• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The AIG Memo

David Biedny

Paranormal Adept
Well, folks, we're in deep, deep trouble.

You might want to sit down before clicking here.

I read it, and I'll tell you, this rabbit hole has no bottom. It's knifes all the way down.

If you can prove it's all bunk, please, I'd love for this to not be happening. Shoot this down.

Please.


dB
 
I'm an angry enough fella at what is going on with our financial sytems, so I don't even know if I want to read it. *sigh*
 
our prime minister made some comments in the media that i think have some merit, that is to let the "sick" banks go under, not prop them up with injections of cash from the reserve (often undisclosed to all but the two partys concerned)

inter bank credit and lending has stopped because no one is sure which banks are sick and which are not.
so a bank with money is nervous about lending to another bank for fear that bank is just going to go belly up and never repay the loan.

by all means slap a govt guarantee on depositors funds, but bailing out the institutions themselves seems silly.

down here the govt has leglistated to ensure every worker has to play some of his/her salary on the stockmarket, its called superannuation, and every worker has a fund which the employer has to contribute to and the employee does too. this money is then played on the stock exchange, by the fund managers.

so every week your money goes into the fund, and they tell us that those funds lost 6 % last year 17 % this year, and next year will be a loss as well......

youd be better off putting the money under the matress

im of the mind that by the time all the "funny money" is cleaned out of the system, ppls superannuation funds will be gutted.

billions of dollars worth of "forced" savings ie super......gone

ultimatly the sooner we reckon the numbers, wipe the funny money out of the equation, count and revalue the assets left, the better.

bailing out sick banks behind closed doors only creates a situation where interbank lending stops because no one knows whos safe to do business with, culling the weak and sick from the herd so the healthy can prosper seems sensible
 
WTF...David this does not look good..this reads as if I was imagining the worst...I had said let AIG fail and the airline industry would get another insurer...let AIG fail and the consumers would find other means to secure there future well being...but reading this makes me feel like if AIG fails everything falls apart...I have heard that economists don't even know how interwoven AIG is gobally and if they unravel what that means...should I buy guns? or will amunition be more valuable
 
*shakes head*

If this is indeed real, then it pretty much explains what I thought AIG is in the first place. A money hole and a form of extortion.

I can say this, regardless if this is "real" or not, we have roughly $1.5 QUADRILLION (that's 1,500 trillion) of long-term debt in the various derivitives markets. How do you even begin to explain that, let alone take it into consideration on our financial markets and the effect on our daily lives?
 
I'll have an answer for you in a bit.

I called a couple people I know. For right now, I'd say it's a hit piece meant to be spread in order to create havoc in the market.

I've seen a lot of things going on that point to direct manipulation through bad data, or FALSE data.
 
AIG has according to the doco 1. 6 Trillion in derivatives exposure.................

what gives me the irrits, is that the finance ppl knew the derivatives scheme only worked if the model could be based on fire insurance models.

that is, if individual houses burn a few at a time, if every policy holders house burns down at the same time, the fund is done for.

but they knew when they insured "finance" itself that the world has seen that scenario in the great depression, and the various recessions of last century, it all goes all at once, and every policy holder calls in the policy.

they knew it was possible, and they took the risk, using the money to give fantastic returns on pension funds and investment trusts, and in doing so in posting such high returns naturaly captured even greater market share.

it was a really stupid risk to take, and now the money is gone. all i can say is that future investors will be looking carefully at a companys annual report/s before investing, and gauging the degree of that companys investature in things like derivatives and making informed choices on that basis.

will there be a derivatives market ten years from now, id say yes, but it will be used for what its supposed to, not seen as a cash cow for milking

companies up to their eyeballs in derivatives exposures, knew that with the easy money, came great risk. that being that every house burns down all at once, but they knew weve had depressions, and recessions, they knew that sometimes every house has burnt down all at once, knew it was an all or nothing gamble

that in the event of a major financial problem such as recession or depression the entire derivatives market would collapse
 
Title: Too big to fail? 5 biggest banks are 'dead men walking'
Source: Yahoo News
URL Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20090309/pl_mcclatchy/3184724
Published: Mar 9, 2009
Author: Greg Gordon and Kevin G. Hall,


WASHINGTON — America's five largest banks, which already have received $145 billion in taxpayer bailout dollars, still face potentially catastrophic losses from exotic investments if economic conditions substantially worsen, their latest financial reports show.
Citibank, Bank of America , HSBC Bank USA , Wells Fargo Bank and J.P. Morgan Chase reported that their "current" net loss risks from derivatives — insurance-like bets tied to a loan or other underlying asset — surged to $587 billion as of Dec. 31 . Buried in end-of-the-year regulatory reports that McClatchy has reviewed, the figures reflect a jump of 49 percent in just 90 days.
The disclosures underscore the challenges that the banks face as they struggle to navigate through a deepening recession in which all types of loan defaults are soaring.
The banks' potentially huge losses, which could be contained if the economy quickly recovers, also shed new light on the hurdles that President Barack Obama's economic team must overcome to save institutions it deems too big to fail.
While the potential loss totals include risks reported by Wachovia Bank , which Wells Fargo agreed to acquire in October, they don't reflect another Pandora's Box: the impact of Bank of America's Jan. 1 acquisition of tottering investment bank Merrill Lynch , a major derivatives dealer.
Federal regulators portray the potential loss figures as worst-case. However, the risks of these off-balance sheet investments, once thought minimal, have risen sharply as the U.S. has fallen into the steepest economic downturn since World War II, and the big banks' share prices have plummeted to unimaginable lows.
With 12.5 million Americans unemployed and consumer spending in a freefall, fears are rising that a spate of corporate bankruptcies could deliver a new, crippling blow to major banks. Because of the trading in derivatives, corporate bankruptcies could cause a chain reaction that deprives the banks of hundreds of billions of dollars in insurance they bought on risky debt or forces them to shell out huge sums to cover debt they guaranteed.
The biggest concerns are the banks' holdings of contracts known as credit-default swaps, which can provide insurance against defaults on loans such as subprime mortgages or guarantee actual payments for borrowers who walk away from their debts.
The banks' credit-default swap holdings, with face values in the trillions of dollars, are "a ticking time bomb, and how bad it gets is going to depend on how bad the economy gets," said Christopher Whalen , a managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a company that grades banks on their degree of loss risk from complex investments.
 
Wow David, this is really scary. Has anyone found out if it is a real memo or a hoax?
The thought of all of the senior citizens who are already in a struggle to make ends meat suddenly loosing their pentions, coupled with the thought of people who are working now and paying into these systems only to see their savings go up in smoke both frightens and angers me. (I'm a new poster and don't know what kind of language is ok yet:eek:)
And then thinking about simple things like people's ability to meet their basic needs going away every single day at an alarming rate... David I am an angry human!:mad: The worst thing about this is that if it is true, and everyone knows already how much trouble the economy is in, I don't see any government bailout helping in the long term. It is like putting a bandaid on someone's ruptured appendix. The whole thing is just nuts, and I wonder where we will be in 5 years. Hopefully not standing in a line waiting for a loaf of bread so I can feed my kids.
 
That news is legit and there is deep fear of this. Some action seems to be in the works to counter a potential recursive catastrophy beyond anything humankind has ever seen. :eek:

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200903051128DOWJONESDJONLINE000856_FORTUNE5.htm
UPDATE:Industry Groups Back Creation Of Systemic Risk Regulator

WASHINGTON</LOCATION> -(Dow Jones)- Several financial industry groups Thursday said they agreed the U.S. needs to create a new market stability regulator to patrol for widespread risks, but they warned that this new regulator's powers should not be narrowly defined to just overseeing institutions like <ORG>American International Group Inc.<ORGID value="NYSE:AIG" /></ORG> (AIG) that are deemed "too big to fail."

How the heck did a sensitive report like that leak out ?!?!

This is a planned leak to provoke... no question.
 
It is a rough draft of the talking points they are going to cite. It is legit according to a source I have. I have a friend who works in finance and he told me this was old news to them. To clarify who my source is, he's the guy who got us pre-approved for our mortgage, and there are more things going wrong than people can imagine. 17 percent of all FDIC loans are going into Default due to improper filing of forms, and of course, improperly vetted clients.

There's a LOT of things happening in this crisis, and it's not going to get any better until there is some accountability, and incarcerations for those who played fast and loose with the rules.
 
I wonder how long before some of the players behind the shenanigans that led to this situation start getting lynched by angry mobs. We are getting closer and closer to that point, I believe.
 
If the document is genuine, there's only one motive for AIG to create it: to beg for more money from the federal government.

It's natural that such a document would suggest that the economic health of the whole world depends on AIG getting more bailout money. And they may even be right; I'm not well-educated in economics enough to have a meaningful opinion. At this point, the world economy is so fubar that it's unlikely that anyone knows enough to really say what's going to happen, no matter how educated they are in the field. But if AIG's people were so smart, why are they in this situation?

Significantly, this doc was obviously designed to be read and understood by laypeople without a background in economics. Also, AIG hasn't taken legal steps to pull it, as far as I know. Nor have they (AFAIK) issued a statement denying that the doc came from them. All this strongly indicates that AIG wants this out there.

Hate crimes are in a special category because they hurt the whole community. If a cross burns on one lawn, it causes pain and discord for everyone who thinks they might now be targeted. I'm of the opinion that professional fearmongering should be viewed in a similar light. I'm with FDR on fear (one reason why I personally don't like the storable food ads on this site) and I wish President Obama would say something similar.

Too bad that so much of our current economy depends on stoking fear. Every time something happens, people go into a frenzy of buying and selling it. It makes it difficult to get down to the real issue. It's particularly ironic that we're also engaged in a war on "terror," when as a society we spend so much time manufacturing and consuming our own horror.
 

You know, I saw that today, and thought to myself, what's it going to take for people to riot, to take to the streets, to surround the White House and demand justice? A college professor of mine once told me, "no country is more than three meals away from a revolution". When people go hungry for a few days because they had to hand over their food money to the IRS, perhaps that will be the straw that broke the camel's back. I've been saying on Angry Human that this might be the most interesting tax season in many years, with lots of people facing the decision of feeding their families or handing every dime of cash over to the IRS. Put food in your kid's mouths, or take a loan so a banker can get a $200K bonus, especially when that banker's bank is actually worth a fraction of the cash they've been handed by the Feds, taxpayer money being flushed down the toilet, never to be seen again.

It's a bad nightmare, and it's far from over.

dB
 
Angry Human AIG Episode

Whoa, that's some pretty heavy stuff. Absolutly crazy,complicated stuff. I can see why this is not on Anderson 360 or Fox News. Also, this goes far beyond the whole Left vs. Right, Blue vs. Red, Jackass vs. Elephant paradigm—and probably the main reason more people aren't talking about this. People are just pointing their finger at a particular Republican or Democrat, they want to be able to pin it on a side. Seems like it goes waaay deeper than that.
 
Back
Top