But then maybe they dont want too much accuracy because it would too embarrassing ?

Yes always makes me laugh when I see folks slagging off Thailand over the "Face" issue

Yet the reality is most countries are the same way about "Face" or the picture they want to paint.

Key to Iceland success - "pushing losses on to bond holders rather than tax payers"

http://businessweek.com/news/2012-08-12/imf-says-bailouts-iceland-style-hold-lessons-for-crisis-nations

More criminality, corruption conflicts of interest.

HSBC fined $1.9bl ; but the money laundered in the Mexican drug cartel action alone was 7bl and rather than any criminal trails we have the banks chairman of the time now in high UK government office as a trade minister.

From sky news app-

HSBC has confirmed it will pay $1.92bn (£1.2bn) to settle a money-laundering probe by US authorities - the largest penalty of its kind ever paid by a bank.

The investigation of Europe's largest bank has focused on the transfer of billions of dollars on behalf of nations such as Iran and the movement of money through the US financial system from Mexican drug cartels.

The bank is expected to pay $1.25bn (£778m) in forfeiture - the biggest such amount in any case involving a bank - on top of $655m (£408m) in civil penalties.

Under what is known as a deferred prosecution agreement, the bank will be accused of violating the Bank Secrecy Act and the Trading With The Enemy Act.

Following the announcement, Sky's City Editor Mark Kleinman learned that the financial penalty will result in lower bonus payments among top executives.

The bank's chief executive Stuart Gulliver said it accepted responsibility for its past mistakes.

"We have said we are profoundly sorry for them, and we do so again," he said in a statement.

"The HSBC of today is a fundamentally different organisation from the one that made those mistakes.

"Over the last two years, under new senior leadership, we have been taking concrete steps to put right what went wrong and

to participate actively with government authorities in bringing to light and addressing these matters."

The bank added that it also expected to reach a settlement with the Financial Services Authority in the UK.

A US Senate investigative committee reported earlier this year that in 2007 and 2008, HSBC Mexico sent about $7bn (£4.35bn) in cash to the US. The committee said such an amount of cash pointed to illegal drug proceeds.

The current trade minister, Lord Green, was HSBC's chairman from 2006 to 2010, after serving as its chief executive between 2003 and 2006."

But then maybe they dont want too much accuracy because it would too embarrassing ?

Yes always makes me laugh when I see folks slagging off Thailand over the "Face" issue

Yet the reality is most countries are the same way about "Face" or the picture they want to paint.

Same with the inflation stats the world over. No one believes a word the government says when essentials are jumping 10, 20, 30 % but inflation stats reported as 1 or 2% .

Key to Iceland success - "pushing losses on to bond holders rather than tax payers"

http://businessweek....-crisis-nations

Iceland's success

Iceland Gets $11 Billion Bailout, but Will be Saddled with Debt for Years to Come

http://moneymorning....celand-bailout/

for a country with 319,000 citizens that's $34,483 per capita including babies and old pensioners just for this bridge loan not included existing former public debt. total public debt is 128.6% of GDP (2011 est.)

only 6 countries are higher indebted (Zimbabwe being the champion).

more on Iceland's (aka Whale Oil Island) "success":

"The country secured over $10 billion in loans from the IMF and other countries to stabilize its currency and financial sector, and to back government guarantees for foreign deposits in Icelandic banks."

"Iceland began making payments to the UK, the Netherlands, and other claimants in late 2011 following Iceland's Supreme Court ruling that upheld 2008 emergency legislation that gives priority to depositors for compensation from failed Icelandic banks."

"Iceland owes British and Dutch authorities approximately $5.5 billion for compensating British and Dutch citizens who lost deposits in Icesave when parent bank Landsbanki failed in 2008."

source: CIA factbook

https://www.cia.gov/...ok/geos/ic.html

But then maybe they dont want too much accuracy because it would too embarrassing ?

Yes always makes me laugh when I see folks slagging off Thailand over the "Face" issue

Yet the reality is most countries are the same way about "Face" or the picture they want to paint.

Maybe not so much the country in this case but the party in power.

more on Iceland's (aka Whale Oil Island) "success":

"The country secured over $10 billion in loans from the IMF and other countries to stabilize its currency and financial sector, and to back government guarantees for foreign deposits in Icelandic banks."

"Iceland began making payments to the UK, the Netherlands, and other claimants in late 2011 following Iceland's Supreme Court ruling that upheld 2008 emergency legislation that gives priority to depositors for compensation from failed Icelandic banks."

"Iceland owes British and Dutch authorities approximately $5.5 billion for compensating British and Dutch citizens who lost deposits in Icesave when parent bank Landsbanki failed in 2008."

source: CIA factbook

https://www.cia.gov/...ok/geos/ic.html

your horizon needs to stretch beyond quoting information from your own banksters and

the CIA

your horizon needs to stretch beyond quoting information from your own banksters and

the CIA

and your horizon should stretch beyond thoughts of condoning and/or justifying theft. only thieves and fraudsters applaud theft and fraud!

your horizon needs to stretch beyond quoting information from your own banksters and

the CIA

and your horizon should stretch beyond thoughts of condoning and/or justifying theft. only thieves and fraudsters applaud theft and fraud!

where have i said i condone and/or justify theft. ?

Alex Lah said 4 years you were senile and i think things have only gone downhill with you since then

Survey: 40 Percent Of Americans Have $500 Or Less In Savings

“It doesn’t shock me, but it does scare me. You know, we often say that the reason so many people fall off the edge in a tough economy is that they’re standing way too close to it, and I think this is a perfect demonstration of that.”

http://philadelphia....ess-in-savings/

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- Most Americans don't have nearly enough money stashed away for emergencies and more than one-in-four don't even have a single penny saved.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/06/25/pf/emergency-savings/index.htm?iid=HP_LN

i hope its not the same 40% as this........

Number of guns and gun owners in USA

Most estimates range between 39% and 50% of US households having at least one gun(that's about 43-55 million households). The estimates for the number of privately owned guns range from 190 million to 300 million.

I refer you back to:

" The bloody business should be going bust! Why should the tax payers bail out bond holders?"

It is not theft. The bond holders directly involved should have to accept a hair cut or let the company go broke and get zero! Up to them, that is the risk signed up for when investing and the reason a % is paid.

Again Y should they be bailed out by tax payers, gold holders or property owners?!

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

Number of guns and gun owners in USA

Most estimates range between 39% and 50% of US households having at least one gun(that's about 43-55 million households). The estimates for the number of privately owned guns range from 190 million to 300 million.

and that dear children is the reason why senile ignorants, residing in northern Thailand, fear the results of a global financial crisis and soil their underwear.

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

Understandable but does that ever happen?

Meaning does a bank ever offer bonds & fixed rates at the same amount of return at the same time?

I just always assumed risk to reward would be greater with bonds but never looked.

True?

While the White House is celebrating the lowest unemployment numbers in the history of the Obama administration, other statistics suggest the scope of the jobs market remains as grim as ever. Indeed, the number of Americans without jobs in the eyes of the Labor Department has shrunk two percentage points, but the proportion of Americans who are actively seeking employment as at its lowest in ages.

This is why reports mean squat in the USA

The truth can only be known by being there & seeking employment.

Their method of counting is rigged. They poll a small amount & also

declare many as not being countable because,

They are not on unemployment benefits

They have taken a low paying temp job to tie them over

They have given up looking after years of nothing

etc. etc. etc.

No it isn't it just doesn't agree with your preconceptions.

No it isn't it just doesn't agree with your preconceptions.

No that's not it

But your welcome to your misconception

Austria said it planned stricter controls over regional finances after a Salzburg civil servant gambled hundreds of millions of euros of taxpayers' money on high-risk derivatives Salzburg officials said last week they had sacked a finance director after determining she used doctored documents and false signatures to hide a trail of losses from deals that started more than a decade ago, causing a book loss of 340 million euros ($439 million)..

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/11/austria-economy-provinces-idUSL5E8NB7IN20121211

I refer you back to:

" The bloody business should be going bust! Why should the tax payers bail out bond holders?"

It is not theft. The bond holders directly involved should have to accept a hair cut or let the company go broke and get zero! Up to them, that is the risk signed up for when investing and the reason a % is paid.

Again Y should they be bailed out by tax payers, gold holders or property owners?!

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

If there is a government deposit garrantee scheme on deposits then up to that limit should be returned by the gov, unless the gov goes bankrupt too of course. But that deposit garrantee was part of the original deal so only that should be paid. Any unsecured deposit or bond should not be paid; that's the deal, that's what you sign up for and the risk you take.

I refer you back to:

" The bloody business should be going bust! Why should the tax payers bail out bond holders?"

It is not theft. The bond holders directly involved should have to accept a hair cut or let the company go broke and get zero! Up to them, that is the risk signed up for when investing and the reason a % is paid.

Again Y should they be bailed out by tax payers, gold holders or property owners?!

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

If there is a government deposit garrantee scheme on deposits then up to that limit should be returned by the gov, unless the gov goes bankrupt too of course. But that deposit garrantee was part of the original deal so only that should be paid. Any unsecured deposit or bond should not be paid; that's the deal, that's what you sign up for and the risk you take.

forget any guarantee for deposits. a lot of countries do not have that guarantee and in some countries where that guarantee exists not all banks are covered.

now don't dodge and answer my question "has any of the two who invested an identical amount at an identical yield more recovery rights than the other one?"

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

Understandable but does that ever happen?

Meaning does a bank ever offer bonds & fixed rates at the same amount of return at the same time?

I just always assumed risk to reward would be greater with bonds but never looked.

True?

not true! actually in many cases the (theoretical) recovery rights of bonds are higher than cash deposits. in practice it does not really matter except when it concerns "covered bonds".

No it isn't it just doesn't agree with your preconceptions.

No that's not it

But your welcome to your misconception

In fact, as John Williams’ Shadow Government Statistics website demonstrates, the real unemployment rate is 22.9 percent.

In order to trick the public into believing things are better than they actually are, the Fed and the government do not include unemployed members of the workforce who are not actively looking for work or workers with part-time jobs who are seeking full-time employment.

Despite the government claim that unemployment fell in November, a recent Gallup poll shows that it increased significantly from October to November. “Underemployment, as measured without seasonal adjustment, was 17.2% in November, a 1.3-point increase since the end of October,” Gallup reports. “The uptick in November also puts an end to the six-month trend of improvements or no change.”

http://www.shadowsta...on-pce-deflator

Fed links interest rates to 6.5 pct. unemployment

UBS is expected to be hit with a fine of around $1bn to settle Libor manipulation charges.

The total amount - worth around £620m - will be a combined penalty from US and UK regulators, and is expected to be confirmed early next week.

UBS declined to comment on the news.

It comes two days after the Serious Fraud Office made three arrests as part of its investigation into the fixing of the interbank lending rate.

Sky sources suggested that one of the people detained previously worked as a trader at UBS, which has a big presence in the City "

I refer you back to:

" The bloody business should be going bust! Why should the tax payers bail out bond holders?"

It is not theft. The bond holders directly involved should have to accept a hair cut or let the company go broke and get zero! Up to them, that is the risk signed up for when investing and the reason a % is paid.

Again Y should they be bailed out by tax payers, gold holders or property owners?!

an investor buys a $10,000 bond, issued by a bank, which pays 5% interest and matures in 5 years.

another investor puts $10,000 cash into a fixed deposit with the same bank and both parties agree that interest of 5% is paid.

the bank goes bankrupt.

now tell me genius... has any of the two investors more rights to be compensated than the other one?

If there is a government deposit garrantee scheme on deposits then up to that limit should be returned by the gov, unless the gov goes bankrupt too of course. But that deposit garrantee was part of the original deal so only that should be paid. Any unsecured deposit or bond should not be paid; that's the deal, that's what you sign up for and the risk you take.

forget any guarantee for deposits. a lot of countries do not have that guarantee and in some countries where that guarantee exists not all banks are covered.

now don't dodge and answer my question "has any of the two who invested an identical amount at an identical yield more recovery rights than the other one?"

If no garrantee then no one should be bailed out.

If no garrantee then no one should be bailed out.

do you also uphold that solomonic ruling if one of the investors is a widow with three small children who wanted to beat a part of inflation with money in the bank instead of gold bars under the mattress?

If no garrantee then no one should be bailed out.

do you also uphold that solomonic ruling if one of the investors is a widow with three small children who wanted to beat a part of inflation with money in the bank instead of gold bars under the mattress?

Well that's why governments garrantee deposits.

In a democracy granny can use her right to protest and if pressured in to a vote on it and deposits repaid then I'd say that is democracy in action for the common citizen. What we have now is private pressure on gov from a very wealthy minority demanding to be paid every penny at the expense of granny and everyone else; the opposite of a well functioning democracy.

But to be honest I don't believe in any repayments and granny should work until no longer able and then have her family take care more like it is in Asia than the nanny state of western selfishness. However in a properly functioning banking system deposits should be safe and granny can get a decent % without risk of bank going broke; this means no tiny % fractional reserve or casino shinanigans, just capital leant out at a rate and a slightly lower paid to savers with the spread as profits. Back to basics. Certainly a simple first step would be the high street and casino banking elements should be fully separated and the casino side allowed to go bustif mistakes made without threatening wider economy.

What we have now is private pressure on gov from a very wealthy minority demanding to be paid every penny at the expense of granny and everyone else; the opposite of a well functioning democracy.

if that is what you believe i won't argue with you.

Number of guns and gun owners in USA

Most estimates range between 39% and 50% of US households having at least one gun(that's about 43-55 million households). The estimates for the number of privately owned guns range from 190 million to 300 million.

and that dear children is the reason why senile ignorants, residing in northern Thailand, fear the results of a global financial crisis and soil their underwear.

I don't know about that but another shopping mall shooting and another school / educational establishment shooting all in the space of less than a week and during “ normal “ times does not bode well for how a percentage of the population could act if there was some kind of systemic failure?

The EU has just laid out the roadmap for banking control and possible unification at long last. This was the step that was missed when the euro was launched. Better late than never but it'll take time for the various effets of each step to kick in. Euro-zone is probably a good investment now for long-term, certainly better than USA where most of the debt appears to be owned by China.

The EU has just laid out the roadmap for banking control and possible unification at long last. This was the step that was missed when the euro was launched. Better late than never but it'll take time for the various effets of each step to kick in. Euro-zone is probably a good investment now for long-term, certainly better than USA where most of the debt appears to be owned by China.

Banking union will not end Europe’s crisis

What a banking union will do is ensure that the monetary union becomes sustainable. But it has to survive first.

http://www.ft.com/in...l#axzz2F5N0AMKI