Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion

vbimport

#1

[I]"The Federal Reserve refused a request by Bloomberg News to disclose the recipients of more than $2 trillion of emergency loans from U.S. taxpayers and the assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

Bloomberg filed suit Nov. 7 under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act requesting details about the terms of 11 Fed lending programs, most created during the deepest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

The Fed responded Dec. 8, saying it’s allowed to withhold internal memos as well as information about trade secrets and commercial information. The institution confirmed that a records search found 231 pages of documents pertaining to some of the requests." [/I]
Read the article here…http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=apx7XNLnZZlc&refer=home
So much for transparency from our elected, and appointed, leaders…


#2

Yo D - and I don’t mean democrat-

The current administration cannot get out of Washington [I]fast[/I] enough IMO-eh!!


#3

I hope when someone else gets into the office he tells us where the money went


#4

They can’t. If we knew there would probably be another run of several lending institutions and their stock would drop like rocks. I can see the good and bad of this policy.


#5

[QUOTE=bigmike7;2175156]Yo D - and I don’t mean democrat-

The current administration cannot get out of Washington [I]fast[/I] enough IMO-eh!![/QUOTE]

You should include at least 75% of Congress in there too, IMO.


#6

UTR your wrong I would think it is closer to 95 percent


#7

I would leave the ones in there that have opposed the bailouts. They have their heads screwed on straight enough to stay.


#8

[QUOTE=UTR;2175487]They can’t. If we knew there would probably be another run of several lending institutions and their stock would drop like rocks.[/QUOTE]So an open and transparent stock market is not desirable? The stock values of those institutions are based on their underlying financial strength…If they’re insolvent, then they should be allowed to fail…Like real capitalism… [QUOTE=UTR;2175487]I can see the good and bad of this policy.[/QUOTE]There is no good in this policy…The sooner we demand an accounting of the money the better…


#9

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175582]So an open and transparent stock market is not desirable? The stock values of those institutions are based on their underlying financial strength…If they’re insolvent, then they should be allowed to fail…Like real capitalism… There is no good in this policy…The sooner we demand an accounting of the money the better…[/QUOTE]

They like their so called capitalism when we are sheep to their slaugther but when the sheeps come home to roost they call it corporate welfare and never mentioned capitalism in any reports they make. We are force to live by their capitalism but they seem to be above the law and capitalism effects. If we were really running on true capitalisms those coporate thieves would be long go already and so would those congressmen and representatives whom support them.


#10

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175582]So an open and transparent stock market is not desirable? The stock values of those institutions are based on their underlying financial strength…If they’re insolvent, then they should be allowed to fail…Like real capitalism… There is no good in this policy…The sooner we demand an accounting of the money the better…[/QUOTE]

Here is what can happen when politician’s lips start flapping mindlessly about publicly traded corporations:

http://www.tradingmarkets.com/.site/news/Stock%20News/1841876/

Now imagine this occurring on a large scale.


#11

[QUOTE=UTR;2175653]Here is what can happen when politician’s lips start flapping mindlessly about publicly traded corporations:[/QUOTE]
Was he wrong? IndyMac was a house of cards and his comments brought that to the public’s attention…End result: No longer in business…

[QUOTE=UTR;2175653]Now imagine this occurring on a large scale.[/QUOTE]So we should ignore the reality of the situation? That’s how we got here…
I don’t need, or want, to be protected from myself…


#12

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175659]Was he wrong? IndyMac was a house of cards and his comments brought that to the public’s attention…End result: No longer in business…[/QUOTE]

Well it is a chicken or the egg type of question. Did IndyMac fail because Schumer made incorrect claims against them or because of IndyMac’s failings? Bank’s operations are different than many businesses in that they can be undermined by a lack of confidence by there depositors. That lack of confidence can be for legitimate reasons or it can be from Senators shooting off their mouths irresponsibly. We all know a Senator has never done that before. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175659]So we should ignore the reality of the situation? That’s how we got here…
I don’t need, or want, to be protected from myself…[/QUOTE]

If you think Congress can be trusted to get us out of this mess then you have way more faith in them than the majority of the country. They are as responsible for this mess as much as any bank. My blood boils when I see them sitting on their perches lecturing people they have forced in to testify about being fiscally responsible and then they turn around and vote to increase our national debt by over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS this year alone! Give me a break. These a$$holes need to forfeit their salaries just like they think the CEO’s they grill should do. Schumer may not have been the ultimate reason for IndyMac’s demise but he sure as hell had a hand in it.


#13

[QUOTE=UTR;2175664]…That lack of confidence can be for legitimate reasons or it can be from Senators shooting off their mouths irresponsibly. We all know a Senator has never done that before. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]My Senator was too busy playing footsy in a public restroom stall to be concerned with such mundane matters…

[QUOTE=UTR;2175664]If you think Congress can be trusted to get us out of this mess then you have way more faith in them than the majority of the country.[/QUOTE] Point out where I suggested that congress would do the right thing…They have managed to avoid that particular approach… [QUOTE=UTR;2175664]…and then they turn around and vote to increase our national debt by over ONE TRILLION DOLLARS this year alone![/QUOTE]My calculations show approximately 2.8 Trillion added to the national debt since the financial meltdown… [QUOTE=UTR;2175664] Give me a break. [/QUOTE]You got your tax break and a stimulus check didn’t you? No more breaks for you…Note: I didn’t qualify for a stimulus check… [QUOTE=UTR;2175664] Schumer may not have been the ultimate reason for IndyMac’s demise but he sure as hell had a hand in it.[/QUOTE]He just informed the public of the problem…Dumb, Yes…Unethical, Maybe…Illegal, No…


#14

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175691]My Senator was too busy playing footsy in a public restroom stall to be concerned with such mundane matters…

Point out where I suggested that congress would do the right thing…They have managed to avoid that particular approach… My calculations show approximately 2.8 Trillion added to the national debt since the financial meltdown… You got your tax break and a stimulus check didn’t you? No more breaks for you…Note: I didn’t qualify for a stimulus check… He just informed the public of the problem…Dumb, Yes…Unethical, Maybe…Illegal, No…[/QUOTE]

  1. You seem to be defending Schumer’s actions.

  2. I’m talking about unsucured spending increases. The $2.8 trillion isn’t all debt.

  3. The only stimulus I got was writing a check on April 15th.

  4. Who knows if what Schumer did was illegal. You think the Democrats in control of Congress are going to investigate him? The can’t investigate Wrangle who admits to skating on $75k in back taxes and has a pile of festering crap dragging behind him on other matters. Schumer should have kept his mouth shut instead of spreading rumors and destroying the value the shareholders had in IndyMac. Schumer is more of a flaming a$$hole than most members of Congress and he proves it on a regular basis. He is one that thinks he is royalty and above the laws he is supposed to steward.


#15

[QUOTE=UTR;2175787]1) You seem to be defending Schumer’s actions.[/QUOTE]Schumer is an idiot, but still given the right to prove it by speaking out…The fact remains that he was right…Forgetting about the little things?

[QUOTE=UTR;2175787]2) I’m talking about unsecured spending increases. The $2.8 trillion isn’t all debt.[/QUOTE]Unfunded liabilities undertaken by the Federal Reserve on behalf of the US Treasury on behalf of the all taxpaying citizens of the US…Doesn’t sound like a Christmas present to me…

  • $200 billion to nationalize the world’s two largest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac;

  • $15+ billion for the Big Three auto manufacturers;

  • $29 billion for Bear Stearns;

  • $150+ billion for AIG;

  • $350 billion for Citigroup;

  • $300 billion for the Federal Housing Administration rescue bill to refinance bad mortgages;

  • $87 billion to pay back JPMorgan Chase for bad Lehman Brothers trades;

  • $200 billion in loans to banks under the Fed’s Reserve Term Auction Facility (TAF);

  • $50 billion to support short-term corporate IOUs held by money market mutual funds;

  • $500 billion to rescue various credit markets;

  • $620 billion for industrial nations, including the Bank of Canada, Bank of England, Bank of Japan, National Bank of Denmark, European Central Bank, Bank of Norway, Reserve Bank of Australia, Bank of Sweden, and Swiss National Bank;

  • $120 billion in aid for emerging markets, including the central banks of Brazil, Mexico, South Korea and Singapore;

  • Trillions to guarantee the FDIC’s new, expanded bank deposit insurance coverage from $100,000 to $250,000

[QUOTE=UTR;2175787]3) The only stimulus I got was writing a check on April 15th.[/QUOTE]:smiley:

[QUOTE=UTR;2175787]4) Who knows if what Schumer did was illegal. [/QUOTE]Who cares…IndyMac is dead and life goes on… [QUOTE=UTR;2175787] Schumer should have kept his mouth shut instead of spreading rumors and destroying the value the shareholders had in IndyMac. [/QUOTE]IndyMac did that all on their own…There was a run on the bank and depositors withdrew 6.8% of deposits, within the 10% capitalization requirement…They were insolvent prior to the announcement… [QUOTE=UTR;2175787] Schumer is more of a flaming a$$hole than most members of Congress and he proves it on a regular basis. He is one that thinks he is royalty and above the laws he is supposed to steward.[/QUOTE]

It would be difficult to rate their assholyness quotient based on individual actions…Perhaps a rating of 1 - 10 and bonus points awarded for extremely bad behavior…


#16

Much of the money spent by the Feds are secured with stocks or assets. The fact is no one knows how much will end up as debt.

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175829]Schumer is an idiot, but still given the right to prove it by speaking out…The fact remains that he was right…Forgetting about the little things?[/QUOTE]

Had he not spread rumors IndyMac’s stock may not have dropped like a stone which is what took them down. He had no idea if he was right. All these New York politicians have been sucking the blood of corporations like leeches for decades. Schumer is the ring leader of them right now. He is Head Leech in Charge.

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175829]Who cares…IndyMac is dead and life goes on…[/QUOTE]

You would if you owned stock in IndyMac or were employed by them.

[QUOTE=pipemanid;2175829]Who cares…IndyMac is dead and life goes on… IndyMac did that all on their own…There was a run on the bank and depositors withdrew 6.8% of deposits, within the 10% capitalization requirement…They were insolvent prior to the announcement… [/QUOTE]

IMO, they had the run thanks to Schumer’s rumor mongering about them months earlier which caused their stock value to drop which further added to their troubles. Schumer should have acted more responsibly than he did and, IMO, should be facing a prosecutor. He behaves as recklessly as the CEOs he attacks.


#17

Some more information on IndyMac…