Ron Paul Warns Of Martial Law And Economic Collapse...

[cereal_killer]

Tomorrow has the potential to be SO awesome. Please default.

It's political theater put on by the Dems and Repubs for the benefit of the American sheeple.

America defaulting? Not gunna happen, nor was there ever a threat of it happening.

 

[Contumacious]

Tomorrow has the potential to be SO awesome. Please default.

It's political theater put on by the Dems and Repubs for the benefit of the American sheeple.

America defaulting? Not gunna happen, nor was there ever a threat of it happening.

America's FIRST DEFAULT occurred in 1935.

The Democrats chose default over controlled spending.

.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy.

Handing? You make it sound like free money.

The Fed is purchasing assets from these big banks to the tune of $85 billion+ a month. Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days) so yes... it practically is free money.

When I have a run down car that smells like a dead pig, and no one will buy it, what's the total value? Approximately zero dollars. If this is my only asset I now have a net worth of zero dollars.

But if the Gov't comes along and says "hey I'll pay $5,000 for that piece of shit", they are handing me a free $5,000. That's how I see it.

Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days)

No, the Fed only buys guaranteed bonds, no junk.
Bonds that have been trading above par, not subprime.

 

[KevinWestern]

The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy.

Handing? You make it sound like free money.

The Fed is purchasing assets from these big banks to the tune of $85 billion+ a month. Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days) so yes... it practically is free money.

When I have a run down car that smells like a dead pig, and no one will buy it, what's the total value? Approximately zero dollars. If this is my only asset I now have a net worth of zero dollars.

But if the Gov't comes along and says "hey I'll pay $5,000 for that piece of shit", they are handing me a free $5,000. That's how I see it.

Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days)

No, the Fed only buys guaranteed bonds, no junk.
Bonds that have been trading above par, not subprime.

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE? That's not what I've heard or read.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason. It's providing something that would otherwise not be there. That something is the "freebie" I speak of.
.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The Fed is purchasing assets from these big banks to the tune of $85 billion+ a month. Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days) so yes... it practically is free money.

When I have a run down car that smells like a dead pig, and no one will buy it, what's the total value? Approximately zero dollars. If this is my only asset I now have a net worth of zero dollars.

But if the Gov't comes along and says "hey I'll pay $5,000 for that piece of shit", they are handing me a free $5,000. That's how I see it.

Many of these assets are garbage/toxic/crap that no one else would ever in a million years want to purchase (junk from the subprime mortgage days)

No, the Fed only buys guaranteed bonds, no junk.
Bonds that have been trading above par, not subprime.

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE? That's not what I've heard or read.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason. It's providing something that would otherwise not be there. That something is the "freebie" I speak of.
.

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE?

During QE they bought Treasuries and guaranteed MBS.

That's not what I've heard or read.

Yeah, there's a lot of idiocy printed out there.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.


Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason.

Keeping the system liquid, keeping rates low.

That something is the "freebie" I speak of.

Well, the banks get reserves yielding 0.25% in return for bonds yielding 2%-4%, so I guess the Fed is getting a freebie, in the form of interest formerly paid to banks.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Well, Ron Paul is a bit of an alarmist, but he has valid points... anyone that thinks we just don't spend enough or that taxing the one-per-centers more are the answers is either delusional, or just plain stupid.

 

[KevinWestern]

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE?

During QE they bought Treasuries and guaranteed MBS.

That's not what I've heard or read.

Yeah, there's a lot of idiocy printed out there.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.


Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason.

Keeping the system liquid, keeping rates low.

That something is the "freebie" I speak of.

Well, the banks get reserves yielding 0.25% in return for bonds yielding 2%-4%, so I guess the Fed is getting a freebie, in the form of interest formerly paid to banks.

By keeping the system liquid (by exchanging assets with cash), aren't the banks then using that liquid money to turn a profit by either investing in the market or lending and earning interest? In the absence of the Fed and QE, would the banks have that cash available to turn a profit?

Isn't that incremental profit a "freebie" provided by the Fed? Isn't that the whole point of QE (to get banks investing when they otherwise wouldn't)?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?


.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

We already had a default, it was called the FDR Gold Seizure.

 

[Contumacious]

We already had a default, it was called the FDR Gold Seizure.

EXACTLY.

In 1935 the democrats and progressives found out that they had issued more paper money than there were gold reserves?

Did they abolish the federal reserve board?

Fuck no. They declared bankruptcy , defaulted on their debts and got the scumbags in the SCOTUS to bail them out.

.

.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE?

During QE they bought Treasuries and guaranteed MBS.

That's not what I've heard or read.

Yeah, there's a lot of idiocy printed out there.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.


Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason.

Keeping the system liquid, keeping rates low.

That something is the "freebie" I speak of.

Well, the banks get reserves yielding 0.25% in return for bonds yielding 2%-4%, so I guess the Fed is getting a freebie, in the form of interest formerly paid to banks.

By keeping the system liquid (by exchanging assets with cash), aren't the banks then using that liquid money to turn a profit by either investing in the market or lending and earning interest? In the absence of the Fed and QE, would the banks have that cash available to turn a profit?

Isn't that incremental profit a "freebie" provided by the Fed? Isn't that the whole point of QE (to get banks investing when they otherwise wouldn't)?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?


.

By keeping the system liquid (by exchanging assets with cash), aren't the banks then using that liquid money to turn a profit by either investing in the market or lending and earning interest?

You would have to compare the bonds bought with the reserves held.
If the Fed buys $1 trillion and reserves increase by $900 billion, then the $100 billion went somewhere. Of course if banks had someplace profitable to lend/invest, they could sell a bond now, without the Fed.

In the absence of the Fed and QE, would the banks have that cash available to turn a profit?

Banks have over $2 trillion in excess reserves that they could lend today.......even if the Fed never bought another bond.

Isn't that incremental profit a "freebie" provided by the Fed?

The only thing provided by the Fed is lower yielding cash, that's a cost in my book.

The problem banks have is a lack of capital to back up loans.
They lost trillions in the crash and the witchhunts after.
They don't want to sell cheap stock to replenish capital to boost loans, especially when you have idiots in Congress and the White House on the hunt for their skins.
Better to bide your time, hold your cash.
Also, who wants to make long-term loans at this point?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

So you're saying that in the past 5 years the Fed has not bought any toxic assets from the banks during QE?

During QE they bought Treasuries and guaranteed MBS.

That's not what I've heard or read.

Yeah, there's a lot of idiocy printed out there.

Also, other than the Fed are there buyers lining up to buy these bonds from the banks?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.


Point is, the Fed is doing QE for a reason.

Keeping the system liquid, keeping rates low.

That something is the "freebie" I speak of.

Well, the banks get reserves yielding 0.25% in return for bonds yielding 2%-4%, so I guess the Fed is getting a freebie, in the form of interest formerly paid to banks.

By keeping the system liquid (by exchanging assets with cash), aren't the banks then using that liquid money to turn a profit by either investing in the market or lending and earning interest? In the absence of the Fed and QE, would the banks have that cash available to turn a profit?

Isn't that incremental profit a "freebie" provided by the Fed? Isn't that the whole point of QE (to get banks investing when they otherwise wouldn't)?

The banks are buying these MBS bonds from Fannie and Freddie, not creating them.
There is demand for higher yielding guaranteed bonds, besides the Fed and banks.

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?


.

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?

The end buyer doesn't know, or care, but FF standards would usually exclude "toxic assets", which doesn't mean a mortgage can't turn toxic years later.

 

[KevinWestern]

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?

The end buyer doesn't know, or care, but FF standards would usually exclude "toxic assets", which doesn't mean a mortgage can't turn toxic years later.

Don't really agree with you here. If these MBS were lucrative and valuable, wouldn't the banks just be able to sell them to private investors like they did pre-2008 and get the risk off the books in that manner?

The Fed is providing a service/sale that would not naturally occur in the free market. Or do you believe in the absence of the Fed that these assets would be purchased anyways?


.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

There are zero toxic assets tangled up in Mortgage Backed Securities?

The end buyer doesn't know, or care, but FF standards would usually exclude "toxic assets", which doesn't mean a mortgage can't turn toxic years later.

Don't really agree with you here. If these MBS were lucrative and valuable, wouldn't the banks just be able to sell them to private investors like they did pre-2008 and get the risk off the books in that manner?

The Fed is providing a service/sale that would not naturally occur in the free market. Or do you believe in the absence of the Fed that these assets would be purchased anyways?


.

If these MBS were lucrative and valuable, wouldn't the banks just be able to sell them to private investors like they did pre-2008 and get the risk off the books in that manner?

These bonds are guaranteed. Principal and interest will be paid, monthly, even if every single home owner in the bond stopped paying their mortgage today.
What risk is there that the banks would want to get these off their books?
They trade over par, a bank would have no trouble selling these if they saw another, better use for their money.

Or do you believe in the absence of the Fed that these assets would be purchased anyways?

Mortgage-Backed Securities, CMOs - Markets Data Center - WSJ.com

Would they be cheaper? No doubt. But still very much in demand.

 

[KevinWestern]

Would they be cheaper? No doubt. But still very much in demand.

So you agree that if the Fed wasn't buying MBS, the banks would be forced to sell them at a cheaper price in the free market (if they wanted cash). Let's say MBS X would have a value of $50 in that scenario and $70 in the current QE scenario.

Isn't that extra $20 a "freebie"?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Would they be cheaper? No doubt. But still very much in demand.

So you agree that if the Fed wasn't buying MBS, the banks would be forced to sell them at a cheaper price in the free market (if they wanted cash). Let's say MBS X would have a value of $50 in that scenario and $70 in the current QE scenario.

Isn't that extra $20 a "freebie"?

So you agree that if the Fed wasn't buying MBS, the banks would be forced to sell them at a cheaper price in the free market

Yes, I agree if the Fed didn't buy $40 billion/month, prices would be modestly lower.
Still don't know why you use the term, "forced to sell them". Forced why?
They already have trillions in cash.

Let's say MBS X would have a value of $50 in that scenario and $70 in the current QE scenario.

Or we could more accurately say they traded above par before QE and they're trading above par now.

Currently the Fed has over $1 trillion in MBS, throwing off an extra $20-$40 billion a year in earnings that would have belonged to the banks.
Balance that against the modest price boost on the bank's books.

 

[g5000]

won poing siz mullion rounds 'f ammo! Dee Aitch Ess! Cummin fer yer gunz!

Muuuuuust. Hoard. Bulletz...

 

[g5000]

Again?

Yes, I think Paul's message becomes more relevant with each passing year.

Have you been keeping up with the news? We're on the brink of something not pleasant, that's for sure. The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy. Problem is the is ALL FLUFF. It's not real. You can't just print money indefinitely as a "solve" because there is absolutely no substance behind it. Eventually, things will give-way (which is what we should have let happen in 08).

Obama failed to punish anyone following the last collapse. Not one person was sent to jail despite his campaign promises to "hold the fat cats accountable". So what happens when you give a kid who does something wrong an ice cream cone?

I'm expecting the worst in the next 5 years..



.

The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy.

Handing? You make it sound like free money.

It is free money. By the truckload. At the expense of you, me, everyone who has a retirement account, and savers.

 

[hazlnut]

It's time to start listening to the good Doctor.


Ron Paul Warns of Martial Law and Economic Collapse - YouTube

Take your batshit crazy and peddle it somewhere else, we're all filled up here.

 

[g5000]

There was a massive transfer of wealth from the pockets of the common man up the food chain to Wall Street. Much of that wealth was stolen, with police protection. To keep the machine rolling, Congress was bought and paid to go along.


Though the frauds that were committed are by now well known, no one has gone to jail. The crooks should all be hanging from lamp posts, and Christopher Cox should be hanging alongside them, along with Chris Dodd, Barney Frank, Phil Gramm, Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin, and Larry Summers.


All of these things are still going on. NONE of it has been stopped, and the fraud is actually bigger than ever. So are the banks.

The large failing financial institutions should have been seized in a manner similar to a bad bank that is seized by the FDIC, dismantled, and the parts sold off to people who would run things better and more efficiently. Their executives who committed fraud should be spending time in federal prison.

Credit default swaps should be banned from being sold to anyone who does not have an insurable interest. All OTC derivatives should be sold on independent exchanges managed by entities who are not buying or selling derivatives.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Yes, I think Paul's message becomes more relevant with each passing year.

Have you been keeping up with the news? We're on the brink of something not pleasant, that's for sure. The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy. Problem is the is ALL FLUFF. It's not real. You can't just print money indefinitely as a "solve" because there is absolutely no substance behind it. Eventually, things will give-way (which is what we should have let happen in 08).

Obama failed to punish anyone following the last collapse. Not one person was sent to jail despite his campaign promises to "hold the fat cats accountable". So what happens when you give a kid who does something wrong an ice cream cone?

I'm expecting the worst in the next 5 years..



.

The fed has been handing the banks billions of dollars through QE each month for the past 5 years under Obama, as a method to prop up the economy.

Handing? You make it sound like free money.

It is free money. By the truckload. At the expense of you, me, everyone who has a retirement account, and savers.

It is free money. By the truckload.

They're buying bonds with it, bonds that yield much more than the cash they're "handing" the banks.

At the expense of you, me, everyone

I refied below 4%. That's not an expense.