John Paulson, the hedge fund investor behind the toxic CDO
referenced in the S.E.C. complaint, ratcheted up his
nobody-saw-it-coming rhetoric, with a letter nominally addressed to his own investors but clearly intended for a broader audience of ignoramuses and amnesia victims:
"It is easy to forget that before the collapse, the
overwhelming view of investors, ratings agencies and economists was
that the housing market was strong and would continue to get stronger."
The opposite is true. Nobody was saying that the housing
market was strong and would continue to get stronger during the weeks
prior to April 26, 2007, the closing date of Goldman's notorious Abacus 2007-AC1.
There are countless ways to discredit Paulson's statement, just as
there are countless ways to discredit his claim that he operated in "good faith." (As Vanity Fair was kind enough to point out, Paulson's bad faith manipulations were first highlighted here on HuffPo seven months ago.)
I applaud and welcome Paul Krugman's clarification ...
It is NOT a republican versus democratic issue ... It is a reform versus spin issue!
Yes, we need no bananas ...
Nothing reall new here, just more confirmation from John Hussman, who tends to be somewhat more diplomatic than us, in highlighting what all those who care already know (the rest are buying AIG, Fannie and Freddie): the banking system is completely insolvent. And to make matters worse everyone in this administration from the very top, to the regulators, to the accountants, to the investors, and to the firms themselves, is in on it. The only thing that makes it palatable - the complete lack of any information about just how bankrupt America is and will continue to be for years, even as we hear every single day from the administration propaganda business stations how everything is doing great. Ignore all the talk about an economic recovery - with the cornerstone of the financial system still in default if it weren't for a variety of accounting gimmicks, not to mention the trillions in fiscal and monetary boosts, and the transfer of resurrection costs from the present to the future via the steep debt curve, real GDP would be down 10% or more, and all public financial firms would be undergoing liquidation (and their management teams likely in prison). Of course, public recognition of just how much of a ponzi the entire economy has become is never a good thing going into midterm elections. And with the Fed directly and indirectly monetizing, with Primary Dealers complicit in realizing full well their 4th Hamptons house would be on the block if they don't, with China forced to keep buying our debt as the alternative is a nor so glorious revolution, we all not only live in Wonderland, but are fully aware of this sad reality, yet happily will continue to do so until the day this lie can not be rolled into tomorrow.
Even folks inside the belly of the beast think they should be broken up ...
Heck of a job, guys ...
"Only 21% Say U.S. Government Has Consent of the Governed ... Those with the Lowest Incomes are the Most Skeptical"Submitted by George Washington on 02/18/2010 18:52 -0400
Scott Rasmussen [President of Rasmussen Reports] observes that the American people are “united in the belief that our political system is broken, that politicians are corrupt, and that neither major political party has the answers.” He adds that “the gap between Americans who want to govern themselves and the politicians who want to rule over them may be as big today as the gap between the colonies and England during the 18th century.”
Refuse to Pay Government Debt Incurred for Unlawful and Oppressive Purposes ... It Is the Personal Debt of Those Who Ordered It to Be IncurredSubmitted by George Washington on 02/12/2010 01:16 -0400
Bush, Cheney, Paulson, Geithner and others who ordered that these debts be incurred must be held personally liable for them. We the American people are not responsible to creditors - such as China, Saudi Arabia - who have knowingly financed these illegal and oppressive activities which have not benefited the American people, but solely the handful of corrupt politicians who authorized them ...
Dean Baker, Co-Director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, has put together a simple yet comprehensive presentation on a topic Zero Hedge has discussed in the past: how the demographic shift in the US will mirror the spender-to-saver transformation of an aging Japanese society, and as a result lead to an accentuation of the economic crisis into the double-dip phase, should all the artificial , one-time stimulus actions be phased out. For all those who think that a "new normal" with unemployment straddling double digits for years to come will be conducive to growth, think again. And after today's failed referendum on Obama's healthcare policies, America's immediate future will be focused on two simple propositions: [yes/no] on stimulus and [yes/no] on Q.E. 2. Everything else will be smoke and mirrors.
Let's talk dollars and cents ...
Questions for our Esteemed Chairman ...
Even with a thoroughly discredited Tim Geithner repeatedly saying that a transaction tax is the worst thing since, well TurboTax, the topic is generating more and more traction, and earlier House Democrat leader Steny Hoyer noted that the topic is now a discussion item "on the table". With fervent voices on both side of the table, we would like to present the following paper by Dean Baker highlighting the benefits of a financial transaction tax.
"Financial transactions taxes have been a widely used source of revenue in the United States and
elsewhere in the world. A set of taxes applied to trading in a broad range of financial assets and
scaled to the level of the UK stamp tax on stock trades could raise close to $100 billion a year in
revenue in the United States. Such a tax is arguably efficiency-enhancing since it would substantially
reduce the resources used by the financial sector without reducing its effectiveness in allocating
capital." - Dean Baker
Dear Chairman Frank, Ranking Member Bachus, and Members of the Committee,
During the past two years, the Federal Reserve dramatically changed its operating procedures. Instead of simply setting interest rates to influence macroeconomic conditions, it rapidly acquired a wide variety of private assets and extended massive secret bailouts to major financial institutions.
Yes . . . but only if we get off our butts.