JOE BIDEN: LYING SOCIOPATH GAMER PARASITE LAWYER!
Despite his Wall Street, big business, Big Tech, and billionaire donations, Biden has attempted to portray himself as a small-town fighter from Scranton, Pennsylvania. JOHN BINDER
“This was not because of difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”
“Attorney General Eric Holder's tenure was a low point even within the disgraceful scandal-ridden Obama years.”
DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONTPAGE MAG
Silicon Valley Bank Board Included Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton Donors
Moody’s Chief Economist: Customers Will Ultimately Pay to Save SVB, Signature Bank Depositors
On Monday’s broadcast of C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal,” Moody’s Analytics Chief Economist Mark Zandi stated that ultimately, “we all bear the cost” of backstopping the depositors of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank because banks will pass part of the cost on to consumers, but he thinks the backstopping was the least bad decision.
Zandi said, “In terms of who pays, most directly, it’s the banks themselves. Because the FDIC — who is coming in to resolve these failed institutions and pay off depositors and other creditors — pulls that money out of the Deposit Insurance Fund, the fund that’s been established where banks contribute into that for this very purpose, to pay for failed institutions. But clearly, the banks will then try to pass at least some of that along to their customers. So, they’ll eat some of it in the form of less earnings, lower profits, it probably affects the pay of their executives and other employees. But, ultimately, it likely also ends up in lower deposit rates for depositors and higher lending costs for lenders. So, ultimately, the cost is borne broadly by the customers of the banking system, which is most of us.”
He continued, “Now, having said that, the calculation you have to do here is, if the FDIC didn’t step in and resolve those institutions and if the government hadn’t provided those — that kind of strong backstop, what was the counterfactual then? What would have happened? And it felt really — a couple of weeks ago, it felt pretty uncomfortable. It felt like the banking system could come under extreme pressure, we could have deposit runs and then, ultimately, the cost to all of us would be even greater, because the government would have had to step in, provide more support, there would be more failures, and the cost to us would be even greater. So, it’s kind of a no good choice here…I think policymakers made the least bad choice that they had. But ultimately, we all bear the cost of that as customers of the bank.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
One can make a good argument that banking is part of global economic problems. The system allows banks to get bigger and bigger, with profits going, not to people who create, but to those who despoil. This is no longer a case of lenders driving capitalism. Instead, it is a closed system that works with the government to police people and entices them into bad financial decisions (think of the 2008 collapse over equity-free housing loans). It promotes spending much of our productivity, national and personal, on banking services.
Dem Rep. Gottheimer: We Still Don’t Know What Regulators Did During SVB Collapse
On Wednesday’s broadcast of CNBC’s “Power Lunch,” Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) stated that we still don’t know what regulators did over the weekend that Silicon Valley Bank collapsed.
Co-host Tyler Mathisen asked, “Chairman McHenry was incensed, I guess is a possible way of putting it, over what he described as a lack of transparency over the weekend when SVB was engineered out of existence. He says there are no notes publicly available from the regulators’ emergency meetings over the weekend, and that lack of transparency has a negative effect on the public view of the safety of the financial arena. How do you feel about that? Was there — is there enough transparency about what was going on on that weekend when regulators finally stepped in?”
Gottheimer answered, “Not yet. Which is why I and others have called for an investigation. It starts with this hearing, but it’s got to go a lot deeper. There [were] a lot of question marks. We were all talking over that weekend, and I spoke to the chairman, I spoke to the ranking member, I spoke to a lot of banks, small or medium regional-sized regional banks. We’re all having — and investors and consumers and many non-profits, and we were all having the same discussion of what — they were all panicked, what’s going on. Because it was quiet for a long period, as you know, over that weekend, and a lot of money left small or medium regional banks over the weekend, as we have seen in the numbers. That’s a problem. We should understand why we didn’t have better information, especially those of us on the committee. And we’re going to want to have answers, which is why we’re doing this in-depth investigation.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
BLOG EDITOR: BLACKROCK IS BIDEN'S BIGGEST BRIBESTER. THEY OPERATE OUT OF THE BIDEN WHITE HOUSE UNDER GAMER LAWYER BRIAN DEESE.
Currently, the world is run by moneymen. You only have to look at the way Vanguard and BlackRock own everything between the two of them, even as they use our money to drive those companies into socially destructive and economically wasteful ESG policies (e.g., green energy, DEI, CRT, trans ideology, etc.). (And no, this Reuters article does not debunk the charge, because it ignores the fact that the companies are driven more by ESG policies than by working for their investors. ESG is a huge breach of fiduciary duty.
Australia shows the devastating power that modern banks have over people’s lives
Most Americans cling to the old-fashioned notion that a bank honorably holds their money and pays interest on that money, with the interest coming from the fact that the bank loans that same money to others for an even higher interest rate. We all imagine Jimmy Stewart explaining how banks work to his Bedford Falls neighbors in It’s a Wonderful Life. That’s not true anymore and, Australia’s experience illustrates that, in the 21st century, banks have almost unlimited control over people’s lives.
My parents were loyal to Australia’s Commonwealth Bank way beyond what was logical. It took a lot of evidence from the bank’s own actions for them even to consider changing banks, and even then, it was emotionally painful for them. The reality is that banks have been appalling for a very long time, and their pathology has been progressing exponentially lately, as they no longer try to hide their craven intent.
Here in Australia, for a $10.00 “overdraft” that exists for less than 24 hours, banks charge $25.00. They call this a “fee” because, if they acknowledged that it’s an interest charge, that rate per annum would be over 90,000%!
Banks block our accounts for any number of reasons. My favorite is because a government bureaucracy decides the accountholder transgressed. As we all know, in the world of bureaucracy, everyone is guilty until proven innocent. Getting access to the account again is an uphill battle. You must spend time and money proving that the money you earned and that you put into the bank for safekeeping is, in fact, your property. The costs associated with that proof are yours alone to keep you in your place—and the interest during that time is the bank’s bonus.
Banks devise “products” that promise to pay you interest at a rate that is competitively commercial but build into it certain hoops that you must jump through to achieve that commercial interest rate. They call the hoops a service to help you—to save you time and to focus your energies—but the reality is that they use the fine print to reduce the commercial interest to a theft rate and laugh each month that you fail to comply with the minutiae of their scam.
Banks offer loans that transfer your hard-earned income to their palatial corporate headquarters, where they promote fiscal irresponsibility by lending higher and higher proportions of property value, and they pitch interest rates to reflect risk, even as they assure that they never take a risk. All costs are passed on to the client so that a loan of one million dollars may cost three million by the time the bank forecloses—and it will magically force foreclosure just as the property price and legal fees hit three million dollars. Inflation drives property value increases, and banks help drive that inflation.
One can make a good argument that banking is part of global economic problems. The system allows banks to get bigger and bigger, with profits going, not to people who create, but to those who despoil. This is no longer a case of lenders driving capitalism. Instead, it is a closed system that works with the government to police people and entices them into bad financial decisions (think of the 2008 collapse over equity-free housing loans). It promotes spending much of our productivity, national and personal, on banking services.
Currently, the world is run by moneymen. You only have to look at the way Vanguard and BlackRock own everything between the two of them, even as they use our money to drive those companies into socially destructive and economically wasteful ESG policies (e.g., green energy, DEI, CRT, trans ideology, etc.). (And no, this Reuters article does not debunk the charge, because it ignores the fact that the companies are driven more by ESG policies than by working for their investors. ESG is a huge breach of fiduciary duty.
What the new system means is that we have lost control. We are all working to pay interest on debt that we didn’t need in the first place. Debt investment has created Big Tech, Ukraine, and so much more—unaffordable fads swirling around so-called climate change, unaffordable social programs based on fact-averse policies, all leading to what I’ve heard is 300 trillion in global debt this year (which I suspect underestimates the scope of the problem).
I have a very simple understanding of finance, and probably no understanding of global finance. As I see it, the world works if individuals are in charge of production, innovation, and entrepreneurship, with enterprises functioning at a human level.
The mess we are in is no longer human scale. It is no longer controllable, and to continue to pretend that it is requires short-sighted stupidity at a level no one thought possible two years ago. When we lose human scale, we lose humanity. I’d like to point the finger of blame at a specific person, party, or institution but, basically, it is us. We let it happen.
Nodrog is a pseudonym because Australia is no longer a free country.
Bank TURMOIL Will Make Getting a Mortgage IMPOSSIBLE
Summers: We’ll Either Have ‘Substantially Unsustainable Inflation’ or ‘Fairly Hard’ Downturn Due to Bank Issues
During an interview aired on Friday’s edition of Bloomberg’s “Wall Street Week,” Harvard Professor, economist, Director of the National Economic Council under President Barack Obama, and Treasury Secretary under President Bill Clinton Larry Summers stated that “we are still a substantially unsustainable inflation country unless the economy turns down fairly hard” due to issues in the banking system.
Summers said that while the most recent PCE numbers are better than previous numbers, “I don’t think one should make too much of that. I think we are still a substantially unsustainable inflation country unless the economy turns down fairly hard in response to the credit issues raised by the banking system, and we don’t know yet whether that’s going to happen.”
He added, “So, in a sense, the outcomes here are a bit bifurcated. Either the banking crisis will pass without incident and without large impact on credit, in which case we really do have serious inflation issues and the Fed will have to tighten much more than is priced in, or we’re going to see some kind of real downturn here. And I think both are plausible outcomes and I recognize that there’s a chance we’ll skate through right in between, but I have to say that seems very much odds off to me. Soft landings are very hard, even in the best environment.”
Follow Ian Hanchett on Twitter @IanHanchett
Very Few Are READY For What's Coming!!! (PLEASE PREPARE)
NEXT HUGE BANK FAILURE WILL ROCK THE WORLD? BANKRUPTCIES SURGE, LAYOFFS WORSEN
15 Signs A Massive Car Market Crash Is Already Upon Us
Consumer Sentiment Cracks: First Drop in Four Months
Consumer sentiment unexpectedly worsened in March as worries over a looming recession took hold.
The University of Michigan’s index of consumer sentiment fell to 62.0 in March from 67 in February, an eight percent decline. Compared with a year ago, the index is down four percent.
The midmonth preliminary reading came in at 63.4, so the final number indicates that sentiment continued to deteriorate as March progressed. Economists had expected the final March reading to more or less hold steady with the mid-month score.
Surprisingly, it was not the banking crisis that depressed consumer sentiment.
“This month’s turmoil in the banking sector had limited impact on consumer sentiment, which was already exhibiting downward momentum prior to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank. Overall, our data revealed multiple signs that consumers increasingly expect a recession ahead,” said Joanne Hsu, the director of the survey.
There were steep declines in both the assessment of current conditions and expectations for the future.
“While sentiment fell across all demographic groups, the declines were sharpest for lower-income, less-educated, and younger consumers, as well as consumers with the top tercile of stock holdings. All five index components declined this month, led by a notably sharp weakening in one-year business conditions,” Hsu said.
Year-ahead inflation expectations fell from 4.1 percent in February to 3.6 percent, the lowest reading since April 2021. Long-run inflation expectations came in at 2.9 percent for the fourth consecutive month.
Walmart Reports A Large Number Of Store Closings As Catastrophic Retail Collapse Intensify
A CLOSE LOOK AT BIDENOMICS
CALIFORNIA HAS THE MOST ILLEGALS IN THE COUNTRY AND THE MOST HOMELESS. NOT HARD TO DO THE MATH ON THAT ONE.
VIDEOS
THE NIGHTMARE BEGINS IN JULY!? FINANCIAL CRISIS 2.0, PAYCHECK TO PAYCHECK CROWD
Bank TURMOIL Will Make Getting a Mortgage IMPOSSIBLE
Wave of Loan Defaults Hit the Real Estate Market (Housing Market Warning)
Middle Class Families Can No Longer Afford Rent As Prices Hit Astronomical Levels
Report: 62% of American Consumers Live Paycheck to Paycheck
A report revealed 62 percent of United States adults live paycheck to paycheck.
A report by PYMNTS and LendingClub, a peer-to-peer lending platform, revealed that as of February, 62 percent of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, including 48 percent of high-income consumers.
The report noted that though inflation is lower than it was in July, consumers are still contending with rising costs.
“Inflation has made life more and more expensive, and consumers have already made moves to cope, such as pulling back on discretionary expenses,” the report read. “But one can only pull back so far on spending, and PYMNTS’ data reveals that consumers are finding another way to navigate their lower purchasing power.”
The report observed that for some people “supplemental income may be the key” and noted that about a quarter of consumers had a side job in addition to 17 percent who had other forms of supplemental income.
The report noted 39 percent of those who lived paycheck to paycheck “with issues paying their bills” mentioned “extraordinary expenses” as their reason for seeking side work.
Some 55% percent of respondents reported their supplemental income grew as a share of their total income over the last 90 days.
The report surveyed 4,125 U.S. consumers from Feb. 7 to Feb. 23 and also considered economic data from other sources.
A February press release from LendingClub indicated that in January 60 percent of consumers were living paycheck to paycheck, two percent lower than in February.
The press release also touched on data about outstanding credit card balances, with the average consumer having credit card debt totaling 35 percent of their savings.
However, this figure varied among different consumer groups. Those who indicated they were living paycheck to paycheck without issues paying their bills maintained credit card balances equaling 62 percent of their savings, and those who were living paycheck to paycheck and had trouble paying their bills had credit card debt exceeding their available savings by more than 50 percent.
No comments:
Post a Comment