It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Bank of America and Citigroup stood out for all the wrong reasons in Monday’s market meltdown. Shares of the two banks led the decline amid new doubts about the quality of the assets buried on their balance sheets.
Investors now believe that Bank of America’s net worth is only about a third of what the bank claims; for Citigroup the figure is less than half.
Any time shares of a financial company such as Bank of America or Citigroup plunge it’s particularly worrying. Both are among the roughly 40 U.S. institutions considered too big to fail. The Dodd-Frank Act, adopted in response to
“If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies… The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
The Act, which was passed as a response to the late-2000s recession, was touted as the most sweeping change to financial regulation in the United States since the Great Depression, and purportedly represented a significant change in the American financial regulatory environment affecting all Federal financial regulatory agencies and affecting almost every aspect of the nation's financial services industry.
To promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes To promote the financial stability of the United States by improving accountability and transparency in the financial system, to end "too big to fail", to protect the American taxpayer by ending bailouts, to protect consumers from abusive financial services practices, and for other purposes.
Originally posted by haarvik
I say let them all fail!
We need to restore our finances to our citizens and take it away from the banks and the fed!
Originally posted by illuminatislave
let them crash and burn
and all of the bankers need to be lynched. I don't care who you are, your time on this planet should be at an end
Originally posted by marg6043
Don't worry people, the generous tax payers of America will come back again forced by congress to bailout more money.
For anybody that has not followed the news, yesterday the fed already has send to congress the possibility of more bailouts for the too big in case they start to fail again.
The only problem is that the too big are sitting on liquidity and they never helped the economy recuperate they held onto the last bailouts in order to produce profits in their balance sheets.
Originally posted by Bobaganoosh
Let them fail! Let all of the big banks fail. My only hope is that Santander gets caught in the undertow.
If a bank has more than 15 branches, it is too big to care about it's customers. My mom has worked for small town banks for the last 30 years. She cares. I told her to cut her losses and run, but she said who would care for the people as much as she does? She's right.
Yank your monies from these gluttonous monsters! Why wait for them to fail when we can cause it. Take destiny by the short and curlies and make it happen!edit on 10-8-2011 by Bobaganoosh because: spelling
With $3 trillion in assets, and with liquidity markets being as global and fluid as they are, any regulatory change to MMFs will have far-reaching impacts. Only if and when analysis can demonstrate that the value of these policies outweighs their negative impacts should they be considered. We believe research will show that the January, 2010 changes to money fund regulations are far more than adequate to meet the safety, soundness and liquidity needs of the marketplace.