News Stories

[SaintessHeart]

Stop the Greek hostage crisis!

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — This isn’t about “bailing out Greece.” Yes, the Greeks owe about $500 billion, but they already have spent the money.

This is about bailing out the banks that lent to them.

Global stagnation could be worse for the markets than Greek drama. (Photo: Alkis Konstantinidis/AFP/Getty Image.)

The biggest creditors are French banks. The second biggest are the Germans. The third biggest are the British. I’ll bet a lot of Greek bonds are now held by hedge funds.

These are the people asking for public funds.

What’s happening in Europe right now isn’t a financial crisis. It’s a hostage crisis.

Once again, we are all being held hostage by a bunch of bankers. “Give us a bailout,” they’re saying, “or else the economy gets it!”

Maybe it’s time to call their bluff.

Perhaps Europe should let Greece default. Let it go bust. Force the bond holders to take their losses.

If you invest in a stock that falls, you don’t get made whole.

If you buy bonds in a company or institution that collapses, you don’t get your money back. So why here?

They call it “risk capital” for a reason.

This is Bear Stearns all over again. It’s AIG all over again.

People are going to scare you. They’ll say it will be just like Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. LEHMQ -1.82% “If Greece goes bust, the whole financial system will go down.”

Maybe they’re right. But the burden of proof is on them.

After the high-finance fiascoes and thievery of the past few years, I will take some convincing. We were told we had to step in to rescue AIG to protect Grandma’s annuity, and then it turned out we were really protecting Goldman Sachs Group Inc. GS +0.80%

Greece, as I say, owes about $500 billion. But even if it defaults, all that money won’t be lost anyway. Greece won’t vanish from the world. What will happen instead is that the bond holders will be forced to take a haircut.

Or a buzz cut.

Greek bonds are already trading at about 50 cents on the euro. (They’ve been trading like that for months, so why everyone is suddenly surprised about this crisis is beyond me.) Based on that math, the big banks will need to take losses of around $250 billion.

Yes, that will wipe out a lot of equity. It will wipe out a lot of bonds too. Banks will need to recapitalize. But what is the alternative, “extend and pretend?”

To put this in context, world equity markets are valued at about $50 trillion and those of the European Union at about $10 trillion.

So writing down Greek government bonds by half would be equivalent to a 2.5% decline in European bourses, or a half a percent decline in global markets.

Various commentators warn darkly that if Greece defaults, that will also detonate a derivatives time bomb. All those institutions that wrote credit-default swaps will blow up.

Well, maybe. But whose fault is that?

Greece has been in crisis for more than a year. The institutions have had a long time to sort out their Greek exposure. They have had a long time in which to sell their derivatives and reduce their risks. If they haven’t done so, there’s a point at which we can’t just keep writing them checks.

Those credit-default swaps, most of which are speculative, shouldn’t exist anyway. Once upon a time, you couldn’t take out fire insurance on your neighbor’s house. We should go back to a system where these kinds of contracts aren’t legally enforceable.

Among the banks supposedly at risk is France’s Societe Generale FR:GLE +0.91% . If the management hasn’t prepared for financial disaster, it only has itself to blame.

One of the global strategists who has warned most persistently and brilliantly about the risks in the financial system for many years is Albert Edwards in London. Who does he work for? Er ... SG.

Was the bank’s top brass not paying attention to its own strategist? Who is running this circus?

Some people claim that a Greek default will “break up the euro.” Why? And if, say, Louisiana had to reschedule some of its municipal bonds, would that “break up the dollar?” The suggestion is absurd.

Arkansas rescheduled in the 1930s and yet the dollar survived. Amazing.

Greece shouldn’t be in the euro anyway. But even if it dropped out, the euro could still survive.

Comparisons to Lehman Brothers are overwrought. People forget that in September 2008, America saw two gigantic bankruptcies: Lehman and Washington Mutual.

The second one is forgotten because it caused little or no panic. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. went in, took control and managed the process. Depositors were protected, and the federal government insured there was continuity.

If the European Union and the IMF want to intervene in Greece, maybe they should follow that model.

Yes, there’s a case for providing emergency lines of credit to keep the lights on in Athens.

There is also a case for providing liquidity to frozen markets. As the saying goes, in a financial crisis the government should lend freely to sound institutions — at a high rate of interest. If the European governments want to lend money to some of their banks at 10%, so be it.

Should they really be cutting checks to protect bond holders? How much good is that going to do anyway?

According to CMA DataVision in London, the credit markets now give Greece an 80% chance of default. But the markets also give Portugal and Ireland 50% chances of default, and Spain 23%.

This all is good news, I guess, for those who own gold. If you had to bet from here, you’d say governments on both sides of the pond are just going to keep printing and printing money.

It certainly took this long for someone to realise that the bonds Greece wrote is a trojan horse. *sarcastic*

Though it is kind of worrying that our Grecian members on this forum might lose their jobs or scholarship if the government defaults.

[DonQuigleone]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Whats so shocking about it? Do you think that people are ethically when it comes to money? Millions are stolen in the US and in every other country as well. And it is not only by public officials; the private sector as well.

Nothing new here.

No I think this is unprecedentedly large. We don't get this out and out thievery type of corruption in the west. This is most comparable to something like Enron.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Stop the Greek hostage crisis!



It certainly took this long for someone to realise that the bonds Greece wrote is a trojan horse. *sarcastic*

Though it is kind of worrying that our Grecian members on this forum might lose their jobs or scholarship if the government defaults.

Have to agree. Should have left the bankers out to dry. Instead, us, the taxpayers are paying for it all. We should have at least taken the funds for all they were worth first. Nationalised them and then sold off the good parts. Least this way we wouldn't have been paying back bondholders...

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

Vancouver Police Chief Jim Chu weighs in on riot.

Based on the video footage, I have to dispute the characterizing of this as "just the kind of anarchists we got during the Olympics". Certainly we had many troublemakers from outside the city and they're the ones that really got things moving, but there were an awful lot of drunken idiots and attention whores posing for photos and treating it as a huge party. Whereas during the Olympics everyone was quite happy to steer clear of the anarchists and let the (huge) police presence deal with them.

Thankfully, many of those involved seem to have more bravado than brains (ie. bragging about torching cars on Facebook).

Frankly, the riot and all the people bragging about it will turn out to be just an efficient way to round up and tag morons.

[ganbaru]

Exclusive: China software bug makes infrastructure vulnerable
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75G0CV20110617

Software widely used in China to help run weapons systems, utilities and chemical plants has bugs that hackers could exploit to damage public infrastructure, according to the Department of Homeland Security.

[MrTerrorist]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Exclusive: China software bug makes infrastructure vulnerable
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/...75G0CV20110617

LulzSec is so gonna exploit that.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by MrTerrorist

LulzSec is so gonna exploit that.

putting that out there is like throwing chunks of bloody meat in the water.

[Tsuyoshi]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

putting that out there is like throwing chunks of bloody meat in the water.

One full of Piranhas no doubt

[killer3000ad]

Phillipines navy sends frigate to disputed Spratly Islands

The BRP Rajah Humabon (PF-11) is the last Destroyer Escort/Frigate in its fleet, and considered as one of the oldest active ships of the fleet, and in the world. She is one of three ex-USN Cannon-class destroyer escorts that served the Philippine Navy, the others being BRP Datu Sikatuna (PF-5/PS-77) and BRP Datu Kalantiaw (PS-76).

I pity the crew if something were to happen, that lone obsolete frigate doesn't stand a chance against. Then again it'd be absolutely stupid for China to do anything like sink it.

[Endless Soul]

Originally Posted by killer3000ad

Phillipines navy sends frigate to disputed Spratly Islands


I pity the crew if something were to happen, that lone obsolete frigate doesn't stand a chance against. Then again it'd be absolutely stupid for China to do anything like sink it.

Wow, obsolete is right! That ship was built in 1943!

Like to Wiki article regarding BRP Rajah Humabon (PF-11) ex USS Atherton (DE-169) here.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by MrTerrorist

LulzSec is so gonna exploit that.

They would probably have fixed it before LulzSec exploited it.

[flying ^]

interesting (valid) question of the day Friday Edition

http://www.ktrh.com/cc-common/news/s...rticle=8719378

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by MrTerrorist

LulzSec is so gonna exploit that.

It would be interesting to see, as many cyber-pirating attempt came from China.

[killer3000ad]

US wants to extradite UK student to face copyright infringement charges

Richard O’Dwyer, a 23-year-old student studying computer science at Sheffield Hallam University, created the website TV Shack. Its sole purpose was to offer links to thousands of movies and TV shows from around the web. In return, he generated advertising revenue from the site, but also caught the attention of the US government who have now shut it down.

The problem the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement department had with the site stems from the fact the sources O’Dwyer linked to were not legitimate and therefore formed a copyright infringement. Even though TV Shack did not host any content, O’Dwyer has been targeted by the US government and wants him extradited to face charges. If they succeed, he could face up to 5 years in a US prison.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by killer3000ad

US wants to extradite UK student to face copyright infringement charges

We'll hope he's got a lawyer who can point out clearly to techno-illiterate judges just how bogus this demand is....

... waiting for someone to start accusing public streets of being "conduits to crime".... :P

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Vexx

We'll hope he's got a lawyer who can point out clearly to techno-illiterate judges just how bogus this demand is....

... waiting for someone to start accusing public streets of being "conduits to crime".... :P

Under the British Common Law, it is not considered a copyright infringement because the person is simply an illegitimate agent. Legally speaking, the most that could happen to him is that he is forced to give up the IPs and IDs of the links he appended and fined - I have no idea how the legal system came to the conclusion he is also a criminal : the "accomplice to crime" syllogism is more of a conjured red herring rather than something concrete.

Secondly, advertising generates revenue based on visits and the "contents of interest" the siteowner provides. The contents are only links, not illegal media. Again, it is like assuming he "intentionally" wanted to redistribute the pirated media, when he is "simply providing resources to the visitors of his site", just like any other web-owner. So where the heck does the "copyright infringement" come from when he is not the person redistributing it?

So if this spells "copyright infringement", then what about search engines and Google? They are providing links too should the person want to search for it, and that service is "intentionally made available despite knowing the consequences", so why is it not being attacked for "copyright infringement"?

This is an abuse of the extradition treaty. Queen Liz should just give US the royal finger and put forward discussions to reduce the troop strength in Afghanistan if the House of Loonies decides to send him to the US of A.

[Vexx]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

Under the British Common Law, it is not considered a copyright infringement because the person is simply an illegitimate agent. Legally speaking, the most that could happen to him is that he is forced to give up the IPs and IDs of the links he appended and fined - I have no idea how the legal system came to the conclusion he is also a criminal : the "accomplice to crime" syllogism is more of a conjured red herring rather than something concrete.

Secondly, advertising generates revenue based on visits and the "contents of interest" the siteowner provides. The contents are only links, not illegal media. Again, it is like assuming he "intentionally" wanted to redistribute the pirated media, when he is "simply providing resources to the visitors of his site", just like any other web-owner. So where the heck does the "copyright infringement" come from when he is not the person redistributing it?

So if this spells "copyright infringement", then what about search engines and Google? They are providing links too should the person want to search for it, and that service is "intentionally made available despite knowing the consequences", so why is it not being attacked for "copyright infringement"?

This is an abuse of the extradition treaty. Queen Liz should just give US the royal finger and put forward discussions to reduce the troop strength in Afghanistan if the House of Loonies decides to send him to the US of A.

The legal attempt to equate *links* with *content* happens regularly and repeatedly. Equating those requires a degree of obstinate ignorance or willful cynicism that in the past most of the village would have tarred and feathered the idiots to stop them.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Vexx

The legal attempt to equate *links* with *content* happens regularly and repeatedly. Equating those requires a degree of obstinate ignorance or willful cynicism that in the past most of the village would have tarred and feathered the idiots to stop them.

The common argument is that the "link" accentuates the "consideration" of redistribution of the "content" without permission, hence the "intention" to pirate the media is fulfilled. But the argument from the POV of someone who understands the concept of servers and webhosting, is entirely rubbish because the content is not hosted by the server. And since the content is not in the server, how can the webhost even redistribute it in the first place? And if it is not redistributed, how can there be copyright infringement?

And to even stretch the argument more from the plaintiff's side (though it might sound ludicrous, but it is entirely possible if the judge is dumb as the one convicting TPB), the webhost is simply acting as an agent. But that would be immediately shot down because :

1. There is no principal.
2. The "agent" is doing it out of goodwill or personal interests
3. There is no contract formed by any party for this transaction, it just happened by a search-call-get opportunity.

This fiasco is just another case of legal advisors ballooning "consideration" and tying it to an assumed "intent", under contract law (if it applies, since there isn't any contract to be formed in the first place), his provision of the links is just an invitation to treat, not to form an agreement of any kind (unless he has an indemnity "I Agree" clause prior to the redirection).

Maybe it would work more if the media companies hire marketing advisors too instead of solely legal advisors - when distribution is being whacked like this, it means that the business model has to change because the world does not revolve around the damned company.

EDIT : Here is a humourous editorial about the current market fears which makes quite alot of sense -

Inflation AND deflation is nuts!

Nobody knows why the market goes up or down. Yesterday the markets were going down because prices didn’t move high enough. The implication is that problems in Europe are causing a weak Euro, so a strong dollar, so less foreign demand for our products, so lower prices so, horrors(!), deflation!

So yesterday the world was over. Demolished by a country whose GDP is the same size as that of Connecticut.

Oh wait, and now today the market is going up! What the heck? The headline “Greece fears subside.” Thank God for that. No new worries now. Somehow all of those people are going to still retire at age 55 in Greece and all will be OK.

Meanwhile, I thought what we’re really supposed to be worried about is that Bernanke is running the printing press too much and that we are heading toward not just inflation but hyperinflation a la the Weimar Republic. I saw that headline last week.

So what is it? Inflation? Deflation? There was even this headline a few weeks ago: ”Because of inflation, potato chip manufacturers are putting less chips per bag and they are not telling us.” WHAT!? They aren’t telling us? From now on I want to know exactly how many chips are going in a bag. And does this mean USAToday will no longer have their semi-annual “Obesity Epidemic throughout US” headline? Because I’ll really miss that headline.

To believe two exactly opposite things and have them come to the same conclusion is quite possibly the definition of insanity. I don’t know for sure about, that but we’ll play around with the definition of insanity quite a bit over the next few months. There’s no inflation and there’s no deflation and whatever it is, it has nothing to do with the data we are seeing and what the markets are doing.

Here’s what happened, in 200 words or less: Japan had an earthquake, their manufacturing output was the worst in 60 years that month, and so it reduced the parts that were getting shipped to our factories which, in turn, affected our output and employment. If our auto factories don’t get auto parts, they don’t hire people. Period. Next month, when they get the auto parts, they will hire people. When Japan spends $300 billion to rebuild in the next few months, we will see a complete reversal of the data. In fact, we will see a boom in our data.

Right now one should engage in what I call “relaxed investing.” Just pick some big cheap, low volatile stocks that you can ride until September-October for a good 15-20%.

So stocks like INTC at 8 times forward earnings, AAPL with $65 billion in case and 12 times forward earnings; MSFT at 10x forward earnings; CSCO at 12x forward earnings; XOM (which will rise with oil); WMT (as consumer spending goes back to all-time highs), and JNJ (a Warren Buffett stock that benefits from 76 million baby boomers retiring,) are all strong buys here in anticipation of the market recovering to multi-year highs by Q3.

[Sackett]

Obama overrules his Office of Legal Counsel.

Says America is not engaged in hostilities in Lybia.

...

...

...


I don't even know what to say.

Really?

Really?

Realize that Obama could probably get Congress to authorize combat in Lybia if he just asked.

But instead of doing that he's decided to tell us that firing missiles and killing people in Lybia is not "hostilities", leading to a separation of powers conflict and a Constitutional crisis.

WTF is he doing? Why is he doing this? It makes. No. Sense!

[flying ^]

Originally Posted by Sackett

Obama overrules his Office of Legal Counsel.

jeeez where's the anti war left that dominated media coverage a decade ago...

[Endless Soul]

They're probably tired from protesting the other two wars we're involved in.