Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-01-2009, 05:53 AM
 
12,867 posts, read 14,918,398 times
Reputation: 4459

Advertisements

According to its latest report, the Federal Reserve now owns over $1 trillion of mortgage-backed securities, which is 45.6% of all assets owned by it. One year ago mortgage-backed securities were only 0.6% of the Federal Reserve’s total assets.


The Federal Reserve is very highly leveraged, much more than most banks. It is carrying $2,157.0 billion of debt on $52.8 billion of capital, giving it a leverage of 40.8-times more debt than capital. The mortgage-backed securities it owns are 19-times greater than the Federal Reserve’s capital, meaning that if the true value of these assets is less than 5.3% of their book value, the Federal Reserve’s capital is depleted, effectively making it another insolvent institution.


Given that Fannie Mae is itself insolvent and most other mortgage generating federal agencies are not far from perilously sliding down to that same dire financial condition, it is reasonable to assume that the true value of these mortgage-backed securities is less than 94.7% of their book value. Consequently, the Federal Reserve is therefore – on a strict accounting basis – insolvent. It remains liquid because banks continue to provide it with funding and because people continue to accept in commerce and use without question the Federal Reserve’s liabilities, i.e., the paper currency it issues. But for how much longer? (fgmr)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-01-2009, 05:58 AM
 
268 posts, read 817,522 times
Reputation: 185
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
According to its latest report, the Federal Reserve now owns over $1 trillion of mortgage-backed securities, which is 45.6% of all assets owned by it. One year ago mortgage-backed securities were only 0.6% of the Federal Reserve’s total assets.


The Federal Reserve is very highly leveraged, much more than most banks. It is carrying $2,157.0 billion of debt on $52.8 billion of capital, giving it a leverage of 40.8-times more debt than capital. The mortgage-backed securities it owns are 19-times greater than the Federal Reserve’s capital, meaning that if the true value of these assets is less than 5.3% of their book value, the Federal Reserve’s capital is depleted, effectively making it another insolvent institution.


Given that Fannie Mae is itself insolvent and most other mortgage generating federal agencies are not far from perilously sliding down to that same dire financial condition, it is reasonable to assume that the true value of these mortgage-backed securities is less than 94.7% of their book value. Consequently, the Federal Reserve is therefore – on a strict accounting basis – insolvent. It remains liquid because banks continue to provide it with funding and because people continue to accept in commerce and use without question the Federal Reserve’s liabilities, i.e., the paper currency it issues. But for how much longer? (fgmr)

Shhhhh.... It's a secret.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 07:31 AM
 
12,022 posts, read 11,577,118 times
Reputation: 11136
The MBS market has actually shrank the last several years so they're essentially monetizing the other asset classes without admitting that's what they're doing.

http://www.sifma.org/uploadedFiles/Research/Statistics/SIFMA_USBondMarketOutstanding.pdf (broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 09:58 AM
 
5,760 posts, read 11,549,537 times
Reputation: 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by floridasandy View Post
. . . . It remains liquid because banks continue to provide it with funding and because people continue to accept in commerce and use without question the Federal Reserve’s liabilities, i.e., the paper currency it issues. But for how much longer? (fgmr)
Yep. Ignore the man behind the curtain. I am the Great and Powerful Wizard of OZ!

Sooooo. Since it does not take much a map to see where this path is leading, it seems the real question is How Do We, the (little) People take ourselves Off the Dollar?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 10:58 AM
 
4,010 posts, read 10,214,812 times
Reputation: 1600
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip T View Post
.... How Do We, the (little) People take ourselves Off the Dollar?
Gold. Like everyone outside the USA has decided. Today it crossed the $1200/oz level for the first time ever.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 11:06 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,548,052 times
Reputation: 499
Who does the lender of last resort turn to when they need help? Oh, nevermind. They own everything anyway.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 11:09 AM
 
Location: Houston, Texas
1,084 posts, read 1,548,052 times
Reputation: 499
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo View Post
Gold. Like everyone outside the USA has decided. Today it crossed the $1200/oz level for the first time ever.
Heh, ever try to purchase groceries with gold? A company tried to create gold backed dollars and they got raided and had all of the gold in their vaults "siezed" or more accurately stolen by the powers that be. Google liberty dollars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 11:26 AM
 
975 posts, read 1,755,352 times
Reputation: 524
Theres a very funny video floating around youtube of a guy who tries using a $20 gold piece, but no one will take it..LOL!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 12:55 PM
 
4,010 posts, read 10,214,812 times
Reputation: 1600
Quote:
Originally Posted by smartalx View Post
Heh, ever try to purchase groceries with gold? A company tried to create gold backed dollars and they got raided and had all of the gold in their vaults "siezed" or more accurately stolen by the powers that be. Google liberty dollars.
I am well aware of the Liberty dollar and it is irrelevant to the question asked. From a constitutional standpoint I believe they were within their rights, and the case has yet to be definitively decided in the US courts. Alternative currencies to the federal reserve notes are not unprecidented in the USA especially considering they have existed for less than 100 years.

In any case, the question wasn't on what to use for change in your pocket as currency. The question was on what to do to preserve wealth. Other than that the close to 40 years that it was illegal for Americans to own gold between 1933 and 1971 you tell me when was the last time that someone has been unable to trade gold for paper money? I would be interested to hear what you have to say about that, if anything.

There are a lot of people making misguided arguments against gold, yet the price continues to rise as it has been doing for the last decade. If gold was useless for money, then way does the Fed have more gold stored in its basement in NY than the US has stored in Ft. Knox? It's because they know the worth of the stuff even though they say otherwise.

Last edited by lumbollo; 12-01-2009 at 01:04 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-01-2009, 01:23 PM
 
5,760 posts, read 11,549,537 times
Reputation: 4949
Quote:
Originally Posted by lumbollo View Post
Gold. Like everyone outside the USA has decided. Today it crossed the $1200/oz level for the first time ever.
Sure, I follow that is the cliche, no-thought-involved "answer." But Gold tends to completely impractical to use, it does provide any utility, and cannot serve as food, nor fuel, nor shelter, and we (again, little) people do not tend to produce it.

That all adds up to is we would have to produce things of value to trade for this thing of no practical value (Gold) from people that do produce it.

Overall, that does not seem so smart.

I was hoping to dig a little deeper into some thought on this topic, if anyone cares to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top