Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 07-18-2012, 09:48 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Do you have evidence that any of the American banks involved with setting LIBOR rates were manipulating their figures?

Widespread? How many banks involved?

Do you understand what LIBOR rates are, and how they are set?
Libor Scandal May Hit U.S. Banks Harder Than Their British Counterparts

See above post.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-18-2012, 10:39 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,894,256 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
LIBOR---LONDON INTERBANK OFFERING RATE

Only THREE, yes THREE!!!! US banks would be involved, and the degree that they may have been involved in rate manipulation is under investigation.

Your idea of widespread seems to be very broad indeed.

AND once again, does the Secretary of the Treasury have any, any, any authority over foreign banking, banking consortiums, associations, etc?

Please explain how. In fact, since you are such an expert, why not explain exactly what the job of the Secretary of the Treasury actually is. Excluding whistleblower, which you've already stated isn't his job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 11:13 AM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
LIBOR---LONDON INTERBANK OFFERING RATE

Only THREE, yes THREE!!!! US banks would be involved, and the degree that they may have been involved in rate manipulation is under investigation.
Good, we have got past the point that there is nothing Geithner can do. Now lets see if he does. Here is my prediction. He is going to come out and say that something like this is very hard to prove and would be too costly to prosecute.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 11:29 AM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,894,256 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Good, we have got past the point that there is nothing Geithner can do. Now lets see if he does. Here is my prediction. He is going to come out and say that something like this is very hard to prove and would be too costly to prosecute.
My prediction, the investigation will be ongoing for years, and eventually the banks will be fined.

It's a serious regulatory concern, but the stickler about this manipulation is that the banks involved were working to keep the interest rate low. And the impact that LIBOR has is that it's a benchmark used to help determine other interest rates. If they worked to keep interest rates on consumer loans, consumer credit and mortgages low, then you'll be hard-pressed to find individuals who were hurt by this manipulation. Who was hurt? Other banks and derivatives traders. And the sympathy for big banks and derivatives traders is mighty low right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 02:10 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
My prediction, the investigation will be ongoing for years, and eventually the banks will be fined.
A slap on the wrist at most. A punishment the banks are perfectly willing to accept.

Quote:
It's a serious regulatory concern, but the stickler about this manipulation is that the banks involved were working to keep the interest rate low. And the impact that LIBOR has is that it's a benchmark used to help determine other interest rates. If they worked to keep interest rates on consumer loans, consumer credit and mortgages low, then you'll be hard-pressed to find individuals who were hurt by this manipulation. Who was hurt? Other banks and derivatives traders. And the sympathy for big banks and derivatives traders is mighty low right now.
We all were hurt. Each and every one of us in the continued chipping away of faith in the banking system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 03:46 PM
 
42,732 posts, read 29,894,256 times
Reputation: 14345
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
A slap on the wrist at most. A punishment the banks are perfectly willing to accept.



We all were hurt. Each and every one of us in the continued chipping away of faith in the banking system.
If you had faith left by the time this scandal surfaced, you are a faithful person indeed. I remember when Greenspan was Shocked, Shocked I Tell You! that in the face of deregulation the banking industry went for short-term profits rather than long-term health. He expected an industry that revolves around greed to behave with foresight and thoughtful planning.

The industry revolves around greed. Rationality requires that observers outside the system understand that, and understand that regulation is about maintaining stability and long-term health of the economy. People inside the industry will work to maximize their profits, even when that means finding ways around regulation. It's the regulators' job to prevent them from finding ways around regulation.

Geithner, when he alerted the regulators to the problem, had a perfectly reasonable expectation that his memo would be acted upon. The problem was two-fold. First the mindset, too big to fail was resonating in the halls of the industry, the halls of regulators and the halls of government, which stifled the appropriate response that the regulators should have had to the problem. And the second problem was that regulators, both in the United States and England are understaffed and underfunded. Think Madoff and the SEC. The SEC sent inexperienced examiners to Madoff's office, where they were intimidated and actually refused access. Regulators need TEETH.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-18-2012, 04:12 PM
 
79,907 posts, read 44,231,797 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
If you had faith left by the time this scandal surfaced, you are a faithful person indeed. I remember when Greenspan was Shocked, Shocked I Tell You! that in the face of deregulation the banking industry went for short-term profits rather than long-term health. He expected an industry that revolves around greed to behave with foresight and thoughtful planning.
I find it funny that people still seek him out for his opinion on financial issues.

Quote:
The industry revolves around greed. Rationality requires that observers outside the system understand that, and understand that regulation is about maintaining stability and long-term health of the economy. People inside the industry will work to maximize their profits, even when that means finding ways around regulation. It's the regulators' job to prevent them from finding ways around regulation.
Well, that's the idea anyway.

Quote:
Geithner, when he alerted the regulators to the problem, had a perfectly reasonable expectation that his memo would be acted upon. The problem was two-fold. First the mindset, too big to fail was resonating in the halls of the industry, the halls of regulators and the halls of government, which stifled the appropriate response that the regulators should have had to the problem. And the second problem was that regulators, both in the United States and England are understaffed and underfunded. Think Madoff and the SEC. The SEC sent inexperienced examiners to Madoff's office, where they were intimidated and actually refused access. Regulators need TEETH.
What was done with Libor appears to be outright fraud. The government has the resources to address fraud when it wants to. Such as Enron. The S&L mess. You can come to your own conclusions as to why it is but the government has absolutely no desire to enforce their regulations with our current financial mess.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-20-2012, 09:10 PM
 
1,535 posts, read 1,634,663 times
Reputation: 385
Nationalizing the Financial Industry | Walter Donway | FINANCIAL SENSE

The US Gov has slowly Nationalizing the Financial Industry by taking over banks, this article gives the details of how and why this has been taking place.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2012, 01:55 AM
 
8,483 posts, read 6,936,194 times
Reputation: 1119
Will see if anything of substance comes of this. I mentioned the JPM thing was bigger, well don't be surprised to see much more unfold.

http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/publi...rder062712.pdf

This guy breaks down the LIBOR for ya in plain english. The Rolling Stones guy is one of the few telling the truth. As stated, it's a business model.

Of course, Geithner knew, the former head of the New York Fed? Seriously?


It's over for the banking cabal. 4.jul.2012 - YouTube

Previously posted by me.

Audit of the Federal Reserve Reveals $16 Trillion in Secret Bailouts | Unelected (really more than 26trillion if you count currency swaps)
quote:
Citigroup: $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000)
Morgan Stanley: $2.04 trillion ($2,040,000,000,000)
Merrill Lynch: $1.949 trillion ($1,949,000,000,000)
Bank of America: $1.344 trillion ($1,344,000,000,000)
Barclays PLC (United Kingdom): $868 billion ($868,000,000,000)
Bear Sterns: $853 billion ($853,000,000,000)
Goldman Sachs: $814 billion ($814,000,000,000)
Royal Bank of Scotland (UK): $541 billion ($541,000,000,000)
JP Morgan Chase: $391 billion ($391,000,000,000)
Deutsche Bank (Germany): $354 billion ($354,000,000,000)
UBS (Switzerland): $287 billion ($287,000,000,000)
Credit Suisse (Switzerland): $262 billion ($262,000,000,000)
Lehman Brothers: $183 billion ($183,000,000,000)
Bank of Scotland (United Kingdom): $181 billion ($181,000,000,000)
BNP Paribas (France): $175 billion ($175,000,000,000)

Got about 20% running the other which amts to 80% of the economy. (Less than 800 companies control 80%)
Revealed – the capitalist network that runs the world - physics-math ...



quote:
An analysis of the relationships between 43,000 transnational corporations has identified a relatively small group of companies, mainly banks, with disproportionate power over the global economy.

What's more, although they represented 20 per cent of global operating revenues, the 1318 appeared to collectively own through their shares the majority of the world's large blue chip and manufacturing firms - the "real" economy - representing a further 60 per cent of global revenues.


"In effect, less than 1 per cent of the companies were able to control 40 per cent of the entire network," says Glattfelder. Most were financial institutions. The top 20 included Barclays Bank, JPMorgan Chase & Co, and The Goldman Sachs Group.

Top 25 of the top 50 listed.
1. Barclays plc
2. Capital Group Companies Inc
3. FMR Corporation
4. AXA
5. State Street Corporation
6. JP Morgan Chase & Co
7. Legal & General Group plc
8. Vanguard Group Inc
9. UBS AG
10. Merrill Lynch & Co Inc
11. Wellington Management Co LLP
12. Deutsche Bank AG
13. Franklin Resources Inc
14. Credit Suisse Group
15. Walton Enterprises LLC
16. Bank of New York Mellon Corp
17. Natixis
18. Goldman Sachs Group Inc
19. T Rowe Price Group Inc
20. Legg Mason Inc
21. Morgan Stanley
22. Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc
23. Northern Trust Corporation
24. Société Générale
25. Bank of America Corporation

Original paper.
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/...107.5728v2.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2012, 02:20 AM
 
8,091 posts, read 5,914,144 times
Reputation: 1578
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
If you had faith left by the time this scandal surfaced, you are a faithful person indeed. I remember when Greenspan was Shocked, Shocked I Tell You! that in the face of deregulation the banking industry went for short-term profits rather than long-term health. He expected an industry that revolves around greed to behave with foresight and thoughtful planning.

The industry revolves around greed. Rationality requires that observers outside the system understand that, and understand that regulation is about maintaining stability and long-term health of the economy. People inside the industry will work to maximize their profits, even when that means finding ways around regulation. It's the regulators' job to prevent them from finding ways around regulation.

Geithner, when he alerted the regulators to the problem, had a perfectly reasonable expectation that his memo would be acted upon. The problem was two-fold. First the mindset, too big to fail was resonating in the halls of the industry, the halls of regulators and the halls of government, which stifled the appropriate response that the regulators should have had to the problem. And the second problem was that regulators, both in the United States and England are understaffed and underfunded. Think Madoff and the SEC. The SEC sent inexperienced examiners to Madoff's office, where they were intimidated and actually refused access. Regulators need TEETH.
Inexperienced examiners???

Regulators with teeth???

Bill Summary & Status - 95th Congress (1977 - 1978) - H.R.2176 - CRS Summary - THOMAS (Library of Congress)

Quote:
FEDERAL BANKING AGENCY AUDIT ACT of 1978 ----------------------------------------


Federal Banking Agency Audit Act - Amends the Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950 to authorize the General Accounting Office (GAO) to conduct independent audits of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Prohibits the GAO from auditing:

(1) transactions conducted on behalf of or with foreign central banks, foreign governments, and nonprivate international financing organizations;

(2) deliberations, decisions, and actions on monetary policy matters, including discount window operations, reserves of member banks, securities credit, interest on deposits, and open market operations;

(3) transactions made under the direction of the Federal Open Market Committee including transactions of the Federal Reserve System Open Market Account; and

(4) those portions of oral, written, telegraphic, or telephonic discussions and communications among or between Members of the Board of Governors, and officers and employees of the Federal Reserve System which deal with topics listed in this Act.
The GAO's teeth have been pulled out before they even get to the table.....they literally can't do anything.

Unless you are talking about independent auditors...which is basically the Fed auditing themselves.
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 > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:38 PM.

© 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