So I guess 7286 is the big closing low number on the Dow Jones. After that, the next leg down is in the low 6000's back from 1997/1998. Wow.

 

It will probably get to that too. There is nothing stopping the economic disaster at this point, I just hope it stops before everybody has to reside in caves and live off the land.

Edited February 20, 200917 yr by whitesoxfan101

It will probably get to that too. There is nothing stopping the economic disaster at this point, I just hope it stops before everybody has to reside in caves and live off the land.

That's not possible either because global warming is going to burn up our crops. We're just a moneyless, hopeless society.

That's not possible either because global warming is going to burn up our crops. We're just a moneyless, hopeless society.

You know, if I tried posting in Kaperbole for a week, I feel like I'd wind up suspended...

You know, if I tried posting in Kaperbole for a week, I feel like I'd wind up suspended...

 

i doubt it

 

this coming form an expert on being suspended.

You know, if I tried posting in Kaperbole for a week, I feel like I'd wind up suspended...

Damn! My plot is foiled! (Evil Grin).

The N word comes up in talks about bank ideas again.

 

Nationalization? Feds, Citi at the table

 

The federal government is in talks to beef up its ownership stake in Citigroup to as much as 40 percent of the company's common stock, the Wall Street Journal reported Sunday—just days after the Obama administration said it didn't want to nationalize America's largest banks.

 

Citigroup proposed the move to regulators, the Journal reported, and a Treasury Department spokesman signaled late Sunday that the government is open to the idea, even as he refused to discuss Citi directly.

 

Treasury spokesman Isaac Baker told POLITICO: "We don't comment on conversations with specific banks. However. we are open to considering a request to [convert preferred stock to common shares] if the institution and its regulator believe it would promote the long term stability of that institution, and if we believe it's in the best interest of long term stability of our economy and financial system."

 

That represents a dramatic change of tone from White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on Friday. "This administration continues to strongly believe that a privately held banking system is the correct way to go, ensuring that they are regulated sufficiently by this government," Gibbs said at the time. "That's been our belief for quite some time."

 

But throughout the week, stock market investors didn't believe the denials, and continued furiously selling bank stocks out of fear that a government takeover would wipe out shareholder value. By the close of trading on Friday, Citigroup, one of the most beleaguered banks, traded at just $1.95 per share.

 

In some ways, it looked like the market's worries about nationalization could have become a self-fulfilling prophecy. The collapse of Citi's stock price makes it much more difficult for the bank to conduct business on Monday, and could spark a broad loss of confidence in the company's viability. It could also impact the stock price and future viability of other banks.

 

As global markets open for trading Monday, the fate of Citi, a bank with 200 million customer accounts and operations in more than 100 countries, hangs in the balance.

 

Media disclosure of the existence of the talks puts enormous pressure on the administration and the bank's executives to come to terms overnight. One source familiar with Citigroup's thinking said late Sunday night that it will be important to have some kind of announcement ready by Monday morning, because confidence in Citi is eroding at such a rapid pace.

 

"Citibank is in 109 different countries, and no other bank has that kind of presence. If there's a run on the bank in the United States tomorrow, what's going to happen in Europe and Latin America and Asia?" the source said.

 

On Wall Street and in Washington, fierce debate has raged about bank nationalization - whether it represents a cure for the financial markets' collapse, or could trigger further economic catastrophe. And although a 40 percent ownership stake in Citigroup would not give the federal government majority control of the bank, some inside the bank believe it would represent nationalization in all but name. "Tomorrow, we may see de facto nationalization," said the source. "The thinking is that the stock is at such a low point right now that it can't have that much of a dilutive effect on the shareholders."

 

The U.S. government already has a modest stake in Citigroup as a result of a $45 billion cash infusion to the company last fall. The Journal reported bank executives would like to keep the government's share closer to 25 percent. But a bigger ownership position would be designed to reassure investors, businesses and individuals with Citi accounts that the bank is safe to do business with. And presumably, federal regulators would exercise some degree of control over the bank's restructuring, although it's unclear exactly how much authority the federal government would exert.

 

One element that many will be looking for in any Citigroup announcement will be whether or not a government official takes a seat on Citi's board of directors—such a move would signal that the feds intend to take a firm hand in running the bank's future.

 

The deepening bank crisis threatens to overshadow the White House's plans this week to focus on the budget deficit and other long-term policy and fiscal priorities. The White House Sunday night referred questions to Treasury.

 

Meanwhile, Bank of America Corp. said Sunday that it isn't discussing a larger ownership stake for the government. "There are no talks right now over that issue," Bank of America spokesman Robert Stickler told the Journal. "We see no reason to do that. We believe the goal of public policy should be to attract private capital into the bank, not to discourage it."

Wait, did i read that right?

Asian investors won't buy debt and mortgage-backed securities from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac until they carry explicit U.S. guarantees, similar to those given on bonds issued by Bank of America Corp. or Citigroup Inc.

The Dow is down a little more than 200 points right now. It's down to numbers not seen this decade, and is down just about a full 50 percent from where it was when it reached an all time high less than a year and a half ago. Yay.

Clearly, the only way around this problem is larger retention bonuses.

American Insurance Group, the insurance giant that is 80-percent owned by the US government, is in discussions with the government to secure additional funds so it can keep operating after next Monday, when it will report the largest loss in U.S. corporate history, CNBC has learned.

 

Sources close to the company said the loss will be near $60 billion due to writedowns on a variety of assets including commercial real estate.

 

That massive loss is likely to spur downgrades in its insurance and credit ratings that will force AIG to raise collateral that it doesn't have.

 

In addition, if AIG's book value falls below a certain level, as it seems certain to do, it will trigger default in certain of its debt instruments, say people familiar with the situation.

 

All of this adds up to a huge headache for the Federal Reserve and Treasury, which have already provided over $150 billion of assistance to AIG.

 

Talks between the government and AIG are focussed on how the company can swap some of the debt held by the government for equity in AIG.

 

The problem is that the government's ownership stake cannot exceed its current 79.9 percent, leaving officials to try and find a creative way to transfer value to the US in exchange for AIG reducing its debt so that it can then borrow more from the government to meet its collateral calls.

Clearly, the only way around this problem is larger retention bonuses.

This is what you get when insurance companies decide to become market speculators. Just a really bad business pairing model, fraught with risk, which should be the opposite of what an insurance company enters into.

 

market crashes today, again

 

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090223/pl_nm/...nians_clinton_4

 

The United States plans to offer more than $900 million to help rebuild Gaza after Israel's invasion

 

...

 

*sigh*

Just as long as our government controls everything, the money doesn't mean anything.

 

This is what you get when insurance companies decide to become market speculators. Just a really bad business pairing model, fraught with risk, which should be the opposite of what an insurance company enters into.

 

 

I believe I was criticized on this site a couple months ago by saying the insurance cos. would be the next to fall. Quite a handsome return since.

I believe I was criticized on this site a couple months ago by saying the insurance cos. would be the next to fall. Quite a handsome return since.

I think we all knew AIG was in trouble. But some of the other giants, who were more conservative, i.e. ALL, are doing OK (not great though).

 

Allianz is the European AIG in waiting.

Just as long as our government controls everything, the money doesn't mean anything.

I believe you've just justified spending another trillion or two invading another country.

2nd deepest bear market in market history.

AmEx is doing something sort of novel, as a way to get some of their high risk debtors off the books. They are offering $300 to certain customers, if they close their accounts.

 

I saw a headline today pointing out that the major markets are now down approximately 50% from their peak. Half. Yikes.

 

How do we measure jobs saved?

 

Is it just a way for the Messiah to save his a** when the jobs numbers don't show him creating as many as he says. If any at all.

 

Using a model to say you will save X amount of jobs based on X amount of jobs being lost with no stimulus is assinine. And I cannot believe everyone is o.k. with this nonsense. By now we all know govt's do not know how to predict/project. A good example is revenue projections from new/higher taxes. Are they ever close to projections?......

 

 

 

I saw a headline today pointing out that the major markets are now down approximately 50% from their peak. Half. Yikes.

 

 

And still have a ways to go.

I saw a headline today pointing out that the major markets are now down approximately 50% from their peak. Half. Yikes.

Didn't the graph I posted yesterday make that point? Am I back on Ignore for you? Dah.

Didn't the graph I posted yesterday make that point? Am I back on Ignore for you? Dah.

What was that? Did anyone else hear something? Sounded like someone banging rocks together, in the distance.

 

Another interesting note on the mortgage mess...how pervasive was fraud on the part of the mortgage lenders in creating all these bad loans and getting them approved and sold off?

A rating agency (Fitch) first reviewed a small sample of nonprime loan files after the secondary market in nonprime loan paper collapsed and nonprime lending virtually ceased. The second document everyone should read is Fitch's report on what they found.

Fitch's analysts conducted an independent analysis of these files with the benefit of the full origination and servicing files. The result of the analysis was disconcerting at best, as there was the appearance of fraud or misrepresentation in almost every file.

 

[F]raud was not only present, but, in most cases, could have been identified with adequate underwriting, quality control and fraud prevention tools prior to the loan funding. Fitch believes that this targeted sampling of files was sufficient to determine that inadequate underwriting controls and, therefore, fraud is a factor in the defaults and losses on recent vintage pools.

Fitch also explained why these forms of mortgage fraud cause severe losses.

 

For example, for an origination program that relies on owner occupancy to offset other risk factors, a borrower fraudulently stating its intent to occupy will dramatically alter the probability of the loan defaulting. When this scenario happens with a borrower who purchased the property as a short-term investment, based on the anticipation that the value would increase, the layering of risk is greatly multiplied. If the same borrower also misrepresented his income, and cannot afford to pay the loan unless he successfully sells the property, the loan will almost certainly default and result in a loss, as there is no type of loss mitigation, including modification, which can rectify these issues.