by Pops » Fri 02 Mar 2012, 17:56:34
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vaseline2008', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'W')all Street's biggest banks are locked in an increasingly frantic struggle with the Federal Reserve over the right to retain the jewels of their commodity trading empires: warehouses, storage tanks and other hard assets worth billions of dollars.
Yeah, I wrote last year about GS doing a deal with a refiner the upshot of which was that it would allow them to hold physical oil which isn't always legal for banks
My knee jerk is that I'm up to here with Wall Street and "financialization" and computerized gambling that privatizes profit and socializes risk.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
by Pops » Mon 05 Mar 2012, 13:45:12
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'A') guess is a unsupported opinion. Just so you understand the difference. The amount of money from the banking industry flowing into the Obama campaign both in 2008 and currently is fact.
That's true
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')n the 2012 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, Romney's top five contributors are Goldman, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley (MS), Credit Suisse (CS), and Citigroup (C), while other major financial industry donors include Barclays (BCS), UBS (UBS), and Wells Fargo (WFC). None of those companies rank among the top 20 contributors to the Obama campaign.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he flow of campaign money from large financial companies to Romney highlights the industry's priorities on a range for issues. For example, lobbyists for the the International Swaps and Derivatives Association and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, trade groups that represent the interests of banks and securities firms, are angling to weaken rules contained in Dodd-Frank that would restrain speculation in the energy markets. Wall Street firms also are pushing back against another provision in the law called the Volcker Rule that seeks to restrict banks' ability to trade for their own accounts and to invest in hedge and private equity funds. Other areas of concern include proposed global capital requirements for large banks and the amount of risk mortgage lenders might have to retain on their balance sheets.
...
Romney has said he would repeal Dodd-Frank. By contrast, the Obama administration has made the law a hallmark of the president's re-election campaign, with U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geither writing in op-ed in The Wall Street Journal on Thursday arguing that Dodd-Frank established "safer and more modern rules of the road for the financial industry."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504343_162- ... ign-funds/80% of contributions over $1,000$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Nearly half of the donors to Obama’s reelection campaign in 2011 gave $200 or less, more than double the proportion seen in 2007, according to the analysis from the Campaign Finance Institute, which tracks money in politics...
Just 9 percent of donors to GOP front-runner Mitt Romney, by contrast, came from the lowest end of the contribution scale, the study shows.
The legitimate object of government, is to do for a community of people, whatever they need to have done, but can not do, at all, or can not, so well do, for themselves -- in their separate, and individual capacities.
-- Abraham Lincoln, Fragment on Government (July 1, 1854)
by careinke » Mon 05 Mar 2012, 14:56:21
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pup55', 'B')anks: We want to invest in Commodities so we can convert the useless electronic paper you're giving us to something that can retain some value.
Fed: No, that kind of defeats the purpose. We want you to make that money available to actual people so they can start businesses and buy houses.
Banks: But the European banks can do what they want, why can't we?
Fed: They have problems of their own. That is why so many people have checked out of the Euro and bought Brent Crude.
Banks: It is anti-free-market for you to keep us from trying to diversify and make our portfolio more profitable.
Fed: Are you kidding? Free market? What about the 7 to 10 Trillion Dollars we gave you in 2008 because you could not make your margin call.
Banks: That was different. We want free markets when we win, but want you to pay when we lose.
Fed: Exactly. We would prefer not to bail out your commodity trading function. You are no brighter now than you were at that point.
Banks: We will wait until November. Romney will let us do what we want.
Fed: Sadly, that is right. What happens after that is beyond our control.
Your post is confusing to me. The Fed IS the Banks, literally. If you changed Fed to Government, it would be more accurate.
Cliff (Start a rEVOLution, grow a garden)
-
careinke
- Volunteer
-
- Posts: 5047
- Joined: Mon 01 Jan 2007, 04:00:00
- Location: Pacific Northwest
-
by vaseline2008 » Tue 06 Mar 2012, 14:02:39
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ian807', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rangerone314', 'S')hould be a revolution and a purge of the corruption every 75 years or so.
That's what elections were supposed to be. An election is a kind of institutionalized revolution that happens every 4 years or so. Unfortunately, that process has been subverted by the wealthy. As long as societies allow great concentrations of wealth and power, this will continue.
That is how evolution works, by competition. The losers die off and the winners get to have their genes live on. Why should it change? Mountains have a large base at the bottom to support the peaks at the top.
I'd rather be the killer than the victim.
The Money Badger don't care. Sucks to be poor!
by rangerone314 » Tue 06 Mar 2012, 20:32:16
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'A') guess is a unsupported opinion. Just so you understand the difference. The amount of money from the banking industry flowing into the Obama campaign both in 2008 and currently is fact.
We're debating who's a bigger whore, Romney or Obama? I guess while we're at it, we can discuss the semantics of being less of a virgin, or being more pregnant.
An ideology is by definition not a search for TRUTH-but a search for PROOF that its point of view is right
Equals barter and negotiate-people with power just take
You cant defend freedom by eliminating it-unknown
Our elected reps should wear sponsor patches on their suits so we know who they represent-like Nascar-Roy
-
rangerone314
- Light Sweet Crude
-
- Posts: 4105
- Joined: Wed 03 Dec 2008, 04:00:00
- Location: Maryland
-
