The $200 billion bail-out for predator banks and Spitzer charges are intimately linked
by Greg Palast
Global Research, March 14, 2008 GregPalast.com
While New York Governor Eliot Spitzer was paying an "escort" $4,300 in a hotel room in Washington, just down the road, George Bush's new Federal Reserve Board Chairman, Ben Bernanke, was secretly handing over $200 billion in a tryst with mortgage bank industry speculators.
Both acts were wanton, wicked and lewd. But there's a BIG difference. The Governor was using his own checkbook. Bush's man Bernanke was using ours.
This week, Bernanke's Fed, for the first time in its history, loaned a selected coterie of banks one-fifth of a trillion dollars to guarantee these banks' mortgage-backed junk bonds. The deluge of public loot was an eye-popping windfall to the very banking predators who have brought two million families to the brink of foreclosure.
Up until Wednesday, there was one single, lonely politician who stood in the way of this creepy little assignation at the bankers' bordello: Eliot Spitzer.
Who are they kidding? Spitzer's lynching and the bankers' enriching are intimately tied.
How? Follow the money.(THIS ONE'S FOR YOU SENDERS)
The press has swallowed Wall Street's line that millions of US families are about to lose their homes because they bought homes they couldn't afford or took loans too big for their wallets. Ba-LON-ey. That's blaming the victim.
Here's what happened. Since the Bush regime came to power, a new species of loan became the norm, the "sub-prime" mortgage and it's variants including loans with teeny "introductory" interest rates. From out of nowhere, a company called "Countrywide" became America's top mortgage lender, accounting for one in five home loans, a large chuck of these "sub-prime."
Here's how it worked: The Grinning Family, with US average household income, gets a $200,000 mortgage at 4% for two years. Their $955 a month payment is 25% of their income. No problem. Their banker promises them a new mortgage, again at the cheap rate, in two years. But in two years, the promise ain't worth a can of spam and the Grinnings are told to scram - because their house is now worth less than the mortgage. Now, the mortgage hits 9% or $1,609 plus fees to recover the "discount" they had for two years. Suddenly, payments equal 42% to 50% of pre-tax income. Grinnings move into their Toyota.
Now, what kind of American is "sub-prime." Guess. No peeking. Here's a hint: 73% of HIGH INCOME Black and Hispanic borrowers were given sub-prime loans versus 17% of similar-income Whites. Dark-skinned borrowers aren't stupid - they had no choice. They were "steered" as it's called in the mortgage sharking business.
"Steering," sub-prime loans with usurious kickers, fake inducements to over-borrow, called "fraudulent conveyance" or "predatory lending" under US law, were almost completely forbidden in the olden days (Clinton Administration and earlier) by federal regulators and state laws as nothing more than fancy loan-sharking.
But when the Bush regime took over, Countrywide and its banking brethren were told to party hardy - it was OK now to steer'm, fake'm, charge'm and take'm.
But there was this annoying party-pooper. The Attorney General of New York, Eliot Spitzer, who sued these guys to a fare-thee-well. Or tried to.
Instead of regulating the banks that had run amok, Bush's regulators went on the warpath against Spitzer and states attempting to stop predatory practices. Making an unprecedented use of the legal power of "federal pre-emption," Bush-bots ordered the states to NOT enforce their consumer protection laws.
Indeed, the feds actually filed a lawsuit to block Spitzer's investigation of ugly racial mortgage steering. Bush's banking buddies were especially steamed that Spitzer hammered bank practices across the nation using New York State laws.
Spitzer not only took on Countrywide, he took on their predatory enablers in the investment banking community. Behind Countrywide was the Mother Shark, its funder and now owner, Bank of America. Others joined the sharkfest: Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup's Citibank made mortgage usury their major profit centers. They did this through a bit of financial legerdemain called "securitization."
What that means is that they took a bunch of junk mortgages, like the Grinnings, loans about to go down the toilet and re-packaged them into "tranches" of bonds which were stamped "AAA" - top grade - by bond rating agencies. These gold-painted turds were sold as sparkling safe investments to US school district pension funds and town governments in Finland (really).
When the housing bubble burst and the paint flaked off, investors were left with the poop and the bankers were left with bonuses. Countrywide's top man, Angelo Mozilo, will "earn" a $77 million buy-out bonus this year on top of the $656 million - over half a billion dollars - he pulled in from 1998 through 2007.
But there were rumblings that the party would soon be over. Angry regulators, burned investors and the weight of millions of homes about to be boarded up were causing the sharks to sink. Countrywide's stock was down 50%, and Citigroup was off 38%, not pleasing to the Gulf sheiks who now control its biggest share blocks.
Then, on Wednesday of this week, the unthinkable happened. Carlyle Capital went bankrupt. Who? That's Carlyle as in Carlyle Group. James Baker, Senior Counsel. Notable partners, former and past: George Bush, the Bin Laden family and more dictators, potentates, pirates and presidents than you can count.
The Fed had to act. Bernanke opened the vault and dumped $200 billion on the poor little suffering bankers. They got the public treasure - and got to keep the Grinning's house. There was no "quid" of a foreclosure moratorium for the "pro quo" of public bail-out. Not one family was saved - but not one banker was left behind.
Every mortgage sharking operation shot up in value. Mozilo's Countrywide stock rose 17% in one day. The Citi sheiks saw their company's stock rise $10 billion in an afternoon.
And that very same day the bail-out was decided - what a coinkydink! - the man called, "The Sheriff of Wall Street" was cuffed. Spitzer was silenced.
Do I believe the banks called Justice and said, "Take him down today!" Naw, that's not how the system works. But the big players knew that unless Spitzer was taken out, he would create enough ruckus to spoil the party. Headlines in the financial press - one was "Wall Street Declares War on Spitzer" - made clear to Bush's enforcers at Justice who their number one target should be. And it wasn't Bin Laden.
It was the night of February 13 when Spitzer made the bone-headed choice to order take-out in his Washington Hotel room. He had just finished signing these words for the Washington Post about predatory loans:
"Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which he federal government was turning a blind eye."
Bush, said Spitzer right in the headline, was the "Predator Lenders" Partner in Crime." The President, said Spitzer, was a fugitive from justice. And Spitzer was in Washington to launch a campaign to take on the Bush regime and the biggest financial powers on the planet.
Spitzer wrote, "When history tells the story of the subprime lending crisis and recounts its devastating effects on the lives of so many innocent homeowners the Bush administration will not be judged favorably."
But now, the Administration can rest assured that this love story - of Bush and his bankers - will not be told by history at all - now that the Sheriff of Wall Street has fallen on his own gun.
A note on "Prosecutorial Indiscretion."
Back in the day when I was an investigator of racketeers for government, the federal prosecutor I was assisting was deciding whether to launch a case based on his negotiations for airtime with 60 Minutes. I'm not allowed to tell you the prosecutor's name, but I want to mention he was recently seen shouting, "Florida is Rudi country! Florida is Rudi country!"
Not all crimes lead to federal bust or even public exposure. It's up to something called "prosecutorial discretion."
Funny thing, this "discretion." For example, Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, paid Washington DC prostitutes to put him diapers (ewww!), yet the Senator was not exposed by the US prosecutors busting the pimp-ring that pampered him.
Naming and shaming and ruining Spitzer - rarely done in these cases - was made at the "discretion" of Bush's Justice Department.
Or maybe we should say, 'indiscretion.'
Greg Palast, former investigator of financial fraud, is the author of the New York Times bestsellers Armed Madhouse and The Best Democracy Money Can Buy.
Greg Palast is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Greg Palast
Investment banks are borrowing from Fed Wednesday March 19, 12:12 pm ET
NEW YORK (Reuters) -Investment banks Goldman Sachs Group Inc (NYSE:GS - News), Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (NYSE:LEH - News) and Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS - News) are testing a new program that allows investment banks to borrow directly from the Federal Reserve, according to people at the banks. ADVERTISEMENT
In a bid to stabilize jittery markets, the Fed said on Sunday that it would allow investment banks to borrow from its discount window using a wide range of investment-grade securities as collateral.
Markets were unstable after a run on the bank at Bear Stearns Cos Inc (NYSESC - News) forced the investment bank to sell itself to JPMorgan Chase & Co (NYSE:JPM - News) at a fire-sale price.
The Fed has also cut the rate at which dealers borrow at the discount window to 2.5 percent from 3.5 percent, in two separate actions this week.
Goldman Sachs plans to test the program sometime this week, a spokesman said. Morgan Stanley Chief Financial Officer Colm Kelleher said his bank has already tested the program, and a spokeswoman for Lehman said the investment bank has also done so.
Erin Callan, CFO at Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (NYSE:LEH - News), said in a conference call on Tuesday that dealers can borrow from the discount window at attractive terms.
"We would expect that the dealer community will actively begin to access the new program," Callan said. The program is a statement of confidence to parties that trade with and finance Lehman, and will also allow Lehman to fund more business with clients, she added.
In August, when commercial paper markets were seizing up, the Fed cut the discount rate for commercial banks. Soon after that, the four largest U.S. banks and a major international bank borrowed more than $2 billion total at the discount window, to help remove the stigma of getting short-term financing from the central bank.
(Reporting by Dan Wilchins; additional reporting by Chris Reiter and Christian Plumb; editing by John Wallace)
One of the more stunning developments of the Bear Stearns (BSC: 5.33, -0.58, -9.81%) fire sale is that many of the firm's 14,000 employees, as well as the firms many thousands of shareholders, have just watched their stakes in the company go up in smoke. What's more, Sunday's news that JPMorgan Chase (JPM: 42.47, -0.24, -0.56%) would purchase Bear for $236 million, or $2 a share -- a fraction of its value even from the close of trading Friday -- sent fears that there might not be much of Bear Stearns left when the merger is set to be completed later this year.
"This is gonna go down as the biggest theft in all of financial history, said William Smith, portfolio manager of Smith Asset Management and a former Bear employee. "The $2 a share stock price is more symbolic than anything because the alternative is nothing."
"This is one of the unfortunate stories on Wall Street. I'm a former Bear guy. I have friends over there. My friends just watched their fortunes vaporize," Smith added.
The deal between JPMorgan and Bear was whipped together over the weekend to save Bear from both bankruptcy and possible liquidation. If approved by Bear shareholders, it will bring an end to the company's 85-year-old history.
Bear's employees currently own about one-third of the firm's stock. It was considered a point of pride among Bear employees to own stock in the firm, and selling that stock was considered bad form. Indeed, employees often received their annual bonuses in the form of stock. Bonuses received recently are now basically worthless.
Even the company's top management was required to own significant stakes. Former Bear Chief Executive Jimmy Cayne's was worth nearly $1 billion as recent as last year when the firm's stock was at $170. That paper wealth has now evaporated.
Another big loser in this deal might be British billionaire Joseph Lewis, who currently owns a 9.6% stake in Bear. In just a few months Lewis has lost about $1.16 billion in paper wealth.
It doesn't have to be just paper wealth that are going up in smoke. According to CNBC's Charlie Gasparino, JPMorgan is expected to lay off more than half of the company's 14,000 employees.
Combined with the stock's collapse, that places at least 7,000 highly-paid employees both poor and unemployed.
The plummeting shares of Bear is already causing shareholders to call their lawyers. The law firm Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins said it has filed a class action suit against Bear Stearns, claiming that company's executives were negligent in their duties to both employees and shareholders, according to Reuters.
According to the terms of Sunday's deal, JPMorgan will exchange 0.05473 of its shares for one share of Bear Stearns. It values Bear at just $236 million, compared to Bear’s Friday market capitalization of $3.54 billion.
The deal is expected to close in the next 90 days, and is subject only to shareholder approval, which both banks expect to happen.
"JPMorgan Chase stands behind Bear Stearns," said JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon in a press release Sunday. "Bear Stearns' clients and counterparties should feel secure that JPMorgan is guaranteeing Bear Stearns' counterparty risk."
Shareholder approval could become a point of contention. In a conference call Sunday night, an individual shareholder asked JPMorgan why this deal was better than bankruptcy. When JPMorgan officials refused to answer and directed the question to Bear, the shareholder defiantly told JPMorgan he would vote down the merger.
Bear's shares traded at more than $150 less than a year ago. The deal places Bear's stock at a 93% discount to Friday's close.
While an individual shareholder's voice might not be significant, it potentially echoes the sentiment of other shareholders. Bear has always been known as a defiantly independent organization. With Bear employees owning one-third of Bear, and individual and institutional investors feeling that $2 a share might be too little, there could be a proxy fight.
To finance the deal, the Federal Reserve approved up to $30 billion in special financing to help JPMorgan work through Bears illiquid assets, mostly complicated investments backed by subprime mortgages.
Bear's massive holdings in securities backed by subprime mortgages and other risky investments enabled JPMorgan to purchase the company at such a discount. These securities have been basically frozen since August, and Bear and others banks like Citigroup (C: 20.41, -0.30, -1.44%) and Merrill Lynch (MER: 41.45, -5.18, -11.10%) have had to sit back and watch as the value of these assets has collapsed.
JPMorgan's CFO said in a call to investors Sunday night that once the company acquires Bear it will conduct an "orderly" selling of approximately $5-6 billion of Bear's assets in order to get them off the balance sheet. The bank said that, even with the merger, JPMorgan plans to maintain its tier one capital ratio of 8%.
The $236 million price tag values Bear at less than the cost of its headquarters on Madison Avenue in Midtown Manhattan, which is worth about $1 billion, according to current real estate market estimates.
The discount is also largely due to the huge transaction costs JPMorgan said it will have to incur in order to acquire Bear. JPMorgan said those costs approach $6 billion, much of it related to litigation, as well as the cost of reducing the balance sheet, various accounting measures and costs related to physically merging the two companies.
Despite the huge discount, JPMorgan will in fact be acquiring several strong businesses, most notably Bear's prime brokerage and global clearing businesses. JPMorgan said it expects Bear will provide, once fully integrated, $1 billion in earnings for the firm.
This deal closed at near record speed. JPMorgan officials said they had a team of more than 200 people working on the deal over the weekend, collecting as much information on Bear as they could.
It was widely expected Bear would not survive the weekend based on the torment the company went through beginning last summer. The final decline began early last week when speculation hit the markets that Bear was having a tough time building its liquidity position.
According to the firm, those rumors escalated on Thursday, which caused some of the company's clients to pull their money out of the firm. In other words, Bear suffered from a classic example of a run on the bank. "People wanted to get cash out," Bear Stearns CEO Alan Schwartz said Friday on a conference call. "At the pace we were going, the continued liquidity demands would outstrip our liquidity resources."
The deal between Bear and the Federal Reserve and JPMorgan was to keep Bear functioning "normally" for 28 days.
As part of the acquisition, JPMorgan said it would guarantee all past and future business by Bear until the transaction is approved. The banks said they have already spoken with regulators and believe they have more than enough support.
The guarantee is incredibly important for Bear, because the bank is going through an almost lightning-quick collapse of confidence in the company's ability to operate. Traders and other investment bankers said on Friday they refused to do business if Bear was the counterparty. With the backing of the larger and cleaner balance sheet of JPMorgan, Bear can return to business until the acquisition is completed.
Financier Chosen To Head Treasury Bush Nominates Henry Paulson To Succeed Snow By Michael A. Fletcher and Paul Blustein Washington Post Staff Writers Wednesday, May 31, 2006
President Bush named Goldman Sachs Group Inc. Chairman Henry M. Paulson Jr. as Treasury secretary yesterday, turning to a prominent Wall Street insider to lead his economic team and become the chief promoter of the administration's fiscal policies.
The nomination, announced in a brief Rose Garden ceremony, marked the first time Bush has chosen a chieftain from the world of finance to head the Treasury after the Cabinet post was occupied by two industrial-sector executives who struggled to hold sway with Bush's inner circle. Although Bush has shown mistrust of financiers, he hailed Paulson's service as head of "one of the most respected firms on Wall Street" who has "an intimate knowledge of financial markets and an ability to explain economic issues in clear terms."
The move culminated a months-long recruitment during which Paulson rebuffed several White House overtures, according to administration officials and people familiar with Paulson's decision making. White House Chief of Staff Joshua B. Bolten renewed the effort in recent weeks and persuaded his former Goldman Sachs colleague to meet with Bush at the White House earlier this month. It was then, after a long Saturday meeting 11 days ago, that Bush persuaded Paulson to take the job.
In the meeting, Paulson sought assurances that the post, which at times has been seen as subordinated by the White House, would have the proper kind of stature.
"He was curious about what was myth and what was reality when it came to the inner workings of the job," said a top Bush adviser with close knowledge of the selection process. "I think he was reassured by understanding how the job operates."
If confirmed by the Senate, Paulson, 60, will replace Treasury Secretary John W. Snow, who in December told the White House that he wanted to step down after three years in the job. Although a loyal booster of Bush's policies, Snow suffered from the widespread perception in markets and on Capitol Hill that he was an advocate rather than a key policymaker.
The White House sought Paulson even though he and his wife contributed nearly $1 million to an environmental organization that has been harshly critical of the president.
Paulson's nomination comes as the economy is exhibiting robust growth and strength, but also some troubling signs. While the economy grew at its fastest rate in 2 1/2 years during the first quarter of 2006 and unemployment remains low, public opinion polls show that a majority of Americans think the economy is in fair or poor shape. Rising gasoline prices and a median household income that, adjusted for inflation, has fallen during the Bush years have fanned public anxiety.
"Everything is going great in the economy until you look at the people in it," said Jared Bernstein, senior economist with the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute.
In brief remarks, Paulson said 32 years on Wall Street have given him a keen sense of the power that markets have in fostering economic growth and efficiency. "Our economy's strength is rooted in the entrepreneurial spirit and the competitive zeal of the American people, and in our free and open market," Paulson said as Bush looked on. "It is truly a marvel, but we cannot take it for granted."
In choosing Paulson, Bush defied skeptics who predicted that late in his presidency he would be unable to attract a Wall Street heavy hitter for a position that up to now has held little power in his administration. As chief since 1999 of one of Wall Street's wealthiest investment-banking firms, Paulson brings high-caliber financial credentials that contrast with Bush's previous Treasury chiefs -- Paul H. O'Neill, who ran Alcoa aluminum, and Snow, of the CSX railroad.
The White House was eager to find a candidate with credibility among investors. Markets have turned highly volatile in recent weeks, with the biggest dips coming in commodities and stocks in Asia, Latin America and Eastern Europe. U.S. stocks, which have also dropped sharply from recent highs, sank anew yesterday, with the Dow Jones industrial average shedding 184.18 points, mainly because of a rise in oil prices and a report showing a decline in consumer confidence. With Alan Greenspan having recently left the Federal Reserve Board in the untested hands of a new chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, the administration was in danger of lacking a figure with deep experience in market downturns -- such as the Asian flu of the late 1990s -- that could undermine the international economy.
This is why true conservatives have a difficult time joining the Republican camp. They're a bunch of crooks. Our money was used to make sure multi-millionaires didn't have to take responsibility for their shoddy lending practices. Republicans claim of small government and individual responsibility are BULLS#*T. The IRS sends a refund check for $600 to the working stiff, all the while forking over $200,000,000,000(yes...that's what 200 billion looks like) to one of the wealthiest private investment banking firms in the country. This is Metroplex on steroids. Our system of governance is broken. Both parties are absolutely drunk with power. Where do we go from here??
Don't forget who was instrumental in getting the lending laws amended so that the banks and lending institutions could write those loans that should have never been given to people who the banks knew couldn't afford the homes people were buying in the first place. It was old slick Willy and the Dems but both parties have to share the blame on this one because the Reps should have tightened the lending laws back up years ago b4 we were in this crisis.
You're missing the point.....The Feds are handing over $200 billion to the banking industry, specifically Bear Stearns, yet the people who are losing their houses to sub prime loans and can't pay their mortgage are still out of a home. What is we the taxpayer getting in return for a $200 billion bailout? People aren't getting their homes back with rates they can afford, and the banks don't get stuck with the devalued properties. Who wins? The banks. If I were a blind believer in Republican policy I might try to throw out the same red herring you are and blame it on Clinton. But I can't, this is nothing more than the Bush administration looting the treasury to makes sure the Bankers who helped him win the presidency don't lose their shirts. And not just lose their shirts, but to continue to live their millionaire lifestyles.
Cicero if Clinton hadn't lifted the restrictions on the loans we wouldn't be in this situation to begin with. I'm all for letting Bear Sterns go bankrupt and like you I'm against baili8ng any company out of debt due to poor business practices. The precedent was started long ago when the government bailed out the auto industry.
The ones I really feel sorry for are the employees who invested their savings in a company whom they thought was a decent company only to lose everything they have worked all their lives for. To answer your question the tax payer isn't going to get a darn thing for the $200 billion spent to bail out Bear Sterns and as far as I'm concerned there isn't a decent party to vote for in an election as they're all the same corrupt and pander to lobbyists, big business, and oil companies.
FBI expands subprime mortgage crisis probe By Jerry Seper March 19, 2008 An FBI investigation into the subprime mortgage crisis has expanded from 14 to 17 companies suspected of accounting fraud, improperly securing loans and insider trading, and could grow even larger, according to government officials.
While the FBI has acknowledged an ongoing investigation into lending practices involving subprime mortgages, which financial experts have said could take years to complete, neither the bureau nor the Justice Department has commented publicly on any specific targets.
Bear Stearns Cos., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley separately have acknowledged, however, that government investigators were asking for information about their subprime lending practices.
Those acknowledgments were contained in annual reports the companies are required to submit in January to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, although it was not clear whether the disclosures were related to the FBI probe. All three said they were cooperating with the government's requests.
Yesterday, Reuters news agency reported that the FBI investigation was looking at Countrywide Financial Corp., the largest U.S. mortgage lender, although bureau officials declined to comment and Countrywide said it was unaware of any investigation.
According to the firm's most recent SEC filing, a number of investors have brought lawsuits against Countrywide in California and Delaware, saying directors and executives did not disclose complete and accurate information about its mortgage lending practices and financial condition.
"The FBI has been investigating potential fraud in the mortgage/sub-prime lending industry, however, we can not confirm or deny which companies are under investigation," said FBI spokesman Richard Kolko.
FBI officials have said agents are looking into possible fraud during the many stages of mortgage securitization, adding that the investigation involved subprime lenders, housing developers and the many banks that packaged loans as securities.
Included in the investigation, said Neil Power, chief of the FBI's economic crimes unit, was an extensive review of the financial records and other documents generated by firms forced into bankruptcy by the mortgage crisis.
Senior FBI criminal investigators said during a media briefing in Washington in January that "plenty of shenanigans with mortgages and subprime loans" were costing the nation tens of billions of dollars a year.
"Greed is definitely not good for our economy right now," said FBI Assistant Director Ken Kaiser. "It's hurting homeowners. It's hurting honest businesses. And it's hurting investors and markets around the world."
At the time, the FBI confirmed it was "squarely focused on cracking down on the largest of these financial crimes, launching pro-active initiatives and shifting resources as trends emerge, all the while working hand-in-hand with a host of government and private sector partners."
The FBI said it was investigating 14 corporations involved in subprime lending as part of the bureau's Subprime Mortgage Industry Fraud Initiative started last year, and the companies spanned the financial services industry, from mortgage lenders to investment banks that bundle loans into securities sold to investors.
It also said the investigation had focused on insider trading by some executives, adding that it had more than 1,200 cases open, up about 40 percent from last year.
The FBI said the targeted "hot spots" included California, Texas, Arizona, Florida, Ohio, Michigan and Utah; that suspicious-activity reports it reviewed for potential mortgage fraud had grown from 3,000 in fiscal 2003 to 48,000 in fiscal 2007. It also said it was on pace this year to receive more than 60,000 such reports.
This is starting to resemble another Enron and I hope that if there was any illegal activity being done by the CEO's and officers of any of these companies they spend jail time for their actions.
Ask them about their high priced hookers.....with investors money...now repaid with taxpayer money....... ................................boy,,,,what a shame what a shame what a sham what a sham..................................................................................... >
...you are a product of your environment, your environment is a product of your priorities, your priorities are a product of you......
The replacement of morality and conscience with law produces a deadly paradox.
STOP BEING GOOD DEMOCRATS---STOP BEING GOOD REPUBLICANS--START BEING GOOD AMERICANS
The government should not be in the business of starting and sustaining and bailing out private businesses. And Shadow you are correct....it all started with the bailing out of the auto industry. If the government continues to 'have' to bail out private companies, it will just prove that we, as a supposedly economically sound nation is not so sound after all. Or perhaps that it is just all corrupt..perhaps?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
SC - News) forced the investment bank to sell itself to JPMorgan Chase & Co (NYSE:JPM - News) at a fire-sale price.
