Paying for $Protection
- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
When creditors start paying high-quality borrowers to hold on to their money at debt auctions, you know the world is in the midst of an unprecedented
[See the full post at: Paying for $Protection]I have heard that there was a time when the Swiss banks charged a negative interest for the privilege of stashing your loot there, though I do not know about Swiss sovereign debt. I agree with Ash that negative interest rates are a sure sign of deflationary collapse. There are some who claim that the Fed does not set interest rates but rather follows the market to give it the appearance of more clout than it actually has. OTOH, the MSM and some of the quasi alternative media (Jim Puplava) are insisting that the green shoots have arrived and that 2012 will be nominally quite bullish for stocks, if simply because of more QE. Motha Global has sent a warning sign to anyone with two synapses and two pennies to rub together that privately held bank accounts headed up by “private” bankstas such as Jaime are not a safe place to stash your cash. Glad the article referred to the 21 primary dealers. I remember when the number was 22 – about three months ago.
Galinazo
With the election upcoming I would think there will be every effort made by the current occupant to keep markets humming along, printing and making cash seem foolish to hold, for instance, the current talk of costs to be placed on holding money market funds. If Markets are weak leading to the election I would look for a bookie and start placing some serious money on the other guy and make my dough that way instead:)
From sidebar https://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com Jesse’s Cafe
Fed Playing Favorites With Wall Street in Secretive Bond Deals: Mortgages
“Goldman Sachs held onto almost all of the bonds the New York Fed sold to it for at least a day, rather than mainly fulfilling client orders as Credit Suisse did last month, based on data from Trace, the transaction reporting system of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.
Goldman Sachs told some investors who bid on the bonds through the bank that, while they had offered the best prices on individual securities, the firm had bought the debt for itself, according to three money managers with knowledge of the matter. Goldman Sachs then offered the securities for sale to the investors, they said. The prices were between 1 and 3 cents on the dollar higher, said one of the people, who declined to be identified because the transactions aren’t public. “
I think that too much is made of the election in terms of financial decisions by the powers that be. The elections are set up so that anyone who might be nominated by the red or blue team is a puppet. I think in the last election, the Owners favored Obama simply because he was a wolf in sheep’s clothes and thus could inflect a lot more damage to the common man with a lot less resistance. But to make my point: The collapse of Lehman which according to all the pundits brought the global Ponzi within hours of a total meltdown, the $80B bailout (for starters) of AIG (of course a pass through of public money to the TBTF banks), the shifting of Merrill Lynch to Bank of America to form Lynch America, and the Tarp Heist as well as the $14-24? trillion Fed alphabet soup all transpired within 60 days prior to the last presidential election. And the nationalization of Freddie and Fannae, the bazooka that was never to be fired, occurred only a few weeks earlier. So much for the positive calm pre-election theory.
I think in the last election, the Owners favored Obama …
I think it is like football or hockey club owners where it might make some substancial monetary and prestige difference to the owners about which team wins, for the dweeb sports fan all he is gets is to pay the freight and a hangover. The same as goes for the dweeb electorate. (of course he coud put a few dollars with the bookie so it isn’t a total waste)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.