[HereWeGo]

As long as the US can borrow in its own currency, then there is no possibility of default, as indicated by (c) in kewp’s post. Nations that have defaulted in the past usually borrowed in dollars rather than their national currency.

kewp-
I see 2 reasons for the Fed to increase the monetary base so drastically.
1) GDP = MV, and V is clearly slowing drastically.
2) Debt destruction is clobbering digital dollars. The increase in the monetary base is an attempt to partially make up for that phenomenon, but unlikely to be sufficient until banks start to lend more aggressively.

[HereWeGo]

As long as the US can borrow in its own currency, then there is no possibility of default, as indicated by (c) in kewp’s post. Nations that have defaulted in the past usually borrowed in dollars rather than their national currency.

kewp-
I see 2 reasons for the Fed to increase the monetary base so drastically.
1) GDP = MV, and V is clearly slowing drastically.
2) Debt destruction is clobbering digital dollars. The increase in the monetary base is an attempt to partially make up for that phenomenon, but unlikely to be sufficient until banks start to lend more aggressively.

[HereWeGo]

As long as the US can borrow in its own currency, then there is no possibility of default, as indicated by (c) in kewp’s post. Nations that have defaulted in the past usually borrowed in dollars rather than their national currency.

kewp-
I see 2 reasons for the Fed to increase the monetary base so drastically.
1) GDP = MV, and V is clearly slowing drastically.
2) Debt destruction is clobbering digital dollars. The increase in the monetary base is an attempt to partially make up for that phenomenon, but unlikely to be sufficient until banks start to lend more aggressively.

[HereWeGo]

As long as the US can borrow in its own currency, then there is no possibility of default, as indicated by (c) in kewp’s post. Nations that have defaulted in the past usually borrowed in dollars rather than their national currency.

kewp-
I see 2 reasons for the Fed to increase the monetary base so drastically.
1) GDP = MV, and V is clearly slowing drastically.
2) Debt destruction is clobbering digital dollars. The increase in the monetary base is an attempt to partially make up for that phenomenon, but unlikely to be sufficient until banks start to lend more aggressively.

[HereWeGo]

As long as the US can borrow in its own currency, then there is no possibility of default, as indicated by (c) in kewp’s post. Nations that have defaulted in the past usually borrowed in dollars rather than their national currency.

kewp-
I see 2 reasons for the Fed to increase the monetary base so drastically.
1) GDP = MV, and V is clearly slowing drastically.
2) Debt destruction is clobbering digital dollars. The increase in the monetary base is an attempt to partially make up for that phenomenon, but unlikely to be sufficient until banks start to lend more aggressively.

[HereWeGo]

Hmm … Paulson and co. forced all 4 monster banks – C, WFC, JPM, and BAC – to take $25B “injections” so that the weak bank would not be singled out.

Let’s see now:

WFC has positive earnings and swallowed all of WB without an FDIC backstop.

BAC has positive earnings and swallowed both CFC and MER.

JPM has positive earning and swallowed BSC (admittedly with the Fed’s backstop) and WM (minus WM debt.)

C has negative earnings.

Now which bank was Paulson trying to protect? Maybe Sen. Schumer could help us out with this one.

One of these banks is not like the others …

[HereWeGo]

Hmm … Paulson and co. forced all 4 monster banks – C, WFC, JPM, and BAC – to take $25B “injections” so that the weak bank would not be singled out.

Let’s see now:

WFC has positive earnings and swallowed all of WB without an FDIC backstop.

BAC has positive earnings and swallowed both CFC and MER.

JPM has positive earning and swallowed BSC (admittedly with the Fed’s backstop) and WM (minus WM debt.)

C has negative earnings.

Now which bank was Paulson trying to protect? Maybe Sen. Schumer could help us out with this one.

One of these banks is not like the others …

[HereWeGo]

Hmm … Paulson and co. forced all 4 monster banks – C, WFC, JPM, and BAC – to take $25B “injections” so that the weak bank would not be singled out.

Let’s see now:

WFC has positive earnings and swallowed all of WB without an FDIC backstop.

BAC has positive earnings and swallowed both CFC and MER.

JPM has positive earning and swallowed BSC (admittedly with the Fed’s backstop) and WM (minus WM debt.)

C has negative earnings.

Now which bank was Paulson trying to protect? Maybe Sen. Schumer could help us out with this one.

One of these banks is not like the others …

[HereWeGo]

Hmm … Paulson and co. forced all 4 monster banks – C, WFC, JPM, and BAC – to take $25B “injections” so that the weak bank would not be singled out.

Let’s see now:

WFC has positive earnings and swallowed all of WB without an FDIC backstop.

BAC has positive earnings and swallowed both CFC and MER.

JPM has positive earning and swallowed BSC (admittedly with the Fed’s backstop) and WM (minus WM debt.)

C has negative earnings.

Now which bank was Paulson trying to protect? Maybe Sen. Schumer could help us out with this one.

One of these banks is not like the others …

[HereWeGo]

Hmm … Paulson and co. forced all 4 monster banks – C, WFC, JPM, and BAC – to take $25B “injections” so that the weak bank would not be singled out.

Let’s see now:

WFC has positive earnings and swallowed all of WB without an FDIC backstop.

BAC has positive earnings and swallowed both CFC and MER.

JPM has positive earning and swallowed BSC (admittedly with the Fed’s backstop) and WM (minus WM debt.)

C has negative earnings.

Now which bank was Paulson trying to protect? Maybe Sen. Schumer could help us out with this one.

One of these banks is not like the others …

[HereWeGo]

I don’t see how a debtor nation can continue to spit in the eye of creditors. Isn’t the idea to mitigate the credit crisis rather than to exacerbate it?

[HereWeGo]

I don’t see how a debtor nation can continue to spit in the eye of creditors. Isn’t the idea to mitigate the credit crisis rather than to exacerbate it?

[HereWeGo]

I don’t see how a debtor nation can continue to spit in the eye of creditors. Isn’t the idea to mitigate the credit crisis rather than to exacerbate it?

[HereWeGo]

I don’t see how a debtor nation can continue to spit in the eye of creditors. Isn’t the idea to mitigate the credit crisis rather than to exacerbate it?

[HereWeGo]

I don’t see how a debtor nation can continue to spit in the eye of creditors. Isn’t the idea to mitigate the credit crisis rather than to exacerbate it?

[Author]

Posts