do you know what the federal reserve is?

[Allan from Fallbrook]

Aldante: You completely missed the thrust of my argument, both on Andersen/Enron and the Fed.

I’m not defending Enron, nor am I defending the Fed. I was simply pointing out that your various assertions have been largely specious and unsupported by fact. I’d be very interested in seeing the valuation methodology used for those toxic assets currently on the Fed’s books and would be the first one to say that, in all likelihood, they are considerably overvalued, just as they were overvalued prior to the Fed’s acquisition of them.

To say that most analysts out there were taken by surprise by Enron is a misstatement and a gross simplification. It simply isn’t true, any more than saying that the various banks, investment banks, rating agencies and counterparties were surprised. Enron had been playing with fire for quite some time and it was no secret on Wall Street.

And, yes, the information was disclosed. Does this mean that Andersen didn’t play a significant part and help enable Enron? Nope, not at all. But if you ask a CPA like SK about how the big players like Price, Deloitte, etc pull the same shit on a daily basis, you’ll find that Andersen wasn’t alone. The fees involved, tens of millions of dollars, were simply too big and, at that point, ethical constraints go out the window. Is it right? Again, nope, but it does happen.

And, lastly, what would you define as a “real” audit? I’d challenge you to go back and pore over the Enron financials. I have. The information is available and a fairly rudimentary Statement of Cash Flows is easy to compose on Excel and will tell you everything you need to know about how precarious Enron’s situation was, and was for a long while.

[SK in CV]

I’m impressed. Really. That’s a fine comment. But I’m a bit confused by this part.
[quote=aldante]
I do not understand how you could try and counter my arguement using the “few analysts” who saw Enron coming and not see how that contradicts you own arguement. Anyone who is not in favor of an audit is drinking from the FED’s Koolaid – that same “buying the hype” crowd you spoke of in your post. Or they suspect that a real audit might reveal a gigantic ponzi scheme. 99% of Americans are worse off after our credit crisis. Mr. Bernenke, the guy people are defending (by not advocating a real audit) told us all in May 2008 all would be fine and we would not hit a recession. He also told us Freddie and Fannie would be fine. And you want to use his figures? You would read the “free info” and take it as fact?

[/quote]

A couple comments and questions.

I’m reasonably sure that nobody here has indicated, even by implication, that they are “not in favor of an [Fed} audit”. I think for the most part, it’s been pretty unanimous in favor of further examination.

2nd, and more importantly, what is a “real audit”? Who does it? Who decides who is trustworthy enough to do it? You are apparently advocating an audit above and beyond that which has already been done, presumably in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards (which, despite your skepticism, I suspect was done properly). What would be your suggestion on how to formulate the scope of an audit of the fed, which would “reveal a giant ponzi scheme”?

The problem, as I see it, is that an audit would probably reveal little that we don’t already know. Typically, audits report on results of operations and current conditions. The problems are neither events nor existing conditions. I think they are systemic. The financial structure of the US (and probably much of the world), including the fed, the SEC, financial reporting in general, and the companies that are all supposedly regulated by those agencies and others, promotes that existing structure. That’s what they have been created to do. I don’t pretend to have a better path, but I think it’s flawed.

[SK in CV]

I’m impressed. Really. That’s a fine comment. But I’m a bit confused by this part.
[quote=aldante]
I do not understand how you could try and counter my arguement using the “few analysts” who saw Enron coming and not see how that contradicts you own arguement. Anyone who is not in favor of an audit is drinking from the FED’s Koolaid – that same “buying the hype” crowd you spoke of in your post. Or they suspect that a real audit might reveal a gigantic ponzi scheme. 99% of Americans are worse off after our credit crisis. Mr. Bernenke, the guy people are defending (by not advocating a real audit) told us all in May 2008 all would be fine and we would not hit a recession. He also told us Freddie and Fannie would be fine. And you want to use his figures? You would read the “free info” and take it as fact?

[/quote]

A couple comments and questions.

I’m reasonably sure that nobody here has indicated, even by implication, that they are “not in favor of an [Fed} audit”. I think for the most part, it’s been pretty unanimous in favor of further examination.

2nd, and more importantly, what is a “real audit”? Who does it? Who decides who is trustworthy enough to do it? You are apparently advocating an audit above and beyond that which has already been done, presumably in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards (which, despite your skepticism, I suspect was done properly). What would be your suggestion on how to formulate the scope of an audit of the fed, which would “reveal a giant ponzi scheme”?

The problem, as I see it, is that an audit would probably reveal little that we don’t already know. Typically, audits report on results of operations and current conditions. The problems are neither events nor existing conditions. I think they are systemic. The financial structure of the US (and probably much of the world), including the fed, the SEC, financial reporting in general, and the companies that are all supposedly regulated by those agencies and others, promotes that existing structure. That’s what they have been created to do. I don’t pretend to have a better path, but I think it’s flawed.

[SK in CV]

I’m impressed. Really. That’s a fine comment. But I’m a bit confused by this part.
[quote=aldante]
I do not understand how you could try and counter my arguement using the “few analysts” who saw Enron coming and not see how that contradicts you own arguement. Anyone who is not in favor of an audit is drinking from the FED’s Koolaid – that same “buying the hype” crowd you spoke of in your post. Or they suspect that a real audit might reveal a gigantic ponzi scheme. 99% of Americans are worse off after our credit crisis. Mr. Bernenke, the guy people are defending (by not advocating a real audit) told us all in May 2008 all would be fine and we would not hit a recession. He also told us Freddie and Fannie would be fine. And you want to use his figures? You would read the “free info” and take it as fact?

[/quote]

A couple comments and questions.

I’m reasonably sure that nobody here has indicated, even by implication, that they are “not in favor of an [Fed} audit”. I think for the most part, it’s been pretty unanimous in favor of further examination.

2nd, and more importantly, what is a “real audit”? Who does it? Who decides who is trustworthy enough to do it? You are apparently advocating an audit above and beyond that which has already been done, presumably in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards (which, despite your skepticism, I suspect was done properly). What would be your suggestion on how to formulate the scope of an audit of the fed, which would “reveal a giant ponzi scheme”?

The problem, as I see it, is that an audit would probably reveal little that we don’t already know. Typically, audits report on results of operations and current conditions. The problems are neither events nor existing conditions. I think they are systemic. The financial structure of the US (and probably much of the world), including the fed, the SEC, financial reporting in general, and the companies that are all supposedly regulated by those agencies and others, promotes that existing structure. That’s what they have been created to do. I don’t pretend to have a better path, but I think it’s flawed.

[SK in CV]

I’m impressed. Really. That’s a fine comment. But I’m a bit confused by this part.
[quote=aldante]
I do not understand how you could try and counter my arguement using the “few analysts” who saw Enron coming and not see how that contradicts you own arguement. Anyone who is not in favor of an audit is drinking from the FED’s Koolaid – that same “buying the hype” crowd you spoke of in your post. Or they suspect that a real audit might reveal a gigantic ponzi scheme. 99% of Americans are worse off after our credit crisis. Mr. Bernenke, the guy people are defending (by not advocating a real audit) told us all in May 2008 all would be fine and we would not hit a recession. He also told us Freddie and Fannie would be fine. And you want to use his figures? You would read the “free info” and take it as fact?

[/quote]

A couple comments and questions.

I’m reasonably sure that nobody here has indicated, even by implication, that they are “not in favor of an [Fed} audit”. I think for the most part, it’s been pretty unanimous in favor of further examination.

2nd, and more importantly, what is a “real audit”? Who does it? Who decides who is trustworthy enough to do it? You are apparently advocating an audit above and beyond that which has already been done, presumably in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards (which, despite your skepticism, I suspect was done properly). What would be your suggestion on how to formulate the scope of an audit of the fed, which would “reveal a giant ponzi scheme”?

The problem, as I see it, is that an audit would probably reveal little that we don’t already know. Typically, audits report on results of operations and current conditions. The problems are neither events nor existing conditions. I think they are systemic. The financial structure of the US (and probably much of the world), including the fed, the SEC, financial reporting in general, and the companies that are all supposedly regulated by those agencies and others, promotes that existing structure. That’s what they have been created to do. I don’t pretend to have a better path, but I think it’s flawed.

[SK in CV]

I’m impressed. Really. That’s a fine comment. But I’m a bit confused by this part.
[quote=aldante]
I do not understand how you could try and counter my arguement using the “few analysts” who saw Enron coming and not see how that contradicts you own arguement. Anyone who is not in favor of an audit is drinking from the FED’s Koolaid – that same “buying the hype” crowd you spoke of in your post. Or they suspect that a real audit might reveal a gigantic ponzi scheme. 99% of Americans are worse off after our credit crisis. Mr. Bernenke, the guy people are defending (by not advocating a real audit) told us all in May 2008 all would be fine and we would not hit a recession. He also told us Freddie and Fannie would be fine. And you want to use his figures? You would read the “free info” and take it as fact?

[/quote]

A couple comments and questions.

I’m reasonably sure that nobody here has indicated, even by implication, that they are “not in favor of an [Fed} audit”. I think for the most part, it’s been pretty unanimous in favor of further examination.

2nd, and more importantly, what is a “real audit”? Who does it? Who decides who is trustworthy enough to do it? You are apparently advocating an audit above and beyond that which has already been done, presumably in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards (which, despite your skepticism, I suspect was done properly). What would be your suggestion on how to formulate the scope of an audit of the fed, which would “reveal a giant ponzi scheme”?

The problem, as I see it, is that an audit would probably reveal little that we don’t already know. Typically, audits report on results of operations and current conditions. The problems are neither events nor existing conditions. I think they are systemic. The financial structure of the US (and probably much of the world), including the fed, the SEC, financial reporting in general, and the companies that are all supposedly regulated by those agencies and others, promotes that existing structure. That’s what they have been created to do. I don’t pretend to have a better path, but I think it’s flawed.

[aldante]

SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.

[aldante]

SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.

[aldante]

SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.

[aldante]

SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.

[aldante]

SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.

[SK in CV]

[quote=aldante]SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.[/quote]
Again, I don’t know where to begin.

The fed has little in the way of outstanding obligations other than dollars in circulation and cash on deposit from federally chartered banks and the US Treasury. This makes up over 90% of the feds obligations. You’ll have to explain where that examination will lead.

The US did not fund $60 billion to aid in the crisis in Greece. It granted a credit line to the IMF a year ago, with exposure estimtated to be $5 billion. Many experts consider that estimate high.

I think you’re actually referring to S 3217 and HR 4173, which are the current bills headed to reconciliation. they both grant the examination powers to the GAO.

I never asserted that we would not find new information. Only that if the audit was consistent with what are normally called “audits”, then there would be little if any new information. Traditional audits have already been done. So the scope has to be redirected. Which is why I asked for your recommendations, that if I understand what you’re saying correctly, will lead nowhere. Even a different approach to “valuing the assets” may not be very informative.

You totally lost me on the free society thing. And with the “FEDS’ committments are revealed” thing. What do you think the secret fed committments are?

[SK in CV]

[quote=aldante]SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.[/quote]
Again, I don’t know where to begin.

The fed has little in the way of outstanding obligations other than dollars in circulation and cash on deposit from federally chartered banks and the US Treasury. This makes up over 90% of the feds obligations. You’ll have to explain where that examination will lead.

The US did not fund $60 billion to aid in the crisis in Greece. It granted a credit line to the IMF a year ago, with exposure estimtated to be $5 billion. Many experts consider that estimate high.

I think you’re actually referring to S 3217 and HR 4173, which are the current bills headed to reconciliation. they both grant the examination powers to the GAO.

I never asserted that we would not find new information. Only that if the audit was consistent with what are normally called “audits”, then there would be little if any new information. Traditional audits have already been done. So the scope has to be redirected. Which is why I asked for your recommendations, that if I understand what you’re saying correctly, will lead nowhere. Even a different approach to “valuing the assets” may not be very informative.

You totally lost me on the free society thing. And with the “FEDS’ committments are revealed” thing. What do you think the secret fed committments are?

[SK in CV]

[quote=aldante]SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.[/quote]
Again, I don’t know where to begin.

The fed has little in the way of outstanding obligations other than dollars in circulation and cash on deposit from federally chartered banks and the US Treasury. This makes up over 90% of the feds obligations. You’ll have to explain where that examination will lead.

The US did not fund $60 billion to aid in the crisis in Greece. It granted a credit line to the IMF a year ago, with exposure estimtated to be $5 billion. Many experts consider that estimate high.

I think you’re actually referring to S 3217 and HR 4173, which are the current bills headed to reconciliation. they both grant the examination powers to the GAO.

I never asserted that we would not find new information. Only that if the audit was consistent with what are normally called “audits”, then there would be little if any new information. Traditional audits have already been done. So the scope has to be redirected. Which is why I asked for your recommendations, that if I understand what you’re saying correctly, will lead nowhere. Even a different approach to “valuing the assets” may not be very informative.

You totally lost me on the free society thing. And with the “FEDS’ committments are revealed” thing. What do you think the secret fed committments are?

[SK in CV]

[quote=aldante]SV,
I think that the main line of the audit should be focused on obligations that the FED has with counter parties, and what the value is of thier entire balance sheet and what comprises their balance sheet. Its funny but Ron Paul was ridiclued by Ben Bernanke about the possiblity of the US funding part of the Greek crisis about 3 months ago now and it turns out our committment may be $60 billion or so.

Who should perform? Great question. I am pretty sure that HB 1207 and SB 604 say that entity should be the CBO. I don’t know enough either way to advocate for against that recommendation. I do disagree with you on your premise that “we” would not find out new information. I think that the majority of the American population would be appaled at what this independant organization has gotten us into. I don’t know the specifics but the notion that we live in a free society will be smashed when the FEDS’ committments are revealed. I think it would amount to the Germans funding Greek workers retirements at 50 years old x 100. I think that it will be difficult to control mass anger in the US at that point.
Bottom line is that we as a country (not individually) have been living beyond our means since 1982 and our debt needs to be either restructured or paid. The FED has been the bartenter – and Americans the drunks. So that is why-btw I am sitting it out in real estate….I think a lot more hurt is coming down the pipe.[/quote]
Again, I don’t know where to begin.

The fed has little in the way of outstanding obligations other than dollars in circulation and cash on deposit from federally chartered banks and the US Treasury. This makes up over 90% of the feds obligations. You’ll have to explain where that examination will lead.

The US did not fund $60 billion to aid in the crisis in Greece. It granted a credit line to the IMF a year ago, with exposure estimtated to be $5 billion. Many experts consider that estimate high.

I think you’re actually referring to S 3217 and HR 4173, which are the current bills headed to reconciliation. they both grant the examination powers to the GAO.

I never asserted that we would not find new information. Only that if the audit was consistent with what are normally called “audits”, then there would be little if any new information. Traditional audits have already been done. So the scope has to be redirected. Which is why I asked for your recommendations, that if I understand what you’re saying correctly, will lead nowhere. Even a different approach to “valuing the assets” may not be very informative.

You totally lost me on the free society thing. And with the “FEDS’ committments are revealed” thing. What do you think the secret fed committments are?

[Author]

Posts