Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,660 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,736,493
Pageviews Today: 2,603,970Threads Today: 1,064Posts Today: 16,790
09:01 PM

Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
Message Subject PIN THIS!! WE ARE FUCKED - If you own ANY stock market shares READ THIS
Poster Handle Chrit
Post Content
The fed itself is its own primary bond holder.

The fed owns 43% of its own bonds, they inject this money that they have borrowed from themselves back in to the market. If the market takes a down turn and the fed fails to make a profit by the time these bonds mature, the value of the dollar will collapse in on itself.

That 77 billion the fed made last year barely got them by.

To put it very simply, itís like using one credit card to pay off another credit card. Thatís fine till you miss one payment then the whole thing collapses quickly.

In 2007 the fed held just 4% of its own bonds.

In 2010 the fed only owned 24% of its own bonds; this is how quickly it has gotten out of control.

Foreign banks are just waiting for our market to collapse so they can buy in cheap!

We are caught in what is known as a ďthird world debt trapĒ now that foreign governments will not buy our bonds, we have to leverage our selves, and like I said the second the market doesnít have a return its over!
 Quoting: Chrit

The Fed doesn't issue bonds, the US Treasury does and the Fed buys them. Interest paid to the Fed gets returned to the Treasury.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 3586871

Fed has bought $1.6 trillion in bonds with QE &QE2 due to the fact no one else would buy the debt. The Debt brought on By QE & QE2 is part of the debt ceiling it, does exist. The bonds held by the Fed are literally money that the government owes to itself.

like I said in 2007 the fed owned less then 4% of the bonds, today they hold 43% of all issued bonds.

Everything changed in 2008, hard to find any link at all that I like on the subject, this one is ok.

Article:The Fed can issue non-interest bearing debt now. This is the Federal Reserve notes that we use as a medium of exchange. When the Fed buys things like Treasury bills, commercial paper, junk bonds, stocks, or many other securities, it pays by creating reserves for banks that can be cashed out, if desired, as Federal Reserve notes. The Fed has created a ton of potentially inflationary reserves lately. It is paying interest on these reserves in order to "sterilize" them, that is, prevent them from being cashed out and from being used to make an excessive amount of new loans. It's trying to save the banking system without causing inflation. It appears that the proposal to issue interest-bearing debt is a variation on this scheme.

The basic scheme that is now in place is that the Fed wishes to support security markets that are under pressure. It buys mortgage obligations, for example. The sellers deposit their checks. The Fed clears them by crediting the reserve account of the member banks making the deposits. Ordinarily, as the bank lends, the multiplicative effect of fractional-reserve banking kicks in. The money supply rises. At present, the Fed is trying to short-circuit that process by paying interest on the reserves. Their success at this manipulation will end when the banks start making loans that pay interest higher than what the Fed is offering. At that point the Fed will have to sell loans so as to drain reserves from the system, if it wishes to stem inflation. The Fed will be reluctant to do this. It has fewer Treasury bills than it used to. Its loans are too illiquid to sell. The Fed must overcome this problem or risk much higher inflation.

Enter the new scheme. The Fed issues interest-bearing debt. Whoever buys this, whether an investor or a bank, they pay with a check. When it clears, some bank's reserves decline. This absorbs reserves and/or cash from the system. The banks, for example, use their reserves to buy the Fed's debt. It carries a higher interest rate than what the Fed pays on the short-term reserve accounts. This deters the banking system from using all those reserves in an inflationary manner. In short, the Fed is re-financing the liability side of its balance sheet. It is converting short-term debt (bank reserves) into long-term debt (its own bonds.) By funding its troubled assets with long-term debt, the Fed signals that it intends to hold these assets for a long time. It is now thinking about funding these long-term assets with long-term debt. The banking system is being induced to convert short-term liquid reserves into long-term Federal Reserve bonds.

The big picture here is something like this. The banking system has a lot of lousy loans on its books. It didn't mark them all down or fully because that would reveal that many banks are insolvent. They would need to be re-organized. The insolvent banks didn't want this done. The Fed rode to the rescue by exchanging its good securities for bad loans from the banks ó some of them, not all. Meanwhile, bad loans began to crop up elsewhere in the system. The Fed took on some of those too. In the process, it has created far too high a level of bank reserves, a level that is highly inflationary if put to work making new loans. By issuing long-term debt, the Fed would complete the process it began. The banks would now have as assets the better securities the Fed loaned them plus they would have Federal Reserve bonds.

As for the Fed, its balance sheet would now carry as assets many troubled loans that the banks once held. On the liability side, the Fed would have issued its own bonds. Its financial leverage would have increased dramatically even as its asset quality decreased dramatically. Some of the shakiness of the banking system would be transported into shakiness of the Fed as a bank. This would not resolve all the problems because the total amount of shaky debt in the system, in the U.S. and worldwide, is so great that the Fed can absorb only a small fraction of it.

An interesting thing to wonder about is the risk of the Fed's bonds. The riskiness of liabilities derives from the riskiness of assets. Since the Fed has taken on numerous questionable loans (and refuses to be transparent about those loans), its assets have risen in risk as compared to when it held mainly Treasury bills. If the cash flows of the Fed's bonds are to be serviced by the cash flows of these assets, then those bonds will not be risk-free. But the Fed has the power to buy any security it wants to. It can buy its own bonds in the market and support the price (although this raises bank reserves and defeats the purpose of the bonds). It can make them risk-free, although this is unlikely.

50% rule

[link to www.lewrockwell.com]

This below is the new scheme dated just 11 days ago.


[link to tv.ibtimes.com]
Please verify you're human:

Reason for reporting: