And now a bank run

reply to post by sc2099


I cannot tell you for sure, no..

However it makes sense.. the banks honestly should have gone insolvent by now.. they where seeing 0 profit in fact loosing billions a month.. they then had to write down hundreds of billions in loans..

Yet they are still afloat..

How so? ... Who is speculating on oil? .. IMO, the money in their reserves, as well as through the Fed is being used in their own portfolios to speculate on a product we all need .. oil .. easy money because they have the billions to manipulate the money.. it causes inflation, but a different kind of inflation then if money where printed out of nothing.. it acts no different then if they Gov raised taxes on us.

Yes, I firmly believe banks are speculating in the oil markets.. heavily.. I think if the people knew the truth we would tear these institutions down. Congress hauled the oil execs to a meeting.. oil executives said "it's not us .. we cannot and do not manipulate oil prices.. it is OUTSIDE of our range of control" .. And we know it's not OPEC .. they are mad at us for demanding we lower the price when we caused the price to shoot through the roof...

The best evidence is the news says "prices rose due to increasing demand" .. in actually demand has FALLEN

reply to post by Rockpuck


Thank you for helping spread the word that the supply and demand excuse is just that. An excuse. I know it's off topic, but I find it infuriating that people still propagate the notion that the consumer's were responsible for driving the price up (heh, no pun intended). Demand has dropped - the price continued to rise.

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Rockpuck

 

Thank you for helping spread the word that the supply and demand excuse is just that. An excuse. I know it's off topic, but I find it infuriating that people still propagate the notion that the consumer's were responsible for driving the price up (heh, no pun intended). Demand has dropped - the price continued to rise.

Demand may have dropped in the US (I don't know about Canada or Europe so I'll just say US for now), but has it not risen in China and India? Would that not effect the price in a global market?

Originally posted by sc2099

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Rockpuck

 

Thank you for helping spread the word that the supply and demand excuse is just that. An excuse. I know it's off topic, but I find it infuriating that people still propagate the notion that the consumer's were responsible for driving the price up (heh, no pun intended). Demand has dropped - the price continued to rise.

Demand may have dropped in the US (I don't know about Canada or Europe so I'll just say US for now), but has it not risen in China and India? Would that not effect the price in a global market?

That's a good point. But is there no difference in regional pricing - or is there only one pump were getting the oil from? This market was supposed to be 'free' and I may have ignorantly assumed that meant freedom from monopolization and price fixing. If I was wrong then I guess what we have here does not represent a true free market.

reply to post by sc2099


1. China gets oil from separate sources then the US for the most part.. for instance, China gets oil from Iran, where as we do not..

I would not say that the world is one giant oil reserve that all nations pull from..

2. China's average energy needs increase is 4-6% yearly..

Oil in 2001 was $20 a barrel. 2008 it is $145 ..

Even calculating in an increase in China's needs, subtracting the Increase in supplies form OPEC nations ...

The price of oil should hover around $40 a barrel.

Oil is nothing more then a bubble.. which will eventually pop.

reply to post by Maxmars


different nations can price oil separately.. OPEC however was designed to stop "price wars" where bigger producers like Saudi Arabia could lower the price to under sell their competitors..

OF course, Saudi Arabia more then any other OPEC nation still under sells their products ..

But in the markets that buy, oil is purchased based on "perceived worth" .. if oil's value in relation to demand reaches, say, $90 a barrel, and everyone is currently selling for $85 well it's obvious they will sell their product for what it's worth to reap the best revenue. Which is why the oil companies keep telling the World it's not their fault.. because technically, they are only following the markets .. they cannot sell under market value. It's the "Speculators" driving the price .. that much is known because Congress was going to try and prevent speculation on oil .. but it's WHO is the speculators that we don't know -- I believe it's the banks.

Sorry, I did not mean to derail the thread.

But technically it's still about the banks if I understand Rockpuck correctly, and I am inclined to accept his judgment.

I still don't understand how the mystery is maintained. The banks conceal part of their operation from the public, no? Why is this sacrosanct? What is it about banking that requires occlusion and secrecy?

reply to post by Maxmars


The banks require complete secrecy so as to hide from the public.. because I am fairly certain that if the public took it's head out of it's arse and paid attention, most of the executives and board members would be tried for high treason..

Oil speculating would not be the only thing the banks keep secret..

Do YOU know how your credit score is calculated? A number that literally rules our lives is entirely clandestine.

Anyone ever watch this vid or read the book for that matter?
video.google.com...
The Energy Non Crisis?
It talks about oil being an indirect tax. IMF and World Bank being responsible for high gas prices. I'd like to know what one of u more knowledgeable folks think about it.

reply to post by jefwane



Talking about the FDIC and its ability to bail out the fianancial institutions reminds me that when Continental Bank of Illinois went under in the 1980's, the media had story afer story saying that should three to four equally sized banks go under shortly thereafter, the FDIC would be broke.

Yet most of the sleeping public thinks that as long as they have their holdings spread around in several banks, then they comply with the FDIC guidelines of having each account under the $ 100,000 limit snd so all would be well for them.

reply to post by Outrageo



Thank you soo much for this video, interest free loans would be great comming from the gov't where a minimal taxation would pay the 'gov't' employess. Debt free would be wonderful.

There is a bit of follow-up from Reuters on Indymac this evening.

From Reuters

In particular the significant size of IndyMac's deposits that are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp might present a challenge. If the deposits, which total more than $17 billion, had to be guaranteed, that could temporarily dent the FDIC's war chest of around $53 billion.

The article is pretty soothing in its tone, but does raise alot of the questions about FDIC's abillity to handle failures beyond this. The entire article seems to asume the question is "when" not "if" indy goes under. Has anyone caught any non-financial media attention to this? I've seen a couple of links to LA area newspapers and tv but nothing really national outside of the newslinks you can find under the Yahoo finance boards.

Even worse news out of the New York Times tonight. Seems like people are starting to blab about plans for a Fannie and Freddie bailout.

See my thread in breaking here.

Fannie and Freddie are truly the bloated trillion dollar (900lb just didn't cut it) gorilla in the room.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by Maxmars

 

Oil speculating would not be the only thing the banks keep secret..

Do YOU know how your credit score is calculated?

A number that literally rules our lives is entirely clandestine.

Honestly, it seems completely arbitrary. From what I know, it is supposed to work like this: When you make a payment on time it is reported to the credit agency which is a +. When you make a payment late or miss a payment it is reported as a -. When you carry a high balance on revolving credit it is reported as a -. When you request credit it is reported as a -. When someone else inquires into your credit, whether or not you had anything to do with it, it is reported as a -.

But what actually happens is: When you make payments on time it is hardly ever reported. When any of the other things happen it is reported 10 times over so your credit gets tons of -'s.

It seems to me like the number just says what the agency wants it to say. It's such a total scam.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by mybigunit

 

$58 billion far surpasses the amount of IndyMac's depositor FDIC insured depositor assets. Also, do you have a source that has that amount? From my understanding their reserves are immediately replenished as needed.

[edit on 9-7-2008 by ALightinDarkness]

Do you have a source for your "understanding" that FDIC reserves are immediately replenished as needed? Replenished by Whom? And what is their own source of ever flowing funds to the FDIC? Alladin's lamp?

reply to post by quong


The federal budget is an amazing document. Check the "transfers" section. Truly, it does tell you how these things work.

Originally posted by ALightinDarkness
reply to post by quong

 

The federal budget is an amazing document. Check the "transfers" section. Truly, it does tell you how these things work.

I think what quong is saying that the money does just magically get replenished it gets taken one way or another from you and me. We have to pay for these runs on the bank because we will have to borrow or create the money which adds more onto our debt adds more to the interest we have to pay for the borrowed money and continues to add to our inflation problems by creating all these dollars.

The fact remains that there is a finite amount of currency in circulation. ALL of that currency was created by the Fed and delivered under terms of indebtedness. There can be not equilibrium ever in the financial totality as it is imposed on us. The money that is 'replenished' is pre-burdened by interest due on it. We perpetually cycle the national finances at a continually losing pace. Every act of 'contributing' to solve the problem, indebts us, the tax-payer, further.

This scam has gone on for a very long time. It has been known amongst the financial elites since its inception.

reply to post by mybigunit


Many times it's in the form of a transfer actually.. which may or may not be what Light is talking about..

When one account needs more financing they can take them form other accounts..

The account most often abused by this is the Social Security accounts.. which was used extensively in 06 as the Fed met their debt ceiling ..

Which of course means now the SS account will need more money as the Boomers retire.....

Originally posted by mybigunitI am of the belief most of these are rumors that are being used to tank things so the big boys can go in and buy shiite for pennies on the dollar.

Like today's performance with FRE? What a day to be in cash. I wish I had one of these each week -- I would be able to retire by 40.

This short game is getting out of hand. The Bernake discount window rumor was friend of a friend type and did you see how FRE reacted this afternoon?