Great ticker. But I had to read it several times because I was distracted by those **** staring me in the face in that ad on the side. WTF?

Everyone, send this ticker link to all your friends, family, CONgressmen, and any mdia outlets you choose. This thing is finally gathering steam, and of course people like CNBC are going to try to smear KD all over the place but they can't do that much longer. This info is truth, plain and simple, and the masses are catching on.

Our time has arrived

Too bad the horse is out of the barn. These recommendations would have prevented most of the losses.

Better late than never, but as you know thats a giant double decker **** sandwich you're asking us to eat.

Quote:

when banked are seized

typo: s/b "banks"

Gen,

In light of this excellent ticker I must admit total confusion as to who the good guys and bad guys are in this ****ing contest: http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idU....

Perhaps they are all bad, someone should FIGURATIVELY shoot them all, and let God sort them out.

Pete

Banks routinely bid on their own foreclosures. I don't see a reason to stop that. As an old bank examiner from the SandL crisis years I've got an idea how to address the valuation. Require any REO that goes back on the books to be appraised by a FHA approved appraiser selected at random by the supervising regulatory agency. Then reflect the loss on the books. I don't have a problem with the bank protecting their position, I have a big problem with cooking the books.

The government is operating under different assumptions. If you buy into these assumptions, then the current regulatory approach almost makes sense. These assumptions are:

1. This economic adjustment will be brief if we do the right thing

2. The right thing is, ensure that major banks retain the appearance of strength and independence.

3. All regulatory action and inaction, legal or otherwise, is justifiable in pursuit of #2, because the rule of law is irrelevant when the future of the country is at stake.

Many of us on TF, including me, disagree violently with all of these assumptions. But they are ALMOST self-consistent.

What I would like to say to government folks who buy into these assumptions is this: by doing everything possible to protect and recapitalize the banks, you are rewarding the behavior that created the mess. How can you think it possible, when you reward that behavior, that it won't keep happening?

That's where even the government's alternative-reality point of view falls to the ground.

Quote:

3. All regulatory action and inaction, legal or otherwise, is justifiable in pursuit of #2, because the rule of law is irrelevant when the future of the country is at stake.

Since the Country is nothing more then a collection of individuals, then any individual who finds himself/herself in financial distress should stop paying any/all taxes, financial obligations, etc. until the situation is resolved.

If illegal actions are for the benefit of everyone, then let's get to it and see where it ends.

Yes, I know that you don't agree with what you posted. This is directed at the government crooks (aka Regulators)

Forcing the bankers to be honest seems like a wet dream becoming a nightmare.

Until someone works out the negative consequences and the corrective action plans that will prevent the "lawmakers" life turning into a nightmare, they will refuse to act.

Would you volunteer to move into "tent city and join the soup line"?
jal

They will not under any circumstances do any of Gen's suggestions. They will ride the runaway train right over the cliff and into the abyss. And they don't give two secretions of your choice who ends up harmed, homeless, or dead as a consequence.

Why?

In a word, greed. Greed makes people blind, deaf, and stupid. These people promulgating these crimes (and we are taking about criminal intents and acts here) are far more concerned about what's in it for them to give a **** about anyone or anything else. So, unless something really dramatic happens (major terrorist strike within the continental U.S., armed revolt/revolution/civil war, etc.) they'll ride the runaway train until they ge thrown off.

Well said Odd! The truth and nothing but the truth. Until something dramatic happens that upends the powers that be, things will remain the same. This reminds me of the story of Ike Eisenhower, who was a lowly Major with no future in the Army along with George Patton prior to WW2. When the future of the Republic was in doubt, that's when they ascended to power, cleaning out all of the idiots above them.

War tends to focus folks to do what's necessary for survival. Bankruptcy tends to do the same for businesses. Not allowing the banks or other business entities to fail "because they are too big" may have been a fatal mistake for this country's future.

Many criticize the Cash for Clunkers program. I consider it a step up from the Bush and Obama TARP programs because at least it incented someone to produce and consume a car, albeit paid by the taxpayer. That's a hell of a lot better than just ****ing money into the hands of greedy bank pig men.

Good Ticker Karl Thank you

If we survive to next election:

1. Vote out all incumbents especially those who were chairmen of any financial or related committee.(especially those who facilitated this fiasco and allowing the raping of America)

2. Vet any opponent of the incumbent. (see who is bankrolling his/her campaign, see who is endorsing that person, in view of current fiasco give the lesser known a chance or one who isn't well financed. We got to shake this thing up some way some how).

3. Start a petition for Pres Obama to get rid of Larry Summers and Tim Geitner
(yes I am doing what I am suggesting)

4. Take your money from the banks now (Seems these folks don't move unless the
citizens do something drastic

5. Oh yes insist on term limits for elected representatives and the voters get to vote on whether elected representatives get a raise.

C-Span is covering the Senate Banking Committee. Sen Bennett of Utah just finished a diatribe about how everyone just kept playing musical chairs because there was No Risk, since it was just passed along.

Sen Bennett is the typical disingenuous political idiot.

Everyone had risk and it called Criminal Fraud, but the Risk Is Not Realized if federal regulators do not Enforce The Law.

Too bad this ticker is not entered into the Senate Banking Committee record.

Quote:

Many criticize the Cash for Clunkers program. I consider it a step up from the Bush and Obama TARP programs because at least it incented someone to produce and consume a car, albeit paid by the taxpayer.

I respectfully disagree since it is little more than the pigmen trying to create artificial demand in the economy, moral hazard and or an attempt to create fiat demand. It is the first step towards a command and control economy in which the participants are robbed of their freedom of choice and in this particular case their good judgment. Why trade in a vehicle that has been paid for, clear title, for more debt? And additionally, the trend for nearly all products is planned obsolescence, designed to fail within a shorter period of time and further the fiat demand eCONomy.

Until we return to a product driven economy fueled by quality and free choice we linger in a centrally planned malaise. Unlike the MSM pump monkeys we are not all socialists now, some of us never will be and if the river flows against us we will find eddies in which to hide our productive contribution to society furthering the ultimate collapse.

KD- ;) Hopefully it makes it to those in power looking for guidance. They seem to be reading your words, lets see if they plagiarize it.


------------------

I am also against the clunker program. It will create a deeper recession in the car industry. They are "buying" customers from tomorrow for today. When tomorrow comes, there will not be any customers to sell a car to.

I note a more frequent mention of 'Enron' in Denninger's

tickers. Most J6P's understand Enron was a huge scam

that somehow escaped any regulatory intervention until it

was literally too late to do anything about it.

Consequently, it's pretty effective to get the message

across that at the root of this crisis isn't different

than what caused Enron's investors, its pensioners, to be

completely obliterated.

Regardless of Enron's impact to ensuring better

accountability and subsequently how business was to

conduct itself going forward and its effectiveness

restoring a supposed confidence in the system, we are back

to its model again.

But now the difference is we apparently have Enron II

albeit on a global-scale.


Denninger is saying that our leaders know they have an

Enron-like situation and they're apparently working to

cover it up because they cannot afford the devastation it

would cause to our economy much less the world's if the

truth is revealed.

There is no fall back here in their eyes other than to

keep the illusion going until things hopefully reverse.

You cannot first destroy the house in order to save it.

They are buying time with your future, your children's

future, because nothing's more important than ensuring

survival of the fittest.

And if things don't reverse it was moot anyway so they

will continue on with the illusion because they have no

acceptable viable choice given them.

This is the end-game logic and strategy of the current

people in charge, to ensure political survival and to

thus subsequently ensure their benefactors are protected

from devastation at all costs including if necessary

the sacrifice of the common man's welfare. It is one hell

of a tightrope indeed.

Yes the horrible truth is that it is 'us' against them as

it has always been, in that this essentially is a war

being waged against the non-elite as it were.

Lastly, we're witnessing a Hail Mary pass of economically

biblical proportions and even some have awakened to the

extreme doubt if the quarterback much less the receiver

can pull it off.

Many of the rest out there haven't a clue about what's

going on until just like an Enron and regardless of all

the appearances and illusions that things are chugging

along business as usual through the blurting of the MSM it

will all come collapsing down upon them if that pass is

incomplete.

They don't care as long as they come out of it intact and

we are there to clean it up at all costs for foremost

their benefit and their survival.

It's every man for himself. Unfortunately they work in

teams and we do not. As it ever was.

Those green shoots are camouflaging punji traps.

Im going with Gen's spray painted dead weeds. Someone has to go around with spray cans and that creates Green jobs. You know how desperately Obama wants to save or create 4 million jobs. ;) No better way to create green jobs like using green spray cans...just make sure they are CFC free.

Oddone - I agree with you - I think your observation, though sad, is spot-on.

They will take it over the edge into the abyss simply because admitting to the truth and changing behaviors to reflect the truth requires humility - which to them is an abomination, so-to-speak.

I had a small version of this current national mess happen to me personally - a vicious lie told to my parents about me by my sister that cost me my relationship with them as a daughter.

She had 20 years to come clean and never did. Sad to say my parents have died and I stood on their graves to tell them that they believed the wrong one.

Gen I think you will "like" this story....

http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Financial_coll....

Iceland bank gave loans from 45 million to 1.4 billion € to 210 shareholders 15 days before collapse.

I forwarded this blog, "Back To Basics," to a real estate developer friemd in Boston, for his opinion. He doesn't agree with Karl:

"As to #1, I disagree strongly. He's espousing the tactic banks used in the real estate crash of 1989. The banks & then the FDIC kept a short leash on all borrowers and then pulled the plug. The borrower knows the tenant mix, the entitlement process and the market. Instead banks foreclosed gave the loan i.e. the property, to a credit analyst, someone who can analyze loans and balance sheets, but utterly clueless about the expertise the borrower has, who is now gone. While the analysts were busily writing down values while simultaneously having their thumbs up their butts about important issues that could have salvaged value. The banks were overwhelmed with loan portfolios they truly did not know how to mange or could not because of the sheer volume, taking many of them down, spawning the final federal bailout at a cost to the US taxpayer ~$450 billion. In the 2000 downturn, the banks smartened up and realized the borrower provided real expertise and set out a timeline and plan with the borrower that brought the project back in a safe, reasoned and orderly manner. It's not "cooking the books"; it's developing a sound business plan to deal with a crisis in a non-draconian fashion. What is recommended in #1 is madness, and could well result in disaster.

Regarding #2, more often than not, the lender bidding-in makes good sense. Case in point, the Bayside Exposition Center. Corcoran Mullins goes bust, the bank bids in and takes title. Thereafter hires a firm with expertise to run the center while turnaround efforts work to a hopefully successful completion.

Again he's wrong on #3. To irrationally flood the market, merely makes a bad market worse. Care must be taken as to the time of year and to the number, size and quality of competing properties to be put on the market.

#4, wrong again. Of course subordinate loans can still have value, otherwise people wouldn't be interested in them. By way of example, Broadway Partners loses the Prudential Center in foreclosure. There are 8 tranches in the deal. One of the tranche holders, Normandy Partners, buys the asset, protecting their interest. The best buyer gets the asset, i.e. the outfit that most knows all the facts, warts and quirks of the property.

If, in #5, he is referring to single purpose entities, he whiffs again. He doesn't understand that there is no valid comparison between Enron and single purpose real estate entities. Enron's purpose was to deceive, not the case with single purpose entities. Everything is upfront as to the collateral, guarantees and equity. When people have done cross collateralization, it often creates a daisy chain of economic chaos. A single purpose entity format is good way to conduct the real estate business. If the deal doesn't make sense on its own with certain levels of guarantees and equity, then the loan shouldn't be made in the first place. Real estate deals must be evaluated for the most part as to their implicit strength.

The author should think hard about the truth of the illiquidity of real estate and not look on it as fungible as stocks, oil or securities."

Of course he doesn't agree; he's one of the folks that believes in the tooth fairy and that the cap rates used in CRE during the bubble are actually "reasonable."

Of course the condo in Naples with one couple living in it - the entire 30 story building - says otherwise.

Status,

I agree with your comment. I never said that the "Cash for Clunkers" program is good, but it is certainly a relative step up from just handing government money over to pigmen that broke the rules and sometimes the law for nothing substantial in return. At least the clunkers program generates some demand, albeit artificially and centrally controlled by government, and not the market. TARP returns nothing. The auto industry has been given a small bone with this clunkers program so no one can say the two administrations were really controlled and dominated by bankers, which is really what happened. All other industries were essentially left abandoned in order to save the large banks, which essentially will not contribute anything to the solution of this crisis.