Bank of America Forces Taxpayers To Cosign on 53 TRILLION In Derivatives. Too Big To Fail.

[stocktrader23]

The government?s patronage of the bank was never clearer than in recent weeks, when B of A quietly decided to move trillions of dollars (trillions, not billions) in risky Merrill Lynch derivatives contracts off Merrill?s books and onto the books of the parent/retail arm, Bank of America.

This decision was done at the behest of counterparties to those transactions, who wanted those contracts placed under the aegis of Bank of America, whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The move was made, according to reports, so that Bank of America could avoid posting $3.3 billion in collateral to satisfy the company?s creditors. In other words, Bank of America just got You the Taxpayer to co-sign as much as $53 trillion worth of dicey derivative contracts.

The FDIC wasn?t pleased by the move, but the Fed apparently encouraged it.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-of-a-20111028

[vsex]

Doesn't surprise me in the least.

[Caligari]

Originally Posted by stocktrader23

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-of-a-20111028

Completely insane.
As the outcry grows BofA and assorted ilk will do as much as they can before the govt is forced to step in and change the laws.
I say forced because at some point they will have no choice.

Upstate NY congressman Maurice Hinchey put it best. "What Bank of America is doing is perfectly legal ? and that's the problem,? he said.

This is exactly why the Glass-Steagall Act needs to be reinstated: without a separation of Investment Banks and Commercial Banks, what we end up getting is taxpayer-guaranteed gambling. Instead of encouraging prudence and savings by insuring deposits in commercial banks, the FDIC is now being turned into a vehicle for socializing speculative losses.

[Phoenix]

what are those OWS people crying about again?

people still dont know??

lol

[GAMEFINEST]

Fuck man all legal too

[cykoe6]

This is an absolute travesty. The real exposure for the FDIC is only 1 trillion (because they are only insuring deposits) but the fact that this was allowed to happen is a true outrage. People need to remember who was in charge when this occurred.

Given this, it boggles the mind that the OWS useful idiots are demanding even more government control over the economy. The answer to the real problem of big government corruption is not even more big government. Unfortunately the children of OWS are being led down the path to doom by the pied piper.

[Lucy - CSC]

Goodbye American sovereigty hello world government controlled by the bankers.

[oscer]

i don't use this bank thankfully ....

[DaddyHalbucks]

That's chump change compared to the TRILLIONS of dollars of US taxpayer money paid out over the last half century for inherently fraudulent government social programs. When you consider the scope of hundreds of millions of beneficiaries, including tens of millions of illegal aliens, it is no surprise that we are broke. How can you pay people to do nothing and maintain a vital economy? You can't. The word is unsustainable. Heck, billions were paid out to dead people.

The banks and Wall Street executives are petty criminals compared to the people who orchestrated socialism in the USA.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by stocktrader23

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics...-of-a-20111028

[TheDoc]

Sad... the extreme anti-american conservative right take over that started with Ronald Reagan's mass deregulation scam is almost complete, much more and they will have sucked all of our money away from us... and of course left us with trillions in debts to deal with. And what's the extreme right's solution? To try and say things are too regulated.... that too much Gov is causing this, that "other things" are the problem.... What a pathetic joke.

This will wake up even more Americans as it gets exposed... and people question why the OWS movement is focused on corrupt business.

[nation-x]

This piece provides an interesting historical perspective

Originally Posted by Sam Pizzigati

On April 27, 1942, Franklin D. Roosevelt went on national radio and pronounced that ?no American citizen ought to have a net income, after he has paid his taxes, of more than $25,000 a year.? FDR?s proposed $25,000 limit would be worth today, after adjusting for inflation, about $300,000.

How did Americans, you might wonder, react to Roosevelt?s proposal? Did members of Congress charge that the President had gone out of his mind? Did business leaders predict the end of civilization as we know it? Did pollsters report a tidal wave of public revulsion?

Nothing of the sort. George Gallup report that 49 percent of Americans supported FDR?s idea of an income cap, 37 percent opposed it, with the rest undecided.

And what about members of Congress? They didn?t, in the end, adopt FDR?s 100 percent top tax rate. But they did enact, halfway through World War II, a top tax rate of 94 percent on all income over $200,000.

Overall, in 1943, the richest 2,500 Americans, after exploiting every loophole they could find, paid 78 percent of their total incomes in federal income tax.

How does that compare to today? Last year, our richest Americans, after exploiting every loophole they could find, paid 17.5 percent of their total incomes in federal tax.

Back in FDR?s time and before, Americans saw great concentrations of private wealth as a threat to our republic. Those Americans feared concentrated wealth.

Louis Brandeis, one of greatest Supreme Court justices, put the matter simply. "We can either have a democracy in this country,? Brandeis said about a hundred years ago, ?or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can?t have both.?

Brandeis faced an America where great wealth did rest in the hands of a few.

In 1915 average Americans made less than $10 a week. America?s richest families then averaged, on a weekly basis, over $20,000. That would be the equivalent today of $370,000 a week.

America a century ago, declared Justice Louis Brandeis, had become a plutocracy. The rich ruled. They bought politicians. They squeezed workers. They built giant mansions. They totally dominated America?s political and economic life. Sounds familiar?

But average Americans, back a century ago, fought fight back. They battled to cut the rich down to democratic size. They wrote into law a steeply progressive income tax. They enacted an estate tax to prevent the inheritance of vast dynastic fortunes. They passed antitrust legislation. They gave trade unions the right to organize and challenge corporate power.

By 1950, America?s plutocracy would be no more. By 1950 America?s most opulent mansions had become museums and libraries and hospitals and schools. The American people had triumphed over America?s plutocrats, and that triumph made them incredibly proud.

Frederick Lewis Allen, then America?s most popular and widely read historian, captured that pride in his last book, a 1952 history of the first half of the twentieth century. Allen titled his book The Big Change.

And what was that big change? Americans, Allen proclaimed, had brought about a massive ?redistribution in income from well-to-do to the less well-to-do.? The United States, to its great and undying credit, had become a significantly more equal place.

Modern America, Frederick Lewis Allen and his readers believed, would forever more be a middle class nation. The plutocrats had been routed. They would never be back.

The nation?s most respected economists sent the same message. In 1955, Simon Kuznets, a future Nobel Prize winner, delivered his presidential address to the American Economic Association. His thesis: The more industrial societies like the United States mature, the more equal they become.

Who could argue with that? In the 1950s and 1960s, the United States was becoming more equal. The share of the nation?s wealth belonging to average Americans was rapidly increasing, the share belonging to the rich just as rapidly decreasing.

In the quarter century after World War II, the incomes of average Americans, after taking inflation into account, doubled.

And then, in the early 1970s, everything started changing. America stopped becoming more equal. Real wages for average Americans started stagnating. America?s biggest fortunes, meanwhile, started multiplying, slowly at first, but then, after 1980, at breakneck speed.

Between 1973 and 2000, the average income of the bottom 90 percent of the American people, after adjusting for inflation, actually dropped by 7 percent.

Over that same time period, the incomes of our top 1 percent, the folks who took home at least $337,000 last year, rose by 148 percent. And the richest of the rich, the top tenth of the top 1 percent, saw their incomes rise 343 percent.

The plutocrats were back.

In 1975, the most widely acclaimed CEO in the United States was Reginald Jones, the chief executive at General Electric. Reginald Jones took home $500,000 in 1975, a sum that equaled 36 times the income of that year?s typical American family.

In 2000, the most widely acclaimed CEO in the United States was Jack Welch, who also happened to be the chief executive at General Electric. Welsh took home $144.5 million in the year 2000, a sum that equaled 3,500 times the income of that year?s typical American family.

In 1982, in its first annual census of America?s four hundred richest individuals, Forbes magazine counted 13 billionaires. In 2000, Forbes counted 267.

The plutocrats were most definitely back.

In just twenty-five years, the United States had, in fact, witnessed the most colossal redistribution of wealth in modern world history.

But here?s the amazing part. This enormous redistribution of wealth today sits nowhere on our political radar screen.

Our nation?s top political leaders, Republicans and Democrats alike, have essentially concluded that colossal concentrations of wealth, in the grand scheme of things, need not be cause for concern. And too many of the rest of us haven't challenged that conclusion.

Oh sure, we Americans today certainly do bellyache about CEO pay excesses. And we?re not happy with tax giveaways to the rich. We may even lament, with John Edwards, that ?we live in a country where there are two different Americas.?? But our hearts and minds remain overwhelmingly focused on the absence of wealth, not its concentration.

http://www.unlockyourlife.com/pizzigati.html

[slapass]

You were already signed on the line for the deposits. We need to tell the too big to fail people to fuck off. If Citibank or GM was gone, would you care?

[DWB]

Bullets and bombs.

[sperbonzo]

Only government can force taxpayers to do anything. While they egg you on against "evil bankers", you are eagerly trying to give that same government even MORE power. Fools.



.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

Only government can force taxpayers to do anything. While they egg you on against "evil bankers", you are eagerly trying to give that same government even MORE power. Fools.



.

Other than bank deregulations don't have the best history of working out for the people, ever... and every where they are heavily regulated, this doesn't happen or happens very little, which is a bit odd.

[SmokeyTheBear]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

Only government can force taxpayers to do anything. While they egg you on against "evil bankers", you are eagerly trying to give that same government even MORE power. Fools.
.

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."

Thomas Jefferson

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Other than bank deregulations don't have the best history of working out for the people, ever... and every where they are heavily regulated, this doesn't happen or happens very little, which is a bit odd.

You realize that the same party that is yelling about deregulation was overseeing Fannie and freddie and eagerly having them buy up high risk loans and totally screw up the the normal restrictions of risk management

[stocktrader23]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

You realize that the same party that is yelling about deregulation was overseeing Fannie and freddie and eagerly having them buy up high risk loans and totally screw up the the normal restrictions of risk management

You talk your own ass into circles.

[glamourmodels]

DaddyHalbucks you are an idiot

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Sad... the extreme anti-american conservative right take over that started with Ronald Reagan's mass deregulation scam is almost complete, much more and they will have sucked all of our money away from us... and of course left us with trillions in debts to deal with. And what's the extreme right's solution? To try and say things are too regulated.... that too much Gov is causing this, that "other things" are the problem.... What a pathetic joke.

This will wake up even more Americans as it gets exposed... and people question why the OWS movement is focused on corrupt business.

There is no business corruption without big government handouts. The bigger the government the bigger the corruption. It is actually very simple despite your attempts to obfuscate the issue. The idea that the answer to big government corruption is even bigger government is absurd in the extreme. Only an idiot or liar (in your case likely both) could possibly argue otherwise.

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."

Thomas Jefferson

This quote is entirely correct, which is why arguing for a more powerful government as a solution to the problem is so absurd. A constitutionally limited government as envisioned by the founding fathers is the only answer. The current corporatist bureaucratic abomination that grows grows bigger by the day is the root of the problem. More government is certainly not the solution. Government and bureaucracies are corrupt by their very nature. That is why the government needs to be as small and as limited in function as possible. Jefferson knew this...... that is why it is so amusing to see the socialists quoting him approvingly......seemingly oblivious to the irony. The cognitive dissonance is deafening.

[stocktrader23]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

This quote is entirely correct, which is why arguing for a more powerful government as a solution to the problem is so absurd. A constitutionally limited government as envisioned by the founding fathers is the only answer. The current corporatist bureaucratic abomination that grows grows bigger by the day is the root of the problem. More government is certainly not the solution. Government and bureaucracies are corrupt by their very nature. That is why the government needs to be as small and as limited in function as possible. Jefferson knew this...... that is why it is so amusing to see the socialists quoting him approvingly......seemingly oblivious to the irony. The cognitive dissonance is deafening.

That's all well and good but if they let these banks implode in 2008 (BUSH BTW) the economy would have taken a royal fucking and everyone would be out in the streets raising hell. At this point they need to regulate out the fucking corruption, then they can work on smaller government.

BTW, you idiots like to remove health care and other social programs when talking about a smaller government even though every other first world country easily manages these things. Also, do you ever bitch and moan about the fucking war and absurd tax cuts going on at the same time? You can't have your cake and eat it too.

[VikingMan]

Yeah but as long as Walmart and Mcdonalds are open for business and MTV keeps cranking out Jersey Shore episodes the average turd will not be alarmed in the least. The moment that the food stamp program is disrupted or ends this country is going to explode with zombies who have been juiced up with all the class warfare indoctrination. Who is rich? YOU ARE RICH. What is most pathetic is all the religious nuts who will welcome the chaos as a sign that Jebus is about to return to rapture them. This will give the bankers even more control. Have fun The 20th century was by far the bloodiest in world history and this century is going to be 10x worse. Better stock up on twinkies.

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by stocktrader23

You talk your own ass into circles.

I guess this is not a fair conversation. I work with banks and banking everyday and I actually understand how the normal free market risk management model will naturally keep risk adverse banks from taking on too much high risk investment. When the Feds started taking away that risk, they removed those natural restrictions on thebanks and the result was inevitable. Left to their own devices, banks would never jhave continued making high risk loans with no place to put the bad paper and no chance of a bail out.


.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by SmokeyTheBear

"The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first."

Thomas Jefferson

fake quote.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

You realize that the same party that is yelling about deregulation was overseeing Fannie and freddie and eagerly having them buy up high risk loans and totally screw up the the normal restrictions of risk management

I realize both parties are guilty of deregulation, laws, etc that have allowed multiple types of bank, financial, and market manipulations to take place, including lack of accountability practices, and a ton of other crap that helped create the problems of today.

F&F are simply the result of past deregulations that allowed them to back and absorb loans like they did (and other crap), then fail, then basically be absorbed by the Gov, basically making them a hidden nationalized banking structure.

This started roughly 30 years ago, maybe before that I'm not sure... but I do know we can all name and spot various things that helped setup and create the issues of today, basically meaning - this didn't just happen.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

There is no business corruption without big government handouts. The bigger the government the bigger the corruption. It is actually very simple despite your attempts to obfuscate the issue. The idea that the answer to big government corruption is even bigger government is absurd in the extreme. Only an idiot or liar (in your case likely both) could possibly argue otherwise.

Yes I realize roughly 30 years ago right wing radicals came into power and started to deregulate the financial and banking industries while allowing the gov to expand and grow at levels never seen before in history. As well, it appears once this started to happen a chain reaction of corruption set in, more and more with each President as well.

Internal spending, infrastructure spending, education, science, state spending, even social spending... basically, many types spending does not equal 'big' government to the point of bankrupting citizens and destroying our Country.

We were doing these things well before the out of control spending or the big gov of today.... balance is without question possible.

[TheSquealer]

[stocktrader23]

Absolutely, Go Obama.

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Internal spending, infrastructure spending, education, science, state spending, even social spending... basically, many types spending does not equal 'big' government to the point of bankrupting citizens and destroying our Country.

I understand your position very well...... you are in favor of government handouts and graft for you favored constituencies but it oppose for everyone else.

[Shotsie]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

I understand your position very well...... you are in favor of government handouts and graft for you favored constituencies but it oppose for everyone else.

If the government doesn't step in guess what happens? I'll give you a hint, it started gaining momentum in the US during the Great Depression and this famous singer was a part of it.

[Nikki_Licks]

There was a thread about this a few weeks ago and I can't believe that they are getting away with this....this will only stop when BofA is handed it's ass by the people of this country.

Really nice to know this POS bank is once again going to stick it to the American people when the shit comes tumbling down.

http://dailybail.com/home/holy-bailo...illion-of.html

[Lucy - CSC]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

That's chump change compared to the TRILLIONS of dollars of US taxpayer money paid out over the last half century for inherently fraudulent government social programs. When you consider the scope of hundreds of millions of beneficiaries, including tens of millions of illegal aliens, it is no surprise that we are broke. How can you pay people to do nothing and maintain a vital economy? You can't. The word is unsustainable. Heck, billions were paid out to dead people.

The banks and Wall Street executives are petty criminals compared to the people who orchestrated socialism in the USA.

You really are a moron. Socialism is not wealth redistribution but control of various industries in the economy, usually infrastructure to benefit the good of the people.

http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/uk_national_debt

Here is a graph showing British debt. Socialism came in after worldwar II when Britain was most in debt. If socialism cost money then how did we repay the debt? I ends during the 80s under Margaret Thatcher. You may notice that when it ends the debt starts growing again.

[nation-x]

[nation-x]

In other news, Fox News poll confirms that the majority of Americans polled would rather see Barack Obama re-elected than any of the Republican candidates or just wouldn't care if he was re-elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/p...on-cain-train/

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

I understand your position very well...... you are in favor of government handouts and graft for you favored constituencies but it oppose for everyone else.

You seem confused, those aren't gov handouts, those are things that already have and continue to spark innovation, new industries and economic growth.... and my favored and only constituents are the American people.

[cykoe6]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

You seem confused, those aren't gov handouts, those are things that already have and continue to spark innovation, new industries and economic growth.... and my favored and only constituents are the American people.

Spoken like a true politician.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by cykoe6

Spoken like a true politician.

Yeah screw history.....

[DWB]

Get out while you still can.

[DWB]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Yeah screw history.....

That could be your slogan when you run.

The Doc
Screw History!

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by nation-x

In other news, Fox News poll confirms that the majority of Americans polled would rather see Barack Obama re-elected than any of the Republican candidates or just wouldn't care if he was re-elected.

http://www.foxnews.com/interactive/p...on-cain-train/

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH!

I see how this works.

Suddenly Fox News is a trusted and credible news source thats not watched only by brainwashed idiots.

No wait...

I don't see how this works.

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by DWB

That could be your slogan when you run.

The Doc
Screw History!

We don't need more Conservative mentalities on the ticket....

[nation-x]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH!

I see how this works.

Suddenly Fox News is a trusted and credible news source thats not watched only by brainwashed idiots.

No wait...

I don't see how this works.

That post was intended to be satirical... it's rather ironic don't you think?

[huey]

Ah derivatives of derivatives.

[junction]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Originally Posted by nation-x

Can you explain to me what Obama has to do with this?

[_Richard_]

woo.. is this the 175 trillion notional bailout? here is hoping europe pulls through

[u-Bob]

Originally Posted by Lucy - CSC

Socialism is not wealth redistribution but control of various industries in the economy, usually infrastructure to benefit the good of the people.

"Public works are not accomplished by the miraculous power of a magic wand. They are paid for by funds taken away from the citizens." -- Ludwig von Mises

[TheDoc]

Originally Posted by u-Bob

"Public works are not accomplished by the miraculous power of a magic wand. They are paid for by funds taken away from the citizens." -- Ludwig von Mises

"And the funds returned, with generations of interest, via the economical benefits that most public works provide." ~TheDoc on GFY

[IllTestYourGirls]

Big gov ie FDIC caused this. Wooohooo for regulations!