Seeking Alpha

Jim Myrtle

Jim Myrtle
Send Message
View as an RSS Feed
View Jim Myrtle's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Bank Of America's Report Betrays Uselessness Of Big Bank Earnings Releases [View article]
    "My article is a statement of fact. 56% of Bank of America's earnings are from a reduction in loan loss reserves. That is absurd."

    What is the correct percentage that you'd feel wasn't absurd?
    Were you complaining during the smash that their reported earnings were too low, because they put too much in loss reserves?
    Jul 20, 2012. 07:23 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Bank Of America's Report Betrays Uselessness Of Big Bank Earnings Releases [View article]
    "the likes of BAC had an offseting benefit from the FED's MBS purchases - under which they were basically paid rich for impaired assets"

    Yeah, those guaranteed bonds that are trading well above par sure were "impaired".
    Jul 20, 2012. 07:19 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "The Fed buys Euros for dollars. The Euro collapses anyway, and the Fed - which PRINTS dollars - "loses" its investment."

    Well, the ECB has committed to return the dollars in exchange for the now collapsed Euros.
    Jul 10, 2012. 09:27 AM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "The Fed was lending (swapping for less in demand Euros) dollars to Euro banks via a loan to the ECB at a lowered swap rate so we can help our good buddies overseas and they wouldn't go and collapse on us"

    Yes, the purpose is to help Europe. And they had 100% cash collateral. And their counterparty can print money. Sounds safe.
    So what's your gripe?
    Jul 10, 2012. 08:38 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "Glass-Steagall would not have prevented bad loans, it would/should have prevented (if correcly implemented) the packaging of loans into toxic CDO's and the sale of said CDO's"

    I thought mortgages had been turned into MBS for decades under Glass-Steagall? Was I mistaken?

    "If they were maybe they would have the confidence to go and lose 8 billion as well"

    Darn those companies that can't make money on every single trade.

    "JP Morgan payed their taxes? Well wasn't that big of them!"

    I know, it's kinda like they're taxpayers instead of supported by the taxpayer.

    "Congrats on your belief that LIBOR manipulation is no big deal"

    Who said that?
    Jul 9, 2012. 08:57 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    But...but...Glass-Stea... 1%...TBTF...paid themselves bonuses...won't lend...made bad loans they knew wouldn't be repaid...where's my bailout...LOL!

    When you string together all their greatest hits, it sounds funny, doesn't it. Don't ask them about derivatives, they'll start talking about "never paying them back".
    Jul 9, 2012. 07:18 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "No interest on a currency swap?"

    Did you think the Fed charges the ECB 1% and the ECB charges the Fed 1%?

    "He's talking about a liquidity swap, it's a loan to the central bank of Europe priced at some spread over the overnight rate."

    No, that would be a loan, not a swap.

    "but the loan portion is dead on, how could it be anything else? "

    The clue is in the name. Swap.
    The Fed gives the ECB $50 billion (or whatever) and the ECB gives the Fed the same value in Euros. Now, the Fed can take those Euros and buy Euro debt with it, but there is no rate attached to the swap.

    "Why would there be an economic reason for the transaction to exist if it wasn't a loan?"

    The reason is to supply dollar liquidity to Euro banks.
    Jul 9, 2012. 04:50 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "Well said, Mr. Dimon. So what do you call derivative bets that leave government (i.e., taxpayer) backed institutions on the hook for $8 billion"

    Taxpayer backed? JPM paid back TARP, in full, at a profit to the Treasury. They also paid nearly $7.8 billion in taxes in 2011.
    Nearly $7.5 billion in 2010 and $4.4 billion in 2009.

    " Reversion to Glass-Steagall is THE obvious antidote"

    How would that have prevented bad mortage loans?

    " There currently exists a monopoly of dangerous greed mongering that serves no public good, yet is implicitly, if not explicitly, bankrolled by a public that has no choice in the matter! "

    I know, Fannie and Freddie were just awful ideas.
    Jul 9, 2012. 04:21 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    Is it another article that provides no evidence to back up your claim?
    Thanks.

    "Everyone on this site who thinks debt is good and that everything is managable through taking on more debt to protect the old debt we have "

    Hello Mr Strawman. Spending a lot of time with Michael, aren't you?.
    Jul 9, 2012. 12:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    Making silly claims and running away from them, without proof, is also denial.
    You're gettiing good at it.
    Thanks for the laughs.
    Jul 8, 2012. 01:01 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    Awesome. You can read! Yes, a supposed guarantee reduces their financing costs. See that, no check or wire involved.
    Jul 8, 2012. 01:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "Keep in mind that quite a few of the paper “assets” the Fed holds are still radioactive, including a mountain of subprime mortgages that would fatally poison the U.S. banking system if they were returned to their rightful owners"

    Radioactive? MBS that are trading well above par?

    "For this…let’s call it a “favor,” the Fed charges 50 basis points — without calling it a…ahem…loan"

    Ummmm....it's a swap. There is no interest. Because it's not a loan.
    The Fed gives the ECB $1 billion and receives the same value in Euros. No interest.

    I see why you like this source, he's as confused as you are.
    Jul 7, 2012. 01:38 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    Did you read the article? It's obvious you didn't.
    The government is not giving a wire or a check or a fist full of FRNs to the banks. No taxpayer money changed hands.

    "How they get the money is NOT the issue"

    Read the article and get back to me, silly.
    Jul 7, 2012. 01:34 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Big Banks' $76 Billion Per Year Federal Subsidy And What We Need To Do About It [View article]
    "why isn't all that free money the government is giving to the banks restarting the global economic demand?"

    Well, for one thing, the government isn't giving free money to the banks.
    Jul 7, 2012. 01:32 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The U.S. Banking System: Weak, Yet Still Supplying Europe [View article]
    Yeah, Dodd, Frank, Raines......just terrible.

    Put the politicians in charge, they'll fix it. LOL!
    Jul 7, 2012. 01:29 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
1,138 Comments
790 Likes