Because insuring the deposits of the banking system isn't enough.
We have to make sure the people who own the debt and equity of banks are insured too!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Bern Identity
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Because insuring the deposits of the banking system isn't enough.
We have to make sure the people who own the debt and equity of banks are insured too!
What piezoe is gung ho for, saving the equity holders of banks, is what is almost certainly going to lead to the same thing that happened in Cyprus and then Europe and is now only discreetly being mentioned in alternative press today. Bank bail-ins.
What it means is this. Instead of bank debt and equity holders being bailed out by the gov't and central banks, these security holders will be bailed out by the depositors of the banks. The gov't realizes what a public relations (and economic) catastrophe awaits if taxpayer and/or fiat money is continually used to bail out owners of banks. So, in order to accomplish the same thing, they're just going to let depositors in the banks take the hit. Of course we're talking about uninsured depositors here, but it still can only be considered a royal raping of the public. Why is it so bad? Because it's turning banking economics upside down. Deposits have always been treated as something people give to banks for safekeeping. Not a loan. And rightfully so. First, equity holder of banks would be wiped out, then debt holders, then uninsured deposit holders.
But now, somewhat under the radar, they want to turn this all upside down and save the debt and equity holders, also give the derivative positions of the banks seniority, and make the uninsured depositors take the hit. This is a cram down of losses on the innocent. All to save the real risk takers. Which are the equity holders, debt holders, investors in inter-bank derivative trades, etc.
This is the statists using their fiduciary position to enrich those people who they favor. What we call cronies. In any kind of just system, this would be some kind of high crime. But not here, and not now. It's just business as usual for the elites.
It's a continuation of the giant rip off that occurred in the GM bankruptcy, where the bondholders were used as the fall guys in order for obama's car czar, steve ratner, to hand out goodies to the unions and keep them whole. This was a royal raping of the bondholders and just yet another example of the elites plundering the innocent for their own nefarious gains.
http://www.dailywealth.com/2125/gm-americas-biggest-bankruptcy
I created a post in the economics section about this, i think i called it something like 'you don't know how badly you're being screwed' or something like that. And the idiots came out of the woodwork to villify the post. They're either too dumb to understand what's happening or are complicit in the shattering of what was once a just and legal system. Who cares about those things when you have a better idea? That's their motto.
Laws are things that are only to be enforced when they can do the statists some good. If they harm the statists and their various cronies and allies, then those laws might as well not exist. And the judicial system seems only too happy to assist them in the plundering.
What it means is this. Instead of bank debt and equity holders being bailed out by the gov't and central banks, these security holders will be bailed out by the depositors of the banks. The gov't realizes what a public relations (and economic) catastrophe awaits if taxpayer and/or fiat money is continually used to bail out owners of banks. So, in order to accomplish the same thing, they're just going to let depositors in the banks take the hit. Of course we're talking about uninsured depositors here, but it still can only be considered a royal raping of the public. Why is it so bad? Because it's turning banking economics upside down. Deposits have always been treated as something people give to banks for safekeeping. Not a loan. And rightfully so. First, equity holder of banks would be wiped out, then debt holders, then uninsured deposit holders.
But now, somewhat under the radar, they want to turn this all upside down and save the debt and equity holders, also give the derivative positions of the banks seniority, and make the uninsured depositors take the hit. This is a cram down of losses on the innocent. All to save the real risk takers. Which are the equity holders, debt holders, investors in inter-bank derivative trades, etc.
This is the statists using their fiduciary position to enrich those people who they favor. What we call cronies. In any kind of just system, this would be some kind of high crime. But not here, and not now. It's just business as usual for the elites.
It's a continuation of the giant rip off that occurred in the GM bankruptcy, where the bondholders were used as the fall guys in order for obama's car czar, steve ratner, to hand out goodies to the unions and keep them whole. This was a royal raping of the bondholders and just yet another example of the elites plundering the innocent for their own nefarious gains.
http://www.dailywealth.com/2125/gm-americas-biggest-bankruptcy
I created a post in the economics section about this, i think i called it something like 'you don't know how badly you're being screwed' or something like that. And the idiots came out of the woodwork to villify the post. They're either too dumb to understand what's happening or are complicit in the shattering of what was once a just and legal system. Who cares about those things when you have a better idea? That's their motto.
Laws are things that are only to be enforced when they can do the statists some good. If they harm the statists and their various cronies and allies, then those laws might as well not exist. And the judicial system seems only too happy to assist them in the plundering.
OK, post of the year so far. Great points fhl.
awesome post revealing and providing a deeper understanding.
What piezoe is gung ho for, saving the equity holders of banks, is what is almost certainly going to lead to the same thing that happened in Cyprus and then Europe and is now only discreetly being mentioned in alternative press today. Bank bail-ins.
What it means is this. Instead of bank debt and equity holders being bailed out by the gov't and central banks, these security holders will be bailed out by the depositors of the banks. The gov't realizes what a public relations (and economic) catastrophe awaits if taxpayer and/or fiat money is continually used to bail out owners of banks. So, in order to accomplish the same thing, they're just going to let depositors in the banks take the hit. Of course we're talking about uninsured depositors here, but it still can only be considered a royal raping of the public. Why is it so bad? Because it's turning banking economics upside down. Deposits have always been treated as something people give to banks for safekeeping. Not a loan. And rightfully so. First, equity holder of banks would be wiped out, then debt holders, then uninsured deposit holders.
But now, somewhat under the radar, they want to turn this all upside down and save the debt and equity holders, also give the derivative positions of the banks seniority, and make the uninsured depositors take the hit. This is a cram down of losses on the innocent. All to save the real risk takers. Which are the equity holders, debt holders, investors in inter-bank derivative trades, etc.
This is the statists using their fiduciary position to enrich those people who they favor. What we call cronies. In any kind of just system, this would be some kind of high crime. But not here, and not now. It's just business as usual for the elites.
It's a continuation of the giant rip off that occurred in the GM bankruptcy, where the bondholders were used as the fall guys in order for obama's car czar, steve ratner, to hand out goodies to the unions and keep them whole. This was a royal raping of the bondholders and just yet another example of the elites plundering the innocent for their own nefarious gains.
http://www.dailywealth.com/2125/gm-americas-biggest-bankruptcy
I created a post in the economics section about this, i think i called it something like 'you don't know how badly you're being screwed' or something like that. And the idiots came out of the woodwork to villify the post. They're either too dumb to understand what's happening or are complicit in the shattering of what was once a just and legal system. Who cares about those things when you have a better idea? That's their motto.
Laws are things that are only to be enforced when they can do the statists some good. If they harm the statists and their various cronies and allies, then those laws might as well not exist. And the judicial system seems only too happy to assist them in the plundering.
I just reread this... you wrote... "The amounts were revealed, but not the names of specific recipients."
My memory of the real time reporting knows that these amounts must not have been revealed. That would have been completely contrary to the point of messaging coming out from the politicians and Paulson and just about all the establishment traitors at the time.
its is contrary to the plain meaning of just about all the articles on read on this subject.
Could you document where the amounts were revealed real time or even in a timely manner or even before the FOIA loss in court.
My memory of the real time reporting knows that these amounts must not have been revealed. That would have been completely contrary to the point of messaging coming out from the politicians and Paulson and just about all the establishment traitors at the time.
its is contrary to the plain meaning of just about all the articles on read on this subject.
Could you document where the amounts were revealed real time or even in a timely manner or even before the FOIA loss in court.
Bernanke was right, in my opinion, to want to delay identifying specific banks that were getting emergency loans from the Fed. (It wasn't just the monster banks, it was any getting those loans that he wanted to delay identifying.) He was rightfully concerned that this news might result in an even worse run on bank securities. The amounts were revealed, but not the names of specific recipients. However the specifics would have been revealed in due time anyway, as once the banks were stabilized and recovering there would no longer be a need to protect this information. Because Bloomberg had to go through the FOI procedure, this produced the much needed delay. Kudos to Bernanke again for outstanding, level headed management of the crisis!
I hope this settles "the amounts were revealed... ahem... speculation by piezoe.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income
The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income
The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
QE is the very definition of printing money. Where did the Fed get the money it used to buy bonds? Out of thin air, that's where.
I think I said, the amounts were revealed by the Fed but not the individual recipients, didn't I? The article you refer to does not contradict my statement , does it? So, would you make your point again please, perhaps using other words. I do not understand what you are driving at other than to imply something that isn't true.I hope this settles "the amounts were revealed... ahem... speculation by piezoe.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d-to-congress-gave-banks-13-billion-in-income
The Fed didn’t tell anyone which banks were in trouble so deep they required a combined $1.2 trillion on Dec. 5, 2008, their single neediest day. Bankers didn’t mention that they took tens of billions of dollars in emergency loans at the same time they were assuring investors their firms were healthy. And no one calculated until now that banks reaped an estimated $13 billion of income by taking advantage of the Fed’s below-market rates, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its January issue.
Jem, this will allow you to search open market operation back to 2000. https://apps.newyorkfed.org/markets/autorates/tomo-search-page
Here you can see all the OMD since Dodd-Frank in 2010, with a 2 -Yr delay in these reports.
See also these quarterly reports http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/
As I mentioned, now days there is a lot of Fed reporting that is almost in real time: see for example: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/current/h41.htm
There are also links that will give you specific assets bought and sold. Each asset is specifically identified. For example go here http://nyapps.newyorkfed.org/markets/soma/sysopen_accholdings.html
to see the open markets account and click on the various tabs to see the identity of the specific holdings. (note that they don't tell you what color paper the various holdings are printed on. Some could be on pink paper, which would be a communist holding!)
If you want historical data you must first download this program which will dredge it up for you : http://www.federalreserve.gov/datadownload/Choose.aspx?rel=H41
There is way more than enough stuff on, the Fed websites to spoil the day of any hardened Fed conspiracist! For example, THIS: http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm
is guaranteed to ruin their day!
And I haven't even touched on all the conspiracy wrecking stuff available on the Treasury website. See the TARP account for example. Oh, I'm sorry. TARP is making a profit for the taxpayer. Who knew?
Here you can see all the OMD since Dodd-Frank in 2010, with a 2 -Yr delay in these reports.
See also these quarterly reports http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/z1/current/
As I mentioned, now days there is a lot of Fed reporting that is almost in real time: see for example: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/current/h41.htm
There are also links that will give you specific assets bought and sold. Each asset is specifically identified. For example go here http://nyapps.newyorkfed.org/markets/soma/sysopen_accholdings.html
to see the open markets account and click on the various tabs to see the identity of the specific holdings. (note that they don't tell you what color paper the various holdings are printed on. Some could be on pink paper, which would be a communist holding!)
If you want historical data you must first download this program which will dredge it up for you : http://www.federalreserve.gov/datadownload/Choose.aspx?rel=H41
There is way more than enough stuff on, the Fed websites to spoil the day of any hardened Fed conspiracist! For example, THIS: http://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_12784.htm
is guaranteed to ruin their day!
And I haven't even touched on all the conspiracy wrecking stuff available on the Treasury website. See the TARP account for example. Oh, I'm sorry. TARP is making a profit for the taxpayer. Who knew?
Last edited:
thank for the link it is interesting. I note you keep focusing on the accounting mechanisms... and I am trying to get you to focus on the money creation.
Where is the summary of all the money they created in the past year...
column and row
those links seem to reporting the bank has 4. 6 trillion in assets of which over 4. something trillion is the face value of securities of which 1.7 is mortgage backed securities. That was a lot of crap they purchased with the money they created electronically out of thin air. Here is how the FED purchased those securites... by creating 2 trillion dollars out of the electronic either....
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/03/where-did-the-federal-reserve-get-all-that-money.html
“Now, you might ask the question, well, the Fed is going out and buying 2 trillion dollars of securities – how did we pay for that? And the answer is that we paid for those securities by crediting the bank accounts of the people who sold them to us, and those accounts, at the banks, showed up as reserves that the banks would hold with the Fed. So the Fed is a bank for the banks. Banks can hold deposit accounts with the Fed, essentially, and those are called reserve accounts. And so as the purchases of securities occurred, the way we paid for them was basically by increasing the amount of reserves that banks had in their accounts with the Fed." Chairman Bernanke
2. But... again I want to know the column that shows how they created trillions to lend out what tallied up to 16 trillion. Where is that money creation column. You have said they reported the amounts but not the names... when and where do you get this information. It is not consistent with any of the reporting I produced for you. The FED created and gave that money out secretly. Why are you obfuscating this fact.
3. Again, where is the column that says no other money is being created in the Federal Reserve system besides the columns we show here?
Where is the summary of all the money they created in the past year...
column and row
those links seem to reporting the bank has 4. 6 trillion in assets of which over 4. something trillion is the face value of securities of which 1.7 is mortgage backed securities. That was a lot of crap they purchased with the money they created electronically out of thin air. Here is how the FED purchased those securites... by creating 2 trillion dollars out of the electronic either....
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/03/where-did-the-federal-reserve-get-all-that-money.html
“Now, you might ask the question, well, the Fed is going out and buying 2 trillion dollars of securities – how did we pay for that? And the answer is that we paid for those securities by crediting the bank accounts of the people who sold them to us, and those accounts, at the banks, showed up as reserves that the banks would hold with the Fed. So the Fed is a bank for the banks. Banks can hold deposit accounts with the Fed, essentially, and those are called reserve accounts. And so as the purchases of securities occurred, the way we paid for them was basically by increasing the amount of reserves that banks had in their accounts with the Fed." Chairman Bernanke
2. But... again I want to know the column that shows how they created trillions to lend out what tallied up to 16 trillion. Where is that money creation column. You have said they reported the amounts but not the names... when and where do you get this information. It is not consistent with any of the reporting I produced for you. The FED created and gave that money out secretly. Why are you obfuscating this fact.
3. Again, where is the column that says no other money is being created in the Federal Reserve system besides the columns we show here?
I think I said, the amounts were revealed by the Fed but not the individual recipients, didn't I? The article you refer to does not contradict my statement , does it? So, would you make your point again please, perhaps using other words. I do not understand what you are driving at other than to imply something that isn't true.
Last edited: