Slashdot Mirror
SEC Hit With Data Destruction Complaint
DMandPenfold writes "The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the US financial regulator, has been accused of destroying thousands of data files on high profile inquiries including an early-stage investigation into convicted Ponzi scheme fraudster Bernard Madoff. The allegations, raised by former SEC employee Darcy Flynn, have prompted the US Senate Judiciary Committee to write to SEC chairwoman Mary Schapiro to demand an immediate explanation. The SEC exists to set a tough example on corporate governance, and it fines banks heavily for both lax practice and deliberate malpractice. Questions over any involvement it may have in sensitive document destruction are not likely to sit comfortably with some in the industry. The SEC insists it has kept records in accordance with the law on its computer system."
They will protect their own.
The agency that is supposed to keep the banks from committing the kinds of fraud they have been blatantly committing in the last 10 years or so has been wiping data. Ooops!
... That is what has happened to every other whistle blower under this administration. And the worse the corruption exposed, the worse the sentence. If the SEC is guilty of total fraud sheltering billions of dollars in Wall Street theft, then expect the DOJ to go for the death sentence for Darcy Flynn.
All those greedy bastards who invested with Madoff and were pissed that all they would get back was their *actual* investment have been whining for months about not getting their fictional 10%-a-year interest back too. Now they'll probably use stuff like this to sue the SEC and recoup their fictional gains out of all of *our* pockets. Just great.
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
".. with some in the industry". Huh? I would think the "industry" would be delighted that any documents related to any investigation are destroyed.
The DOJ has shown itself to be completely unwilling to prosecute bankers or their regulators. It's clear that the only chance we have for justice is vigilante justice. I would really like to see some poor guy who has had his life ruined by these criminals snap and start assassinating bankers and financial regulators. These people need to learn that there are consequences.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I'm confident that an SEC investigation of this issue will set the record straight.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
The US government is running the exact same ponzi scheme. With a good credit rating and increasing debt attracting investors in unsustainable deficit spending, Standard and Poor called it in the last negotiations to raise the limit. It is a risky investment even though the past payment record has been perfect. Obama has declared the rating invalid. This is like Enron declaring a downgrade invalid.
The truth shall set you free!
People like Madoff don't exist without anyone knowing about it. People all the way to the top are fully aware of these ponzi fraudsters but nothiing is done.
Madoff was taken down for political reasons. They've known about him for years and there is significant proof of this.
I'm not at all surprised that people in the SEC are scrambling to cover their asses.
Those interested in the particulars might also want to check out a recent Rolling Stone article by Matt Taibbi. Basically, the SEC feels that until an actual case is opened, it is not required to store files for "matters under investigation". Definitely worth a read.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/is-the-sec-covering-up-wall-street-crimes-20110817
The SEC doesn't enforce anything at the big banks, because those companies are where ex-SEC lawyers go if they want a big paycheck later. You don't prosecute your future employer. They only go after little fish just so they can appear as if they are doing their job. Small hedge fund who did something wrong? Expect the SEC to kick your ass if you cross them. Firm like Goldman? The SEC management will stop any attempt to investigate them, because the top people have their eye on retiring from there to a cushy Goldman job.
There's a good chat with Matt Taibii, author of the fun Why Isn't Wall Street in Jail?, discussing how SEC Document Shredding Covers Up Wall Street Crimes. This has been going on for a long time now, and the shredding is central to why the Bernie Madoff scheme wasn't caught earlier too.
I'm sure it has.. considering who wrote the rules, it's easy to see how none were broken.. There will be much much noise and outrage, and then... nothing.. It's hardly worth reporting this stuff when we all know nothing will come of it. The system will stand strong as ever.
For justice, we must go to Don Corleone
Full article on their paper edition, appetizer here http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/is-the-sec-covering-up-wall-street-crimes-20110817 but don't eat anything heavy prior to reading.
WARNING: Smartphones have side effects--most of them undocumented.
I didn't RTFA nor do I really know anything about the issue at hand. I'm just wondering if we get to blame Obama for this.
What doesn't kill you only delays the inevitable
S&P called it because a political party in the US was prepaired to default on our debt.
If violating our Constitution had not been presented as a "valid" option by the Tea Party, the S&P rating never would have changed.
As soon as the Tea Party forced the issue and started pissing on the very document they claim to love and defend, the only way to prevent the down grade was to create a meaningful adjustment of spending and revenue. And again, thanks to the Tea Party, the outcome of that came up short.
And it isn't a "Risky investment". It's AA rated. It puts us on par with utility companies and other extremely stable business sectors. The point of AAA ratings is that they are for entities that are legally require to pay out on debts. The US is still constitutionally required to pay out on debts, so by the standard we should still be AAA. But far right ideologs like Bachman and Perry keep spewing crap that makes the world think that we could actually default dispite our constitution.
Some of the blaim is Obama's with out a doubt, he's been playing the gentle leader roll ever since the GOP coined the "Ramming it down our throats" talking point in the year long insurance reform debate.
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Is it just me or when any organization say they acted "in accordance with the law" in circumstances such as this, it actually sounds like a confirmation they did something wrong?
"The SEC insists it has kept records in accordance with the law on its computer system".
Yeah, right.
Perhaps that should read more like... "Some non-technical SEC suit, with neither the insight nor expertise required to make such pronouncements, said 'The SEC insists it has kept records in accordance with the law on its computer system.'"
When a revolving door exists between corporate powers and government, then this kind of distasteful behavior should be expected. The solution should be to create a system at the government regulator that makes it impossible. Destroying records? Create a system that logs all work, always. Make it so, in order to do their jobs, employees must leave a trail of documentation that is automatically stored with an agency outside their control.
"Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
I say hang em with their own rope. I am sure that the SEC has various fines and what not it can impose on corporations for each instance of the actions that they have been hit with. I say let them play by their own rules. No I don't want to see the SEC go away but would like them to actually do their job. They should go after individuals who ordered or where compliant in the data destruction.
Time to offend someone
"The SEC exists to set a tough example on corporate governance, and it fines banks heavily for both lax practice and deliberate malpractice.".. I laughed out loud when I read this because the truth is that the SEC is currently there to let financial wrong-doers off the hook and to act as as employment agency for wannabe-wall-streeters.
See this shocking article: (print version)
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411?print=true
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
Could it have been handled better? Sure...but it did at least get them started talking about some serious reform we need. I dunno if it will actually happen, but at least it is on top of the conversation stack at this point.
And at the very least..even if they hadn't passed the ceiling raise (which I had no doubt they would at the last minute)...the US would still have paid its debts...we'd just have had to emergency cut some funding to programs, which might have been tough on some, but we'd have survived ok.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Nation scale debt isn't like home debt and never will be. No private citizen, no matter how rich or powerful, has the ability to issue a fiat currency, so anything you cite that relates to corporate or personal finance is pretty much invalid. The whole "we can't keep spending like this!" chestnut is false. Your idea that U.S. debt is a ponzi scheme shows that you don't understand finance or the workings of the ponzi.
Notice how U.S. t-bills have had a huge run in the last few weeks following the debt ceiling raise? That's because the financial markets know that US debt is still the absolute safest bond on the market, period.
Some of the blaim is Obama's with out a doubt, he's been playing the gentle leader roll ever since the GOP coined the "Ramming it down our throats" talking point in the year long insurance reform debate.
Obama is absolutely complicit. Just look at his actions, not his words, which are meaningless. Obama has gone along with everything the Republicans wanted, so that means he must favor those things. He just says different things to make you think otherwise. The man is a liar, and this should be no surprise, because he was a lawyer before he got into politics. Lawyers are nothing but professional liars and sociopaths.
"Explanation: We're doing what we've been instructed to do by Big Money interests in government for the last 30 years."
Corporations Own the Government
One of the questions raised when Obama appointed Mary Schapiro to run the SEC was the fact that she was the party responsible for minimizing oversight, actively ignoring whistleblowers, in the Madoff case. While the media was disinterested in her appointment to head the SEC it raised some eyebrows in the financial community given that she was largely responsible for the non-investigation of Madoff in her previous roles.
It is not unreasonable to suggest that the current SEC has significant self-interest in destroying the paper trail in the Madoff case. From outward appearances it reflects gross incompetence on the current head of the SEC in the best case and many would raise the specter of malfeasance.
Federal records regulations are broad and rather simple. If material doesn't meet a specific condition for retention, such as an open investigation, then it must be destroyed within a specified time frame, based on the content of the material. These rules were developed when paper was the primary medium of storage.
To paraphrase: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by bureaucracy."
Invenio via vel creo
Wrong. The lions share of our debt comes from the deficit caused by the Bush tax cuts and the unbudgeted spending for the Iraq war. I saw a chart from a couple months ago that attributed about 10% of our $14 trillion debt to Obama.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
Bush's tax cuts, medicare changes, and wars have cost us $5 trillion, about 1/3 of our total debt.
Obama [... has] run up more debt in less than 3 years that GW Bush did in his whole 8 years...
There's no need for lies here. We've incurred $2.4 trillion in debt under Obama and a staggering $6.1 trillion under GW.
Don't believe me? You can check for yourself, but I don't take you to be a facts-based kinda guy.
I went to eat some animal crackers and the box said, "Do not eat if seal is broken." I opened the box and sure enough..
Ironically, the Slashdot ad in the upper-left of my screen is for a document shredding company.
"SHREDX: THE WRONG SHREDDING SERVICE CAN BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN YOU KNOW"
You should really examine the confirmation bias before opening your mouth /ever/ again.
There are well accepted reasons for deficit spending. Bush/Cheney did it for no good reason other then getting the votes of jingoists and the elderly, and lining the pockets of big pharma. In eight years the created only 3 million jobs, the economy shrunk everywhere execpt the financial industry, and they dug a deep financial whole for when deficit spending was really necessary.
Bush's own treasurey secretary walked off the job in 2002. Heck, Bush himself admits that he is responssible for a lot of the current problems in the United States.
Not saying the Obama has a perfect record -- not by a long stretch -- but stop and smell the shit your shovelling.
My one main gripe with Republicans is their hipocracy over fiscal responsiblity. After Reagan, Bush H., and Bush W., it is amazing that anyone still believes it. At least the former two at the good sense to raise tax revenue.
Thanks to the confirmation bias, however, all these little drones run around talking about how fiscally irresponsible the Democrats are.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Kind of a mediocre trolling attempt there. Keep at it thought, in no time you could lure dozens of angry responses!
Hugs and kisses,
Juan Epstein
Japanese nuclear auditors and regulators getting cushy jobs later in the nuclear industry. This always blows up sooner or later and the price to pay always is gigantic. There is a _reason_ these regulators and auditors exist, namely to prevent the inevitable blow-up.
For them to be corrupt is treason at best. Life without parole is too good for these corrupt and evil scum.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
so that means he must favor those things
It is very difficult to know what politicians really favour, because politics is the art of spin and backroom deals. It would be interesting to see what Obama got in return for going along with the Republicans, or if he got screwed because he was the weaker negotiator. Or he could really be a Republican trojan horse.
/did/ see Obama go up against the healthcare companies. So we know he believes in something.
Now, we
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Violence is the last resort of the disempowered. Justice is said to belong to the courts -- a system that reduces violence in society a great deal. But if the courts fail...
When you talk everything away from someone, you eventually lose control over them, and then they turn on you.
Not saying that I support violence, but I *am* saying that we should consider a larger picture for why these things happen. That is, if you consider intelligence to be of some utility in preventing violent outbreaks from happening again.
Like all pain, suffering is a signal that something isn't right
Now, we /did/ see Obama go up against the healthcare companies. So we know he believes in something.
He did? The results don't show much. We got a healthcare "reform" that didn't really reform anything. In exchange for the bit about not denying people for pre-existing conditions (which still hasn't taken effect IIRC), they got tons of concessions including the requirement that people buy insurance, which is plainly unconstitutional. You can't require people to buy stuff by law; if the government deems something so important that it wants to force it on the people (like, say, Social Security or curbside trash collection), then it has to do so by making it a government service, not by forcing people to buy something from a private company.
Obama is about to spend us into oblivion. He's run up more debt in less than 3 years that GW Bush did in his whole 8 years
Incorrect.
Increase in debt under George W. Bush: $6,106 billion
Increase in debt under Barack Obama through the end of 2010: $1,653 billion
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
What's your source?
Attention deficit disorder is a complicated issue, spanning several major... HEY LET'S GO RIDE BIKES!
I know it is a pretty sorry piece of reform. The health-care lobby is one of the most powerful institutions in this country. Now, if politicians weren't so interested in vote grabbing, then the Democrats and Republicans could have ganged up against the health-care lobby, and then we'd see useful meaningful reform. But with the current political climate...
Um... so you wrote that with the implied assumption that that USA will in fact pay back those debts... something it has failed to do for the last 200 years or so. I'm just curious, you see, I'm not a math guy, so I'm just curious where you think the money to pay those debts is going to come from? Also while answering that question, I want you to find the GDP of the USA and compare it, on a graph, to the deficit go back at least 10 years.
What you will find, is that the USA economy is built on the principle of growth. A LOT of growth. In fact, growth that is utterly and completely unsustainable. Furthermore, the budget in effect right now, assumes that the money to pay off the debt is raises will come in a future generation/budget. It won't. It never has, and short of massive cuts, it never will (we've never cut more than 2% in a fiscal year). And arguably, any cut deep enough to really matter is going to fubar the economy so bad we would actually be worse off. (like taking 50% out of the military budget).
Now, like I said, I'm not a math guy... but I can read a projection just like anyone. The projections say that the USA will NEVER pay off that debt. In fact, any realistic person looking at international debt/income/payments would have to assume that the ENTIRE scheme is a ponzi scam. There is NO PLACE ON EARTH where the money to pay off international debt can come from, without creating A) more ACTUAL debt or B) economic restructuring.
Now who will guard the guardians? Another corrupt corporation, sold out to the financial industry? When will we understand that, ultimately, all these so-called warchdogs are accountable to us, the people?
They always say "don't take it personally"so we don't have to face the fact it's our money and our life they are embezzling and disappearing into their pockets. Well, when it's about my money or my life, that's personal enough to me, so I take it personally and I say everyone should consider doing the same and making it known, and demand accountability for all these fuckers.
This is like Enron declaring a downgrade invalid.
Or like Enron paying for a triple A rating 4 days before their collapse? Companies like Enron pay for their rating from supposedly impartial ratings agencies who have been handed a monopoly on rating by the US gov and allowed to charge the people they are rating money for supplying that rating. S&P and the other rating agencies are now steeped in corruption, and have been since they started taking money for their ratings - they are definitely not an innocent party calling it as they see it I'm afraid, they are as corrupt as any of the players in this game.
That's not to say they are wrong on the US debt - the US probably doesn't deserve an AAA rating, as the default by stealth which is induced inflation and QE is full speed ahead already, meaning that creditors in the rest of the world are being bilked to preserve the US in the style to which it has become accustomed. However S&P calling the US gov at this point in time is more likely a play to get kickbacks or favours from major clients like goldman sachs tipped off prior to the downgrade than a drive for truth - the ratings agencies haven't produced an honest rating in decades.
Too bad, at this rate, at the end of his 8 years term (assuming he will get reelected of course), he would have surpassed debt under GW, by another 50%.
The NSF just exonerated Michael Mann for doing the same thing with climate data, I'm not sure why the SEC wouldn't be allowed to do it too?
-Styopa
Actually, Obama's biggest sin is not reversing the measures Bush took that are plowing us into the ground (but note that without Bush, we would be doing fine as well). Sadly, Obama even promised us those reversals and has yet to deliver. We don't seem to be out of Iraq and Gitmo seems to still be there. Instead of universal health care, we got yet another mandatory insurance law.
something it has failed to do for the last 200 years or so.
So far as I know, other than a scare back in the 1970's, the US has never failed to pay off a debt.
The US has not been "debt free" in 200 years. That is in no way the same as "failed to pay offdebts". Not even close! Heck, I haven't been debt free in 15 years, but every debt I've ever had has been paid off or is currently paid ahead of schedule.
Furthermore, the budget in effect right now, assumes that the money to pay off the debt is raises will come in a future generation/budget. It won't. It never has, and short of massive cuts, it never will
It came damn close. Clinton got the country back into surplus mode and Bush COULD have started paying down the debt in 2001.
Yeah, it's going to take fiscal responsibility and a LONG time to pay off, but it is absolutely possible.
(like taking 50% out of the military budget).
While I agree that taking 50% out of the military budget would have some effect on the economy (that's a whole lot of Soldiers, Airmen, Seamen, and Marines out looking for a job), I think it'd be a great place to start :)
any realistic person looking at international debt/income/payments
Total debt sits around $14.5T today. Gross Federal Revenue (not GDP, just the amount of money that the feds pull in through taxes) is projected around $4.5T for 2011. That puts our income to debt ratio to about 1:3.25. Now, the classic rule of thumb for buying a house is to never go over 3x your gross anual salary. So to any realistic person looking at our debt, it should not seem extreme at all. Yeah, we're on the high end of where we want to be, but we're not encroaching on the 'doom and gloom' side of things. Not by a long shot.
Responsible cuts, tax reforms, and fiscal responsibility over the next 30 years could reduce our federal debt to insignificant levels based on even minor growth rates.
Now, like I said, I'm not a math guy
Great, now here's the thing. You have just admited to being ignorant on the subject. That's fine, it just means you lack in knowledge, something that can be easily remedied through research and education. But after having just mentioned your short comings, you are espousing your self proclaimed ignorant opinion as fact.
Not trying to be harsh here, but if you admit that you don't know what you're talking about, don't spout your opinion as fact.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
If he feels that signing statements are undemocratic, should he still use them to accomplish things that he feels should be done?
And the worse the corruption exposed, the worse the sentence
Not just retroactively - cover-ups can be a bitch too. I was told the other day that most of the evidence for the Enron scandal was in Building 7. Haven't verified that alleged fact for myself, but I didn't shrink back in horror and disbelief either.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
In this most recent issue the Republicans refused to compromise, so the choices were basically go along with the Republicans or else cut government spending drastically and immediately so they could make the debt payments.
Personally I would have loved to see him stand up to the Republicans and then make the debt payments from the defence budget.
Not to mention his swearing in consisted of:
"oh BTW, we're involved in 2 wars you can't get out of, and I basically destroyed the economy. Have fun. k thx bye!"
Absolutely. For another perspective, look here.
Personally I would have loved to see him stand up to the Republicans and then make the debt payments from the defence budget.
Right, so why didn't he?
No one ever talks about revenue or spending either, just debt. Debt is the result of revenue minus spending, and any idiot could have predicted that revenue would not be doing well after the economy tanked. I'd like to see a graph of how much revenue and spending changed over the years, so that we can factor out declines in revenue from the increases in the debt.
This is completely academic. The US is bankrupt. It is not possible to pay off our debt unless we do one of two things.
1. Default
2. Print the money to pay it, without borrowing the created money like we do right now
Why? A few reasons. For one reason there is more debt than there is money when you take into consideration the private debt as well. When you pay that much debt, reserves get drained and banks become insolvent, causing a classic fractional reserve deflationary spiral. That doesn't even take into account the 80 trillion in unfunded liabilities we have with the pension insurance program and others.
We're screwed. So we either default, or print the money. Borrowing it just keeps propagating and enforces the only two possible solutions.
So Linus, what are we going to do tonight?
The same thing we do every night Tux. Try to take over the world!
If you don't like corporations and the rich buying gov power, you have to eliminate the gov power.
No civilization has been able to prevent money from buying gov's power.
90% of the news is some version of "money bought power, yet again".
Fighting against human nature is stupid. This is a mis-alignment of incentives. If you want corps and govs to be honest, you have to separate their arenas of concern, and have real competition in both worlds. Corporations don't get rich screwing customers except in this insane world of regulators bought by the regulatees.
The big screw-the-customers corporations are all heavily regulated : All of the drug companies, the banks, the cable companies, the telcos, ...
Trader Joes, as an example, NEVER screws anyone, so far as I am aware. I can buy their $2 --> $50 bottles of wine and be confident that they are giving me good value. Ditto for any other products. They make $, I don't have to worry.
IBM charges high prices, but rarely screws customers, so far as I am aware. Intel, AMD, ditto.
This is an argument for at least 2 departments performing every function of gov, and people voting with their tax dollars which one they want to support. And/or privatizing as many gov functions as possible.
They are one of the fastest-growing chains in the US. I hate Safeway, etc. because I know their prices are out of line with TJs.
"The Constitution, the WHOLE Constitution, and nothing but the CONSTITUTION."
Look, the Democrats warned us that a few weeks ago that if we didn't raise the debt ceiling, then our credit rating would be downgraded. It would be a disaster of unparallelled proportions if we allowed this to happen. The only way to prevent this, they claimed, was to raise the debt ceiling so we wouldn't default. Well, look what happened anyway. We didn't default, but the credit rating was downgraded anyway. Does it remind you of all the arguments submitted to them back in 2008 that if they didn't pass the TARP Bank Bailout bill that financial institutions all over the country would fail and we would find ourselves mired in another Great Depression. Well, they passed the TARP act and look what happened. They really dodged a bullet back then, didn't they?
If you don't like corporations and the rich buying gov power, you have to eliminate the gov power.
And your proposal to do this without the rich buying private-sector power (see also: the history of the Pinkertons) is what exactly?
There's a fairly interesting argument that paying down the national debt would actually harm the economy... macroeconomics seems to be a tad counter-intuitive.
Yeah, it's going to take fiscal responsibility and a LONG time to pay off, but it is absolutely possible.
Not if you've seen the Zeitgeist movies, which spell out how fractional lending and reserve banking is stealing the fruits of our labor and giving it to the bankers. Then you will know that we can never pay off our debt. Since the "debt" was created out of thin air by loaning a certain amount of the money supply, that money supply cannot possibly grow to 10% more of the money supply in order to pay back the "loan with 10% interest" (assuming the loan was 10%; the number doesn't matter, as long as it is positive it can never be paid off). It rather saddens me that so many of us on this site haven't been exposed to this. Google "Zeitgeist", it's the first hit; there are now three movies and they're working on a fourth. What I talk about above is expanded on most in the second movie, but I recommend them all. And they're free downloads, torrents available at their site.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
ITT: partisan assholes and Obama apologists. Should Obama gain a second term (lol) he'll approach GW's spending.
The idea that not taking on more debt to maintain your interest payments on existing debt (lol, hello polzi scheme) will necessitate default is ludicrous. There's nothing else that can be cut first? And it was all a bluff: Biden went running to China to assure them the threats of default were just internal politics.
Ignoring the closing of the gold window -- America's greatest default -- and pretending that the problem is the debt ceiling (and not the debt) threatening America's first ever default is pure ignorance. Sheeple have short memories. What has happened to the price of gold since this default? $35/oz to ~$1,750/oz. That's the real value of the mighty USD. The CPI is a manipulated statistics; all the inflation they've been exporting to fools thinking it was money (a safe store of value) is about to return home to buy up everything they own. You don't know what depression is yet, USA. (If you don't believe me, add unfunded liabilities to your $14 trillion debt.)
Also, "valid" debt as per the constitution means only that the Government will not dispute the obligation. It does necessitate that it will actually be paid. Also, payment of debt with inflation is still a default.
It's probably like this model;
1) Reduce government so it's too small that some company no longer has an incentive to buy politicians.
2) .... some sort of free-market miracle happens here ...
3) Profit!
>> If this involves gnomes stealing underwear -- I think it hasn't really been thought out too well.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
If you don't like corporations and the rich buying gov power, you have to eliminate the gov power.
1. Get rid of government ...
2.
3. Somalia
Whoopseee! Surely it ends in profit???!?
I am familiar with the story of the marooned banker and his invisible gold ;)
Luckily we have two things in place that counter act that senario: ;)
1) The feds control interest rates, so long as they can artificially keep the interest on their debts below the growth rate, it isn't an issue.
2) The feds can print money, which in and of itself is risky as it can lead to inflation, but in a worst case scenario, we can always mint that $1 Trillion platinum coin
Not to say that there are some people just F$#@ing the system over ('Quantitative Easying' my ass!)
But to say that it is an incurrable situation is FUD.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
There's a fixed amount of money. I (Federal Reserve) print it, all of it. I loan you (US Government) $X with terms of 10% interest. Given that there's a fixed amount of money (X), where will you obtain the additional 10% to pay me back? You won't, which is the idea, and the reason that our currency has lost 98% of its wealth in the last 100 years, and 70% of its wealth since Nixon took us off the gold standard 40 years ago (i.e., the loss is now accelerating). The fed printing money adds to that effect.
But, yeah, whatever; I don't need to convince you to invest soundly, in order to benefit from my investments.
I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
Actually, they have a mandate to retain all of those documents for 25 years with no exceptions. They have shredded documents exactly matching the types described in their agreement with the NARA.
The more you dig, the harder it is to not see malice. The upper managers at the SEC regularly come from and then return to the boards of exactly the institutions they are regulating. Those lateral moves often happen after a shred-fest.
Actually, they have a mandate to retain all of those documents for 25 years with no exceptions. They have shredded documents exactly matching the types described in their agreement with the NARA.
The more you dig, the harder it is to not see malice. The upper managers at the SEC regularly come from and then return to the boards of exactly the institutions they are regulating. Those lateral moves often happen after a shred-fest.
Actually, they have a mandate to retain all of those documents for 25 years with no exceptions. They have shredded documents exactly matching the types described in their agreement with the NARA.
The more you dig, the harder it is to not see malice. The upper managers at the SEC regularly come from and then return to the boards of exactly the institutions they are regulating. Those lateral moves often happen after a shred-fest.
La meilleure Yamaha YZF R1 carénage pour motos ont un manteau trois-couche sur toutes les pièces. Les Yamaha YZF R6 carénage peuvent également être personnalisés selon vos préférences. Les Yamaha YZF 1000R Thunder ace carénage doivent cependant être installés professionnellement dans un atelier de carrosserie. Un atelier de carrosserie aura tous les outils nécessaires pour répondre aux carénages sur votre vélo Yamaha FJR1300A carénage. Carénages Ducati sont également disponibles en différentes variétés. Ces accessoires sont fabriqués à partir de plastique de haute qualité ABS qui est utilisé dans les vélos originaux fabriqués par la société.Yamaha YZF 600R Thunder cat carénage viennent dans une gamme fantastique de modèles et de formes de personnaliser le look de la moto. Carénages moto sont disponibles pour toutes les marques populaires de vélos.
Suzuki GSXR 600 carénage vélo sont principalement fabriqués à partir de plastique ABS, et les Suzuki GSXR750 carénage de moto de haute qualité sont moulées par Suzuki GSXR 1000 carénage. Ils viennent en différentes Suzuki GSXR 1300 Hayabusa carénage, dessins et polit pour leur donner une gamme de Suzuki GSX 600 F Katana carénage. Suzuki GSX 750 F Katana carénage Ninja sont très populaires parmi les motards avides de Suzuki RGV 250 carénage. Ces carénages sont fabriq