Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
or in excess of

Max Keiser (13/8/13)

Recommended Posts

Max reckons because of all the shenanigans the banks have created for themselves, they will have no choice but to steal from depositors to pay compensation and fines. This is because the Government will refuse to bail them out, or print any more dosh. And he`s put a 2 year timescale on it. Just a tad worrying that the unthinkable is being seen as a possibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max reckons because of all the shenanigans the banks have created for themselves, they will have no choice but to steal from depositors to pay compensation and fines. This is because the Government will refuse to bail them out, or print any more dosh. And he`s put a 2 year timescale on it. Just a tad worrying that the unthinkable is being seen as a possibility.

Well that's what you get with Max. I know that they've chosen bail-ins as the future. The MSN won't be interested till the first bank fails. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max reckons because of all the shenanigans the banks have created for themselves, they will have no choice but to steal from depositors to pay compensation and fines. This is because the Government will refuse to bail them out, or print any more dosh. And he`s put a 2 year timescale on it. Just a tad worrying that the unthinkable is being seen as a possibility.

Actually, I think they ended up not taking any money from anyone who had under 100,000 Euros. Been looking around the web for an update on the final deal but had no luck finding anything! Maybe I'm mistaken but I'm sure I heard something along those lines on the news....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The power to seize deposits on an EU wide basis has already been put in place- without a democratic shot being fired- that's EU wide- not just Euro wide- so it includes the UK.

Three beaming eurocrats – Barroso, Van Rompuy and Lithuanian Dalia Grybauskaite – emerged triumphant from a session two days ago, in which they mapped out the biggest bank heist in world history. This is to put flesh on the eurozone law hastily passed on August 1st (while EU citizens were on holiday) to deal with the inevitability event of a bank collapse. Under this draft proposal – which many expect to be applied to the entire EU – no depositor big or small will in future be able to feel safe with money deposited in a bank. The Slog now calls for those who represent us, across the entire cultural spectrum of European society – to do something.

In a barely read piece a month ago, the International Business Times reported on the rapidly drafted new EU law for “overhauling its policy on how banks receive bumper bailouts”. Be aware: this is an EU move, not a eurozone move: it is already law (it passed on August 1st) and although for now it applies only to the eurozone, it is an EU law. Hardly anyone has commented on this, but the approach being taken matches word for word the 3-card trick George Osborne used six weeks ago when he said:

“In future, taxpayers will not be called upon to bail banks out. It will be down to the creditors and the owners”.

yesterday from the German site Deutsche Wirtschafts Nachrichten (German Economic News) came a piece reporting that all bets are off as far as the ‘guarantee of all funds under €100,000′ pledge is concerned. Under the current Lithuanian Presidency of Dalia Grybauskaite (seen left between a Trot and a poet), the proposal as drafted – and almost entirely ignored by the Western media – states as follows:

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/global-looting-the-new-eu-bailin-law-was-passed-8-days-ago-did-you-notice/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The power to seize deposits on an EU wide basis has already been put in place- without a democratic shot being fired- that's EU wide- not just Euro wide- so it includes the UK.

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/08/09/global-looting-the-new-eu-bailin-law-was-passed-8-days-ago-did-you-notice/

This looks like the fnal piece they need to sieze cash assets, and they plan to.

What is this EU law called, BTW? Link?

I posted this elsewhere in mid-March:

The taboo on breaking insurance guarantees on deposits up to the €100K has been broken, even if the final Cyprus deal does not do this.

Bondholders, for reasons I do not fully understand, may avoid a haircut , whilst depositors could be hit, apparently turning the pecking order for losses on it's head. This is apparently to do with legal problems with penalising bondholders, the Cypriot bonds being issued under English law, though I neither know nor understand the specifics.

Perhaps coincidentally, New Zealand, which has no depositor guarantee scheme, passed laws on Tuesday allowing levies on bank deposits. http://www.interest.co.nz/bonds/61824/reserve-bank-says-implementing-its-open-bank-resolution-policy-could-save-taxpayers-more

Spain this week amended it's Constitution to allow levies on bank deposits. Spain is also making vague proposals about making such levies, of around 0.1%.

ZH reports that JP Morgan believes that Europe-wide capital controls are inevitable (although I read the report as meaning Eurozone-wide). http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-22/jpmorgan-inevitability-europe-wide-capital-controls

Joerg Kraemer, chief economist of the German Commerzbank allegedly suggests that Italy could/should seize 15% of Italian deposits. https://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/depositor-levies-now-frankfurt-calls-for-italy-to-be-plundered/

The body that guarantees USA deposits, the FDIC, published a joint white paper with the Bank of England in December 2012 exploring a common approach to “Resolving Globally Active, Systemically Important, Financial Institutions”. This proposes appropriation of depositor guarantee scheme funds to prop up a failing bank, rather than (have to) compensate depositors after a failure. "Under such a scenario, deposit guarantee schemes may be required to contribute to the recapitalization of the firm" (Para 34)

Depositor guarantee schemes are morphing into schemes that will instead protect the banks and bondholders, increase the risk to depositors, and allow raids on depositor's funds.

Together with bank charges, zero interest rates and threats of negative interest rates, these moves will surely precipitate capital flight that will itself reduce the stability of the banks and make failure, and hence deposit confiscation, more likely.

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/publications/Documents/news/2012/nr156.pdf

See para 34

I am advising my daughter to use multiple bank accounts and buy some PHYSICAL gold as somethink low risk, but the USA has a history of confiscating gold [maybe it could happen in Europe too]

Just don't trust banks, that's all.

Edited by happy_renting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is this EU law called, BTW? Link?

This is the one:

EU finance ministers reach agreement on the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive – 27.06.2013

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/bank/crisis_management/

Here's a quote from the press release;

Discussions today focussed on the all-important details of how the costs of resolution are shared. From the start, I have insisted that the regime must convince markets and citizens that we are serious about ending public bailouts of banks. To the furthest extent possible, bank losses must be covered by private bank investors and the banking sector as a whole. As established in the run-up to today’s meeting, there is an inextricable link between how much capacity there is within a bank to allocate losses to shareholders and creditors, how much flexibility is given to exclude one or other creditor from having to bear losses, and how much money has to be available in resolution funds sourced from the banking sector to cover any shortfall. Fortunately, the outcome ensures an appropriate equilibrium between these variables and I am confident the solution found is credible.

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-601_en.htm?locale=en

Apparently this can all be put in place without the need to vote on any of it- using this;

The European Council Regulation (EC) No 381/2001 of 26 February 2001 created a rapid-reaction mechanism, to be used in those ‘exceptional’ circumstances where ‘the action is immediate and cannot be launched within a reasonable time-limit under the existing legal instruments‘. Basically, it’s an Emergency Powers Act by any other name.

http://hat4uk.wordpress.com/2013/08/12/global-looting-how-an-eu-regulation-can-become-a-law-without-mep-involvement/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think they ended up not taking any money from anyone who had under 100,000 Euros. Been looking around the web for an update on the final deal but had no luck finding anything! Maybe I'm mistaken but I'm sure I heard something along those lines on the news....

I take it you are talking about Cyprus. Those with balances of less than EUR 100K were excluded from the bail-in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I take it you are talking about Cyprus. Those with balances of less than EUR 100K were excluded from the bail-in.

Not in the original plan- only after it was pointed out to the brussels sprouts that breaching the 'deposit guarantee' might just frighten the horses.

The latest EU proposals reintroduce some ambiguity on the sanctity of guaranteed deposits going forward- suggesting some kind of haircut might be imposed if needed below the 100K cut off.

No doubt those involved would be offered equity in return for the money they fondly (and incorrectly) imagined was their own-so that's all right then. :lol:

It would be crazy to do this of course- but we are talking about the EU here-so anything is possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not in the original plan- only after it was pointed out to the brussels sprouts that breaching the 'deposit guarantee' might just frighten the horses.

It was actually the other way round - the Euro bankers stated to the Cypriot authorities something along the lines of, "WTF are thinking? are you out of your tiny little minds? We are sending someone over who actually knows what they are doing".

A team went over to organise a bail-in plan, that was then passed into law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was actually the other way round - the Euro bankers stated to the Cypriot authorities something along the lines of, "WTF are thinking? are you out of your tiny little minds? We are sending someone over who actually knows what they are doing".

A team went over to organise a bail-in plan, that was then passed into law.

Not quite- the original EU scheme went like this;

On 20 March 2013, the EU proposed a bailout package incorporating almost all of the above measures.

Most controversially, the package proposed that ordinary depositors pay a 'tax' or 'solidarity levy' on Cypriot bank deposits, amounting to a permanent write down in the nominal value of their deposits.

The deposit levy was 6.75% on deposits of less than €100,000 (the ceiling for European Union account insurance) and 9.9% for deposits above that amount. In return, the depositors would receive shares in the relevant banks.

But- to be fair- there was this nice fragment of sophistry introduced in an attempt to sell the idea of haircutting the guaranteed deposits;

The EU has indicated that deposit guarantees are only operative 'in the event of a bank failure'. In contrast, the tax or a deposit levy is 'a fiscal measure applied to all bank accounts' not to those in failing banks.
:lol:

At some point I guess the term 'bank run' was mentioned and the plan to 'levy' the insured deposits was dropped. The resulting confusion is what you are referring to above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Max reckons because of all the shenanigans the banks have created for themselves, they will have no choice but to steal from depositors to pay compensation and fines. This is because the Government will refuse to bail them out, or print any more dosh. And he`s put a 2 year timescale on it. Just a tad worrying that the unthinkable is being seen as a possibility.

and I think he's right.....there will be AN ATTEMPT.

...and it will be successful for about 6 months......and then they are all going to be hunted down and exterminated.

funnily enough, some of farage's rants in the EU parliament( mr barroso's in the bunker planning world domination etc), while having quite a humorous overtone, do carry a very blunt and very candid hidden meaning.....and actually 100% true.

Mr Barroso's cohorts have indeed been building bunkers(for the forthcoming manufactured act of war...in the case of the UK it's supposed to be blamed on radical islam and then the "cohorts" of barroso will be manipulating the domestic politics/media so we aren't supposed to notice the insideous enemy within),and have been planning world domination for quite some time.

...but we already know about them.....that's why we give them 6 months to live once they try.

...as for conquering our brothers across the pond......absolutely no chance.

when we get through this mess the THERE WILL BE NO PROSPECT OF SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE WHATSOEVER....THEY, ALONG WITH IRELAND AND ENGLAND WILL BE FULLY ANNEXED WITH THE US/CANADA, with each operating as a separate "state" within the union.(and perhaps some of the french..mainly brittany and the north will feel like clubbing together)...this will actually work as ireland and scotland won't be raising too many objections about being run by a country that has had the majority of it's leadership from scottish or irish roots for centuries.

to force the point there will be us/canadian garrisons posted in ireland,england and scotland.

...and we'll be getting our lovely royal blue passports back, plus the right to bear arms...and we absolutley WILL be armed to the teeth again.

NO MORE MR NICE GUY.

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and I think he's right.....there will be AN ATTEMPT.

...and it will be successful for about 6 months......and then they are all going to be hunted down and exterminated.

funnily enough, some of farage's rants in the EU parliament( mr barroso's in the bunker planning world domination etc), while having quite a humorous overtone, do carry a very blunt and very candid hidden meaning.....and actually 100% true.

Mr Barroso's cohorts have indeed been building bunkers(for the forthcoming manufactured act of war...in the case of the UK it's supposed to be blamed on radical islam and then the "cohorts" of barroso will be manipulating the domestic politics/media so we aren't supposed to notice the insideous enemy within),and have been planning world domination for quite some time.

...but we already know about them.....that's why we give them 6 months to live once they try.

...as for conquering our brothers across the pond......absolutely no chance.

when we get through this mess the THERE WILL BE NO PROSPECT OF SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE WHATSOEVER....THEY, ALONG WITH IRELAND AND ENGLAND WILL BE FULLY ANNEXED WITH THE US/CANADA, with each operating as a separate "state" within the union.(and perhaps some of the french..mainly brittany and the north will feel like clubbing together)...this will actually work as ireland and scotland won't be raising too many objections about being run by a country that has had the majority of it's leadership from scottish or irish roots for centuries.

to force the point there will be us/canadian garrisons posted in ireland,england and scotland.

...and we'll be getting our lovely royal blue passports back, plus the right to bear arms...and we absolutley WILL be armed to the teeth again.

NO MORE MR NICE GUY.

Off the meds I see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In case any of you missed the implications of what I posted above, the intended changes in the UK are to sequestrate the funds set aside in deposit guarantee schemes to be used to save a failing bank.

If the bank then still fails, there will probably be no funds left to guarantee the deposits of any size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not quite- the original EU scheme went like this;

But- to be fair- there was this nice fragment of sophistry introduced in an attempt to sell the idea of haircutting the guaranteed deposits;

:lol:

At some point I guess the term 'bank run' was mentioned and the plan to 'levy' the insured deposits was dropped. The resulting confusion is what you are referring to above.

It was an EU bail out but the Cypriots were told to come up with their contribution through a bail-in. The Cypriot government then devised the bizarre tax on all savers because it didn't want to scare bond holders or rich Russians who launder their money through Cyprus.

The EU absolutely hated this because it made bank runs on weaker banks more likely and so it breathed a sigh of relief when the Cypriot parliament rejected it.

After the Cypriots screwed it up the first time, some grown ups went over to put a basically model bail-in together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These 'Max Keiser' types are bit po faced IMO. I could name others but not going to, as the 'jury is still out' at the moment.

Currently Max and Steph are trying to climb aboard the anti-fracking bandwagon, by clambering aboard the 'Artist Taxi Drivers' bandwagon (all seems a bit desperate to me). Though raging about Big Oil in the back of his taxi has a certain irony.

However Steph then starts attacking cyclists in Lycra for being 'aggressive.' WTF are you supposed to do?

Another economist who claims is raging about rentierism, was also raging against Irish bank repo's. Hang on a minute, won't that allow the market to clear and reduce prices?

Very confusing. Be careful who you 'support.' Max and Steph are very entertaining, but thats it, its entertainment. Like current markets I suspect they are very 'fickle' and have their own bandwagons and agenda's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very confusing. Be careful who you 'support.' Max and Steph are very entertaining, but thats it, its entertainment. Like current markets I suspect they are very 'fickle' and have their own bandwagons and agenda's

oh there's lots of bandwagons with lots of agenda's for world domination,that's for sure.

as i've said before.:

bandwagon 1: radical islam........thinks it can achieve world domination by outbreeding everybody..currently being used as patsies and footsoldiers by bandwagon 2 and bandwagon 3...although should they realise this in it's entirity they will probably turn on both.

bandwagon 2: Rome..........using bandwagon1 to exterminate heretics(namely us and uk), and then hoping to draw them both into a war of mutual bankruptcy and annhialation leaving holy roman empire 2.0 with one emperor in charge of civic matters while the pope gets his old job back as temporal supremo.....currently using bandwagon 1 for demographic warfare and bandwagon 3 for political subversion of bandwagon 4...with some sleeper cells from bandwagon 2 embedded in bandwagon 4 to provoke hysterical response by attack from bandwagon 1, and to convert bandwagon 4 to bandwagon 2's ideaology(theoretically)

bandwagon 3 international communism.......seeking to forment a "jihad" between the whole of christendom and the whole of islam...and then mop up afterwards.....actively funding the fanatics on both sides of bandwagon 1 and bandwagon 2.....currently in a rather fragile alliance with both bandwagon 1 and bandwagon 2, but recognise that the extremists in bandwagon 1 will treat them as infidels also....so will only fund bandwagon 1 insofar as to weaken both anglosaxons and bandwagon 1,and ahieve sufficient weakening and depopuplation of US/UK bandwagon 1 and bandwagon 2 before making the final strike.

bandwagon 4..the anglosaxons currently the focus of attack by all of the above, but giving funding,and industry to factions of bandwagon 3,because they know that both bandwagon 2 and bandwagon 3 can't stand each other...and along with india will rid the world of bandwagon 2 who have been persecuting them for centuries once the military/industrial war machine achieves critical mass.( and are expecting a doublecross/trade embargo/diplomatic cut-off/sneak attack from bandwagon 2 once bandwagon 4 have been framed for unpopular measures to counter bandwagon 1....which agents of bandwagon 2 actually initaiated in the first place.).

do you catch my drift?

Edited by oracle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I cannot say I'm surprised at you needing to edit that post.

It looks like a labour of love but ultimately destined for the TLDR category :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After the Cypriots screwed it up the first time, some grown ups went over to put a basically model bail-in together.

I think many would disagree with that statement. Including the President of Cyprus. Besides the EU's decree to put the shovel in people's savings, there was precious little detail in implementation. From capital controls to dealing with the lawsuits are still being worked out on the hoof.

Some might argue that bringing the whole country's economy to a standstill - likely to a point beyond recovery - to save one bank is counter productive. I can imagine capital controls being in place for at least five years. For any confidence in the banking system to return . . . maybe a decade, as happened in Russia after the bank crash. Until then, all Cyprus banks are effectively redundant. It's not clear to me how any of them can continue to function without deposits. Obviously, people are very sparing about putting money in when you can't take it out.

Every kind of business here is stuffed. Real estate and big ticket items are dead. Large sums of money are frozen. Many little kiosks no longer have cigarettes . . importers will only take cash. Shops and stores are closing every day on my local main street and few take plastic anymore as cash takes precedence over bank accounts. People being paid late, or being asked to work for half-pay, or for cash-in-hand without social contributions, is now the norm.

Oh, and the 100,000 figure is meaningless. People with a lot less than that might not have had 47.5% stolen, but they've lost their livelilhoods, one hundred per cent.

Yet for the EU, this a 'model bail-in' and a success story. How no-one has yet put a bomb under Place Schuman I really don't know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many would disagree with that statement. Including the President of Cyprus. Besides the EU's decree to put the shovel in people's savings, there was precious little detail in implementation. From capital controls to dealing with the lawsuits are still being worked out on the hoof.

Some might argue that bringing the whole country's economy to a standstill - likely to a point beyond recovery - to save one bank is counter productive. I can imagine capital controls being in place for at least five years. For any confidence in the banking system to return . . . maybe a decade, as happened in Russia after the bank crash. Until then, all Cyprus banks are effectively redundant. It's not clear to me how any of them can continue to function without deposits. Obviously, people are very sparing about putting money in when you can't take it out.

Every kind of business here is stuffed. Real estate and big ticket items are dead. Large sums of money are frozen. Many little kiosks no longer have cigarettes . . importers will only take cash. Shops and stores are closing every day on my local main street and few take plastic anymore as cash takes precedence over bank accounts. People being paid late, or being asked to work for half-pay, or for cash-in-hand without social contributions, is now the norm.

Oh, and the 100,000 figure is meaningless. People with a lot less than that might not have had 47.5% stolen, but they've lost their livelilhoods, one hundred per cent.

Yet for the EU, this a 'model bail-in' and a success story. How no-one has yet put a bomb under Place Schuman I really don't know.

I agree that it was an awful thing to happen but bail outs are dead. If a bank is bust then there has to be a bail in. In Iceland the banks and the entire country went bust and yet it is now largely back on its feet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that it was an awful thing to happen but bail outs are dead. If a bank is bust then there has to be a bail in. In Iceland the banks and the entire country went bust and yet it is now largely back on its feet.

No, there doesn't have to be a bail-in. If a bank is bust, it's bust, end of story.

The bail-in, Cyprus style, is punishment of the innocent . . and theft pure and simple. The Central Bank, with the ECB, was charged with regulating Laiki. It singularly failed to do so.The ECB supplied Laiki with 9bn in liquidity assistance knowing Laiki to be insolvent. But with the bail-in, ordinary people with accounts in other banks lost their savings and the ECB lost nothing . . . it simply posted its Laiki debt against a bank that wasn't bust (Bank of Cyprus) . . . talk about high-handed.

The Eurozone banks should be exposed for the risk they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0OCcjz4lfU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, there doesn't have to be a bail-in. If a bank is bust, it's bust, end of story.

The bail-in, Cyprus style, is punishment of the innocent . . and theft pure and simple. The Central Bank, with the ECB, was charged with regulating Laiki. It singularly failed to do so.The ECB supplied Laiki with 9bn in liquidity assistance knowing Laiki to be insolvent. But with the bail-in, ordinary people with accounts in other banks lost their savings and the ECB lost nothing . . . it simply posted its Laiki debt against a bank that wasn't bust (Bank of Cyprus) . . . talk about high-handed.

The Eurozone banks should be exposed for the risk they are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0OCcjz4lfU

Allowing the bank to go bust is the worst option. Basically everyone would be effectively bailed in as creditors, but the bank would cease to be a going concern, destroying more value than a bail-in.

I thought that the Bank of Cyprus was also bust, but not as badly as Laiki. It clearly needed the money.

Edited by Ah-so

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   217 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.