High-frequency trading will turn out to be the biggest fraud ever.
It's a definitely a BIG DEAL, but it seems that any angle followed here claims that most markets and indexes are only partly based on LIBOR. It's not as if this is the lynch pin that would make the entire world collapse. And what's more, there is a natural limit on how much they could manipulate these rates even if the major lenders and borrowers are colluding. If the rate goes too low then markets (partly) using it have money flood in and the rates on the external market float up to balance it. It has to, and it probably wouldn't take long. Because if the rates remained too low and resulting demand stayed that high, the borrowing bubbles up to the major banks, who's debt is more expensive than LIBOR would suggest.
Still I expect there will be some new governance and compliance offices created out of this.
ironically it's homeowners and students that have lucked out because of this (although the media is spinning this as the banks fucking homeowners whose 5 year ARM's are coming due)
Hey jacksraw, I just watched an interesting debate which was basically about using violence against government in protests and such. It reminded me of our debate here. I thought you might be interested. I think Hedges got destroyed by the anarchist defending black bloc tactics. Either way it's good discourse in my opinion.
Around 41:15 is an excellent explanation of how the media, government and law enforcement define violence and spin it. One example being at a protest in Montreal some years ago the police were tossing tear gas canisters into the crowd and those dressed in black would protect the crowd by tossing them back towards police and the headlines would read protesters dressed in black attacked police with tear gas. The debate is about the use of violence in social movements. In my opinion Hedges gets destroyed early and never recovers. Hedges opinions seem to be based on fear IMO.
I think many in this thread might find this whole debate interesting.
Thanks. I may take a look if time allows.
I'll tell you this though, of course the media is capable of spinning, misconstruing or *gasp* misunderstanding the actual events, but hearing a story (from an anarchist) about how the only thing these people who happened to be dressed in black were doing was desperately defending the crowd is going to make me chuckle more than anything.
As in all things, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
The image of UC Davis police calmly coating seated protesters with pepper spray in November was shocking to the millions who saw it on videos gone viral - but it wasn't a criminal act, the Yolo County district attorney has concluded.
At issue was whether officers broke the law on Nov. 18 by using the chemical irritant on 21 students during a protest over rising tuition.
In a 12-page report issued this week, the district attorney's office describes UC police trying to remove a group of arrested students while surrounded by protesters chanting, "Set them free!" A smaller group then linked arms and sat down across the walkway, blocking the officers' exit route.
In the videos, Lt. John Pike of the campus police is seen slowly and deliberately spraying the students, pausing to shake the can before continuing. At least one other officer, Alexander Lee, is also seen spraying.
By linking arms, the seated protesters engaged in "active" rather than "passive" resistance, according to the district attorney's report, which relied not only on the officers' accounts but on University of California-commissioned studies of the incident, on experts in the use of force, and on UC policy.
Officers may use pepper spray when they encounter active resistance, the report says.
But whether the officers used the chemical in an unlawful manner - 11 students were treated for the effects of pepper spray and two were taken to the hospital - could not be proved "beyond a reasonable doubt," says the report.
"Lt. Pike's pepper spraying of the seated protesters has been seen by and has outraged millions of viewers throughout the world," the report says, but adds that the decision about whether to prosecute considered a broader context, including the officers' belief, discredited in hindsight, that they were surrounded by a hostile mob.
There were between 200 and 250 protesters, said Mike Cabral, assistant chief deputy of the district attorney's office.
Pike and Lee, who had been on paid leave, left their jobs in July. Pike's attorneys did not return calls for comment. But Pike told the Sacramento Bee that he was relieved that he would not be charged. After the incident, Pike had been deluged with harassing phone calls, e-mails and visits to his home.
UC officials declined to comment, as did several students who were pepper-sprayed.
The 21 are in the process of settling their civil lawsuit against UC, which the regents approved Sept. 13. The American Civil Liberties Union, representing the students, expects to file the settlement in federal court in Sacramento next week. The terms will then become public, said spokeswoman Rebecca Farmer.
This incident and the forceful use of batons on students by UC Berkeley police in November prompted UC officials to examine their response to protests across the 10-campus system. UC spent nearly $1 million on two studies, outside attorneys and insurance, said Steve Montiel, a UC spokesman.
The suit alleges that "the Hustle" was a nickname for the bank's "High-Speed Swim Lane," or HSSL program, designed to streamline the mortgage origination process. But the government alleges it was "intentionally designed to process loans at high speed and without quality checkpoints, and generated thousands of fraudulent and otherwise defective residential mortgage loans."
The government says the program was started by mortgage lender Countrywide Financial, but continued after it was purchased by Bank of America in 2008. It ran through 2009, according to the suit.
"For the sixth time in less than 18 months, this office has been compelled to sue a major U.S. bank for reckless mortgage practices in the lead-up to the financial crisis," said U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara in a statement. "The fraudulent conduct alleged in today's complaint was spectacularly brazen in scope."
"Countrywide and Bank of America...cast aside underwriters, eliminated quality controls, incentivized unqualified personnel to cut corners, and concealed the resulting defects," said Bharara. "These toxic products were then sold to the government-sponsored enterprises as good loans. This lawsuit should send another clear message that reckless lending practices will not be tolerated."
i dunno... "reckless" and "fraud" are two different things to me...
Should everyone have a mortgage? No... i get that. But does it excuse them from having to pay it?
read the article
According to the suit, Countrywide's own quality control reports showed a 40% defect rate in some months, which is about 10 times higher than industry standard. But instead of addressing the problems with the loans, it gave employees bonuses for making them look better than they actually were.
I have a Countrywide loan.
These companies took on high risk debt and then were able to sell it to people who were even dumber. Pretty easy strategy.
Protesting. The Surpeme Court says you can't do it on their steps.
The regulation bans activities on the court's grounds or building such as picketing, speech-making, marching, vigils or religious services "that involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which is reasonably likely to draw a crowd or onlookers."