The Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. would see their powers redefined, and in many ways expanded.

We are so very F'D, I C

"The bill includes a provision intended to curb Wall Street’s influence over the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Its president would be appointed by the president of the United States, not by a board that includes representatives of member banks."

Seeing as how Wall St., via their contributions and lobbyists, effectively appoints the POTUS, I'm not seeing a significant change here.

poic wrote:

hide the sausage

Poic! Fambly blog!

I'm feel like taking a on the that dodd is serving.

Something had to be done--and this is better than most of us expected. Because of that, it probably won't be passed.

Nemo wrote:

So where will Sen. Dodd be employed next year?

Hopefully shoveling shit on the 9th level in hell..but that's just me.

What are the one or two largest lobbying campaigns where the donors didn't get what they wanted?

tobacco settlement?

From the last thread:

"One can kilt themselves just falling."

Took my daughter to the ER after a bad fall, worried about concussion. Was told it is IMPOSSIBLE for a serious injury to occur just from falling down.

Full disclosure: I'm not a big supporter of our education

not_going_to_post wrote:

Was told it is IMPOSSIBLE for a serious injury to occur just from falling down.

True, if you have little brain, like the person who told you that.

Dodd=Rip Van Winkle

rb wrote:

I just did a search on 'Repo 105'. Nothing.

Google: Results 1 - 10 of about 1,770,000 for repo 105. (0.24 seconds)

Equator Oversees 125,000 Automated Short Sales in Four Months « HousingWire

Quick, stare right down to the end of your knows.
whatya got?.

some investor guy wrote:

Why? Short covering.

why would a short cover just before the largest purchaser of MBS is getting out of the market?

Here's a guess:

if it's a teaching gig, it sure as heck won't be anything on ethics.

I think the idea of a $50 billion fund is just hilarious.

Bond Girl wrote:

I think the idea of a $50 billion fund is just hilarious.

Yeah. It's only what? 1.67 Enron Units?

I mean, a $50 billion fund is kind of like getting Californians to chip in to buy a fire extinguisher for wildfire season. Lehman could make that kind of money up.

Dodd will negotiate (by removing ALL teeth in the plan) with the Repubs and Blue Dog Dems, and the final bill will fail because those same Repubs and BD Dems will vote against the bill they insisted be watered down.

same old, same old....

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

guess CA is running out of stim money.

Tease

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

Pink slips sent to thousands of Calif. teachers - San Jose Mercury News
guess CA is running out of stim money.

In prior years, this has often been a ruse Because of long lead times required for layoffs, large numbers of notices were sent which weren't really expected to be completed. This time, they may actually stick.

Lobbyist Ben Dover wrote:

Met Ben when he stopped in our pit at the races to visit with a friend of mine.

He's a hottie, let's face it.

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

Home Builders Can't Compete With Foreclosures

Home builders just need to buy/make some corp. divisions for home demolition and foreclosure auctions

Cradle to Grave Housing, LLC

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

in people willing to pull the trigger and buy a house

And by that they mean "people eligible for a loan."

Bond Girl wrote:

And by that they mean "people eligible for a loan."

=> =>

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

although one expert said that's no surprise.

"unexpectedly unexpected"?

Bond Girl is in the house! What's hapnin in muni world, BG?

SNAFU wrote:

What, exactly, does that mean?

Dodd claims that they will 'rent' space at the Fed, and that's ALL. Don't believe it. Repub. Ranking Member Sen. Corker insisted that Con. Prot. Agency not be independent and Dodd accomodated. If they are intended to be independent, why did Corker insist they be part of the Fed?

This agency is just a ponzi game's moving hands at work. If it is created it will be toothless, and quickly captured by the banksters with appointees from GS/JPM/BAC/WF, the Treasury politicos, and Heritage Foundation. Big argument will ensue to provide the rationale for not passing the bill.

Some reality...

In Oakland investors are making a gross profit of typically $120k buying FC's, fixing them up and reselling them within 2-3 months. Of course, they are very selective in the properties they are buying; those that with some sweat equity will be converted from wrecks to attractive and affordable for a few tens of thousands. The fact that the homes aren't FHA eligible makes for easier pickings for the investors.

In January, about 6% (13) of Oakland sales were by investors and all but one of them was at a substantial gain.

Bond Girl wrote:

Administratively attached is still attached.

Fogged. Divorce? Physics? Zen? The Meaning of Life? It's all getting to be too complicated...

Corporations are People with Rights (says the SCOTUS). Banksters are just going to ensure the Right to Life Without Oversight. No public funding of Corp. abortions will be allowed.

On the check I sent in for taxes, I wrote that it was for "Lloyd Blankfein's Aston Martin Fund."

Huge loophole excludes the Bureau from any authority (rulemaking, supervision or enforcement) over merchants, retailers and other sellers of nonfinancial services who just so happen to extend credit in connection with that sale.

Section 1027(a) (page 1079)

This loophole extends to real estate brokers and agents in Section 1027(b) and to mobile home and modular home merchants in Section 1027(c), the theory apparently being that they are already regulated. Hah.

I don't mind the exclusions for CPAs, attorneys, persons regulated by state insurance regulators, employee benefit and compensation plans, persons registered under state security laws (Section 1027 (e) through the 8th letter)

Then the catch-all exclusion for Persons Regulated by the SEC (Section 1027(i) - page 1092). You gotta love how the big banks come out as top dogs again.

Senator Rob Dawg's competing legislation, all four words:

"Derivatives are insurance products."

Funny, 1336 pages, and not a single mention of Fannie and Freddie.

They'll get to that. They promise. Like, next year or something.

Comrade Alexei Mikhailovich wrote:

But how can you get to full employment in this seriously automated world? Luddism?

Wait for the boomers to die. That solves a lot of problems. 40 years from now people will be dooming about labor shortages and creating real estate bubbles in Africa.

They probably could have avoided a lot of this if they considered these products securities. I see some of these products as being pretty useful, but since the only thing anyone has ever known is a complete free for all, that is really difficult to argue.

This stuff does not really matter in the end. We can't afford another crisis. The math is against us. They either see that, or they don't. Which means they either see that they are as *&%$ as everyone else, or they don't.

This is just to placate the mob. The Volker Rule..............NOW? Puhlease! How can these banks even get their equity to break-even w/out rampant speculation in the markets? They aren't making loans. Besides playing the spread.....how are these banks making money?

You want "reform"? Mark to Market, withdraw TARP, and kill these zombies!

Are you suggesting that blowing up small countries and collateral arbitrage are not perfectly legitimate business models for banks? Where did you go to school?

Terry wrote:

the CFPB is nominally under the Fed, but the president appoints its sole director and it has its own budget - the Fed has no control over the bureau - it is independent - Dodd is just making it look like it is under the Fed.

It's not entirely clear to me how independent the CFPB is from the Fed. Certainly the Fed has no direct jurisdiction over its activities, hence the autonomy provisions, but there are limitations on that autonomy, notably in the veto power of the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the members of whom are all the top regulators and likely to be sympathetic to the Fed Chairman who of course is also one of the members of the Council.

One could believe the CFPB will be independent so long as they don't tread on the banking system.

How funny. I'm actually familiar with Long Now...

Probably not for the better. "Testing social cohesion," as Moody's puts it, is not generally a peaceful process.

Rob Dawg wrote:

This proposal is 1300 pages because it is still all about the banks. Even the consumer components are about consumer relationships with the banks.

It's not all about the banks. There are plenty of good consumer protection concepts involved. It's just that the CFPB will not be allowed to do anything that adversely affects the banking system in the eyes of the top regulators. We already know the top regulators are quite pro-banks. It remains to be seen how the interplay will develop.

Census form arrived today.

I don't remember filling one of these out before...

Do they really need to know names of household members? And phone number? That's intrusive...

And to top it all off, now the world press is tracking our bunker buster bombs as they move to Diego Garcia.

Jesse's Café Américain

Beautiful.

homedad43 wrote:

now the world press is tracking our bunker buster bombs as they move to Diego Garcia.

I wouldn't be concerned about the tracking until the day someone can stop a B-2.

Outsider wrote:

Do they really need to know names of household members? And phone number? That's intrusive...

I think by law all you need to provide is the number of people in the household. You are required to answer this. Anything further is up to you. Of course, the government will tell you, or lead you to believe otherwise.

Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 of the Constitution.

Interesting suggestions, Scone. Many thanks.

From Elizabeth Warren, via Firedoglake:
“Since bringing our economy to the brink of collapse, Wall Street has spent more than a year and hundreds of millions of dollars in an all-out effort to block financial reform.

Um, is there any way to verify that Wall Street has spent hundreds of millions in a little more than a year to block reform? As I recall, they didn't even spend that much < strike>buying</ strike> supporting Barack Obama for the Presidency. That seems very cost ineffective to me. Surely thay could have done so for less, so as to make their bonus pool bigger....

The F-117 shot down over Kosovo was rumored to have been tracked from the Italian airport it took off from and reported by cell phone.

Not sure the amount of truth to that, but a heads up to anti aircraft might have helped if you can't track by radar.

I've spent enough time in the New Mexico desert and you can spot them at night fairly easily if you are watching very closely and carefully.

Bachmann, a Republican, said her family will only be indicating the number of people in the household, because "the Constitution doesn't require any information beyond that.

She might be subject to a maximum $100 fine!

ghostfaceinvestah wrote:

Bachmann, a Republican

That seems odd as Republicans have historically been averse to supporting privacy issues.

oh gads...just finished the Lehman report. It long and seems to be complete. Money quote:

The Examiner concludes that there is sufficient evidence to support a colorable

claim that: (1) certain of Lehman’s officers breached their fiduciary duties by exposing

Lehman to potential liability for filing materially misleading periodic reports and (2)

Ernst & Young, the firm’s outside auditor, was professionally negligent in allowing

those reports to go unchallenged. The Examiner concludes that colorable claims of

breach of fiduciary duty exist against Richard Fuld, Chris O’Meara, Erin Callan, and Ian

Lowitt, and that a colorable claim of professional malpractice exists against Ernst &

Young.2915

So I think that the system has enough checks and balances so more regs are not required so long as the Fed does and says it will stay completely clear of anything approaching a bailout. Also, lets ditch the Delware incorp. laws that shelter Directors and Officers - the banks will like this as less regulation means better buz. practices

I simply cant imagine the lawsuits that will flow from this report. And I say go for it.

scone thx for that I love eno!

Mr Slippery wrote:

Counting heads is in the constitution and is needed to apportion representatives accurately.

Counting heads is fine. These are not:

1. Whether the residence is owned or rented
   1. Telephone number (in case the Census Bureau has follow-up questions)
   2. Name
   3. Sex
   4. Age and date of birth
   5. Whether of Hispanic origin
   6. Race
2. Whether that person sometimes lives somewhere else

Blackhalo wrote:

They come out of the dividends/reinvestment bucket...

Well, that would make sense. Still, is there any actual support of the hundreds of millions spent in little more than a year claim? I mean, one of the reasons we're in this mess is because people couldn't seem to count properly, we should find out if those proposing fixes can count any better than those they would control.

It may seem intrusive, but the personal census records are sealed for more than 70 years. The last US Census to be released was the 1930 one -- trust me, the genealogists have a nirvana moment when this happens every ten years. Until then, you're just a data point for apportionment, federal grants, etc.

U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3 (in part):

The actual Enumeration shall be made within three years after the first meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent term of ten years, in such manner as they shall by law direct.

Congress has by law so directed:

US CODE: Title 13,221. Refusal or neglect to answer questions; false answers

However, one may not be asked about one's religious affiliations:

US CODE: Title 13,225. Applicability of penal provisions in certain cases

Of course we already knew Michele Bachmann doesn't understand lots of things.

Barley wrote:

I may be wrong but you have no legal obligation to answer those!

Correct.

alkaloids,

I was in Austin today. A medical device company (VC backed) laid off 25% of its workforce including a founder/VP or Engineering. Also, NetSpend was "laying off" in preparation for an IPO. Hmmm.

Mr Slippery wrote:

Counting heads is in the constitution and is needed to apportion representatives accurately. I am mailing mine back in the morning.

Why would "race" be needed to apportion representation for any reason other than gerrymandering?

"And to top it all off, now the world press is tracking our bunker buster bombs as they move to Diego Garcia."

How is this anything other than standard internet hysteria? The actual article was extremely light on details and heavy on "analysis". Diego Garcia could just be a hub for USNS supply ships. Those weapons could be headed anywhere, or nowhere. I can't see how this implies any large scale preparations in progress.

Not saying it is wrong, just not compelling.

threepaweddog wrote:

The last US Census to be released was the 1930 one -- trust me, the genealogists have a nirvana moment when this happens every ten years.

I'm in that boat. It is interesting to see how my ancestors' lived, and I am glad that they answered it. It is interesting to see who owned a TV or radio, what their occupations were, and other "simple" information that has been lost through oral history in my particular family lineage.
.
I just don't see the problem that people have with the Census. The government is already too big, too overreaching, and too cumbersome. I figured we should all want it to continue to grow exponentially to hurry up its collapse similar to having too many fronts in a war.

yagij wrote:

I figured we should all want it to continue to grow exponentially

be patient; mexico is moving in soon.

"Why would "race" be needed to apportion representation for any reason other than gerrymandering?"

I have assumed this to be an obvious motivation behind the census. Politicians spending public money to get to know the playing field. Maybe I'm just losing my faith in government's altruism.

JP wrote:

Anyone see Up in the Air?

A powerful and compelling movie. It, "UP" and "Inglorious Basterds" were my favorites last year.

JP, put another way, a solution looking for a problem to solve.

I know that biz plan, I've seen it many times.

One VC I knew had an acronym for a class of companies: ACOPs = a couple of professors. Usual issue is that it lacks somebody with dirt under the fingernails and many scars from solving ops problems.

The movie spoke volumes to a previous life of mine (and probably to a bunch of folks, judging by the response.) That was then.

I know the area reasonably well. Lived in Austin for about 12 years ending 6 years ago. Had a client up in that area -- a little boot-strapped software start-up that eventuallly got sold to a British public company. Founder and employees did okay.

4thstreet wrote:

Within about half a minute, he figures, he would be going 690 miles per hour and become the first skydiver to break the speed of sound.

Why would he end up going so fast? Thin atmosphere at that altitude?

I thought that falling objects hit a certain speed and then stopped accelerating.

Blackhalo wrote:

And then THEY can use the census data to locate those pockets of minorities they might have a beef with...

lol exactly.

Anyone see Up in the Air?

I thought it was a gem, one of the best Americana movies of all time. Deeply cynical with a smile. Very hard to do.

Bubblisimo Gerkinov wrote:

Why would he end up going so fast? Thin atmosphere at that altitude?
I thought that falling objects hit a certain speed and then stopped accelerating.

Yes. And yes. They stop accelerating when drag = force from gravity. Shape obviously helps, but the reason he would get supersonic is that there is very little wind resistance up there. The article discusses that there will maybe be problems as part of his body goes supersonic first (it's an odd shaped thing, the human body) and there could be a lot of turbulence/waves/etc across him. I think he'll suffer similar problems as the atmosphere thickens and he slows down again.

alkaloids, the question in those businesses is always what the founders/the startup owns versus what the university owns. Have to be very careful, particularly with UT. A few years back they were notoriously difficult to deal with.

alkaloids wrote:

One of my thesis advisors (chemistry)

Now I understand your handle.

is in the process of starting up a company with a few colleagues and most of the legwork being done by a graduating student from the lab (who is capable, mind you, but still someone just finishing up a chemistry phd). I'm not terribly optimistic.

Don't want to overstate my case either. My undergrad advisor + grad students started a very successful company. (They make Roomba.) But they are the exception, and they survived a long time on gov't grants before hitting on a good commercial success.

Hackman wrote:

alkaloids, the question in those businesses is always what the founders/the startup owns versus what the university owns. Have to be very careful, particularly with UT. A few years back they were notoriously difficult to deal with.

Yep, the IP is pretty tricky. This is not a UT project, and they have a strong history of support from the school, but it's still tricky. One of my other former colleagues is staring up an "institute" that is mostly just a grant-accepting body so that a researcher can get grants from, say, the NIH to do research in whatever facilities they'd like but keep all their IP. Good for some of the stuff I'm doing right now where the infrastructure needs are quite low, but less so for other fields where you need million-dollar instruments.

Mish has disappeared from the links?

Has he freaked out and stopped posting? Maybe the unionized space aliens got him?

some investor guy wrote:

Mish has disappeared from the links?

CR has dropped him due to the politicization of his blog.

Just FYI Diego Garcia is where B-2's and B-52's can operate from and the B-2 has apparently flown missions to Iraq from there.

Actually, not wrong. As I said, the "personal" census records will not be made public for more than 70 years. The statistical aggregates are made public for the purposes of apportionment, distribution of federal funds, etc.

From the article you linked:

The data, from the 2000 census, [provided to Homeland Security] had already been made public on the [Census] agency's Internet site and did not include any individual names or addresses, information the agency is prohibited from disclosing.

Congress' purpose in asking the "race" question on the census is to determine compliance with the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts. Whether Homeland Security uses public domain statistical data, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

The dumbass from the helium balloon might have a jet pack. If not, at 120 mph, he's got a 13 minute time out.

Dodd's bill is Ugly for startups
Dodd's attack on angel financing

Of course fossils like Dodd don't know that startups is what keeps the US ahead of rest of world.

Is the metaphor of a parasite really that far off? I mean seriously...

Of course, I've often referred to the big banks and corrupt lobbyists in similar (angry) terms. These are vile creatures who don't even attempt to hide the fact that they are there to engorge themselves off the productive labors of the private sector. The public unions are no different.

And I do try to be clear it isn't the public sector union workers that are the parasites, per se, it's the public union itself, and its management. Just like it's the Citi management that deserves to be thrown in prison, not given vast wealth taken from current and future generations of American taxpayers at gunpoint.