Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Wall Street Pentagon Papers: Biggest Scam In World History Exposed

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:18 PM
Original message
The Wall Street Pentagon Papers: Biggest Scam In World History Exposed
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 05:19 PM by Poboy


The Wall Street Pentagon Papers: Biggest Scam In World History Exposed - Are The Federal Reserves Crimes Too Big To Comprehend?
By David DeGraw, AmpedStatus

What if the greatest scam ever perpetrated was blatantly exposed, and the US media didnt cover it? Does that mean the scam could keep going? Thats what we are about to find out. I understand the importance of the new WikiLeaks documents. However, we must not let them distract us from the new information the Federal Reserve was forced to release. Even if WikiLeaks reveals documents from inside a large American bank, as huge as that could be, it will most likely pale in comparison to what we just found out from the one-time peek we got into the inner-workings of the Federal Reserve. This is the Wall Street equivalent of the Pentagon Papers.

----


Just when I thought the banksters couldnt possibly shock me anymore they did. We were finally granted the honor and privilege of finding out the specifics, a limited one-time Federal Reserve view, of a secret taxpayer funded backdoor bailout by a small group of unelected bankers. This data release reveals emergency lending programs that doled out $12.3 TRILLION in taxpayer money - $3.3 trillion in liquidity, $9 trillion in other financial arrangements.
Wait, what? Did you say $12.3 TRILLION tax dollars were thrown around in secrecy by unelected bankers and Congress didnt know any of the details?

Yes. The Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves. The original copy of the Constitution spontaneously burst into flames. The ghost of Tom Paine went running, stark raving mad screaming through the halls of Congress.
The Federal Reserve was secretly throwing around our money in unprecedented fashion, and it wasnt just to the usual suspects like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, etc.; it was to the entire Global Banking Cartel. To central banks throughout the world: Australia, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, England To the Feds foreign primary dealers like Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Deutsche Bank (Germany), Royal Bank of Scotland (U.K.), Barclays (U.K.), BNP Paribas (France) All their Ponzi players were gifted. All the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations got their cut.

-----

Even the Financial Times, which named Lloyd Blankfein its 2009 person of the year, reacted by reporting this: The initial reactions were shock at the breadth of lending, particularly to foreign firms. But the details paint a bleaker and even more disturbing picture.

-----

Based on many conversations Ive had with people, it seems that the average person doesnt comprehend how much a trillion dollars is, let alone 12.3 trillion. You might as well just say 12.3 gazillion, because people dont grasp a number that large, nor do they understand what would be possible if that money was used in other ways.Can you imagine what we could do to restructure society with $12.3 trillion? Think about thatPeople also cant grasp the colossal crime committed because they keep hearing the word loans. People think of the loans they get. You borrow money, you pay it back with interest, no big deal. Thats not what happened here. The Fed doled out $12.3 trillion in near-zero interest loans, using the American people as collateral, demanding nothing in return, other than a bunch of toxic assets in some cases. They only gave this money to a select group of insiders, at a time when very few had any money because all these same insiders and speculators crashed the system. Do you get that? The very people most responsible for crashing the system, were then rewarded with trillions of our dollars. This gave that select group of insiders unlimited power to seize control of assets and have unprecedented leverage over almost everything within their economies - crony capitalism on steroids. This was a hostile world takeover orchestrated through economic attacks by a very small group of unelected global bankers. They paralyzed the system, then were given the power to recreate it according to their own desires. No free market, no democracy of any kind. All done in secrecy. In the process, they gave themselves all-time record-breaking bonuses and impoverished tens of millions of people - they have put into motion a system that will inevitably collapse again and utterly destroy the very existence of what is left of an economic middle class.

That is not hyperbole. That is what happened.

We are talking about trillions of dollars secretly pumped into global banks, handpicked by a small select group of bankers themselves. All for the benefit of those bankers, and at the expense of everyone else. People cant even comprehend what that means and the severe consequences that it entails, which we have only just begun to experience.



Very detailed, researched article, link-
http://ampedstatus.com/the-wall-street-pentagon-papers-...
Refresh | +370 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tosh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:32 PM
Response to Original message
1. Another great reason to love Bernie Sanders.
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 05:33 PM by tosh
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
44. +1000% ... yes, ONLY Bernie pushed for this information ....!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #44
107. And, sadly enough, Ron Paul. nt
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 06:07 AM by Enthusiast
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tosh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #107
146. Yes. I've been startled at how much sense
Ron Paul has been making to me these past two weeks. I didn't realize that he was an ally in having this "backdoor bailout" info made public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
live love laugh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #44
148. "Can you imagine what we could do to restructure society with $12.3 trillion?" Wow...just wow. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #148
181. How about if we could just find the $2.3 TRILLION Pentagon can't account for ????
Or is it now $3.4 TRILLION -- ??

Ah, records got burned up with the Accountants in Pentagon in "new wing."


:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PhillySane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #1
135. Bernie Sanders for President 2012
where do I sign up?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #135
182. +1000% ....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
valerief Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:15 PM
Response to Reply #1
159. +666 trillion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DCKit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
2. Not enough unreccers on DU to keep THIS one down. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Thanks for the recs. Lots of video clips/testimony at link as well!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tosh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Almost forgot...
THANKS Poboy!!! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
4. 12.3 trillion is about 85% of our GDP
It was a real "go-for-broke" move

The only guess I can make is that the unregulated derivatives products pushed by the big US financial players were such bad investments, and so ubiquitous, that they threatened the entire international monetary system -- and other countries behind the scenes began screaming at the US that they weren't going to play patsy for US bankers
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hydra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
29. The derivatives market was so far out there
That it was in the realm of 250+ trillion, I think?

They were betting on money that COULD NEVER EXIST, even if the whole world tried to put the money together.

Why they actually needed money when they were spinning it out of moonbeams is the $64,000 question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Mark D. Donating Member (420 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #29
68. Actually...
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 12:20 AM by Mark D.
It was over 1 QUADRILLION. It's unimaginable. Over a thousand trillion. Not actual money, but if the 'too big to fails' bet too much in that quadrillion casino, and lost, the risk of their collapse meant the Fed and others 'had to act'. Now I think it's more like ONLY 500 trillions in derivatives. We are being held hostage financially by these bankers. It's estimated the parent family of the modern banking system, the now-largely British Rothschilds hold from 100-500 Trillion themselves. THe US power-broker Rockefellers 'only' have 10-15 trillion. The total worth of everyone worth over a million dollars, worldwide, is about 55 trillion.

These numbers are staggering, and in the hands of a few. It's a big club, and we ain't in it. (George Carlin). Every year a trillion shifts from the bottom 99% of Americans to the top 1%, since 1980. Credit rose when income fell. A couple working full time today has the same disposable income ONE PERSON had working full time around 1960. Health costs for an average family projected to hit 20,000 per year soon, even WITH health care reform in place. Now we learn of this 'bank heist'. There's little left, and it's going fast, into their pockets and not hours. As Faux News, the Kardashians and Jersey Shore keeps us occupied.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #29
108. Those are some real ambitious crooks. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
howmad1 Donating Member (959 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:57 PM
Response to Reply #4
43. It would take 31,700 years to count to a trillion!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
jotsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:49 PM
Response to Original message
6. New bookmark for me thanks!
Would like to offer one in trade, anything you like to find a challenge, don't know that I can help if I don't ask not trying to pry.

Recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
7. Duplicate
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 05:53 PM by Raksha
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. I don't think people are going to be shocked, simply because it's too big to comprehend.
Hell, it's too big for ME to comprehend! I have a feeling I'm going to be outraged once it sinks in, but I have no idea how long that's going to take.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #8
31. 21,000 overnight loans = its not as big as you think
All the money was paid back and the program succeeded in its goal of preventing large-scale bank failures during the credit freeze-up. Its more of a non-story, except that if you sum it all up and leave out the essential details (such as the actual repayment of the money, and that much of it was overnight loans), it sounds pretty hair-raising.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AlabamaLibrul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #31
35. It's still as big as I think.
In overnight loans, the Fed was essentially keeping the entire financial market afloat during the period of the crisis. Still is, of course, but not as much as before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. That they were...and it did work
There might be cause for outrage as to why we put such a priority on the banks and did a good job there, while some other parts of the economy might have been in as great a need and been left hanging out to dry...but at least in theory it was a sound strategy. Obama's big priority was not banks but manufacturing, which had been in decline for decades; the old "we don't make anything here anymore" thing. Manufacturing is capital intensive, however, and requires a healthy banking sector to grow.

Manufacturing has been doing ok lately, the long term decline reversed, but it is all agonizingly slow and tenuous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #39
49. It worked for the FED and for the banks ... not for the public ...
just to save the asses of the corrupt and the criminal --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #49
64. There is that, but there are enough real crimes that invention is unnecessary
This particular story is a piece of crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #64
66. These banks committed real crimes .. just look at your credit card bills ....
26% -- interest on money?

That's better than the Mafia does -- !!

And, if you lend them $1000 -- what's the interest?

This only happens when government is corrupted -- that's why they got

deregulation which permitted this crime wave --

And it was a crime wave --

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #66
72. That's a whole different issue, which half-baked gibberish about TARP does nothing for. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:54 AM
Response to Reply #72
77. Overturning of regulations was criminal intent ... and it applies to the entire
financial sector and the entire financial coup they've just pulled off --

All of the banks were saved and could have only been saved by FED action -

they could NOT have raised sufficient funds to save their banks -- and

certainly not at interest rates of 0% which FED gave them!!

They then turned around and invested this money in Treasury securities at

.035% and .04% interest -- rather than lending it out to citizens.


Again -- no way they could have borrowed money to save their banks --

not at any affordable interest rate -- and not on any affordable terms.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #77
139. I believe you meant 3.5% and 4% interest--not .035% and .04%. Big difference.
But your assertion about them getting no-interest to exceedingly super low-interest loans that they then used to make BILLIONS is accurate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #139
174. What ... ? You took .04% to mean 40% ... ????
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 10:50 PM by defendandprotect


How could you take .035% to mean anything but 3 and a half percent?

Or .04% to mean anything but four percent?

Here's ten percent .10% .... here's one percent .01% --

You're making a disingenuous argument -- but what they made should

be returned to the American public.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #174
177. No, I took .035% to mean 35/100ths of one percent. And .04% to mean 4/10ths of
one percent.

.10% is one tenth of one percent. Just as 1.0% equals one percent and 10.5% is ten and one/half percent.

Our sales tax rate is now 7.75% which means that we multiply the value of the sale by .0775, not by .0775%.

I wasn't trying to be 'disingenuous'. I was trying to be mathematically accurate.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #177
180. Shouldn't have stated it that way --
wasn't concentrating on that part of the post --

thanks!!

But think we both have it right now -- ?

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
1monster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #64
132. So, if I borrow (without permission) my boss's big bucks on to bet on the horses on Saturday
and pay back the money on Monday morning, I haven't committed a crime and won't be prosecuted if the authorities find out?

Somehow, I don't believe in that scenario.

And what if the Fed's gamble hadn't worked out? Who would be left holding the empty bag and expected to fill it? The Fed and their pet bosses? I doubt it very much. It would be us.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:06 PM
Response to Reply #35
46. Pressure was on to naitonalize these corrupt and criminal banks...this bailed them out ....
in more ways than one!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #31
48. Of course it is HUGE coup ... who would have lent these banks money ... and at what rates????
What the FED did was rescue these banks from their own corruption and crime --

No other financial institutions would have rescued these banks --

even if anyone wanted to ... at what interest rate would these banks have had to pay?

Wouldn't have happened!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:35 AM
Response to Reply #48
73. US manufacturing was the real priority
which is capital intensive and had been in decline for decades. Without healthy banks, we'd loose more businesses, more manufacturing and more good jobs, and basically have another lost decade, while the rest of the world marched onward.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #73
78. We've lost 50,000 manfacturing plants over past 10 years ....
and saw no interest in combating that such as overturning the trade agreements

so have no clue what you're saying here.

We could have had healthy banks simply by NATIONALIZING them which is what Obama

was being pressured to do by most involved.

And Rahm bragged about that "rescue" given those pushing for NATIONALIZING.

Obama also ignored economists who told him the STIMULUS was only 25% of what was

needed -- where was the concern there for saving small business, mfg or mfg jobs??


Corruption and crime has marched on -- that's all --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:10 AM
Response to Reply #31
118. BWAHAHAhahahahahaha .... (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
naaman fletcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:38 PM
Response to Reply #31
137. lie
the idea that it was all paid back is a massive lie. Pro-publica has the score. At most a third of it has been paid back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #31
143. $1.93 trillion outstanding as of September 2010
"All the money" was not paid back.
Far from it. TARP was a small piece of the government's bank welfare programs.
$4.72 trillion disbursed, $13.86 trillion max at risk, $1.93 trillion outstanding:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Total_Wall_S...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #143
155. Ok, I'll concede there is more to the picture
The OP is about the banking industry, however, and that is pretty much covered by the TARP program where the accounting is good and the sums have been paid back.

The sourcewatch run-down is a good counter to that, I have to admit. As it notes, bailout loans to the insurance industry are still outstanding, and there are still very large problems with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac which may or may not blow up on us and cost fortunes...the reform bill of 2010 did steer clear of those as well, perhaps no a solvable problem at the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #155
157. no, not all the tarp money has been repaid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SOS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #155
187. The biggest chunk was the purchase of $1.1 trillion in worthless MBS.
The Fed wants the Wall Street banks to buy this garbage back, but the banks
have informed Mr. Bernanke that they will refuse his demand.
The banks have more power than the government, which is the main problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #143
175. Some talk about the totals being more like $23 trillion in all ... but we also have missing
Pentagon funds still -- $2.3 TRILLION Rumsfeld said Pentagon co uldn't

account for -- and I think with other monies lost after that it rose

to $3.4 TRILLION!!


:eyes:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #175
176. Link-
LOS ANGELES, Jan. 29, 2002
The War On Waste
Defense Department Cannot Account For 25% Of Funds $2.3 Trillion

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/01/29/eveningnews/m...


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #176
178. And memories of Rep. Cynthia McKinney chasing after Rumsfeld...!!! Loved it!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 10:17 AM
Response to Reply #178
186. Of couse none of her detractors have/had an answer, so the smear
campaign began. They suceeded in silencing her.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #186
188. Agree --
and they always manage to put it over somehow ... !!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rockholm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #8
152. If it were sex related, people would get it.
Blowjob in Oval Office, girlfriend in Argentina, homophobe with rent boys on the side, dick pics to cheelerleader, whatever.....
Sex sells. Getting screwed by the big boys on Wall Street? If it's not on Entertainment Tonight, nobody understands or gives a rat's ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
reformist2 Donating Member (998 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:54 PM
Response to Original message
9. All the big banks should have gone bankrupt. But they let millions of people go bk!

Banks are "too big too fail", but if you help bail out the people, they won't ever learn the value of a dollar! /sarcasm
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #9
45. Rahm confirms that Obama didn't NATIONALIZE banks despite the pressure to do so!!!
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 11:04 PM by defendandprotect
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #45
88. You say that like it was possible, easy, and a good idea!
First, there is no plan to nationalized the banks. Considering the size of the project and the legal and financial implications, someone in power saying "we should just do it" would likely make a banana-repuplic style mess of one of the world's largest economies. Rather, what they did was a temporary government intervention, which worked well and cost little. If all the options were on the table, the results of the one that was chosen would likely still be the best, with the least harm.

Of course we have problems, and the abuse of the system over the past decade or so has been the cause of much of it, but the whole thing was wound down at little cost and a banking reform bill was passed earlier this year. Hopefully it is all heading in a better direction.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:55 AM
Response to Reply #88
93. It was possible -- and it was recommended to Obama --
the economists also told Obama that the STIMULUS was only 25% of what was

needed --


You think we have "abuse" over the past decade or so --


:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
denem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
10. A Bald Lie : "The Fed doled out $12.3 trillion in near-zero interest loans"
On any reading, even yours, $9.3 trillion was a contingency guarantee, not a loan. It's like saying the life insurance company doled out $1.5 million because you took out a policy. BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Ikonoklast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #10
33. Give it up, People here don't understand how those loans were counted.
If I loan you a million dollars every day for a year, and you paid it back every day for a year, how much money was loaned?

$365 million dollars, right?

According to those here that believe this stupid artiicle, that's correct.


But, in actuality, it's only ONE MILLION that was ever loaned, over and over.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #33
50. Tell us who else would have lent this money and at what rates to corrupt banks?
And what terms?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
On the Road Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #33
71. Oh, Is That It?
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 12:34 AM by On the Road
The Fed expanded the Discount Window during the crisis and the $12.3T is the cumulative amount of the transactions during some period? That is really not an honest way to describe it.

There was an ever stupider article posted here which contained a sentence like "Think about what you could do with $12.3 trillion dollars." As if that amount actually existed and could be used instead for something else.

I swear, half the people here would be overjoyed for all whole system to collapse just so they would something else to be outraged about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:08 PM
Response to Reply #10
47. If not for US Treasury, what would it have cost these banks to borrow this money....
or to have it guaranteed elsewhere?

Wouldn't have happened -- these were corrupt and criminal banks --

pushed for overturning of regulations which crime easy for them --

and then... they didn't face the consequences -- they only faced

more bonuses!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #47
128. The Fed is not the Treasury
The Fed made these loans, and they were mostly paid back within 24 hours.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 06:13 PM
Response to Original message
11. Rec'd I think this is why they are going after Wikileaks.
To try to stop the release of documents that may expose further the total corruption that brought down this and Europe's economies.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #11
52. Exactly what Thom Hartmann is also saying ... agree with you ....
Public figures out this scam what they are going to conclude is that it could

have only happened by collusion of corrupt government --

which they thought they'd gotten rid of when they elected Obama!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
myrna minx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:05 AM
Response to Reply #11
67. I agree. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DemReadingDU Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:21 AM
Response to Reply #11
112. agree, n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jeffersons Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
12. K&R WikiLeaks was a cover for this. It keeps media focused on the wrong things
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. You think they were working with them? Or just that they are being used as a decoy.
Do you think this is what WIKI has?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
freshwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #12
40. That's what I read
From another website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
14. Typical Anti-Fed Nonsense
The 9 trillion number is pure fantasy. It is based on adding up the total of repaid overnight loans.

The 3.3 Trillion was used to buy assets.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Alerted? Me? n/t
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 07:44 PM by Taitertots
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. No, I mean the page linked in the OP.
Read down. It's a cesspool.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
55. How many of these banks would still exist if they had to borrow this money on open market?
At what interest rates --?

And on what terms -- ???

Many of the banks took this zero interst money and invested it in Treasury

securities rather than lending it out --

That money and that interest should come back to the American public --

These people should have been in jail and their corrupt businesses closed down.

Lots of pressure on Obama to nationalize these banks -- which is what should have been done!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #55
69. None of them, which is the reason we had to act
Otherwise there would have been dire economic consequences.

Obama has no authority to nationalize the banks. The most he could do is sign a bill nationalizing the banks.

Who are you going to put in jail? What crimes have they even committed?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #69
94. No -- it's the reason why the banks should have been NATIONALIZED....
which was recommended to Obama --

And, isn't it what FDR did -- nationalize the banks?

NATIONALING would simply have moved the corrupt and criminal out of the banks --

that's all -- business would have continued -- so would the jobs.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #94
103. Calling FDR's actions "Nationalizing" is not 100% accurate
All the solvent firms returned directly to the market. Only insolvent firms were forced to close. Their assets and liabilities were not transfered to the state (nationalization).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:27 PM
Response to Reply #103
172. Well, we weren't bailing out SOLVENT banks were we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:42 AM
Response to Reply #172
184. We were not nationalizing them either n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:49 AM
Response to Reply #55
75. How many of our jobs would still exist if the govt hadn't rescued the banks is a better question
It was all discussed at the time, but the recession would have been much deeper and longer lasting - after the banks failed, manufacturing would fail, then the service industries, and so on. Without even considering the effects on government (FDIC coverage is inadequate for insured deposits in such a disaster, for example), how do you think we would get things going again? Our current system requires capital to run, but capital needs are mediated by the banking industry...with that in ruins, you would have to create a national bank from scratch, in the midst of a giant national emergency with a big (D) on it. Assuming we still have a government, can you imagine the fight it would take to create a national bank? The repugs would be talking secession over that one...

As it is we don't have to dig out from the wreckage - we provided short term low interest loans, nothing collapsed, the loans all got paid back, and earlier this year the big reform package was passed to hopefully better regulate the banking sector.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #75
95. NATIONALIZING the banks ....
keeps the banks going -- however the owners lose their interest in it --

jobs would remain the same --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:01 AM
Response to Reply #75
97. ...and same had we NATIONALIZED the auto industry ....
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 02:01 AM by defendandprotect
could have been turned over to the workers -- and they could have

been making thousands of electric cars by now --

What's the new one the Germans have --

SOLAR BATTERIES -- almost 400 miles before car needs recharging --

and recharges in 6 minutes!


Time to recognize the immense damage the alliance between the automobile

industry and the oil industry has done to the planet and humanity!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #14
76. No. The 3.3 trillion was used to buy "assets."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:09 AM
Response to Reply #76
83. And didn't they force the sale of one or more banks to Goldman Sachs ....
depreciating the sale price and assets --

don't recall the full particulars on that one?

Trying to think of the name of the bank --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:07 AM
Response to Reply #14
82. Anti-FED nonsense? Why should FED be setting economic policy for America?
That's an issue for Congress -- not a private bank -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #82
86. It is the whole reason we have a central bank
They are not setting economic policy. They are pursuing a policy set by congress. Stable price levels, moderate interest rates, and long run stability in production and employment. To pursue these aims they are using tools provided to them by congress.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:40 AM
Response to Reply #86
89. Unfortunately, they are setting economic policy for America ... including
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 01:41 AM by defendandprotect
decisions re whether or not we have inflation --

setting interest rates --

and making decisions re employment levels --

on and on --

Why are you denying this?


Again, these are decisions which must be made by our Elected Officials --

who can be un-elected -- not by a PRIVATE BANK -- !!



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:01 AM
Response to Reply #89
99. They are not setting the policy
Their goals are already explicitly stated and controlled by the federal government. Stable price levels, moderate interest rates, and long run stability in production and employment. There is nothing to deny, their policy is explicitly stated.

They are also NOT a private bank.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #99
173. FED is deciding whether to act any further re economy ....
Fed decides what interest rates are and what employment goals will

be -- they've had a Greenspan policy of "employee insecurity."

FED is a private bank -- look it up --


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:56 AM
Response to Reply #173
185. The Fed is not a private bank in any conventional sense
They are a central bank, not a private bank.

As chairman of the Federal Reserve Greenspan had no authority at all to effect employee insecurity. However, he is certainly right that it acts as a hedge against inflation. Calling "employee insecurity" a Greenspan policy is disingenuous at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #89
149. Correntewire.com has interesting discussion about this.
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 03:18 PM by truedelphi
Meanwhile our Congress first allows for Bailouts and Wars, then screams its head off about how we need to be fiscally austere, as otherwise the Deficit will be outta site.

Far as I am concerned - let's slash their salaries by 30% to remind them of who it was who did these things.

It certainly wasn't your average person saying "Please give eleven trillion and counting" to the Big Banks. In fact, in early Oct 2008, more average citizens called Congress to oppose the Bailouts than at any other juncture in recent history.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Truth2Pwer Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
18. Thank You very much for this!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 08:18 PM
Response to Original message
19. I feel like
:puke:

I'm forwarding this to many. I've always thought we should have all our protests in front of the Federal Reserve instead of Congress or the WH.

K and R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. I feel like its a sideshow, an attention trap
...designed to get people to think they should be protesting in front of the federal reserve instead of congress or the WH.

The key fact that this whole line of crap leaves out - every penny of those trillions was paid back, with whatever interest was required. The majority of those trillions were overnight loans, granted while the banking industry was in a condition near collapse and overnight credit to meet liquidity regulations was unavailable anywhere. The whole program actually turned a profit and was a success by any measure, according to its purpose for existence (to prevent major bank failures), and if you understand that all the money was paid back, then what is the real complaint? All that I have heard is that the interest rate charged on those loans was too low, and the banks profited by paying a lower interest rate on the money borrowed than they paid on the money they lent. That's nothing I would cheer over, but I can live with that.

Now what real issues might this be designed to distract you from? The long-planned gutting of Social Security, perhaps, or another trillion dollar giveaway to the wealthy, perhaps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #26
56. Money rules this world...
and it rules Congress and WH.

If you don't get that, well......no one can help you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:19 PM
Response to Reply #26
57. Exactly ... this is all the result of corrupt government ...
which permitted these banks to go on a crime spree --

and they rewarded them with loans and guarantees they could not

have gotten otherwise --- thus keeping their banks open and

allowing them to reward themselves with new bonuses!!

Further, many of the banks took this money at 0% and then turned

around and invested it in Treasury securities at .035% and .04%

interest --

That should be illegal and all the funds returned to the American taxpayer!!

Also, the calls were for NATIONALIZING these banks and Obama well knew that --

but stonewalled it -- as Rahm acknoweldges.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TorchTheWitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #26
96. paid back to WHOM???
That's what the issue is here and it's VERY real. All those mega billions were taken from the tax paying citizens driving up the deficit and given to the Fed to bail out the banks. The banks took that money, bought toxic accets with it and also gave themselves stargeringly huge bonuses for being total and utter failures and instead of using it to put it back into the system, they used it buy up smaller banks thus making them even up to 100 TIMES bigger than when they were "too big to fail".

And you're saying that they paid it all back, so all is good. REALLY???? Who the fuck did they pay it back TO??? They paid it back to the FED - NOT the government nor the tax payers that were made to give it to them! Why isn't all this mega trillions back in the hands of we the people who gave it to them??? Why isn't it given back to the government that took it from we the people so that the government could DO something with it help the people???

And you think that this is all GOOD???? That this is not a real issue????



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #96
124. I believe you are under a mistaken impression that the Fed's money is from the taxpayers
All those mega billions were taken from the tax paying citizens

No. Wrong on both counts. The Fed's money does not come from taxpayers, and the Fed is not capable of increasing the deficit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 08:20 PM
Response to Original message
20. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
sasha031 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 08:39 PM
Response to Original message
21. thank you for posting this/ K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
22. Can you imagine what we would have found if Grayson's bill for the deep audit had passed? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:51 AM
Response to Reply #22
109. The mere suggestion is why he is out. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
23. sick
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:36 PM
Response to Original message
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
seafan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:42 PM
Response to Original message
25. Bernanke, Paulson, Geithner, Blankfein, GW Bush must be arrested immediately.
Before they flee. And they are only the first five criminals in this global heist.


All of this explains why these vampires of Wall Street have been arming themselves since last year.



The Wall Street Pentagon Papers: Biggest Scam In World History Exposed - Are The Federal Reserves Crimes Too Big To Comprehend?

By By David DeGraw
AmpedStatus

December 6, 2010


.....

We were finally granted the honor and privilege of finding out the specifics, a limited one-time Federal Reserve view, of a secret taxpayer funded backdoor bailout by a small group of unelected bankers. This data release reveals emergency lending programs that doled out $12.3 TRILLION in taxpayer money - $3.3 trillion in liquidity, $9 trillion in other financial arrangements.

.....

The Federal Reserve was secretly throwing around our money in unprecedented fashion, and it wasnt just to the usual suspects like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Citigroup, Bank of America, etc.; it was to the entire Global Banking Cartel. To central banks throughout the world: Australia, Denmark, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland, England To the Feds foreign primary dealers like Credit Suisse (Switzerland), Deutsche Bank (Germany), Royal Bank of Scotland (U.K.), Barclays (U.K.), BNP Paribas (France) All their Ponzi players were gifted. All the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations got their cut.

.....

To start with, as always, the US television news media (propaganda) networks just glossed over the whole thing - nothing to see here, just move along, back after a message from our sponsors Other than that obvious reason, Ive come to the realization that the Federal Reserves crimes are so big, so huge in scale, it is very hard for people to even wrap their head around it and comprehend what has happened here.

Think about it. In just this one peek we got at its operations, we learned that the Fed doled out $12.3 trillion in near-zero interest loans, without Congressional input.

.....




From just one of the links in this piece:


FT
December 3, 2010


It took two years, a hard-fought lawsuit, and an act of Congress, but finally on Wednesday, the Federal Reserve disclosed the details of its financial crisis lending programmes. The initial reactions were shock at the breadth of lending, particularly to foreign firms. But the details paint a bleaker, earlier, and even more disturbing picture.

.....

The Fed uploaded to its website several giant spreadsheets giving details on about 21,000 of its recent transactions. This data dump wasnt willing: it was a response to litigation by Bloomberg, and a provision in the Dodd-Frank financial reform law requiring disclosure.

Almost immediately analysts and bloggers sifting through the data honed in on Fed lending to non-US banks, particularly multibillion-dollar loans in October 2008 to Barclays of the UK, UBS of Switzerland, Dexia of Belgium, and several German banks. It didnt take long to spot the $11.5bn loan to Royal Bank of Scotland, on October 9, 2008. It was the largest to date. Then the loans got even bigger.

However, a close examination of the data shows that foreign lending actually began well before the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers triggered the 2008 crisis. Indeed, as some have argued and these data confirm the crisis began a year earlier, when supposedly safe structured investment vehicles began to collapse during 2007.

The Fed, apparently worried about global ripples, reacted by supporting non-US borrowers with new loans. Its first central bank liquidity swap effectively a $10bn 13-month loan to the European Central Bank was in December 2007. At the same time, the Fed began lending through its Term Auction Facility, with nearly all of the first $20bn going to several non-US banks.

Fed officials have claimed they did not know of the need for large-scale intervention in the financial markets until autumn 2008. Ben Bernanke, Fed chair, also testified that The only way we could have saved Lehman would have been by breaking the law. Yet the Feds new spreadsheets belie these claims. The data show the Fed was lending prolifically abroad in 2007, and then domestically, to investment banks including Lehman in early 2008.

.....





It's time to send the posse for these criminals.






Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #25
27. indeed.... traitors
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #25
129. Arrested for...?
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 11:01 AM by Recursion
What's the charge you're looking for?

The Fed exists to lend money to large institutions (the article, incidentally, is just flat-out wrong when it says "taxpayer money"; the Fed does not receive taxpayer money).
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
westerebus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #129
160. Is it in the FED's Charter to lend to Foreign banks?
I may be mistaken. I thought the Congress had to authorize transfers that had the full faith and credit of the American people? I'm not trying to be snarky.

My understanding is the FED is our central bank, not the EU's. So home grown is fine with limits, across the pond requires some authorization when you add taxpayer risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:57 PM
Response to Reply #160
164. What "taxpayer risk"?
Where do funds from taxes come into play here? That's what I'm not seeing. The Fed isn't funded by taxpayers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
westerebus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #164
166. A trillion in MBS with Frannie and Freddie written on it.
That I believe is taxpayer risk, as taxpayers are the underwriter's of those obligations.

It's held by the FED or do I have this wrong?

Then there's the gold. Who does that belong to?

Are you saying, we the taxpayer's don't owe the FED anything?

I don't see how that happened.

QE2 is the FED buying US debt and according to Ben: " We are using the FED's money to do this ".

So who's money was he using before this?

I know the FED can create money and the Treasury can sell debt.

So if the FED is buying Treasury debt, with their money, taxpayers are not on the hook for the loan?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #166
183. I think you have it backwards
A trillion in MBS with Frannie and Freddie written on it. That I believe is taxpayer risk, as taxpayers are the underwriter's of those obligations. It's held by the FED or do I have this wrong?

The Freddie/Fannie MBS's are ultimately backed by the taxpayer, yes. The Fed bought a lot of them because other brokers wouldn't -- that's the Fed putting their money on the line to save our money, not the other way around.

Then there's the gold. Who does that belong to?

The bullion the NY Fed holds? A bunch of foreign countries and sovereign wealth funds.

Are you saying, we the taxpayer's don't owe the FED anything?

Well, when the Fed buys US Debt we owe that to them. That's kind of the whole point; the Fed is a ready market for Treasury debt.

QE2 is the FED buying US debt and according to Ben: " We are using the FED's money to do this ".

So who's money was he using before this?


If you've ever bought a savings bond, yours. Both individual and institutional investors buy US debt; the Fed bought a lot to both increase the money supply and heat up the treasury bond market. If the Fed is buying bonds, other people are more willing to buy them because if they chicken out they can sell them to the Fed.

You asked "whose money was he using before": nobody's. The whole point is the Fed is making purchases of debt at a level it wasn't before.

I know the FED can create money and the Treasury can sell debt.

So if the FED is buying Treasury debt, with their money, taxpayers are not on the hook for the loan?


Sure we are, but you're acting like the Treasury was minding its own business and the Fed walked up and talked them in to borrowing money.

The Treasury has an allowable debt level set by Congress, and then has to auction off those bonds; the Fed is buying some up to make the price the Treasury gets higher.

Are you somehow more comfortable selling the bonds to China, or to banks with zero accountability? (The Fed's accountability is insufficient, but it's certainly more than the fully private banks'.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:52 PM
Response to Original message
30. This is what I would consider to be TREASON
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 09:57 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. Except that the OP describes it so badly
...seriously, the whole thing is about overnight loans made during the credit freeze-ups before and after inauguration. If you followed the economic news at the time you knew it was going on, it was widely reported on and debated over, and eventually it worked out very well - the short term loans prevented large scale bank failures and were all repaid, with interest. The whole program was at a considerable risk due to the sums involved and the uncertainty of the times, but its close to a final accounting and seems to have done better than broken even - at no actual cost to taxpayers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #32
51. You forgot to tell us about the army of unicorns we got back too...
... some of us apparently missed that one too, darn!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #30
61. it is ... it's collusion of government officials with crooks and criminals ....
These banks could not have borrowed this money on open market --

they were more than "rescued" -- in fact call was for nationalizing the banks.

They could not have rescued themselves by borrowing -- they would have faced

unaffordable interest rates -- and unaffordable terms.

Bernie Sanders also related that many of these banks then took this 0% interest

money and bought Treasurey securities with it at .035% and .04% interest --

Taxpayers should get back every penny of that, as well --

and the bonus money.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #61
130. How can taxpayers get it "back"? The Fed doesn't get taxpayer money
This wasn't taxpayer money. This was a credit window that the Fed wisely expanded to certain investment banks -- they should have done more of this, more quickly. The Fed basically agreed to
A) lend some money to certain large investment banks and other companies on a daily basis (which is why the number ends up looking so big)
B) guarantee some of their other loans
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
felix_numinous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:18 PM
Response to Original message
34. This heist is what destroyed our economy,
and no way should Americans have to lose one cent of SS, Medicare or Welfare benefits!!

It is us who should not pay out one more penny of our taxes, unless we have representation. WE have got to stop supporting these thieves in every way, until they give back this money to the Treasury, to the American people, and to the countries destroyed by the illegal wars. Perhaps this sounds like an extreme rant, but it is these people who are truly insane and out of control.

This money would balance our budget many times over, would pay for a WPO program, alternative energy program, veteran benefits, and would build back our infrastructure. We need this money, it is OURS!!! Fuckers!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #34
41. It was paid back, and it saved the banking sector from collapse.
The whole program was folded up at a net cost of close to zero to the taxpayer. That's a far cry from something that "destroyed our economy". Failure to compete successfully with China might be the best bet for that title.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Raksha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #41
53. If the money was paid back as you say, then...umm... WHERE IS IT???
Who has control of it now? The Fed? The banks? If so, why aren't they lending? If it was paid back, then why the worldwide austerity programs? Why all the cuts in social spending, why the hikes in tuition?

And why the epidemic of foreclosures? The house I'm living in (rented) is in foreclosure, scheduled to be auctioned on December 20th. Although this one is a legal foreclosure due to my landlord's bad judgment, many of them are NOT. A lot of them are blatantly fraudulent. There are instances of people being foreclosed on who have never been behind on their payments.

One of articles linked to the lead article asserts a connection between the bailout and these overnight loans you claim were paid back. The claim is that the banks are basically insolvent "zombie banks." Everything I'm seeing around me both locally and globally supports that claim. It's as though they are frantically trying to replace their hypothetical assets with real ones before anyone notices they are insolvent. But we can't help but notice, because taking those assets out of people's blood.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #53
65. The TARP Program, and its all accounted for.
http://commercialinvestmenteducation.com/tarp-accountin... /

This is a basic rundown. One difference from the account of the OP is in sum totals, where if you have a billion and lend it 21000 times in short term loans, you can say either you have lent 1 billion, or you have lent 21 trillion. Depends on whether you want to fire people up or reassure them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #65
87. Wall Street bailout alone is over $4.6 TRILLION and no final figures on anything yet ....
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Total_Wall_S...

And that's only Wall Street -- back up a page or two on Source Watch link --
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
westerebus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #65
167. Maiden Lane I and II ring any bells?
And TARP was just one slice of the pie.

Bought and paid for at a great rate.

I do recall LIBOR going off the wall back then.

The rate banks charge each other for loans.

That's if they were lending to each other.

No honor (confidence) among thief's?

Lehman REPO? Short sales?

Oops. Lost a investment bank. No worries.

Crashed the economy!

Stuff happens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:11 AM
Response to Reply #41
84. ALL of these corrupt and criminal banks should have been NATIONALIZED ...
that would also have kept them in business and their workers still working.

These banks could not have borrowed anything like these funds on the open

market -- no such affordable interest rates -- no affordable terms!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #41
133. I Can't believe someone is here defending this shit
yes I can
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
westerebus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #133
168. And there's several at that...
I wonder if on the back of their computer there's not a 'Property of the US Government' tag?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #168
169. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Taitertots Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #34
110. What heist? All that money was loans and purchasing assets
The loans are a same overnight loans dishonestly recounted every night.

The money also didn't come from your taxes and won't ever go to the treasury. It was never there in the first place. It wasn't your money. The Fed is self funded by fees from banks and open market activities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Bennyboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
36. K&R'd
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BobTheSubgenius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
37. I'm sure this has been posted numerous times, but if you want to see what a trillion looks like..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
38. The crony ''insiders'' got to use Govt Trillions to make Billions loaning it back to We the People.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #38
58. Actually, many banks took the 0% loans and bought Treasury securities with it ....
at .035% and .04% -- rather than lending it out to the public --

That's also from Bernie Sanders!!!

That was inbetween their paying themselves huge bonuses!!

Public should get all of that money back plus the interest!!



Meanwhile, they could not have saved their banks by going to the open market

No one would have lent them money -- and even if any was lent it would have been

at unaffordable rates -- and unaffordable terms!!

These banks were corrupt and criminal and should have been nationalized --

as Obama was told. Rahm bragged about Obama not nationalizing them and rather

"rescuing" them.


All of this can only happen via corruption of government!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:42 AM
Response to Reply #58
90. The sums involved are staggering. Just moving offshore requires genius...
...in the form of the Meyer Lansky of the War Party, Phil Gramm.

After leading Wall Street de-regulation as a U.S. Representative (D for a long while-TX) and then as a U.S. Senatore (R for the longest while-TX), Phil Gramm took a gig as vice chairman of UBS, the Swiss bank. The FBI should start at the top and arrest the so-and-sos who obviously are corrupt and work down.

If I didn't believe in the Constitution, I'd say: "Arrest them all. It's time to clean house."

The thing is, unlike what passes for Justice, I say we first investigate, then prosecute the guilty.

Honest prosecutors would find we should arrest them all, from Wall Street to Washington.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:51 AM
Response to Reply #90
92. Evidently, they used private pension funds to help move corporations out of America....
and private pension funds to finance the housing bubble --


You're probably already familiar with Catherine Austin Fitts ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9dGHuRExiM&feature=rela...


And I think there's a bit of a shorter version around -- ?


Also agree with all of your sentiments on Justice --

but certainly the right wing corruption of DOJ and courts is still with us, imo!

In fact, Obama has astonished me on his failure to act for justice --

Near fell down when this alleged one time temp teacher of Constitutional Law

said he saw "no reason" to impeach W Bush!!


Thanks for the info -- :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
liberation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
42. Nothing new, in the big scheme of things, given that Capitalism at its core is a game of CONfidence
Get it? ;-)

Still, the sad part is that revelations like these will have almost no effect on the majority of people, you know the ones conned. It seems that part of human nature involves the predisposition of people to defend and side those whoa are deceiving and abusing them, because the individuals affected consider a worse alternative contemplating the realization that they have been deceived and used.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #42
59. Think everyone would get the story if it was heard ... except on internet ...
where are they going to hear it -- not on FAUX News --

or CNN ... did even PBS cover this?


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
burrowowl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
54. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BadGimp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:27 PM
Response to Original message
60. THE FED DOES NOT DOLE OUT TAXPAYER DOLLARS
I can't believe people keep talking about the Fed like it's a US Government institution. It's NOT.

It's a freakin BANK people. The Government can regulate it like any bank but it's not OUR MONEY!!! The money in the Fed belongs to some of the worlds wealthiest people / (companies?)and nations (I think there are some nations with funds in the fed).

I think the US gave the Fed it's charter, but the President and Congress have no control over the fed. the President in largely ceremonious manner appoints the head of the Fed but I doubt he does little more than rubber stamp the person he's been told to approve.

And another thing.. Stop conflating the Deficit with the Debt! Teh Deficit is the amount we spend over what we have every year, and then have to borrow to pay, and the Debt is the total amount we borrowed to date (plus interest, less payments) that remains outstanding (that means we still owe it).

Google it or use Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #60
62. Let's try this ... who OKay'd these loans if not Bush/Obama ... ????
Edited on Sat Dec-11-10 11:48 PM by defendandprotect
why would that be necessary to lend them OPM?

Catherine Austin Fitts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u9dGHuRExiM
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bhikkhu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #62
74. This would all be easier if you had followed the news at the time
...probably there are some good books out on it now, as the whole thing was well covered and debated on. If you are starting from scratch without any information about the big credit freeze-up and so forth, internet forums and youtube aren't really the greatest place to start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #74
80. Banks did not lend money after being rescued because they invested it in Treasury securities...
after having gotten it from the FED at 0% interest --

they got a return from Treasury of .035% and .04% --

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Klingon Donating Member (37 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:29 AM
Response to Reply #74
113. So Bloomberg, Bernie and Ron Paul missed the news too?
All three complained in different ways about the secrecy of Fed's loans to private banks.

And the lawsuit must have been useless too. Should have been thrown by the judge then. The plot thickens.

Maybe I missed the news that you're referring to. Could you show a piece that reported on Fed's lending money to the foreign banks mentioned in the OP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bread_and_roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #74
119. what there are some good books and reporting on is how we've all been ripped off to benefit the 1%
at the top - with some "trickle down" to the next few %. However, that reporting is not coming out of this Admin or the beltway pundits who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #60
98. That's right, the Fed is not a US government institution.
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 02:13 AM by JackRiddler
It is effectively an independent, private branch of government that controls the monetary system and is at least coequal in power. Its main branch in New York serves as the cartel coordination and lobby for the Wall Street banksters. Members of the Congress that supposedly sets policy and has oversight themselves had to fight to see the audit of its bailouts that have now been released.

The bailouts (Fed and Treasury) achieved a temporary rescue of the criminal class that created the economic disaster.These are the ones who blackmailed the Congress with the threat of global failure to get the bailouts going, and who now continue to extract profitability out of the productive economy through interest. These policies are suppressing demand and keeping the productive economy buried, guaranteeing future disasters but allowing asset deflation so that the surviving superbanks get to pick up assets on the cheap.

Capitulation to gangsters was not responsible. What the bailout information shows is that the Fed has enormous powers that could have been applied instead to starting a new banking system after 2008, instead of rescuing the criminals who perpetrated the vast subprime and derivatives frauds. This could have been effected through the device of bailing out the states (which may be corrupt but aren't scams through and through like the big banks) and allowing them to start state consumer and development banks to replace the system. The only help that should have gone to private banks should have been to the solvent ones! And it's the solvent ones who effectively were punished to allow the surviving Zombies to live and grow.

Otherwise the rest of the bigs should have been liquidated at that time and their executives investigated, instead of the Fed and Treasury assisting them in getting bigger.

Now enough with your apologetics and empty condescension. Goodnight!

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Dec-11-10 11:35 PM
Response to Original message
63. This thread is a perfect example of how supposedly intelligent liberals jump on any crap someone
posts if it feeds into their already preconceived notions.

It doesn't matter if the initial post is essentially mistaken gibberish. If it SOUNDS truthy, it flys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warren DeMontague Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #63
70. It's Ron Paul, "Buy Silver" Wack-A-Doodle stuff.
Of course, my masters at the Bohemian Grove implanted me with a chip to make me say that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
immune Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #63
121. "Truthy"? Try this on for size.
In 1963-just before this assassination JFK put bill 11110 into effect: since then there has been no one to come forward with the courage to challenge the Fed.

John F. Kennedy
Executive Order 11110 - Amendment of Executive Order No. 10289 as Amended, Relating to the Performance of Certain Functions Affecting the Department of the Treasury
June 4, 1963

Office of the Federal Register
Office of the Federal Register

By virtue of the authority vested in me by section 301 of title 3 of the United States Code, it is ordered as follows:

SECTION 1. Executive Order No. 10289 of September 19, 1951, as amended, is hereby further amended --

(a) By adding at the end of paragraph 1 thereof the following subparagraph (j):

"(j) The authority vested in the President by paragraph (b) of section 43 of the Act of May 12, 1933, as amended (31 U.S.C. 821 (b)), to issue silver certificates against any silver bullion, silver, or standard silver dollars in the Treasury not then held for redemption of any outstanding silver certificates, to prescribe the denominations of such silver certificates, and to coin standard silver dollars and subsidiary silver currency for their redemption," and

(b) By revoking subparagraphs (b) and (c) of paragraph 2 thereof.

SEC. 2. The amendment made by this Order shall not affect any act done, or any right accruing or accrued or any suit or proceeding had or commenced in any civil or criminal cause prior to the date of this Order but all such liabilities shall continue and may be enforced as if said amendments had not been made.

JOHN F. KENNEDY
THE WHITE HOUSE,
June 4, 1963

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
79. That's Why I think wealth should be LIMITED
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 01:17 AM by undergroundpanther
NO ONE has a right to have incomprehensible wealth,in this world.It should be punishable by death to take that much wealth away from humanity.Why do we permit such theft if others are slaves,suffer in poverty and starve and are work to death?

If we TOOK it tall away from all these corrupted groups and individual thieves and stopped letting corporations,politicians,ceos religious scammers, banks and a few sociopath families steal from the world like they do and forever limited how much anyone can have .I can scarcely let myself imagine how much better life in this world could be without the bankers, the wealthy,ceos,corrupted rich, and corporations.
And these monsters demand more to prevent collapse of the dollar and a default by the US government, the American people are being told they must sacrifice to reduce the national debt and budget deficit. Thatsacrifice being demanded means we suffer impoverishment, unemployment, ruin of our social safety net,no health care, cuts and more cuts to social Security, reductions in Medicare, Medicaid,until it is gone.
The entire US capitalist economy rested on a huge Ponzi scheme that has exploited and financially abused most of the people in this world.

Life could be better for everyone with those trillions,instead of wasting it on just for a few selfish greedy criminal monsters.

Thinking about all of what we had stolen from us,how we are made to live and our dreams crushed along with so much more because of these evil monsters, and the fact some people will defend these monsters,even if they suffer and millions suffer too, it makes me so sad I want to die because these monsters will never have a guillotine blade sever their grotesque heads from their necks..and their families w3ill never pay the world back for the terrible things they have caused.

Imagine..The world living without hunger,without homelessness.Where everyone has the best health care, the time to travel,more time to live life,learn,more time to create,socialize,rest,raise their kids,and to heal,less stress,time to heal from abuse,to know one another, to self actualize,to clean up our world..a world that cannot waste money on war,voodoo economy scams or kings or tolerating families of greedy sociopaths.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:03 AM
Response to Reply #79
81. Exactly ... nor should the FED have the power it does over our government ....
FED is actually setting our economic policy -- something the Congress should

be doing -- it's a political decision - especially when it concerns jobs --

and where the FED has angled for decades for "employee insecurity" -- we need

the Congress to set a goal of full employment.

Man's inhumaity to man begins with the dollar bill which converts too often to

immoral and corrupt power over others.


Lovely post -- except for the guillotine part!

They'd probably use it on us!


:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:22 AM
Response to Reply #81
85. Well..
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 01:37 AM by undergroundpanther
Lovely post -- except for the guillotine part!

Well should we hang them than? That's what the constitution says to do with traitors.

We better spread the word and be ready to citizen arrest these monsters BEFORE they can use the guillotine on us.
Even if we let the pigs live, we should become like a guillotine in separating them from the wealth and power that belongs to all of us..ASAP.

As for full employment I dunno if I could handle it too many people are bullies and if I had to depend on a bully to eat it would be like it was when I was a kid and I cannot stay safe in a situation like that.

Besides if those trillions were returned to us,I think we should have REASONABLE additude about jobs,all unionized,good wages,full benefits,vacation time,4 times a year for at least a month long.Time off without alot of hassle,full child care,and child leave for both spouses, benefits for GBLT people too,plenty of breaks,everyone gets a 2 hour lunch,or siesta and a social safety net that lets no one fall through the cracks,and free housing,top notch public transport,free net,cable,phone,electric,food clean water,heat,social gathering places, schools that encourage novel thinking,questioning authority and status quo,art music and creativity,and teach kids how to read write and do math,good higher education for free,and top notch child protection and social services.Work should be PART of life not ALL of your life,it should help improve quality of life,not exploit people for profits.If everyone had a useful job there would be alot of free time as most everyone working would free up time. To employ all would mean everyone doing part time work with the things above..That kind of change would drastically reduce the stress and isolation that is driving people crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #85
91. Agree with you ... and all of your observations ....
That kind of change would drastically reduce the stress and isolation that is driving people crazy.


:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
undergroundpanther Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:29 AM
Response to Reply #91
104. I fear we will never have a chance
to make those so needed changes..Sometimes I just wish I was dead. I feel so powerless watching my means to survive circling round the toilet bowl getting closer to the drain ..The stress of life it is so painful.I can't close my eyes and pretend it's all gonna be ok. I can't pretend or play the denial game.The future is terrifying,and bleak.

I remember a snippet of my time in middle school at lunch listening to the other kids yammer about oh,he's so cute and mork and mindy etc..I wanted so bad to be stupid and unaware too. I envied their ignorant bliss and trivial concerns,the simplicity of their lives contentment with the vapidity ,untouched they seemed by the kind of horrors I was living through that had already made me crazy.. Later that day I tried to ram a pencil through my temple.I guess I thought a self lobotomy might help. When I talk to people here in this suburban wasteland they seem so much like the kids in middle school except it's the kids,the lawn,the dinner party..And I still feel like ramming an icepick in my own skull. I am truly sad and scared of what is happening to this country,this world..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
LarryNM Donating Member (130 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:20 PM
Response to Reply #79
150. Imagine +1000 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
dreamnightwind Donating Member (863 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:15 AM
Response to Original message
100. Time for a people's currency?
First, I found this article to be shrill and biased. That's not to understate the size of what the recent Fed papers release showed, it is truly astounding. But I get little perspective from this article, not much differentiation between money that was run around the track to keep the beast moving (but eventually repaid) and money that we are unlikely to recover. And that's an analysis I'd really like to see.

Regarding the overall situation, I think, just for kicks, we should look into moving to a People's Currency, that can be adopted by we the people. This currency would not carry the taint of empire, and it would spend only in the grass-roots.

Our U.S. currency is hopelessly controlled by the oligarchs. Just forget about it, it's not based on anything real anyway, and start building an organic alternative. Get local grocers to accept it. They can buy from local farmers who accept it. Hire tradesmen who use it.

Seems like this would be very difficult to get widely adopted, but if it did, it would be a way out of the trap we find ourselves in. New game.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
immune Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #100
125. People's currency,
Absolutely. Its way past time to turn this around and we aren't the only ones who know it.

Sen. Dick Durbin, on a local Chicago radio station this week (May 1, 2009), blurted out an obvious truth about Congress that, despite being blindingly obvious, is rarely spoken: "And the banks -- hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created -- are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place." The blunt acknowledgment that the same banks that caused the financial crisis "own" the U.S. Congress -- according to one of that institution's most powerful members -- demonstrates just how extreme this institutional corruption is.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Banks/Bankers_Own_Con...

And then there's Dennis Kucinich. And Ron Paul. Its time to find out who's on our side on this and get behind them, R or D or I, it really doesn't matter anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
democracy1st Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:33 AM
Response to Original message
101. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:44 AM
Response to Original message
102. Enron x 12 Trillion. Some of us knew those banksters were goddamn gangsters from day one.
Now the greedy rotten bastards are gunning for Social Security, Postal Service and National Parks.

They won't be satisfied until we are all homeless and jobless or dead.


:grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:45 AM
Response to Original message
105. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:19 AM
Response to Original message
106. recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BlueJac Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
111. Mind Blowing facts.........
is it pitchfork time yet??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:01 AM
Response to Original message
114. This was late 2008 correct? I tried to look through some of the links
but it's a lot of information. I'm assuming this happened when we just heard about the big banks here being bailed out (BOA, Chase, Wells Fargo, etc..). This is just revolting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:25 AM
Response to Original message
115. "Please, sir. May I have another".
Let's all grab our ankles, chant in unison, and vote centrist again and again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:32 AM
Response to Original message
116. Thanks for posting this. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
117. More "change" I can believe in.
Maybe someday when voters run out of excuses for their "leaders" we`ll get real change. Sickening.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
soryang Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
120. CDOs, MBSs, and naked derivatives need to be reigned in
Credit default swaps where the investor has no interest on the underlying principal needs to be prohibited.

Here is what happened by analogy. I take out 10 insurance policies on each home in my neighborhood. Then I burn the entire neighborhood down. I demand my payment from AIG even though I have no conceivable insurable interest in any of these homes. AIG can't pay. There are thousands of claims like these from all over the world. AIG and other CDS shorts around the world can't pay. So I get my old buddies in the Congress, the Treasury Department, the Fed, and the White House to guarantee payments for my arson, fraud and gambling problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #120
122. At the very least, naked derivatives need to wear a towel
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
soryang Donating Member (642 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #122
127. Or naked shorts!
:D
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NoPasaran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
123. Biggest scam in world history?
I guess the Fourth Crusade was chopped liver.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
russspeakeasy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
126. Thanks Poboy....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
caseymoz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
131. Yep. It looks like Marx was right after all.

Twenty years after the Cold War, the wealthy have been working double time by their behavior to prove he isn't discredited. Now we have globalized capitalism, predicted by Marx, run by a small, international cartel, also check, a globalized workforce who are constantly being undercut with diminishing wages, check, and an undercutting of public services, check, and the rich squeezing out what little the poor still have through various exploitative practices: like debt, like gambling, etc.

Plus, we have, potentially, international communications among the workers/proletariat.

I'm not exactly a Marxist, but I thought that rumors of Marx's death were exaggerated. We still hadn't seen how capitalism would behave without communism competing against it. The verdict: very badly.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:42 AM
Response to Original message
134. Wow, I see this thread has completely blown up with 300 +/- recs.
I am very glad a lot of people here are paying attention to these subjects and also want to find out what is really going on.
It is our money, our country. We deserve to know!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 12:35 PM
Response to Original message
136. Sons of bitches!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MissDeeds Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
138. Thanks for posting this, Poboy
K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
CrispyQ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:48 PM
Response to Original message
140. Here's what a trillion dollars looks like:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
riverbendviewgal Donating Member (377 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
141. I have just one question
What do I do with my money?

I am retired....have savings...some locked up , some fluid....I don't trust the banks anymore...
What do I do?

I know I can't control what is happening...I can only control what will happen to my money...

What is everyone doing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
glinda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #141
153. We are in the same boat. I don't know. Anyone any ideas for retired folks?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #141
154. I see you have a Canada icon. Not that it makes you much safer, but
at least your money is half sound. I have no suggestions -or none I'd be comfortable enough to throw out there as 'advice'.
We're all in the dark, doing different things and hoping we have something for any contingency.

Use Credit Unions is a good way of taking money away from the criminals, but ultimately we are powerless to combat a rigged game.


"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible..."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
geckosfeet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:00 PM
Response to Original message
142. Well, on the whole, I would say they need more tax cuts to shelter their wealth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:31 PM
Response to Original message
144. We've allowed thieves to take over the financial system.
That's why we deregulated. Because we wanted to be taken hostage. We should not be surprised any more than getting bit by a snake. The GOP will deregulate kidnapping next if they can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Xicano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
145. 
I can attest to that. On the several occasions after I've explained to people just how much one trillion dollars is, I can see a look on them that says they didn't realize just how much it is.

If from day 1 (the day so-called jesus was to suppose to have been born) you spent one million dollars every single day up to today. You still! wouldn't have spent one trillion dollars. You would still have to continue spending one million dollars a day every single day for another 729 years.

Now what the OP is posting amounts to over 12x that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:12 PM
Response to Original message
147. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Luciferous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
151. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
AllyCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:22 PM
Response to Original message
156. It's hard to read this stuff and think we are anything but screwed,
but we have to keep fighting. Not sure how, but hope people are going to get something going so I can help. Right now, just trying to raise awareness until something comes up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
158. We're up to 369 recommends. This thread is Epic.
I find it encouraging. Having little hope, I take what I can get these days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
guzzie Donating Member (23 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #158
163. Australia ?
Um - I don't think so.

What happened was wrong, especially since the tax payers around the world are now footing hte bill - but lets keep it real.

The amount doled out did not exceed 3 trillion when you look at it IMPARTIALLY - why exagerate when it makes you look stupid ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
161. k & r
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 05:34 PM
Response to Original message
162. The Master Class ...
a bunch a gutless trolls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 06:57 PM
Response to Original message
165. "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions"
Defense v.s. Wall Street : A Cost Comparison
Being an avid documentary film fan, I recently re-watched an excellent one called "Why We Fight" by Eugene Jarecki. For those who haven't seen it, it tackles the topic of the military industrial complex in post WWII America.

While watching this film I had a sudden flashback to September 10, 2001, the day before the infamous and horrific attacks on the twin towers and the pentagon. The image that I saw was that of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld standing at a podium and telling the reporters in the press conference:

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions"


I instantly remembered how stunned I was at hearing the word trillion in an era before the financial crisis had made us desensitized to the enormity of the number. Back then a billion was a lot of money!

So I decided to do a quick cost comparison between the wall street induced cost burden to the US federal budget and those induced by the lost funds admitted to by Rumsfeld on that day. Considering the outrage directed at Wall Street in the post TARP era, I was very curious to see the results.

Note: This is simply a comparison of inefficiencies and/or possible foul play by wall street and the pentagon. This is not an indictment of either nor is it a discussion about the relative worth of the functions they serve.


=====

http://fedupmontrealer.blogspot.com/2010/12/defense-vs-...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
StarsInHerHair Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
170. we're done`
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
171. Congress voted for this ...American people have been
robbed of all their futures by just a few crooked men

the money needs to be returned
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DeadEyeDyck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:18 PM
Response to Original message
179. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 25th 2017, 05:12 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC