Gary A

Geithner's Bad Judgment Leaves Taxpayers Holding the Bag

While I agree with being against political attacks, Geithner should be attacked by average Joe as being a mole, a plant, a Trojan Horse that came from the private Federal Reserve Bank. Yes congress allowed stuff, but the Fed looked the other way while ponzi loans sanctioned by Basel 2 hit our shores. I say we do away with all of these crooks, and export them to some island in the South Pacific. It isn't a party issue. It is a mercantile versus mainstream America issue. hubpages.com/hub/Will-...

The founding fathers should have imprisoned Alex Hamilton and we would have a clear path to economic sanity.


On Nov 20 09:10 AM Tom Armistead wrote:

> Personal attacks on Geithner are uselss and counter-productive.
> I followed the AIG situation as it developed, and have now read the
> SIGTARPs report, a pre-condition for intelligent discussion. <br/>
>
> The outcome was inevitable once the decision was made to bailout
> AIG. The counterparties on the CDS had what were in effect market
> value guarantees, and once AIG was supported by the triple A credit
> of USG they cashed them in. Geithner had an extremely bad lie, created
> by more than a decade of negligent regulation in which Congress played
> a pivotal role.
>
> Specifically, CFMA exempted CDS from regulation as insurance, and
> OTS was way overmatched as a regulator for AIGFP, or any financial
> institution for that matter. If CDS had been regulated as insurance,
> which is what they are, AIG would have written less coverage and
> what they did write would have been supported by adequate reserves
> and would not have included the requirement of collateral posting.
>
>
> The request for an audit by SIGTARP was politicallly motivated: the
> resulting attacks on Giethner are politically motivated: meanwhile,
> these same members of Congress were asleep at the switch when they
> let CFMA get passed and voted into law. They were also remiss in
> that they watched and applauded and created the entire process of
> deregulation which got us where we are today.

How the AIG Bailout Scuttles the Chance for a Second Stimulus

But why the bailouts of anyone? We are told that there was a run on money markets last year. We are told that this run threatened the entire financial system. But we are never told who ran the funds. Never told. Why should we believe that this money market run was just a fraud and a scam to get money from the taxpayer?

Unless we are given more information I say prosecute and hang all of them. I am working under the assumption that the run was a scam unless someone proves differently.

AIG Counterparties: The SIGTARP Report

I am willing to engage in a little counterparty failure. Hey you guys, I want to insure you against stock market losses. Why don't you email me and we can talk.

I am well capitalized. I can protect you. Even if you are levered to the moon!

AIG Counterparties: The SIGTARP Report

Is sigtarp like Sieg heil? Sounds like a bunch of fascist corporate socialism to me:)

Special Inspector: AIG Counterparty Volunteered to Take Haircut, Geithner Refused

Geithner is a thief. With the other two stooges, Summers and Bernanke, this is how they steal:

1. They rob folks of fixed income returns by keeping bond yields low.
2. They rob passbook accounts as banks give no interest.
3. They rob taxpayers/consumers by making AIG whole so Goldman Sachs could be whole.
4. They cause the value of assets to go up, raising the cost of living.

You guys can add more if you want. I am old. That is all I could think of: hubpages.com/hub/Proof...

Is This the End of 'Too Big to Fail'?

You have it right. Who would be against this plan? You clean up the insolvent banks by hitting the stockholders, then the bondholders, then the other banks, and lastly the taxpayer. Whoever is against this is against the ability of the United States to excercise her sovereign power. This is close to treason in my view. We can disagree about certain aspects of the bill and if it is passed never to be used, then it is truly a joke. We will see.


On Oct 28 04:16 PM tripleblack wrote:

> [quote] It requires the failed firm's creditors and shareholders
> to bear "first loss", and, if the brief is to be believed, only if
> they are entirely wiped out and there remains a shortfall will assessments
> be laid - on other large financial institutions, not the taxpayer.
> This should result in large amounts of "social pressure" to stop
> stupid actions, since the risk of them can fall on other large market
> participants. [quote]
>
> This was always the idea behind the FDIC, a form of government supervised
> self-insurance.

Is This the End of 'Too Big to Fail'?

You guys don't get it. The creditors, leveraged hedge funds who hold the bonds of the financial institutions, should be taken down and risk spread around. Then other banks should pay, and then the taxpayer should be responsible for much less of this.

Wildebeast, why would the Founding fathers be appalled at the ability of our government to find another way to insure taxpayers are not on the hook for this resolution of an insolvent bank? They fought the Revolutionary War because the Bank of England abused them!!

Analyzing Larry Summers

Alan, both parties are at fault. IMO the Bank of International Settlements allowed shadow banking and the Fed looked the other way as this system was imported to the US in the form of liar loans.

This was a ponzi SCAM. And it happened under the watch of the BIS, the home bank of the central banks.

Making the Fed the financial watchdog king is putting the fox in charge of the hen house. Just remember, Rubin, Greenspan, Frank, Gramm, etc all had something to do with making Wall Street into a casino. Both parties were in the pockets of the rich banks. And now the consumer, the engine of the world, is broke. Yet no one is prosecuted for this fraud.

They may get around to prosecuting the foot soldiers like Mozillo, but what about Geithner, Greenspan, Summers, Rubin, Frank, Graham, Dodd, etc. etc? If you commit a crime that is high up enough, no one gets prosecuted. I think Voltaire said something like that.

Analyzing Larry Summers

And one more thing. A true nationalization would NOT have had the government putting all the money in. That is a LIE. The bondholders, who Summers protected as they are levered by hedge funds, would have had to take a hit.

The cronies would not allow that and they rule the financial world. But the crisis is not over. Until the consumer delevers, which may be years and years, there will be no real recovery. Banks are still in danger and our credit system is threatened by lack of demand.

Analyzing Larry Summers

OMG, I can't believe that people are writing like this. Clearly you had the authority if you read the guidelines of the Bank of International Settlements, to take over any bank at the local level, even multinationals. People who say otherwise should be prosecuted for fraud.

And here is another fraud perpetrated by Summers, ie, that unemployment is a lagging indicator. It is, rather, according to Pimco, a leading indicator. Why? Because these jobs are gone forever, and the consumer is tapped out.

But Summers and the insiders bailed out their buddies with money that should have gone to workers, who need deleveraging more than banks. Without the consumer this economy is dead in the water, yet Summers bailed out his cronies instead, laboring under the false notion that this is an ordinary recession. It is not. If unemployment is a leading indicator, it is NOT NORMAL.

Obama better be listening to reason here. He simply cannot continue to listen to Summers and Geithner, two criminal minds.

Banking Bailouts by Other Means

I have a link to an institute that was founded by the derivative exchanges. This link is to banks that make worldwide policy. It includes a Rothschild bank, JPM, Citibank, UBS, etc. riskinstitute.ch/13474... Please note in this other link that it is clearly stated that the local bank regulator, ie, the central bank of that country, has the authority to nationalize and liquidate a multinational bank. Please note that Bernanke said he did not have the authority to do so, but this is apparently a lie: riskinstitute.ch/13474...

My point is that the United States government is engaging in highly risky behavior, taking toxic assets on the books, when the Fed could have nationalized the banks, sold the toxics for whatever they could get, protected the taxpayer and this episode would not be mired down in an infinite bank bailout today.

Proposal for Fed to Become the Next AIG

Perhaps they are involved in the fraud swaps still threatening. No one else can be the counterparty to the banks since the banks raped the mortgage insurers and they are running out of money. Word has it that the banks purchased multiple swap products on one property. Markopolos is about to break this and hinted at it in a speech: bank-abuse.com/bankste...

This could be the greatest ponzi in the world without counterparties, except of course, the taxpayer.

Seething Over Liddy's AIG-Goldman Connection

The GS thieves have done their thieving legally. But they are morally bankrupt and we will see the Geithners, Paulsons, Summers and Liddys of the world ultimately get their just reward. They came into the world with nothing and they will exit with nothing.