Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Federal Reserve Data On Loans During Crisis Released

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward

    Is Verizon a bank?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday December 24, 2011 @03:50PM (#38484414)

    ...than the banks. Looks like only about $100 billion not paid back by banks, but the two government sponsored organizations are expected to have losses approaching $300 billion. SEC is now suing the former CEO's for fraud.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      So why are they not going to jail? Suing an individual that isn't Bill Gates or other billionaire sounds pointless at best. This is how the system buries the problem: "Look what we did to those criminals" when the criminals that caused the issue in the first place was Congress, the SEC, Bill Clinton's administration and every president after him including the current clod in the White House.

    • by Uberbah (647458)

      ...than the banks. Looks like only about $100 billion not paid back by banks

      Uh, no. The banks have borrowed 16 trillion , and haven't come close to paying it back. Despite getting their loans at 0% interest while continuing to charge their customers usurious interest rates (i.e., the same taxpayers that are bailing them out) or just buying Treasury Bonds.

      Man, I wish I could borrow money from the government at 0% interest, only to borrow that money back to the government and receive interest in return.

  • Bloomberg (Score:5, Informative)

    by dokebi (624663) on Saturday December 24, 2011 @03:55PM (#38484456)

    After this and other "bombshell" revelations by Bloomberg this year, they are apparently the only financial news organization worth its salt in the US. Kudos to them, and shame on everyone else (WSJ, FT, Economist, etc etc).

  • It calls the money which FED lent "public money." But it wasn't money lent out of the US Treasury. It was money lent by the FED itself. The fact that the loans were branded as "emergency" just made them shorter term and lower interest loans (shorter term loans would always have to be lower interest). FED's main reason for operation is to be the underwriter of all banking. It lends money to banks which then re-lend it in smaller denominations. I am still not seeing why there is this large scale attempt
    • by Arker (91948) on Saturday December 24, 2011 @05:21PM (#38484976) Homepage
      The thing is, the Constitution delegated to Congress the rights to "coin money" for a reason. They have interpreted that instead as a right to delegate the right to print currency, and delegated said right to the Federal Reserve so they dont have to waste time actually doing their jobs. And every time the Fed turns on the printing press, by diluting the pool of currency, it's the same effect as milling coins or flat-out counterfeiting really - it's a hidden, involuntary tax. We all pay the bill through inflation and reduction in value of our savings and retirement. That makes it the people's money just the same if it were revenue taxed openly.
      • Isn't the "inflation tax" lower than any flat tax that's ever been proposed?

        • by rohan972 (880586)

          Isn't the "inflation tax" lower than any flat tax that's ever been proposed?

          Well if we had just an "inflation tax" perhaps that would be relevant, but it just gets piled on top of all the other taxes. As I see it, it isn't the level of taxation from inflation that is the problem, it's that it taxes savings. It is one more thing creating an environment hostile to wise personal financial decision making.

          • by superwiz (655733)

            Well if we had just an "inflation tax" perhaps that would be relevant, but it just gets piled on top of all the other taxes.

            Actually, it would be much, much worse. At least today we have a notion of taxes so we have a language in place to discuss the effect of inflation. If inflation was the only tax, it would grow much faster (all corruption begins with nepotism because no one can deny their family and family also has family). It would be a rapid expansion of cronyism. In fact, once it is allowed to take foot hold, it would be all pervasive within a generation.

            • Your predictions remind me of y2k Armageddon!

              • by superwiz (655733)
                These are not predictions. This is what happened in every country which switched to financing the government through inflation. y2k armageddon didn't happen because of the millions of man hours spent to avert it -- not because it wouldn't have happened otherwise.
                • Wait, it happened to Japan?

                  Also, your fear of inflation is hyperbolic and irrational. "In 1920, I could buy a suit for $20!" But a computer cost $Infinity...

                  • by superwiz (655733)
                    I do not fear inflation. I simply point out its effects. Your attempt to smear me with a brush of someone irrational is just that -- a smear. Japan has a modern taxation system -- it does not rely on inflation as he main source of taxation, so I am not sure why you threw that in there. I suspect you are grasping for deflections (since you are unquestionably grasping for ad hominems).
                    • First, provide some data.

                      Second, has any country explicitly made taxes voluntary and created money to fund the budget?

                      What I'm proposing is to keep fundamental American freedoms (unlike Zimbabwe), and use the created money to stimulate innovation through providing everyone with a basic income and holding challenges (which biz can hold too, like google, netflix). We have not just lost a world war, so comparisons to Weimar are invalid.

                      What matters is innovation and the advance of knowledge, because that is wh

          • If you were guaranteed a basic income, you wouldn't need to devote so much wisdom to money matters, and could use it instead to advance knowledge and create technology that would further raise standard of living and keep the currency strong because we produce things others want. (Consider Japan with a 200% debt-to-gdp ratio and a currency whose value they consider too high.)

      • by superwiz (655733)

        I have to reply to this with the same response I just gave below:

        "I addressed that point. What you are saying is an argument against FED being the underwriter of ALL borrowing. It's NOT an argument against these specific loans. My point is that this is being heralded as something out of the ordinary that FED did, but, in fact, it was FED doing what FED does. Whether or not FED should be the entity which is responsible for the levels of issued currency is a DIFFERENT argument.

        • by Arker (91948)
          No, it's not. Most people didnt understand what the Fed is and what it does. Until they do we wont get rid of it. This - letting people see what it is they do - helps. The fact that you are one of the small minority that already knows what they do is great - it's also not the point.

The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not "Eureka!" (I found it!) but "That's funny ..." -- Isaac Asimov

Working...