monday1929

FASB Changes Perpetuate Fair Value Lying

Your Deluded beliefs have been and will be highly profitable for me, but damaging to society. If you believe that Govts. are larger than the Market, you do not know History.


On Apr 03 10:23 AM Conan the Barbarian wrote:

> citez: Agreed, but let's carry it forward a tad.
>
> All of the World's Governments are now focused on "fixing" the problems
> and will do Whatever it takes to do so. If anyone actually believes
> that any kind of credit contraction will stand in the way of their
> concerted efforts, they have fully deluded themselves.
>
> The US no longer stands alone in this effort.

The FASB Rally: More Dishonest Breathing Room For Banks

And when does the tooth fairy show up at our doors? This "fire sale"
has been going on over two years now, when will you admit you are wrong? Prices are prices, as the Great Free Market Pirates loved to Tout in their heyday.


On Apr 03 07:15 AM citetez wrote:

> The "dishonesty" was really in forcing banks to book paper losses
> before they occurred (and when they might never occur) on illiquid
> assets based on a temporary market crisis. This killed the banks
> and perpetuated the crisis. Lifting Mark to Market will be hailed
> as the end of this crisi period. Not all will be rosy from here,
> but this allows the markets and the marketplace to heal.

The FASB Rally: More Dishonest Breathing Room For Banks

No, the internet bubble involved other crimes. All your other points are good, though.


On Apr 03 07:43 AM Michael L wrote:

> Watch when banks start buying assets from each other at "market prices".
> You buy mine and I'll buy yours. The ol' boy network or hucksters
> and frauds has new life. FASB? Who runs that and with what oversight?
> Wasn't mark to market what kept Greenspans internet bubble afloat
> for so long? When it comes to the American puplic the government's
> motto seems to be "if you can't beat 'en, cheat 'em."

The FASB Rally: More Dishonest Breathing Room For Banks

Keep believing, it is profitable for me. mauldin is good, but vastly underestimated the extent of this coming Depression. He also just published the Criminal PIMCO's take on things, a disappointment for me.


On Apr 03 04:52 AM yay wrote:

> you have to take into account that these writedowns at first occured
> because there was no market, and there was no market because nobody
> wanted the ACCOUNTING risks these instruments brought with them,
> not neccessarily DEFAULT risks, if you discount the cashflow these
> papers will bring if ypu hold them till maturity you should still
> get a fairly high value, read mauldins report on this, frontline
> report or sth from 2 weeks ago...

The Mark-to-Market Myth

Or Lower purpose......


On Apr 03 07:34 AM CautiousInvestor wrote:

> The decision to change M2M was a poliitical decision and one designed
> to buy time and forestall harsh realities; don't try to divine some
> guiding brilliance.
>
> I suspect modifications to M2M and the PPIP legacy programs were
> designed on their own...........giving very little thought to the
> possible interplay between the two initiatives. This has been a distinguishing
> hallmark feature of Treasury efforts; nobody has articulated an overarching
> strategy and how all the myriad actions work together and serve some
> higher purpose.

Stiglitz: PPIP Assets = Call Options

The Great thing is that virtually everyone but the hopelessly corrupted see right through this. If this goes through the People may finally rise from their slumber. How many will pay their Taxes in full to a Geithner led treasury?


On Apr 02 06:39 AM morph366 wrote:

> Think of the PPIP as a political figleaf for Tim Geithner. When,
> as will almost certainly be the case, the taxpayers end up having
> overpaid for the assets the Treasury can claim that it was all done
> through a "price discovery" process with their private sector partners.

Derivatives: Just One Reason to Short the Banks

If everything were "balanced", then there would be no chance of profit. It is amazing that , at this late date, one still must read those defending one Quadrillion in derivatives as "harmless". Even Greenspan admitted he got that all wrong. Your ignorance assures a few more months of profitable trading. I will be buying from you at the bottom (S&P 200) when you finally "see the light". See you then.


On Mar 30 02:02 PM NickH wrote:

> This is a useless, hysterical article and I can't figure out how
> it got published. It is a bald faced attempt to "talk your book"
> and scare us all to death thinking we are stupid and don't know that
> these entities balance their books with long and short positions.
> Which editor okayed publishing of this piece? Must have been after
> a 2 Martini lunch.

Derivatives: Just One Reason to Short the Banks

Yes, after riding them down from$40.00 to one dollar, why not bet that a fascist system keeps Citi/JPM/BAC and the other walking dead walking a bit more. Their shares are just lottery tickets now- and always were. The Elites should be proud of what they wrought.


On Mar 31 01:53 AM GtownMetal wrote:

> C has $35.6 Trillion in derivatives and only $1.20 Trillion in equity,
> if 3.4% of their derivatives default it totally wipes out their $1.2
> Trillion in equity. Is that a chance any of you would take in this
> market?

Derivatives: Just One Reason to Short the Banks

Can we all assume you are being sarcastic about the "balanced banks" holdings?


On Mar 30 05:08 AM balabanovj wrote:

> Derivatives come in many forms. For Marc to say that these are huge
> liabilities to the banks carrying them, without knowing the balance
> of derivative that they hold is pure ignorance. If the derivatives
> are well spread, there is no reason for worry, and I doubt the portfolios
> of BAC or even C are anything but balanced.
>
> JBB

Are We Headed for a Commercial Property Catastrophe?

Let's make the future retirement payments to Govt. officials involved in these crimes dependent on the future performance of the "plans" they devise.
If they do not work as hoped, no payments are made and the Fed and Treasury failures can work until they are ninety, as the citizens they rob will be forced to do.

Are We Headed for a Commercial Property Catastrophe?

Exactly- the whole point of most of these "plans" is simply to push out the day of reckoning, then blame faulty models and "unprecedented, unforseeable" market volatility. And, of course, the guilty will be safely, and comfortably, retired by then.

DB Chief Risk Officer: We're in the Middle of the Crisis Still

If you do not understand how the govt manipulates statistics, you do deserve the govt. you get, and the investment returns too.
At what point will you believe we are in a Depression, 10 years after it is over when the govt. "revisions" catch up?


On Mar 31 02:14 PM Vox Rationalis (aka BS Detector) wrote:

> "Zero Hedge would be willing to bet that at least 5 of these data
> points will likely receive some peculiar fudging, resulting in totally
> unexpected upside surprises..."
>
> Looks like one for the loss column.
>
> By the way, did you bother to look at the durable goods order data
> that seems to form the basis for your conspiracy theory about seasonal
> data adjustment? The seasonally-adjusted growth in new orders from
> January to February was 3.4%. The base number, which is adjusted
> for calendar days? 3.2%.
>
> Excuse me if I'm unimpressed by your theory.

Are Citi, Bank of America Pushing Prices Up?

Don't worry, future generations will forget the bankers' sins and be fleeced all over again.


On Mar 29 10:23 AM User 289589 wrote:

> after what ken lewis has done to bac stock holders,who can ever trust
> bankers again??

Are Citi, Bank of America Pushing Prices Up?

Citi and BAC can hardly be called "private entities". They are habitual criminals and if they are gaming their own rescue, which is being funded by taxpayer dollars ( yes, I know, for our "collective" benefit) it needs to be investigated.


On Mar 27 12:05 PM It Figures wrote:

> This story has a lot of misperceptions, in my opinion.
>
> First, in a market with thousands of participants involving trillions
> of dollars, a single institution buying a few tens or hundreds of
> millions of securities doesn't move the needle.
>
> Second, with the feds promising to finance, almost for free, private
> speculators to buy this paper "to remove toxic assets from the banking
> industry's balance sheet" in the popular terminology, how can it
> be bad in any way if a private entity puts it's own capital on the
> line in an attempt to acquire assets it deems undervalued.
>
> Third, the author has no concept of what "insider trading" means.
> These banks have been telling the world that the current market prices
> are nuts, and are now acting on their analysis, for their own profit.
> Yes, they probably have better insight into the economic value of
> these securities, because they own similar paper and know first hand
> the cash flow and prepayment behavior, but this information is readily
> available to market participants, and the banks have made no secret
> of their opinions. That's why they carry them on their books at the
> values they do.
>
> This is exactly what the dozens of government programs are hoping
> to accomplish.
>

U.S. Public Transfixed by Day-to-Day Market Gains but Blind to Future Losses

Yes, that 1966-1982 was nice and quick. And that is in nominal Dow. Inflation adjusted we went nowhere for 25+ years.
America's Delusions are unbreakable. So far.


On Mar 27 05:22 AM Cetin Hakimoglu wrote:

> Do keep in mind that tax payers technically don;t pay a penny of
> the stimulus, bailouts, or tax cuts. Federal income taxes have not
> increased a penny since George W. Bush's original tax cuts. And it
> will remain that way.
>
> What bears repeating is that we're in a new bull market, and once
> a bull market gains momentum it's hard to stop. This is because we're
> still in the Goldilocks economic phase of low inflation, modest growth,
> low rates, easy money, and globalization. Nothing really changed
> between June 2007 and now. A slight dip in GP and other econ data,
> a small rise in unemployment, but as long as consumers keeps spending
> away the recessions will be brief as has been the case since the
> the Great Depression.