely excluded in everything but name from future EU negotiations.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 10, 2011, 11:32:32 PM
On HIGNFY last night, Ian Hislop repeated the rumour that Germany is printing the mark again, as an "emergency measure".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 12, 2011, 12:09:02 PM
Is it just me, or are there a lot of 'how did we get into this mess?' documentaries around at the moment? It feels like there's been one or two a week for the past month now.

What boggles my mind is that some of them clearly identify the problem and then flub the analysis. Peston's 'The Party's Over: How the West Went Bust' was particularly dumb.

Peston identifies that one of the problems is that the UK is a consumer economy that has grown largely based on spending, and that we can't keep spending when we're borrowing to do so. Okay. He then argues that we need to transform to a German model where we become net exporters and sell to the world...

But we're a tiny island where space is at a premium, so manufacturing will not be as cheap as it can be in the US or China where factories have less obvious overheads, and people require less money to cover their basic bills...

... and of course, the big unspoken problem is that you need people to buy whatever you are selling, which means that quite aside from the issues where we try to force our economy to invert, and the practical problems there... someone, somewhere needs to be the consumer.

Zizek argues that the point of destruction in capitalism is where all debts are paid, and he's right. We've reached a situation where there can be no more debt because banks have lost faith that we'll ever pay it back, but the entire functioning of the global economy is based on more debt coming from somewhere and the debt continuing to roll on into the future.

The idea that we can all become net exporters in the German model and thus alleviate the debt crisis is patent nonsense, but this seems to be the underlying assumption behind 'restructuring the economy'. Has anyone actually thought this through?  :horrormirth:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on December 12, 2011, 03:21:41 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on December 12, 2011, 12:09:02 PMIs it just me, or are there a lot of 'how did we get into this mess?' documentaries around at the moment? It feels like there's been one or two a week for the past month now.

What boggles my mind is that some of them clearly identify the problem and then flub the analysis.

It's to make sure that the demographic that feels they should be somewhat informed, believe the right things and won't be tempted too much to go and think about answers for themselves.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 13, 2011, 03:25:59 PM
Where did I put my tinfoil again?  Oh right, I left it at the offices of the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/world/europe/euro-crisis-pits-germany-and-us-in-tactical-fight.html?_r=1&pagewanted=2)....

QuoteThe Germans, for their part, seem almost to welcome the collapse of market confidence: without the rising pressure from markets, Silvio Berlusconi would not have resigned as prime minister of Italy. And without the incentive of fear, most European partners would have been more reluctant to give Brussels oversight authority over national budgets — and the right to impose sanctions for violators.

"The Germans had a strategic insight or advantage to let the crisis get to the threshold within the European Union necessary for France to be willing to hand over the kind of sovereignty the country has always resisted," said Jacob Funk Kirkegaard of the Peter G. Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. "You could say that the crisis has either been the wake-up call or the tool that Germany has used to beat them into submission."

Note: I am not saying this is crazy: I am saying this makes too much sense, and the reality detector they normally use at the NYT, to make sure too much does not get in the product, must have been not working properly that day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on December 13, 2011, 03:30:25 PM
You're saying that Germany either caused or contributed to the eurozone collapse as a power play against France?

That's rather chilling.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 13, 2011, 03:39:07 PM
It has been a claim from the Right here, that Germany failed to conquer Europe militarily so decided to do so economically, for a long time.

I doubt that Germany deliberately plotted out the course for the economic disaster... but it does make a good degree of sense that they have encouraged things along now. This isn't just a power play against France; if they force the UK out, every other country looks like they are too reliant on German money to function to go against their authority. Whether or not the peoples of Europe will allow themselves to be bound by it when push comes to shove is another question. France has already shown willingness in the past to just refuse to pay fines, and unless Germany are willing to back up their demands with military force, I suspect other countries will just ignore these limitations when it suits them too.

What Germany doesn't seem to get in this situation is that imposing austerity on their partners is going to damage their own economy significantly too. Germany is one of the few net exporters, and if they demand the stringent regulations they're setting up and that comes to pass... they're cutting into their own markets. It isn't quite cut and dry, and it'll be interesting to see how this plays out in practice rather than on paper.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 13, 2011, 03:39:11 PM
Yup.

The German position within Europe has been insanely unhelpful and even damaging to the EU as a whole.  Germany had the largest stimulus within Europe (5% of the GDP), yet when other nations (who ran deficits with the collusion of German financial and industrial interests) asked for funding for bailouts, Germany attached specific clauses and conditions to those bailout loans - on the one hand demanding austerity measures be put in place, which caused the aforementioned economies to severely contract - and on the other making some of the conditions of loans be massive purchases from German arms manufacturers.  Unsurprisingly, Germany recovered, while at risk nations floundered and got worse, creating a systemic crisis that has near-fatally undermined confidence in the Euro and the Eurozone as a whole.

German insistence on austerity has pushed the Eurozone to the brink, and caused the passage of the current Eurozone deal, which effectively puts the entire Eurozone economy under de facto German control. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 13, 2011, 04:05:56 PM
I honestly don't think German financial services think in terms of absolute gain. 

Partially because there is a nasty whiff of neo-Nazi sentiment wafting out of the offices of Frankfurt nowadays, with lots of whining about Muslims and inferior races and the like.  And that kind of sentiment tends to be a very zero-sum type of personality, the "I'll fuck the world over, but damnit, I'll be the King of this pile of ashes" mentality.

It might hurt Germany in the long run, but it will hurt everyone else first, and that is what really matters.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 13, 2011, 04:11:34 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 13, 2011, 04:05:56 PM
I honestly don't think German financial services think in terms of absolute gain. 

Partially because there is a nasty whiff of neo-Nazi sentiment wafting out of the offices of Frankfurt nowadays, with lots of whining about Muslims and inferior races and the like.  And that kind of sentiment tends to be a very zero-sum type of personality, the "I'll fuck the world over, but damnit, I'll be the King of this pile of ashes" mentality.

It might hurt Germany in the long run, but it will hurt everyone else first, and that is what really matters.

That sort of rhetoric seems to be on the rise everywhere. People in power seem convinced that it is best to drag everyone down, if it means that their relative position gains.

I blame Capitalism = Competition thinking. Because the important thing is to win, as though at some point someone is going to call time, tot up the scores and declare an overall victor.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 14, 2011, 10:06:24 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/13/left-right-challenge-eu

Owen Jones is suggesting here that the whole German treaty thing will likely be renegotiated once the Socialists sweep to power in France.  However, because the UK dropped the veto bomb, it will not get a say in the process.

Oh well, I'm sure the French Socialists will staunchly defend the interests of the City of London  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 16, 2011, 05:09:57 PM
Speaking of the French....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16222988

QuoteFinance minister Francois Baroin has become the latest French figure to allege weaknesses in the UK economy.

It comes a day after the chairman of the French central bank suggested the UK's credit rating should be downgraded - ahead of France.

Mr Baroin said: "The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying."

Downing Street has said the coalition has a credible plan for the economy. Meanwhile UK officials are to join continuing eurozone talks.

Britain will be involved despite Prime Minister David Cameron's veto of an EU-wide treaty change involving all states.

'Rather be French'

France has been warned by US credit ratings agency Standard and Poor's that it could lose its triple-A credit rating over the eurozone crisis.

But Mr Baroin told Europe 1 radio: "The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying, and you'd rather be French than British in economic terms."

On Thursday, the chairman of the French central bank, Christian Noyer, suggested that any downgrade should instead start with the UK "which has more deficits, as much debt, more inflation, less growth than us".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 21, 2011, 09:09:18 AM
Quote from: Cain on December 16, 2011, 05:09:57 PM
Speaking of the French....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16222988

QuoteFinance minister Francois Baroin has become the latest French figure to allege weaknesses in the UK economy.

It comes a day after the chairman of the French central bank suggested the UK's credit rating should be downgraded - ahead of France.

Mr Baroin said: "The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying."

Downing Street has said the coalition has a credible plan for the economy. Meanwhile UK officials are to join continuing eurozone talks.

Britain will be involved despite Prime Minister David Cameron's veto of an EU-wide treaty change involving all states.

'Rather be French'

France has been warned by US credit ratings agency Standard and Poor's that it could lose its triple-A credit rating over the eurozone crisis.

But Mr Baroin told Europe 1 radio: "The economic situation in Britain today is very worrying, and you'd rather be French than British in economic terms."

On Thursday, the chairman of the French central bank, Christian Noyer, suggested that any downgrade should instead start with the UK "which has more deficits, as much debt, more inflation, less growth than us".

Moody's has pretty much said it is going to do just that this morning.

Good thing remaining out of the eurozone agreement is going to keep our financial sector so secure! :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 21, 2011, 10:10:36 AM
I notice the BBC carefully worded its piece on Moody's.  Two bits of praise to every one bit of criticism.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 21, 2011, 10:34:06 AM
Richard Seymour has a great piece on his blog about the collapsed pension negotiations in the UK

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/12/from-clutches-of-partial-victory.html

QuoteIt can't be that often that a Tory minister, anxious to look smart, does something stupid.  Can it?  I have watched this government with some perplexity, wondering if I have underestimated its cunning, or if they really do think they can arouse the whole labour movement and organised left in unified opposition, and trounce them in a jiffy.  Their complacency as they embarked on a structural adjustment programme more extreme in its intended effects than anything accomplished by Thatcher, whether the blowback comes in the form of student protests, riots or strikes, seems extraordinary.  Seemingly convinced that they need not offer any material substratum to secure the consent of a viable social bloc for their agenda, they simply turn to harsher policing.  Apparently unable to imagine the riff-raff posing a real threat to them and their superior class allies, they forget the old salami-slicing praxis and just revel in the reluctance of their opponents to fight, pushing them around, taking their provocations to indulgent, extravagant new levels. 

And just when it seemed that the government had finally revisited the old techniques of divide-and-rule, offering just enough concessions to win tacit acquiescence from Unison and GMB leaders while attacking and isolating the PCS, Pickles goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid that destroys it.  For sure, the deal announced between the government and (some) unions over pensions was awful, so awful that it was a real question whether rank and file workers could be made to swallow it.  The government conceded nothing in terms of its bargaining totals, nor the principle issues over which the two sides were in negotiation.  Even a moderate, media-friendly Labourite like Sally Bercow was denouncing the agreement as a sell out yesterday.  The idea that those who hit the pickets and streets on 30th November were more likely to take such a deal is dubious.  But evidently the union bureaucracies who have been most reluctant to fight are now the most eager to call of hostilities and negotiate the terms of surrender.  Without the support of union leaders in the big Labour-affiliated unions, getting strike action back on the agenda for the New Year is that bit harder.  So, it is only reasonable to infer that Pickles just blew a tactical victory for the government.

The problem now is that the government and the union leaders will be back around the table to patch this up quickly, rush the deal through and make it a fait accompli as soon as possible.  Trade unionists are now planning an emergency lobby of the TUC over this, to go with the emergency meeting (you should go) and emergency statement (I invite you to sign).  This is a pivotal moment in the struggle against austerity.  So much hangs on whether the organised labour movement will even put up a fight.  That will make all the different between the vindication of Tory arrogance, and its humiliating reproof.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 21, 2011, 10:54:42 AM
Quote from: Cain on December 21, 2011, 10:34:06 AM
Richard Seymour has a great piece on his blog about the collapsed pension negotiations in the UK

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2011/12/from-clutches-of-partial-victory.html

QuoteIt can't be that often that a Tory minister, anxious to look smart, does something stupid.  Can it?  I have watched this government with some perplexity, wondering if I have underestimated its cunning, or if they really do think they can arouse the whole labour movement and organised left in unified opposition, and trounce them in a jiffy.  Their complacency as they embarked on a structural adjustment programme more extreme in its intended effects than anything accomplished by Thatcher, whether the blowback comes in the form of student protests, riots or strikes, seems extraordinary.  Seemingly convinced that they need not offer any material substratum to secure the consent of a viable social bloc for their agenda, they simply turn to harsher policing.  Apparently unable to imagine the riff-raff posing a real threat to them and their superior class allies, they forget the old salami-slicing praxis and just revel in the reluctance of their opponents to fight, pushing them around, taking their provocations to indulgent, extravagant new levels. 

And just when it seemed that the government had finally revisited the old techniques of divide-and-rule, offering just enough concessions to win tacit acquiescence from Unison and GMB leaders while attacking and isolating the PCS, Pickles goes and spoils it all by saying something stupid that destroys it.  For sure, the deal announced between the government and (some) unions over pensions was awful, so awful that it was a real question whether rank and file workers could be made to swallow it.  The government conceded nothing in terms of its bargaining totals, nor the principle issues over which the two sides were in negotiation.  Even a moderate, media-friendly Labourite like Sally Bercow was denouncing the agreement as a sell out yesterday.  The idea that those who hit the pickets and streets on 30th November were more likely to take such a deal is dubious.  But evidently the union bureaucracies who have been most reluctant to fight are now the most eager to call of hostilities and negotiate the terms of surrender.  Without the support of union leaders in the big Labour-affiliated unions, getting strike action back on the agenda for the New Year is that bit harder.  So, it is only reasonable to infer that Pickles just blew a tactical victory for the government.

The problem now is that the government and the union leaders will be back around the table to patch this up quickly, rush the deal through and make it a fait accompli as soon as possible.  Trade unionists are now planning an emergency lobby of the TUC over this, to go with the emergency meeting (you should go) and emergency statement (I invite you to sign).  This is a pivotal moment in the struggle against austerity.  So much hangs on whether the organised labour movement will even put up a fight.  That will make all the different between the vindication of Tory arrogance, and its humiliating reproof.

I'd totally missed this, and having read up on it...

I genuinely think that the Tory government is looking to rile up the left as much as possible. The general population can then be convinced that these greedy bastards are going on strike completely unreasonably and making THEIR lives difficult because the Unions want more money at a time when we have no money.

Then the left wing can be smashed.

David Cameron has already talked about making it illegal for unions to fund political parties, which would be the death knell of the Labour party. He wants to cripple or destroy any opposition the Conservatives might possible have, because it is unthinkable for any other force to gain ground in our systems which isn't one of the major three parties.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 21, 2011, 11:51:05 AM
Well, I would say the unions are an adjunct to the Labour Party and so part of the three party system, but point taken.

Bueno de Mesquita is proven right again: generally what leaders care about most is preserving their political power, at the expense of internal rivals.  Labour buys votes with public spending, the Tories attempt to undermine Labour and....well, the theory fails to explain the actions of the Lib Dems, but nothing's perfect, right?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on December 27, 2011, 07:51:30 PM
Not a surprise, but the data is new...
Wealth Gap Between Lawmakers, Constituents Grows (http://slatest.slate.com/posts/2011/12/27/congress_wealth_data_data_shows_widening_wealth_gap_between_lawmaker_and_constituent.html)

QuoteThe Times reports that the median net worth of a member of Congress climbed 15 percent from 2004 to 2010, to $913,000; meanwhile, the median net worth for all Americans dropped 8 percent over that same period, to roughly $100,000. The lawmakers' gains are even more noteworthy because over that same period the net worth of the richest 10 percent of Americans remained essentially flat, based on inflation-adjusted figures.
Quote from: The NY TimesThere is broad debate about just why the wealth gap appears to be growing. For starters, the prohibitive costs of political campaigning may discourage the less affluent from even considering a candidacy. Beyond that, loose ethics controls, shrewd stock picks, profitable land deals, favorable tax laws, inheritances and even marriages to wealthy spouses are all cited as possible explanations for the rising fortunes on Capitol Hill.

Substitute "shrewd stock picks" with "insider trading", and you're all set.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 30, 2011, 10:09:01 PM
Yeah.  They don't call it the military-industrial-Congressional complex for nothing.

"Oh, looks like that bill approving 145,000 acres of land for a new Lockheed Martin factory in Jefferson County is going to pass, now we've finally confirmed we have the votes for tomorrow.  I wonder if this will affect stock prices?"


Anyway, it looks like some conservatives have realized Wall Street is playing them for suckers:

http://www.hughhewitt.com/transcripts.aspx?id=938b9e1b-caba-4327-8e3d-509d1922eecd

QuoteKevin Williamson: Well, I don't know that they're necessarily all that anti-Romney, although they're certainly more pro-Obama. The thing is that there is a great misconception that Wall Street is politically conservative, or even that big business, high finance in general is politically conservative. It's not. If you look at the kinds of issues that most American conservatives really care about, where they are culturally, where they are morally, where they are religiously, these guys aren't there. And not only are they not there, they're actively opposed to it. I mean, these are guys making five, six, seven hundred thousand dollars a year who live in Manhattan and getting manicures and sending their kids to Choate and places like that. They're not showing up at parent's day in a Sarah Palin T-shirt. That's just not who they are, not what they believe. But the one thing that they really are good at is using the rhetoric of being pro-business and being pro-free enterprise to kind of buffalo us conservatives, and get us to agree to all sorts of favors and subsidies and handouts for them.

Other conservatives are not as quick up the uptake, though

QuoteHugh Hewitt:  I'm just not going to buy that. I do think they might show up in a Sarah Palin T-shirt, and I do think that they are generally often quite conservative, very Evangelical. Some are deeply Roman Catholic, traditionalist, generous, high-minded people.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on December 31, 2011, 05:54:05 AM
This could be interesting. Thanks Cain. :)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 01, 2012, 01:06:32 PM
I suspect such heresy will not spread too far, based on my reading of Corey Robin's book on conservatism. 

Anyway.  In more good news for 2012, Craig Murray is predicting a crash in the UK housing market.  His logic seems to support his conclusions:

QuoteAverage house prices currently stand at over 6 times average earnings. That compares to a long term average since 1945 of under 4, which charts show to be the norm.

People simply cannot afford to buy homes at six times their earnings. People living on average earnings, and paying the high rents such high property prices entail, would take ten years to save one years earnings, which would give them a deposit. They then would need five times earnings (or two and half times joint earnings for

[...]

I expect the massive decoupling of house prices from average earnings will end in 2012 or 2013 and we will see a major crash in house prices. It may not begin in 2012 – possibly it can be delayed until 2013, but I predict that by 2015 we will see house prices to earnings ratios back to four per cent. And as I see no significant increase in average earnings over that period, that means a fall in nominal house prices of over 40%.

House prices currently bear no relation to the ability of people to buy them to live in. They are like a rock balanced on an apex, requiring only a little push to crash them down. A number of pushes are coming:

- Cuts in housing benefit. The whole rush to the private rented sector has been underpinned by artificially high rents forced up by government payment of housing benefit. I am of course extremely sorry that individuals may be hurt by the implementation of these cuts. I also expect some backtracking as it dawns on MPs that the £2,800 per month does not actually go into the pocket of the Daily Mail's Sudanese refugee family, it goes into the fat pocket of some Tory landlord. But the housing benefit cuts will reduce returns to landlords and knock house prices.

- Unemployment. The main impact of public spending cuts is yet to feed through in terms of higher unemployment – you ain't seen nothing yet. Tories like unemployment – it reduces the costs and leverage of labour. 2012 is the year that it will really hit. By the end of 2012, repossessions will be very high. This would always spark a drop in house prices; people have not yet got their heads round what a fall it will be this time.

- Interest Rates. The key factor in balancing that house price boulder has been the lack of any high wind of interest rates. The short term outlook is for base rates to remain real terms negative (which is undeniably true yet strangely almost never said). But that will not last forever either...

The coming crash in house prices is of course going to have a huge effect on the viability of the financial sector, and will join together with sovereign bond defaults in precipitating the fall of the casino capitalists who live on our labour and have the rest of us in their lockhold.

I do not share his optimism about how a crash will play out.  I suspect it will be more along the lines of "and lots of blood will be spilt, and it probably wont be spilt in guarded compounds in Chelsea or Kensington".  But the rest seems fairly accurate.
Title: The Triumphant Return of GERMAN SATIRE
Post by: Cain on January 01, 2012, 10:40:51 PM
It's a common misconception that Germans, as a people, suffer from a lack of a sense of humour.  If anything, they have an abundance of it, if especially dry humour is your thing.

However, they are branching out into satire and parody, if this is anything to go by:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CC6f2RB9iO8&feature=related

The BBC explains:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16377189

QuoteA 1963 British comedy sketch which is cult New Year's Eve viewing in Germany has inspired a YouTube hit featuring Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy.

The heads of the German Chancellor and the French President have been superimposed on to the two characters in the 18-minute sketch Dinner For One.

Ms Merkel "plays" 90-year-old Miss Sophie whose butler, "Mr Sarkozy", impersonates her imaginary friends.

The original is hugely popular in Germany but is little known in Britain.

It is traditionally broadcast by several different German TV stations on New Year's Eve, and its popularity in both Germany and Scandinavia has made it one of the world's most repeated television shows.

During the routine, British comedienne May Warden plays upper-class Miss Sophie who is hosting a dinner for her four close friends to mark her birthday.

But because she has outlived them all, her butler James - played by Freddie Frinton - impersonates each guest, getting more drunk with each toast.

'Triple A'

In the YouTube version, Angela Merkel's "guests" include former Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou, former Spanish PM Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero and British PM David Cameron - all impersonated by "Nicolas Sarkozy".

"Mr Sarkozy", pretending to be Mr Cameron, tells "Mrs Merkel" in English, "You are looking younger than ever", before switching to German and saying, "You look richer than ever".

"Mrs Merkel" tells "Mr Cameron" during a toast: "Don't forget we speak German in Europe".

As "Mr Sarkozy" scurries around the table in an ever more drunken way, the narrator says: "This is what happens every euro rescue summit, whether or not anyone else is there, it is just these two doing everything themselves".

The parody ends - like the original - with the butler taking the old lady up to her bedroom. In the original, James asks Miss Sophie whether it will be the "same procedure as last year" then promises to do "his very best".

In the YouTube version, "Mr Sarkozy" tells "Mrs Merkel" he will give her his "triple A".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on January 03, 2012, 11:04:11 AM
Quote from: Martin Sandbu"What do you do then?" asks Prof Hudson. Either you enter a process of debt deflation and "concentrate property at the top of the income distribution", he says. "Or you write down debts to amounts that can be paid, in which case you can keep a middle class." If these are the alternatives, jubilees may yet stage a comeback.

Michael Hudson, an economics professor at the University of Missouri, has said what anyone who has looked at the state of the global economy knows; there is too much debt to be paid back. Martin Sandbu's article is a confused and ill-researched mess, but I'm glad to see the call for a debt amnesty getting some ground.

Coupled with the possibility of a massive housing crash in 2012/13, which would see even more people with mortgages suddenly locked into houses which are worth massively less than they are paying for them, I think this point of view might just gain ground.

It'd destroy the banks, and people tend to get this strange ethical righteousness whereby they don't want to see people who owe money saved from paying it back because they are immoral or something  :?. I don't think it is likely, but I'll keep my fingers crossed!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on January 04, 2012, 12:02:53 PM
If you need more proof regarding how weak the banks are...

Last night the European Central Bank's 'Marginal Lending Facility' lent €15.012 billion. On Monday they lent €14.8bn, and last Thursday they leant €17.3bn, which was the highest day since June 2009.

The Marginal Lending Facility is the banking equivalent of a crisis loan used to get emergency liquidity when they have reason to expect they won't be able to meet their obligations. It has been suggested that they are taking these loans to try and make their balance sheets look artificially stronger before they are revealed to shareholders, rather than for this purpose. Either way, the Marginal Lending Facility has very high interest rates and so is only turned to when nobody else is available.

The banks aren't lending to one another again; they are bracing for one or more to go down. The loans are anonymous, but we do now that since Thursday, almost €50bn has been leant out. For comparison, the greek bailout has totalled €110bn since May 2010.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 04, 2012, 01:08:45 PM
There are so many potential ways the global economy can explode this year (hedge funds, banks, Chinese/British property price collapses, the straits of Hormuz, another earthquake somewhere important, a tsunami or hurricane etc) that I'll be surprised if we make it to the end of the year in anything like as "good" a condition as we are now.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on January 25, 2012, 12:33:23 PM
Monday, Lagarde said that the Eurozone firewall needs to be made much bigger for Spain and Italy to avoid default. Approximately $500bn, with an expectation that there will need to be $1tn provided over the next two years for bailout funds worldwide.

Germany seems to be the target again. Given how belligerent they were last time I just don't see it going through.

Really will be interesting to see what's still standing at the end of 2014.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 25, 2012, 12:43:46 PM
South America and China have already made it clear they're not going to pay into an IMF fund for European stability.  I bet Angela Merkel is feeling mighty isolated nowadays...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2012, 08:25:56 AM
I'm going to agree with the Institute of Directors

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16827424

QuoteFred Goodwin knighthood 'hysteria' criticised

Figures from the business world have hit out at a decision to strip former Royal Bank of Scotland boss Fred Goodwin of his knighthood.

He had been criticised over the bank's near-collapse in 2008, which prompted a taxpayer bailout. Political pressure to remove the honour had mounted recently.

This, along with the focus on bank bonuses, are two of the biggest sources of political-economic stupidity in the UK today.

Firstly, who gives a fuck if Goodwin has a knighthood or not?  Oh, thats right, people who think Knighthoods count as anything more than political favours for people impressed by archaic titles.  In other words, idiots.  It's not surprising that the head of one of the biggest banks in a country with an outsized financial sector and where that sector has significant political influence would be honoured by that system.

A smart person would say "lets use this to hang it around the neck of both current and past governments, highlight their essential continuity and underline the political influence of the banks".  An idiot goes "OMG Fred Goodwin is disgracing the noble institution of the Knighthood, and devaluing the hard work of honest people like Bono, this is an outrage, fix it and fix it now."

Secondly, bonuses.  Yes, giving people bonuses for fucking up is bad.  Yes, giving them bonuses for performing their job marginally competently is also not great.  Did bonuses cause the financial crisis?  Fuck no, so shut up about them, you little tits.  Whining about bonuses when the Eurozone is starting to fall apart and the Chinese property bubble has collapsed and American banks have been engaged in highly criminal acts and are getting away with it....all that suggests you a) know nothing about finance and b) deserve to have your right to vote taken away for being irredeemably stupid.

I realise this also applies to most members of Parliament who took part in the idiotic "debate" on the issue last week.  I am, if anything, more convinced of the above two points.

On the other hand, watching the IoS whine about the "political act" of stripping a knighthood, as if giving a knighthood were also not a political act, was the height of hilarity.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on February 01, 2012, 08:38:59 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 01, 2012, 08:25:56 AM
I'm going to agree with the Institute of Directors

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16827424

QuoteFred Goodwin knighthood 'hysteria' criticised

Figures from the business world have hit out at a decision to strip former Royal Bank of Scotland boss Fred Goodwin of his knighthood.

He had been criticised over the bank's near-collapse in 2008, which prompted a taxpayer bailout. Political pressure to remove the honour had mounted recently.

This, along with the focus on bank bonuses, are two of the biggest sources of political-economic stupidity in the UK today.

Firstly, who gives a fuck if Goodwin has a knighthood or not?  Oh, thats right, people who think Knighthoods count as anything more than political favours for people impressed by archaic titles.  In other words, idiots.  It's not surprising that the head of one of the biggest banks in a country with an outsized financial sector and where that sector has significant political influence would be honoured by that system.

A smart person would say "lets use this to hang it around the neck of both current and past governments, highlight their essential continuity and underline the political influence of the banks".  An idiot goes "OMG Fred Goodwin is disgracing the noble institution of the Knighthood, and devaluing the hard work of honest people like Bono, this is an outrage, fix it and fix it now."

Secondly, bonuses.  Yes, giving people bonuses for fucking up is bad.  Yes, giving them bonuses for performing their job marginally competently is also not great.  Did bonuses cause the financial crisis?  Fuck no, so shut up about them, you little tits.  Whining about bonuses when the Eurozone is starting to fall apart and the Chinese property bubble has collapsed and American banks have been engaged in highly criminal acts and are getting away with it....all that suggests you a) know nothing about finance and b) deserve to have your right to vote taken away for being irredeemably stupid.

I realise this also applies to most members of Parliament who took part in the idiotic "debate" on the issue last week.  I am, if anything, more convinced of the above two points.

On the other hand, watching the IoS whine about the "political act" of stripping a knighthood, as if giving a knighthood were also not a political act, was the height of hilarity.

I think both issues are largely down to the low standards of reporting (which are themselves down to the fact people eat that shit up I guess).

It is a lot easier to report 'YOU have to call a Bad Man Sir, isn't that terrible?' or 'Banker Earns More In One Year Than You Ever Will' than it is to try and explain the Eurozone crisis. This way, the reporters can tick the 'financial news' box and be guaranteed of finding some suitably outraged people to huff indignantly about it for prime time. If they ask the man on the street whether they think the Eurozone has any future, they'll have to ask six times as many people before they find one who says something intelligible.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2012, 08:48:07 AM
Yeah, totally.

Still, it's as annoying as hell.  Self-righteous indignation does not remove the terrors of economics!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 13, 2012, 09:27:12 AM
Greece has voted yet again for austerity measures...though this time they had to kick out 40+ MPs for voting against them.

Also, about 80,000 people protested in Athens alone.  30 buildings were set on fire.  And Greece is still no closer to paying off its debt.

The absolute worst part?  That in 2008, Greece's debt stood at 260 billion Euros, and as of today, the EU has spent 340 billion Euros on bailouts, once you throw in PSI etc into the mix.  And Greece is still no closer to paying off its debt.

We should have just paid the thing off entirely in 2008 and told them to never do it again.  Instead, we've worked a painful level of debt up into a systemic global financial risk.  Go us!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 13, 2012, 05:17:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 09:27:12 AM
The absolute worst part?  That in 2008, Greece's debt stood at 260 billion Euros, and as of today, the EU has spent 340 billion Euros on bailouts, once you throw in PSI etc into the mix.  And Greece is still no closer to paying off its debt.

:aaa:
absolutely incredible!

of course, if that had happened, it would have set a bad precedent for debt forgiveness.
and we don't want all those people around the world that are hopelessly indebted to empires to think they could demand dignity, now, do we?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 13, 2012, 05:19:42 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 13, 2012, 09:27:12 AM
The absolute worst part?  That in 2008, Greece's debt stood at 260 billion Euros, and as of today, the EU has spent 340 billion Euros on bailouts, once you throw in PSI etc into the mix.  And Greece is still no closer to paying off its debt.


I got the impression a while ago that the EU - or parts of it, anyway - wasn't actually interested in fixing Greece, but instead picking over its bones.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 13, 2012, 05:40:59 PM
in the past it was only the smudgy countries that were preyed upon by the empires using IMF bailout type devices, right?
i would think action like this would put a chill down the spines of all players in the EU that aren't at the top of the pack.  that your 'union' might just eat you at some point seems like it would hurt the morale and cohesion of the venture as a whole.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on February 13, 2012, 05:48:16 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on February 13, 2012, 05:40:59 PM
in the past it was only the smudgy countries that were preyed upon by the empires using IMF bailout type devices, right?
i would think action like this would put a chill down the spines of all players in the EU that aren't at the top of the pack.  that your 'union' might just eat you at some point seems like it would hurt the morale and cohesion of the venture as a whole.

We aren't all in this together.

That's the basic mentality of the EU. It isn't a matter of trying to help each other through this; nobody cares about anyone but themselves. I don't even mean that they want what to do what is best for their countries, I mean that the naked self-interest runs higher than that. All the countries in the EU want to do everything they can to perpetuate the power structures which are already in place, and if that means throwing the undesirables like Greece under the bus, well, at least it is politically palatable back home.

I'm not going to say that Greece had (and has) no problems with its population; it clearly does. Tax evasion is rife, for a start. But the governments and media have done a fantastic job of selling the idea that failing to cut deficits is a matter of 'laziness', and that therefore anyone who is in trouble has brought it on themselves. Why should WE help THEM out? We're in tough times too, after all, and WE didn't bring it on OURSELVES, right?!

It is a self destructive and naive political ideology which is devouring our countries from within. We all seem to have this lunatic idea that if we position ourselves properly we can ride the wave of debt to come out at a higher position relative to our competitors, completely ignoring that all we really succeed in doing is dragging the entirety of Europe down and possibly lowering global living standards as a result.

Because this is preferable, presumably, to eating the bankers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on February 21, 2012, 10:08:09 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 01, 2012, 08:25:56 AM
I'm going to agree with the Institute of Directors

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16827424

QuoteFred Goodwin knighthood 'hysteria' criticised

Figures from the business world have hit out at a decision to strip former Royal Bank of Scotland boss Fred Goodwin of his knighthood.

He had been criticised over the bank's near-collapse in 2008, which prompted a taxpayer bailout. Political pressure to remove the honour had mounted recently.

This, along with the focus on bank bonuses, are two of the biggest sources of political-economic stupidity in the UK today.

Firstly, who gives a fuck if Goodwin has a knighthood or not?  Oh, thats right, people who think Knighthoods count as anything more than political favours for people impressed by archaic titles.  In other words, idiots.  It's not surprising that the head of one of the biggest banks in a country with an outsized financial sector and where that sector has significant political influence would be honoured by that system.

A smart person would say "lets use this to hang it around the neck of both current and past governments, highlight their essential continuity and underline the political influence of the banks".  An idiot goes "OMG Fred Goodwin is disgracing the noble institution of the Knighthood, and devaluing the hard work of honest people like Bono, this is an outrage, fix it and fix it now."

Secondly, bonuses.  Yes, giving people bonuses for fucking up is bad.  Yes, giving them bonuses for performing their job marginally competently is also not great.  Did bonuses cause the financial crisis?  Fuck no, so shut up about them, you little tits.  Whining about bonuses when the Eurozone is starting to fall apart and the Chinese property bubble has collapsed and American banks have been engaged in highly criminal acts and are getting away with it....all that suggests you a) know nothing about finance and b) deserve to have your right to vote taken away for being irredeemably stupid.

I realise this also applies to most members of Parliament who took part in the idiotic "debate" on the issue last week.  I am, if anything, more convinced of the above two points.

On the other hand, watching the IoS whine about the "political act" of stripping a knighthood, as if giving a knighthood were also not a political act, was the height of hilarity.

I want to make a comment on bonuses, even though it is a very marginal issue in the entire financial mess, because I think it highlights the gestures being made to placate people.

All through the BBC news yesterday I heard people saying how great it was Lloyds bankers were losing £2 million out of their (combined) bonuses in order to be punished for fraudulent PPI sales. These are the individuals responsible for the criminal act which has dragged on for years.

In total, the PPI fiasco cost Lloyds £3.2 billion.

The bankers are still getting bonuses - at least six figures and in some cases still seven. However, by giving them this slap on the wrist, Lloyds have now responded to public opinion. Barclays and Royal Bank of Scotland are being criticized this morning for not doing so, which will likely spiral into yet more coverage of ZOMG banker's bonuses.

But in total, the actual payback for what the bankers did amounts to 1/100th of the .2 of the losses their actions have incurred. The huge losses are still covered, essentially, by government bailouts.

-

In more pertinent financial news, the greek 'voluntary writeoff' of 53% of their debt is being considered over the next few days. If it goes ahead, people are hoping that they can have Greece back on a stable footing by 2020. Everyone else seems to be basically treating this as a default, because they can call it what they want but it means they aren't capable of paying, and although the Euro is up in the short term... it seems unlikely that any sensible private investors are going to be buying European government bonds any time in the future.

If we also have an Iranian crisis in the next three months as is being predicted in some quarters, Europe is going to go into shock and another very deep recession. I suspect we're going to see that anyway over the next year; the eurozone crisis isn't going away, nobody is addressing the real issues, everyone in the financial world seems to be either in huge denial or panicking at an increasing rate.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 23, 2012, 02:37:18 PM
Disturbing news from Greece:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/02/paul-mason-of-bbc-on-how-austerity-is-reducing-greece-to-developing-country-status.html

QuoteThe BBC's Paul Mason, fresh back from Greece, gives a report on Democracy Now of how living conditions have deteriorated as a result of the imposition of austerity measures. One of the stunners, mentioned in Atlantic Wire (hat tip Lambert), is that not only will some Greeks have to work without pay, some will have to pay for their jobs (yes, that is not a typo). The euphemism is a "negative salary."

Mason also discusses how this program is radicalizing the public. Communists, Trotskyists and other extreme-left groups are polling at 43%. That's a strikingly high number. This plus the level of dissent on the street suggests Greece is on its way out of the eurozone.

Not so much the high polling of the extreme left - to be honest, if the Greeks weren't doing that, I'd be worried, given their history.  The paying to have a job bit...that's worrying.

Things have gotten so bad the major centre-left Greek parties are now finally questioning the austerity measures being put in place.  I honestly won't be surprised if this ends in violence.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on February 23, 2012, 02:59:45 PM
I'm sure I'm only seeing one side here, but I read Krugman's blog quite often, and he has continually shown through historical (and current) analysis that austerity during a recession only increases the recession.

Other than blind ideology, why the fuck are all politicians (and some economists) so gung-ho about austerity in a recession?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 23, 2012, 03:10:02 PM
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita actually kindof answers this in his "The Dictator's Handbook: Why Bad Behaviour Is Almost Always Good Politics."

Politicians desire three things, 1) to acquire power, 2) to hold onto power and 3) to control the cash flow.

Recessions are not bad because there is less money per se, but because there is less money for politicians to buy off opposition and pay supporters.  Recessions are a political issue, not an economic one.

Politicians therefore have to prioritise who needs to be payed off.  What austerity tells us is that in so-called democracies, the general public is not a powerful or influential or unified enough actor that it needs to be bought off, beyond certain basic concessions.  Banks, on the other hand, are. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on February 23, 2012, 03:43:22 PM
And so I can assume that the "freshwater economists" (Anti-Keynesians from Chicago and their ilk) are merely ideological puppets for the plutocracy?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 28, 2012, 10:19:21 AM
Yes, although in many cases, they really don't know this is the case, they are true believers.

John Gray, the former libertarian political theorist in the UK, is quite instructive here.  He explains that a lot of the Neo-liberal thinking is an attempt to return to the classical liberalism of Adam Smith, Ricardo, Cobden etc.  But as he continues, the economic systems they proposed had fundamentally different priors to those we currently have, namely, a god actively involved in the affairs of man and who loved humanity.

Therefore, he sees a "return" to classical liberalism as a farce, because many of the theorists do not hold these priors, and so they search for alternative explanations to back up those theories, which of course is a logical fallacy right there.  It's a form of fundamentalism, to him, and in fact directly mirrors religious fundamentalism not only in terms of origin, but also in that it is a shallow parody of the depth and complexity of the theories that have gone before (Smith and Cobden, for instance, considered classical liberalism not the best system, but the least worst, and were quite aware of the flaws inherent in it).

Neo-liberal economists have been lavishly funded by certain key interests at top Universitities, most notably Chicago, which has led to generations of economics students being taught theories which are...suspect to put it mildly.

Not that the Keynesians are much better, to be honest.  While Keynes does have a certain level of respectability, there is a lot of disagreement over how to actually implement his theories, some of which are, to put it plainly, whack.  Furthermore, in the currently existing world, social democracy of the sort Keynesians generally seem to support, is not a credible answer.  For all their flaws, the bastardized Keynesian/MMT/neo-liberal economic model massively outperforms social democracies in terms of economic output.  Sure, it tends to be mostly in terms of rentier theft and fraud, and has a distressing tendency to crash every decade or so...but nevertheless, the social democratic model still relies on an ever-growing economy, which is not going to happen in a world of dwindling energy resources.  The Neo-liberal model also suffers because of that, but it will make a lot of money for certain people before it all comes crashing down.  The misery will not be more equally distributed, as it likely would under a social democratic system.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 28, 2012, 10:21:08 AM
Speaking of energy resources...

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NB28Dj05.html

QuoteThe end game is about to begin. On the one hand you have the noise and rhetoric. Greedy speculators gouging gasoline prices; mad mullahs preparing to wipe Israel off the map; bunker buster bombs and fleets being positioned; huge demand for oil from the BRIC countries; China's insatiable thirst for oil; the oil price will head for $200 a barrel and will never again fall below $130 ...

On the other hand you have the reality.

Oil Markets

The oil markets are completely manipulated and orchestrated, and the conductors of the orchestra have the benefit of having already held a rehearsal in 2008.

History never repeats itself, but it does rhyme. This time around it is not demand from the United States that is collapsing, but European Union and United Kingdom demand, as oil prices in euros and pounds sterling have never been higher. In the meantime, the US is awash in oil as domestic production quietly increases, flushed out by the high prices.

As I have outlined in previous articles, the culprit for the high oil prices between 2009 and 2012 – with the exception of the speculative "spike" between March 2011 and June 2011 driven by Fukushima and Libyan price shocks – has been passive investment by risk-averse investors, which enabled producers to support oil prices at high levels.

Much of this passive money underpinning the market and enabling producers to monetize inventory pulled out of the market in September 2011, and another wave pulled out in December 2011.

What is now happening is the end game: an orchestrated wave of noise that is drawing in speculative money. This is enabling the producers who are actually in the know to hedge by selling production forward during what they confidently expect will be a temporary – and pre-planned – managed fall in the oil price.

The Game Plan

The smartest kids on the block knows that gasoline prices much over US$4 per gallon will be both deflationary and lethal to President Barack Obama's re-election chances. So that won't happen other than briefly.

I am by no means the only commentator who has pointed out the complete counter-productivity of these oil sanctions. The smart kids are well aware that oil sanctions are completely useless, and simply enable China to fill its strategic reserves at a discount to the market price at the expense of Greece and Italy in particular.

But the US has been quite happy to let the EU – as useful idiots – take the economic hit. The high oil prices caused by all this noise and nonsense are actually a net benefit to Iran – which rattles its sabre loudly as elections approach.

The effect of a managed decline in oil prices to, and probably over-correcting well through, $60 a barrel – which is coming fairly soon – will be extremely beneficial to the US in two ways.

Firstly, it will be catastrophic in particular for Iran, Russia and Venezuela – not exactly on the White House party list – whose hugely oil-dependent revenues will collapse. The ensuing economic mayhem will open these countries up to regime change and to rescue plans which Wall Street will be dusting off.

Secondly, the US population will be laughing all the way to the gas station as gasoline prices fall – at least temporarily – below $2.50 a gallon and release purchasing power into the economy, thereby doing the president's re-election chances no harm at all.

What will then happen is that members of the Organization for Petroleum Exporting Countries will panic and genuinely reduce their production. The Saudis/Gulf Cooperation Council will again orchestrate the inflation of the oil price – as they did in 2009 – comfortable in the knowledge that they have been able to hedge against this temporary fall in prices at the expense of the speculators currently pouring in to the market.

That's the game plan as I see it of the smartest kids on the block. What could ever go wrong?

Continue reading for the full scope.  I might X-post this to the ""News which highlights the structure of the system" thread too.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 28, 2012, 03:41:01 PM
Ohhhh, very interesting! I know I've said it before, but I'm expecting this year to be chock-full of interesting developments.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on March 13, 2012, 03:14:41 PM
The FT are breaking a new story right now (haven't been able to find it mentioned elsewhere) which implies that the banks conspired to set interest rates.

The full article is here (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/6e5d1d0e-694e-11e1-9618-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1ozQOCEeE) I don't know if you can see it without signing up but I'll try and summarize the key points.

As we know a large part of the credit crunch was down to banks being unwilling to lend to one another.

What determined bank 'confidence' was their Libor rating. Every day employees at the major banks are asked: "At what rate could you borrow funds, were you to do so by asking for and then accepting interbank offers in a reasonable market size, just prior to 11am?"

Regulators are now uncovering evidence which suggests banks colluded in order to try and manipulate interest rates. At best, they have been massaging the answer to the question to make themselves look stronger than they are (after all, if they look strong then the answer to the question genuinely does become better for them). At worst, it is a cynical manipulation which has caused untold damage to the EU economy. Amongst other things, the average US adjustable rate mortgage is linked to Libor.

It looks like most of the major banks are holding their hands up to some kind of culpability in this, which implies that the rot goes very deep and is undeniable.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 13, 2012, 03:17:22 PM
Unusual Libor ratings were also at the heart of what brought down Lehman Brothers. 

Is there anything to suggest how far back interest rates were fixed?  I'm thinking especially summer 2007, if the data is available.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on March 13, 2012, 03:23:33 PM
One employee is specifically called out for his actions in 2007. It sounds like they could be looking back over everything from the past 26 years (which would take a very long time, obviously), but the article isn't entirely clear on that point. Although a lawyer for a bank attached to the investigation is playing down the cooperation and scale, the FBI, Department of Justice, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, European Commission and Financial Services Authority are all called out as probing into this area, as well as the Japanese Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 13, 2012, 03:25:33 PM
The specific bank I had in mind was French.  I think.  I'm going to take a nap, then I'll research and come back with what I have, as I am fairly sure it is related.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 16, 2012, 11:02:06 PM
Bank of America has put $55 trillion worth of derivatives risk onto American taxpayers

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2011/10/21/bank-of-america-derivatives-merrill.html

QuoteBank of America    reportedly shifted $55 trillion of risky derivatives from its Merrill Lynch    unit over to its retail bank, which holds deposits ultimately backed by U.S. taxpayers.

The move, initially reported by Bloomberg this week, moved into the full glare of the public spotlight by Friday.

The New York Post reported that the "funky Merrill Lynch derivatives" were transferred at the request of those on the other side of the derivative trade after the bank's debt was recently downgraded.

That's not surprising since ratings downgrades often trigger calls for more collateral from derivatives holders wanting to ensure their counterparties are good for the money if they have to pay up. With the derivatives now in the hands of the banking unit, FDIC-insured deposits can be tapped to make good on those derivatives, if necessary.

"There are many reasons trades are moved, this is common practice across the industry and done at the request of the client," said BofA spokeswoman Colleen Haggerty. "These trades do not impact FDIC insurance or insured deposits. Derivative positions are hedged and subject to robust risk-management practices and do not pose any material risks to the bank."

Those reassurances do little to allay concerns.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 19, 2012, 02:34:47 PM
So, the UK is now planning to sell off its roads to sovereign wealth funds.

I predict this having a hilariously tragic series of consequences, a few years down the line.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 19, 2012, 02:35:54 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 16, 2012, 11:02:06 PM
Bank of America has put $55 trillion worth of derivatives risk onto American taxpayers

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2011/10/21/bank-of-america-derivatives-merrill.html

QuoteBank of America    reportedly shifted $55 trillion of risky derivatives from its Merrill Lynch    unit over to its retail bank, which holds deposits ultimately backed by U.S. taxpayers.

The move, initially reported by Bloomberg this week, moved into the full glare of the public spotlight by Friday.

The New York Post reported that the "funky Merrill Lynch derivatives" were transferred at the request of those on the other side of the derivative trade after the bank's debt was recently downgraded.

That's not surprising since ratings downgrades often trigger calls for more collateral from derivatives holders wanting to ensure their counterparties are good for the money if they have to pay up. With the derivatives now in the hands of the banking unit, FDIC-insured deposits can be tapped to make good on those derivatives, if necessary.

"There are many reasons trades are moved, this is common practice across the industry and done at the request of the client," said BofA spokeswoman Colleen Haggerty. "These trades do not impact FDIC insurance or insured deposits. Derivative positions are hedged and subject to robust risk-management practices and do not pose any material risks to the bank."

Those reassurances do little to allay concerns.

Yeah, that's not at ALL sketchy.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 21, 2012, 12:25:03 PM
Initial reaction to the budget: what a clusterfuck.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 23, 2012, 12:29:17 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on September 19, 2011, 03:43:47 PM
i encountered some folks a couple years ago online that were part of some effort to promote a general debt amnesty under the auspices of 'Jubilee' as described in the Leviticus, where all debts are forgiven. (these folks weren't pushing for the forgiveness and pardoning of criminals, however  :lol:)

i haven't heard hide nor hair of their attempts since then, so they were obviously unsuccessful in spreading the meme, but I wonder if the time is ripe to spread this notion through the religious right?  What would the republican leaders do if it became a statement of christian faith to support a debt amnesty as prescribed in the good book?

That's the first thing I thought of. Jubilee.

The religious right has an extremely filtered perception of bible reading, though. */obvious* I love pointing them to the 23rd chapter of Matthew since it describes them to a T, it makes them mad as fuck but it doesn't change anything.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on March 23, 2012, 02:02:42 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 19, 2012, 02:34:47 PM
So, the UK is now planning to sell off its roads to sovereign wealth funds.

I predict this having a hilariously tragic series of consequences, a few years down the line.

Private roads??  WHAT COULD GO WRONG?  :lulz: 

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 23, 2012, 07:25:22 AM
Going by the nationalisation of the railways, absolutely everything.

Also, the only large toll road operated in the UK has been the M6 Birmingham North Relief Road...which has not exactly been a roaring success
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 25, 2012, 09:34:22 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-23/mf-global-s-corzine-ordered-funds-moved-to-jpmorgan-memo-says.html

QuoteJon S. Corzine, MF Global Holding Ltd. (MFGLQ)'s chief executive officer, gave "direct instructions" to transfer $200 million from a customer fund account to meet an overdraft in one of the brokerage's JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) accounts in London, according to an e-mail sent by a firm executive.

Edith O'Brien, a treasurer for the firm, said in an e-mail sent the afternoon of Oct. 28, three days before the company collapsed, that the transfer of the funds was "Per JC's direct instructions," according to a copy of a memo drafted by congressional investigators and obtained by Bloomberg News.

If Corzine doesn't get done for this, you may as well accept you now have an aristocracy.  This is so blatantly and overtly illegal....and also shows Corzine was lying when he testified in front of Congress.

It'll also destroy investor confidence in brokerages like MF Global.  No consumer protection = lots of nervous people.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 29, 2012, 11:21:23 PM
Two protestors in Italy have self-immolated in protest of government austerity cuts.

Spainairds have not gone that far yet, opting to set fire and riot in Barcelona instead.  Large protests are also affecting other Spanish cities.  In some places, public sector workers have gone for 4 months without pay.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on March 29, 2012, 11:28:49 PM
This is about to get interesting, isn't it?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 30, 2012, 11:27:21 AM
It doesn't look good.  Our Spanish cleaners are of the opinion that their country is fucked, based on my conversation with them this morning.

Best part is that the budget has not even been unveiled yet.  When it does, I expect things to get even worse.  And Spain has a 23% unemployment rate.  If you add in the scores of civil servants who are clearly not getting paid, it's probably closer to 25%.  In particular, the 18-24 unemployment rate is just shy of 50%.

That's enough people to cause a significant disturbance.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on March 30, 2012, 12:38:17 PM
How come the UK aint in the same shit? Did we end up with a fat wad of the yen that went to our american overlords, or are we just better at mismanaging our finances?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 30, 2012, 02:26:20 PM
11 IX{jaguar 6:25 pdT = 5 min TV.news = THAT ? this
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 01, 2012, 02:43:29 PM
4/1 2nd 1/4 started / Au  1669 Ag 32.32 > 50 : 1
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 03, 2012, 09:18:48 AM
How do you know the UK economy is bad?

When "Pret a Manger set to create 550 jobs" is considered BBC website newsworthy.

Note: UK unemployment is 2,680,000.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 03, 2012, 02:54:30 PM
6:54:32.1 KidNap4RandSum Aberdeen N Lanicshure "Last Week" ice Cream
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on April 05, 2012, 08:51:12 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 29, 2012, 11:21:23 PM
Two protestors in Italy have self-immolated in protest of government austerity cuts.

Spainairds have not gone that far yet, opting to set fire and riot in Barcelona instead.  Large protests are also affecting other Spanish cities.  In some places, public sector workers have gone for 4 months without pay.

And here is the first Ive seen of the greek self immolations.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0405/pensioner-commits-suicide-outside-greek-parliament.html
If the government don't defuse that by this evening they could be looking at an outright rebellion.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on April 05, 2012, 09:15:45 AM
Quote from: Faust on April 05, 2012, 08:51:12 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 29, 2012, 11:21:23 PM
Two protestors in Italy have self-immolated in protest of government austerity cuts.

Spainairds have not gone that far yet, opting to set fire and riot in Barcelona instead.  Large protests are also affecting other Spanish cities.  In some places, public sector workers have gone for 4 months without pay.

And here is the first Ive seen of the greek self immolations.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0405/pensioner-commits-suicide-outside-greek-parliament.html
If the government don't defuse that by this evening they could be looking at an outright rebellion.

The link says he shot himself, is that the right one?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on April 05, 2012, 11:41:13 AM
He shot himself on the Greek Parliaments doorsteps.
Immolation does not strictly mean setting fire to oneself.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 05, 2012, 12:45:47 PM
Well, actually, it does, but it can be classed as the same form of protest, I suppose.

Looks like the protests have turned violent again.  Not getting much in the way of real information about the situation on the ground from the BBC though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on April 05, 2012, 01:42:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2012, 12:45:47 PM
Well, actually, it does, but it can be classed as the same form of protest, I suppose.

Looks like the protests have turned violent again.  Not getting much in the way of real information about the situation on the ground from the BBC though.
Fair enough, I was referring to the offering up as a sacrifice as protest. didn't know it was strictly a burnt offering.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 06, 2012, 09:07:10 AM
I also thought it was all about fire, but it turns out Faust is right.
It comes from the latin for sprinkling with meal and is related to the verb to grind.
QuoteDefinition of IMMOLATE
transitive verb
1
: to offer in sacrifice; especially : to kill as a sacrificial victim
2
: to kill or destroy often by fire
— im·mo·la·tor noun
See immolate defined for English-language learners »
See immolate defined for kids »
Examples of IMMOLATE

    a man who immolated himself as an act of protest
    <a ceremony in which they immolated their cherished possessions so that the gods would send rain>

Origin of IMMOLATE
Latin immolatus, past participle of immolare to sprinkle with meal before sacrificing, sacrifice, from in- + mola sacrificial barley cake, literally, millstone; akin to Latin molere to grind — more at meal
First Known Use: 15th century
Cool, learned something.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 14, 2012, 05:19:06 PM
Here's a translation of the letter the Greek man mentioned above wrote:

QuoteThe collaborationist Tsolakoglou government has annihilated my ability for my survival, which was based on a very dignified pension that I alone (without any state sponsoring) paid for 35 years.

    Since my advanced age does not allow me a way of a dynamic reaction (although if a fellow Greek was to grab a Kalashnikov, I would be the second after him), I see no other solution than this dignified end to my life, so I don't find myself fishing through garbage cans for my sustenance.

    I believe that young people with no future, will one day take up arms and hang the traitors of this country at Syntagma square, just like the Italians did to Mussolini in 1945 (Piazza Loreto in Milan).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery th read
Post by: hirley0 on April 14, 2012, 06:07:06 PM
 http://www.curtrenz.com/  {click at Time Certain ?


Quote from: Cain on April 14, 2012, 05:19:06 PM
Here's a tr
Quotethr
3

yes i do have A peso, iT should last a Long Long time at current exchange rates

Brazil Real Exchange Rate
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/USD/graph120.html
http://www.x-rates.com/d/JPY/BRL/graph120.html
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/MXN/graph120.html

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 18, 2012, 11:41:01 PM
17th there was an interesting 20$/oz  spike(V) in gold price -.5hr\+1.5/hr
HUMP DAY? GUESSING :? spy will sell of friday \
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 20, 2012, 10:28:17 AM
http://www.russellsage.org/sites/all/files/Rethinking-Finance/Philippon_v3.pdf

QuoteHistorically, the unit cost of intermediation has been somewhere between 1.3% and 2.3% of assets. However, this unit cost has been trending upward since 1970 and is now significantly higher than in the past. In other words, the finance industry of 1900 was just as able as the finance industry of 2010 to produce loans, bonds and stocks, and it was certainly doing it more cheaply. This is counter-intuitive, to say the least. How is it possible for today's finance industry not to be significantly more efficient than the finance industry of John Pierpont Morgan?

The problem is the reliance on neo-classical economic thinking, which assumes prices should decrease as technology should lead to lower costs and superior predictive models.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 21, 2012, 11:14:31 AM
Oceanfreight rates are increasing.

Quote from: internal office emailThe attached is a General Rate Increase(GRI), established by the Ocean Freight Industry (FENEX), effective 1 April 2012.  It will be in effect until and to include 30 June 2012.  Increase equals around 30%.
Quote from: internal office emailCarriers are minimizing their fleet (ships), in order to heighten freight cost and claim a lack of shipping or space capacity.

And it's getting worse:
Quote from: internal office emailIn all acutality, their has been another GRI introduced for 1 May 2012.

Now i don't know much about this subject, but this seems like a bad trend.
Somebody please reassure me that global trade isn't grinding to a halt.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 22, 2012, 06:39:33 PM
"Global trade is not grinding to a halt."  There you go.  I mean, it probably is, but you did ask...

Also http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-04-21/italian-police-seize-1-5-billion-u-s-securities-from-man-s-car.html

QuoteItaly's financial police seized U.S. government securities with a nominal value of $1.5 billion from an unidentified man in his 70s, they said in an e-mailed statement.

The police said they also took certificates of deposit for about 1,000 tons of gold, which together with the U.S. bonds are worth more than 3 billion euros ($4 billion). The assets were found in a briefcase in the man's car in Viterbo near Rome because of their "doubtful origin," according to the statement.

The man has previous convictions for robbery, extortion, drug trafficking and money laundering, according to the police statement.

The probe, dubbed "Million Dollar," is being carried out in and around the capital in cooperation with officials from the U.S. Embassy. Police said they're evaluating "the authenticity, the nature and the origin" of the securities, some of which may date from the 1930s.

A lot of fake securities have been popping up in the last year or so.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery th read
Post by: hirley0 on April 22, 2012, 07:18:47 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on April 14, 2012, 06:07:06 PM
http://www.curtrenz.com/  {click at Time Certain ?
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/USD/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/USD/graph120.png)
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/MXN/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/MXN/graph120.png)
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/ARS/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/ARS/graph120.png)
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/JPY/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/JPY/graph120.png)

ahHH ssOOO  Fridays sell of did NOT take place
now to check up on the other 120's ? SUMsay  FLAT?

OK? the next thing for her to do?/?
N THE WORLD STAGE??? is to sync with Costa Rica
http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/CLP/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/CLP/graph120.png)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 22, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
use Chilean Peso  AS LEGAL TENDER IN

Argentine Peso  AS 1/100th
REMember this is about Money 1k 500 200 100 50 20 10 5 1 .5 .25 .1 &.01
13 coins. those above 50 are to be made with 2 metals outer & inner
NOT heads & Tails | this should get the wheels turning | of course
with Mayan Calendar graphics naturally | Starting with the use of
the Chilean current Peso as legal tender in the Argentine capitol .
Title: Re: Financial fuckery th read
Post by: hirley0 on April 23, 2012, 10:50:34 PM
3pm pdTBBC My guess is todays move is over
that the Market will be flat the rest of the week on Low Volume ?/?
Links {fast) when available to me | i mean next 2 weeks | thanks


Quote from: hirley0 on April 14, 2012, 06:07:06 PM

3

Quote from: hirley0 on April 22, 2012, 07:18:47 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on April 14, 2012, 06:07:06 PM
http://www.curtrenz.com/  {click at Time Certain ?
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/USD/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/USD/graph120.png)
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/MXN/graph120.html
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/MXN/graph120.png  /img
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/ARS/graph120.html
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/ARS/graph120.png /img]\
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/JPY/graph120.html
http://www.x-rates.com/d/BRL/JPY/graph120.png /img

ahHH ssOOO  Fridays sell of did NOT take place
now to check up on the other 120's ? SUMsay  FLAT?
NAVY selloff Monday 3%  /-/A

OK? the next thing for her to do?/?
N THE WORLD STAGE??? is to sync with Costa Rica
http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/CLP/graph120.html
(http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/CLP/graph120.png)
Min on DW.D >? / ?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 23, 2012, 11:14:39 PM
o6o  2 v .5  should the thirteenth coin be a .5 or a two?

Quote from: hirley0 on April 22, 2012, 08:27:07 PM
use Chilean Peso  AS LEGAL TENDER IN Argentine Peso  AS 1/100th
Money 1k 500 200 100 50 20 10 5 1 .5 .25 .1 &.01 13 coins.

also TBD where in South America are the RARE EARTH deposits
WHEN will the news appear ?

http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/dow/     2/3Min {USE this 1
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^DJI             1m / java pop up
http://www.google.com/finance?cid=983582  1/3 Min { i AM watching?
http://www.dowjones.com/            >           1.5 {{ no connection
http://data.cnbc.com/quotes/.DJIA  >           plugin required = NC =   
http://www.djaverages.com/                       1 Min
page 7 http://www.stockpup.com/               10 Sec
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 24, 2012, 07:06:00 AM
 :fnord: 2012 May branch (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,11728.1230/msg,1175466.html)
ready to dominate the world stage  ?/?      photos will rotate CCW
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Michele_Bachelet_%282009%29.jpg/220px-Michele_Bachelet_%282009%29.jpg)     (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Chinchilla_Adelante.jpg/220px-Chinchilla_Adelante.jpg)
        Michele_Bachelet  (http://www.unwomen.org/)Chili                 Chinchilla_Adelante (http://www.laura-chinchilla.com) Costa Rica

(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/dam/assets/120207040628-argentina-kirchner-story-top.jpg)
                                    Kirchner (http://www.casarosada.gob.ar/) Argentina
                                INPUT WHEN is AVAILABLE#967  :fnord: (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.960/msg,1168814.html)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 26, 2012, 12:12:03 AM
3
:fnord:  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Bachelet)
:fnord:  (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2010/02/laura-chinchilla-woman-elected-president-of-costa-rica.html)  :fnord:  (http://lanota.com/index.php/CONFIDENCIAS/Laura-Chinchilla-adelante-en-las-encuestas-de-Costa-Rica.html)
:fnord:  (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/24/cristina-kirchner-win-argentina-elections)  :fnord:  (http://pjmedia.com/blog/argentinas-president-kirchner-flunks-economics/) :fnord:  (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/oct/23/cristina-kirchner-argentina)
12:27:37 AM
Read 23524 1:23 pdt -27&30 Clearly i would like to bring the 3 of them
here to help get them in touch with each other. My search for their E-Mail
address on the WEB yesterday was futile. then again i understand that i
simplty AM NOT cleaver at communication myself & it will take more than i
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on April 26, 2012, 04:39:01 AM
Official: Britain staggers into double-dip recession
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/04/25/another_british_recession

Not that things are much different in the US. Directly after the "dot-bust" I noticed much of the same over this side of the pond... the bubble during the middle of the decade was just papering over the cracks... The issues (effects on the populace) are remarkably similar.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 26, 2012, 05:04:48 AM
On the other hand, the US didn't decide that "cut ALL the things" was a serious economic policy and as such, has growth on a level that would ensure reelection over here.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on April 26, 2012, 08:50:46 AM
Quote from: Cain on April 26, 2012, 05:04:48 AM
On the other hand, the US didn't decide that "cut ALL the things" was a serious economic policy and as such, has growth on a level that would ensure reelection over here.

It may ensure er-election, yes, but IMHO it would also guarantee fiscal death. The US is out of its collective tree. Reading the comments in the El Reg article brings to mind a zillion of the exact same complaints I've been hearing for the last 12 yrs or so. Even tho they may be hurting, I appplaud our UK cousins for taking tha sane path (in the long run)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 26, 2012, 01:46:45 PM
Economics clearly isn't your strong suit.  The UK plan is nuts, as the only thing it definitely does, in the long run, is shrink the UK economy.  Cutting spending has shrunk the tax base, the number of people in work and the economic-social stability the UK depends upon to attract foreign investors. 

And what a surprise!  Unemployment continues to grow, the economy continues to shrink.  Our Triple A rating from Standard and Poors wont matter for crap if we turn out like the next Greece.

And you know the one thing the Chancellor and his cronies have absolutely refused to do?  Reform the banking sector in any way, or shift the tax burden onto top earners.  Taxes were recently cut for those earning over £150,000 a year.  Goldman Sachs has been allowed to pay no interest on unpaid taxes for over a decade.  One of our government's chief economic advisors is himself a tax-dodger, with over £200 million in his wife's name in a tax haven, and a major funder of the Tories has not paid any tax at all in the last decade.

Our economic plans have also succeeded at opening the door for the privatisation of the education and health system, something a vast majority of voters are opposed to.

Trust me, the USA is bad.  At a lot of things, including economic policy.  But the US economy is growing, and US unemployment is decreasing.  Neither of those things has happened in the UK for a very long time.  Neither of those things seems to be happening in any state that embraced austerity measures, except Germany, which also did a number of things very differently to other states and centred its policy around maintaining employment levels.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 26, 2012, 02:50:09 PM
Or, to put it another way: just because the British government are doing precisely the opposite of the Obama government, it doesn't mean it is any less stupid.  Reversed stupidity is not intelligence (http://lesswrong.com/lw/lw/reversed_stupidity_is_not_intelligence/).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on April 26, 2012, 05:34:37 PM
Well said, Cain.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on April 26, 2012, 05:41:13 PM
True, dat. Logic fail on my part. I'm not at all familiar with the UK, my main sources are BBC and The Register.

I still maintain that the US figures are BS not to be trusted at all. For the same reason that the US employment figures are BS. Don't be fooled by what the gov't measures and reports on. The "growth" is illusory.The official figures are only a small and selective subset of what is really happening.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 26, 2012, 06:49:57 PM
11:20pdT  ?  Read 23574 times  + 6

http://www.unwomen.org/2010/09/un-women-staff-welcomes-michelle-bachelet/
http://melaniezoltan.suite101.com/biography-of-michelle-bachelet-a349569
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2010/sga1262.doc.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_Bachelet
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=52834

http://www.ticotimes.net/  4/20  (http://www.ticotimes.net/Business/Chinchilla-outlines-new-fiscal-measures_Friday-April-20-2012)
"My government has had to deal with problems whose solutions were neglected for many years," Chinchilla
Look the solution is very simple. Not only legalize prositution | make it mandatory.


http://www.buenosairesherald.com/



10:40 - purple ? 12 IMIX ? Read 23568  {seams like A Lot
AnyWay years ago i did play the risk board game? 7 my guess is the withdrawel
of the Mexicans across the Boarder back to Mexico, has profound implications
about upcomming news stories | Not in Mexico | { well never mind
- - -
Again /-/ow to get 3 gals in the same (Um}Pool at the same time ?/?/?
is beyound my current compreHenShion. E-Mail was my 1st guess :
that got no where, (in the computer age}: Carrier Pigeon { i doubt it
? ? ?
Maybe cinco de mayo | 2012 ? (Humm.. | worth a shot | back to the
papers | Maybe a front Page | Add ?/?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 26, 2012, 07:49:45 PM
Read 23588 times +8  My reading of the gold chart
suggests to me FLAT 16-17 UNtill 3rd 1/4 then be in SA RE:'s TBC at +20?

(Read 23580 times)+6 10:49:45 AM / 10:52:08 AM  / (BWUW)
Believe Whatever yoU Want at 10:54:31.AM

REMember she May be the heavy weight | she is not the Majority Here |
the EU " a common currency " is A wrong headed approach | exchange RATES:
CHILLI  PESO | Legal tender in Argentina. | $ v ¢ | (Comprenda'?}?/?

The group announced their intention to model the new community after the European Union including a common currency, parliament, and passport.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on April 26, 2012, 11:27:20 PM
Quote from: inode_buddha on April 26, 2012, 05:41:13 PM
True, dat. Logic fail on my part. I'm not at all familiar with the UK, my main sources are BBC and The Register.

I still maintain that the US figures are BS not to be trusted at all. For the same reason that the US employment figures are BS. Don't be fooled by what the gov't measures and reports on. The "growth" is illusory.The official figures are only a small and selective subset of what is really happening.

The way I see with my limited understanding of this large and complex problem, is that even if certain figures are just noise and padding, jobs being created, or even job-loss just slowing down dramatically, is a measure of growth that means something. And it means something more tangible that gross domestic product, something that directly affects the working class. More importantly if the working class feel that the job market is doing better, then it probably is, and they will probably be reminded that Obama DIDN'T go AUSTERITY NAO, and that in places that went AUSTERITY NAO are doing WORSE much WORSE that the US.

Besides not spending cash, and cutting costs in one of the largest employers in the US would have really fucked things up. Public services would be falling apart faster and there would be MORE jobless people.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 27, 2012, 01:35:34 AM
moving along to the blueGREEN waters in Japan TBC
13:55 pdT beWare errors exist  Wait till NoOn Sun?
ay at 12:41:09.PM pdT-1/-/r
http://www.unwomen.org/
http://www.unwomen.org/2012/04/building-future-leaders-and-decision-makers-in-the-ict-sector/
http://www.unwomen.org/2012/04/espanol-la-directora-ejecutiva-de-onu-mujeres-visita-argentina/
Posted on April 26 2012

On
the first
day of her
mission to Argentina on 2
5 April, UN Women Executive D
irector Michelle Bachelet, met P
resident Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner
and Foreign Minister Hector Timerman in Casa Rosada,
23670+16 U? did not?/? include Chinchilla_Adelante Costa Rica

Moving on at 11:59:43 AM  to the $500 gold/silver ? CoIn
http://www.stockhouse.com/Columnists/2010/March/23/Argentina-s-gold-mining-boom--A-lustrous-trend
the earily implication may be that the 1K (kilo Coin may be % Pure Peru & % ARG)
Minted in the Economic depressed area of S.A, / Not to include Brazil | on their own
ei Not a part of the S.A. Legal tender swap group My Coin Your Coin ? Me Peso Su Peso



Top 20 Silver Producing Countries in 2011 the ? ARG $5 Coin ? 5g/Ag
http://www.silverinstitute.org/site/supply-demand/silver-production/
Read 23666+12 times NoOn posit
.BAC2 THE CAN DATE d'Bait
1 AKBAL{darkness ? Sat ? 4/28
the current objective is to update the charts to reflect reality
NOt current economic thinking| one Planet houses all {not true?
-
begin with the ARG/CLP EXCHANGE RATE
NEXT LOOK AT CLP/ARG | NOW THINK SPREAD
the Agentine CLP_Ask/Bid
the Chilean  ARG_Ask/Bid
THE bid ask spread to be used in both countries to maintain the
fixed ratio between the two initial coins Copper/Silver at 1/100
for a short interval of time (week Month Year}? GET IT STARTED?
by making it legal: the details will work themselves out very soon
-
once the size of the coins are MINTED copper_CLP v silver_ARG
assume $1/g Silver & 380/453.6 1¢/g copper Assume A 5 g Peso ?

thus ARG? $5 /coin & CLP 5¢ /Coin these coins could then combine
in the ARG+100CLP V BRZ in an assumption _- that short term
price stability can be achieved & that stair step S.A. economic
charts will develop in time with the introduction of SPREAD
price CONTROLS implemented in each joined state that does allow
the another state to mint a fraction of its coinage. the Econ
problems aRe solvable in S.A. With sum cross border understandings
I refer to as On Paper / in Fact / & most importantly in the flesh 
http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/
(http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=ag%20lon&type=V&weight=LB&days=3&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0)

(http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=ni%20lme&type=L&weight=LB&days=6&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0)

(http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=cu&type=L&weight=LB&days=3&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0)

23654+18 13 COINS THIS is not A EU {one  size fits all plan
the main concept is each nation mints a coin or 2 or 3
for example Chili Mints A Peso & Argentina mints one too.
next Argentina makes the Chilean coin legal tender in Argentina
at 1/100 ARG | Next once the TWO of them have an agreement
on paper/ in practice / & in the flesh Next think Costa Rica ?
Next think 2 coins | say nickle & a metal of choice | the CR units
include those as legal tender both in Chili & Argentina. Once
the plan is put into effect the problems will eventually resolve
themselves, As the users establish exchange rates by usage?
Yes the Rates are going to change | Nickles will be heaver than
dimes for example & the ARG/CHP MAY VARY?/?  to stabalize
the 100:1 ratio over a brief time period say 30days the BUY/sell
spread will be altered with the transaction (spread) fee going
to the Mint state. thus there will be gaps ? Jumps over night
from period to period in the exchange value of every one of
the 13 coin units: But there will be a system in place to retain
a fixed rate of each coin Minted by each sovern state. It will
not take very long for the South American people to come to
the conclusion of which coins to use which t hold in reserve
and which to convert. going on anyway sum thoughts about
coins thmselves {other than the Mayan calendars  thought
ARE silver/oxide battery coins | Lithium battery coins | in plastic?
bimetalic ones with a threaded hole in the center for use as
thermal couples | magnetic dipoles | Use sum imagination Girls ? buttons
Read 23636 times)+28 vale  :fnord:  (http://ycharts.com/companies/VALE)
READ 23608+20 - 23613 +5
http://www.mining.com/2012/04/09/us8-4-billion-rare-earth-deposit-discovered-in-brazil/
Sul Americana Metais (SAM),
Giant Brazilian miner Vale (NYSE: VALE)

Quote from: hirley0 on April 23, 2012, 11:14:39 PM
where in South America are the RARE EARTH deposits
WHEN will the news appear ?
THIS1 v (http://money.cnn.com/data/markets/dow/) THAT4 (http://www.curtrenz.com/)

^ READ UP ^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 29, 2012, 09:19:46 AM
v READ DOWN v  Read 23690 times +20 2 KAN

23:02 2012  04/28 pdT for limegreen post around midnight board time
-
Nice try} that is my guess {But i'poise the Argentine people are in no mood 4UN
= =
Here is my plan For what its worth| it is U who must be accessable NOT SHE:
THAT MEANS 1. YOU MUST HAVE A CALENDAR  of events that is accessable to me
: : :
what that basically says is ACcessable to ALL. the Prior to 5/5 let it be know
where you will be. the test is eventually to take the plung into the radio
active waters of the FUCUSHIMA desaster { probably late summer is best.
? ? ? ?
it does not seam reasonable to try to go it alone, & i do poise .K. will
be very difficult to convince to even give a second glance much less spend
a weekend soaking up cs whatever the number. i will do my best | 0 | and
try to say chinchilla several times at night prior to turning of the set.
/tilt\
the reason for thinking about CS {YES i will look up the number & Link
rather than gold silver copper & afew others to numerous to mention (13}
is because the knowledge about the spread | probably North | & distance
i mean concentrations at that distance Maybe 41 Miles North? Listen
~bt~
there are to many variables/unkowns at this time 2: Now that SHE KNOWS
she eithor goes or she don't. it seams rather clear. My guess is yes
knowing the details of the plung is required | & should be easy to find
once the schedule of events can be found. 5/5 is comming | IT IS NOT HERE {yet
.BB.
by by baby?  yeah HA is right i guess{ what to do what to do | Map it #1
| find the hot spot #2 | try at least 3 times to convince them to take the
time to take the plunge? for the good of all, not in the National interest
A BREAK in the complexities of office will do them BOTH good | & Teach CS2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesium-137
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_effects_from_Fukushima_I_nuclear_accidents
http://www.asrltd.com/japan/plume.php {the impact map May suggest Midway may be OK2
http://www.asrltd.com/japan/img/Tepco_Measurement_2.gif
(http://www.asrltd.com/japan/img/Tepco_Measurement_2.gif)

think about it & be sure .
Read 23709 time+19 7AM pdT tick Do NOT consider this T to be
that of a Friendly Followe  i AM not i have already Gone to the sites
Those aRe just more inforced stupidity in place
places that don't work. My guess is i will move on to MONEY . .
(Read 23742 times) +33&1/3 Maybe mONeY :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,2728.45.html)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 08, 2012, 05:15:18 AM
 :fnord: Monday |iguess any news is good news | F1  (http://www.crash.net/f1/news/177621/1/argentina_discussing_f1_return.html)
http://topics.bloomberg.com/cristina-fernandez-de-kirchner/  ? :fnord: YES I Guess" (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-05-07/argentina-taps-ex-schlumberger-executive-galuccio-to-oversee-ypf.html)
-----------

5/7 Cc4U ? (http://www.ticotimes.net/Current-Edition/News-Briefs/President-Chinchilla-appoints-temporary-transport-minister-_Monday-May-07-2012)
To comment, write a letter to the editor to letters@ticotimes.net.
Please make sure to include your full name and location.
Let hers must be 500 words or fewer. Submissions should be or

=
      http://www.presstv.ir/detail/239673.html
(http://previous.presstv.ir/photo/20120505/s.alambaigi20120505095141937.jpg)

__ Read 24003 times ? My new 1 new post per day limit { probably in effect
              (http://www.casarosada.gov.ar/images/phocagallery/thumbs/phoca_thumb_m_180512foto8.jpg)<Read 25591 times
Tue ? Fast car it is: Thus FEE-Mail THE CHinCHilla to set up
a 1/4 mile drag race on her soil. Stock car? off the lot? yours v hers
stagered start in effect, such that if you choose a very fast 5 sec 1/4
and she chose a 1908 classic {used car option) 25 second / 1/4
the computed delay for the dead heat finish would be know in
advance. the stagard start | once the race is over both cars to
be auctioned ofF on site. high bid 1st round has choice OR both
at the bid price each. if only 1 then a second bidding round
once the maiden is over, the next race (as a team} can be scheduled
in CHilli ? not necessarily in the capitol?/? but at for example indi
, datonna, etc class tract in Chilli / Against their top brands ?/?/?
& again the Gals {duo} cars to be auctioned at the track after race
_don't forget to put an envelope in the glove box with a thank U note & hair_?

12 IX  SO IT GOES?  i did try to read the link. But there is
so much online interference,  it was impossible. (i call Saint Vitus dance} + U
need a pug in. /-/A . No. What i want is a schedule of events?/? today Wed?
this side of the date line, it will be 9-11 on the second story terminal?/?/?
So maybe i can read all of the B bs. But really i have no interest in Police
State Activity other than Ni report on NYPD car shadow movements East
of StOTT | not 4th coming naturally | oh well | ED | now where was i | oh Y
ea/-/. |HaHaHa | Cinco de May Has past | there were no real Quakes to
speak of, i really do not understand this actuallyHow can this
be? Where are the onliners at this time? Moving along anyway?/?
i sure do see A Hi probability of continued drops in Au. way down DEEP
as the Austerity planners Dump gold and force a Global 1. not that THAT
maters here or in Grease but DOWN by inTENT. S.A. Will have to do some
Fast Moves not to get caught in the Norths Bid to Dump the Metals
i the mean time More bad weather in the Low Lands LikeLy
With the SF Quakes on hold for some time | No chance of A Win Fall ?
as Far as Ca in general it looks like a very good crop year = drop in
grape prices too. the defence $ will most likely remainin & around the
Meditranian to prevent is drying up in September | & same Songs for
Yellow, & S. China 2.  MORE of the same | Beach weather ( W&E ) ?
break out you Hawaiian threads. & get on with Sun bathing 2012 ::
13 MEN ? 5/10  Read 24142 +140-1/2 days
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on May 08, 2012, 08:57:58 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-einhorn/fed-interest-rates_b_1472509.html

David Einhorn writes one of the best articles I've ever read on HuffP.

I'd quote some of it here but reading it ate up my break and I'm swamped.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 08, 2012, 09:11:24 PM
"One of the best articles on HuffPo" is not exactly high praise. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on May 08, 2012, 09:22:27 PM
 :lol:

Noted.  I was actually a little surprised to find something there I thought was worth sharing.

I've usually liked Einhorn though, no matter where or when he writes on financials.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 08, 2012, 09:36:53 PM
Meanwhile, shares in Athens crashed as the news that anti-EU rightists/far left-green coalitions emerged as the big winners of the Greek elections.

There are so many anti-EU and austerity parties in Parliament there right now, if they didn't hate each other almost as much as they did the EU, they could form a coalition.  Problem is, SYZRIA and Golden Dawn, in the same room...well, that's a recipe for a bloodbath.  Nevertheless, looks like SYZRIA are going to be the real power brokers in any functioning government, the latter not being a given with the way the vote breakdown went.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on May 08, 2012, 11:56:54 PM
I suppose this means there's going to be even more squabbling?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 09, 2012, 07:12:04 AM
Yes, although with Sarkozy going, the Germans may find themselves less able to inflict austerity measures on the Greek population.  Hollande wants to try something else.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 10, 2012, 01:13:17 PM
                                                           K,c ? 5/9 (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/k/cristina_fernandez_de_kirchner/index.html)
laura\latimes (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2010/02/laura-chinchilla-woman-elected-president-of-costa-rica.html)(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/17/timestopics/kirchner.jpg)
        Argentine-Spanish-tr3  (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/telecoms/9253321/Argentine-Spanish-trade-row-escalates-after-Telefonica-fined.html)(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02214/argentina_2214402b.jpg)
                                               (http://a.abcnews.com/images/International/bf5ca93e8d80492f9949a5702eb84c52_mn.jpg) abc  (http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/world/president-cristina-fernandez-de-kirchner.htm)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 11, 2012, 04:13:52 AM
It occurs to me, the political situation in Greece is now perfect for a military coup.  Especially if Syriza form a government...I'm sure there are more than a few crustly old colonels who lived it up as freshly minted lieutenants back in the days of the Junta.  Also worth noting that the Golden Dawn apparently has more than just a passing level of support among the security services and within the military...allegedly.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 11, 2012, 11:45:22 AM
3:45AM pdT http://Laura-chinchilla.com May 11, 2012

THIS effort halts my system BIG time with long delays
& virtual memory loss latimes ?/? (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/laplaza/2010/02/laura-chinchilla-woman-elected-president-of-costa-rica.html) or-speeding/  (http://laura-chinchilla.com/costa-rica-tourists-getting-credit-cards-charged-for-speeding/)

pdx00782 says:
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
May 11, 2012 at 3:11 am
-mail / Friday, May 11, 2012 ?They said? 4:11:12.13 pdT
NopE whaT iReally said was -m | Get iT ? YEAH (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32413.60.html)

http://tycho.usno.navy.mil/simpletime.html ? board time 3:16:??03:16:16 AM
                      20:20 (http://laura-chinchilla.com/wp-content/uploads/cache/261_NpAdvSubFea.jpg)03:20:27 AM
9:45B http://laura-chinchilla.com/comments/feed/
Monday, May 07, 2012 3:34 PM ? http://translate.google.com/#es|en|
limited in time Edition } good
Your May 11, 2012 at 3:11 am comment is awaiting moderation. { GOOD
May 12, 2012 at 4:45 am comment is awaiting moderation.
No PE ? _ 3 ETZNAB i did Try2 :fnord:  (http://laura-chinchilla.com/costa-rica-tourists-getting-credit-cards-charged-for-speeding/) s awa mo _ May 13, 2012 at 5:15 am
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 11, 2012, 05:54:53 PM
JP Morgan Chase managed to lose $2 billion in high risk trades.

Even better, there were rumblings just over a month ago that said portfolio was risky, and it was subject to a lot of criticism in the press, which Jaime Dimon shrugged off in his typical manner.

Much more interesting:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/banks-prepare-return-drachma-083804551.html

QuoteLONDON (Reuters) - Banks are quietly readying themselves to start trading a new Greek currency. Some banks never erased the drachma from their systems after Greece adopted the euro more than a decade ago and would be ready at the flick of a switch if its debt problems forced it to bring back national banknotes and coins.

From the end of the Soviet Union - which spawned currencies such as the Estonian Kroon and the Kazakh Tenge - to the introduction of the euro, they have had plenty of practice in preparing their systems to cope with change.

Planning behind the scenes has been underway since Europe's debt crisis erupted in Greece in 2009, said U.S.-based Hartmut Grossman of ICS Risk Advisors who works with Wall Street banks.

"A lot of the firms, particularly in Europe and also here, have been looking at that for a long time," said Grossman, who added that the latest Greek political crisis had brought matters "to a little bit of a head".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 11, 2012, 05:58:03 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 11, 2012, 05:54:53 PM
JP Morgan Chase managed to lose $2 billion in high risk trades.

Even better, there were rumblings just over a month ago that said portfolio was risky, and it was subject to a lot of criticism in the press, which Jaime Dimon shrugged off in his typical manner.

Much more interesting:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/banks-prepare-return-drachma-083804551.html

QuoteLONDON (Reuters) - Banks are quietly readying themselves to start trading a new Greek currency. Some banks never erased the drachma from their systems after Greece adopted the euro more than a decade ago and would be ready at the flick of a switch if its debt problems forced it to bring back national banknotes and coins.

From the end of the Soviet Union - which spawned currencies such as the Estonian Kroon and the Kazakh Tenge - to the introduction of the euro, they have had plenty of practice in preparing their systems to cope with change.

Planning behind the scenes has been underway since Europe's debt crisis erupted in Greece in 2009, said U.S.-based Hartmut Grossman of ICS Risk Advisors who works with Wall Street banks.

"A lot of the firms, particularly in Europe and also here, have been looking at that for a long time," said Grossman, who added that the latest Greek political crisis had brought matters "to a little bit of a head".

Nothing will happen to anyone, of course.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 11, 2012, 06:01:30 PM
Of course not.

Because the person with ultimate responsibility for this loss is none other than Jaime Dimon himself.  He built up the Chief Investment Office, the people repsonsible for the loss, he hand-picked their boss, and he gave her specific instructions to trade aggressively. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 11, 2012, 06:09:13 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 11, 2012, 06:01:30 PM
Of course not.

Because the person with ultimate responsibility for this loss is none other than Jaime Dimon himself.  He built up the Chief Investment Office, the people repsonsible for the loss, he hand-picked their boss, and he gave her specific instructions to trade aggressively.

I'm not sure any laws were broken, but with a stupid $2 Bn loss, he ought to be sacked.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on May 12, 2012, 03:44:30 AM
"...you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the Bank. ... You are a den of vipers and thieves."
—Andrew Jackson in 1834

:argh!:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on May 12, 2012, 12:49:21 PM
If the pressure gets high enough, I'm sure that they'll find some low-level employee in their organization who they can scapegoat as a "rogue trader".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 12, 2012, 01:03:45 PM
http://www.brasil.gov.br/sobre/brazil/president-of-the-republic/biography/br_model1?set_language=en :fnord: RF (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32469.0.html)

(http://i49.tinypic.com/t52a8y.jpg)
-3 ETZNAB ----nYet-(Read 24383 times) ====Comprenda'?  MAY 13th
3:33&1/3 Read 24350 +20 in 6.5Hr aka 1/4 day fix.ed
9AM ^READ UP^ d'La in effect  Read 24330 times+34/1/5thDay
thread  (Read 24296 times)  Michele_Bachelet ?  May 2012 ?  2 CABAN 
May 6, 2012 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tag/michele-bachelet
May 9, 2012 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-sm0J4PrVWA
Thu 10 May 2012
===============
ily Almanac for: May 7, 2012. Skip N  :fnord: 7A (http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/people/A0932924.html)
go ... On Saturday, May 26  :fnord: /-/ ike (http://www.efworld.org/news/news.php)
ursday, May 10, 2012 ... Updated: March 11, 2010. Mi  :fnord: NY ? PD (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/michelle_bachelet/index.html)
- - -
http://www.biography.com/people/michelle-bachelet-37782
http://www.daylife.com/topic/Michelle_Bachelet
http://www.evri.com/person/michelle-bachelet-0x272aa
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 12, 2012, 01:52:12 PM
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/jamies-cryin-dimon-j-p-morgan-chase-lose-2-billion-20120511

QuoteIf you're wondering why you should care if some idiot trader (who apparently has been making $100 million a year at Chase, a company that has been the recipient of at least $390 billion in emergency Fed loans) loses $2 billion for Jamie Dimon, here's why: because J.P. Morgan Chase is a federally-insured depository institution that has been and will continue to be the recipient of massive amounts of public assistance. If the bank fails, someone will reach into your pocket to pay for the cleanup. So when they gamble like drunken sailors, it's everyone's problem.

Activity like this is exactly what the Volcker rule, which effectively banned risky proprietary trading by federally insured institutions, was designed to prevent. It will be argued that this trade was a technically a hedge, and therefore exempt from the Volcker rule. Not only does that explanation sound fishy to me (as Salmon notes, for Iksil's trade to be a hedge, this would mean Chase had an equally giant and insane short bet on against corporate debt, which seems unlikely), but it's sort of immaterial anyway: whether or not this bet technically violated the Volcker rule, it definitely violated the spirit of the law. Hedge or no hedge, we don't want big, federally-insured, too-big-to-fail banks making giant nuclear-powered derivatives bets.

So yeah.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 12, 2012, 05:05:47 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18046280

QuoteEurope central bankers have been openly expressing views on the possibility of Greece leaving the eurozone as its leaders struggles to form a government.

Germany's top banker said it was up to the Greeks to decide, but if they did not keep to their bailout commitments, they would receive no new aid.

His counterpart in the Irish Republic said a Greek exit would be damaging but not necessarily fatal to the euro.

QuotePer Jansson, deputy head of Sweden's central bank, was quoted by Bloomberg as saying on Friday that central bankers across Europe had begun discussing the possibility of a Greek exit from the eurozone and how to handle the consequences.

"I would be very careful in speculating that it would be a painless process without complications," he said in Stockholm.

Irish central bank chief Patrick Honohan told a conference in the Estonian capital Tallinn on Saturday: "It [a euro exit] is not imagined in the legislation, in the treaties, but things can happen that are not imagined in the treaties."

"Technically, it can be managed," he added.

"It would be a knock to the confidence for the euro area as a whole. So it would add to the complexity of the operation until things settle down again. It is not necessarily fatal, but it is not attractive."

Speaking at the same conference, EU Economic and Monetary Commissioner Olli Rehn was quoted by Bloomberg as saying Europe was "certainly more resilient" to a possible Greek exit than it had been two years ago when it would have been "massively under-prepared".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 14, 2012, 07:30:35 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/GZtyC.jpg)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on May 15, 2012, 02:57:19 AM
Wow, what a picture.  I wonder why the police shields are in English.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on May 15, 2012, 05:42:14 AM
Here, refill your rage gland. Or the Kool-Aid. whatever.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304743704577382371561326132.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Dcomments
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 15, 2012, 10:09:39 AM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on May 15, 2012, 02:57:19 AM
Wow, what a picture.  I wonder why the police shields are in English.

Historically there is a strong British/American influence on the Greek security services.  The shields are probably manufactured in British or American factories, and so don't have Greek letters set.  Changing them would involve a higher cost, and besides, there is something almost poetic about Greek police being armed with shields in the lettering of a foreign power.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on May 15, 2012, 11:06:22 AM
Damn, and here I was thinking it was left over from the last time they played england at home  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on May 15, 2012, 11:20:54 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 14, 2012, 07:30:35 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/GZtyC.jpg)

Like PMZ, my initial reaction was being very impressed how striking the picture is. Because damn, orange fire on the right, blueish glow on the left, two teams meeting at the corner of a block in textbook two-point perspective...

Why are the police standing in the middle of that fire, btw? Is it even a fire?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 15, 2012, 11:32:18 AM
Looks like the masked anarchists on the left (lol) are throwing Molotov cocktails at them.  I suspect the police did not decide to have a pleasant evening stroll and play in a fire they just found.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on May 15, 2012, 02:38:40 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 15, 2012, 11:32:18 AM
the masked anarchists on the left (lol)

:lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 16, 2012, 05:29:39 PM
The Greeks are having a run on their banks, to the tune of $894 million in the last 24 hours.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:37:50 PM
SYZRIYA have got a lot of people nervous - despite the fact that, unlike other Greek leftists, they actually at least want to stay in the EU.

I say if German bankers want their filthy drachma so fucking badly, they can pay for an army to go collect it.  It'd be cheaper than this nonsense.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 16, 2012, 05:39:29 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:37:50 PM
SYZRIYA have got a lot of people nervous - despite the fact that, unlike other Greek leftists, they actually at least want to stay in the EU.

I say if German bankers want their filthy drachma so fucking badly, they can pay for an army to go collect it.  It'd be cheaper than this nonsense.

Interesting thing:  The German banks made loans to other countries that they would never have made to Germans.  How G/S sold them on allowing people to borrow for consumption is beyond me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:41:56 PM
For the Germans, loans were always means to an end - the end being control of the Eurozone's finances.  They saw how well conditional loans were in helping to bring down the Warsaw Pact (Hungary in particular was susceptible to German economic pressure), and they wanted that to be their means of pulling the strings on Eurozone economies.  It wasn't so much about turning a profit as controlling the debt.

SO THAT WORKED OUT REALLY WELL.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 16, 2012, 05:47:15 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:41:56 PM
For the Germans, loans were always means to an end - the end being control of the Eurozone's finances.  They saw how well conditional loans were in helping to bring down the Warsaw Pact (Hungary in particular was susceptible to German economic pressure), and they wanted that to be their means of pulling the strings on Eurozone economies.  It wasn't so much about turning a profit as controlling the debt.

SO THAT WORKED OUT REALLY WELL.

Well, it marginally beats marching into Belgium, which is what they usually do.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:55:26 PM
The problem with marching into Belgium nowadays is one may actually have to be responsible for it.

I suppose the fact the Germans now see that the violence of government should be covered by the veneer of international finance is some form of improvement, though no doubts most Greeks would disagree.

Interesting fact: 50% of all Athenian police officers voted for the Neo-Nazi Golden Dawn.  The Golden Dawn are anti-austerity as well, so I doubt they'll be used directly as pawns by international finance, should SYZRIYA fail to cobble together a coalition, but it's still worth noting.  Should the ECB try and pull off a technocratic coup like they did in Italy, they may find a higher level of resistance than was present in Rome.

And the Greek army, of course, can never be discounted.  More than a few ranking generals and colonels now were bright young lieutenants during the junta, after all.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 16, 2012, 06:24:45 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:55:26 PM
The problem with marching into Belgium nowadays is one may actually have to be responsible for it.

I suppose the fact the Germans now see that the violence of government should be covered by the veneer of international finance is some form of improvement, though no doubts most Greeks would disagree.

On the other hand, it's not like they were forced to take loans at gunpoint, back at the beginning of all this mess, in 95-07.

Quote from: Cain on May 16, 2012, 05:55:26 PM
Interesting fact: 50% of all Athenian police officers voted for the Neo-Nazi Golden Dawn. 

Hardly a shock.  Argentinian cops were pretty similar in the 40s, and I don't think I need to mention Daley's cops in 1968.  They didn't wear armbands, but they would cheerfully have voted for Mussolini.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 17, 2012, 09:32:23 PM
Prepare for one of the biggest market corrections of all time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18105608

QuoteFacebook shares will begin trading in New York on Friday in one of the most eagerly-anticipated share flotations in recent stock market history.

Demand is set be high as this week the social networking site said it would be selling 25% more shares than planned.

The sale is expected to value the company at about $100bn (£63bn), the same as internet shopping giant Amazon.

But questions remain about the firm's ability to generate profits and take advantage of mobile phone platforms.

There are also concerns that once the company has to answer to shareholders, there may be a greater emphasis on advertising to generate profits.

Facebook advertising doesn't generate shit in the way of profits, as can be evidenced by the "quality" of said advertisers.  You're not getting 800 million views turned into clicks - you're getting 800 million people skipping past adverts to play Farmville and look at the pictures from Mike's party last night.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on May 17, 2012, 09:42:50 PM
Also GM has decided to pull all paid advertising from FB, but will maintain its FB page. :lulz:

I suspect that there will be an even greater push towards selling and sharing PII of FB users once they realize how little revenue they will get from selling ad space, or there will be even more intrusive ads on FB which will push people out of FB.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 17, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
Im really tempted to buy some puts for this titanic, could make some nice money on it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Precious Moments Zalgo on May 18, 2012, 12:38:17 AM
Quote from: Faust on May 17, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
Im really tempted to buy some puts for this titanic, could make some nice money on it.
I was thinking the same thing, but have no idea what duration to go for.  It would really suck to buy a bunch of puts and watch them expire out of the money, only to have a correction come a month later.  Overvalued companies never seem to have their prices corrected in the time frame I expect them to.  I realize that this is because I'm mostly trading against a bunch of robots who base their buy/sell decisions on analysis of trend graphs, who are in the market for milliseconds at a time, and who couldn't give a fuck about the actual worth or long-term prospects of the companies whose stock they trade.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2012, 01:31:36 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 17, 2012, 09:32:23 PM
Prepare for one of the biggest market corrections of all time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18105608

QuoteFacebook shares will begin trading in New York on Friday in one of the most eagerly-anticipated share flotations in recent stock market history.

Demand is set be high as this week the social networking site said it would be selling 25% more shares than planned.

The sale is expected to value the company at about $100bn (£63bn), the same as internet shopping giant Amazon.

But questions remain about the firm's ability to generate profits and take advantage of mobile phone platforms.

There are also concerns that once the company has to answer to shareholders, there may be a greater emphasis on advertising to generate profits.

Facebook advertising doesn't generate shit in the way of profits, as can be evidenced by the "quality" of said advertisers.  You're not getting 800 million views turned into clicks - you're getting 800 million people skipping past adverts to play Farmville and look at the pictures from Mike's party last night.

BE THE FIRST DUMBFUCK ON YOUR BLOCK TO RUN OUT AND BUY SOME STOCK!

I don't hold Zuckerberg responsible for this, by the way.  The Free Market™ demanded it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on May 18, 2012, 02:54:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2012, 01:31:36 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 17, 2012, 09:32:23 PM
Prepare for one of the biggest market corrections of all time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18105608

QuoteFacebook shares will begin trading in New York on Friday in one of the most eagerly-anticipated share flotations in recent stock market history.

Demand is set be high as this week the social networking site said it would be selling 25% more shares than planned.

The sale is expected to value the company at about $100bn (£63bn), the same as internet shopping giant Amazon.

But questions remain about the firm's ability to generate profits and take advantage of mobile phone platforms.

There are also concerns that once the company has to answer to shareholders, there may be a greater emphasis on advertising to generate profits.

Facebook advertising doesn't generate shit in the way of profits, as can be evidenced by the "quality" of said advertisers.  You're not getting 800 million views turned into clicks - you're getting 800 million people skipping past adverts to play Farmville and look at the pictures from Mike's party last night.

BE THE FIRST DUMBFUCK ON YOUR BLOCK TO RUN OUT AND BUY SOME STOCK!

I don't hold Zuckerberg responsible for this, by the way.  The Free Market™ demanded it.

Is this why facebook changed my notification settings from "no fucking email notification" to "BLOW THA MOTHAFUCKIN BOX UP!!!!!" today? That's supposed to make me spend money I don't have on worthless stock?

And Elizabeth Warren is trading on the Cherohonkey thing?

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 18, 2012, 07:39:07 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2012, 01:31:36 AM
BE THE FIRST DUMBFUCK ON YOUR BLOCK TO RUN OUT AND BUY SOME STOCK!

I don't hold Zuckerberg responsible for this, by the way.  The Free Market™ demanded it.

No, absolutely.

Blame Zuckerburg, if anything, for running away from the USA and renouncing his citizenship in order to not pay taxes on this.  A move that has been lauded in certan high finance circles, because, well, tax avoidance is cool.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 18, 2012, 08:17:48 AM
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on May 18, 2012, 02:54:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2012, 01:31:36 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 17, 2012, 09:32:23 PM
Prepare for one of the biggest market corrections of all time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18105608

QuoteFacebook shares will begin trading in New York on Friday in one of the most eagerly-anticipated share flotations in recent stock market history.

Demand is set be high as this week the social networking site said it would be selling 25% more shares than planned.

The sale is expected to value the company at about $100bn (£63bn), the same as internet shopping giant Amazon.

But questions remain about the firm's ability to generate profits and take advantage of mobile phone platforms.

There are also concerns that once the company has to answer to shareholders, there may be a greater emphasis on advertising to generate profits.

Facebook advertising doesn't generate shit in the way of profits, as can be evidenced by the "quality" of said advertisers.  You're not getting 800 million views turned into clicks - you're getting 800 million people skipping past adverts to play Farmville and look at the pictures from Mike's party last night.

BE THE FIRST DUMBFUCK ON YOUR BLOCK TO RUN OUT AND BUY SOME STOCK!

I don't hold Zuckerberg responsible for this, by the way.  The Free Market™ demanded it.

Is this why facebook changed my notification settings from "no fucking email notification" to "BLOW THA MOTHAFUCKIN BOX UP!!!!!" today? That's supposed to make me spend money I don't have on worthless stock?

And Elizabeth Warren is trading on the Cherohonkey thing?

It's supposed to make you click on ads you don't give a fuck about.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on May 18, 2012, 09:28:36 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on May 18, 2012, 08:17:48 AM
Quote from: Anna Mae Bollocks on May 18, 2012, 02:54:35 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2012, 01:31:36 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 17, 2012, 09:32:23 PM
Prepare for one of the biggest market corrections of all time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18105608

QuoteFacebook shares will begin trading in New York on Friday in one of the most eagerly-anticipated share flotations in recent stock market history.

Demand is set be high as this week the social networking site said it would be selling 25% more shares than planned.

The sale is expected to value the company at about $100bn (£63bn), the same as internet shopping giant Amazon.

But questions remain about the firm's ability to generate profits and take advantage of mobile phone platforms.

There are also concerns that once the company has to answer to shareholders, there may be a greater emphasis on advertising to generate profits.

Facebook advertising doesn't generate shit in the way of profits, as can be evidenced by the "quality" of said advertisers.  You're not getting 800 million views turned into clicks - you're getting 800 million people skipping past adverts to play Farmville and look at the pictures from Mike's party last night.

BE THE FIRST DUMBFUCK ON YOUR BLOCK TO RUN OUT AND BUY SOME STOCK!

I don't hold Zuckerberg responsible for this, by the way.  The Free Market™ demanded it.

Is this why facebook changed my notification settings from "no fucking email notification" to "BLOW THA MOTHAFUCKIN BOX UP!!!!!" today? That's supposed to make me spend money I don't have on worthless stock?

And Elizabeth Warren is trading on the Cherohonkey thing?

It's supposed to make you click on ads you don't give a fuck about.

"LIKE TARGET IF YOU THINK THIS PUPPY IS IRRESISTABLE"

I actually saw that today.  :x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 19, 2012, 07:42:00 AM
10 CHICCHAN :32:Lo (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31337.msg1169087.html#msg1169087) 7:32:17

READ UP ^ALREADY
Hu? it is today already? Shirley is Quiet oh well ?/?
all weekend to plot me next key press? What to do?what to dO
.1 find GoFre she {$hirley Should have ACcout Already = No D delay
2: never mind the cost it is 100% MiLLi $ timing & current C ¢onVERsion
3? in ARS (http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/USD/graph120.html) (http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/USD/graph120.png)
It. Is cLick Hair photo (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.975/msg,1172761.html) | (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/17/timestopics/kirchner.jpg)
=4 it is the current drop of Mayan tong Blood


http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=1d&s=FB&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=goog&ql=1

My guess is that its a buy at the price of silver | just a min |

http://www.ajpm.com/  28.82 currently ? who has a SHare

http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/fb/option-chain   | No options found

Fine by me | So Shirley ? How much for 1 of your 29 June Calls ? Humm Babe

1:23p goog June650 chart (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=GOOG&selected=GOOG&qm_page=61735&qm_symbol=GOOG) 5PM page change ? (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=GOOG&selected=GOOG&qm_page=96547&qm_symbol=GOOG)
Even though the spy (http://www.curtrenz.com/) is in a free fall | My guess is this sector is NOt

besides it looks to me as though there will be a sharp/profitable bounce ON
or possibly below the purple line. GET in line | Who is the goFr 4this Humm?

12:45 further its probably 500 Argintine (aka K herself}
i do not have 1 ? i do have some Chilli N Mex Peso | So count me in line |
Mid Week or sooner | say 2 or 3 OZ Ag | meet up tbd i'poise  /-/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 21, 2012, 08:15:07 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/jpmorgans-potential-trading-loss-just-keeps-spiraling-higher-2012-5

QuoteWhen JPMorgan first announced that its CIO office had blundered into a huge trading loss, the number was pegged at $2 billion, though the company said it could go higher.

Then the loss was reported to be $3 billion.

And now....

$5 billion or more?

From WSJ:

The nation's largest bank has said publicly that its losses on the trades have surpassed $2 billion, and people familiar with the matter have said they could over time reach $5 billion.

But the losses could be even bigger if the company sells its positions into a market that has turned against its positions, some traders say. Improvements in the markets could slice the bank's losses.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 21, 2012, 09:30:14 AM
 NoOn 4:00PM EDT - Nasdaq Real Time Pr (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=goog)
It appears options on FB will be listed after Memorial D
:29 optionshouse (http://landing.optionshouse.com/google/options/optsboth/?gclid=CJ_07qWBkrACFccBRQodcHeZsQ&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&utm_term=what%20are%20call%20options&utm_campaign=Options+Education)
:27 http://www.kkraus.com/
:24 http://momentumoptionstrading.com/2012/05/21/market-pops-facebook-fb-flops/

10:15:33 LoK4 June25 FB.ver (http://www.facebook.com/CBOE/posts/408613219170865) (
Fix 11 FB flat at -15 % Now whaT see ** (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/fb) ast ale:$34.77¢
10:32 pd clearly i know knot: my guess Au no lower than 1567 by bounce T
StOp messing with my clock. Thank U ay at 09:32:03 A
NAVY {raining} MONDAY ? Eclipse was obscured here by clouds.
moving along despite disapointing results | although i do not know WHEN
it shirley seams probable there is going to be a profitable positive bounce
across a broad spectrum of charts, & i'poise the pick of the litter is FB
for the Fall Buy option or maybe even June 30's . check links below ?

http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html {12:35:08 AM edit1600 to 1650?

http://www.curtrenz.com/  {{LOOK4 BOUNCE off purple line (Thursdays ?

** http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=goog
Eventually the June40's will be posted for FB | exact timing requirement ?
My best guess around 3-5 | but watch for the chart(s)

_  http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=GOOG&selected=GOOG&qm_page=61735&qm_symbol=GOOG  _
_^READ UP ^_~V read down V~
FB    (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/fb/option-chain)  Option Chain for Facebook Inc. (FB)    No options found.
Read more: http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/fb/option-chain#ixzz1vX0ENczB

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=GOOG&selected=GOOG&qm_page=56268&qm_symbol=GOOG] GOOG  http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20120616C00650000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true WRONG mONTH so siLLy

TEAL TUESDAY well fox: U get con? What scratch?/? /-/4U!
http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20120616C00650000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 22, 2012, 01:55:24 PM
Nasdaq Real Time Pr (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=goog)
  (Comprenda'?) 5:05
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=FB&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=GOOG&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) (http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/12/17/timestopics/kirchner.jpg) (http://www.x-rates.com/d/ARS/USD/graph120.png) 5MdT

10M Pt 1 Au&Ag 2 & then F Because theY FolloW,,,, My guess is U
     (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/plati.gif)
     (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/gold.gif)
     (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif)
NoOn Posit: Partial Quote from CAIN  in rebooT space
It's going to take another crash, at the very least. 
An actual crash, not just the dress rehearshal that we had in 2008.
I agree: in the mean time however i have a couple of GRANT's ?
i'poise i could hand off to Ni | AS | as i understand this .. she can do
PAY PAL | whereas i can NOT | Foe's Only | (Comprenday | Fox ?/?
yeah: i guess U can NOT play FB  so stick to pass go | 1/2 June4me

3:52 PM for the :16 posit post
-
really My guess about the W.econ is as Cain has mentioned.{reboot
My guess is as follows the '08 dip in gold price was due to the 04
Tsunome{ the gold dip that is upcomming will be the '110311 RESULTS
Same sng | thiS dip will be deeper & longer lasting. &I do thinK A.M.
is correct to plan for it in advance (to limit it| & that the French
are wrong in their opinion about what is wrong. I do not rule out -
(never mind} today on DW.DE they showed an upticked chart | Maybe it
has begun ?/? Althought i REMain U for now | and will say 9/:: EDt?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 22, 2012, 10:48:29 PM
Quote from: Precious Moments Zalgo on May 18, 2012, 12:38:17 AM
Quote from: Faust on May 17, 2012, 11:24:26 PM
Im really tempted to buy some puts for this titanic, could make some nice money on it.
I was thinking the same thing, but have no idea what duration to go for.  It would really suck to buy a bunch of puts and watch them expire out of the money, only to have a correction come a month later.  Overvalued companies never seem to have their prices corrected in the time frame I expect them to.  I realize that this is because I'm mostly trading against a bunch of robots who base their buy/sell decisions on analysis of trend graphs, who are in the market for milliseconds at a time, and who couldn't give a fuck about the actual worth or long-term prospects of the companies whose stock they trade.

Even without a reevaluation anyone shorting a put on this from the start day would already have made a killing.

I've been hammered in my tiny handful of shares (1100 spread over a handful of shares), I'm in four oil explorations, one of which I have topsliced a nice 300 off, two that look promising and one thats way in the red. I'm also long on Bank of Ireland but thats more of hope of the economy improving money in a wishing well or some such thing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 22, 2012, 10:52:25 PM
There is talk of a new bailout for Ireland being in the works...maybe.

Turns out the ECB approved a 100 billion dollar loan via the Greek central bank in secret just a few days ago, as well.  So even if you don't see something official, assume unofficial support is there.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 22, 2012, 11:03:18 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 22, 2012, 10:52:25 PM
There is talk of a new bailout for Ireland being in the works...maybe.

Turns out the ECB approved a 100 billion dollar loan via the Greek central bank in secret just a few days ago, as well.  So even if you don't see something official, assume unofficial support is there.

Its rumor that has spread: basically the government are trying to ensure we vote yes to the fiscal treaty by threatening us that our existing bailout fund (which comes in yearly intervals) will be cut off.

This has led people to believe that we are under financial duress, which while true, is well within the expected margin, our existing bailout will suffice. There are scares because of Mortgage arrears from TSB however we saw this with BOI and AIB, and what they simply had to do was wave the arrears, it will eat into the profit at the end of the mortgage but they still have a steady income, its just late fees wont be paid.
If however should any more European banks tank, that's a very different story then but it wont just be Ireland.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 22, 2012, 11:06:20 PM
Ah, I hadn't looked into that too much, thanks for the extra info.

And yes, if there is a bank run, I would be more worried about Spain and Italy tanking first...which would then take us all down.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 23, 2012, 09:01:48 AM
 :fnord:  (http://www.curtrenz.com)
   
(http://www.curtrenz.com/Chart.JPG)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 23, 2012, 10:18:55 AM
Facebook shares fell 9% yesterday.  And things are set to get even worse (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18163687):

QuoteReuters and the Wall Street Journal reported that Facebook's advisers may have revised their financial forecasts for the social networking company, but that only selected investors were told.

Mary Schapiro, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said "there are issues that we need to look at".

Richard Ketchum, chief executive of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), said there were "matters of regulatory concern".

But in a statement, Morgan Stanley spokesman, Pen Pendleton, said the bank had "followed the same procedures for the Facebook offering that it follows for all initial public offerings".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on May 23, 2012, 11:47:46 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 23, 2012, 10:18:55 AM
Facebook shares fell 9% yesterday.  And things are set to get even worse (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-18163687):

QuoteReuters and the Wall Street Journal reported that Facebook's advisers may have revised their financial forecasts for the social networking company, but that only selected investors were told.

Mary Schapiro, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said "there are issues that we need to look at".

Richard Ketchum, chief executive of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), said there were "matters of regulatory concern".

But in a statement, Morgan Stanley spokesman, Pen Pendleton, said the bank had "followed the same procedures for the Facebook offering that it follows for all initial public offerings".

I've heard via slashdot that the two main players were goldman sachs and jp morgan... had internally downgraded their outlook but didn't let on about it very much... they are being "looked at".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 23, 2012, 04:09:14 PM
Goldman Sachs, witholding relevant information from clients?  Well, I for one am shocked if this charge is true.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on May 23, 2012, 08:25:07 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 23, 2012, 04:09:14 PM
Goldman Sachs, witholding relevant information from clients?  Well, I for one am shocked if this charge is true.

The lawsuits are already starting. http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/05/23/1528212/facebook-zuckerberg-sued-over-ipo
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 24, 2012, 02:13:09 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 23, 2012, 04:09:14 PM
Goldman Sachs, witholding relevant information from clients?  Well, I for one am shocked if this charge is true.

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:14:39 AM
Is there any chance of the SEC forcibly sodomizing Zuckerberg in his mouf?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:16:25 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:14:39 AM
Is there any chance of the SEC forcibly sodomizing Zuckerberg in his mouf?

Probably not, since he ran away from America just before floating Facebook, renouncing his citizenship to avoid all those pesky taxes.

No doubt he'll get a slap on the wrist, and avoid even having to pay for that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:21:10 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:16:25 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:14:39 AM
Is there any chance of the SEC forcibly sodomizing Zuckerberg in his mouf?

Probably not, since he ran away from America just before floating Facebook, renouncing his citizenship to avoid all those pesky taxes.

No doubt he'll get a slap on the wrist, and avoid even having to pay for that.

HAW!

He did?  That's so fucking America™.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:26:19 AM
Sorry, it was Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook, who ran away.

Zuckberg simply plans to issue stock options which will mean he avoids all corporate tax, and in fact will get a rebate from the feds.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:33:27 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:26:19 AM
Sorry, it was Eduardo Saverin, the co-founder of Facebook, who ran away.

Zuckberg simply plans to issue stock options which will mean he avoids all corporate tax, and in fact will get a rebate from the feds.

He also just had a cheapskate wedding, IIRC.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:38:19 AM
Yup.  Someone's back garden.  Keeping it classy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 24, 2012, 02:39:02 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 24, 2012, 02:38:19 AM
Yup.  Someone's back garden.  Keeping it classy.

Yeah, and from what I gather, he didn't even tell anyone it was a wedding.

Boy, is HE gonna enjoy the next few forever.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 24, 2012, 03:42:22 PM
2 AKBAL Read 25854 THE MINT SHOULD BE MOBILE ? wheel or track

THE Tantalum ARS 1
160/LB (http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=ta%20scrap%20vac%20solids&type=M&weight=LB&days=60&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0) ?ME 35¢/G 1 = 3G 2.2 OK?
REMember U R making a standard UsE a Cow? anyway the Mayan Calendar.
the coin should not say one anything it should report the WEIGHT  OF
THE COIN  & the amount of each ingreediant if more than Ta  was used
probably they should not be dated | they maybe should have a LOT #
Like Zip Ou Pop  and probably be issued in set amounts Like 400 K / lot?
not 10 1 Lot and 100 the next Some Standard number arrived at in advance

1:45 PM 6?6 doubt that praying is the Answer? I do:
My guess is crossing the border is, & their4 Nic is right & L rong
she should send her girls to the isle to take HiLo rides "SOON"
stop praying foe miricals, try to get the peso peso ration to .01/1
think S.A. & forget Argintina. U jave done what U can | go to the
Quake cross the Line | talk to the one in charge of the SUB.
AND DONT FORGET TO LEASE AN ISLAND WHILE THERE chp 1st choive

12:34.AM 20120605 it does seam clear:
grasping at straws {two chilean not 1 was
grasping at straws |one 5 should do for now
the problem now seams to be the ONE.
the ARS COIN should not exceed two times melt
and my guess is that Ta {Tantalum be considered
assuming the problem can be resolved in time
the third coin to be added is the 20 silver
by bringing the Silver price down current
coins from Mexico should do. that leaves #4
to be a four hundred from Peru. the basic 4
.05 1 20 & 400 | perhaps four  coins would
do to Unite the rapid response recruits to
arrive on scene with the correct standards?

it looks to me like the one chili paso has a .22 cent value
in other words about 1/10 the value of the 5 paso coin & THAT it too
should be a coin accepted as LEGAL tender in Argentina as .5 cents
aka a half penny Which would make too many coins thus drop the 1

Well it seams clear it is cinco.
http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/coins/c5peso.htm
(http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/images/1a.jpg)(http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=cu&type=L&weight=LB&days=3&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0) ? about 3/4¢ / g
aluminum (98% Al; 2% otros metales) Weight: 0.70 grams

(http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/images/50a.jpg)(http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/images/10a.jpg)(http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/images/5a.jpg)
          7.0 grams  5¢                  3.5     3¢                       2.2  2¢
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/3/3d/Chilean_coins.jpg/100px-Chilean_coins.jpg) ? Which Coin ?(http://www.joeskitchen.com/chile/pesos/images/100a.jpg)
      Metal: (92% Cu; 6% Ni; 2% Al) Weight: 9.0 grams Diameter: 27 mm
1, (5), 10, 50, 100  and 500 pesos; 6 coins ?
Coins currently in circulation are in denominations of
read 25753 ^
THURSDAY ?  
1 MUCUK

(http://www.pandaamerica.com/upd_images/phg1975marcos1000p.jpg)_____M_____(http://www.usagold.com/gold/coins/pics/gold-coin-argentina.jpeg)


(http://www.goldcoinsgain.com/images/country-coins/costa.jpg)_W_(http://www.usagold.com/gold/coins/pics/gold-coin-chile.jpeg)


REMember this is about Money 1k 500 200 100 50 20 10 5 1 .5 .25 .1 &.01 1/2¢ 13 coins.
     if you are Wondering?
   this is about Bead prices


and also about the size & construction of the (.25)'$ in sPacific 8:10AM pdT
1 Onza = 8 Escudos = 16 Pesos. 1 Peso = 8 Reales making 1 Onza = 64 Reales?
9:11pm PDT
TRING TO STAY TUNED IN:   i did check the old 16 to 1 Ag Au ratio ?/?
its about 55 { the speed limit in Oregon}? WiLL ty the gram as a unit
rather than onza OR ounce and thinking in terms of a 1/4 .. Silver
today was 28.28 ask? and one US dime was $2 ( a tWO Dollar bill }
AM  not opposed to TWO'S in fact i ather favor the denomination
however to use that the 1/2 dollor would be dropped to retain 13?
-
THUS that sticking point is the main point in these TAILS 2 or 1/2
{never mind) back to the search for the 1/4 COIN ? what to use
clearly gold & Silver make no cents, so it must be copper / or
some mix, sampeling copper | i mean silver copper ratio ? spread
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.960.html
page 65 has those charts | currently ? 3.45 v 28.28 ? 27.50 ~ 125
over twice the Au/Ag
.Read 25504  Mon Shirley, the paragraph below
contains an incorrect suggestion on my part, about sources of materials
for new coinage going forward into the chaos forthcoming.
THE SOURCE of S.A. coinage must BE S.A..NOT northern Hemisphere
Also the idea of REMoving S.A. from IMF WBO & WTO Metals exchange
ratios NOW needs to be CONsidered. take the ratio of the copper
penny to the nickle nickle as an example | over a short period of
time that ratio would be 5:1 | however clearly as conditions change
the ratio would change also | Maybe to 6 to one | a 20% change |
in the stabelization of S.A. economics a doubling of the ratio
would be considered to be a limit from one period to the next
Au/Ag from 55 to 110 for example | yes its complex | but going along
with the WTO WBO & IMF's plan's for the ratio of O to H in the
atmosphere is far FAR more threatening to crop yields than 100%
AU/AG Jumps or tin v Ti

at this point let me attempt to toss nickle into the MIx | OK?
thus i wind up with Copper {pennies/centavos){{Chili?
Nickle {Nickles) Titanium {dime .1) & Tantalum Cobalt Ferro Chrome
Quarters .25 | No 1/2 $ Coin ? anyway: Ni Canada, Russia, Cuba &
New Caledonia | Ti Australia, Norway | Ta Thailand {exclusive ?
:
Anyway2 i do wish to express my personal thanks to the ARS for
their move to stablize something. UNderstanding how difficult
it must be, in these time of great uncertantity! I DO think
the poper choice was made there & further as presure mounts
in requards to the choice. That you maintain a steady hand about it.

More Laundry day Navy larouchepac (http://larouchepac.com/node/22850) Showing 0 comments  | Si' EStoy
check yourself into the nearest mental institution 70's Jo OK E'$
forward this message to the more sane U bet "THEY" R Read 25523
Read 25560 timNHK has entered on tv their numbers
for todays market action reporting 40 day to spread their radio activity
  i'poise my 4cast4 a spike up ramp down |\ has been met by the VERY
extream ~ sign wave of increasing amplitude. HOW Long they can fund
such funny tails REMains for 4Me a Question. 7.25 India Ports story
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 25, 2012, 10:52:40 PM
(http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/archive/01410/web-argentina28_1410409cl-3.jpg) (http://specials-images.forbes.com/imageserve/00OA5wb8msflG/186x282.jpg?fit=scale&background=000000)<click (http://www.forbes.com/profile/cristina-fernandez/)
TUE5/29?Sun27?/?? good times coming to an end  :fnord:  (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/editorials/a-new-argentina/article2444712/)
8:08pm article (http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=8462441) 8:15 galuccio-ypf (http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/2012/05/07/galuccio-ypf-to-be-more-like-norways-statoil/#axzz1wDzTUnM6)
7:40pm mercopress (http://en.mercopress.com/2012/05/18/argentina-has-a-jewish-president-for-two-days-beatriz-rojkes) 5/29 (http://en.mercopress.com/2012/05/29/dollar-restrictions-target-money-of-non-declared-origin-argues-argentine-senator) -power/27 (http://en.mercopress.com/2012/05/28/cfk-says-handing-over-power-in-2015-in-unavoidable-others-will-have-to-run-argentina)
Mon5:34pm reuters.120D? (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/28/argentina-mining-imports-idUSL1E8GS42720120528)30*4=120 JUNE(6+4=10) OCT?
BY THEN IF THERE IS A CRASH IN ECO PLANNING
it should show up on economic data charts. My guess is yes Gold below 1500
{never mind) | oh yeah the real deal | My guess is the Pacific NW Tsunomi
will not take place prior to OCT 2014 | that is like 2 years after Oct. Comprenda'?

Now about Leasing one of your Straits? Islands to .RU's for 99 Yr to put
in A N sub refueling  facility. THEY should do it in exchange for towing
services of underwater barges from ARS to Angola | as some fair trade.

UNDERWATER BARGES  are simply large hollow concrete structures
to herd cattle into for transport across the Atlantic to Angola without
the normal problems of surface transport | but with the problems of
UNderwater | boyancy | air supply | cable connections | destination port?

2: ?? 52:40  2:45-47 dw.de ran the ARs Story ?/?
Links if i can find 1
i call it Car v SHip "ay at 01:55:23.PM"
http://www.dw.de/dw/0,,9102,00.html
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15977140,00.html
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15977140_page_0,00.html
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15977140_page_1,00.html
   (http://www.dw.de/image/0,,15967834_301,00.jpg)     Date 25.05.2012 :JokE   (http://media.turnofspeed.com/media/hub/26101659.jpg)
http://www.germantv.info/GermTVstart_en.html


Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 26, 2012, 05:30:30 AM
More Greece

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18216307

QuoteIn the interview published on Friday, the International Monetary Fund head said: "As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax.

"I think they should also help themselves collectively," Ms Lagarde said.

She added: "I think more of the little kids from a school in a little village in Niger who get teaching two hours a day, sharing one chair for three of them, and who are very keen to get an education. I have them in my mind all the time.

"Because I think they need even more help than the people in Athens."

And when asked if she was saying to the Greeks and other European nations that they had had a nice time and it was now payback time, Ms Lagarde responded: "That's right."

Probably not worth mentioning, but that "little village" probably has similar levels of debt to Greece. That part of the world isn't really known for affluence. Good to know the IMF cares though. I doubt it cares enough to actually do that whole "helping" thing. You have to let people help themselves out of the debt you helped them into.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 26, 2012, 02:13:52 PM
QuoteI think more of the little kids from a school in a little village in Niger who get teaching two hours a day, sharing one chair for three of them, and who are very keen to get an education. I have them in my mind all the time.

"Because I think they need even more help than the people in Athens."

Only for the moment.  The Greek education budget has been slashed 29% over the last three years, and further cuts are being demanded.

Also, wow, check out THAT condescending paternalism.  Maybe if this international organisation Ms Lagarde may have heard of, something called an Eye-Em-Ef, had not insisted on "market reforms" in Niger in the 1990s, which involved cutting government spending and lowering corporate taxes, maybe the poor children of Niger would have an education system which worked a little bit better.

Just a thought.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on May 26, 2012, 06:19:55 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on May 26, 2012, 05:30:30 AM
More Greece

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18216307

QuoteIn the interview published on Friday, the International Monetary Fund head said: "As far as Athens is concerned, I also think about all those people who are trying to escape tax all the time. All these people in Greece who are trying to escape tax.

"I think they should also help themselves collectively," Ms Lagarde said.

She added: "I think more of the little kids from a school in a little village in Niger who get teaching two hours a day, sharing one chair for three of them, and who are very keen to get an education. I have them in my mind all the time.

"Because I think they need even more help than the people in Athens."

And when asked if she was saying to the Greeks and other European nations that they had had a nice time and it was now payback time, Ms Lagarde responded: "That's right."

Probably not worth mentioning, but that "little village" probably has similar levels of debt to Greece. That part of the world isn't really known for affluence. Good to know the IMF cares though. I doubt it cares enough to actually do that whole "helping" thing. You have to let people help themselves out of the debt you helped them into.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-MDqWWApB-pU/T03FUWGg-EI/AAAAAAAAA-0/E3iMPxESBTE/s1600/Greek+anarchists.jpg)

Greeks helping themselves, collectively.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 26, 2012, 06:28:09 PM
They are, as soon as power structure of the country holding back a complete collapse and default is out of the way greece is free to recover.

The reason they are not being allowed to is because whatever they default for directly hits the ECB and more importantly has a knock on effect on every european financial institution there is.

Hell a greek default could even set off the American banks as well. I would love to see them default.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 29, 2012, 09:32:44 AM
Facebook is out of ideas

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18234004

QuoteSocial networking giant Facebook is to launch its own smartphone by next year, reports have suggested.

The New York Times cited unnamed sources, including Facebook employees, suggesting that the network had been hiring several smartphone engineers.

Facebook recently admitted it was struggling to make money out of its growing mobile audience.

The company, which recently floated on the stock market, has also just launched its own mobile app store.

The App Center currently offers links to Facebook-enabled apps within Apple's iOS and Google Android stores but developers will soon be able to write apps to be placed exclusively in Facebook's store.

According to the New York Times, Facebook has hired experts who worked on the iPhone and other smartphones.

It quoted a Facebook employee as saying the site's founder Mark Zuckerberg was "worried that if he doesn't create a mobile phone in the near future... Facebook will simply become an app on other mobile platforms".

I expect this will not exactly reassure would-be investors.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 29, 2012, 09:34:44 AM
It's also worth noting that, at least in part, the problem with Greece is tax collection, on the richest sections of their population.  The middle and working classes have been squeezed to breaking point.

Syzria, out of all the Greek parties, is the one most likely to raise taxes on the richest in Greece.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Triple Zero on June 01, 2012, 01:42:42 PM
Quote from: Cain on May 29, 2012, 09:32:44 AM
Facebook is out of ideas

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-18234004

QuoteSocial networking giant Facebook is to launch its own smartphone by next year, reports have suggested.

The New York Times cited unnamed sources, including Facebook employees, suggesting that the network had been hiring several smartphone engineers.

Facebook recently admitted it was struggling to make money out of its growing mobile audience.

The company, which recently floated on the stock market, has also just launched its own mobile app store.

The App Center currently offers links to Facebook-enabled apps within Apple's iOS and Google Android stores but developers will soon be able to write apps to be placed exclusively in Facebook's store.

According to the New York Times, Facebook has hired experts who worked on the iPhone and other smartphones.

It quoted a Facebook employee as saying the site's founder Mark Zuckerberg was "worried that if he doesn't create a mobile phone in the near future... Facebook will simply become an app on other mobile platforms".

I expect this will not exactly reassure would-be investors.

There are also rumours they're looking to buy Opera.

Which makes a lot more sense than building a smartphone (http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2012/05/face_opera.html), because Opera's two mobile browsers (Opera Mobile and Opera Mini) are the best generic mobile browsers out there, plus Opera has good relations with various mobile carriers, and some other things (read the liItnked article). Facebook taking a slice of that pie could turn out to be a very smart move.

It also means that the last (usable) browser not developed in the USA gets bought up by an American mega-corporation.

Also, it also means Opera is going to lose a lot of users over this, myself included. I suppose I'll give [a mod of] Chromium a go--being Open Source is one thing Opera has always lacked. I should check what browser RMS uses :) Though I expect he doesn't require much features cause 95% of his time is spent on email.
Title: Fed follows Basel III
Post by: inode_buddha on June 08, 2012, 03:21:29 AM
Sumbitch, they actually *did* it....
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/financial-regulation-fed-idINL1E8H7I7E20120608

FYI I greatly approve of this move - long overdue IMHO by decades.  :mittens:
Title: Re: Fed follows Basel III
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 08, 2012, 07:07:01 AM
Quote from: inode_buddha on June 08, 2012, 03:21:29 AM
Sumbitch, they actually *did* it....
http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/06/08/financial-regulation-fed-idINL1E8H7I7E20120608

FYI I greatly approve of this move - long overdue IMHO by decades.  :mittens:

I'm almost willing to be optimistic, but we'll see.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 09, 2012, 12:13:43 AM
SUNDAY 6/17 Read 26211  Just saying

Quote from: BabylonHoruv on June 13, 2012, 05:01:47 PM
The median family networth decreased 40% between 2007 and 2010.
My guess was mostly due to the 2004 Sumatra Tsunomi
thus there was a four year delay for the ECO-friendly's to compute?
Computers have increased in speed since that time
THUS my guess is it will be less than 4 for the Fucushima #'s
Maybe next week but most likely Augest?
OR was it October?/?
i have trouble with those Asia driven event time's?

26040 ?   26049  spike Up |\ ramp down day on the DAX >1%?
MUMBEL mumbell Read 25964 times at 12:17:44 AM  :fnord:  (http://www.chicos.gov.ar/buzon-de-mensajes) {25991 9:30St

Link to YESterday http://blogs.reuters.com/chrystia-freeland/2012/06/07/the-euro-zone-slow-motion-crashes-and-latvia/

Link to the Video 1F/d http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.msg1175346.html#msg1175346

Link to ? http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31860.30/msg,1179084.html


^ READ UP ^ OR BACK > (P69} (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1020.html) (Ta5} (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1020/msg,1175656.html) (P64=KLM} (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.945/msg,1167584.html)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: BabylonHoruv on June 13, 2012, 05:01:47 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/average-family-net-worth-collapses-40-in-three-years-2012-6 (http://www.businessinsider.com/average-family-net-worth-collapses-40-in-three-years-2012-6)

The median family networth decreased 40% between 2007 and 2010. 

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on June 13, 2012, 07:24:45 PM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on June 13, 2012, 05:01:47 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/average-family-net-worth-collapses-40-in-three-years-2012-6 (http://www.businessinsider.com/average-family-net-worth-collapses-40-in-three-years-2012-6)

The median family networth decreased 40% between 2007 and 2010. 


LOL
   \
:bankster:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on June 17, 2012, 10:03:46 AM
In 2008 when LB went tits up and triggered the global crisis, did anyone notice which stocks share or commodities went up?

I'm going to guess gold but I can't be certain even looking at the figures from back then I'm not certain.

I'm expecting Greeces new government to renege on the bailout agreement and default.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 18, 2012, 12:14:53 PM
Monday ? 13 IX ? http://www.x-rates.com/
LOOKING FOR x-r for paraguay & bolivia | did not find ?
when? annexing these two it should first be resolved
WHAT metal will be used for their common coin?
NOT : copper  CLP |  Tantalum ARS |  Silver MEX ?
also the rate of change TaLks too
Monthly rate on ARS = ~ 3 %
Whomever is responsible should be given a metal
8:30pdT -
IT DID occure to me? that the place to go? to look for
ECONOMIC DIRECTION ?/?  is  Columbia ????/ | i have no idea Y.
other than the chart(s) timing. Who to see? What to say ? WHERE
TO STAY? all Questions  among scads of others?/? + Paraguay & Bolivia
it does seam like the gold coin 1.5 ? 2.2 K should be from Peru though?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Placid Dingo on June 19, 2012, 11:01:32 PM
Election over with New Democracy win. I've also been hearing reorts that museums in Greece are closed, affecting tourism, and inability to maintain security is affecting security of precious artefacts.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 21, 2012, 06:36:40 PM
26686-26552 =134/?   :fnord: 69 charts (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1020.html)


C :fnord: F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) CDE_ :fnord: _FB (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1)          sept31C5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922C00031000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) sept31P5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00031000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  FB  :fnord:  (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB)

20120709 Mon out on open 3.36 =+.25  9/22.31 3.1

http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=GLD&selected=GLD&qm_page=82970&qm_symbol=GLD
http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/fb/option-chain#ixzz1yZIpu6f0
http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=VALE&selected=VALE&qm_page=51185&qm_symbol=VALE
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 21, 2012, 06:38:53 PM
Fri 6:50 i mean 5:55 Mt: Final entry { probably
Thur? 7:49?Lookii iT is so Silly iZ out | close 9/29 : 9/29 CLOSE
Tue missing? regurg: {Hold Long?/?
4.20-3.55=+.65/s31 | ?2.65Long S29p
23/4:56AM pdT  Low3.55} + ADD AN open {NO TRADE {{DELETED
&At 9: SEPT29@3 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00029000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
VERY INTERESTING?  the "Low3.55} became so /-/i priced
there R No. buyer thus exit at 420  Leaving t 9: SEPT29@3 (UR) L= yes
green | limegreen & maroon | Mondays Navy very soon
20 / 9AMdT  Low3.55 | close-1.5hr ? 9pdT.| Volume19
20 / 3:45Ap Where did my 3.33&1/3 on open disappear 2?
19 / 4:30pm Maybe tomorrow |
18 / 9:25AM the 31's were not shown in chain ? Rback
17 / 9:30AM pdT should be \ NOT: | sad B.true |/+@.69=not
8:41AMpdt  16 asleep at the switch // Spy flag @ 138 till 8
20120715 A Dream /'\
^ Read Up^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on July 05, 2012, 06:42:56 PM
New short article from Taibbi asks:
Why is Nobody Freaking Out About the LIBOR Banking Scandal? (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/why-is-nobody-freaking-out-about-the-libor-banking-scandal-20120703#ixzz1zlroD9Mp)

Seems an appropriate question....
it sounds like much bigger news than the play it is getting here in the states.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 05, 2012, 08:12:14 PM
Check the "Random News Stories" thread.  We're trying to piece it together up there.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 05, 2012, 08:42:29 PM
Off the immediate subject, does Greece still exist?  I haven't heard anything in weeks.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 05, 2012, 08:50:54 PM
Funny you should ask.  There's talk about kicking them out of the Eurozone.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 05, 2012, 08:54:39 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on July 05, 2012, 08:50:54 PM
Funny you should ask.  There's talk about kicking them out of the Eurozone.

That's awesome.

"You can't balance a checkbook, so GET THE FUCK OUT OF OUR CONTINENT!"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on July 06, 2012, 10:19:37 AM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on July 05, 2012, 06:42:56 PM
New short article from Taibbi asks:
Why is Nobody Freaking Out About the LIBOR Banking Scandal? (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/why-is-nobody-freaking-out-about-the-libor-banking-scandal-20120703#ixzz1zlroD9Mp)

Seems an appropriate question....
it sounds like much bigger news than the play it is getting here in the states.



It only affected $800 trillion or so contracts according to the Wall Street Journal. Relax there, big guy.

Taibbi on Viewpoint with Eliot Spitzer here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0oV2mI0IYp8
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on July 06, 2012, 10:52:38 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on July 05, 2012, 08:42:29 PM
Off the immediate subject, does Greece still exist?  I haven't heard anything in weeks.
They have formed a government and have done nothing. This has allowed a brief respite where there economy stabalises a little. Give it another week and when they can actually find a finance minister (The guy they nominated and voted in walked out and quit politics forever saying he wasn't able to take that on), when they have this guy then the shitstorm will resume.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 06, 2012, 10:53:29 AM
Meanwhile, in Europe...

Slovenia looks like it might need a bailout next.  Slovenia is small fry, comparatively - especially since French growth has ground to a halt and the government, having repealed certain austerity measures, is now having to make up the difference via one-off and permament tax hikes.  It's hard to tell how much of France's problems are the international investor class hyperventiliating at being forced to pay some kind of taxes at all, and how much of it has to do with underlying French economic weaknesses in regards to banks, bailouts etc.  But even the appearance of a recession could spark panic in the international markets.
Title: LIBORFEST
Post by: Cain on July 06, 2012, 11:00:47 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-07-05/wall-street-bank-investors-in-dark-on-libor-liability.html

QuoteBarclays, like other lenders that help set key rates for $360 trillion in securities, has given investors scant guidance on the liability they face for alleged market manipulation. More than a dozen banks are being probed by U.S., Asian and European regulators for collusion in setting interbank lending rates. The others have mirrored Barclays on minimal disclosure.

"The automatic reaction from investors is: 'Who's next?'" said Todd Hagerman, a New York-based analyst at Sterne Agee & Leach Inc. who recommends investors remain "cautious" on the biggest U.S. banks. "It's fair to assume that legal and related professional fees and associated reserves are going to continue to remain elevated, if not increase."

Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc. (C), Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and UBS AG (UBSN) are among the lenders whose participation in setting the London and Europe interbank offered rates, known as Libor and Euribor, are under investigation. None of the banks would say if they set aside reserves to cope with potential liabilities and, if so, how much.

"I believe that Barclays had previously reserved for only about one-third of their ultimate liability" in regulatory fines, Charles Peabody, a banking analyst at New York-based Portales Partners LLC, said in an e-mail. Other banks' reserves "will probably prove inadequate."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/diamond-ousting-was-plotted-by-his-outraged-bankers-in-new-york-7912735.html

QuoteBob Diamond's New York bankers were enraged by his reluctance to quit after the Libor scandal broke.

The Wall Street division of Barclays, where many staff who had previously worked for the collapsed Lehman Brothers were based, even talked of plotting some kind of insurrection to force him to leave, according to reports in the US.

Monday night's memo to staff from Mr Diamond particularly enraged his New York trading floor.

CNBC interviewed 14 traders there who all confirmed that the note, which was supposed to be an attempt to calm his workforce, had had the opposite effect.

"It was ridiculous that he thought he could stay on after the Libor scandal," said one senior executive. "It made us look like crooks and fools."

Some, CNBC reported, even began plotting to force him to resign. "We were like: 'What world is he living in?'" said one trader. "How could he not see the writing on the wall?" Another added: "He was like a guy trying desperately to keep his girlfriend from breaking up with him. I was literally cringeing reading the letter," said another.

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-07-03/diamond-s-exit-shows-libor-only-what-each-bank-says-it-is

QuoteBarclays has gone from saying in January it can borrow for three months at interest rates that were on average above other banks to saying it can borrow more cheaply than its peers even though the cost of insuring the London-based firm's debt using credit-default swaps rose 36 percent, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

The contrast between banks' daily submissions for Libor and other measures of their creditworthiness shows why regulators from Europe to the U.S. are beginning to fine them for manipulating the market for short-term rates. While the British Bankers' Association reveals Libor submissions from each bank, the process that the firms use to come up with their individual rates is opaque and not based on actual transactions.

"After the Barclays admission, we have proof that Libor is not a reliable benchmark," said Alessandro Giansanti, a senior rates strategist at ING Groep NV in Amsterdam.

Libor is hardwired into the world's financial system, meaning credible alternatives have been slow to develop. ICAP Plc, which started the New York Funding Rate in 2008 amid concern about the veracity of Libor, cut the minimum number of participants in April required in its daily survey of unsecured loans because of a decline in interbank lending.

http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2012/07/the-libor-scandal-will-expose-more-naked-bankers/

QuoteSo it is against this backdrop that I have been thinking about this Barclays LIBOR fixing news and the fine and scandal it has caused. The question I am asking myself is how did Barclays manage to influence the whole market over an extended period in a manner that was material to their borrowing costs all on their own? It strikes me as almost impossible.

So it is interesting to note that other institutions are being looked at.

Just like we have seen in past periods of market turmoil, they are often associated with behaviour that is either illegal or with the benefit of hindsight deemed immoral. My guess is that there is more to this scandal than meets the eye and that this will not be the only market where manipulation of price for short term interest rates or bonds will be exposed.

Central bankers are doing their best to take back the ascendancy and control for the financial system and we heard last night that the BoE and FSA were involved in Barclay's CEO Diamond's demise. Equally in the context of the above the move by the ECB overnight to limit the acceptance of some bonds as collateral for loans looks structurally worrying but could simply be a shot across bank management's bow not necessarily an anti-bailout move.

Time will tell but as the tide runs out there'll be a few more naked bankers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 07, 2012, 10:14:33 PM
The wheel is spinning and the sacrificial bank will soon be chosen!
BET NOW! Name your bank, I'll name your odds that it's gone next year!

This is wonderful. A giant game of who's going to get fucked and cause major headlines.

Thinking about the ties between several large UK banks to those in Europe and America there's a pretty good chance that it could be anyone.

I'd ask for a Cain prediction, but he should be away getting laid or drunk or something. If you're not man then bugger off and do so post haste.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
OK never mind then! read in sept? {Maybe

Yeah: Teal Tuesday, E.com has become so Stupid SiLLy i May As
weLL say .. Hillsborrow 11:33 Grocery Outlet ? address net time /-/i
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:34:08 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.

Wait til I start talking like that at work.  Or in the sack.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 24, 2012, 02:39:11 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:34:08 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.

Wait til I start talking like that at work.  Or in the sack.

  :lol: They'll be looking at you, and nothing but colors will come out of your mouth.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 02:45:24 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 02:39:11 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:34:08 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.

Wait til I start talking like that at work.  Or in the sack.

  :lol: They'll be looking at you, and nothing but colors will come out of your mouth.

Oh.  Like those times I "talked" to Mike.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on July 24, 2012, 03:20:07 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/07/22/tax-havens.html#

Quote
The report says:

    * UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs are the three private banks handling the most assets offshore
    * 92,000 people, or 0.001 per cent of the world's population, hold $21 trillion in hidden assets

I don't know if it's just me but the villainy is getting taken to such cliched extremes it's getting cartoonish.

I bet their accountants even look like Snidely Whiplash.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 03:30:52 AM
Quote from: Net on July 24, 2012, 03:20:07 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/07/22/tax-havens.html#

Quote
The report says:

    * UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs are the three private banks handling the most assets offshore
    * 92,000 people, or 0.001 per cent of the world's population, hold $21 trillion in hidden assets

I don't know if it's just me but the villainy is getting taken to such cliched extremes it's getting cartoonish.

I bet their accountants even look like Snidely Whiplash.

We demanded bad guys, they appeared.

Why is everyone shocked?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 24, 2012, 07:35:23 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 02:45:24 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 02:39:11 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:34:08 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.

Wait til I start talking like that at work.  Or in the sack.

  :lol: They'll be looking at you, and nothing but colors will come out of your mouth.

Oh.  Like those times I "talked" to Mike.

Yes, like that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 24, 2012, 07:36:52 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 03:30:52 AM
Quote from: Net on July 24, 2012, 03:20:07 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/07/22/tax-havens.html#

Quote
The report says:

    * UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs are the three private banks handling the most assets offshore
    * 92,000 people, or 0.001 per cent of the world's population, hold $21 trillion in hidden assets

I don't know if it's just me but the villainy is getting taken to such cliched extremes it's getting cartoonish.

I bet their accountants even look like Snidely Whiplash.

We demanded bad guys, they appeared.

Why is everyone shocked?

Because the FREE MARKET™ and AMERICA™!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 02:00:48 PM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 07:36:52 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 03:30:52 AM
Quote from: Net on July 24, 2012, 03:20:07 AM
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/story/2012/07/22/tax-havens.html#

Quote
The report says:

    * UBS, Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs are the three private banks handling the most assets offshore
    * 92,000 people, or 0.001 per cent of the world's population, hold $21 trillion in hidden assets

I don't know if it's just me but the villainy is getting taken to such cliched extremes it's getting cartoonish.

I bet their accountants even look like Snidely Whiplash.

We demanded bad guys, they appeared.

Why is everyone shocked?

Because the FREE MARKET™ and AMERICA™!

Rant inspired.

BRB.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 24, 2012, 02:57:28 PM
ahh at last .. the peaceful feel of dead silence
i only wish that the same could be said about the bus ride

$200 Hand Held  &A $2200 Fur for it, to fit into .. {:}




Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 07:35:23 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 02:45:24 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 02:39:11 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:34:08 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:31:21 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 01:11:31 AM
Quote from: PROFOUNDLY RETARDED CHARLIE MANSON on July 24, 2012, 01:09:00 AM
Quote from: The Dead Reverend Roger on July 24, 2012, 12:23:00 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on July 22, 2012, 11:30:03 AM
A NEW 24/7 Econ is in the chip as i cLICK iT :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livegold.html)
By now? it seams clear 2me
THAT having Sat & Sun off Aint Any Longer an AfordAble Luxury i con Aford.
^ READ UP ^ stupid

Hirley0, I am beginning to understand what you post.

That is both amazing and terrifying.

I told you that would happen eventually.

I checked...His posting hasn't changed.  So it's me.

YEP.  :lol: Wait until you start having conversations with him without thinking about it.

Wait til I start talking like that at work.  Or in the sack.

  :lol: They'll be looking at you, and nothing but colors will come out of your mouth.

Oh.  Like those times I "talked" to Mike.

Yes, like that.






DO NOT FAIL TO BUY YOUR HAND HELD

a fur before U cLick it next
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 29, 2012, 11:04:18 AM
AM getting out? ?9am pdt or p 22, 2012 29 8.1 - 8.0     
4PM PDT S29P (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00029000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true){ TIME TO EXIT 7.5? 1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00029000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
5:40 Power Grid Failure | miners ? Air | Calcuta {swimming
CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/) C&F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1) 31C5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922C00031000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 31P5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00031000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 25P. (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB)
7/30 color=navy | BAC2Boo2Um ..  {LOOKs LiKe setUP 2B=1/DOw
:sad: Right the next chunk is FUR's Stone
a NINE CARROTS diamonds might do? but i was think'N more Pluto On Yum
-
then a robotic arm on that to do the point & click trip | - | say go and it's Away
scrolling thru 5th dime space at an ever Accellerating pace | no more broken
NAILs Total out lay 3&1/3 T ea | not bad for starters. in at 3.??
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on August 02, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
27790 0:07 CS20p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922P00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   321PM CDE S20p 1.10 21 5D (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922P00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

CDE Jan20P 2.70-.17B2.45A2.60V2 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
R=27753 t=9:22 MdT A=0 12^
|/ t: 4:04 & 9:23 add1 3.5 FB20c 3:55pm Just cLicN |Fri REM imf wbo & zYx v Me.
e HoRo+ to g  {bad timing (IMO)...
06:48:26 AM   5dDec FB20 4.2 0V :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
ok2: go along with the HoRo+ to get long FB today then
There was/is Money to be maid on FB? if my guess is correct
as the Market goes UP FB goes down & then the switch | Further My guess
is the Global numbers are ripe for a major decline (&4 A Long time} No 2
year Recession (ah La 08| down for the Long Count, no matter whos in
Or whos out. clearly?/? the Quick money was taken already & SO
My guess is that even thought the worth less FB will be worth more
its pure political Ft. financial trickery. Hold your hat
YEAH: 100% cash Waiting to go + as soon as DOW \. DEC/?Aug12?
Quote from: hirley0 on July 29, 2012, 11:04:18 AM
AM getting out? ?9am pdt or p 22, 2012 29 8.1 - 8.0     
27597 ^ READ UP ^ 4/4 IN PRE SEASON ? ABout .5K Pay ATTention :8
CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/) | C&F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1) |   FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB) |  DEC20c (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) CDE16p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on August 09, 2012, 09:42:30 PM
  FB    S23c (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922C00023000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   S19p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00019000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
CDE    S22c (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922C00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   S19p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922P00019000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

IN AT 1 OUT AT THREE page ei daily's 27807

Title: this is actually happening
Post by: inode_buddha on August 10, 2012, 03:44:03 AM
WSJ: Goldman gets off

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443537404577579840698144490.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 03, 2012, 06:34:09 PM
20121017 time to end this. i can only hope you had
the smartZ to do exactly the opposite of what was suggested
IF True, U should have a ROSE ¢ent in your local yeah /-/

Quote from: hirley0 on August 02, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/) C&F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1)  FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB) ?   D20c1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 4.2&3.5  5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)    |CDE   D16p.3M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)|
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 12, 2012, 11:16:44 PM
Oct 1 1AM v time 2 shift 1/4's see Prior Post above
26 28916a}Second1a5@80.80 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00750000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 28977 @70.000=#3
Apple Inc. 2012 Oct 20 750.00 Put v NASDAQ Options (NSO)
28748A  21 sell What ? {Put^? G?/}  A (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 28752a5@50.50 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00750000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) |/|/28800
28717   19 buy(0@6)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) OR SELL(0@.75)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) oR SEE 21 |/
28693A 17 SELL AM RALLY ? {THERE was not 1 | see 19}
28607A 14 (Vale} (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@VALE%20%20130316C00012000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) CDE  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) AAP (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=AAPL&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)L   (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20121020C00670000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)OO (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)G  Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020C00065000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)Q (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=QQQ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020P00075000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) F_B (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)
28575 9/13  :fnord: CDE10/20_23c3 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=fs%2Css%2Cr14&c=) cde10/20_27p3 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
28558 9/12   :fnord: FB10/20_19C3  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020C00019000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020C00019000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) FB10/20_23p3 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020P00023000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020P00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
^ READ UP ^ Smarting from Sept: Sell4pap Worth0 .
Oct 1 1AM ^ it will be several days before this pencils OUt?

Sept 26th check it: yeah: confusing So i'LL regroup:
Sept 12th summery? 0(S19p&S23c)-2 0|S20p5D-1.1 ?T=-3.1 {probably so/?

Quote from: hirley0 on September 03, 2012, 06:34:09 PM
28534 11t APPLE V fb#
28451 7F 28516 10M  {THEY have it their way4now://
Quote from: hirley0 on August 02, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/) C&F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1)  FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB) { (S19p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00019000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) S23c (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922C00023000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true))1M   D20c1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 4.2&3.5  5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  }   
28309 LOCATION REVISION 9/1 CDE |S20p5D  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922P00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)1.1    D16p.3M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)|

12 2:50:53.P
5 D16p.3M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 1${8:15pdT 29248
10/1 inquiry: photo finish29179
BLUE ?=20130119CALLs except Q=1020 R=PUTs
VALE (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VALE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00029000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true). (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119C00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119C00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)D (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)E (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00035000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) A (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119C00690000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)AP (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=AAPL&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)L (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119C00675000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)OO (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119P00725000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020C00065000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)Q (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=QQQ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=ss&c=)Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020P00075000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)       3m15C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 6mFB (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) 3m25P (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
GREEN ?= finance.yahoo 6 Month price chart
v10c20p A690/740 G675/725 Q65/75                fb15/25
it doth occur to me today (on the 5th} to seLL CaLLs
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 14, 2012, 04:17:04 PM
The Fed has announced another round of Quantative Easing.

I'm sure this time it'll really help the economy recover  :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 27, 2012, 04:40:31 PM
lolz

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/21/lloyds-anti-fraud-boss-jailed

QuoteA former head of online security at Lloyds Banking Group has been jailed for five years after defrauding the company of almost £2.5m.

Jessica Harper, 50, whose £60,000-a-year role included fighting fraud, submitted 93 false and doctored invoices to pay herself a total of £2,463,750, which she then gave to friends and her three brothers to allow them to buy property.

The fraud took place during the financial crisis, when Lloyds received substantial amounts of taxpayers' money. She stole the money over four years by creating a dummy bank account in the name of an IT firm that carried out work for the bank.

Southwark crown court heard that Harper told police she deserved the money for showing loyalty to the firm when she could earn four times as much elsewhere, but denied personally benefiting from the fraud.

And http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=767&Itemid=74&jumival=8820

QuoteQuadrillion Dollar Derivatives Market 20 Times Global GDP

(Video link)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 27, 2012, 05:31:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 27, 2012, 04:40:31 PM
lolz

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/21/lloyds-anti-fraud-boss-jailed

QuoteA former head of online security at Lloyds Banking Group has been jailed for five years after defrauding the company of almost £2.5m.

Jessica Harper, 50, whose £60,000-a-year role included fighting fraud, submitted 93 false and doctored invoices to pay herself a total of £2,463,750, which she then gave to friends and her three brothers to allow them to buy property.

The fraud took place during the financial crisis, when Lloyds received substantial amounts of taxpayers' money. She stole the money over four years by creating a dummy bank account in the name of an IT firm that carried out work for the bank.

Southwark crown court heard that Harper told police she deserved the money for showing loyalty to the firm when she could earn four times as much elsewhere, but denied personally benefiting from the fraud.

And http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=767&Itemid=74&jumival=8820

QuoteQuadrillion Dollar Derivatives Market 20 Times Global GDP

(Video link)

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Freeky on September 27, 2012, 06:20:41 PM
(http://i874.photobucket.com/albums/ab310/arrancar47/Facepalmx2Combo.gif)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 28, 2012, 07:30:03 PM
Nice job, Fed:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443328404578022110261892852.html?mod=WSJAsia_hpp_LEFTTopStories

QuoteChinese and South Korean central-bank officials criticized the U.S. Federal Reserve's latest easing efforts and advocated reducing Asia's dependence on the U.S. dollar.

The comments Thursday, at a joint seminar in Beijing by the two central banks, are the clearest indication yet of a rising backlash in Asia against U.S. monetary policy, suggesting it could speed up the search for alternatives to the dollar as the main global currency.

"The rise in global liquidity could lead to rapid capital inflows into emerging markets including South Korea and China and push up global raw-material prices," said Bank of Korea Gov. Kim Choong-soo. "Therefore, Korea and China need to make concerted efforts to minimize the negative spillover effect arising from the monetary policies of advanced nations."

Chen Yulu, an academic adviser to the People's Bank of China, said Asia needs a "regional core currency" to reduce its dependence on the dollar. China's ultimate goal is for the yuan to be as important as the euro or the dollar, he said.

This is a consequence of Ben Bernanke doing so much hand-holding for the wilting flowers on the Federal Reserve Board that he actually forgot to co-ordinate the quantative easing with other central banks.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 28, 2012, 09:52:08 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 28, 2012, 07:30:03 PM
Nice job, Fed:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443328404578022110261892852.html?mod=WSJAsia_hpp_LEFTTopStories

QuoteChinese and South Korean central-bank officials criticized the U.S. Federal Reserve's latest easing efforts and advocated reducing Asia's dependence on the U.S. dollar.

The comments Thursday, at a joint seminar in Beijing by the two central banks, are the clearest indication yet of a rising backlash in Asia against U.S. monetary policy, suggesting it could speed up the search for alternatives to the dollar as the main global currency.

"The rise in global liquidity could lead to rapid capital inflows into emerging markets including South Korea and China and push up global raw-material prices," said Bank of Korea Gov. Kim Choong-soo. "Therefore, Korea and China need to make concerted efforts to minimize the negative spillover effect arising from the monetary policies of advanced nations."

Chen Yulu, an academic adviser to the People's Bank of China, said Asia needs a "regional core currency" to reduce its dependence on the dollar. China's ultimate goal is for the yuan to be as important as the euro or the dollar, he said.

This is a consequence of Ben Bernanke doing so much hand-holding for the wilting flowers on the Federal Reserve Board that he actually forgot to co-ordinate the quantative easing with other central banks.

Oh sweet jesus.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 29, 2012, 08:51:21 AM
The article says the process will probably take until the 2040s to actually be set in motion, so it's not really a short-term worry for the US.

It's just really fucking stupid.  Small things like this add up, and given the limited shelf-life of the North Korean state and potential power of a unified Korea, giving them further points of agreement with China (they're already in agreement over Japan's disturbing nationalism/revisionist history) is not really an ideal way to go about the much vaunted "Return to the Pacific".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 01, 2012, 06:53:38 AM
29287 2pm asian news reported IRR{Rial BELOW 35k NOT @12 ?{70%
29090 FLOW of FunNY North2South

USD2MXN (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=USD&to=MXN)2COP (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=MXN&to=COP)2CLP (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=COP&to=CLP)2ARS (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=CLP&to=ARS)2BRL (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=ARS&to=BRL) 4NoW
___>\ __ /<__:=__ /<__>\ ___ 
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=MXN&to=USD
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=COP&to=USD
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=CLP&to=USD
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=ARS&to=USD
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=BRL&to=USD

? tbD $2¢ (http://www.wallstreetdaily.com/wallstreet-research/ppc/top-currencies-report.php?code=X303N3A1&gclid=CIa6vcWZ87ICFYaDQgodpggAgw)
could it be? ORtagA? HoHoHoLds Key West | OR was it May?
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=XAG&to=USD  {Silver
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=EUR&to=USD
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=USD&to=IRR   {Iran
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=USD&to=IQD   {IRAQ
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=USD&to=XAF  {African Cfa Francs
http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=XAG&to=XAF

http://www.fxoptions.com/Site/ProductSpecifications/BRB.htm
https://practice.forex.com/positions-orders.html
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 02, 2012, 11:45:27 PM
it seams rather clear to me 4U to do the eXact opposit:

VALE .CDE AAPL GOOG QQQ       3m15C 5D 6mFB 3m25P 5D

it also seams clear to me | ON THE FIFTH to sell | & A Call ?

its ALSO very clear that the Sept Sell Put should have been G not A

{never mind | My guess today is 'CDE | sell the Call ?/?

20121003 Wednesday 10:40 pdT
other than myself see top of page | & yes: i guess
the US Free Market ? is anything but: it is now
and for the future { until fall election | Go V prop
and their4 confined to (Um} their channels
I WILL no doubt be moving on away from the
current tend / And look for some reality \ elsewhere 

there R 2 of those tails USD\MEX & ARS\BRL their4 Most of my time
going down will be spent on those 2 {selling calls) & not top of page
where i was trying to hold out hope for My$elf. Stay tuned ?/?

10:51pdT the other way to look at this then / MEX/COP & CLP/ARS
would now suggest to sell A put {never mind see RED below : ?

10:55 My 3rd & last ReMark is to think the opposite
{To the contrary) MORE LATER at this speed /-/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 07:18:37 PM
BROWN?  1? https://practice.forex.com/positions-orders.html
A true Waist of mY TimE | https://practice.forex.com/CurrencyPair?cp=XAGUSD
https://practice.forex.com/Pages/ImageOld.aspx?pair=XAG_USD&interval=60&q=38

Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than 0 {0H:
Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than or equal to 50 {{ make Up Ur Mi
Transaction Failed Amount must be divisable by 50 {{{ divisable spelling |/
2: http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=XAG&to=USD {try this instead
3# (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif) 
4 & the PriZe was http://www.ajpm.com/ LoNG 34.1 {y at 10:52:11.AM
5th
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 10, 2012, 08:22:15 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 07:18:37 PM
Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than 0 {0H:
Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than or equal to 50 {{ make Up Ur Mind
:lulz:
2:42 Silver    $33.86 34.1-33.86 = (Loss) of A Quarter Less A PenNY
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 10, 2012, 08:21:15 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 02, 2012, 11:45:27 PM
20121003 Wednesday 10:40 pdT
other than myself see top of page | & yes: i guess
the US Free Market ? is anything but: it is now
and for the future { until fall election | Go V prop
and their4 confined to (Um} their channels
I WILL no doubt be moving on away from the
current tend / And look for some reality \ elsewhere 


And then people ask me "Why do you read all of Hirley0's posts?", and I respond, "Because of shit like THIS" (above).

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 10, 2012, 08:22:15 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 07:18:37 PM
Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than 0 {0H:
Transaction Failed Amount must be greater than or equal to 50 {{ make Up Ur Mi

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 11:47:58 PM
Link to top of page 73  :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1080.html)

Y!
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 10, 2012, 08:21:15 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 02, 2012, 11:45:27 PM
20121003 Wednesday 10:40 pdT
other than myself see top of page | & yes: i guess
the US Free Market ? is anything but: it is now
and for the future { until fall election | Go V prop
and their4 confined to (Um} their channels
I WILL no doubt be moving on away from the
current tend / And look for some reality \ elsewhere 


And then people ask me "Why do you read all of Hirley0's posts?", and I respond, "Because of shit like THIS" (above).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 11:49:10 PM
USD2MXN (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=USD&to=MXN)2COP (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=MXN&to=COP)2CLP (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=COP&to=CLP)2ARS (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=CLP&to=ARS)\2BRL (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=ARS&to=BRL) A e theory v READ DOWN  v

9th{29287) 10 11 thread (Read 29321 times) .5*d#=34/2 +17
IT DOES OCCURE to me to look for the place to take a LONG TERM position
432100 | the "ECONOMIC" object is to sell,  the wish is FOR ARS (http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=ARS&to=BRL)
TO MAINTAIN its stable rate of revaluation that is current policy. thank U

http://www.bmfbovespa.com.br/en-us/home.aspx?idioma=en-us
:fnord:  (http://www.bmfbovespa.com.br/en-us/markets/commodities-and-futures/commodities-and-futures.aspx?idioma=en-us)

3:33&1/3 PDt {29442
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 11:50:08 PM
F12_4.17}_34.0111:12{00 33.992:39{3 338.19{10
________8:2712:17__________________________4:02pm{17:
U11___$34.04.26(22)__________________________$34.17
______|9\&11/PM|   3AM        |       9& 11AM  }____{5PM   pdT
______| Kong    |   London                 NY       |_(Sidney | Hong

http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif  http://www.ajpm.com/
(http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif) 

http://www.x-rates.com/graph/?from=XAG&to=USD
https://practice.forex.com/Pages/ImageOld.aspx?pair=XAG_USD&interval=60&q=38
10 11.1 next some reality? Work on timing: ^READ UP^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 10, 2012, 11:51:10 PM
10 11(22) & THEN Sum {29392-321 ? declining interest?_71^
10 10(24) 34.1 /10:52:11.AM-2:44:58 PM 33.86 =-(24)¢
^ READ Mkt {W<=====<E{ (0-24}TIME UP ^  &&  v N/S posit'$? DOWN v
http://en.mercopress.com/argentina
Thursday, October 11th 2012 - 23:20 UTC  Accra
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 11, 2012, 02:47:53 AM
I am THIS close to understanding what you're saying about the market, Hirley0.

Break it down for me:  How fucked ARE we?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Prince Glittersnatch III on October 11, 2012, 03:10:20 AM
Considering Hirley0 is looking for a new reality to move to, Id say were beyond fucked.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 19, 2012, 05:26:55 PM
it looks rather serial to me
i best stay out of the fray a few days  {29573 29591} yiP
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 19, 2012, 09:59:47 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 19, 2012, 05:26:55 PM
it looks rather serial to me
i best stay out of the fray a few days  {29573

It's orange.

That's BAD, guys.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on October 20, 2012, 03:28:49 AM
I don't think I've ever seen hirley0 use orange.  :eek:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 22, 2012, 02:59:13 PM
r=navy {29662 I c NHK has a new logo ? line above S?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 23, 2012, 12:07:17 AM
time 4me to move along Agin
from China Russia India & Burma crib 4 short
to the electron1 electron?
/-/owever as this is A Quant chemical trail NOT Qual
    Coulomb  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coulomb
1 C in...    is equal to...
   SI base units       1 A s
   CGS units       2997924580 statC
   Atomic units       6.24150965(16)×10^18 e[1]
No {what i meant was
measured in Coulombs/second which is named Amperes.

for whatever reason i do NOT find the line i seek L8R
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 23, 2012, 07:42:57 PM
20121023 TEAL Tuesday ?
ok so exactLy where am i in this d,bait ? \/\/ith BROWN
.1 I DO: believe in ELecTron
\/\//-/AT U Ask does that /\/\ean
For 1 thing i assume the probability of 1
/\/\eaning simply 1 electron in three states Solid Liquid & gas
so this {2day) is only about the Solid electron,
and i wish to count {in milli second) the number passing A point
with a parameter of 1 amp
other factors that are know about this EQUATIONS are
1 Volt & 1 Ohm e=i*r  i=e/r & r=e/i   ?/?/?

In this algebraic expression,
voltage (E) is equal to
current (I) multiplied by
resistance (R).  :fnord:  (http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/vol_1/chpt_2/1.html)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 23, 2012, 08:05:42 PM
Each unit of measurement is named after a famous experimenter in electricity: The amp after the Frenchman Andre M. Ampere,
the volt after the Italian Alessandro Volta,
and the ohm after the German Georg Simon Ohm.

see Link in prior post

One coulomb of charge is equal to 6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons. The symbol for electric charge quantity is the capital letter "Q," with the unit of coulombs abbreviated by the capital letter "C." It so happens that the unit for electron flow, the amp, is equal to 1 coulomb of electrons passing by a given point in a circuit in 1 second of time. Cast in these terms, current is the rate of electric charge motion through a conductor.
OK so there U C the number i was looking for YES-terd-ay: /-/owEVEr
REMember this TO AVOID the $¢IENCE TRAP i USe Milli
THUS DROP THREE ZERO's there
BUTT weight i want just 1 so drop 15 more 18 total
So now i have six & A Quarter OR sex for 1/4 U pick
bringing me to my other point for 2day
\/\//-/AT period of time is e-18 anyway | i ask U \/\/eb: 12:05 pdT

An attosecond is an SI unit of time equal to 10−18 of a second. (one quintillionth of a second)
ATT-0-SECOND AKA  not a Go-Mint # BUTT A tell -E +band 1

1 attosecond – the time it takes for light to travel the length of three hydrogen atoms.

320 attoseconds – estimated time it takes electrons to transfer between atoms

i wiLL use 360 to avoid the \/\/eb web

4:20 going ALONE to my next post
symbol kW·h, kW h or kWh) is a unit of energy equal to 1000 watt hours or 3.6 megajoules.

now despite the TV noises in my ear | my conversion of
1000 watt hours
into AMP.yours for Ms | & the TV noises make this dificult so Later

for your info the TV is at $pending | not at cDC 285 313 1916
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 08:48:20 AM
chugging along to tomorrow in 15 min or lesspdt
Amps = Watts/Volts  1Amp - 1Kw/1Kv aka
this 1Amp, is equal to 1 coulomb of electrons passing purr Sec
6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons/S shorten time to
ATT-0-SECOND AKA  not a Go-Min
DOWN to 6&1/4 electrons/^  divide by 6.25 to get 1 electron for A Answer
1A/6.25 = .16A  Achieve this change by reducing \/\/
.16A=.16W/1v yes this Tail is about Money skip2Fri if U like
OK? the picture is 1 electron passing 1aS | HowEVEr the distance is now a
factor{parameter R*T=D | i do not know the Answers | even though i will
reintroduce the 360 number as T= D/R =360 ATT-0-SECOND
Another way of thinking about it is 360 electrons from A2B
call it a /-/elping of electrons OR ? next convert it to make ¢Ts
'poise 1/4$ per KwHr going tward tomorrow Board time. ReDrink
Kw = 1Amp at 1000V OR 10A@100v or 9.09+ @110 etc
let me call this a TEN till i get close
1 Quarters worth of electrons = 10A for 1 Hr { is that correct :
but 10A = 10*C{6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons/S)*60*60
2.25e23 electrons per $.25 = 1+ e-22 ¢ /electron
OR 1 /-/elping = 3600000 ATT-0-¢ call it 4 yocto¢ 2day in Oct
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
SOLID BROWN.
00:54 2012 10/24 off line waiting for days to align

my connection speed is show as 55 mbs | i'LL say bytes
Or bits U pick. some have 100 | there may B faster
i donno |using 100 mbs the 1 B = 1/100000000 of A S

Ti83 says 10e9 attoS A AT 4YOCTO¢ / /-/
CONFUSION POINT. 360AS//-/
24-10=14 == 100E12
MAYBE 400PICO¢/B

OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 24, 2012, 04:54:54 PM
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.

I think it might be dependent on the CONFUSION POINT.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:47:13 PM
14:04 pdT
00:54 2012 10/24 off line waiting for days to align

my connection speed is show as 55 mbs | i'LL say bytes
Or bits U pick. some have 100 | there may B faster
i donno |using 100 mbs the 1 B = 1/100000000 of A S

Ti83 says 10e9 attoS A AT 4YOCTO¢ / /-/
CONFUSION POINT. 360AS//-/
24-10=14 == 100E12
MAYBE 400PICO¢/B

OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED




Quote from: Man Yellow on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.

LOOK several thiNGs seam clear to me
.1 I AM probably wrong again
2: i did come up with a Figure  PICO¢/B
3? Obviously i have been snookered see 75
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:57:07 PM
Quote from: Man Green on October 24, 2012, 04:54:54 PM
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.

I think it might be dependent on the CONFUSION POINT.


truely i do not know
in two hours i'LL recheck it
in the mean time snookered
I half 2 look in the book
in the book there is no CTRL F search
well what do you know
i did find it
APPENDIX A P113
TO BE THE VICTUM
to be UNable to shoot the CUE BALL
in a direct line
at the object ball
"WHITCH IS on".
check it yourself 794M89o
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 24, 2012, 10:01:05 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:57:07 PM
Quote from: Man Green on October 24, 2012, 04:54:54 PM
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.

I think it might be dependent on the CONFUSION POINT.


truely i do not know
in two hours i'LL recheck it
in the mean time snookered
I half 2 look in the book
in the book there is no CTRL F search
well what do you know
i did find it
APPENDIX A P113
TO BE THE VICTUM
to be UNable to shoot the CUE BALL
in a direct line
at the object ball
"WHITCH IS on".
check it yourself 794M89o

Well hot damn! Learn something new every day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 10:13:57 PM
Quote from: Man Green on October 24, 2012, 10:01:05 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:57:07 PM
Quote from: Man Green on October 24, 2012, 04:54:54 PM
Quote from: Man Yellow on October 24, 2012, 03:14:13 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 09:18:29 AM
OR TWICE THAT AT MY SPEED


Wouldn't that be unsafe?  I mean, I couldn't keep that pace up if I tried.

I think it might be dependent on the CONFUSION POINT.


truely i do not know
in two hours i'LL recheck it
in the mean time snookered
I half 2 look in the book
in the book there is no CTRL F search
well what do you know
i did find it
APPENDIX A P113
TO BE THE VICTUM
to be UNable to shoot the CUE BALL
in a direct line
at the object ball
"WHITCH IS on".
check it yourself 794M89o

Well hot damn! Learn something new every day.

Fine of course
Much of it was caused by font
Never mind
i WILL Byte
some may have to do with the Ti Too
My guess the tI is leaning / greening G
& i do
think
atto is Pro PRo test.
13:13 post time Maybe
OK bac2po 2 min & coUnT'N
CONFUSION POINT. 360AS//-/
Maybe a better term would be Yelpfull but i like /-/2 Ok
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 11:20:59 PM
2:10- Trying to move along by leaving 3D space/time
By adding parameters
In this algebraic expression,
voltage (E) is equal to
current (I) multiplied by
resistance (R)
-
in other words for example adding Temperature
so i will say something like the following silliness
the resistance as it heats up {due to global warming {{ & other factors
is lengthened, becoming more resistant,  changing i

i could of course easily be wrong , the concept of increasing the
parameters from 3 to 4 is another question. so i will try to find
a fifth parameter to include. 2:20:20

i did want to get the parameters BIT in while in memory
as it is truly failing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on October 25, 2012, 12:00:24 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 24, 2012, 11:20:59 PM
2:10- Trying to move along by leaving 3D space/time

If you make it, let me know.  Because I'm coming with you.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on October 25, 2012, 03:21:40 AM
SEND POSTCARDS, GUYS.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 26, 2012, 11:56:54 PM
ORange Fri 2:56:54 P
durring the pasT .5Hr OPB {Oregon Public Broadcasting
http://www.opb.org/television/schedules/
the NBR {National Business Report is broadcast
durring the period i usually think fF
Re: Financial fuckery thread
So U sometimes GEt the above type time stamp
4get it i don't listen much any more to $ bac2TV
in Oregon they issue paper roomeeX calls \/AcouchER's  =4$
the farmers market{ACROSS Salmon| closed for the season
i had 1/2 VA's left so i took them across salmon & traded
4 ginger {I NOW HAVE GInger}
so i ask WEB what to do?/?
Make Ale OK it worked really well
& now i feel much better
6:9 now back2N
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 27, 2012, 09:13:49 AM
YEAH ? Kno
anyway C it is clear to me PlanIt E does not Kneed another
USeLess car parts plant. what the place needs is a ship yard
capable of building 9 passenger Underwater fishing boats
CAPABLE of operation UNDER the most treturous sea conditions

equipped with modern electronic nets | not those string things
on Reels. to be leased on a seasonal basis rather than sold
directly so as to avoid the car traffic congestion scene.

A joint venture Brazil Uruguay & Argentina with the Main plant
in Uruguay & 1 repair yard in N Brazil & 1 South in Argentina.

& while i am at it C? maybe think about a new booking agent.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on October 28, 2012, 08:09:31 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 27, 2012, 09:13:49 AM
equipped with modern electronic nets

You called sir? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSBdEPontd4&feature=player_detailpage#t=34s)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 31, 2012, 10:48:01 PM
Quote from: Net on October 28, 2012, 08:09:31 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on October 27, 2012, 09:13:49 AM
equipped with modern electronic nets

You called sir? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSBdEPontd4&feature=player_detailpage#t=34s)

30119 YEAH i c there are going 2B solar panels in the N.
African desert /-/. my connection speed is slow ?er_detailpa?
the 3:31 audio was understandable

30184 14:40 -|   |+ an electric field exists in water
between (hm}? bipoles  that field herds fish like a fence effects HOrses ?/?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 06, 2012, 01:08:25 AM
it is still NoVemBer : wat else should i say?/? /-/. {30299  {5:09:56 PM
:fnord: link to CONfuseN point (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.msg1218507.html#msg1218507) 2.25e23 electrons per $.25

ok cheat and drop the .2 ? 2.5e23 electrons per US Quarter post 65 etc
1¢= e22 | My AA says it is 2500mAh ? 2.5 Amps for 1 hour ? 1 amp /2.5/-/r
BUUT  1 amp per Second WAs ? 6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons/S)*60*60
6.25e18*60^2 =2.25e22 *2.5=5.625e22 ? OVER one Nickles worth of electrons
PER AA. & NOW YOU KNOW THE SIZE OF Ni. one 5¢ peace | maybe A dime in NY
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 06, 2012, 11:56:37 PM
Quote from: CAKE on October 25, 2012, 03:21:40 AM
SEND POSTCARDS, GUYS.
i did i rather doubt that it was appriciated HoweveR
now bac2F_n | {30347  think http://www.curtrenz.com/
so on sunday in A sirprize move .. we wound up at
the Candel Light : it is now just a dirt patch | no building left
on the way back up the hill
i suggested getting post cards from the Art building
the art building is the next building nort of the candel light
and at times artists leave pre paid postage cards in there in the lobby
one of the best deals in the city As Far as i AM concerned . eoT bac2cu
_ http://www.kitco.com/charts/techcharts_gold.html
Quote from: hirley0 on May 24, 2012, 03:42:22 PM
(http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=ta%20scrap%20vac%20solids&type=M&weight=LB&days=60&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0) (http://www.metalprices.com/pubcharts/PublicCharts.aspx?metal=cu&type=L&weight=LB&days=3&size=M&bg=&cs=1011&cid=0)
30382 CROSSING? 6th on the South Side of Jackson
a new structure looms large. it is already occupied by the new
arivals. 515 i think i saw above the south door. A\-\ /-/A $$$$.¢
Anyway bac2¢ost of election Ny Flood & Fu2?
2012 election costs could reach record $5.8 billion
Total Cost of Election Could Be $6 Billion
Flood defense plan could cost up to $29 billion* 
could exceed $18 billion in New York alone
World Bank's estimated economic cost was US$235 billion
and tsunami could cost up to $309 billion,
The next step? when ever it occurs
Looks like a T to me 6.9 is my guess: /-/AstA LegGo
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 08, 2012, 10:37:19 PM
this week on the back slash team \
theory to find the primo back slashers \\ maybe ask Advanced ? declines
REMember WHEN DOW went DOWN wed to commemorate? Tue$ {never mind
the $.$ was made on div don't U Tink? wHERE?/?
http://www.marketvolume.com/advance_decline/ratio.asp
http://www.market-harmonics.com/free-charts/volume/adro.htm <?
OK according to that  red line crossed 0 going down
= time to buy | TIME TO BUY = time to sell | IF stock UP put down
so sell PutN{ Maybe ? whitch putN?/?

 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 08, 2012, 11:03:31 PM
SUNDAY 11/11 10AM todays propAgangDA is
it's assumed the free market system Sept below
IS a relic of the past: /-/As no place in modern econ theories C next post

the probability that this NoV E/¢ is incorrect is /-/i
However the concept E/¢ is assumed correct & not ¢/E
of course the the symbol for the electron E above is a Question?
Quote from: hirley0 on November 06, 2012, 01:08:25 AM
it is still NoVemBer : wat else should i say?/? /-/. {30299  {5:09:56 PM
:fnord: link to CONfuseN point (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.msg1218507.html#msg1218507) 2.25e23 electrons per $.25

ok cheat and drop the .2 ? 2.5e23 electrons per US Quarter post 65 etc
1¢= e22 | My AA says it is 2500mAh ? 2.5 Amps for 1 hour ? 1 amp /2.5/-/r
BUUT  1 amp per Second WAs ? 6,250,000,000,000,000,000 electrons/S)*60*60
6.25e18*60^2 =2.25e22 *2.5=5.625e22 ? OVER one Nickles worth of electrons
PER AA. & NOW YOU KNOW THE SIZE OF Ni. one 5¢ peace | maybe A dime in NY


Quote from: hirley0 on September 12, 2012, 11:16:44 PM

A (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 28752a5@50.50 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00750000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) |/|/28800
28717   19 buy(0@6)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) OR SELL(0@.75)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) oR SEE 21 |/
28693A 17 SELL AM RALLY ? {THERE was not 1 | see 19}
28607A 14 (Vale} (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@VALE%20%20130316C00012000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) CDE  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) AAP (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=AAPL&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)L   (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20121020P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20121020C00670000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)OO (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)G  Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020C00065000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)Q (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=QQQ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020P00075000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) F_B (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)
28575 9/13  :fnord: CDE10/20_23c3 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=fs%2Css%2Cr14&c=) cde10/20_27p3 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020P00027000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
28558 9/12   :fnord: FB10/20_19C3  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020C00019000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020C00019000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) FB10/20_23p3 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020P00023000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121020P00023000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/) C&F  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Css%2Cfs%2Css%2Cr14&c=FB) C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1)  FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB) { (S19p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922P00019000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) S23c (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20120922C00023000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true))1M   D20c1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 4.2&3.5  5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20121222C00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  S20p5D  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20120922P00020000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)1.1    D16p.3M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)|
D16p.3M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00016000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
VALE (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VALE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20121020C00029000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true). (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119C00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119C00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)D (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=CDE&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)E (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@CDE%20%20%20130119P00035000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) A (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119C00690000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)AP (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=AAPL&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)L (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119C00675000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)OO (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119P00725000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020C00065000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)Q (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=QQQ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=ss&c=)Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020P00075000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)       3m15C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 6mFB (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) 3m25P (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 08, 2012, 11:04:34 PM
Leaving the distribution of e18 ergs of Energy behind 20th ¢ent
Moving on :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31493.30.html)
to the movements of e24 ergs of electrons {2.4V)
OR in some cases Like NY & BA the Lack of distribution C next Post

Read 30497 Listen? the point i try {UNsuc) above is A NewK1
in old 20th¢ent N Jokes WAS about e18 Ergs of energy. take a step{*e6=
18+6= ate e24 "ergs" | the QU becomeS # of electrons per e24 "ergs" of
Energy. REMember i refer here to two(2) 1.2 Volt AA batteries(5¢ea) 2.4V

reply #1126?
A\ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119C00690000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)A\P (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=AAPL&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)/L (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) G\ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119C00675000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)O\O (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=GOOG&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)/G (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@GOOG%20%20130119P00725000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) Q\ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020C00065000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)Q\ (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=QQQ&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=ss&c=)/Q (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20121020P00075000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) it possible the trends are about to reverse THUS
THE CON is to sell the puts as they should become the new back slash \

3m15C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D\ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119C00015000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
6mFB (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=FB&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=)
3m25P (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D/ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

of course since i AM usually wrong THEN U2 should sell WeLL the Blues
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 08, 2012, 11:05:33 PM
of course it is possible CLIT in effect Fri i like ctrlB
5D/ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) { i /-/AVe /\/o iDea click it anyway face North:
2&1/2 e18 /2K to get ToNNE ? e15 T {MoOn e22)
30541 :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31493.msg1222143.html#msg1222143)
is the transfer of e24 ergs of electrons {@ 24.v)  TBC^
The Relevant question U do not twit about
^ READ LINE UP ^
i'poise once again if one two EIGHT holds the put
ramp will be very shallow. extending dowN from 200 to close
it will not be steep like the / red L Line was {IMO) now 4U ..
REPLY 1127 /L (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@AAPL%20%20130119P00740000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) :fnord: g (http://www.kitco.com/charts/livesilver.html)
Quote from: hirley0 on November 08, 2012, 10:37:19 PM
:fnord: \this week on the back slash team : (http://www.market-harmonics.com/free-charts/volume/adro.htm)
30453 FriDay DOWN day today?
http://markets.money.cnn.com/services/api/chart/snapshot_chart_api.asp?symb=INDU
it may be a very long way Down: My guess however is the LiNE will hold
Meaning it should be reversal day possibly looking tward a year end /
Christmas  rally IT LOOKS LIKE LiNE Held2PM
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 14, 2012, 09:16:59 AM
3:48:19 Wed. FB 12%/  :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)3:50:51.52 :fnord:  (http://markets.money.cnn.com/services/api/chart/snapshot_chart_api.asp?symb=INDU) ?Friday? Get out?
YES: its ctrlB from here ON {never mind
the question to find is what should the NewT line LINE up 2B
24 Volt sound nice (20 1.2'AA} BUTT 48 is another # SOMEone
SHOULD answer the De'Fault howeveR  poise 12KwHr/day ?
poise 1Hr/d ON poise 12v  1000Amp Nop 120V 100A No 12A 1KV
OK getting Warm 1KV/1.2v/B = .8&1/3 KBatteries
tbc 1:17
OK 840 AA batteries /20 { 620G for ROW of twenty
42 ROWS * 620GRAMS/row = about 30Kg counting container
at current {chemical tech) = about 65 pounds of batteries on your
wheels/boat + convert an old electric blanket to under wear & U2
are now ready for GLOW BALL WARming & 2 cool Knights
{3:24am
Rather that tink in terms of VoltA a  better Way is to say
MiLLi & in this case not MiLLi Second, but ah . OK 2500mah Or 2.5ah
at 1.2v 2.5+1.2=3W Whatever However the number
in Question is 12Kw/hr/d to get A result devide 12 by 3 to get 4 thousand
batteries a bit Or 2 diff that 840 {oh my)WeLL i can
Hardly wait for the NewT to be invented, manufactured & distributed
bac2theD.bb 3:35:27 AM
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 16, 2012, 10:43:40 AM
2:43 & 9:25 too moving on | Hopefully
yeah 20121118 11:38:39.400 pSt- ?
?1 Gov/Go/4MoreG
.2 IMF (http://www.imf.org/)&WBO  (http://www.worldbank.org/)
a. What will it take? Grant to individual, Not loans to countries
  B: A system of computers, inter connected in such a way, as to achieve
      sustainability, not the one thrust upon individuals by GG4g{Wrong: 
3: Value of the electron v VAlue of some islands off the continental mainland
  c? 'Cause it seams clear the protection the Seas of the past, have passed
  and now the angry seas fueled mostly by those very islands have turned.
   D* don't UC planned obsolescence is obsolete, them selves? 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 19, 2012, 08:38:56 AM
30881 RATIONING should avoid controversy to start
by starting with A single item (not gas} probably food like lettuce, OR
banannas for a short term period {week, month? Quarter) and then
the next item etc, etc. it should be rather factual what food is causing
the problem in advance , corn, soy beans, wheat, rice, sugar etc
and it should be advertized ahead of time what the next 6 items will
probably be. it should be a rather simple task to do rationing theory
right the first time from the start. be sure to include eggs as #6 
30849 it seams reasonable to me: RATIONING is the future 30863
30830 ?electron#30844 Ome {Oregon Medical Exchange w/d = Original
30823 rationing sex comes to mind? start somewhere globally? 12:39:46.AM
30788 ON THE THEORY of RATIONING  2013 :fnord:  (http://en.mercopress.com/2012/11/19/gasoline-rationing-extended-in-new-york-until-next-friday)
30743 Look?
iz Just trying to get away from IMF & WBO thinking
{that the standards of living of said islanders should be as espoused by
IMF & WBO Officials | 4get 'EM . think Jackson? Independent Treasury
find the Grand Duke & get on with Restoration Projects {IMO)

Projects that do not require IMF+WBO  Loans/Leans/Leases
Projects accomplished by individuals, WHO take the time to be interested.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 26, 2012, 09:48:41 PM
Platinum $1,613 1,618 +6.00 3:45
http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/pt3650lf_ma.gif
WiLL the Pt RooMer effect the Pt Price?
Platinum $1,611 1,616  -5.00 1:53:36.PM
http://www.ajpm.com/  http://www.kitco.com/charts/liveplatinum.html
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: McMegaDeff on November 27, 2012, 06:58:38 AM
I believe in platinum...don't know when, but soon...it reminds me of a slingshot, pulled back right now.

Nano tech is just becoming marketable...which is cool...I liken it to the invention of the flying car, but it's happening now.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 27, 2012, 09:03:35 AM
Quote from: McMegaDeff on November 27, 2012, 06:58:38 AM
I believe in platinum...don't know when, but soon...it reminds me of a slingshot, pulled back right now.

Nano tech is just becoming marketable...which is cool...I liken it to the invention of the flying car, but it's happening now.

TEAL Tuesday 11/27 & an odd # day | read = 31016
ODD numbered days i try to be aggressive | i'LL attempt not to be howver
lemme look for palladium now to pass time |
http://www.kitco.com/images/live/plad.gif
http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/pd3650lf_ma.gif
http://www.kitco.com/charts/techcharts_palladium.html
OK so here is my bit | ever 20 years  prices double what they were prior
the doubling of prices has already taken place | except for cattle of course
so my guess is a return to 2K is possible ? not probable the way i see things
^ Me in chat mode \/\/ith not in this UNIverse disclaimers
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on November 27, 2012, 04:51:38 PM
Quote from: McMegaDeff on November 27, 2012, 06:58:38 AM
Nano tech is just becoming marketable...which is cool...

UNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on November 28, 2012, 01:41:14 AM
><http://www.cnbc.com/id/49540593

An article that made me laugh out loud about some of the ideas I've had about currencies over the last few years.

><http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/27/europe/gallery/milk-protests/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

Milk as a bell weather to real inflation is an interesting idea, but reminds me of that scene in American Gangster between Frank and Dominic about the "true cost of production,  'cause it's gotta be controlled, right? It's got to be set. It's gotta be fair."

So now I'm reading about Milk, from cow to market.  Learning something new, anyway.

Hirley0: 
Quote30849 it seams reasonable to me: RATIONING is the future 30863

Scary prospect, which drives rationing, recursive as that is.

Quote30823 rationing sex comes to mind? start somewhere globally? 12:39:46.AM

Christ man, you're talking anarchy.

QuoteProjects that do not require IMF+WBO  Loans/Leans/Leases
Projects accomplished by individuals, WHO take the time to be interested.

I like this idea.  I've taken to moving some extra scratch that would otherwise realize less than 2%, into a spread of unsecured private loans through a couple of websites that do that sort of thing.  It's not much, but It's helping people who would otherwise be turned down by a bank, or have to do it through a credit card at a ridiculous rate, which is still a bank.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on November 28, 2012, 02:51:07 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on November 28, 2012, 01:41:14 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49540593

An article that made me laugh out loud about some of the ideas I've had about currencies over the last few years.

oops. looks like we may have to make a couple calls to Ethiopia to get things in order for the Germans...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on November 28, 2012, 02:32:53 PM
QuoteThe actual presence of the gold wouldn't make a lick of difference unless, say, Germany's central bank decided it wanted to start using the gold for some practical, non-monetary purpose like making watches.

Also known as "the EU's financial crisis recovery plan".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on November 29, 2012, 05:17:40 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2012, 02:32:53 PM
QuoteThe actual presence of the gold wouldn't make a lick of difference unless, say, Germany's central bank decided it wanted to start using the gold for some practical, non-monetary purpose like making watches.

Also known as "the EU's financial crisis recovery plan".

:spit:

:horrormirth:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 29, 2012, 10:46:08 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on November 28, 2012, 01:41:14 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49540593
http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/27/europe/gallery/milk-protests/index.html?hpt=hp_c2
Hirley0: 
Quote30849 it seams reasonable to me: RATIONING is the future 30863
Scary prospect, which drives rationing, recursive as that is.
starting with <> & thanks Milk price coming soon
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 29, 2012, 10:49:03 AM
Quote from: Alty on November 29, 2012, 05:17:40 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2012, 02:32:53 PM
QuoteThe actual presence of the gold wouldn't make a lick of difference unless, say, Germany's central bank decided it wanted to start using the gold for some practical, non-monetary purpose like making watches.

Also known as "the EU's financial crisis recovery plan".

&: + FB3m25P (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=3m&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5D/ (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=90423&snap=true&symbol=@FB%20%20%20%20130119P00025000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=213&chhig=126&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 29, 2012, 10:51:08 AM
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2012, 02:32:53 PM
QuoteThe actual presence of the gold wouldn't make a lick of difference unless, say, Germany's central bank decided it wanted to start using the gold for some practical, non-monetary purpose like making watches.

Also known as " plan".
& EU - INDU (http://markets.money.cnn.com/services/api/chart/snapshot_chart_api.asp?symb=INDU)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 29, 2012, 10:54:35 AM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on November 28, 2012, 02:51:07 AM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on November 28, 2012, 01:41:14 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/49540593

An article that made me laugh out loud about some of the ideas I've had about currencies over the last few years.

oops. looks like we may have to make a couple calls to Ethiopia to get things in order for the Germans...
& erman ? CU (http://www.curtrenz.com/)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 29, 2012, 10:57:28 AM
& i A French connection http://f-t-z.fr/forum/accueil.php

Quote from: Disco Pickle on November 28, 2012, 01:41:14 AM

So now I'm reading about Milk,

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on December 09, 2012, 12:46:05 AM
Since this isn't a financial board, I thought a thread based on this was a silly idea, but I come here to the lot of you for troof, and thought I'd get some reality check outside of the bubble of forums I've dug through in my research on this idea.

Potentially an internets full of financial fuckery, but has anyone here heard of the P2P lending scene since it first debuted in 2006ish, crashed predictably, then began to recover?

Ippy, hirly0, have you heard of this? Is it something you'd do? 

Cain, Faust, P3nt, Pixy, and other boardlings outside of the states: is there anything like this going on across the pond?  I haven't done any digging on it happening outside of these borders but I'm curious about the mindset difference that might exist in other countries to lending money to strangers based on a risk calculated by a third party.

TGGR, LMNO, ECH, RWHN (sigh acronyms) you guys cut to the meat of issues and I'd appreciate the visceral on this one. 

I'm anticipating a discussion on usury coming from this and I'd be interested to have it.  It's a subject which I haven't formed a for or against, but currently support because it's all I've ever known people to do.

Full disclosure: I've already invested with both of the big sites, prosper and lending club, but I'm in for change and wouldn't miss it if they defaulted.  I'm really liking the idea of helping people get their house in order for rates lower than a bank would charge, but I'm having a hard time reconciling that with my general distrust of people and their intentions. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on December 09, 2012, 05:31:35 PM
I hadn't heard of it.  reading up on it now.  initial reaction is that if it became a viable means of borrowing for the wider audience, the banks would squash it like a bug.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on December 10, 2012, 11:25:14 PM
Quote from: Disco Pickle on December 09, 2012, 12:46:05 AM
Since this isn't a financial board, I thought a thread based on this was a silly idea, but I come here to the lot of you for troof, and thought I'd get some reality check outside of the bubble of forums I've dug through in my research on this idea.

Potentially an internets full of financial fuckery, but has anyone here heard of the P2P lending scene since it first debuted in 2006ish, crashed predictably, then began to recover?

Ippy, hirly0, have you heard of this? Is it something you'd do? 

Cain, Faust, P3nt, Pixy, and other boardlings outside of the states: is there anything like this going on across the pond?  I haven't done any digging on it happening outside of these borders but I'm curious about the mindset difference that might exist in other countries to lending money to strangers based on a risk calculated by a third party.

TGGR, LMNO, ECH, RWHN (sigh acronyms) you guys cut to the meat of issues and I'd appreciate the visceral on this one. 

I'm anticipating a discussion on usury coming from this and I'd be interested to have it.  It's a subject which I haven't formed a for or against, but currently support because it's all I've ever known people to do.

Full disclosure: I've already invested with both of the big sites, prosper and lending club, but I'm in for change and wouldn't miss it if they defaulted.  I'm really liking the idea of helping people get their house in order for rates lower than a bank would charge, but I'm having a hard time reconciling that with my general distrust of people and their intentions.

It sounds like high risk, the people who are going to be attracted to it and cause it the largest loss are property developers who can stake enough cash to get a decent loan which will just be dumped into their over valued and saturated markets.
You can make money on this. And it's crash would have been a good time to get in, but you have to have a realistic exit and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what prices or times those would be.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on December 11, 2012, 12:38:42 AM
Quote from: Elder Iptuous on December 09, 2012, 05:31:35 PM
I hadn't heard of it.  reading up on it now.  initial reaction is that if it became a viable means of borrowing for the wider audience, the banks would squash it like a bug.

Not sure they'd be able to now.  After Prosper's initial shutdown by the SEC for selling unlicensed securities, paying off the state fines, and filing with the SEC, they're officially operating within the law.  There is the problem of the pending class action filed by the group of initial investors who lost a large chunk of cash, and the fact that they're hemorrhaging cash to expand.  I'm still thinking they could continue to follow Lending Club's growth curve and turn profitable.

There have been some large funds moving in to keep them solvent, which means to me that there's definite potential for profit.  An independent audit last year put their seasoned return at somewhere around 9%, which beats the shit out of anything on the bond market.  Only a few of the mutual funds I hold are doing anything like that.

Quote from: Faust on December 10, 2012, 11:25:14 PM

It sounds like high risk, the people who are going to be attracted to it and cause it the largest loss are property developers who can stake enough cash to get a decent loan which will just be dumped into their over valued and saturated markets.
You can make money on this. And it's crash would have been a good time to get in, but you have to have a realistic exit and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what prices or times those would be.

It's very much high risk.  I've thought of several scams that could easily be run by the sort of people who have absolutely no problem fucking people over using organized fraud and people with nothing to loose by screwing their credit score up for 7 years. 

I've also considered the possibility of people taking the cash and dumping it into a hard asset like a house, but at the rates the loans are going for, I can't see that being a good use unless the max loan of $20,000 would pay off the property, free up the monthly payment and the person was to just walk away from the debt until it became time barred.  If the house gets paid off and they're otherwise fairly financially stable, they could likely take the credit score hit over the next 7 years.  The difference between the likely mortgage rate and the rate for the cash is most likely very large.

Then, there's the possibility of someone with a good credit history taking out a full 20,000 (at around 5%ish I'm guessing, which is still a fucking crazy rate to borrow money) and spreading it out with enough care to get close to the 10% return I've seen people reporting.  Even after paying down the principle at the borrowing rate, you're still basically making free money.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: McMegaDeff on December 13, 2012, 04:32:36 AM
recently got into the sven . . . it made sense enough to me, chinese movies ya! but it's looking pretty effed up nowadays.

Just getting into the stock market.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 17, 2012, 04:42:43 PM
I've been thinking over how mucb has happened this year in politics and finance. For my own purposes I was going to do a 'yearly roundup' type thing for the year's big financial controversies when I get home tonight. Would y'all like it here or in its own thread?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 17, 2012, 04:45:12 PM
Here, please.

I have been watching the slow capsizing of France with interest.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 17, 2012, 11:30:35 PM
With two weeks to go until 2013 it seems like a good time to reflect on the year that was 2012. If you're anything like me, trying to keep up with the many flavours of doom and fucked-upness which plagued us throughout the year has been exhausting. This is by no means a comprehensive list but just a select few of the announcements and stories that seem to stand out the most by the end of this year.

First half of the year covered here. Second half will be covered tomorrow (hopefully).

(This is largely focused on Europe and the UK because that's where most of the action has been and that is where I've largely been paying attention - I'm sure I'm missing tons of stuff across the Middle East and USA particularly)

January

The new year starts with predictions that we will see a return to recession in Europe. Italy, France and Spain are foreshadowed in earnest alongside the continuing horror story that is Greece.

Obama is seen as weak on the economy and there are fears that he will not remain president. As all alternatives to him seem to be various brands of insanity this makes markets quiver.

Did you know the Olympics are happening this year? If not you are probably dead. Also the Olympics are simultaneously going to cure all Britain's economic woes and burden us with debt which will follow our children's children to their graves.

Eurozone manufacturing continues to decline or stagnate.

Greece threatens to exit the euro if it isn't bailed out. There is general wailing and gnashing of teeth. 'Will the Euro survive the year?' becomes the question people are 'too afraid to ask' and yet ask at every opportunity. Spoiler: Yes. Yes it will.

Greece eats more austerity measures, 30 buildings are burned down, 80,000 people protest and 40 MPs are thrown out for voting against the measures.

Oil price rises sharply due to middle east troubles.

US manufacturing is better than expected.

Chinese company Sinopec buys up vast amounts of US oil in a $2.2 bn deal. China's foreign investment record will continue to quietly grow in the background as large foreign company and assets are purchased throughout the year.

Banks borrow massively from the European Central Bank to shore up their reserves. Surprisingly this does not fill anyone with confidence.

Scottish Independence is discussed towards the end of January. People immediately scream that Scotland should be buried under a mountain of debt for their insolence, or something. Scottish independence will continue to lurk throughout the year.

Iranian oil is subjected to sanction.

February

Fred Goodwin disgraces the noble institution of the Knighthood omg.

Banker's bonuses are also used to hide the fact that no substantial change has been made to the banking industry. Instead token gestures to placate the public by cutting bonuses are made and seem to work.

China is sounded out about a Eurozone rescue fund. Laughs uproariously.

UK economy is going to enter recession!

Greek government is initially wary of the bailout proposal from the EU. Eventually thousands of job cuts are agreed.

The Conservative Party begins to turn on people 'banker bashing'. Constant reminders about how great the free market are become the norm.

More quantitative easing shoves another £50bn ... somewhere. This brings the total to £275 bn. Whether or not this has accomplished anything positive remains unclear.
Moody's places UK on negative outlook. People become aware that ratings agencies exist for seemingly the first time.

Italy and the Netherlands slide into recession.

March

Gold price falls by 5 per cent. Glenn Beck's head explodes on live TV (I wish).

Libor rate fixing story is broken for the first time.

Bank of America shifts $55 trillion of derivative risk onto the American taxpayer.

Protests sweep Italy and Spain as their governments bring in ruthless austerity measures. Italian protests set themselves on fire; Spanish protestors set fire to everything around them.

Eurozone unemployment continues to rise.

Brazil overtakes the UK's economy to become the 6th largest in the world.

April

Possible fuel strike hits the UK. Woman sets herself ablaze because the government tell her to.

Greek protests continue to be violent and bloody. More lives lost.

Britain goes into recession. Nobody is really surprised.

Pasty tax causes widespread horror as the public realizes they may have to pay more for fatty food.

IMF loans $987 million to Bangladesh

May

France elects Hollande over Sarkozy to try and bring about alternatives to austerity. He will ultimately prove unable to deliver on his full promise but his election does send ripples of concern throughout Europe as the anti-austerity lobby seems to be growing in popularity.

Spain continues to be in recession, markets decline steadily as we continue to be doomed. Spanish banks are forced to raise 30bn Euro to try and ease pressure. This does nothing.

Greece continues to spiral deeper and deeper into recession. An inability to form a government leads to yet more calls for Greece to leave the Eurozone.

Eurozone as a whole avoids recession because Germany grows; most everywhere else shrinks or remains stagnant.

Cameron demands Europe gets its act together. Is roundly mocked by all.

Facebook becomes publicly listed. Lol.

JPMorgan lost billions upon billions. How many billions? Uncertain but at least 6 by the end of the month. Also the American taxpayer foots the bill.

Japan's economy grows 1% as government spending on rebuilding causes a surge in business and investment. This goes uncommented on by the British government, whose continue slashing of public investment ensures the recession gets worse.

European business activity falls to a three year low.

OECD officially announces that the Eurozone is the biggest threat to global outlook because of the large amount of crisis hotpoints. WELL HOLY CRAP WHO WOULDA THUNK IT?

Pasty Tax fiasco continues into May. Politicians pretend to be human beings rather than android lizards by eating pasties in public at one another.

Vince Cable suggests learning from Germany rather than screeching at them as though they and the rest of the Eurozone are pod people. He is largely ignored by everyone else in government.

June

Eurozone unemployment reaches 11 per cent, American unemployment remains uncertain due to the vast amount of tinkering done with the definition of 'unemployment'.  No matter which way you slice it, it remains worse than expected and so world markets freak.

BASEL 3 is announced. For those unaware, BASEL 2 had still not been fully implemented when BASEL 3 was declared. Some estimates put full compliance as much as a decade away by which time we will presumably be up to BASEL 20. Or SYBIL will have closed down the hotel.

Greek tourism falls. Presumably because much of Greece is still on fire.

Australia seems to be doing very nicely thank you very much. Despite not featuring much up until this point, Australia's economy – when it has been mentioned – has consistently been strong and good.

European Central Bank declares that there are some risks to the Eurozone. Uproarious laughter occurs.

The Halifax says that British property prices will flatline. Daily Mail readers find more credence to claims the world will end in 2012.

Spain says it isn't seeking a bailout. Then it discusses a bailout. Spanish banks receive a bailout of 100bn Euro. By midway through the month they are asking for another 62 bn.

Brazil, despite having become the 6th largest economy in the world in March, is described as sliding backwards and having a 'once' booming economy as the Eurozone crisis deepens.

Italy sells off a number of major public companies to reduce their debt. This has no appreciable effect on their continued problems.

Greek election momentarily stalls European catastrophe.

The G20 occurs: Leaders agree that there are problems in Europe. They also agree something should be done. Somebody should do something. Probably.

UK Inflation drops to 2.8% officially despite food and fuel prices continuing to rocket upwards. Surely there can be no statistical witchcraft going on here.

UK banks are downgraded. Rage at ratings agencies is high as banks call them irresponsible. Irony meters worldwide explode.

UK government begins signalling that they will cut unemployment benefit and squeeze the unemployed. The fact that unemployment benefit makes up 2% of all benefits is quietly ignored by the media who seem to believe that not having a job is simply a matter of being lazy.

German unemployment rises to 6.8% (compared to a steady EU average of 11%)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on December 18, 2012, 08:00:11 PM
Holy shit.

More!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 18, 2012, 08:34:27 PM
Excellent summation.  Looking forward to the second part.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 19, 2012, 01:01:04 AM
July

Libor fixing continues to be the real news as evidence mounts that banks colluded to mislead the public.

Japan approves the merger of Tokyo and Osaka exchanges to make the world's third largest stock exchange.

Bank of England throws another £50bn into the economy. This brings us to £375bn. Apparently I missed £50bn somewhere, whoops!

Italy slashes national spending by 26 bn euro. Not to be outdone, the UK government slashes £6.7 bn more than expected (for a total of £11bn in the year to March).

China's demand for oil falls for the first time in three years – retail fuel price in China is cut 5%. Chinese growth slows but still stands at 7.8% as other economies stagnate or decline.

Euro falls to a 2 year low against the dollar.

UK borrowing rises in June. As it transpires this foreshadows a complete failure by the UK government to actually lower borrowing over the course of the year despite slashing budgets.

Spanish crisis deepens even further, and they ban short-selling.

Germany's AAA rating is put on negative outlook despite the fact that Germany is the only country in Europe pretty roundly considered to be doing okay.

UK recession deepens – GDP falls 0.75%

It transpires that $21 trillion is being sheltered in tax havens across the world by the top 0.001 per cent - the super rich. Nothing much is done with this knowledge.

August

Inexplicably the BBC chooses this month to ask whether we are looking at a global recession. I can only presume the economics editor awoke having suffered a deep coma from January until now.

The US decides that it won't press charges against Goldman Sachs.

The bank of England finally decides to stop pumping more money into the economy in the hope things would happen. Towards the end of the month it transpires that the top 5% of households in the UK have benefitted most from the quantitative easing measures.

RBS suffers a computer glitch which causes people to be unable to access their funds for a long time. They pay out £125 million to inconvenienced customers.

Italian economy is confirmed to have shrunk by 0.7% in the second quarter of 2012.

The Olympics either destroyed or made the UK economy. Nobody really knows. They do largely agree that is was a bloody good time, though.

Greece's economy contracts by 6.2% in the second quarter of the year. There are more fires in Athens. Over 5 years Greece has lost 20% of its economy, in no small part due to the horrific mishandling of spending cuts and reaction from Europe.

Germany's economy actually grows! By 0.3%

The Eurozone as a whole contracts by 0.2%. If it contracts again in the third quarter it will officially be in recession and then presumably the earth will fly into the sun, according to most level-headed analysts.

Egypt asks for $4.8 bn from the IMF. There's no immediate answer.

September

Bond-buying euro debt plan put into action. Europe is now resigned to a recession in 2012 with a total of 0.4% shrinkage and hopes for a 0.5% growth in early 2013.

OECD suddenly rounds on the UK and believes it will shrink by 0.7%

Planning rules are to be relaxed in the UK, allowing the millions of people who want to build skyscrapers in their back gardens to do so. Surprisingly this does not bring us back into the black immediately.

Japan's growth slows but is still existant.

UK banks are accused of misselling 35bn euros of derivatives in Italy to the surprise of nobody.

Huawei – a Chinese telecoms giant – announces £1.3bn of investment in the UK over the next five years as China continues to make aggressive moves into infrastructure development.

The Federal Reserve adopts quantitative easing. Because it has been working so well everywhere else. Oil price reaches a four month high as a result of investors seeking a safe haven to put their cash.

Bank of England opens up a 'funding for lending' scheme which equates to allowing 5/6 top banks being allowed to borrow up to 5% of their loan book immediately and more if they follow through on lending targets. Taken together these 5 banks represent £1.2 trillion of lending.

Greek efforts to  meet stringent austerity targets fail causing yet more wailing and threats before they are given the next batch of money.

October

Hirley0 uses orange when asked to describe the state of the economy. This is the most dire warning to date.

Iran's rial hits an all time low against the US dollar. Iran is placed under enormous amounts of pressure internally and externally, but there is no clear path for them to take. Surely this could not possibly go horribly wrong.

The EU says banks should split risky trading from personal banking. Something which any sane person never stopped believing and most have been calling for since the beginning of the crisis.

The Bank of England continues to dramatically do nothing. Which is probably better than giving money to rich people.

US unemployment hits the lowest it has been since Obama took office. This may be in part due to people taking jobs for no pay and various other ways to manipulate statistics before an election, but try not to look behind the curtain. He's not Romney! And as his success becomes more obvious, markets stop panicking outright.

US eye Huawei and ZTE as security threats. Who would have thought that letting Chinese companies buy up energy and infrastructure assets might not be a great idea?!

The European Stability Mechanism is launched. Even from launch people point out that the 500 bn euro it has access to would be a fraction of the amount needed to rescue Italy or Spain, let alone both of them. The head of the fund says he is sure there'll be no more major decisions on Greece, though, so that's fine.

Greek and Spanish unemployment stand at 25%

Eurozone Banking Union proposed which will help set banking regulation across Europe. Cameron shits self in public and Osbourne bawls like a baby. It remains unclear what effect this will have on UK banking regulation.

Eurozone business activity contracts at its fastest rate in over three years – particularly in France and Germany.

The UK emerges from recession with a 1% growth boost from the Olympics! Almost as though investing public money in projects which come to fruition can be good for the economy. The country is still likely to end the year worse off than it began.

Hurricane Sandy hits the US causing $20bn of damage just as the economy starts to recover.

November

The UK government decides to mess with the price of alcohol because too few people hate them already.

Greece performs even worse than expected and stocks fall 5% as traders throw them under a bus.

Growth and Infrastructure bill introduced in the UK, designed to allow companies to tarmac puppies (or at least not care about the environment in their developments)

Ireland attempts to blame and shame those responsible for the crisis. Apparently they are unaware that bankers are incapable of feeling guilt as anything other than a warm and pleasant glow.

Greek riots ahead of the next round of austerity voting reach particularly impressive lengths with protestors pulling out all the stops. Athens continues to burn. The deal goes ahead anyway. Greece's economy falls yet again and they manage to negotiate more time for the deeper, harder cuts they clearly need to set themselves on the righteous path of growth.

Barack Obama is elected president. The sun rises the next morning.

Eurozone growth forecasts are cut again. I didn't mention these the last couple of months but a third consistent drop in forecasts is impressive.

Romney threats to blow up the economy in a fit of pique. Obama says 'Go ahead, punk, make my day.'

France loses triple-A credit rating. Remarkably the people of France continue to exist, rather than being sucked into a 'null space' as had been predicted by some experts.

UK public sector borrowing is admitted to be worse than expected. In truth it will transpire that despite the heavy cuts, Britain's foreign deficit has continued to grow under Osbourne.

Mark Carney is named as new Bank of England governor. He's a Canadian. This seems to be his most important qualification according to the media.

Mervyn King – now with nothing left to lose – points out that the Eurozone has become an even graver threat over the past year and is now set to crash and burn any hope the UK has for growth. He is largely ignored by government which continues its policy of pointing at the EU and screeching like a pod person. Nigel Farage criticizes the government for not screeching loudly enough.

Plans for a Eurobond are published. Germany pretty much declares this a no-go from the outset.

Eurozone unemployment hits record highs.

December

Osborne admits his plans have fucked everything forever. Resolves to fuck harder and deeper into the new year.

Greek bond buyback begins.

Australia continues to do pretty well on the quiet.

Ireland decides to raise taxes and slash public spending because this year has proven that to be a recipe for success.

Noise is made that the UK may lose its AAA rating. As France hasn't ceased to exist (yet) people wonder if we should care.

Use of the term 'Fiscal Cliff' reaches maximum annoyance threshold. Christine Lagarde demands that US leaders wrestle atop an actual cliff in order to solve the dispute once and for all.

Silvio Berlusconi announces that he will run for Prime Minister and that should he get it, he will solve all Italy's debt woes with his penis.

US and UK agree to allow one national regulator to oversee the insolvency of failing large banks, rather than asking bodies from different countries to deal with individual subsidiaries. This may be the first truly sensible and good piece of news in over six months. World edges closer to ending.

-------

And there we have it. The economic news to date.

There seems to be very little hope that anything being worked on now will turn things around in the new year. Going over this stuff has reaffirmed in my mind that the general hope from our politicians is that if they ignore the problem long enough it will go away. The big developments are likely to be:

Italy, Spain, Greece all suffering. Well, everyone is going to suffer next year. These countries will suffer even more than most I would imagine.

France may or may not be the next on Europe's chopping block; it has been declining, but it is still much stronger than the others.

Eurozone banking regulation is the only huge development coming along and I sincerely doubt it will have any teeth. Cameron will continue to shit bricks over this because it would directly hurt his friends if it came into effect and actually curbed banking excess.

The ESF is going to come online alongside existing bailout mechanisms. I would be astounded if it doesn't lend out all its money before 2014.

I suspect that American unemployment figures have been fiddled more than is obvious. That's largely because of the very fortunate timing for Obama. I could be wrong; if I am, it looks like America may be pulling around. China's growth is slowing but is still strong on a global scale, but the USA would be very vulnerable if EU members start collapsing as they have been threatening to do all year.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on December 19, 2012, 01:09:46 AM
It's kinda weird seeing it all just laid out at once.
Appreciate it DS.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 19, 2012, 09:22:59 AM
QuoteMark Carney is named as new Bank of England governor. He's a Canadian. This seems to be his most important qualification according to the media.

He's also the former head of Investment Banking for Goldman Sachs, a fact curiously absent from almost all media reporting about him.

Funny, that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 19, 2012, 09:30:59 AM
Quote from: Cain on December 19, 2012, 09:22:59 AM
QuoteMark Carney is named as new Bank of England governor. He's a Canadian. This seems to be his most important qualification according to the media.

He's also the former head of Investment Banking for Goldman Sachs, a fact curiously absent from almost all media reporting about him.

Funny, that.

... Wooooow.

I heard that he had a fairly impressive track record in his work at the Bank of Canada, but I had missed that he was head of Investment Banking at Goldman Sachs.

It is almost as though all the talk about how things need to change and how we need new ideas and new ways of doing things is bullshit, and the very same people are being put in place to keep the status quo stable.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 19, 2012, 09:44:35 AM
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/26/mark-carney-appointment-bank-england) at least seemed to realize something was up:

QuoteHe and many others in central bank circles know that most of the Britain's banks are very highly leveraged. That without the support of the Bank of England's quantitative easing programme, and its very low lending rates – all effectively backed by British taxpayers – Britain's banks would effectively be insolvent.

And so Carney will continue with quantitative easing – which has provided British banks with the liquidity needed to indulge in speculative activity both at home and abroad, speculative activity that bears a scary resemblance to that undertaken before the crisis.

Speculative (http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com/2012/07/black-dossier-hsbc-terrorist-finance.html) activity (http://antifascist-calling.blogspot.com/2012/09/black-dossier-2-hsbc-global-drug-trade.html) such as laundering money for Mexican and Russian organised crime funds (http://www.nbcnews.com/business/report-hsbc-allowed-money-laundering-likely-funded-terror-drugs-889170) and the Iranian government (http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/standard-chartered-to-pay-u-s-330-million-to-settle-iran-laundering-claims/).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Deepthroat Chopra on December 20, 2012, 02:22:06 AM
"Australia continues to do pretty well on the quiet."

Well, they're not so quiet about it here. It's also a little deceptive, in that we have what economists are calling "a two speed economy".

The fast speed, being the mining sector, and the slow speed, being the rest of us.

Australia has a lot of rocks and things that the rest of the world, especially China, and to a lesser extent, India, want. These keep the overall numbers up on the indicators economists like to use to determine economic strength (GDP, balance of payments, etc.). This is making miners, who in Australia seem to be very ardently right-wing and obese, extremely rich. It doesn't seem to be trickling down to the rest. The government has just reduced social security to single people with children, putting them well below a poverty line. This is a Labor government, which while having left it's socialist roots decades ago, still tries to pride itself on looking after the "battler". Some states are shedding civil servants on a Southern European scale, and removing permanent contracts. Non-mining tradespeople have a lot less work and income, as do "unskilled" labourers.

Still, it could have been worse. Aparrently our banking sector had much fewer "toxic assets" (I think that means sub-prime investments) and were thus not tied to the property markets of the USA (and at home) like banks all around the world were. I think the governments stimulus spending was better targeted than other countries, with it going into keeping building industries and "unskilled" jobs afloat with infrastructure projects.

And we're about to start selling uranium to India! Nuclear non-proliferation be gone!

There seems to be this feeling here that just as long as we welcome our new Chinese overloads with open arms and prawn feasts, we're going to be OK. We just have to accept our role as Asia's quarry, and the subsequent environmental results, to do this.

I don't really undertsand economics, which seems to make me qualified to opinionate on it.






Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Scribbly on December 20, 2012, 08:16:22 AM
Quote from: Deepthroat Chopra on December 20, 2012, 02:22:06 AM
"Australia continues to do pretty well on the quiet."

Well, they're not so quiet about it here. It's also a little deceptive, in that we have what economists are calling "a two speed economy".

The fast speed, being the mining sector, and the slow speed, being the rest of us.

Australia has a lot of rocks and things that the rest of the world, especially China, and to a lesser extent, India, want. These keep the overall numbers up on the indicators economists like to use to determine economic strength (GDP, balance of payments, etc.). This is making miners, who in Australia seem to be very ardently right-wing and obese, extremely rich. It doesn't seem to be trickling down to the rest. The government has just reduced social security to single people with children, putting them well below a poverty line. This is a Labor government, which while having left it's socialist roots decades ago, still tries to pride itself on looking after the "battler". Some states are shedding civil servants on a Southern European scale, and removing permanent contracts. Non-mining tradespeople have a lot less work and income, as do "unskilled" labourers.

Still, it could have been worse. Aparrently our banking sector had much fewer "toxic assets" (I think that means sub-prime investments) and were thus not tied to the property markets of the USA (and at home) like banks all around the world were. I think the governments stimulus spending was better targeted than other countries, with it going into keeping building industries and "unskilled" jobs afloat with infrastructure projects.

And we're about to start selling uranium to India! Nuclear non-proliferation be gone!

There seems to be this feeling here that just as long as we welcome our new Chinese overloads with open arms and prawn feasts, we're going to be OK. We just have to accept our role as Asia's quarry, and the subsequent environmental results, to do this.

I don't really undertsand economics, which seems to make me qualified to opinionate on it.

Thanks for the rundown  :)

I didn't mean that to sound condescending in any way - I just meant that whilst we have heard that Australia has been doing well... the reasons why haven't been made very clear. I hadn't heard anything about the two-speed economy, or the mining industry for that matter, so that's all very interesting. What I had heard was that Australia's economy is tied to China's in the same way that Canada's economy is tied to the United States; so people often invest in Australia as a way to take advantage of a rise in China's economy. Which seems pretty consistent with what you said but now also makes a lot more sense.

I hadn't heard anything at all about Australia preparing to sell nuclear materials to India. That is very surprising given how much the media has loved to shriek about nuclear energy and weapons this year, between Fukushima and Iran. I wonder if we'll hear any more about that as the deal progresses.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 20, 2012, 01:29:33 PM
Indian nuclear program has an American blessing, possibly as part of the Australian-Indian-Japanese alliance envisioned by certain people to counteract Chinese influence in SE Asia.

The media goes quiet when strategic interests are concerned.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 20, 2012, 02:11:31 PM
Quote from: Demolition_Squid on December 20, 2012, 08:16:22 AM
Quote from: Deepthroat Chopra on December 20, 2012, 02:22:06 AM
"Australia continues to do pretty well on the quiet."

Well, they're not so quiet about it here. It's also a little deceptive, in that we have what economists are calling "a two speed economy".

The fast speed, being the mining sector, and the slow speed, being the rest of us.

Australia has a lot of rocks and things that the rest of the world, especially China, and to a lesser extent, India, want. These keep the overall numbers up on the indicators economists like to use to determine economic strength (GDP, balance of payments, etc.). This is making miners, who in Australia seem to be very ardently right-wing and obese, extremely rich. It doesn't seem to be trickling down to the rest. The government has just reduced social security to single people with children, putting them well below a poverty line. This is a Labor government, which while having left it's socialist roots decades ago, still tries to pride itself on looking after the "battler". Some states are shedding civil servants on a Southern European scale, and removing permanent contracts. Non-mining tradespeople have a lot less work and income, as do "unskilled" labourers.

Still, it could have been worse. Aparrently our banking sector had much fewer "toxic assets" (I think that means sub-prime investments) and were thus not tied to the property markets of the USA (and at home) like banks all around the world were. I think the governments stimulus spending was better targeted than other countries, with it going into keeping building industries and "unskilled" jobs afloat with infrastructure projects.

And we're about to start selling uranium to India! Nuclear non-proliferation be gone!

There seems to be this feeling here that just as long as we welcome our new Chinese overloads with open arms and prawn feasts, we're going to be OK. We just have to accept our role as Asia's quarry, and the subsequent environmental results, to do this.

I don't really undertsand economics, which seems to make me qualified to opinionate on it.

Thanks for the rundown  :)

I didn't mean that to sound condescending in any way - I just meant that whilst we have heard that Australia has been doing well... the reasons why haven't been made very clear. I hadn't heard anything about the two-speed economy, or the mining industry for that matter, so that's all very interesting. What I had heard was that Australia's economy is tied to China's in the same way that Canada's economy is tied to the United States; so people often invest in Australia as a way to take advantage of a rise in China's economy. Which seems pretty consistent with what you said but now also makes a lot more sense.

I hadn't heard anything at all about Australia preparing to sell nuclear materials to India. That is very surprising given how much the media has loved to shriek about nuclear energy and weapons this year, between Fukushima and Iran. I wonder if we'll hear any more about that as the deal progresses.

America has a two-speed economy as well.

1.  How the stock market is doing.
2.  How the real world is doing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Deepthroat Chopra on December 20, 2012, 10:37:41 PM
Dem Squid, I did not think you were condescending   :) I was glad to read your post on it.

In spite of the "two-speed economy", I still think our government did a reasonable job of economic mangagement. While they get criticised bu the (more conservative) oppposition for wasting money on school halls, and on "pink batts" (home insulation), for example, these were more a means to an end to keep as many people employed in the building and non-skilled labour jobs, which they thought were usually the first to suffer when recession looms.

Most Australians were given a straight $1000 from the government, and encouraged to spend it, in an attempt to keep the retail sector afloat. It seems most people did spend this straight up, even it was on imported flat-screens and American whiskeys. Not one bottle shop (off-license, liquor store) had to shut its doors!

These kind of actions, which economists termed "Keynesian", seemed to work well within the capitalist framework. Sorry to state the obvious, but politicians and media never once asked the questions of "what economic system might work better so we're not just lurching from managing economic crises every decade or so?". The media (Australia is notorious for concentrated media ownership in the hands of Murdochs, Conrad Blacks, and a couple of rich right-wing yokels) of course hated all this, and has criticised it endlessly.

The negative of all this for this country is that it seems to have consolidated, or increased, the power of miners. We had a Prime Minister who, I think rightfully, thought increasing the taxes on the huge mining companies would be worth pusuing. Around the same time, he suggested his labor Party should be less influenced by unions. Having pissed off the mining industry and the unions, he was replaced as Prime Minister by his own party within weeks, and his suggested legislation was watered down after Labor "consulted with" the mining giants. The banks here have come out of the crisis with good PR, but don't seem to be using it for the power grab the miners are.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 26, 2012, 12:09:40 PM
And of course, the increased influence of the mining lobby means the increased influence of Gina Rinehart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gina_Rinehart).

What are Ms Rinehart's politics?  Well... (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2198868/Gina-Rinehart-Worlds-richest-woman-calls-Australian-workers-paid-2-day.html)

It also makes my uncle, a miner, increasingly obnoxious, which I didn't think was possible.  If I wasn't already arranging a tragic series of accidents to occur to him for other crimes, I might just have to do something to stop his annoying bleating.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Deepthroat Chopra on December 26, 2012, 10:44:39 PM
Rinehart's politics... :horrormirth:

After Lord Monkton, professional climate-change denier/skeptic, advised her to take control of Australian media, she quite publicly tried to take over Fairfax (runs the broaodsheets in Sydney and Mebourne, and other smaller papers) and a national TV network. She doesn't seem to have been successful, YET.

She's also also vanity-published (self-) a book of her very own, which I will not read. There's a titillating review here - http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/12/12/mad-beyond-the-dreams-of-tamburlaine-rinehart-book-reviewed/

which includes a poem she wrote in tribute to Joh Bjelke-Petersen, remembered as a hillbilly dictator by the rest of Australia who ruled a large state with an iron fist. The review makes her book sound like a long "let them eat cake" statement to everyone else. This would include her family, as her relationship with her parent/s was filtered through court time while she they suing each other for control of the family wealth. This is the same relationship she is presently having with all her children also.

Not trying to get off topic, but these are the kind of people keeping Australia's economic numbers afloat.

Edited to fix link.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 27, 2012, 10:13:37 AM
No, I think it is entirely relevant.  As things stand, Rinehart is about the most powerful female non-politician in Australia (depending on if you define "the Queen" as a political role), and one of the most influential in the whole SE Asia region due to the family business.  Her politics, and so attempts to shape the policy-making of the Australian government in this regard are highly relevant to the topic at hand.

She kinda strikes me as a 21st century, derp-tastic version of Rupert Murdoch.  I mean, we all know Murdoch is a bastard.  No argument there.  But he wasn't ever accused of being a stupid one.  Rineharts frequent failures and public outbursts, combined with an apparent lack of media skills of any kind, make her even less sympathetic, and she simply doesn't have the business acumen or common sense to use the media to her advantage.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 31, 2012, 08:33:47 PM
Oh look.  HSBC have entered into a deferred prosecution agreement with the Justice Department in the US over allegations of money laundering for terrorist groups and organised crime.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/December/12-crm-1478.html

$1.256 billion isn't being left off cheaply by any normal standard, but for a bank with $16.8 billion profit in 2011 alone, it's not exactly what you'd call a strong deterrent to future acts.

Why?

Well, supposedly the Justice Department  "decided against indicting HSBC in a money-laundering case over concerns that criminal charges could jeopardize one of the world's largest banks and ultimately destabilize the global financial system."

So, Too Big To Fail Be Prosecuted.

Except, uh, it's not immediately clear how indicting HSBC or its managers would cause problems for the international financial system.

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/12/the-second-great-betrayal-obama-and-cameron-decide-that-banks-are-above-the-law.html

QuoteProsecuting HSBC's fraudulent controlling managers would not harm anyone innocent other than their families--and virtually all prosecutions hurt some family members. Breuer claims that virtually all of HSBC's senior officers have been removed, so his argument is doubly absurd.

http://rowans-blog.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/beware-snake-oil-salesmen-saying-that.html

Quote"Whose confidence, their Mexican drug traffickers, their international sanctions breakers, their global tax evaders, or the ordinary, law-abiding clients who are entitled to assume that their bank will obey the laws imposed on them and will provide a safe place of deposit?"

Now, why on earth would US prosecutors approve of a bank being involved in obviously illegal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_Credit_and_Commerce_International) activity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nugan_Hand_Bank)?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 31, 2012, 08:40:10 PM
HELLLLOOOOO, PLUTOCRACY!   :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 31, 2012, 08:56:39 PM
Certainly part of it.

However, I was thinking more hegemony.  Funding insurgencies is expensive, even with the CIA's budget.  A massive protection racket conducted by US intelligence agencies and their allies within various government departments, however, is not only a tidy little earner for all involved, but keeps organised crime and terrorist movements solvent.  The money sweetens the deal, but is only to ensure compliance, not the terminal goal of such a venture.

I mean, the CIA were palling around with the Mafia back when Castro still had real hair, and the Mafia were idiots compared to, say, the UAC or the Northern Alliance. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on December 31, 2012, 08:59:01 PM
Quote from: Cain on December 31, 2012, 08:56:39 PM
Certainly part of it.

However, I was thinking more hegemony.  Funding insurgencies is expensive, even with the CIA's budget. 

I hadn't even thought that far, Cain.  I was stuck on the idea that the bank cannot be prosecuted for breaking laws.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 31, 2012, 09:02:53 PM
Ever I am here to ask the question "why" that should be the case.

At least until I suffer a fatal mugging.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 03, 2013, 01:52:36 PM
Meanwhile, in the UK, the government has launched an all-out assault on benefits rises.

Why?

The argument is that since no-one else is getting inflation equalling payrises, those on benefits should not, either.  Throw in copious amounts of strawmen about punishing those who "choose to work" and scroungers and Labour and you get the general idea.

Polls show it is not working, but it's fairly depressing to watch, nontheless.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 03, 2013, 05:24:45 PM
Ah, here is more proof of the kind of thing I am talking about:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/03/obesity-benefits-cuts?CMP=twt_gu

QuoteObese and other unhealthy people could be monitored to check whether they are taking exercise and have their benefits cut if they fail to do so under proposals published on Thursday by a Conservative-run council and a local government thinktank.

Westminster council and the Local Government Information Unit say new technologies such as smart cards could be used to track claimants' use of leisure centres, allowing local authorities to dock housing and council benefit payments from those who refuse to carry out exercise prescribed by their GP.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 03, 2013, 06:07:15 PM
This is brilliantly savage

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n01/john-lanchester/lets-call-it-failure

QuoteIn June 2010, in his first budget, Osborne said the structural deficit was 4.8 per cent, and that with three years of reduced spending, the figure would be down to 1.9 per cent. So how's that going? Well, by the end of those three years, after £59 billion of tax rises and spending cuts, the figure is set to be 4.3 per cent. Even that number was achieved only thanks to a kitchen sink's worth of special inputs, including a £3.5 billion windfall from auctioning off the 4G telecom spectrum, and some exuberant, almost rococo creative accounting to do with the transfer of Royal Mail pension liabilities, state ownership of the Bradford and Bingley building society, and interest credit from the Bank of England's quantitative easing scheme.[1] All the tweaky accounting is in the government's favour, obviously. (The Royal Mail transfer is a particular goody: the pension fund's £28 billion in assets are transferred to the government, meaning a sudden boost to its books, even though the liabilities are transferred too, meaning that the taxpayer is now going to have to make up the fund's significant deficit. So we're now on the long-term hook, but who cares, as long as the government gets a short-term boost to the balance sheet, and another medium-term boost to the balance sheet when the Royal Mail is sold off to a private buyer, a process which is going to be much easier now that it's no longer liable for its own employees' pensions.) If you reverse the creative accounting and add the interest from the quantitative easing back where it used to be, as a Bank of England asset, it adds 0.6 per cent to the structural deficit. That takes it back up to 4.9 per cent – higher than it was when the coalition came to power. Osborne's single biggest economic ambition was to get the deficit down, but he hasn't managed it, and has had to abandon his noisily announced target to get rid of most of the deficit in a single parliament. Gather round, children, and take a good look. This is the thing we call failure.

QuoteBecause the coalition has ringfenced spending in health, schools and overseas development, the cuts needed to achieve the public spending targets all have to come from non-ringfenced departments. That means job cuts – lots and lots and lots of job cuts. In the last quarter of 2008, total public sector employment was 6,058,000. At the moment, it stands at 5,860,000.[4] This means that in the four years since the crisis hit the public sector has lost 198,000 jobs. Public sector employment has fallen for 11 quarters in a row. Here, though, is the bad news: the OBR predicts that from a starting point of 2011, by the beginning of 2018, the economy will have lost 929,000 public sector jobs. That means there are more than half a million public sector jobs still to be cut over the next five years. 'All this implies an average fall in GGE' – General Government Employment – 'of just under 30,000 per quarter over the remainder of the period.' That's 10,000 public sector jobs going every month: more than 330 people being sacked every day, or (given an eight-hour workday) one public sector worker being sacked every ninety seconds for the next half-decade.

Is this achievable? Could any government do that? No government in British history has, which should give us a clue. The cuts to unprotected, unringfenced departments, in real terms (that means adjusted for inflation), would amount to more than 30 per cent. The Institute for Fiscal Studies thinks it is 'inconceivable' for the implied levels of cuts to be achieved. In the LRB of 11 March 2010, when the cuts to unprotected departments were set to be 18 per cent, I quoted an IFS economist as saying that 'for the Ministry of Defence an 18 per cent cut means something on the scale of no longer employing the army.'
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 03, 2013, 06:16:12 PM
AUSTERITY!
    \
:winner:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 03, 2013, 06:16:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 03, 2013, 05:24:45 PM
Ah, here is more proof of the kind of thing I am talking about:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/03/obesity-benefits-cuts?CMP=twt_gu

QuoteObese and other unhealthy people could be monitored to check whether they are taking exercise and have their benefits cut if they fail to do so under proposals published on Thursday by a Conservative-run council and a local government thinktank.

Westminster council and the Local Government Information Unit say new technologies such as smart cards could be used to track claimants' use of leisure centres, allowing local authorities to dock housing and council benefit payments from those who refuse to carry out exercise prescribed by their GP.

Uh wow.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on January 03, 2013, 06:19:04 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 03, 2013, 06:16:22 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 03, 2013, 05:24:45 PM
Ah, here is more proof of the kind of thing I am talking about:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/03/obesity-benefits-cuts?CMP=twt_gu

QuoteObese and other unhealthy people could be monitored to check whether they are taking exercise and have their benefits cut if they fail to do so under proposals published on Thursday by a Conservative-run council and a local government thinktank.

Westminster council and the Local Government Information Unit say new technologies such as smart cards could be used to track claimants' use of leisure centres, allowing local authorities to dock housing and council benefit payments from those who refuse to carry out exercise prescribed by their GP.

Uh wow.

Relax.  It's only slapstick.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: inode_buddha on January 08, 2013, 08:18:07 PM
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/rescued-by-a-bailout-a-i-g-may-sue-its-savior

Seems that AIG may be suing the US Gov't for the harsh terms of the bailout...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 08, 2013, 08:55:30 PM
Quote from: inode_buddha on January 08, 2013, 08:18:07 PM
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/01/07/rescued-by-a-bailout-a-i-g-may-sue-its-savior

Seems that AIG may be suing the US Gov't for the harsh terms of the bailout...

OH HOLY SHIT

I hope they do, because I would love to see the precedent THAT would set for borrowers to sue lenders for setting harsh terms.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 11, 2013, 04:02:30 PM
So....18 months ago, JP Morgan Chase were fined $88 million for sending gold to Iran.  They were also told to improve their compliance programs.

However, they did not.

Their punishment?  Being told yet again to improve their compliance programs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/11/us-jpmorgan-compliance-idUSBRE90A0DN20130111

QuoteA U.S. regulatory probe of JP Morgan Chase & Co is expected to result in an order that the bank correct lapses in how it polices suspect money flows, in an action expected as soon as Friday, people familiar with the situation said.

The action would be in the form of a cease-and-desist order, whichregulators use to force banks to improve compliance weaknesses, the sources said.

The order is expected to be issued by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve.

JP Morgan is not expected to pay a monetary penalty, according to one person familiar with the situation.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 12, 2013, 07:53:08 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 11, 2013, 04:02:30 PM
So....18 months ago, JP Morgan Chase were fined $88 million for sending gold to Iran.  They were also told to improve their compliance programs.

However, they did not.

Their punishment?  Being told yet again to improve their compliance programs.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/11/us-jpmorgan-compliance-idUSBRE90A0DN20130111

QuoteA U.S. regulatory probe of JP Morgan Chase & Co is expected to result in an order that the bank correct lapses in how it polices suspect money flows, in an action expected as soon as Friday, people familiar with the situation said.

The action would be in the form of a cease-and-desist order, whichregulators use to force banks to improve compliance weaknesses, the sources said.

The order is expected to be issued by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Reserve.

JP Morgan is not expected to pay a monetary penalty, according to one person familiar with the situation.

"You should stop doing that."

"No."

"OK... but you really should stop doing that."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 17, 2013, 01:32:29 PM
Remember in 2009 and 10, when people were talking about using "export-driven growth" to get the world out of the financial crisis?  People pointed to the examples of China, and Germany, and said "we should do that", ignoring the impossibility that everywhere in the world could maintain a trade surplus.

Well, there is another reason it's not a good idea:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/economics-blog/2013/jan/15/germany-exports-economic-slowdown

QuoteAfter posting strong growth of 4.2% in 2010 and 3% in 2011, Germany came down to earth with a bump last year. National output expanded by 0.7%, and although Berlin has yet to publish data for the final three months of 2012 the government is pencilling in a fall in gross domestic product of around 0.5%.

Two key factors lie behind the current slowdown. Firstly, life has been a lot tougher in 2012 for German exports. The impressive recovery in 2010 was largely due to global demand for Germany's precision manufacturing goods, particularly the machine tools needed by the bigger developing countries for their industrialisation programmes. That demand cooled in 2012, with the uncertainty caused by the US fiscal cliff row further affecting export sales.

Secondly, the euro finally took its toll both on exports and investment. The sharp contractions in Greece, Spain and Portugal, together with budget cutbacks and slower growth in other eurozone member states, has not only fed through into weaker order books for German firms, it has also made them more cautious about spending money on new plant and machinery.

Take away exports and investment and there is not a lot to sustain German growth. The price of making German industry ultra-competitive in world markets has been a prolonged period of low wage settlements, keeping a firm lid on consumer spending. Reforms to the labour market and to the welfare state have also ensured that little of the gain from Germany's productivity improvements over the past decade have trickled down to workers in the form of higher living standards. Unemployment, on the other hand, has come down.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 22, 2013, 12:20:59 PM
Welfare queens decry welfare for others

http://news.yahoo.com/business-ceos-call-raising-retirement-age-190704794--finance.html

QuoteAn influential group of business CEOs is pushing a plan to gradually increase the full retirement age to 70 for both Social Security and Medicare and to partially privatize the health insurance program for older Americans.

The Business Roundtable's plan would protect those 55 and older from cuts but younger workers would face significant changes. The plan unveiled Wednesday would result in smaller annual benefit increases for all Social Security recipients. Initial benefits for wealthy retirees would also be smaller.

Medicare recipients would be able to enroll in the traditional program or in private plans that could adjust premiums based on age and health status.

Included on the Business Roundtable?  Goldman Sachs.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57552173/goldman-sachs-ceo-entitlements-must-be-contained/

QuoteSo there will be things that, you know, the retirement age has to be changed, maybe some of the benefits have to be affected, maybe some of the inflation adjustments have to be revised. But in general, entitlements have to be slowed down and contained."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on January 22, 2013, 02:14:48 PM
70?

Welcome back to the Victorian Era, spags.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on January 22, 2013, 03:32:20 PM
It's not really the Victorian era until they eliminate all child labor laws.  Then we can have cradle-to-grave employment, with the added bonus that no one will live long enough to actually see any of the entitlement programs pay out.  It's a brilliant plan to save us from The Deficit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on January 22, 2013, 04:00:29 PM
Quote from: deadfong on January 22, 2013, 03:32:20 PM
It's not really the Victorian era until they eliminate all child labor laws.  Then we can have cradle-to-grave employment, with the added bonus that no one will live long enough to actually see any of the entitlement programs pay out.  It's a brilliant plan to save us from The Deficit.

I don't know if you've seen it, but the GOP has been making a concerted effort to eliminate child labor laws since 2006.  Earlier than that, really, but that's when the idea went from "Arkansas kook" to "mainstream GOP".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 22, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
Pretty sure the GOP would re-institute slavery in a heartbeat if it were economically feasible.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 22, 2013, 06:04:33 PM
Be grateful for the small benefits of outsourcing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on January 23, 2013, 12:18:33 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 22, 2013, 04:00:29 PM
Quote from: deadfong on January 22, 2013, 03:32:20 PM
It's not really the Victorian era until they eliminate all child labor laws.  Then we can have cradle-to-grave employment, with the added bonus that no one will live long enough to actually see any of the entitlement programs pay out.  It's a brilliant plan to save us from The Deficit.

I don't know if you've seen it, but the GOP has been making a concerted effort to eliminate child labor laws since 2006.  Earlier than that, really, but that's when the idea went from "Arkansas kook" to "mainstream GOP".

I remember Gingrich making some noises about it during the interminable Republican primary debates, but I was unaware that the effort was both older and more serious than that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 23, 2013, 05:03:32 PM
It's the most wonderful pointless time of year - the Davos convention!

Will Hutton (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/20/davos-world-economic-forum-bad-capitalism?INTCMP=SRCH) sums up my feelings pretty well:

QuoteMore than 2,500 alpha men and women from more than 100 countries will descend on Davos this week to spend four days discussing the world's urgent need to adopt "resilient dynamism". This, the organising watchword for this year's annual gathering of panjandrums at the World Economic Forum, is allegedly the way out of the crisis. It is meaningless.

Who, for example, would support non-resilient stagnation? Western capitalism, and, arguably, global capitalism, has arrived at an apparent dead end. It is in profound trouble. But if the best answer to austerity and economic malaise is resilient dynamism every delegate should stay at home. As a call to action, you might as well urge everyone to be manly, womanly and decisive. Virtuous states of mind, but hardly blueprints for action.

In any case, for most of the business leaders attending Davos, the economic malaise is an abstraction. Profits as a share of GDP in almost all western countries are at record highs, along with executive pay. Meanwhile, real wages for the majority are stagnating, if not falling, justified by our economic leaders in Davos as the proper if sad consequence of "structural adjustment". Goldman Sachs, for example, shamed from deferring its bonus payments into the next financial year so that its staff could enjoy the lower tax rate, has just enjoyed a bumper year. Davos men and women are prospering. No structural adjustment for them.

There will doubtless be the usual appeals for more free trade, more scientific research and more investment in skills as the expensively clad executives move from seminar and sonorous keynote speech to reception and back to the dinner table. But what there will not be at Davos is a willingness to countenance a sea change in the way capitalism is organised. It can do what it will and that is to continue to confer fortunes on those at the top, with little risk, while directing pain on to others.

Also worth reading for some very unusual and interesting IMF conclusions - such as earning inequality being at the heart of the current British economic situation, caused in part by the decline of trade unions.  Has a Fabian infiltrated the hallowed halls of Neoliberalism?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 23, 2013, 05:14:49 PM
Note to self: Add "resilient dynamism" to my list of business doublespeak terms.


What a load of meaningless bullshit.  I really did like the interpretation of the IMF report.  Income shifted to the top, living wages get squeezed, the working class starts living on easy credit which fuels an unstable demand, and then when things go POP, it all crashes hard.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on January 23, 2013, 05:26:04 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 22, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
Pretty sure the GOP would re-institute slavery in a heartbeat if it were economically feasible.

I thought ALEC did that already?  :x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 23, 2013, 05:47:41 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 23, 2013, 05:14:49 PM
Note to self: Add "resilient dynamism" to my list of business doublespeak terms.


What a load of meaningless bullshit.  I really did like the interpretation of the IMF report.  Income shifted to the top, living wages get squeezed, the working class starts living on easy credit which fuels an unstable demand, and then when things go POP, it all crashes hard.

Yup.  Which is pretty much exactly what happened.

A bunch of other, related stuff also happened, of course, but the above part put's it into an easily understandable context.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 23, 2013, 07:51:05 PM
http://www.bmmagazine.co.uk/newswire/14352/glaxo-disregards-suppliers-with-90-day-payment-terms/

Just a nice example of corporate "Fuck You"

QuoteA spokesman for GSK said: "We greatly value the relationships with have with our many suppliers and understand the pressures on cash-flow and financing being faced by smaller companies at this time.

This is why, for smaller companies, we have a number of schemes in place to help them, including alternative payment schedules and offering supply chain finance."

So, instead of paying their bill, here's some finance instead. This makes total sense. For GSK.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 25, 2013, 03:25:43 PM
Another case of a bank selling shit assets, then shorting the securities they sold

http://www.propublica.org/thetrade/item/explosive-charge-morgan-stanley-peddled-security-its-own-employee-called-nu

QuoteOn March 16, 2007, Morgan Stanley employees working on one of the toxic assets that helped blow up the world economy discussed what to name it. Among the team members' suggestions: "Subprime Meltdown," "Hitman," "Nuclear Holocaust," "Mike Tyson's Punchout," and the simple-yet-direct: "Shitbag."

Ha ha. Those hilarious investment bankers.

Then they gave it its real name and sold it to a Chinese bank.

We are never going to have a full understanding of what bad behavior bankers conducted in the years leading up to the financial crisis. The Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission have failed to hold big wrongdoers to account.

We are left with what scraps we can get from those private lawsuits lucky enough to get over the high hurdles for document discovery. A case brought in the New York State Supreme Court in Manhattan against Morgan Stanley by a Taiwanese bank, which bought a piece of the same deal the Chinese bank did, has cleared that bar.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on January 25, 2013, 04:58:48 PM
wow!  that's amazing...  and nothing will come of it.  :sad:
it's like there could be a document discovered titled, "how we will criminally fuck over the entire public, and why we will get away with it", and nothing would happen to them.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on January 26, 2013, 04:57:44 AM
What's up with this? http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/25/us/pentagon-layoffs/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Ben Shapiro on January 26, 2013, 05:25:53 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 22, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
Pretty sure the GOP would re-institute slavery in a heartbeat if it were economically feasible.

The Democratic Party beat them to it years ago. They have made a killing of racisim,sexism,and the poor. A few bread crumbs is better than no bread at all right? I honestly don't know which party to hate more.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on January 26, 2013, 09:10:03 AM
Quote from: /b/earman on January 26, 2013, 05:25:53 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 22, 2013, 04:31:19 PM
Pretty sure the GOP would re-institute slavery in a heartbeat if it were economically feasible.

The Democratic Party beat them to it years ago. They have made a killing of racisim,sexism,and the poor. A few bread crumbs is better than no bread at all right? I honestly don't know which party to hate more.

They're politicians. It's not an either-or scenario.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 26, 2013, 03:44:57 PM
Forgot to mention this one:

QuoteSo there was this guy who repeatedly claimed that his wife's division of HypoVereinsBank was smuggling cash into Switzerland for the benefit of its wealthy, tax-evading private clients. He even pressed charges with the Bavarian police but nobody took it at all seriously, although he named 24 of the clients and their advisors at HVB and gave details of the Swiss bank accounts. Eventually, he was arrested for assaulting her.

Well, you can't condone this kind of behaviour.

Unusually, he was sent to a secure psychiatric hospital, and has been there ever since, while HVB surfed the bubble and sank in the crash. Had he been found guilty, he might not have done time at all. No, stop. Going by the account here, he was held responsible, but acquitted on the grounds of diminished responsibility and sent to the funny farm because he thought HVB was crooked, a belief that only a madman could apparently hold.

And now it turns out he was...right in every detail, even if he accused another figure in the case of being on the side of the bankers because he lived next door to one. HVB's private clients operation was hugely involved in tax evasion, and yes, carloads of raw cash were driven to Switzerland, to be paid into accounts with codenames like "Monster". The original file on the case has been shredded. And HVB's internal audit knew as long ago as 2003.

Now, although the state minister of justice is getting support from the top, this isn't stopping the taxman from working down the list, reminding those on it that an arrangement could always be made for those who voluntarily choose to settle their outstanding debts.

And if that wasn't good enough, with its distinct Jimmy Savile flavour, a sinister lobbyist hacks into the Ministry of Health's e-mail on behalf of one of Germany's most powerful interest groups...the pharmacists.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on January 28, 2013, 12:17:31 AM
Quote from: Cain on January 26, 2013, 03:44:57 PM
Forgot to mention this one:

QuoteSo there was this guy who repeatedly claimed that his wife's division of HypoVereinsBank was smuggling cash into Switzerland for the benefit of its wealthy, tax-evading private clients. He even pressed charges with the Bavarian police but nobody took it at all seriously, although he named 24 of the clients and their advisors at HVB and gave details of the Swiss bank accounts. Eventually, he was arrested for assaulting her.

Well, you can't condone this kind of behaviour.

Unusually, he was sent to a secure psychiatric hospital, and has been there ever since, while HVB surfed the bubble and sank in the crash. Had he been found guilty, he might not have done time at all. No, stop. Going by the account here, he was held responsible, but acquitted on the grounds of diminished responsibility and sent to the funny farm because he thought HVB was crooked, a belief that only a madman could apparently hold.

And now it turns out he was...right in every detail, even if he accused another figure in the case of being on the side of the bankers because he lived next door to one. HVB's private clients operation was hugely involved in tax evasion, and yes, carloads of raw cash were driven to Switzerland, to be paid into accounts with codenames like "Monster". The original file on the case has been shredded. And HVB's internal audit knew as long ago as 2003.

Now, although the state minister of justice is getting support from the top, this isn't stopping the taxman from working down the list, reminding those on it that an arrangement could always be made for those who voluntarily choose to settle their outstanding debts.

And if that wasn't good enough, with its distinct Jimmy Savile flavour, a sinister lobbyist hacks into the Ministry of Health's e-mail on behalf of one of Germany's most powerful interest groups...the pharmacists.

Ho ho hee hee ha ha!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 28, 2013, 07:52:40 PM
Oh ho ho, look at this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/21/vatican-secret-property-empire-mussolini

QuoteFew passing London tourists would ever guess that the premises of Bulgari, the upmarket jewellers in New Bond Street, had anything to do with the pope. Nor indeed the nearby headquarters of the wealthy investment bank Altium Capital, on the corner of St James's Square and Pall Mall.

But these office blocks in one of London's most expensive districts are part of a surprising secret commercial property empire owned by the Vatican.

Behind a disguised offshore company structure, the church's international portfolio has been built up over the years, using cash originally handed over by Mussolini in return for papal recognition of the Italian fascist regime in 1929.

Since then the international value of Mussolini's nest-egg has mounted until it now exceeds £500m. In 2006, at the height of the recent property bubble, the Vatican spent £15m of those funds to buy 30 St James's Square. Other UK properties are at 168 New Bond Street and in the city of Coventry. It also owns blocks of flats in Paris and Switzerland.

The surprising aspect for some will be the lengths to which the Vatican has gone to preserve secrecy about the Mussolini millions. The St James's Square office block was bought by a company called British Grolux Investments Ltd, which also holds the other UK properties. Published registers at Companies House do not disclose the company's true ownership, nor make any mention of the Vatican.

Surprising?  Fascist money, the Vatican, dodgy banking arrangements and secrecy go together like peas and carrots.

Or have people forgotten who Roberto Calvi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Calvi) is?

Also of interest:

QuoteBritish wartime records from the National Archives in Kew complete the picture. They confirm Profima SA as the Vatican's own holding company, accused at the time of "engaging in activities contrary to Allied interests". Files from officials at Britain's Ministry of Economic Warfare at the end of the war criticised the pope's financier, Bernardino Nogara, who controlled the investment of more than £50m cash from the Mussolini windfall.

Nogara's "shady activities" were detailed in intercepted 1945 cable traffic from the Vatican to a contact in Geneva, according to the British, who discussed whether to blacklist Profima as a result. "Nogara, a Roman lawyer, is the Vatican financial agent and Profima SA in Lausanne is the Swiss holding company for certain Vatican interests." They believed Nogara was trying to transfer shares of two Vatican-owned French property firms to the Swiss company, to prevent the French government blacklisting them as enemy assets.

Earlier in the war, in 1943, the British accused Nogara of similar "dirty work", by shifting Italian bank shares into Profima's hands in order to "whitewash" them and present the bank as being controlled by Swiss neutrals. This was described as "manipulation" of Vatican finances to serve "extraneous political ends".

This is charmingly naive, however:

QuoteWhile secrecy about the Fascist origins of the papacy's wealth might have been understandable in wartime, what is less clear is why the Vatican subsequently continued to maintain secrecy about its holdings in Britain, even after its financial structure was reorganised in 1999.

I mean, does anyone with any historical awareness really think Vatican complicity in fascist movements ended with the deaths of Hitler and Mussolini?  Does anyone really believe that Vatican money has not been put to "good" use during the unstable years in Italy, or in shoring up anti-Communist movements in South America?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 28, 2013, 08:11:22 PM
Would the Catholic obsession with Fascism have anything to do with Reich's idea of the psychology of repression?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 28, 2013, 08:13:57 PM
Possibly.  IANAP, however.

I suspect it has more to do with them both being afraid of the modern world in general and Communism in particular, though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 30, 2013, 09:02:31 AM
http://en.starafrica.com/news/zimbabwe-has-217-in-the-bank-finance-minister.html

QuoteAfter paying public workers' salaries last week, the balance in cash-strapped Zimbabwe's government public account stood at just $217, Finance Minister Tendai Biti said Tuesday.

"Last week when we paid civil servants there was $217 (left) in government coffers," Biti told journalists in the capital Harare, claiming some of them had healthier bank balances than the state.

"The government finances are in paralysis state at the present moment. We are failing to meet our targets."

Zimbabwe's economy went into free-fall at the turn of the millennium, after President Robert Mugabe began seizing white-owned farms.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 30, 2013, 09:28:10 AM
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-28/libor-lies-revealed-in-rigging-of-300-trillion-benchmark.html

Quote

For years, traders at Deutsche Bank AG, UBS AG, Barclays, RBS and other banks colluded with colleagues responsible for setting the benchmark and their counterparts at other firms to rig the price of money, according to documents obtained by Bloomberg and interviews with two dozen current and former traders, lawyers and regulators. UBS traders went as far as offering bribes to brokers to persuade others to make favorable submissions on their behalf, regulatory filings show.

Members of the close-knit group of traders knew each other from working at the same firms or going on trips organized by interdealer brokers, which line up buyers and sellers of securities, to French ski resort Chamonix and the Monaco Grand Prix. The manipulation flourished for years, even after bank supervisors were made aware of the system's flaws.

"We will never know the amounts of money involved, but it has to be the biggest financial fraud of all time," says Adrian Blundell-Wignall, a special adviser to the secretary-general of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris. "Libor is the basis for calculating practically every derivative known to man."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 30, 2013, 10:21:25 AM
Nice find, this was a stunning bit of self awareness:

QuoteSome former regulators say they were surprised to learn about the scale of the cheating. "Through all of my experience, what I never contemplated was that there were bankers who would purposely misrepresent facts to banking authorities," says Alan Greenspan, chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006. "You were honorbound to report accurately, and it never entered my mind that, aside from a fringe element, it would be otherwise. I was wrong."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 30, 2013, 02:44:17 PM
And yet, no arrests, and no breaking up the institutions.



TOO BIG TO PROSECUTE.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on January 30, 2013, 04:31:17 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 30, 2013, 02:44:17 PM
And yet, no arrests, and no breaking up the institutions.



TOO BIG TO PROSECUTE.

Bit of a pickle we've got ourselves in, isn't it?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 30, 2013, 05:45:50 PM
US economy shrank by 0.1%.

THANKS A LOT, OBAMA
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 03, 2013, 05:10:56 PM
lol, chavez

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-30/chavez-s-681-bond-returns-buoy-goldman-andes-credit-correct-.html

Quoteince taking office in 1999, Hugo Chavez has spread his socialist revolution in Venezuela by seizing more than 1,000 companies. For bondholders that stuck by him, he's also delivered returns that are double the emerging- market average.

The 681 percent advance, equal to 14.7 percent annually, has enriched investors from OppenheimerFunds Inc. to Goldman Sachs Asset Management LP that counted on Chavez's willingness to siphon the country's oil wealth to pay its creditors in the face of start-stop growth and falling reserves. While his policies drove away enough investors to keep Venezuela's borrowing costs over 12 percent on average during his tenure, or 4 percentage points higher than those of developing nations, he's never missed a bond payment.

"This is a really great high-income and high-total-return investment for your portfolio," said Sara Zervos, an emerging- market debt manager at New York-based OppenheimerFunds, which oversees $176 billion in assets and has invested in Venezuelan notes for more than a decade. "Chavez hasn't done a lot of good for his country, but he has the objective to service the bonds. Our interests are aligned."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 04, 2013, 04:01:49 AM
 :lulz: Gotta love it!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 06, 2013, 03:04:37 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21348719

Nothing new, just more reminding you all that still no one is thinking about criminal charges here.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 07, 2013, 02:21:27 PM
Matt Taibbi on the new head of the SEC:

QuoteI was shocked when I heard that Mary Jo White, a former U.S. Attorney and a partner for the white-shoe Wall Street defense firm Debevoise and Plimpton, had been named the new head of the SEC.

I thought to myself: Couldn't they have found someone who wasn't a key figure in one of the most notorious scandals to hit the SEC in the past two decades? And couldn't they have found someone who isn't a perfect symbol of the revolving-door culture under which regulators go soft on suspected Wall Street criminals, knowing they have million-dollar jobs waiting for them at hotshot defense firms as long as they play nice with the banks while still in office?

I'll leave it to others to chronicle the other highlights and lowlights of Mary Jo White's career, and focus only on the one incident I know very well: her role in the squelching of then-SEC investigator Gary Aguirre's investigation into an insider trading incident involving future Morgan Stanley CEO John Mack. While representing Morgan Stanley at Debevoise and Plimpton, White played a key role in this inexcusable episode.

More here (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/choice-of-mary-jo-white-to-head-sec-puts-fox-in-charge-of-hen-house-20130125).

Also here (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/new-sec-chief-mary-jo-white-thinks-the-government-should-bring-cases-to-a-point-20130130).

QuoteIt's certainly strange that White has to qualify the idea that bringing cases is a positive thing in a government official – that bringing cases is a "positive thing . . . to a point." Can anyone imagine the future head of the DEA saying something like, "For a prosecutor, bringing drug cases is a positive, to a point?"

One would think that even a defense firm would value a regulator with an aggressive rep -- after all, a tough lawyer is a tough lawyer. What this testimony shows is that what is valued instead in this rarefied community of millionaire lawyers (where one can easily "get a reputation") is a talent for political calculation, and a sensitivity to what may or may not hamper one's ability to "function in the private sector." What they're looking for is someone who, when sitting in the regulator's seat, does the job, but doesn't live the job, if you catch the distinction.

Given that White has already made this move from enforcement to defense once, and given that we now know that she knows that firms like hers value regulators who can avoid creating "resentment in the business community" and retain their ability to "function in the private sector," I think it's safe to expect that White's SEC will take very good care to bring cases, but only "to a point."

Just another day in Wall Street.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 07, 2013, 03:06:44 PM
wow.  that's really something!
do you suspect that she will even feel the need to respond to this article, though? 
it seems, from my perspective, that while we were in the thick of the economic meltdown's media attention, articles like this would get passed around and shared by J.Q.Public who would try to understand how they were getting fucked over, and Taibbi was particularly good at explaining it in common terms.

it seems that sentiment of scrutiny on our economic elites has dried up to a large extent these days. to be sure, there's a heightened belief that "yeah, the rich are fucking us", but there's not any more widely held appetite to process, let alone get outraged, at specific instances like this, odious as they may be.

or perhaps it's just projection on my part....  i feel kind of fatalistic regarding these matters lately.  :|
i mean, this is pretty crappy here, and i recognize that, and i just feel a headshake and a shrug, when i think i should feel some anger.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 07, 2013, 03:09:14 PM
No, I think you're right. 

I think it's going to take a much bigger crash than 2008 for things to get shaken up.  Incidentally, you might also want to read Taibbi's article on Neil Barofsky's book.  He explains just how utterly insulated D.C. is from the rest of the country and the consequences of its actions.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 07, 2013, 03:13:36 PM
i'll queue it up.  :)
thanks
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Disco Pickle on February 08, 2013, 02:57:49 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 30, 2013, 02:44:17 PM
And yet, no arrests, and no breaking up the institutions.



TOO BIG TO PROSECUTE.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/04/14/business/20110414-prosecute.html (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/04/14/business/20110414-prosecute.html)

a comparison between the cases and prosecutions brought during the S&L and 2007 crisis.

Seems to me that the wolves swapped out their silk suits for wool blends somewhere in late 94. 

My thoughts on this have been taking me back to the 6 degrees of separation concept.  The people who become heads of the SEC and top banks all either know each other personally, or could very easily be within a minimum of 6 degrees of anyone who does, or could be up and coming. 

Even in a city as populous as D.C. and NY, the insular world the sort of people who fill these positions inhabits should be very finite by design, considering the wealth and pedigree required to ever occupy once of these positions.

Distastefully as it is, it's going to happen that they're covering each other's asses.  Like a well run drug ring, the ones at the top rarely get caught, because they've insulated themselves with multiple layers of actors, making moves on their behalf.

This isn't meant to be a "why it happens"    That's clearly money. 

More of a how, I guess.   I'll chew on it a bit more.   
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 15, 2013, 03:04:23 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/john-kerry-heinz-ketchup-2013-2

QuoteThe "Oracle of Omaha" Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway and investment firm 3G Capital are buying ketchup maker Heinz for $28 billion.
The stock is up over 20 percent in the pre-market.
Everyone is probably wondering how much Secretary of State John Kerry and his wife Teresa Heinz Kerry, the Heinz ketchup heiress, might make from this deal.
All members of the Senate, House, Executive branch and Judicial branch are required to disclose assets belonging to their spouse and/or dependent children, according to Open Secrets.
According to Open Secrets, last year then-Senator Kerry disclosed his 2011 assets, which included a valuation of $3,000,003 worth of HJ Heinz Co.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 16, 2013, 10:20:11 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100442841

QuoteActing just one day after the surprise announcement that H.J. Heinz would be acquired by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway and Brazil-based 3G Capital for $23.3 billion, the SEC has gone to court to freeze assets associated with what it calls "highly suspicious options trading."

The SEC accuses "unknown traders" of having advance word of the deal and buying options a day ahead of the news to make "risky bets" that Heinz's stock price would rise. Both the size and the timing of the trades raised suspicions at the SEC.

Of course, this wouldn't be the first time that unusual trading practices and Warren Buffett have appeared in the same sentence.  Or does everyone need yet another reminder of Buffett's investment in Goldman Sachs (and subsequent public defence of them)?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 16, 2013, 10:23:16 AM
If Berlusconi keeps on going this way, he's going to suffer an "accident".  I mean, he's not saying anything didn't already know, but being so brazen and blatant about it...well it's really going to upset those with images to maintain.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/be7b2b5c-76bb-11e2-ac91-00144feabdc0.html

QuoteFormer prime minister Silvio Berlusconi has defended the need for bribery in winning contracts for Italy's multinationals, as politicians campaigning in general elections have been forced to respond to a welter of corruption scandals revolving around the nexus of politics and business.

"Bribes are a phenomenon that exists and it's useless to deny the existence of these necessary situations when you are negotiating with third world countries and regimes," Mr Berlusconi, leader of a centre-right coalition and seeking his fourth stint in office, said on Thursday.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 18, 2013, 02:44:15 PM
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/jackson-jr-plea-deal-implicates-wife-article-1.1265389

QuoteWASHINGTON — Former Congressman Jessie Jackson Jr. used $750,000 in campaign funds to buy personal items ranging from a $43,000 gold Rolex watch to a $4,600 fedora worn by Michael Jackson, the Justice Department charged Friday.
Federal prosecutors slapped the one-time rising political star with fraud and conspiracy charges as they revealed the stunning allegations of misspending.
In an affidavit, prosecutors said Jackson used his campaign kitty to buy everything from a $5,000 football signed by U.S. presidents, furs and a cashmere cape to memorabilia related to Bruce Lee and Jimi Hendrix.
Jackson, the son of the famous civil rights leader, is expected to plead guilty, one of his lawyers said.

Fairly small scale compared to the rest of the thread.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 19, 2013, 02:31:15 PM
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/burger-king-net-up-94-on-lower-expenses-2013-02-15?Link=obinsite

QuoteBurger King Worldwide Inc.'s BKW +0.40%  fourth-quarter profit jumped 94% as the hamburger chain recorded a sharp drop in expenses, outweighing a slump in revenue driven by foreign-currency headwinds.

Shares of Burger King rose 3.7% to $17.20 in recent premarket trading as results beat Wall Street estimates. The stock has risen 8.4% in the past three months

I have neigh idea how the accomplished this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 19, 2013, 03:23:20 PM
Hah, you're optimistic.

Horse is far more expensive than rat.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 19, 2013, 03:45:28 PM
I know, I just couldn't think of a good Rat pun.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100464841

QuoteWhat if there was a Ketchup War, yet no one showed up to fight?

The surprise deal that saw Berkshire Hathaway and 3G Capital Management swoop in this with a $28 billion bid for ketchup maker H.J. Heinz, came with an interesting wrinkle that links two of the world's biggest burger behemoths.

Call it two degrees of supply chain separation: 3G owns a majority stake in Burger King, which is a direct competitor of McDonald's. Heinz — now partly owned and likely to be run by 3G — supplies red sauce to both fast food giants.

Heinz new ownership structure raised an improbable, yet plausible, possibility. If the new bosses at 3G wanted to squeeze Burger King's competition, it could terminate the agreement to supply Heinz ketchup to McDonalds.

Ketchup war sounds so much more interesting in my head.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 19, 2013, 08:35:48 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 19, 2013, 03:45:28 PM
I know, I just couldn't think of a good Rat pun.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100464841

QuoteWhat if there was a Ketchup War, yet no one showed up to fight?

The surprise deal that saw Berkshire Hathaway and 3G Capital Management swoop in this with a $28 billion bid for ketchup maker H.J. Heinz, came with an interesting wrinkle that links two of the world's biggest burger behemoths.

Call it two degrees of supply chain separation: 3G owns a majority stake in Burger King, which is a direct competitor of McDonald's. Heinz — now partly owned and likely to be run by 3G — supplies red sauce to both fast food giants.

Heinz new ownership structure raised an improbable, yet plausible, possibility. If the new bosses at 3G wanted to squeeze Burger King's competition, it could terminate the agreement to supply Heinz ketchup to McDonalds.

Ketchup war sounds so much more interesting in my head.

Not supplying ketchup might squeeze them, charging McDonalds more than they charge Burger King seems like a more likely tactic though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 09:27:13 AM
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57570925-38/need-bitcoins-this-atm-takes-dollars-and-funds-your-account/?part=rss&subj=news&tag=title

Someone was talking about Bitcoins recently, here's a development with absolutely no problems whatsoever.

QuoteNASHUA, N.H. -- Zach Harvey has an ambitious plan to accelerate adoption of the Internet's favorite alternative currency: installing in thousands of bars, restaurants, and grocery stores ATMs that will let you buy Bitcoins anonymously.
It's the opposite of a traditional automated teller that dispenses currency. Instead, these Bitcoin ATMs will accept dollar bills -- using the same validation mechanism as vending machines -- and instantly convert the amount to Bitcoins and deposit the result in your account.
"It's even easier than just using a regular ATM," says Harvey, 33, who demonstrated the device to CNET this weekend at the Free State Project's annual Liberty Forum. "You could probably do it in about five seconds. The thing that would take the longest would be the bill validator taking in the dollar."

I am interested in alternative currencies and would like to see one work sometime. I'm pretty sure this isn't going to be one of them.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 25, 2013, 04:03:18 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 09:27:13 AM
I am interested in alternative currencies and would like to see one work sometime.

I am interested in alternative influenza, because the old kind isn't cool anymore.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 25, 2013, 04:19:19 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

DING DING DING.  Nothing changes.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 04:30:58 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

....


You know what? Now that I think about it like that, I'm inclined to agree. I think this may have been hangover thinking from idiot youth.

Thanks Nigel/Reptoid Overlord, I forgot to THINK and SHUT UP.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 25, 2013, 04:32:26 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 04:30:58 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

....


You know what? Now that I think about it like that, I'm inclined to agree. I think this may have been hangover thinking from idiot youth.

Thanks Nigel/Reptoid Overlord, I forgot to THINK and SHUT UP.

I wouldn't worry about it.  Most of the world forgets to THINK and they ALL - even me - forget to SHUT UP.  I mean, I try to SHUT UP, but everything backs up like a bad drain and I get "swimmers" in my eyes, and then it's a bad day on Drachmann Street.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 04:38:46 PM
Appreciated.

I think part of the infatuation was borne from an idea of "alternative currencies creating alternative economies". The problem is I've not really thought any further on this than when I was about 15 so I'm inclined to file it under "Bullshit"

If anyone can give an example of alternative currencies "working" I'd look at it with fresh eyes and see just how stupid 15 year old me was.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 25, 2013, 06:08:17 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 04:38:46 PM
Appreciated.

I think part of the infatuation was borne from an idea of "alternative currencies creating alternative economies". The problem is I've not really thought any further on this than when I was about 15 so I'm inclined to file it under "Bullshit"

If anyone can give an example of alternative currencies "working" I'd look at it with fresh eyes and see just how stupid 15 year old me was.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C3%B6rgl#The_W.C3.B6rgl_Experiment

does this example of a demuraged currency count?  (theres better descriptions/history of it elsewhere online that i had read. it was pretty interesting)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:20:13 AM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 25, 2013, 04:38:46 PM
Appreciated.

I think part of the infatuation was borne from an idea of "alternative currencies creating alternative economies". The problem is I've not really thought any further on this than when I was about 15 so I'm inclined to file it under "Bullshit"

If anyone can give an example of alternative currencies "working" I'd look at it with fresh eyes and see just how stupid 15 year old me was.

Bitcoins work, if by work you mean "make it much simpler to buy drugs on the internet"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 01:55:25 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

And gives it to WHOM?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on February 26, 2013, 01:57:25 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 01:55:25 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

And gives it to WHOM?

Anarcho-syndalistic punks who want to smoke pot with the Libertarians on the Moonbase. DUH
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 01:57:36 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 01:55:25 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

And gives it to WHOM?

Depends on the currency.  From what I understand about Bitcoin it gives out new money in a random lottery.  For stuff like Ithaca Hours it gives the printing press to a local organization.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 02:24:57 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 01:57:36 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 01:55:25 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

And gives it to WHOM?

Depends on the currency.  From what I understand about Bitcoin it gives out new money in a random lottery.  For stuff like Ithaca Hours it gives the printing press to a local organization.

Oh, that's fucking BRILLIANT.  Tucson yahoos in charge of printing money.  Seguin, Texas po'buckers running printing presses.  That's Goddamn GENIUS.  WAY better than a currency that's somewhat stable.

Let's do this shit TODAY.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: deadfong on February 26, 2013, 02:48:52 AM
They tried something like the Ithaca Hours in Lawrence KS about ten or so years ago; I cannot remember what it was called.  I think the argument for it, aside from being a "hip" kind of thing to do, was to keep more money in the local economy.  It failed miserably, as I recall.

I do wish I had one of the three-dollar bills - it had William Burroughs on it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 03:12:51 AM
Quote from: deadfong on February 26, 2013, 02:48:52 AM
They tried something like the Ithaca Hours in Lawrence KS about ten or so years ago; I cannot remember what it was called.  I think the argument for it, aside from being a "hip" kind of thing to do, was to keep more money in the local economy.  It failed miserably, as I recall.

I do wish I had one of the three-dollar bills - it had William Burroughs on it.

Jesus, I wish I had one.

And I wish I could laugh in the face of the hipster that tried that shit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on February 26, 2013, 06:44:10 AM
I googled Ithaca Hours (http://www.ithacahours.org/).

QuoteThe local currency in Ithaca, N.Y., is called "Ithaca Hours." They are bought with U.S. dollars and can be traded with local shops for products or services.



Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 26, 2013, 04:24:50 PM
Quote from: deadfong on February 26, 2013, 02:48:52 AM
They tried something like the Ithaca Hours in Lawrence KS about ten or so years ago; I cannot remember what it was called.  I think the argument for it, aside from being a "hip" kind of thing to do, was to keep more money in the local economy.  It failed miserably, as I recall.

I do wish I had one of the three-dollar bills - it had William Burroughs on it.

Local companion currencies CAN be a good thing for a local economy, as long as everyone in the area has to accept them, including landlords and utility companies, and as long as they are regulated to prevent wild inflation.

There is to this day some alternative local currency floating around Oregon, but since it's all strictly voluntary only hippies accept it, making it essentially worthless for most of us.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 04:28:48 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

NIGEL:  RUINING UTOPIAN DREAMS FOR YOU.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 26, 2013, 04:34:36 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 04:28:48 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

NIGEL:  RUINING UTOPIAN DREAMS FOR YOU.

  :lol: The idea of all these little municipalities being their own independent economies with their own currencies...

WHOOO DOGGIES! LET THE FUN BEGIN!  :aaa::1fap:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 04:39:08 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:34:36 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 04:28:48 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

NIGEL:  RUINING UTOPIAN DREAMS FOR YOU.

  :lol: The idea of all these little municipalities being their own independent economies with their own currencies...

WHOOO DOGGIES! LET THE FUN BEGIN!  :aaa::1fap:

BUT IT WORKED SO WELL UNDER THE ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION!

Oh, wait, it didn't.  It failed miserably.  But we're SMARTER and BETTER than THEY were, and they just didn't try HARD enough, and couldn't make people PURE enough to PLAY ALONG.

But we CAN do that now.  Oh, my, yes.  All it takes is some bully boys with rubber truncheons, and our utopia will be PERFECT. 

I CAN ALREADY HEAR THE JACKBOOTS ON THE STAIRS!  HOORAY!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on February 26, 2013, 04:40:38 PM
I'm gonna invest in wheelbarrows, to carry all the currency when getting a cup of coffee.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 26, 2013, 04:44:19 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on February 26, 2013, 04:40:38 PM
I'm gonna invest in wheelbarrows, to carry all the currency when getting a cup of coffee.

See?  This is what I'm talking about.  There's always some smartass that won't play along.

So we need to make our Perfect State™ perfect, and you can't make an omelet without cracking some skulls.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on February 26, 2013, 09:02:42 PM
Buying alternative currency that only works at certain places is probably like buying food stamps, only legal. It's only worth doing if you get double your money.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 26, 2013, 09:55:16 PM
DIDN'T WORK BEFORE?

TRY DOING IT HARDER.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 27, 2013, 09:13:45 AM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2011/sep/23/local-currencies-german-chiemgauer
QuoteWhat makes the chiemgauer different to conventional currency is that it automatically loses value if you don't spend it. Unlike traditional money that can be saved, the chiemgauer is only valid for three months – the idea being that it must be spent, thereby boosting the local economy. If the notes aren't spent, they can be renewed by buying a stamp that costs 2% of the note's face value – so over a year, the currency depreciates 8%. Notes can be renewed up to seven times.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 27, 2013, 06:25:50 PM
sounds similar to the Worgl scrip that was successfully used in another german town during the depression which i mentioned a while back in the thread.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 27, 2013, 06:47:15 PM
So the "successful" attempts seem to all share the need for inbuilt depreciation. Interesting to note that the UK is currently playing with the idea of negative interest (Unlikely to ever happen. Daily Heil and co will pull the "punishing savers" card) but this has been seen in the EU.

Which leads to: What happens when you can no longer earn currency? Versions of Welfare/Aid could be difficult with this, as the impact would be felt more at the local level. There seems to be an assumption that the economy it is introduced to is self contained and can provide all required services to sustain it. So it's basically only useful in isolated communities and for limited things. Which are self sustaining.

There's plenty of them around I guess.


Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 27, 2013, 06:51:19 PM
if the problem is too low a velocity of the money, then yeah, it appears the inbuilt depreciation is beneficial.
what do you mean by 'when you can no longer earn currency'?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 27, 2013, 07:01:05 PM
Old age/illness/etc. Take your pick, but there's a dozen situations you could name where working a XX hour week becomes impossible.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 27, 2013, 07:18:58 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 27, 2013, 07:01:05 PM
Old age/illness/etc. Take your pick, but there's a dozen situations you could name where working a XX hour week becomes impossible.
ahh. ok. gotcha.
i don't think a demuraged scrip like this is put forward as a good idea for a sustained currency or sole currency by anyone...
it's just seems to be a good remedy for when the commerce in an area grinds to a halt and some grease is needed.
it sure isn't a good medium for savings, obviously, which you can't simply ignore the need for.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:34:38 PM
Quote from: Pope Partum Depression on February 26, 2013, 06:44:10 AM
I googled Ithaca Hours (http://www.ithacahours.org/).

QuoteThe local currency in Ithaca, N.Y., is called "Ithaca Hours." They are bought with U.S. dollars and can be traded with local shops for products or services.

Any currency can be purchased with US dollars.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

I'd love to, can you hold my hand a little?  I'm not sure where you are going. 

As mentioned before, where it puts that control can definitely be an issue, you can either get the random lottery of Bitcoins, which mostly means money is printed by botnets, obviously not a desirable outcome, or you get a printing press controlled by some other organization.  The methods used by that organization to regulate the amount of money, how it is used, and so forth seem like they would determine whether that group having control rather than the government is a good or bad thing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Don Coyote on February 27, 2013, 09:55:12 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 27, 2013, 07:01:05 PM
Old age/illness/etc. Take your pick, but there's a dozen situations you could name where working a XX hour week becomes impossible.

If we are positing a society that uses a currency the depreciates, and is thus interested in keeping the amount of money from ballooning as a means of preventing massive wealth disparity and therefore social disparity. Then it would seem safe to also posit that such a society would be concerned for the welfare of the old, injured and others who cannot provide for themselves and thus would likely have a means of supporting those among their members that need it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 27, 2013, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

I'd love to, can you hold my hand a little?  I'm not sure where you are going. 

As mentioned before, where it puts that control can definitely be an issue, you can either get the random lottery of Bitcoins, which mostly means money is printed by botnets, obviously not a desirable outcome, or you get a printing press controlled by some other organization.  The methods used by that organization to regulate the amount of money, how it is used, and so forth seem like they would determine whether that group having control rather than the government is a good or bad thing.

Sorry, I don't really have time. But I'd like you to postulate a system that has several thousand independent economies, each of which prints their own currencies independent of any centralized regulation. Don't just imagine what might happen if everything goes RIGHT; also imagine what happens when things go WRONG.

HINT: This has actually happened many times before, all over the world. You can look it up; it's called "The history of currency".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 27, 2013, 10:15:20 PM
Quote from: six to the quixotic on February 27, 2013, 09:55:12 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on February 27, 2013, 07:01:05 PM
Old age/illness/etc. Take your pick, but there's a dozen situations you could name where working a XX hour week becomes impossible.

If we are positing a society that uses a currency the depreciates, and is thus interested in keeping the amount of money from ballooning as a means of preventing massive wealth disparity and therefore social disparity. Then it would seem safe to also posit that such a society would be concerned for the welfare of the old, injured and others who cannot provide for themselves and thus would likely have a means of supporting those among their members that need it.

ACHTUNG, COMRADE! THAT ROAD LEADS STRAIGHT TO SOCIALISM!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 27, 2013, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

I'd love to, can you hold my hand a little?  I'm not sure where you are going. 

As mentioned before, where it puts that control can definitely be an issue, you can either get the random lottery of Bitcoins, which mostly means money is printed by botnets, obviously not a desirable outcome, or you get a printing press controlled by some other organization.  The methods used by that organization to regulate the amount of money, how it is used, and so forth seem like they would determine whether that group having control rather than the government is a good or bad thing.

Sorry, I don't really have time. But I'd like you to postulate a system that has several thousand independent economies, each of which prints their own currencies independent of any centralized regulation. Don't just imagine what might happen if everything goes RIGHT; also imagine what happens when things go WRONG.

HINT: This has actually happened many times before, all over the world. You can look it up; it's called "The history of currency".

The problem seems to be that those economies aren't actually independent and when they trade with one another you have issues of currency manipulation, arbitrage, etc.  Historically this has been partially dealt with by using valuable commodities like gold and silver for trade.  This has also been dealt with in the modern world by using a third party currency, usually the dollar. 

I'm still not seeing a problem that looks worse than our current mess with a centrally controlled bank making sure that the rich get richer and the poor get fucked.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 28, 2013, 01:40:09 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 27, 2013, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

I'd love to, can you hold my hand a little?  I'm not sure where you are going. 

As mentioned before, where it puts that control can definitely be an issue, you can either get the random lottery of Bitcoins, which mostly means money is printed by botnets, obviously not a desirable outcome, or you get a printing press controlled by some other organization.  The methods used by that organization to regulate the amount of money, how it is used, and so forth seem like they would determine whether that group having control rather than the government is a good or bad thing.

Sorry, I don't really have time. But I'd like you to postulate a system that has several thousand independent economies, each of which prints their own currencies independent of any centralized regulation. Don't just imagine what might happen if everything goes RIGHT; also imagine what happens when things go WRONG.

HINT: This has actually happened many times before, all over the world. You can look it up; it's called "The history of currency".

The problem seems to be that those economies aren't actually independent and when they trade with one another you have issues of currency manipulation, arbitrage, etc.  Historically this has been partially dealt with by using valuable commodities like gold and silver for trade.  This has also been dealt with in the modern world by using a third party currency, usually the dollar. 

I'm still not seeing a problem that looks worse than our current mess with a centrally controlled bank making sure that the rich get richer and the poor get fucked.

Yeah, your way is way better.  The rich get poor and the coyotes get fat.  Nobody knows where the poor went off to.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 28, 2013, 06:43:28 AM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 10:56:37 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 27, 2013, 10:13:06 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:36:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 26, 2013, 04:19:57 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 26, 2013, 12:19:02 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 25, 2013, 04:18:49 PM
The problem with alternative currencies is that at the end of the day, it's still just a virtual representation of goods or services. Exchanging one for the other has no benefit that I can think of.

It takes control of the printing press away from the government.

Oh wow I really reallly want you to follow that line of thinking to its logical conclusion.

I'd love to, can you hold my hand a little?  I'm not sure where you are going. 

As mentioned before, where it puts that control can definitely be an issue, you can either get the random lottery of Bitcoins, which mostly means money is printed by botnets, obviously not a desirable outcome, or you get a printing press controlled by some other organization.  The methods used by that organization to regulate the amount of money, how it is used, and so forth seem like they would determine whether that group having control rather than the government is a good or bad thing.

Sorry, I don't really have time. But I'd like you to postulate a system that has several thousand independent economies, each of which prints their own currencies independent of any centralized regulation. Don't just imagine what might happen if everything goes RIGHT; also imagine what happens when things go WRONG.

HINT: This has actually happened many times before, all over the world. You can look it up; it's called "The history of currency".

The problem seems to be that those economies aren't actually independent and when they trade with one another you have issues of currency manipulation, arbitrage, etc.  Historically this has been partially dealt with by using valuable commodities like gold and silver for trade.  This has also been dealt with in the modern world by using a third party currency, usually the dollar. 

I'm still not seeing a problem that looks worse than our current mess with a centrally controlled bank making sure that the rich get richer and the poor get fucked.

The problem here isn't our currency, it's our economic structure. A different currency won't change that, and instituting locally independent currencies will make it worse.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 28, 2013, 06:45:03 AM
In other words, the currency is just the map. LITERALLY.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 28, 2013, 09:14:15 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 28, 2013, 06:45:03 AM
In other words, the currency is just the map. LITERALLY.
Good point. But in this case there is only one map and it is drawn by people who have much to gain by controlling where you think you can go. Wouldn't it be nice if there were several big map brands(like the dollar or euro) that can be used by whoever needs it and smaller more localized maps that fit better to the local terrain?

It is not about choosing the perfect currency, it is about giving people a choice of which currency to use in a given situation. They can even be tied directly to a dominant currency like in most examples given ITT of succesful alternative currencies. I think it is more a social engineering thing than an economics thing.

I just realized that all of this is irrelevant because money is going digital and then the big map brands have absolute insight in and control over what you are buying when, where, and how.

Maybe we should promote alternative currencies for the sole reason that they will keep cash alive and so keep black markets easy.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on February 28, 2013, 04:46:03 PM
Quote from: :regret: on February 28, 2013, 09:14:15 AM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on February 28, 2013, 06:45:03 AM
In other words, the currency is just the map. LITERALLY.
Good point. But in this case there is only one map and it is drawn by people who have much to gain by controlling where you think you can go. Wouldn't it be nice if there were several big map brands(like the dollar or euro) that can be used by whoever needs it and smaller more localized maps that fit better to the local terrain?

It is not about choosing the perfect currency, it is about giving people a choice of which currency to use in a given situation. They can even be tied directly to a dominant currency like in most examples given ITT of succesful alternative currencies. I think it is more a social engineering thing than an economics thing.

I just realized that all of this is irrelevant because money is going digital and then the big map brands have absolute insight in and control over what you are buying when, where, and how.

Maybe we should promote alternative currencies for the sole reason that they will keep cash alive and so keep black markets easy.

That sounds really nice, but can you imagine a scenario in which the rich and powerful do not simply buy up the alternative currencies, literally or metaphorically, in order to remain rich and powerful?

I can't.

Adding different brands of "map" just gives the rich and powerful more brands to own.

Alternative currencies change nothing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 28, 2013, 05:03:13 PM
There's no functional difference between an oligarchy and an ogliopoly, when you're not a member.

Also Thiers' Law being neglected, ITT.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on February 28, 2013, 05:25:05 PM
Well, that's something I had to Google. 

And then Cain made me learn something.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on February 28, 2013, 05:38:44 PM
I had heard of Gresham's law, but not Thier's law.  good read, and makes sense.
someone i talked to had once mentioned that the historical base of compulsion in currency use was what was acceptable for tax collection, and legal tender laws came later.  i believe it was the old 'tally sticks' issued in england some thousand years ago or so that was cited.  people would trade with various commodities, or local currencies, but the sticks were the standard because that's what the piper ultimately required.  (incidentally, that system lasted a long freaking time, iirc.)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on March 01, 2013, 07:42:57 AM
Well, if local taxes are required to be paid in local currencies that does create a built in demand.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 01, 2013, 02:26:21 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on March 01, 2013, 07:42:57 AM
Well, if local taxes are required to be paid in local currencies that does create a built in demand.

Yeah, we had this thing called "The Articles of Confederation" just prior to the current constitution, that allowed exactly that.

And it worked so fucking well, the country almost dissolved into a monarchy of some kind.  So let's do that again.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 01, 2013, 02:36:27 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:34:38 PM
Quote from: Pope Partum Depression on February 26, 2013, 06:44:10 AM
I googled Ithaca Hours (http://www.ithacahours.org/).

QuoteThe local currency in Ithaca, N.Y., is called "Ithaca Hours." They are bought with U.S. dollars and can be traded with local shops for products or services.

Any currency can be purchased with US dollars.

Well yeah, that was my point. If you have to buy it with USD, then the people selling it consider USD to be the REAL currency.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 01, 2013, 03:40:06 PM
In other fucked financial news, the utter fuckwads who legislate our country actually let the sequester happen.  You know, when Republicans decided to fuck around with the budget ceiling in 2011 leading us straight towards default which fucked with our S&P credit rating, and only relented after a bill was passed that would make things so horrible it would force congress to come up with a better budget by 2013?

Yeah, that horrible thing just happened.  And now some assholes from both sides are saying it's a good thing.

I fucking hate the people who are running this counrty.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 01, 2013, 03:55:41 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 01, 2013, 03:40:06 PM
In other fucked financial news, the utter fuckwads who legislate our country actually let the sequester happen.  You know, when Republicans decided to fuck around with the budget ceiling in 2011 leading us straight towards default which fucked with our S&P credit rating, and only relented after a bill was passed that would make things so horrible it would force congress to come up with a better budget by 2013?

Yeah, that horrible thing just happened.  And now some assholes from both sides are saying it's a good thing.

I fucking hate the people who are running this counrty.

Yeah, we were talking about that at the morning meeting.

Here's the fairly immediate result:  Civilian government employees (not the military or heaven forbid the president, congress, or cabinet members) will lose 20% of their pay within 4 weeks.

Then social programs get hit, about a week after that.  Some may even happen sooner.

One thing we can all be thankful for, is that neither Eric Cantor nor Boehnor nor Obama will have to miss any meals or house payments, and isn't THAT the important thing.

Austerity:  It's not for everyone.  Just YOU.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 01, 2013, 03:58:22 PM
:crankey:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 01, 2013, 03:58:50 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 01, 2013, 03:58:22 PM
:crankey:

Well, who the fuck didn't see THIS coming?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 01, 2013, 04:00:23 PM
To be honest, I thought it was going to be a manufactured fake last-minute drama, which in a way would be a perfect end to a manufactured fake crisis.  But no. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 01, 2013, 04:07:23 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 01, 2013, 04:00:23 PM
To be honest, I thought it was going to be a manufactured fake last-minute drama, which in a way would be a perfect end to a manufactured fake crisis.  But no.

There are a few people getting very, very wealthy in Germany due to austerity measures in the surrounding nations.

I don't think OUR wealthy people want to miss out on that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 01, 2013, 04:27:14 PM
BBC's reporting last minute discussions are ongoing.

Aren't you glad your nation's future is being decided by a bunch of old, rich guys playing "Chicken"?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 01, 2013, 04:28:55 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 01, 2013, 04:27:14 PM
BBC's reporting last minute discussions are ongoing.

Aren't you glad your nation's future is being decided by a bunch of old, rich guys playing "Chicken"?

I don't think there will be a fix.

Or rather, the fix has been in, and this is just theater...To see which party takes the blame.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 01, 2013, 04:36:15 PM
Which in itself is so very 1985 in our time.

"The Sequester has always been Obama's fault."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Juana on March 01, 2013, 04:39:35 PM
Christ almighty.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on March 01, 2013, 05:47:30 PM
It's times like this I wish I knew a lot more about stocks and shares because I'd bet limbs that there have been some really fucking weird transactions over the past few days. Probably a couple of new faces coming up into top richest lists from this.

Quote from: Pope Partum Depression on March 01, 2013, 02:36:27 PM
Quote from: Pergamos on February 27, 2013, 09:34:38 PM
Quote from: Pope Partum Depression on February 26, 2013, 06:44:10 AM
I googled Ithaca Hours (http://www.ithacahours.org/).

QuoteThe local currency in Ithaca, N.Y., is called "Ithaca Hours." They are bought with U.S. dollars and can be traded with local shops for products or services.

Any currency can be purchased with US dollars.

Well yeah, that was my point. If you have to buy it with USD, then the people selling it consider USD to be the REAL currency.

It occurs to me you could get quite rich, quite quickly by selling "Local currencies" to tourists fresh in the country. Any country.

BRB ordering printing press and plane tickets to various tourist hotspots.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 01, 2013, 08:23:16 PM
Haha, the press corps are too busy pointing out Obama made a sci-fi faux pas* to take note of what this actually means.

*As the BBC notes: Jedis do mind tricks, Vulcans mind meld.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on March 01, 2013, 08:33:24 PM
From what I see, Obama is clearly stating what the press has been to afraid to say: The Republicans are being straight-up dicks about this whole thing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on March 01, 2013, 10:51:08 PM
Is it just me or is the two man con played out right in front of us? Keepingit a party issue just emphasises this and keeps it divisive.

As previously noted, the end result is most likely already known, so this is just a fuck about while people get their ducks in a row. When you get the last "I've bought/sold my shit" call it'll go ahead.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 12:55:25 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.

I'm convinced that all of this was deliberate.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on March 04, 2013, 01:03:54 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 12:55:25 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.

I'm convinced that all of this was deliberate.

That's been obvious for some time now. (http://rense.com/general82/carrlin.htm)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 04, 2013, 01:12:07 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 12:55:25 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.

I'm convinced that all of this was deliberate.

I'm not.  I think Obama is that big of an idiot he thought his proposals would be bad enough to force the Republicans hands.

He miscalculated badly, and US credit is going to get hammered by investors as a result.  On top of the damage done to the economy.  Or the questions that will be raised about the ongoing and future viability of the dollar as the global reserve currency in the face of US financial indecision.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 04, 2013, 03:38:51 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 04, 2013, 01:12:07 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 12:55:25 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.

I'm convinced that all of this was deliberate.

I'm not.  I think Obama is that big of an idiot he thought his proposals would be bad enough to force the Republicans hands.

He miscalculated badly, and US credit is going to get hammered by investors as a result.  On top of the damage done to the economy.  Or the questions that will be raised about the ongoing and future viability of the dollar as the global reserve currency in the face of US financial indecision.

I think that Obama is anything but an idiot. I think it was completely deliberate, and that it's part of a larger strategy. I just don't know yet what the strategy is.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 04, 2013, 09:44:25 AM
Then you're making the same basic error that the "Obama is a 19th dimension chess master we must trust in his plans" crowd who support him are.  Leaders make mistakes, and Obama has made a ton. 

I don't just read the American press, remember.  When worried sounds are being made in Japan and Israel and China and various European capitals on a range of issues from military procurement to the viability of the dollar as a reserve currency, that suggests someone fucked up.  If the vote on the debt ceiling doesn't go Obama's way, these worried sounds are only going to increase.

If anything, the only political advantage in this is that it has allowed Obama to lay the blame at the feet of the Republicans, with most people agreeing they are more to blame.  Which pretty much fits in perfectly with how politicians have acted for the past decade, Putin aside - they undertake policies which, will objectively disastrous, benefit them in small scale political support and partisan posturing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 02:07:57 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on March 04, 2013, 03:38:51 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 04, 2013, 01:12:07 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on March 04, 2013, 12:55:25 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 02, 2013, 11:42:41 AM
And Obama has signed the cuts into effect.

QuoteThe BBC's Mark Mardell in Washington says the cuts were designed to be so brutally painful that politicians would be forced to agree on a better way of balancing the books

WELL, DIDN'T THAT WORK OUT JUST GREAT.

I'm convinced that all of this was deliberate.

I'm not.  I think Obama is that big of an idiot he thought his proposals would be bad enough to force the Republicans hands.

He miscalculated badly, and US credit is going to get hammered by investors as a result.  On top of the damage done to the economy.  Or the questions that will be raised about the ongoing and future viability of the dollar as the global reserve currency in the face of US financial indecision.

I think that Obama is anything but an idiot. I think it was completely deliberate, and that it's part of a larger strategy. I just don't know yet what the strategy is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serf
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Elder Iptuous on March 04, 2013, 02:40:01 PM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on March 01, 2013, 04:00:23 PM
To be honest, I thought it was going to be a manufactured fake last-minute drama, which in a way would be a perfect end to a manufactured fake crisis.  But no.

same here.
if somebody had offered me a wager, i'd be a poorer man right now.  i was fucking certain!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 04, 2013, 04:00:37 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 04, 2013, 09:44:25 AM
Then you're making the same basic error that the "Obama is a 19th dimension chess master we must trust in his plans" crowd who support him are.  Leaders make mistakes, and Obama has made a ton. 

I don't just read the American press, remember.  When worried sounds are being made in Japan and Israel and China and various European capitals on a range of issues from military procurement to the viability of the dollar as a reserve currency, that suggests someone fucked up.  If the vote on the debt ceiling doesn't go Obama's way, these worried sounds are only going to increase.

If anything, the only political advantage in this is that it has allowed Obama to lay the blame at the feet of the Republicans, with most people agreeing they are more to blame.  Which pretty much fits in perfectly with how politicians have acted for the past decade, Putin aside - they undertake policies which, will objectively disastrous, benefit them in small scale political support and partisan posturing.

I'm not sure why you would think I would take that line of thinking... while I think it was deliberate, I also don't anticipate that anything good will come out of it... not for us plebes on the ground, anyway. If both Obama and the Republicans were willing to go this far, they probably both stand to benefit from the outcome in some way. Either that or they're willing to burn it all to the ground just for funzies.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on March 04, 2013, 04:34:21 PM
Didn't cain said what he stands to gain

Quote from: Cain on March 04, 2013, 09:44:25 AM
benefit them in small scale political support and partisan posturing.

Why should a politician concern himself with things like the far reaching damage of his decisions or worse still communist ideas like The Bigger Picture when there are things like party opinion, and personal image to think about?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 04, 2013, 04:41:20 PM
Quote from: Faust on March 04, 2013, 04:34:21 PM
Didn't cain said what he stands to gain

Quote from: Cain on March 04, 2013, 09:44:25 AM
benefit them in small scale political support and partisan posturing.

Why should a politician concern himself with things like the far reaching damage of his decisions or worse still communist ideas like The Bigger Picture when there are things like party opinion, and personal image to think about?

Yeah, pretty much this.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 09, 2013, 01:07:53 AM
Holder basically admitted (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/03/eric-holder-gets-pass-agg-with-senators-on-tbtf.html) that some banks are too big to prosecute:

QuoteGRASSLEY: OK. On the issue of bank prosecution, I'm concerned that we have a mentality of too-big-to-jail in the financial sector of spreading from fraud cases to terrorist financing and money laundering cases — and I cite HSBC. So I think we're on a slippery slope.

So then that's background for this question. I don't — I don't have recollection of DOJ prosecuting any high-profile financial criminal convictions in either companies or individuals. Assistant General — Attorney General Breuer said that one reason why DOJ has not brought these prosecutions is that it reaches out to, quote/unquote, "experts" to see what effect the prosecutions would have on the financial markets.

So then on January 29th, Senator Brown and I requested details on who these so-called experts are. So far, we've not received any information. Maybe you're going to, but why have we not yet have been provided the names of the experts that DOJ consults with as we requested on January 29th? Because we need to the find out why we aren't having these high profile cases.

And then I got one follow-up. But maybe you can answer that quickly.

HOLDER: Well, we'll endeavor to answer your letter, Senator. We did not, as I understand it, retain experts outside of the government in making — in making determinations with regard to HSBC. Now, if we could just put that aside for a minute, though. The concern that you have raised is one that I, frankly, share. And I'm not talking about HSBC now. That would not be appropriate.

But I am concerned that the size of some of these institutions becomes so large that it does become difficult for us to prosecute them when we are hit with indications that if you do prosecute, if you do bring a criminal charge, it will have a negative impact on the national economy, perhaps even the world economy. And I think that is a function of the fact that some of these institutions have become too large.

Again, I'm not talking about HSBC. This is just a – a more general comment. I think it has an inhibiting influence — impact on our ability to bring resolutions that I think would be more appropriate. And I think that is something that we — you all need to — need to consider. So the concern that you raised is actually one that I share.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on March 09, 2013, 01:51:40 AM
How realistic are these "negative impacts"? I often wonder whether or not that idea itself is manufactured, sort of a nationally broadcasted, federally backed "WHO IS JOHN GALT?" signal or whether we do actually need these banks to keep on their course to prevent DOOM.

Even typing that last bit out makes me feel like a rube, but even after much Naked Capitalism, and others,filtering though my brain I still don't know.

Rather, and more to the point, will prosecuting these places have any long-standing negative impacts on the economy. I mean, those worse than letting them do what they do naturally, which seems awfully negative, what with the stealing out money and all.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 09, 2013, 03:43:21 AM
If they're too big to prosecute, doesn't it seem that the logical response is to split them up into smaller entities that CAN be held responsible?

Of course it is.

And, of course, if you look at the natural life cycle of capitalism, that's impossible under our current economic system.

If you look at it as an ecology where different businesses are species, investment capitalism is a system that not only discourages, but inevitably, continuously, diminishes diversity.

GROW OR DIE.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pergamos on March 09, 2013, 06:47:32 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on March 09, 2013, 03:43:21 AM
If they're too big to prosecute, doesn't it seem that the logical response is to split them up into smaller entities that CAN be held responsible?

Of course it is.

And, of course, if you look at the natural life cycle of capitalism, that's impossible under our current economic system.

If you look at it as an ecology where different businesses are species, investment capitalism is a system that not only discourages, but inevitably, continuously, diminishes diversity.

GROW OR DIE.

It seems like the point of anti-trust laws was to avoid exactly that, a company that is big enough to influence the economy directly all by itself.  I am glad to hear Elizabeth Warren making noise about holding these banks accountable, but I haven't heard anyone talking anti-trust and that seems like it should have been the first option as soon as the words "too big to fail" were uttered.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 09, 2013, 06:51:16 PM
But preventing banks from being too big to fail will make them too small to succeed.

I missed a promising career in PR.  :sad:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on March 19, 2013, 09:40:41 AM
QuoteBanking giant HSBC, which was hit with a US fine for money laundering last year, is facing fresh accusations of illegal activity in Argentina.

Argentina has alleged that the bank used "fake receipts" to facilitate money laundering and tax evasion, and launder 392m pesos ($77m; £50m).

The country's tax authority said it had filed criminal charges against HSBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21840052

HSBC - Determined not to learn. Or more profitable to remain ignorant. Or Both.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 31, 2013, 02:14:53 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/29/libor-lawsuits-claims-dismissed_n_2981513.html

QuoteA judge on Friday dismissed a "substantial portion" of claims facing a number of banks in a barrage of lawsuits accusing them of interest-rate rigging.

U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in Manhattan ruled for the banks, which include Bank of America Corp , JPMorgan Chase & Co and others, of allegedly manipulating the London Interbank Offered Rate, commonly known as Libor.

The judge granted the banks' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' federal antitrust claims and partially dismissed their claims of commodities manipulation. She also dismissed racketeering and state-law claims.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on March 31, 2013, 02:21:56 PM
I wonder if a judge these days is more or less expensive than before the recession?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 05, 2013, 12:49:32 PM
I've been reading through this on and off lately:

http://www.icij.org/offshore

Summary:

QuoteKEY FINDINGS
Government officials and their families and associates in Azerbaijan, Russia, Canada, Pakistan, the Philippines, Thailand, Mongolia and other countries have embraced the use of covert companies and bank accounts.
The mega-rich use complex offshore structures to own mansions, yachts, art masterpieces and other assets, gaining tax advantages and anonymity not available to average people.
Many of the world's top's banks – including UBS, Clariden and Deutsche Bank – have aggressively worked to provide their customers with secrecy-cloaked companies in the British Virgin Islands and other offshore hideaways.
A well-paid industry of accountants, middlemen and other operatives has helped offshore patrons shroud their identities and business interests, providing shelter in many cases to money laundering or other misconduct.
Ponzi schemers and other large-scale fraudsters routinely use offshore havens to pull off their shell games and move their ill-gotten gains.

Lots of good stuff. Enjoy.

Oh, and the price of a judge rises when times are tight. Those who need to bribe them tend not to suffer too much in recessions.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 18, 2013, 04:19:10 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22197970

QuoteIMF chief Christine Lagarde has been summoned by a French court to answer questions over alleged abuse of office during her time as France's finance minister, her lawyer has said.

Ms Lagarde is to be questioned before a magistrate in May over her role in the awarding of financial compensation to businessman Bernard Tapie in 2008.

Ms Lagarde, who took over as IMF chief in 2011, denies any wrongdoing.

Her apartment was searched last month as part of the ongoing investigation.

As finance minister, Ms Lagarde referred Mr Tapie's long-running dispute with bank Credit Lyonnais to an arbitration panel, which awarded him 400m euros (£340m) damages.

Mr Tapie was a supporter of ex-President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Critics say she abused her authority but Ms Lagarde denies any wrongdoing.

The IMF voiced their backing to Ms Lagarde in a statement last month, saying: "The executive board continues to express its confidence in the managing director's ability to effectively carry out her duties."

Ms Lagarde's flat was raided by French police in March, but she has not been formally charged with any crime.

Her lawyer, Yves Repiquet, told the AFP news agency she would now "finally have the opportunity to provide the court with explanations and clarifications that will exonerate her of any criminal responsibility".

Nothing suspicious here, move along.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on April 18, 2013, 04:32:55 PM
And the Last Chair was up in court for sexually assaulting his hotel room maid. Glad to see the IMF isn't just an organisation run by exploitative monsters who treat the job like a toy box.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 20, 2013, 11:47:11 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22227019


QuoteThe UK government has launched a legal challenge against plans for a European financial transactions tax (FTT).

The FTT, which aims to raise public funds and discourage speculative trading, will be adopted by 11 EU states - but not by the UK.

Ministers fear it could be imposed on UK firms trading with businesses based in one of those states.

The Robin Hood Tax campaign group said the legal move was about "defending one rather rich square mile".

The 11 countries going ahead with the FTT are Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Austria, Portugal, Greece, Slovenia, Slovakia and Estonia.

Under their plans, transactions of shares, currencies and bonds would be taxed.

Quote"Britain doesn't want to take part but it also doesn't want to be caught in the effects of this tax being introduced by other countries. Let's be clear - financial transaction tax is not a tax on banks or bankers, it's a tax on pensioners and people with savings and investments.

The bolded just shows again how disconnected Government can be from the populace. I know a few pensioners, not many with huge portfolios though.

I've seen these kind of tobin taxes pushed around for a while. Gut feeling tells me it's a good idea. Gut also says there will be many loopholes and the actual amount of cash raised will not be as expected.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 20, 2013, 03:09:45 PM
In the history of the world, there has never been such a thing as a tax that applies on a progressive scale depending on the size of the transaction, ever.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 20, 2013, 05:05:02 PM
Ah, to clarify, I mean I've seen the idea pushed around. Guessing it's pretty much doomed to fail?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 20, 2013, 06:07:34 PM
I was being sarcastic.

If the tax were set in such a way that financial transactions over a certain limit were hit, in small but progressive ways (0.1-0.5% is the range I see bandied around) it would have a minor impact on savings and pensioners, while increasing state revenue.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 20, 2013, 06:42:03 PM
My brain appears to be made of shit today.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 22, 2013, 10:37:57 PM
Surely deserving, first I've heard of this lot:
QuoteThe government has been defeated in the Lords over plans to allow employees to give up workplace rights in return for shares in the company they work for.

Before the loss - by 69 votes - it was suggested that workers should get free legal advice before taking part.

The Treasury has tabled two new amendments offering to provide written details of any proposed scheme and a seven-day "cooling-off" period.

The proposals now return to the House of Commons.

This will result in "parliamentary ping-pong", meaning the Growth and Infrastructure Bill goes back and forth between the two Houses until a resolution is reached.

'Unrealistic'
Ministers want to introduce a new owner-employee contract, which allows business owners to award shares worth between £2,000 and £50,000 to their staff. They say the change would cut red tape and help businesses.

In return, the employee would give up certain rights, including unfair dismissal, redundancy, training rights and also the right to ask for flexible working.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22258699

This seems aimed at a very particular kind of employee. "Cut red tape" is clearly lies, and these surrendering of rights looks easy to turn compulsory.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 25, 2013, 10:16:37 PM
Nice HBOS piece from Private Eye. Well worth the subscription if you can, worth checking the 3 new articles every couple of weeks otherwise.

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=news&issue=1338

QuoteDAVID CAMERON, ever keen on people who "do the right thing", authorised his officials to tell the press last week that former HBOS chief executive Sir James Crosby had done just that in giving up his knighthood and a third of his pension entitlement. It was now up to the "consciences and judgement" of other executives whether they followed his example.
"The comments from the prime minister's office shift the focus from Sir James to his successor, Andy Hornby, and Lord Stevenson, the bank's former chairman," reported the Financial Times, whose own parent company also used to have Stevenson as chairman.

But Dennis Stevenson may be a harder man to chasten than the wretched ex-Sir James Crosby. As the parliamentary commission on banking standards noted two weeks ago in its damning report on HBOS, which needed a £20bn bail-out: "Lord Stevenson has shown himself incapable of facing the realities." Not quite true, actually: he has long understood the reality that it's not what you know, it's whom you know. Stevenson's career shows how far you can get with a genius for networking and schmoozing.

In 1990 he had the foresight to hire Peter Mandelson – then at a loose end while awaiting election to the Commons in 1992 – as a £28,000-a-year "consultant" for the market-research firm SRU, which Stevenson ran with Harpers & Queen style-guru Peter York. Through Mandelson he came to the attention of Tony Blair.

Fiddling while HBOS burned
Stevenson was duly knighted in 1997, soon after Labour's election victory. In 1998 he joined the advisory panel of Demos, New Labour's favourite think-tank, and a year later entered the House of Lords as Lord Stevenson of Coddenham. By then he had become chairman of the Halifax, and when the former building society merged with the Bank of Scotland in 1999 he took charge of the new HBOS, where he remained until the crash of 2008 – presiding over the reckless incompetence described in the banking commission's recent report.

A talented violinist who used to play for the National Youth Orchestra, Stevenson fiddled while HBOS burned. Or, as he told the commission in December: "There was a lot of mistaken lending. I wasn't there in the trenches with the people making the decisions. I was only there at the most part-time." For this part-time divertissement he earned £815,000 a year.

'Intellectual snob'
Being "in the trenches" never appealed to Stevenson. As he had told the Sunday Times in 1996: "I am a terrible intellectual snob." With HBOS and other directorships financing his agreeable lifestyle, he could devote himself to higher things such as his trusteeship of the Tate Gallery and his seat on the red-leather benches – though even there he was exceedingly part-time. (In his 14 years in the Lords he has voted just 10 times.)

Nevertheless, in May 2000, a year after his elevation, he was chosen by Blair to supervise the appointment of "people's peers", a now-forgotten Labour stunt whereby people such as hairdressers or firefighters could apply to join the Upper House. In the event, the great unwashed were rejected: the new peers consisted of the same old establishment grandees – ex-diplomats, business chiefs, professors. Half of them already had knighthoods.

Clod-hoppingly negligent
Stevenson explained loftily that ordinary folk might not "feel comfortable standing up in debates and talking and cutting it". While not ruling out the possibility that "someone of that kind" would become a peer, he said "it would be a great responsibility on our part appointing them; we would have to do it very carefully".

If only such due diligence had been exercised before Stevenson – a man with no banking qualification or expertise – was given the chairmanship of HBOS. Would any hairdresser or firefighter have been so clod-hoppingly negligent?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 25, 2013, 10:20:45 PM
Same issue of PE, UK tax/Goldman-sachs/whistleblowers related

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&issue=1338

QuoteIN CONNIVING with HM Revenue & Customs to cover up dodgy tax deals with multinationals like Vodafone and Goldman Sachs, National Audit Office (NAO) boss Amyas Morse has broken his own rules on the crucial task of dealing correctly with whistleblowers.
In Eye 1336 we reported how, after the NAO had initially given the deals relatively clean bills of health, it was forced by MPs on the public accounts committee (PAC) to look again, this time with the help of a retired judge. According to an email from the tax boss who did the deals, Dave Hartnett, to senior colleagues before the judge had started work, NAO boss Morse had confided at a private meeting that the findings, which would be filtered through him, would not amount to much.

Grave breach of trust
Hartnett also reported that "Amyas told me that the PAC was relying heavily on advice/evidence from [one other and] Osita Mba", the man who, we now know, originally blew the whistle on the Goldman Sachs case. Thus Morse was privately divulging confidential information about sources to the body under investigation, which in this case was also the whistleblower's employer. According to Hartnett, the auditor-general also "told me in confidence that he had grave doubts about Mr Mba's analysis and evidence" [which turned out to be accurate], again showing his preference for helping HMRC out of a hole rather than investigating serious allegations against it.

As well as being a grave breach of trust, Morse's snitching to Hartnett breached the NAO's whistleblower policy, which says that "great care should be exercised in pursuing our inquiries of the body under investigation to avoid revealing the name of the whistleblower, or any associated details... which could effectively identify him or her". This is precisely what the NAO and Morse did; and future whistleblowers might now not trust Britain's public spending watchdog.

Curious silence
Oddly, nobody seems willing to hold the NAO chief to account. This is the first real test of NAO chairman Sir Andrew Likierman, brought in four years ago after the Eye exposed an expenses scandal under Morse's predecessor, Sir John Bourn. But since he first heard about it three weeks ago when the Eye called him, there is no sign of action from Sir Andrew. Margaret Hodge's generally outspoken Commons committee is curiously silent on the point too. Why the reticence?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 28, 2013, 03:13:03 PM
Italy continues to be a mockery of politics (or, more worryingly, it's future), with the attempted assassination of the new Italian PM, moderate left-winger Enrico Letta during the swearing in ceremony for the new government.

Naturally, the new Interior Minister, described as a "close Berlusconi ally" has described the incident as isolated, not terrorism.  That remains to be seen.  There are a lot of "isolated incidents" when the left is close to power in Italy, and that the Democratic Party has the support of former Italian Communist Party members is probably making some people nervous.  The atttempt doesn't seem to be serious by Italian standards, but then, if it's merely a warning, it doesn't need to be entirely so.

Berlusconi's party forms part of the ruling coalition, but he himself is declining a cabinet position.  Trying to take after his mentor, Giulio Andreotti, and become the power behind the scenes in Italian politics?  Either way, it'll be business as usual in Italy - corruption, graft, kickbacks and tax dodges, punctuated by the occasional bombing or shooting.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 04, 2013, 01:07:56 PM
Beware of Brown-Vitter (http://www.alternet.org/economy/how-much-heralded-bank-reform-proposal-could-actually-blow-american-economy):

QuoteIt sounds like a fabulous idea: a bipartisan bill to end big commercial bank bailouts. Though it probably won't pass, there are certainly many good things in the freshly minted Terminating Bailouts for Taxpayer Fairness Act, co-sponsored by Sherrod Brown (OH-D) and David Vitter (LA-R).

Greater transparency? Like it. Juggernauts like JPMorgan Chase with over $500 billion in assets forced to hold more capital to protect against losses? This is a terrific proposal, the one big idea that would at a stroke make bank bailouts a lot less likely. No more taxpayer funds to bail them out? Three cheers, even if one doubts that federal authorities will ever dare to let another behemoth go down after their ghastly experience with Lehman.

But there's more to this bailout bill than meets the eye – much more than many progressive cheerleaders realize. Some things in the bill could hurt us, and even increase overall risk in the financial system.

Loud criticisms of Brown-Vitter are coming from predictable sources like corporate law firm DavisPolk. But, as ProPublica's Jesse Eisinger has pointed out, they aren't too convincing. Warning that higher capital requirements could cause credit to dry up, Great Depression-style, as banks scramble to meet them, or the howl that the bill would make U.S. banks less competitive are so much hot air. That's just the banking industry and its supporters crying wolf again.

So if the banking industry hates the bill, what's not to love?

The real problem is not what the bailout bill does; it's what it doesn't do. Or, more specifically, who and what it leaves out.

If we recall the financial crisis of 2007-'08, the threat of large financial institutions collapsing and causing havoc across the economic system was real and very scary. The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported in 2011 that risky and reckless activity, coupled with breakdown in governance, had compromised the global economy. Commercial megabanks like Citigroup, Bank of America and JPMorgan (though it doesn't like to admit it) were over-extended and posed enormous risk.

But there were other financial institutions that were NOT commercial banks that were also extremely dangerous. Remember Lehman Brothers? It was an investment bank, rather than a commercial bank, and it would not be covered under Brown-Vitter. So was Bear Stearns. Does the name AIG ring a bell? Astonishingly, the bill asks nothing new of the giant insurer that we actually did bail out in 2008 to avoid complete meltdown. Giant hedge funds like Long Term Capital Management, which nearly went belly-up in the late 1990s and got a bailout, would also escape the requirements.

It hardly suffices to say, as the bill's champions do, that the Financial Stability Oversight Council the Dodd-Frank bill established could still intervene if it wants to. That council has been notably slow to move. The plain fact is that holding more capital is desirable not just for big banks, but for all the financial institutions that potentially can bring down the system.

The right question to ask is, why would anyone seek to exclude the non-commercial banks from Brown-Vitter? Well, there's something going on behind the scenes: Let's call it Clash of the Financial Titans. Since the financial crisis, the commercial banks have gotten special treatment from the Federal Reserve and the regulators. They know they can be bailed out if they run into trouble. So does everyone else, which gives them a huge advantage over other kinds of financial institutions which do not have the same assurance. The big banks get money cheaper because people know they'll be backstopped. The big boys also sometimes move risky parts of their business, like derivatives, in and out of the insured deposit sections of their firms, when dubious creditors worry they might go belly-up.

Essentially, Brown-Vitter boils down to the insurance industry wanting to take away the political benefits of the commercial banking sector, under the guise of reforming the systemic risk that the banking system as a whole poses.  While it would be a correction, it wouldn't solve the overall issue of big investment banks posing a risk to the entire financial sector.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 09, 2013, 06:24:17 PM
http://oilprice.com/Finance/the-Markets/JP-Morgan-A-New-Type-of-Dirty-Energy.html

QuoteAs US power plants lose money, a bit of market manipulation goes a long way ... ask JPMorgan Chase.

The banking giant is accused of manipulating energy prices in Michigan and California to make money-losing power plants appear more profitable to investors—and now it faces penalties from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which regulates the sale of electricity.

Detailed in a New York Times report, JPMorgan Chase is accused of selling electricity to authorities in California and Michigan between 2010 and 2011 at prices calculated to appear falsely attractive.

How much did these two US states pay for this manipulate on: $83 million—that's in excess of what they would have paid normally.

The scandal heated up in November, when FERC imposed a temporary, 6-month ban on JPMorgan's ability to trade physical power at market-based rates, beginning in April this year. The reason: The bank failed to disclose information to FERC and the California authorities during the market manipulation investigation. JPMorgan blew off the ban with a shrug.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 09, 2013, 06:37:53 PM
Ofuck   :lulz:

GEE, THAT WASN'T PREDICTABLE AT ALL.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 09, 2013, 06:44:09 PM
Would I be safe in assuming Goldman-Sachs and co will have been up to something similar in the same timeframe? The nonchalance indicates a cultural thing to me but I'm not sure.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 09, 2013, 06:46:56 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on May 09, 2013, 06:44:09 PM
Would I be safe in assuming Goldman-Sachs and co will have been up to something similar in the same timeframe? The nonchalance indicates a cultural thing to me but I'm not sure.

"Too big to fail". And too big for consequences. We've created a cultural climate in which bankers believe they can get away with anything with complete impunity.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on May 09, 2013, 06:55:04 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on May 09, 2013, 06:46:56 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on May 09, 2013, 06:44:09 PM
Would I be safe in assuming Goldman-Sachs and co will have been up to something similar in the same timeframe? The nonchalance indicates a cultural thing to me but I'm not sure.

"Too big to fail". And too big for consequences. We've created a cultural climate in which bankers believe they can get away with anything with complete impunity.

Believe?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 10, 2013, 02:09:49 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on May 09, 2013, 06:55:04 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on May 09, 2013, 06:46:56 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on May 09, 2013, 06:44:09 PM
Would I be safe in assuming Goldman-Sachs and co will have been up to something similar in the same timeframe? The nonchalance indicates a cultural thing to me but I'm not sure.

"Too big to fail". And too big for consequences. We've created a cultural climate in which bankers believe they can get away with anything with complete impunity.

Believe?

Eventually, they'll get theirs. The question is how fucked the world will be by then.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 10, 2013, 09:27:33 AM
Looks like there is some pushback against JP Morgan in California (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/05/california-attorney-general-sues-jp-morgan-over-debt-collection-abuses-including-sewer-service-robosigining.html) generally:

QuoteCalifornia Attorney General Kamala Harris is on a roll. There's been a fair bit of media coverage about abusive debt collection practices, particularly in credit cards, but at least until Harris filed a suit on Thursday against bank miscreant JP Morgan (hat tip Deontos), surprisingly little action.

Because the amounts are usually much smaller than in mortgages, banks have incentives to play fast and loose if they think they can wring some extra blood out of the turnip of an overextended consumer. But the result often goes well beyond just improperly submitting information to the court. JP Morgan and other banks have been accused of trying to collect on debt where they have the amounts wrong, where the debt was discharged in bankruptcy, or where the consumer was never notified an action was underway. And when the debt is sold to debt collectors, the same problems with inaccuracy of information, invalidity of the debt, and abuse of the legal system multiply.

QuoteHarris mentions over 100,000 dubious lawsuits filed between January 2008 and April 2011 and contends that the illegal conduct extends from "pre-lawsuit correspondence" to the validation and papering up of debt sold to third parties.

The interesting bit is how the suit is framed. The defendants are the JP Morgan holding company plus two business units, as well as an unnamed "DOES 1 through 100, inclusive" where the AG intends to obtain their names and capacities. This raises the specter that she intends not only to sue other firms (such as the law firms that were Chase's arms and legs) but individuals at Chase and its agents.

QuoteEach defendant for each violation. We have 100,000+ violations at Chase, with at least three entities involved, each a separate defendant. And if she can get the individuals who were supervising the robosigning operations (better yet, the C level execs ultimately responsible) and the complicit law firms, she might bankrupt some well placed people. This could be extremely entertaining.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 10, 2013, 09:29:33 AM
Keep those doors revolving (http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/wall-street-hires-washington-91115_Page2.html):

QuoteTwo of the biggest blue-chip firms in the industry, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, will soon have top-level executives with the ear of the CEO who once occupied senior jobs in the White House and the U.S. Treasury. Other banks including Citigroup, Credit Suisse and JPMorgan Chase also have staffed up with former political and regulatory officials...

A very short list of other top political operatives now working in and around Wall Street includes: Ed Skyler, former deputy New York City mayor for operations, who is now executive vice president for global public affairs at Citigroup; Calvin Mitchell, who ran press operations for Geithner at the New York Federal Reserve and is now global co-head of corporate communications at Credit Suisse; Jennifer Zuccarelli, formerly of the Paulson Treasury department and Mark Kornblau, a veteran of multiple Democratic presidential campaigns, who both now have senior roles at JPMorgan Chase. Andrew Williams, a former Geithner spokesman, now works for Siewert at Goldman.

And there are many more.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 10, 2013, 11:23:48 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22477745

QuoteRatings agency Moody's has downgraded the Co-operative Bank's debt rating to "junk" status, citing fears that it is vulnerable to potential losses.

The agency warned that the bank may need "external support" if it could not strengthen its balance sheet.

The Co-op said it was "disappointed" by Moody's decision.

The news preceded the resignation of chief executive, Barry Tootell, following the bank's failure to buy 631 branches from Lloyds Banking Group.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 15, 2013, 01:45:25 PM
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/10057460/Petrol-price-rigged-for-a-decade.html

QuoteMPs and energy experts tonight raised fears motorists have been "taken for a very expensive ride", after officials searched the offices of BP and Shell for evidence of price-rigging.

The companies are suspected of distorting the oil price since 2002, meaning drivers have potentially been ripped off for more than 10 years.

Over that time, petrol prices have risen dramatically by more than 80 per cent to around 135p per litre.

European investigators, who raided the London offices of BP and Shell, said the alleged price-rigging could have had a "huge impact" on the cost of oil, including the price of fuel for consumers.

The investigation into market-fixing already has echoes of the Libor scandal, which saw the banks falsely report key interest rates used to calculate mortgages. It cost several British banks hundreds of millions of pounds in fines.

High oil prices also had an impact on the 2008 financial crisis.  No doubt this isn't just a UK based problem, or limited to the price of petrol.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 15, 2013, 02:29:04 PM
I love the statements that they've come out with so far. I wonder if they are all represented by the same PR firm?

QuoteThe oil companies confirmed their offices have been raided.

A spokesman for BP said the company is "cooperating fully with the investigation and unable to comment further at this time."

A Shell spokesman also confirmed its companies are "currently assisting the European Commission in an enquiry into trading activities".
"We are fully cooperating with the investigation. For legal reasons we cannot make any further comment at this stage".

Platts, the price-reporting agency, said the European Commission has "undertaken a review at its premises in London" and confirmed it is "cooperating fully".

"Cooperating fully" seems to mean smiling and nodding while the shredder works overtime.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on May 15, 2013, 02:44:12 PM
I hear this on the radio this morning.  I like how the used the word "raided", but it probably doesn't mean what I'm thinking (busting down the doors with shotguns and police dogs).

It also wasn't surprising, as the energy companies are probably the most powerful things around these days.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 15, 2013, 03:07:45 PM
Related article on the mindset of the ultra-rich:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/06/politics-envy-keenest-rich

Quote'I never did anything for money. I never set money as a goal. It was a result." So says Bob Diamond, formerly the chief executive of Barclays. In doing so Diamond lays waste to the justification that his bank and others (and their innumerable apologists in government and the media) have advanced for surreal levels of remuneration – to incentivise hard work and talent. Prestige, power, a sense of purpose: for them, these are incentives enough.

Others of his class – Bernie Ecclestone and Jeroen van der Veer (the former chief executive of Shell), for example – say the same. The capture by the executive class of so much wealth performs no useful function. What the very rich appear to value is relative income. If executives were all paid 5% of current levels, the competition between them (a questionable virtue anyway) would be no less fierce. As the immensely rich HL Hunt commented several decades ago: "Money is just a way of keeping score."

The desire for advancement along this scale appears to be insatiable. In March Forbes magazine published an article about Prince Alwaleed, who, like other Saudi princes, doubtless owes his fortune to nothing more than hard work and enterprise. According to one of the prince's former employees, the Forbes magazine global rich list "is how he wants the world to judge his success or his stature".

The result is "a quarter-century of intermittent lobbying, cajoling and threatening when it comes to his net worth listing". In 2006, the researcher responsible for calculating his wealth writes, "when Forbes estimated that the prince was actually worth $7 billion less than he said he was, he called me at home the day after the list was released, sounding nearly in tears. 'What do you want?' he pleaded, offering up his private banker in Switzerland. 'Tell me what you need.
'"

Never mind that he has his own 747, in which he sits on a throne during flights. Never mind that his "main palace" has 420 rooms. Never mind that he possesses his own private amusement park and zoo – and, he claims, $700m worth of jewels. Never mind that he's the richest man in the Arab world, valued by Forbes at $20bn, and has watched his wealth increase by $2bn in the past year. None of this is enough. There is no place of arrival, no happy landing, even in a private jumbo jet. The politics of envy are never keener than among the very rich.

Pretty much covers how people seem to think once they've reached a certain level of wealth. It's the great mix of privilege and entitlement writ large.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on May 15, 2013, 03:27:59 PM
Quote"Money is just a way of keeping score."

This is also a very important quote.  If it means nothing to them, then via the Mind Projection Fallacy (http://lesswrong.com/lw/oi/mind_projection_fallacy/), it means nothing to anyone else, either.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 15, 2013, 03:34:12 PM
Nail, head, hitting.

I've worked for more than a few employers who refused to give pay rises as policy. More than a few staff were on the poverty line and costs of living were still increasing. The apathy from above was amazing. "Working harder" was not the way out of that hole. Few staff took the leap into the unknown rather than get by on his pittance.

It also helps explain the hatred of things like minimum wage, unions, workers rights etc.... If you don't care about a pittance, reasonable hours and various benefits, why should they? Get back down the mine.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 16, 2013, 01:14:02 PM
Spin the wheel and speculate on how much they will actually pay!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22552109

QuoteHM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has won its case in the High Court, where it had been accused of illegally letting investment bank Goldman Sachs off part of its tax bill.

The campaign group UK Uncut Legal Action had claimed that the taxpayer had been cheated of up to £20m.

It said HMRC had let Goldman Sachs off the hook through a "sweetheart deal".

The judge ruled the deal was "not a glorious episode in the history of the Revenue", but said it was not unlawful.

HMRC said it had changed its practices since it made the agreement with Goldman Sachs in 2010.

It also said that the maximum that had been lost to taxpayers was £8m.

HA HA HA

QuoteHMRC welcomed today's judgement.

NO SHIT

Quote"The High Court's comprehensive dismissal of UK Uncut's claim puts to rest the fallacy that HMRC is soft on large businesses," said Jim Harra, HMRC's director general for business tax.

It does?

QuoteBut the group behind the legal action said it was important that the country knew more about so-called "bespoke settlements", where the tax authorities make private deals with big companies.

"We are disappointed we've lost the case," said Anna Walker of UK Uncut Legal Action.

"But it has exposed the truth behind these backroom deals," she told the BBC.

"The government talks tough on tax, but does not do much," she added.

The deal between Goldman Sachs and HMRC, in which the bank was excused interest payments on National Insurance contributions, was declared "reasonable" in a report by the National Audit Office.

Oh. Everything's actually OK then. Business as usual. Don't mention Vodaphone. Or Topshop. Or pretty much any national chain store to at least a degree.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 22, 2013, 11:07:14 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22615146

QuoteThe technology giant Apple has been defending itself against accusations that it's avoided paying tax on tens of billions of dollars in profits.

Chief executive Tim Cook told a US Senate committee Apple paid all the taxes it owed, complying with both the law, and the spirit of the law.

He said last year it paid $6bn to the US Treasury, a tax rate of about 30%.

Earlier, the head of a Senate committee panel accused Apple of "exploiting an absurdity" in its tax payments.

My Bullshit alarm is tingling.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 22, 2013, 12:13:46 PM
ad 39199 77.777% per day got it? o/o
ad 39171 77.777% gross= $3.466 exit today | ?Later? 2.737\2.80
ad 39163 :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20130622C00090000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)  :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20130622C00090000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true){Long at 1.95 ob on open 1.54 vv Links not LL'n?
ad 39135T4W{Trade4Week =?LL90c5 Mon_1.95  :fnord:  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=37335&qm_symbol=LL) :fnord:  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=77906&qm_symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20130622C00090000)
ad 39075{11:00:52 pm) ? (12:30:30 am}39085 Sat? LL90c5 (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20130622C00090000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
ad 39023  ? Tuesday rally CRM1p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@CRM%20%20%20131116P00045000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) LL1C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20131116C00085000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) UMPQ5 (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=UMPQ&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
ad 38973 http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838459 Jim Cramer ch8 3.5-4
ad 38951? ad 38918 preamble  NHK 2-2:30am & DW.DE-3
NEXT & then bac2sleep lately No Sleep so TV CH8.1 ????/
3?4  ok so the suggestion is e-bay (so yeah i'LL take some time 3:13 >
INDX> :fnord:  (http://www.curtrenz.com/) :fnord:  (http://markets.money.cnn.com/services/api/chart/snapshot_chart_api.asp?symb=INDU) |eBAY> :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=%2Cm26-12-9&c=)  :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=ss&c=) :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=&c=) |? :fnord:  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=15460&qm_symbol=EBAY) 52.5octC  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=24607&qm_symbol=EBAY)chart1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

U^http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1125.html^P
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 29, 2013, 10:02:47 AM
UK Finanical system shown to be a joke, again,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22689416

QuoteConsumers' lack of trust in financial firms led to a 92% increase in cases taken up by the financial ombudsman service last year.

Individuals were also more aware of their rights and more willing to complain, the chief ombudsman said.

Claims for the mis-selling of payment protection insurance (PPI) dominated, accounting for 74% of complaints, but most sectors saw a rise in gripes.

Banks said they had hired more staff to deal with complaints efficiently.


It's pretty safe to say that any bank product currently being sold, or ever been sold is/was being mis-sold. I've actually lost track of the number of products/services that were dodgy.

Edit - Statistics are Fun!

QuoteNew cases in numbers

PPI: 378,699 new cases, an annual rise of 140%
Current accounts: 19,560, annual rise of 34%
Mortgages: 11,920, annual rise of 25%
Unsecured loans: 7,809, annual rise of 25%
Investment-linked products: 4,697, annual rise of 42%
Mortgage endowments: 4,657, annual rise of 43%
Pensions: 4,401, annual rise of 27%
Other banking services: 3,838, annual rise of 30%
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 29, 2013, 10:31:06 AM
Yet more totally unexpected and shocking revelations:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22698387

QuoteA former senior partner at accountancy giant KPMG has agreed to plead guilty to insider trading.

US authorities had charged Scott London in April for allegedly passing information to a golfing friend, who then traded on the share trips.

His plea agreement was announced on Tuesday at the US Attorney's Office in Los Angeles.

It came a week after the friend, Buddy Shaw, pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud.

In his plea agreement, Mr London admitted giving Mr Shaw insider information about KPMG's clients on at least 14 different occasions.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Bruno on May 30, 2013, 08:46:41 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on May 15, 2013, 03:07:45 PM
Related article on the mindset of the ultra-rich:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/may/06/politics-envy-keenest-rich

Quote'I never did anything for money. I never set money as a goal. It was a result." So says Bob Diamond, formerly the chief executive of Barclays. In doing so Diamond lays waste to the justification that his bank and others (and their innumerable apologists in government and the media) have advanced for surreal levels of remuneration – to incentivise hard work and talent. Prestige, power, a sense of purpose: for them, these are incentives enough.

Others of his class – Bernie Ecclestone and Jeroen van der Veer (the former chief executive of Shell), for example – say the same. The capture by the executive class of so much wealth performs no useful function. What the very rich appear to value is relative income. If executives were all paid 5% of current levels, the competition between them (a questionable virtue anyway) would be no less fierce. As the immensely rich HL Hunt commented several decades ago: "Money is just a way of keeping score."

The desire for advancement along this scale appears to be insatiable. In March Forbes magazine published an article about Prince Alwaleed, who, like other Saudi princes, doubtless owes his fortune to nothing more than hard work and enterprise. According to one of the prince's former employees, the Forbes magazine global rich list "is how he wants the world to judge his success or his stature".

The result is "a quarter-century of intermittent lobbying, cajoling and threatening when it comes to his net worth listing". In 2006, the researcher responsible for calculating his wealth writes, "when Forbes estimated that the prince was actually worth $7 billion less than he said he was, he called me at home the day after the list was released, sounding nearly in tears. 'What do you want?' he pleaded, offering up his private banker in Switzerland. 'Tell me what you need.
'"

Never mind that he has his own 747, in which he sits on a throne during flights. Never mind that his "main palace" has 420 rooms. Never mind that he possesses his own private amusement park and zoo – and, he claims, $700m worth of jewels. Never mind that he's the richest man in the Arab world, valued by Forbes at $20bn, and has watched his wealth increase by $2bn in the past year. None of this is enough. There is no place of arrival, no happy landing, even in a private jumbo jet. The politics of envy are never keener than among the very rich.

Pretty much covers how people seem to think once they've reached a certain level of wealth. It's the great mix of privilege and entitlement writ large.


But if we tax them too much, they won't work as hard, and we'll all starve!  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 31, 2013, 01:18:17 AM
This is hilarious:

http://www.theworld.org/2013/05/northern-ireland-town-fakes-prosperity-for-g8-summit/

QuoteWhat they've done is they have filled the shop front window with a picture of what was the business before it went bankrupt or closed. In other words, grocery shops, butcher shops, pharmacies, you name it, they have placed large photographs in the windows that if you were driving past and glanced out the window, it would look as if this was a thriving business. It's an attempt really by the local authority to make the place look as positive as possible for the visiting G8 leaders and their entourages, and it's really tried to put a mask on a recession that has really hit this part of Ireland really very badly indeed.

Werman: So it's kind of like a trompe l'oeil, and I saw a picture in one newspaper. I'm a little confused because the door looked open.

Keenan: Yeah, it looks as if the door is open and inside you can see a well-stocked shop. It's nothing of the sort. That door has been locked shut for well over a year because that particular business went bust this time last year, and that is an image to make it look as if everything is normal in the town and in the county, but unfortunately it's not. The County of Fermanagh has suffered terribly as a result of the credit crisis and the resulting recession.

IOW, the G8's own Illuminati are just as deceived and misled and propagandized at as the rest of us.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 31, 2013, 10:01:53 AM
Probably more appropriate in the Buttcoin thread:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/05/feds-smash-liberty-reserve-alleging-billions-in-money-laundering-charges/

QuoteOn Tuesday, federal prosecutors unsealed the indictment of seven men alleged to be involved with Liberty Reserve, one of the world's most notorious digital currencies. (Liberty Reserve was the preferred payment choice of a booter site used to attack Ars in March of 2013.)

Federal authorities seized LibertyReserve.com and four other related domain names, effectively shutting down the site. The site's founder, Arthur Budovsky Belanchuk (who apparently renounced his US citizenship in 2011 to become a Costa Rican citizen), was arrested last Friday.

In a 27-page indictment (PDF), the defendants are charged with money laundering and conspiracy to operate unlicensed money transmitting business. They are ordered to surrender "all property, real and personal" including: "at least $6 billion" and tens of millions of dollars more allegedly contained within bank accounts across Costa Rica, Cyprus, Russia, Hong Kong, Morocco, China, Spain, Latvia, and Australia.

Attempts to reach Liberty Reserve via phone and e-mail were not immediately successful.

Prosecutors labeled Liberty Reserve as a "criminal business venture, one designed to help criminals conduct illegal transactions and launder the proceeds of their crimes." The indictment also noted that the site was "a financial hub of the cyber-crime world, facilitating a broad range of online criminal activity, including credit card fraud, identity theft, investment fraud, computing hacking, child pornography, and narcotics trafficking."

Liberty Reserve is believed to have more than a million users worldwide, including more than 200,000 in the United States alone. According to the indictment, the company processed more than 12 million transactions annually "and is believed to have laundered more than $6 billion in criminal proceeds" between 2006 and May 2013.

I can't help but think how much of that $6 Billion was from well known financial institutions. I'd bet limbs that HSBC or the like has shoved some cash through this thing at least once.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 31, 2013, 10:32:56 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 31, 2013, 01:18:17 AM
This is hilarious:

http://www.theworld.org/2013/05/northern-ireland-town-fakes-prosperity-for-g8-summit/

QuoteWhat they've done is they have filled the shop front window with a picture of what was the business before it went bankrupt or closed. In other words, grocery shops, butcher shops, pharmacies, you name it, they have placed large photographs in the windows that if you were driving past and glanced out the window, it would look as if this was a thriving business. It's an attempt really by the local authority to make the place look as positive as possible for the visiting G8 leaders and their entourages, and it's really tried to put a mask on a recession that has really hit this part of Ireland really very badly indeed.

Werman: So it's kind of like a trompe l'oeil, and I saw a picture in one newspaper. I'm a little confused because the door looked open.

Keenan: Yeah, it looks as if the door is open and inside you can see a well-stocked shop. It's nothing of the sort. That door has been locked shut for well over a year because that particular business went bust this time last year, and that is an image to make it look as if everything is normal in the town and in the county, but unfortunately it's not. The County of Fermanagh has suffered terribly as a result of the credit crisis and the resulting recession.

IOW, the G8's own Illuminati are just as deceived and misled and propagandized at as the rest of us.

When the queen came over, they actually started up new businesses in the derelict shops which are still doing good business today. Shallow fake facsimiles sounds more appropriate for the g8.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 31, 2013, 10:32:57 AM
Well, I don't know about that, but I can say that $6 billion is small change compared to the extent of money laundering that HSBC and Standard Chartered admitted to in the last couple of years.  As Bill Black points out, "just one facet of Standard Chartered's money laundering and one facet of HSBC's money laundering operation were, respectively, over 40 and 100 times larger than Liberty Reserve's "staggering" total money laundering for all purposes."

Not to say that Liberty Reserve are not shitheels.  They clearly are.  But big thieves hang little thieves, and, well, the state takes its marching orders from the large investment banks. 

I'm speaking literally, by the way (http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/banks-lobbyists-help-in-drafting-financial-bills/).

Quote"Bank lobbyists are not leaving it to lawmakers to draft legislation that softens financial regulations. Instead, the lobbyists are helping to write it themselves."

Citigroup essentially wrote the bill which sailed through House Financial Services Committee this month, over the objections of the Treasury.  Essentially, it deregulates the derivatives market for the banking industry, a $700 trillion dollar market that is dominated (93%) by just four American banks: Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Citigroup.  Edit to add: naturally, large amount of money WHICH ARE TOTALLY NOT BRIBES were spent on convincing Congressmen to vote in favour of HR 992.  More than $1.3 million was donated to the members of the House Financial Services committee in the first quarter of 2013 alone.

Incidentally, getting back to the Liberty Reserve thing, Citigroup bought out Banamex in 2001.  Banamex was the preferred institution for drug money laundering by Raúl Salinas de Gortari, the brother of President Carlos Salinas de Gortari.  Banamex CEO Roberto Hernández has been accused of trafficking cocaine via properties in the Carribbean.

The funds transferred by Raúl Salinas are said to be between $90 million to $100 million...so perhaps not as large as Liberty Reserve, but Salinas is not the only gangster in Mexico with an offshore account. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on May 31, 2013, 10:42:41 AM
Quote from: Faust on May 31, 2013, 10:32:56 AM
When the queen came over, they actually started up new businesses in the derelict shops which are still doing good business today. Shallow fake facsimiles sounds more appropriate for the g8.

True, it is rather apt.  Though IMO, shallow fake fascimiles also sum up the Royal Family quite well...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 31, 2013, 11:10:27 AM
From the Ireland piece:

QuoteWerman: Where is the money coming from for all these very accurate-looking photographs of meat and other things for sale?

Keenan: This is one big initiative really stemming from the Foreign Office in London. This is David Cameron's gig. It's his invitation, it's his decision to host the G8 in County Fermanagh, which is, don't forget, part of the United Kingdom. It's also on the island of Ireland, it's in Northern Ireland, but he will be the hosting head of government and it's his say so. Much of the money that has been spent in and around the host town of Enniskillen, about more than £300,000 worth, that's getting on from half a million dollars, the bulk of the cash and certainly the driving force behind the plans to tidy up the place, that's all coming from London.

Demonstrates that the UK is no longer really a country, it's London with bits attached. This partly makes me question why it was not just held in London anyway. Riot/protest risk? Probable but surely expected.

Surely it would have been easier, quicker and cheaper to get various high street brands to open shops and commit to staff them for say 3 months. I'm sure any reasonably sized company could find a way to write off any expense involved.

On the Liberty Reserve side, it will be interesting to see who ends up swinging in the breeze here. Seems to have much wider implications than I first saw. As always, info appreciated and now I need to read more.



Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on May 31, 2013, 11:24:16 AM
Quote from: Cain on May 31, 2013, 10:42:41 AM
Quote from: Faust on May 31, 2013, 10:32:56 AM
When the queen came over, they actually started up new businesses in the derelict shops which are still doing good business today. Shallow fake facsimiles sounds more appropriate for the g8.

True, it is rather apt.  Though IMO, shallow fake fascimiles also sum up the Royal Family quite well...

Cant speak for the rest of then but she was a nice old lady and very smiley.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 31, 2013, 12:25:58 PM
ad 39544 BS4AM SELL 5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) if?WHEN RSI  5d  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=r14&c=) =>77.7 {AKA 2Hr Turn
ad 39404 CHART(GTLS) :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@GTLS%20%20130720C00100000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@GTLS%20%20130720C00100000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)|SAKS(SKS) :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@SKS%20%20%20130720C00015000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@SKS%20%20%20130720C00015000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) Tuned in ?
ad 39358  i keep 4get'N to tune in the $i'G 3am ch8.1
ad 39287 in my opinion there are 2 ways to see that CORP.charts
As individual unpublished accounts. {Peridoic {{not continious {{{subject2G
39289 enough $/Jok & on2 My WARt/nipON not TBC
/uo  t
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 31, 2013, 12:27:36 PM
3PM?} ad 39544?$?  :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,30433.msg1266178.html#msg1266178)
ad 39538 call it SMALL TIME The main point? NOT LONG TERM
short time theory is opposite the trend when the trend is up the bet is down?{7:10:46 am
4:27 not 3:27 :fnord:  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php)
http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=20241&qm_symbol=CHART Symbol is not valid (GTLS)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 01, 2013, 09:05:09 AM
yeah its Sat ad 39448 :fnord: Jim Cramer  (http://www.cnbc.com/id/15838459) Time for the revised revision,
of the original revised revision, REVISED: CRM1p (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@CRM%20%20%20131116P00045000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) LL1C (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@LL%20%20%20%20131116C00085000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

INDX> 2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)3m  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
2y sell
6m buy is days away
3m buy on yellow line
5d  sell
Hr  am  RSI > 77.7 else 4get it

|eBAY> 2y  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=%2Cm26-12-9&c=)  6m  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=ss&c=) 5d  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=r14&c=)  :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBAY&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)|? :fnord:  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=15460&qm_symbol=EBAY) 52.5octC  (http://www.quotemedia.com/results.php?qm_page=24607&qm_symbol=EBAY)chart1M (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true) 5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 03, 2013, 12:49:46 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-22745618

QuoteSouth African officials are investigating claims ex-Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his family stashed $1bn (£600m) in assets in the country.

Libya has reportedly called for help in repatriating diamonds, gold and cash.

The assets were being held by four banks and security companies in South Africa, reports quoting Libyan investigators say.

Some estimates suggest that Gaddafi's total foreign assets could be worth as much as $80bn.

Gaddafi was captured and killed as he tried to flee his home town of Sirte during Libya's political uprising in October 2011.

Any assets belonging to him or his family are firmly considered by many Libyans as state-owned property that should be returned.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 03, 2013, 01:15:33 AM
Oh, FFS

QuoteA New York-based real estate firm Rapid Realty has offered its 800 employees a 15% pay raise if they tattoo the company's logo onto their bodies, and the offer is snowballing, according to CBS New York. So far, nearly 40 employees accepted the challenge, AOL Jobs reported.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/05/02/employees-get-tattoo-of-company-logo-for-pay-raise/#ixzz2UX1oKNHT
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 03, 2013, 02:41:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on June 03, 2013, 01:15:33 AM
Oh, FFS

QuoteA New York-based real estate firm Rapid Realty has offered its 800 employees a 15% pay raise if they tattoo the company's logo onto their bodies, and the offer is snowballing, according to CBS New York. So far, nearly 40 employees accepted the challenge, AOL Jobs reported.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2013/05/02/employees-get-tattoo-of-company-logo-for-pay-raise/#ixzz2UX1oKNHT

Oh sweet jesus.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 03, 2013, 08:12:25 AM
Yeah, cash for tattoos has been happening for a while. This is the first time I've seen it linked to a pay rise though.

Considering the owner pays for the tattoo and gives the employee a pay rise, that would imply he's got (at least marketing) cash to burn. Which is a little unusual in these economic times. I guess it's kind of unspoken that he could just give everyone a 15% rise and not have them plaster his shitty logo on their skin.

Some kind of pseudo-altruistic power kick I guess.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 03, 2013, 11:37:21 AM
3:33&1/3 AM blow by blow | Meet the press on NBC | Not Cram Her
at this time trading in London ? NY open in a couple hours
http://www.forexlive.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/1154-650x343.png nikkie
http://gw.londonstockexchange.com/StaticImages/SummaryChart2_15.UKX.png {FTSE.sell {{AG.sell
http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif   {3:03:33 am PSt {{Board T
Tiz true | not a buy by by 1 | AM A sell SELL sell type eBay.5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@EBAY%20%20131019C00052500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
5ampdT Asia on opb/pbs CH10.1 Look sell  3con | so on open + on RSI + ?
although the truth is I WAS ASLEAP, never the less it is
also true it opened at 5 and out at 4 does = 1 on the day, thus is 2bank:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 03, 2013, 01:09:32 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on June 03, 2013, 08:12:25 AM
Yeah, cash for tattoos has been happening for a while. This is the first time I've seen it linked to a pay rise though.

Considering the owner pays for the tattoo and gives the employee a pay rise, that would imply he's got (at least marketing) cash to burn. Which is a little unusual in these economic times. I guess it's kind of unspoken that he could just give everyone a 15% rise and not have them plaster his shitty logo on their skin.

Some kind of pseudo-altruistic power kick I guess.

Large companies, such as the banking sector and real estate, returned to pre-crash levels of profit from around 2011 onwards.

There is a lot of money sloshing around, there are just less jobs, meaning downward pressure on wages, meaning frankly repulsive power tripping like this is considered acceptable practice.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 03, 2013, 04:29:54 PM
Cain, is this credible?

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 03, 2013, 04:32:49 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 03, 2013, 04:29:54 PM
Cain, is this credible?

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola

I posted a link to the same thing, about 3 months ago.  Not the same article, but the same Warren Buffet information.  I would have expected no less than what Buffet did.  The fact is, the companies that outsourced so much over the last 30 years are now finding that nobody can afford their product, so they're borrowing to exist, instead of borrowing to expand.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 03, 2013, 04:38:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 03, 2013, 04:32:49 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 03, 2013, 04:29:54 PM
Cain, is this credible?

http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/billionaires-dump-economist-stock/2012/08/29/id/450265?PROMO_CODE=110D8-1&utm_source=taboola

I posted a link to the same thing, about 3 months ago.  Not the same article, but the same Warren Buffet information.  I would have expected no less than what Buffet did.  The fact is, the companies that outsourced so much over the last 30 years are now finding that nobody can afford their product, so they're borrowing to exist, instead of borrowing to expand.

I remember you talking about that, and that's part of what made this article stand out to me.

I just want to know when it's safe to stop paying my mortgage.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 03, 2013, 04:41:30 PM
Well, the article is trying to sell the book at the bottom, hence the sensationalistic presentation.

95% market correction sounds like bullshit, too.  Not to mention, Buffett can be and has been significantly wrong in selling stocks before.  Investors, even as skilled as he are, become prone to certain patterns of thinking and beliefs which can end up affecting their overall performance, and some of the stocks Buffett has dumped recently have gone on to do well.

That said, with the Fed stopping quantative easing, the issues in Japan, China and Europe, I wouldn't blame anyone for being somewhat pessimistic about where the market will be going in the next couple of years. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 04, 2013, 01:56:53 AM
blow blow blow bs con tin U ed
thus i did go to the bank about 12:34
i took a share of sunshine to (UM}  dump
never mind i checked the  bank stock chart :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=UMPQ&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=fs,ss,r14&lang=en-US&region=US) while waiting
the bank was very busy so there was a long LONG wait.
i saw that the bank stock was up / and when i began ..
writing these lines i thought it was a buy signal ?
now i see et took a dip later so ?/?
My guess still is there will be a bounce off the yellow line :fnord:  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)
& so now i am a bit confused {never mind sell Sell SELL:
LOOK? IT POSSIBLE?  even probable that Monday(3)
was indeed a reversal day (yellow line not hit
so in that case there would be a buy signal in the post after next
HOWEVER since i am  simply Sell person?
it makes sense once the buy signal happens, to sell a put
PUT in context that means pick a stock that follows
not a leader as i thoght the bank might be maybe gamble :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=PG&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180)
ok looks like PG is the Sell the buy  on this line
so I C 77.66  but get a pop uP too so redirect'N
To view the interactive charts download and install the latest version of Flash {No.
& LOOK FOR 5d :fnord:  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=PG&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
quotemedia GETS ME BEYOND  the yahoo  hol out
and by the looks of this PG is a leader and not tha 1 to choose Tuesday
TBC Tuesday MoRn
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 04, 2013, 05:03:03 AM
Preamble to Tuesday SELL? ||||||||| 9 chosen 4no reason
ACTIVE
0 GE (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=GE&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
2 VALE (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=VALE&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
4 JPM (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=JPM&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
VOLATILE
1 ALK (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=ALK&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
3 MPC (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=MPC&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
9 VRX (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=VRX&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
DIVIDEND
6 VOC (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=VOC&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
7 VIP (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=VIP&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
8 PT (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=PT&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=195&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)

IN TODAYS ENTRIES ge & alk Lead the rally
by days .. while at the same time the dividend stocks trail
in as much as it is a trailing one that is of interest?
one of those kind will be found as they have not yet turned up
SUBJECT of course to last minute revisions
00:00:00.0 pdT {Not board VRX5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@VRX%20%20%20130622P00087500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 04, 2013, 08:33:25 AM
40099133485

|___________________________|  DOW [url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US] [color=blue]2y[/color] [/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US][color=blue]6m[/color] [/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US] [color=blue]3m[/color][/url][url=http://www.curtrenz.com/] [color=blue]3mC[/color] [/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US][color=blue]5d[/color] [/url][url=http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&&symbol=DJI&chscale=1d&chtype=FinancialCandleStick&chwid=709&chhig=350&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true][color=blue] 1d[/color][/url]
[img height=110 width=220]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]    [img height=100]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eDJI&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]

|___________________________|  DAX  [url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US] 2y[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US] 6m[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US] 3m[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US] 5d[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180] 1d[/url]
[img height=110 width=220]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]  [img height=100 width=240]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]

|___________________________|  N/SP [url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US]2y[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US] 6m[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=v&p=m10&lang=en-US&region=US] 3m[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US] 3m[/url][url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US] 5d[/url][url=http://www.nikkei.co.jp/gifdata/nk_chart_L.gif] 1d[/url]
[img height=110 width=220]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]   [img height=100 width=180]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eN225&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]

[url=http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US]EWZ[/url]






Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 06, 2013, 12:41:38 AM
DOW ag|/ (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif). (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@QQQ%20%20%20130705P00074000&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)KGC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |  2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 3mC  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&&symbol=DJI&chscale=1d&chtype=FinancialCandleStick&chwid=709&chhig=350&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   Q5/S&P (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=QQQ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 07, 2013, 11:09:38 AM
Brazil EWZ (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Bovespa (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/brazil-stock-market.png?s=ibov) | B/V5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |  VRX5d (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@VRX%20%20%20130622P00087500&chscale=5d&chtype=AreaChart&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)   bmrn1m

6/7  VRX 87.5 Jun 22, 2013  4.6 -3.4=+       1.2   
     BMRN 60.0 Jun 22, 2013  2.65-2.5=+.15*2= .3  (http://app.quotemedia.com/quotetools/getChart?webmasterId=500&snap=true&symbol=@BMRN%20%20130622P00060000&chscale=1m&chtype=AreaChart&locale=en_US&chwid=277&chhig=116&chpccol=ff0000&chfrmon=false&chton=false&chpcon=true)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:10:06 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22840878

Odd angle here on payday loan (Wage Slavery 2- Electric Boogaloo) firms:

QuoteThe NUS is urging colleges and universities to ban adverts by these companies.

"Students are struggling to make ends meet, and this is having a real impact on their wellbeing and their education," said Pete Mercer, from the NUS.

"It is great that these institutions have already joined our campaign, and I hope that others will soon follow suit."

But Russell Hamblin-Boone, chief executive of the CFA, said the campaign was misjudged.

"It is concerning that the NUS is denying choices to its members, who are all educated and intelligent people, without fully understanding either the short-term lending industry or the way young people are managing their finances in 2013," he said.

"Payday loans are extremely flexible, but that does not make them right for everybody. To get a loan from a reputable and responsible short-term lender you need both regular and disposable income."

This meant it was not the correct choice for many students, he said.

"We fully support the desire of the NUS to protect its students and any efforts to drive out rogue lenders, but this campaign against advertising on campus will do little to tackle bad lending practice, and discredits the whole industry unjustifiably," he added.

Students say no adverts, half the piece is pretty much an advert for payday loans. There's one line of quote from a student, and a good 3 paragrapghs from this 3 letter agency.

Who are the CFA?

Well, wikipedia gave me this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Consumer+Finance+Association+&go=Go

And going for CFA got nothing either.

Hmm. Well let's find their webpage.

http://www.cfa-uk.co.uk/about/the-cfa/our-role.html

QuoteOur role
The CFA is the principal trade association representing the interests of major short-term lending businesses operating in the UK. The CFA is setting the standards for payday lenders by driving industry improvements and best practice and through proactively participating in consultations and research about the industry.


Sounds like a lobby group of some sort to me.

This isn't even beginning to touch on the general predatory nature of this shit in general, and the probability of such an association is to generally allow it's members to hide behind a veneer of respectability. Who are the members?

http://www.cfa-uk.co.uk/about/cfa-members.html

Less than a dozen fairly prominent payday loan firms and pawnbrokers. All of whom have considerable ammounts of negative tales kicking around in relation to them.

Welcome to the new way. Hock your shit to get to the next meal and think its right for you! Then buy some more expensive shit on credit to hock later. Or Terrorists.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:14:25 PM
By the by,
http://www.cfa-uk.co.uk/information-centre/industry-briefings/current-briefings/young-people-and-their-finances.html

QuoteStudents
When they reach further and higher education, the average annual income of a typical student is around £7,000, 46% of which is derived from student loans. With money tight, 49% of students say that they have taken on a full or part time job in the last academic year, with 43% of them saying they did so to support themselves through university and help make ends meet.

Yeah. Those students all get turned away at the door. Don't hate the moneylenders.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 10, 2013, 08:18:03 PM
Yes, the CFA is the "professional" trade body of the payday loan business.

Professional in scare quotes because it's not exactly clear how professional companies who target under 18s, the mentally ill and those who are intoxicated when signing the agreement forms really are.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:30:17 PM
This mainy caught my eye as the "towns" around this way have most of those shops in each. I'm certain you could find a branch of any of those members within 25 miles of where I'm sitting now, tops.

There's also the thing of businesses like this thriving in economic times like this. Gives them a certain incentive to keep things like this for as long as possible. In the meantime get as many as possible into the cycle of just spending 5/10/20/50... more prior to each payday with forever extending options and renewals. Getting them at University is pretty much a loan sharks wet dream. Still young enough for a clean-ish credit score which I'm pretty certain will make up 80%+ of the decision. A shit credit rating won't exclude you, you'll just have an APR similar to your phone number.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on June 11, 2013, 05:31:44 AM
My former neighbor's kid got a payday loan and couldn't pay it on time. He was terrified because he got a phone call at work from a guy saying he had to come up with the full amount plus a shitload of interest before his "court date" in two days. It was over $1000, about double what he originally borrowed.

I asked him if he'd gotten a court summons. Nope. I googled the guys phone number and a bunch of stuff came up about how it was a bullshit extortion racket.

He called the payday loan place and they said they didn't even have it anymore, they sent it to "collections".

He never paid it, but I wonder how many people fall for that
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on June 11, 2013, 11:07:39 AM
I thought payday loans companies were charitable organisations, giving you free money, which you don't have to give back. Did I do it wrong again? :?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 11, 2013, 03:25:07 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on June 11, 2013, 11:07:39 AM
I thought payday loans companies were charitable organisations, giving you free money, which you don't have to give back. Did I do it wrong again? :?

There's a slight difference between a "loan" and "usury".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on June 11, 2013, 03:45:30 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on June 11, 2013, 03:25:07 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on June 11, 2013, 11:07:39 AM
I thought payday loans companies were charitable organisations, giving you free money, which you don't have to give back. Did I do it wrong again? :?

There's a slight difference between a "loan" and "usury".

This.

He'd have paid the loan back to the place he got it from, in time, with some interest. He was working at Whataburger, that's the reason he was late in the first place - he didn't HAVE any extra money half the time.

Paying a (supposedly) outside agency that wants double the amount, makes insanely false threats and is likely to just pocket the money anyway rather than applying it to the debt is another ball of wax.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 11, 2013, 04:17:22 PM
Aren't deregulation and the free market great?!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 11, 2013, 04:18:38 PM
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 11, 2013, 04:17:22 PM
Aren't deregulation and the free market great?!

Sure, if you're the human equivalent of a tape worm.   :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Anna Mae Bollocks on June 11, 2013, 04:22:43 PM
What happens once they're bled the poor to death? */rhetorical*
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 11, 2013, 11:30:12 PM
Behold, two terrible casualties of the banking crisis.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22865297

QuoteMr Crosby's knighthood is the second casualty of the banking crisis. Fred Goodwin, the former chief executive of Royal Bank of Scotland, was stripped of his knighthood in 2012 after leading the bank to near-collapse in 2008, and an eventual multi-billion pound government bailout.

I really am glad that whole thing only cost two knighthoods. It could have fucked the world or something.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 12, 2013, 12:16:36 AM
Wednesday | there were scores of WiFi drop carriers today
litterly 1 fore ever mouse click on SAVE | 1 in place now 23:00

Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on June 11, 2013, 04:17:22 PM
Aren't deregulation and the free market great?!
& WHERE WERE the two of them hanging out Tuesday ?

Quote from: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:10:06 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:14:25 PM
Quote from: Cain on June 10, 2013, 08:18:03 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on June 10, 2013, 08:30:17 PM
Quote from: stelz on June 11, 2013, 05:31:44 AM
UNsure how to bundle  these ~" Ill us ion s'$ "~  for reSaiL

I DO recognize the chart pattern
&THus can qUote Prev Close 3.45
was 84% MOV v FROM mY 4.1 F

ad 40300 10:10:10.0110
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 13, 2013, 06:12:56 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on June 06, 2013, 12:41:38 AM
DOW (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EDJI&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=) ag|/ (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif) KGC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |  2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 3mC  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d   (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Q5/S&P (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=QQQ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)   spy?dow :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=DOW&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) SPY (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Quote from: hirley0 on June 07, 2013, 12:51:36 AM
DAX  2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180) | CVS5PMC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=PMC&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) CVS60WAG (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=WAG&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) | forecast (http://www.forecasts.org/dax.htm)( :fnord: ) (http://www.forecasts.org/images/stock-market/dax.gif)McD (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=DAX&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=125284&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=973255629&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1) |
Celesio AG (CAKFY.PK)(CAKFF.PK) is a German pharmaceutical |n,cludes: CVS, PMC, WAG
Quote from: hirley0 on June 07, 2013, 11:09:38 AM
Brazil EWZ (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Bovespa (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/brazil-stock-market.png?s=ibov) | B/V5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |
NIKKEI 2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=v&p=m10&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://www.nikkei.co.jp/gifdata/nk_chart_L.gif) |  TKECF (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) |_China_>SSE> 2y (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/china-stock-market.png?s=shcomp) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EN225&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 15, 2013, 08:44:27 PM
ad 40802 {Mon 6/24 6:46am pdT y=a*b^x a=15.48 b.99 =?14.54
ad 40388 ^ Not worth 1 Ms. Yeah: noW it has returned? See @}
ad 40422 donno/don't give a rats pelt/-WiF mY GUESS=\  SEEW (http://www.forecasts.org/djia.htm)X (http://www.forecasts.org/dax.htm)Y (http://www.forecasts.org/nikkei225.htm)
ad 40461 0K the guess is down\ when? / Looking ?
| g1 SPY (http://www.curtrenz.com/) ABOVE 165 then down below 50dMA towards the 200dMA line
ad 40802 {XpecK 155 ?/? \_ y=a*b^x Remember {{No:
| g2 60d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5EDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) stoc will remain below 50 for weeks & move below 20
ad 40802 {SAME OPINION
| g3 today5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5EDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) get out when RSI returns above 50 ? close
ad 40802  {SHOULD HIT 20 AGAIN?
| g4  A  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)Way (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) to play MAY be VRX or BMRN 2avoid?
ad 40802 {BMRN {{ NOT VRX
| g5 TM (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5EN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) in the PM RSI at 80 ob {sell C
ad 40802 {has me guessing {{AVoid for now
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 18, 2013, 01:03:01 PM
Remember the LIBOR fuckup? Well, we've finally been able to charge someone:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22952843

QuoteFormer UBS and Citigroup trader Tom Hayes has been charged by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in connection with its investigation into the manipulation of Libor.

Mr Hayes, 33, has been charged with eight counts of conspiracy to defraud, and will appear before Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday.

These are the SFO's first criminal charges related to Libor.

Mr Hayes, who is a British citizen, has previously denied any wrongdoing.

He was arrested by police and the SFO last year alongside two other traders.

A small step, but a positive one. It really should embarrass a lot more people at the total lack of repercussions involved for doing this kind of shit. It's almost enough to make you start to think that they might benefit from it or something.

Some quick HA HA
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22949338

QuoteChancellor George Osborne has announced plans to stop multinationals hiding their profits from the taxman in shadowy offshore "shell" companies.

He pledged to set up a UK register of beneficial ownership - which could be open to the public - to make it clear who was gaining from such arrangements.

The chancellor hopes other G8 nations will sign up to the idea.

He said more progress had been made on reforming the global tax system in the past 24 hours than the "past 24 years".

So it'll be even more shocking when nothing happens then. This wanker's been promising reform in this area for years and still hasn't lifted a finger. No mention of the "progress" under previous governments which included some very clever deals to sell government buildings to off-shore companies and then rent them back. The vast majority of government buildings ARE tax dodges. No wonder google/Vodaphone/Etc. execs keep looking at you like you've shat the bed and want a cuddle.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 18, 2013, 01:40:19 PM
He's 33, and the LIBOR rigging has been going on since 2005.  This trader's a fall guy, nothing more.  And no doubt there's a nice retirement plan waiting for him, assuming he can keep his mouth shut.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 18, 2013, 01:45:47 PM
Considering the banking convictions at large, it seems likely that anyone convicted is a fall guy. All of them so far seem fucking puny in real terms.

Is there anyone of note actually facing real consequences yet?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on June 18, 2013, 01:58:48 PM
There was that guy, what was he called again ... oh, yeah - the taxpayer  :argh!:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 18, 2013, 08:18:27 PM
in another hour it will be WEdnesday already
& a rather strange day for me to say the least
the TRACK aka 4th& Alder { timing? peliminary practice ?
i poise i'LL try Belmont thats 5 after Just a min
http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/BEL061913USA-EQB.html
Just Race #1 $60,000. For Maidens, Foaled In New Y & {never mind
its just practice crossing Broadway on Alder at 10 to 10 PDt
@2 at 8/5 is all i care to mention
then there's the Farmers market at she*'s park ? Whats its name?
zuccini {never Mind 2:30 PM buhs / LUNCHinn { oh {{ what {{{WHO
Back by 4? 4th again?/? the 9th at Belmont Hiss STORY try Arlington
http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/AP061913USA-EQB.html {nopE
http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/PEN061913USA-EQB.html {nopE
http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/IND061913USA-EQB.html  {#4R5
{LoC LoC LoC 1 PER LINE VALLY FUNny + 1 MORE JUST NOW2


YEAH?yeah THUS i went down to 4th AVe via Alder
to wageR on1, it was a new event for me {LoC
So i looked as best as i could at the multitude of screens
both on the entry level & also downstairs| unable to see what i was
looking around for i grabed the ?"schedule"? 6-17-23 Fa was not
listedbut Prax was at 10AM? i ASK THE TICKET LADY but i
translated Fa wrong & got now were using her hand held?
in as much as i had gone that far i decided to watch A
race. #10 was favorite & ran last. when the race finished
the screen jumped to the Fa Track, i wondered what was
coming thru A switch from T1 to T2 on the East screen
after a breef Fa screen the screen returned to T1
i left in a bit of confusion / with the Schedule in
pocket and got Symphony bars on sale at rite aid
the a pass thru Nordstrums for polo on my way to
9th/salmon for dinner/Lunchmenu &2 Bank 4 {never mind
Bread & Braunschweiger at Safeway & now 12:34 pdT{{Last Edit: Today at 11:34:50 am
ps DON'T WANT TO 4GET TO MENTION TODAYS vrx MOVE
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 09:18:08 AM
Ah.

Ha.

Ha ha.

HA HA HA

AHAHAHAHAHHAHA

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22954586

Oh gods, my sides, they ache

QuoteSenior bankers guilty of reckless misconduct should be jailed, a long-awaited report on banking commissioned by the government has recommended.

The Parliamentary Commission on Banking Standards was set up by Chancellor George Osborne last year after a number of scandals involving the industry.

The cross-party group's fifth report attacked the lack of accountability of bankers and also said some bonuses should be withheld for up to 10 years.

It gets better.

QuoteThe report advocated:

senior bankers should be assigned clear personal responsibilities, with the legal onus on them to show they have done all that is reasonably required

recklessly disregarding these responsibilities should be made a criminal offence - including a possible prison sentence

senior bankers - and anyone in a position to cause the bank serious harm, such as top traders - should adhere to a new set of banking standards set by regulators

pay for bankers should be deferred for up to 10 years, with the ultimate payout linked to the long-term performance of the bank and of the employee's particular business area

deferred pay and pension rights should also be cancellable if a banker misbehaves, or - in the case of senior managers - if the bank has to be bailed out

banks should be legally required to put financial safety ahead of shareholder interests

Thinking about similarites to Leveson yet? You should be.

QuoteThe committee also criticised the male-dominated culture on trading floors, saying banks should be required to publish their gender ratios and take action where there is a significant imbalance.

I'm sure they'll get right on that.

Anyway, more HA HA at the link. Everyone can now go and give each other a good stroke about how they've figured it all out now so it's only a matter of time until it's all AOK again. Note - The media has effectively beaten any Leveson reforms into dust. Anything likely to be implemented from that will be a joke and back to business as usual. Considering the current (Or any likely) UK government I doubt they're that worried.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on June 19, 2013, 09:42:58 AM
LOL, yeah. I wonder how much that exercise in stating the utterly fucking obvious cost us?

Next the gravity inquiry - 6 months, 20 million bucks on executive lunches to find out that, yes, gravity is an actual thing

Someone explained to me a while back why we need these fucking idiots but I can't for the life of me remember
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 09:54:14 AM
As far as I can figure, to give jobs to the boys, you need some cushy jobs first. Explains the abundance of Quangos and committees and such.

It's very important to have important people ask other important people questions about their important business. Then you can all calmly agree that a a very nasty crime has gone on and we shall not talk about it like that at all.

The vast majority of the Leveson issues were actual clear cut criminal issues. Many of the banking issues seem to be clear cut criminal issues. Don't worry about that though. We're getting a shiny new regulator. Because the FSA does/did/claimed to do such a fucking wonderful job.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:06:45 AM
Did anyone else notice this in the sidebar?

QuoteThe bill gives the Treasury the power to impose tougher requirements on banks to increase their ability to absorb losses, in particular by requiring a bank to borrow money from markets in a form that allows the bank to impose losses on the lenders if it gets into trouble.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 10:27:45 AM
Oh shit, I missed that.

That's a nice bit of icing around the pill in a worst case situation. My guess is that will get into statue somehow, the rest..... probably not.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:32:14 AM
Well, Osborne roused himself from his party strategic musings (his real job - Chancellor is only his cover identity (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9883373/George-Osborne-should-stick-to-his-job-and-leave-politicking-to-others.html)) to say that the findings of the inquiry "may" affect the Banking Reguations Bill.

Which is of course political code for "go fuck yourself".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on June 19, 2013, 10:45:53 AM
Is there any single sentence in political parlance that isn't code for "go fuck yourself"?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 10:51:55 AM
Quote from: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:32:14 AM
Well, Osborne roused himself from his party strategic musings (his real job - Chancellor is only his cover identity (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9883373/George-Osborne-should-stick-to-his-job-and-leave-politicking-to-others.html)) to say that the findings of the inquiry "may" affect the Banking Reguations Bill.

Which is of course political code for "go fuck yourself".

This is most unusual.

I thought the way to behave in government these days was to swear to implement all reforms immediately in full, regardless of what the actually are or are about. Then impersonate a fish on dry land for a few weeks until the next scandal.

Very odd. Far too cautious. Must be a reptoid.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:52:00 AM
"Go fuck yourself" itself.

Unfortunately, that only ever seems to get any form of use in Australia's Parliament.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:53:08 AM
Quote from: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 10:51:55 AM
Quote from: Cain on June 19, 2013, 10:32:14 AM
Well, Osborne roused himself from his party strategic musings (his real job - Chancellor is only his cover identity (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/georgeosborne/9883373/George-Osborne-should-stick-to-his-job-and-leave-politicking-to-others.html)) to say that the findings of the inquiry "may" affect the Banking Reguations Bill.

Which is of course political code for "go fuck yourself".

This is most unusual.

I thought the way to behave in government these days was to swear to implement all reforms immediately in full, regardless of what the actually are or are about. Then impersonate a fish on dry land for a few weeks until the next scandal.

Very odd. Far too cautious. Must be a reptoid.

Well, we do know his boss, David Cameron, is a lizard (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/16/charlie-brooker-cameron-a-lizard).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 10:56:00 AM
I thought Cameron was some kind of Skin-suit that Blair invented.

The more you know.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 19, 2013, 04:39:42 PM
Wait, what?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-22977174

QuoteItalian fashion designers Domenico Dolce and Stefano Gabbana have been sentenced to jail in Italy for one year and eight months for tax evasion.

The pair were not at the trial and deny the charges.

They are accused of hiding millions of euros from Italian tax authorities.

Dolce and Gabbana have not yet given a public comment on the sentence and are likely to appeal the verdict. They are said to be unlikely to go to jail any time soon.

I need to get into the Italian justice system more. Corrupt and incompetent seem to be the watchwords.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 22, 2013, 03:47:15 PM
ad 40725 is the global Econ worth a whole line? http://www.curtrenz.com/
i sort of doubt that. that is worth a dropped carrier there is 0 doubt
maybe more than 1 any way i xpect a double top {LoC2
So 5/17 to 6/17 = 30d Shirley the second is at least a month away
and it's not out of the question that the bottom of the dip
May be that far out itself, Just when that event takes place is a?
i'LL leave to others to debait /-/AHa hasta" LegGo'
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on June 23, 2013, 05:30:42 PM
40769 to boaring for words {LoC1
to reel to be allowed as thought without LoC & ASSociated time delays
- {never mind , the origonal thought has vanished
www.how-do-you-spell.com/origional
ictionary.reference.com/browse/original
LoC2,3 &4?Loss of Carrier :::
anyway about the time interval between the doubling of the price
which i say in the prior 4 score has been 20 years ? Price doubled twice?
My guess is the period has changed, and is probably half what it was
& will continue to be shorter & shorter as the length of the year ?/?
increases /-/A HA ha not funNY My JoK {never mind bac2
tomorrows open | where ? Tokoyo ? Minilla | where does matter
Not at the pole | Now on to the graphics .. not POLAR yet U bet
LoC5,6 &7?
- {never mind , the origonal thought has vanished
www.how-do-you-spell.com/origional
ictionary.reference.com/browse/original
LoC2,3 &4?Loss of Carrier :::
anyway about the time interval between the doubling of the price
which i say in the prior 4 score has been 20 years ? Price doubled twice?
My guess is the period has changed, and is probably half what it was
& will continue to be shorter & shorter as the length of the year ?/?
increases /-/A HA ha not funNY My JoK {never mind bac2
tomorrows open | where ? Tokoyo ? Minilla | where does matter
Not at the pole | Now on to the graphics .. not POLAR yet U bet LoC5

http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.msg1269670.html#msg1269670
YEAH? LooK BACK THERE? read up g5,4,3 etc
mY gUESS IS ITS TIME TO exit spy?dow :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=DOW&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 7:47AM PDT

XactLy Y i check this BS is Beyond Some Reason : i did check the German
forcast for the DOW  the July Low 145? was touched today ?/? so maybe
its over. i rather 'poise another gap down tomorrow? so at this time ..
NoOn My guess is to take a day trade profit | Mkt oN close & remain
short anyway as far as my real view why do anything
its all just propaanda. telling me that the Sandcockewes are worth
tv min and Japan is worth something?/? Maybe a waist deposit
of UNwanted materials, to the depth of the tallest structure. bac2QU:{LoC

ad 40853 There are possibly afew more points on the DOWN side
However with my monitor down, my only statement must be
GET OU & TAY OUT BAC2hOs ASAP {? 4July ?
ad 40892 new monitor off junk pile & time to reboot = 0"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 24, 2013, 08:58:39 AM
Some HO HO sir?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23020508

QuoteThe number of cases of serious tax evasion are at their lowest level in the five years, despite widespread belief it is on the rise, according to a report by law firm Pinsent Masons.

HM Revenue and Customs defines tax evasion as "serious" when the sum involved is higher than £50,000 or it is worthy of prosecution.

HMRC found evasion cases fell 16% between the two most recent tax years.

The report comes as governments have vowed to cut corporate tax avoidance.

HMRC's local offices reported 2,888 suspected cases of tax evasion, down from 3,456 in the previous 12 months, it said.

HO HO HO.

The missing word here is "Detected".

Remember that HMRC have had lay-offs like everywhere else. And that they are still taking the "Light regulatory touch" approach to tax(I.e - Pay what you want) which is why Starbucks recently paid what they felt they could get away with.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 27, 2013, 08:23:55 AM
Totally shocking news:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23065501
QuoteThe Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has referred the payday lending industry to the Competition Commission because of concerns about "deep-rooted problems with the way competition works".

The OFT said it found that customers found it difficult to identify or compare the full cost of payday loans.

The OFT added that there were barriers to switching between lenders when loans were "rolled over".

It was also concerned that competition was based on speed rather than cost.

"The competitive pressure to approve loans quickly may give firms an incentive to skimp on the affordability assessment which is designed to prevent irresponsible lending and protect consumers," the OFT said in a statement.

No surprises, but just wait to see how toothless the regulation, if any is. If you can get an MP's ear for a couple of grand, I bet they've got more than a couple of mates in Government.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 27, 2013, 08:20:47 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23081752

QuoteThe so-called Anglo tapes date from September 2008 when the bank was on the verge of collapse.

Former chief executive of the bank, David Drumm, can be heard setting out the strategy for the meeting.

"Get into the f***ing simple speak: 'We need the moolah, you have it, so you're going to give it to us and when would that be?' We'll start there," he said.

Mr Drumm was speaking on the phone to Director of Treasury John Bowe.

He said he would threaten regulators unless they wrote him a cheque.

"I'm going to keep asking the thick question: 'When, when is the cheque arriving?'" he said.
...

"Because if they don't give it [7bn euro (£5.9bn] to us on Monday, they have a bank collapse. If the f***ing money keeps running out the door, the way it has been running out the door."

The former bank chief said he would "lose the plot" and threaten to hand over the keys to the bank and walk away.

He said: "If you want the f***ing keys now, I can give them to you. So I'm relaxed about it."

Classy. Talk about entitlement writ large. I wonder how many other banking execs made calls like this?

It also gives a bit of an insight into the way banks interact with government.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 27, 2013, 08:32:50 PM
No surprises:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/top-tory-funder-runs-highcost-loans-company-8656356.html
QuoteA top Conservative Party funder is revealed today as the man behind one of Britain's biggest high-cost lenders.

Financier Henry Angest – a friend of the Camerons and a former Tory Treasurer – gave the Conservatives a £5m overdraft facility shortly before the last General Election at an attractive interest rate of just 3.5 per cent.

The high-cost credit company Mr Angest controls, Everyday Loans, charges members of the public interest at an average 74.8 per cent APR.

Indicates the continued secured future of payday loans with an APR of Fuckyou%.

QuoteThe Tory grandee behind one of Britain's biggest high-cost lenders, Henry Angest, is estimated to earn £519,000 as chief executive of the exclusive private bank Arbuthnot. He is one of the Conservative Party's largest financial backers, having channelled almost £7m to the Tories in loans and donations over the past decade.

Married to Dorothy, he is a publicity-shy, Swiss-born, respected City investment banker who is a former master of the Worshipful Company of International Bankers. His passion – apparently – is dendrology, the study of trees.

A google on the bold leads to a font of shitbaggery.

http://www.internationalbankers.co.uk/content/master_court.aspx

A few names on that list stand out as obvious bastards. I suspect you can tell a lot just by the nature and structure of the pseudo-freemason thing. For instance, bankers getting their jollies from a club they've set up. Which in no way assists the cartel aspect of banking at all.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on June 28, 2013, 11:33:31 AM
Via Naked Capitalism, a 2008 paper:

http://emlab.berkeley.edu/users/webfac/bardhan/e271_f08/suresh.pdf

QuoteCovert operations organized and abetted by foreign governments have played a substantial role in the political and economic development of poorer countries around the world. We look at CIA-backed coups against governments which had nationalized a considerable amount of foreign investment. Using an event-study methodology, we find that private information regarding coup authorizations and planning by the U.S. government increased the stock prices of expropriated multinationals that stood to benefit from the regime change. The presence of these abnormal returns suggests that there were leaks from the CIA or others in the executive branch of government to asset traders or that government officials with access to this information themselves traded upon it. Consistent with theories of asset price determination under private information, this information took some time to be fully reflected in the stock price. Moreover, the evidence we find suggests that coup authorization information was only present in large, politically connected companies which were also highly exposed.

This could also link into PRISM and NSA surveillance, though we have no evidence as of yet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on June 29, 2013, 10:13:42 AM
Oh, very interesting...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 02, 2013, 05:32:13 PM
ad 41381 4NuK2 :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,31493.msg1275491.html#msg1275491) 41404 Lots4 ?buy?{ad 41440 ad 41454} 41577
ad 41358 the color is fixed? does the trix's <Ro-oL>
ad 41317 Really TV.cam ON WRONG SIDE OF  ЯR >pr.CAM {IMO
Look elsewhere to pass the time  :fnord:  (http://www.equibase.com/static/entry/index.html?SAP=TN)
^read up^ todays opinion is the MkT is as doo dead on open
THUS ?/? $60/MONTH OF ELECTRICITY was about
THUS ?/? $60/MONTH OF ELECTRICITY was about
4. $60 = Cost Of Usage ==  kWh rate * Kilowatt Hours (kWh)  (.1*600)
3. 600 = Kilowatt Hour (kWh) == Hours Of Use * Kilowatt (kW) ((24*30)*.8 )
2. .8 = Kilowatt (kW) == Watts / 1000 ( 800 }?
1. 800 = Watts ==Volt x Amps   (120 * 7}?
0. 7to11   AMps = About Ten*6.24e18 OR 7e17 electron's per sec *2.6e6 /M
-. 2e24    per Month {Maybe {{ check it for yourself {{{ Errors probable
-- 6000¢/2e24 = 10^20electron'$=.3¢ { again Maybe
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_electrons_per_second_does_one_amp_equal
http://www.wrecc.com/residential/simpleElectricalFormulas.aspx
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_electrons_in_1_kWh
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_electrons_per_second_does_one_amp_equal
http://www.wrecc.com/residential/simpleElectricalFormulas.aspx
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_electrons_in_1_kWh
?1 (http://www.energylens.com/articles/kw-and-kwh)
LINK bac2 JUNE (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.msg1269161.html#msg1269161) One ampere is 6.25 X 10^18 electrons per second
http://www.webmath.com/kwh.html $0.05 per kiloWatt-hour is a "ball park" cost for electricity
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_pricing BUY}Kuwait, Russia, Bhutan | SELL Solomon Islands, Denmark
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source NG:65.5 SolarT251
Coasting along with the IMf WBo & a 3rd ACrowNIM i dont know ECB
below may be my view of the exchange rates for " THE ELECTRON " ^READ UP^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 10, 2013, 08:32:16 PM
v DOWN v
ad 41500 tekcf ? bmrn  5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V5d
ad 41563  yeah: LoOks like its OvEr A.M. Lost? is my guess
ad 41618  { Maybe?/? if long? sell the open & take the cash
ad 41643 Look? With A German offing France Seams a sure bet

(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 11, 2013, 12:23:49 AM
HA HA
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23249466

QuotePostal workers are set to receive millions of pounds' worth of Royal Mail shares when the company is privatised later this year.

Business Secretary Vince Cable said employees would be given 10% of shares as part of a stock market flotation.

He described it as "the biggest employee share scheme for nearly 30 years".

Unions have reacted angrily to the plans and have threatened to ballot for strike action.

The Communication Workers Union (CWU) said the sale of Royal Mail was "unwanted by public, customers and the workers".

PRIVATISE ALL THE THINGS. FREE MARKET. SOMETHING.

There's only one way this will end. I never liked post anyway. No doubt there will be a lovely slice of corruption to go along with this somewhere too.

Totally unrealated topic, totally not a bung for everyone to keep quiet about everyone else's fuckups/bribes/other:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23262503

QuoteThe MPs' expenses watchdog will recommend a pay rise for MPs to £74,000 but will say there should be cuts to other allowances, the BBC has learned.

BBC political editor Nick Robinson says the body will back a rise for after the 2015 election but will recommend a less generous pension scheme.

There could also be cuts to meal allowances and taxi claims.

The proposals, to be unveiled on Thursday, will go to consultation before being finalised later this year.

MPs are currently paid £66,396, but that is due to rise to £67,060 in April 2014 and rise by a further 1% the following year.

The recommendation amounts to a rise of around £6,300 a year, or 9.3%, on what MPs would be getting in 2015.

Suddenly a lot of UK politicians have a lot of flattering things to say about the lawyers running IPSA. Total co-incidence.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 11, 2013, 12:30:16 AM
Paranoid fantasy moment - Royal mail sell off forces more communication electronically. The idea of this being pre-meditated for that exact effect is somewhat concerning. It would certainly seem easier for a government to totally monitor digital communications compared to physical mail.

Please, anyone, tell me that's utterly insane.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 15, 2013, 12:39:12 PM
3:45 http://www.edf.com/the-edf-group-42667.html
3:45  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89lectricit%C3%A9_de_France
i will try to find the Paris utility share? prior to NY.open:
discounting both Germany & Japan as viable AsHo.ecoN'$
^READ UP^ not down
Quote from: hirley0 on July 10, 2013, 08:32:16 PM
v DOWN v
ad 41500 tekcf ? bmrn  5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V5d
ad 41563  yeah: LoOks like its OvEr A.M. Lost? is my guess
ad 41618  { Maybe?/? if long? sell the open & take the cash
ad 41643 Look? With A German offing France Seams a sure bet
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 15, 2013, 12:52:50 PM
EDF.PA (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EDF.PA&t=1d) 2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-GB&region=GB)>(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-GB&region=GB)  1d>(http://ichart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=edf.pa&lang=en-GB&region=GB)  | KEP.1yr (http://charting.nasdaq.com/ext/charts.dll?2-1-14-0-0-512-03NA000000KEP-&SF:1%7C5-WD=530-HT=395-)
That's more like it 10%/d     i do hope THEY can flat line the rate /
LoOk Water it down, soak it up |Stability|stability|stability| that is the ONLY solution

Quote from: hirley0 on June 13, 2013, 06:12:56 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on June 06, 2013, 12:41:38 AM
DOW (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EDJI&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=) ag|/ (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif) 1  (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au0365lf_ma.gif) X (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au3650lf_ma.gif) KGC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |  2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 3mC  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d   (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Q5/S&P (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=QQQ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)   spy?dow :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=DOW&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) SPY (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
Quote from: hirley0 on June 07, 2013, 12:51:36 AM
DAX  2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180) | CVS5PMC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=PMC&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) CVS60WAG (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=WAG&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) | forecast (http://www.forecasts.org/dax.htm)( :fnord: ) (http://www.forecasts.org/images/stock-market/dax.gif)McD (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=DAX&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=125284&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=973255629&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1) |
Celesio AG (CAKFY.PK)(CAKFF.PK) is a German pharmaceutical |n,cludes: CVS, PMC, WAG
Quote from: hirley0 on June 07, 2013, 11:09:38 AM
Brazil EWZ (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Bovespa (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/brazil-stock-market.png?s=ibov) | B/V5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |
NIKKEI 2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=v&p=m10&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://www.nikkei.co.jp/gifdata/nk_chart_L.gif) |  TKECF (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) |_China_>SSE> 2y (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/china-stock-market.png?s=shcomp) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EN225&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
YES: -10%/d does make ¢ents to me / get on with the Tails Pillar to Post?
NO: i am not to stable myself | get over it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on July 15, 2013, 01:24:16 PM
ad 41955 Weakly: ERA of Island$ is over (Japan Britten Hong Kong Tiawan etc}
ad 41876 ?/? 41911
ad 41759 & yeah? Paris is open already & .EP down again
anyway i do wonder about the New Martian Probe?  Curiosity :fnord:  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_%28rover%29)
&THUS i wonder if EArthTHings HAve not gone 1 wheel turn to
far and started a inner planetairy war | & now Martians have replied
with bed bugs & atmospheric floaters | Hello bad Air | good by space R
Shirley: My guess once across the 20 | no looking back
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: MMIX on July 15, 2013, 01:26:36 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on July 11, 2013, 12:30:16 AM
Paranoid fantasy moment - Royal mail sell off forces more communication electronically. The idea of this being pre-meditated for that exact effect is somewhat concerning. It would certainly seem easier for a government to totally monitor digital communications compared to physical mail.

Please, anyone, tell me that's utterly insane.
Well I would love to, except . . .
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 17, 2013, 09:44:15 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/23321835

QuoteMore British bankers earned more than one million euros (£860,000) each in 2011 than the rest of the European Union (EU) put together, according to the European Banking Authority (EBA).

Figures from the EU's banking regulator showed 2,346 bankers earned more than 1m euros in the UK, compared with 739 in the rest of the EU.

In Germany, Europe's second-largest economy, there were just 170.

The figures illustrate why Britain opposed EU plans for a bonus cap.

It was outvoted by countries that believe it will prevent bankers taking the kind of risks that led to the financial crisis. Under the plans, a senior banker's bonus will be limited to 100% of salary, or 200% with shareholder approval.

"The data show what has been feared for some time," said Nicholas Stretch, of law firm CMS Cameron McKenna.

"Because London has a very large number of people with variable high pay, the forthcoming bonus capping rules... will have a particular impact on our financial services industry and lead to extensive changes in how remuneration is provided."

Well, fuck.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 22, 2013, 04:22:33 AM
LYNCH MAHBS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23330477

QuoteThe Archbishop of Canterbury has described the naming and shaming of bankers in the wake of the financial crisis as "lynch mobbish".

The Most Reverend Justin Welby admitted sympathy for former bankers when hearing evidence as a member of the Banking Standards Commission.

He admitted "thinking, 'I'm not sure I would have been very different,' rather than thinking how bad they were".

But he also said some senior bankers had tried to avoid accountability.

"Certainly one of the trends that has been very unfortunate, to put it mildly, is that in some financial services companies there was a clear policy of not telling the top people - they made sure they weren't told things - because then they could plead ignorance, and that's just unacceptable.

"But this business of somehow saying that one individual bears the whole blame as opposed to simply the accountability - it feels lynch mobbish," he said.

Archbishop Welby was an oil executive before becoming a priest.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 22, 2013, 07:38:09 AM
Quote from: Cain on July 22, 2013, 04:22:33 AM
LYNCH MAHBS

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23330477

QuoteThe Archbishop of Canterbury has described the naming and shaming of bankers in the wake of the financial crisis as "lynch mobbish".

The Most Reverend Justin Welby admitted sympathy for former bankers when hearing evidence as a member of the Banking Standards Commission.

He admitted "thinking, 'I'm not sure I would have been very different,' rather than thinking how bad they were".

But he also said some senior bankers had tried to avoid accountability.

"Certainly one of the trends that has been very unfortunate, to put it mildly, is that in some financial services companies there was a clear policy of not telling the top people - they made sure they weren't told things - because then they could plead ignorance, and that's just unacceptable.

"But this business of somehow saying that one individual bears the whole blame as opposed to simply the accountability - it feels lynch mobbish," he said.

Archbishop Welby was an oil executive before becoming a priest.
:lulz: :horrormirth: :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on July 22, 2013, 12:27:29 PM
Nothing shocking about that. When you're already making a living on the second biggest racket on the planet, the only way up is to move to the biggest racket on the planet
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 22, 2013, 12:30:41 PM
And then defend the third biggest racket.

Incidentally, quite interesting, how inextricably linked London finance and oil fortunes made in the Middle East are.  That is the basis of our "special relationship" with our Saudi allies, after all.  They keep selling us oil, and investing the profits in London, London's political elite grow rich and fat off the proceeds, and everyone is happy except the hundreds of thousands of people we allow to be killed by the policies of our Saudi allies or our own to secure those goals.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 25, 2013, 09:38:54 AM
And the Church of England just got very weird (http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2013/jul/25/church-england-wonga):

QuoteThe archbishop of Canterbury has told Wonga that the Church of England wants to "compete" it out of existence as part of its plans to expand credit unions as an alternative to payday lenders.

The Most Rev Justin Welby said he had delivered the message to Errol Damelin, chief executive of Wonga, one of Britain's best-known payday lenders, during a "very good conversation".

"I've met the head of Wonga and we had a very good conversation and I said to him quite bluntly 'we're not in the business of trying to legislate you out of existence, we're trying to compete you out of existence'," he told Total Politics magazine.

"He's a businessman, he took that well."

The archbishop's remarks come after he launched a new credit union for clergy and church staff earlier this month at the General Synod in York.

Welby, who has served on the parliamentary Banking Standards Commission, has said he plans to expand the reach of credit unions as part of a long-term campaign to boost competition in the banking sector.

There are also plans to encourage church members with relevant skills to volunteer at credit unions. Small, local lenders could also be invited to use church buildings and other community locations with the help of church members.

The government announced an investment of £38m in credit unions in April to help them offer an alternative option to payday lenders.

I'm not sure how I feel about this.  On the one hand, not being in thrall to pay day loans companies is undoubtedly a good thing.  But is being in debt to the CoE really going to be better?  How is the CoE going to use this newfound economic relevance to leverage their position and influence in the UK?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on July 25, 2013, 10:07:05 AM
I'm reminded of a fairy story I read as a child. Something about an undead wizard kicking a bunch of tables over...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Doktor Howl on July 25, 2013, 04:01:53 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 25, 2013, 10:07:05 AM
I'm reminded of a fairy story I read as a child. Something about an undead wizard kicking a bunch of tables over...

He wasn't undead at that point.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on July 25, 2013, 05:32:20 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on July 25, 2013, 04:01:53 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on July 25, 2013, 10:07:05 AM
I'm reminded of a fairy story I read as a child. Something about an undead wizard kicking a bunch of tables over...

He wasn't undead at that point.

...allegedly
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 26, 2013, 11:35:17 AM
Sort of related:
http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/the-real-story-about-londons-housing-crisis

Particularly related:
QuoteOne such place, of course, was Rushcroft Road. Indeed, it's not difficult to make the wider connection between these evictions and a broader opposition to anyone deemed to be challenging the nature of property ownership. Last year, Westminster passed legislation banning squatting in residential property. "Squatters who break the law [must] receive a proper punishment," declared prisons minister Crispin Blunt, in a consultation published before the ban in 2010. "There are avenues open to those that are genuinely destitute which do not involve occupying somebody else's property."

But are those avenues effective? Not only is it extremely difficult to access social housing, but a report by the Resolution Foundation suggests that rent is now unaffordable for two thirds of families on lower incomes. A House of Commons select committee report on the housing crisis published last week highlighted plans to tackle bad landlords and letting agency fees, but not rent control. This weekend, the Guardian's Patrick Collinson suggested that this is due to the Conservative Party's concerns that imposing such controls would cause landlords to spend less money maintaining their properties. On a more basic level, it also seems to indicate the extent to which the party is devoted to protecting the rights of property owners over those of their tenants, despite the critical circumstances.

When even councils with a Labour majority, such as Lambeth, are in agreement with this, it seems that the confidence with which the police and bailiffs evicted the residents of Rushcroft Road was not just a matter of tactical conduct, but a symptom of the extent to which the ideology of austerity is now an unquestionable part of mainstream politics – a politics that has now begun dedicating itself to the forcible clearance of centres of opposition.

Austerity as part of main stream politics seems dead on. I doubt that's going away.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 04, 2013, 01:54:48 PM
Yves Smith on the Eurozone crisis (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/08/european-pundits-starting-to-give-up-on-the-eurozone.html):

QuoteWe've been pointing out for some time that Germany has refused to budge from wanting contradictory things relative to the Eurozone. Germany wants to continue to run trade surpluses, which are now predominantly with other countries in Europe. That means it needs to finance its trade partners' deficits. But Germany simultaneously does not want to do that, at least with other Eurozone members. The only way to square that circle would be if the euro were vastly cheaper, so that Germany's trade surplus was more with the rest of the world than with its fellow Europeans, and that countries like Spain could come closer to a trade balance or achieve a trade surplus via trade with the rest of the world. No one has entertained that as a solution, since the required level of euro depreciation would be so large as to invite retaliation from Europe's major trade partners (I haven't seen good estimates, but early on, Wolfgang Munchau suggested between .6 to .9 to the dollar).

The whole premise of the EU/Eurozone project was successive crises would force further integration. We'd assumed that the Eurobanks were sufficiently wobbly that absent more banking integration (at a minimum, a deposit guarantee), you'd eventually see some sort of Big Problem (see an analysis by Josh Rosner from last year of the poor condition of the German banks). Yet the European officialdom has managed to pull off years of "barely enough at the last minute" salvage operations to keep things from falling over. But the Germans have also insisted on crushing and failed austerity, and refuse to relent even as compliant periphery countries keep missing their targets and in the case of Greece, the result of breaking a country on the rack is a failed state.

Even though we've had quite a few individual commentators from Europe argue in favor of a Eurozone dissolution, the pundit class has treated that as impossible because the costs were so high that whatever compromises needed to be made would eventually be reached.

Now something still has to break, but some of my correspondents who've just been in Europe now think that we will see a political crisis in Europe before we see an economic one, and that, like objects in your rear view mirror, may be closer than it appears.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on August 14, 2013, 09:08:15 AM
Navy Mon {wash day | My guess is Si will sell off some? this wk?/?
Brown Anyway? Yesterday i thought seriously of taking a new position
in silver, I DID NOT. oh well ? time will tell back2bac2 { ad 43261
ad 43642 My guess is i may buy today 2/5 {1st2banK tho
ad 43692 Well? again i did not {wrong again {{AVoide'Nit
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 21, 2013, 10:20:28 AM
I know it's HuffPo, but you go to war with the article you have, not the article you wish you had:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/income-inequality-wall-street_n_3762422.html

QuoteThis echoes an OECD study from earlier this year that found the U.S. had the highest income inequality in the developed world. It followed only Chile, Mexico and Turkey among all nations.

QuoteOne other thing you'll notice from the chart is that the United Kingdom has slashed taxes on the top 1 percent almost as aggressively the U.S. has, and yet the share of income going to the top 1 percent is not nearly as big. So there's something else going on here besides just tax breaks.

That something is Wall Street, more or less, as Matthew O'Brien of The Atlantic points out. The same politicians that have busily been slashing taxes on the wealthy have also been loosening fetters on banking, allowing the financial sector to swell to bloated size and mop up ever-more income while contributing ever-less back to the economy. Again, this is consistent with other studies that have attributed much of the rise in in inequality to the pay being sucked up by bankers and overpaid CEOs.

At the same time, U.S. lawmakers have also made it easier and more tax-friendly for the wealthy to pile up more capital gains on their investments. As O'Brien puts it, "The top 1 percent leveraged itself to the market, and haven't looked back."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on August 21, 2013, 03:51:01 PM
Quote from: Cain on August 21, 2013, 10:20:28 AM
I know it's HuffPo, but you go to war with the article you have, not the article you wish you had:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/15/income-inequality-wall-street_n_3762422.html

QuoteThis echoes an OECD study from earlier this year that found the U.S. had the highest income inequality in the developed world. It followed only Chile, Mexico and Turkey among all nations.

QuoteOne other thing you'll notice from the chart is that the United Kingdom has slashed taxes on the top 1 percent almost as aggressively the U.S. has, and yet the share of income going to the top 1 percent is not nearly as big. So there's something else going on here besides just tax breaks.

That something is Wall Street, more or less, as Matthew O'Brien of The Atlantic points out. The same politicians that have busily been slashing taxes on the wealthy have also been loosening fetters on banking, allowing the financial sector to swell to bloated size and mop up ever-more income while contributing ever-less back to the economy. Again, this is consistent with other studies that have attributed much of the rise in in inequality to the pay being sucked up by bankers and overpaid CEOs.

At the same time, U.S. lawmakers have also made it easier and more tax-friendly for the wealthy to pile up more capital gains on their investments. As O'Brien puts it, "The top 1 percent leveraged itself to the market, and haven't looked back."

Yep

And there are all kind of studies in the works right now about stress, health disparities, and life expectancy based on income inequality. The long-term ramifications are truly grim for the nation as a whole, because a comfortably middle-class, educated populace is vital for the production of a large pool of innovators and researchers.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on September 02, 2013, 09:25:32 AM
There's a number of threads this is relevant to:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23924860

QuoteVodafone's sale of its 45% stake in Verizon Wireless to the US telecoms group Verizon Communications for a staggering $130bn (£84bn) looks set to be announced on Monday.

I understand that the board of Vodafone has today approved the massive disposal. The final hurdle, thought to be a formality, is approval from the board of Verizon, which is expected on Monday.

QuoteWill there be a furore over the absence of any UK tax payments by Vodafone on the £84bn proceeds from the sale of its 45% stake in Verizon Wireless?

Well my understanding is that Vodafone does not believe any tax would have been payable, even if the assets had been held in the UK, and not via a Dutch holding company.

That is because the last Labour government's 2002 Finance Act introduced an exemption from tax on capital gains from "substantial shareholdings" held by companies.

So, in Vodafone's view, if MPs on the Public Accounts Committee wants to blame someone for the absence of revenues for the Exchequer from the eye-wateringly huge deal, they should direct their criticism at Gordon Brown, chancellor at the time.

Tax reform was mentioned by all 3 parties at the last round of elections. I'm sure you'll be amazed at how much reform has been done. There's no mention of Vodaphones other tax problems in the UK (I.e - not paying any, ever) so I assume that's a non-issue now.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on September 03, 2013, 03:12:37 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/swiss-banks-say-theyre-sorry-assisting-tax-cheats-8C11062055

:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on September 04, 2013, 09:10:05 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on September 03, 2013, 03:12:37 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/swiss-banks-say-theyre-sorry-assisting-tax-cheats-8C11062055

:lulz:
Wait, what??
Banks taking responsibility?
This world just gets weirder and weirder.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on September 04, 2013, 12:22:10 PM
Hang on, they're making out as if hiding billions in offshore accounts to avoid tax is some kind of crime. Hasn't someone legalised that yet? Fuck are these idiots thinking about? Or is this just a case of the US figuring out a neat new way to fleece non-oil bearing nations for a quick buck?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 07, 2013, 05:32:50 PM
ag|/  (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif)   KGC :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=KGC+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=5d)  2Y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=2y&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6M (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3M (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=KGC&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=w14&c=CDE) 5D (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1 (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)        ajpm/silver-bullion (http://www.ajpm.com/silver-bullion.html)       Morgan (http://www.coinflation.com/coins/1878-1921-Silver-Morgan-Dollar-Value.html)
ad 44450 } sorted by time Zone{ that i assuMe is false

NIKKEI         2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=v&p=m10&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://www.nikkei.co.jp/gifdata/nk_chart_L.gif) |  TKECF (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) |_
ChinaSSE     2y (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/china-stock-market.png?s=shcomp) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EN225&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
DAX            2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180) | CVS5PMC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=PMC&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 60WAG (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=WAG&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) | forecast (http://www.forecasts.org/dax.htm)( :fnord: ) (http://www.forecasts.org/images/stock-market/dax.gif)McD (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=DAX&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=125284&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=973255629&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1)
EDF.PA (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EDF.PA&t=1d)         2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-GB&region=GB) KEP.1yr (http://charting.nasdaq.com/ext/charts.dll?2-1-14-0-0-512-03NA000000KEP-&SF:1%7C5-WD=530-HT=395-)
Brazil          EWZ (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Bovespa (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/brazil-stock-market.png?s=ibov)     | B/V5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) |
DOW           2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 3mC  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
O  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EDJI&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=) Yc (http://finance.yahoo.com/bonds/bonds_small.png)  BND (http://finance.yahoo.com/bonds) 30 (http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/TR) 10 (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=10_YEAR&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=1224040&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=1109677223&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1) :fnord:  (http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/bond/10_year/charts)  AU 1y  (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au0365lf_ma.gif) X (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au3650lf_ma.gif)   |  Q5/S&P (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=QQQ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)   s?dow :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=DOW&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) S (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)

v JAPAN N225 v                               v  TKECF  v D.listed 9/16
img height=100]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]     img height=100]http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US[/img]
v CHINA SS v
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
v DAX  v                                   v FRENCH EDF.PA v
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)     (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-GB&region=GB)
v brazil v                                                      v DOW v
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)     (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=EWZ&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 10, 2013, 11:29:25 AM
ad 44992 BY Si AT THE 9AM OPEN ? $21.46 ? CHineese sold?
ad 44963 connection(s) ha(ve) timed out 3:33AM no charts
ad 44952 What a bad week for me RACE WISE - - -
ad 44916  21.8 the B.B. Joke was short lived {as eXpected
ad 44903  Asleep @ _ & $21.75/$21.80 77 | Dog Bumped -$2.1
ad 44872  U R? wood would be my guess $23.22/$23.27 78
ad 44848 W R4 .;, {$23.01/$23.06=.9978 KGC+10%
ad 44816 T R13 Bq curie is 37  Cu {$21.76 / $21.81 =.9977
ad 44764 it is Mon. Race 4 }{6 HR sell X? Hold Si' Buy BMRN
ad 44692 reThink 14th} ad 44708 ?10:40AM
ad 44648 Peace talks = lower silver price {22.6 =will buy? SOLD1
ad 44622 N?C take1  Dow/dax Hold/  Ag/KGC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) BUY Fri/22.9
ad 44558 COMMENCE DAILIES  ^ READ UP ^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 24, 2013, 04:47:50 PM
Relevant to this thread and my interests

http://www.thebull.com.au/articles/a/40900-neuroscience-may-help-us-understand-financial-bubbles.html

I'm skeptical, but interested.

QuoteThe study asked participants to make trades within an experimental bubble environment, where asset prices were higher than underlying values. While making these trades, they were hooked up to scans which detected the flow of blood to certain parts of the brain.
They found two areas of the brain's frontal cortex were particularly active during bubble markets: the area which processes value judgements, and that which looks at social signals and the motives of other people.
Increased activity in the former suggests that people are more likely to overvalue assets in a bubble. Activity in the latter area shows participants are highly aware of the behaviour of others and are constantly trying to predict their next moves.
"In a bubble situation, people start to see the market as a strategic opponent and shift the brain processes they're using to make financial decisions," De Martino said.
"They start trying to imagine how the other traders will behave and this leads them to modify their judgement of how valuable the asset is. They become less driven by explicit information, like actual prices, and more focused on how they imagine the market will change."
"These brain processes have evolved to help us get along better in social situations and are usually advantageous. But we've shown that when we use them within a complex modern system, like financial markets, they can result in unproductive behaviour that drives a cycle of boom and bust."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on September 24, 2013, 05:04:12 PM
-
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on September 24, 2013, 05:40:40 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 24, 2013, 05:04:12 PM
Yeah, I'm suspicious as well.

Also, just thought you'd like to know, the Fed is fucking you (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101046937):

QuoteIn an interview on "Squawk Box," the founder of Duquesne Capital said the Fed's policy of quantitative easing was inflating stocks and other assets held by wealthy investors like himself. But the price of making the rich richer will be paid by future generations.

"This is fantastic for every rich person," he said Thursday, a day after the Fed's stunning decision to delay tightening its monetary policy. "This is the biggest redistribution of wealth from the middle class and the poor to the rich ever."

I know, you already know this.  But being able to quote a billionaire hedge fund manager agreeing may even cause a few glibertarians to wake up and take notice.

I really don't know, at this point, what it will take to make people wake up. I kind of think that everybody is just depressed and awaiting their inevitable fate. I don't understand what else it could be.

Also, thanks a lot, Obama.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on September 24, 2013, 06:40:35 PM
Quote from: Mean Mister Nigel on September 24, 2013, 05:40:40 PM
Quote from: Cain on September 24, 2013, 05:04:12 PM
Yeah, I'm suspicious as well.

Also, just thought you'd like to know, the Fed is fucking you (http://www.cnbc.com/id/101046937):

QuoteIn an interview on "Squawk Box," the founder of Duquesne Capital said the Fed's policy of quantitative easing was inflating stocks and other assets held by wealthy investors like himself. But the price of making the rich richer will be paid by future generations.

"This is fantastic for every rich person," he said Thursday, a day after the Fed's stunning decision to delay tightening its monetary policy. "This is the biggest redistribution of wealth from the middle class and the poor to the rich ever."

I know, you already know this.  But being able to quote a billionaire hedge fund manager agreeing may even cause a few glibertarians to wake up and take notice.

I really don't know, at this point, what it will take to make people wake up. I kind of think that everybody is just depressed and awaiting their inevitable fate. I don't understand what else it could be.

Also, thanks a lot, Obama.
I know I, for one, have the 'bend over and lube up' approach to the economy and politics clusterfuck.

I have the desire to run for the hills but I live in flatland :(
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on September 24, 2013, 11:38:11 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on September 07, 2013, 05:32:50 PM
agL  (http://www.kitco.com/images/live/silver.gif)   T :fnord:  (http://www.kitco.com/charts/techcharts_silver.html)              :fnord: ajpm (http://www.ajpm.com/silver-bullion.html) :fnord:  (http://www.ajpm.com/gold-bullion.html)    Morgan (http://www.coinflation.com/coins/1878-1921-Silver-Morgan-Dollar-Value.html).¢an (http://www.coinflation.com/canada/)U5 (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=UMPQ&t=5d&l=off&z=l&q=c&p=&a=r14&c=)I (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=UMPQ&t=5d&q=c&l=off&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
    KGC :fnord:  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=KGC+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=5d)                                      2Y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=2y&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6M (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3M (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=KGC&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=w14&c=CDE) 5D (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1 (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
v  TKECF  v D.listed 9/16 Re 10/3
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)   TKECF (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 5D/s (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=TKECF&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) |_
O  (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EDJI&t=1d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=) Yc (http://finance.yahoo.com/bonds/bonds_small.png)  BND (http://finance.yahoo.com/bonds) 30 (http://futures.tradingcharts.com/chart/TR) 10 (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=10_YEAR&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=1224040&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=1109677223&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1) :fnord:  (http://www.marketwatch.com/investing/bond/10_year/charts)  AU 1y  (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au0365lf_ma.gif) X (http://www.kitco.com/lfgif/au3650lf_ma.gif)   |  Q5/S&P (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=QQQ&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)   s?dow :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=DOW&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) S (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=SPY&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eAXJO&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-AU&region=AU)ASX200 (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5EAXJO)           2Y (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EAXJO&t=1y&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=m26-12-9&c=) 6m (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=6m&s=%5EAXJO&l=on&z=l&q=c&a=ss&c=spy&ql=1) 3m (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EAXJO&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=w14&c=) 5d (http://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=%5EAXJO&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=r14&c=)
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)NIKKEI         2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=v&p=m10&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eN225&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://www.nikkei.co.jp/gifdata/nk_chart_L.gif) |   
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)ChinaSSE     2y (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/china-stock-market.png?s=shcomp) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EN225&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=000001.SS&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)
v DAX   FRENCH EDF.PA v EU no longer CHARTED Jan17, '14 3:21:00.000
DAX            2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eGDAXI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=%5eGDAXI&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180) | CVS5PMC (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=PMC&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 60WAG (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CVS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=WAG&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) | forecast (http://www.forecasts.org/dax.htm)( :fnord: ) (http://www.forecasts.org/images/stock-market/dax.gif)McD (http://www.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=DAX&uf=7168&type=2&size=2&sid=125284&style=1013&freq=1&time=8&rand=973255629&ma=1&maval=50&lf=1&lf2=4&lf3=0&height=444&width=579&mocktick=1)
EDF.PA (http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EDF.PA&t=1d)         2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-GB&region=GB) 5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EDF.PA&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-GB&region=GB) KEP.1yr (http://charting.nasdaq.com/ext/charts.dll?2-1-14-0-0-512-03NA000000KEP-&SF:1%7C5-WD=530-HT=395-)
Brazil          EWZ (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EWZ&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=%5EGSPC&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US) Bovespa (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/charts/brazil-stock-market.png?s=ibov)     | B/V5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)  B/V6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VRX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=BMRN&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) | EBR>  2y (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBR&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US) 6m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBR&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBR&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US)  5d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBR&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=EBR&t=1d&q=&l=&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
DOW           2y  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=2y&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)6m  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 3m (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=m10&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 3mC  (http://www.curtrenz.com/)5d  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US) 1d (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=1d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
v EWZ v DOW v  <ad 45176
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=%5eDJI&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=EWZ&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)
.(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)kgc.cde
(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=FCX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SCCO&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)fcx.sc

ad 45040 9/24 TuePush to Bottom PtB
Thur ad 45133 
ad 49306 Mon Rev 20140120 ASX200
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on October 04, 2013, 04:09:48 AM
QuoteJust because the government has shut down doesn't mean Congress will cease its central function of making Americans' lives miserable. While everyone watches the legislative back-and-forth on the budget, the House may vote this week to thwart a key new Labor Department protection affecting $10.5 trillion in retirement funds. Basically, House Republicans want to allow the financial services industry to continue to steal from your 401(k) and IRA plans. And far too many Democrats want to help them.

The Labor Department proposal, known as the "fiduciary rule," would change the ethical standards by which employer-based retirement products like 401(k)'s and IRAs are marketed and sold. The rule has not been updated since 1975, before 401(k)'s and IRAs even existed. The Labor Department wants to broaden the definition of a "fiduciary" to cover all financial advisers who offer individual investment advice for a fee. Under the rule, they would be legally required to work in the best interest of their clients. For example, a fiduciary would not be able to push investment products on customers in which they have a financial stake.

http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114944/labor-department-fiduciary-rule-congress-votes-thwart-it

QuoteGiven all the tricks and self-dealing from this industry, an allegedly "independent" study that refuses to release the context for its claims is mostly worthless. Moreover, even if you were to take the Wyman study on its own terms, it claims that non-fiduciary advice is valuable, so valuable that brokers could not offer it to small investors if the costs became too burdensome. This directly contradicts the secondary argument, that the industry makes more than enough money off large investors, almost all of whom have a fiduciary arrangement, so they can float cheap advice to the smaller retirement account holders. It's pretzel logic.

This is a huge deal. The retirement crisis will become one of the bigger stories of the next decade as the baby boomers turn 65. Millions of people are being systematically ripped off and sold a bill of goods about how they can maintain their standard of living after they stop working. And politicians in both parties want to keep allowing the financial industry to perform this deceitful game. While the true solution, as said before, is a total revolution in thinking about retirement, protecting ordinary investors and ending the rent-extraction from worthless intermediaries is at least a start. This one is worth a call to your Congresscritter.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/david-dayen-mysterious-study-backs-financial-adviser-thieves-who-want-to-keep-bilking-small-investors.html#sjGVAFTvHpycePTZ.99
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on October 04, 2013, 11:17:49 AM
ad 46013 2:01 BBC SUV.car  + Rail tunnel | I liquidated Mon
ad 45977 things R not Well in 502.ViL |L&F in 7.5H}
ad 45877 ad 45936 ?Sell.ag.Mon.close.4PM  946
ad 45845 this THAT & the other2.28:30 L&F_ 9 e/A 11.3rd?=DJ
ad 45830 Farmers Market  at 10:30 Asian pears
ad 45816 did not: trip West {Satisfactory
ad 45798 may hit the Junk 4 $1.2 dimes {& maybe not2
ad 45786 My guess? Based upon EW? | be Long Stocks
ad 45732 yeah the theory of the set piece v Me HiHo
ad 45683 Clearly GOLD moves from Low to Hi ?/? South2North
ad 45656  L+HK-{ Look it is cleer B is Because it is Not LorH
ad 45564 12ad 45584 13 {4get it. 625 London Selling Hong Kong buying:
ad 45549 10/11 the dowN & Up model still in place keep the pACE
ad 45526 TV says its EconNOmICs My assessment is as above^
ad 45506 Boring enough FUR sh 3:45 PM ANYWAY
ad 45485 |\ spike up ramp down OR |/ down& up its all BS2Me
/\/\y guess is Economics is 99 &44/100% political propaganda nothing more
Quote from: Cain on October 05, 2013, 08:33:30 PM
... That would be a  pay rise for me
Quote from: Demolition Squid on October 05, 2013, 09:54:45 PM
Wow. {did U MeAn DoW?|
ad 45472 NOT SURE ABOUT TIMING |.BR DOWN | DoW  down | Ag up |
Quote from: Net on October 04, 2013, 04:09:48 AM
QuoteJ st  http://www.newrepublic.com/article/114944/labor-department-fiduciary-rule-congress-votes-thwart-it

QuoteGi v  :fnord:  (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/10/david-dayen-mysterious-study-backs-financial-adviser-thieves-who-want-to-keep-bilking-small-investors.html#sjGVAFTvHpycePTZ.99)
ad 45349 ? will $ D'value ????/  405 COIN SHOW :fnord: ajpm (http://www.ajpm.com/silver-bullion.html) ^ READ UP ^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on October 05, 2013, 08:33:30 PM
-
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on October 05, 2013, 09:54:45 PM
Wow.

I don't feel qualified to predict what the effects on the economy will be if they go through with it, but it'll be damn interesting to find out! Here's hoping they put it into action.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on November 01, 2013, 11:12:56 AM
22 ad 47495 http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,32982.msg1309367.html#msg1309367
18 ad 47341 http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/bmrn 65C (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/bmrn/option-chain/131221C00065000-bmrn-call) D70P (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/bmrn/option-chain/131221P00070000-bmrn-put)
15 ad 47139   VRX05C  (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/vrx/option-chain/131221C00105000-vrx-call) & 110P (http://www.nasdaq.com/symbol/vrx/option-chain/131221P00110000-vrx-put)
20131101ETR {Mid Month ad 46164 {SAME M&M ad 46217 <14d>
ad 46310 Mumbeling along till ? mid month 46358 506
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on November 18, 2013, 10:27:20 PM
I think this has pretty much all the classic modern signs:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24989742

QuoteAn investigation has been launched at the Co-op Bank after its ex-chairman was filmed allegedly buying drugs.

QuoteThe Co-op Group said it was launching a "fact-finding process to look into any inappropriate behaviour" and a review of its "democratic structure".

QuoteWest Yorkshire Police said it was making enquiries after Mr Flowers, 63, was reportedly filmed by an acquaintance he met online buying £300 worth of illegal drugs including cocaine.

QuoteAndrew Tyrie, who chairs the influential Treasury Select Committee and headed up the recent banking standards commission, said MPs could see Mr Flowers was "manifestly unsuitable" for the job.

"There's also the track record of the bank," he added.

"The Co-op was a bank that was up to its ears in bad lending... and it did its full share of PPI mis-selling even as it was busy articulating its higher ethical principles."

Just another day at the bank. Remember, it's just a bad apple. It's not all of them. This is totally the only banking executive who has anything to do with poor decisions and drugs.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 11, 2013, 09:21:07 AM
The Black Agenda Report (http://blackagendareport.com/content/democracy-going-down-count-detroit) has a very interesting piece up on what is happening in Detroit:

QuoteIn place of an already straitjacketed, comprador-dominated home rule, Michigan's Republican Gov. Rick Snyder governor imposed his own regent in the noxious form of Emergency Financial Manager Kevyn Orr, who was until this year a bankruptcy attorney from the multinational firm Jones Day, which is the mercenary legal arm for much of the Fortune 500, including most of the banks that have conspired to destroy Detroit's tax base.

This summer Orr, acting as the one-man embodiment of Detroit's now-powerless executive and legislative branches, requested that the city be declared bankrupt. Federal Bankruptcy Court Judge Steven Rhodes finished hearing testimony last Friday on whether Orr, possibly the most hated man in Detroit, has met all the criteria for Chapter 9 law, including having negotiated in good faith with its creditors. These include the city's retirees, whose pensions are protected by Michigan's constitution and, therefore, do not consider themselves "creditors" who can be forced to take a "hair cut," in Wall Street parlance, in a municipal bankruptcy proceeding. Until just days before he announced his proposal to cut pensions on June 14, Orr pretended that he both respected those protections and thought there was only a "50-50" chance that he would try to pull the bankruptcy trigger.

Even Judge Rhodes thought he smelled a rat, although that doesn't mean he won't rule for the rodents. He asked Jones Day lawyer Bruce Bennett – who is, in this Alice in Wonderland legal world, acting as Detroit's lawyer and, therefore, the lawyer for former Jones Day employee Kevin Orr – if Orr hadn't acted in bad faith by misleading the retirees.

"I'm the wrong person to ask," Bennett said.

"You're his lawyer," the judge replied, repeating, "You're his lawyer."

Bennett maintained that, even if Orr had been misleading, "it was corrected three...or four days later.... Mistakes happen."

QuoteEarlier in the week, Judge Rhodes rejected the NAACP's challenge to Kevyn Orr's Emergency Financial Manager powers on the grounds that they unconstitutionally disenfranchise a majority of Michigan's African American citizens. The judge said the public has a more "substantial interest in the speedy and efficient resolution of a municipal bankruptcy case that affects as many people and institutions, and as much of the local, regional and national economy, as this case does." He said the NAACP could continue its suit after the bankruptcy is done.

In other words, the people's right to vote is secondary to working out the financial claims brought by derivatives-wielding bankers. If the people's franchise stands in the way of Lord's of Capital's right to "restructure" Detroit to their liking, then the franchise must be rendered inoperative, at least until the spoils have been divvyed up – that is, until all the issues that matter have been made moot.

Of course, this is quite similar to how the EU has gone about dethroning national governments whose economic policy is not to the liking of the financiers in Frankfurt and Zurich.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 16, 2014, 11:48:44 AM
I bet this will eventually tie in to something bigger and more interesting:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25742130

QuoteFor five years, she is believed to have controlled Uzbekistan's largest conglomerate, a Swiss-registered company called Zeromax. She has always denied any connection to the company which published profits of $3-4bn a year until it was mysteriously shut down in 2010.

Kamollodin Rabbimov, a political analyst who used to work for the presidential administration but is now based in France, says Zeromax was causing such problems that Islam Karimov decided to close it.

"Gulnara monopolised entire sectors of the economy," he says. "She started interfering in sales of natural gas, gold trade, logistics. She was sucking away so many resources that she single-handedly created a budget deficit."

I won't claim any kind of insight into Uzbekistan, but I'd suggest it's probably indicative of what's occurring behind the scenes in similar nations.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 30, 2014, 09:05:25 AM
So, the Mail potentially has found something interesting here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547684/TWO-senior-American-bankers-working-London-commit-suicide-just-two-days-one-jumped-500ft-death-JP-Morgan-skyscraper.html

QuoteTwo top ranking American bankers working in senior positions in London have committed suicide in the space of two days.

Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old JP Morgan bank executive, died early this morning after he jumped 500ft from the top of the bank's European headquarters. His body was discovered on the ninth floor roof, which surrounds the 33-story Canary Wharf skyscraper.

Just two days earlier, on Sunday, fellow American banker, William 'Bill' Broeksmit, 58, was found hanging in his South Kensington home.

Broeksmit – who retired last February – was a former senior manager at Deutsche Bank and had lived in London many years. He started working for the bank in 1996 but left for a period of 7 years before returning in 2008.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on January 30, 2014, 09:13:38 AM
He was retired? Well that is weird. I could speculate and pull all kind of wild ass ideas about why people such as those might do that, and probably have no idea.

But it seems strange that someone who is not actively involved in that business would bail like that.

Unless he thought we were ALL fucked no matter what. Then again, incomplete info.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on January 30, 2014, 09:24:11 AM
Yeah.  It could all be personal reasons, and nothing work-related at all.  But still, worth noting.  JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank are involved in shady shit on occasion, and it's possible, despite being retired, Broeksmit knew something or had done some consulting work or similar.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on January 30, 2014, 09:27:05 AM
Hmm
QuoteBroeksmit was one of around 100 bankers who left Merrill Lynch for Deutsche when its investment banking arm was founded in the 1990s.

He was involved in the process of rescuing the bank in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, when many investment banks found their debts were 'toxic', and unlikely ever to be repaid.
Broeksmit, a renowned risk expert, assisted the bank's efforts to shift the worst of the debt, and reduce its total amount of lending.
Chiefs at Deutsche Bank had planned to promote  Broeksmit to its management board in 2012, but stopped when the German financial regulator expressed doubts about his experience as a leader.

Can't help but wonder where that debt got shifted to. The inexperience as a leader thing seems a little odd as well. This would suggest German regulators are actually serious, which makes this sound more like a "We know what shady shit you're up to, we just can't prove it"
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on January 30, 2014, 11:48:37 PM
Quote from: hirley0 on August 02, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
C5F (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=CDE&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=b&a=ss&a=fs&a=ss&a=r14&c=FB&ql=1) |   FB (http://www.nasdaq.com/aspxcontent/options2.aspx?symbol=FB&selected=FB&qm_page=54241&qm_symbol=FB)

http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=CDE&t=6m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=FB&p=b&a=ss,fs,ss,r14&lang=en-US&region=US
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2014, 12:42:15 PM
Another banker suicide.  Not in London this time, so probably not connected...but still, worth keeping an eye on (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-01-30/russell-investments-chief-economist-dueker-found-dead.html):

QuoteMike Dueker, the chief economist at Russell Investments, was found dead at the side of a highway that leads to the Tacoma Narrows Bridge in Washington state, according to the Pierce County Sheriff's Department. He was 50.

He may have jumped over a 4-foot (1.2-meter) fence before falling down a 40- to 50-foot embankment, Pierce County Detective Ed Troyer said yesterday. He said the death appeared to be a suicide.

Dueker was reported missing on Jan. 29, and a group of friends had been searching for him along with law enforcement. Troyer said the economist was having problems at work, without elaborating. Dueker was in good standing at Russell, said Jennifer Tice, a company spokeswoman. She declined to comment on Troyer's statement about Dueker's work issues.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 01, 2014, 12:48:23 PM
It's probably worth mentioning while everyone in the USA and UK is warbling on about how amazing the economic outlook finally is (because anemic growth in a couple of overbloated sectors built on fraud is amazing, apparently), China looks like it might be tanking (http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/01/us-china-economy-pmi-idUSBREA1002H20140201) soon:

QuoteChina's factory growth eased to an expected six-month low in January, hurt by weaker local and foreign demand, a survey showed, a soft start for the year that heightens worries of an economic slowdown.

The official Purchasing Managers' Index (PMI) edged down to 50.5 in January from December's 51, the National Bureau of Statistics said on Saturday, in line with market expectations.

The change reinforces concerns that China's economy is stuttering and could drag on financial markets on Monday as global investors, already nervous about capital flight in emerging markets, find another reason to sell riskier assets.

There are other indications that not all is well in China either.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/30/business/international/as-china-slows-the-pain-hits-home.html
http://therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=11405
http://www.scmp.com/business/economy/article/1413690/davos-fear-economic-hard-landing-china-and-japan-enmity
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/24/business/daily-stock-market-activity.html

I dont know if this is linked to any of the above, but it's worth considering.  If China's economy is about to go down the tubes, well, a lot of people are going to be negatively impacted by that.  China's been a pretty safe bet for investment for several years now with it's ever expanding economy.  I have no doubt significant sums have been put into Chinese firms and banks, and those assets may now be at conisderable risk.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 03, 2014, 12:19:11 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26014387

QuoteThe extent of corruption in Europe is "breathtaking" and it costs the EU economy about 120bn euros (£99bn) annually, the European Commission says.

QuoteMs Malmstroem said that in some countries public procurement procedures were vulnerable to fraud, while in others party financing was the main problem, or municipal bodies were badly affected. And in some countries patients have to pay bribes in order to get adequate medical care, she wrote.

The EU study includes two major opinion polls, which indicated that three-quarters of EU citizens consider corruption to be widespread in their country.

Four out of 10 of the businesses surveyed described corruption as an obstacle to doing business in Europe.

In Sweden, 18% of people surveyed said they knew someone who had received a bribe, compared with a European average of 12%, Ms Malmstroem said.

This is sure to cause a little bit of concern in certain circles. It's been the stance of the EU for a while that corruption only happens in places like Africa, India, Russia and China. I would suggest that these numbers are, as always, lower than reality and based in caution. The "1 in 5 know someone who took a bribe" should send big alarm bells out, considering that the Swedish economy is pretty dependent on exports.

It would seem that in times of austerity, people everywhere are more open corruption. Who would have thought?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 05, 2014, 04:53:34 PM
So, about those dead people...

http://wallstreetonparade.com/2014/02/a-rash-of-deaths-and-a-missing-reporter-%E2%80%93-with-ties-to-wall-street-investigations/

QuoteIn a span of four days last week, two current executives and one recently retired top ranking executive of major financial firms were found dead. Both media and police have been quick to label the deaths as likely suicides. Missing from the reports is the salient fact that all three of the financial firms the executives worked for are under investigation for potentially serious financial fraud.

QuoteThe case of David Bird, the oil markets reporter who had worked at the Wall Street Journal for 20 years and vanished without a trace on the afternoon of January 11, has this in common with the other three tragedies: his work involves a commodities market – oil – which is under investigation by the U.S. Senate's Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations for possible manipulation. The FBI is involved in the Bird investigation.

Bird left his Long Hill, New Jersey home on that Saturday, telling his wife he was going for a walk. An intentional disappearance is incompatible with the fact that he left the house wearing a bright red jacket and without his life-sustaining medicine he was required to take daily as a result of a liver transplant. Despite a continuous search since his disappearance by hundreds of volunteers, local law enforcement and the FBI, Bird has not been located.

Let's just say I'm giving a little more credence to the possibility of foul play now....
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on February 05, 2014, 04:55:51 PM
This smells like shit.  Just saying.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 05, 2014, 05:01:33 PM
I'm still not entirely sold that something is happening.  However, I would be unsurprised to discover if this were the case, let's say.  It's possible that a lot of people who happen to work for banks being investigated are stressed out, and the New Year normally sees a jump in suicides anyway.  It could just be coincidence.

But my "suspicious bastard" gland is tingling.  Especially with a financial journalist vanishing only a couple of weeks beforehand.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 08, 2014, 02:50:34 PM
A few questions regarding the stockmarket and the world economy.
Is it true that about 95% of the money being moved in the stockmarkets of the world is not in any way connected to any physical objects like food, water or buildings (or TV's, computers and make-up etc. etc. etc.)?
If not, then what is the percentage roughly?

How large a part of the world economy is stock market trading?

If these percentages combined lead to 50% or higher, does this mean that actual production and factories are irrelevant to the world economy?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 08, 2014, 04:00:01 PM
According to the CIA World Factbook, the global economy is $71.83 trillion as of 2012.

According to the American Enterprise Institute, world stock markets were valued at $63.4 trillion as of 2012.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 09, 2014, 08:12:56 PM
Quote from: Cain on February 08, 2014, 04:00:01 PM
According to the CIA World Factbook, the global economy is $71.83 trillion as of 2012.

According to the American Enterprise Institute, world stock markets were valued at $63.4 trillion as of 2012.
Thanks.
So i think it is safe to say that the global economy is not really related to its production capacity. Ergo in a sane world the global economy going down the drain doesn't hurt normal people.

Sadly, this is not a sane world. Can't we reshape it or something?


PS I could have looked those numbers up myself, apologies for not doing so.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on February 11, 2014, 05:48:54 PM
the 3 day Jump in CDE ? kgs ?/?
PROMPS these links
u mean: estimated $ cost of thames flood {i have no idea WHAT i mean.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/10/flooding-costs-one-billion-pounds-insurance-expert-warns-rising-premiums

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/2/10/1392059031973/Flooding-in-Wraysbury-011.jpg)

:fnord:  (http://www.bdlive.co.za/world/europe/2014/02/10/uks-cameron-visits-flooded-areas-as-blame-game-escalates)

(http://www.bdlive.co.za/incoming/2014/02/10/uk-flood-feb-10-2014/ALTERNATES/crop_400x250/UK+flood+Feb+10+2014)

- :fnord: -

(http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/simgad/3548277752335032980)


thus my guess for the / cde/K spike is sell at 33&1/3 % Rise
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on February 11, 2014, 06:02:10 PM
ad 50036
the 3 day Jump in CDE ? kgc ?/? Kilo gram centigrades for shorts
PROMPS these links
u mean: estimated $ cost of thames flood {i have no idea WHAT i mean.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/10/flooding-costs-one-billion-pounds-insurance-expert-warns-rising-premiums

(http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2014/2/10/1392059031973/Flooding-in-Wraysbury-011.jpg)

:fnord:  (http://www.bdlive.co.za/world/europe/2014/02/10/uks-cameron-visits-flooded-areas-as-blame-game-escalates)

(http://www.bdlive.co.za/incoming/2014/02/10/uk-flood-feb-10-2014/ALTERNATES/crop_400x250/UK+flood+Feb+10+2014)

- :fnord: -

(http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/simgad/3548277752335032980)


thus my guess for the / cde/K spike is sell at 33&1/3 % Rise

(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=KGC&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)

Fridays Close ?  this post would NOT post .  except by H&R:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on February 11, 2014, 08:53:25 PM
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA190ES20140211?irpc=932&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

QuoteBarclays said it would axe up to 12,000 jobs this year even as it raised bonuses for investment bankers, prompting fury among politicians and unions who said it had not learned the lessons of the financial crisis.


Gee, really? Maybe because it helped make it happen while contributing to the larget theft in human history with absolutely no legal reprucussions.
Maybe, just maybe, they think they can do whatever the hell they want.
For some reason.


:lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on February 11, 2014, 11:37:24 PM
Quote from: Alty on February 11, 2014, 08:53:25 PM
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSBREA190ES20140211?irpc=932&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews

QuoteBarclays said it would axe up to 12,000 jobs this year even as it raised bonuses for investment bankers, prompting fury among politicians and unions who said it had not learned the lessons of the financial crisis.


Gee, really? Maybe because it helped make it happen while contributing to the larget theft in human history with absolutely no legal reprucussions.
Maybe, just maybe, they think they can do whatever the hell they want.
For some reason.


:lulz:
Yep.
The behaviour you reward gets repeated.
This is basic conditioning.
Stop giving them cookies when they shit in your bed!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 12, 2014, 12:15:48 PM
Silicon Valley has been involved in a wage-setting scheme for years

http://pando.com/2014/01/23/the-techtopus-how-silicon-valleys-most-celebrated-ceos-conspired-to-drive-down-100000-tech-engineers-wages/

QuoteIn early 2005, as demand for Silicon Valley engineers began booming, Apple's Steve Jobs sealed a secret and illegal pact with Google's Eric Schmidt to artificially push their workers wages lower by agreeing not to recruit each other's employees, sharing wage scale information, and punishing violators. On February 27, 2005, Bill Campbell, a member of Apple's board of directors and senior advisor to Google, emailed Jobs to confirm that Eric Schmidt "got directly involved and firmly stopped all efforts to recruit anyone from Apple."

Later that year, Schmidt instructed his Sr VP for Business Operation Shona Brown to keep the pact a secret and only share information "verbally, since I don't want to create a paper trail over which we can be sued later?"

These secret conversations and agreements between some of the biggest names in Silicon Valley were first exposed in a Department of Justice antitrust investigation launched by the Obama Administration in 2010. That DOJ suit became the basis of a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of over 100,000 tech employees whose wages were artificially lowered — an estimated $9 billion effectively stolen by the high-flying companies from their workers to pad company earnings — in the second half of the 2000s. Last week, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals denied attempts by Apple, Google, Intel, and Adobe to have the lawsuit tossed, and gave final approval for the class action suit to go forward. A jury trial date has been set for May 27 in San Jose, before US District Court judge Lucy Koh, who presided over the Samsung-Apple patent suit.

This is pretty amazing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 12, 2014, 12:25:21 PM
I'm honestly surprised. I would have thought Microsoft would have been the one to be involved in this cluster fuck much more prominently.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on February 12, 2014, 09:17:51 PM
Adobe & LucasWorks were also in on this. FUCKERS (this affects my industry, and if "engineer" wages have been kept down, every entry level position below them has been kept down as well).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 12, 2014, 09:56:14 PM
Yeah, it sounds like virtually any software household name brand had a part in this game.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 17, 2014, 11:56:13 AM
Another dead banker.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-13/ryan-crane-jpmorgan-equities-trading-executive-dies-at-37.html

QuoteRyan Crane, a JPMorgan (JPM) Chase & Co. employee who in a 14-year career at the New York-based bank rose to executive director of a unit that trades blocks of stocks for clients, has died. He was 37.

He died on Feb. 3 at his Stamford, Connecticut, home, according to the website of Leo P. Gallagher & Son Funeral Home in Greenwich, Connecticut. The cause of death will be determined when a toxicology report is completed in about six weeks, said a spokeswoman for the state's chief medical examiner.

Crane started at JPMorgan in equities trading after graduating from Harvard University in 1999, according to his profile on the LinkedIn Corp. website. Following promotions, he worked as an executive director, or a rank above vice president and below managing director, in the bank's Americas Program Trading group. Program traders handle transactions in baskets of at least 15 stocks, often for mutual-fund clients seeking to rebalance index-linked portfolios.

It'd be nice to have some kind of base-rate for deaths of executive bankers by time of year and age, to compare this apparently recent glut of suicides and deaths to.

I mean, it's possible this is entirely normal and within the established baseline of expected deaths for people in that industry.  Or for people otherwise matching their demographic characteristics.  It's even likely that this is the case.

But I like numbers, to be sure.  Because I keep hearing disturbing rumours about the housing market in the USA and UK.  I keep hearing that the problems aren't solved, and the next crisis could be magnitudes worse than 2008.  And bankers killing themselves could be an indication that something is about to go down, badly.

Or it could be something else.  Banks and organised crime are joined at the hip.  HSBC and Wachovia do business with terrorists and cartels on a daily basis...do we really think JP Morgan wouldn't also involve themselves?  Has something happened to cause a split, or for these groups to believe the banks are not being entirely honest with their cash?

Like I said, it's probably nothing.  But I'd like to know for sure. I'm just too lazy to crunch the numbers. :sad:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on February 17, 2014, 12:08:26 PM
Hmm. This is starting to be a trend I can get behind.

QuoteBut I like numbers, to be sure.  Because I keep hearing disturbing rumours about the housing market in the USA and UK.  I keep hearing that the problems aren't solved, and the next crisis could be magnitudes worse than 2008.  And bankers killing themselves could be an indication that something is about to go down, badly.

I keep hearing similar things only about China and the inevitability of doom there. I've been chalking most of it up to fearmongering with an inevitable failure due there at some point anyway in the future. A crisis or good warning of an upcoming one there could certainly cause suicidal feelings here if you've heavily invested your rebalancing strategy on it.

No proof, naturally, but seemed worth raising as an outside possibility.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on February 18, 2014, 06:01:22 PM
Whoa, another one? I think you're right to keep an eye on this (good idea keeping the Lo5s in mind tho).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on February 18, 2014, 06:51:53 PM
I was made aware that there's been zero change in regulation RE: mortgage lending practices, which is ever so slightly terrifying.

Hopefully, this trend is simply due to all those carefully made voodoo dolls in my closet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on February 19, 2014, 04:05:06 AM
And we have another.

http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/02/18/j-p-morgan-employee-falls-to-death-in-hong-kong/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on February 19, 2014, 04:19:06 AM
Jesus. That's, what, six?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on February 19, 2014, 04:36:05 AM
Eh, I dunno. I just can't buy the idea that I've already seen conspiracy nuts tout over this. The notion that impending economic doom would cause these people to kill themselves seems a bit absurd. They would still have more resources than most, already do. It's the little people that end up starving to death in such situations. The rich are almost always relatively rich.

And, IIRC, the number of people who jumped to their deaths because of the market crash that led to the Depression is dramatized.   
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on February 19, 2014, 07:33:40 AM
What if, now hear me out, what if...these bankers feel...guilty for fucking millions and millions of people ovahahahaha HAHAHAHAHAHA!

Oh, god, I kid, I kid.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 19, 2014, 09:23:28 AM
That's what makes it odd.  People in a business where ruthlessly fucking everyone over isn't merely expected, but also valorised, seem to be showing a great amount of grief and depression at their situation.

Which means either "banker" is the wrong characteristic to be focusing on, when it should be, say, "late-middle age workaholics whose personal lives are a shambles and drink too much", or something strange is going on.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on February 20, 2014, 02:39:51 AM
This guy missed an epic sink-shitting opportunity:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/02/i-crashed-a-wall-street-secret-society.html

Quote"Give me that or I'll fucking break it!" Novogratz yelled, grabbing for my phone, which was filled with damning evidence. His eyes were bloodshot, and his neck veins were bulging. The song onstage was now over, and a number of prominent Kappas had rushed over to our table. Before the situation could escalate dangerously, a bond investor and former Grand Swipe named Alexandra Lebenthal stepped in between us. Wilbur Ross quickly followed, and the two of them led me out into the lobby, past a throng of Wall Street tycoons, some of whom seemed to be hyperventilating.

:lulz:

I have to forgive him because he got a handy list of their names (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2014/02/revealed-members-of-kappa-beta-phi.html) but man, what a missed opportunity.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 20, 2014, 11:26:46 AM
He almost caused them to shit in sinks with the video he made, so that counts for something, right?

As an aside, I would've strung them along on the offer of hush money, then reported on that, too.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 01, 2014, 01:14:47 PM
Gold prices have been manipulated, it seems

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-28/gold-fix-study-shows-signs-of-decade-of-bank-manipulation.html

QuoteThe London gold fix, the benchmark used by miners, jewelers and central banks to value the metal, may have been manipulated for a decade by the banks setting it, researchers say.

Unusual trading patterns around 3 p.m. in London, when the so-called afternoon fix is set on a private conference call between five of the biggest gold dealers, are a sign of collusive behavior and should be investigated, New York University's Stern School of Business Professor Rosa Abrantes-Metz and Albert Metz, a managing director at Moody's Investors Service, wrote in a draft research paper.

"The structure of the benchmark is certainly conducive to collusion and manipulation, and the empirical data are consistent with price artificiality," they say in the report, which hasn't yet been submitted for publication. "It is likely that co-operation between participants may be occurring."

The paper is the first to raise the possibility that the five banks overseeing the century-old rate — Barclays Plc, Deutsche Bank AG (DBK), Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS), HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA) and Societe Generale SA (GLE) — may have been actively working together to manipulate the benchmark. It also adds to pressure on the firms to overhaul the way the rate is calculated. Authorities around the world, already investigating the manipulation of benchmarks from interest rates to foreign exchange, are examining the $20 trillion gold market for signs of wrongdoing.

The data seems to show manipulation of gold prices, in a steady downward direction, since 2004.  The author of the paper says he himself is not entirely sure why this would be the case.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 01, 2014, 04:43:31 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 01, 2014, 01:14:47 PM
Gold prices have been manipulated, it seems

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-28/gold-fix-study-shows-signs-of-decade-of-bank-manipulation.html

QuoteThe London gold fix, the benchmark used by miners, jewelers and central banks to value the metal, may have been manipulated for a decade by the banks setting it, researchers say.

Unusual trading patterns around 3 p.m. in London, when the so-called afternoon fix is set on a private conference call between five of the biggest gold dealers, are a sign of collusive behavior and should be investigated, New York University's Stern School of Business Professor Rosa Abrantes-Metz and Albert Metz, a managing director at Moody's Investors Service, wrote in a draft research paper.

"The structure of the benchmark is certainly conducive to collusion and manipulation, and the empirical data are consistent with price artificiality," they say in the report, which hasn't yet been submitted for publication. "It is likely that co-operation between participants may be occurring."

The paper is the first to raise the possibility that the five banks overseeing the century-old rate — Barclays Plc, Deutsche Bank AG (DBK), Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS), HSBC Holdings Plc (HSBA) and Societe Generale SA (GLE) — may have been actively working together to manipulate the benchmark. It also adds to pressure on the firms to overhaul the way the rate is calculated. Authorities around the world, already investigating the manipulation of benchmarks from interest rates to foreign exchange, are examining the $20 trillion gold market for signs of wrongdoing.

The data seems to show manipulation of gold prices, in a steady downward direction, since 2004.  The author of the paper says he himself is not entirely sure why this would be the case.

SURPRISE!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 07, 2014, 04:56:41 PM
Quote from: Nigel on March 01, 2014, 04:43:31 PM

SURP  RISE!

Did you mean SURF RISE ?

http://en.mercopress.com/2014/03/07/with-an-eye-on-argentina-and-venezuela-brazil-private-sector-wants-mercosur-trade-in-local-currencies
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 12:42:04 AM
ad 51531 Monday ? No /OR/ Limited access to page 97 ^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 12:44:02 AM
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=post;msg=1333033;topic=20156.1485
ad 51531 Trying to find my way ?/? Somewhere ? Prior.


Quote from: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 12:42:04 AM
ad 51531 Monday ? No /OR/ Limited access to page 97 ^
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:42:21 AM
Don't worry Hirley, I'll look into this this evening.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 07:50:23 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:42:21 AM
Don't worry Hirley, I'll look into this this evening.

Hi: Not worried:: iT sure has been A Difficult week However>
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 07:50:23 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:42:21 AM
Don't worry Hirley, I'll look into this this evening.

Hi: Not worried:: iT sure has been A Difficult week However>

Yeah, I thought I had everything fixed last Sunday but apparently not.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 08:02:17 AM
it looks to me like you set the clock back 1 hour /\/ot spring forward fall back

Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 07:50:23 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:42:21 AM
Don't worry Hirley, I'll look into this this evening.

Hi: Not worried:: iT sure has been A Difficult week However>

Yeah, I thought I had everything fixed last Sunday but apparently not.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Faust on March 11, 2014, 08:42:54 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 08:02:17 AM
it looks to me like you set the clock back 1 hour /\/ot spring forward fall back

Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:54:31 AM
Quote from: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 07:50:23 AM
Quote from: Faust on March 11, 2014, 07:42:21 AM
Don't worry Hirley, I'll look into this this evening.

Hi: Not worried:: iT sure has been A Difficult week However>

Yeah, I thought I had everything fixed last Sunday but apparently not.

Hehe, I might have done that too but I don't think that will fix what's going on.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on March 11, 2014, 09:59:55 PM
97205 -  http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,20156.1440.html  
http://www.ajpm.com/silver-bullion.html
http://www.ajpm.com/gold-bullion.html
ad 51662 :fnord: Я (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,35581.msg1333434.html#msg1333434) -  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=post;msg=1330455;topic=28564.255) /  +  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php/topic,28564.255.html) ad 51702  51794 51836 E/Я
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on March 16, 2014, 11:08:36 PM
http://truth-out.org/news/item/22496-imf-urges-redistribution-to-tackle-growing-inequality
http://www.imf.org/external/np/pp/eng/2014/012314.pdf

QuoteThe IMF, arguably the world's premiere financial institution, is stating unequivocally that income inequality "tends to reduce the pace and durability" of economic growth. In a paper released Thursday, the fund also suggests that a spectrum of approaches to "progressive" redistribution – national tax and spending policies that are purposefully tilted in favour of the poor – would decrease inequality and hence "is overall pro-growth".

If anyone can recommend some good crash courses/background info on the IMF, I'm all ears.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on March 17, 2014, 07:52:19 AM
Joe Stiglitz, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, said the IMF was in the business of destroying third world economies, in favour of monopoly cartels.  Just put "stiglitz IMF" into Google and you'll get the goods.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on March 17, 2014, 08:05:51 AM
Quote from: Cain on March 17, 2014, 07:52:19 AM
Joe Stiglitz, former Chief Economist of the World Bank, said the IMF was in the business of destroying third world economies, in favour of monopoly cartels.  Just put "stiglitz IMF" into Google and you'll get the goods.
And now that the monopoly cartels are seeing their profits go down the IMF is changing it's tack.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on March 22, 2014, 07:42:30 PM
Well what do you know.

http://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on March 22, 2014, 10:17:36 PM
Yah, I've been quietly raging about that for a few weeks. The wage fixing of 'engineer' class employees directly affects wages of all tech employees across the industry.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on April 09, 2014, 06:50:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 30, 2014, 09:05:25 AM
So, the Mail potentially has found something interesting here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547684/TWO-senior-American-bankers-working-London-commit-suicide-just-two-days-one-jumped-500ft-death-JP-Morgan-skyscraper.html

QuoteTwo top ranking American bankers working in senior positions in London have committed suicide in the space of two days.

Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old JP Morgan bank executive, died early this morning after he jumped 500ft from the top of the bank's European headquarters. His body was discovered on the ninth floor roof, which surrounds the 33-story Canary Wharf skyscraper.

Just two days earlier, on Sunday, fellow American banker, William 'Bill' Broeksmit, 58, was found hanging in his South Kensington home.

Broeksmit – who retired last February – was a former senior manager at Deutsche Bank and had lived in London many years. He started working for the bank in 1996 but left for a period of 7 years before returning in 2008.


MORE BANKER SUICIDE (seriously, this is a trend now)
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/08/news/companies/abn-amro-suicide/index.html
A former senior ABN Amro banker suffering from severe depression killed his wife and daughter before taking his own life.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 09, 2014, 09:12:35 PM
Quote from: Telarus on April 09, 2014, 06:50:28 PM
Quote from: Cain on January 30, 2014, 09:05:25 AM
So, the Mail potentially has found something interesting here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2547684/TWO-senior-American-bankers-working-London-commit-suicide-just-two-days-one-jumped-500ft-death-JP-Morgan-skyscraper.html

QuoteTwo top ranking American bankers working in senior positions in London have committed suicide in the space of two days.

Gabriel Magee, a 39-year-old JP Morgan bank executive, died early this morning after he jumped 500ft from the top of the bank's European headquarters. His body was discovered on the ninth floor roof, which surrounds the 33-story Canary Wharf skyscraper.

Just two days earlier, on Sunday, fellow American banker, William 'Bill' Broeksmit, 58, was found hanging in his South Kensington home.

Broeksmit – who retired last February – was a former senior manager at Deutsche Bank and had lived in London many years. He started working for the bank in 1996 but left for a period of 7 years before returning in 2008.


MORE BANKER SUICIDE (seriously, this is a trend now)
http://money.cnn.com/2014/04/08/news/companies/abn-amro-suicide/index.html
A former senior ABN Amro banker suffering from severe depression killed his wife and daughter before taking his own life.
Did you contrast with average suicide rates?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pæs on April 09, 2014, 09:21:27 PM
Banker suicides are because Necronomicoin, duh.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 09, 2014, 09:21:52 PM
Quote from: Pæs on April 09, 2014, 09:21:27 PM
Banker suicides are because Necronomicoin, duh.

I still need to write something for that...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pæs on April 09, 2014, 09:27:36 PM
I keep opening the thread and then losing steam.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 09, 2014, 09:31:18 PM
Quote from: Pæs on April 09, 2014, 09:27:36 PM
I keep opening the thread and then losing steam.

I just keep not getting to it, because I am busy as fuck, and when I have time, my brain is empty.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on April 11, 2014, 12:11:46 AM
I wish I did have actual numbers to compare to the general population. Because of stories like this one:

http://politicalblindspot.com/bank-ceo-assassinated-in-parking-garage/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 11, 2014, 08:14:54 AM
Quote from: Telarus on April 11, 2014, 12:11:46 AM
I wish I did have actual numbers to compare to the general population. Because of stories like this one:

http://politicalblindspot.com/bank-ceo-assassinated-in-parking-garage/
If only we had some people with researching skills that look up these interesting and new things for us.
I would gladly pay for some paper object filled with this kind of thing.
Because they are filled with new and interesting facts we could maybe call them interestingpapers?
I have heard legends of such things existing in the past, the people that did this kind of work were called journalists or something like that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 11, 2014, 08:26:33 AM
Shut up! Journalism and research was outlawed last decade in favour of crowd-sourcing all information.

Bow before Metadata, your new god.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 11, 2014, 08:30:06 AM
Also:
QuoteHermann's website blamed "the Liechtenstein Government and country financial market authority" for having "illegally destroyed my investment company Hermann Finance and its funds, depriving me of my livelihood."

Little else is know beyond this. But what is clear now is that at least one of the 13 dead international banking heavyweights was deliberately killed.

Plausible motivation and 13 is surely getting towards statistically significant. I'd be interested to know what their list is, who's on it and when did they start keeping it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 11, 2014, 09:54:56 AM
Probably unrelated, probably totally innocent, just seems worth adding to the list:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jim-flaherty-former-finance-minister-dead-at-64-1.2605728

QuoteA source close to the family told the CBC's Evan Solomon that Flaherty died of a massive heart attack. Emergency services were called to Flaherty's home in Ottawa at 12:27 p.m. Thursday.

Conservative MP Kellie Leitch, who lives in the same building, was administering CPR when paramedics arrived, according to sources. Leitch is a pediatric surgeon who co-chaired Flaherty's campaign for the Ontario PC leadership. Flaherty was her friend and mentor.

Flaherty had battled health problems in the months leading up to his resignation, most publicly, a painful skin condition called bullous pemphigoid. But Flaherty had also experienced a medical issue during a Conservative caucus meeting some time in the last eight months. He was attended to by Leitch on that occasion as well.

Conservative MP Bernard Trottier said on CBC News Network's Power & Politics that Flaherty's Conservative colleagues thought at the time the problem was related to "extreme fatigue."

The bold made me question this a little. "Extreme fatigue" like "Tired and emotional" is pretty vauge and is usually used to indicate a totally different problem. "Tired and emotional" is typically shorthand for "Drunk", and "Extreme fatigue" often means "Hungover".

Probably way off the mark in this instance, but I'd be interested to see the follow up stories in the next few weeks after the obligatory pseudo-mourning rituals are completed.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 14, 2014, 08:08:10 AM

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-magazine-monitor-26957683

QuoteLater this year, the UK economy will get a £10bn boost from illegal drugs and prostitution, writes Anthony Reuben.

The Office for National Statistics, which has to calculate the figure, confirmed it at an economic forum last week and will publish more details next month. It will be £3bn from prostitution and £7bn from illegal drugs.

The European Union has declared that illegal activities need to be included in national accounts so that comparisons can be made between countries. In the Netherlands, for example, some drugs are permitted that are illegal elsewhere in Europe, and there is legal prostitution. Given that the allocation of the EU budget is based on the size of a country's economy measured by gross domestic product (GDP), the EU wants to be sure that all countries are measuring it in the same way.

The inclusion of illegal activities in GDP is one of a range of changes to the national accounts which will be introduced across Europe from September. The activities involved are only supposed to be those in which both parties are, at least nominally, voluntary participants.

This could have some interesting consequences. For one, you'll get at least a crude idea of the various values of EU drug markets in comparison to their neighbours. There's a few benefits to that, particularly if you're considering a legalisation/taxation move to try and prop up you're fucked economy. There's more than a few EU countries that could consider that.

It'll certainly be interesting to see this data when available and see the size of the black market across the EU. I have a feeling that some states will grossly underestimate the size of their own.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 14, 2014, 01:13:34 PM
Wouldn't it be hilarious if many countries decide to legalize weed for monetary gain but it backfires and drug use rates drop?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 14, 2014, 03:10:52 PM
That would surely be a major victory in the ongoing war on drugs.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 16, 2014, 11:01:03 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27048297

QuotePaul Flowers, the former Co-op Bank chairman, has been charged with drug possession, prosecutors have said.

Mr Flowers was arrested in November following newspaper allegations he was involved in a drug deal.

He had stepped down from the Co-op six months earlier over concerns about his expenses. He resigned as a Methodist Church minister days before his arrest.

He has been charged with two counts of possession of a class A drug and one count of possession of a class C drug.

The charges relate to cocaine, methamphetamine and ketamine.

Will be interesting to see the fallout from this. It would also be interesting to see the results of mandatory piss testing if you're an executive of a bank. This seems to be a very established cultural theme and I really don't understand how anyone can claim the economy to be improving if you've still got the same cracked up wankers spinning the roulette wheel.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 16, 2014, 11:08:53 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27046286

QuoteStarbucks is to move its European head office from Amsterdam to London by the end of the year, following a row over corporate tax avoidance.

"This move will mean we pay more tax in the UK," the company said.

Horseshit, and I'll tell you why. No company will act in a manner that will negatively impact on their own profits. This becomes more true as the organisation you look at increases in size. Starbucks is now very large indeed. If Starbucks are indeed "paying more UK tax" then this is because they have minimised tax exposure in other European countries.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on April 16, 2014, 01:10:24 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on April 16, 2014, 11:01:03 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27048297

QuotePaul Flowers, the former Co-op Bank chairman, has been charged with drug possession, prosecutors have said.

Mr Flowers was arrested in November following newspaper allegations he was involved in a drug deal.

He had stepped down from the Co-op six months earlier over concerns about his expenses. He resigned as a Methodist Church minister days before his arrest.

He has been charged with two counts of possession of a class A drug and one count of possession of a class C drug.

The charges relate to cocaine, methamphetamine and ketamine.

Will be interesting to see the fallout from this. It would also be interesting to see the results of mandatory piss testing if you're an executive of a bank. This seems to be a very established cultural theme and I really don't understand how anyone can claim the economy to be improving if you've still got the same cracked up wankers spinning the roulette wheel.

"Hopped up on meth and Special K" is a great way to sum up the economy of the past decade.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 18, 2014, 10:54:36 PM
ad 53482 NBR is playing on TV {the mini 1
it seams clear to me, pushing down keyboard keys constitutes work
How to get paid for it, seams a easy to me as finding a system
{NOT nbr | that accounts per keystroke / time spent on line ?



Quote from: Regret on April 11, 2014, 08:14:54 AM
Quote from: Telarus on April 11, 2014, 12:11:46 AM
I wish I did have actual numbers to compare to the general population. Because of stories like this one:

http://politicalblindspot.com/bank-ceo-assassinated-in-parking-garage/
If only we had some people with researching skills that look up these interesting and new things for us.
I would gladly pay for some paper object filled with this kind of thing.
Because they are filled with new and interesting facts we could maybe call them interestingpapers?
I have heard legends of such things existing in the past, the people that did this kind of work were called journalists or something like that.

no i don't know where today end of nbr 3:57pm pdt

ad 53979 pic: The US "pivot" or "G 05:52 2014 04/27
Look it Takes time to rewire my SandNaps 4it
?" Hirley0 wants us to buy gold. "?
no i do NOT.  I want U to be able to. though
Link2FF goes here > Later 06:54 Meaning Mon
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 18, 2014, 10:59:38 PM
4/23 $/HIT? (http://finance.yahoo.com/lookup;_ylt=At4vA7Ft9WiZ8UnBahRFjX3xVax_;_ylu=X3oDMTFja3FudHFmBHBvcwMxBHNlYwN5ZmlTeW1ib2xMb29rdXBSZXN1bHRzBHNsawNuZXRmbGl4?s=netflix) EBY (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=EBAY&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&p=&a=r14&c=) FB (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=FB&ql=1) TWTR (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=TWTR) NFLX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=NFLX) MX (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX.MX+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=2y) sa/mx (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=NFLX34.SA&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=NFLX.MX&ql=1) SAF2 (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=)
4/22  http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=mlist  :fnord:
Members 1 to 30 (of 5238 total members) ? sort by date / by posts


http://nbr.com/   earch Results By: Google ? Yahoo!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 18, 2014, 11:00:41 PM
ad 53785 nflx? ad 53881
ad 53661 S.S in play 2day + Tom foolery {Tf| ?int=68
ad 53593 No sand.shuns in play today ? ?? ?/
& Sanctions. = Limited access to deposit/withdraw'N etc /  & mine is  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=34727.msg1339882#msg1339882)
0k clearly the Mark.it is no longer CoOp.rate  tiz individules
PIPE LINE DELAY ? 53486 ad 53573 ^ READ UP ^
2 hours ago ... WASHINGTON :fnord: ory/news/2014/04/18/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2014/04/18/obama-keystone-xl-pipeline-congress-canada/7874199/) DELAY IN EFFECT:;
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 22, 2014, 12:03:49 PM
Big Pharma just got a little bigger:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27107416

QuoteNovartis and GlaxoSmithKline, two of the world's top drugmakers, have struck a multi-billion-dollar deal to join forces and reshape their businesses.

The deal involves swapping assets and combining their consumer health units.

Novartis will acquire GSK's cancer drugs business for $16bn (£9.5bn) and sell its vaccines division, excluding the flu unit, to GSK for $7.1bn.

In a separate deal, Novartis has agreed to sell its animal health division to Lilly for nearly $5.4bn.

Novartis said the moves would help the firm focus on its key businesses.

Read - Price fixing and monopolies are now easier to conduct and hide from the general public. Scandal of this nature within 5 years, guaranteed.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 01:04:21 PM
I think it's high time we start robbing their IP. Anything life saving or offering a better quality of life should be open sourced. Entertainment industry IP was kinda cute and kitchy and it's vaguely amusing to see them piss and moan while they price themselves out the market but pharma IP is downright fucking evil.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on April 23, 2014, 06:25:05 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 01:04:21 PM
I think it's high time we start robbing their IP. Anything life saving or offering a better quality of life should be open sourced. Entertainment industry IP was kinda cute and kitchy and it's vaguely amusing to see them piss and moan while they price themselves out the market but pharma IP is downright fucking evil.
Have you heard of Genetic IP?
It is a thing. A very bad thing.
I can't decide which is worse though.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

I don't know if "open source" was something invented by the hacker community (as the name suggests) or if it was a thing before that but it applies (imho) universally. IP robs the collective memeplex of ideas, open source enriches it.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

Gonna argue that.  Why put a shitload of work into something, if someone can just walk off with it?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 07:02:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

Gonna argue that.  Why put a shitload of work into something, if someone can just walk off with it?

Pretty simple, really - you do it so that when they improve on it, you get to walk away with the improvement.

Bonus, if you do it right, you get to share the workload.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 07:06:15 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 07:02:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

Gonna argue that.  Why put a shitload of work into something, if someone can just walk off with it?

Pretty simple, really - you do it so that when they improve on it, you get to walk away with the improvement.

Bonus, if you do it right, you get to share the workload.

In the meantime, I have to eat.  So, if I'm an author or something, I cannot make a living without IP protection.  It's really that simple.  And I'd rather live in a world with MORE books than LESS.

Likewise, if I am going to sink resources into developing a technology, I have to have some sort of payoff, or I'm out of business.  Which means no further new tech from me.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 23, 2014, 07:34:28 PM
NFLX? C.note Limit  :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=33053.msg1340504#msg1340504)Jun 21 375 (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=8264&qm_symbol=@NFLX%20%20140621C00375000) NvS (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=NFLX&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=VIPS&ql=1)
.1 http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=NFLX 12:34 pm pDt (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/t?s=NFLX&lang=en-US&region=US&width=300&height=180)
2: 2y/MACD (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=m26-12-9&c=) :45 = ay at 10:42:31 am (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=2y&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)
3? 6m/SloSto (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=ss&c=)(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)a.SPY? (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=6m&s=NFLX&l=on&z=l&q=c&a=ss&c=spy&ql=1)(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=SPY&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)
4* 3M/W%R (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=w14&c=)(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US)a.SAF2 (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=)(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)  b:(http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=3m&q=l&l=on&z=l&c=NFLX&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US)
5= 5d (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=5d)  c (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=r14&c=)  x (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=NFLX&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=NFLX.MX&ql=1)  sp (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=NFLX&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=SPY&ql=1) U (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=5d&s=NFLX&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=UMPQ&ql=1)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 08:03:50 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 07:06:15 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 07:02:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

Gonna argue that.  Why put a shitload of work into something, if someone can just walk off with it?

Pretty simple, really - you do it so that when they improve on it, you get to walk away with the improvement.

Bonus, if you do it right, you get to share the workload.

In the meantime, I have to eat.  So, if I'm an author or something, I cannot make a living without IP protection.  It's really that simple.  And I'd rather live in a world with MORE books than LESS.

Likewise, if I am going to sink resources into developing a technology, I have to have some sort of payoff, or I'm out of business.  Which means no further new tech from me.

Like I said, I understand it but it still saddens me. Cures cannot be created without recovering investment. So they come out expensive as fuck and whaddya know - people die because of it. It's how it is but that doesn't mean I have to like it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 08:18:53 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 08:03:50 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 07:06:15 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 07:02:19 PM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on April 23, 2014, 06:51:40 PM
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 06:40:54 PM
The thing with any form of IP is it's a bastard of a thing. Understandable in a capitalism scenario, I'm not arguing the logic of it, but no less regrettable for all that. The more information that is freely available to everyone, the faster we progress.

Gonna argue that.  Why put a shitload of work into something, if someone can just walk off with it?

Pretty simple, really - you do it so that when they improve on it, you get to walk away with the improvement.

Bonus, if you do it right, you get to share the workload.

In the meantime, I have to eat.  So, if I'm an author or something, I cannot make a living without IP protection.  It's really that simple.  And I'd rather live in a world with MORE books than LESS.

Likewise, if I am going to sink resources into developing a technology, I have to have some sort of payoff, or I'm out of business.  Which means no further new tech from me.

Like I said, I understand it but it still saddens me. Cures cannot be created without recovering investment. So they come out expensive as fuck and whaddya know - people die because of it. It's how it is but that doesn't mean I have to like it.

The trick is to limit IP.  A patent should not be exclusive forever, for exactly that reason.  And they aren't.

For example, the lorazapam I take costs $4/pill ($0.30, actually, but I am fortunate enough to have decent insurance).  Before the patent expired, it would have cost about 3 times that amount.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on April 23, 2014, 08:46:19 PM
Yeah, I guess we're collectively doing the best we can manage with the shit we have.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 24, 2014, 11:24:25 AM
WeLL? this is a Question for her (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=showposts;u=4407)
Rather than 1 for them
i do not actually play the slots
when ever i do go / whiTch aint very often
ESPecially now that the shuttle costs
when once upon a WHEN
it was free *****

I guess the point i was trying to convey WAS
IF i did play them?
it would be for a dime or a QUARTER

THAT SAID
i guess the question is about PayPal {Maybe?/?
OR bit coins "past", present, Future>

speaking of future
today i will try to find a SMF in .br (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=33053.msg1340582#msg1340582) :fnord:
now that Dilma has taken up the WEB GoneTlet {more later ((about 9:

ad 53881 yes i found 1.ar ^ / lot of time D'La
My guess its US ? noT ARe
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 27, 2014, 02:51:37 AM
HEY CAIN:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-20/bnp-banker-his-wife-and-nephew-murdered-belgium

How many fucking boxes does THAT tick?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on April 29, 2014, 09:55:08 AM
ad 54052 dw.DE OVER: Ff 2014 04/29  03:27  Oh A 7 what2say | Think SA?
easier said than done: ar.yesterday:} yeah:> SMF
in argintina or brazil {Maybe Columbia |{ WHAT ?

ad 54124 3 Ff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_crash
My4cast4 sept 29 (http://media.turnofspeed.com/media/hub/main_qu12-15a108007.jpg)2014 is this YEAR

3 Ff 4/30 v 5/1 Hump v Thor My guess is the trend is down and non eventfull ad 54201
and again the update of the IMG of Wednesday wiLL be done later today SORRY >
Lo0kY it seams clear today the grim event May well be 2016
3 Ff54263 5/1->2 the Ans of course is WhiTch chart | the ans
Nflx (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.msg1340460#msg1340460) THE qUEST why/who "the spike"
3 Ff 5/1->3 now enter travel back in time as 5/3 B4 5/2
the question to answer| what is my guess about chart \
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on April 29, 2014, 03:45:39 PM
ha ha ha
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27201985
ha ha ha
QuoteEuropean banks will be expected to prove they can survive a 7% drop in GDP under new tougher stress tests unveiled by the regulator.

It says banks should also be able to withstand a 14% fall in house prices and up to a 19% drop in share prices under a worst-case scenario.
HA HA HA

Let's say that again with a straight face. The worst case scenario these people seem able to imagine is a 15% drop in house prices and 20% drop in share prices.
They could probably have done with a quick look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market_crash

Hooded robes are to the right, kool-aid to the left. If you actually think this will prevent anything that is.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on May 01, 2014, 08:38:02 AM
LOL - the guys in charge of economics have no concept of how economics works. The 21st century really is MY CENTURY  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on May 01, 2014, 08:48:41 AM
It's great isn't it?

Seriously, when someone asks me about "worst case situation" it's a lot fucking worse than a 15% drop. If you can't imagine worse than that then I'd suggest you need to get the fuck out because you can't count to 16.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on May 01, 2014, 08:58:00 AM
You know how they say "power corrupts"? Well that's true, but not in the sense that's usually ascribed. Power does not corrupt moral integrity - it corrupts neural pathways in the brain meat - the most powerful are the most incapable of any form of rational thought.

It's so retarded, it's approaching genius! :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on May 01, 2014, 09:02:52 PM
There are two ways to respond to power:
- Consider yourself responsible for everything that happens to that which you have power over.
- Don't give a fuck and watch it all burn while you laugh maniacally.

Let's say half of the powerful people takes path one and the other half takes path two.
The ability to control the effects of your power is inversely proportional to the amount of power.
This leads to stress, and as we know stress makes people stupid, tired, prone to snap-judgements, and eventually burnt out, insane or dead.

The Path One leaders dominate the positions of above average but still low power. This is because of two reasons: They die more often when put in higher positions and they are not as good at functioning or pretending to function in higher positions.
The Path Two leaders are immune to this type of stress, so they dominate the positions of high power.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 04, 2014, 12:30:43 PM
v READ DOWN v From ad 54401 { Waxing fort Night ?
Ff401 5/4<3 Tomorrows "change" means 4me Monday open call=By
Ff449 5/5<3.Sat it doeth appear to me the situation is 4 change
Ff460 5/6<4&5 Look 5/4=0 5/5=oLh.4am
3 Ff497 5/7<4&6 stiLL LoT | the T confusion is STiLL CON.f 7> Y no offline data ?-W7
3 Ff535 5/8<5&6} no idea see 5/9 FB\ Wed U/ SMF.ar (http://www.smfpersonal.net/support/adk-portal-shoutbox-doesnt-work-t7618.0.html;new#new)
Ff568  5/9<6 in@16.06 Or .16 8>there was no "support". only -MeSS
Ff607  5/10<7<8 9> MeSS.RES BAC2$ =_10>LoC7RoC8 ..LoC
Ff632  5/11<8oLe>7AM>=y at 04:57:44 am by hirley0
Ff660  5/12<10 MAYBE LATER?
Ff696  5/13<10 ITS ABOUT $10/MONTH >C.NOTE/Y for 0NG
771Ff  5/14<11 806 54832 ad 54866 SHUT DOWN>?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on May 13, 2014, 07:47:51 PM
Check it out: SEC audits show 50% of private equity firms are stealing from their clients. (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117735/private-equity-fraud-how-firms-are-ripping-their-investors)

QuoteThese results were unveiled last week when Andrew Bowden, the director of the SEC's examinations office, gave a speech titled "Spreading Sunshine in Private Equity." The big takeaway: Half of the SEC's exams find corruption in the way fees and expenses are handled. Or as Bowden forcefully describes it: "When we have examined how fees and expenses are handled by advisers to private equity funds, we have identified what we believe are violations of law or material weaknesses in controls over 50 percent of the time."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on May 14, 2014, 04:23:07 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on May 13, 2014, 07:47:51 PM
Check it out: SEC audits show 50% of private equity firms are stealing from their clients. (http://www.newrepublic.com/article/117735/private-equity-fraud-how-firms-are-ripping-their-investors)

QuoteThese results were unveiled last week when Andrew Bowden, the director of the SEC's examinations office, gave a speech titled "Spreading Sunshine in Private Equity." The big takeaway: Half of the SEC's exams find corruption in the way fees and expenses are handled. Or as Bowden forcefully describes it: "When we have examined how fees and expenses are handled by advisers to private equity funds, we have identified what we believe are violations of law or material weaknesses in controls over 50 percent of the time."

Nice find.

CAVEAT EMPTOR!
   \
:bankster:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 17, 2014, 10:54:06 AM
 :fnord: NFLX instead NvS (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.msg1340460#msg1340460)

VIPS(http://www.erisbarandgrill.com/photo/math/VIPS.JPG) :fnord:  (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=NFLX&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)


http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=CDE&p=b&a=fs&lang=en-US&region=US
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=VIPS&t=2y&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US


http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VIPS&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=r14&c=
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VIPS&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=w14&c=
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VIPS&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=ss&c=
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=6m&s=VIPS&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=b&a=fs&c=CDE&ql=1
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=VIPS&t=2y&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=m26-12-9&c=


http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/
VIPS CHART (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=72027&qm_symbol=VIPS) |  Option's  (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=47584&qm_symbol=VIPS) |  155.00 Call  (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=11789&qm_symbol=@VIPS%20%20140816C00155000)

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: hirley0 on May 25, 2014, 08:20:55 AM
http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=68964&qm_symbol=NFLX :fnord: 405m1 (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=76017&qm_symbol=@NFLX%20%20140613C00405000)
RSI (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=r14&c=)              IMG (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)                  NFLX  :fnord: VIPS (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=VIPS&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)                 :fnord:  (http://www.principiadiscordia.com/forum/index.php?topic=20156.msg1340460#msg1340460)

:fnord: 1d (http://www.quotemedia.com/finance/quote/?qm_page=87795&qm_symbol=NFLX) 5d (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX+Basic+Tech.+Analysis&t=5d) 3mW (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=3m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=w14&lang=en-US&region=US) 6mS (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US) 2YrMc (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX&t=2y&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=m26-12-9&lang=en-US&region=US)   |    34F.SAm6v (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=6m&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=&a=&c=)I (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX34F.SA&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&a=v&p=s&lang=en-US&region=US): (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=6m&s=NFLX34F.SA&l=on&z=l&q=c&c=NFLX&ql=1)     MX5d (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?s=NFLX.MX&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=v&a=r14&c=)I (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX.MX&t=5d&q=c&l=on&z=l&p=v&a=r14&lang=en-US&region=US)    MX6mS: (http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ta?t=6m&s=NFLX.MX&l=on&z=l&q=c&p=v&a=ss&c=NFLX&ql=1)I (http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/z?s=NFLX.MX&t=6m&q=c&l=on&z=l&c=NFLX&p=v&a=ss&lang=en-US&region=US)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 03, 2014, 09:38:55 AM
Stop press, shock horror, etc, etc,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27662623

QuoteThe prices in forex are set by traders who are doing the deals. Traders are able to pick a selection of the trades they have been asked to execute, meaning they can choose those most advantageous to their bank. The prices are set at the 4pm "fix", a daily City benchmark against which currencies are priced. I have written a short "How It Works" at the end of this blog on the allegation that forex is manipulated.

Regulators around the world including the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in London and the US Department of Justice are investigating allegations of forex manipulation. It has been reported that at least 15 banks are involved and nine are thought to have suspended or fired traders. No allegations have been proved and no admissions of fault made.

Martin Wheatley, the head of the FCA, said the allegations, if substantiated, could be "every bit as bad as Libor", referring to the revelations three years ago that the market which governs how banks lend to each other was regularly fixed.

So I'm sure we'll all be stunned to learn that people have been fucking about with the money markets every bit as much as everything else.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 03, 2014, 09:42:04 AM
What's one of the other leading articles today? A stroke job for premium bonds.

If you're not familiar with this particular scam, don't bother. It's rather dull and is basically playing the lottery with worse odds for a smaller payout. You don't need to buy a ticket though so it's totally a good deal.

It's also a nice place to stash cash which is the only logical reason you'd shove 30 grand into this nonsense.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 03, 2014, 10:00:16 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27676000

QuoteFrance's foreign minister has criticised a potential $10bn (£6bn; 7.3bn euros) fine for banking giant BNP Paribas as "not reasonable".

Media reports have suggested the bank might have to pay the fine over allegations it broke trade sanctions against Sudan, Iran and Cuba.

"The fine has to be proportionate and reasonable. These figures are not reasonable," Laurent Fabius said.

The US Justice Department is currently looking into the claims.

Mr Fabius said on the France 2 television channel that if the fine was imposed it would be "an extremely serious problem".

He added it would be an example of an "unfair and unilateral decision".

His warning comes just two days ahead of Barack Obama's visit to France, where the US President is set to hold bilateral talks with French President Francois Hollande.

Mr Fabius said that if a fine of the reported scale was imposed, it would hit BNP Paribas' funds and result in fewer loans for French businesses.

"It's an extremely serious question that the Americans must handle in a spirit of partnership and not unilaterally," he added.

When you've stopped laughing, think about some of the other fines issued to banks of late. HSBC faced nowhere near this for extensive money laundering. I can't help think that it's Iran and Cuba being involved here that's escalated how seriously the USA have decided to deal with it.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 03, 2014, 10:15:18 AM
While I'm at it, Barclays being naught boys again:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27536127

QuoteMr Plunkett was a director on the precious metals desk.

He was responsible for pricing and managing Barclays' risk on a contract that was specifically linked to the price of gold at 3:00p.m. on 28 June 2012.

If the gold price was above $1,558.96 (£925.57) at that time then Barclays would be required to make a payment of $3.9m to its customer.

But if the price was below that benchmark Barclays would not have to make the payment.

Mr Plunkett created fake orders with the intent of pushing the price of gold below $1,588.96, which he succeeded in doing.

The result was Barclays was not obligated to make the $3.9m payment to its customer, and Mr Plunkett booked a profit of $1.75m for the bank.

QuoteBarclays and Mr Plunkett agreed to settle at an early stage, thereby qualifying for a 30% discount on their fines.

Again, we're still talking fines instead of jail. Like you'd expect for substantial levels of fraud.

QuoteThe FCA also fined the trader, Daniel James Plunkett, £96,500.

City trader. Director at the metals desk. £100K fine. This does not feel proportionate.

Also, highlights how vulnerable the system is to abuse from one person in the right place. I can't see any real changes being made to this as he probably made substantially more for the bank that £26 Million.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 11, 2014, 10:31:04 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27788238
QuoteThe European Commission is to open a formal investigation into Apple, Starbucks and Fiat in relation to tax arrangements with three EU countries.

The firms' arrangements with Ireland, the Netherlands and Luxembourg will be investigated.

Announcing the move, tax commissioner Algirdas Semeta said that "fair tax competition is essential".

Last year, a US Senate investigation accused Ireland of giving special tax treatment to Apple.

The European Commission will look at whether the companies' tax affairs breach EU rules on state aid.

Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia said: "In the current context of tight public budgets, it is particularly important that large multinationals pay their fair share of taxes."

Countries in Europe cannot allow certain firms to pay less tax than they should, Mr Almunia added.

Apple said that it had not had "any special tax deal with the Irish government".

It's that time of year again where we piss and moan about multinationals dodging tax and then do fuck all to fix the problem. Nice how the article focuses on Apple and ignores Fiat and Starbucks. The BBC bias towards reporting on Apple in detail is getting quite blatant and I'm certain there's more than a couple of writers/editors who hold shares. It's the only reasonable explanation at this point.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 11, 2014, 11:53:11 AM
Shocking only because of the levels of idiocy invovled:
http://www.hannapub.com/ouachitacitizen/news/local_state_headlines/article_8a017c20-ed41-11e3-b622-0017a43b2370.html

QuoteCongressman Vance McAllister admitted Thursday to voting against legislation in the U.S. House anticipating he would get a political contribution for his vote.
A Republican from Swartz, McAllister spoke about the matter as an example of how "money controls Washington" and how work on Capitol Hill is a "steady cycle of voting for fundraising and money instead of voting for what is right."
McAllister made the remarks during a Northeast Chapter of Louisiana CPAs gathering at the University of Louisiana-Monroe's Alumni Center.
McAllister said he voted "no" on legislation related to the Bureau of Land Management though he did not identify the bill. McAllister said a colleague on the House floor told him that he would receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation if he voted against the bill. He would not name his colleague since he "did not want to put their business out on the street."
"I played dumb and asked him, 'How would you vote?'" McAllister said. "He told me, 'Vote no and you will get a $1,200 check from the Heritage Foundation. If you vote yes, you will get a $1,000 check from some environmental impact group.'"
That answer was a surprise, McAllister said.
"I said, 'Are you serious?' and he told me, 'Yeah, wait and see,'" McAllister said.
McAllister said he voted against the bill but did not receive a $1,200 contribution from Heritage Foundation. Federal law prohibits public officials, including members of Congress, from directly or indirectly seeking, accepting or agreeing to receive anything of value in return for the performance of any official act such as voting.
"I voted no, and I didn't get a Heritage Foundation check but he did," McAllister said. "I went back and checked with my friend, 'I didn't get a check, man. What were you talking about?' He told me, 'Well, I got one. Why didn't you?'"

How fucking dumb do you have to be to become a congressman and not understand the basics of lobbying?

How much dumber do you have to be to take your ignorant fucked up attempt at getting a bribe and making it nice and public?

I suppose we shouldn't wonder about how dumb you would need to be to vote for such a chap. That'll get depressing.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 20, 2014, 09:42:43 AM
http://realbusiness.co.uk/article/26990-fearnley-whittingstalls-river-cottage-raises-1m-through-mini-bonds-

Quotehe company raised the cash with equity crowdfunding platform Crowdcube's new mini bond option, which is aimed at more established businesses and was launched two weeks ago. It allows companies to raise £1m+ by selling non-transferable, unsecured mini bonds.

The River Cottage Bond, which allowed private investors to make an initial investment of £500 or more, and pays out 7% fixed interest per annum, will allow the company to expand its award-winning chain of restaurants.

This fucking stinks. I'm not exactly certain how this gets around FSA/collective investment regulations but I'm seeing a fucking fantastic way to potentially wash money.

That ROI is somewhat fishy too. I'd seriously question their ability to honour that.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on June 20, 2014, 05:55:25 PM
Seriously.  The whole thing REEKS of "Ponzi Scheme".
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on June 20, 2014, 10:45:10 PM
That was my first instinct too, but this is a "celebrity chef" that's doing this so there's got to be some kind of mechanism that's allowing it. I'd guess have conditions for payout (which you just fall short of) will be featured. I'll check into this mini-bond thing more but the whole "kickstarter for existing businesses" is just asking for money to be laundered surely.

Please tell me I'm not crazy for viewing every financial tale in criminal terms. It just seems to be saving so much time but I'm probably veering towards the paranoid.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on June 21, 2014, 05:34:22 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on June 20, 2014, 10:45:10 PM
That was my first instinct too, but this is a "celebrity chef" that's doing this so there's got to be some kind of mechanism that's allowing it. I'd guess have conditions for payout (which you just fall short of) will be featured. I'll check into this mini-bond thing more but the whole "kickstarter for existing businesses" is just asking for money to be laundered surely.

Please tell me I'm not crazy for viewing every financial tale in criminal terms. It just seems to be saving so much time but I'm probably veering towards the paranoid.
I don't think you're crazy.

Then again, I may be crazy myself because i see money as a potential social interaction (with other people, objects or organisations), and not as an object.
A person/object/organisation would have to be seriously antisocial to try to hoard money.
So I am distrustful of people who use money to make more money while keeping their social interactions to a minimum, that is just silly.
If you don't want to colapse the potential into a social interaction, then just don't do anything with your money. That way you can be as alone as you want. But why would you do something with your social interactions to increase your potential social interactions when you don't want to have any social interactions?! I know you don't want to have social interactions because i know you want to hoard money.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on July 01, 2014, 02:49:12 AM
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html

QuoteAt the same time that people like you and me are thriving beyond the dreams of any plutocrats in history, the rest of the country—the 99.99 percent—is lagging far behind. The divide between the haves and have-nots is getting worse really, really fast. In 1980, the top 1 percent controlled about 8 percent of U.S. national income. The bottom 50 percent shared about 18 percent. Today the top 1 percent share about 20 percent; the bottom 50 percent, just 12 percent.

But the problem isn't that we have inequality. Some inequality is intrinsic to any high-functioning capitalist economy. The problem is that inequality is at historically high levels and getting worse every day. Our country is rapidly becoming less a capitalist society and more a feudal society. Unless our policies change dramatically, the middle class will disappear, and we will be back to late 18th-century France. Before the revolution.

And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won't last.

It's quite startling to hear this from a self-described plutocrat.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on July 04, 2014, 08:38:14 PM
Quote from: Net (+1 Hidden) and 5 guests on July 01, 2014, 02:49:12 AM
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/06/the-pitchforks-are-coming-for-us-plutocrats-108014.html

QuoteAt the same time that people like you and me are thriving beyond the dreams of any plutocrats in history, the rest of the country—the 99.99 percent—is lagging far behind. The divide between the haves and have-nots is getting worse really, really fast. In 1980, the top 1 percent controlled about 8 percent of U.S. national income. The bottom 50 percent shared about 18 percent. Today the top 1 percent share about 20 percent; the bottom 50 percent, just 12 percent.

But the problem isn't that we have inequality. Some inequality is intrinsic to any high-functioning capitalist economy. The problem is that inequality is at historically high levels and getting worse every day. Our country is rapidly becoming less a capitalist society and more a feudal society. Unless our policies change dramatically, the middle class will disappear, and we will be back to late 18th-century France. Before the revolution.

And so I have a message for my fellow filthy rich, for all of us who live in our gated bubble worlds: Wake up, people. It won't last.

It's quite startling to hear this from a self-described plutocrat.

OH MY GOD THIS GUY FUCKING GETS IT.

Wonder if anyone will listen...
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 14, 2014, 08:51:03 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28289331

QuoteDetails of £1.1bn worth of defence spending are to be unveiled by the prime minister later.

It is due to include cash for drones, UK special forces and intelligence gathering to tackle global terrorism.

David Cameron is due to make the announcement at the Farnborough International Air Show.

He is expected to say funds for "vital" Ministry of Defence programmes have been found as a result of austerity measures.

£1.1 Billion buys a fucking lot of all of the above. This is in no way related to the emergency law being shoved through.

If anyone starts bitching about the previous governments spending habits, they need to seriously stop smoking crack. Where this 1.1Bn has come from is the shocking thing, really. It's not from chasing down tax dodgers or making (any multinational corporation) pay what they owe in back-taxes. It's essentially taken from the poorest in society and seems to now be being spent of fuelling oppressive surveliance techniques against them. I bet drone use here will be pretty common within 5 years ("We need to find this missing kid, you see")

The rest for "special forces and tackling terrorism" just means more money for GCHQ,MI5, MI6 and various police forces. Which have excellent records for corruption and idiocy. So the future's bright. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Reginald Ret on July 14, 2014, 01:34:36 PM
Quote from: Junkenstein on July 14, 2014, 08:51:03 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28289331

QuoteDetails of £1.1bn worth of defence spending are to be unveiled by the prime minister later.

It is due to include cash for drones, UK special forces and intelligence gathering to tackle global terrorism.

David Cameron is due to make the announcement at the Farnborough International Air Show.

He is expected to say funds for "vital" Ministry of Defence programmes have been found as a result of austerity measures.

£1.1 Billion buys a fucking lot of all of the above. This is in no way related to the emergency law being shoved through.

If anyone starts bitching about the previous governments spending habits, they need to seriously stop smoking crack. Where this 1.1Bn has come from is the shocking thing, really. It's not from chasing down tax dodgers or making (any multinational corporation) pay what they owe in back-taxes. It's essentially taken from the poorest in society and seems to now be being spent of fuelling oppressive surveliance techniques against them. I bet drone use here will be pretty common within 5 years ("We need to find this missing kid, you see")

The rest for "special forces and tackling terrorism" just means more money for GCHQ,MI5, MI6 and various police forces. Which have excellent records for corruption and idiocy. So the future's bright.
The sad thing is? a lot of them actually believe it will ever only be used for that.

this may be relevant:
http://thesamovar.wordpress.com/2007/07/17/function-creep-surveillance-in-london/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 24, 2014, 09:12:17 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28415508

QuoteUS video game publisher Electronic Arts (EA) has reported a 51% jump in profit for the April-to-June quarter, boosted by strong sales of titles like Titanfall and FIFA 2014.

Net profit rose to $335m (£196m) for the period, up from $222m a year ago,

EA has also benefitted from the launch of gaming consoles, which has driven up demand for its video game titles.

Quotelarge part of that growth was driven by the so-called "freemium" model - which offers free content but then charges users for additional digital goods.

EA said $105m of its mobile revenue during the period "comprised of digital extra content and advertising revenue, reflecting the shift to the freemium business model".

That was up 39% from a year ago.

Behold, the future of gaming.

In other EA idiocy, The stupidly DRM filled always online sims game now has an offline mode. Only took a couple of years and a festering playerbase to prompt that.

Financial idiocy in games companies may be worth it's own thread. The dying online version on Mechwarrior is a total trainwreck with terrible design decisions, broken promises and beating the players for cash at every turn. Not many games offer bonus skins with a $500 pricetag. Even fewer do it while actively lying to the fans faces.

Seriously, check out the Mechwarrior thing, it's hilarious.

http://www.gamefront.com/500-gold-mechs-go-on-sale-in-mechwarrior-online/

QuoteThe gold mechs are a good idea. They will be the main target for the whole opposing team. Maybe even teammates will shoot them (oops, sorry, just testing my weapon groups)."

"The thing is, gold plated mechs... It's... It's the first truely indefensible thing they've done. I mean, really, could it have it any more crass? Gold plated? Really PGI? Really?"

Run down of some of the fuckery these developers have pulled in their search for a quick buck. I'm almost impressed. It's a cracking example of how not to run the development of a product in any way.

http://www.gamefront.com/mechwarrior-online-forum-ragesplosion/

Quote
A few days after the patch, PGI President Russ Bullock issued an apology letter to the community. This letter is notable for a number of reasons. First, it is a massive wall of text that is very difficult to read. Second, it acknowledges the communication issues, but pins the blame on Erlam, one of the community's favorite figures.
Finally, the letter unintentionally insulted those upset by the changes to Mechwarrior Online by stating that the community has been widely accepting of Mechwarrior Online's proposed direction, when countless rage threads on the forums showed otherwise. The result was a feedback thread that grew by dozens of posts per hour, the majority of which were extremely negative. Some players made blog posts calling Russ out for the apology, including one by a published BattleTech author that dissected the apology point by point. Countless users expressed their desire to seek refunds, and many got them.

The thread and other heavily critical forum posts like it were also notable in that they showed clear evidence of moderator censorship. Posts critical of PGI's direction of the game — even posts worded in a neutral manner — were deleted by moderators, with thread page numbers fluctuating as scores of negative or critical posts were removed. When players yelled about their posts being deleted, the moderators probated them.

Like I said, It's almost impressive.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 24, 2014, 01:27:42 PM
Somewhat related, the "freenium" model is an abomination, and must be put to death in a violent and gruesome manner.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Raz Tech on July 24, 2014, 01:42:33 PM
Video games, to me, are already nearing the point of being unplayable.  Somewhere between the handholding method of game creation nowadays, where you don't really have to know how to do things as long as you can follow an arrow on a compass or a shiny gold trail on the ground, and the now accepted idea that you can put out a full-priced game that you only completed half of and then just put out the rest of the game as DLC to squeeze even more pennies out of people. 

What's going to happen when some games go the way of cell phone games, and you can only beat some levels through either endless grinding, or spending real money on special super-awesome equipment that will make that level super-easy.

What's going to happen when Call Of Duty sells the best weapons and if you don't feel like paying, you only get standard crap.

I hate it.  I yearn for the days of old.  Maybe the graphics weren't as beautiful, but they usually told a good story, were complete, and there was actual difficulty involved.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on July 24, 2014, 01:53:40 PM
To be honest, I haven't played a genuine computer game since Myst.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 24, 2014, 03:43:05 PM
If EA are really smart, they'll implement RNG with a freemium system.

That's kinda what they did with ME3.  You could spend money for Bioware points, to purchase packs to unlock content faster.  The trick is, with the packs, the contained goods are randomised and so there is no guarantee that, for example, you will get a black-listed weapon if you open half a dozen arsenal packs (as I've found from experience).

The only difference is that with ME3, none of the content was available to paid subscribers only.  If you had the patience and the skills to pay the bills, you could afford to unlock everything for free (minus the 900 hour average it has taken to do so thus far).
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 24, 2014, 03:50:33 PM
Don't even suggest that to them. Others are already doing it with a large degree of success. "Banned in Japan now" levels of success.

Familar with the term "Kompu Gacha" It's essentially Mcdonalds monopoly - Collect X ammount of Y to win Z. Only your ability to collect X is based on RNG rather than any kind of skill. Oh yeah, it costs every time you try too. Remember the various tales of kids racking up silly levels of debt on their parents credit cards and such? The vast majority of instances involved a Gacha style game.

Related stuff for the interested:

QuoteBoth gashapon and gachapon are Japanese onomatopoeia, made up of two sounds: "gasha" or "gacha" for the turning of a crank on a toy vending machine, and "pon" for the sound of the toy capsule dropping into the receptacle. It is used to describe both the machines themselves, and any toy obtained from them. Tomy, another major player in capsule toy market, uses "Gacha" (ガチャ gacha?) instead of "Gachapon" for their capsule vending machines and toys.[citation needed]

Gashapon machines are similar to the coin-operated toy vending machines seen outside of grocery stores and other retailers in other countries. While American coin-operated vending toys are usually cheap, low-quality products, sold for a quarter, 50¢, or sometimes 75¢[dubious – discuss], Japanese gashapon can cost anywhere from ¥100–500 (approx. US$1–6) and are normally a much higher quality product.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gashapon

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/BetableBlog/20120525/171124/Why_quotKompu_Gachaquot_Was_Banned.php

QuoteThe Japanese social gaming market is substantial, worth $1.4 billion in 2011, and it is dominated by two major players: GREE and DeNA. When rumors began circulating that the "kompu gacha" reward system that GREE and DeNA utilized extensively was going to be made illegal, their stocks were pummeled by over 20% in two days. Now, kompu gacha is illegal in Japan and both companies are swearing up and down that the new regulation will not cripple their businesses.

Hint - It did.

It's interesting legally, as you're essentially banning a game mechanic. Imagine how that would play out in the US.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 24, 2014, 03:53:15 PM
Much more detail compared to my crude description above:


http://www.slideshare.net/altnate/kompu-gacha-examplesofcompletegachaen
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Telarus on July 25, 2014, 09:09:58 PM
Quote from: Raz Tech on July 24, 2014, 01:42:33 PM
What's going to happen when some games go the way of cell phone games, and you can only beat some levels through either endless grinding, or spending real money on special super-awesome equipment that will make that level super-easy.

Oh, did you not hear of the absolute disaster that the mobile re-make of Dungeon Keeper evolved into?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 25, 2014, 09:49:46 PM
No, do tell?

Never mind
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/editorials/reviews/10956-Dungeon-Keeper-Mobile-Review-Wallet-Reaper
QuoteIt started in the game's very tutorial. The grasping. The harassing. The demands for money. As I was being taught about how gems can speed up the building and excavating of dungeons, the game's narrator - a twee redesign of the once iconic Horned Reaper - openly mocked me, making fun of how "polarizing" in-app purchases were before shamelessly telling me how spending my real money will grease the wheels and get things accomplished. This is how it begun, and it only got worse from there.

(http://cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/library/deriv/673/673415.jpg)

The most positive thing I can say about that is that none of the original Bullfrog team seem to be involved at all and likely didn't have a choice. IP laws and developer deals being what they are. EA as well so no shock there.

I think it may be worth a broader look at this in general. While not on the same level as the banks, there's assuredly all kinds of evil shit involved in the games industry as it stands. We've not even mentioned Blizzard yet.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Raz Tech on July 25, 2014, 10:43:41 PM
Man that was one of my favorite computer games of all time, and here it is being bastardized :(
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Aucoq on July 26, 2014, 03:39:57 AM
Quote from: Raz Tech on July 24, 2014, 01:42:33 PMthe now accepted idea that you can put out a full-priced game that you only completed half of and then just put out the rest of the game as DLC to squeeze even more pennies out of people. 

That's what drives me up the wall.  How about Blizzard releasing Starcraft II in three fucking parts?  My head damn near exploded when they said that's what they were going to do.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 29, 2014, 08:20:38 AM
Starcraft 2 in three parts? Still nowhere near as horrific as Diablo 3 with it's always online DRM (No single player game for YOU. Ever. Even Simcity figured this shit out. Eventually.) and consistent failure to understand the basics of game design. They're about 2 and a half years into game+expansion at this point and it just looks like a total mess.

The community management isn't exactly wonderful either. These were the chaps that thought RealID (Your REAL ID! Tied to your account! With your address and everything! What could go wrong?) would be fine. Then were surprised when the announcer was immediately pizza bombed. Needless to say, that escalated but the company is far from smart and has a noted position of "We don't give a shit unless it will make $1 billion +". Bobby Kotick understands business in ways I never will.   

If a bored Mod gets the chance, a split on this gaming stuff would be appreciated. There's plenty that warrants it's own thread between developer/publisher fuckery, horrible monetisation models and outright cash grabs, it's a huge industry that I don't spend nearly enough time kicking the ankles of.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 29, 2014, 08:32:52 AM
Please put down any hot drinks and ensure you are not eating.











Seriously.












You were warned.


















http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28535001

QuoteIn a new report, ResPublica called for an oath for bankers to "fulfil their proper moral and economic purpose".

QuoteDirector at ResPublica, Philip Blond, said: "As countless scandals demonstrate, virtue is distinctly absent from our banking institutions.

"Britain's bankers lack a sense of ethos and the institutions they work for lack a clearly defined social purpose."

He said an oath would "finally place bankers on the road to absolution".

He apparently said this with a straight face.

Quote"But meaningful cultural change in an industry as complex and diverse as banking takes time."

You know what inspires a meaningful cultural change in any complex diverse industry? Laws. And enforcing existing Laws. Both of which are utterly lacking and there's no political will to change this.

I guess we're all supposed to cheer for the side which agrees to get the bankers to read the bit of card saying "I won't be naughty".

That this is the best suggestion a think tank can devise is quite frankly laughable. Or at least it would be if it wasn't so fucking tragic.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on July 29, 2014, 09:04:54 PM
 :lolchix:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Salty on July 29, 2014, 11:47:51 PM
Oh, it's laughable. I can't stop!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pæs on July 30, 2014, 12:33:42 AM
PROMISE RINGS FOR BANKERS. OH YES, THIS IS WHAT WE NEED.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Pæs on July 30, 2014, 12:38:45 AM
"I swear to fulfil, to the best of my ability and
judgement, this covenant:
I will do my utmost to behave in a manner that
prioritises the needs of customers. It my first duty
to provide an exemplary quality of service to my
customers and to exhibit a duty of care above and
beyond what is required by law.
I will apply myself to ensuring that the work that
I perform is in line with values that engender the
responsible creation of value. It is my duty to conduct
my business in an ethical manner and to ensure that
my actions impact positively on the wellbeing of
people both inside and outside my enterprise.
I will confront profligacy and impropriety wherever
I encounter it, for the conduct of bankers can have
dramatic consequence for society. 
I will remember that I remain a member of society,
with special obligations to the financial security and
wellbeing of my customers, their families and the
communities they reside in.
If I do not violate this oath, may I benefit from the
prosperity that comes from serving customers well.
May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions
of my calling and may I long experience the joy that
comes from supporting the needs of society.
This oath I make freely, and upon my honour."
The Bankers' Oath


(http://iconian.com/hof/bankerwide.png)
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 31, 2014, 08:55:37 AM
The "bankers bonus" meme has been fantastic for the banking industry.  It moves the terms of debate away from dangerous territory, regarding illegal and quasi-illegal banking practices and concentration of money and power, towards a kind of soap opera politics of envy, which in turn assures the bankers that hatred towards them is nothing more than jealousy.  Everyone wins...well, except the public good.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: minuspace on July 31, 2014, 10:26:48 PM
That's why I was thinking this Offerings to Cthulhu, OFF, crypto currency thing might be interesting.  Like one of those things that's so wrong, it might just be right?  Let me know if we talked about this already, I'm experiencing a little time slippage after my last jump. :lol:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on August 04, 2014, 10:52:26 AM
Back on gaming again:
https://robertsspaceindustries.com/funding-goals

Pushing $50 Million. "First AAA title with your cash".

From what I can see so far it's either going to be genre-breaking or the biggest kickstarter clusterfuck since such things began.

Consider their current stretch goal:
QuoteAlien Languages – Do you speak Banu? We will work with real-world linguists to create distinctive and realistic alien languages for Star Citizen's three biggest alien races, the Vanduul, the Xi'An and the Banu. No universal translators, no garbled animal noises: Star Citizen's aliens will be speaking their own authentic languages!

What could possibly go wrong?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on August 24, 2014, 12:47:09 AM
Meh, Klingon was made up by just one langauge nerd. So was the Dothraki language on GOT. Fuck, just look at the shit Tolkien did for fun. Its apparently not hard for a dedicated language nerd to cook up a decent sounding fake language for movies and stuff.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on August 27, 2014, 07:47:04 AM
I'm not familiar with the field to be fair, I think I was more looking at the level of cash thrown at it and how stretch goals can fuck you.

Fun fact - About 50% of all kickstarter funded video games that should be released by now, aren't. Of those not yet out, more than a couple have hit problems of various levels and are likely to never be finished.

Thinking on this, I'll do a "business of games" thread at some point. EA alone does enough shady shit to justify it.


In other news:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28948518

QuoteRoyal Bank of Scotland has been fined £14.5m by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for "serious failings" in its mortgage sales business.

The City watchdog said RBS did not ensure that it gave suitable mortgage advice to customers.

Quote"Only two of the 164 sales reviewed were considered to meet the standard required overall in a sales process," the FCA added.

And they were so close to the 100%. Shame. That must have been one guy actually doing his job. Twice.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: minuspace on August 27, 2014, 10:26:54 AM
The future is kickstarters for REAL initiated encounters of the 5th kind.  PM.
Quote from: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on August 24, 2014, 12:47:09 AM
Meh, Klingon was made up by just one langauge nerd. So was the Dothraki language on GOT. Fuck, just look at the shit Tolkien did for fun. Its apparently not hard for a dedicated language nerd to cook up a decent sounding fake language for movies and stuff.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on August 27, 2014, 11:43:53 AM
For those naysaying EA's microtransaction system...Dragon Age Inquisition's multiplayer has been officially announced.  Everything is available without paying...but they're relying on the same random number generator system that ME3MP used.  Meaning it will probably take 900+ hours of gameplay to unlock everything to maximum level, if a similar number of classes, upgrades and weapons are made available (probably not).

They're also reducing the grind in some ways (break down useless items to create useful ones), which suggests at the very least either Bioware has more control over its MP than people originally thought, or else EA is reconsidering some of the worse aspects of their online gameplay. 
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on September 27, 2014, 12:48:25 PM
Carmen Segarra recorded Goldman Sachs doing God's work with the Fed.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-26/the-secret-goldman-sachs-tapes
http://www.thisamericanlife.org/sites/default/files/TAL_536_transcript.pdf

QuoteIn meetings, Fed employees would defer to the Goldman people; if one of the Goldman people said something revealing or even alarming, the other Fed employees in the meeting would either ignore or downplay it. For instance, in one meeting a Goldman employee expressed the view that "once clients are wealthy enough certain consumer laws don't apply to them." After that meeting, Segarra turned to a fellow Fed regulator and said how surprised she was by that statement -- to which the regulator replied, "You didn't hear that."
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on October 14, 2014, 08:41:15 AM
This one's sneaking by nicely:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29572475

QuoteThere are rising concerns in Europe over negotiations to liberalise trade with the United States.

The project, the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, aims to remove a wide range of barriers to bilateral commerce.

QuoteIn the EU, campaigners say that consumers could be faced with more genetically modified food, hormone treated beef and chicken meat that has been rinsed with chlorine.

Another major concern is the provisions under discussion to enable foreign investors - for example American firms investing in the EU - to sue a host government in some circumstances if they are hit by a change in policy.

The bold is nicely worded. A "hit" from a change in policy could be literally anything. From new minimum wage requirements to regulation changes to taxation to roadworks near the office to whatever. Governments change policies more often that I can count. Any time a new body occupies a post there's policy changes.

Take Education in the UK for example. A large sector that suffers policy changes literally annually if not more frequently. Now consider the potential range of suppliers to the sector. It's extensive. Now consider how many lawsuits you could be looking at from even basic changes. Menu change? Caters sue. Textbook change? Publishers sue. Uniform change? Suppliers sue. Basically everyone will sue everyone sooner or later and they won't have to demonstrate a lot to be able to win.

Yet I'll bet big money on all political parties being for this. I wonder why?
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: P3nT4gR4m on October 14, 2014, 09:18:10 AM
Quote from: Junkenstein on October 14, 2014, 08:41:15 AM
This one's sneaking by nicely:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29572475

QuoteThere are rising concerns in Europe over negotiations to liberalise trade with the United States.

The project, the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP, aims to remove a wide range of barriers to bilateral commerce.

QuoteIn the EU, campaigners say that consumers could be faced with more genetically modified food, hormone treated beef and chicken meat that has been rinsed with chlorine.

Another major concern is the provisions under discussion to enable foreign investors - for example American firms investing in the EU - to sue a host government in some circumstances if they are hit by a change in policy.

The bold is nicely worded. A "hit" from a change in policy could be literally anything. From new minimum wage requirements to regulation changes to taxation to roadworks near the office to whatever. Governments change policies more often that I can count. Any time a new body occupies a post there's policy changes.

Take Education in the UK for example. A large sector that suffers policy changes literally annually if not more frequently. Now consider the potential range of suppliers to the sector. It's extensive. Now consider how many lawsuits you could be looking at from even basic changes. Menu change? Caters sue. Textbook change? Publishers sue. Uniform change? Suppliers sue. Basically everyone will sue everyone sooner or later and they won't have to demonstrate a lot to be able to win.

Yet I'll bet big money on all political parties being for this. I wonder why?

Answer your own questions much? Best democracy money can buy.  :lulz:
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on October 14, 2014, 09:47:59 AM
Absolutely.

Best case situation with that shit is governments only get sued every 4-5 years. Worst case is a lawsuit every time a politician opens their mouth.

If it goes ahead you can pretty much write off any possible positive reform indefinitely. Wages stop dead, no new regulations regarding H+S or environmental impacts. No increase in standards in any industry for fear of being sued forever.

I'm starting to suspect we may even see a slip in standards before a great rush for every nation to treat its citizens as horribly as possible to avoid financial penalties.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on November 20, 2014, 09:25:18 PM
UK government, doing what it does best. I can only assume Osbourne and co spend most of their day in slack jawed amazement at Velcro. I'm reasonably confident of this. 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-30125780

Quoten a surprise move, the UK government has withdrawn its legal challenge to EU legislation that caps the level of bankers' bonuses.

Chancellor George Osborne said he had recognised the challenge was "now unlikely to succeed".

The move comes after an adviser to the European Court of Justice rejected the UK's legal arguments against the plan.

The cap restricts bonuses to 100% of banker's pay or 200% with shareholder approval.

QuoteThe government put forward six legal arguments to support its case; the advocate general decided none of them held water.

However, he did make one rather interesting point. He said that because the level of bonus is linked to annual salary, and there is no cap on salaries, there is not really a bonus cap at all.

Which is all relatively fucking moot anyway because we're apparently still pretending not to live in a world of tax havens, loopholes and various other ways for those earning these sums to effectively reduce their liability to nothing.

Apparently there's some shit about this driving away "talent". Fucking GREAT. If we can drive all the "talented bankers" out of the banks then they might not turn to shit and do grossly horrific evil shit all the fucking time.

That's actually serious. This thread started in '09, is now 106 pages and isn't even anywhere near all of the shady shit you could lay at the feet of various financial institutions. No-one's clean and you can't even play "who's the least dirty" with any kind of straight face.

Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 04, 2014, 06:23:42 AM
So in his Autumn statement, Osbourne has laid out a vision of a future where the UK government is spending less as a percentage of GDP than we have since 1930. Before we had things like 'the national health service', for instance.

He's also had to admit that, although he promised he'd bring the deficit down to £35 billion, it has in fact risen to £100 billion.

Despite this, he - and the press in general - are going to claim that his policies are still working great because the UK's growth is the fastest in Europe and our unemployment figures have fallen faster than expected. Never mind that Europe is still mired in catastrophe, so this is like saying we're faster than a sprinter who has just been shot in the leg, and the reason unemployment has fallen is a combination of part-time jobs, self-employment and government schemes which literally bribe companies to take on staff who are then not paid the minimum wage. Oh, and encouraging the jobcentre to sanction people and remove them from unemployment benefit for - say - attending an interview when they should be signing on. Even if this kills them. (http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/aug/03/victims-britains-harsh-welfare-sanctions)

Note that we literally have benefits claimants starving to death and Osbourne plans to slash from those dirty scrounging benefits claimants even harder to claw back money for, say, dig up and destroy ancient burial sites in order to build a cheaper and bigger road. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-30248826)

The worst thing is, he's probably going to get in and he's probably going to do it because the public seem to believe that, whilst Labour and the Lib Dems are full of incompetent idiots, the Conservatives are just evil - which is better than incompetent or stupid. But he hasn't met a single economic challenge he has set himself! He's living in a fantasy world, and he's planning to just do the same thing, but harder if he gets in next time. Even though the deficit is almost three fucking times the size his godawful cuts were supposed to get it to, and the areas he wants to cut for most of this are already literally killing people.

And they'll vote him in anyway because who else is there?

Goddamnit.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 04, 2014, 05:12:35 PM
Yeah, this country is pretty much fucked.  Our political class are good for nothing except scrounging bribes off Saudis for arms deals, and buggering kids then covering it up.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 05, 2014, 08:55:14 AM
Oh, and by the by

http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2015/01/china-worlds-largest-economy

But do keep this in mind:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/sorry-but-america-is-still-no-1-2014-12-04
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on December 05, 2014, 10:41:08 AM
Those were great reads, Cain. Thanks for that!
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on December 16, 2014, 05:55:25 PM
Russia's economy looks likely to crash.

Well, sorry.  You played a good game, Putin, but you made the same fatal mistake the Soviet Union did: you had a raw resource, export driven economy and didn't diversify.  And when the Saudis came and wrecked your shit by flooding the global oil markets and bringing prices down massively, you had nothing to counter with.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on January 26, 2015, 01:23:49 PM
Just listened to an interesting interview with Alexis Tsipras (new Prime Minister of Greece) on Today.

He was calm and collected, and made some very cogent points. The one which most struck a chord with me was his answer to the question 'What would you say to a German politician who has to tell his electorate why they are giving more money to Greece?'

His answer was that the entire problem has been too much money going to Greece. Greece has been turned into a debt colony, and of the massive amount of cash poured into the country, only 10 per cent has actually reached the Greek government - the rest has been immediately forced out to debtors, accomplishing nothing for the nation or Europe as a whole.

He wants to bring structural reforms into Europe to deal with the debt at the same time as rebuilding their shattered public services and infrastructure - instead of the current system imposed by Brussels which, he believes, was naive and not really thought through at all. It was refreshing to hear a politician saying what has been obvious to most of us for years - that the debt is so absurdly huge that trying to devote the bulk of resources to paying it back is infeasible. He didn't quite use the words 'default', or 'debt writeoff' but I wouldn't be surprised if Greece starts to push for, say, legislation to tackle the interest on government debt throughout the Eurozone. So at least it stops getting bigger, and governments can start charting a course to pay it off in the next two hundred years.

I doubt that it'll be taken up, I don't even know how feasible it'd actually be, but at least there's one high ranking politician who is finally prepared to say that the debt is just too much to be dealt with by paying it back in a normal way. It'll be interesting to see where things go from here. People have been saying that Greece won't get very far because it has a very weak bargaining position, but I'm not so sure that is the case. Whilst it is in severe trouble and needs European help if it is going to pay back the debt, the sense I got from Tsipras was that - whilst he said repeatedly 'a greek exit is not on the table', it was clearly in his mind. Greece loses a lot by leaving Europe, but does it lose as much as it would staying in and being forced to devote almost its entire national finances to paying off debt? I don't think the people on the ground believe so, and they're the ones he is accountable to.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 26, 2015, 01:40:37 PM
Krugman seems to agree. (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/those-radical-vsps/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body)

QuoteAs we head for the big Greek face-off, Francesco Saraceno makes a point I've also made on a number of occasions: although many of the press reports describe Syriza as "far-left", it's actually preaching fairly conventional economics, while the supposedly responsible officials of Brussels and Berlin have been relying on radical doctrines like expansionary austerity and a growth cliff at 90 percent
.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on January 26, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
Aaaaand listening to George Osbourne's rebuttal is truly enraging.

He's babbling about how the UK is so great and how Greece needs to bring its public spending under control because that was where the problem was born.

Apparently Greece should just create jobs and attract businesses. Because that's something that a government can just wave its hand and do, especially when devoting the bulk of its resources towards paying back debtors.

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 26, 2015, 01:40:37 PM
Krugman seems to agree. (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/those-radical-vsps/?module=BlogPost-Title&version=Blog%20Main&contentCollection=Opinion&action=Click&pgtype=Blogs&region=Body)

QuoteAs we head for the big Greek face-off, Francesco Saraceno makes a point I've also made on a number of occasions: although many of the press reports describe Syriza as "far-left", it's actually preaching fairly conventional economics, while the supposedly responsible officials of Brussels and Berlin have been relying on radical doctrines like expansionary austerity and a growth cliff at 90 percent
.

Anything which doesn't involve giving as much money as possible to the financial services sector seems to be portrayed as one step away from Communism. I guess that makes sense when you look at the interests behind much of the media.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: LMNO on January 26, 2015, 01:53:37 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on January 26, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
Aaaaand listening to George Osbourne's rebuttal is truly enraging.

He's babbling about how the UK is so great and how Greece needs to bring its public spending under control because that was where the problem was born.


Bring public spending under control.  You mean like this:

(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2015/01/25/opinion/012515krugman2/012515krugman2-blog480.png)

Blue line is what was initially proposed for Greek spending in 2010.  Red line is what actually happened, because the EU kept bitching.




As an aside, I realize I rely on Krugman for economic advice almost exclusively, which can be dangerous.  However, it appears that his predictions have been more accurate than most.  I'd be happy to bookmark any other economist's blog, if y'all have one you have confidence in.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on February 09, 2015, 01:09:39 PM
BREAKING NEWS: Bank helps clients evade tax, government slaps wrists. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31248913)

QuotePanorama has seen accounts from 106,000 clients in 203 countries, leaked by a whistleblower in 2007.

The documents include details of almost 7,000 clients based in the UK.

HSBC admitted that some individuals took advantage of bank secrecy to hold undeclared accounts. But it said it has now "fundamentally changed".

The bank now faces criminal investigations in the US, France, Belgium and Argentina.

The government is pursuing civil rather than criminal prosecutions because - they say - they'll get some money quicker. There are calls amongst some MPs to press for criminal charges because, you know, they broke the bloody law. As one person on the news said 'if they were benefit scroungers, they'd be queuing around the courts to have their cases heard - it is disgraceful we've only seen 1 prosecution so far'.

Which might be a fun new rhetorical spin. Tax evasion = benefit fraud, because in both cases you are laying claim to money you don't deserve, from the government purse.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 09, 2015, 01:42:39 PM
Reminder: this is the same HSBC that laundered organised crime money originating from the drug trade, managed financial resources for terrorist groups and also helped Iran get around international sanctions which the UK voted for in the UN.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on February 12, 2015, 12:44:43 PM
Greece has failed to even agree the terms for future talks today.

Germany has been described as 'extremely relaxed' about the crisis.

I get the feeling that Greece is being treated like a petulant child, and everyone else is expecting them to stop throwing their silly tantrum and come sit back down at the table under the terms Germany sets.

I sincerely hope that they don't, and the whole thing collapses in a flaming wreckage just out of sheer spite at this stage.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on February 12, 2015, 01:04:23 PM
I'm pretty sure, at this stage, Germany's intentions are to force an exit by the Eurozone of Greece.

I wonder who (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11373274/Germanys-top-institutes-push-Grexit-plans-as-showdown-escalates.html) could've sold them on that idea?

I wouldnt be surprised to find Russian whispering is also encouraging such an outcome....the new coalition has some interesting links with the Kremlin, and a closer relationship between the two would be mutually beneficial.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: ñͤͣ̄ͦ̌̑͗͊͛͂͗ ̸̨̨̣̺̼̣̜͙͈͕̮̊̈́̈͂͛̽͊ͭ̓͆ͅé ̰̓̓́ͯ́́͞ on March 14, 2015, 01:40:39 AM
QuoteStock buybacks were once considered a form of illegal stock manipulation, until 1982, when President Ronald Reagan's Securities and Exchange Commission chair John Shad (a former Wall Street CEO) loosened the rules.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/biggest-scam-bankrupting-business-middle-class/
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Demolition Squid on April 16, 2015, 07:53:51 AM
I'm gonna look a little pedantic here but... from last night's David Cameron interview.

Q: Well let's talk about 12 billion and what 12 billon is, 'cause I think most people will find that abstract. Let's suppose you took 12 billion in a year – that's your saving – and you divided that across all the households in the country. What would it be roughly?

A: Well it is half as much as the 21 billion that we saved in the last parliament.

Then later...
A: We've set out – we've set out the biggest ones as you say of the 12 billion. The 12 billion is half of the 21 billion that we achieved in the last parliament


I'm annoyed for all sorts of reasons. The main one, though, is that the interviewer didn't pick him up on the fact that 12 billion just isn't half of 21 billion. I can see why Cameron wants to make it sound like it is - he probably isn't so stupid that he thinks 21 is actually 24 - but if you pick apart his answer what he's actually implying that 1.5 billion is a pittance he's happy to just wave away.

The other way of looking at it is that in this parliament he's managed to get all 21/33 billion in needed cuts - which is just under 2/3, and presumably he took the easy stuff first so needing to get that last 1/3rd is going to be tough.

It is irrelevant anyway in the broader scheme of things because Cameron is probably using the numbers he was specifically shot down for using a few months ago and he hasn't actually achieved close to 21 billion in savings, but the fact a man can repeatedly state '12 is half of 21' whilst discussing his financial strategy and not be called on it says a lot about the interview.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on April 16, 2015, 08:10:59 AM
The entire Tory financial plan is complete fuckery, so I'm not surprised they misplaced a couple of billion in it all.  The entire manifesto read like a fantasy, or some sort of fever dream.  And the housing policies  :x
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: minuspace on April 30, 2015, 09:56:51 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 09, 2015, 01:42:39 PM
Reminder: this is the same HSBC that laundered organised crime money originating from the drug trade, managed financial resources for terrorist groups and also helped Iran get around international sanctions which the UK voted for in the UN.
Absolutely ludicrous, same bullshit, different day.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Junkenstein on July 12, 2016, 10:14:01 AM
It has been far too long since this thread has been updated. It's been earning it.

Today:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36768140

QuoteS officials refused to prosecute HSBC for money laundering in 2012 because of concerns within the Department of Justice that it would cause a "global financial disaster", a report says.
A US Congressional report revealed UK officials, including Chancellor George Osborne, added to pressure by warning the US it could lead to market turmoil.
The report alleges the UK "hampered" the probe and "influenced" the outcome.
HSBC was accused of letting drug cartels use US banks to launder funds.
The bank, which has its headquarters in London, paid a $1.92bn (£1.48bn) settlement but did not face criminal charges . No top officials at HSBC faced any charges.

QuoteThe report says: "George Osborne, Chancellor of the Exchequer, the UK's chief financial minister, intervened in the HSBC matter by sending a letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke... to express the UK's concerns regarding US enforcement actions against British banks."
The letter said that prosecuting HSBC could have "very serious implications for financial and economic stability, particularly in Europe and Asia".
Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said a series of factors were considered when deciding how to resolve a case, including whether there may be "adverse consequences for innocent third parties, such as employees, customers, investors, pension holders and the public".
The report also accuses former US Attorney General Eric Holder of misleading Congress about the decision.
The report says Mr Holder ignored the recommendations of more junior staff to prosecute HSBC because of the bank's "systemic importance" to the financial markets.

With everything else (Elections/austerity/brexit/ISIS/etc.) that's currently going on, I can see a great deal of financial fuckery to come.
Title: Re: Financial fuckery thread
Post by: Cain on July 12, 2016, 10:25:15 PM
One might almost be tempted to say that HSBC is...too big to fail  8)

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAH