Financial Crisis

[Naam]

I have to confess that I was not aware before reading this that derivatives have “super-priority” status

in any bankruptcy.

" Cyprus-style confiscation of depositor funds has been called the “new normal.” Bail-in policies are appearing in multiple countries directing failing TBTF banks to convert the funds of “unsecured creditors” into capital; and those creditors, it turns out, include ordinary depositors.

Shock waves went around the world when the IMF, the EU, and the ECB not only approved but mandated the confiscation of depositor funds to “bail in” two bankrupt banks in Cyprus. A “bail in” is a quantum leap beyond a “bail out.” When governments are no longer willing to use taxpayer money to bail out banks that have gambled away theircapital, the banks are now being instructed to “recapitalize” themselves by confiscating the funds of their creditors, turning debt into equity, or stock; and the “creditors” include the depositors who put their money in the bank thinking it was a secure place to store their savings."

In the US after the Glass-Steagall Act was implemented in 1933, a bank could not gamble with depositor funds for its own account; but in 1999, that barrier was removed. Recent congressional investigations have revealed that in the biggest derivative banks, JPMorgan and Bank of America, massive commingling has occurred between their depository arms and their unregulated and highly vulnerable derivatives arms. Under both the Dodd Frank Act and the 2005 Bankruptcy Act, derivative claims have super-priority over all other claims, secured and unsecured, insured and uninsured. In a major derivatives fiasco, derivative claimants could well grab all the collateral, leaving other claimants, public and private, holding th

e bag.

The derivatives market is estimated at $600 trillion , which is 10 times the size of U.S. GDP and just four banks hold a staggering 95.9% of U.S. derivatives

Pity that you haven't got the faintest clue how a derivative works.

derivatives and the bullshit how the gloom&doomers label them have been discussed in this thread

ad nauseam since years. but the bullshit keeps on walking and surfacing same as the bullshit spread

by the "Silver Quacks", the "Galactic gold-pressed Latinum Council" et al.

that derivatives in various forms are also used by rice farmers in Isaan and by average investors has

been explained multiple times... but to no avail.

oh well...

[midas]

derivatives and the bullshit how the gloom&doomers label them have been discussed in this thread

ad nauseam since years. but the bullshit keeps on walking and surfacing same as the bullshit spread

by the "Silver Quacks", the "Galactic gold-pressed Latinum Council" et al.

that derivatives in various forms are also used by rice farmers in Isaan and by average investors has

been explained multiple times... but to no avail.

oh well...

And equally as has been discussed in this thread ad nauseam since years as you put it

is that some of us use this thread to exchange resources so we can at least try to work out what the hell is going on and even try to get a better idea the extent of this thing we call the financial crisis.

There are some people who have spent their entire working life in the field of derivatives and who, who have consistently warned of potential problems and the size of the potential problems. Naam surely you have to give such people some credit? Apart from that our previous debates in this thread on this subject were confined to the potential size of the problem. Some people who have worked in this field all their lives say it's of great concern because of the sheer size- $600 trillion whereas i know by now you have consistently dismissed that. Although you have never explained why it is not a problem?Can you do that now for our benefit?

Why exactly is it bullshit ?

ANYWAY apart from all that the information I posted in #13498 deals with an entirely different concern and I

can't see how you can simply dismiss this as being bullshit without at least explaining yourself for the benefit of people who may not know what you may know ? .

This deals with the priority of ownership in the event of a collapse of the bank. I forgot to put the link to the book, from which this information was taken. The book is entitled Web of Debt: The Shocking Truth About Our Money System written by an attorney named Ellen Hodgson Brown , who is also president of the public banking institute. I have no reason not to treat what she has written in any way other than with an open mind. What she writes seems perfectly logical and of great concern. So why is what she is saying bullshit

in your eyes?

She is merely explaining the scenario that could lead to the banks seizing people's bank accounts

The very fact that we have reached this stage where governments and banksters seem quite openly relaxed about confiscating peoples hard earned private assets suggests to me that the rabbit hole could be much deeper and much more complex than many people could even contemplate. Otherwise, why would the banksters and governments be prepared to even contemplate such drastic action?

http://www.amazon.com/Web-Debt-Shocking-Truth-System/dp/0983330859/ref=dp_ob_title_bk#reader_0983330859

[

Edited April 11, 2013 by midas

[Naam]

There
are some people who have spent their entire working life in the field
of derivatives and who, who have consistently warned of potential
problems and the size of the potential problems.

Naam surely you have to give such people some credit?

our previous debates in this thread on this subject were confined to the
potential size of the problem. Some people who have worked in this
field all their lives say it's of great concern because of the sheer
size- $600 trillion whereas i know by now you have consistently
dismissed that.

YES Midas, i do! but "size of potential problems" has nothing to do with

"often misquoted size in volume/value".

there was a time, i'm sure one can even find it in this thread,

when talk was about $60 trillion which not much later morphed

miraculously to $600 trillion which is correct but... see below.

Apart from that
Although you have never explained why it is not a problem?

Can you do that now for our benefit?
Why exactly is it bullshit ?

i am not wasting my time writing a dissertation and limit myself

to "talking about financial derivatives in volumes and generalising

their potential problems without a shred of definition what derivatives

are, how they work and who are using them is plain bullshit".

the majority of derivatives are nothing but simple business transactions

without the danger of causing problems but in many cases generating

benefits for both parties including the bank/broker/intermediary who

arranges that contractual transaction for a fee.

simple example:

-Midas is a farmer growing rice.

-Naam has a big extended family which devours rice by the bags.

-Midas has certain expenses to meet to be paid for by his rice harvest in autumn

but does not know whether the price he will achieve will match these expenses.

-Naam has a certain amount of income till autumn when he has to buy the rice to

feed his extended family. because he is a planner he buys all the rice needed in

bulk for an extended period.

to solve their problems

-Midas approaches an intermediary and asks him to find today a buyer for his rice

to be harvested in autumn for price "X" that is sufficient to pay for the living expenses

(extended period) of the Midas family, rice seedlings, fertiliser, maintenance of machinery

and hired labour.

-intermediary tells Midas "can do, no problem!" because

-Naam has yesterday approached the intermediary with "i would like to buy rice of

this autumns harvest for price "X" because "family mine hab hungryness too mutt".

intermediary arranges a deal between Midas and Naam, takes his fees, is happy

and Midas as well as Naam are happy and have a good night's sleep.

when autumn arrives various scenarios are possible such as

-harvest brought in rice price matches Midas's selling and Naam's buying price.

everybody is happy. no problem.

-harvest was extremely good. rainy season provided just the right amount of precipitation,

bumper harvest, rice price goes down. Midas happy because he has a secured a good

price for his product. Naam not so happy because he could have bought the rice considerably

cheaper but consoles himself "at least i could sleep relaxed". no problem.

-harvest yields very low. hardly any rain when it was needed. rice price explodes. Midas

making a sour face but Mrs Midas tells him "don't make a face. you got for your rice the

price you asked for and all the money we need for the next season!" Naam very happy

because he saved money. bottom line: no problem.

-worst case scenario. rice harvest down to 15% of usual yield. it turns out that Midas does

not own any rice fields but sold "nekkid". Naam demands his rice for the agreed price.

problem but only if Midas does not sell some of his gold stash, buy the expensive rice and

delivers it to Naam. if Midas has no gold stash and no daughters he can sell into slavery then

big problem.

dozens of different scenarios exist but only the last one i mentioned causes problems. in

reality most of these kind of deals are closed smoothly without causing any problems.

[mccw]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

[mccw]

Naams is a nice example of what a properly regulated derivatives market should be dealing in; but presently the whole sector is sparsely regulated if at all and so wide open to abuses.

The worse being where the biz or farmer is on one side and the bank on the other rather than simply acting as an middle man facilitating smooth operations of trade they are actively betting against the real productive economy and sucking the wealth out of it while not producing or contributing anything useful themselves.

[manarak]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

Derivatives transactions must be done by qualified people who understand the products.

In this case, there is no "misselling", because derivatives are a matter of equations, not emotions.

Anyway, only the sales people / banks are to blame and not the product in itself.

Would you blame 18 karat gold if some crook sold 525 gold to you, pretending it's 18k?

For me the problem lies with banks and sales.

[manarak]

Naams is a nice example of what a properly regulated derivatives market should be dealing in; but presently the whole sector is sparsely regulated if at all and so wide open to abuses.

The worse being where the biz or farmer is on one side and the bank on the other rather than simply acting as an middle man facilitating smooth operations of trade they are actively betting against the real productive economy and sucking the wealth out of it while not producing or contributing anything useful themselves.

Naams example is a classic hedge deal.

There is nothing wrong with such futures/forwards, even if as you descibe, mccw, the counterparty is a bank.

These are standardized products, and the banks that act as counterparties are not "sucking the wealth out", there is no way to do that with such products.

In fact it is rare that hedge transactions will be made between two hedgers, and any "betting" will instead increase the liquidity of the market, which is a good thing.

Problems stem from "structured products", where neither the product nor the counterparty risks are easily understandable. Add some sales bla-bla and sales incentives on top, and you've got a recipe for disaster.

That's the part of the derivatives market that needs regulation, not the straight futures and options.

[cheeryble]

So Mccw

You seem to have serious concerns.......so.

1. What proportion of all derivatives do you have complaints about? (within a couple of % will do)

2. Are you forwarding them to the compliance officers and regulators?

And If you don't have a good answer to 1or 2 .....

<deleted> are u wasting our time with them for?

[midas]

YES Midas, i do! but "size of potential problems" has nothing to do with[/font][/size] "often

misquoted size in volume/value". there was a time, i'm sure one can even find it in this thread,when talk was about $60 trillion which not much later morphed miraculously to $600 trillion

Naam yes I concede I don't know how they arrived at $600 trillion only that this kind of figure now seems to appear consistently in all reports. But surely isn't that also a big part of the problem?

No one knows exactly how many there are, or what they are because the market is totally unregulated ?

i am not wasting my time writing a dissertation

I wasn't asking you to write a dissertation Naam , but you did so anyway!

No I was only looking for you to define in more detail which element (s ) you consider to be “ bullshit“? For example is it :-

( a ) that you don't believe the outstanding value of derivatives is around $600 trillion?

( b ) that you don't consider these outstanding derivatives to present a similar problem to that

which occurred in 2008?

( c ) you don't consider it to be a problem that they are totally unregulated?

etc, etc…….

and limit myself to to "talking about financial derivatives in volumes and generalizing their

potential problems without a shred of definition what derivatives are, how they work and who are using them is plain bullshit".

I think it is recognised by those trying to ring the alarm bells we are talking generally about what is commonly referred to as over-the-counter derivatives ( OTC ). But these can include Collateralized Debt Obligations related to mortgages and CDSs, ( Credit Default Swaps ), futures contracts, interest rate swaps, options contracts, foreign exchange contracts etc. but I believe the general consensus is that credit default swaps are the main cause for concern and absolutely none of it is regulated.

the majority of derivatives are nothing but simple business transactions without the danger of causing problems

I totally disagree with that statement and I would go as far as to say it is grossly inaccurate, simplybecause you or I or anyone simply don't know that?! Not even Brooksley Born the former head ofthe Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] knew that and she resigned because of that !

Edited April 12, 2013 by midas

[midas]

Naam please consider how utterly bizarre the situation looks right now :-


1. A former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC], Brooksley Born was appointed by Bill Clinton. This woman was the top of her class at law school and was an exceptionally bright woman. She tried desperately to regulate derivatives but was vilified by Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin (then-Treasury Secretary ) and Larry Summers then-Deputy TreasurySecretary ) These 3 people even poisoned the minds of members of Congress to stop Born and limit future regulation. Everyone turned against her simply because she was the lone wolf warning people about the danger of derivatives and yet just a few weeks later she was proved correct !!.


2. Then Alan Greenspan subsequently appeared before Congress and admitted he was wrong about his theory he had applied over 40 years that markets can regulate themsleves and he was wrong about his belief that there was no reason to regulate the derivatives market . But actually Alan Greenspan in one sense misled or even lied to Congress because 40 years ago there were no such thing as derivatives!


3. Then you had Barack Obama as soon as he took power swearing to immediately tackle the regulation of credit default swaps. But look at what has happened? Once again the lobbyists have stopped him and that is why even to this day the derivatives market still remains totally unregulated.


This excellent Frontline documentary called “ The Warning “ describes all this and if you fast forward to 22.17 minutes you will hear Brooksley Born the former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] herself say she was so worried about derivatives that she couldn't sleep at night !!

She firmly believes there will be another 2008 caused by derivatives ! Would you call her the doom and gloomer because of that?


http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657

Edited April 12, 2013 by midas

[midas]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

in a nutshell mccw !

Edited April 12, 2013 by midas

[mccw]

So Mccw You seem to have serious concerns.......so.1. What proportion of all derivatives do you have complaints about? (within a couple of % will do)2. Are you forwarding them to the compliance officers and regulators?And If you don't have a good answer to 1or 2 .....<deleted> are u wasting our time with them for?

Those warning of something fishy over at Lehman Bros, Enron or Cyprus were wasting everyone's time were they? Sure they didn't know full size of the s"t pile but they could see its likely to hit the fan sooner or later and can take steps to prepare or profit accordingly.

Chock dee

[mccw]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

Derivatives transactions must be done by qualified people who understand the products.

In this case, there is no "misselling", because derivatives are a matter of equations, not emotions.

Anyway, only the sales people / banks are to blame and not the product in itself.

Would you blame 18 karat gold if some crook sold 525 gold to you, pretending it's 18k?

For me the problem lies with banks and sales.

"Banks miss sold 90% of derivatives"!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/rate-swap-scandal/9838803/Banks-mis-sold-more-than-90pc-of-rate-swaps-says-FSA.html

[manarak]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

Derivatives transactions must be done by qualified people who understand the products.

In this case, there is no "misselling", because derivatives are a matter of equations, not emotions.

Anyway, only the sales people / banks are to blame and not the product in itself.

Would you blame 18 karat gold if some crook sold 525 gold to you, pretending it's 18k?

For me the problem lies with banks and sales.

"Banks miss sold 90% of derivatives"!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/rate-swap-scandal/9838803/Banks-mis-sold-more-than-90pc-of-rate-swaps-says-FSA.html

so we agree, that's great!

[midas]

As an indication as to what extent this business lacks good faith in “ The Warning “ they describe how one employee referred to the business as a "wet dream “ and another Bankers Trust employee said, "We set them up."

Echoes of Goldman Sachs, referring to their own clients as “ muppets “….

Problems stem from "structured products", where neither the product nor the counterparty risks are easily understandable. Add some sales bla-bla and sales incentives on top, and you've got a recipe for disaster.
That's the part of the derivatives market that needs regulation, not the straight futures and options.

Edited April 12, 2013 by midas

[Naam]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

mccw,

we all have been warned that (not all) banks made and still make speculative bets, that was several years ago. therefore we had all time to adjust as much as possible (within our means, capabilities and last not least available possibilities) to protect whatever little wealth we own.

that we don't agree how to do the latter is quite normal.

it also goes without saying that most probably none of the resident participants commands a total net worth of $ 20 million which (i think) is required to distribute assets in such a diversified manner that even the worst case scenario will not endanger a modestly comfortable life style.

standing at the wailing wall and hitting our heads on it whilst bitterly complaining about that cruel world and its criminal bankers/politicians and what not will abso-<deleted>-lutely not cause any change but is a pure waste of time.

that also applies to irrelevant discussions about trillions of derivatives which may let the universe crumble or pitying Lady Brooksley who has sleepless nights about it.

Naam please consider how utterly bizarre the situation looks right now

no i won't Midas. perhaps i would waste a naughty thought if Lady Brooksley had big boobs and a big butt and was my neighbour. but then another Lady, namely Mrs Naam would make sure that any naughty thought of mine does not become real.

[mccw]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

[yoshiwara]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

Those plans probably focus on holding on to rapidly plunging gold prices....

[mccw]

Buy buy buy

[Naam]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

the lot constantly chanting "just wait... it will... in future... it's only a matter of time" has lost contact with today's reality and misses a lot of chances to compensate for the future dangers they are warning.

sitting back, chanting a mantra and hope that it will come true within a time frame that they have no idea about or pointing out negative incidents with wailing and mourning which have no effects on what happened or will happen is not a solution.

[midas]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

the lot constantly chanting "just wait... it will... in future... it's only a matter of time" has lost contact with today's reality and misses a lot of chances to compensate for the future dangers they are warning.

sitting back, chanting a mantra and hope that it will come true within a time frame that they have no idea about or pointing out negative incidents with wailing and mourning which have no effects on what happened or will happen is not a solution.

Yes but hang on a minute! Lady Brooksley said "just wait... it will... in future... it's only a matter of time" and then was proved correct, not once.......... but TWICE ! And whether she has big boobs and a big butt or not ....compared to you who earlier in this thread said “what financial crisis “ ? ..............she has a considerably better track record at interpreting the financial system and predicting “ events “ than you do.

And just maybe some people “ sit back and chant a mantra “ because it's better than participating in a fraudulent Ponzi that is inevitably going to collapse again because absolutely nothing has been fixed?

Edited April 13, 2013 by midas

[lannarebirth]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

I think one may assume that banks are always acting in dangerous bad faith so long as they continue to control legislatiures (unless it is the legislature that controls the bank, which is becoming a less frequent occurance). That said, there are worse things than having your money in the bank, under insured limits of course, owning property and owning income producing instruments.

[midas]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

Those plans probably focus on holding on to rapidly plunging gold prices....

But they still have something to show for it, as opposed to the poor buggers who had their BIG money in bank accounts in Cyprus and the same for whoever is next ( rumour it is a tossup between Portugal and Slovenia )

[lannarebirth]

Naam please consider how utterly bizarre the situation looks right now :-

1. A former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC], Brooksley Born was appointed by Bill Clinton. This woman was the top of her class at law school and was an exceptionally bright woman. She tried desperately to regulate derivatives but was vilified by Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin (then-Treasury Secretary ) and Larry Summers then-Deputy TreasurySecretary ) These 3 people even poisoned the minds of members of Congress to stop Born and limit future regulation. Everyone turned against her simply because she was the lone wolf warning people about the danger of derivatives and yet just a few weeks later she was proved correct !!.

2. Then Alan Greenspan subsequently appeared before Congress and admitted he was wrong about his theory he had applied over 40 years that markets can regulate themsleves and he was wrong about his belief that there was no reason to regulate the derivatives market . But actually Alan Greenspan in one sense misled or even lied to Congress because 40 years ago there were no such thing as derivatives!

3. Then you had Barack Obama as soon as he took power swearing to immediately tackle the regulation of credit default swaps. But look at what has happened? Once again the lobbyists have stopped him and that is why even to this day the derivatives market still remains totally unregulated.

This excellent Frontline documentary called “ The Warning “ describes all this and if you fast forward to 22.17 minutes you will hear Brooksley Born the former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] herself say she was so worried about derivatives that she couldn't sleep at night !!

She firmly believes there will be another 2008 caused by derivatives ! Would you call her the doom and gloomer because of that?

http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657

I don't think anyone midas, including your detractors, say you're wrong. I think what they say is "So what?". How does that background information help anyone protect their money or make more? Frankly midas i agree with most of what you say, but we have different tactics it seems. My tactic is in trying to make more money to beat these bastards back. It's been my experience that having more helps. I'm not sure what you've been do'in.

[lannarebirth]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

Derivatives transactions must be done by qualified people who understand the products.

In this case, there is no "misselling", because derivatives are a matter of equations, not emotions.

Anyway, only the sales people / banks are to blame and not the product in itself.

Would you blame 18 karat gold if some crook sold 525 gold to you, pretending it's 18k?

For me the problem lies with banks and sales.

"Banks miss sold 90% of derivatives"!!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/rate-swap-scandal/9838803/Banks-mis-sold-more-than-90pc-of-rate-swaps-says-FSA.html

Interesting article. There is no such thing as "no cost" insurance as any first year college student could tell you. I imagine people selling that "insurance" profitted handsomely by it, personally.

Edited April 13, 2013 by lannarebirth

[mania]

I don't think anyone midas, including your detractors, say you're wrong. I think what they say is "So what?". How does that background information help anyone protect their money or make more? Frankly midas i agree with most of what you say, but we have different tactics it seems. My tactic is in trying to make more money to beat these bastards back. It's been my experience that having more helps. I'm not sure what you've been do'in.

I agree but it is exhausting

It is both a stop gap & a curse

Curse because as long as the majority thinks this way

nothing will change.

Stop gap is obvious & logical, but exhausting & sad.

I do not condone violence but I do wish at times folks would

"beat these bastards back" with some good old fashioned justice.

[lannarebirth]

Problem is Naam, based on all the evidence of speculative bets and even purposeful destructive practices, how can any one believe the banks are not acting in dangerous bad faith? Especially when they have now snuck legislation through making thier derivatives no1 for payouts, completely throwing out the traditional hierarchy... This really smacks of a set up in the offing.

There are also numerous articles about the banks miss selling interest rate hedges to SMEs. Like PPI but far more damaging

mccw,

we all have been warned that (not all) banks made and still make speculative bets, that was several years ago. therefore we had all time to adjust as much as possible (within our means, capabilities and last not least available possibilities) to protect whatever little wealth we own.

that we don't agree how to do the latter is quite normal.

it also goes without saying that most probably none of the resident participants commands a total net worth of $ 20 million which (i think) is required to distribute assets in such a diversified manner that even the worst case scenario will not endanger a modestly comfortable life style.

standing at the wailing wall and hitting our heads on it whilst bitterly complaining about that cruel world and its criminal bankers/politicians and what not will abso-<deleted>-lutely not cause any change but is a pure waste of time.

that also applies to irrelevant discussions about trillions of derivatives which may let the universe crumble or pitying Lady Brooksley who has sleepless nights about it.

>Naam please consider how utterly bizarre the situation looks right now

no i won't Midas. perhaps i would waste a naughty thought if Lady Brooksley had big boobs and a big butt and was my neighbour. but then another Lady, namely Mrs Naam would make sure that any naughty thought of mine does not become real.

It wasn't that long ago that 2 million was real money, then 5 million. Now 20 million? I'm not sure I can keep up. The good news, I suppose, is that people are calling me, almost everyday, to buy property I bought many years ago for pennies on the current dollar/baht.

[lannarebirth]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

Those plans probably focus on holding on to rapidly plunging gold prices....

But they still have something to show for it, as opposed to the poor buggers who had their BIG money in bank accounts in Cyprus and the same for whoever is next ( rumour it is a tossup between Portugal and Slovenia )

Let's say you're right. Would you continue to keep your money in Portugal or Slovenia? Are there bank controls yet? No.

Edited April 13, 2013 by lannarebirth

[midas]

lannarebirth, on 13 Apr 2013 - 11:54, said:

midas, on 12 Apr 2013 - 12:06, said:

Naam please consider how utterly bizarre the situation looks right now :-

1. A former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC], Brooksley Born was appointed by Bill Clinton. This woman was the top of her class at law school and was an exceptionally bright woman. She tried desperately to regulate derivatives but was vilified by Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin (then-Treasury Secretary ) and Larry Summers then-Deputy TreasurySecretary ) These 3 people even poisoned the minds of members of Congress to stop Born and limit future regulation. Everyone turned against her simply because she was the lone wolf warning people about the danger of derivatives and yet just a few weeks later she was proved correct !!.

2. Then Alan Greenspan subsequently appeared before Congress and admitted he was wrong about his theory he had applied over 40 years that markets can regulate themsleves:rolleyes: and he was wrong about his belief that there was no reason to regulate the derivatives market . But actually Alan Greenspan in one sense misled or even lied to Congress because 40 years ago there were no such thing as derivatives!

3. Then you had Barack Obama as soon as he took power swearing to immediately tackle the regulation of credit default swaps. But look at what has happened? Once again the lobbyists have stopped him and that is why even to this day the derivatives market still remains totally unregulated.

This excellent Frontline documentary called “ The Warning “ describes all this and if you fast forward to 22.17 minutes you will hear Brooksley Born the former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] herself say she was so worried about derivatives that she couldn't sleep at night !!

She firmly believes there will be another 2008 caused by derivatives ! Would you call her the doom and gloomer because of that?

http://video.pbs.org/video/1302794657

I don't think anyone midas, including your detractors, say you're wrong. I think what they say is "So what?". How does that background information help anyone protect their money or make more? Frankly midas i agree with most of what you say, but we have different tactics it seems. My tactic is in trying to make more money to beat these bastards back. It's been my experience that having more helps. I'm not sure what you've been do'in.

And how can you possibly fight the bastards back when our society has become one where our political

leaders not only support but actively encourage ( and get elected on this platform ) 50% of the population to do bugger all and where the other 50% have to support them. This culture is not going to change in my lifetime!

Can I ask you why do you say making more helps?

Can you be more specific as to why it is necessary to keep making more in your case? What is wrong if a person assesses their own situation, decides they are living a comfortable and stress free life and no longer wants to be involved in financial system which has too many fraudulent aspects? Maybe I would have been tempted if there was even the slightest attempt to clean up the system whereas things have actually got even worse.

It doesn't help me at all if I am risking what I have spent so much of my working life accumulating ? It would be like stepping out on a frozen lake knowing that at any time it will give way.

that kind of background information may help some to decide that protecting what they already have at this point in time should be more important than hoping to make more?

Edited April 13, 2013 by midas

[Naam]

The lot constantly denying the plainly obvious are the real time wasters. This is the financial crises thread so naturally related links are shared. Its not about moaning. Just updating. We all have our own plans in action but I still enjoy to see the links. Keep em coming. Cheers

the lot constantly chanting "just wait... it will... in future... it's only a matter of time" has lost contact with today's reality and misses a lot of chances to compensate for the future dangers they are warning.

sitting back, chanting a mantra and hope that it will come true within a time frame that they have no idea about or pointing out negative incidents with wailing and mourning which have no effects on what happened or will happen is not a solution.

Yes but hang on a minute! Lady Brooksley said "just wait... it will... in future... it's only a matter of time" and then was proved correct, not once.......... but TWICE ! And whether she has big boobs and a big butt or not ....compared to you who earlier in this thread said “what financial crisis “ ? ..............she has a considerably better track record at interpreting the financial system and predicting “ events “ than you do.

And just maybe some people “ sit back and chant a mantra “ because it's better than participating in a fraudulent Ponzi that is inevitably going to collapse again because absolutely nothing has been fixed?

i care a flying fàrt whether or how many times Lady Brooksley was right. her sleepless nights does not put food on my table or pay my utility bills. perhaps she has a better track record interpreting the financial system but i seriously doubt she made more dough than me since 2008 with her attitude. sleepless nights hamper logical thinking during daytime!

i said once in jest "what financial crisis?" which you keep on repeatedly quoting out of context because you are a xxxxx who likes twisting facts or sidestep issues. today i say "what financial crisis?" and i mean it because the last eruption of a financial crisis has provided clever investors with opportunities that don't come up every now and then. having said so, i admit that the big bang will come sooner or later. sooner means perhaps in a couple of months, later means perhaps not within my statistical life expectancy.

when will you realise that neither you nor me can fight Goldman Sucks or the Right Honourable Mr. Diamond (sic!) who does "God's work"? for God's sake stop your wailing, whining and whinging! go to your rice fields and do some irrigating or plant some vegetables in your garden instead of pitying ad nauseam the poor Cypriots or Zimbabwens because of their financial losses. get a dog or two and have some fun with them.

and... come to think of it... nobody here is interested what shitty city in California went bankrupt or what redneck state assembly members are mulling to introduce gold coins in the upper midwest of the Greatest Nation on Earth™. 99% of Thaivisa members who live in Thailand are interested in the exchange THB/home currency or how to add some income for a better living. and that applies to another "the writing's on the wall!" member MCCW too.

Thaivisa is loaded nearly every day with new hare-brained schemes how to make some additional Baht. but even those who come up with the silliest ideas are preferable to the wailing ones because they are trying to work out something instead of repeating "the sky is falling!"