Tag Archives: Credit Suisse

Is it reality?

That is the question I am faced with as I saw the article at CBC which I cannot continue as CBC screwed up its site giving us advertisements every inch of the article, as such Brodie Fenlon clean up your freaking site, and fire the idiot responsible for this. Yet the BBC came to the rescue and gives us (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx2v37z333lo) ‘Trump deep sea mining order violates law, China says’ in earnest, that article is three days old and I preferred the CBC article as it shows a little more clearly how desperate America has become for funds. I reckon that the interest on 36 trillion of debt is gnawing on the bones of America, more prevalent that gnawing has gone beyond the bones as it is starting on the bowels of America. The BBC article gives us “Donald Trump has signed a controversial executive order aimed at stepping up deep-sea mining within US and in international waters. The move to allow exploration outside its national waters has been met by condemnation from China which said it “violates” international law.” I tend to agree with China, but merely as it allows a setting where the desperate poor countries who cannot counter America and these nations are left with baubles. A setting they learned from the slave traders around 1768. You have to hand it to trump. He is giving the old scriptures a chance to prove themselves. The issue I partially have a problem with is “The administration estimates that deep-sea mining could boost the country’s GDP by $300bn (£225bn) over 10 years and create 100,000 jobs”, in the first there is no clear setting for the $300,000,000,000 revenue. If they ‘mine’ in a few wrong sports, the price if mining and the revenue of staff will cost them an easy $50,000,000,000 which implies a lost revenue base of 16%, the second part is that these jobs are mostly given to people they just evicted. Only the higher levels will get a nice dime, the rest will be done by Americans who didn’t want the job anyway and that breeds errors and often mistakes. A non-committed employee screws up the daily routine a lot more than you are happy with and that will be dozens of people. The part that I never gave the right attention is seen in ““The harm caused by deep-sea mining isn’t restricted to the ocean floor: it will impact the entire water column, top to bottom, and everyone and everything relying on it,” he added in a statement released on Friday.” The he in that quote is Jeff Watters of Ocean Conservancy, a US-based environmental group. The fact that Jeff merely got one quote implies that he has a whole lot more to say and I wonder if we will ever see that part of the equation. The larger setting is that America is now ready to start bullying its way through international waters. So what will they call those who want to intervene on their waters (or too close to it), will they suddenly be branded pirates? A larger setting that America has lost the plot and I warned for this a decade ago. Deal with your debt unless it deals with you and that seemingly seems to be happening now. It also opens a new setting. These little nations will now be ready to side with China, which is another headache for America. And that setting will give China (as a protector or these nations) an options to scuttle these miners. So $300 billion largely lost and American lives lost (at present no one cares about those). Now we get the added cost of these mining platforms and as such America gets into deeper waters. 

So the end of the BBC article gives us “A recent paper published by the Natural History Museum and the National Oceanography Centre looked at the long term impacts of deep sea mining from a test carried out in the 1970s. It concluded that some sediment-dwelling creatures were able to recolonise the site and recover from the test, but larger animals appeared not to have returned.

The scientists concluded this could have been because there were no more nodules for them to live on. The polymetallic nodules where the minerals are found take millions of years to form and therefore cannot easily be replaced.” As such we have a (non proven) stage for the desperation of Americans. This was shown half a century ago. And the fact that America is willing to ignore “larger animals appeared not to have returned” as well as “polymetallic nodules where the minerals are found take millions of years to form and therefore cannot easily be replaced”. As I personally see it, to ignore these two facts implies that America doesn’t care (or cares less) about marine life and that it will act like a carrion eater in regards to the ocean floor and take now what needs millions of years to form whispers (to me) that America is decently beyond broke and it falls to President Trump to default the larger part of 36 trillion of debt. I’m pretty sure that I made mention of that chance in the past and as I am likely proven right yet again, the question becomes why didn’t economics signal clear levels of dangers? The news now, as the Times writer (and American economist) Irwin Stelzer gives us that the economy of America is in rather good shape. So is it really? Please give us the goods on how America is doing well? It might be that the America Economy is seemingly hanging tough, but they lost billions of revenue all over the field from retail to defense contracts. They might be in denial, bit as I see it only two years ago we would never have seen ‘Italian defence and aerospace giant Leonardo has signed a new Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia’ a mere three months old. So how much did America lose here? I cannot set the valuer of that contract, but the quote “multiple areas of collaboration to include space industry, airframe MRO (Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul), localisation of electronic warfare systems and radars and assembly of helicopters, a focus on Combat Air and Cross-Domain Integration fields, industrialisation processes and human capital development, national supply chain in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the country’s role for Leonardo in the region as well as the global value chain.” (Source: www.leonardo.com) leaves me to believe that it is a serious amount of money, now add the new European slices and with the tariffs the loss of America is now on a threshold to fuel a larger recession than ever speculated on before, the larger players (read: Bloomberg) set this chance at the moment at 40%, as America scuttled their own retail houses (like Walmart) of cheaper goods, they need to continue without the goods, you might think it is nothing, yet 1% of the American population works there, now take out the thousands of shoppers (read: immigrants) and that 2025 revenue of US$680.99 billion will topple by at least 10%, 30% if they are not careful and what remains of that Net revenue of US$19.436 billion? You see, they either fire a whole lot of them or lose close to 40% of their business. These are personally considered numbers, so I might be wrong here to the amount of loss, but not the intention of loss and this is merely Walmart. There are several other chains facing this setting. So how good is that shape of the economy? 

I wrote a few years ago that we need to see where all these bonds are, no serious journalist ever looked into that matter it was the time around the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in 2023. I wondered how the could have happened and it was a much bigger thing. The acquisition of Credit Suisse by UBS gave me pause to ponder, I figured that several banks had over swallowed on bonds which left them not dissolvent, but left their funds largely frozen as such I speculated that Credit Suisse and SVB had too many bonds and at that time the loss of value of these bonds were crippling them. At present no one really looked at this, even to debunk my train of thought and now we also see some are selling their debt of the US. The BBC touched on that on April 10th (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yrr0e7499o), so feel free to think I am crazy (always a decent stance to have) but there is ruffling in the economic oceans and the stage that the economic times are decently horrendous is not a bad thing. 

I just thought of something, did America rename the Gulf of Mexico for mining purposes? Now a bad stance, if it not for the tiny fact that the Bermuda Triangle is there too, as such how many mining platforms will operate in that region and what remains a few weeks later is anyones guess. Just me having fun with the situation. 😛

Have a great day and feel free to enjoy a coffee, it leaves you with a warmer feeling than a US bond at present will. 

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics, Science

Forbes Foreboding Forecast

Yup, it happens. Sometimes the others are all on your train ride, but that does not make your prediction true. Yet to see this we need to take the whole image into consideration. For me I saw this come towards us like a freight train without any brakes when I wrote about it as early as September 2020. I wrote several times that these settings were a really bad setting and the outcome would not be a nice one. Then I warned that the US economy had nowhere to go, not when they insult and offend Saudi Arabia (and to some extent the UAE), as such China would gain billions in revenue. We saw last month (could have been 2 months ago), news that America was ‘worried’ about China making so much headway into the middle East. And now Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/01/29/the-us-dollar-is-finished-wall-street-legend-warns-trumps-and-bidens-china-nightmare-is-suddenly-coming-true/) gives us ‘The U.S. Dollar Is ‘Finished’—Wall Street Legend Warns Trump’s And Biden’s China Nightmare Is Suddenly Coming True’. Really? First off, this isn’t suddenly, I made mentions for almost 4 years that this stage was underway. The fact that the dollar is finished is not entirely wrong, but not to the degree we see predicted. Wall Street will take any stance to diminish that danger. People will end up with nothing, but the almighty dollar will sail on, even though the galleon it once had will be replaced by a simple sloop (as piracy goes). 

So whilst we get “The U.S. dollar is “finished as the world’s reserve currency,” analyst Richard X Bove told the New York Times just days after his retirement from a storied 54-year career as a Wall Street analyst.” I initially tend to agree. Yes the dollar as a reserve currency is pretty much a bye bye black sheep operation. It is the “Bove, who sees bitcoin and cryptocurrencies as winning in a post-dollar dominant world, predicted that China will overtake the U.S. economy” part I do not completely agree with. You see the Yuan is and will be an important part of the global economy, but China has its own skeletons to deal with. Evergrande is one and that $300,000,000,000 issue will hinder the Chinese economy to a massive degree. Not to mention the Chinese population that is hurt by that loss. I reckon that being related to Shawn Siu in China is a lot more dangerous than being a loudmouthed disrespectful American in that region, but that could merely be my take on that situation. You see, China needs both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to get the traction to push forward. Yes, they will push the dollar of its throne and Americans with their arrogance did this to themselves, but without the Middle East China has no real momentum. That was the larger station we needed to see. I tried to warn people, but to them I knew nothing. And true, I have no degrees in economy, but I have looked into numbers for decades and I have both a creative mind to see beyond the numbers and a critical mind to question any hypothesis I have. As such I saw what is now being published as ‘suddenly’. My timeline has three years of warnings of the dangers the US and its dollar were facing. I do not have the knowledge or insight to discuss or oppose the digital currency changes, but I can tell that the ego of ex-presidents with his opposition to the digital dollar will be the end of the American economy. The digital dollar would allow Wall Street to diminish the impact the slam the dollar is about to make. If that stops the damage will be enormous. I don’t think the US economy will have any cards to play. Especially now that the EU nations are vying for the same defence contracts that were once almost uniquely America alone. With France, the UK and Germany vying for whatever spending dollars they can, China might end up with a little less, but they still have a lot of billions coming their way, all billions lost to America now and the EU is trying to get a few as well, an indoor fight between the US and EU is not one they were ready for and overall the American evangelisers are now starting to be a lot more quiet. Money talks and the US has none left. Now that the Ukrainian Russian military debate is now three weeks away from two years. A short term prediction by the Kremlin is now a setting that they could actually lose. A stage not considered a year ago and that also brings a lot more problems to the EU nations as well as America. America that has been catering to Russian needs no less and that is important as the people are now a lot more eager to accept China as the new leader. This is not some Nixon fantasy, this is the case of Wall Street deciding on what is best for the world and that is not how it works. That only has any value in the delusional mind of some. So whilst we see what happens next, we see that the power players are vacating towards the UAE. Some will go to other destinations, but the mess that they are leaving behind (not all due to them) will leave the American population without anything left. So what do you think happens when the dollar collapses and 200,000,000 Americans see that their savings are gone. Do you really think they will will side with Trump and his multiple multi million lost lawsuits? Consider that no one has a clear view on how much he owns. Some state that he only has now less than 3 billion and he was dropped from the Forbes 400 list, he came up $300,000,000 short (a lot more with the lawsuits he lost). To give you some reference, Elon Musk is apparently 96 times wealthier. He has 9600% more wealth than Donald Trump and that is the person Americans pissed off, all whilst he has the foundations of a solution for the energy shortage they face. So how is ego holding up? When the UAE engages with that solution, America will come up short in funds and energy. So the ‘suddenly’ setting wasn’t there. This has been out in the open for up to 4 years. And that picture goes from bad to worse soon enough. 

Could I be wrong?
It is a fair question and I ask myself that question pretty much every day. It is not indecisiveness, it is not doubt. It is about verifying the numbers again and again from whatever reliable source I can find. Verification is everything. Richard X Bove and I got to the same conclusions via different ways and as such I wonder why others were never on that page. Why was the media not all over this? They were so ready to protect Elizabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried, but this they didn’t see? Ask yourself that question and wonder what else they got wrong and more importantly why did they get that wrong. You might come to some conclusions that will scare you. Mainly because you all worked towards your retirement, but how many funds saw the golden future that the dollar bonds brought? When that falls flat your retirement will be gone and there is no coming back from that. I think that a few banks in America, as well as Credit Suisse Group AG (now part of UBS), isn’t it interesting that none of them were properly investigated by the media? They all gave the same story, but no one looked into how many dollar bonds these banks had. It might be nothing, but I doubt it. You see, Credit Suisse was handed a $54 billion lifeline. The fact that ANY bank needed THAT MUCH money was never properly investigated and it wasn’t just them. We see all the claims, but to need a 54 billion lifeline implies that that piece of rope is made from weaved platinum threads with diamonds. When did you ever need a lifeline like that?

And these places all matters, because that is to some extent the impact that the dollar pushed for, at least that is how I personally see it. There will be plenty of people stating that I am wrong, but after 4 years I have been proven correct too many times. Let them come up with verifiable data and clear sources to prove me wrong. I dare them.

Enjoy the day, my Wednesday just started.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

The thin ice

We all know the expression, no skating on thin ice. Yet when you think of it, when was the last time you saw thin ice? We all hear it, but when did you yourself, with your own eyes see a case of thin ice? We tend to think it is a danger avoided, but when no one sees that danger, is it a danger? Don’t get me wrong, I am not doubting that thin ice exists, before ice is thick enough to carry our weights it will be thin ice. A lot of thin ice seeing is assumption. We see ice and we see no one else skating on it, as such we take it for granted that THAT part is thin ice. Hold on to that thought because I am about to give light to two very different articles.

Arab News
The first was Arab News (at https://www.arabnews.com/node/2395561/business-economy) where we see ‘Saudi banks’ residential loans surge in August as apartments gain prominence’. This article seems nice, but when you read it we are given two parts. The first one is “Mortgage lending to houses, apartments and lands rose to SR7.14 billion in August from SR5.43 billion in July” This is a 30% rise in a month and that is huge. Now there are other factors on play like trends. How was that last year versus this year and a few other things, but 30% matters. In addition we are given “The increase in apartment financing by Saudi banks compared to house financing is due to the increase in prices of houses and private villas compared to the prices of apartments, which has made villas and houses unaffordable to average-income individuals,” and this comes from Talat Zaki Hafiz, an economist and financial analyst. There is the added “Notably, financing of houses still dominates Saudi banks’ new residential mortgage landscape, constituting a 70 percent share in August. While apartments comprised 25 percent of the pie, land financing held the remaining 5 percent.” It seems that the Saudi banks have things well in hand. We can also infer that people are in a better state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is in a better state and the people are setting their lives accordingly. Now, this is speculative, but if the economy was really bad real estate would not skyrocket by 30%, so something is going right there. 

The Guardian
The guardian gives us a very different story in the UK (at https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/oct/21/mortgage-debts-and-bust-firms-put-uk-banks-profits-under-pressure) there we are given ‘Mortgage debts and bust firms put UK banks’ profits under pressure’. Now we can argue that the UK has twice the amount of people and that is true, yet as I personally see it, banking is banking. If a bank has a certain margin, having twice that margin implies that bank is twice as rich. Now, I get it, it is not that simple, but read me out.

We are given “Bosses watched in horror as a mini-banking crash led to the collapse of a string of US lenders including Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), and later Switzerland’s largest lender, Credit Suisse.” Here we have a problem, what I speculated all along and I saw one part revealed in April was “SVB had few traditional banking uses for the cash that piled up, it instead invested $91 billion in Treasury bonds and U.S. government agency mortgage-backed securities between 2020 and 2021. This brought SVB’s investments to roughly half its total assets.” You see, this was stupid greed and I warned in advance of it, more than once actually and the Guardian does not mention treasury bonds once, there is a whole engine spinning news and misdirecting news all over the media. The speculative setting is that owners of US treasury bonds will auto renew or lose a lot of money, so what would you do if you were the idiot relying on a 2% payday of $91,000,000,000? That amounts to a $1.87 billion payday. I would do the same thing, but these banks used their clients money to hedge that bet and the US government was eager to cater to that level of greed. I reckon that this is why Janet Yellen kept a close eye on this. In addition, I wonder how deep Credit Suisse was involved. 

Yet the setting is housing and “By July, the former Ukip leader Nigel Farage went to war with NatWest over plans to close his accounts at its private bank, Coutts.” Really? One account has that much impact? You see ‘Coutts bank boss quits in row over Nigel Farage’s canceled account’ some might see this as a joke, but for Peter Flavel the boss in question it is not a joke. There is something wrong with banking and banks all over the west. Don’t ask me what, but all these events are part of a larger problem, a problem that involves stake holders blending the message for banks and as I personally see it, the Guardian has been catering to these stake holders. It is highly speculative but even as this truth is given “Speaking to broadcasters Thursday, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said it “wasn’t right for people to be deprived of basic services like banking because of their views.” I think it wasn’t the views (alone). I reckon that some views opposing the current need is a larger setting and people like Farage could be able to spot that in the documentation handed to them, moreover certain banks have been skating on the thin ice for too long and at some point someone will sink through the ice. That is the danger of the thin ice. For the longest time the thin ice was an urban myth at best, because we never aw cases. But the British banks are in a spot of bother and people like Nigel Farage would shine a big light on that problem, better to get rid of these people and when banks do that, when banks do that to politically A-listers, how much trouble are they really in. You see in March 12th (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/03/12/i-honestly-dont-get-it/) I raised a few questions regarding bonds and the eager beavers in the media never looked at that part, not the Times, not the Guardian, not any respectable newspaper as I personally see it. So why not? What trouble is America trying to pass over thin ice? What are we not told and isn’t that the duty of banks to inform their customers? I reckon that Saudi Banks are doing a lot better because they do not cater to anything else but their goals and the goals of THEIR customers. I could be wrong, but considering that we are left in the dark for over 6 months, all whilst Saudi banks are doing 30% better in a month implies something. It implies that they are doing something right.

 Enjoy the last day of the weekend, Monday is soon here, here it will arrive in less than 300 minutes.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

It’s a BRICS house

That was the setting and it is not a new setting. The BBC gives us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-65784030) ‘Brics ministers call for rebalancing of global order away from West’. This is not new to me. I made mentions even before I wrote ‘Brain drain, by design’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2022/11/17/brain-drain-by-design/) which was November 2022. So this is not new. I am not happy that Russia is in the mix and I did not consider Brazil in that mix. But India and China were. And even more, which we also see here with “Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said “more than a dozen” countries including Saudi Arabia had expressed interest in joining the group”, which I saw coming a mile away. And I reckon that Saudi Arabia and China will then offer an inclusion to the UAE. It is now becoming a simple play that puts the US and the EU out of business. The UK still has its ties to India, as such it needs to play a very careful game to not be set aside, and it is possible that the UK will have some form of shelter, but the US is pretty much done for. It’s news cycle is all about avoiding defaulting from one point to another, and when that goes wrong it goes really wrong with the US and the EU, both Canada and the UK will feel that sting massively. Then as Japan goes Australia will be in similar dire conditions. A stage that was never speculative, anyone with a decent grasp of the abacus could work that out and the  biggest trap they went for was to shut Saudi Arabia out, to let (according to their ego’s) it become a pariah. All for a journalist no one gave a fig about. More importantly there was never any evidence, that much was clear in that United Nations essay and they tried it again with that cyber report that involved Jeff Bezos. Now that new house, that domicile made from BRICS and its members will become the new world powers. As I said, the fact that it includes Russia is not my choice and I am not happy about it. And now that we see more and more business outsourcing to India, that stage will change even more. Those in doubt better get a clue, because if I see my tactics correctly, the BRICS union will set stations so that there is no more debt raising for the US. I am not sure how they will pull it off, but if any of the BRICS members now or new will sell their US bonds it will all stop right quick. We were that close to the edge and now that edge is crumbling. I might not be in time to sell my IP, but I do have an alternative and that setting is close. I will not get much, if anything, but I will get out with my skin decently intact, which is likely more than most others can say at that point. 

So when we consider the BRICS members (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) a new setting comes and with that the largest ass kissing contest in the EU will start with vonder Leyen on her knees. After that whatever allies the US had will be running for the hills, any hill for that matter. The rich people will already have plans in place, they will have locations ready and they will watch from a massive distance with family and friends how the US implodes upon itself. I reckon that 2024 will be the least comfortable place on the planet to be at that point. Yes, people will call me crazy, people will say that I am causing a panic. Yet these facts were out there for anyone to see, you merely thought that the western media would give you the goods, something they haven’t done in close to a decade. I gave several clues out on several matters on how the media was giving you the runaround going all the way back to September 2012. But you all thought I was crazy. Well, when this situation becomes a reality, you get to see how crazy I was. Did you actually think that someone can have a $32,000,000,000,000 debt and no one comes to collect? I have seen people hide under beds because someone was ringing the doorbell for an outstanding $750. And the final parts was seen a few months ago when Saudi Arabia closed the door on ‘saving’ with a simple “The head of Credit Suisse Group’s largest shareholder, Saudi National Bank (SNB), said on Wednesday it would not buy more shares in the Swiss bank on regulatory grounds” Did you think it was going to be that simple? They lost lost more than $26,000,000,000 in market value. That was the setting I did not initially see, but when we see the larger stage we see that it was more then a loss. I reckon that whatever BRICS has in place, or is about to have in place. The US is now in deep water, they are up to their neck and someone is adding water to the equation. For China it will work out rather well. You see after the US falls, Japan is pretty much next in line with a debt of $9,300,000,000,000, or 1,343.4 % of their GDP. A debt that is 13 times their GDP, without the US that will pretty much strangle them over night and whomever had those bonds can end that economy right there, right quick.

Did you think they were all too big too fail? 

A writer named Jenny Holzer wrote Truisms (1978-1983) gave us “Change is valuable because it lets the oppressed be tyrants.” I think we are about to see the impact of just how nasty that could end up being. 

Could I be wrong?
Of course I can be wrong, yet consider what is shown, and what was implicitly not shown. When you put those two together you get an image. Yes we can speculate that some are presenting a wannabe scenario. Yet two of these players (China and India) have the drive, the people and the will to push forward. Now add the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to the mix and you get a massive unsettling concoction that no one in the west wants to try and that is what we see now. The next debt ceiling is January 2025, which might sound nice, but if some of these bonds are set to market in 2024 the US will be in much deeper waters and this is not a secret either. I wrote about this (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/03/12/i-honestly-dont-get-it/) on March 12th with ‘I honestly don’t get it’ and even before that. Who will push? I have no idea, because I do not know where all the US bonds are and the media wasn’t too sharing, were they? 

So you can look int this or consider moving to anywhere where this cesspool does not hit, which is another reason why I was eager to sell my IP to Saudi Arabia and the Kingdom Holding Co. I reckoned that a (starting) 5 billion annual revenue stream would appeal to them, apparently I was wrong there too. Will I be wrong again? Perhaps, but I have been correct a lot more times than I was wrong. As such I have a decent confidence in me being right.

Enjoy the weekend (or at least try to).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

A state of banking

Yes, the banking issues remain and they are seemingly getting worse. This is seen in the BBC (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65467019) where we are given ‘Credit Suisse: Asia investors sue Switzerland over bank collapse’, which reads funny, but that is the effect of lawsuits. Yet that article and the BBC article (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65370751) named ‘£55bn withdrawn from Credit Suisse before rescue’ gave me reason to pause. This was not some setting of chance. Can you grasp how much £55,000,000,000 is? That is not some account, some people. That is the works of a few titans and someone gave THEM the heads up. So when we are given “The Swiss banking giant said 61.2bn Swiss francs left the bank in the first three months of the year” there I an issue, this is not merely a bank run. Then this many multimillionaires are running for the hills, someone set the watchtower on fire and stated, run for your life. Yes, it is highly speculative, but 55 billion pounds? That is serious cash in any economy. So when we consider the first article and we see “Already a Credit Suisse client for several years, he bought around $500,000 worth of bonds in January despite the bank having been hit by a series of scandals and compliance problems over the past few years” as well as “The type of bonds he bought from Credit Suisse are known as AT1 bonds, or contingent convertibles. They normally carry high yields for investors but are considered among the riskiest bonds that banks issue”, so in January this person decided to take a high risk setting, and in that time, or at least over the next 6 weeks when a staggering amount of billions pulled out, that person sat still? I know there is a sucker born every minute, but this comes across as the emperor of all suckers. Then we get the mother of all issues “Central to their claim is who was given priority when the bank failed. The terms of the bonds, seen by the BBC, show that bondholders are, if possible, supposed to be compensated first, after which come shareholders. But in practice, shareholders were allowed to exchange their Credit Suisse shares for UBS shares, albeit at a vastly reduced value.” There we see two parts. The first is ‘if possible’ which is a dangerous subjective term, the second is the stage of when they were alerted? How reachable were they?

Then the second article gives on tiny sliver. It is “Credit Suisse had been loss-making and had faced a string of problems in recent years, including money laundering charges.” As such, at what moment in delusional time is buying bonds in a loss making company a good idea? That is beside all the legal issues (including money laundering). In which situation (when it is not a government) are you investing in bonds in something that is losing money? Those in March (if they had done their homework) would have seen dozens of billions of pounds leaving that ‘sinking’ vessel. Only those with a peculiar sense of delusion are setting their up their portfolio in such a place. And when we see the end of the article giving us “The deal, when it was announced, valued Credit Suisse at $3.15bn (£2.6bn), whereas on the Friday before the settlement was reached it had been valued at about $8bn.” A place that is a mere 32% of its value in a week and 55 billion went the way of water whilst the bank went the way of the dodo. When a bank is a mere 8 billion and 55 billion left its shores? Even if half leaves the shores, I would be running like Forest Gump and no chocolates would be required. So I ask you are these investors that banked on governments saving their coin (and hide)? Is that what governments do now, all whilst they fail to hold banks to account?

I will let you decide, enjoy the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Politics

The premise of danger

That is what I feel is in play, but there is a word of warning, my premise is speculative. To see this we need to take a look at two new articles, both from the BBC. The first one is ‘First Republic makes last ditch bid to find rescue deal’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65441302). I will go into details shortly. The second one is ‘US Fed admits failure to take forceful action on SVB’ (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65428206) which came in a day earlier, but it all links to ‘I honestly don’t get it’ (at https://lawlordtobe.com/2023/03/12/i-honestly-dont-get-it/), which I wrote on March 12th. As such we have a growing concern that stretches well beyond 6 weeks and now we get “According to reports, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), a US financial regulator, sought bids for First Republic by the end of last week and has been assessing them over the weekend. Investment banking giant JP Morgan Chase is believed to be one of the banks invited to bid for First Republic, according to news agency Reuters. Bank of America is also understood to have been approached.” And in those six weeks I made a few clear presumptions/speculations. Yet NONE of the media looked into any of that, not even by their own accounts. The setting is that slippery and as such the media has shown that it can no longer be trusted. You see, there was a clear premise that some banks have too many US Bonds, but no one is willing t report on it and now people are withdrawing cash. The global setting becomes that putting your wealth in your mattress (or in a Saudi or Dubai bank) tends to be safer and that is not a good thing. No one is willing to look into the bulk of the US bonds and where they are, more importantly, no one is looking into which banks have US Bonds and how may they have of them, but the journalistic joke (ICIJ) was willing to play the NSA game (Credit Suisse leak) and emotionally speculate away whatever they could. The media is failing us all, because many are driven to ‘governmental’ needs. Yet, this is speculative, but look at what was published and what we are told, the numbers do not add up (neither do the topics). And in the second article we get “The US central bank has said it failed to act with “sufficient force and urgency” in its oversight of Silicon Valley Bank”, as such they didn’t learn in 2008 and they are seemingly not learning now. I use the word seemingly because of the Bonds issue, as I personally see it, some aren’t willing to report on connected matters and that is a whole different kettle of fish, but it is my view and if there is decent evidence proving me wrong, I will accept that. 

So when we are given “Michael Barr, the Federal Reserve’s vice chair for supervision, who led the review, said the US central bank should toughen its rules in response to what it had learned from SVB’s demise” we need to consider a few things. Basel III was created in 2010 (13 years ago) and in the US it was named the “Dodd-Frank Act” which was supposed to stop banks from taking excessive risks, which was partially repealed on May 24, 2018 by former President Trump. And now we have several new messes that could (in a most dire setting) bring about a new age of poverty in the US. Yet the larger setting that pushed for this is how many banks have US Bonds and how many do they have? 

And there is enough evidence out there, but for some reason the bulk of the media will not go near it, why not? If you follow the timeline and you start digging into 

Silicon Valley Bank (SVB)
Signature Bank
First Republic Bank
Credit Suisse
UBS Group AG (they bought Credit Suisse)

A weird setting starts to evolve and I am not an economist, as such someone will tell me I am wrong, but when you start comparing where $20 trillion in US Bands are, the picture shifts. Some are well established ‘banks’ like Rothschild & Co, as such plenty will have bonds, but some took a chance on getting rich quick and the partial repealing of the Dodd-Frank act allowed them, as such several are now in problems and there are more in this level of problem, but someone is brushing these facts under the carpet (and the banks themselves are hiding issues), as such I expect to see more revelations like this over the next 2 quarters. I recon the US Central banks are doing whatever they can to douse that fire before a full baking meltdown is on the horizon and the media is assisting, because if they were not, we would see a lot more facts come to light. Or as my grandfather would say ‘the best secret keeper of an adulterer is a brothel’, to state that someone is getting rich of keeping the secret at present and as I personally see it, the media is assisting them. Why is that? It is (again as I personally see it) because you are no longer entitled to getting the actual news. You get filtered information. News that is censured and approved by share holders, stake holders and advertisers.

Take notice of that small fact and enjoy Monday, only 112 hours until the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

What at first we don’t grasp

Yes, that is the setting we all face, even me. We don’t get everything, we don’t see everything and we don’t put it all together at a first notion. We think at times that the stage is clear, but it I not. It is made harder by a media that cannot be trusted, that relies on emotions and flames to get digital dollars and at times some of them merely keep silent for whatever reason. In this case (I checked today) according to Google Search, only Reuters and Arab News reported on this. You see, Pakistan has placed its first Russian oil order of 100,000 barrels a day. They did so because it is discounted oil and Pakistan does not have great oil reserves and it has 231 million people, as such for them discounted oil is essential, but that also means that Russia is now getting another flow of cash to prolong the war, more important, it might now have a long standing oil customer. You see, no matter how we feel, Pakistan does not care too much about Europe and more important, the war does not touch them. It feels indifferent, but business is indifferent. Business is what Pakistan needs for its people and its commerce and in this discounted oil matters a whole lot. So what do you think other nations will do? 

As such Arab News gives us “Pakistan has placed its first order for discounted Russian crude oil under a new deal struck between Islamabad and Moscow, the country’s petroleum minister said, with one cargo to dock at Karachi port in May. The deal will see Pakistan buy crude oil only, not refined oil, and imports are expected to reach 100,000 barrels per day if the first transaction goes through smoothly, Minister Musadik Malik told Reuters on Wednesday night. “Our orders are in; we have placed that already,” he said.” We might be upset, be might get angry but we need to realise that Musadik Malik can make a case. He must look out for the needs of its country and in a commodity like oil, the discounted version matter a whole lot. People want to get angry, but why? When you get groceries, do you get the brand at $1.99 or the supermarket version at $1.29? Especially when you know that they come from the SAME factory? You feel happy that you saved $0.70 and took that from the factory mouth. I know it is not that simple, because the supermarket orders 10,000 packages to get that discount, but for the consumer it is a saving. So what happens when a nation can get a barrel at $10-$30 less? That is one to three million less and the Pakistani government pockets that savings and they are not the only one with a budget issue. 

Reuters had a photo telling us “People on motorcycles wait for their turn to get petrol at a petrol station in Karachi, Pakistan, November 25, 2021” and that is one queue, Pakistan has them at nearly every gas station, some of these people live from gas tank to gas tank and now the Pakistani government could offer it slightly cheaper. Reuters also give us “As a long-standing Western ally and the arch-rival of neighbouring India, which historically is closer to Moscow, analysts say the crude deal would have been difficult for Pakistan to accept, but its financing needs are great.” And they would be right. The larger issue is not merely how the Pakistani situation is, it is what other nations are in a similar stage, because that matters. When nations can save up to 20% they will take the deal, there I little doubt in my mind and when you explode in anger, just realise that plenty of AMERICAN corporations are still doing business with Russia, I see the list all over LinkedIn with some repetition. There is a website (at https://dontfundwar.com/directory/) were we see hundreds still doing business in Russia. Companies with EU or American origins, as such we need to act locally before we can demand anything international and lets be clear. This is not on Saudi Arabia, no on Venezuela or any other oil producing nation. This is the consequence of a global economy and we better realise that the larger picture is not set in emotion, it is set on cold hard cash and cold needs of board directors and shareholders. The funniest was Credit Suisse (well it was until UBS took over) “Stop new business in Russia while meaningfully cutting exposure by 56%” so in a bank, what is ‘new business’? And in all this what is ‘exposure’? Doing it without a marketing spin, or is there more? 

We might not grasp all elements, we might not see all the elements in play. The list for example does not expose the transitional partners that work via Asia, or Africa as such the question becomes how much scaling back was in place? For one company to stop dealing with Russia and some old granny does it via Sun City for that player is that scaling back? 

The media is all quiet about a lot of it and you get to wonder why. I reckon until someone exposes certain links then they will casually mention it on page 23 of the newspaper to cover their own asses and sone distant link on their website will mention it, well after you repair the accidental broken link. There are many reasons why some act how they do, but the simple reason is money and the revenue they are measured against. A war that impacts global economy is a dirty one. They all ignored the larger impact of Yemen because there was no linked global economy, the same was the case for Syria. Now in the Ukraine it is different and we see all kinds of issues pop up.

Enjoy your discounted meal (and day).

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Military, Politics

It has holes

There are a number of issues with banks, the latest one is the one I left alone initially. It was the Credit Suisse – UBS issue. 

The initial issue are the holes, like a Swiss cheese, it has holes. In the cheese it is accepted as it is part of the process. But with banks? How many holes can we allow for? Now, the ice is thin here. I am not an economist and I am no banking person, So what do I know? Well, I know infrastructures going back to my Intelligence days, I have seen companies getting gobbled up and in some cases for all the wrong reasons, you see those parts were on paper pleasing, but the reality of it was that reality bites and that is when you feel like a Japanese guy gobbling up a live fish. That is seemingly OK, until the fish eaten is a piranha and it starts eating you from the inside out.

So lets get back to the first article (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-65177258) where we see ‘Credit Suisse investors angrily confront bank as chairman says sorry’. There we see Ulrich Korner in some stage of apathy. He reminded me of a Dutch political comic in one of their newspapers (a long time ago) where we see “When we get to item 4, it would be best if at least one of the board members start crying”. It felt like a farce, a joke for the stockholders who are about to lose a lot more than they bargained for. The text the BBC gives us is “The loss-making bank had already been struggling for a number of years after a series of scandals, compliance problems and bad financial bets. Mr Lehmann told investors at the Annual General Meeting that management had a plan to turn things around but had been “thwarted” by fears prompted by the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in the US.” I personally feel like this is misdirection. I personally believe that the US bond issues are stretched on several fronts and as I wrote in previous articles, how did Credit Suisse stock up on the Basel III front? What was the safety gap? It is my personally belief that there was close to none (or at least a lot too little), and now Credit Suisse will be removed and their banks will hoist the UBS logo soon enough, especially with the scandals and bad bets that were made. 

Yet that same day, the Irish times (at https://www.irishtimes.com/business/financial-services/2023/04/05/ubs-chair-says-credit-suisse-integration-will-take-up-to-four-years/) shows us ‘UBS chair says Credit Suisse integration will take up to four years’ that is for banking in these volatile times a massive risk to take and it is not taken lightly, as such I believe that people like Janet Yellen would have been on the phone with a few people. When the American bonds go, the US economy will go and I reckon they will take the Japanese and EU economy into the abyss with them. It is a personal view and I have nothing to prove it with, but the weak response from the media implies that these sources got told to play it cool or face consequences. It is a speculation, but when we take the view I had in the past on Shareholders and stake holders, I belief that I am decently correct and it is a personal view after all.

The Irish Times also gives us “Even with downside protection in the form of government support, there’s a “huge amount of risk in integrating these businesses,” Mr Kelleher, who is from Cork, said in prepared remarks for the bank’s annual general meeting on Wednesday.” The setting is that UBS is getting the bank for three billion Swiss francs. One source tells us “How much a company is worth is typically represented by its market capitalisation, or the current stock price multiplied by the number of shares outstanding. Credit Suisse Group net worth as of April 06, 2023 is $2.76B.” When we see other sources we get “Total assets CHF 531 billion and Total equity CHF 45 billion” this was last year and they have a little over 50,000 staff. I reckon that the bosses there are working on their resume and I would suggest the word ‘scandal’ is written correctly, because involvement in sandal does not go over well in the financial sector. And when you see these numbers, it is all sold for 3 billion? And we see no serious questions from any media. 

So what is left of the assets? What are the bond numbers and total value per nation of bonds acquired. There is no insight of that. Just like the meltdown of 2008 no one is to blame and the US is fixing the carper so that it can hide more dirty laundry. So how long until the people realise that their economy is largely based on an empty egg shell? 

The Irish Times also gives us “Shareholders will receive one UBS share for every 22.48 Credit Suisse shares held” this implies a mere 4.44% of value return for the shareholders, yes their value goes up butt this level of saturation is an issue and I reckon that more banks will follow at some point. Banks will become bad investment for the tax write off and the shareholders will lose out. Don’t get me wrong, I have no real sympathy for them, this is the outcome of shares and stocks. Sometimes you lose. But we need to look back to 2012. In the Netherlands we saw ‘SNS Reaal mulls bad bank for property operations’ (source: Reuters), it was their too big to fail operation and the people were not happy, it was a setting of real estate that was just beyond believe and now we get a similar setting but now it is not real estate, it is banks that are the bad investments and how many of them are holding bonds? The fact that the media never properly investigated this implies that I am a lot closer to the truth than even I am happy about. 

And the last part is giving us ““I understand that not all stakeholders of UBS and Credit Suisse are pleased with this approach,” Mr Kelleher said. “However, all parties, and in particular the Swiss authorities, considered this solution the best of all available options.” – Bloomberg” yes that sounds good, but I have a list (and that is just the Credit Suisse naughty list).

US tax fraud conspiracy, 2014, 2023
Malaysia Development Berhad scandal, 2015
Mozambique secret loans scandal, 2017
US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act violation, 2018
Climate controversy, 2018
Espionage scandal, 2019 (debatable issue)
Greensill Capital, 2021
Archegos Capital, 2021
Forex manipulations conviction, 2021
Drug money laundering scandal, 2022
Suisse secrets leak, 2022 (debatable issue, I still believe it was an NSA activity)
Russian oligarch loans documents destruction after invasion of Ukraine, 2022
Social media rumours, 2022 (debatable)

So 10 issues and 3 debatable issues, but the debatable issues do leave a mess at the front door of Credit Suisse. In all this Credit Suisse is walking around without clean hands, and the hands must always be clean. So does that warrant a CHF 550 billion downgrade? I honestly d not know and there is debate on some of these sources. I get that there will be differences in sources, but this much? This does not make sense, but it makes a lot more sense when we consider where the priority of Janet Yellen is and it is not the bank, it is the USA. Taking her away from the issues and letting it all be phrased by Bloomberg is not acceptable, not in the least. As Baby Herman states “This all smells like yesterday’s diapers

As I personally see it, this bank issue has holes like we see in Swiss Cheese. 

Have a great day!

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Welcome to the OC bitch!

Yes, this sounds strong and it was part of a script. The series threw that phrase out for weeks as the OC was gaining traction. It drove Misha Barton to success and that is pretty much all I know about the series. We take some facts to the bank, we count on it, we depend on it. But then I got to thinking. OC also stands for Organised Crime and at present can you tell the difference whether  it is Organised Crime or a bank? That is not a joke, it is a serious question. Al Jazeera gives us (at https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/29/french-prosecutors-raid-five-banks-in-massive-tax-fraud-case) ‘French prosecutors raid five banks in massive tax fraud case’. There we are given “banks, including Societe Generale, BNP Paribas and HSBC, faced a compensation request of more than $1bn” we also get “an earlier report in Le Monde newspaper, said Tuesday’s searches had also targeted Exane, which is part of BNP Paribas, and Natixis, the investment bank arm of French banking group BPCE” in the late 80’s someone told me “To be a thief, you need to be good and agile, if you lack these skills you could always become a banker” well we have been seeing that a lot since 2008 onwards. And now we see “it was impossible to put an exact figure on the scale of the fraud but said the banks together faced an overall compensation request of more than $1bn, including fines and late interest payments” this had been going on (as far as they could tell) since 2014. So what is the difference between Organised Crime and bankers? Is it a mere case of legislation? So after we are given the sleep creating news (by the media) regarding United States of Silicon Valley Bank, Signature Bank, and Credit Suisse. We see more cases regarding Fraud? So when will someone wake up and realise that banks are either properly regulated or they are allowed to collapse and the shareholders lose their funds. So when we see advertisement from HSBC how climate change ignores borders, can the next advertisement please state “Climate change, not unlike our alleged involvement in fraud is happily ignoring all border issues” 

Perhaps it is more on point than the so called ‘awareness’ vibes they are spreading now. And when I look at half a dozen advertisements from HSBC I can apply the same strokes to the text and the advertisement becomes a lot different, it becomes a clear path of opportunity seeking. Now, I cannot tell how involved HSBC is, but the raids seem to imply issues. You see the banking system has been skating on the edge of legality for so long (for the need of profit) and when we think back to the billboard days when we got all the anti-Brexit announcements, I saw that there was no mention of Bank fraud, as such, is this hypocrisy or is it like adultery. Everyone expects you to lie about that? Think about that for a second. It is the ‘expects you to lie’ part. In 2018 UNSW gave us ‘Heavy penalties are on the table for banks caught lying and taking fees for no service’, I would add to that that anyone lying is barred from banking services forever. There needs to come a time when these issues need to be dealt with. And the fact that a raid on five banks was done, implies (not proven) that there is a massively large problem out there. So why do we allow these bankers to continue? 

It is a serious question. Uber is short on people, there is seemingly a shortage in supermarkets, let the disgraced bankers fill those holes. Just a thought.

Meanwhile German Deutsche Welle gave us (at https://www.dw.com/en/paris-banks-raided-in-100-billion-tax-fraud-probe/a-65151312) ‘Paris banks raided in €100 billion tax fraud probe’. This seems to be the larger stage (and several media had nothing on this). So when we consider “the investigations are linked to legally dubious “cum cum” practices in which banks create overly complex legal structures as a way to allow wealthy clients to skip out on tax liabilities for dividends. Authorities say Societe Generale, BNP Paribas, BNP Paribas subsidiary Exane, Natixis and the British banking behemoth HSBC are suspected of aggravated tax fraud laundering. Moreover, BNP and Exane are suspected of aggravated tax fraud” can you honestly answer whether there is a difference between Organised Crime and Bankers. We could argue that most bankers have some form of Filofax and are therefor Very Organised Crime. Yet that is seemingly the largest difference at present. Yet this text also gives us another side and that is important. It is seen with “complex legal structures as a way to allow wealthy clients to skip out on tax liabilities for dividends”. That raises the question whether the law was ACTUALLY broken. The Al Jazeera article and two others did not clearly give me this, so there are issues which reflect back on the old premise I made 25 years ago “The tax systems are in dire need of a complete overhaul” This view was mainly on the US and EU, but the setting still applies. And when we see terms like tax fraud and tax fraud laundering and the stage is ‘suspected’ the question becomes “Were laws broken?” You see if that is not the case, these bankers were merely clever sneaky bastards (aka: administrators) and there is no law stopping them (just like there is no laws on Karen’s and idiots). They are all allowed to stay, visit our surroundings and do their business and they are allowed to be as creative they can be within the law and the law is the issue. We might think they are hiding behind the setting of ‘overly complex legal structures’, but that isn’t illegal and we need to recognise that. We need to recognise that the laws and specifically tax laws have been blatantly ignored by all who should have ben overhauling them. That is the heart of the matter and that is under debate as I personally see it. Yet for over 3 decades politicians avoided that subject and now that governments are all running out of funds they are desperate to keep the nose away from their necks and that time is runing out faster and faster. That is merely how I see it.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Oh boy, there was more

It all started 4 days ago when I wrote ‘I honestly don’t get it’. I comprehended the stage just fine, it is the lack of comprehension of greed, what people will do to fill their own pockets at the expense of everything and everyone. You see Basel III was published in 2010 after the first meltdown, it was extended to 2015 with extensions going as far as January 2023. So 13 years and the whining bitches (aka banks) still will not learn. SVB is merely one example and the actions by congress made perfect sense. Now we have Credit Suisse and the setting changes.

It now needs (and apparently just received) 45 billion to be ‘secured’. This is a little more than the national budget of Qatar which is 53rd on a list of national budgets with 228 nations with on last place Wallis and Futuna. To give you a better picture, it is twice the amount Oman has for its citizens, they are in 68th position. They need THAT MUCH money. The issue is that big and do not talk to me about journalists or those clowns at the ICIJ. They are all about their Pandora papers and what a joke they are. 

You see, I stated in the first article the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) and now we see the BBC give us (at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64964881) giving us “After Credit Suisse shares plunged on Wednesday, a major investor – the Saudi National Bank – said it would not inject further funds into the Swiss lender”, it matters and I will get back to this. In the mean time The Guardian gives us “The bank had been forced to delay the publication of its annual report last week after a last-minute call from the US Securities and Exchange Commission relating to what Credit Suisse described as the “technical assessment” of revisions to cashflow statements going back to 2019. The bank said those discussions had now been concluded” I believe it is more, I personally believe that was why Yellen got involved in day one. I think the SVB and others have too many bonds and they are not ready to mature yet and with interest up these things are making banks bleed money and they are bleeding a lot. You see, there is an estimated total of TWENTY THREE THOUSAND BILLION DOLLARS in US government bonds floating around and I reckon the SVB and Credit Suisse are now in levels of pain, they had too many of those. As such the outstanding part, not merely these two represent $23,000,000,000,000 and no one can cover it they are all stretched beyond thin. This is what I expect is happening and I warned for this as early as 2016, there is a point of no return and the banks are way past that. Putting your IP in the USA is about to become one of the most expensive jokes tech firms have faced in well over half a century.

Could I be wrong?
Yes, that is the case, but that can be tested quite easily. You see, if you make a tally of where all these US government bonds were and you set that tally in a mineable solution especially with pre 2016 and past 2016 when Dodd-Frank got cancelled you will learn a few things and this is what I saw on day one, but weirdly enough the media is not going there (neither is the ICIJ), so you get to wonder why.

Oil in the family
now we get back to the Saudi National Bank. In this I agree with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman. Oil is a commodity, there is no cap, if you need oil more and more, you are working from the wrong business plan and if that relies on exceeding your budget by over 30 trillion dollars you get what’s coming to you. In addition I would add the Republican Party making small talk stating that they need to pull away from Ukraine, I lose the little sympathy I had left for them. The US has slammed Saudi Arabia again and again, in some cases with the assistance of a United Nations essay writer. There is only so much people will take. They had the option to help Saudi Arabia create a nations defence strategy, they bailed out and now China is there. They made fake promises and most were not kept and now we see banks asking Saudi Arabia (in Oliver Twist style) can we have some more please? 

As such we see event after event and now that things are on the rails, the train has speed and they just ran out of rails. This is early and before I expected it, but I never considered the impact of Russia being stupid and attacking the Ukraine, it merely escalated things. 

America has two options, does it become part of China or part of Russia. It seems that the Republicans want to be part of Russia, the rest I do not know, but we are now in the process of the final financial act. And my evidence? Investigate the CET1 setting of EVERY bank (especially the two in trouble) and then look at where the bonds are and how many of these bonds are/were with the SVB and Credit Suisse. I have no doubt they both have too many. Then consider Basel III and see how many banks hold up at that point. They were warned for 13 years, so let them rot, let them collapse and let the investors and share holders take the fall and live life in minimum wage. 

And in all this, too many of the media are all about flaming and not doing too much about it, merely pushing towards bailouts. That time has gone as I personally see it. 

All whilst the Australian Financial Review gives us a mere 45 minutes ago “The failure of Silicon Valley Bank has exposed fresh divisions on Capitol Hill over banking reform, as US lawmakers from both parties trade blame for the lenders’ collapse and squabble over future legislation to shore up the financial system” squabble on something that was shown 13 years ago. Still think I am wrong? 

Enjoy the money you have, there might be a lot less soon enough.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media, Politics