[Most Recent Quotes from www.kitco.com]

BANK

← Older posts

Business • BANK OF AMERICA – LYING SCUM – TOO BIG TO TRUST

Published June 20, 2013 | By admin

BANK OF AMERICA – LYING SCUM – TOO BIG TO TRUST

Posted on 19th June 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues
bank of america, foreclosures, Lord Acton, scum, Too Big To Trust

“The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.” – Lord Acton

Bank of America whistle-blower’s bombshell: “We were told to lie”
Bombshell: Bank of America whistle-blowers detail horrid schemes to fleece borrowers, reward foreclosures (UPDATED)
By David Dayen

(Credit: Sashkin via Shutterstock/Salon)

Bank of America’s mortgage servicing unit systematically lied to homeowners, fraudulently denied loan modifications, and paid their staff bonuses for deliberately pushing people into foreclosure: Yes, these allegations were suspected by any homeowner who ever had to deal with the bank to try to get a loan modification – but now they come from six former employees and one contractor, whose sworn statements were added last week to a civil lawsuit filed in federal court in Massachusetts.

“Bank of America’s practice is to string homeowners along with no apparent intention of providing the permanent loan modifications it promises,” said Erika Brown, one of the former employees. The damning evidence would spur a series of criminal investigations of BofA executives, if we still had a rule of law in this country for Wall Street banks.

The government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), which gave banks cash incentives to modify loans under certain standards, was supposed to streamline the process and help up to 4 million struggling homeowners (to date, active permanent modifications number about 870,000). In reality, Bank of America used it as a tool, say these former employees, to squeeze as much money as possible out of struggling borrowers before eventually foreclosing on them. Borrowers were supposed to make three trial payments before the loan modification became permanent; in actuality, many borrowers would make payments for a year or more, only to find themselves rejected for a permanent modification, and then owing the difference between the trial modification and their original payment. Former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner famously described HAMP as a means to “foam the runway” for the banks, spreading out foreclosures so banks could more readily absorb them.

These Bank of America employees offer the first glimpse into how they pulled it off. Employees, many of whom allege they were given no basic training on how to even use HAMP, were instructed to tell borrowers that documents were incomplete or missing when they were not, or that the file was “under review” when it hadn’t been accessed in months. Former loan-level representative Simone Gordon says flat-out in her affidavit that “we were told to lie to customers” about the receipt of documents and trial payments. She added that the bank would hold financial documents borrowers submitted for review for at least 30 days. “Once thirty days passed, Bank of America would consider many of these documents to be ‘stale’ and the homeowner would have to re-apply for a modification,” Gordon writes. Theresa Terrelonge, another ex-employee, said that the company would consistently tell homeowners to resubmit information, restarting the clock on the HAMP process.

Worse than this, Bank of America would simply throw out documents on a consistent basis. Former case management supervisor William Wilson alleged that, during bimonthly sessions called the “blitz,” case managers and underwriters would simply deny any file with financial documents that were more than 60 days old. “During a blitz, a single team would decline between 600 and 1,500 modification files at a time,” Wilson wrote. “I personally reviewed hundreds of files in which the computer systems showed that the homeowner had fulfilled a Trial Period Plan and was entitled to a permanent loan modification, but was nevertheless declined for a permanent modification during a blitz.” Employees were then instructed to make up a reason for the denial to submit to the Treasury Department, which monitored the program. Others say that bank employees falsified records in the computer system and removed documents from homeowner files to make it look like the borrower did not qualify for a permanent modification.

Senior managers provided carrots and sticks for employees to lie to customers and push them into foreclosure. Simone Gordon described meetings where managers created quotas for lower-level employees, and a bonus system for reaching those quotas. Employees “who placed ten or more accounts into foreclosure in a given month received a $500 bonus,” Gordon wrote. “Bank of America also gave employees gift cards to retail stores like Target or Bed Bath and Beyond as rewards for placing accounts into foreclosure.” Employees were closely monitored, and those who didn’t meet quotas, or who dared to give borrowers accurate information, were fired, as was anyone who “questioned the ethics … of declining loan modifications for false and fraudulent reasons,” according to William Wilson.

Bank of America characterized the affidavits as “rife with factual inaccuracies.” But they match complaints from borrowers having to resubmit documents multiple times, and getting denied for permanent modifications despite making all trial payments. And these statements come from all over the country from ex-employees without a relationship to one another. It did not result from one “rogue” bank branch.

Simply put, Bank of America didn’t want to hire enough staff to handle the crush of loan modification requests, and used these delaying tactics as a shortcut. They also pushed people into foreclosure to collect additional fees from them. And after rejecting borrowers for HAMP modifications, they would offer an in-house modification with a higher interest rate. This was all about profit maximization. “We were regularly drilled that it was our job to maximize fees for the Bank by fostering and extending delay of the HAMP modification process by any means we could,” wrote Simone Gordon in her affidavit.

It is a testament to the corruption of the federal regulatory and law enforcement apparatus that we’re only hearing evidence from inside Bank of America now, in a civil class-action lawsuit from wronged homeowners, when the behavior was so rampant for years. For example, the Treasury Department, charged with specific oversight for HAMP, didn’t sanction a single bank for failing to follow program guidelines for three years, and certainly did not uncover any of this criminal conduct. Steven Cupples, a former underwriter at Bank of America, explained in his statement how the bank falsified records to Treasury to make it look like they granted more modifications. But Treasury never investigated. Meanwhile, the Justice Department joined with state Attorneys General and other federal regulators to essentially bless this conduct in a series of weak settlements that incorporated other bank crimes as well, like “robo-signing” and submitting false documents to courts.

These affidavits, however, should return law enforcement to the case. William Wilson, the case management supervisor, alleges in his statement that this “ridiculous and immoral” conduct continued through August of 2012, when he was eventually fired for speaking up. That means Bank of America persisted with these activities for at least six months AFTER the main, $25 billion settlement to which they were a party. So state and federal regulators could sue Bank of America over this new criminal conduct, which post-dates the actions for which they released liability under the main settlement. Attorneys general in New York and Florida have accused Bank of America of violating the terms of the settlement, but they could simply open new cases about these new deceptive practices.

They would have no shortage of evidence, in addition to the sworn affidavits. According to Theresa Terrelonge, most loan-level representatives conducted their business through email; in fact, various email communications have already been submitted under seal in the Massachusetts civil case. State Attorneys General or US Attorneys would have subpoena power to gather many more emails.

And they would have very specific targets: the ex-employees listed specific executives by name who authorized and directed the fraudulent process. “The delay and rejection programs were methodically carried out under the overall direction of Patrick Kerry, a Vice President who oversaw the entire eastern region’s loan modification process,” wrote William Wilson. Other executives mentioned by name include John Berens, Patricia Feltch and Rebecca Mairone (now at JPMorgan Chase, and already named in a separate financial fraud case). These are senior executives who, if this alleged conduct is true, should face criminal liability.

Bank accountability activists have already seized on the revelations. “This is not surprising, but absolutely sickening,” said Peggy Mears, organizer for the Home Defenders League. “Maybe finally our courts and elected officials will stand with communities over Wall Street and prosecute, and then lock up, these criminals.”

Sadly, it’s hard to raise hopes of that happening. Past experience shows that our top regulatory and law enforcement officials are primarily interested in covering for Wall Street’s crimes. These well-sourced allegations amount to an accusation of Bank of America stealing thousands of homes, and lying to the government about it. Homeowners who did everything asked of them were nevertheless pushed into foreclosure, all to fortify profits on Wall Street. There’s a clear path to punish Bank of America for this conduct. If it doesn’t result in prosecutions, it will once again confirm the sorry excuse for justice we have in America.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=56329

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:34 pm

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Business • BANK OF AMERICA – LYING SCUM – TOO BIG TO TRUST

Published June 20, 2013 | By admin

BANK OF AMERICA – LYING SCUM – TOO BIG TO TRUST

Posted on 19th June 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues
bank of america, foreclosures, Lord Acton, scum, Too Big To Trust

“The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks.” – Lord Acton

Bank of America whistle-blower’s bombshell: “We were told to lie”
Bombshell: Bank of America whistle-blowers detail horrid schemes to fleece borrowers, reward foreclosures (UPDATED)
By David Dayen

(Credit: Sashkin via Shutterstock/Salon)

Bank of America’s mortgage servicing unit systematically lied to homeowners, fraudulently denied loan modifications, and paid their staff bonuses for deliberately pushing people into foreclosure: Yes, these allegations were suspected by any homeowner who ever had to deal with the bank to try to get a loan modification – but now they come from six former employees and one contractor, whose sworn statements were added last week to a civil lawsuit filed in federal court in Massachusetts.

“Bank of America’s practice is to string homeowners along with no apparent intention of providing the permanent loan modifications it promises,” said Erika Brown, one of the former employees. The damning evidence would spur a series of criminal investigations of BofA executives, if we still had a rule of law in this country for Wall Street banks.

The government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP), which gave banks cash incentives to modify loans under certain standards, was supposed to streamline the process and help up to 4 million struggling homeowners (to date, active permanent modifications number about 870,000). In reality, Bank of America used it as a tool, say these former employees, to squeeze as much money as possible out of struggling borrowers before eventually foreclosing on them. Borrowers were supposed to make three trial payments before the loan modification became permanent; in actuality, many borrowers would make payments for a year or more, only to find themselves rejected for a permanent modification, and then owing the difference between the trial modification and their original payment. Former Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner famously described HAMP as a means to “foam the runway” for the banks, spreading out foreclosures so banks could more readily absorb them.

These Bank of America employees offer the first glimpse into how they pulled it off. Employees, many of whom allege they were given no basic training on how to even use HAMP, were instructed to tell borrowers that documents were incomplete or missing when they were not, or that the file was “under review” when it hadn’t been accessed in months. Former loan-level representative Simone Gordon says flat-out in her affidavit that “we were told to lie to customers” about the receipt of documents and trial payments. She added that the bank would hold financial documents borrowers submitted for review for at least 30 days. “Once thirty days passed, Bank of America would consider many of these documents to be ‘stale’ and the homeowner would have to re-apply for a modification,” Gordon writes. Theresa Terrelonge, another ex-employee, said that the company would consistently tell homeowners to resubmit information, restarting the clock on the HAMP process.

Worse than this, Bank of America would simply throw out documents on a consistent basis. Former case management supervisor William Wilson alleged that, during bimonthly sessions called the “blitz,” case managers and underwriters would simply deny any file with financial documents that were more than 60 days old. “During a blitz, a single team would decline between 600 and 1,500 modification files at a time,” Wilson wrote. “I personally reviewed hundreds of files in which the computer systems showed that the homeowner had fulfilled a Trial Period Plan and was entitled to a permanent loan modification, but was nevertheless declined for a permanent modification during a blitz.” Employees were then instructed to make up a reason for the denial to submit to the Treasury Department, which monitored the program. Others say that bank employees falsified records in the computer system and removed documents from homeowner files to make it look like the borrower did not qualify for a permanent modification.

Senior managers provided carrots and sticks for employees to lie to customers and push them into foreclosure. Simone Gordon described meetings where managers created quotas for lower-level employees, and a bonus system for reaching those quotas. Employees “who placed ten or more accounts into foreclosure in a given month received a $500 bonus,” Gordon wrote. “Bank of America also gave employees gift cards to retail stores like Target or Bed Bath and Beyond as rewards for placing accounts into foreclosure.” Employees were closely monitored, and those who didn’t meet quotas, or who dared to give borrowers accurate information, were fired, as was anyone who “questioned the ethics … of declining loan modifications for false and fraudulent reasons,” according to William Wilson.

Bank of America characterized the affidavits as “rife with factual inaccuracies.” But they match complaints from borrowers having to resubmit documents multiple times, and getting denied for permanent modifications despite making all trial payments. And these statements come from all over the country from ex-employees without a relationship to one another. It did not result from one “rogue” bank branch.

Simply put, Bank of America didn’t want to hire enough staff to handle the crush of loan modification requests, and used these delaying tactics as a shortcut. They also pushed people into foreclosure to collect additional fees from them. And after rejecting borrowers for HAMP modifications, they would offer an in-house modification with a higher interest rate. This was all about profit maximization. “We were regularly drilled that it was our job to maximize fees for the Bank by fostering and extending delay of the HAMP modification process by any means we could,” wrote Simone Gordon in her affidavit.

It is a testament to the corruption of the federal regulatory and law enforcement apparatus that we’re only hearing evidence from inside Bank of America now, in a civil class-action lawsuit from wronged homeowners, when the behavior was so rampant for years. For example, the Treasury Department, charged with specific oversight for HAMP, didn’t sanction a single bank for failing to follow program guidelines for three years, and certainly did not uncover any of this criminal conduct. Steven Cupples, a former underwriter at Bank of America, explained in his statement how the bank falsified records to Treasury to make it look like they granted more modifications. But Treasury never investigated. Meanwhile, the Justice Department joined with state Attorneys General and other federal regulators to essentially bless this conduct in a series of weak settlements that incorporated other bank crimes as well, like “robo-signing” and submitting false documents to courts.

These affidavits, however, should return law enforcement to the case. William Wilson, the case management supervisor, alleges in his statement that this “ridiculous and immoral” conduct continued through August of 2012, when he was eventually fired for speaking up. That means Bank of America persisted with these activities for at least six months AFTER the main, $25 billion settlement to which they were a party. So state and federal regulators could sue Bank of America over this new criminal conduct, which post-dates the actions for which they released liability under the main settlement. Attorneys general in New York and Florida have accused Bank of America of violating the terms of the settlement, but they could simply open new cases about these new deceptive practices.

They would have no shortage of evidence, in addition to the sworn affidavits. According to Theresa Terrelonge, most loan-level representatives conducted their business through email; in fact, various email communications have already been submitted under seal in the Massachusetts civil case. State Attorneys General or US Attorneys would have subpoena power to gather many more emails.

And they would have very specific targets: the ex-employees listed specific executives by name who authorized and directed the fraudulent process. “The delay and rejection programs were methodically carried out under the overall direction of Patrick Kerry, a Vice President who oversaw the entire eastern region’s loan modification process,” wrote William Wilson. Other executives mentioned by name include John Berens, Patricia Feltch and Rebecca Mairone (now at JPMorgan Chase, and already named in a separate financial fraud case). These are senior executives who, if this alleged conduct is true, should face criminal liability.

Bank accountability activists have already seized on the revelations. “This is not surprising, but absolutely sickening,” said Peggy Mears, organizer for the Home Defenders League. “Maybe finally our courts and elected officials will stand with communities over Wall Street and prosecute, and then lock up, these criminals.”

Sadly, it’s hard to raise hopes of that happening. Past experience shows that our top regulatory and law enforcement officials are primarily interested in covering for Wall Street’s crimes. These well-sourced allegations amount to an accusation of Bank of America stealing thousands of homes, and lying to the government about it. Homeowners who did everything asked of them were nevertheless pushed into foreclosure, all to fortify profits on Wall Street. There’s a clear path to punish Bank of America for this conduct. If it doesn’t result in prosecutions, it will once again confirm the sorry excuse for justice we have in America.

http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=56329

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Wed Jun 19, 2013 10:34 pm

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Other • Bank Of Japan Machinations Crash Into Reality

Published June 13, 2013 | By admin

Bank Of Japan Machinations Crash Into Reality
THURSDAY, JUNE 13, 2013 AT 8:09AM
The Japanese stock market has become a case study of central-bank manipulations, and of what happens eventually as reality cannot be eliminated forever.

On Thursday, the Nikkei, after a horrific 800-point or 6% dive on a staircase to hell, or to 12,416, whichever came first, recovered a few hundred points, then climbed back down that staircase and ended the day at 12,445, the lowest close since April 3, down 844 points for the day, the second largest swoon so far in 2013.

The largest swoon this year? May 23, a 1,460-point crash, or 9.2%, from its intraday peak (after a 300-point jump that morning) of 15,943 – the highest most euphoric point since December 2008. Now the Nikkei is down 21.9% from that peak, and in bear market territory. Both the Nikkei and the Topix dropped below the 100-day moving average during the day, which in itself triggered more selling, as these technical indicators, and the buy-sell behavior they engender, become self-fulfilling prophecies (for a while), not only on the way up, but also on the way down – their raison d’être; otherwise they’d be utterly useless.

It took the Nikkei 50 days – from April 3 to May 23 – to make it up that far, and just 20 days to come back down. Up by escalator, down by elevator (with ear-popping speed).

This is what happens when a stock market gets inflated by a central bank: promises of boundless money-printing attract the hot money that causes values to balloon to ridiculous highs in the shortest time. Then something happens, some silly event, the recognition that enough money has been made, a rumor that some big hedge fund is bailing out, a disappointing statement by the Bank of Japan, something… and some of the hot money suddenly has had enough, tries to take profits, tries to bail out, just when there are not many euphoric buyers left, and what you hear is a giant hissing sound. And what you get is capital destruction and wealth transfer.

Thank goodness, for the Bank of Japan, there is nothing like a good stock market crash to prop up the otherwise wilting market for Japanese Government bonds. They’ve been an awful investment recently: the 10-year JGB has been yielding below 1% even though the BOJ promised to create 2% inflation. The official plan is to hand JGB buyers a loss on an inflation-adjusted basis. So investors have been bailing out of JGBs while the BOJ has been gobbling them up through its massive bond-buying program. Yields have been jumping up and down in the most tumultuous manner, rising for the 10-year JGB from the freaky 0.315% low of April 5 to briefly kissing 1% on May 2, and panicky bondholders have been pulling out their hair along the way.

Since then, JGBs have “stabilized” somewhat, with yields retreating below 0.9%. But during yesterday’s stock market massacre, these despicable JGBs suddenly seemed like a pretty good deal again, given the choice between losing money fast in stocks and losing money more slowly in JGBs. In response, yields on the 10-year JGB briefly plunged from 0.88% to 0.80%, only to rise back to 0.86%.

In support of its machinations, the BOJ has stated repeatedly and explicitly that it is trying to inflate the stock market to create the "wealth effect" – that ephemeral and treacherous impetus for people to spend money they see on a computer screen but haven’t realized yet and haven’t paid their taxes on yet. But on average, they actually can’t spend the money they see on that screen because they’d have to sell to do so, and pull their money out of the market. It would cause a crash. And annihilate that beautiful wealth effect.

Instead, central banks use the wealth effect to lure consumers with a vision of wealth so that they’d spend their savings, or spend with their credit cards. And then, when the market does crash, consumers are left holding the bag: the vision of wealth has dematerialized, their savings have been decimated, and credit card bills have piled up. An insidious central bank strategy.

But that’s secondary for the BOJ. Its primary concern is the enormous government bond market – and the banks, retirement funds, and other institutions that own a big portion of these crappy bonds. They’re the lifeblood of the Japanese economy. And when push comes to shove, the BOJ lets stocks plunge in order to support bonds – as it has done on numerous occasions.

It’s hard to blame the BOJ. There are no more good options available for Japan. The economy has become physically dependent on out-of-control government deficit spending – with half of the spending being borrowed money! The debt, now over 200% of GDP, is so huge and growing so rapidly that reasonable solutions no longer apply. But reality cannot be pushed out forever. Someone eventually MUST pay for it all: the bondholders, the taxpayers, or all Japanese (via run-away inflation).

The one thing we know from Abenomics, and from the policies of all prior governments: they’ll try to push the day of reckoning out as far as possible, hopefully beyond their time in politics, and hopefully with enough warning to allow the elite to protect itself from the fallout. The BOJ’s job is to make that possible.

Abenomics has its detractors – in peculiar places – and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe must be experiencing some interesting pillow talk. His wife has attacked one of the major components of his economic policies, the nuclear power industry.

http://www.testosteronepit.com/home/201 … ality.html

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:31 am

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Other • Basel III: How The Bank For International Settlements Is Go

Published May 29, 2013 | By admin

Basel III: How The Bank For International Settlements Is Going To Help Bring Down The Global Economy
By Michael, on May 28th, 2013
A new set of regulations that most people have never even heard of that was developed by an immensely powerful central banking organization that most people do not even know exists is going to have a dramatic effect on the global financial system over the next several years. The new set of regulations is known as "Basel III", and it was developed by the Bank for International Settlements. The Bank for International Settlements has been called "the central bank for central banks", and it is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland. 58 major central banks (including the Federal Reserve) belong to the Bank for International Settlements, and the decisions made in Basel often have more of an impact on the direction of the global economy than anything the president of the United States or the U.S. Congress are doing. All you have to do is to look back at the last financial crisis to see an example of this. Basel II and Basel 2.5 played a major role in precipitating the subprime mortgage meltdown. Now a new set of regulations known as "Basel III" are being rolled out. The implementation of these new regulations is beginning this year, and they will be completely phased in by 2019. These new regulations dramatically increase capital requirements and significantly restrict the use of leverage. Those certainly sound like good goals, the problem is that the entire global financial system is based on credit at this point, and these new regulations are going to substantially reduce the flow of credit. The only way that the giant debt bubble that we are all living in can continue to persist is if it continues to expand. By restricting the flow of credit, these new regulations threaten to burst the debt bubble and bring down the entire global economy.

Not that the current global financial system is sustainable by any means. Anyone with half a brain can see that the global financial system is a pyramid scheme that is destined to collapse. But Basel III may cause it to collapse faster than it might otherwise have.

So precisely what is Basel III? The following is a definition from the official website of the Bank for International Settlements…

"Basel III" is a comprehensive set of reform measures, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, to strengthen the regulation, supervision and risk management of the banking sector. These measures aim to:

improve the banking sector’s ability to absorb shocks arising from financial and economic stress, whatever the source
improve risk management and governance
strengthen banks’ transparency and disclosures.
All of that looks good at first glance. But when you start looking into the details you start realizing what it is going to mean for the global financial system. Banks are going to be required to have higher reserve ratios and use less leverage. Banks are going to have to be more careful with their money, which is a good thing, but it is also going to mean that credit will not flow as freely. Unfortunately, the only way for a debt bubble to survive is if it keeps expanding. Anything that restricts the flow of easy money threatens to bring a debt bubble to an end.

These new regulations are going to be phased in between 2013 and 2019. You can see a chart which shows the implementation schedule for the Basel III regulations right here.

So why is bringing the debt bubble to an end a bad thing?

Well, because it will cause the false prosperity that we have been enjoying to disappear, and that will be an exceedingly painful adjustment.

Sadly, most people have no idea what is happening. Most people have never even heard of "Basel III" or "the Bank for International Settlements". Most people just assume that the people they voted into office know what they are doing and have everything under control.

Unfortunately, that is not the case at all. The truth is that an unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers is making decisions which deeply affect us all, and there is not much that we can do about it.

This unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers played a major role in bringing about the last financial crisis. The following is a brief excerpt from a recent article posted on Before It’s News…

If you have any questions about the power of these Basel Banking Regulations you can also see the effects that Basel II and 2.5, mark to market accounting, had on the Housing Markets in the United States of America in 2008. There were many causes for that housing bubble, then housing crisis, but Basel II and 2.5 was most assuredly the pin that popped the housing bubble that led to the financial crisis of 2008-09.

But do most people know about this?

Of course not. Most people want to blame the Republicans or the Democrats or Bush or Obama, and they have no idea about the financial strings that are being pulled at the highest levels.

It is so important that we get people educated about how the global financial system actually works. The following is a summary of how the Bank for International Settlements works from one of my previous articles entitled "Who Controls The Money? An Unelected, Unaccountable Central Bank Of The World Secretly Does"…

An immensely powerful international organization that most people have never even heard of secretly controls the money supply of the entire globe. It is called the Bank for International Settlements, and it is the central bank of central banks. It is located in Basel, Switzerland, but it also has branches in Hong Kong and Mexico City. It is essentially an unelected, unaccountable central bank of the world that has complete immunity from taxation and from national laws. Even Wikipedia admits that "it is not accountable to any single national government." The Bank for International Settlements was used to launder money for the Nazis during World War II, but these days the main purpose of the BIS is to guide and direct the centrally-planned global financial system. Today, 58 global central banks belong to the BIS, and it has far more power over how the U.S. economy (or any other economy for that matter) will perform over the course of the next year than any politician does. Every two months, the central bankers of the world gather in Basel for another "Global Economy Meeting". During those meetings, decisions are made which affect every man, woman and child on the planet, and yet none of us have any say in what goes on. The Bank for International Settlements is an organization that was founded by the global elite and it operates for the benefit of the global elite, and it is intended to be one of the key cornerstones of the emerging one world economic system.

Even though most people have never even heard of the BIS, the truth is that the global elite have had big plans for it for a very long time. In another article I included a quote from a book that Georgetown University history professor Carroll Quigley wrote many years ago entitled "Tragedy & Hope"…

[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.

Today we have such a system, and most of the public does not even know that it exists.

And when the next great financial crisis strikes, there will probably be very little ever said about the Bank for International Settlements in the mainstream media.

But right now the BIS is helping set the stage for the great credit crunch that is coming.

Get prepared while you still can, because time is running out.

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/arch … al-economy

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Tue May 28, 2013 7:50 pm

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Basel III: How The Bank For International Settlements Is Going To Help Bring Down The Global Economy

Published May 28, 2013 | By admin

The Bank For International Settlements - Photo by Yago VeithA new set of regulations that most people have never even heard of that was developed by an immensely powerful central banking organization that most people do not even know exists is going to have a dramatic affect on the global financial system over the next several years.  The new set of regulations is known as “Basel III”, and it was developed by the Bank for International Settlements.  The Bank for International Settlements has been called “the central bank for central banks”, and it is headquartered in Basel, Switzerland.  58 major central banks (including the Federal Reserve) belong to the Bank for International Settlements, and the decisions made in Basel often have more of an impact on the direction of the global economy than anything the president of the United States or the U.S. Congress are doing.  All you have to do is to look back at the last financial crisis to see an example of this.  Basel II and Basel 2.5 played a major role in precipitating the subprime mortgage meltdown.  Now a new set of regulations known as “Basel III” are being rolled out.  The implementation of these new regulations is beginning this year, and they will be completely phased in by 2019.  These new regulations dramatically increase capital requirements and significantly restrict the use of leverage.  Those certainly sound like good goals, the problem is that the entire global financial system is based on credit at this point, and these new regulations are going to substantially reduce the flow of credit.  The only way that the giant debt bubble that we are all living in can continue to persist is if it continues to expand.  By restricting the flow of credit, these new regulations threaten to burst the debt bubble and bring down the entire global economy.

Not that the current global financial system is sustainable by any means.  Anyone with half a brain can see that the global financial system is a pyramid scheme that is destined to collapse.  But Basel III may cause it to collapse faster than it might otherwise have.

So precisely what is Basel III?  The following is a definition from the official website of the Bank for International Settlements…

“Basel III” is a comprehensive set of reform measures, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, to strengthen the regulation, supervision and risk management of the banking sector. These measures aim to:

  • improve the banking sector’s ability to absorb shocks arising from financial and economic stress, whatever the source
  • improve risk management and governance
  • strengthen banks’ transparency and disclosures.

All of that looks good at first glance.  But when you start looking into the details you start realizing what it is going to mean for the global financial system.  Banks are going to be required to have higher reserve ratios and use less leverage.  Banks are going to have to be more careful with their money, which is a good thing, but it is also going to mean that credit will not flow as freely.  Unfortunately, the only way for a debt bubble to survive is if it keeps expanding.  Anything that restricts the flow of easy money threatens to bring a debt bubble to an end.

These new regulations are going to be phased in between 2013 and 2019.  You can see a chart which shows the implementation schedule for the Basel III regulations right here.

So why is bringing the debt bubble to an end a bad thing?

Well, because it will cause the false prosperity that we have been enjoying to disappear, and that will be an exceedingly painful adjustment.

Sadly, most people have no idea what is happening.  Most people have never even heard of “Basel III” or “the Bank for International Settlements”.  Most people just assume that the people they voted into office know what they are doing and have everything under control.

Unfortunately, that is not the case at all.  The truth is that an unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers is making decisions which deeply affect us all, and there is not much that we can do about it.

This unelected, unaccountable body of central bankers played a major role in bringing about the last financial crisis.  The following is a brief excerpt from a recent article posted on Before It’s News…

If you have any questions about the power of these Basel Banking Regulations you can also see the effects that Basel II and 2.5, mark to market accounting, had on the Housing Markets in the United States of America in 2008. There were many causes for that housing bubble, then housing crisis, but Basel II and 2.5 was most assuredly the pin that popped the housing bubble that led to the financial crisis of 2008-09.

But do most people know about this?

Of course not.  Most people want to blame the Republicans or the Democrats or Bush or Obama, and they have no idea about the financial strings that are being pulled at the highest levels.

It is so important that we get people educated about how the global financial system actually works.  The following is a summary of how the Bank for International Settlements works from one of my previous articles entitled “Who Controls The Money? An Unelected, Unaccountable Central Bank Of The World Secretly Does“…

An immensely powerful international organization that most people have never even heard of secretly controls the money supply of the entire globe.  It is called the Bank for International Settlements, and it is the central bank of central banks.  It is located in Basel, Switzerland, but it also has branches in Hong Kong and Mexico City.  It is essentially an unelected, unaccountable central bank of the world that has complete immunity from taxation and from national laws.  Even Wikipedia admits that “it is not accountable to any single national government.“  The Bank for International Settlements was used to launder money for the Nazis during World War II, but these days the main purpose of the BIS is to guide and direct the centrally-planned global financial system.  Today, 58 global central banks belong to the BIS, and it has far more power over how the U.S. economy (or any other economy for that matter) will perform over the course of the next year than any politician does.  Every two months, the central bankers of the world gather in Basel for another “Global Economy Meeting”.  During those meetings, decisions are made which affect every man, woman and child on the planet, and yet none of us have any say in what goes on.  The Bank for International Settlements is an organization that was founded by the global elite and it operates for the benefit of the global elite, and it is intended to be one of the key cornerstones of the emerging one world economic system.

Even though most people have never even heard of the BIS, the truth is that the global elite have had big plans for it for a very long time.  In another article I included a quote from a book that Georgetown University history professor Carroll Quigley wrote many years ago entitled “Tragedy & Hope”…

[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world’s central banks which were themselves private corporations.

Today we have such a system, and most of the public does not even know that it exists.

And when the next great financial crisis strikes, there will probably be very little ever said about the Bank for International Settlements in the mainstream media.

But right now the BIS is helping set the stage for the great credit crunch that is coming.

Get prepared while you still can, because time is running out.

View full post on The Economic Collapse

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Gold and Silver • Bullion bank led casino manipulates gold price – and everyth

Published May 24, 2013 | By admin

Bullion bank led casino manipulates gold price – and everything else!

http://www.mineweb.com/mineweb/content/ … &sn=Detail

While the banking cartel tries to suppress gold prices, demand for the physical metal continues to increase.

Author: David Levenstein
Posted: Tuesday , 21 May 2013
JOHANNESBURG –

Although the primary purpose of the futures markets is to provide an efficient and effective mechanism for the management of price risks, when it comes to precious metals, and as we have seen in recent weeks, it has become nothing more than a casino run by a group of bullion banks that are acting as agents for the US Federal Reserve which is intent in manipulating these markets as they do all other markets. And, while much of the recent volatility has been caused by the options and futures market, the regulatory authorities of the CFTC who came up with a series of hikes in margins to stop the price of both gold and silver from rising, claiming that the markets were extremely volatile, I see they have done nothing to prevent the recent price drops.

The action or lack thereof by the regulatory authorities is most disturbing and would suggest that they themselves are colluding with the parties involved in this illegal manipulation of the gold and silver market.

See also: Mr Spock would definitely find current gold price levels illogical

How can they ignore the massive short sale that took place on Friday, April 12, 2013, when short sales of gold hit the New York market in an amount estimated to have been somewhere around 400 tons of gold? This enormous sale implies an illegal conspiracy of sellers intent on rigging the market or action by the Federal Reserve through its agents, the bullion banks. Last Friday, this suspicious selling resumed, with the equivalent of 17 tons sold on the New York Comex in two bursts in the morning, according to market sources.

Any normal seller that wanted to exit a position would do it discreetly and slowing thereby trying to ensure the best possible price and not simply dump an enormous amount all at once unless the goal was not profit but to smash the bullion price.

See also: The current gold run is not a repeat of the 1970s – WGC

Interestingly, the futures markets were established to prevent such huge price swings in commodities. The business of trading futures is not new and in fact it is now more than 100 years old. It began in Chicago during the 1800’s.

Chicago was a growing city in the 1830s and a centre for the sale of grains grown nearby to be shipped to the East. Prior to the establishment of central grain markets in the mid-nineteenth century, the nation’s farmers carted their newly harvested crops up rivers or dirt roads to major population and transportation centres each fall in search of buyers. These seasonal supply gluts drove prices downward to giveaway levels and even to throwaway levels as corn, wheat and other crops often rotted in the streets or were dumped in rivers and lakes for lack of storage. Come spring, shortages frequently developed and foods made from corn and wheat became barely affordable luxuries.

By the early 1850s, the local merchants began to buy corn from farmers which they then sold to the Chicago merchants on time contracts, or forward contracts, to minimize their risk. The farmers risked not having anyone buy their corn or having to sell at rock-bottom prices, and the merchants risked not having any corn to buy or having to buy at sky-high prices. The forward contract set forth the amount of corn to be sold at a future date at an agreed-upon price. Forward contracts in wheat also started in the early 1850s.

As soon as the forward contract became the usual way of doing business, speculators appeared. They did not intend to buy or sell the commodity. Instead, they traded contracts in hope of making a profit.

Speculation itself became a business activity. Contracts could change hands many times before the actual delivery of the corn. During this time, contracts were negotiated and traded in public squares and on street curbs. Then in 1848, 82 merchants formed a centralized marketplace to trade grain, and this was the beginning of the Chicago Board of Trade – more commonly known as the CBOT, the oldest futures exchange in the world. Today it is one of the largest futures exchange in the world.

Now around the same time metals merchants living in London began to sell contracts of copper on forward contracts. Imagine for a few minutes that you are a metals merchant living in London in say 1890. You lease vessels to sail to Chile where you buy copper ore. However, the journey takes several months, and during this time the price of copper fluctuates so you have no idea what it’s going be by the time your vessels return. Hopefully, when your copper is finally delivered the price is high enough for you to cover all your expenses and make a small profit. On the other hand if prices have plummeted you are going to make a large loss. So, you are always at risk.

Now, suppose that while having a cup of tea with some other traders, one of them tells you that he is prepared to pay you a guaranteed price for a specific quantity of copper that you only have to deliver in 6 months’ time. You do your calculations and figure that this price is enough to cover all expenses as well as make you a small profit – risk free. So you agree to this. But in the meantime if prices soar, you cannot claim the higher price, but you are protected if prices plummet. This meant that no matter what the domestic conditions were, when your shipments of copper arrived, you would receive the price agreed upon a few months previously

Then, once again speculators arrived. They had no intention of taking physical delivery and instead they traded contracts in hope of making a profit. For example, let’s say that you were offered $0.40c per pound. Now some other trader who believes that prices will be a lot higher than this in three months’ time offers say 0.41c per pound, and then another trader makes an offer of say 0.42c per pound, and so on. So, before delivery is made, the actual contract can be traded many times over. And, this is how the London Metal Exchange began.

The actual London Metal Exchange (LME) was officially formed in 1877. And it’s because of the merchants in Chicago and London that the process known as hedging began. And as these exchanges grew, more and more contracts were added. Futures trading is now a global industry, and futures can be traded electronically outside the United States in more than 80 countries. While electronic trading is becoming more and more popular, a huge amount of business is still done in the pits.

Now the gold and silver futures markets are not being used for their original purpose, but are being used to manipulate prices by some entity that does not want to see prices of precious metals move higher. As this is certainly not what the producers want, it is reasonable to surmise that the institution behind this is the US Federal Reserve. While, this has always been considered as another conspiracy theory, it is widely known that central banks and other major financial institutions have been manipulating Libor, bonds, equities as well as the foreign exchange market. So, it is absolutely plausible that they are manipulating precious metals, in particular gold and silver

Before the spike in gold prices that took place on Monday, the price of gold has dropped by more than $100 over the past seven sessions. The last time gold fell for eight consecutive sessions was in 2009, with that run ending on March 4. Since April the price is down by more than $200 an ounce and down by around 16% since the beginning of the year.

In the same time, global equities have advanced and the US dollar has gained against its major peers. The Dow Jones Industrial Average and benchmark S&P 500 stock index surged to new closing highs in a rally that has pushed both indices this year up 17%. The DOW made another record close at 15354 while S&P 500 also had a record close at 1667. The FTSE 100 made a five year high at 6723 while DAX also closed at another record high of 8389. And, the Nikkei closed above 15000 at 15138.

The U.S. dollar index which measures its value against a basket of six major currencies, rose to 84.371, it’s highest in nearly three years. However, much of the dollar’s recent gains can be attributed to the euro, which fell to a six-week low on talk the European Central Bank could introduce negative deposit rates, a move that effectively would make banks pay to park their cash overnight with the ECB.

See also: Gold still an important diversifier for central banks – WGC

The latest EU figures released Wednesday show full year-and-a-half of contraction in the Eurozone as tens of millions of individuals remain unemployed.

EU data agency Eurostat said output across the 17 states that share the euro — which are home to 340 million people — fell by 1.0% compared to the same quarter last year. France has also slipped into recession with a 0.2% quarter-on-quarter contraction, with unemployment already running at a 16-year high.

While outflows of gold exchange traded funds continue, demand for physical gold remains robust especially from Asia. The latest World Gold Council Gold Demand Trends report, covering the period of January to March 2013 has indicated that demand for gold jewellery continues to grow. Total jewellery demand was up 12% year-on-year in Q1 2013, primarily driven by Asian markets. Jewellery demand in China was up 19% and stood at a record 185 tons, with demand in India and the Middle East was up 15% and in US demand increased 6%, for the first time since 2005.

See also: ETF sales outweigh jumping retail gold demand in Q1 – WGC

Demand for gold in China and India was also driven by an increase in bar and coin sales – up 22% year-on-year in China and 52% in India. In the US demand for bars and coins was up 43% compared with the same quarter in 2012. Globally bar investment was up 8% and official coins such as American Eagles and Canadian Maple Leafs were up 18%. Gold-backed ETFs, which in 2012 accounted for 6% of the world’s gold demand, fell by 177 tons.

Marcus Grubb, Managing Director, Investment at the World Gold Council said “The price drop in April, fuelled by non-physical moves in the market, proved to be the catalyst for a surge of buying that has left many retailers short of stock and refineries introducing waiting lists for deliveries. Putting this into context, sales of bars and coins, jewellery and consumption in the technology sector still make up 81% of the market. What these figures show is that even before the events of April, the fundamentals of the gold market remain robust with; growing demand in India and China, central banks consistently adding gold to their reserves and strong buying of investment products such as gold bars and coins.”

According to the report, investment demand in India was up by 52% compared to last year, despite an increase in import duties from 4% to 6% in January. Gold bars and gold coins continued to attract strong demand despite an increase in import duties which took place in January.

US investment demand in bars and coins increased in the first quarter and a surge in investment pushed Thailand to the third largest market for gold bars and coins in the first quarter. Meanwhile European investment demand slowed and investment across the Middle East was unchanged.

Total mine production in Q1 2013 was up 4% on last year at 688 tons and recycling fell 4% resulting in a total supply that is 1% higher than a year ago. However according to several gold analysts, global gold production is set to decline in the coming years.

While global stock markets, which have been propped up by the unprecedented debt-monetization scheme of central banks in particular the US Federal Reserve and the Bank of Japan, demand for physical gold remains robust. I also believe that the demand for gold in the second quarter is going to be substantially greater than the demand seen in the first quarter.

With increased demand for physical gold I have no doubt that the price will soon rebound.

David Levenstein is a Johannesburg-based expert on investing in precious metals. He began trading silver through the LME in 1980 and over the years has dealt with gold, silver, platinum and palladium. He has traded and invested in bullion, bullion coins, mining shares, exchange traded funds, as well as futures for his personal account as well as for clients. www.lakeshoretrading.co.za

Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but there is no guarantee as to completeness or accuracy. Any opinions expressed herein are statements of our judgment as of this date and are subject to change without notice.

Statistics: Posted by DIGGER DAN — Thu May 23, 2013 5:28 pm

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

International News • Laos Land Grabs: Deutsche Bank Backs Ruthless ‘Rubber Lords

Published May 15, 2013 | By admin

Laos Land Grabs: Deutsche Bank Backs Ruthless ‘Rubber Lords’

By Martin Hesse, Jörg Schmitt and Wieland Wagner

Wieland Wagner / DER SPIEGEL
Vietnamese companies have been ruthlessly taking advantage of Laotian locals and their environment to create vast rubber plantations. The "rubber lords" are also getting support for the land grabs from Germany’s Deutsche Bank, which is violating its ethics and sustainability policies, critics say.

A haggard man wearing only shorts squats on the tiny porch of his wooden shack. The 27-year-old from the Laotian village of Ban Hatxan lives here with his wife and parents. Lying before him are three lifeless lizards, their dinner. Three chickens are running around beneath his pile dwelling, and there is also a pig. This is all the family has left.

The young farmer, who prefers not to give his name out of fear of reprisal, is a refugee. He fled from the Vietnamese company Hoang Anh Gia Lai (HAGL), which operates vast rubber plantations here in Laos. The Vietnamese in this region are known as the "rubber lords."
"They came onto my property three years ago without warning," the farmer says. Since he was a child, his family had lived on the patch of land, extracting oil from palm fruits. "We were able to make a living from it," he says. But then HAGL sent in its clearing squad. "They felled the trees and burnt the rest down, including our house."

More than 8,000 kilometers (5,000 miles) separate Germany from Laos and Vietnam. But HAGL also receives funds and support for its land grab in Southeast Asia via Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest bank. A fund operated by its subsidiary DWS also has direct investments in HAGL, as well as in a second Vietnamese raw-materials company, a subsidiary of the Vietnam Rubber Group. What’s more, the bank helped HAGL get listed on the London Stock Exchange.

The story shows how Western financial corporations want to get in on the success of emerging markets like Vietnam at any price — and how this leads them to support the ruthless exploitation of raw materials used to satisfy the hunger of China and other economic powers, often at the expense of the environment and the indigenous population.

Research by Global Witness, a London-based environmental organization, has found that this land-grabbing is also directly supported by the World Bank in the belief that it brings some benefit to poor countries like Laos. Via its International Finance Corporation (IFC) subsidiary, the development bank has invested money in a private equity fund involved with HAGL that is based in the Cayman Islands, a tax haven.

The IFC states that the fund is responsible for its investment policies, and that it provides assistance in making sure that the fund complies with environmental and social standards that conform to World Bank requirements.

Capitalizing on Limited Resources

The story begins in the early 1990s, when a young man named Doan Nguyen Duc was building wooden furniture for schools in the Vietnamese highlands. Before long, Duc expanded into the lumber industry and had a hand in the uncontrolled deforestation of Vietnam over the course of that decade. But he only amassed a real fortune after the turn of the millennium when he got into the real estate business.

People now call him "Bau Duc" or "Duc, the Boss." He was the first person in Vietnam to buy his own private jet, he purchased a football club and he says he wants to become the country’s first billionaire.

Among those reportedly helping him in this effort is Deutsche Bank, which has been doing business in Vietnam since the 1990s. In 2007, the bank purchased shares of the Vietnamese bank Habubank. Like other fast-growing Asian countries, Vietnam was attracting many investors during that period.

"Bau Duc" first took HAGL public in 2008 on the Ho Chi Minh City Stock Exchange. The IPO was a success, and the company quickly tripled in market value. But "the Boss" wanted more and soon had plans to make HAGL the first Vietnamese company listed on the London Stock Exchange. Deutsche Bank assisted in the effort. In late 2010, it acquired shares in HAGL, and a few months later it facilitated the company’s debut on the stock market in London. To allow investors to purchase stakes in HAGL, Deutsche Bank issued global depository receipts (GDRs), which are certificates representing ownership of the underlying shares held by the bank itself.

To ensure the public listing was also a success in London, there needed to be a story about growth. Things hadn’t been going very well any longer with HAGL’s property development business, so the company began focusing more on raw materials. "The Boss" recognized the potential behind the enormous demand coming out of China and other countries in the region enjoying strong growth.

"I think natural resources are limited, and I need to take them before they’re gone," Duc told Forbes magazine in a 2009 profile. And take them he has. At first, it was in Vietnam. But when expansion hit its limits there, he also moved into neighboring Cambodia and Laos.

‘What Other Option Do We Have?’

Until 2012, there were 2.6 million hectares (6.4 million acres) of land available for rent in Cambodia, or three-quarters of the country’s arable land. Roughly half of the concessions have gone to rubber companies. Laos has awarded land rights to 1.1 million hectares, a large part of which has also been dedicated to rubber cultivation.

Few raw-material magnates have gotten a shot at winning these allotments, and HAGL alone reportedly controls more than 80,000 hectares of land in the region.

A deal that the company closed with the Laotian government shows how it succeeded in becoming a major player in the rubber business. When the country won the bidding to host the 2009 Southeast Asian Games, it urgently needed the help of foreign investors to put on this major event. In return for providing the equivalent of $19 million (€14.6 million) in (credit) financing for the athletes’ village, HAGL received concessions to 10,000 hectares of land on which it was allowed to clear forests and plant rubber trees in their stead. Locals living on the land often only learned about the deal when the bulldozers arrived.

Since the Vietnamese company enjoys the support of Laos’ central government, local politicians are powerless. "Of course we are also worried about the future and the climate," says one public official in Attapeu, a provincial capital in southern Laos. HAGL’s deforestation activities will transform this part of the country for generations, he continues, but he also notes that: "Laos is a poor country, so what other option do we have? We need development." And HAGL promises development.

Global Witness also accuses the company of having used direct personal ties with power brokers in Cambodia and Laos to secure concessions for its land grab. In Cambodia, for example, the area that individual companies are allowed to acquire titles to is limited to 10,000 hectares. But the rubber lords surpassed these limits by using a convoluted network of subsidiaries to secure additional concessions. The companies also regularly clear areas outside those for which they have been granted concessions.

Already in 2012, the United Nations released a critical report on Cambodia in which it said: "The granting and management of economic and other land concessions in Cambodia suffer from a lack of transparency and adherence to existing laws." It is doubtful whether the domestic population benefits from how the land is used, it continues, while corruption is rampant and there are "well documented, serious and widespread human rights violations associated with land concessions." The report also notes that the environment is being destroyed, and that locals aren’t being given any say in concession-related matters and are being stripped of their livelihood. Concession holders sometimes use violence, it adds, and have even been supported by the military.

Laos residents are experiencing the same thing. Some of the uprooted farmers in Attapeu Province have withdrawn into a forest clearing upstream along the Xe Kaman, a river that winds its course through southeastern Laos like a brown ribbon. They are afraid of the Vietnamese, and anyone who picks a fight with the plantation company has to contend with Laotian authorities.

Many here are still hoping to receive compensation for the stolen land, among them the haggard young man from the village Ban Hatxan. People from HAGL paid the farmer 1.5 million kip, or about €150, for three hectares of land. They initially didn’t intend to compensate him for the house. "They said: ‘Why do you want money for that, seeing that it burnt down?’" he says. In the end, one of the men handed him 16,000 kip — or just enough to buy a noodle soup with meat at a restaurant in the nearby provincial capital Attapeu. Until the government makes a new plot of land available to him, the farmer has no other choice but to work on the HAGL plantation with others who were also displaced.

Questioning Ethics and Sustainability Policies

Is it possible that Deutsche Bank really knew nothing about all this? That’s hard to believe. In the share prospectus HAGL published before being listed on the London Stock Exchange, the company itself alluded to legal violations. The document notes how some of HAGL’s "existing projects are being developed without necessary government approvals, permits or licences." It also adds that "development and operation of certain projects are not fully in compliance with applicable laws and regulations."

HAGL subsequently claimed that some of the passages in the prospectus had been incorrectly translated, and that it has always acted in accordance with the laws. The company could not be reached for further comment, though.

For its part, Deutsche Bank states that an assessment conducted by the DWS fund, which reportedly only has a 0.6 percent stake in HAGL, found "no evidence of a violation of internationally accepted norms." Were there any proof to substantiate the allegations, it added, the bank would enter a dialogue with the companies to improve conditions related to environmental and social issues.

However, HAGL actually even broke Vietnamese laws with its Deutsche Bank-orchestrated listing on the London exchange and was fined by the country’s securities watchdog for doing so.

In any case, financing the rubber lords does not conform to the sustainable banking standards that Deutsche Bank officially professes. "How can Deutsche Bank expect customers and shareholders to believe what it tells them about its ethics and sustainability policies when it is secretively bankrolling these activities?" Megan MacInnes, who is in charge of land issues for Global Witness, asks in a statement.
MacInnes also says this isn’t the first time that Deutsche Bank has attracted attention for financing land-grabbing. The Frankfurt-based bankers must use their influence, she says, "to bring the companies’ operations back in line with the law, and fix its policies so this doesn’t happen again."

At Deutsche Bank, though, there is quite a difference between claims and reality. And that remains the case in the first year of the cultural transformation pledged by the bank’s two new co-heads, Anshu Jain and Jürgen Fitschen.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/bus … 99324.html

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Wed May 15, 2013 9:58 am

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Business • No Bank Deposits Will Be Spared from Confiscation

Published May 1, 2013 | By admin

No Bank Deposits Will Be Spared from Confiscation

By Matthias Chang
Global Research, April 24, 2013

I challenge anyone to prove me wrong that confiscation of bank deposits is legalized daylight robbery

Bank depositors in the UK and USA may think that their bank deposits would not be confiscated as they are insured and no government would dare embark on such a drastic action to bail out insolvent banks.

Before I explain why confiscation of bank deposits in the UK and US is a certainty and absolutely legal, I need all readers of this article to do the following:

Ask your local police, sheriffs, lawyers, judges the following questions:

1) If I place my money with a lawyer as a stake-holder and he uses the money without my consent, has the lawyer committed a crime?

2) If I store a bushel of wheat or cotton in a warehouse and the owner of the warehouse sold my wheat/cotton without my consent or authority, has the warehouse owner committed a crime?

3) If I place monies with my broker (stock or commodity) and the broker uses my monies for other purposes and or contrary to my instructions, has the broker committed a crime?

I am confident that the answer to the above questions is a Yes!

However, for the purposes of this article, I would like to first highlight the situation of the deposit / storage of wheat with a warehouse owner in relation to the deposit of money / storage with a banker.

First, you will notice that all wheat is the same i.e. the wheat in one bushel is no different from the wheat in another bushel. Likewise with cotton, it is indistinguishable. The deposit of a bushel of wheat with the warehouse owner in law constitutes a bailment. Ownership of the bushel of wheat remains with you and there is no transfer of ownership at all to the warehouse owner.

And as stated above, if the owner sells the bushel of wheat without your consent or authority, he has committed a crime as well as having committed a civil wrong (a tort) of conversion – converting your property to his own use and he can be sued.

Let me use another analogy. If a cashier in a supermarket removes $100 from the till on Friday to have a frolic on Saturday, he has committed theft, even though he may replace the $100 on Monday without the knowledge of the owner / manager of the supermarket. The $100 the cashier stole on Friday is also indistinguishable from the $100 he put back in the till on Monday. In both situations – the wheat in the warehouse and the $100 dollar bill in the till, which have been unlawfully misappropriated would constitute a crime.

Keep this principle and issue at the back of your mind.

Now we shall proceed with the money that you have deposited with your banker.

I am sure that most of you have little or no knowledge about banking, specifically fractional reserve banking.

Since you were a little kid, your parents have encouraged you to save some money to instil in you the good habit of money management.

And when you grew up and got married, you in turn instilled the same discipline in your children. Your faith in the integrity of the bank is almost absolute. Your money in the bank would earn an interest income.

And when you want your money back, all you needed to do is to withdraw the money together with the accumulated interest. Never for a moment did you think that you had transferred ownership of your money to the bank. Your belief was grounded in like manner as the owner of the bushel of wheat stored in the warehouse.

However, this belief is and has always been a lie. You were led to believe this lie because of savvy advertisements by the banks and government assurances that your money is safe and is protected by deposit insurance.

But, the insurance does not cover all the monies that you have deposited in the bank, but to a limited amount e.g. $250,000 in the US by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), Germany €100,000, UK £85,000 etc.

But, unlike the owner of the bushel of wheat who has deposited the wheat with the warehouse owner, your ownership of the monies that you have deposited with the bank is transferred to the bank and all you have is the right to demand its repayment. And, if the bank fails to repay your monies (e.g. $100), your only remedy is to sue the bank and if the bank is insolvent you get nothing.

You may recover some of your money if your deposit is covered by an insurance scheme as referred to earlier but in a fixed amount. But, there is a catch here. Most insurance schemes whether backed by the government or not do not have sufficient monies to cover all the deposits in the banking system.

So, in the worst case scenario – a systemic collapse, there is no way for you to get your money back.

In fact, and as illustrated in the Cyprus banking fiasco, the authorities went to the extent of confiscating your deposits to pay the banks’ creditors. When that happened, ordinary citizens and financial analysts cried out that such confiscation was daylight robbery. But, is it?

Surprise, surprise!

It will come as a shock to all of you to know that such daylight robbery is perfectly legal and this has been so for hundreds of years.

Let me explain.

The reason is that unlike the owner of the bushel of wheat whose ownership of the wheat WAS NEVER TRANSFERRED to the warehouse owner when the same was deposited, the moment you deposited your money with the bank, the ownership is transferred to the bank.

Your status is that of A CREDITOR TO THE BANK and the BANK IS IN LAW A DEBTOR to you. You are deemed to have “lent” your money to the bank for the bank to apply to its banking business (even to gamble in the biggest casino in the world – the global derivatives casino).

You have become a creditor, AN UNSECURED CREDITOR. Therefore, by law, in the insolvency of a bank, you as an unsecured creditor stand last in the queue of creditors to be paid out of any funds and or assets which the bank has to pay its creditors. The secured creditors are always first in line to be paid. It is only after secured creditors have been paid and there are still some funds left (usually, not much, more often zilch!) that unsecured creditors are paid and the sums pro-rated among all the unsecured creditors.

This is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

The law has been in existence for hundreds of years and was established in England by the House of Lords in the case Foley v Hill in 1848.

When a customer deposits money with his banker, the relationship that arises is one of creditor and debtor, with the banker liable to repay the money deposited when demanded by the customer. Once money has been paid to the banker, it belongs to the banker and he is free to use the money for his own purpose.

I will now quote the relevant portion of the judgment of the House of Lords handed down by Lord Cottenham, the Lord Chancellor. He stated thus:

“Money when paid into a bank, ceases altogether to be the money of the principal… it is then the money of the banker, who is bound to return an equivalent by paying a similar sum to that deposited with him when he is asked for it.

The money paid into the banker’s, is money known by the principal to be placed there for the purpose of being under the control of the banker; it is then the banker’s money; he is known to deal with it as his own; he makes what profit of it he can, which profit he retains himself,…

The money placed in the custody of the banker is, to all intent and purposes, the money of the banker, to do with it as he pleases; he is guilty of no breach of trust in employing it; he is not answerable TO THE PRINCIPAL IF HE PUTS IT INTO JEOPARDY, IF HE ENGAGES IN A HAZARDOUS SPECULATION; he is not bound to keep it or deal with it as the property of the principal, but he is of course answerable for the amount, because he has contracted, having received that money, to repay to the principal, when demanded, a sum equivalent to that paid into his hands.” (quoted in UK Law Essays, Relationship Between A Banker And Customer,That Of A Creditor/Debtor, emphasis added,)

Holding that the relationship between a banker and his customer was one of debtor and creditor and not one of trusteeship, Lord Brougham said:

“This trade of a banker is to receive money, and use it as if it were his own, he becoming debtor to the person who has lent or deposited with him the money to use as his own, and for which money he is accountable as a debtor. I cannot at all confound the situation of a banker with that of a trustee, and conclude that the banker is a debtor with a fiduciary character.”

In plain simple English – bankers cannot be prosecuted for breach of trust, because it owes no fiduciary duty to the depositor / customer, as he is deemed to be using his own money to speculate etc. There is absolutely no criminal liability.

The trillion dollar question is, Why has no one in the Justice Department or other government agencies mentioned this legal principle?

The reason why no one dare speak this legal truth is because there would be a run on the banks when all the Joe Six-Packs wise up to the fact that their deposits with the bankers CONSTITUTE IN LAW A LOAN TO THE BANK and the bank can do whatever it likes even to indulge in hazardous speculation such as gambling in the global derivative casino.

The Joe Six-Packs always consider the bank the creditor even when he deposits money in the bank. No depositor ever considers himself as the creditor!

Yes, Eric Holder, the US Attorney-General is right when he said that bankers cannot be prosecuted for the losses suffered by the bank. This is because a banker cannot be prosecuted for losing his “own money” as stated by the House of Lords. This is because when money is deposited with the bank, that money belongs to the banker.

The reason that if a banker is prosecuted it would collapse the entire banking system is a big lie.

The US Attorney-General could not and would not state the legal principle because it would cause a run on the banks when people discover that their monies are not safe with bankers as they can in law use the monies deposited as their own even to speculate.

What is worrisome is that your right to be repaid arises only when you demand payment.

Obviously, when you demand payment, the bank must pay you. But, if you demand payment after the bank has collapsed and is insolvent, it is too late. Your entitlement to be repaid is that of a lonely unsecured creditor and only if there are funds left after liquidation to be paid out to all the unsecured creditors and the remaining funds to be pro-rated. You would be lucky to get ten cents on the dollar.

So, when the Bank of England, the FED and the BIS issued the guidelines which became the template for the Cyprus “bail-in” (which was endorsed by the G-20 Cannes Summit in 2011), it was merely a circuitous way of stating the legal position without arousing the wrath of the people, as they well knew that if the truth was out, there would be a revolution and blood on the streets. It is therefore not surprising that the global central bankers came out with this nonsensical advisory:

“The objective of an effective resolution regime is to make feasible the resolution of financial institutions without severe systemic disruption and without exposing taxpayers to losses, while protecting vital economic functions through mechanisms which make it possible for shareholders and unsecured and uninsured creditors to absorb losses in a manner that respects the hierarchy of claims in liquidation.”(quoted in FSB Consultative Document: Effective Resolution of Systemically …)

This is the kind of complex technical jargon used by bankers to confuse the people, especially depositors and to cover up what I have stated in plain and simple English in the foregoing paragraphs.

The key words of the BIS guideline are:

“without severe systemic disruptions” (i.e. bank runs),

“while protecting vital economic functions” (i.e. protecting vested interests – bankers),

“unsecured creditors” (i.e. your monies, you are the dummy),

“respects the hierarchy of claims in liquidation” (i.e. you are last in the queue to be paid, after all secured creditors have been paid).

This means all depositors are losers!

http://www.globalresearch.ca/no-bank-de … on/5332743

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Wed May 01, 2013 12:16 pm

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

American • ‘Perpetuating Blight’: Deutsche Bank ‘Slumlord’ Case Going

Published April 25, 2013 | By admin

‘Perpetuating Blight’: Deutsche Bank ‘Slumlord’ Case Going to Trial

AFP
Is Deutsche Bank one of the biggest "slumlords" in Los Angeles? The city thinks so, and has brought a lawsuit against the German banking giant that is headed to court now that a dismissal bid was rejected.

It appears that the real estate crisis fallout in the United States isn’t over for Deutsche Bank. A judge has rejected the bank’s bid to dísmiss a lawsuit that has accused the bank of becoming one of the biggest "slumlords" in Los Angeles, reports said on Wednesday.

ANZEIGE

The 2011 case brought by the city of L.A. alleges that the bank allowed hundreds of properties to fall derelict and evicted low-income residents illegally in order to sell the properties after foreclosure. With the bid’s rejection, the case will now go to court.
"This ruling will now allow our action to move forward to trial and ultimately to holding the bank accountable for its intolerable practice of perpetuating blight," city attorney Carmen Trutanich said in a statement to news agency Reuters.

The city hopes to get a court order to force Deutsche Bank to repair the properties and put a stop to the evictions. The bank also faces damage payments that could reach hundreds of millions of dollars.

From Boom to Blight

Many Americans lost their homes when the housing bubble burst beginning around 2006, sparking a credit crisis in the country. In the boom and its aftermath, subsidiaries of Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest, reportedly took on the titles of over 2,000 properties in the city.

In hopes of combating increased blight following the wave of foreclosures, L.A. passed a law requiring banks to properly maintain run-down properties or face fines. Poorer neighborhoods have seen the worst of the problem, which has strained municipal services and increased crime, the city says.
In response to the court decision, reached in an April 8 hearing and released on Tuesday, Deutsche Bank told Reuters the city had targeted the "wrong party" and that it would continue to "vigorously" fight the case. The bank has said that loan servicers were contracted to handle the properties.

Court cases over US real estate interests have already cost Deutsche Bank a substantial amount. Last year alone, the bank agreed to pay some $202 milllion to avoid a lawsuit against its subsidiary Mortgage IT. In early April, the bank got rid of billions in US real estate loans to even out its balance sheet.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/bus … 96481.html

Statistics: Posted by yoda — Thu Apr 25, 2013 6:05 am

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Gold and Silver • Largest Dutch Bank Unable To Deliver Gold To Customers

Published April 24, 2013 | By admin

Largest Dutch Bank Unable To Deliver Gold To Customers

https://www.hardassetsalliance.com/inve … -customers

Hard Assets Alliance Team April 05, 2013
The Hard Assets Alliance has been warning readers and customers about the perils of big banks. The latest victim: ABN AMRO, which is the largest Dutch bank in the Eurozone. It recently defaulted on its gold deliveries to customers.

Largest Dutch bank defaults on physical gold deliveries to customers
GOLDAPRIL 3, 2013BY: KENNETH SCHORTGEN JR

http://www.examiner.com/article/largest … rs?cid=rss

Last week, a rubicon was crossed in the precious metals market as one of the largest banks in Europe defaulted on their gold contracts, and informed their customers there was no physical gold available for delivery.

ABN AMRO, the largest Dutch bank in the Eurozone, issued a letter to their gold contract customers of failure of delivery, and instead will pay account holders in a paper currency equivalent to the current spot value of the metal.

ABN AMRO, the biggest Dutch bank, has sent a letter to its clients stating that they will no longer be able to take physical deliveries of the gold they have bought through ABN. Instead they are offered money at the current market rate for gold. Basically, instead of owning a risk free, physical asset (a gold bar or a gold coin), the bank’s clients now own a monetary claim on ABN AMRO, being exposed to the bank’s credit risk. – Voice of Russia

Over the past two months, there has been a concerted effort by the major Western banks to bring down the price of gold and silver, even as countries like Russia, Iran, and China continue to accumulate the physical metal in large quantities. Like the folly of betting against the stock markets when the Fed is pumping up equities with $85 billion per month, going against the J.P. Morgan silver short machine in the futures market has been a losing proposition for silver bulls.

Interestingly for Europe however, since the Eurozone crisis spread from Greece to Spain, Italy, and Cyprus, the fastest growing currency being purchased by retail investors is Bitcoin. Bitcoin is a digital currency that is out of the control of sovereign central banks, and to this point, has not been manipulated by inflationary monetary policy.

In investing circles there is an adage which says, if you don’t hold it, you don’t own it. Whether it is land, metals, or other hard assets, if it is held in a bank, in a paper instrument, or in a paper currency, the documented owner has management control, but not physical control. And as the world saw last month in Cyprus, the government, or even a major bank like ABN AMRO, can change the terms of a contract at any time, and return to investors asset values set by the bank, and not the customer’s intention.

Statistics: Posted by DIGGER DAN — Wed Apr 24, 2013 7:58 am

View full post on opinions.caduceusx.com

Posted in Of interest | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment
← Older posts

Link1 | Link2 | Link3

Copyright © 2013. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by WordPress and WordPress Theme created with Artisteer.