Warm_Paw

As Asset Valuations Soar, Earnings Wobble - How Safe Is Banking?

So many articles, so little actually said...

Let's start with question #1.
Of the top ten banks, how much toxic asset does each bank hold?

#2.
What is the book value for these assets?

#3.
What is the market value of these assets?

#4.
How many banks have suspended mark to market accounting?

#5.
If forced to sell these toxic assets, can these banks produce effective capitalization to meet their requirements?

#6.
Can these banks even calculate future losses on MBS' due to bundling?

#7.
When are the next wave of matuiry dates to occur?

There media people - answer these questions.

This should get GE on the ball and sell CNBC before the answers come out. hehe

Goldman, CIT and the Modest Return of Capitalism

It's ugly.
Maybe Obama didn't know Paulson was setting him up handing him this tarp idea. He just hit the scene and was relying on the existing financial gurus.
The big question is, how much toxic asset does Goldman still hold and have they honestly marked it to market?
Could be a farce to get sideline money poring in so these banks can really unwind.
Credit Suisse selling some mortgage securities is the beginning of the sales pitch.
I know I wouldn't touch them with a ten foot pole.
Like buying Bre X!

Did We Nationalize Banks, Or Did They Nationalize Us?

Paulson was pooping his pants in his congressional testimoney yesterday.
He couldn't look any guiltier.
My humble opinion is that he moved to save Goldman's butt before he passed on his position.
That's why the haste.
The GOP basically scrambled to inject AIG with enough money to save Goldman, initiating the plan to then hand it to Obama.
The GOP put us in this position, even Greenspan acknowledges that trying to regulate the mortgage industry would never have got past congress at that time.
A very thorough investigation of Hank Paulson should ensue.
It's a conflict of interest that he's an ex Goldman employee.
When AIG was infused with Capital, who was the chief beneficiary?
The tax payer should have been given a referendum.
What Obama is now going to have to deal with is that the same ol' boys network on Wall Street is now going to cause another financial crisis only this time, on his watch.
The destruction of these banks would have cleansed the country.
As for Nationalization, it's a non event.
The govt doesn't want to own the banks and the banks are repaying as soon as they can.
The powers that be understand the tax payer's dollars should never have been used in this way. These banks should have failed if they were destined to fail and from the rubble come new banks. Better banks.
There is no proof the transition from such an occurrence would have sent the US into depression.
The shift would have rewarded banks that avoided the sub prime mess, instead of banks with the most political cronyism.