Online:
Visits:
Stories:
Profile image
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

The Fed is a Cartel Operating against the public Interest 2nd in series

Monday, March 17, 2014 12:03
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Peter Palms
RINF Alternative News

The game called bailout is not a whimsical figment of the imagination, it is real. Here are some of the big games of the past and their final scores.

In 1970, Penn Central railroad became bankrupt. The banks that lent money to it had taken over its board of directors and put it further into the hole, all the while extending bigger loans to cover the losses. Directors concealed reality from stockholders and made additional loans so the company could pay dividends to keep up a false front. Directors and their banks unloaded their stock at unrealistically high prices. When the truth became public, stock holders were left holding the empty bag. The bailout, involved government subsidies to other banks to grant additional loans. When Congress was told that the collapse of Penn Central would be devastating to the public interest, it responded by granting $125 million in loan guarantees so banks would not be at risk. The railroad failed anyway, but the banks were covered. Penn Central was nationalized into AMTRAK and continues to operate at a loss.

In 1970, as Lockheed faced bankruptcy, Congress heard essentially the same story. Thousands would be unemployed, subcontractors would go out of business, and the public would suffer greatly. So Congress guaranteed $250 million in new loans, which put Lockheed 60% deeper into debt than before. Now that government was guaranteeing the loans, it made sure Lockheed became profitable by granting lucrative defense contracts at non competitive bids. The banks were paid back.

In 1978, Chrysler was on the verge of bankruptcy. Congress was told that the public would suffer if the company folded, and that it would be a blow to the American way if freedom-of-choice were reduced from three to two makes of automobiles. So Congress guaranteed up to $1.5 billion in new loans. The banks reduced part of their loans and exchanged another portion for preferred stock. The banks’ previously uncollectable debt was converted into a taxpayer-backed, interest-bearing asset.

In 1972, the Commonwealth Bank of Detroit, with $1.5 billion in assets, became insolvent. It had borrowed heavily from Chase Manhattan to invest in high-risk and potentially high-profit ventures. Now that it was in trouble, so was Chase. The bankers went to Washington and told the FDIC the public must be protected from the great financial hardship that would follow if the Commonwealth folded. So the FDIC pumped in a $60 million loan plus federal guarantees of repayment. Chase took a minor write down but converted most of its potential loss into taxpayer-backed assets.

In 1979, the First Pennsylvania Bank of Philadelphia became insolvent. With assets in excess of $9 billion, it was six-times the size of Commonwealth. It, too, had been an aggressive player in the ’70s. Now the bankers and the Federal Reserve told the FDIC that the public must be protected from the calamity of a bank failure of this size, that the national economy was at stake, perhaps even the entire world. So the FDIC gave a $325 million loan–interest-free for the first year, and at half the market rate thereafter. The Fed offered money to other banks at a subsidized rate for the purpose of re-lending to First Penn. With that enticement, they advanced $175 million in immediate loans plus a $1 billion line of credit.

In 1982, Chicago’s Continental Illinois became insolvent. It was the nation’s seventh largest bank with $42 billion in assets. The previous year, its profits had soared as a result of loans to high-risk business ventures and foreign governments. Although it had been the darling of market analysts, it quickly unraveled when its cash flow turned negative. Fed Chairman Volcker told the FDIC it would be unthinkable to allow the world economy to be ruined by a bank failure of this magnitude. So, the FDIC assumed $4.5 billion in bad loans and took 80% ownership of the bank in the form of stock. In effect, the bank was nationalized, but no one called it that.

Bailouts up to this point pale by comparison to the trillions of dollars pumped into banks, insurance companies, automobile manufacturers, and banks of other countries beginning in 2008. It started with what was called the sub-prime meltdown, caused by a calculated policy of the nation’s largest banks to entice low-income families into accepting mortgages in excess of what they could afford. The assumption was that the value of houses would rise forever, so people could pay off old loans by taking out larger new loans based on the increasing value of real estate. These doomed mortgages were packaged together, given fancy names, and sold to naive investors and investment funds. When the day of reckoning arrived, millions of mortgage holders lost their mythical equity (and their homes) while millions of investors lost their money.

The banks that created this bubble were on the brink of collapse but, carefully following the rules of the Game, they told Congress they were too big to fail, because, if they did, so would America itself. Congress dutifully approved virtually every request for taxpayer funding regardless of the amount. This legalized plunder was coordinated by two Secretaries of the Treasury, Henry Paulson and Timothy Geithner, who came from the banking fraternity and used their positions of public trust to protect and enrich the cartel.

All of the money was provided by the Federal Reserve acting as the “lender of last resort.” That was one of the purposes for which it had been designed. We must not forget that the phrase “lender of last resort” means that the money is created out of nothing resulting in the confiscation of wealth through inflation.

NATIONALIZATION BECOMES A REALITY

What the government funds, it controls; and what it controls, it owns. This point was made crystal clear when, on April 1, 2009, Treasury Secretary, Timothy Geithner (CFR), announced he was prepared to oust the CEO of any bank that received a bailout if he doesn’t run the bank correctly. Geithner was not planning to fire anyone. The purpose of his statement was to convince the public that the government was being conscientious and responsible with the handling of so much money, but the significance of his statement is that the Secretary of the Treasury now holds the power to oust bank CEOs without concern for the wishes of their boards of directors.

1.   “Federal Reserve NY reports paper profit,” BBC News (Net), July 30, 2010.

2.   “Grassley Slams GM, Administration Over Loans Repaid with Bailout Money,” Fox News (Net), Apr 22, 2010.

3.   “Ousting bailed-out U.S. bank CEOs: Timothy Geithner,” Reuters (Net), Apr. 1, 2009.

That represents the ultimate privilege of ownership. The new reality is that the financial industry and major chunks of the insurance and automobile industries now have been nationalized, which is a soft word for saying they are owned by the government.

In May, 2009, the government pumped another $7.5 billion into GMAC (the finance arm of GM), another $3.8 billion in December, and another $3.8 billion in January, 2010, for a total of $16.3 billion. This gave the government a controlling ownership of 56%.1   By early 2010, the government had given a total of $57.6 billion to General Motors, itself, and held controlling interest. It now runs the company as it wishes.

By February of 2009, AIG (broke again) was 80% owned by the government.2   In that same month, Alan Greenspan, former Chairman of the Federal Reserve, openly called for nationalization of all failing banks (which means most of them).

The new business model for America is clearly recognizable. Its dominant feature is the merger of government, real estate, and commerce into a single structure, tightly controlled at the top. It is the same model used in Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Communist China.

THE SYSTEM ALREADY IS GLOBAL

One of the most revealing episodes in this drama was played out in a federal hearing room on March, 3, 2009, when Fed Chairman Bernanke testified before the Senate Budget Committee. When Senator Bernie Sanders asked if he would provide the names of the financial institutions that received bailouts, Bernanke paused for a moment and then said, flatly, “No!” The excuse for this amazing refusal was that to reveal their names might cause the public to lose confidence in those banks and withdraw their deposits, which would cause further problems. There may have been a less praiseworthy motive for the secrecy. Rumors were flying that billions of dollars had been sent overseas to banks of other countries, and such information would not have set well with American citizens.

1.    “US bails out General Motors-related company GMAC with further $3.8bn,” by David Teather; Guardian (Net), Jan. 1, 2010.

2.    “AIG Seeks More US Funds As Firm Faces Record Loss,” by David Farber, CNBC (Net), Feb. 23, 2009.

3.    “Greenspan backs bank nationalization,” by K. Guha and E. Luce, Financial Times (Net), Feb. 18, 2009.

Were the rumors true? Subsequent events indicate that they were. Two months later, the IMF announced it was bailing out banks in Greece to the tune of $145 billion, 20% of which was provided by the U.S. Indeed, American citizens were giving $8 billion to Greek banks. 1

The following week, the Federal Reserve announced it would provide funding to bail out European banks without Congressional approval. The part about bypassing Congress was not news, because Congressional approval was never a serious obstacle. The newsworthy aspect was that the Fed now admitted it was operating as a money machine for the world, not just the United States. The new program is integrated with the central banks of Canada, England, the EU, Switzerland and Japan. Money for future bailouts of banks in other countries now can be created by the Federal Reserve at the expense of American citizens (without their knowledge or consent) and be moved to the central banks of those countries who will determine how to distribute it to their local commercial banks.2 That was big news, but mainstream media treated it as just a dry press release and said nothing about the certain pauperization of American taxpayers. The primary reason Bernanke said no to Senator Sanders is that a yes answer would have brought all of this to light.

http://peterPalms.com/credentials 
75 year history of Palms & Company 
http://www.intota.com/viewbio.asp?bioID=765681&perID=722170 



Source: http://rinf.com/alt-news/breaking-news/fed-cartel-operating-public-interest-2nd-series/

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.