Skip to content

CAN YOU ANSWER,”TOO BIG TO FAIL”?

April 20, 2016

? To Big To Fail ? Only IF you know what causes “systemic failure” and or “monetary collapse”?
Can you answer the question….’Why was the ‘failure’ of the Savings and Loans Sector, not a possible
‘systemic failure’ or causation for a ‘monetary collapse’. Or any “BOOM-BUST” ? Dot Coms ?
Perhaps, maybe: It was different- the banks did not abandon their fiduciary duty; they did protect the assets.
In these cases, no systemic risk or possible monetary failure; just bust (recession). The system worked: the Federal Bank turned the “FICTITIOUS” money into “GENUINE” money.
In 2007 and 2008, the Fed was forced to replace the money the banks received (read-stole) for “fraudulently guaranteed safe securities.(MBSs)”

READ…. https://justaluckyfool.wordpress.com/2016/01/21/so-where-is-the-multi-trillion-dollar-class-action-lawsuit/
Quote, Sheila Bair. Quote Ben Bernanke.

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/04/big-fail-eyes-specialist.html#more-10264

Too Big to Fail From the Eyes of a Specialist….

“…understand the statute or the concept of what the statute provides as to when the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) designates an institution as systemically dangerous. (In a telling euphemism, they are actually designated “systemically important.”)…”

We must ask, “What designates an institution as “monetarily systemic dangerous”?

“Let us begin with reality. MetLife reported that at yearend 2015 it had total assets of $878 billion. That means that it poses a massive risk to the global system should it fail. Maybe, if it had $500 billion less in reported assets it might be worthy of debate. It has over $200 billion more in reported assets that Lehman claimed when it failed – and Lehman triggered a global crisis.”
e statute or the concept of what the statute provides as to when the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC) designates an institution as systemically dangerous. (In a telling euphemism, they are actually designated “systemically important.”)
Too Big is not the problem, the quality of the assets becomes the question; $878 billion that is leveraged too many times should be considered a “possible systemic risk”. Any institution that has $878 billion in assets that has zero leverage has ONLY its self at risk.

“The probability of a global crisis is increased enormously if (a) we continue to create and make worse the criminogenic environments that produce the increasingly severe fraud epidemics that drive our financial crises and….

Separation of all Private For Profit Corporations from “special entitlements legislated for them from and by government”,
they must become accountable and transparent, subject to civil and criminal law.

(b) if we continue to allow systemically dangerous institutions to exist rather than shrinking them.”

“The issue is when the next systemically dangerous entity will fail – not “if.”

“One of the reasons we, the Bank Whistleblowers United, proposed getting rid of the systemically dangerous institutions through the use of banking regulators’ powers to set individual minimum capital requirements is that it allows vastly quicker remedial action than the cumbersome FSOC procedure that took over two years to designate MetLife as posing a systemic risk.”

” Even if we broke up every big bank, reinstated Glass-Steagall, and put the speculators who created the 2007-2008 crash in jail
I’m not certain we can save the nation from financial collapse.”
Yes, because breaking up the ‘size’ of the too big to fail doesn’t cure the disease.
The disease of “systemic failure” and “monetary collapse” can only be cured by:
‘Separation of Private For Profit Banks’ from being the recipients of special privileges and protections granted by the state, and by taking away their legislated privilege of being allowed to issue our currency and poisoning that issuance with a taxation called ‘interest’.
The sole right of issuance belongs to the people, the true owners of the ‘National Wealth’. The people have entrusted their Central Bank to be the sole guardian of this ‘National Wealth’
‘ Reverse an economic recovery program that has privileged the recovery of financial markets and corporate profits has fueled the increase in wealth inequality, in the United States and across the world.’”
Take back from the Private For Profit Banks (PFPB) what we have legislated as an entitlement, “The issuing of our own money and charging “We The People” interest on that issuance .”
Then we could allow them to fail as they no longer will be a ‘systemic risk’ or be able to cause
‘monetary failure.’ Then we must make them subject to civil and criminal laws.

“Capitalism is the best system to date devised by mankind. As it is administrated, perhaps, is where the ‘flaw’ is manifested. If capitalism used its Central Bank properly, with honesty, accountability and transparency for the betterment of the common good, with equality and justice for all, capitalism could be the one of the greatest achievements of mankind.”

Quote Mises (1998, 440): “Only free banking would have rendered the market economy secure against crises and depression. [And] [t]here is no reason whatever to abandon the principle of free enterprise in the field of banking.”
“Free banking means banks operate in an environment in which banks are subject to the general rules of commercial and civil law and are not the recipients of special privileges and protections granted by the state; placing “the banking business under the general rules of commercial and civil laws compelling every individual and firm to fulfill all obligations in full compliance with the terms of the contract.”

QUOTE: Soddy, “…indeed it is now a truism was that nothing useful can be done unless and until a scientific money system
takes the place of the one now always breaking down. The corollary, however, is never likely to be popular with our professional politicians…
It was that, if such a thing were done, little else in the way of arbitrary interference with and government control over the essential activities
of men in the pursuit of their livelihood would be required.
Indeed, just as now not one in a thousand understands why the existing money system has such power to hurt him,
so, if it were corrected as here outlined, not one in a thousand would need to know or, indeed, would know,
except by the consequences, either that it had been rectified or how it had been rectified…”
Since, in all monetary civilizations, it is money that alone can effect the exchange of wealth
and the continuous flow of goods and services throughout the nation, money has become the life-blood of the community,
and for each individual a veritable licence to live at all…
A very slight knowledge of our actual existing monetary system makes it abundantly clear that,
without democracy knowing or allowing it, and without the matter ever being before the electorate
even as a secondary or minor political issue, the power of uttering money has been taken out of
national hands and usurped as a perquisite by the moneylender. Practically every genuine
monetary reformer is unanimous that the only hope of safety and peace lies in the nation
instantly resuming its prerogative over the issue of all forms of money…”
Comments by Justaluckyfool ( http://bit.ly/MlQWNs )
( “You are always welcome to share, copy, plagiarize, improve, etc..any comments.)
Read and challenge: DESTROY, EDIT OR ENDORSE. “SODDYISM”
… every monetary system must at long last conform, if it is to fulfil its proper role
as the distributive mechanism of society. To allow it to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government.”
Frederick Soddy writings, namely “The Role Of Money”
(Entire book as a free download…) http://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp ;

UPDATE-NEW POST:
http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/04/bernies-economic-policies-fit-economic-theory.html#more-

http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/04/bernies-economic-policies-fit-economic-theory.html#more-10285
“Fifth, mainstream macro proponents like Athreya (p. 340) strongly support Bernie’s policy that it is essential to get rid of the systemically dangerous banks, which he aptly describes as holding America for “ransom.” …
“Athreya, a strong supporter of freshwater macro, agrees that creating effective institutions that restore the rule of law are vital to countering the negative externalities caused by elite fraud and global climate change.
A good deal of macroeconomic work on the crisis aims to clarify why privately optimal arrangements, particularly debt, can create ex-ante and ex-post inefficiency.
Bernies policy, “get rid of” would be a treatment of the symptoms since it lacks the … “creating effective institutions that restore the rule of law (which) are vital to countering the negative externalities caused…”
The cure would be an Honest Central Bank as the sole guardian of the sovereign currency and all institutions being held accountable to civil and criminal rule of law.

MMT scholars begin with assumptions that are empirical and based on how sovereign currencies actually function.I will leave the heavy lifting on MMT to my colleagues. …What Davidson asserts – “money.” He also thinks money must be “raised” (presumably through taxation), so he does not understand how sovereign money is created.
MMT…assumes incorrectly how sovereign currencies actually function as a SYSTEM OF DISTRIBUTION… and does not understand how sovereign money AS WEALTH is created;yet, does understand how sovereign money AS A REDEEMABLE RECEIPT is created.
It can never be repeated enough:Read and challenge: DESTROY, EDIT OR ENDORSE. “SODDYISM”

“Since, in all monetary civilizations, it is money that alone can effect the exchange of wealth
and the continuous flow of goods and services throughout the nation, money has become the life-blood of the community,
and for each individual a veritable licence to live at all…
A very slight knowledge of our actual existing monetary system makes it abundantly clear that,
without democracy knowing or allowing it, and without the matter ever being before the electorate
even as a secondary or minor political issue, the power of uttering money has been taken out of
national hands and usurped as a perquisite by the moneylender. Practically every genuine
monetary reformer is unanimous that the only hope of safety and peace lies in the nation
instantly resuming its prerogative over the issue of all forms of money…”
Read and challenge: DESTROY, EDIT OR ENDORSE. “SODDYISM”
“… every monetary system must at long last conform, if it is to fulfil its proper role
as the distributive mechanism of society. To allow it to become a source of revenue to private issuers is to create, first, a secret and illicit arm of the government and, last, a rival power strong enough ultimately to overthrow all other forms of government.”
Frederick Soddy writings, namely “The Role Of Money”
(Entire book as a free download…) http://archive.org/details/roleofmoney032861mbp ;

Advertisements
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: