KTFA:
Nanny1: Backdoc, Always appreciate your thoughts on the Big Picture. Today you brought up football and you seem to "get" that to. Feel like it is now my chance to get some questions answered:
How wide do you have to be to be a wide reciever?
Post route??
Now the real kicker! Often the play-by-play announcer will declare that someone has just "run around his own left end." Huh? I tried that once and it "HURT."
Appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks nanny1
BACKDOC: QUESTION #1 WIDE ENOUGH TO SLIP THROUGH THE TINIEST CRACK IN THE LINE! HEE HEE
QUESTION #2 WELL THE KICKER RARELY HAS TO RUN AROUND THE LEFT END BUT WHEN HE DOES IT USUALLY DOESN'T END WELL ESPECIALLY IF ITS A BROKEN PLAY! HEE HEE
FORTUNATELY THE COACH, "B.I.S.", CALLED IN THE PLAY THROUGH THE "IMF", THE "KEYWORD", (DR. S.), CALLED A PLANNED PLAY SO THE ODDS GO UP BIG TIME! BAAA HAAA
THIS PLAY COULD PUT A HURT ON THE GLOBAL POVERTY LEVEL IN HUGE TOUCHDOWN! DOC
....
Nanny1: Backdoc, Always appreciate your thoughts on the Big Picture. Today you brought up football and you seem to "get" that to. Feel like it is now my chance to get some questions answered:
How wide do you have to be to be a wide reciever?
Post route??
Now the real kicker! Often the play-by-play announcer will declare that someone has just "run around his own left end." Huh? I tried that once and it "HURT."
Appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks nanny1
BACKDOC: QUESTION #1 WIDE ENOUGH TO SLIP THROUGH THE TINIEST CRACK IN THE LINE! HEE HEE
QUESTION #2 WELL THE KICKER RARELY HAS TO RUN AROUND THE LEFT END BUT WHEN HE DOES IT USUALLY DOESN'T END WELL ESPECIALLY IF ITS A BROKEN PLAY! HEE HEE
FORTUNATELY THE COACH, "B.I.S.", CALLED IN THE PLAY THROUGH THE "IMF", THE "KEYWORD", (DR. S.), CALLED A PLANNED PLAY SO THE ODDS GO UP BIG TIME! BAAA HAAA
THIS PLAY COULD PUT A HURT ON THE GLOBAL POVERTY LEVEL IN HUGE TOUCHDOWN! DOC
....
Dinar Updates:
rcookie ...G7 MEETING IN JAPAN REVEALS 6.3 BILLION DOLLAR AID PACKAGE FOR IRAQ...TO DEAL WITH FINANCIAL CHALLENGES & STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMY THROUGH REFORMS IN COORDINATION WITH INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS INCLUDING THE IMF...
500 MILLION EUROS FROM GERMANY ALONE...IMPOSE STABILITY IN IRAQ AND SUPPORT PM ABADI EFFORTS...GLOBAL SUPPORT...
************
wmawhite Folks...this is GREAT!
"Official: Iraq seeks to open up banking cooperation at the Arab and international levels" this says it all! "general manager of the Rafidain Bank spokesman Kamal al-Hassani said: keep pace with the achievements reached by the developed world in the banking systems, he has been putting the finishing touches to complete the project activate MasterCard service, in coordination with the company's global card..."
We are at that point in time that we are looking when an Iraqi can use his/her credit card drawn on his/her bank in Iraq and buy that food at some store anywhere in the world.
*************************************
WingIt:
JustTom: HMMM.. I understand the redemption center employees have been notified of the possibility that their holiday weekend may be interrupted and that they will be compensated for the inconvenience cxonsiderably
BlackeyePea: Good Day everyone. Not much other than many are on standby..eager for this weekend…. JustTom is giving accurate info..that was the rumbling earlier this morning…. These people just seemingly find one more thing to do..but the things have run its course.
Blackeyepea: I was telling Gerry yesterday even when the goes, Obama won't get the economic credit. It will take years for this to be absorbed into the system… If anything, credit will be given for brining Iraq back on line economically after umpteen years
JustTom: I had no idea they had tied this thing to the Global Climate Agreement… Well at least I understand that agreement has been signed now let's hope that was the last stumbling block.
Blckeyepea: . We are just once again in a waiting period good folks!
************
LifeisArt: HOW TO LOVE.
1. LISTEN WITHOUT INTERRUPTING
2. SPEAK WITHOUT ACCUSING.
3. GIVE WITHOUT SPARING.
4. PRAY WITHOUT CEASING.
5. ANSWER WITHOUT ARGUING.
6. SHARE WITHOUT PRETENDING.
7. ENJOY WITHOUT COMPLAINT.
8. TRUST WITHOUT WAVERING.
9. FORGIVE WITHOUT PUNISHING.
10. PROMISE WITHOUT FORGETTING.
rcookie ...G7 MEETING IN JAPAN REVEALS 6.3 BILLION DOLLAR AID PACKAGE FOR IRAQ...TO DEAL WITH FINANCIAL CHALLENGES & STRENGTHEN THE ECONOMY THROUGH REFORMS IN COORDINATION WITH INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTIONS INCLUDING THE IMF...
500 MILLION EUROS FROM GERMANY ALONE...IMPOSE STABILITY IN IRAQ AND SUPPORT PM ABADI EFFORTS...GLOBAL SUPPORT...
************
wmawhite Folks...this is GREAT!
"Official: Iraq seeks to open up banking cooperation at the Arab and international levels" this says it all! "general manager of the Rafidain Bank spokesman Kamal al-Hassani said: keep pace with the achievements reached by the developed world in the banking systems, he has been putting the finishing touches to complete the project activate MasterCard service, in coordination with the company's global card..."
We are at that point in time that we are looking when an Iraqi can use his/her credit card drawn on his/her bank in Iraq and buy that food at some store anywhere in the world.
*************************************
WingIt:
JustTom: HMMM.. I understand the redemption center employees have been notified of the possibility that their holiday weekend may be interrupted and that they will be compensated for the inconvenience cxonsiderably
BlackeyePea: Good Day everyone. Not much other than many are on standby..eager for this weekend…. JustTom is giving accurate info..that was the rumbling earlier this morning…. These people just seemingly find one more thing to do..but the things have run its course.
Blackeyepea: I was telling Gerry yesterday even when the goes, Obama won't get the economic credit. It will take years for this to be absorbed into the system… If anything, credit will be given for brining Iraq back on line economically after umpteen years
JustTom: I had no idea they had tied this thing to the Global Climate Agreement… Well at least I understand that agreement has been signed now let's hope that was the last stumbling block.
Blckeyepea: . We are just once again in a waiting period good folks!
************
LifeisArt: HOW TO LOVE.
1. LISTEN WITHOUT INTERRUPTING
2. SPEAK WITHOUT ACCUSING.
3. GIVE WITHOUT SPARING.
4. PRAY WITHOUT CEASING.
5. ANSWER WITHOUT ARGUING.
6. SHARE WITHOUT PRETENDING.
7. ENJOY WITHOUT COMPLAINT.
8. TRUST WITHOUT WAVERING.
9. FORGIVE WITHOUT PUNISHING.
10. PROMISE WITHOUT FORGETTING.
Emailed to Recaps:
The Federal Reserve's $4.3 trillion ticking time bomb
Quantitative easing was a Faustian bargain.
The Federal Reserve has a big problem if it wants to raise rates again. It will have to pay U.S. and foreign banks enormous sums of money instead of U.S. taxpayers.
Not only would the Fed likely draw the ire of Congress, but it could also become a target of the next U.S. president—be it Clinton or Trump. That’s because the gangbuster profits of $90 billion (plus) per year that the Fed remits to the Treasury could easily dwindle to zero. According to several leading economists, it’s also possible that the Fed will become technically insolvent (though it always has the power to print its way out of such a disastrous state).
Quantitative easing was a Faustian bargain
The putative savior of the financial crisis, quantitative easing, was a Faustian bargain. The Fed got to inject trillions of dollars into the financial sector while simultaneously “sterilizing” the very same money. It did this by incentivizing banks to deposit their digital cash at the Fed, paying above-market interest rates.
Currently, the Fed pays 0.50% annually to banks to keep that money out of the economy. It might not seem like much, but the comparable rate paid by the U.S. Treasury for T-bills is 0.28%. In other words, the Fed pays banks nearly twice as much as the Treasury does.
But the Fed refuses to acknowledge this. Each year, the Fed Chair is required by law to testify twice in front of Congress. Both Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen have used the word, “comparable,” to assert disingenuously that the Fed is paying an amount of interest similar to what banks could earn in the marketplace. It’s possible to “compare” apples to oranges, but it doesn’t mean they’re similar.
Currently, the Fed is paying banks about $12 billion per year in interest. If the Fed raises rates two times (by 0.25% each time) and the level of reserves stays the same, that number doubles to $24 billion. If we are to believe San Francisco Fed President John Williams, who targets an eventual 3.0% for short-term rates, then that's $72 billion per year to the banks. This is a huge expenses for the Fed. Subtract from that the $90 billion (plus) per year in operating profits, and the amount of money the Fed pays to the Treasury gets pretty small.
The Fed is poised to take huge capital losses
But it gets worse. The Fed is taking capital losses on its $4.3 trillion bond portfolio, and those losses will eventually accelerate. When the bonds that the Fed holds mature, it realizes losses because it paid above-market prices for most of them to begin with.
The Fed is currently keeping its balance sheet the same size, purchasing new bonds when old ones mature. Should it decide to sell bonds, it would realize huge losses over a short space of time and would likely go into debt with the U.S. Treasury. According to Hall and Reis, it would take the Fed 6 to 10 years to work off the debt and get back in the green.
Bottom line: No matter how you slice it, the Fed payments to Uncle Sam will not only drop off a cliff someday, they could also go negative. That means, the taxpayers would be indirectly on the hook for Federal Reserve operating losses.
The crisis comes when Congress realizes the Fed is paying the government nothing (or next to nothing) while shelling out billions to the banks. Several members of Congress have already been critical of Fed payments to banks, but they’ve largely missed the mark. When the next budget crisis arises without the Fed paying it’s perceived “fair share,” all it would take is a few impassioned speeches to stir the masses and make monetary policy a de facto political animal.
The worst possible outcome would be for a fickle and indecisive Congress to assert its authority over monetary policy.
Unfortunately, by waiting seven years to raise rates—and into an economy growing at best modestly—the Fed has backed itself into a corner. The Fed has clearly chosen the banks over the best interests of the taxpayers, and this will eventually come back to bite Chair Yellen.
http://ift.tt/1Wpxzut
The Federal Reserve's $4.3 trillion ticking time bomb
Quantitative easing was a Faustian bargain.
The Federal Reserve has a big problem if it wants to raise rates again. It will have to pay U.S. and foreign banks enormous sums of money instead of U.S. taxpayers.
Not only would the Fed likely draw the ire of Congress, but it could also become a target of the next U.S. president—be it Clinton or Trump. That’s because the gangbuster profits of $90 billion (plus) per year that the Fed remits to the Treasury could easily dwindle to zero. According to several leading economists, it’s also possible that the Fed will become technically insolvent (though it always has the power to print its way out of such a disastrous state).
Quantitative easing was a Faustian bargain
The putative savior of the financial crisis, quantitative easing, was a Faustian bargain. The Fed got to inject trillions of dollars into the financial sector while simultaneously “sterilizing” the very same money. It did this by incentivizing banks to deposit their digital cash at the Fed, paying above-market interest rates.
Currently, the Fed pays 0.50% annually to banks to keep that money out of the economy. It might not seem like much, but the comparable rate paid by the U.S. Treasury for T-bills is 0.28%. In other words, the Fed pays banks nearly twice as much as the Treasury does.
But the Fed refuses to acknowledge this. Each year, the Fed Chair is required by law to testify twice in front of Congress. Both Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen have used the word, “comparable,” to assert disingenuously that the Fed is paying an amount of interest similar to what banks could earn in the marketplace. It’s possible to “compare” apples to oranges, but it doesn’t mean they’re similar.
Currently, the Fed is paying banks about $12 billion per year in interest. If the Fed raises rates two times (by 0.25% each time) and the level of reserves stays the same, that number doubles to $24 billion. If we are to believe San Francisco Fed President John Williams, who targets an eventual 3.0% for short-term rates, then that's $72 billion per year to the banks. This is a huge expenses for the Fed. Subtract from that the $90 billion (plus) per year in operating profits, and the amount of money the Fed pays to the Treasury gets pretty small.
The Fed is poised to take huge capital losses
But it gets worse. The Fed is taking capital losses on its $4.3 trillion bond portfolio, and those losses will eventually accelerate. When the bonds that the Fed holds mature, it realizes losses because it paid above-market prices for most of them to begin with.
The Fed is currently keeping its balance sheet the same size, purchasing new bonds when old ones mature. Should it decide to sell bonds, it would realize huge losses over a short space of time and would likely go into debt with the U.S. Treasury. According to Hall and Reis, it would take the Fed 6 to 10 years to work off the debt and get back in the green.
Bottom line: No matter how you slice it, the Fed payments to Uncle Sam will not only drop off a cliff someday, they could also go negative. That means, the taxpayers would be indirectly on the hook for Federal Reserve operating losses.
The crisis comes when Congress realizes the Fed is paying the government nothing (or next to nothing) while shelling out billions to the banks. Several members of Congress have already been critical of Fed payments to banks, but they’ve largely missed the mark. When the next budget crisis arises without the Fed paying it’s perceived “fair share,” all it would take is a few impassioned speeches to stir the masses and make monetary policy a de facto political animal.
The worst possible outcome would be for a fickle and indecisive Congress to assert its authority over monetary policy.
Unfortunately, by waiting seven years to raise rates—and into an economy growing at best modestly—the Fed has backed itself into a corner. The Fed has clearly chosen the banks over the best interests of the taxpayers, and this will eventually come back to bite Chair Yellen.
http://ift.tt/1Wpxzut
via Dinar Recaps - Our Blog http://ift.tt/1TLxyRa
No comments:
Post a Comment