It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. Bank ' to fail within months '

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 11:23 AM
link   
Good points. It's sad to see that people can't see through the massive layers of propoganda we are subject to everyday.


Originally posted by St Udio
the OP link must have been reading the plethora of state side authors who make educated guesses that the next bank may be either:

National City
Washington Mutual

there are a couple others that get mentioned


and the last post about the economy getting whooped being the buzz since 2007... and it not happening yet
1) I'd point out that the BLS continually puts out bogus statistics.
2) also the Federal Reserve has made extradodinary moves to give liquidity to every banker in the USA
3)the SEC has intervened in 'free' market forces and has restructered 'shorting' standards and regulations to Protect the Sacred 19 financial houses.... even while the shorts on oil & gold are allowed to skyrocket unsupervised!

the stock market and economy are not being allowed to naturally correct
and the false info we are being given paints a picture of the rest of the world heading into recession but not the "USA"
the rest of the investors & economic pundits still are half asleep...
but continue to watch as each Fed/Treasury/SEC/PPT manipulation is finally seen for what it is...and inflation is revealed to be 16%+ and unemployment is closer to 12+% and the GDP is & has been negative since late 2007.
(building hamburgers is classified as 'manufacturing' according to the Govt...)




posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 11:52 AM
link   
THis guy is sharp. He's been warning of a meltdown since 2005.


Homeowners, backed by rising house prices, are piling up debt. The Federal government has thrown fiscal prudence out the window. The country as a whole is absorbing an astounding three-quarters of global excess savings. But, as long as interest rates remain low and growth high, Americans can laugh at predictions that their excesses are laying the seeds of ruin.


commentary



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I think this guy is a plant. First he's mentioned a few things that have really bothered me. Not what he said but how he said it for instance:


Despite hopes that the US economy had turned the corner, Mr Rogoff claimed it was "not out of the woods". "I would even go further to say 'the worst is to come'," he said. "We're not just going to see mid-sized banks go under in the next few months," said Mr Rogoff, who held the IMF role between 2001 and 2004. "We're going to see a whopper, we're going to see a big one, one of the big investment banks or big banks."


We have no idea which Bank has the most potential to collapse in such a fashion, but we're going to come out and tell you it's going to happen anyway?
Why?

And the second part that scares me is WHAT he said:


"We have to see more consolidation in the financial sector before this is over."



We're nationalizing and consolidating?

Where I come from that's called Fascism. All the statements made in this article by this man are very generalized. I don't think he's warning of a meltdown so much as he's giving future administrations reason to further "Nationalize and Consolidate". This is a slippery slope in my opinion. We're not headed for financial collapse, we're heading for the collapse of Financial Security and privacy, as well as the erosion of consumer rights. That's what happens when you consolidate and nationalize.

Besides there's no authority in the constitution for us to be doing this.
But I suppose that doesn't matter anymore does it?

[edit on 19-8-2008 by projectvxn]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:21 PM
link   
My thought is where do these insiders put their money into when this happens? A cashiers check or gold?They apparently know ahead of time and let the other investors lose instead. (better them than us)

It makes me believe these events are planned ahead of time even if they appear to be cyclical. Are they drawing names out of a hat?

The bank I have my 401k in has several other smaller banks under different names and the funds are not protected or insured either. Is that really legal and or should they be forced to have these insured? Maybe they're psychic.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:26 PM
link   
U.S. Treasury may have no choice but nationalise Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae after investors dumped the two groups' shares on monday.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by L.HAMILTON]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by L.HAMILTON
U.S. Treasury may have no choice but nationalise Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae after investors dumped the two groups' shares on monday.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by L.HAMILTON]


Or they could allow their collapse and stop wasting resources on them. If these investors are dumping shares left and right that should tell you something. Absorbing a financial institution is not going to fix this. I'm sure they'll have no choice each and every time the have to nationalize a bank or financial institution until there's nothing left to absorb like the fascist bastards that they are.

You've got to see where this is going. Germany was on the brink of financial collapse when the German leadership decided to absorb financial institutions, in order to save them from collapse. Once this happened those financial institutions began to work for the Nazi war machine.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:33 PM
link   
Freddie and Fannie won't be federalized because they are both GSE's (Government Sponsored Enterprises). But, our federal government will pump in as much money to keep them from failing. Which basically means that the tax payers will be the bag holders for Freddy and Fannie.



Originally posted by L.HAMILTON
U.S. Treasury may have no choice but nationalise Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae after investors dumped the two groups' shares on monday.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by L.HAMILTON]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Oh no, not a big bank?! Nostradamus gave more detail than this.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
Oh no, not a big bank?! Nostradamus gave more detail than this.



Precisely my point. Using general language, and then advocating nationalization and consolidation in order to fix it? If that's not a fascist policy I don't know what is...It just seems like a very veiled attempt at excusing such destructive and wasteful policies.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:43 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 
Thanks, I'm having trouble with my keyboard . Takes several tries before it spits out proper U.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:46 PM
link   
This is good news. Financials will go even further on sale. Get them at fire sale prices people. This is what the powers at hand are doing look at history. They spread rumors and let the propaganda flow to kill value of companies and then go in and buy them for crack money. The fact is the controllers of our banking system is the cause of this. They issued a ton of credit and now have retracted it. Anyone who understands how our reserve system works understands that there is no where near enough money out there to cover the current debts with interest. So bankruptcy for many is inevitable. However when companies like ***** get down to $7 a share or so jump in like mad and hold. 3 to 5 years from now when its back up to $60 a share you will be glad you did.



[edit on 19-8-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Fannie and Freddie's problems lie not so much in the mortgages that were originated under their guidelines, but more so in that they have been buying paper on the open market for a while now. They've said that they didn't originate sub-prime paper and while technically correct they bought a whole lot of it from people who did, and even more Alt-A. The stock on both of these companies is rightfully a zero and despite what you hear on the Yahoo! finance message boards I don't think the shareholders will be happy about whatever comes. The bond holders, which include many foreign governments, SWFs, and lots of Bond funds (including the largest PIM(P)CO) are really the ones screaming for the bailout. I think it's BS the prospectus on FNM and FRE bonds explicitly said they were not backed by the taxpayer, they obviously were not as safe as Treasuries hence the higher yield. I'm resigned to the fact that there is going to be some sort of bailout, but would like to see pre-housing bill agency bonds take a nice haircut when it happens. I can deal with future agency debt having a full backstop going foward if they actually put some adult supervision to those creatans. As long as the GSE's are able to contribute to CONgress like they have been nothing good for the taxpayer is going to come out of them. What I could deal with and what I think will happen are probably very different so, I'm really expecting once Hank pulls out his Bazooka we are going to see some fun in the credit (particularly long term treasury) market.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 12:58 PM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


Fannie and Freddie will not be allowed to fail plain and simple as that. The powers want a bank that is big but not to big to fall. They want this bankruptcy to push stocks lower to the floor so they can go in and pick up the pieces and laugh 3 to 5 years from now. Im guessing Lehman even though I would be surprised if it was them considering they are part of the Fed club. Wamu would be another to go under I would consider.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:13 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


I think they'll hit penny stock levels. FRE is already there and FNM is shortly behind. Paulson's bazooka is what's concerning me and keeping me away from any play on them short or long. The right thing to do is to let them fail, protect the government's abillity to borrow, and take the quarter century or so it's going to take to unwind them.

I've heard you say to buy financials at that level before, I ask again how do you expect them to rebound so high in such a short period when they will no longer be leveraged so highly? Doesn't lower leverage= lower profits? I agree that some of them will be great deals if you buy at your price target, but I think a 10-20 year horizon is much more realistic than a 3-5. How long did it take banks to recover from the S&L debacle?

I'm thinking whatever bank this guy is talking about might be a shock to us all. If you told me Lehman, Wamu, National City, or even Wachovia was on deaths door, I'd say "I've known that for a while now." What happens if it's someone that everyone thought was one of the safe harbors like Wells (they do have alot of HELOC exposure, and changed the time that they write those off from 120 to 180 days)? I'm thinking Black Swan here.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by jefwane]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
Hey check it out, not to worry there is a plan in place.

Check this out


There are some interesting little quotes from that document like


The WGGSCS had concluded that in planning for the sudden involuntary exit of a clearing bank as a result of financial or legal problems,



steps to mitigate risks to the financial system from the interruption or termination of services of a clearing bank. The sudden loss of such services would disrupt the trading and settlement of U.S. government securities. Federal Reserve open market operations and debt issuance by the United States Department of the Treasury (“U.S. Treasury”) for the critical purpose of funding and operating the U.S. Government might also be disrupted.


I haven't had time to look at the whole document but it seems really interesting. I also notice that it was produced in 2005, so that seems to me to say that people knew what was coming.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by jefwane
 


I say buy financials because I feel there are a lot of banks sitting on a lot of borrowed cheap money from the fed. They are holding on to this money they are not lending it out as you know. I feel that when rates start to rise that you will see this money get leaked out little by little. If you borrow money at 2% and lend it at 12 to 15% you just gained 10% or so on tens of billions these guys are sitting on. You are looking into this matter way to much. try to simplify it some.

The FED balance sheet was around $850 billion and its now around $200 billion which means these banks have borrowed around $600 billion in funds. Now we know they arent lending these funds out. They are sitting on it. Why do you think that banks are going up on every corner. I dont know where you live but here in Florida there is a bank going up on every corner. Why? Because they are anticipating a big boom. Dont buy into the propaganda. this is an ugly situation no doubt but there is no money in a total collapse so the powers that be will not allow it to happen. They will let it collapse enough to get things for dirt dirt cheap.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
I remember this summer we were suppose to go through another great depression.

Then it was September....

Then somewhere we were suppose to invade Iran in July?

Theories = scared folk who keep giving news sites more hits and probably more money.

Honestly, let's stop freaking out until we know for sure something horrible is going to happen in the banking department.

I think we should worry about issues that are currently affecting the existence of our species, such as the next World War that's going to break out very soon if some countries don't behave.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:32 PM
link   
reply to post by mybigunit
 


That's a good point, but I think they may be holding on to it because they know that the landsharks are coming. I think it's entirely possible that some of the paper they securitized could come back at them. We've already seen what happened with the ARS stuff. If it turns out that the stuff they securitized was fraudulent couldn't it get put back to them? It's gotta be a great time to be a lawyer right now. We know that the monolines can't cover the insurance they wrote on these instruments, and though it looks like the taxpayer is going to be the one holding the bag one can hope there is a smidgeon of justice to this whole mess.

I live a little north of ya right on the Georgia/Alabama line. Property values around here are holding up better than even in Atlanta because of BRAC at Ft. Benning and a large automobile factory being built, but the local newspaper of record has had to reduce the font on the legal notices section to squeeze all the foreclosures in.

You know there was a real-estate population boom in the 20's in Florida that went crunch pretty nastily. It's one of the real correlations I see between then and now. I have a neighbor who bought a second house down in Panama City and is having a helluva time trying to sell it. He's actually hoping for a hurricane.

[edit on 19-8-2008 by jefwane]



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
I'd wager a soon-to-be worthless dollar on Lehman Brothers sinking. There's been so much talk about their troubles even before Bear Stearns sank (which was downed by a conspiracy of other bankers in a classic wall street scam now being investigated by the FBI, not from losses from subprimes...whole other thread for this one). Scary times indeed.



posted on Aug, 19 2008 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Aw #...i am gonna go get a gun.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join