griffin federal reserve

[ucodegen]

[quote investor]
UC of degenerate: If this is what you call “not sliming” then I would hate to see what you call negative.
[/quote]
I find that anyone who uses the 1st grade technique of rewording/restructuring a ‘name/callsign’ in a vain attempt to discredit someone through insinuation is boorish and immature at best. It also demonstrates someone who has a lack of intellect for skillful verbal jousting. A person using their non-financial degrees to make $550k/year in the real-estate business would have the ability for some nice snappy comebacks.

Using “UC of degenerate”.. that is weak, comes from an elementary school yard, and belongs on an elementary school yard.

I will readily admit that I am not up to “Allan from Fallbrook’s” skill though.

[ucodegen]

[quote pri_dk]
Can someone, other than our friend “investor,” explain to me the motivation for the secrecy behind the Fed’s ownership?

It is a bit curious, and seems to be to do much to fan the conspiracy theory flames.

What’s the wisdom behind this structure?
[/quote]

Wisdom from which perspective?

From the perspective of the entities that have ownership:
keeping your association and potential influence in the Fed secret.

From the political point of view:
see above and mix in political contributions.

From the view of the citizens:
None what so ever.

While the conspiracy theorists are largely pointing in the wrong directions, there are issues out there. The ‘monied’ don’t mind the conspiracists because they keep pointing in the wrong directions, and they can ‘work’ in the background (diversion technique).

How about:
Why is a CDS(Credit Default Swap) not considered an insurance product – despite what it does and its associated risk exposure. Who/what has an interest on keeping the current status quo with respect to CDS(s).

Why was the TARP lending done to BofA for 3.5%, but it was lent to FRE/FNM at 10%? This is ignoring the fact that congress did a bit of meddling in the running of FRE/FNM an may have some to do with the current state of both entities. At what rate was TARP money lent to GS?

During the rapid one-day drop in the stock market, why were some of the trades unwound? Who was being protected? Wouldn’t this type of protection be creating a moral hazard? (many more questions on this one item).

[ucodegen]

[quote pri_dk]
Can someone, other than our friend “investor,” explain to me the motivation for the secrecy behind the Fed’s ownership?

It is a bit curious, and seems to be to do much to fan the conspiracy theory flames.

What’s the wisdom behind this structure?
[/quote]

Wisdom from which perspective?

From the perspective of the entities that have ownership:
keeping your association and potential influence in the Fed secret.

From the political point of view:
see above and mix in political contributions.

From the view of the citizens:
None what so ever.

While the conspiracy theorists are largely pointing in the wrong directions, there are issues out there. The ‘monied’ don’t mind the conspiracists because they keep pointing in the wrong directions, and they can ‘work’ in the background (diversion technique).

How about:
Why is a CDS(Credit Default Swap) not considered an insurance product – despite what it does and its associated risk exposure. Who/what has an interest on keeping the current status quo with respect to CDS(s).

Why was the TARP lending done to BofA for 3.5%, but it was lent to FRE/FNM at 10%? This is ignoring the fact that congress did a bit of meddling in the running of FRE/FNM an may have some to do with the current state of both entities. At what rate was TARP money lent to GS?

During the rapid one-day drop in the stock market, why were some of the trades unwound? Who was being protected? Wouldn’t this type of protection be creating a moral hazard? (many more questions on this one item).

[ucodegen]

[quote pri_dk]
Can someone, other than our friend “investor,” explain to me the motivation for the secrecy behind the Fed’s ownership?

It is a bit curious, and seems to be to do much to fan the conspiracy theory flames.

What’s the wisdom behind this structure?
[/quote]

Wisdom from which perspective?

From the perspective of the entities that have ownership:
keeping your association and potential influence in the Fed secret.

From the political point of view:
see above and mix in political contributions.

From the view of the citizens:
None what so ever.

While the conspiracy theorists are largely pointing in the wrong directions, there are issues out there. The ‘monied’ don’t mind the conspiracists because they keep pointing in the wrong directions, and they can ‘work’ in the background (diversion technique).

How about:
Why is a CDS(Credit Default Swap) not considered an insurance product – despite what it does and its associated risk exposure. Who/what has an interest on keeping the current status quo with respect to CDS(s).

Why was the TARP lending done to BofA for 3.5%, but it was lent to FRE/FNM at 10%? This is ignoring the fact that congress did a bit of meddling in the running of FRE/FNM an may have some to do with the current state of both entities. At what rate was TARP money lent to GS?

During the rapid one-day drop in the stock market, why were some of the trades unwound? Who was being protected? Wouldn’t this type of protection be creating a moral hazard? (many more questions on this one item).

[ucodegen]

[quote pri_dk]
Can someone, other than our friend “investor,” explain to me the motivation for the secrecy behind the Fed’s ownership?

It is a bit curious, and seems to be to do much to fan the conspiracy theory flames.

What’s the wisdom behind this structure?
[/quote]

Wisdom from which perspective?

From the perspective of the entities that have ownership:
keeping your association and potential influence in the Fed secret.

From the political point of view:
see above and mix in political contributions.

From the view of the citizens:
None what so ever.

While the conspiracy theorists are largely pointing in the wrong directions, there are issues out there. The ‘monied’ don’t mind the conspiracists because they keep pointing in the wrong directions, and they can ‘work’ in the background (diversion technique).

How about:
Why is a CDS(Credit Default Swap) not considered an insurance product – despite what it does and its associated risk exposure. Who/what has an interest on keeping the current status quo with respect to CDS(s).

Why was the TARP lending done to BofA for 3.5%, but it was lent to FRE/FNM at 10%? This is ignoring the fact that congress did a bit of meddling in the running of FRE/FNM an may have some to do with the current state of both entities. At what rate was TARP money lent to GS?

During the rapid one-day drop in the stock market, why were some of the trades unwound? Who was being protected? Wouldn’t this type of protection be creating a moral hazard? (many more questions on this one item).

[ucodegen]

[quote pri_dk]
Can someone, other than our friend “investor,” explain to me the motivation for the secrecy behind the Fed’s ownership?

It is a bit curious, and seems to be to do much to fan the conspiracy theory flames.

What’s the wisdom behind this structure?
[/quote]

Wisdom from which perspective?

From the perspective of the entities that have ownership:
keeping your association and potential influence in the Fed secret.

From the political point of view:
see above and mix in political contributions.

From the view of the citizens:
None what so ever.

While the conspiracy theorists are largely pointing in the wrong directions, there are issues out there. The ‘monied’ don’t mind the conspiracists because they keep pointing in the wrong directions, and they can ‘work’ in the background (diversion technique).

How about:
Why is a CDS(Credit Default Swap) not considered an insurance product – despite what it does and its associated risk exposure. Who/what has an interest on keeping the current status quo with respect to CDS(s).

Why was the TARP lending done to BofA for 3.5%, but it was lent to FRE/FNM at 10%? This is ignoring the fact that congress did a bit of meddling in the running of FRE/FNM an may have some to do with the current state of both entities. At what rate was TARP money lent to GS?

During the rapid one-day drop in the stock market, why were some of the trades unwound? Who was being protected? Wouldn’t this type of protection be creating a moral hazard? (many more questions on this one item).

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
I am a conservative, not a soros lover. Davelj jumps to invalid assumptions when he says that. But that doesn’t bother davelj. [/quote]

I find it humorous that you’re the only person who hasn’t figured this out: My references to George Soros have NOTHING to do with your politics. It’s a reference to your screen name “investor”. I envision you envisioning yourself flying off to Davos in your imaginary private jet to cavort with other Investors and Very Important People (with multiple Doctorates) at Davos and Gstaad. And that makes me chuckle.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
I am a conservative, not a soros lover. Davelj jumps to invalid assumptions when he says that. But that doesn’t bother davelj. [/quote]

I find it humorous that you’re the only person who hasn’t figured this out: My references to George Soros have NOTHING to do with your politics. It’s a reference to your screen name “investor”. I envision you envisioning yourself flying off to Davos in your imaginary private jet to cavort with other Investors and Very Important People (with multiple Doctorates) at Davos and Gstaad. And that makes me chuckle.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
I am a conservative, not a soros lover. Davelj jumps to invalid assumptions when he says that. But that doesn’t bother davelj. [/quote]

I find it humorous that you’re the only person who hasn’t figured this out: My references to George Soros have NOTHING to do with your politics. It’s a reference to your screen name “investor”. I envision you envisioning yourself flying off to Davos in your imaginary private jet to cavort with other Investors and Very Important People (with multiple Doctorates) at Davos and Gstaad. And that makes me chuckle.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
I am a conservative, not a soros lover. Davelj jumps to invalid assumptions when he says that. But that doesn’t bother davelj. [/quote]

I find it humorous that you’re the only person who hasn’t figured this out: My references to George Soros have NOTHING to do with your politics. It’s a reference to your screen name “investor”. I envision you envisioning yourself flying off to Davos in your imaginary private jet to cavort with other Investors and Very Important People (with multiple Doctorates) at Davos and Gstaad. And that makes me chuckle.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
I am a conservative, not a soros lover. Davelj jumps to invalid assumptions when he says that. But that doesn’t bother davelj. [/quote]

I find it humorous that you’re the only person who hasn’t figured this out: My references to George Soros have NOTHING to do with your politics. It’s a reference to your screen name “investor”. I envision you envisioning yourself flying off to Davos in your imaginary private jet to cavort with other Investors and Very Important People (with multiple Doctorates) at Davos and Gstaad. And that makes me chuckle.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
It is a mystery isn’t it? How can a doctor be a real estate professional? Hmmmmm.[/quote]

There’s nothing mysterious about it, really. Most of what you claim about yourself is not true. The two doctorates, which you won’t reveal, being at the top of the list.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
It is a mystery isn’t it? How can a doctor be a real estate professional? Hmmmmm.[/quote]

There’s nothing mysterious about it, really. Most of what you claim about yourself is not true. The two doctorates, which you won’t reveal, being at the top of the list.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
It is a mystery isn’t it? How can a doctor be a real estate professional? Hmmmmm.[/quote]

There’s nothing mysterious about it, really. Most of what you claim about yourself is not true. The two doctorates, which you won’t reveal, being at the top of the list.

[davelj]

[quote=investor]
It is a mystery isn’t it? How can a doctor be a real estate professional? Hmmmmm.[/quote]

There’s nothing mysterious about it, really. Most of what you claim about yourself is not true. The two doctorates, which you won’t reveal, being at the top of the list.

[Author]

Posts