PDA

View Full Version : U.S. Issues I just want to thank the Fed Gov....


petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:20 PM
Today several people will be put on the unemployment lines because the Fed Gov decided the bank where my wife works needs to be shut down.

Here is the skinny...

They took $0, that's 0 with a Z, 0 $'s from TARP.

They were told they had to raise more capital so the owners of the bank tossed in almost $20 mil of THEIR money

They were told to raise more so they sold off a few branches....

They were told to raise more so they put the company up for sale....

Then our wonderful government stepped in and said, sorry we are closing you down and selling you to who WE want to own you!

Now here is the gig, the bank is not "struggling" but not doing great. They have a lot of business loans that aren't getting a full payment every month but they are getting something and they are working with their customers so everyone can stay in business.

Well, that still goes down on the Fed books as a bad loan.

So now not only is a bank that cares about its employees, customers and community being shut down and people forced out of work, we still have companies like Citi and Bank of America, who took billions of tax payer $'s that are in no threat of being shut down.

I asked my wife why the bank didn't raise their interest rates to draw new deposits to raise capital. Answer: The Fed Gov won't let them.

This is about the biggest fucking hypocrisy I have ever seen. A bank that took nothing from the tax payers, put their money in to raise capital, not tax payer money, works with their customers on things Obama loves to tout like reduction on loans or loan forgiveness so their customers can stay in business and keep their employees working as well is being shut down and sold off to someone they don't even have a say on.

WTF is wrong with this picture? WTF can some bank take billiosn of OUR $'s and be allowed to stick around but a bank that said, "we'll find a way to make it without screwing the tax payer and our customers" gets shut down?

Thank you, Obama. Thank you, Democrats. You have shown about as much hypocrisy as you can on this. You are putting hard working people out on the street for no good damn reason. This bank doesn't need you. This bank was able to manage their way through the hard times without you fucking it all up for them and their customers. This bank asked you for no help. This bank did what a good community bank should do and chose to manage their way through the hard times and decide what pills they had to swallow to do it. This bank would have been just fucking fine at the end of the day.

It's not even a publicly traded company!!! Sure they had problems. But unlike our President and our fucked up Congress, they figured out how to work through those problems. That is until Uncle Sam got involved and fucked it all up for everyone.

Way to go you fucking jack offs.

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 04:36 PM
Evil banks.


Sorry for the entire crappy deal. Did wife keep a job through all this?

BucEyedPea
08-12-2011, 04:37 PM
It's called fascism.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:38 PM
Evil banks.


Sorry for the entire crappy deal. Did wife keep a job through all this?

Don't know yet..

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 04:41 PM
Don't know yet..


That really sucks. Some asshat HR person letting people swing till they announce a decision.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:42 PM
That really sucks. Some asshat HR person letting people swing till they announce a decision.

Oh no, they have no say on the matter. This is all the Fed Gov now calling the shots. Right now my wife is waiting to have her desk inspected by a cop and agents from the OCC and FDIC. She cannot leave until they tell her she can.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:44 PM
It's called fascism.

It's call a bunch of fucking bullshit!

I just want everyone on this board to remember this the next time you hear about the Obama Admin telling banks they should do things like loan forgivness or reduce principal owed. It's all a bunch of billy-jack bullshit.

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 04:44 PM
She should call Channel 5

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:46 PM
This bank did not take 1 fucking dime from the tax payer yet here is the Fed Gov running their business into the god damn ground. If the Fed Gov would have just stayed the fuck out of it from the get go they would be doing just fine. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to raise more capital. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to have to sell off branches. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital a second time. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital for a 3rd time.

Do we see the fucking problem here?

vailpass
08-12-2011, 04:47 PM
Sorry to hear it, hope your wife can keep her job (if she wants it).

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:47 PM
She should call Channel 5

Nah, not gonna do any good and it could hurt her future opportunities.

FD
08-12-2011, 04:48 PM
This bank did not take 1 ****ing dime from the tax payer yet here is the Fed Gov running their business into the god damn ground. If the Fed Gov would have just stayed the **** out of it from the get go they would be doing just fine. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to raise more capital. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to have to sell off branches. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital a second time. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital for a 3rd time.

Do we see the ****ing problem here?

I'm sorry to hear things didn't work out. I hope the bank's employees land on their feet.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:50 PM
And the ****ing capper of all if this.....as her bank gets shut down for "not raising enough capital"...our mother ****ing Congress is $14.6 tril in debt with a President screaming and whining because we got downgraded and he still wants to spend even more money we don't have!!!

Is that mother ****ing irony or what? the brokest dicks in this country shutting someone else down for not having what they consider is enough capital.

You can't make this ****ing shit up!!!!

BucEyedPea
08-12-2011, 04:50 PM
This bank did not take 1 ****ing dime from the tax payer yet here is the Fed Gov running their business into the god damn ground. If the Fed Gov would have just stayed the **** out of it from the get go they would be doing just fine. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to raise more capital. It was the Fed Gov that forced them to have to sell off branches. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital a second time. It was the Fed Gov that told them to raise more capital for a 3rd time.

Do we see the ****ing problem here?

Yeah, it's fascism. I meant it. They don't really own it if they can't control it because the state controls it.
Fascism is also a bunch of bull-shit too. So we're both right.

I hope you wife can keep her job but she may want to look for another anyway.

Backwards Masking
08-12-2011, 04:55 PM
Today at my job a military vechicle was brought in and had to have the red and blue vinyl completely stripped and black lettering (same exact design, same location) put on over it, because they decided the black lettering "looked better". Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't we 10 trillion in debt and in the middle of an econonomic crisis? i'm not trying to sound anti military but if we're cutting funding to libraries and education couldn't the military do just fine with the PERFECTLY FUNCTIONAL lettering that wa already there instead of WASTING tax payers money replacing it? For the record I thought the red and blue lettering looked better anyway.

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 04:58 PM
Today at my job a military vechicle was brought in and had to have the red and blue vinyl completely stripped and black lettering (same exact design, same location) put on over it, because they decided the black lettering "looked better". Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't we 10 trillion in debt and in the middle of an econonomic crisis? i'm not trying to sound anti military but if we're cutting funding to libraries and education couldn't the military do just fine with the PERFECTLY FUNCTIONAL lettering that wa already there instead of WASTING tax payers money replacing it? For the record I thought the red and blue lettering looked better anyway.

Doesn't the military have a motor pool and shop to do that?

petegz28
08-12-2011, 04:59 PM
The Fed Gov gets downgraded and our President goes on a temper tantrum tirade, the sentate calls meetings to harass SP for downgrading them but yet, even though THEY are $14.6 til in debt...even though THEY need to raise capital....they insist on adding $7 tril MORE to our deficit and then tell someone else they are going to shut them down for not having enough capital.

This is just pure fucking insanity. These cock suckers in D.C. are so fucking tone deaf. I feel like I am in the Twilight Zone right now.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 05:06 PM
Update: Wife just called and said she has no idea when she will be home. They are FORCING everyone to stay until all the processing is done. Then she has to work this weekend, both days, to finish it all out but yet...they won't tell her if she has a job or not!?!?!?

I call that being held hostage and would tell them go take a fucking hike. You tell me if I have a job and then we will discuss WTF you are going to make me do.

Calcountry
08-12-2011, 05:13 PM
Today several people will be put on the unemployment lines because the Fed Gov decided the bank where my wife works needs to be shut down.

Here is the skinny...

They took $0, that's 0 with a Z, 0 $'s from TARP.

They were told they had to raise more capital so the owners of the bank tossed in almost $20 mil of THEIR money

They were told to raise more so they sold off a few branches....

They were told to raise more so they put the company up for sale....

Then our wonderful government stepped in and said, sorry we are closing you down and selling you to who WE want to own you!

Now here is the gig, the bank is not "struggling" but not doing great. They have a lot of business loans that aren't getting a full payment every month but they are getting something and they are working with their customers so everyone can stay in business.

Well, that still goes down on the Fed books as a bad loan.

So now not only is a bank that cares about its employees, customers and community being shut down and people forced out of work, we still have companies like Citi and Bank of America, who took billions of tax payer $'s that are in no threat of being shut down.

I asked my wife why the bank didn't raise their interest rates to draw new deposits to raise capital. Answer: The Fed Gov won't let them.

This is about the biggest ****ing hypocrisy I have ever seen. A bank that took nothing from the tax payers, put their money in to raise capital, not tax payer money, works with their customers on things Obama loves to tout like reduction on loans or loan forgiveness so their customers can stay in business and keep their employees working as well is being shut down and sold off to someone they don't even have a say on.

WTF is wrong with this picture? WTF can some bank take billiosn of OUR $'s and be allowed to stick around but a bank that said, "we'll find a way to make it without screwing the tax payer and our customers" gets shut down?

Thank you, Obama. Thank you, Democrats. You have shown about as much hypocrisy as you can on this. You are putting hard working people out on the street for no good damn reason. This bank doesn't need you. This bank was able to manage their way through the hard times without you ****ing it all up for them and their customers. This bank asked you for no help. This bank did what a good community bank should do and chose to manage their way through the hard times and decide what pills they had to swallow to do it. This bank would have been just ****ing fine at the end of the day.

It's not even a publicly traded company!!! Sure they had problems. But unlike our President and our ****ed up Congress, they figured out how to work through those problems. That is until Uncle Sam got involved and ****ed it all up for everyone.

Way to go you ****ing jack offs.Don't you understand, if the Marxist control the banks, they control who gets loans.

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 05:13 PM
Swear to God Get Channel 5 on this.

Calcountry
08-12-2011, 05:13 PM
It's called fascism.Bingo.

Calcountry
08-12-2011, 05:15 PM
It's call a bunch of ****ing bullshit!

I just want everyone on this board to remember this the next time you hear about the Obama Admin telling banks they should do things like loan forgivness or reduce principal owed. It's all a bunch of billy-jack bullshit.What do you think that bitch did when he took over Chrysler, and closed dealerships that were profitable? They were republican, but profitable, so he closed them.

Bondholders? screw them rich people, my union friends need theirs.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 05:18 PM
Ok, they are not FORCING everyone to stay. She said if someone had to leave the would "work with them". So it's pretty much an unspoken hostage situation where they will push it as far as the legally can.


All IA ms aying is, if you can't tell me I got a job then you can do your own fucking dirty work and kiss the fattest part of my ass!

RedThat
08-12-2011, 05:30 PM
Today several people will be put on the unemployment lines because the Fed Gov decided the bank where my wife works needs to be shut down.

Here is the skinny...

They took $0, that's 0 with a Z, 0 $'s from TARP.

They were told they had to raise more capital so the owners of the bank tossed in almost $20 mil of THEIR money

They were told to raise more so they sold off a few branches....

They were told to raise more so they put the company up for sale....

Then our wonderful government stepped in and said, sorry we are closing you down and selling you to who WE want to own you!

Now here is the gig, the bank is not "struggling" but not doing great. They have a lot of business loans that aren't getting a full payment every month but they are getting something and they are working with their customers so everyone can stay in business.

Well, that still goes down on the Fed books as a bad loan.

So now not only is a bank that cares about its employees, customers and community being shut down and people forced out of work, we still have companies like Citi and Bank of America, who took billions of tax payer $'s that are in no threat of being shut down.

I asked my wife why the bank didn't raise their interest rates to draw new deposits to raise capital. Answer: The Fed Gov won't let them.

This is about the biggest ****ing hypocrisy I have ever seen. A bank that took nothing from the tax payers, put their money in to raise capital, not tax payer money, works with their customers on things Obama loves to tout like reduction on loans or loan forgiveness so their customers can stay in business and keep their employees working as well is being shut down and sold off to someone they don't even have a say on.

WTF is wrong with this picture? WTF can some bank take billiosn of OUR $'s and be allowed to stick around but a bank that said, "we'll find a way to make it without screwing the tax payer and our customers" gets shut down?

Thank you, Obama. Thank you, Democrats. You have shown about as much hypocrisy as you can on this. You are putting hard working people out on the street for no good damn reason. This bank doesn't need you. This bank was able to manage their way through the hard times without you ****ing it all up for them and their customers. This bank asked you for no help. This bank did what a good community bank should do and chose to manage their way through the hard times and decide what pills they had to swallow to do it. This bank would have been just ****ing fine at the end of the day.

It's not even a publicly traded company!!! Sure they had problems. But unlike our President and our ****ed up Congress, they figured out how to work through those problems. That is until Uncle Sam got involved and ****ed it all up for everyone.

Way to go you ****ing jack offs.

Good post petegz28. Man that is so depressing to hear and an unfortunate cruel reality to bear with. After reading all that, it seems as if the banks in general are all controlled by those in power. It wouldn't surprise me if everything was all a conspiracy.

Those banks that don't contribute by not taking tax payers money aren't really benefitting those in power. It sounds like its all about how much sheep they can pull? And the ones that aren't pulled are cut off or stomped on.

Sure Obama can sugarcoat everything and feed the people what they want to hear but in the end his actions don't compliment his words. He is a politician. And Politicians are well just politicians? they say a bunch of bs to get people to believe in them so that way they can get the most votes, but in the end they don't do as they say and later we find out they're all about themselves. That doesn't surprise me.

BucEyedPea
08-12-2011, 05:35 PM
Ok, they are not FORCING everyone to stay. She said if someone had to leave the would "work with them". So it's pretty much an unspoken hostage situation where they will push it as far as the legally can.


All IA ms aying is, if you can't tell me I got a job then you can do your own ****ing dirty work and kiss the fattest part of my ass!

What about the folks who pitched in their own money. Do they get their money back?
I'd insist on it.

Garcia Bronco
08-12-2011, 05:40 PM
Ok, they are not FORCING everyone to stay. She said if someone had to leave the would "work with them". So it's pretty much an unspoken hostage situation where they will push it as far as the legally can.


All IA ms aying is, if you can't tell me I got a job then you can do your own ****ing dirty work and kiss the fattest part of my ass!

Let your wife finish out the work if she wants. Take a break and enjoy each other. Sunday, put together the resume and beat the pavement Monday. Quitting could also have severance implications. Unfortunately you have to ride the wave right now because this is happening. There is nothing you can do about it except get emotional. Which does you no good. Have something special for that wife when she gets home.

DenverChief
08-12-2011, 05:40 PM
Fuck banks. Credit Unions are the way to go. Sorry about your wife

Backwards Masking
08-12-2011, 07:36 PM
Doesn't the military have a motor pool and shop to do that?

apprently not, the co. i work for does stuff for them all the time. in fact, they said if it weren't for gov. jobs coming their way they'd have a hard time making ends meet.

2bikemike
08-12-2011, 07:49 PM
Sorry to hear this Pete. My daughter went through the exactly same thing awhile back. She landed on her feet and hopefully your wife wil too.

HonestChieffan
08-12-2011, 07:54 PM
apprently not, the co. i work for does stuff for them all the time. in fact, they said if it weren't for gov. jobs coming their way they'd have a hard time making ends meet.

Amazing.

petegz28
08-12-2011, 08:04 PM
Sorry to hear this Pete. My daughter went through the exactly same thing awhile back. She landed on her feet and hopefully your wife wil too.

She will find something, I am not worried about her. I am more pissed about the whole situation in general.

mlyonsd
08-12-2011, 08:34 PM
Sorry to hear this pete. Cheer yourself up by watching the rest of the game.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 12:25 PM
What bank is this?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 12:43 PM
What bank is this?

It doesn't matter and I am not going to say the name of the bank for various reasons.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:01 PM
Well it would be nice to at least try to find out the whole story. Is the federal govt shutting down small banks all over the country and forcing them to sell? Do you have any links describing this practice in general and why they're doing it?

orange
08-13-2011, 01:38 PM
First National Bank of Olathe.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/08/12/3073396/regulators-close-first-national.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 12, 2011Contact: Dean DeBuck
(202) 874-5770OCC Appoints Receiver for The First National Bank of Olathe
WASHINGTON — The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver for The First National Bank of Olathe, Olathe, Kansas. As of June 30, 2011, the bank had approximately $538 million of total assets.

The OCC acted after finding that the bank had experienced substantial dissipation of assets and earnings due to unsafe and unsound practices. The OCC also found that the bank incurred losses that depleted its capital, the bank is critically undercapitalized, and there is no reasonable prospect that the bank will become adequately capitalized without federal assistance.

The FDIC will release information about the resolution of the bank.

http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-106.html
# # #

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:46 PM
The FDIC and Enterprise Bank & Trust entered into a loss-share transaction on $419.6 million of the First National Bank of Olathe’s assets. Enterprise Bank will share in the losses on the asset pools covered under the agreement.

The FDIC was appointed receiver and estimated the cost to the deposit insurance fund at $116.6 million. The FDIC said the Enterprise Bank acquisition “was the least costly resolution.”


So basically if petegz's wife didn't work here, and the FDIC didn't do the "least costly resolution", he would make a thread complaining about govt waste?

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 01:47 PM
Today several people will be put on the unemployment lines because the Fed Gov decided the bank where my wife works needs to be shut down.

Who?

The closed bank’s six branches will reopen today as branches of Enterprise Bank, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said. Depositors will automatically become Enterprise Bank depositors.

Typically a bank will just keep its employees and managers through a switch like this. It happened here in Springfield, everybody kept their job.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:49 PM
apprently not, the co. i work for does stuff for them all the time. in fact, they said if it weren't for gov. jobs coming their way they'd have a hard time making ends meet.

Not to derail, but keep this in mind when advocating stuff like balanced budget right now - which would mean a gigantic instantaneous drop in govt spending. The govt doesn't just give money to poor people and illegals, it also is a huge driver of the economy, especially in a down investment climate like this when businesses are sitting on their hands.

You can make the argument that the govt shouldn't be driving the economy at all. But at least acknowledge that if you slash govt spending to the bone, a lot of businesses who rely on that are going to be out of work - and it's very likely the economy would contract to the point of throwing us into a full-blown depression.

orange
08-13-2011, 01:52 PM
Here's what I was looking for, an objective analysis:

http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/kansas/olathe/the-first-national-bank-of-olathe/

Dallas Chief
08-13-2011, 01:53 PM
First National Bank of Olathe.

http://www.kansascity.com/2011/08/12/3073396/regulators-close-first-national.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 12, 2011Contact: Dean DeBuck
(202) 874-5770OCC Appoints Receiver for The First National Bank of Olathe
WASHINGTON — The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) today appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) as receiver for The First National Bank of Olathe, Olathe, Kansas. As of June 30, 2011, the bank had approximately $538 million of total assets.

The OCC acted after finding that the bank had experienced substantial dissipation of assets and earnings due to unsafe and unsound practices. The OCC also found that the bank incurred losses that depleted its capital, the bank is critically undercapitalized, and there is no reasonable prospect that the bank will become adequately capitalized without federal assistance.

The FDIC will release information about the resolution of the bank.

http://www.occ.gov/news-issuances/news-releases/2011/nr-occ-2011-106.html
# # #

What a dickhead move. I've never neg repped anybody here in 9 years. Congratulations dipshit...

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:54 PM
I think we just had the only 3 left-of-center (non conspiratard) posters in the DC forum post back to back to back itt.

orange
08-13-2011, 01:54 PM
What a dickhead move. I've never neg repped anybody here in 9 years. Congratulations dipshit...

**** you, idiot. Bank closings are news, whatever you and petegz28 may think.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:56 PM
What a dickhead move. I've never neg repped anybody here in 9 years. Congratulations dipshit...

Why? He posted nothing other than easy-to-google public info.

Peteg made the thread. A ton of posters jumped all over the govt while only taking his side and knowing the vaguest of details. I don't see anything wrong with looking at the other side of the story, and to do that you have to know what bank it is.

HonestChieffan
08-13-2011, 01:57 PM
Hope Pete's wife comes out of this ok regardless of the whys and hows.

Orange needs to fuck himself. Just a tiny bit of compassion for a guy who's wife may get screwed over through no fault of her own and as a result of government intervention would be appropriate..what a dickhead.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 01:58 PM
Petegz said he wasn't worried about his wife, just pissed about the situation.

You guys must be having a really tough time with all the conflicting thoughts on this one. Let's see 1) banks are evil, but 2) petegz's wife works for bank. Also 3) govt bailouts are always bad, but 4) I wish govt would keep bailing out this bank (in the form of default risk to FDIC) for petegz's wife's sake.

Ouch! Brain hurt!

orange
08-13-2011, 02:02 PM
Hope Pete's wife comes out of this ok regardless of the whys and hows.

Orange needs to **** himself. Just a tiny bit of compassion for a guy who's wife may get screwed over through no fault of her own and as a result of government intervention would be appropriate..what a dickhead.

ROFL

It's a NEWS ARTICLE all over the entire nation. But it's a big, dark secret here on CP.

As for "compassion ...," she hasn't lost her job, has she? This is just one for "da govt. is da debbil" thread. How about a little compassion for the FNBO depositors who don't have to worry about their deposits, now.

BucEyedPea
08-13-2011, 02:05 PM
ROFLThis is just one for "da govt. is da debbil" thread.

Just like our Founders thought:

"Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master." ~ George Washington

The Constitution is not an instrument for the government to restrain the people, it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government."~ Patrick Henry

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 02:08 PM
ROFL

It's a NEWS ARTICLE all over the entire nation. But it's a big, dark secret here on CP.

As for "compassion ...," she hasn't lost her job, has she? This is just one for "da govt. is da debbil" thread. How about a little compassion for the FNBO depositors who don't have to worry about their deposits, now.

I actually don't think anybody's going to lose their job except the bank owners who set the loan policies.

HonestChieffan
08-13-2011, 02:10 PM
I actually don't think anybody's going to lose their job except the bank owners who set the loan policies.

Lets hope that is the case and Mrs. Pete comes out ok.

Dallas Chief
08-13-2011, 02:14 PM
**** you, idiot. Bank closings are news, whatever you and petegz28 may think.

derrrr... Why don't you take your lame ass reasoning to the Drain? Who the f*** do you think you are? Walter Cronkite? This involves someone on here's significant other and he stated directly that he didn't want it shared where she worked. He came on here to vent and probably looking for some support from his CP confidants. But oh no, Orange The News Avenger to the rescue!!! This is the public domian and we should ALL know about everything that ever happens in the world in every detail, objectively of course, huh? Why is it that most donk fans suffer from the most severist case of assholeitis? Must be the air, or lack thereof...

Sorry about your wife's troubles Pete. Sorry for POS like this orange peckersnot having zero respect.

orange
08-13-2011, 02:19 PM
derrrr... Why don't you take your lame ass reasoning to the Drain? Who the f*** do you think you are? Walter Cronkite?

As I said before, FOAD. I posted here because I post here. And I posted to counter the typical BULLSHIT RIGHT-TARD LIES that pass for thought among some of you.

And That's The Way It Is.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3268/2907462435_ce553353ce_z.jpg

p.s. While the fact that you RIGHT-TARDS don't read the news comes as no surprise whatsoever, you really shouldn't ascribe your personal failings to everyone else.

BucEyedPea
08-13-2011, 02:24 PM
LMAO at that pic. O.M.G.

Dallas Chief
08-13-2011, 02:31 PM
As I said before, FOAD. I posted here because I post here. And I posted to counter the typical BULLSHIT RIGHT-TARD LIES that pass for thought among some of you.

And That's The Way It Is.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3268/2907462435_ce553353ce_z.jpg

Cool. Keep justifying your need to be an insensitive pr!ck.

derrrrr... I had to prove him wrong. Truth, justice, and the Orange way!!! Now it's not because it is newsworthy, it is because I have to support the government position always at all times! I must make sure that the R's on the Planet can't express even a modicum of disgust with the current admin, even if it is directly impacting the lives of their loved ones...

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 02:35 PM
wtf are you frothing at the mouth about? You can't make your position correct just by getting madder and madder about it.

orange
08-13-2011, 02:39 PM
Cool. Keep justifying your need to be an insensitive pr!ck.

derrrrr... I had to prove him wrong. Truth, justice, and the Orange way!!! Now it's not because it is newsworthy, it is because I have to support the government position always at all times! I must make sure that the R's on the Planet can't express even a modicum of disgust with the current admin, even if it is directly impacting the lives of their loved ones...

Cool. Keep justifying your need to blame Obama for every perceived wrong turn in your - or anyone else's - life.

The FDIC has nothing to do with the "current admin." It's a NEW DEAL program to protect ordinary Americans from corrupt bank practices.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:45 PM
Petegz said he wasn't worried about his wife, just pissed about the situation.

You guys must be having a really tough time with all the conflicting thoughts on this one. Let's see 1) banks are evil, but 2) petegz's wife works for bank. Also 3) govt bailouts are always bad, but 4) I wish govt would keep bailing out this bank (in the form of default risk to FDIC) for petegz's wife's sake.

Ouch! Brain hurt!

Um the Fed gov didn't bail out this bank and the bank never asked them too. They poked their nose into a business where they didn't need too and fucked it all up. Got it? No on asked the Fed Gov for help yet they fucked it up anyway.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:46 PM
Who?



Typically a bank will just keep its employees and managers through a switch like this. It happened here in Springfield, everybody kept their job.

Dumb ass, all the operations people are going to be gone. JFC, where do you get this shit?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:48 PM
**** you, idiot. Bank closings are news, whatever you and petegz28 may think.

I think you're a complete jack off and classless idiot......

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:49 PM
I actually don't think anybody's going to lose their job except the bank owners who set the loan policies.

Wrong again, dumbass.

orange
08-13-2011, 02:50 PM
I think you're a complete jack off and classless idiot......

And I think you're a moron in a state of permanent right-tard panic. So there you go.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 02:50 PM
Um the Fed gov didn't bail out this bank and the bank never asked them too. They poked their nose into a business where they didn't need too and ****ed it all up. Got it? No on asked the Fed Gov for help yet they ****ed it up anyway.

If the bank couldn't pay their depositors, who pays? Do you understand what the FDIC is?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:52 PM
Here's what I was looking for, an objective analysis:

http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/kansas/olathe/the-first-national-bank-of-olathe/

That's hardly objective. Go fuck yourself. They were doing a lot of what your hero Obama says banks should do....work with their customers, etc. They didn't ask for help, they didn't need help. They were managing through their problems just fine until the Fed Gov stuck their fucking nose in it. The brokest organization on the planet telling someone else they don't have enough money to do business.

orange
08-13-2011, 02:53 PM
Um the Fed gov didn't bail out this bank and the bank never asked them too. They poked their nose into a business where they didn't need too and ****ed it all up. Got it? No on asked the Fed Gov for help yet they ****ed it up anyway.

This is utterly wrong, as usual.

When the FNBO slapped that "Deposits Federally Insured" sign on their window - to bring more depositors and make more money - they agreed to abide by the FDIC's terms.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:54 PM
If the bank couldn't pay their depositors, who pays? Do you understand what the FDIC is?

:spock: No, what is FDIC?

They were paying. What about this don't you get? If they have someone who has a loan and they work with that person, which Obama loves to say the banks should do, the loan still gets listed as a troubled asset. See, unlike our President and Congress, these people were actually finding a way to survive the troubles without fucking the tax payer. That is until the OCC and FDIC got involved.

orange
08-13-2011, 02:54 PM
That's hardly objective. Go **** yourself. They were doing a lot of what your hero Obama says banks should do....work with their customers, etc. They didn't ask for help, they didn't need help. They were managing through their problems just fine until the Fed Gov stuck their ****ing nose in it. The brokest organization on the planet telling someone else they don't have enough money to do business.

Out of $600 M in assets in 2010, they've lost half in a year. And this is your idea of "doing fine." :doh!:

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:55 PM
This is utterly wrong, as usual.

When the FNBO slapped that "Deposits Federally Insured" sign on their window - to bring more depositors and make more money - they agreed to abide by the FDIC's terms.

No shit, Sherlock. And it was your fucked up party that had to start fucking up all the rules that put them out of business. Hope you're happy, dick brain.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:56 PM
Out of $600 M in assets in 2010, they've lost half in a year. And this is your idea of "doing fine." :doh!:

If you read the OP, I said they weren't doing great but they weren't struggling either. They were managing their way through their problems just fine without the Fed Gov jacking it all up for everyone. And just so you know, you uninformed dickhead, they lost half those assets cause they sold off 4 branches you ****ing idiot.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 02:58 PM
If this wasn't your wife's bank, and the fed let them slide and ended up paying a lot more when they went under, we'd have another thread with someone exactly like you blaming the feds/Obama for being so stupid/wasteful and doing yet more bailouts.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 02:59 PM
And if this wasn't your wife's bank, and the fed let them slide and ended up paying a lot more when they went under, we'd have another thread with someone exactly like you blaming the feds for being so wasteful.

That's an assumption on your part and nothing more, asshole.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 03:02 PM
Right because no one ever complains about the feds wasting money on this forum.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:05 PM
Right because no one ever complains about the feds wasting money on this forum.

What money were they wasting? This bank never asked for any money when it was offered to them. Contrary to popular, leftist beliefs, there are companies out there that know how to manage themselves out of trouble without the Fed Gov being involved.

orange
08-13-2011, 03:08 PM
What money were they wasting? This bank never asked for any money when it was offered to them. Contrary to popular, leftist beliefs, there are companies out there that know how to manage themselves out of trouble without the Fed Gov being involved.

There may be such companies, but FNBO wasn't one of them.

http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/kansas/olathe/the-first-national-bank-of-olathe/

They were crashing. Hard. And that's the same link from above. The one you said isn't objective. It looks pretty objective to me. Just lots of numbers. Please explain what exactly banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org has against FNBO. Why are they not objective?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:10 PM
There may be such companies, but FNBO wasn't one of them.

http://banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org/banks/kansas/olathe/the-first-national-bank-of-olathe/

They were crashing. Hard. And that's the same link from above. The one you said isn't objective. It looks pretty objective to me. Just lots of numbers. Please explain what exactly banktracker.investigativereportingworkshop.org has against FNBO. Why are they not objective?

Get this through your ****ing head once and for all, they were managing through their troubles until the Fed Gov got involved and started ****ing it all up. But I forgot, Orange, you worked there, you knew the people at the top, you knew what the bank was doing. Sheesh, and here I thought you were just some dumbass looking up articles written by people that had no clue of the bank.

How objective can it be when you make stupid statements about their assets falling when you had no fucking clue as to why??? don't listen to me, Orange. Don't listen to someone with inside information. That would be almost to sensible for you.

orange
08-13-2011, 03:10 PM
What money were they wasting?

The $539 M in deposits that we taxpayers were on the hook for in a year or so, when this bank inevitably collapsed, perhaps?

This bank never asked for any money when it was offered to them.

And this is just plain FALSE. The FNBO asked the govt. to insure its deposits. Period. Insurance has a value. It's "money" the FNBO asked for from the govt.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:15 PM
Another insight for you, Orange, that your "objective" link fails to mention, they had a shitload of assets that were NOT brokered CD's but the Fed Gov in all their wisdom said they were when they weren't and made them dump them.

Do us all a favor and stfu already. You're fucking clueless as all hell when it comes to this situation.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:16 PM
The $539 M in deposits that we taxpayers were on the hook for in a year or so, when this bank inevitably collapsed, perhaps?



And this is just plain FALSE. The FNBO asked the govt. to insure its deposits. Period. Insurance has a value. It's "money" the FNBO asked for from the govt.

Again, clueless beyond belief but keep on reaching for your straws, pal. You're a fucking idiot in the dark. You have no clue of what you are talking about. They were never even close to defaulting .....until your heros stepped in anyway.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 03:17 PM
The $539 M in deposits that we taxpayers were on the hook for in a year or so, when this bank inevitably collapsed, perhaps?



And this is just plain FALSE. The FNBO asked the govt. to insure its deposits. Period. Insurance has a value. It's "money" the FNBO asked for from the govt.

This is not completely true either, Orange. FNBO may have asked the government for insurance..but the insurance is not free. Banks pay premiums to FDIC for the insurance they receive. So FNBO did not get money from the government, they got a service that they paid premiums for.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:20 PM
This is not completely true either, Orange. FNBO may have asked the government for insurance..but the insurance is not free. Banks pay premiums to FDIC for the insurance they receive. So FNBO did not get money from the government, they got a service that they paid premiums for.

No no no no! Orange says otherwise.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:21 PM
My wife is sitting here laughing her ass off at Orange saying how clueless this guy is and how he has not and inkling of a clue of what he is talking about.

orange
08-13-2011, 03:23 PM
My wife is sitting here laughing her ass off at Orange saying how clueless this guy is and how he has not and inkling of a clue of what he is talking about.

Your wife can laugh all she wants. FNBO is closed. Tell her congratulations on her new job at Enterprise Bank and Trust.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:24 PM
Your wife can laugh all she wants. FNBO is closed. Tell her congratulations on her new job at Enterprise Bank.

I'll tell her...and I'll tell you from her since she is too much of a lady to do so, you can go fuck yourself with your Obama dildo.

orange
08-13-2011, 03:29 PM
since she is too much of a lady

Too bad none of her class has ever rubbed off on you, fuckhead.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:29 PM
And it's ncie that we all get to see that Orange is happy that people lost or are going to lose jobs because our Fed Gov fucked it all up.

We're real proud of ya, Orange.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 03:30 PM
Too bad none of her class has ever rubbed off on you, ****head.

I got more class in my cock sweat than you will ever have.

FD
08-13-2011, 04:00 PM
This is not completely true either, Orange. FNBO may have asked the government for insurance..but the insurance is not free. Banks pay premiums to FDIC for the insurance they receive. So FNBO did not get money from the government, they got a service that they paid premiums for.

Not quite. The fees banks pay to the Deposit Insurance Fund are a small fraction of the potential losses the FDIC can expect. In other words its insurance thats not "actuarially fair." Deposit insurance is a large subsidy to banks like FNBO.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:06 PM
Not quite. The fees banks pay to the Deposit Insurance Fund are a small fraction of the potential losses the FDIC can expect. In other words its insurance thats not "actuarially fair." Deposit insurance is a large subsidy to banks like FNBO.

The fee I pay for my car insurance is a small fraction of the actual loss that would occur if my car it totaled by a tree. All insurance premiums are that. The premiums banks paid were enough that said fees were the only funding FDIC operated under for many years (not sure exactly when taxpayer money began going to FDIC, but I believe it was during the savings and loan crisis in the late 80's.)

orange
08-13-2011, 04:20 PM
The fee I pay for my car insurance is a small fraction of the actual loss that would occur if my car it totaled by a tree. All insurance premiums are that. The premiums banks paid were enough that said fees were the only funding FDIC operated under for many years (not sure exactly when taxpayer money began going to FDIC, but I believe it was during the savings and loan crisis in the late 80's.)

FDIC - i.e. us - is taking a $116 M cost on this. How much of that do you think FNBO ever paid in premiums?

Mojo Jojo
08-13-2011, 04:21 PM
Orange must be retarded. If the GW admin. had done this he would be on the front lines screaming and yelling about the government getting involved in things they should leave alone.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 04:21 PM
My wife is sitting here laughing her ass off at Orange saying how clueless this guy is and how he has not and inkling of a clue of what he is talking about.

Tell her she's an unattractive person that has sex with men for money.

orange
08-13-2011, 04:24 PM
If the GW admin. had done this he would be on the front lines screaming and yelling about the government getting involved in things they should leave alone.

You are retarded.

List of bank failures in 2008

Twenty-five banks failed in 2008[1] (26 including the Utah-based wholly owned subsidiary of Washington Mutual, which was covered under the same FDIC closure notice as its parent company[11]):

Bank City State Date Assets ($mil.)

Douglass National Bank Kansas City Missouri 02008-01-25January 25, 2008 59
Hume Bank Hume Missouri 02008-03-07March 7, 2008 19
ANB Financial NA Bentonville Arkansas 02008-05-09May 9, 2008 2,100
First Integrity Bank, NA Staples Minnesota 02008-05-30May 30, 2008 55
IndyMac Pasadena California 02008-07-11July 11, 2008 32,000
First National Bank of Nevada Reno Nevada 02008-07-25July 25, 2008 3,400
First Heritage Bank, NA Newport Beach California 02008-07-25July 25, 2008 254
First Priority Bank Bradenton Florida 02008-08-01August 1, 2008 259
The Columbian Bank and Trust Company Topeka Kansas 02008-08-22August 22, 2008 752
Integrity Bancshares Inc. Alpharetta Georgia 02008-08-29August 29, 2008 1,100
Silver State Bank Henderson Nevada 02008-09-05September 5, 2008 2,000
Ameribank Northfork West Virginia 02008-09-19September 19, 2008 113
Washington Mutual Bank Henderson Nevada 02008-09-25September 25, 2008 307,000
Main Street Bank Northville Michigan 02008-10-10October 10, 2008 98
Meridian Bank Eldred Illinois 02008-10-10October 10, 2008 39
Alpha Bank & Trust Alpharetta Georgia 02008-10-24October 24, 2008 354
Freedom Bank Bradenton Florida 02008-10-31October 31, 2008 287
Franklin Bank Houston Texas 02008-11-07November 7, 2008 5,100
Security Pacific Bank Los Angeles California 02008-11-07November 7, 2008 561
The Community Bank Loganville Georgia 02008-11-21November 21, 2008 681
Downey Savings and Loan Newport Beach California 02008-11-21November 21, 2008 12,800
PFF Bank and Trust Pomona California 02008-11-21November 21, 2008 3,700
First Georgia Community Bank Jackson Georgia 02008-12-05December 5, 2008 238
Haven Trust Bank Duluth Georgia 02008-12-12December 12, 2008 572
Sanderson State Bank Sanderson Texas 02008-12-12December 12, 2008 37

Total Assets ($mil.) from bank failures in 2008: $373,578.

That's just one year of the Bush administration. Please show any one of them that orange objected to.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:26 PM
FDIC - i.e. us - is taking a $116 M cost on this. How much of that do you think FNBO ever paid in premiums?

It is insurance..that is the risk the insurer takes. If I buy a car tomorrow, pay one month of insurance, and hit a tree, then the insurance company is hosed. How low has that bank been in business? If they have been there for 20, 30, 40 years, etc....then they will have paid some pretty significant premiums over the years. I have no idea what the premium rates are for banks, however.

Also, FNBO did not ask or beg to get FDIC insurance. If I recall correctly, banks nowadays are required to have it as part of federal regulation. In other words, you can't open a bank without it. I believe this was one of the changes made to the banking system during the savings and loan crisis, when FSLIC was dissolved and all banking insurance issues were put on FDIC's doorstep.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:29 PM
In fact, according to npr, most states laws require banks to have FDIC coverage. So FNBO probably had no choice but to participate in order to be in business:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/04/do_banks_need_the_fdic.html

orange
08-13-2011, 04:30 PM
It is insurance..that is the risk the insurer takes. If I buy a car tomorrow, pay one month of insurance, and hit a tree, then the insurance company is hosed. How low has that bank been in business? If they have been there for 20, 30, 40 years, etc....then they will have paid some pretty significant premiums over the years. I have no idea what the premium rates are for banks, however.

Also, FNBO did not ask or beg to get FDIC insurance. If I recall correctly, banks nowadays are required to have it as part of federal regulation. In other words, you can't open a bank without it. I believe this was one of the changes made to the banking system during the savings and loan crisis, when FSLIC was dissolved and all banking insurance issues were put on FDIC's doorstep.

FNBO has been - make that had been - around a long time. Long before the FDIC, in fact.

As for banks paying a tiny fraction of the cost of actually closing one of them - that's because the risk is spread around. And the healthy banks subsidize the failures like FNBO. Which is one reason why the FDIC shuts down the failures like FNBO - so the healthy banks don't have to pay more (and pass those costs on to the us customers).

orange
08-13-2011, 04:32 PM
In fact, according to npr, most states laws require banks to have FDIC coverage. So FNBO probably had no choice but to participate in order to be in business:

http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2009/04/do_banks_need_the_fdic.html

So petez28 should be thanking the State of Kansas?

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:32 PM
FNBO has been - make that had been - around a long time. Long before the FDIC, in fact.

As for banks paying a tiny fraction of the cost of actually closing one of them - that's because the risk is spread around. And the healthy banks subsidize the failures like FNBO. Which is one reason why the FDIC shuts down the failures like FNBO - so the healthy banks don't have to pay more (and pass those costs on to the us customers).

I know that. So why are you bitching about them having it and making it sound like the bank took a handout? It is not a hand out, it is insurance required by state law.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:34 PM
So petez28 should be thanking the State of Kansas?

You can debate that with him. My only point of contention was that FDIC insurance is not a government handout, but rather that it is insurance, like any other insurance a business is required to have to operate.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 04:34 PM
So petez28 should be thanking the State of Kansas?

Pete's unattractive, sexual escort of a wife should be thanking the State of Kansas.

orange
08-13-2011, 04:42 PM
I know that. So why are you bitching about them having it and making it sound like the bank took a handout? It is not a hand out, it is insurance required by state law.

That's your screwed up interpretation. petegz28 has said repeatedly that the FDIC has no business interfering with FNBO because FNBO never got anything from them, to which I have said repeatedly "poppycock."

And as for "required by state law" - that's questionable. Your link didn't say anything about which states require it. Or anything about Kansas. You have ASSUMED a fact not in evidence. Besides which, that's a recent change. FNBO may well have had FDIC insured deposits long before that.

And none of which changes the simple fact that FNBO was failing.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 04:45 PM
FDIC - i.e. us - is taking a $116 M cost on this. How much of that do you think FNBO ever paid in premiums?

You wouldn't be taking any hit if they stayed the fuck out of it.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 04:48 PM
FNBO has been - make that had been - around a long time. Long before the FDIC, in fact.

As for banks paying a tiny fraction of the cost of actually closing one of them - that's because the risk is spread around. And the healthy banks subsidize the failures like FNBO. Which is one reason why the FDIC shuts down the failures like FNBO - so the healthy banks don't have to pay more (and pass those costs on to the us customers).

What a clueless moron. Healthy banks? Is that code for banks who took billions of our $'s so they wouldn't go out of business? Unlike FNBO?


Get this through your fucking head once and for all, FNBO would have made it through all this just fine until you Dem twerps started fucking with everything.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 04:50 PM
You can debate that with him. My only point of contention was that FDIC insurance is not a government handout, but rather that it is insurance, like any other insurance a business is required to have to operate.

He's a fucking idiot. He has not fucking idea of what he is talking about. He is so far off on things it's borderline insane. He is talking out of his ass without any first hand knowledge of anything. He has already made 2 erroneous statements because he has no fucking clue. It's a good thing for Obama people like him exist or the guy would never get a fucking vote.

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:50 PM
That's your screwed up interpretation. petegz28 has said repeatedly that the FDIC has no business interfering with FNBO because FNBO never got anything from them, to which I have said repeatedly "poppycock."

And as for "required by state law" - that's questionable. Your link didn't say anything about which states require it. Or anything about Kansas. You have ASSUMED a fact not in evidence. Besides which, that's a recent change. FNBO may well have had FDIC insured deposits long before that.

And none of which changes the simple fact that FNBO was failing.

So you interpret carrying mandated insurance as asking for a government handout? Got it.

orange
08-13-2011, 04:53 PM
FNBO would have made it through all this just fine until you Dem twerps started ****ing with everything.

No, they wouldn't have. They were FAILING. Crapping Out. Going Bust.


Cool. Keep justifying your need to blame Obama for every perceived wrong turn in your - or anyone else's - life.

THIS applies here - as well as to every single post you ever make here.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 04:54 PM
No, they wouldn't have. They were FAILING. Crapping Out. Going Bust.




THIS applies here - as well as to every single post you ever make here.

You have no idea of what you speak. None. Nada. Zilch. You're ****ing clueless. Did you work there? Do you know people who worked there? What's that? No. So yea, you're right on top of what was happening. You didn't even know they sold 4 branches last year and got ****ed out of holding a ton of assets because everyone else in the world except the FDIC considered what they had to be non-brokered CD's thus their assets falling, as you tried to state. The FDCI MADE THEM DUMP ASSETS, JFC! Get that through your skull. See, you have no ****ing idea. the simple fact that you don't want to accept is the FDIC caused this failure by their rule changing and intervention. PERIOD!

orange
08-13-2011, 04:54 PM
So you interpret carrying mandated insurance as asking for a government handout? Got it.

No, you INVENTED IT. Show me where I said "handout."

Maybe you're confused because EVERYTHING the government ever does is a HANDOUT in this forum.

orange
08-13-2011, 04:58 PM
. Did you work there? Do you know people who worked there? What's that? No. So yea, you're right on top of what was happening.

Yes, I'm sure the janitors there knew exactly what the Board was doing at all times...

But nevertheless, I know that their actual numbers - as posted on an objective site (unless you've uncovered the deep bias those guys have against FNBO) - indicate a bank that's FAILING. Burning out. Crashing. Swirling down the toilet.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 04:58 PM
No, you INVENTED IT. Show me where I said "handout."

Maybe you're confused because EVERYTHING the government ever does is a HANDOUT in this forum.

Um where you said they asked the Fed Gov for money by being a member of FDIC???

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 04:59 PM
The $539 M in deposits that we taxpayers were on the hook for in a year or so, when this bank inevitably collapsed, perhaps?



And this is just plain FALSE. The FNBO asked the govt. to insure its deposits. Period. Insurance has a value. It's "money" the FNBO asked for from the govt.

This is what you said. You did not use the word handout, but anyone with any reading comprehension whatsoever can see that is what you were saying. Money asked for from the government is a handout, no?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:00 PM
Yes, I'm sure the janitors there knew exactly what the Board was doing at all times...

But nevertheless, I know that their actual numbers - as posted on an objective site (unless you've uncovered the deep bias those guys have against FNBO) - indicate a bank that's FAILING. Burning out. Crashing. Swirling down the toilet.

You don't know jack squat. You haven't got a fucking clue. You know their "real numbers" but had no idea they sold 4 branches and the FDIC forced them out of CDARS. You're an idiot on this. Plain and simple.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:00 PM
If I ask the guy at McDonald's for a cheeseburger, I expect to pay. I still ASKED for it, it's still my CHOICE.

Just like FNBO's FDIC insurance was their CHOICE.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:01 PM
This is what you said. You did not use the word handout, but anyone with any reading comprehension whatsoever can see that is what you were saying. Money asked for from the government is a handout, no?

No.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:02 PM
If I ask the guy at McDonald's for a cheeseburger, I expect to pay. I still ASKED for it, it's still my CHOICE.

Just like FNBO's FDIC insurance was their CHOICE.

Keep squirming....you opened your mouth.

They paid for insurance. Not for the FDIC to control their business.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:03 PM
No.

Just like when I turn 68 or 74 or 80 or whatever it turns out to be and I apply for Social Security benefits, that's not going to be a "handout," either.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:04 PM
Just like when I turn 68 or 74 or 80 or whatever it turns out to be and I apply for Social Security benefits, that's not going to be a "handout," either.

You're shooting a huge hole in your own argument. Keep going.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:04 PM
They paid for insurance. Not for the FDIC to control their business.

WRONG. ABOLUTELY, MORONICALLY ****ING WRONG!

mnchiefsguy, you want to take that one?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:05 PM
WRONG. ABOLUTELY, MORONICALLY ****ING WRONG!

mnchiefsfan, you want to take that one?

Uh, no it isn't. FDIC is insurance. They paid premiums to have that insurance. Sorry...

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 05:06 PM
Keep squirming....you opened your mouth.

You're shooting a huge hole

Is this how you arouse your unappealing, escort wife?

I feel a disco ball dropping.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:09 PM
Is this how you arouse your unappealing, escort wife?

I feel a disco ball dropping.

That's probably whatever you crammed up your ass last night during your routine masturbation to your Obama posters.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 05:10 PM
That's probably whatever you crammed up your ass last night during your routine masturbation to your Obama posters.

Did you say that one, or was that from your unattractive escort wife?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:10 PM
The FDIC's interference caused this failure pure and simple. Anyone who actually knows the inside skinny, unlike Orange, will tell you this.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:11 PM
Did you say that one, or was that from your unattractive escort wife?

i hate to disappoint you since I know the mere thought of a woman aknowledging you in any form would be a huge ego boost for you but no, that came from me.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 05:12 PM
i hate to disappoint you since I know the mere thought of a woman aknowledging you in any form would be a huge ego boost for you but no, that came from me.

Any chance we could get her to sign up on ChiefsPlanet?

What's her email address? I'll ask her myself.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:13 PM
They paid for insurance. Not for the FDIC to control their business.

WRONG. ABOLUTELY, MORONICALLY ****ING WRONG!

mnchiefsguy, you want to take that one?

http://www.crossfitvallejo.com/.a/6a00e54ee3afea8833010536a25790970c-800wi

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:15 PM
Any chance we could get her to sign up on ChiefsPlanet?

What's her email address? I'll ask her myself.

I don't recall you ever paying me for such info???

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 05:15 PM
I don't recall you ever paying me for such info???

How much? Do you have a paypal account?

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 05:17 PM
Keep squirming....you opened your mouth.

They paid for insurance. Not for the FDIC to control their business.

If you are insured by FDIC, you are under their authority. Right or wrong, if the Corporation tells a bank to jump, they say how high.

I can't find any links other than the npr one as to which states require FDIC coverage. However, I also cannot find a single bank in the state of Kansas that does not have said coverage, so it could be reasonable to conclude that it is a requirement.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:18 PM
Just a guess, here, but I take it that classy petegz28 unloaded some of his "class" on someone's wife?

mnchiefsguy
08-13-2011, 05:18 PM
Direckshun has an unhealthy obsession with pete's wife, for what it is worth. Kind of creepy.

orange
08-13-2011, 05:19 PM
If you are insured by FDIC, you are under their authority. Right or wrong, if the Corporation tells a bank to jump, they say how high.

Thank you very much for that spot of clarity and truthfulness. Let's see how classy petegz28 reacts.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 05:20 PM
Direckshun has an unhealthy obsession with pete's wife, for what it is worth. Kind of creepy.

I think his wife would find that she and I have a lot in common.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:23 PM
I think his wife would find that she and I have a lot in common.

That you both wear skirts?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:24 PM
How much? Do you have a paypal account?

did you ok this with your boyfriend first?

petegz28
08-13-2011, 05:25 PM
If you are insured by FDIC, you are under their authority. Right or wrong, if the Corporation tells a bank to jump, they say how high.

I can't find any links other than the npr one as to which states require FDIC coverage. However, I also cannot find a single bank in the state of Kansas that does not have said coverage, so it could be reasonable to conclude that it is a requirement.

Well I will say I stand corrected. Unlike some others on here. But you lend a little insight to it all, it was the FDIC's power that forced this.

FD
08-13-2011, 06:06 PM
It is insurance..that is the risk the insurer takes. If I buy a car tomorrow, pay one month of insurance, and hit a tree, then the insurance company is hosed. How low has that bank been in business? If they have been there for 20, 30, 40 years, etc....then they will have paid some pretty significant premiums over the years. I have no idea what the premium rates are for banks, however.

Also, FNBO did not ask or beg to get FDIC insurance. If I recall correctly, banks nowadays are required to have it as part of federal regulation. In other words, you can't open a bank without it. I believe this was one of the changes made to the banking system during the savings and loan crisis, when FSLIC was dissolved and all banking insurance issues were put on FDIC's doorstep.

Its insurance but its not actuarially fair like your car insurance is. This is because the FDIC's reserve requirements are mandated by Congress and these determine the fees, as opposed to them being set by accountants.

As a result, the insurance is a large implicit subsidy, by the Federal government, to the banks that are insured. The flip side of this subsidy is that banks are subject to Federal regulations requiring that they remain fully capitalized. They might not like this part but its the cost that comes with the subsidy.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 06:12 PM
Its insurance but its not actuarially fair like your car insurance is. This is because the FDIC's reserve requirements are mandated by Congress and these determine the fees, as opposed to them being set by accountants.

As a result, the insurance is a large implicit subsidy, by the Federal government, to the banks that are insured. The flip side of this subsidy is that banks are subject to Federal regulations requiring that they remain fully capitalized. They might not like this part but its the cost that comes with the subsidy.

:LOL: $14.6 tril is all I can say. I am not disagreeing with you, just pointing out the tremendous amount of hypocritical BS that exists there

Bwana
08-13-2011, 06:32 PM
Sorry to hear that dude. I hope she gets hired on with the new management team.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 06:47 PM
That you both wear skirts?

Maybe. I won't know until you give me her email address.

What's your name? I'm going to look you both up on Facebook.

Bwana
08-13-2011, 06:55 PM
Maybe. I won't know until you give me her email address.

What's your name? I'm going to look you both up on Facebook.

Dick? Is that you? :evil:

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 07:07 PM
Dick? Is that you? :evil:

:thumb:

Warrior5
08-13-2011, 07:08 PM
**** banks. Credit Unions are the way to go. Sorry about your wife

This. Piss on banks.

Hope things work out at your wife's work, and yes, the hypocritical tyranny makes me want to vomit.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 07:16 PM
You know what I think is hypocritical?

Pete demanding transparency from the government, then taking a piss when I ask him for his wife's phone number.

Shit, Pete. Step up to the plate.

petegz28
08-13-2011, 07:25 PM
Maybe. I won't know until you give me her email address.

What's your name? I'm going to look you both up on Facebook.

Pervert stalker

Dallas Chief
08-13-2011, 07:33 PM
Cool. Keep justifying your need to blame Obama for every perceived wrong turn in your - or anyone else's - life.

The FDIC has nothing to do with the "current admin." It's a NEW DEAL program to protect ordinary Americans from corrupt bank practices.

Hey peckersnot! Don't go confusing me with some whole other body. I never blamed Obama for any of this. Frankly I don't know anything about the situation. I am simply calling you out for being a gigantic know it all asshole for posting links directly related to the situation when it was clear to ALL that Pete didn't want to go there. Why don't you and suzzer run off and find a poker forum to post in or something...

Backwards Masking
08-13-2011, 07:50 PM
Not to derail, but keep this in mind when advocating stuff like balanced budget right now - which would mean a gigantic instantaneous drop in govt spending. The govt doesn't just give money to poor people and illegals, it also is a huge driver of the economy, especially in a down investment climate like this when businesses are sitting on their hands.

You can make the argument that the govt shouldn't be driving the economy at all. But at least acknowledge that if you slash govt spending to the bone, a lot of businesses who rely on that are going to be out of work - and it's very likely the economy would contract to the point of throwing us into a full-blown depression.

Then why not just GIVE the money to us, rather than create meaningless labor (ie replacing the perfectly good vinyl on the vehicle) to earn it. They're creating a way for us to earn a living? Not when they take taxes out and waste, i mean CREATE more work that doesnt need to be done at other businesses I, as the taxpayer, am ultimately paying for out of my standard deductions.

I don't disagree with what you posted above, I do disagree that we need to be charging the taxpayers to change the color of govt. vehicles for no reason. Not sure how anyone could defend funding that when we're 10-100 tril in debt and slashing education funding left and right.

suzzer99
08-13-2011, 08:20 PM
The work to change the system w/o throwing us into a depression like CCB would have.

Direckshun
08-13-2011, 08:52 PM
Pervert stalker

What's your last name?

I got a list of Petes from the Kansas City area on Facebook. Trying to see which ones are married, so my list is getting a little shorter.

suzzer99
08-14-2011, 12:17 AM
You guys are mean and weird.

mnchiefsguy
08-14-2011, 02:58 AM
Its insurance but its not actuarially fair like your car insurance is. This is because the FDIC's reserve requirements are mandated by Congress and these determine the fees, as opposed to them being set by accountants.

As a result, the insurance is a large implicit subsidy, by the Federal government, to the banks that are insured. The flip side of this subsidy is that banks are subject to Federal regulations requiring that they remain fully capitalized. They might not like this part but its the cost that comes with the subsidy.

This may be true, but since the FDIC is the only gig in town, and is a requirement to get a bank charter according to most state laws, I have a tough time calling it a subsidy, when it is a requirement for a bank to do business.

whatsmynameagain
08-14-2011, 06:15 AM
Hey Pete, can we get some more pics of that new car? Life must be tough for you in this economy. Obama made you get laid off, then you get a new job, overspent on a new car. Now the wife is going to get laid off because of obama. In a month or so we will see pics of petes wifes new car. Will the government be still holding you down? Tough economy....

petegz28
08-14-2011, 06:25 AM
Hey Pete, can we get some more pics of that new car? Life must be tough for you in this economy. Obama made you get laid off, then you get a new job, overspent on a new car. Now the wife is going to get laid off because of obama. In a month or so we will see pics of petes wifes new car. Will the government be still holding you down? Tough economy....

I guess you're jealous?? And it isn't just my wife, it's several people at the bank. And I don't recall blaming Obama for Sprint laying me off. Heaven forbid we saved up for almost a year to buy a car we wanted. Heaven forbid we buy a new car once every 10 years.

suzzer99
08-14-2011, 09:30 AM
This may be true, but since the FDIC is the only gig in town, and is a requirement to get a bank charter according to most state laws, I have a tough time calling it a subsidy, when it is a requirement for a bank to do business.

W/o the FDIC though, there probably would have been a run on this bank at he first sign of trouble. Then you'd have people losing their life savings instead of just complaining about he meddling feds. And the bank would have died a lot sooner.

banyon
08-14-2011, 09:52 AM
The FDIC's interference caused this failure pure and simple. Anyone who actually knows the inside skinny, unlike Orange, will tell you this.

Do you think the FDIC should be abolished?

If so, what is the alternative for depositors when we get a run on the banks like happened in the Great Depression?

BucEyedPea
08-14-2011, 10:08 AM
W/o the FDIC though, there probably would have been a run on this bank at he first sign of trouble. Then you'd have people losing their life savings instead of just complaining about he meddling feds. And the bank would have died a lot sooner.

No, the FDIC in a fractional reserve banking system increases the liklihood of bank failures because it creates moral hazard. This means banks can and will act less responsibly. This is what happened during the bank crisis and there wasn't enough money to save them even under the FDIC—hence the bailouts. Many went bankrupt and more continue to. If you allowed a free-market in banking, a few bank runs would keep the rest more honest and thus the system more stable. This would extend to not using fractional reserve banking. The best and strongest would survive because people would flock to them.

Banks have enjoyed govt protection for a long time in this country even before FDIC because there were banking holidays. It's a protected group. Being protected is part of the problem.

suzzer99
08-14-2011, 10:16 AM
Moral hazard to some degree yes. But society has determined that's still better than what happened during the depression with massive panic and constant runs on banks. Of course we're now trying to unlearn all those lessons of history we learned the hard way.

banyon
08-14-2011, 10:18 AM
No, the FDIC in a fractional reserve banking system increases the liklihood of bank failures because it creates moral hazard. This means banks can and will act less responsibly. This is what happened during the bank crisis and there wasn't enough money to save them even under the FDIC—hence the bailouts. Many went bankrupt and more continue to. If you allowed a free-market in banking, a few bank runs would keep the rest more honest and thus the system more stable. This would extend to not using fractional reserve banking. The best and strongest would survive because people would flock to them.

Ridiculous. Another rewrite, this time of recent history. The banks became involved in highly complex speculative mortgage backed collateralized debt obligations. This was what exposed them, NOT a run on the bank. There is ZERO evidence of that. This was made possible by two things: (1) the repeal of the Glass-Stegall limitation which prohibited banks from trading, (2) the nationalization of the mortgage process which used to be run by local banks who actually knew who they were lending to (80's legislation allowed banks to cross state lines finally to lend on mortgages). Both of these changes were DEregulatory, not increased regulation.

Banks have enjoyed govt protection for a long time in this country even before FDIC because there were banking holidays. It's a protected group. Being protected is part of the problem.

What the hell do bank holidays have to do with anything? The government decided their holidays?

BucEyedPea
08-14-2011, 10:30 AM
Moral hazard to some degree yes. But society has determined that's still better than what happened during the depression with massive panic and constant runs on banks. Of course we're now trying to unlearn all those lessons of history we learned the hard way.

I don't think "society" knows much about it to be honest. It was passed by politicians a long time ago. It doesn't mean it works either. It made it worse if you look at where we are today.

The lessons of history are that the winners write those history books and we don't get the whole truth necessarily. One of them is that FDR saved us from the Depression and that the war ended. Both are myths.

banyon
08-14-2011, 10:35 AM
I don't think "society" knows much about it to be honest. It was passed by politicians a long time ago. It doesn't mean it works either. It made it worse if you look at where we are today.

The lessons of history are that the winners write those history books and we don't get the whole truth necessarily. One of them is that FDR saved us from the Depression and that the war ended. Both are myths.

The fact that WWII ended is a myth? :spock:

Was Lincoln still alive in Buenos Aires in 1946 ordering our troops to rape civilians again?

BucEyedPea
08-14-2011, 10:37 AM
Bank runs are now satisfied with money hot off the presses from the central bank or with taxpayer money. This impoverishes people in a manner that's more difficult to detect. The Federal Reserve operates much like Bank of England model and they've been running this ruse for centuries.

banyon
08-14-2011, 10:39 AM
Bank runs are now satisfied with money hot off the presses from the central bank. This impoverishes people in a manner that's more difficult to detect. The Federal Reserve operates much like Bank of England model and they've been running this ruse for centuries.

So, you've amended your post then that the FDIC increases the likelihood of bank failures? (since that's obviously false).

suzzer99
08-14-2011, 10:44 AM
I don't think "society" knows much about it to be honest. It was passed by politicians a long time ago. It doesn't mean it works either. It made it worse if you look at where we are today.

The lessons of history are that the winners write those history books and we don't get the whole truth necessarily. One of them is that FDR saved us from the Depression and that the war ended. Both are myths.

Yeah and it's pretty crucial to the libertarian POV to convince themselves FDR's policies were a failure. Much the same with convincing themselves that global warming is a myth. Otherwise the whole house of cards collapses. So it's not like mises is remotely unbiased on these.

petegz28
08-14-2011, 11:16 AM
Do you think the FDIC should be abolished?

If so, what is the alternative for depositors when we get a run on the banks like happened in the Great Depression?

No. I think, like with most Fed Gov programs, they are out of fucking touch and need to get their shit together.

banyon
08-14-2011, 11:22 AM
No. I think, like with most Fed Gov programs, they are out of ****ing touch and need to get their shit together.

What is the FDIC out of touch with?

petegz28
08-14-2011, 11:25 AM
What is the FDIC out of touch with?

Well as I stated in an earlier post, CDARs are not brokered CD's but the FDIC says "we say they are". Thereby they forced FNBO to dump the CDAR's they had causing them to lose a lot in assets and dealing them a blow. When have you ever known any part of the Fed Gov to exercise common sense, banyon? Even in the programs many support when you get into the details of them those same people say "that's stupid".

banyon
08-14-2011, 11:29 AM
Well as I stated in an earlier post, CDARs are not brokered CD's but the FDIC says "we say they are". Thereby they forced FNBO to dump the CDAR's they had causing them to lose a lot in assets and dealing them a blow. When have you ever known any part of the Fed Gov to exercise common sense, banyon? Even in the programs many support when you get into the details of them those same people say "that's stupid".

Why did the FDIC say they forced them to do that?

petegz28
08-14-2011, 11:32 AM
Why did the FDIC say they forced them to do that?

I just told you, the FDIC considered them to be brokered CD's. I don't understand all the technicalities but they are in the minority on that opinion. For some reason they made them dump them because FNBO should not have been allowed to have them once they hit the FDIC's radar screen, etc, etc. All I know is that was a major blow to FNBO dealt by the FDIC.

banyon
08-14-2011, 11:51 AM
I just told you, the FDIC considered them to be brokered CD's. I don't understand all the technicalities but they are in the minority on that opinion. For some reason they made them dump them because FNBO should not have been allowed to have them once they hit the FDIC's radar screen, etc, etc. All I know is that was a major blow to FNBO dealt by the FDIC.

This seems to be a pretty good summary of the technicalities involved:

The Birth of "Hot Money"

Brokered deposits have helped banks grow explosively from tame domestic companions into muscular monsters that are capable of ripping the face off of economic prosperity when the lending institutions blow up.

To understand all the forces at play here, we need to look back nearly 50 years.

As far back as the 1960s, depositors searching for high-yielding savings and thrift accounts were matched up by brokers who steered them to banks offering the best yields.

Say, for example, you have $1 million that you want to deposit. A "deposit broker" would take the cash, and break it up into several smaller portions, each of them below the maximum allowed to qualify for federal deposit insurance. Those deposits would be spread among banks that are customers of the broker.

That cash provides the banks with money that they can turn around and lend. And it also provides the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. with fees for its insurance fund.

But brokered deposits also have a dark side.

Fueled by hot-money deposits, banks too often shift into a turbocharged growth mode. They expand into markets they don't know and concentrate their loans, instead of spreading their risks. When the music stops, as it did in 2008, these banks crash and burn.

As early as 1963, regulators tagged brokered deposits as problematic. They limited any bank's holding of them to only 5% of total deposits. Regulators were worried that upward pressure on interest rates from banks trying to attract depositors would spread across the economy. Later, some brave and stalwart regulators screamed that these deposits were causing bank failures and threatened the entire banking system.

In 1984, William M. Isaac, chairman of the FDIC, personally identified the origins of what would later become the U.S. savings and loan crisis. He railed about how S&Ls and thrifts were paying high yields to attract brokered deposits and using the money to make crazy, speculative loans and bets. He proposed killing the brokered deposits business altogether.

Banks, of course, loved brokered deposits. And they fought hard against the FDIC's initiative to kill the hot-money juggernaut.

Special interest groups were intent on seeing the brokered-deposit business flourish. And they'd already won some extraordinary trophies.

The Deposit Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 proved to be their first bonanza. It removed the 5% limit on brokered deposits imposed by regulators in 1963. It phased out a ceiling on the interest rates that banks could pay. And it raised FDIC insurance from $40,000 to $100,000 (in 2008, insurance was raised to $250,000). The 1980 Act was shepherded through Congress by the Carter Administraion. When Donald T. Regan was appointed the U.S. treasury secretary in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, Regan also became chairman of the Depository Institutions Deregulation Committee, and helped push through the 1982 Garn-St. Germain Act, which furthered the 1980 act.

As fate would have it, Regan came to the Treasury Department from Merrill Lynch, which was one of the biggest players in the brokered-deposit business. Back then, it was Merrill Lynch, not Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS), running on the Washington inside track.

By 1984, the party was rocking and no one wanted anyone to take away the punch bowl. The FDIC's Isaac was trying to kill off brokered deposits. So was Edwin J. Gray, chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, which regulated thrifts.

Both were slammed to the mat.

The Securities Industry Association (SIA), a lobbying powerhouse, joined deposit broker First Atlantic Investment Corporation Securities Inc. (FAIC), and sued to repeal the initiative. The duo won a quick victory. FAIC would later have the dubious distinction of having brokered the second-largest amount of deposits into thrifts that would subsequently fail.

A total of 1,043 thrifts failed during the S&L crisis. Taxpayers were stuck with a $124 billion cleanup bill.

The memory of it still haunts Isaac, the former FDIC chairman.

"The record of the 80's is clear," Isaac told me in an interview. "We got flat out opposition from Treasury and Congress refused to back the regulators."

Little has changed since then: Special interests continue to steer us straight at the icebergs.

Isaac was replaced by L. William Seidman, who ran the FDIC from 1985-1991. Ironically, Seidman later joined the board of a new outfit called Promontory Interfinancial Network LLC.

Promontory's business: Brokering deposits.

When Bloomberg Markets magazine asked Seidman about the nature of the company he'd joined, he conceded there would be critics. But he had an answer ready.

"The question can be raised: `Is this what the government wanted when they put in deposit insurance?'" Seidman told his interviewer.

But then he answered his own question by stating that "one man's loophole is another man's God-given right.''

Promontory Interfinancial is a rising star in the brokered-deposits business and is also a powerhouse special interest machine. Its list of founders reads like a "Who's Who" of financial-sector regulation, and includes:

· Mark Jacobsen, FDIC chief of staff from 1999-2002.
· Eugene Ludwig, comptroller of the currency from 1993-1998.
· And Alan Blinder, vice chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve from 1994-1996.

They know how the system works.

I asked Jacobsen, Promontory's co-founder, president and chief operating officer, about creating the firm and what it meant to be in the business. His response: "The fact is, I have a different perspective now than I would when I was a former regulator."

Jacobsen makes an eloquent case for Promontory's business model. Although the firm has a product that mimics traditional brokered deposits, Jacobsen's brainchild is actually a product called the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service, or CDARS.

CDARS are "reciprocal deposits." They allow local banks to bring in large depositors who might otherwise shop their funds around through other deposit brokers. The large deposits are broken up through CDARS and spread out across Promontory's member network of nearly 3,000 banks.

The bank receiving the large deposit doesn't miss out. It gets back an equivalent sum in small deposits from the network to use to fund its loan book and assets.

Promontory recently persuaded the FDIC to separate reciprocal deposits out from a calculation of total brokered deposits held by any one bank. Brokered deposits are subject to additional FDIC levies when the agency calculates what a financial institution must pay into the deposit-insurance fund. However, in spite of being statutorily defined as brokered deposits, CDARS won't be counted as such when the FDIC calculates those additional assessments.

This exception isn't lost on other banks, says Sherrill Shaffer, a professor of banking and financial services at the University of Wyoming who is also a former chief economist of the New York Federal Reserve Bank - and a one-time head of the Department of Supervision, Regulation and Credit at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

"When losses go up at the FDIC, premiums (on brokered deposits) go up in the next quarter," Prof. Shaffer said. "So any banks not using CDARS end up cross-subsidizing those that do. To get around that, they have to sign up."

Financial Intrigue - Internet Style
In the brokered-deposit universe, the deepest black hole exists in cyberspace.

A constellation of special interests is pushing brokered-deposit services. The weapon of choice is a powerful device known as "listing services."

Listing services are nothing more than a cyberspace bulletin board where banks that advertise the rates on their certificates of deposits (CDs) can be linked up with consumers or institutions searching the Internet for the highest yields for their savings.

But it's also a gravity-free zone where the mere press of a button can cause "hot money" to jump from one bank to another - effortlessly and instantaneously.

In spite of that reality, listing-service money isn't counted as a brokered deposit. Instead, it's counted as a "core deposit" - which regulators define as a "stable source of funding" for lending.

But here's the reality:

Listing-service deposits are hot-money deposits advertised by banks that have to be rolled over or replaced when CDs mature. Far from being stable, these deposits actually create liquidity issues for banks.

Because they are hot money disguised as core deposits, listing-service deposits can also mask capital-adequacy issues at a bank.

Failing to distinguish between core deposits and hot money makes it tougher to assess risk at banks that accept those deposits.

Because listing services are incorrectly classified - despite their risk - banks don't have to pay the higher deposit-insurance premiums assessed on other hot-money deposits. That means the FDIC isn't paid for the additional risk it's taking on by insuring these higher-risk deposits.

Because listing services are counted as something that they're not, no one really understands the effect of listing-service deposits on bank operations.

http://moneymorning.com/2010/02/26/hot-money/

Seems like they are functionally identical to brokered deposits except that they create an artificial middleman to divvy up and randomize/sort the small deposits. What's wrong with that opinion? I don't know what the "majority opinion" is, but I'll bet it reminds me a lot of the people trying to claim with a straight face that high-frequency trading is necessary for liquidity.

petegz28
08-14-2011, 12:00 PM
This seems to be a pretty good summary of the technicalities involved:

The Birth of "Hot Money"

Brokered deposits have helped banks grow explosively from tame domestic companions into muscular monsters that are capable of ripping the face off of economic prosperity when the lending institutions blow up.

To understand all the forces at play here, we need to look back nearly 50 years.

As far back as the 1960s, depositors searching for high-yielding savings and thrift accounts were matched up by brokers who steered them to banks offering the best yields.

Say, for example, you have $1 million that you want to deposit. A "deposit broker" would take the cash, and break it up into several smaller portions, each of them below the maximum allowed to qualify for federal deposit insurance. Those deposits would be spread among banks that are customers of the broker.

That cash provides the banks with money that they can turn around and lend. And it also provides the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. with fees for its insurance fund.

But brokered deposits also have a dark side.

Fueled by hot-money deposits, banks too often shift into a turbocharged growth mode. They expand into markets they don't know and concentrate their loans, instead of spreading their risks. When the music stops, as it did in 2008, these banks crash and burn.

As early as 1963, regulators tagged brokered deposits as problematic. They limited any bank's holding of them to only 5% of total deposits. Regulators were worried that upward pressure on interest rates from banks trying to attract depositors would spread across the economy. Later, some brave and stalwart regulators screamed that these deposits were causing bank failures and threatened the entire banking system.

In 1984, William M. Isaac, chairman of the FDIC, personally identified the origins of what would later become the U.S. savings and loan crisis. He railed about how S&Ls and thrifts were paying high yields to attract brokered deposits and using the money to make crazy, speculative loans and bets. He proposed killing the brokered deposits business altogether.

Banks, of course, loved brokered deposits. And they fought hard against the FDIC's initiative to kill the hot-money juggernaut.

Special interest groups were intent on seeing the brokered-deposit business flourish. And they'd already won some extraordinary trophies.

The Deposit Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 proved to be their first bonanza. It removed the 5% limit on brokered deposits imposed by regulators in 1963. It phased out a ceiling on the interest rates that banks could pay. And it raised FDIC insurance from $40,000 to $100,000 (in 2008, insurance was raised to $250,000). The 1980 Act was shepherded through Congress by the Carter Administraion. When Donald T. Regan was appointed the U.S. treasury secretary in 1981 by President Ronald Reagan, Regan also became chairman of the Depository Institutions Deregulation Committee, and helped push through the 1982 Garn-St. Germain Act, which furthered the 1980 act.

As fate would have it, Regan came to the Treasury Department from Merrill Lynch, which was one of the biggest players in the brokered-deposit business. Back then, it was Merrill Lynch, not Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (NYSE: GS), running on the Washington inside track.

By 1984, the party was rocking and no one wanted anyone to take away the punch bowl. The FDIC's Isaac was trying to kill off brokered deposits. So was Edwin J. Gray, chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, which regulated thrifts.

Both were slammed to the mat.

The Securities Industry Association (SIA), a lobbying powerhouse, joined deposit broker First Atlantic Investment Corporation Securities Inc. (FAIC), and sued to repeal the initiative. The duo won a quick victory. FAIC would later have the dubious distinction of having brokered the second-largest amount of deposits into thrifts that would subsequently fail.

A total of 1,043 thrifts failed during the S&L crisis. Taxpayers were stuck with a $124 billion cleanup bill.

The memory of it still haunts Isaac, the former FDIC chairman.

"The record of the 80's is clear," Isaac told me in an interview. "We got flat out opposition from Treasury and Congress refused to back the regulators."

Little has changed since then: Special interests continue to steer us straight at the icebergs.

Isaac was replaced by L. William Seidman, who ran the FDIC from 1985-1991. Ironically, Seidman later joined the board of a new outfit called Promontory Interfinancial Network LLC.

Promontory's business: Brokering deposits.

When Bloomberg Markets magazine asked Seidman about the nature of the company he'd joined, he conceded there would be critics. But he had an answer ready.

"The question can be raised: `Is this what the government wanted when they put in deposit insurance?'" Seidman told his interviewer.

But then he answered his own question by stating that "one man's loophole is another man's God-given right.''

Promontory Interfinancial is a rising star in the brokered-deposits business and is also a powerhouse special interest machine. Its list of founders reads like a "Who's Who" of financial-sector regulation, and includes:

· Mark Jacobsen, FDIC chief of staff from 1999-2002.
· Eugene Ludwig, comptroller of the currency from 1993-1998.
· And Alan Blinder, vice chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve from 1994-1996.

They know how the system works.

I asked Jacobsen, Promontory's co-founder, president and chief operating officer, about creating the firm and what it meant to be in the business. His response: "The fact is, I have a different perspective now than I would when I was a former regulator."

Jacobsen makes an eloquent case for Promontory's business model. Although the firm has a product that mimics traditional brokered deposits, Jacobsen's brainchild is actually a product called the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service, or CDARS.

CDARS are "reciprocal deposits." They allow local banks to bring in large depositors who might otherwise shop their funds around through other deposit brokers. The large deposits are broken up through CDARS and spread out across Promontory's member network of nearly 3,000 banks.

The bank receiving the large deposit doesn't miss out. It gets back an equivalent sum in small deposits from the network to use to fund its loan book and assets.

Promontory recently persuaded the FDIC to separate reciprocal deposits out from a calculation of total brokered deposits held by any one bank. Brokered deposits are subject to additional FDIC levies when the agency calculates what a financial institution must pay into the deposit-insurance fund. However, in spite of being statutorily defined as brokered deposits, CDARS won't be counted as such when the FDIC calculates those additional assessments.

This exception isn't lost on other banks, says Sherrill Shaffer, a professor of banking and financial services at the University of Wyoming who is also a former chief economist of the New York Federal Reserve Bank - and a one-time head of the Department of Supervision, Regulation and Credit at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

"When losses go up at the FDIC, premiums (on brokered deposits) go up in the next quarter," Prof. Shaffer said. "So any banks not using CDARS end up cross-subsidizing those that do. To get around that, they have to sign up."

Financial Intrigue - Internet Style
In the brokered-deposit universe, the deepest black hole exists in cyberspace.

A constellation of special interests is pushing brokered-deposit services. The weapon of choice is a powerful device known as "listing services."

Listing services are nothing more than a cyberspace bulletin board where banks that advertise the rates on their certificates of deposits (CDs) can be linked up with consumers or institutions searching the Internet for the highest yields for their savings.

But it's also a gravity-free zone where the mere press of a button can cause "hot money" to jump from one bank to another - effortlessly and instantaneously.

In spite of that reality, listing-service money isn't counted as a brokered deposit. Instead, it's counted as a "core deposit" - which regulators define as a "stable source of funding" for lending.

But here's the reality:

Listing-service deposits are hot-money deposits advertised by banks that have to be rolled over or replaced when CDs mature. Far from being stable, these deposits actually create liquidity issues for banks.

Because they are hot money disguised as core deposits, listing-service deposits can also mask capital-adequacy issues at a bank.

Failing to distinguish between core deposits and hot money makes it tougher to assess risk at banks that accept those deposits.

Because listing services are incorrectly classified - despite their risk - banks don't have to pay the higher deposit-insurance premiums assessed on other hot-money deposits. That means the FDIC isn't paid for the additional risk it's taking on by insuring these higher-risk deposits.

Because listing services are counted as something that they're not, no one really understands the effect of listing-service deposits on bank operations.

http://moneymorning.com/2010/02/26/hot-money/

Seems like they are functionally identical to brokered deposits except that they create an artificial middleman to divvy up and randomize/sort the small deposits. What's wrong with that opinion? I don't know what the "majority opinion" is, but I'll bet it reminds me a lot of the people trying to claim with a straight face that high-frequency trading is necessary for liquidity.

I think you made my point. Thanks!

mnchiefsguy
08-14-2011, 12:17 PM
W/o the FDIC though, there probably would have been a run on this bank at he first sign of trouble. Then you'd have people losing their life savings instead of just complaining about he meddling feds. And the bank would have died a lot sooner.

I completely agree. I just don't think you can bash the bank for using the services FDIC offers because:

1. In most states, it is the law.

2. The public expects banks to have FDIC protection. It is the one brand that the general public knows, and a bank would not get many customers by not being FDIC insured.

I don't know the details of what happened with this particular bank, I just don't think you can bash them for using what was required or them. I don't think you can call it a handout or a subsidy, making it sound like the bank was somehow pilfering tax dollars, when in reality they were paying their dues for the coverage they received. You can argue that what they paid was too low, but since that fee is set by Congress and their is no market for banking insurance, I fail to see how the bank is a freeloader by being FDIC insured. The bank may be at fault for 1000 other things, but not this.

In addition, saying that FDIC causes bank failures because banks act less responsibly is like say drivers drive faster and more recklessly because they have car insurance. I just don't think that is the case. Banks are driven just like any other business, they want to turn a profit, and if the profit is right, they will take risks.

orange
08-14-2011, 12:38 PM
I think you made my point. Thanks!

Really? Which of "your points" do you think he made. This one?

I just told you, the FDIC considered them to be brokered CD's.

Couldn't be, since the article makes it clear CDARs get preferential treatment compared to other brokered deposits:

CDARS are "reciprocal deposits." They allow local banks to bring in large depositors who might otherwise shop their funds around through other deposit brokers. The large deposits are broken up through CDARS and spread out across Promontory's member network of nearly 3,000 banks.

The bank receiving the large deposit doesn't miss out. It gets back an equivalent sum in small deposits from the network to use to fund its loan book and assets.

Promontory recently persuaded the FDIC to separate reciprocal deposits out from a calculation of total brokered deposits held by any one bank. Brokered deposits are subject to additional FDIC levies when the agency calculates what a financial institution must pay into the deposit-insurance fund. However, in spite of being statutorily defined as brokered deposits, CDARS won't be counted as such when the FDIC calculates those additional assessments.

Maybe your point that he made is this one:

I don't understand all the technicalities...

But if you're looking for more of the "why" they came down on FNBO,
For some reason they made them dump them because FNBO should not have been allowed to have them once they hit the FDIC's radar screen, etc, etc.

this sums it up pretty good:

'Til Death Do Us Part: The Brokered Deposit Dilemma
By Stephen M. Klein
February 24, 2009

Recent Developments

The rumors of the FDIC “locking down” banks from brokered deposits are true. Here is how it happens. If you are not “well capitalized,” then under Prompt Corrective Action (“PCA”) (a leftover piece of legislative shrapnel from the thrift bailout 20 years ago), you are precluded from accepting or renewing any brokered deposits without receiving a waiver from the FDIC, which is rarely forthcoming and is granted only under limited circumstances. Paying more than 75 basis points above the average deposit rate in your market will be considered the same as taking a brokered deposit.

You can also find yourself in the same fix if you are rated a composite “4” or “5” bank or have a Cease and Desist Order (“C&D”). In that event, you are deemed to be just adequately capitalized (no matter your level of capital), and are subject to the same PCA brokered deposit restrictions.

The Dilemma

If you fall below “well capitalized” or are rated a “4” or “5” bank or get a C&D, you are effectively locked out of taking brokered deposits. If brokered deposits are a critical source of your funding, you could actually expire from a lack of liquidity, like WaMu and Bank of Clark County, even if you have adequate capital. In fact, you technically could be well capitalized and still become illiquid. Again, remember, if you are actually just adequately capitalized or are a “4” or “5” or have a C&D, you cannot even pay a premium for regular deposits in your market above 75 basis points. Further CDARS are also considered brokered deposits, even though they are held by existing customers.

Our discussions with the FDIC suggest that this is a bright line test and that waivers for brokered deposits are the exception (e.g. as a temporary bridge for a sale of the bank). To understand this hard-line approach, you have to realize that the FDIC believes that if a bank fails, the brokered deposits (which the FDIC inherits as a liability) will effectively be a total loss to the deposit insurance fund, based on their past experience. Hence, NO MAS!

What To Do

Clearly, any steps your bank can take now to avoid any of these PCA triggering mechanisms are absolutely critical. We realize that raising capital in today’s environment can be challenging, but significant dilution is still better than the alternative. Ultimately, lowering your dependence on brokered deposits would be a good practice. Keep in mind that once you get in trouble, borrowing from the FHLB, the Fed, or bankers’ banks becomes increasingly challenging, further drying up your secondary sources of liquidity.

Conclusion

We highly recommend that your bank focuses on this serious, potential liquidity situation and avoids getting yourself in this impossible dilemma. Whether the FDIC will soften its stance as the breadth of this crisis spreads, is hard to determine. Even arguments allowing you to renew or replace brokered deposits solely to support the steady disposal of toxic assets have fallen on unreceptive ears to date. So please be forewarned of the seriousness of this situation.

If you should have any questions or wish to discuss issues specific to your financial institution please contact any of the following members of the Graham and Dunn Financial Services Team.

http://www.grahamdunn.com/go/articles/-til-death-do-us-part-the-brokered-deposit-dilemma

petegz28
08-14-2011, 12:43 PM
Ah, I see how it works...

This bank acquired The First National Bank of Olathe, headquartered in Olathe, KS, after it failed on Aug. 12, 2011.
This bank acquired Legacy Bank, headquartered in Scottsdale, AZ, after it failed on Jan. 7, 2011.


(Only bank failures since Jan. 1, 2010 are listed)

This bank is owned by Enterprise Financial Services Corp., which has received money through the TARP program.


Guess the Fed Gov is going to get a hold of your bank one way or the other...

petegz28
08-14-2011, 01:16 PM
Enterprise had received $35,000,000 in TARP .

http://trackthestimulus.com/TARP_Recepients.aspx

It's a good thing a bank who took TARP and has yet to repay anything (possibly) was given the selection from the FDIC to buy more banks.

mnchiefsguy
08-14-2011, 01:19 PM
Not sure how recent this list is but at the time it was created Enterprise had received $35,000,000 in TARP and has yet to repay a single penny.

http://trackthestimulus.com/TARP_Recepients.aspx

It's a good thing a bank who took TARP and has yet to repay anything (possibly) was given the selection from the FDIC to buy more banks.

One certainly would think that a bank that was so financially insecure that it had to accept money from the government would be prohibited from buying more banks and increasing its debt. But hey, that is common sense, right?

(Not saying that the FBNO should or should not have been sold, etc., but there is no reason to allow banks that have taken tarp money and not repaid it to go further into debt by expanding)

petegz28
08-14-2011, 01:20 PM
Regulatory reforms and the recession’s toll have made it difficult for small banks to raise capital, said Rick Maples, head of investment banking and the financial institutions group at Stifel, Nicolaus & Co. Inc.

http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/stories/2010/09/06/focus5.html

petegz28
08-14-2011, 01:21 PM
One certainly would think that a bank that was so financially insecure that it had to accept money from the government would be prohibited from buying more banks and increasing its debt. But hey, that is common sense, right?

(Not saying that the FBNO should or should not have been sold, etc., but there is no reason to allow banks that have taken tarp money and not repaid it to go further into debt by expanding)

That list was as of 2009. I am trying to find if Enterprise repaid or not. Regardless your point stands, if a bank had to take TARP they shouldn't be allowed to be buying other banks. Especially banks that didn't take TARP.

banyon
08-14-2011, 01:28 PM
I think you made my point. Thanks!

You argued they should be treated differently, the point of that article was that they shouldn't. That's your point?

petegz28
08-14-2011, 01:29 PM
You argued they should be treated differently, the point of that article was that they shouldn't. That's your point?

My point is they changed the rules mid-game and dealt a blow. Your article confirms that.

orange
08-14-2011, 01:29 PM
One certainly would think that a bank that was so financially insecure that it had to accept money from the government would be prohibited from buying more banks and increasing its debt. But hey, that is common sense, right?

(Not saying that the FBNO should or should not have been sold, etc., but there is no reason to allow banks that have taken tarp money and not repaid it to go further into debt by expanding)

You don't sell something if you can't find a buyer.

banyon
08-14-2011, 01:30 PM
My point is they changed the rules mid-game and dealt a blow. Your article confirms that.

Yeah, but we're having a policy argument. Why SHOULD they be treated differently?

mnchiefsguy
08-14-2011, 01:50 PM
You don't sell something if you can't find a buyer.

If the bank you are selling to has millions of dollars in tarp debt, they are not really a buyer..they are just using government funds to expand their business. They are basically expanding for free, or interest free at the very least.

petegz28
08-14-2011, 01:56 PM
You don't sell something if you can't find a buyer.

There were others interested that i didnt see on the tarp list

HonestChieffan
08-14-2011, 09:10 PM
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-i-ldvYSfUes/TkeXv6ZfTYI/AAAAAAABH50/ufiAr3mdGFw/s320/image4.jpg

WilliamTheIrish
08-17-2011, 09:18 PM
Pete, This thread is outstanding. All the anger of a Pete umpire/referee/NFL official complaint thread.

So tell us all: what was/is your wife's position at the bank? Did she lose her job?

petegz28
08-17-2011, 09:21 PM
Pete, This thread is outstanding. All the anger of a Pete umpire/referee/NFL official complaint thread.

So tell us all: what was/is your wife's position at the bank? Did she lose her job?

She doesn't know and won't know until later this week, hopefully. I'd rather not give her position at this time. You never know who is reading this, know what I mean?

WilliamTheIrish
08-18-2011, 12:39 PM
Hope it all works out for the both of you Pete.

As an aside, and not that it changes a thing, but I think you and the others overreacted to orange posting that article. (JMO)

petegz28
08-18-2011, 01:40 PM
Hope it all works out for the both of you Pete.

As an aside, and not that it changes a thing, but I think you and the others overreacted to orange posting that article. (JMO)

The dick part about that was I said I didn't want to name the bank at the time and he felt like it was necessary for whateve reason. It just wasn't cooth, imo, but oh well, I have my un-cooth moments as well

btlook1
08-20-2011, 02:00 AM
Sorry about your wifes bank, hope it works out for her.
You totally got baited by some losers in this thread dude. I see now why so many people say the DC forum is a cess pool.
Keep your head up and rise above the crap that settles at the bottom of this forum.