Tag: Financial crisis

 

Gee, it’s a good thing the governments rode to the rescue with billions of dollars in Corporate Welfare for the lying cheating fucktards who screwed everything up, no?

Otherwise, gosh, we would have had people not being able to buy bread, power shut off to everyone, riots in the streets …

No, we would have had the banks nationalized.  Which is what should have happened in the first place.

But here with the 1-year anniversary of the collapse, we are having a ridiculous level of retroactive propagandizing BY the criminals who fucked everything up in the first place.  The same people who STILL haven’t had any new regulations to control their activities, the same people who STILL haven’t faced any repercussions for nearly destroying the economy of the western world, are now expecting us to BELIEVE their bullshit about how they managed to dodge the bullet and keep us all from anarchy and starvation …

U.K. Faced ‘Bank Runs, Riots’ as RBS and HBOS Neared Collapse

This begs the question for me — why haven’t we had a run on the banks? Who in their right mind would continue keeping their money in banks?  How stupid are people?  Wait, I already know the answer to that.

“Hey, I know we almost destroyed the world economy, and took every dollar you owned with it, but hey, it’s all good now!  Trust us!”

Oct. 7 (Bloomberg) — A year ago today, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and HBOS Plc were close to collapse, causing a chain reaction that could have ended with riots in U.K. cities, security analysts and economists said.

Bank failures would have forced the government to cancel police leave and deploy troops as the breakdown of the financial payments system threatened the ability of utilities to provide essential services, said David Livingstone, a fellow at the Royal Institute for International Affairs in London, a former adviser to the government’s Cobra crisis response committee.

“You are talking about a situation with mass disorder and panic,” the former Royal Navy officer said in an interview. There would be “riots, pandemonium, everyone fending for themselves.”

Chancellor of the Exchequer Alistair Darling, Bank of England Governor Mervyn King and Financial Services Authority Chairman Adair Turner met at 5 p.m. on Oct. 7, 2008, and readied a 250 billion-pound ($398 billion) rescue for the banks in the 16 hours before they opened for business the following day. In response to a Freedom of Information Act request from Bloomberg News one year on, the Treasury declined to say if it had a contingency plan for the two banks, then or now.

Releasing such information would probably “have a destabilizing effect on financial markets,” damage the government decision-making process and cause commercial harm to the banks involved, the Treasury said in a letter.

“In the current economic climate, economic perception, even if totally misconceived, is important and has the capacity to alter market behavior,” the government said. “To confirm or deny whether or not the information is held, either in relation to the banks mentioned in your request or more generally” would hurt the banks and the U.K.’s economic interests.

‘Catastrophic’ Costs

The crisis last year was the worst Britain had faced in peacetime, Darling told the British Broadcasting Corp. last month. The two banks were not “confident they could get to the end of the day,” on Oct. 7, King told the same program.

“You would have had unmitigated panic and a bank run,” said Tom Kirchmaier, a fellow at the London School of Economics. “People would not have been able to buy bread. The cost to the economy would have been catastrophic.”

RBS and HBOS, then in talks to be taken over by Lloyds TSB Group Plc, had more than 35 million business and individual customers with 475 billion pounds of deposits, 22 percent of the U.K. total, held at about 3,250 branches.

‘Contagious Effects’

“If RBS hadn’t been propped up as it was, in practice it would have been nationalized the following week,” former Bank of England deputy governor John Gieve said in a Bloomberg Television interview. “If RBS, HBOS, Lloyds had gone down, that would have had huge contagious effects throughout the rest of the world.”

The failure of Edinburgh-based RBS and HBOS would have had a domino-effect with customers seeking to take out their deposits from other lenders and causing a wider run on U.K. banks, said Vicky Redwood, an economist at Capital Economics Ltd.

“Trust in the banking system would have completely collapsed” and would have generated civil unrest, said Redwood. “People would have been rushing to take their money out of the other banks and you would have been heading back to the depression era.”

Movie marques in cities across America tonight showcase “free admission” to Michael Moore’s latest film,”Capitalism: A Love Story” for anyone who’s “fallen on hard times.”

“To kick off the national release of “Capitalism: A Love Story,” I’ve asked the studio to offer a number of screenings in the nation’s hardest hit cities — the ones with the highest unemployment rates and highest foreclosure rates — where those who’ve lost their jobs or who are in foreclosure (or have already been evicted) may attend my film free of charge,” Moore writes.  “They’ve agreed, and so tonight (Thursday), the night before our opening day, ten cities will grant you free admission if you have fallen on hard times. The list of theaters and cities is below. You don’t need to bring any proof of your situation — just show up — it’s the honor system, no questions asked. Link

The free 7:30 p.m. screenings are scheduled in Saginaw, Michigan; Elkhart Indiana;Peoria, Illinois; Las Vegas, Nevada, Fresno, California, Phoenix, Arizona, Raleigh/Durham, North Carolina;Baltimore, Maryland, Tampa/St. Pete/Florida and Cleveland, Ohio. For information on theater locations, click here.

“Capitalism, A Love Story” debuts tomorrow.

(from dmott9’s flickr photostream

The looting operation commonly known as the US Government’s financial rescue plan will accelerate now that we know the next move in this cynical game. Up to now, the hundreds of billions of dollars supplied by taxpayers to dishonest and incompetent financial institutions have been LOANS. In theory, at least, the recipients pledged to repay the taxpayers once their businesses recovered. Now we learn that Geithner and Summers, the embedded agents of Wall Street intend to convert these loans to STOCK. What’s wrong with that? Here’s what is wrong:

1. Common stock holders, unlike bond holders or secured lenders, have no assurance of any return on their investment. All they are entitled to are stock certificates and an invitation to the shareholders’ meeting. Bankruptcy of the company in which they own stock usually results in a TOTAL LOSS.

2. The voting rights of stock can be engineered to deprive certain classes of stockholders of representation. This can be done by subtle, incremental degrees, so that the public slowly loses the control that would properly be associated with a large equity position. All a crooked bank has to do is get the government to agree to convert its equity into a class of stock that has restricted voting rights. Since Geithner and Summers are Wall Street puppets, their complicity in this matter is assured. Anything that restores investor “confidence” in the markets is OK with them.

3. A large equity position usually translates into representation on the board of directors, another important means of control that should be available to taxpayers owning substantial amounts of stock in a company. However, the appointment of “zombie directors,” removes this threat to management. The government-appointed directors of AIG have already demonstrated their completely ineffectual presence and thus provided an impressive example of how not to represent the interests of taxpayers.

Conversion of US Treasury loans to stock without securing the rights of stockholders for the taxpayers is the perfect form of “nationalization” for Wall Street. The gangsters at Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Citigroup, and B of A will receive vast infusions of taxpayer cash, while continuing to operate irresponsibly and paying themselves lavish bonuses. The taxpayer “stockholders” will either lose everything in massive bankruptcies and reorganizations or receive nothing in return for their huge investment as their equity is rendered meaningless by cunning management maneuvering.

This is legalized looting of the Treasury, and Obama’s administration is directly responsible for it.

Jordan Valley stands next to me at the crap game. She looks like a hooker but she’s really a porn star. Big difference. Sex for money, sure, but still a big difference. Hookers have no screen presence, Spitzer’s is a perfect example, and when you see Jordan for the first time, well all you can say is – “I get it.”

Jordan could have been a big star. She’s got the looks; the camera loves her; her voice is smoky valley girl, but Jordan Valley can’t act her way out of a paper bag. Or plastic.

So, I’ve got Jordan standing next to me blowing on my dice for luck, the pit crew is looking at me like I’m crazy and I’m sure the eyes in the sky are gathering for the next play. I’ve bet it all on one roll of the dice; a $50,000 prop bet on a crap three. It pays fifteen to one. One roll for $750,000. Just enough for what I need.

And just as I throw down the table, Jordan whispers in my ear “Are you a madman or a fool?”

Everyone who ever watched the X-Files is familiar with the sinister figure of the “cancer man,” the chain-smoking head of the conspiracy to manipulate humanity for its own good (and that of its secret government).

The image of the cancer man is much in my mind these days as I ponder the question of how Geithner and Summers were appointed to determine Obama’s economic policies. After doing a bit of fruitless Google searching to answer this question, I realized that I already knew the answer. These men were put in place by people who wish to remain unknown, because their actions as the true controllers of the Executive Branch of the government of the United States are contrary to the beliefs of the American people and the founding principles of our nation.

When the cancer men selected Geithner and Summers they guaranteed that the interests of wealthy individuals and powerful financial corporations would be placed above the interests of ordinary taxpayers. Since the arithmetic of Democracy opposes such an outcome, they must operate in secret, and that is why there is no available anwer to the question of who proposed Geithner and Summers. What is even more interesting is that this question is not even raised in the press.

How do the cancer men conceal their role? They use the age-old devices of indirect action and influence that have corrupted politics for millenia. A key corruption mechanism is the “marker” system of exchanging favors. Ambitious and well-connected people keep a mental ledger book of favors done and received for and from powerful acquaintances. Dealing reliably with markers qualifies a player in this system for advancement to a powerful position. Geithner and Summers were appointed in exchange for loyal past service in protecting the interests of very wealthy and powerful people. They understand that people who accumulate these markers will be able to cash them in at the end of their public service for very comfortable living arrangements.

Similarly, the people who put Geithner and Summers on the (very) short list for Obama cabinet appointments were accumulating markers for future redemption. The beauty of the marker system is that there is no immediate quid-pro-quo to compromise the players. Temporal separation of corrupt action and subsequent reward sterilizes the transaction and frustrates investigation. Even if we could find every last phone log, email, and meeting transcript pertinent to the Geithner and Summers nominations, we would never find a direct inducement of bribery. All we would see is powerful people “suggesting,” through intermediaries, that these men would be “good choices” for Obama.

So I ask you all to ponder why nobody in the press knows who recommended Geithner and Summers for their jobs, and, more importantly, why nobody even cares about this question: Who are the people who control the Obama administration?

Who are the cancer men?

Original article, by Barry Grey, via World Socialist Web Site:

Some of the more astute and honest commentators on the “bailout” of the American auto companies announced Friday by President Bush have pointed to a critical aspect of the plan to shut plants, wipe out jobs and bring the wages, benefits and work rules of United Auto Workers members in line with those of workers at nonunion foreign-owned companies in the US.

Even Bush said if you repeat the propaganda enough people will believe, or didn’t somebody say that earlier in history, like maybe Herman Goebbels?

Original article, a speech by Jeremy Dear given at the Annual Conference of the Labour Representation Committee (the organising hub of the left wing within the Labour Party and among trade union activists), via Socialist Appeal (UK):

As an aside, you may be asking why we should be interested in what Jeremy Dear is giving a speech on? The answer, to me, is simple: Labour has been hijacked by the neoliberal militarists just the same as the Democrats have been. While the crisis in Britain may not be 100% the same as here in the US, it is part and parcel of the collapse of international capitalism. Our workers face the same problems as theirs. It is within this framework that I think Dear’s speech is worth a read: