http://www.reuters.com/…

The New York Times, quoting unnamed government officials, said Treasury was considering taking ownership stakes in many U.S. banks. A Treasury spokesperson could not be reached for comment on the story.

Sure… why not. These people like Barney Frank and Charles Schumer have no problems pushing the government closer and closer to some Nazi / fascist / Soviet communist amalgamation. The police state of the right and the economic totalitarianism of the left. Either these guys are so blinded by their position of power they don’t see this lockstep toward Amero-fascism or they are Manchurian candidates.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aTfNzYM.5Wfk&refer=home

Iceland’s government seized control of Kaupthing Bank hf, the nation’s biggest bank, completing the takeover of a banking industry that has collapsed under the weight of its foreign debt.

Iceland is guaranteeing Kaupthing’s domestic deposits and taking control of banks in an attempt to provide a “functioning domestic banking system,” the country’s Financial Supervisory Authority said in a statement on its Web site today.

The banks are saddled with about $61 billion of debt, 12 times the size of the economy, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Twelve times? Sounds huge but I’ve nothing to compare it to.

http://www.bloomberg.com/…

American International Group Inc., the insurer taken over by the government, may access $37.8 billion from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, in addition to the $85 billion loan that helped it stave off bankruptcy.

AIG can swap as much as $37.8 billion of its “investment- grade, fixed-income securities” for cash to “replenish liquidity” at the New York-based insurer, the Fed said late yesterday in a statement. AIG spokesman Nicholas Ashooh said the assets were held mainly in U.S. life insurance subsidiaries and declined to say how much of the new program has been used.

“You’re in for a dime, you’re in for a dollar on this one,” said David Havens, a credit analyst at UBS AG. “The core problem is liquidity as opposed to solvency, though as the businesses deteriorate and adverse economic conditions take hold, solvency will also become more of an issue.”

The problem is liquidity as opposed to solvency? Sounds familiar. Sorry gentlemen but not having the liquidity to pay for one’s debts is insolvency:

A business may be cash flow insolvent but balance sheet solvent if it holds illiquid assets, particularly against short term debt. Conversely, a business can have negative net assets showing on their balance sheet but still be cash flow solvent if ongoing revenue is able to meet debt obligations, and thus avoid default – for instance, if it holds long term debt.

http://query.nytimes.com/…

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

By STEVEN A. HOLMES

Published: September 30, 1999

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

…

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

It was obvious to just about everyone… yet Democrats in particular… the likes of Dodd, Clinton, Schumer, Reid, Obama, etc. endorsed and in several cases explicitly benefited from the Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The CRA was not the only or even the most important aspect which lead to the current crisis. Bad lending couldn’t have been sustained or would have been possible if not for the Federal Reserves incredibly low interest rates and market manipulation. The CRA was the vehicle which the rode the low interest wave to creating the boom.

http://www.nytimes.com/…

The Bush administration on Saturday formally proposed to Congress what could become the largest financial bailout in United States history, requesting unfettered authority for the Treasury Department to buy up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets.

The proposal, not quite three pages long, was stunning for its stark simplicity. It would raise the national debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion. And it would place no restrictions on the administration other than requiring semiannual reports to Congress, granting the Treasury secretary unprecedented power to buy and resell mortgage debt.

A $700 billion expenditure on distressed mortgage-related assets would be roughly what the country has spent so far in direct costs on the Iraq war and more than the Pentagon’s total yearly budget appropriation. Divided across the population, it would amount to more than $2,000 for every man, woman and child in the United States.

“This is a good foundation of a plan that can stabilize markets quickly,” Mr. Schumer said in a statement. “But it includes no visible protection for taxpayers or homeowners. We look forward to talking to Treasury to see what, if anything, they have in mind in these two areas.”

In Florida, Senator Barack Obama of Illinois, the Democratic presidential nominee, said he would press for a broader economic stimulus initiative to be part of the bailout plan for financial firms.

Senator John McCain of Arizona, the Republican nominee, issued a statement on Saturday saying he was reviewing the administration’s plan. He also urged the administration and lawmakers to consider his own plan for creating a trust within the Treasury Department to aid ailing mortgage lenders and other financial institutions.

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader, said in a statement: “This proposal is, and should be kept, simple and clear.” He added, “Simply put, now is not the time for partisan plans or pet projects.”

Some Democrats, including lawmakers like Mr. Frank and Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and the chairman of the banking committee, were adamant about including provisions to promote government action to stabilize real estate prices and help troubled borrowers refinance their mortgages.

Still another group of Democrats was pushing for a wider stimulus package that would direct help more directly and immediately to Main Street, perhaps including an increase in unemployment benefits and investments in infrastructure projects, including bridges and roads, that would help to create jobs.

A fourth, smaller group of lawmakers was highly critical and in some cases adamantly opposed to the plan. That group included including Senator Jim Bunning, Republican of Kentucky, and Senator Bernard Sanders, independent of Vermont.

“The free market for all intents and purposes is dead in America,” Mr. Bunning declared on Friday. “The action proposed today by the Treasury Department will take away the free market and institute socialism in America. The American taxpayer has been misled throughout this economic crisis. The government on all fronts has failed the American people miserably.”

COME ONE, COME ALL! FREE MONEY! FREE FASCISM! ALL YOU CAN CARRY!

I have to laugh because otherwise I may cry.

Redirect blame.

http://money.cnn.com/…

The government seizure of IndyMac Bancorp Inc. late Friday may set off more concern about other banks failing under the weight of the mortgage implosion and credit crisis, but few seem to be in danger, according to Richard Bove, a banking analyst with Ladenburg Thalmann Inc.

Bove said there was likely some truth to accusations that comments from “a prominent senator” that IndyMac was in danger hurt the thrift, one of the largest mortgage lenders in the country.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., raised concerns about the bank in a letter June 26 that has been widely criticized as undercutting investor confidence in IndyMac. The senator defended his actions in a news conference on Sunday, saying his letter merely pointed out problems that regulators allowed to build up for years.

“There are no benefits by having prominent officials claiming that large financial institutions are failing, are insolvent; are incapable of raising funds; or that they should be allowed to fail,” Bove wrote in a note to clients. “This grandstanding does nothing to create confidence in the American financial system.”

“Additionally, there can be no doubt that this recent era of regulation-lite allowed excesses to develop in the financial system. The unwillingness of the supposed protectors of the system to actually protect it is also inexcusable,” Bove said.

Let us look at these two statements separately and together.

There are no benefits by having prominent officials claiming that large financial institutions are failing, are insolvent; are incapable of raising funds; or that they should be allowed to fail.

BS. Prominent officials are just human beings, likely investors, and their opinions matter just as anyone else’s in the market. They may be ignorant of economic theory, they may be completely talking out of their ass but the MSM has thousands of economic gurus doing that every day and few complain.

Additionally, there can be no doubt that this recent era of regulation-lite allowed excesses to develop in the financial system. The unwillingness of the supposed protectors of the system to actually protect it is also inexcusable.

I would hardly call this an era of regulation-lite. There are lots of regulations. The problem is government intervention. As for unwillingness to regulation. I simply don’t believe that. Politicians will do whatever will get them the most power. If regulation is it they will. Economic law be damned.

Together now. Bove should be complaining about politicians interfering and regulating and not them talking. Is it really that difficult to see that cheap money and other market manipulations are the primary causes for this all? The cheap money dumped into the housing market? The unfair advantages given to the GSEs. The evidence seems to scream off the paper/monitor. These guys like Bove want to keep this fascist system going. They are going to blame those who are competitors. And it’s likely to work… like the many times before… and we will all suffer because of it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25605640/

Bowing to President Bush’s demands, the Senate approved and sent the White House a bill Wednesday to overhaul bitterly disputed rules on secret government eavesdropping and shield telecommunications companies from lawsuits complaining they helped the U.S. spy on Americans.

The relatively one-sided vote, 69-28, came only after a lengthy and heated debate that pitted privacy and civil liberties concerns against the desire to prevent terrorist attacks. It ended almost a year of wrangling over surveillance rules and the president’s warrantless wiretapping program that was initiated after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

The House passed the same bill last month, and Bush said he would sign it soon.

How completely not surprising that the Democrats would hand Bush and friends more dictatorial powers.

All the amendments were defeated. McCain didn’t bother to vote, Obama, Specter, Lieberman voted for it. Feingold, who had said “This president broke the law,” voted against it. As did Biden, Clinton, Schumer, Kerry and Dodd. Glad to see the NJ senators, Lautenberg and Menendez, voted Nay.

You can find the full list of how they all voted at GovTrack.us

They have legalized a major crime and transfered a huge amount of power, which they don’t have, to the executive branch. They don’t even fully know what they are giving immunities to. The information is highly classified. Just sad.