I've spoken often about pension fraud and subprime mortgage fraud so won't do so this time, both involving trillions of dollars in Wall Street fraud so, with those and the LIBOR and interest rate swap frauds you can see the ten trillion in corporate fraud right there----and that is just the banking industry. As the articles from last time state-----our Federal, state, and local officials CAN BE DOING SOMETHING TO STOP AND RECOVER FRAUD----only as in Maryland they are silent and doing nothing but working for Wall Street.
Wall Street-Caused Financial Collapse Cost $12.8 Trillion
Since the Wall Street caused financial collapse was triggered more than four years ... $12.8 trillion. ... trillions of additional government dollars were spent, ...
Let's look at what is widely considered the FED's Wall Street fraud and this is what makes the FED 'crony and criminal' in the eyes of the world. It was deliberate action taken by Bernanke to bailout Wall Street from what was massive fraud -----nothing noble about that. As I state over and over, the FED's QE policy is a fraud in itself as the FED spends $4-5 trillion so far in buy-backs of toxic subprime mortgage loans from Wall Street banks under the guise of re-capitalization. As the article below states----any debt the FED incurs will become a debt for the taxpayer as it will be taken from the US Treasury. When the FED says it is making profits from their dealing that go to the Treasury making it sound as it they are paying back the debt they are creating ------THAT IS A LIE! The American people will have taken tens of trillions of debt from FED actions all to maximize Wall Street profit-----and it is the FED's mission to create a stable US economy and full employment.
GREENSPAN AND NOW BERNANKE HAVE DONE THE OPPOSITE AT TREMENDOUS HARM TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND WHAT SHOULD BE TERMED TERRORISM AND TREASON.
For those in Baltimore take a look at the bailout of AIG and Maiden Lane II and III----had AIG been allowed to go bankrupt as it should----HighStar, the spinoff of AIG that took all of AIG's assets just before the 2008 crash----would have been a loser as well as creditors would have come to it for their money. Who are the major shareholder's of HighStar----profiting from the massive subprime mortgage fraud illegally? Ivy League universities like Johns Hopkins. So, the article below has a tangled web of conspiracy to defraud the American people that comes home to Baltimore! The only way these Maiden Lane bailouts were paid off were via the FED's free money zero % interest fueling of mergers and acquisitions overseas bringing those profits and payoffs and the bundling of foreclosures of tens of millions of American homeowner's homes brought to foreclosure often from the crash and lack of recovery......both of which were the sum-total of the Wall Street BULL market from 2009 to today and that is why 95% of the market's profits went to the 1%!
WHEN YOUR POL STATES THAT STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COFFER'S ARE EMPTY AND THEY HAVE TO MAKE THESE DEALS----THEY ARE LYING!
Please look at the study referred to in this article----remember, this study only collects data that it can access-----it is widely believed that the FED spent more.
Bernanke's Obfuscation Continues: The Fed's $29 Trillion Bail-Out Of Wall Street
Posted: 12/14/2011 9:08 am EST Updated: 02/13/2012 5:12 am EST
Since the global financial crisis began in 2007, Chairman Bernanke has striven to save Wall Street's biggest banks while concealing his actions from Congress by a thick veil of secrecy. It literally took an act of Congress plus a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Bloomberg to get him to finally release much of the information surrounding the Fed's actions. Since that release, there have been several reports that tallied up the Fed's largess. Most recently, Bloomberg provided an in-depth analysis of Fed lending to the biggest banks, reporting a sum of $7.77 trillion. On December 8, Bernanke struck back with a highly misleading and factually incorrect memo countering Bloomberg's report. Bloomberg has largely vindicated its analysis.
Any fair-minded reader would conclude that Bernanke's memo to Senators Johnson and Shelby and Representatives Bachus and Frank is misleading. One could even conclude that it is not just a veil of secrecy, but rather a fog of deceit that the Fed is trying to throw over Congress.
He argues that the sum total of the Fed's lending was a mere $1.2 trillion, and that it was spread across financial and nonfinancial institutions of all sizes. Further, he asserts that the Fed never tried to hide the bail-outs from Congress. Both of these assertions fly in the face of the facts available (as the Bloomberg response makes clear).
As Bernanke notes, analyses of the bail-out variously put the total at $7.77 trillion (Bloomberg) to $16 trillion (GAO) or even $24 trillion. He argues that these reports make "egregious errors," in particular because they sum lending over-time. He also claims that these high figures likely include Fed facilities that were never utilized. Finally, he asserts that the Fed's bail-out bears no relation to government spending, such as that undertaken by Treasury.
All of these assertions are at best misleading. If he really believes the last claim, then he apparently does not understand the true risks to which he exposed the Treasury as the Fed made the commitments.
There are a number of issues that must be understood. First, the Fed quibbles about the differences among lending, guarantees, and spending. For the purposes of this blog I will accept these differences and call the sum across the three "commitments." In spite of what Bernanke claims, these do commit "Uncle Sam" since Fed losses will be absorbed by the Treasury. (The Fed pays profits to Treasury, so if its profits are hurt by losses, payments to Treasury are reduced. If the Fed should go insolvent, the Treasury will almost certainly be forced to recapitalize it.) I do, however, agree with the Chairman that a tally should not include facilities that were created but not utilized (there were several of them, and the tally I present below does not include any facilities that were not used, nor does it include "guarantees").
Second, there are (at least) three different ways to measure the Fed's bail-out. One way would be to find the day on which the maximum outstanding Fed commitments was reached. According to the Fed, that appears to have been about $1.5 trillion sometime in December 2008. I'm willing to take Bernanke at his word. Fair enough, if we want a good measure of the maximum Fed exposure to credit risk, that is probably as good as we will find.
Another way would be to take the total of commitments made over a short period of time -- say, a week or a month. That would be a measure of systemic distress and would help to identify the worst periods of the GFC (global financial crisis). Obviously, this will be a bigger number and will depend on the rate of turn-over of Fed loans. For example, many of the loans were very short-term but were renewed. Bernanke argues that it is misleading to add up across revolving loans. Let us say that a bank borrows $1 million over night each day for a week. The total would be $7 million for the week. In a period of particular distress, the peak weekly or monthly lending would spike as many institutions would be forced to continually borrow from the Fed. Bernanke argues we should look only at the lending at a peak instant of time. While that measures the Fed's risk, it does not tell us how much intervention was required.
And that leads to the final way to measure the Fed's commitments to propping up Wall Street: add up every single damned loan, guarantee and asset purchase the Fed made to benefit banks, banksters, real Housewives on Wall Street, fraudsters, and their cousins, aunts and uncles. This gives us the cumulative Fed commitments.
The final important consideration is to separate "normal" Fed actions from the "extraordinary" or "emergency" interventions undertaken because of the crisis. That is easier than it sounds. After the crisis began, the Fed created a large alphabet soup of special facilities designed to deal with the crisis. We can thus take each facility and calculate the three measures of the Fed's commitments for each, then sum up for all the special facilities.
And that is precisely what Nicola Matthews and James Felkerson have done. They are PhD students at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, working on a Ford Foundation grant under my direction, titled "A Research And Policy Dialogue Project On Improving Governance Of The Government Safety Net In Financial Crisis." To my knowledge it is the most complete and accurate accounting of the Fed's bail-out. Their results will be reported in a series of Working Papers at the Levy Economics Institute (www.levy.org). The first one is titled "$29,000,000,000: A Detailed Look at the Fed's Bail-out by Funding Facility and Recipient."
Here's the shocker. The Fed's bail-out was not $1.2 trillion, $7.77 trillion, $16 trillion, or even $24 trillion. It was $29 trillion. That is, of course, the cumulative total. But even the peak outstanding numbers are bigger than previously reported. I do not want to take any of their fire away -- interested readers must read the full account. However, I will use their study as the source for a brief summary of total Fed commitments.
Here I am only going to focus on the final measure of the size of the bail-out: the cumulative total. This is not directly comparable to the Fed's $1.2 trillion estimate, which is peak lending.
I will post more on the important research done as part of this Ford Foundation grant; in coming blogs I will also explain why all Americans should be horrified at the Fed's actions, and by Bernanke's continued attempt to cover-up what the Fed has done.
When all individual transactions are summed across all facilities created to deal with the crisis, the Fed committed a total of $29,616.4 billion dollars. This includes direct lending plus asset purchases. Three facilities -- CBLS, PDCF, and TAF -- overshadow all other facilities, and make up 71.1 percent ($22,826.8 billion) of all assistance. Totals (in billions) and percent of total, by facility are as follows. Any outstanding loans are in in parantheses.
Term Auction Facility: $3,818.41, 12.89%
Central Bank Liquidity Swaps:10,057.4 (1.96), 33.96%
Single Tranche Open Market Operation: 855, 2.89%
Terms Securities Lending Facility and Term Options Program: 2,005.7, 6.77%
Bear Stearns Bridge Loan: 12.9, 0.04%
Maiden Lane I: 28.82, (12.98) 0.10%
Primary Dealer Credit Facility: 8,950.99, 30.22%
Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility: 217.45, 0.73%
Commercial Paper Funding Facility: 737.07, 2.49%
Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility: 71.09, (.794) 0.24%
Agency Mortgage-Backed Security Purchase Program: 1,850.14, (849.26) 6.25%
AIG Revolving Credit Facility: 140.316, 0.47%
AIG Securities Borrowing Facility: 802.316, 2.71%
Maiden Lane II: 9.5 (9.33) 0.07%
Maiden Lane III: 24.3, (18.15) 0.08%
AIA/ ALICO: 25, 0.08%
Totals $29,616.4, 100.0%
Source: "$29,000,000,000,000: A Detailed Look at the Fed's Bail-out by Funding Facility and Recipient" by James Felkerson, forthcoming, Levy Economics Institute, based on data analysis conducted with Nicola Matthews for the Ford Foundation project "A Research And Policy Dialogue Project On Improving Governance Of The Government Safety Net In Financial Crisis".
It's hard to wrap your head around the amount of fraud the FED is connected to but the figures above are separate from the ones below------the QE fraud. Keep in mind Clinton Wall Street neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons as well as Wall Street thinks this mechanism was a success and a model for coming economic crashes----like the one around the corner!
Again, to the entire world----it all is labelled fraud. The FED never had this kind of action in its mission----it is crony and corrupt targeting huge aid to a few individual corporations all under the guise of TOO BIG TO FAIL----which has been proven time and again not to be true.
Good Riddance To QE: It Was Just Plain Financial Fraud
Nov. 11, 2014 2:15 PM ET
QE has finally come to an end, but public comprehension of the immense fraud it embodied has not even started. In round terms, this official counterfeiting spree amounted to $3.5 trillion— reflecting the difference between the Fed’s approximate $900 billion balance sheet when its “extraordinary policies” incepted at the time of the Lehman crisis and its $4.4 trillion of footings today. That’s a lot of something for nothing. It’s a grotesque amount of fraud.
The scam embedded in this monumental balance sheet expansion involved nothing so arcane as the circuitous manner by which new central bank reserves supplied to the banking system impact the private credit creation process. As is now evident, new credits issued by the Fed can result in the expansion of private credit to the extent that the money multiplier is operating or simply generate excess reserves which cycle back to the New York Fed if, as in the present instance, it is not.
But the fact that the new reserves generated during QE have cycled back to the Fed does not mitigate the fraud. The latter consists of the very act of buying these trillions of treasuries and GSE securities in the first place with fiat credits manufactured by the central bank. When the Fed does QE, its open market desk buys treasury notes and, in exchange, it simply deposits in dealer bank accounts new credits made out of thin air. As it happened, about $3.5 trillion of such fiat credits were conjured from nothing during the last 72 months.
All of these bonds had permitted Washington to command the use of real economic resources. That is, to consume goods and services it obtained directly in the form of payrolls, contractor services, military tanks and ammo etc; and, indirectly, in the form of the basket of goods and services typically acquired by recipients of government transfer payments. Stated differently, the goods and services purchased via monetizing $3.5 trillion of government debt embodied a prior act of production and supply. But the central bank exchanged them for an act of nothing.
Remember, Bernanke just spent these several years buying toxic mortgage loans off of banks----but did not touch any from the Federal program that acted as a cesspool for the last fraudulent loans....flash-forward to today and here comes another round of low-income housing funding with no oversight and accountability heading out just as the economy is ready to crash yet again!
If you remember, Wall Street used Freddie and Fannie as the receptacle for all of the toxic subprime mortgage loan fraud imploding it along with AIG insurance corporation as the end all for the massive Wall Street fraud. Is was Obama and Congressional neo-liberals who in 2009 should have made Wall Street write off all of what we know was hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud handed to these Federal Housing Programs-----but as with all the other frauds Obama allowed the fraud to stay with Wall Street and taxpayers paid for that billions of dollars in fraud. Now, with Wall Street yet to pay trillions of dollars in this same mortgage fraud Obama has his Housing Agency using taxpayer money to subsidize low-income housing rather than using the recovered fraud. As this article shows----yet again, taxpayers are going to feel the losses as the bond market crash sucks all revenue from Federal, state, and local government coffers. So this will again end with a low-income program crashing with hundreds of billions of taxpayer money lost.
IT IS SIMPLY A MECHANISM TO MOVE TAXPAYER MONEY TO WALL STREET----IT IS NOT A MECHANISM TO AID LOW-INCOME FAMILIES.
As you see below the housing frauds are continuing with Obama determined that taxpayers will shoulder all of the costs of the subprime mortgage fraud and again, as with the last frauds of the 2000s-----organizations for low-income housing support these deals they know will ultimately end badly for these families. It moves taxpayer money to the banks by the trillions!
There is an article at the end that shows a Chinese government corporations coming to NY to build low-income housing -----guess who will get these Federal subsidies? That's right-----foreign investment firms.
Keep in mind that Freddie and Fannie made a bundle off of the foreclosure re-bundling.....selling the homes of people given Freddie loans back to the people creating the subprime mortgage fraud. Then look at where all those Freddie profits went----back to the Treasury which is now under constant attack by corporate fraud and subsidy. ABSOLUTELY NONE OF THIS TAXPAYER REVENUE IS COMING BACK TO THE PEOPLE! Look as well at the low-income housing advocates demanding money come to this project. I have not heard one low-income housing advocacy group demanding justice from this entire fraud that killed their constituents. Keep in mind this decision is coming just as the economy is about to crash yet again. No doubt contracts will be signed for all this money just as we head into a Depression. Note the Republicans calling this move dangerous-----all of this policy is Republican policy for moving public wealth to the rich!
DEMANDING MONEY WITHOUT ACCOUNTABILITY IS NOT HELPING THE PEOPLE FOR WHOM THESE GROUPS ADVOCATE. THIS DEAL WILL PLACE THESE LOW-INCOME FAMILIES INTO THE SAME TEMPORARY HOUSING CONDITIONS.
Fannie, Freddie to Begin Payments to Affordable Housing Funds Fannie and Freddie Will Send 0.042% of Every Dollar in New Mortgage Purchases to the Funds
. Bloomberg News By Joe Light Updated Dec. 11, 2014 5:09 p.m. ET
The regulator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ordered the mortgage companies to begin giving potentially hundreds of millions of dollars a year to a pair of affordable-housing funds, pleasing low-income-housing advocates but sparking anger among groups that say they are worried about the risk to taxpayers.
The two funds, one administered by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and one by the Treasury Department, enable states and other bodies to get money to build low-income rental housing or to rehabilitate existing housing.
In letters to the chief executives of Fannie and Freddie on Thursday, Federal Housing Finance Agency director Mel Watt lifted a suspension of payments to the funds put into effect in 2008, when Fannie and Freddie teetered on the brink of collapse.
The companies returned to profitability in 2012 and Mr. Watt wrote in the letters that “circumstances have changed [since the suspension was implemented] and the temporary suspension is no longer justified.”
The decision is the latest move to use Fannie and Freddie to bolster housing affordability. On Monday, Fannie and Freddie unveiled details of new programs that will allow some borrowers to get mortgages with down payments of as little as 3%, rather than 5%.
Critics contend that decisions on down payments and on giving money to the funds could make Fannie and Freddie vulnerable in the event of another downturn. Proponents of the moves have said they will provide a much-needed boost to efforts to lower housing costs.
Fannie and Freddie will make a payment to the funds each year of 0.042% of the unpaid principal balance of their new mortgage purchases in the previous year. If not for the suspension, the companies together would have made a payment of about $500 million in 2014, based on 2013’s volume. After Mr. Watt’s decision, the first payment won’t be made until early 2016.
Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R., Texas), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, said his panel would call Mr. Watt to testify after Congress reconvenes in January. He called the move a “lump of coal in the stocking of every American taxpayer.”
In the meantime, the decision is a victory for low-income-housing advocates, who have sought the funding for years.
The Fannie-Freddie funding mechanisms for the funds are of special value to low-income-housing advocates, since they don’t need consistent appropriations from Congress. The budgets of other sources of low-income-housing money, such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, have come under pressure in recent years.
“We are thrilled,” said Sheila Crowley, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition. “This is the first new money for housing production for extremely low income people” in years, said Ms. Crowley, whose organization estimates that there were more than 10 million renter households in 2012 with income generally below 30% of their area’s median.
Fannie and Freddie don’t make loans. They buy them from lenders, wrap them into securities and provide guarantees to make investors whole in case of default. The companies were put into a conservatorship by the government in 2008 and received almost $188 billion in bailout money. Since 2012, they have been required to send nearly all of their profits to the U.S. Treasury, and as of the end of 2014 will have paid more than $225 billion.
The provision for Fannie and Freddie to make payments to the funds was established as part of a broader bill meant to stem the housing crisis in 2008. But the payments were almost immediately suspended by then-FHFA Director James Lockhart as the companies’ losses mounted.
As the companies returned to profitability, the FHFA came under increased pressure to lift the suspension. The National Low Income Housing Coalition and others last year sued the FHFA to force it to reinstate payments. That lawsuit was thrown out in September by a federal district court judge who said that the plaintiffs didn’t have standing to bring the suit.
On the other hand, many Republican lawmakers have repeatedly asked Mr. Watt to leave the suspension in place, citing the taxpayer backing of the companies and continuing legislative efforts to overhaul them.
“It is beyond irresponsible to restart these affordable-housing allocations without first dealing with the underlying problems at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” said Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.) on Thursday. Mr. Corker had been one of the primary proponents of a bill to overhaul the housing-finance system that stalled in May.
As we all know, Obama and Congressional neo-liberals join Republicans in allowing foreign corporations and in the case below the Chinese government to launder all of the wealth stolen in fraud from their nation's citizens just as China and nations overseas are allowing Wall Street and US corporations to launder the tens of trillions of dollars looted from the US Treasury usually in real estate deals. Consider that the goal for these global corporate pols is to end all public programs and that included public housing. So, when a Chinese corporation is handed public housing with the goal of it becoming private-----just how does China take care of its low-income citizens? Well, that is what this policy has as a goal----
Meanwhile, all of the wealth stolen from corporate fraud and corporations paying no taxes is what has left these US communities crumbling and third world. A once thriving first world nation brought to its knees by Clinton neo-liberalism. Trans Pacific Trade Pact will allow these Chinese real estate corporations to operate in the US as they do in China. So, think Mumbai and its slums right outside of uber-rich city centers and that is the goal of Clinton neo-liberals and Bush neo-cons.
WOW!!!!! Just in time for Freddie and Fannie -----the Federal Housing Agencies for low-income housing to give all kinds of taxpayer money to foreign corporations just before a coming economic crash-----AND THIS CHINESE CORPORATION HAS A HISTORY OF THE WORST OF THIRD WORLD SLUM--LORDING COMING TO NYC AND LA----AND A CITY NEAR YOU----YES, BALTIMORE!
A PAY-TO-PLAY FOR GLOBAL US CORPORATIONS WANTING TO SET UP IN THESE FOREIGN NATIONS!
Americans get third world slum landlords and global US corporations get to set up Goldman Sachs branches in China!
The Chinese government is building affordable housing in Brooklyn China's latest overseas investment project.
(Getty/Spencer Platt) SHARE Written byLily Kuo@lilkuo ObsessionChina's Transition December 16, 2014
Executives from one of China’s largest state-owned property developers broke ground this week on a mixed-income housing project in a somewhat unlikely locale: the hipster haven of brownstone Brooklyn. “We are committed to doing everything we can to keep this neighborhood diverse, affordable and accessible for all New Yorkers,” said I-Fei Chang, head of Greenland Holdings Group’s US expansion. Chang has said in the past that a range of incomes of residents is “what makes a city successful.”
1 Greenland’s affordable housing venture in Brooklyn, 298 apartments in an 18-story building in Prospect Heights, is part of a larger 15-tower apartment project in Atlantic Yards, (now rebranded “Pacific Park) adjacent to the Barclays Center, which will cost an estimated $4.9 billion to build. Half of the 298 units are supposed to be for families that make as low as 40% of the median income for the area—that’s about $33,560 for a family of four. Here’s where the development sits within the neighborhood:
Not surprisingly, the deal is likely less about neighborhood altruism and more about Chinese property developers’ drive to expand overseas. Greenland has invested about $20 billion in 13 cities outside of China since last year, and is just one of many mainland developers taking advantage of China’s loosening restrictions on overseas direct investments to get into US real estate. The Atlantic Yards project marks the largest overseas investment by a Chinese property developer to date.
It’s too bad that Chang’s comments about diverse and accessible housing don’t seem to apply to Greenland’s home base in China. Shanghai, where the company is based, and other Chinese cities have some of the least affordable housing in the world, pushing families and single workers into slum-like villages, overcrowded group apartments, and even underground homes. In China, Greenland is best known for building a 636-meter (2,087 feet) skyscraper for luxury apartments and office space in Wuhan. It will be China’s tallest skyscraper.
New York City is just one locale on Greenland’s list. The company is also building a $1 billion complex for hotels, apartments and luxury condos in downtown Los Angeles, and its chairman Zhang Yuliang said this week that it is looking to expand in its existing markets (paywall).