The Fed

[Google]

FED needs to GO.

i have been on board with Ron paul on AUDIT. Long past DUE.

When the audit happens, you be sure and get back to us when you find all that money the Fed printed and gave to the banks for everyone to buy houses and run up their credit cards, okay?

The Federal Reserve was audited. The Dodd-Frank Act had a little known provision that allowed the Government Accountability Office to conduct a one time audit.

I suggest you read it, because what you are doing now is what you accused the OP of doing--making misleading statements and oversimplifying the issue.

Why did the Federal Reserve lend trillions to foreign central banks in 2009? What was that money used for? Normally, this type of transaction would be illegal, but the Fed has invoked emergency powers since 2008 which they are still operating under.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf

 

[Darkwind]

It's weird how people can hear the news, but never quite connect the dots if they conflict with their particular weird bias.

The film says the banker calls the Fed who calls the Treasury to print money to give to people to buy houses. And we get geniuses who watch this and say, "Outstanding".

Some people totally fall for this shit. Even though what really happened has been in all the papers!

Large Investors Sue Bank of America

Bank of America Corp. was sued by 15 former Countrywide Financial Corp. institutional investors who said they lost money after being misled about the mortgage lender’s financial condition and lending practices.

Last month, the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank entered an $8.5 billion agreement to end most litigation by investors who bought securities backed by risky Countrywide home loans.

CDOs. CDS. Secondary market. Bonds, for chrissakes.

Look these things up. Learn something about them.

Fractional reserve banking is Old Testament shit. We are in a whole new paradigm now, and it is destroying the entire world economy.

Iceland had a bubble. Ireland had a bubble which on a relativity scale dwarfed ours. So did Spain. England had a bubble.

And the beat goes on. We had subprime countries borrowing money from the world's banks. Greece, Spain, Italy.

Do you fools think these countries were all calling the US Fed to get money to lend to all those international borrowers? Are you really that stupid? Is your tunnel vision really that narrow?

Blow it out yer ass son.

I have put him on ignore, along with a few others that live for the sole sake of arguing. Not for the purpose of exchanging information or to express opinion, but the the purpose of addiction and enjoyment of belittling people. He is no better, and in many instances, far worse than the worst of the liberals here. Any disagreement is met with hostility, verbal attacks that are not only unwarranted, but often wrong while his positions are absurd.

I intend to put any activity I have on this forum to either productive discussion of issues and an exchange of information, and to ignoring the little dicks with the big mouths.

 

[Google]

CDOs. CDS. Secondary market. Bonds, for chrissakes.

Look these things up. Learn something about them.

Fractional reserve banking is Old Testament shit. We are in a whole new paradigm now, and it is destroying the entire world economy.

Iceland had a bubble. Ireland had a bubble which on a relativity scale dwarfed ours. So did Spain. England had a bubble.

And the beat goes on. We had subprime countries borrowing money from the world's banks. Greece, Spain, Italy.

Do you fools think these countries were all calling the US Fed to get money to lend to all those international borrowers? Are you really that stupid? Is your tunnel vision really that narrow?

YES, and you are demonstrating a staggering ignorance. GAO audited the Federal Reserve and we know for a God damned fact that YES the Fed did lend money to all those international borrowers.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf

In fact, between 2008-2010 we know for a fact that the Federal Reserve lent out $16,000,000,000,000--MORE than the entire GDP of America, a large percentage went to those international borrowers that you FALSELY say they didn't.

YOU ARE WRONG

 

[g5000]

What was driving the train wreck that was the 2008 mortgage collapse was government interference. In the mid-90's the Clinton administration radically interpreted the Community Reinvestment Act, dramatically changing lending standards that banks use to determine who they will lend to.

Holy shit. I cannot believe the CRA meme is still alive.

Astounding.

Please explain how the negroes of Iceland caused their property bubble. Please explain how the negroes caused the bubbles in Spain and Italy and England.

There was $70 trillion of investor money out there which the banks wanted. But there was not $70 trillion worth of good risk to loan money to. So the banks threw the underwriting laws of the universe out the window and made riskier and riskier loans in order to capture the fees on all that investor money. And this required a global team effort.

They did not need the CRA to motivate them. Lehman Brothers was not subject to the CRA, dumbass. Nor was Bear Stearns. Nor was Merrill Lynch. Nor was the Royal Bank of Scotland. Nor was Spain's Bankia. And on and on and on.

Lehman Brothers bought its own chain of brokerages so its supply chain feeding the derivatives products it was selling to investors would not be broken. And those brokers lowered their lending standards in order to keep the monster fed. And as I said, Lehman was not subject to the CRA.

The CRA meme was invented six minutes after Lehman collapsed by idiots who had no clue of what was going on who felt that negoes just HAD to be behind all this.

Dick Fuld was even asked by one of the CRA bongwater drinkers when he went to Congress. His answer, "De minimus."

I defy you to find anyone in any of the failed banks around the world who blames the CRA.

 

[g5000]

CDOs. CDS. Secondary market. Bonds, for chrissakes.

Look these things up. Learn something about them.

Fractional reserve banking is Old Testament shit. We are in a whole new paradigm now, and it is destroying the entire world economy.

Iceland had a bubble. Ireland had a bubble which on a relativity scale dwarfed ours. So did Spain. England had a bubble.

And the beat goes on. We had subprime countries borrowing money from the world's banks. Greece, Spain, Italy.

Do you fools think these countries were all calling the US Fed to get money to lend to all those international borrowers? Are you really that stupid? Is your tunnel vision really that narrow?

YES, and you are demonstrating a staggering ignorance. GAO audited the Federal Reserve and we know for a God damned fact that YES the Fed did lend money to all those international borrowers.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf

In fact, between 2008-2010 we know for a fact that the Federal Reserve lent out $16,000,000,000,000--MORE than the entire GDP of America, a large percentage went to those international borrowers that you FALSELY say they didn't.

YOU ARE WRONG

Thank you for exploding your ignorance all over the page. Awesome.

Look at the dates of those loans, dipshit.

Those were loans to prop up the FAILED banks.

AFTER the bubble popped.

 

[g5000]

In other words, those loans SAVED the world. Having a central bank saved our bacon after the derivatives bubble blew up.

 

[Google]

CDOs. CDS. Secondary market. Bonds, for chrissakes.

Look these things up. Learn something about them.

Fractional reserve banking is Old Testament shit. We are in a whole new paradigm now, and it is destroying the entire world economy.

Iceland had a bubble. Ireland had a bubble which on a relativity scale dwarfed ours. So did Spain. England had a bubble.

And the beat goes on. We had subprime countries borrowing money from the world's banks. Greece, Spain, Italy.

Do you fools think these countries were all calling the US Fed to get money to lend to all those international borrowers? Are you really that stupid? Is your tunnel vision really that narrow?

YES, and you are demonstrating a staggering ignorance. GAO audited the Federal Reserve and we know for a God damned fact that YES the Fed did lend money to all those international borrowers.

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d11696.pdf

In fact, between 2008-2010 we know for a fact that the Federal Reserve lent out $16,000,000,000,000--MORE than the entire GDP of America, a large percentage went to those international borrowers that you FALSELY say they didn't.

YOU ARE WRONG

Thank you for exploding your ignorance all over the page. Awesome.

Look at the dates of those loans, dipshit.

Those were loans to prop up the FAILED banks.

AFTER the bubble popped.

Negroes? What the fuck are you talking about? You can't help but insert some bullshit insinuation that what I'm saying is racist. Pathetic, and a sure sign that you don't have anything substantive to contribute.

So you think the banks got together and said "hey, you know those lending standards that we use to determine who we give mortgages to? Let's throw it out and lend to people with no verifiable income, so eventually we will all go bankrupt."

The lending standards were changed and that is the driving factor behind the entire subprime mortgage fiasco. The fact that investment banks felt comfortable packing GOVERNMENT backed mortgages is they felt is was safe.

The logic behind your assessment is so stupid, yes investment banks got together and said he can we go bankrupt.

 

[g5000]

I have put him on ignore, along with a few others that live for the sole sake of arguing. Not for the purpose of exchanging information or to express opinion, but the the purpose of addiction and enjoyment of belittling people. He is no better, and in many instances, far worse than the worst of the liberals here. Any disagreement is met with hostility, verbal attacks that are not only unwarranted, but often wrong while his positions are absurd.

I intend to put any activity I have on this forum to either productive discussion of issues and an exchange of information, and to ignoring the little dicks with the big mouths.

Sorry to make your butt hurt. Run away now.

 

[Google]

Thank you for exploding your ignorance all over the page. Awesome.

Look at the dates of those loans, dipshit.

Those were loans to prop up the FAILED banks.

AFTER the bubble popped.

Dipshit, why don't you actually try READING it, because you just demonstrated that you haven't.

What percentage of that $16,000,000,000,000 went to prop up failed banks?

 

[dilloduck]

In other words, those loans SAVED the world. Having a central bank saved our bacon after the derivatives bubble blew up.

Our fed saved the world? Why would they do that ?

 

[g5000]

So you think the banks got together and said "hey, you know those lending standards that we use to determine who we give mortgages to? Let's throw it out and lend to people with no verifiable income, so eventually we will all go bankrupt."

Not quite. They weren't smart enough to see the destruction they were causing until it was too late. They made flawed assumptions about the products they were building.

The real fraud did not start until 2006, after AIG informed them the products they had been building had reached a 90 percent toxicity level. From that point on, some on Wall Street were well aware of what was happening, and so they created synthetic CDOs to sell to investors to buy the risk of failure from them. Products like ABACUS-2007 ac 1.

You really don't have a clue, do you.

The lending standards were changed

Indeed they were! But they were not forced into it. I plainly said they threw the underwriting laws of the universe out the window, but I guess that sailed over your ability to comprehend.

$70 trillion dollars. Structured finance products. Risk transferrence.

What burned the banks was that they began drinking their own bongwater. They worshipped at the alter of "risk management", thinking they had it licked. And they still do, even as the financial world continues to collapse around them.

AIG FP didn't put any collateral up against the CDS they were selling, because they believed the loans being made that were going into the CDOs they were insuring would follow the historical actuarials. And the first ones made actually did. But AIG did not monitor the ones which followed very closely, until they had reached the point of 90 percent subprime.

I know why the CRA meme persists. It is because people equate the word "subprime" with "low income", and way, way in the back, "low income" means "blacks".

But like I said about not connecting dots that disagree with their biases, people who think "subprime" means "low income" have never noticed all those people who bought all those new houses that were built were not primarily low income. They were primarily middle class.

When all those houses started foreclosing, they did not look at their foreclosed neighbor and say, "He looks like me. I had NO IDEA he was a negro." But that is what Fox News was telling him was behind all this.

A "subprime" loan was targeted at middle class people. Because middle class people can borrow more money than low income people. If you have to shovel $70 trillion into borrowers' hands, you will never get there making loans to low income people. You have to get middle income people to borrow as much as they can. And if a guy making $40,000 cannot logically afford to borrow $400,000, you put him into a subprime loan that he can afford for the first three years, then you sell that piece of shit loan to an institutional investor and laugh your fucking ass off as you then bet against that same loan.

Look it up. Abacus. Goldman Sachs. Fabrice Tourre. John Paulson.

The Fed helped in a marginal way by lowering interest rates to make it easier to shovel that investor money into middle class borrowers' hands.

 

[g5000]

Thank you for exploding your ignorance all over the page. Awesome.

Look at the dates of those loans, dipshit.

Those were loans to prop up the FAILED banks.

AFTER the bubble popped.

Dipshit, why don't you actually try READING it, because you just demonstrated that you haven't.

What percentage of that $16,000,000,000,000 went to prop up failed banks?

The point is that it does nothing to prove the Fed printed money for borrowers to use to buy houses. It does nothing to support the cartoon.

The Fed loaned the money in your link after the bubble popped. They did that because the velocity of money had dropped to virtually zero. That money provided short term liquidity to those banks. Short term. Quick turnaround.

And so the Fed saved the world's bacon. Without central banks, the world would have plunged into a depression.

 

[dilloduck]

So you think the banks got together and said "hey, you know those lending standards that we use to determine who we give mortgages to? Let's throw it out and lend to people with no verifiable income, so eventually we will all go bankrupt."

Not quite. They weren't smart enough to see the destruction they were causing until it was too late. They made flawed assumptions about the products they were building.

The real fraud did not start until 2006, after AIG informed them the products they had been building had reached a 90 percent toxicity level. From that point on, some on Wall Street were well aware of what was happening, and so they created synthetic CDOs to sell to investors to buy the risk of failure from them. Products like ABACUS-2007 ac 1.

You really don't have a clue, do you.

The lending standards were changed

Indeed they were! But they were not forced into it. I plainly said they threw the underwriting laws of the universe out the window, but I guess that sailed over your ability to comprehend.

$70 trillion dollars. Structured finance products. Risk transferrence.

What burned the banks was that they began drinking their own bongwater. They worshipped at the alter of "risk management", thinking they had it licked. And they still do, even as the financial world continues to collapse around them.

AIG FP didn't put any collateral up against the CDS they were selling, because they believed the loans being made that were going into the CDOs would follow the historical actuarials. And the first ones made actually did. But AIG did not monitor the ones which followed very closely, until they had reached the point of 90 percent subprime.

I know why the CRA meme persists. It is because people equate the word "subprime" with "low income", and way, way in the back, "low income" means "blacks".

But like I said about not connecting dots that disagree with their biases, people who think "subprime" means "low income" have never noticed all those people who bought all those new houses that were built were not primarily low income. They were primarily middle class.

When all those houses started foreclosing, they did not look at their foreclosed neighbor and say, "He looks like me. I had NO IDEA he was a negro." But that is what Fox News was telling him was behind all this.

A "subprime" loan was targeted at middle class people. Because middle class people can borrow more money than low income people. If you have to shovel $70 trillion into borrowers' hands, you will never get there making loans to low income people. You have to get middle income people to borrow as much as they can. And if a guy making $40,000 cannot logically afford to borrow $400,000, you put him into a subprime loan that he can afford for the first three years, then you sell that piece of shit loan to an institutional investor and laugh your fucking ass off as you then bet against that same loan.

Look it up. Abacus. Goldman Sachs. Fabrice Tourre. John Paulson.

The Fed helped in a marginal way by lowering interest rates to make it easier to shovel that investor money into middle class borrowers' hands.

So the Fed helped caused the mess and then saved the whole world from it ? How much does the world owe them now ?

 

[Darkwind]

So you think the banks got together and said "hey, you know those lending standards that we use to determine who we give mortgages to? Let's throw it out and lend to people with no verifiable income, so eventually we will all go bankrupt."

Not quite. They weren't smart enough to see the destruction they were causing until it was too late. They made flawed assumptions about the products they were building.

The real fraud did not start until 2006, after AIG informed them the products they had been building had reached a 90 percent toxicity level. From that point on, some on Wall Street were well aware of what was happening, and so they created synthetic CDOs to sell to investors to buy the risk of failure from them. Products like ABACUS-2007 ac 1.

You really don't have a clue, do you.

The lending standards were changed

Indeed they were! But they were not forced into it. I plainly said they threw the underwriting laws of the universe out the window, but I guess that sailed over your ability to comprehend.

$70 trillion dollars. Structured finance products. Risk transferrence.

What burned the banks was that they began drinking their own bongwater. They worshipped at the alter of "risk management", thinking they had it licked. And they still do, even as the financial world continues to collapse around them.

AIG FP didn't put any collateral up against the CDS they were selling, because they believed the loans being made that were going into the CDOs would follow the historical actuarials. And the first ones made actually did. But AIG did not monitor the ones which followed very closely, until they had reached the point of 90 percent subprime.

I know why the CRA meme persists. It is because people equate the word "subprime" with "low income", and way, way in the back, "low income" means "blacks".

But like I said about not connecting dots that disagree with their biases, people who think "subprime" means "low income" have never noticed all those people who bought all those new houses that were built were not primarily low income. They were primarily middle class.

When all those houses started foreclosing, they did not look at their foreclosed neighbor and say, "He looks like me. I had NO IDEA he was a negro." But that is what Fox News was telling him was behind all this.

A "subprime" loan was targeted at middle class people. Because middle class people can borrow more money than low income people. If you have to shovel $70 trillion into borrowers' hands, you will never get there making loans to low income people. You have to get middle income people to borrow as much as they can. And if a guy making $40,000 cannot logically afford to borrow $400,000, you put him into a subprime loan that he can afford for the first three years, then you sell that piece of shit loan to an institutional investor and laugh your fucking ass off as you then bet against that same loan.

Look it up. Abacus. Goldman Sachs. Fabrice Tourre. John Paulson.

The Fed helped in a marginal way by lowering interest rates to make it easier to shovel that investor money into middle class borrowers' hands.

So the Fed helped caused the mess and then saved the whole world from it ? How much does the world owe them now ?

One of the chief ways to gain and hold onto power is to manufacture a crisis. This way, you will always understand the leverage needed to solve the crisis. This puts those who were involved in the crisis within your power and control.

The Fed is a master of this. Create the bubble, prevent any attempts to solve the bubble, allow the bubble to 'pop' and then apply the remedy liberally (no pun intended).

The Fed has created far more problems than they will ever help solve.

Unless you are one of those people who think that throwing money at a problem is the only way to solve it.

 

[dilloduck]

Not quite. They weren't smart enough to see the destruction they were causing until it was too late. They made flawed assumptions about the products they were building.

The real fraud did not start until 2006, after AIG informed them the products they had been building had reached a 90 percent toxicity level. From that point on, some on Wall Street were well aware of what was happening, and so they created synthetic CDOs to sell to investors to buy the risk of failure from them. Products like ABACUS-2007 ac 1.

You really don't have a clue, do you.







Indeed they were! But they were not forced into it. I plainly said they threw the underwriting laws of the universe out the window, but I guess that sailed over your ability to comprehend.

$70 trillion dollars. Structured finance products. Risk transferrence.

What burned the banks was that they began drinking their own bongwater. They worshipped at the alter of "risk management", thinking they had it licked. And they still do, even as the financial world continues to collapse around them.

AIG FP didn't put any collateral up against the CDS they were selling, because they believed the loans being made that were going into the CDOs would follow the historical actuarials. And the first ones made actually did. But AIG did not monitor the ones which followed very closely, until they had reached the point of 90 percent subprime.

I know why the CRA meme persists. It is because people equate the word "subprime" with "low income", and way, way in the back, "low income" means "blacks".

But like I said about not connecting dots that disagree with their biases, people who think "subprime" means "low income" have never noticed all those people who bought all those new houses that were built were not primarily low income. They were primarily middle class.

When all those houses started foreclosing, they did not look at their foreclosed neighbor and say, "He looks like me. I had NO IDEA he was a negro." But that is what Fox News was telling him was behind all this.

A "subprime" loan was targeted at middle class people. Because middle class people can borrow more money than low income people. If you have to shovel $70 trillion into borrowers' hands, you will never get there making loans to low income people. You have to get middle income people to borrow as much as they can. And if a guy making $40,000 cannot logically afford to borrow $400,000, you put him into a subprime loan that he can afford for the first three years, then you sell that piece of shit loan to an institutional investor and laugh your fucking ass off as you then bet against that same loan.

Look it up. Abacus. Goldman Sachs. Fabrice Tourre. John Paulson.

The Fed helped in a marginal way by lowering interest rates to make it easier to shovel that investor money into middle class borrowers' hands.

So the Fed helped caused the mess and then saved the whole world from it ? How much does the world owe them now ?

One of the chief ways to gain and hold onto power is to manufacture a crisis. This way, you will always understand the leverage needed to solve the crisis. This puts those who were involved in the crisis within your power and control.

The Fed is a master of this. Create the bubble, prevent any attempts to solve the bubble, allow the bubble to 'pop' and then apply the remedy liberally (no pun intended).

The Fed has created far more problems than they will ever help solve.

Unless you are one of those people who think that throwing money at a problem is the only way to solve it.

They're obviously pretty damn powerful. They have the world's economy in their hands. ( which is pretty much the same as our lives). Probably too late to do anything about it now.

 

[Toro]

I've spent nearly 20 years investing and trading in the capital markets, and I learned a long time ago that if you can't articulate a thesis, i.e. you rely on others, you don't understand it and you are probably intellectually limited. This is especially true of highly ideological people. Those people generally don't survive in my business.

Not everyone is as smart and articulate as you Toro.

We depend on commentators, poets, musicians and others to say in a clear concise manner that the majority of us understand but can't seem to "verbalize". Does that make us stupid?

In the time you made both of your posts, you could have watched the video (its only 30 minutes) and offered your opinion.

Why don't you just do that?

Because I waste enough time here as it is. I'm here to let off steam. I have stacks and stacks and stacks of reading material of interest that I'm going to burn 30 minutes on rather than on almost anything posted here.

The onus is on the OP to articulate the argument. Anyone can post "read this book," "watch this video." If one can't articulate it, it is most likely that one doesn't understand it.

 

[Toro]

And it tosses in a JFK conspiracy theory as a cherry on top!

It's stuff like this why I usually don't watch anything that is more than a few minutes long. Every time I have spent the time, it turns out to be garbage. Maybe this is not, I don't know, but I've been down that road enough times before.

 

[Darkwind]

So the Fed helped caused the mess and then saved the whole world from it ? How much does the world owe them now ?

One of the chief ways to gain and hold onto power is to manufacture a crisis. This way, you will always understand the leverage needed to solve the crisis. This puts those who were involved in the crisis within your power and control.

The Fed is a master of this. Create the bubble, prevent any attempts to solve the bubble, allow the bubble to 'pop' and then apply the remedy liberally (no pun intended).

The Fed has created far more problems than they will ever help solve.

Unless you are one of those people who think that throwing money at a problem is the only way to solve it.

They're obviously pretty damn powerful. They have the world's economy in their hands. ( which is pretty much the same as our lives). Probably too late to do anything about it now.

Yep, that kind of power is the killing kind. Does anyone seriously think they would be willing to relinquish that power without a fight? They even have their dupes defending them here on USMB....Every nook and cranny.

 

[dilloduck]

And it tosses in a JFK conspiracy theory as a cherry on top!

It's stuff like this why I usually don't watch anything that is more than a few minutes long. Every time I have spent the time, it turns out to be garbage. Maybe this is not, I don't know, but I've been down that road enough times before.

So you know the score---the Readers Digest version is still " Why do we keep the Fed? ".
I realize they saved the world's economy and everything but it seems to me that they were responsible for keeping in good shape in the first place. Pretty much a wash and we still pay for their services.

 

[dilloduck]

One of the chief ways to gain and hold onto power is to manufacture a crisis. This way, you will always understand the leverage needed to solve the crisis. This puts those who were involved in the crisis within your power and control.

The Fed is a master of this. Create the bubble, prevent any attempts to solve the bubble, allow the bubble to 'pop' and then apply the remedy liberally (no pun intended).

The Fed has created far more problems than they will ever help solve.

Unless you are one of those people who think that throwing money at a problem is the only way to solve it.

They're obviously pretty damn powerful. They have the world's economy in their hands. ( which is pretty much the same as our lives). Probably too late to do anything about it now.

Yep, that kind of power is the killing kind. Does anyone seriously think they would be willing to relinquish that power without a fight? They even have their dupes defending them here on USMB....Every nook and cranny.

They've done a great job of dividing America into think one party or the other is gonna fix everything.