turninforhome10
09-07-2011, 10:20 AM
http://www.americanbanker.com/issue...-1041928-1.html
This was why I was bringing a dead idea so late in the game. I had figured that the closer we get to the elections the more information that will be coming forward. We are just at the tip of the iceberg. If we ever get to the real truth it will shake all foundations of an already eroded American confidence. How will S&P rate US debt when our the whole of Fed could be under indictment, or at least those from Goldman Sachs, they did get legal counsel last week. The closer we get to Caucus time the more career carnage will be unleashed and the average voter will further turn away from being reliable polling data.
The next step in the investigation should involve politicians and when politicians have the opportunity to turn or burn, we will either get more indictments (patsies) or a dead end on any really big players. I predict Bernanke will be before a hearing committee before Jan if the States Attorneys generals can continue to pick up steam.
What would you pay for this service gamblers.
Conceptually, such arrangements are analogous to letting a gambler with $10 in casino chips place a $100 bet at a blackjack table on the assumption that he'll win. A 2003 Standard & Poor's analysis modeled the most popular type of deal and found that in the event of high claims, the reinsurance vehicle's funds wouldn't be enough to cover the losses it was supposed to take on.
"The captive is unable to pay its full contractual exposure," S&P wrote.
The deals had yet another unusual sweetener, investigators alleged.
Each of a bank's reinsurance vehicles was legally separate not only from the bank's main reinsurance subsidiary but also from all the other funds. If a reinsurance deal didn't have enough money to pay its obligations, the bank could abandon it and leave the mortgage insurer with the unpaid bill.
To carry on the casino analogy above, it would be as if the gambler with $10 in chips were allowed to make that same $100 bet at ten different blackjack tables, collecting on the winning bets and renouncing the losers.
__________________
There is enough natural inconsistency in horse racing without having it forced upon the public by unscrupulous men, yet there is not one-tenth of one per cent, as much crookedness on the turf as it is given credit for.
Pittsburgh Phil
This was why I was bringing a dead idea so late in the game. I had figured that the closer we get to the elections the more information that will be coming forward. We are just at the tip of the iceberg. If we ever get to the real truth it will shake all foundations of an already eroded American confidence. How will S&P rate US debt when our the whole of Fed could be under indictment, or at least those from Goldman Sachs, they did get legal counsel last week. The closer we get to Caucus time the more career carnage will be unleashed and the average voter will further turn away from being reliable polling data.
The next step in the investigation should involve politicians and when politicians have the opportunity to turn or burn, we will either get more indictments (patsies) or a dead end on any really big players. I predict Bernanke will be before a hearing committee before Jan if the States Attorneys generals can continue to pick up steam.
What would you pay for this service gamblers.
Conceptually, such arrangements are analogous to letting a gambler with $10 in casino chips place a $100 bet at a blackjack table on the assumption that he'll win. A 2003 Standard & Poor's analysis modeled the most popular type of deal and found that in the event of high claims, the reinsurance vehicle's funds wouldn't be enough to cover the losses it was supposed to take on.
"The captive is unable to pay its full contractual exposure," S&P wrote.
The deals had yet another unusual sweetener, investigators alleged.
Each of a bank's reinsurance vehicles was legally separate not only from the bank's main reinsurance subsidiary but also from all the other funds. If a reinsurance deal didn't have enough money to pay its obligations, the bank could abandon it and leave the mortgage insurer with the unpaid bill.
To carry on the casino analogy above, it would be as if the gambler with $10 in chips were allowed to make that same $100 bet at ten different blackjack tables, collecting on the winning bets and renouncing the losers.
__________________
There is enough natural inconsistency in horse racing without having it forced upon the public by unscrupulous men, yet there is not one-tenth of one per cent, as much crookedness on the turf as it is given credit for.
Pittsburgh Phil