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: Skeeter Bug who wrote (106765)	1/18/2010 5:02:36 PM
From: mishedlo	3 Recommendations Read Replies (7) \| Respond to of 116555

Can we have a reasonable definition of conspiracy please?! Of course banks hired lobbyists. So does every other major group? If that is your definition of conspiracy, then everything is a conspiracy, probably even this post. But the banks did not get together and say "hey, let's collapse the system so we get bailouts but the small banks won't and we will win." It's the latter, the loonies believe, including many on this board. They even think that is the purpose of what the Fed is doing. I think the collapse is a byproduct of many things gone wrong, not a "planned conspiracy" by banks and the Fed for explicit planned in advance benefit of JPM and the big banks. Were there conspiracies along the way that benefited JPMorgan and the big banks? Yes, and I pointed them out on my blog more so than anyone else. Yes again, there were conspiracies to recklessly save the big banks. BUT this was a byproduct of stupid Fed policies as opposed to something planned from the beginning to cause a depression and a bank consolidation benefiting the big banks. Mish

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (106765)	1/18/2010 6:35:03 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

Skeeter, We have to analyze the importance of US banks along the following lines. Are they contributing to the economic prosperity of the US, or are they taking advantage of favorable taxpayer-backed debt to generate their profits. Until I see banks actually making profits from private lending, rather than taking cheap Federal Reserve money and "investing" in taxpayer backed debt, I think we have every right to limit their extraordinary bonuses. Of course, there's the caveat that the US Treasury/Congress has a major onus to take those borrowed funds and EFFECTIVELY invest them to promote private sector growth and productivity. Hawk