ScreamingEagle
Gold Member
- Jul 5, 2004
- 13,399
- 1,707
- 245
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The fed is just providing unlimited dollar swaps to foreign banks because they can't get dollars on the open market. The alternative to not providing them with access to dollars is that they become insolvent and unable to function, like what happened to Lehman Brothers. On the whole we'd rather avoid another Lehman-style meltdown so this time we're trying to prevent it from happening again.
...
Preventing losers, or at least trying to. The world has lost at least one and a half times global GDP due to the 2008 meltdown, probably eventually a lot more than that. There are still going to be massive economic problems ahead, this dollar deluge only fixes certain banks' liquidity problem, not their actual solvency problem, nor does it fix sovereign governments' solvency or banks' solvency, but at the very least it kicks the can down the road for a while and theoretically gives global policymakers a chance to fix things.
The fed is just providing unlimited dollar swaps to foreign banks because they can't get dollars on the open market. The alternative to not providing them with access to dollars is that they become insolvent and unable to function, like what happened to Lehman Brothers. On the whole we'd rather avoid another Lehman-style meltdown so this time we're trying to prevent it from happening again.
...
Preventing losers, or at least trying to. The world has lost at least one and a half times global GDP due to the 2008 meltdown, probably eventually a lot more than that. There are still going to be massive economic problems ahead, this dollar deluge only fixes certain banks' liquidity problem, not their actual solvency problem, nor does it fix sovereign governments' solvency or banks' solvency, but at the very least it kicks the can down the road for a while and theoretically gives global policymakers a chance to fix things.
So instead of their banks reorganizing and taking their lumps.... we here in the U.S. get to pay for THEIR problems? Is this some socialist society rule...?
And how can we pay for this? We are broke. The only way is to print more dollars....which means the American people get robbed through devaluation of the dollar.....increasing inflation...
so now Obama is a "global policymaker" to the point where he sends Geithner out to take responsibility for foreign banking problems....?
The fed is just providing unlimited dollar swaps to foreign banks because they can't get dollars on the open market. The alternative to not providing them with access to dollars is that they become insolvent and unable to function, like what happened to Lehman Brothers. On the whole we'd rather avoid another Lehman-style meltdown so this time we're trying to prevent it from happening again.
...
Preventing losers, or at least trying to. The world has lost at least one and a half times global GDP due to the 2008 meltdown, probably eventually a lot more than that. There are still going to be massive economic problems ahead, this dollar deluge only fixes certain banks' liquidity problem, not their actual solvency problem, nor does it fix sovereign governments' solvency or banks' solvency, but at the very least it kicks the can down the road for a while and theoretically gives global policymakers a chance to fix things.
So instead of their banks reorganizing and taking their lumps.... we here in the U.S. get to pay for THEIR problems? Is this some socialist society rule...?
And how can we pay for this? We are broke. The only way is to print more dollars....which means the American people get robbed through devaluation of the dollar.....increasing inflation...
so now Obama is a "global policymaker" to the point where he sends Geithner out to take responsibility for foreign banking problems....?
The fed is just providing unlimited dollar swaps to foreign banks because they can't get dollars on the open market. The alternative to not providing them with access to dollars is that they become insolvent and unable to function, like what happened to Lehman Brothers. On the whole we'd rather avoid another Lehman-style meltdown so this time we're trying to prevent it from happening again.
...
Preventing losers, or at least trying to. The world has lost at least one and a half times global GDP due to the 2008 meltdown, probably eventually a lot more than that. There are still going to be massive economic problems ahead, this dollar deluge only fixes certain banks' liquidity problem, not their actual solvency problem, nor does it fix sovereign governments' solvency or banks' solvency, but at the very least it kicks the can down the road for a while and theoretically gives global policymakers a chance to fix things.
So instead of their banks reorganizing and taking their lumps.... we here in the U.S. get to pay for THEIR problems? Is this some socialist society rule...?
And how can we pay for this? We are broke. The only way is to print more dollars....which means the American people get robbed through devaluation of the dollar.....increasing inflation...
so now Obama is a "global policymaker" to the point where he sends Geithner out to take responsibility for foreign banking problems....?
We are shoring up the central banks of the countries so that each country can deal with the internal problems they have. We are not actually bailing out banks, and the risk is minimal because we are not assuming any liabilities.
[
Canals had promised to be a "transport superhighway*"
So instead of their banks reorganizing and taking their lumps.... we here in the U.S. get to pay for THEIR problems? Is this some socialist society rule...?
And how can we pay for this? We are broke. The only way is to print more dollars....which means the American people get robbed through devaluation of the dollar.....increasing inflation...
so now Obama is a "global policymaker" to the point where he sends Geithner out to take responsibility for foreign banking problems....?
We are shoring up the central banks of the countries so that each country can deal with the internal problems they have. We are not actually bailing out banks, and the risk is minimal because we are not assuming any liabilities.
We're not actually shoring up the central banks of other countries. We're acting in conjunction with the nEuropean Central bank, Bank of England, the Japanese and Swiss central bank to flood the financial system with dollars, allowing all the commercial banks who can't currently get access to dollars on the open markets access to dollars.
We are shoring up the central banks of the countries so that each country can deal with the internal problems they have. We are not actually bailing out banks, and the risk is minimal because we are not assuming any liabilities.
We're not actually shoring up the central banks of other countries. We're acting in conjunction with the nEuropean Central bank, Bank of England, the Japanese and Swiss central bank to flood the financial system with dollars, allowing all the commercial banks who can't currently get access to dollars on the open markets access to dollars.
I know it is not direct, and that the risk is minimal in the short run, and that it is actually necessary to keep our economy running. Let's not quibble over the semantics here.
We are shoring up the central banks of the countries so that each country can deal with the internal problems they have. We are not actually bailing out banks, and the risk is minimal because we are not assuming any liabilities.
We're not actually shoring up the central banks of other countries. We're acting in conjunction with the nEuropean Central bank, Bank of England, the Japanese and Swiss central bank to flood the financial system with dollars, allowing all the commercial banks who can't currently get access to dollars on the open markets access to dollars.
I know it is not direct, and that the risk is minimal in the short run, and that it is actually necessary to keep our economy running. Let's not quibble over the semantics here.
We're not actually shoring up the central banks of other countries. We're acting in conjunction with the nEuropean Central bank, Bank of England, the Japanese and Swiss central bank to flood the financial system with dollars, allowing all the commercial banks who can't currently get access to dollars on the open markets access to dollars.
I know it is not direct, and that the risk is minimal in the short run, and that it is actually necessary to keep our economy running. Let's not quibble over the semantics here.
I'm not quibbling over semantics. Quibbling over semantics means arguing over the exact meaning of a particular word. You made a post which is flat wrong and completely misleading. Foreign central banks don't have a problem with access to dollars -- they're making dollar loans to commercial banks along with the Fed. The problem isn't central banks, who can print as much money as they want. The problem, or at least the most current urgent manifestation of the overarching situation, is that foreign commercial banks deemed by the market to have solvency problems can't get access to dollars. That's why the world's major central banks have stepped in to bail them out.