*promote
*quality

[to the idiots laughing--FU!]

Boosting this quality contribution up in the Hot Listing - declared quality by Boise_Lib.

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued Monday, June 18th, 2012 5:52pm PDT - promote requested by Boise_Lib.

We sleep, they live.

Look it at em' sweat and turn red!!

Listen to the excerpt at the end..."we do believe this was an isolated event, bluh blagh bluh.."

Get real asshole, your mouths moving but you're only poppin' spit!

yes, an isolated event, for that day.
don't worry tho, tomorrow is another day of taking stupid bets on other people's money.

Their own worst critics. If critics said only nice things and avoided mentioning the issues and problems, would they still be critics?

To me this person doesn't even matter...just put him down.

I mean the JP Morgan guy...what would happen if a superhero started offing them one by one? Would that scare the rest?

>> ^Yogi:

To me this person doesn't even matter...just put him down.
I mean the JP Morgan guy...what would happen if a superhero started offing them one by one? Would that scare the rest?


I know these two Irish guys that might help you out. They once said,"We're sort of like 7-11. We're not always doing business, but we're always open."

>> ^Unsung_Hero:

>> ^Yogi:
To me this person doesn't even matter...just put him down.
I mean the JP Morgan guy...what would happen if a superhero started offing them one by one? Would that scare the rest?

I know these two Irish guys that might help you out. They once said,"We're sort of like 7-11. We're not always doing business, but we're always open."


I don't know what you're talking about so you're going on the list. Dammit Archibald where did you put my list?!?!

Needs more pitchforks.

@Yogi

I'm sorry my fellow sifters advocate "offing" these guys. These guys work seven days a week and they work to make a profit - just like every other business.

J.P. Morgan Chase was the go to entity to take over Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual when they failed. Why? Chase was strong enough to bear the burden.

Regarding TARP money Chase never wanted it or needed it. Link

The Dodd Frank and Consumer Protection act is a poorly written gargantuan hydra of a bill. I know this because the small community bankers I know are saying they are not going to be able to stay afloat.

My companies president - someone who I know for a fact has voted as a democrat for over 40 years - told me yesterday he will vote against Obama in the upcoming election. Why? We work in real estate and the paperwork needed to finance a project has multiplied - and with it the number of lawyers and legal hours required - that is if we can get something financed period. Good for lawyers - bad for anyone who might want to work building a new shopping center(architects, tradesmen, engineers, etc) or working there in the future.

Make the rules simple, make them fair, and enforce them effectively.

>> ^kevingrr:

@Yogi
I'm sorry my fellow sifters advocate "offing" these guys. These guys work seven days a week and they work to make a profit - just like every other business.
J.P. Morgan Chase was the go to entity to take over Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual when they failed. Why? Chase was strong enough to bear the burden.
Regarding TARP money Chase never wanted it or needed it. Link
The Dodd Frank and Consumer Protection act is a poorly written gargantuan hydra of a bill. I know this because the small community bankers I know are saying they are not going to be able to stay afloat.
My companies president - someone who I know for a fact has voted as a democrat for over 40 years - told me yesterday he will vote against Obama in the upcoming election. Why? We work in real estate and the paperwork needed to finance a project has multiplied - and with it the number of lawyers and legal hours required - that is if we can get something financed period. Good for lawyers - bad for anyone who might want to work building a new shopping center(architects, tradesmen, engineers, etc) or working there in the future.
Make the rules simple, make them fair, and enforce them effectively.


Oh Yay! Another lying apologist Fuckhead.

I'm probably confused about the figures but didnt this guy preside over a $12,000,000,000 loss?

Only to be fawned over by the Pols on that committee. I feel like committing Hara Kiri when I forget a €25 charge to a customer. Different worlds.

@Yogi

Yogi, thank you for your insight. You are a real delight.


Your thoughtful discourse is a great reflection of how the political elites on both 'sides' continue to demonize one another, avoid the facts, and accomplish little other than division.

You should get a show with Rush Limbaugh. You two can waste away shouting expletives and calling people names.


Kudos.

^ downvote that bullshit as I have access denied.

I feel like most of these problems would go away if they were all paid in stock options that aren't transferable for a decade.

Chase is only doing good because they havent been caught yet... and they ended the no-min balance free checking WAMU had in place. Same with Bank of America.

I seriously had bank of america drain my $25.00 account I opened in 2008, telling me they charged a fee one year after the account was opened. Only they decided four months ago. When I went to the bank, they said if I didnt pay another $25.00 in overdraft because they were charging me because they already took my cash, I would be sent to collections. So bank of america stole $50 dollars directly from me, not to mention all the other money they must steal. Run out? Print more, steal more. Buy goods and services and real estate that can't be refunded or liquidated, rinse, repeat.

Fucking assholes.

There was no help for me. I can afford the loss, I'm too smart to know nothing will ever happen to get my money back, and im too dumb to keep track of my money so i put it in a bank and they stole it. I really am not too good at life.


Maybe in the end, there can be only one. And then we can all stfu or gtfo! it would be easier than pretending there was a solution.


ps I'm a white male aged 18-34 with a high 700's credit score and no outstanding debts... i had money to spare... but that doesn't mean the bank can steal it... i could have used it for something too, and it was mine. wahhhhh!!!


geez i sound almost as bad as the corporate babys and other crooks who are sad they can't steal so easily. wahhhh!!! i have to work to live in a country where im not as likely to be raped for an AIDS cure or/and beheaded for my religion!!! communism!!! black people!!!

What we are going to see shortly is traditional banks close up shop in low to low-mid income areas.

The banks offered "Free Checking" with the knowledge that people would overdraft and they would make fees on those overdrafts. There is no such thing as a free lunch or free banking. This was always part of every banks business plan. Caveat Emptor.


Those fees are now being restricted by Dodd-Frank. Therefore the banks can no longer turn a profit in many low/mid income neighborhoods. Banks are in business to make a profit and when they cannot make a profit they will close or downsize.

The solution is fairly simple. Banks will close and currency exchanges and payday loan shops will open. I don't think these businesses are preferable to banks. It an unintended consequence of the bill. It will hurt people it was meant to help.

I have free checking. I maintain a four to five figure balance and I have never been charged. I don't have everything I want, but I have more "things" in my life than I will ever need.

Chase lost $2 Billion dollars? Yea that's a bad call, but they have $2.26 Trillion in assets, $90 Billion in revenue, and $19 Billion in net income. I think they can absorb the loss.

Are you at all sympathetic to the view that there is too much concentration of capital in the financial sector, and not enough in the real economy? I think the compensation has gotten way out of whack in relation to the services they perform. I also think the securitization of debt was a horrible idea. What was wrong with glass steagall you know? What I'd like to see is a return to bankers loaning out deposits, and investors seeking out entrepreneurs. Instead, we have investors seeking to leverage systemic risk knowing full well they have a lifeline because the government can't go ahead and flush our life savings down the toilet now can it?

>> ^kevingrr:

What we are going to see shortly is traditional banks close up shop in low to low-mid income areas.
The banks offered "Free Checking" with the knowledge that people would overdraft and they would make fees on those overdrafts. There is no such thing as a free lunch or free banking. This was always part of every banks business plan. Caveat Emptor.
Those fees are now being restricted by Dodd-Frank. Therefore the banks can no longer turn a profit in many low/mid income neighborhoods. Banks are in business to make a profit and when they cannot make a profit they will close or downsize.
The solution is fairly simple. Banks will close and currency exchanges and payday loan shops will open. I don't think these businesses are preferable to banks. It an unintended consequence of the bill. It will hurt people it was meant to help.
I have free checking. I maintain a four to five figure balance and I have never been charged. I don't have everything I want, but I have more "things" in my life than I will ever need.
Chase lost $2 Billion dollars? Yea that's a bad call, but they have $2.26 Trillion in assets, $90 Billion in revenue, and $19 Billion in net income. I think they can absorb the loss.

@bmacs27

I am completely on board with good legislation and I do think there is too much capital concentration in the financial sector.


Compensation wise I don't care what the banks want to compensate their employees. It's up to their boards, shareholders, and the market to decide that.

A more major concern for me is are we facing an oligopoly in banking? With smaller community banks being squeezed out that could become a real issue. At present I think most banks still have to be pretty competitive to make it, but that could change.

As I said in an earlier post, "Make the rules simple, make them fair, and enforce them effectively."

Glass Steagall, from what I understand, was a pretty good Act. It clearly divided commercial banks and security trading firms. Sounds like a good idea. That said I don't believe I'm very knowledgeable about the issue - and there seems to be a lot of debate about whether it would have prevented the collapse we experienced anyway.

What bothered me about this video and its subsequent commentary was the complete lack of reason. It is all emotion - much of it violent - about a company and a man most of the posters seem to know little about.

@kevingrr

I think there is a lot of reason to be angry, and increasingly a sense that the traditional tools of policy and working within the system have failed us. Jamie Dimon is no hero. He's one of the key people that fought tooth and nail to keep effective regulations from being drafted. They talk big about the natural consequences of the market, and then they go and benefit more than almost any other industry from the government tit. It's disgusting hypocrisy.

I'm also surprised that you would talk about being from the real estate sector, and not be familiar with at least the putative benefits of the securitization of debt (the reason the needed to repeal glass steagall). If you are waiting for a return to the ease of real estate finance you may have experienced in the past decade or two of frothy CDOs you're kidding yourself. The party is over. There needs to be a return to actual underwriting standards, and an enforcement of those standards. That means paperwork. Sorry.

>> ^kevingrr:

Yea that's a bad call, but they have $2.26 Trillion in assets, $90 Billion in revenue, and $19 Billion in net income. I think they can absorb the loss.

But if they don't get that $30 overdraft fee, they'll have to close up shop and head out Californy-way...

@bmacs27

I am all for good lending practices, but what is happening now goes beyond that. I know of several instances of developers having signed leases from investment grade tenants (large pharmaceutical companies , retailers etc.)who have had significant challenges obtaining financing, even with putting up 40% equity.

At the end of the day the fewer 'good' projects that get done means fewer jobs that are created, both on a temporary (construction) and permanent basis.

I am not on the development side so I don't have first hand experience with the above.

I don't disagree that speculative real estate developments should have trouble getting financing, but that isn't the only kind of product being effected by the new standards.

My take on Jamie Dimon is he isn't Bill Gates. He is a banker and he wants to make money for his company and his shareholders. So did Steve Jobs. I don't fault him for looking out for his interests and I don't fault those who seek to restrain them reasonably. I don't view him as a hero or a demon. He is just a banker - and he seems to be a very 'good' one.

@kevingrr

I understand times are tight. That's bankers being responsible, whether voluntarily or at the government's request. They were broke and need to rein in the lending. Tighter standards means it's expected that projects once referred to as "good" are no longer viewed that way. It's tough, but you adapt. If everything is right with the deal, someone will finance. Where there is profit, there is a businessman.

I feel for the laid off construction workers, but frankly there was a bubble. We have HUGE housing developments that are sitting empty and going for 40k a house. We have a glut of empty shopping malls. We don't need more right now. If there is construction to be done right now I firmly believe it is public infrastructure investment we need. Rail, road, bridges, power, etc. That'll put people back to work.

Jamie Dimon has a good rolodex. In todays world, being a good banker means being a good insider trader, and lobbyist. I have about zero patience for their manipulation of our democracy let alone our markets.

@bmacs27

No doubt, the best deals get done. The two I have in mind as examples are either under construction or fully built. When you have firm tenant commitments with specific requirements there is money out there that will back the project. In one case an institutional investor partnered with the developer to fund the project. In the other the developers got cash from just about everywhere and anywhere they could to meet the equity requirement.

What happened in my market is a "flight to quality" or "flight to safety". Basically tenants and developers stopped looking at the green belt (developing outer edges) and started looking at the strongest parts of the local market. That means the CBD and established communities. These deals are harder, but they are safer. Thus the "easy" deals in the developing (speculative) communities ended.

The idea that there are a bunch of empty shopping malls isn't really true. Vacancy rates spiked several years ago yes, but since then the amount of new space to market (supply) has dropped.


When I recently surveyed four communities in Central, IL (Bloomington/Normal, Springfield, Decatur, & Champaign/Urbana) I found that there is very little available retail space. Same goes for the Chicago Loop.

I agree we need infrastructure investment but we also need let the market dictate where new construction is going to take place because each market is different. Location location location. If the fundamentals make sense we need to build.