Sta je sledece? Uvoz lada, ponovo? Radna nedelja od tri dana? :lol:
http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091209-705837.html (http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20091209-705837.html)
Ma kakvi 50 % ...99% bi trebalo a specijalno za one koji su uzeli novac od tax payersa...njima bi od bazichne plate dala 20% koliko da imaju za leba. :x
Stvarno bre nema vishe niko ni stida ni srama.
Kakav komunizam? Pa ovo je komunizam kad te drzava vadi iz govana a ti delish bonuse.Ko ne bi voleo ovakav kapitalizam ( mislim od ovih koji ovu pljachku obilato koriste xuss
Kao shto rekoh dole :
"Kapitalizam bez bankrotstva je kao Hrishcanstvo bez pakla"
Мислиш, Јудаизам?
Hehe.
Radis za firmu kao konj cele godine, napravis im par miliona/par desetina miliona dolara, i onda na 50% para koje inace placas u taksama platis jos 50%?
Jel' znas ko ce ozbiljan da ostane da radi pod tim uslovima? Nece niko. Nemas pojma kakav je mobility u ovom biznisu trenutno, koliko ima otvorenih poslova za ljude koji znaju sta rade. U nejboljem interesu drzave i tax payera je da recimo RBS ne postane skladiste nesposobnjakovica, jer neko treba da zaradi i plati novac koje je UK Treasury ulozio u tu banku. Good luck with that.
Wall Street samo trlja ruke posle ovih vesti. City of London im je 50% manji takmac od jutros.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 02:39:07 PM
Hehe.
Radis za firmu kao konj cele godine, napravis im par miliona/par desetina miliona dolara, i onda na 50% para koje inace placas u taksama platis jos 50%?
Jel' znas ko ce ozbiljan da ostane da radi pod tim uslovima? Nece niko. Nemas pojma kakav je mobility u ovom biznisu trenutno, koliko ima otvorenih poslova za ljude koji znaju sta rade. U nejboljem interesu drzave i tax payera je da recimo RBS ne postane skladiste nesposobnjakovica, jer neko treba da zaradi i plati novac koje je UK Treasury ulozio u tu banku. Good luck with that.
Wall Street samo trlja ruke posle ovih vesti. City of London im je 50% manji takmac od jutros.
Потписујем.
А сад да чујемо и решење.
Hehe vidim kako ste bili mashtoviti zadnjih 10-15 godina :x
Sposobni nema shta ...kakve idiotluke je ta industrija iznedrila u ovom vremenu shta treba da pricham kad ni oni sami vishe ne mogu da nadju ljude koji znaju shta su zamuljali :mrgreen:
Na sta konkretno mislis Slawene?
Problem Britanije nije (samo) to sto im je bankarski sektor najebao, nego prevashodno to sto im je drzavna potrosnja rasla dva puta brze od ekonomije.
Ako si radio za firmu kao konj i zaradio milione shta trazite onda od drzave da vas vadi iz fekalija...
Osim toga i u toj USA ima te dve tri velike finansiske korporacije koje drze monopol ...pa tako je jaHko...
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 02:45:20 PM
Hehe vidim kako ste bili mashtoviti zadnjih 10-15 godina :x
Sposobni nema shta ...kakve idiotluke je ta industrija iznedrila u ovom vremenu shta treba da pricham kad ni oni sami vishe ne mogu da nadju ljude koji znaju shta su zamuljali :mrgreen:
Nema ovde neduznih, najveci deo zapadnog sveta zivi izvan svojih mogucnosti. Lakse je uperiti prst u zgradu od 150 spratova i reci, tu su krivci za sve, nego sagledati kompleksnost problema. Parole prolaze lakse, to je tako oduvek bilo.
QuoteProblem Britanije nije (samo) to sto im je bankarski sektor najebao, nego prevashodno to sto im je drzavna potrosnja rasla dva puta brze od ekonomije.
A shta je problem USA? Ili nema problema :mrgreen:
QuoteLakse je uperiti prst u zgradu od 150 spratova i reci, tu su krivci za sve, nego sagledati kompleksnost problema.
Naravno da nema neduznih i sva ova ujdurma nije bila moguca bez amina onih iz vrha...
Kao nisu znali...iju bash su se shokirali :cry:
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 02:48:18 PM
Ako si radio za firmu kao konj i zaradio milione shta trazite onda od drzave da vas vadi iz fekalija...
Osim toga i u toj USA ima te dve tri velike finansiske korporacije koje drze monopol ...pa tako je jaHko...
Prvo, ako se meni licno obracas, moja firma je prosle godine bila profitabilna, nije uzela nicijeg dolara, fond za koji radim je ove godine do sad investorima vratio 44% na ulozen novac. Da mi neko dodje i kaze da treba da platim 50% talsu na bonmus, rascopao bi mu glavu maljem.
Drugo, nije tacno da dve ili tri forme drze bilo kakav bankarski monolop u Americi. To prosto matematicki nije istina.
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 02:50:16 PM
QuoteProblem Britanije nije (samo) to sto im je bankarski sektor najebao, nego prevashodno to sto im je drzavna potrosnja rasla dva puta brze od ekonomije.
A shta je problem USA? Ili nema problema :mrgreen:
Ima, naravno. Ali je ovdasnja ekonomija, sa svim svojim problemima, i dalje zdravija od vecine zapadnih, britanske pogotovo.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 02:46:46 PM
Na sta konkretno mislis Slawene?
Problem Britanije nije (samo) to sto im je bankarski sektor najebao, nego prevashodno to sto im je drzavna potrosnja rasla dva puta brze od ekonomije.
Не, не, решење само за ово што мучи ВБО.
Дакле, како да се задовољи њена глад за правдом?
QuotePrvo, ako se meni licno obracas, moja firma je prosle godine bila profitabilna,
Nisam se bash tebi lichno obratila ne poznajuci tvoju situaciju , ali mi je drago chuti da niste uzeli pare taxpayera :lol:
U tom sluchaju xjap
Ovde vec godinama slusham kako ljudi koji su vodili ove velike korporacije nakon shto su ih unazadili ( u nekim sluchajevima i bankrotirali) na kraju odlaze iz firme sa bonusima od desetine miliona ( zlatni padobran).Muka mi je slushati to.Kaze takvi su im ugovori, ne bismo ih uspeli dovesti da im nismo to dali...Shta ste ih i dovodili , mislim se. Oslobodi choveka odgovornosti i eto ti sranja. Tako i sa ovim beilautsima...Zashto bi prestali da dele bonuse? Valjda shto su visoko moralni ljudi :mrgreen:
Ja sam stekla utisak da su tih nekoliko korporacija sve i vsja u USA iz ovdashnjih izveshtaja.Nemoj da mi prichash da postoje milioni malih ali i nebitnih finansiskih firmi.I to znam.No hajde mozda me uho vara...nisam na terenu...na licinom mestu :mrgreen:
Quote from: slawen on December 09, 2009, 02:56:57 PM
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 02:46:46 PM
Na sta konkretno mislis Slawene?
Problem Britanije nije (samo) to sto im je bankarski sektor najebao, nego prevashodno to sto im je drzavna potrosnja rasla dva puta brze od ekonomije.
Не, не, решење само за ово што мучи ВБО.
Дакле, како да се задовољи њена глад за правдом?
Heh, daj nesto lakse da resim, izraelsko palestinski konflikt, recimo :lol:
QuoteДакле, како да се задовољи њена глад за правдом?
Pa onako kako je nekad bilo u kapitalizmu...kad si bankrot onda bankrotirash...i to pravo...i idesh na dobosh...a ne delish bonuse.
Vidim u USA smislili i bankrot kad samo "malo" i kratko bankrotirash pa onda poodpushtash radnike i ista ekipa nastavlja da radi.
Ma kakav vam je to kapitalizam xuss
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 03:09:56 PM
QuoteДакле, како да се задовољи њена глад за правдом?
Pa onako kako je nekad bilo u kapitalizmu...kad si bankrot onda bankrotirash...i to pravo...i idesh na dobosh...a ne delish bonuse.
Vidim u USA smislili i bankrot kad samo "malo" i kratko bankrotirash pa onda poodpushtash radnike i ista ekipa nastavlja da radi.
Ma kakav vam je to kapitalizam xuss
Sto ne pitas zagora i ekipu ko je sve i koliko puta 'bejlovan' u zadnjih 20-30 godina, bice ti lakse - garant... :lol:
Veruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju. Sedi pa razmisli sta bi to konrektno znacilo za tebe, tvoju porodicu, lifestyle i sve ostalo.
I to shto kazesh Demo...opet ja u mojim iluzijama o kapitalizmu ( kako ga zamishlja mali Djokica :oops:) )
Ma nije bitno shta bih ja lichno volela Zagore...treba da postoje rules...pravila igre ...ako ne postoje ( kao shto je u zadnje vreme vidljivo) onda ce nas sve odneti vrag.Pa i mene i moju porodicu...
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:12:55 PMVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
;D Trziste radi i to je ono sto se broji...
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:12:55 PMSedi pa razmisli sta bi to konrektno znacilo za tebe, tvoju porodicu, lifestyle i sve ostalo.
Jel' short-term ili long-term??
Nego, kad sam kod toga jel' si citao 'Bombardiers' od Po Bronson-a? Isto pitanje i za Hatemagu.
Haos je... Mis'im knjiga.
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 03:16:48 PM
Ma nije bitno shta bih ja lichno volela Zagore...treba da postoje rules...pravila igre ...ako ne postoje ( kao shto je u zadnje vreme vidljivo) onda ce nas sve odneti vrag.Pa i mene i moju porodicu...
Pravila igre naravno postoje i, naravno, menjaju se prema potrebama.
Pa necemo se valjda drzati (starih) pravila k'o pijan plota... xrofl
QuoteVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
Pa jeste ja i ochekujem ( naivno) da drzava intervenishe a ne da baca pare taxpayera kako ti ono reche chini mi se "iz helikoptera".Kad su pitali onu muchenicu shto je glavni neki "inspektor" za finansije pri administraciji u USA :"Gde su pare" ( misli se na trilione dolara "iz helikoptera" ona muchenica kaze " Ja ne znam">Kad su je pitali kako moze da ne zna a na tom je polozaju ona reche neshto u stilu " Ja sam pitala ali niko nece da mi odgovori...probajte vi da pitate ( obraca se novinaru".Opshte rasulo...i ti to zovesh intervencija xuss.
Quote from: iDemo on December 09, 2009, 03:18:44 PM
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:12:55 PMVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
;D Trziste radi i to je ono sto se broji...
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:12:55 PMSedi pa razmisli sta bi to konrektno znacilo za tebe, tvoju porodicu, lifestyle i sve ostalo.
Jel' short-term ili long-term??
Nego, kad sam kod toga jel' si citao 'Bombardiers' od Po Bronson-a? Isto pitanje i za Hatemagu.
Haos je... Mis'im knjiga.
Jesam, naravno.
Long term. Bez funkcionisuceg bankarskog sistema fiat novac gubi upotrebnu vrednost. Ako mislis da je prihvatljivo da se zarad isterivanja principa vratimo u barter ekonomiju, vidi, to je legitimno misljenje, ali ja se jednostavno ne slazem.
Quote from: zagor te nejJesam, naravno.
xjap
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 03:28:59 PM
QuoteVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
Pa jeste ja i ochekujem ( naivno) da drzava intervenishe a ne da baca pare taxpayera kako ti ono reche chini mi se "iz helikoptera".Kad su pitali onu muchenicu shto je glavni neki "inspektor" za finansije pri administraciji u USA :"Gde su pare" ( misli se na trilione dolara "iz helikoptera" ona muchenica kaze " Ja ne znam">Kad su je pitali kako moze da ne zna a na tom je polozaju ona reche neshto u stilu " Ja sam pitala ali niko nece da mi odgovori...probajte vi da pitate ( obraca se novinaru".Opshte rasulo...i ti to zovesh intervencija xuss.
Izvini, ali pricas kojesta.
Tacno se zna ko je dobio koliko novca, veliki deo programa je isplacen nazad treasuriju, investicija je bila planirana na nivou $700B, zbilja je $200B manje od toga, program je za sad cak profitabilan, cemu se niko nije nadao. Na AIG ce se izgubiti deo investicije, ali je sustina programa ispunjena - finansijski sistem je stabilizovan, tokovi novac su vraceni u normalu, nema panike na money marketu, ova godine je rekordna u svetu po kolicini refinansiranih korporativnih zajmova i obveznica. Americki TARP je apsolutni uspeh. To je prosta cinjenica.
Quote from: iDemo on December 09, 2009, 03:37:23 PM
Quote from: zagor te nejJesam, naravno.
xjap
Hehe, setim se svaki put kad prodjem pored SF FEd building-a :)
Hah, a pazi ovo: sad sad pricao sa ortakom koji je trader za JP Morgan u Londonu, americki drzavljanin; opak lik, razbio se od posla ove godine. Iako je stranac, iako ne radi za banku koja je dobila novac od britanske vlade, 50% tax mu ne gine. Bas principijelno.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 02:53:41 PM
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 02:48:18 PM
Ako si radio za firmu kao konj i zaradio milione shta trazite onda od drzave da vas vadi iz fekalija...
Osim toga i u toj USA ima te dve tri velike finansiske korporacije koje drze monopol ...pa tako je jaHko...
Prvo, ako se meni licno obracas, moja firma je prosle godine bila profitabilna, nije uzela nicijeg dolara, fond za koji radim je ove godine do sad investorima vratio 44% na ulozen novac. Da mi neko dodje i kaze da treba da platim 50% talsu na bonmus, rascopao bi mu glavu maljem.
Drugo, nije tacno da dve ili tri forme drze bilo kakav bankarski monolop u Americi. To prosto matematicki nije istina.
Haha, sjajno kako za mnoge
biti profitabilan u odredjenom vremenskom periodu znaci isto sto i 'imati srece'. Koliko ste prosecno vracali investorima za prosecnih 20 godina i koliko je prosecno ta brojka bila iznad/ispod the market.
I sta ako jedne godine investori izgube novac sa vama? Ok, nema bonusa, ali da li ima daljih penalty? I don't think so. Znaci ulazes novac investora 10 godina, 5 godina imas srece i dobijes ogroman bonus, 5 godina nemas srece i nikom nista. Investor bude na nuli, ako ima srece, a banker zaradi ogromne svote za svoj rad i krajnje sumnjive kvalifikacije i jos sumnjiviju kolicinu znanja o celoj stvari.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:40:28 PM
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 03:28:59 PM
QuoteVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
Pa jeste ja i ochekujem ( naivno) da drzava intervenishe a ne da baca pare taxpayera kako ti ono reche chini mi se "iz helikoptera".Kad su pitali onu muchenicu shto je glavni neki "inspektor" za finansije pri administraciji u USA :"Gde su pare" ( misli se na trilione dolara "iz helikoptera" ona muchenica kaze " Ja ne znam">Kad su je pitali kako moze da ne zna a na tom je polozaju ona reche neshto u stilu " Ja sam pitala ali niko nece da mi odgovori...probajte vi da pitate ( obraca se novinaru".Opshte rasulo...i ti to zovesh intervencija xuss.
Izvini, ali pricas kojesta.
Tacno se zna ko je dobio koliko novca, veliki deo programa je isplacen nazad treasuriju, investicija je bila planirana na nivou $700B, zbilja je $200B manje od toga, program je za sad cak profitabilan, cemu se niko nije nadao. Na AIG ce se izgubiti deo investicije, ali je sustina programa ispunjena - finansijski sistem je stabilizovan, tokovi novac su vraceni u normalu, nema panike na money marketu, ova godine je rekordna u svetu po kolicini refinansiranih korporativnih zajmova i obveznica. Americki TARP je apsolutni uspeh. To je prosta cinjenica.
VBO je u pravu, kad budem imao vremena postiracu YouTube link sa svjedocenja u kongresu, iako sam TARP tad nije bio razmatran. Osim toga, jos uvijek se ne zna kojim bankama je sve to isplaceno i zato je predlozen zakon po kom bi se uradio audit FED-a i otkrilo kome i kad su pare isplacivane i mimo tog programa.
TARP je velikim dijelom sharada i mazanje ociju, kao i onaj tzv. "bank stress test". FED je mimo svog mandata i mimo TARP-a preuzeo ~$1.5T MBS, i uprkos tome vecina banaka je i dalje nelikvidna.
E sad, da li bi se run-on the bank desio, kako bi se mogao sprijeciti, to su vec hipoteticke stvari.
Ali ono sto jeste sigurno, to je cinjenica da su ovim interesi bankara, njihov equity i pozicije ocuvane nasim parama.
low double digits return average since the foundation (15 godina).
Investiranje, ako sve u zivotu, ima veze sa srecom, naravno, ali se ne bazira na tome. Da je tako, ne bi se u skoli jebavao sa free cash flows analizama i slicnim zanimacijama, svo neophodno znanje bi se sticalo za black jack stolom u Vegasu.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 02:39:07 PM
Hehe.
Radis za firmu kao konj cele godine, napravis im par miliona/par desetina miliona dolara, i onda na 50% para koje inace placas u taksama platis jos 50%?
Jel' znas ko ce ozbiljan da ostane da radi pod tim uslovima? Nece niko. Nemas pojma kakav je mobility u ovom biznisu trenutno, koliko ima otvorenih poslova za ljude koji znaju sta rade. U nejboljem interesu drzave i tax payera je da recimo RBS ne postane skladiste nesposobnjakovica, jer neko treba da zaradi i plati novac koje je UK Treasury ulozio u tu banku. Good luck with that.
Wall Street samo trlja ruke posle ovih vesti. City of London im je 50% manji takmac od jutros.
Pa ne moraju ostati, evo mogu recimo u Citi da predju. Ili BOA. Ili HSBC.
Quote from: neprijateljska emigracija on December 09, 2009, 04:21:18 PM
E sad, da li bi se run-on the bank desio, kako bi se mogao sprijeciti, to su vec hipoteticke stvari.
Ali ono sto jeste sigurno, to je cinjenica da su ovim interesi bankara, njihov equity i pozicije ocuvane nasim parama.
Hipoteticke?
Samo kad se setim dana kad je Lehman pukao.
Koje crno hipoteticke, jebote.
Причамо о седамдесетима?
Ахахахахаха!
Ови људи не да ми више нису одвратни, не да су ми постали симпатични, већ бих им послао веш-лонац куване ракије!
Погледај мајсторе (кликабл) (http://www.danas.rs/vesti/ekonomija/blokada_zeleznice_dnevno_kosta_10_miliona_dinara_.4.html?news_id=178673)
Stanisavljević naglašava da je od juna bilo ukupno devet blokada pruge u Lapovu...
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 04:27:46 PM
Quote from: neprijateljska emigracija on December 09, 2009, 04:21:18 PM
E sad, da li bi se run-on the bank desio, kako bi se mogao sprijeciti, to su vec hipoteticke stvari.
Ali ono sto jeste sigurno, to je cinjenica da su ovim interesi bankara, njihov equity i pozicije ocuvane nasim parama.
Hipoteticke?
Samo kad se setim dana kad je Lehman pukao.
Koje crno hipoteticke, jebote.
Ne znam, svaki put kad mi neko pod prijetnjom katastrofe otme $2T i onda u tajnosti razdijeli, ja pocnem da trazim kalash po podrumu.
Mozda je problem u meni? :)
Jesam rekao da imam ugljen u podrumu?
Quote from: neprijateljska emigracija on December 09, 2009, 05:15:06 PM
Jesam rekao da imam ugljen u podrumu?
Sad ce Carbon-Credit jedinica da izvrsi desant na tvoj tavan...
Drustvo, meni dolazi drugar William Jefferson Clinton opet ovde, pa ne mogu duze da se zadrzavam.
Zagore, sta vas jebe Treasury sad oko onog lika sto je najuren?
Ne jebe, due dilligence...
A ispao je magare, neopojano.
$45m/year sort of a dude.
Vain.
Za JP Morgan sam cuo, verujem da su to svi radili, kako su se zapravo TARP pare prelile u new mortgages sa lepim kamatama. Sad bitno je imati funkcionalni finansijski sistem ali nisam odusevljen idejom da se moje pare daju bankama da ne potonu koje ih onda obrnu i izdaju kroz kredite.
Hm, problem je upravo obrnut - nedovoljno novca ide u ista sem super likvidne, super sigurne instrumente - US treasuries, super senior corporate loans i slicno. Hipotekarno pozjamljivanje je problem za obale jer Fannie i Freddie ne kupuju velike zajmove, a sekuritizacija gotovo da ne postoji. Banke su generalno zesce risk averse, sto je u recesiji apsolutno razumljiva stvar...
"Drugovi, ne radi se ovde o ciklicnoj vec strukturnoj krizi kapitalizma"
Plodno tlo za napredne, levicarske ideje. "Dolazi novi svet, lepsi, pravedniji, bopatiji".
Uh, poceo sam pre par dana da citam "Sok Dokrtina" od Naomi Klein. Hteo sam da odustanem posle 15 strana, nekako izdrzav do 50-te i mislim da cu definitivno da prekinem. Jebote, to treba najuriti u Manitobu da cuva ovce.
Neopojano djubre od knjige. Salonska komunjara iz Kenjade.
Ma znam, nego sam hteo eto "da cujem drugu stranu". Jebiga, dirala je u Fridmana a to nikom ne oprastam :mrgreen:
Salu na stranu, nije mi jasno kako se toliki narod primio na tako nesto.
P.S. Kanada, ne Kenjada.
Ti si u Kanadi, ona je u kenjadi :)
Quote from: Pijanista on December 09, 2009, 06:47:34 PM
Salu na stranu, nije mi jasno kako se toliki narod primio na tako nesto.
narod kao narod, voli da polemise a ne razume. za sve su krive korporacije, novi svetski poredak, zla imperija nema tu trunke tvoje krivice.
Inace Pijanista je pomenuo Lenona i "imagine" te kako je doticni bio bogatas. Isto vazi i za Naomi, zalaze se za nekakvu socijalnu pravdu trte-mrte, anti kapitalizam a zivi ko bubreg u loju, glavna je po raznim skupovima i za to dobija lepe dohotke koje bi mogla malo da podeli gladnom narodu promene radi...
Toj se vika "SAO TorontA".
Quote from: Tromotorac on December 09, 2009, 06:01:16 PM
Sad ce Carbon-Credit jedinica da izvrsi desant na tvoj tavan...
Carbon-Credit jedinica, odred Acorn... xfrog
A tek kad vide drva u
bek jardi. Tad sam najebo po dva osnova:carbon-pollutant + je protivu tree-huggers.
Quote from: neprijateljska emigracija on December 09, 2009, 07:10:23 PM
Quote from: Tromotorac on December 09, 2009, 06:01:16 PM
Sad ce Carbon-Credit jedinica da izvrsi desant na tvoj tavan...
Carbon-Credit jedinica, odred Acorn... xfrog
A tek kad vide drva u bek jardi. Tad sam najebo po dva osnova:carbon-pollutant + je protivu tree-huggers.
Aii, pa ti si opkoljen - Acorn spreda a treehugging brigade odpozadi. Srecom, za sve ima leka:
Old Machinegun (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vq7-uyuzYI4#)
Srbin to radi kuburom:
(http://www.pregrada.hr/images/kultura/sk_kubura_smedja.jpg)
Trebace puno kubura za 10,000 acornovaca grada Cikaga...
Pozdravlja vas gospodin Predsednik sve.
teško je čitati vas. samo veznici su na srpskom.
Pinki je video Tita
Drugi put...
(http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/u/B/clinton_sexoffender.jpg)
(http://blackliberal.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/bill-clinton.jpg)
(http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/g/_/clinton_96.jpg)
Quote from: Pijanista on December 09, 2009, 06:41:20 PMUh, poceo sam pre par dana da citam "Sok Dokrtina" od Naomi Klein. Hteo sam da odustanem posle 15 strana, nekako izdrzav do 50-te i mislim da cu definitivno da prekinem. Jebote, to treba najuriti u Manitobu da cuva ovce.
Ja imam (skoro) sve njene knjige - kupljene na rasprodaji za $2. Ni jednu nisam (jos) procitao al' se spremam. Oshtro...
Sto se nisi cenkao?
A, onda OK.
Edit> pogresno mesto
Quote from: iDemo on December 09, 2009, 09:55:14 PM
Quote from: Pijanista on December 09, 2009, 06:41:20 PMUh, poceo sam pre par dana da citam "Sok Dokrtina" od Naomi Klein. Hteo sam da odustanem posle 15 strana, nekako izdrzav do 50-te i mislim da cu definitivno da prekinem. Jebote, to treba najuriti u Manitobu da cuva ovce.
Ja imam (skoro) sve njene knjige - kupljene na rasprodaji za $2. Ni jednu nisam (jos) procitao al' se spremam. Oshtro...
Gubis vreme. Stvarno go qrac. ja volim da citam one sa kojima se ne slazem, ali moraju da budu barem inspirativni. Ova je em udavna, em bez veze.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:40:28 PM
Quote from: vbo man on December 09, 2009, 03:28:59 PM
QuoteVeruj mi da ne bi zelela da zivis u svetu u kom je bank run unistio globalni bankarski sistem jer drzave nisu intervencionisale i stabilizovale situaciju.
Pa jeste ja i ochekujem ( naivno) da drzava intervenishe a ne da baca pare taxpayera kako ti ono reche chini mi se "iz helikoptera".Kad su pitali onu muchenicu shto je glavni neki "inspektor" za finansije pri administraciji u USA :"Gde su pare" ( misli se na trilione dolara "iz helikoptera" ona muchenica kaze " Ja ne znam">Kad su je pitali kako moze da ne zna a na tom je polozaju ona reche neshto u stilu " Ja sam pitala ali niko nece da mi odgovori...probajte vi da pitate ( obraca se novinaru".Opshte rasulo...i ti to zovesh intervencija xuss.
Izvini, ali pricas kojesta.
Tacno se zna ko je dobio koliko novca, veliki deo programa je isplacen nazad treasuriju, investicija je bila planirana na nivou $700B, zbilja je $200B manje od toga, program je za sad cak profitabilan, cemu se niko nije nadao. Na AIG ce se izgubiti deo investicije, ali je sustina programa ispunjena - finansijski sistem je stabilizovan, tokovi novac su vraceni u normalu, nema panike na money marketu, ova godine je rekordna u svetu po kolicini refinansiranih korporativnih zajmova i obveznica. Americki TARP je apsolutni uspeh. To je prosta cinjenica.
Evo ga i YouTube link:
Alan Grayson: Is Anyone Minding the Store at the Federal Reserve? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXlxBeAvsB8#)
Mislim da sam ga i na starom forumu bio okacio.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 09, 2009, 03:40:28 PM
Tacno se zna ko je dobio koliko novca, veliki deo programa je isplacen nazad treasuriju, investicija je bila planirana na nivou $700B, zbilja je $200B manje od toga, program je za sad cak profitabilan, cemu se niko nije nadao. Na AIG ce se izgubiti deo investicije, ali je sustina programa ispunjena - finansijski sistem je stabilizovan, tokovi novac su vraceni u normalu, nema panike na money marketu, ova godine je rekordna u svetu po kolicini refinansiranih korporativnih zajmova i obveznica. Americki TARP je apsolutni uspeh. To je prosta cinjenica.
WASHINGTON – The Treasury Department is acknowledging for the first time that it lost $61 billion on two key programs designed to stabilize the economy after the largest financial crisis in decades.
The government is losing more than $30 billion on lifelines extended to insurance giant American International Group Inc., according to Treasury data released Wednesday in an audit by the Government Accountability Office. It also is losing more than $30 billion on rescues of struggling automakers Chrysler and General Motors.
Treasury says the losses are offset in part by profits earned from bank bailouts. It says the bank bailouts will net taxpayers $19.5 billion.
Over all, the bailouts are projected to cost taxpayers $41.5 billion.
Ponovo: stvar nije toliko u samom TARP-u, koliko je u tom preuzimanju MBS od strane FED-a. Off ballance sheet accounts, etc.
Gresis. Fed je stabilizovao hipotekarno trziste koje se potpuno raspadalo, plus je ovo iskorisceno kao injekcija novca u market pod necuvenim deflatornim pritiskom. Bernanke je vrhunski vatrogasac.
Alane, TARP ce na kraju da kosta, prevashodno zbog AIGja, ali je svaki realizovani program do sad bio profitabilan. $5B je zaradjeno na BofA, Citi ce da bude profitabilan, JPM je bio profitabilan, GS je bio profitabilan. Sve je ovo sasvim nepocekivano jer su projektovan gubici na Tarpu bili izmedju 25% do cak 50%. A i to je prihvatljiva cena u poredjenju sa jebenim ambisom.
QuoteCiti ce da bude profitabilan
Just one opinion :
QuoteIt would be if it was not the case that the City is a Vampire Squid bleeding the whole world, as opposed to just the UK.
The sooner the City is disintermediated, and becomes a service provider, the better. Indeed, due to the systemic and terminal shortage of bank capital, I do not believe that they would have any other option other than State ownership.
Citi se sprema da izadje iz Tarpa pre nove godine.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 10, 2009, 02:14:12 PM
Gresis. Fed je stabilizovao hipotekarno trziste koje se potpuno raspadalo, plus je ovo iskorisceno kao injekcija novca u market pod necuvenim deflatornim pritiskom. Bernanke je vrhunski vatrogasac.
Alane, TARP ce na kraju da kosta, prevashodno zbog AIGja, ali je svaki realizovani program do sad bio profitabilan. $5B je zaradjeno na BofA, Citi ce da bude profitabilan, JPM je bio profitabilan, GS je bio profitabilan. Sve je ovo sasvim nepocekivano jer su projektovan gubici na Tarpu bili izmedju 3od 25% do cak 50%. A i to je prihvatljiva cena u poredjenju sa jebenim ambisom.
Mogu da prihvatim da je jedan dio tih mjera neophodan, jer je gro banka nelikvidan ( o ulozi FED - samog Bernakea u kreiranju krize neki drugi put).
Ali zasto se to onda ne uradi uz potpunu transparentnost i javnu raspravu? TARP barem sadrzi nekakav mehanizem kontrole, ogranicenja i obavezu da se on isplati nazad.
Ali preuzeti ~$1.5T ( i velikim dijelom monetizirati) losih dugova je ne samo stetno po buducnost drzave, vec je i protivzakonito.
Nije protivzakonito, FED ima ogromnu autonomiju u odrzavanju stabilnosti monetarnog sistema, i treba da je ima, sta god o tome mislio onaj histericni Paul i slicna ekipa poluobavestenih magaraca.
Da nije upumpavan novac u ekonomiju, situacija bi bila mnogo teza, i na kratak, i na srednji, i na dug rok. Posle Japana, deflacija nije teorijski pojam, nego dokazano katastrofalan ekonomski ishod.
QuotePresident Nicolas Sarkozy is to follow Britain's lead and impose a one-off tax on bonus pay-outs by banks operating in France.
The French government intends to include the 50 per cent tax in the budget bill going through parliament. It will be levied on bonus pay-outs above €27,000 and will be paid by the banks, bringing Paris in line with London.
France and Britain want similar one-off taxes to be adopted across the EU.
A senior French official told the Financial Times that the French government had been considering such a tax for some time but had been deterred from doing so by the threat to the competitiveness of Paris as a financial centre.
"There is no obstacle to doing it now if it has been done in London," the official said.
Razmishljanja jednog Francuskog bankara :
Quoteby Jerome a Paris
Thu Dec 10th, 2009 at 05:36:11 AM EST
Bankers and their flunkies are lying with abandon in an attempt to crank up the faux-outrage at the recent decision by the UK government to impose a new 50% levy on banks bonuses.
In one of the most shameless misuse of maths, the FT says that Top bankers' bonus rate to top 100%:
John Whiting, policy director of Chartered Institute of Taxation, said the total tax rate on bonuses for high-earning bankers would be about 104 per cent, of which about half would be paid by the employee. For an individual receiving a bonus of £1m, the bank would pay the new tax of £500,000, total national insurance would be £138,000 and personal income tax would be £400,000.
Given that the 50% levy is not paid out of the bonus, but is paid additionally by the bank, this is, quite simply, a lie. The tax rate for bankers will not change one iota - for a £1 million bonus, it would be 53.8% payable in taxes and social charges. What would change would be the cost for the banks to pay out the bonus, as they'd need to cough up an additional £500,000.
If you wanted to come up with a all-in tax rate (ie amount in taxes to overall amount paid by the employer, you'd end up with 1,038k to 1,500k, ie a rate of 69.2% in that exemple.
In other words, this levy is correctly designed to penalize employers that want to pay out bonuses, but still makes it possible to do so, in a way which is less socially destructive than before.
In any case, the arguments against the levy are wildly contradictory, and someone could have a field day to point out the contradictions they reveal:
* it is unenforceable anyway as ways to make these payments tax-free will be put in place .
Why the outrage, then, if it's ineffective? Wouldn't the bankers be better placed to look as if they are publicly chastised and discreetly keep to their money? Why is it that they seem to want to be able to flaunt their wealth-capture? Is it that they want to be reassured that they actually deserve that money?
* it will weaken London as a financial center, as bankers move to Switzerland or New York.
I must confess to be nonplussed by these assertions of the profound weakness of London's position. Who knew that all it took to attract people away from the City was lower taxes - it's rather amazing that no other place on the continent has thought of doing that before, and that other countries conspired to let London keep its position so far... Specialisation, expertise concentration, "cluster" and network effects do not matter. Who knew that people would so easily abandon family, friends and the supposedly fantastic lifestyle quality of London to go to sleepy Zug or untaxed (snort) New York in droves?
* it's bad for the economy
The most exasperating argument is that cutting the City to size is somehow a bad thing. It is being repeated with increasing frequency (see Monday's FT for an exemple) that the City has created no perceivable value for the UK economy. It is rather obvious that claims about the prosperity of recent years still refuse to acknowledge the net long term result, ie taking into account the current crisis. And there still is no acknowledgement that the apparent overall prosperity in good years was not shared at all beyond a very small minority, whereas the crisis is disproportionately hitting the poor and middle classes.
Peter Mandelson, the party's chief strategist, famously remarked: "We are intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich, as long as they pay their taxes."
The new levy is, arguably, fully compatible with that sunny precept.
Hehe. London je do juce imao jedan competitive advantage u poredjenju sa Parizom i Frankfurtom, od Margaret Thatcher i raskida sa komunjarama tipa Scargilla. Britanija nema manufacturing kao Nemacka, nema ogromnu poljoprivredu kao Francuska. Budale.
nesumnjivo da se radi o politickom potezu mada ne mislim da ce London to osetiti na duze staze. Prvo radi se o 'one time deal' drugo, sav taj narod koji tamo radi je vecinom iz UK tako da ce po definiciji tu i ostati i traziti novi posao - ako im ovo nije po volji. Trece, i ja sam za kadno oporezivanje ili ogranicavanje bonusa kod banaka koje su dobile pare od drzave. Ili neka im daju pare za dobro poslovanje a oduzmu za protekle godine kada su stvarali sve ove derivate i trejdovali ih te doveli do ovoga.
Nema snase da je one time deal. Fiskalna rupa Velike Britanije je takvih razmera da su zesce povisene takse neminovne. Branice AAA rating kako god znaju i umeju, cena gubljenja top ratinga za njih je prohibitivno visoka. A nema politicke volje da se seche potrosnja.
Moze li meni neko ukratko da objasni zasto je UK u cabru?
Missim, od kolonijalne sile, prve industrijaliizovane zemlje, posle II sv rata u kome ni izdaleka nisu stradali kao Nemacka su spali na ovo sad. Njihov dug je ogroman, u poredjenju sa ostalim zemljama EU skolstvo i zdravstvo im je katastrofa....
Skup a zloupotrebljavan socijalni sistem, izdrzavanje celokupne Skotske i severne Engleske decenijama.
hehe da nisu imali Tacerovu, sad bi isli na rad u Poljsku.
Otprilike. One liberalne vlade iz sedamdesetih su ih nacisto zasrale.
Konacno...
By Sarah Mulholland
Dec. 10 (Bloomberg) -- JPMorgan Chase & Co. sold $500 million in securities backed by commercial mortgages without aid from a Federal Reserve program to jumpstart lending, according to a person familiar with the transaction.
The five-part offering marks the third sale of commercial mortgage-backed securities in less than a month following a drought that lasted more than a year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The largest top-rated portion priced to yield 2.05 percentage points more than benchmark interest rates, said the person, who declined to be identified because terms are private.
Real estate companies are taking advantage of investor appetite for the securities to pay down maturing debt. The JPMorgan issue is backed by debt on 55 retail properties across the U.S. owned by Oak Brook, Illinois-based Inland Western Retail Real Estate Trust, the person said. The market opened Nov. 16 as Developers Diversified Realty Corp. sold similar bonds, the first offering of commercial mortgage-backed debt since June 2008.
"Clearly there is a demand for well underwritten assets,"
said Scott Buchta, head of investment strategy at Guggenheim Securities LLC in Chicago.
Today's sale is backed by a $625 million loan from JPMorgan to Inland Western. The loan allowed the company to pay off "virtually all" of its 2009 maturities and a "substantial portion" of 2010 debt, Inland Western Chief Executive Officer Steven Grimes said in a Dec. 1 statement.
Outside of TALF
Developers Diversified, based in Beachwood, Ohio, sold its bonds through the Federal Reserve's Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility, or TALF. Both today's sale and a $460 million Bank of America Corp. issue on Dec. 4 were sold outside of TALF.
There may still be some commercial mortgage-backed bonds sold through TALF, though many companies will likely decide against going through the program in part to be able to borrow more against properties, according to Lisa Pendergast, a strategist at Jefferies & Co. in Stamford, Connecticut.
"The additional leverage required to get some deals done means that many deals won't fit in TALF," Pendergast said in an e-mail. "Given the relatively tight levels on non-TALF deals, issuers will opt to forgo the Fed."
The government has made reviving the commercial-mortgage bond market a priority as plunging property values and a pullback in lending threaten to derail an economic recovery. U.S.
commercial real estate prices are down 42.9 percent from the October 2007 peaks, Moody's data show.
Sales of commercial mortgage-backed debt slumped to $12.2 billion last year from a record $237 billion in 2007, choking off financing to borrowers with maturing debt, according to JPMorgan Chase.
For Related News and Information:
Stories about asset-backed securities: TNI US ABS <GO> For top bond news: TOP BON <GO>
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 10, 2009, 05:44:52 PM
Skup a zloupotrebljavan socijalni sistem, izdrzavanje celokupne Skotske i severne Engleske decenijama.
Pa ko onda gore vadi naftu?
UK je kalirala 70-ih, a 80-ih se stabilizovala. A i dalje je u buli.
Quote from: iDemo on December 10, 2009, 10:42:45 PM
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 10, 2009, 05:44:52 PM
Skup a zloupotrebljavan socijalni sistem, izdrzavanje celokupne Skotske i severne Engleske decenijama.
Pa ko onda gore vadi naftu?
Mislim da su net uvoznik nafte ponovo. Severno more je ispumpano, manje vise.
QuoteGordon Brown and Nicolas Sarkozy last night called a truce in their battle over how the City of London should be regulated and declared a joint offensive against excessive bonuses for bankers.
The Prime Minister and French President held a 30-minute tête-a-tête in the margins of a European Union summit in Brussels. A week ago, their meeting was billed as a showdown over inflammatory remarks by M Sarkozy, who declared that Britain was the "big loser" in the share-out of jobs on the European Commission and suggested that his French ally Michel Barnier would use his new post as Internal market commissioner to rein in the "excesses of Anglo-Saxon financial capitalism".
QuoteI love it when sinking ships strap themselves together.
QuoteBanking on US Support: EU Calls for Tax on Global Financial Transactions - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
The European Union is urging the International Monetary Fund to pursue a global tax on financial transactions, known as a Tobin tax. Speaking after a two-day summit of EU leaders in Brussels, Jose Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, said: "The conclusion ... is to propose a global financial transaction levy. It wouldn't be fair that some impose very heavy burdens and others don't. I think it makes sense that a sector that created such a problem for our economies, our taxpayers ... also makes a contribution to the overall economy."
The proposal comes at a time when the International Monetary Fund is trying to develop ways to limit risk in the financial sector. "The European Council emphasizes the importance of renewing the economic and social contract between financial institutions and the society they serve," the EU wrote in the summit's closing statement.
Ever since the financial crisis plunged the world into an economic downturn, the European Union has been keen to find a way to avoid a repeat. But it is unlikely that the Tobin tax, named after American economist James Tobin, will gain much traction. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown proposed such a tax at November's G-20 summit of developed and emerging nations, arguing that the proceeds could be used to fund future financial bailouts. But the proposal faced immediate opposition from both US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
QuoteBut they don't want to upset daddy so they won't do it.
QuoteData on French tax evaders 'was stolen' from HSBC in Switzerland | France 24
Part of a list of 3,000 alleged French tax evaders being used by the French authorities to put pressure on Switzerland was stolen from HSBC Private Bank by a former employee, a French newspaper has reported.
Le Parisien reported on Wednesday that an employee working in the IT department at the Geneva branch of HSBC Private Bank stole the information in 2008 before fleeing to France.
Mora da su male plate u IT-u xrofl
Quote* [new] Re: Economy - 12 December (none / 0)
House Passes Far-Reaching Bill Tightening Financial Rules NYT
WASHINGTON -- The House on Friday approved a Democratic plan to significantly tighten federal regulation of Wall Street and the financial sector, advancing a far-reaching Congressional response to the financial crisis still reverberating through the economy.
After three days of floor debate, the House voted 223 to 202 to approve the measure, which did not get a single Republican vote. It creates a new agency to oversee consumer lending, establishes new rules for transactions that contributed to the meltdown, and seeks to reduce the threat that one or two huge companies on the verge of collapse could bring down the economy.
"As we have seen over the past year, our financial system is broken and we can no longer afford to maintain the status quo," said Representative Ed Perlmutter, a Colorado Democrat and member of the Financial Services Committee, which spent months assembling the measure. The Senate has made less headway in drafting a companion bill.
The vote is the most significant legislative act to confront the financial crisis that exploded last year since the vast and costly bailout that was rammed through Congress at the peak of the emergency. It was an effort to address comprehensively what many of the bill's supporters have called the underlying causes of the collapse -- reckless risk-taking unrestrained by regulation.
The bill's principal provisions establish a process for dismantling large, failing financial institutions; set up a council to identify and regulate firms that are so big, interconnected or risky that they need heightened supervision to keep them from bringing down the whole financial system; create a new consumer financial-protection agency to squelch unfair and abusive practices; and for the first time, regulate over-the-counter derivatives markets. The bill also contains provisions on executive pay, investor protection, credit ratings, hedge funds and insurance.
QuoteWe've won round 1!
I have just received confirmation from a very credible Congressional source that the bill to audit the Federal Reserve is included in the House financial reform legislation which passed today. My source says:
The Fed audit provision which passed the Financial Services Committee a few weeks ago is part of the bill. This is a real milestone, as it means that the full House of Representatives has passed a bill that mandates a complete audit of the Fed.
The effort to audit the Fed - supported by 79% of the American people - is gaining traction.
QuoteCongressman Kucinich has announced that even after his proposed amendment to HR 4173 to tax TARP recipients was shot down, he "will be introducing legislation based on the amendment that [he] offered, that will pave the way for a more fair and just tax treatment of absurd bonuses in the financial industry."
It will be useful to see if the vote goes once again along party lines, in which case the banana republic nature of America will truly shine, as republicans and democrats finally confirm they have terminally flip-flopped on all issues pertaining to Wall Street, even as Main Street anger over banker compensation continues rising. If this proposal gets voted on, Democrats, who will likely once again vote it down, stand to reap the full fury of over 300 million Americans, who will realize that the Democratic party now holds banker remuneration and bonus concerns closer to its heart than those of small and medium-sized businesses (let along Joe Sixpack). And in that case, watch out come mid-term election time. Now if only Bernanke's reappointment can be stalled for another year, there just may be a little hope for capitalism yet.
Ovi Ameri sve komunjare :roll:
Кучинић/Кусинич је најближе комунизму у Конгресу.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 10, 2009, 05:53:00 PM
Otprilike. One liberalne vlade iz sedamdesetih su ih nacisto zasrale.
Лабуристичке, имају и они ЛДП (либералне демократе)...
Quote from: slawen on December 09, 2009, 02:38:22 PM
Мислиш, Јудаизам?
Slawene u judaizmu ne postoji koncept pakla.
Ти кажеш: "Kapitalizam bez bankrotstva je kao Hrishcanstvo bez pakla"
Ја кажем: "Мислиш, Јудаизам?"
То значи да је: хришћанство без пакла = јудаизам.
А можда је требало да прво спроведем анкету ко је схватио шта сам хотио касти.
Quote from: slawen on December 12, 2009, 07:59:14 PM
Ти кажеш: "Kapitalizam bez bankrotstva je kao Hrishcanstvo bez pakla"
Ја кажем: "Мислиш, Јудаизам?"
То значи да је: хришћанство без пакла = јудаизам.
А можда је требало да прво спроведем анкету ко је схватио шта сам хотио касти.
nisi se pravilno izrazio
Аха.
scientia utrinque par pares contrahentes facit
Јел' то оно једна глава, а два господара?
Пошто изнајмљивање твоје?
Tu, autem, filii Parezo.
досада
Al im je Obama zapretio ( mislim bankarima u USi ).
Udara im na savest :evil:
Kaze ne razumeju u kakvim je govnima USA. Kaze ljudi aman vi delite milione i dalje...
A njima vidim puca prsluk za USu? Evo Zagor od tolikog patriotizma reshio da svoj bonus da kao samodoprinos xfuck5 :mrgreen:
A predpostavljam da ce i Hate njegovim stopama xrofl
Ej bre nije shala preCednik vapije...
QuoteObama: I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of, you know, fat cat bankers on Wall Street. The only ones that are gonna be paying out these fat bonuses are the ones that have now paid back that TARP money and aren't using taxpayer loans.
Kroft: Do you think that's why they paid it back so quickly?
Obama: I think in some cases that was a motivation. Which I think tells me that the people on Wall Street still don't get it. They don't get it. They're still puzzled. "Why is it that people are mad at the banks?" Well, let's see. You guys are drawing down $10, $20 million bonuses after America went through the worst economic year that it's gone through in decades, and you guys caused the problem. And we've got ten percent unemployment. Why do you think people might be a little frustrated.
Kroft: Do you think that they've made some of these bonuses based in part on the generosity and policies of the United States government to help put the financial system back on its feet?
Obama: I think there is no doubt about it. And what's most frustrating me right now is you've got these same banks who benefitted from taxpayer assistance who are fighting tooth and nail with their lobbyists up on Capitol Hill fighting against financial regulatory reform.
Kroft: Why is it taking so long?
Obama: Well, everything appears to take long in Congress. We can talk about health care (LAUGHS) if you want. This is democracy in action.
QuoteGoldman Trades Shouldn't Get U.S. Aid, Volcker Says
Dec. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Goldman Sachs Group Inc., which took $10 billion in U.S. bailout funds last year, shouldn't get taxpayer support if the firm focuses on trading over banking, according to former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker.
The "safety net" provided by the U.S. government "should not be extended beyond the core commercial-banking business," Volcker, 82, said in an interview yesterday at Deutsche Bank AG's Berlin office, where he was attending a conference. "They can do trading and do anything they want, but then they shouldn't have access to the safety net."
Goldman Sachs, the most profitable investment bank in Wall Street history, has reaped more than 90 percent of its pretax earnings this year from trading and so-called principal investments, which include market bets on securities and stakes in companies. The other 10 percent came from advising clients on takeovers and capital-raising and from asset management, which includes managing hedge funds and buyout funds.
When the collapse of smaller rival Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. triggered a crisis of investor confidence last year, regulators allowed Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, another competitor, to convert into bank holding companies. That put the New York-based firms under the Fed's purview and gave them access to cheap funding.
The two firms received federal guarantees on new debt issues, as did commercial banks and some companies with financing businesses, such as General Electric Co.
QuoteAbu Dhabi gives Dubai $10 billion in surprise bailout
DUBAI (Reuters) - Abu Dhabi stepped in to help fellow United Arab Emirates member Dubai with a $10 billion injection, of which $4.1 billion was allocated to troubled state-owned conglomerate Dubai World to pay immediate obligations, Dubai said on Monday.
The move was the least expected of all options Dubai had on the table after requesting a standstill on $26 billion in Dubai World debt on November 25, alarming markets and shaking the image of the emirate as a regional business hub.
"The government of Abu Dhabi has agreed to fund $10 billion to the Dubai Financial Support Fund that will be used to satisfy a series of upcoming obligations on Dubai World," the chairman of the Dubai Supreme Fiscal Committee said in a statement.
"As a first action for the new fund, the government of Dubai has authorized $4.1 billion to be used to pay the sukuk obligations that are due today."
Lako je njima a ko ce da spasava USA kad uskoro dugovi stignu na naplatu :mrgreen:
QuoteCleaners 'worth more to society' than bankers - study
By Martin Shankleman, BBC News
Hospital cleaners are worth more to society than bankers, a study suggests. The research, carried out by think tank the New Economics Foundation, says hospital cleaners create £10 of value for every £1 they are paid.
It claims bankers are a drain on the country because of the damage they caused to the global economy. They reportedly destroy £7 of value for every £1 they earn. Meanwhile, senior advertising executives are said to "create stress".
The study says they are responsible for campaigns which create dissatisfaction and misery, and encourage over-consumption. And tax accountants damage the country by devising schemes to cut the amount of money available to the government, the research suggests.
Don't ask Hate xtwak . It's BBC :mrgreen:
Quote from: vbo man on December 12, 2009, 07:48:27 AM
QuoteCongressman Kucinich has announced that even after his proposed amendment to HR 4173 to tax TARP recipients was shot down, he "will be introducing legislation based on the amendment that [he] offered, that will pave the way for a more fair and just tax treatment of absurd bonuses in the financial industry."
It will be useful to see if the vote goes once again along party lines, in which case the banana republic nature of America will truly shine, as republicans and democrats finally confirm they have terminally flip-flopped on all issues pertaining to Wall Street, even as Main Street anger over banker compensation continues rising. If this proposal gets voted on, Democrats, who will likely once again vote it down, stand to reap the full fury of over 300 million Americans, who will realize that the Democratic party now holds banker remuneration and bonus concerns closer to its heart than those of small and medium-sized businesses (let along Joe Sixpack). And in that case, watch out come mid-term election time. Now if only Bernanke's reappointment can be stalled for another year, there just may be a little hope for capitalism yet.
Ovi Ameri sve komunjare :roll:
Kusinic je budala koja je bankrotirala Cleveland dok mu je bila gradonacelnik.
QuoteKusinic je budala koja je bankrotirala Cleveland dok mu je bila gradonacelnik.
Moze biti vi bolje znate tamo...samo vidim da i Obama vec gubi zivce oko tih bonusa :x
Trenutno je popularno i politicki isplativo biti Robin Hood - inace, pretpostavljam da su federalna i lokalne vlasti su presrecne sto ce imati kome da naplate nekakav income tax ove godine.
Citigroup to Repay $20 Billion of Government Bailout (Update2)
2009-12-14 13:07:37.48 GMT
(Adds Townsend's comment in the fourth paragraph.)
By Bradley Keoun
Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Citigroup Inc., recipient of the biggest U.S. bank bailout, struck a deal with regulators to repay $20 billion to taxpayers and escape government-imposed pay restrictions.
Citigroup, the only major U.S. lender still dependent on what the government calls "exceptional financial assistance,"
will raise the funds with a sale of $20.5 billion of equity and debt. The New York-based company also plans to substitute "substantial common stock" for cash compensation, the bank said in a statement today.
Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit has pressed for an exit from the Troubled Asset Relief Program out of concern that TARP pay constraints make Citigroup vulnerable to employee poaching by Wall Street rivals. Bank of America Corp. exited the program last week after paying back $45 billion of rescue funds.
"It's great news," Gary Townsend, chief executive officer of Hill-Townsend Capital LLC, an investment firm in Chevy Chase, Maryland, said in a Bloomberg Television interview. "It's important for Citi to exit these extraordinary agreements with the U.S. Treasury and the government as quickly as possible.
It's expensive perhaps, but I think it had to be done."
Stock Sale
The bank will sell $17 billion of common stock, with a so- called over-allotment option of $2.55 billion, and $3.5 billion of "tangible equity units." The U.S. Treasury will sell as much as $5 billion of common stock it holds, with plans to unload the rest of its stake during the next six to 12 months. An additional $1.7 billion of common stock equivalent will be issued next month to employees in lieu of cash they would have otherwise received as pay.
The TARP payments will result in a roughly $5.1 billion loss. Citigroup will also terminate its loss-sharing agreement with the government on $301 billion of its riskiest assets.
Canceling about $1.8 billion of trust preferred securities linked to the program will result in a $1.3 billion loss, the company said.
Citigroup fell to $3.86 in New York trading at 8:03 a.m., down from its $3.95 close on Dec. 11. The stock has tumbled 41 percent this year, valuing the lender at about $90 billion.
"We planned to exit TARP only when we were convinced that it was prudent to do so," Pandit said in the statement. "By any measure of financial strength, Citi is among the strongest banks in the industry."
Bank of America
In October, Pandit said he was "focused on repaying TARP as soon as possible" in cooperation with regulators. He pushed to accelerate the talks after Bank of America's plan was announced, people familiar with the matter said last week.
Citigroup, which took $45 billion of TARP funds last year, converted about $25 billion in September into common stock, equivalent to a 34 percent stake.
The government is winding down the bailout programs it arranged as financial markets convulsed late last year. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a Dec. 4 interview that most taxpayer money injected into banks through TARP will eventually be recovered.
JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, all based in New York, repaid bailout funds in June.
San Francisco-based Wells Fargo & Co., with $25 billion of TARP money, isn't subject to pay limits because it never needed a second helping of bailout funds.
Companies still dependent on the Treasury's exceptional assistance program include American International Group Inc. and General Motors Corp.
Quote from: zagor te nej on December 14, 2009, 02:29:01 PM
Citigroup to Repay $20 Billion of Government Bailout (Update2)
2009-12-14 13:07:37.48 GMT
(Adds Townsend's comment in the fourth paragraph.)
By Bradley Keoun
Dec. 14 (Bloomberg) -- Citigroup Inc., recipient of the biggest U.S. bank bailout, struck a deal with regulators to repay $20 billion to taxpayers and escape government-imposed pay restrictions.
Da, ovo je kljucno. A gdje su onih $306 milijardi in Novembra prsole godine?
Mater im lopovsku jebem.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/14/tullett-preborn-to-help-e_n_390873.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/14/tullett-preborn-to-help-e_n_390873.html)
Hehe.
CITI = dead man walking.
Nije "Tullett Preborn" nego Tullett Prebon.
За ВБО и остале...
xjap
Jos dodj sliku koja pokazuje assets...
Well, I'm probably in the 0.001% top savers then.
Odo' ja sad malo da mucim crnce, jebes ti ovo...