Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Duped? POTUS said people were duped re derivatives

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:13 AM
Original message
Duped? POTUS said people were duped re derivatives
BULLSHIT!

I knew it would be a problem when it was fist being kicked about. And my expertise in economics is limited to the school of hard knocks and applying some basic critical thinking in order to try and just survive in a capitalist nation.

If the pros and experts were DUPED, they need to find new careers. They weren't duped. At best, they tuned down their critical thinking in favor of magical thinking and hopes of hitting it big before the inevitable shit hit the fan

Duped? Ah, no, sorry, not buying it. They are just sorta playing dumb so they can pretend they didn't have a part in the party on the promenade deck while people in steerage were drowning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RandomThoughts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. I think they are trying to avoid responsibility also.
Edited on Thu Apr-22-10 11:24 AM by RandomThoughts
However, I personally have great respect for the band on any sinking ship, and enjoy music.

However they did not play any good tunes, and just sold bad instruments.


Well actually some of them might have been living in a delusional fantasy land where they thought they were destined to have everything by some special status in existence or something.



There is a thing about people that talk about having a lot in life. The idea what they have is destine to be theirs. No person ever knows there lot, because it could be someones lot to lose much, go from rich to poor, or gain much and go from poor to rich. So the whole idea of thinking your lot in life is this or that is really silly, since it can change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Absloutley! They want to be able to take the $$ and run from blowback
At the very LEAST they just pretended it was ok and hoped for the best. If someone as ignorant as me knew that was bogus, they sure as hell knew.

At the very least, they were just going along; but at the most logical, they were the root of the problem. They bloody well knew it was a heist and they all wanted to be part of the gang, knowing some, if not all, would get away with bags of loot before anybody called the cops
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sui generis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
2. There are many many kinds of derivatives
Just saying that CDO's represent the entirety isn't quite right but that's our woefully stupid newsdesk who probably had to spell check "derivatives" before they forgot wiki it.

Just the same, ANY bet that pays on a loss is a great bet if the losses are few and far between. If everyone's betting on the loss, it's a lot less profitable to bet against the house, and these CDO's had time frames attached to them, often under a recapitalization agreement (usually turnaround or growth-style investment, but sometimes pure LBO) such as private equity, or other guarantee or assumption of corporate debt.

Highland Capital in Dallas is one such organization that invested heavily in building these houses-of-cards and is now sucking wind just like the bigger players. Greed and Karma will get you faster than Karma alone.

It gets worse in multinational corporations where there are layers of real and paper companies passing profit and derivative income through income-recharacterization schemes, while hiding risk and loss. I think we've only seen the facade start to crumble - there's a whole international building right behind the part that we can see.

It ain't over until the rest of the market regulates more effectively, and does so beyond our borders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
4. Some were, and some were not. He MUST stop trying to find a middle ground in everything. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #4
6. Plus 1000000 . . .
There is a reason that goals are at either end of the pitch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. You root for Celtic or the Rangers. Or ManU or Man City. Not both. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enlightenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Or in my case, Sheff Utd over
that *other* club with the ridiculous day of the week name .

But yes, I agree 100% .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
arthritisR_US Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
5. they weren't duped, they turned down ethical thinking for a quick buck. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. EXACTLY!
Edited on Thu Apr-22-10 12:33 PM by havocmom
edited to add: Maybe I am too cynical, but I read 'they were duped' as: We aren't going to prosecute many, if any, of the perps in this, just like we aren't gonna enforce law re torture and war crimes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 01:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. knr - and some of the people who were ...
"duped" are now part of this administration.

The Woman Greenspan, Rubin & Summers Silenced
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut/370925/the_woman_greenspan_rubin_summers_silenced


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooksley_Born

"Brooksley E. Born is an American attorney and former public official who, from August 26, 1996 to June 1, 1999, was chairperson of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal agency which oversees the futures and commodity options markets. During her tenure on the CFTC, Born lobbied Congress and the President to give the CFTC oversight of off-exchange markets for derivatives in addition to its role with respect to exchange-traded derivatives,<3> but her warnings were opposed by other regulators.<4>...."


FRONTLINE Presents - The Warning
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/warning/

“I walk into Brooksley’s office one day; the blood has drained from her face,” says Michael Greenberger, a former top official at the CFTC who worked closely with Born. “She’s hanging up the telephone; she says to me: ‘That was Larry Summers. He says, “You’re going to cause the worst financial crisis since the end of World War II.”… 13 bankers in his office who informed him of this. Stop, right away. No more.’”


http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nec/director

"National Economic Council Director: Lawrence H. Summers
Director of the National Economic Council and Assistant to the President for Economic Policy
Lawrence H. Summers is the Director of the National Economic Council and was appointed by President Barack H. Obama on November 24, 2008..."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. Yep and that is a big red flag for those not too busy being 'duped'
Thanks for tossing in some very vital info on dupees ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-23-10 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. You're welcome and it is a big red flag indeed ...
many articles were written about the potential problems.

http://contraryinvestor.com/2000archives/mo120700.htm

This is from 12/2000 and we know the growth in derivatives continued to climb after that time.

"US BANKING SYSTEM DERIVATIVES EXPOSURE
UPDATE: 3Q 2000

The Far Too Simple Beauty Of The Promises We've Made...

We're still wiping the fresh ink of the 3Q 2000 US Banking System Derivatives Report from our fingers. Quite timely in terms of what we see as the accelerating deterioration in the credit arena these days. As you know, our stance has been for some time that the derivatives market has been the tranquilizer for the lending and credit risk acceptance community at large in the economic and financial expansion of the last half decade plus. "Everything's fine, we're hedged". We continue to report these numbers to you quarterly, at the risk of boring you to death, to keep you apprised of what seems to be the unspoken risk in the greater financial system. Unspoken by the Fed. Unspoken by the Treasury department. Largely unspoken by bank regulators. Relegated to the off balance sheet netherworld by the SEC. Certainly unspoken by the Wall Street analytical community. Much like our descriptions of the economy and equity markets being extremely dependent on the interlocking set of linkages between credit expansion, dollar strength, consumer spending, foreign capital flows to the US, etc., the derivatives markets in their global entirety are dependent on a web of promises and interlocking counter party risk. A fragile daisy chain whose total strength can only be determined by the strength of the weakest link. Unfortunately, given the virtual complete lack of formal disclosure, assessing default risk and the ramifications of that risk in any meaningful manner is next to impossible.

Suffice it to say that the notional value of derivative contracts being held by the US banking system warrant our attention and attempt at comment..."



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
11. nope, not duped; and there's no real reform until naked shorting is outlawed:
Senator Blanche Lincoln’s Derivatives Reform Bill Must Pass
Thursday, 04/22/2010 - 9:45 am by L. Randall Wray | Post a Comment

Randall Wray echoes Senator Lincoln’s calls for splitting up the risky derivatives business from commercial banks which ought to be serving the public good.

While most reformers are dithering around with trying to bring derivatives onto formal exchanges, Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) has got the right idea: get banks like Goldman out of the business of betting against their own customers. Indeed, she rightly argues that “naked shorting” (using derivatives to bet against assets you don’t hold) is just like buying life insurance on your neighbor’s house-and then setting it afire. As we know, that is exactly what Goldman has been doing for years: marketing debt instruments to customers, and then using credit default swaps (CDSs) to bet that the debt will go bad-all the while helping to ensure that debts will go bad (through, by example, letting a hedge fund run by John Paulson’s hedge fund to pick the trashy subprimes that would go into the debt instruments sold to customers). Senator Lincoln is right: it is not sufficient to bring these practices into the light of day of formal exchanges-instead they should be prohibited practices for any financial institution that receives government support, which includes all chartered banks.

What neither Wall Street nor Washington yet understands is that all chartered banks are really public-private partnerships: they receive Treasury-supplied FDIC insurance, and they have access to the Fed as lender of last resort when things go bad. FDIC insurance makes bank deposits as good as cold, hard, government-supplied cash. Effectively, it allows banks to play with “house money“. At most, banks put up 8% of their owners’ money, and the Treasury kicks in 92% that the banks use to buy assets or to make bets. It is as if you went to Las Vegas and Uncle Sam provided 92 cents of every dollar you gambled. And if you still manage to run into trouble, Uncle Ben Bernanke stands ready to bail you out with free cash. Quite a deal! And a gamble you literally cannot lose.

Now this can be justified only if banks serve the public purpose. That is the quid-pro-quo for the sweet deal Uncle Sam and Uncle Ben provide. Banks are supposed to provide deposit services to customers, and to carefully examine credit-worthiness of borrowers. There is no other justification for bank charters. If they do not make and hold loans, and provide deposits, they have no business holding a bank charter.

It is presumed that private loan officers can do a better job at this than civil servants can do. That seems plausible, at least on the surface. But banks have gradually jettisoned that function–deciding they’d rather “originate and distribute”–originate loans but then push them onto someone else’s balance sheet. Worse, they decided that there is actually no reason to ever assess credit-worthiness since someone else will take the loss if NINJA loans go bad. Indeed, banks decided they could make even more money if they originated loans sure to go bad, packaged the very worst stuff into securities and sold these to pension funds, then used CDSs to bet the junk would crater. Jimmy Stewart thrifts they ain’t.

Goldman and other large banks serve no public purpose. The claim that they “do God’s work” is simply repugnant. Only a singularly rapacious individual who sees himself as a modern-day divinely-chosen monarch could possibly make such a statement.

To be sure we are only talking about the top ten or dozen banks-where all the derivatives are. There are literally thousands of banks all across America that still make loans, issue deposits, and have never seen a derivative. Virtually all derivatives bought or sold, held or pushed like bad heroin are the responsibility of a handful of “too big to fail” thoroughly corrupt institutions that feed at the trough of Uncles Sam and Ben. Indeed, in an ironic twist of fate, these risky and toxic institutions get the best deal of all: because they are the favorites of Uncles Sam and Ben they enjoy the lowest costs of issuing liabilities (that is to say, borrowing). Remember that 8 cents of your own money you take to Las Vegas? You pay more for that than the top gamblers-who not only get Uncle Sam to provide 92 cents of every gambled dollar, but the 8 cents of their own money put into play is cheaper for them to raise because even that is believed to be backed by our Uncles in Washington. In other words, the Washington Uncles subsidize that 8 cents, so that the biggest institutions get an unfair advantage over the thousands of institutions that reside in cities and towns all across American.

This is why firms like Goldman are said to be “backstopped” by Washington — no losses or prosecutions for fraud will be permitted. Yet hundreds and even thousands of smaller institutions will be allowed to fail during this crisis created by the likes of Goldman. They don’t get the backstop.

The recent charges against Goldman have shaken that belief, just as Senator Lincoln’s bill has Wall Street shaking in its penny loafers. Here is the choice she offers: you can continue with your derivatives, acting against the public interest, or you can be a bank. You cannot be both. Take your choice: blood-sucking vampire squid? Or, serve the public interest. If you go for squid, you lose all public protection. In that case, you go “free market” with all that entails-higher costs of borrowing, 100% downside risk, and prosecution when you lie and deceive. Go ahead and bet against your customers–they will vote with their feet if they do not like that treatment and will sue you when you screw them. Burn down houses and go to jail for arson. Your choice.

Or. Take a bank charter, and you will be protected but constrained. No activities that run against the public purpose will be permitted. Go ahead, make loans–but you will hold them on your balance sheet, and thereby take any risks associated with folly. If you make bad bets, you will wipe out the owners. Go ahead, issue deposits and your Uncles will guarantee them. But access to the public trough comes with a cost: no more derivatives, of any kind-traded, untraded, transparent
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
12. The old "Who Could have Foreseen/I Didn't See Nuthin'" strategy
:puke:

It is as believable when Obama said it as when he Bushies said it about 9/11, or a petty-criminal says it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
havocmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Yep
And :hi: my friend. I thought of PMing you with link to this but got a call and I distract easily these days
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-22-10 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
13. Duped to vote for Bush, duped to believe he won, duped to accept he won, duped...
and duped and duped.

They live off us being duped.

Now, are we being duped into believing we were duped so we won't do anything about having been duped?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 04:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC