Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RealMuLan who wrote (75198)	2/24/2008 9:46:11 PM
From: Andrew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

<... "the current level of banks reserves wouldn't allow for such a thing", that can change. Since those regulation can be revised...> It looks like that can change can occur in October 2011: federalreserve.gov "The Chairman noted that the President had recently signed the Financial Services Regulatory Relief Act of 2006, which among its provisions gave the Federal Reserve discretion, beginning October 2011, both to pay interest on reserve balances and to reduce further or eliminate reserve requirements. The Act potentially has important implications for many aspects of the Federal Reserve's operations and the Chairman asked Vincent Reinhart, Director of the Division of Monetary Affairs, to form a committee of Federal Reserve System staff to consider these issues."

To: RealMuLan who wrote (75198)	2/24/2008 9:47:49 PM
From: RealMuLan	Respond to of 116555

[How come no one sues the evil doers in the US banks/financial institutions? They are the ones who put all those toxic wastes together, put the lip stick on them and dress them up looking pretty, then sold them to the bankers/investors all over the world. So the US banks/financial institutions are the most deserved party to be sued!]--"UBS faces lawsuits and investor rebellion independent.co.uk By Sean O'Grady Monday, 25 February 2008 The world's largest asset manager, the investment bank UBS, is facing the most profound crisis in its history, as huge losses, legal battles and a shareholder rebellion place its management under unprecedented pressure. On Wednesday, an extraordinary general meeting will be held at which board members will be forced to defend their stewardship of the bank, while it emerged yesterday that a state-owned German bank is to sue UBS for "significant" losses on a $500m portfolio of securities, allegedly missold to it by the Swiss-based institution. Some 70 per cent of the securities were backed by US sub-prime mortgages. HSH Nordbank, a regional bank centred on Hamburg,said that "UBS appears to have condoned actions which benefited only itself, at the expense of its clients". The investments were sold by UBS in 2002 via a vehicle named North Street 4. The claim against UBS willbe filed in New York over thenext few days. The claim may prove to be the first of many throughout the global financial system and could intensify the credit crunch, as banks become even less willing to lend to one another and seek to "hoard liquidity" in case of vastly expensive lawsuits and other misfortunes. A number of German landesbanks were tempted to diversify into higher risk asset-backed securities, and may follow HSH's lead into litigation. The news will be unwelcome to UBS, already in more difficulties than the majority of its peers. Last week UBS surprised the markets and sent its shares sliding with the announcement that it had $26.6bn of additional exposure to the stricken American mortgage market. Losses on US loans pushed UBS into a $4bn (£2bn) loss for 2007. In December the bank warned of a $10bn exposure to sub-prime problems. Its total exposure to risky loans is variously estimated at $80bn to $100bn. The US Securities & Exchange Commission has launched an inquiry into whether UBS correctly marked-to-market its sub-prime securities. UBS manages approximately $2 trillion of funds. ..."