Registered Members Login:
   
Forgotten Your Details? Click Here To Recover +
Welcome To The ShareCafe Community - Talk Shares And Take Stock With Smart Investors - New Here? Click To Register >

19 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > »    
 
  
Reply to this topic

Banks, behaving badly
mullokintyre
post Posted: Nov 12 2020, 12:04 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 2,944
Thanks: 1079


Anyone who thinks that things are going to change susbatially under a Biden Presidency is dreaming.
The power brokers are still there, still pushing their own agendas, still screwing the non elite American public.
From Wall street omn Parade

QUOTE
After successfully warding off barbarians outside the gates of the local election offices during the count of mail-in ballots, President-elect Joe Biden now has a new army of barbarians to deal with. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, using data collected by the Federal Election Commission, the industry category called “Finance, Insurance & Real Estate” donated a stunning $201,675,240 to Biden’s campaign and PACs supporting him. Add to that the category of “Lawyers and Lobbyists,” which donated $52,378,087, and you’re looking at a cool quarter of a billion dollars.

The bulk of the $52 million that came from “Lawyers and Lobbyists” was donated by the lawyers and partners of the big law firms that represent the biggest Wall Street banks and securities firms. Big donors to Biden and the Democratic Party in the 2019/2020 cycle hail from such law firms as Kirkland & Ellis; Paul Weiss; Akin Gump; Sullivan & Cromwell; Covington & Burling; and Sidley Austin, to name just a few.

The current head of the U.S. Department of Justice, William Barr, hails from Kirkland & Ellis, as does Deputy Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen. The former head of the criminal division of the Justice Department, Brian Benczkowski, who stepped down in July, also came from Kirkland & Ellis.

Covington & Burling similarly staffed up President Barack Obama’s Justice Department with Eric Holder as Attorney General and Lanny Breuer as head of the criminal division. Covington & Burling is also the law firm that fronted for Big Tobacco’s crimes against the American people for four decades. (See our 2012 article, Was the U.S. Justice Department Sold to the Highest Bidder.)

The current Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Jay Clayton, was a former law partner at Sullivan & Cromwell. Clayton represented 8 of the 10 largest Wall Street banks in the three years prior to landing the top post at the SEC in the Trump administration.

One name noticeably missing among the big law firms whose lawyers and partners are supporting Biden and the Democratic party is the law firm, Jones Day. That’s the law firm that sent 12 of its law partners to staff up the Trump administration on the very day Donald Trump was inaugurated.


The politics may have changed, the money has not.
Mick



--------------------
sent from my Olivetti Typewriter.
 
Mags
post Posted: Oct 26 2020, 07:06 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 449
Thanks: 236


In Reply To: nipper's post @ Oct 26 2020, 12:55 PM

Yep, more and more of the same.
It's exponential: Remember how hard bush had to work to get his sept-11 stimulus through, it took months.... That was $700m.
obumma then pumped one through, that took a few weeks... $1.4 trillion...
Now under trump how much did they put in??? And did it in hours...

Just look locally: The budget for Aus is 5 times more than rudd put in... 5 times!!
Did we have endless debate on tv and radio about how the stimulus was bad??? reckless???Nah, most people just grabbed the $750 hitting their bank accounts...
Interestingly, the small business circles I move in, are hard working honest people, and most received no support at all from the government.....
And now, they all have the same conclusion: why am i hiring, when staff literally do not benefit my business financially???
My personal business, my net profit is $15k better off when I work alone. Yes, that's right: a staff member costs me $300 per week. That's how hard it is to employ people in this country. Government has made hiring too expensive, and the school system has made them useless.

And now the UBI crap being trotted out. That tax concessions given to the super system cost the budget horrifically, and that policing self funded retirees costs more than if they gave them the pension anyway...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out what's going on here: Everything is pointing to an utter collapse of the currency. People earning more to stay home, 80% of households paying no net tax, government departments costing more than the problems they're policing etc etc... It's a complete disaster.
And many, many smart individuals can see this: and all they are doing is feathering their nest. Post war these same people were entreprenuers who hired people: Now they see no benefit in staff, so they have none. Big business and investors have no desire for workforces: Company announcing staff cuts will see it's share price rise, every time.
it's a compete disaster: Feathering your nest is THE ONLY answer.
And use the knowledge of the coming economic blow up: USE and ABUSE, is my slogan. 7 in 7 is another one, from the financial sector: by (20)27 you need 7 figures, and cash out, because the years after that are going to be hell.
The stock markets are going to do what Aussie housing did since 2000: Regardless of your knowledge or skill level, almost any investment is going skywards: Just don't be that greedy sucker that's unable to take a profit and walk away.
But the economic vacuum that's coming on the currency collapse, will suck all your wealth via inflation in the blink of an eye. Don't laugh, this is coming. Remember how stupid it sounded that you'd have give people money to take oil away... well, oil did turn negative... and so to will most people finances.



Said 'Thanks' for this post: mullokintyre  
 
nipper
post Posted: Oct 26 2020, 12:55 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 7,732
Thanks: 2595


In Reply To: Mags's post @ Oct 26 2020, 12:10 PM

Mags, so how do we dig ourselves out of the hole? Keep digging, seems to be the answer, so far.
I am in the same camp as you; ride this bronco, be alert to change. I have given up trying to predict outcomes.

on the matter of Banks: Surviving but not altogether thriving
QUOTE
... Because mortgages make up about 70% of their lending book, the big revenue driver for banks is housing credit growth. Twenty years ago, this was running at close to 15%, but in the past decade we've seen this drop down to half that. And, there's questions about whether can continue even at this rate due to the gearing in Australian households....
....Due to the reduced economic activity expected in the next couple of years, the Reserve Bank is likely to keep interest rates low. Again, this is not good news for Australian banks since they price off of the short end of the curve. For banks' net interest margins to increase, short end rates need to go back up, which means the RBA needs to feel so good about the economy that they start to raise the cash rate again. And because banks are highly leveraged, changes in profitability are magnified...
....Add to this competition. Banks have had a four pillar structure and that's been supportive of returns. However now you have got competitive threats from companies outside of the banking sector, mainly tech firms. None of these tech firms have a banking licence (or want one) and yet all of them are making incursions into financial services, mostly in the payments area. This is not because they want to be banks; it is because they want to reduce friction for their core services ...

We are not going to see strong dividends paid out for a while, but the banks do still return their cost capital ......
https://www.sharecafe.com.au/2020/10/19/sur...ether-thriving/


QUOTE
UK economist John Maynard Keynes in 1936 spoke of the liquidity trap when describing the limits of low-interest rates as an effective policy tool. He described situations when uncertainty is so great that even low-interest rates would fail to generate enough demand to ensure full employment. But Keynes was indicating that low interest rates could be ineffective as a macro tool. The worry after 12 years of low and negative rates is that these settings produce side effects that make them counterproductive. Ten side effects stand out.

A core concern is that the Keynes liquidity trap concept seems to underestimate the dampening effect of emergency measures. Low rates seem to dent consumer spending and business investment because they signal that authorities are gloomy, even panicked.

A second side effect is that low interest rates have encouraged so much borrowing that consumer, corporate and government debt have reached an unprecedented level of GDP in many countries. This could prove a systemic risk. Even without such mishaps, future repayments are likely to reduce consumption and investment.

Another side effect is that low and negative rates can lift asset prices. Lower interest rates push investors into riskier assets and argue for higher prices on property and shares, asset gains that tend to boost inequality. More tellingly, negative policy rates helped push bond prices so high that yields went negative... and widely so. The concern is that, if low and negative rates help the economy as intended, interest rates will move higher and puncture asset prices.

A fourth problem is that low and negative rates trouble the business models of insurers and pension funds that typically use the safety and positive returns of government bonds to help meet long-term liabilities. A fifth spillover is that low and negative rates squeeze bank margins, perhaps to the point of threatening financial stability. Any crimping in bank margins brings a sixth problem; that at some level, low rates could backfire by forcing banks to restrict lending ... a level known as the 'reversal rate'.

A seventh handicap is that central banks have faced political pressure for hurting savers and rescuing reckless borrowers. An eighth side effect is low and (especially) negative rates can, perversely again, force people to save more to attain a targeted level of savings.

A ninth drawback is that low rates can encourage unproductive investment. A tenth criticism is that low rates help embed economies in the 'debt trap'. This term describes how indebted economies need more debt to overcome the problems left by past debt. But at some indeterminant point this strategy must miscarry....
https://www.sharecafe.com.au/2020/10/15/sup...h-side-effects/



--------------------
"Every long-term security is nothing more than a claim on some expected future stream of cash that will be delivered into the hands of investors over time. For a given stream of expected future cash payments, the higher the price investors pay today for that stream of cash, the lower the long-term return they will achieve on their investment over time." - Dr John Hussman

"If I had even the slightest grasp upon my own faculties, I would not make essays, I would make decisions." ― Michel de Montaigne
 
plastic
post Posted: Oct 26 2020, 12:16 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 10,452
Thanks: 306


In Reply To: Mags's post @ Oct 26 2020, 12:10 PM

You might be right about no better business but I wouldn't interpret that to be no better stock to be in. Try a bank bond instead.



--------------------
What did Uncle Mel do to us?
 
Mags
post Posted: Oct 26 2020, 12:10 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 449
Thanks: 236


In Reply To: mullokintyre's post @ Oct 26 2020, 11:44 AM

It's all going according to plan: We are in late stage capitalism and fiat currency. The financial places are so powerful, they are literally sucking the life out of anything they touch. Legally, ethically, morally, no one cares.
I've said it before, and I remain true to it: I will hold my banks stocks until the bitter end. There is no better business to be involved in at the present time.


 
mullokintyre
post Posted: Oct 26 2020, 11:44 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 2,944
Thanks: 1079


From WOP

QUOTE
If you needed further proof that crime pays on Wall Street, look at the chart above. Goldman Sachs and its Malaysian subsidiary were criminally charged yesterday by the Justice Department, they admit to the charges, and its stock closed up on the day by $2.49.

The U.S. Department of Justice is being played like a fiddle at a tractor meet. Those big white shoe law firms that handle increasingly dirty cases against the mega banks on Wall Street have twice, in a period of just three weeks, managed to get the Justice Department to announce settlements of landmark criminal cases against two of the largest banks on Wall Street on the day of presidential debates when the public and the media are not paying attention to Wall Street.

On September 29, the day of the first presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden, the Justice Department brought two criminal counts against JPMorgan Chase for “tens of thousands of instances of unlawful trading in gold, silver, platinum, and palladium…as well as thousands of instances of unlawful trading in U.S. Treasury futures contracts and in U.S. Treasury notes and bonds….” That was the date of the first presidential debate.


Nothing to see here folks, move right along, just procedural matters.
I bet the Chinese, Russians and Iranians wish they could have just one of these criminal mega banks in their system, while the US has 5 or 6.
Mick



--------------------
sent from my Olivetti Typewriter.
 


plastic
post Posted: Oct 10 2020, 06:22 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 10,452
Thanks: 306


Which one is the next Drexel Burnham Lambert? Or was that Lehmans already?



--------------------
What did Uncle Mel do to us?
 
Mags
post Posted: Oct 9 2020, 07:15 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 449
Thanks: 236


In Reply To: mullokintyre's post @ Oct 9 2020, 04:59 PM

And that is exactly why I own shares in them far exceeding my deposits with them....
If they go broke, my deposit gets taken to bail them out via government laws...
If they break the law and profit, even wilfully admitting to it, they barely get fined, in fact, their admissions are often ignored...

If I'm clipped speeding, I don't even get a trial: Just get a fine in the mail.....
SMH: Seriously, you have to join them, because you sure as hell can't beat them.


 
mullokintyre
post Posted: Oct 9 2020, 04:59 PM
  Quote Post


Posts: 2,944
Thanks: 1079


From Wall street on parade
QUOTE
Under the richly compensated leadership of Chairman and CEO Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase, the largest bank in the United States, has admitted to an unprecedented five criminal felony counts since 2014 and put on criminal probation three times. Dimon notched two of those felony counts in his belt today. (That’s five felonies more than the bank pleaded guilty to in its prior 100 years of existence. Translation: this is not normal even on Wall Street.)

The bank has agreed today to pay criminal fines and admit to two felony counts of wire fraud for manipulating (spoofing) trading in the precious metals and U.S. Treasury markets. Why the Justice Department is bringing only two counts when its own charging document indicates that traders engaged in “tens of thousands of instances of unlawful trading in gold, silver, platinum, and palladium…as well as thousands of instances of unlawful trading in U.S. Treasury futures contracts and in U.S. Treasury notes and bonds…” is one more sign that this Justice Department is egregiously failing the American people and making a mockery of the word “justice.”

This Justice Department is not only defining deviancy down; it’s defining outrage down. Where is the U.S. Attorney’s voice announcing his resignation over this sellout of a deal?

The routine of charging the largest bank in the United States with felonies and placing it on a three-year probation is now so yawn-worthy at the U.S. Department of Justice that the prosecutors didn’t even bother to hold the usual press conference today to announce the charges and settlement. The Justice Department simply issued a press release and a Deferred Prosecution Agreement which both sides had already signed.

Sweeping the whole mess up and tying it with a tidy bow meant that the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission also had to agree to the settlement, which they obligingly did.

Representing JPMorgan Chase as outside counsel were lawyers from Kirkland & Ellis (the law firm with which Attorney General William Barr was associated before coming to the Justice Department) and lawyers from Sullivan & Cromwell, where SEC Chairman Jay Clayton was a partner before taking the lead at the SEC. (See SEC Nominee Has Represented 8 of the 10 Largest Wall Street Banks in Past Three Years.)

The deal is so sweet for criminal recidivist JPMorgan Chase that it notes that “an independent compliance monitor was unnecessary” despite also revealing that the bank “did not voluntarily and timely disclose to the Fraud Section and the Office the conduct described in the Statement of Facts.” It was required to do that under its prior probation agreement that ended in January of this year.

Monetary fines were also imposed, consisting of the following: a criminal monetary penalty of $436,431,811; a criminal disgorgement amount of $172,034,790; and a victim compensation payment of $311,737,008. That brings to more than $37 billion the total that JPMorgan Chase has paid to settle allegations of fraud and ripping off Americans since the financial crash of 2008.

In a properly functioning Justice Department and bank regulatory system that genuinely wants to ensure the safety and soundness of America’s deposit-taking banks, Dimon would have been forced out when the bank admitted guilt to the first two felony counts in 2014 for its dubious role in handling the business bank account of Ponzi-schemer Bernie Madoff. If not then, perhaps the following year when it pleaded guilty to its role in a bank cartel (actually called “The Cartel”) that rigged the foreign currency market. In the Forex matter, the bank admitted guilt to one felony count and received a deferred prosecution agreement along with other banks involved in the matter.

In the rigging of the foreign currency market case, the Justice Department announced that agreement on May 20, 2015 but the U.S. District Court did not approve the agreement until January 2017. Thus, the clock did not start ticking on the three-year probation period until then. That meant that JPMorgan’s probation period began in January 2017 and ended in January of this year.

To be charged with two more felony counts in the same year your three-year probation ends is the strongest proof that Wall Street has become a fraud monetization system where deferred prosecution agreements and fines are simply the cost of doing business on Wall Street.

The Justice Department brought racketeering charges against three of the precious metals traders at JPMorgan in September of last year. It was the first-time veterans on Wall Street could ever remember a major U.S. bank having its traders charged with racketeering. The Board of Directors of JPMorgan Chase must have taken that as some kind of great branding for the bank: the Board gave Dimon a 1.6 percent raise for the year to a total compensation of $31.5 million.

Forget about the criminals in the White House and other fed govt agencies. The US commercial banks are the real crims.
Mick



--------------------
sent from my Olivetti Typewriter.
 
Mork
post Posted: Sep 22 2020, 09:52 AM
  Quote Post


Posts: 346
Thanks: 84


In Reply To: Mags's post @ Sep 22 2020, 09:26 AM

Agreed Mags,
However, given the ownership of the US Federal Reserve is actually by a few select banks, the crooks are probably one and the same.
So when we saw the Fed bailing out the banks in 2008, they were really bailing out themselves with tax payers and future generations handed an ever increasing debt burden. sounds like debt slavery to me?




--------------------
“It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.”

― Mark Twain
 
 


19 Pages (Click to Jump) V   1 2 3 4 > » 

Back To Top Of Page
Reply to this topic


You agree through the use of ShareCafe, that you understand and accept the TERMS OF USE.


TERMS OF USE  -  CONTACT ADMIN  -  ADVERTISING