President Obama to tax banks and bonuses obscene (Video)

This is a great speech, but the reality is that most of these banks repaid the loan, and have given the government and American people a big "F and U". They are not lending out money, they have increase huge fees to many Americans, they are just fucking outrageous. The bottom line is this, this government under the leadership of George W. Bush and Barack Obama just gave these banks money with NO STIPULATIONS. Just gave the money out up front with no conditions or stipulations. That is what happened, we all know this. Does anyone perform business out here and just give your money to someone/a business without stipulations? I am sure you do not, but the government does. And while Barack Obama is at it, get rid of Timothy Geithner, he is compromised, damaged goods and never should have been confirmed. Folks, until the laws are changed on the books and action is taken, having these speeches and giving outrage means nothing. If you want real change, CHANGE THE DAMN LAWS.



Home Page

The banks continue to make record profits on the taxpayer's back (Video)

Tim Geithner, a fan of I AM NOT, again continues to protect his Wall Street friends, but why shouldn't he? In this aspect, the Obama Administration is no different than any other administration that has sat in the Oval Office, for that is not change anyone can believe in. And progress? What progress? What happened to the transparency? That word is starting to be a joke. And the disparity of Wall Street to Main Street continues to erode. Folks, as the rich gets richer, the average joe/joesetta continues to be on the unemployment dole and unable to find a job. That is what 2010 forward will be all about. Many Americans don't follow the nitty gritty of politics, but they know EXACTLY what they had 5 years ago versus today, for that they understand they have gotten the bad end of the stick.

In Geithner, we trust...

Home Page

Banks continue to gouge its depositors

Well, I bank with Bank of America. I have had issues with this bank for not posting checks in a timely basis, which ended up in huge bank fees. I was able to get everything reversed and from that incident, I watch everything like a hawk with this bank.

But, Bank of America is not the only one who gouges its customers, most of these banks do. This brings me to why the American Public is very angry at bailing these banks out and definitely do not want ANY MORE TAX PAYERS DOLLARS going to the banking industry, period. This industry tied with Wall Street is the reason the housing market is HOSED.

So, like a cheap suit, when you need money you try to get it the best way you can, even if it means abusing your depositors.

A backlash is brewing on Capitol Hill against banks that charge large fees for overdrafts without asking or telling customers, the latest sign that the financial crisis is shifting the balance of power from banks toward borrowers.

Banks struggling to survive have become increasingly reliant on the fees, which could total $38.5 billion this year.

But congressional Democrats, who pushed through new restrictions on credit cards this spring, now are promising a crackdown on overdraft fees, using words like "criminal" and "rip-off" to describe the practice of letting people overspend and then charging them fees without warning. Most overdrafts are now incurred on debit card transactions. read more here....

Home Page

Obama announcing overhaul of financial regulatory system (Video)

Obama plan would cut number of US bank regulators

Home Page

As long as the job numbers are horrific, foreclosures will continue to rise

I am for the stimulus program, I see the Obama Administration signs around various construction jobs, but one thing that bothers me is the job numbers. The unemployment numbers are not coming down, the numbers are going up and I am not sold on the economy bottoming out.

Why is that? Well, I went out of town this holiday weekend. I left from one of the busiest airports in the world, Chicago's O'Hare International Airport. I am here to report that the travel was LIGHT. The plane I was on was half full leaving to my destination, though full on the flight back, but all in all, the airport traffic was one of the lightest I have seen in a very long time.

That says something. It says people don't have the money to travel, even though you can get good deals out there. It also says that if folks are not traveling, it has a roller ball, ripple effect on everything else.

Another indicator is the malls. The one big mall that I have frequented over the years have cut the hours down, drastically. My hairstylist, who works at this large mall, told me that it is hard to book all the stylists at Mario Triccoci, work there has been cut down. Shopping malls are another indicator of how strong the economy is. Case and point, I went to Best Buy to purchase Twilight on a Saturday and I have not been in Best Buy for quite a while, since I purchase most of my goods from the internet, going in that store was a reality check. It was a ghost town. This is an anchor store at a shopping mall, which at one point was crowded EVERY WEEKEND, was like a ghost town. Sure, folks are shopping on the internet, but when people don't have money for a basic lavish necessity as a DVD, times are hard. Yep, the shopping malls are ghost towns.

On the low-income east side of Charlotte, N.C., the 1.1-million-square-foot Eastland Mall recently lost a slew of key tenants, including a Dillard's and, next month, a Sears. Sales per square foot at the venue fell to $210 in 2008 from $288 in 2001.

The Metcalf South Shopping Center in Overland Park, Kan., is languishing after plans to redevelop it into an open-air shopping district fizzled. The stretch of shops that connects the two largest tenants -- a Sears and a Macy's -- stands mostly vacant, patrolled by security guards.

With their maze of walkways and fast-food courts, malls have long been an iconic, if sometimes unsightly, presence in the American retail landscape. A few were made famous by their sheer size, others for the range of shopping and social diversions they provided.

But the long recession is helping to empty out the promenades. Some analysts estimate that the number of so-called "dead malls" -- centers debilitated by anemic sales and high vacancy rates -- will swell to more than 100 by the end of this year.

For many when money is tight people move into the survivor mode of thinking, which means if I don't need it, I won't buy it. So, the smallest of luxury items, like a 13.99 DVD, is put in the I don't need list and if this mode of thinking is out there now, a lot of shopping malls are going through some tough times.

Enters that pesky job number or unemployment number, which is over 600K a month. Americans single most asset of value is their home, period. Americans have seen their home value plummet and the notion that it will pick back up is just a fallacy. It won't, not for a very long time. And since folks are getting the pink slips at record clip, this includes solid home owners, with solid credit, who are now behind on their mortgages.

As job losses rise, growing numbers of American homeowners with once solid credit are falling behind on their mortgages, amplifying a wave of foreclosures.

In the latest phase of the nation’s real estate disaster, the locus of trouble has shifted from subprime loans — those extended to home buyers with troubled credit — to the far more numerous prime loans issued to those with decent financial histories.

With many economists anticipating that the unemployment rate will rise into the double digits from its current 8.9 percent, foreclosures are expected to accelerate. That could exacerbate bank losses, adding pressure to the financial system and the broader economy.

“We’re about to have a big problem,” said Morris A. Davis, a real estate expert at the University of Wisconsin. “Foreclosures were bad last year? It’s going to get worse.”

Economists refer to the current surge of foreclosures as the third wave, distinct from the initial spike when speculators gave up property because of plunging real estate prices, and the secondary shock, when borrowers’ introductory interest rates expired and were reset higher.

“We’re right in the middle of this third wave, and it’s intensifying,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “That loss of jobs and loss of overtime hours and being forced from a full-time to part-time job is resulting in defaults. They’re coast to coast.”

To be honest, there is only so much at this point that government can do. The shame of this is that the Obama Administration inherited a huge financial anchor on its neck and no matter who was in the driver seat; the reality would be the same. The automotive industry is not helping the job numbers, expect unemployment numbers to escalate.

The reality is this in the end:

The issue here is that even the best credit rating in the world is little protection against the fact that if you’re laid off during a recession your income may drop a huge amount. Foreclosures, in turn, help make the economic situation worse and drive up the unemployment rate.

And that is a dilemma that the Obama Administration is in, they can not wave a magic wand and make it better. It will take time. And for some, time is not on their side.

Source

Home Page

Wall Street worries about the banks again? And?

I am sorry, but no pity party for banks here.

We can not save the innovation that put America on the map, the auto industry, but we can give more money to banks that put themselves in this predicament because of sheer greed? The same organizations that don't understand that bonuses in the millions to folks that put the economy where it is just is unacceptable, while American families are struggling partly because of their bad decision making?

Puh-leaze. No pity here.

Obama Administration trend very carefully here. If you want the auto industry to go bankrupt, you for damn sure better make sure some of these banks go down the drain, as well. If you don't, many middle class Americans won't get that picture, AT ALL.

Anxiety is growing again over the health of the nation's largest banks, and with Congress hesitant to commit more money, the Obama administration is exploring ways to strengthen them in the face of an unrelenting recession.

Results of the federal government's "stress tests" on big banks are due May 4, and Wall Street is increasingly worried they will show some banks are in worse shape than expected.

The renewed bank fears drove the stock market down on Monday in its worst showing in six weeks. Bank of America stock lost nearly a quarter of its value, and the Dow Jones industrial average fell almost 290 points.

Bank of America reported a first-quarter profit of $2.8 billion, joining other banks whose earnings reports have looked positive at first blush. But some analysts say accounting steps are concealing the depth of the financial industry's woes.

The banks have been helped by income from trading and cheap borrowing, but they are still struggling with bad debt, said Joe Saluzzi, co-head of equity trading at Themis Trading LLC.

Investors are "looking at bank numbers and are saying they are not that great," he said.

Source

Home Page

Obama Administration to reveal health of top banks

This administration should, especially since we have been dumping money in some of these banks like crazy and they STILL are doing what they want to do with our money with no repercussions in sight.

The administration has decided to reveal some sensitive details of the stress tests now being completed after concluding that keeping many of the findings secret could send investors fleeing from financial institutions rumored to be weakest.

While all of the banks are expected to pass the tests, some are expected to be graded more highly than others. Officials have deliberately left murky just how much they intend to reveal — or to encourage the banks to reveal — about how well they would weather difficult economic conditions over the next two years.

As a result, indicating which banks are most vulnerable still runs some risk of doing what officials hope to avoid.

The decision on handling the stress tests underscores the delicate balancing act by the government, which has spent hundreds of billions to stabilize banks. Despite some signs of improvement in the financial system, many economists remain concerned that banks are still weighed down with toxic assets stemming from the housing downturn.

Until now, the Treasury De-partment has simply said that it will reveal the amounts of any new infusions of capital into banks that regulators judge to be at risk if the economic downturn is prolonged or the economy takes a further dive.

The administration’s hand may have been forced in part by the investment firm Goldman Sachs, which successfully sold $5 billion in new stock on Tuesday and declared that it would use the proceeds and other private capital to repay the $10 billion it accepted from the government in October.

That money came from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, or TARP, and Goldman’s action was seen as a way of predisclosing to the markets the company’s confidence that it would pass its stress test with flying colors.

Goldman’s action has put pressure on other financial institutions to do the same or risk being judged in far worse shape by investors. The administration feared that details on healthier banks would inevitably leak out, leaving weaker banks exposed to speculation and damaging market rumors, possibly making any further bailouts more costly.

The Goldman move also puts pressure on the administration to decide what conditions will apply to institutions that return their bailout funds. It is unclear if Goldman, for example, will continue to be allowed to benefit from an indirect subsidy effectively worth billions of dollars from a federal government guarantee on its debt, a program the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation adopted last fall when the credit markets froze and it was virtually impossible for companies to raise cash. In ordinary times, regulators do not reveal the results of bank exams or disclose the names of troubled banks for fear of instigating bank runs or market stampedes out of a stock. But as top officials at the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Bank focused on the intensity with which the markets would look for signals about the nation’s biggest banks at the conclusion of the stress tests, the administration reconsidered its earlier decision to say little. read more here....

Home Page

Obama meeting with Bank CEO's on Friday

This should be interesting, since the White House has toned down its rhetoric towards the very folks that put us in the predicament we are in.

President Barack Obama plans to meet Friday with about a dozen of the U.S.'s top banking chiefs in an unusual gathering designed to discuss the administration's plans to shore up the financial sector. Attendees are expected to include Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), Morgan Stanley (MS), J. P. Morgan Chase & Co. and Citigroup Inc. (C). The meeting comes as relations between Washington and Wall Street are frayed following last week's furor over bonuses paid to American International Group Inc. (AIG) employees.

At the same time, the administration is relying heavily on private investors and Wall Street banks to implement its various rescue programs and needs to repair its relationship.

(This story and related background material will be available on The Wall Street Journal Web site, WSJ.com.)

Several bank chief executives have openly criticized the White House's handling of the financial crisis, especially its public announcement of "stress tests," designed to measure banks' financial health, that led to a sharp sell off in financial stocks.

Top bank executives often come to Washington but rarely meet privately en masse with top government officials. It is also unusual for the White House to hold such meetings, which are usually handled by the Treasury or Federal Reserve.

Last fall, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson summoned many of the same top bank executives to Washington and pressured them to allow the government to inject capital into their companies. The meeting Friday is expected to be much less contentious, representing instead an effort by Mr. Obama and his top aides to explain efforts he recently announced to stabilize the banking industry.

Many of the executives will arrive Thursday for a meeting of the Financial Services Roundtable, an industry trade group that represents the largest financial-services companies. The group plans to meet privately with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner Thursday night.

Separately, U.K. Prime Minister Gordon met Tuesday with executives from 13 global banks as part of preparations for the Group-of-20 summit in London April 2. A spokesman for the U.K. Treasury said "there was clear agreement about the importance of supporting the global economy, restoring lending by dealing head-on with troubled assets and rejecting protectionism."

Executives meeting with Mr. Brown came from banks including Banco Santander SA (STD), Barclays PLC (BCS), Deutsche Bank AG (DB), Goldman Sachs and Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc. (MTU).

Source

Home Page

It is roll time for Geithner

Today, even before the WHOLE PLAN is revealed, we finally get to see Treasury's Bank Rescue plan.

This plan is about all the toxic assets or bad mortgage paper on many of these banks books. Even though the government has already pumped billions into these banks, many are still in great financial strife and are not lending to consumers.

This is a double edge sword for me. I know, realistically that something has to be done to save the financial system in this country. I know if we don't and listen to hacks like morning joe or joke, do nothing that banks in the country will fall harder than we ever knew. On the other hand, I don't like giving these banks, the AIGs, and even the automotive industry a dime. These companies have board of directors, CEOs, CFOs, Executive Directors, all who are in charge of making decisions for their companies. Along with making decisions, they are also responsible for the direction of their companies, along with taking financial risk. Their risk, lack of forecast, and utter greed in the end took their companies down to come banging on the taxpayers door. I don't like it not one iota.

President Barack Obama is between a rock and a hard place. He is damned if he do, damned if he don't. That is the reality. Barack Obama was not elected to NOT DO anything, he was elected to DO SOMETHING. I am a Barack Obama supporter, but I call it like I see it with him. He is a politician first, no doubt about it. And let's talk about the mountainous of problems left from the last administration. First and foremost the economic mess. The Bush Administration turned a deaf ear and eye to the continuous job loss, the crumbling housing market, the instability of the markets, and the fright of the "R" word for recession. They left that. What is happening now, happened on Bush's watch and since last summer has escalated in this country. That is the reality. Bush could not get away from the kleeg lights fast enough.

Lastly, all this concerned trolling on these cable chatter shows is ridiculous. The stimulus package and the unveiled Geithner plan for banks have not even hit the ground running, yet, and you have these doomsday analysts declaring failure. I have not heard one word, looked at a plan, heard anything from the leaders of the Republican party except their continuous "more tax cuts" that will get us out of this financial mess. The other side has offered NOTHING, ZERO, NADA, on how to fix this. These same folks have zero credibility in any criticism here. These same folks gave Bush a blank check to spend this country into the demise we are at now. So, yes, they have a right to be critical but the criticism needs to come after a plan is implemented not before. And morning joke, well, you get what I mean. He continues to perpetrate gloom and doom, but will be the first to turn around and say, "Gee, maybe we did not understand or know what we are talking about." And he is getting, "How much a year to spout that great analysis?" You feel me?

On Monday morning at 8:45 a.m., the Treasury Department announces its long-delayed bank rescue plan, a three-pronged approach which involves, according to Reuters:

1) Low-interest loans to private investors to buy up banks' bad assets.

2) A public-private fund, run by fund managers, to invest in troubled mortgages, "with government capital matching private capital contributions"

3) The Federal Reserve will enlarge the $1 trillion TALF (Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility) to buy assets "weighing on bank balance sheets."

Collaboration with the private sector is a key element of the bank-rescue plan, according to the Wall Street Journal:

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said the only way to resolve the financial crisis is to work with the private sector to remove troubled assets clogging banks' balance sheets, even at a time when Wall Street moneymakers are being vilified by the public and politicians.

In an interview with The Wall Street Journal Sunday, Mr. Geithner said the government cannot do this alone. "Our judgment is that the best way to get through this is if we can work with the markets," he said. "We don't want the government to assume all the risk. We want the private sector to work with us."

Source

Home Page

Obama Administration attempting to perform sweepers

Cleaning up executive pay for these banks, Wall Stree, should not be required by the government, period. The government should not have any say, AT ALL, about what private institutions do, as long as these companies follow the law. But we are in different waters, at different times.

What AIG did with their carelessness of ramifications to the financial markets in this country is still unbelievable. I know many are just angry, including myself, at the bonuses, but should anyone be surprised? Overall, I am not. President Obama made the best explanation of what AIG did when he sat on the couch chatting with Jay Leno from the Tonight Show. It was a small division of the company, AIG, including some overseas, who gambled the bank and came up very short. In fact some on the board and higher up claimed that they were unaware of what was going on and happened, but believe that if you believe the moon is pink. Thus, it meant that an emergency influx of cash to keep AIG solvent was made in September, 2007, beginning the crap shoot of saving a company that destroyed itself because we were told, "They are too big to fail....."

Here comes the oversight of executive pay.

I feel like this, since Wall Street and these banks are getting taxpayers money than they should be the first to be overhauled. It is these institutions that have put this country where it is at. We must be honest here, what happens to Wall Street affects us down to the very job we have, lost or trying to find. If the financial market is not stable, job freezes will continue, credit will not open up, and what is happening now will continue.

The irresponsibility of these companies has hurt us all. I don't blame folks for being angry at these executives, but the Obama Administration needs to do more. Most of these people need to be fired, removed from their office, so this country can try to move forward, especially with the AIG debacle. The Administration has not handled this well, let's be honest, they have not. I appreciate President Obama and his steadfastness with his Treasury Secretary, Tim Geithner, but Geithner has shown that he does not have the communicative savvy or the gravitas, yet, for this job.

Geithner is a tossup here, for many. I find his excuse for not knowing about AIG bonuses rather laughable, because he was right there in the fire when all this went down about AIG. Next the lame excuse of AIG and their contracts is another rolleyes. Contracts in this country are broken every single day; ask the automotive industry that is what mediation and courts are for. Lastly, Geithner did not show the gravitas, strength to tell AIG where they can kiss it, in professional terms, of course. How can you tell them where to go, when you were in the kitchen helping to create the stew that gave them the bonuses?

There is a disconnect here. A total disconnect. Too many in this administration have been too close to Wall Street, thus we saw what happened with AIG or what did not happen to AIG. Did the President know all the details, intricacies? No, I do not believe Barack Obama read every single contract regarding AIG, that is what cabinet secretaries and staff are for, but congress did not read all the tall-tell signs about AIG, either. Most in congress have not even read many of these bills that are presented in conference the ones they vote on the floor about, that is what their staff is for. Congress stated that they did not know that the bonus element was removed, some did and has started to come out with the admission of Senator Chris Dodd's involvement. As for the others who knew, it will come out. And, the D.C. outrage is manufactured bullshit, really it is. The premise that they did not know, or understand, is not believable, only laughable.

President Obama has a hard job ahead, extremely hard. One thing I do think he is doing right, that is taking it to the American people, stepping over Washington, DC. D.C. must understand, though they are all about ME, is that the American public is not in the D.C. area. The American Public is the rest of this country. Many are angry about the AIG fiasco, while many do not blame Obama for it. We all must remember, in the end while President Obama is taking the responsibility, all this bullshit was left by the Bush-Cheney crowd. Bring up Bush-Cheney and many on the right will shut up right away. In the end, there is nothing to say about it, because it is true.

Officials said the proposal would seek a broad new role for the Federal Reserve to oversee large companies, including major hedge funds, whose problems could pose risks to the entire financial system.

It will propose that many kinds of derivatives and other exotic financial instruments that contributed to the crisis be traded on exchanges or through clearinghouses so they are more transparent and can be more tightly regulated. And to protect consumers, it will call for federal standards for mortgage lenders beyond what the Federal Reserve adopted last year, as well as more aggressive enforcement of the mortgage rules.

The administration has been considering increased oversight of executive pay for some time, but the issue was heightened in recent days as public fury over bonuses spilled into the regulatory effort.

The officials said that the administration was still debating the details of its plan, including how broadly it should be applied and how far it could go beyond simple reporting requirements. Depending on the outcome of the discussions, the administration could seek to put the changes into effect through regulations rather than through legislation.

One proposal could impose greater requirements on company boards to tie executive compensation more closely to corporate performance and to take other steps to ensure that compensation was aligned with the financial interest of the company.

The new rules will cover all financial institutions, including those not now covered by any pay rules because they are not receiving federal bailout money. Officials say the rules could also be applied more broadly to publicly traded companies, which already report about some executive pay practices to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Hard for any politician to not agree with what the Obama Administration is attempting above. In this bastion climate? When folks are thrown out of their homes, losing their jobs, small businesses cannot get credit? You think congress will not go along with this? They may try, but they better be very careful because the public outrage is hot and on fire.

And Chris Dodd? The banking chairman on the hill?

Well, he has his own problems starting back during the primaries. But, my beef with him has been his coziness with Countrywide and AIG. Too close for my comfort. Hard to regulate and vote against the problematic source that has given you millions for your campaign coffers and who knows what else. Dodd has a hard road next year to win. If he is that much of a liability and knowing Connecticut, maybe he should be primaried out. Dodd has been in that seat for a very long time, maybe it time for fresh eyes. Isn't this what the change campaign was all about?

Source

Home Page

Keith Olbermann, Special Comment on the Bankers, March 19, 2009 (Video)

Home Page

Banks mired in bad loans

Again, I don't see how all these banks will make it. I know the notion is to keep pumping the mantra, to big to fail, but the public is not feeling that right now. They don't care and the feeling is good riddance to greedy rubbish anyway. The AIG outrage is the tipping point for many people out here. Case and point, I call my niece a freshman in college, she is busy with her studies and only know what she needs to know about current events. My niece even knew about AIG and said, "Obama needs to get that money back from those bonuses." Her world is about keeping her scholarship, working and studying, so for her to comment that people in her dorm are talking about the AIG fiasco says something. It states folks are not in the weeds or clouds, they are paying attention to what is going on. So, here comes these banks, especially the big ones. Some will fall, it will happen. Time for hard choices for the Obama Administration.

Foreclosures and bad loans raced through the banking industry in 2008, with the more than 8,000 U.S. banks registering a 149 percent increase in troubled assets, according to a new analysis of bank financial reports to the federal government.

While a large majority of banks were still healthy, 163 ended the year with more troubled loans than capital, up from only 13 a year earlier, according to the analysis of data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. by msnbc.com and the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University in Washington, D.C.

Nationwide, seven out of every 10 banks had less capital to cover potential loan losses than a year earlier. The analysis relies on information reported quarterly to the FDIC, calculating each bank's troubled asset ratio, which compares troubled loans against the bank's ability to withstand losses.

Although attention has focused on the largest banks, which hold the lion's share of deposits, the analysis shows how widespread the problems in the banking industry became in 2008 as the mortgage meltdown and broader recession unfolded. Msnbc.com is publishing information on the nation's 400 largest banks as well as all banks with high ratios of troubled loans at year’s end. And the American University group has created a new Web site, BankTracker, to provide information on the financial health of every bank in the country.

Source

Home Page

Citigroup on its way up?

Well, the CEO says for the last two months the bank has operated in a profit. Really? Does this mean the government money helped them? Or is this on their own, for real.

Call me skeptical. I want them to operate in the black, on the up and up, but as long as Citigroup has to take money from us and until they start to repay the money, my verdict is out on Citibank. In other words, they have bad assets on the books and will continue to need propping up.

Embattled Citigroup Inc. surprised Wall Street Tuesday with news that the bank company has operated at a profit in the first two months of the year. But despite the upbeat news, Congress and the Fed continue to review strategies for dealing with a further deterioration of the troubled global banking giant.

Citigroup CEO Vikram Vikram Pandit said late Monday in a memo to employees and clients that during the first two months of this year the bank had its best performance since the third quarter of 2007, when the credit crisis first triggered a wave of losses in the industry.

Pandit's memo said the company had generated $19 billion in revenues in January and February "excluding externally disclosed marks." A Citi spokesman said the company arrived at the profit figure by subtracting $8.1 billion in expenses for the two-month period, along with taxes and any one-time gains or losses. The spokesman did not provide details on those items.

Source

Home Page

Let the banks fail? (Video)

There is a lot of sentiment out there for this, but the reality is that if let Citibank fail, the run on all the banks in this country would be catastrophic. Do I like these banks? Hell to the naw. I think their management and superior attitude is what got them here, but do we want the run on all banks in this country? Do we want long lines to get our money out? And if you have more than 250K in a bank, do you want to lose it? The reality is that this whole economic meltdown was coming. When Bear Stearns went down that was the "light bulb" on, but many in this country and the Bush Administration did not think anything of it. And these blow hard senators for "let the banks fail", where were they and their sentiments about what was really happening? Enjoying their Bush tax cuts, of course.

Home Page

60 Minutes, Your Bank Has Failed (Video)

While we are saving these big banks, we are allowing the little ones to falter. Folks, we are loosing banks WEEKLY, this is bad. Is your money safe?

Home Page