How the World Almost Came to an End on September 18, 2008 81 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Update: Felix Salmon raises questions on Kanjorski's statements: "This is all, frankly, fiction."
• • •
LiveLeak has caught a scary moment of previously undisclosed insight by Paul Kanjorski where he reveals some facts that have not been captured by the media previously. At 2 minutes and 20 seconds in the video below, Democratic Representative Kanjorski explains how the Federal Reserve told Congress members about a "tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the United States, to the tune of $550 billion dollars." According to Kanjorski, this electronic transfer occurred over the period of an hour or two. And it gets worse. Kanjorski paraphrases the following disclosure by Bernanke and Paulson (emphasis added):
On Thursday (Sept 18), at 11 in the morning the Federal Reserve noticed a tremendous draw-down of money market accounts in the U.S., to the tune of $550 billion was being drawn out in the matter of an hour or two. The Treasury opened up its window to help and pumped a $105 billion in the system and quickly realized that they could not stem the tide. We were having an electronic run on the banks. They decided to close the operation, close down the money accounts and announce a guarantee of $250,000 per account so there wouldn't be further panic out there.
If they had not done that, their estimation was that by 2pm that afternoon, $5.5 trillion would have been drawn out of the money market system of the U.S., would have collapsed the entire economy of the U.S., and within 24 hours the world economy would have collapsed... It would have been the end of our economic system and our political system as we know it...We are no better off today than we were 3 months ago because we have a decrease in the equity positions of banks because other assets are going sour by the moment.
Interestingly, Kanjorski, and likely more and more Democrats, are starting to shift to the camp that more time is needed to make a correct decision this time (which may explain Geithner's decision to postpone the "bank-rescue" announcement by one day, to Tuesday), instead of rushing into another half-baked plan. Very scary stuff.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This article has 81 comments:
But what have they done to cure the problem? The fundamental problem is tectonic shift in global financial power and the US Governments policy of prescribing a palliative of easy credit.
The US Government needs to produce a game plan for delivering that famous productivity and cost competitive in the wealth generating industries that actually matter. It is no good pretending that you can be the World's dominant superpower, when all you do is shop.
Furthermore they need to reduce the number of reasons foreigners have for not buying US Goods. Some of that is down to things like foreign policy.
Would you rather have constant resource wars (like old Europe) or an Islamic system where usury is not allowed (and therefore there's no fast way to magnify good ideas)? Easy credit is a better answer.
On Feb 10 09:30 AM Dave Wrixon wrote:
> So they addressed one of the symptoms.
>
> But what have they done to cure the problem? The fundamental problem
> is tectonic shift in global financial power and the US Governments
> policy of prescribing a palliative of easy credit.
>
> The US Government needs to produce a game plan for delivering that
> famous productivity and cost competitive in the wealth generating
> industries that actually matter. It is no good pretending that you
> can be the World's dominant superpower, when all you do is shop.
>
>
> Furthermore they need to reduce the number of reasons foreigners
> have for not buying US Goods. Some of that is down to things like
> foreign policy.
"Someone threw us into the middle of the Atlantic.." Duh! The 'somebody' was the guy telling you he needed 9,7 trillion but couldn't tell you how he was going to spend it..
The Fed told us 'somebody' withdrew 500 billion an hour one morning in September.. How? - cash? into money market accounts? into government securities? No mention of exchange rate operations so gotta have been keeping it in dollars.. Hmm who needs dollars? American banks and hedge funds?
Do elected representative believe that money can electronically disappear? Does this guy know what a computer is? Does he believe the assets cease to exist in cyberspace?
Since the Fed clearly thinks they're idiots and easily fobs them off with stories of electronic wizardry, it's hard for anyone else to have much time for such well meaning buffoons. I have a picture of the session when law-makers were being told the 'big story' by the Fed, whose representative in my mind's eye resembles Austin Power's archrival Dr. Evil...
Ha! ha! This is the funniest thing I've heard in months.. I've just been laughing for 15 minutes...
Don't get it and this enigma is for me the real scary event.
Capitalism in the good times
Socialism in the bad times
We really have talked ourselves into believing we were born with the right to prosperity.
On Feb 10 09:30 AM Dave Wrixon wrote:
> So they addressed one of the symptoms.
>
> But what have they done to cure the problem? The fundamental problem
> is tectonic shift in global financial power and the US Governments
> policy of prescribing a palliative of easy credit.
>
> The US Government needs to produce a game plan for delivering that
> famous productivity and cost competitive in the wealth generating
> industries that actually matter. It is no good pretending that you
> can be the World's dominant superpower, when all you do is shop.
>
>
> Furthermore they need to reduce the number of reasons foreigners
> have for not buying US Goods. Some of that is down to things like
> foreign policy.
On Feb 10 11:04 AM mr freddo wrote:
> I have been advocating that people make sure they have adequate supplies
> on hand in the event that the banks close for an indefinite period.
> It sounds like science fiction but, as you can see from the above
> article, it could happen and it could happen quickly in our electronic
> age.
>
On Feb 10 12:35 PM infp wrote:
> Why aren't we holding the bankers who invested in these 'toxic assets'
> accountable? The executives at Bear Stearns, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie
> Mac, etc. who made millions off the derivatives trade are allowed
> to keep all their money with no apparent consequences. At the very
> least, can't these executives be sued for violating their fiduciary
> responsibility to shareholders and employees? We live in a suit-happy
> nation, awash in lawyers, isn't this a good time to use them?
1. Who were the withdrawers?
2. Where did the money go?
The answers to these questions might reveal some surprises.
For example, if the withdrawers were significantly domestic and quite large in number, the actions taken appear appropriate. If the withdrawers were few in number and/or foreign, we should question whether the actions were appropriate. In this second case, direct intervention with the withdrawers via central banks might have been indicated.
Finally, if the money withdrawn was largely converted to hard assets, that would be evidence of a concerted plan to bring down the U.S. That goes back to the central question: Where did the money go?
Politicians will say anything to justify their blunders. It has be ever so and I regret that it will remain so.
At the same time take special note on how they will not delay the so-called stimulus bill even though the CBO gave it a thumbs down.
If it was, the US Government should be asking who made the withdrawals and then acting in in the interest of its citizens.
On Feb 10 09:20 AM Abdullah al-Libi wrote:
> Paul Kanjorski allowed his family to rip off the taxpayers to the
> tune of over $10,000,000. Go look it up. The guy is a creep.
On Feb 10 11:05 AM Charlberg wrote:
> Is this guy for real? How gullible do you have to be to get elected?
>
> "Someone threw us into the middle of the Atlantic.." Duh! The 'somebody'
> was the guy telling you he needed 9,7 trillion but couldn't tell
> you how he was going to spend it..
> The Fed told us 'somebody' withdrew 500 billion an hour one morning
> in September.. How? - cash? into money market accounts? into government
> securities? No mention of exchange rate operations so gotta have
> been keeping it in dollars.. Hmm who needs dollars? American banks
> and hedge funds?
>
> Do elected representative believe that money can electronically disappear?
> Does this guy know what a computer is? Does he believe the assets
> cease to exist in cyberspace?
>
> Since the Fed clearly thinks they're idiots and easily fobs them
> off with stories of electronic wizardry, it's hard for anyone else
> to have much time for such well meaning buffoons. I have a picture
> of the session when law-makers were being told the 'big story' by
> the Fed, whose representative in my mind's eye resembles Austin Power's
> archrival Dr. Evil...
>
> Ha! ha! This is the funniest thing I've heard in months.. I've just
> been laughing for 15 minutes...
>
If the Fed did not act on Sep. 18, 2008, it would have been the end of the Fed and the US dollar, a fiat currency system that is bound to end some day. The sooner the fiat system ends the better.
The world, and even the United States of America, will continue to exist and will prosper after we rid the world of fiat currencies and Ponzi schemes.
seekingalpha.com/artic...
I am bullish on precious metals and on global shipping. Time to buy more dry bulk shippers today: EXM, EGLE, DRYS, TBSI, GNK, NM.
You can spend 15 minutes laughing if you want .. you need to get an understanding of how money flows work, along with an appreciation of just how leveraged all financial assets are these days. We have about 60 trillion dollars in our US economy these days .. there are though, 600 trillion in CDFs alone, much less the 10 trillion in mortgages, etc. Look into it.
www.nytimes.com/2008/1...
"Up and down Wall Street, hedge funds with billions of dollars at Goldman and Morgan Stanley, another storied investment bank, were frantically pulling money out and looking for safer havens.
Panic was spreading on two of the scariest days ever in financial markets, and the biggest investors — not small investors — were panicking the most. Nobody was sure how much damage it would cause before it ended."
I think the best thing the government could do is take 'baby steps' to solidify the parts of the economy the nation needs the most. The most important part is the banks. After that they can move on to helping people keep their homes and build wealth through taxation and savings. After that, what do they need to do? Banking will help re-build businesses which will create jobs and grow the economy.
I don't believe the government should take charge of the entire economy, individuals' bank accounts, or global s/d. That is for industry and consumers to decide.
On Feb 10 09:30 AM Dave Wrixon wrote:
> So they addressed one of the symptoms.
>
> But what have they done to cure the problem? The fundamental problem
> is tectonic shift in global financial power and the US Governments
> policy of prescribing a palliative of easy credit.
>
> The US Government needs to produce a game plan for delivering that
> famous productivity and cost competitive in the wealth generating
> industries that actually matter. It is no good pretending that you
> can be the World's dominant superpower, when all you do is shop.
>
>
> Furthermore they need to reduce the number of reasons foreigners
> have for not buying US Goods. Some of that is down to things like
> foreign policy.
I DO, really, really,understand why Jim Rogers moved to Singapore now.
Large funds and institutional investors manage 10s or hundreds of billions of dollars and they pretty much all share the same financial worldview which is why they all tend to do the same thing at the same time, no conspiracy required. Computerized trading causes this same effect, when everybody's algorithm responding to the same input hits the 'sell' trigger. $550 billion withdrawn in one hour could very well trigger more 'liquidate' orders and run the system insolvent at a geometric rate. We live in a big-money world where these overweight players have the momentum to crash the system.
I'm not sure Senator Panjorski understands the mechanics but I like his attitude of 'we don't know', which is a lot more productive than pretending you know something then running off full speed in the wrong direction. When it became apparent that buying toxic assets from the asset side of the banks' balance sheets would cost $3 trillion, it made a lot more sense to contribute $300 billion on the capital side. At a 10-to-1 asset-capital ratio, an additional $300B capital restores the banks' balance sheets exactly like $3T would do on the asset side.
And the Senator is right. If you don't have a banking system you don't have an economy. Everybody is 'exposed' to everybody else's woes in modern finance so a few large bankruptcies topples the whole row of dominoes. Action needed to be taken and it was. I don't want to grow my own food in my cave so I support their efforts to keep our economy functional.
On Feb 10 09:01 AM geo511 wrote:
> I'm trying to understand what would've triggered it. Unfortunately
> It's all a bit of a blur maybe I need more coffee, but that's a lot
> of $ to move at one time.
www.doomers.us/forum2/...
Hank Paulson was the one at the Treasury who presided over this event. Ben Bernanke was the one at the Fed at the time. Before we take the guillotine out, remember that these people responded to a crisis, and did what they thought was right.
On Feb 11 12:36 AM Ricard wrote:
> I would like to remind people to give credit where it's due -
>
> Hank Paulson was the one at the Treasury who presided over this event.
> Ben Bernanke was the one at the Fed at the time. Before we take
> the guillotine out, remember that these people responded to a crisis,
> and did what they thought was right.
On Feb 10 12:43 PM John Lounsbury wrote:
> Perhaps the most important questions have not been asked (or answered):
>
>
> 1. Who were the withdrawers?
>
> 2. Where did the money go?
>
> The answers to these questions might reveal some surprises.
>
> For example, if the withdrawers were significantly domestic and quite
> large in number, the actions taken appear appropriate. If the withdrawers
> were few in number and/or foreign, we should question whether the
> actions were appropriate. In this second case, direct intervention
> with the withdrawers via central banks might have been indicated.
>
>
> Finally, if the money withdrawn was largely converted to hard assets,
> that would be evidence of a concerted plan to bring down the U.S.
> That goes back to the central question: Where did the money go?
The Islamic banks are the only ones which got through this whole mess without losing their investments or their value. You might want to read up on Islamic finance theory, since it does allow magnification of investment without usury (through risk sharing like equity, and ownership of assets and lease back which has similar benefits to interest without the usury - there is always a real asset at the heart of every transaction which allows a proper valuation of the "loan" and a bottom on its value). It also prevents the greatest theft of all, inflation due to the discrepancy between interest's exponential monetary growth and the real economy's natural growth.
On Feb 10 10:08 AM jwinkler wrote:
> Ask the folks building the JSF planes about military capability and
> you'll know why the country can shop so much.
>
> Would you rather have constant resource wars (like old Europe) or
> an Islamic system where usury is not allowed (and therefore there's
> no fast way to magnify good ideas)? Easy credit is a better answer.
>
>
>
More likely, Mr. Kanjorski is using fear to make a political case for giving the government more control over the free markets. That seems far more plausible.
On a side note, this is a case for the abolishment of fractional reserve banking systems.
This is just sensationalism.
It may seem small potatoes compared to the volume and size in general of today's activity, but everything's relative and he makes a compelling case that there was an enormous meltdown that looked imminent before the Fed and market makers on the floor of the major exchanges acted in concert to turn things.
On Feb 11 12:02 PM ValueInvestor wrote:
> I'm sure everyone thought the world was coming to an end in 1987
> as well, and look how that turned out.
>
> This is just sensationalism.
On Feb 10 12:35 PM infp wrote:
> Why aren't we holding the bankers who invested in these 'toxic assets'
> accountable? The executives at Bear Stearns, AIG, Fannie Mae, Freddie
> Mac, etc. who made millions off the derivatives trade are allowed
> to keep all their money with no apparent consequences. At the very
> least, can't these executives be sued for violating their fiduciary
> responsibility to shareholders and employees? We live in a suit-happy
> nation, awash in lawyers, isn't this a good time to use them?
On Feb 11 03:17 PM henarl wrote:
> Nah, a total international financial collapse is not the "end of
> the world", or the end of humanity, or even the end of civilization.
> Those things are reserved for mass starvation, epidemic disease,
> nuclear war, or massive natural disaster. Get a grip!
On Feb 10 09:11 AM klarsolo wrote:
> Am I the only person who wonders about the estimate of $ 5.5 trillion?
> Did they just extrapolate the first 1-2 hours to the full day? How
> did they calculate that figure?
stockology.blogspot.co...
I am calling a resumption of the commodity boom as people run away from fiat currency and run towards real fortune: physical assets.
Did it really happen?
Is Kanjorski telling the truth ? The thieves in Washington and Wall St. are looking to cover their behinds after been correctly accused of wholesale Grand Larceny.
When predictions of doom and disaster are uttered by the same people who created this doom and disaster, I'd be inclined to take it with a huge grain of salt and then ask myself why they are in such a hurry.
As for the culprit being "Someone", that does not fly as even in 2001 monitoring of trades and withdrawals were being monitored in realtime utilizing "Promis" data mining software. If, indeed, these billions were being scooped out of accounts their identity would be known. They have already discovered the identities of those who were placing all those Put options on American Airlines and a host of other stocks in early September, 2001 that were subsequently hammered after 9/11.
You are 100% correct about the Lehman default. Looking back, letting Lehman Bros fail was the single worst decision made by Team Paulson/Geithner. It was the event that detonated the credit markets and set off the holocaust. Not their finest moment. And now we expect the same people to lead us out of the wildnerness. Not going to happen. This paper-backed currency system is in its death throes and repeating the same mistakes will not do anything to help us recover. Incredibly, the idiots on CNBC were talking this morning about the importance of revitalizing "securitization" in the debt markets. Hello? Its securitization that got us into this mess. Einstein once said that the classic definition of insanity is repeating the same actions over and over while expecting a different result. We got into this mess due to overleverage and too much debt. Getting us back into debt will NOT help us in any way. We are so screwed and the bankers are NOT part of any solution.
Yank
On Feb 10 09:40 PM Atlas Shrugged wrote:
> The trigger was 'The Reserve' money market fund value falling below
> $1 when their Lehman bonds were marked to zero on September 17.
>
You are 100% correct about the Lehman default. That is precisely why that in looking back letting Lehman Bros fail was the single worst decision made by Team Paulson/Geithner. It was the detonation that set off the holocaust. The banks are now the "walking dead" with little chance of becoming functional again. Those idiots on CNBC this morning were preaching the revival of "securitization" in the credit markets. Hello? Do they not understand that "securitization" is what got us into this mess. It sure as hell will not get us out. Einstein once said the classic definition of insanity is repeating the same actions over and over while expecting a different result. As for Bernanke when I see him giving his speeches or testifying on the Hill he looks like the henpecked husband who just got clobbered by his wife with a frying pan. Dazed and confused. These guys will not be able to lead us out of this mess. The "paper-backed" curecny systen is in its death throes. A gold-backed currecny is the only way out of this mess. And the Central Banks will fight that idea tooth and nail. Expect the Great Depression II. These bankers have led us right over the cliff. And Obama's stimulus will not work one bit.
On Feb 10 09:40 PM Atlas Shrugged wrote:
> The trigger was 'The Reserve' money market fund value falling below
> $1 when their Lehman bonds were marked to zero on September 17.
>
The video clearly shows how Gullible the American people are. They will belive anything, because American politcians since Kenndy's death have become experts in "Communicating with Expertise and eloquence the WRONG thing the RIGHT way" so much for Communications experts. This is what I call deception, and it will never stop, it became a way of life since 1963, and is now even in Churches!!!. I am in Canada and I can see this deception very much in my own country. TRUTH has ceased to exist. now O' is in the middle of this.
If this is truly “real” and potentially as crippling as US Rep Kanjorski claims -- to the tune of 5.5 trillion that is still at risk of evaporating at any time – I’m thinking we’re bound to hear plenty more about it in the next 48 hours from every corner of the audio/video/web political news media. And it will no doubt dwarf all the millions of minutes and billions of words they’ve already spent on this topic over the past several months.
So, I remain unsure and unconvinced of any position, conclusion, or argument I’ve heard to date – and man ‘o man have I heard the whole gamut of them by now. I do agree that we seem to be in a (leaky) life raft dropped in the middle of the Atlantic ocean, searching for the closest/best shore to paddle toward. And I believe we’d better do SOMETHING, as opposed to nothing, if only to buy time until we have more reasoned thinking and empirical data to rely on.
Doing nothing is of course a “long term” solution, because time resolves almost anything if left alone long enough. But, using Rep Kanjorski’s analogy again, if we let the ocean simply drift our raft to some distant shore a year or more from now, it is unlikely that chance will bring us to a landscape we either like or can suitable live on. At least not for the majority of our 300 million people. And not for the other 6 billion folks around the world either -- dragging along behind our raft, holding on to us and one another for dear life. They too are looking to US for leadership and responsible navigation. We owe them something better than a water-logged death while we bicker about which way to go – don’t you think?
President Obama has been in office less than a month. He’s compiled the best brain trust I’ve seen gathered in a new administration’s cabinet during my 64-year lifetime. So let’s give the man the “honeymoon” benefit of doubt that we’ve afforded every President in history, including all the ones who’ve plunged us into these messes, both recently and in the past. It’s the very least we owe to him and his staff . . . and to ourselves!
According to the story ... Fed noticed the withdrawal at 11 am, when account holders withdrew 550 billion in the past two hours, and it was estimated that the total withdrawl will be 5.5 trillion before 2 pm.
So assume the withdrawal started at 9 am. From 9 am to 2 pm is 5 hours. So the estimated withdrawal rate will be 1 trillion per hour on average, especially for the last three hours (11 am to 2 pm), it will be more than 1.6 trillion / hour.
Wow.
... and the disaster was held off by raising account guarantee to 250K.
This implies that the withdrawal happened mostly in small accounts. Assume 50% of the withdrawal was from personal accounts with less than 250K, that will be 5.5 trillion x 50% / 250K, which is about 11 million.
I think the assumption is quite conservative. So that means, on that day, people are withdrawing from or closing at least 11 million MM accounts. That mean it is likely to be an uncoordinated effort of millions of individual investors.
Then after the announcement, most of these millions of people hear the Fed's new guarantee within three hours and decided not to withdraw. Information sure travels fast!
And among these investors, a lot them didn't cash out their brokerage accounts after losing 40% in the stock market, and suddenly started worrying that MM fund is breaking the buck with a less than 1% loss?
Wow.
Also, according to the report form New York times on the next day ...
"Money funds held more than $3.4 trillion in investor funds, as of the most recent industry tally released Thursday, down almost $170 billion from the previous week."
So is it 3.4 trillion, or 5.5 trillion? and every cent will be taken out?
Obviously, we have not heard the real story, or the full story. Or maybe I have missed anything obvious?
www.nytimes.com/2008/0...
Is that all an error in recollection and misplacing some zeros?
On Feb 12 04:08 PM APM wrote:
> Link to NYT article.
>
> www.nytimes.com/2008/0...
infp
BlackyBlack
Jason C. Rines (iThinkBig)
John Lounsbury
Andrew Hughes
All intelligent, logical thoughts & projections!
But that begs another question: What happended to the typical crazies? Are they busy preparing a run for Congress?
www.house.gov/jec/Rese...
I remember my great aunt who grew up in Russia telling me about things after the Revolution getting so bad that people tore up the floor boards in the local grain mill looking for wheat berries. You can bet she always had plenty of food on hand even in her small New York city apartment. I keep her memory close and have made it a point to grab a few non-perishable items every shop.
It's not alarmist or doomer behavior, it's just good sense.
On Feb 10 11:04 AM mr freddo wrote:
> I have been advocating that people make sure they have adequate supplies
> on hand in the event that the banks close for an indefinite period.
> It sounds like science fiction but, as you can see from the above
> article, it could happen and it could happen quickly in our electronic
> age.
>
The videos described here are very interesting. I really liked the content.
joe
Business Opportunities
Your normal "run on the bank" has folks lining up at the door demanding cash. That's where the money goes.
Here you have electronic funds transfer from one institution to some other institution that accepts electronic funds transfer. Where did the money go?
seekingalpha.com/artic...
page 9, Joint Economic Committee Research Report #110-25, September 2008:
Irrational runs on money market mutual funds began. For the week ending on Wednesday September 17, 2008, investors redeemed $145 billion from their money market mutual funds. On Thursday September 18, 2008, institutional money managers sought to redeem another $500 billion, but Secretary Paulson intervened directly with these managers to dissuade them from demanding redemptions. Nevertheless, investors still redeemed another $105 billion. If the federal government were not to act decisively to check this incipient panic, the results for the entire U.S. economy would be disastrous.
Is that what you saw?
On Feb 13 12:51 AM User 356254 wrote:
> before everyone discredits the video based on some other semi-proven
> facts, please check this out:
>
> www.house.gov/jec/Rese...
On Feb 12 04:04 PM APM wrote:
> The numbers don't add up. This seems to be the same old fear mongering.
>
>
> According to the story ... Fed noticed the withdrawal at 11 am, when
> account holders withdrew 550 billion in the past two hours, and it
> was estimated that the total withdrawl will be 5.5 trillion before
> 2 pm.
>
> So assume the withdrawal started at 9 am. From 9 am to 2 pm is 5
> hours. So the estimated withdrawal rate will be 1 trillion per hour
> on average, especially for the last three hours (11 am to 2 pm),
> it will be more than 1.6 trillion / hour.
>
> Wow.
>
> ... and the disaster was held off by raising account guarantee to
> 250K.
>
> This implies that the withdrawal happened mostly in small accounts.
> Assume 50% of the withdrawal was from personal accounts with less
> than 250K, that will be 5.5 trillion x 50% / 250K, which is about
> 11 million.
>
> I think the assumption is quite conservative. So that means, on that
> day, people are withdrawing from or closing at least 11 million MM
> accounts. That mean it is likely to be an uncoordinated effort of
> millions of individual investors.
>
> Then after the announcement, most of these millions of people hear
> the Fed's new guarantee within three hours and decided not to withdraw.
> Information sure travels fast!
>
> And among these investors, a lot them didn't cash out their brokerage
> accounts after losing 40% in the stock market, and suddenly started
> worrying that MM fund is breaking the buck with a less than 1% loss?
>
>
> Wow.
>
> Also, according to the report form New York times on the next day
> ...
>
> "Money funds held more than $3.4 trillion in investor funds, as of
> the most recent industry tally released Thursday, down almost $170
> billion from the previous week."
>
> So is it 3.4 trillion, or 5.5 trillion? and every cent will be taken
> out?
>
> Obviously, we have not heard the real story, or the full story. Or
> maybe I have missed anything obvious?
>
Made in America!!
If you were to introduce gold as a currency again, and increase it's circulation, then you would be endorsing the process of obtaining gold and purifying it. That process requires large amounts of chemicals or mercury, as well as a lot of energy for smelting. Before you say, 'rid the world of fiat currencies', you should provide an alternative that wouldn't cause an ecological disaster.
I agree with ridding the world of Ponzi schemes. The fiat currency issue, though, is only an issue if productivity is flat. I refuse to believe that there aren't any economies of scale or new inventions that could boost productivity in the world.
My last point is that the US dollar is not only backed by the 'full faith and credit of the govt.', but by a big stick. Our military is capable of tearing down regimes in a matter of a few weeks. That capability is weakened when the price of diesel rises, however. The fiat currency we have may not work if there is no stick to back it up.
On Feb 10 02:52 PM Mark Anthony wrote:
> Pure nonsense from Paul Kanjorski.
>
> If the Fed did not act on Sep. 18, 2008, it would have been the end
> of the Fed and the US dollar, a fiat currency system that is bound
> to end some day. The sooner the fiat system ends the better.
>
> The world, and even the United States of America, will continue to
> exist and will prosper after we rid the world of fiat currencies
> and Ponzi schemes.
>
> seekingalpha.com/artic...
>
>
> I am bullish on precious metals and on global shipping. Time to buy
> more dry bulk shippers today: EXM, EGLE, DRYS, TBSI, GNK, NM.
>
video.google.com/video...
It starts out black but hang on to your seats!
then AFTER you see it ask yourself this:
Why not let the US Government buy into the banks big time then share the profits with the people. Right now capitalizing the banks and getting lots and lots of shares is happening. Today the bank's stock values are lower than they have ever been. Buy low. Grab the banks that are insolvent add them to the banks that the US owns a of high percentage of. Over time the people (Government) could own the banks and share the interest and profits with us (put it back in the treasury) so our kids can be taken out of debt (at least Government debt anyway).
I like the kind of bank shares our government is buying right now. They are preferred shares that pay 5% dividend. I wouldn't buy the old ones but I'd love to buy into the ones our government is getting. Maybe they could set up a huge mutual fund that we could participate in. In the end the people would own our banks and those terrible bankers would not.
This is the idea time to do this. This movie needs to be seen by everyone then you will all agree with me!
financialserv.edgeboss...
It's all just a movie....we open on an empty street in lower Manhattan in the early Eighties, where a bunch of High School friends named Bear, Lehman, Merrill, Morgan, and Goldman, decide to played a cruel, twisted joke on a random target. The young toughs see someone they believe is a homeless man, due to his shabby appearance, and rough him up as he begs for mercy. They ultimately throw his lifeless body into a dumpster. This character's true identity will be unknown to us throughout the movie. Through symbolism, an item in the dumpster next to his lifeless body, we will know that the movie's "Deep Throat" like manipulator is the man in the dumpster (the same item from the dumpster is found on his office desk). We will be able to deduce that the man was not homeless, but is actually a player in both TV and the world of financial management.
Spoiler Alert: The character who is the movie's manipulator, is in fact "Cramer". Throughout the movie, the antics of the TV personality Cramer, help to push much of the movie's action, but we do not know that he is also the one tormented at the movie's beginning.
As a result of their torment, the stranger, who turns out to be a low-grade money manager, discovers that his ability to convince almost any small time investor, to buy almost any equity, is almost supernatural. This newly found power of persuasion, allows him to work his way into inner both financial and media power circles. The toughs grow up to run various investment banks located on Wall Street, where their gutsy hubris, allows them to take control of various financial markets.
Cramer, meanwhile, who has always sworn revenge, positions himself in capacities where he can use his bizarre talents to "influence" large numbers of investors. He develops investment programs, founds a website, and slowly puts his master plan in place. Using the Machiavellian idea of keeping your friends close, but your enemies closer, he launches a series of ridiculous stock picks to undermine the confidence that his audience holds for him. Having properly established his buffoonery, he begins to tout "financials", telling everyone how great certain companies are run. His plan is further developed through his friendship with a man named Angelo Mozillo, whom he introduces to the power elite on Wall Street. Angelo has a few "banks" that he owns and runs, with the help of his Uncle Ponzi. They'd like to expand, and think their model would be great for all involved.
As the plan for further world dominance is at its most extended, the master manipulator throws a temper tantrum heard round the World, claiming that these great financial institutions will fail unless the Fed helps them get past a temporary funding problem, by cutting rates. The table is now set for consumer confidence to plummet and hedge fund managers to react to the "blood in the water".
Caught completely unaware, Angelo finds himself the first patsy of a cycle that will eventually take down Cramer's sworn enemies. The method being used is simple. A crisis of confidence is planted, wholesale funding drys up, share price falls, short-sellers systematically take the stock price down further, the business model is questioned, lenders charge more for credit default swaps, the increased insurance costs for default protection depletes the company's ready capital, causing capital ratios to become highly leveraged and eventually challenged by the street. Cramer continues the momentum, at every turn, by constantly writing about how unfair it is, and talking about the issue on his many TV shows. Each company has to sell assets, their stock price drops further, more short selling occurs, and the cycle goes on and on, until Bear and Lehman find themselves "imploded".
By the time Merrill figures out what is going on, he is powerless to stop the attack. He calls his childhood accomplices to warn them of what is really going on, but the clock is ticking. It's a race against time, as Merrill, Morgan and Goldman rush to find a base of capitalization, through mergers with a commercial banks that have an asset base provided by its account holders.
I won't give away the ending....it's riveting.
Possible Story Points:
There as an ambitious underwriter (Meredith Whitney) who dreams of becoming a TV personality and furthering her career. We can see her in a scene where she is talking to someone at a desk, who is in the TV industry and known to us as the manipulation character. Like "Deep Throat" in "All The President's Men", we have an unknown, shadowy character that moves the action, throughout the movie. Although his exact identity is unknown to us, we do know that he is a power player with roots in TV and finance. The shadow figure in this scene, nods his understanding of Meredith's ambitions and reaches into a drawer. He pulls out a post-it laden annual report for Merrill Lynch, which he places on the desk and slides to her. We later have a scene where we see her on TV talking about balance sheets of investment banks, literally blowing the whistle on their "mark to fantasy" Level 3 assets. As the camera pulls back from the TV, we see that we are watching the TV with the shadowy figure, who nods with approval.
Another plot twist can be the scene where Goldman and Morgan find out from Merrill, about the plot against them. They immediately go into action, shorting each other's stock, their shark-like tactics putting each other in even greater danger.
Another key scene would involve the cloaked character, placing a phone call to Treasury Secretary Paulson in mid-2006, telling him in a disguised voice about a plot to undermine capitalism. Paulson rushes to re-form the PPT, and the Paulson character can then helps push the action throughout the movie. The mere existence of the PPT, helps to create the panic that the PPT was formed to fight.
We know the cloaked character is probably the homeless man left for dead in a dumpster at the start of the movie, but never realize it's Cramer until the end of the movie. We do know that Cramer is in the "Eye of the Hurricane", as a TV financial personality, but believe he is sincerely trying to help his friends on Wall Street. It is not until the movie's end that we realize that the shadow manipulator is in fact Cramer, and this helps us understand the TV personality Cramer's actions. Classic thriller ending.
On Feb 10 11:05 AM Charlberg wrote:
> Is this guy for real? How gullible do you have to be to get elected?
>
> "Someone threw us into the middle of the Atlantic.." Duh! The 'somebody'
> was the guy telling you he needed 9,7 trillion but couldn't tell
> you how he was going to spend it..
> The Fed told us 'somebody' withdrew 500 billion an hour one morning
> in September.. How? - cash? into money market accounts? into government
> securities? No mention of exchange rate operations so gotta have
> been keeping it in dollars.. Hmm who needs dollars? American banks
> and hedge funds?
>
> Do elected representative believe that money can electronically disappear?
> Does this guy know what a computer is? Does he believe the assets
> cease to exist in cyberspace?
>
> Since the Fed clearly thinks they're idiots and easily fobs them
> off with stories of electronic wizardry, it's hard for anyone else
> to have much time for such well meaning buffoons. I have a picture
> of the session when law-makers were being told the 'big story' by
> the Fed, whose representative in my mind's eye resembles Austin Power's
> archrival Dr. Evil...
>
> Ha! ha! This is the funniest thing I've heard in months.. I've just
> been laughing for 15 minutes...
>