New Nexus

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > no YOU'RE a smelly poo. Touched you last. I?m glad my pot and kettle comment found resonance with you, Might be time for you to adopt the fetal position, and have a little nap.

*Bob* Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > New Nexus Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Does anyone here know what the (Prompt > Corrective Action Act) is? > > Is the pope Catholic?! > > Well, put (in laymans terms - for those of a > lesser mind) the Prompt Corrective Action is a US > federal law mandating progressive penalties > against banks that exhibit progressively > deteriorating capital ratios. At the lower > extreme, a critically undercapitalized Federal > Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)-regulated > institution (i.e., one with a ratio of total > capital / assets below 2%) is required to be taken > into receivership by the FDIC in order to minimize > long-term losses to the FDIC.[1] The motivation > behind the law is to provide incentives for banks > to address problems while they are still small > enough to be manageable. > > Ask me another - go on. Ask me. At last. Can you tell me why (Prompt Corrective Action Act) was not implemented by Paulson nor Geithner, regarding the banks involvement in subprime, given that it was their duty to implement said Act

Voyageur Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NN, your writing style and somewhat unbalanced > view reminds me of a 15 year old with a dictionary > to hand.... you're not a 15 year old with a > dictionary are you? (no offence to 15 year olds > with dictionaries!). Comments on writing style and yet no comments on substance. Pot and kettle, come to mind. Does anyone here know what the (Prompt Corrective Action Act) is?

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is my prediction: > > "There shall in that time be rumors of things > going astray, erm, and there shall be a great > confusion as to where things really are, and > nobody will really know where lieth those little > things with the sort of raffia-work base, that has > an attachment. At that time, a friend shall lose > his friend's hammer, and the young shall not know > where lieth the things possessed by their fathers > that their fathers put there only just the night > before, about eight o'clock." "All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?"

Huguenot, you really are very badly informed. Your wonderland is dissolving, and you cannot abide the fact that your falsely conceived paradigm is collapsing. Why not try and read the New York Time article in full ? then ponder on it?s implications, and not just vomit up your stupid number crunching game. You are so badly informed, that you didn?t understand what pleading the 5th was.

In a move that could either send BAC stock limit down overnight or send it soaring (we are still trying to figure out just what is going on here), the NYT has broken major news that the US is preparing to go nuclear on more than a dozen big banks among which Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank, in an attempt for Fannie and Freddie to recoup $30 billion if not much more. The lawsuit is expected to hit the docket in the next few days: "The suits stem from subpoenas the finance agency issued to banks a year ago. If the case is not filed Friday, they said, it will come Tuesday, shortly before a deadline expires for the housing agency to file claims." Now, taken at face value, this would mean that Bank of America can kiss its ass goodbye as unlike the Walnut Place litigation, this will take place in Federal Court where Article 77 is not applicable. Yet there is something that gives us pause: namely logic, captured by the following words: "While I believe that F.H.F.A. is acting responsibly in its role as conservator, I am afraid that we risk pushing these guys off of a cliff and we?re going to have to bail out the banks again,? said Tim Rood, who worked at Fannie Mae until 2006 and is now a partner at the Collingwood Group, which advises banks and servicers on housing-related issues." In other words: if the banks are sued, and if justice prevails, the end of the world is nigh and cue TARP 2 - XXX. Now where have we heard that argument over, and over, and over before. Shorthand, do this to us and we will bring the system down

The ?needle? is called Prompt Corrective Action Act and FDIC. It was Timothy Geithner?s and Hank Paulson?s duty to enforce these acts, but given they are part of the banksters brigade of Goldman, they chose to ignore this act. It really boils down to: If I cheat and swindle then get caught, I get punished. If banksters cheat and swindle then get caught, they get rewarded. If we leave criminals in charge, the next hit is going to be much worst.

And as the villagers played hunt the thimble, the great monolith churned greater and greater toxins into the markets, September 23rd do they, don?t they, give Greece more debt. I?d like to say bailout, but I know that to be false.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > UDT, I didn't think you were Rick Channing, and I > wasn't trying to get you banned. I know who you > are. Take a chill pill. > > If you don't want people to debate who you are > then don't post under multiple usernames sounds > pretty simple? > > New Nexus is there again with 'Plead the fifth'. > I've got no idea what that is - so it's clearly > someone either American, or either pretending or > obsessed with America. The only person who did > that recently was Rick Channing, but it doesn't > seem American enough for him. Just as apostrophe is not my strong point. Subtlety is clearly not your forte. Let me break it down for you. It is called guilt by association. = paranoia. Has anyone seen The Crucible lately? = McCarthy hearings. Plead the 5th = again McCarthy hearings. The good thing about living on planet earth now is we do not have to think in single dimensional UK, US, RU, AU, CN. Ideologies.

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > katie1997 Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > I was being perfectly honest. You have the same > > posting style as NN - iin my opinion. Again, > > apologies to you (both) if I'm mistaken. > Meeting > > someone in person doesn't prove anything either. > > > I disagree. It just seems to me that a group of > people can't win their arguments fairly so thay > just try to get the opposition banned by mixing > them up with previous banned members. I think this > behaviour is wrong. It's dishonest and goes > against the forum's t&c. It is called guilt by association. Has anyone seen The Crucible lately? I plead the 5th

mockney piers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Quite NN > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?2 > 0,729998,735065#msg-735065 > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?2 > 0,729998,735224#msg-735224 > > At which point, huguenot, you thought it was UDT, > but your attribution was wrong. that it be > http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?2 > 0,729998,735240#msg-735240 > > So I'm going with my instincts on this. > UDTs words mean may be going back to my original > gut instinct about who he is, despite some claims > elsewhere to the contrary. > > > Oooooh, this is all so coded and cliquey. You see > NN & UDT, this is all it takes to be in the > clique, just a bit of forum eerience, there never > was any illuminati apron or trowel thing going on.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yeah, I'm not sure I agree with you Mockers, in > fact I think you have them the other way round. > > The use of 'Hugo' as a term of address only > highlights one person who also combines that with > habitual Latin board-veteran phrases. Couple that > with the age and other references and I think UDT > is pretty much a dead-cert. > > New Nexus has all sorts of strange habits - for > example 90% of their posts start with quoting > someone else. Something that I can't find anyone > else doing to the same degree unless you go back > to the early days of Snorky. I'm surprised if it's > Snorky though, the subject matter matches, but > Nexus seems a little bit too defensive. > > The only other person I thought Nexus might be > with all this Americ-awe was Rick Channing. You may want to go back over some of my posting, I think you may have your details confused. Or maybe it was Mea culpa

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There are surprisingly few people who use the name > 'Hugo' to refer to me. Of those few you'll find in > a search, I know that several of them are the same > person, so that does somewhat limit the options > for UDT's other incarnations if he has them. > > However, New Nexus only ever rarely refers to me > with some distaste as 'Huguenot' so either it's > someone else or part of an extraordinarily ornate > alter ego. Economic commentator, political commentator, sleuth and now psychologist. Here?s a new name for you, Jack as in, ?Jack of all trades and master of none? Ho no he didn?t, Ho yea he did.

Undisputedtruth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hugo, it's a sign that your juvenile retorts is > really a cover for lack of financial > understanding. > > Scylla directed an interesting question towards > you and yet failed to give an answer. Sorry to say you are wasting your time with Huguenot, he is one of those closed off types, he will not yield to any form of logical nor reasonable debate. You can show him facts, figures, news reports, economic lectures, And if he does bother looking at your body of evidence, he just comes back with the same old ?I know better? answer, then hurls abuse around, like it is normal to talk to people that way. At least king Canute did what he did to show people the limits of his powers, Huguenot thinks he really can hold back the seas, and walk on them too. I now wait for the vanguard to strike.

LadyDeliah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If China and other players do get more power in > the IMF or World Bank, it follows that the US will > have less power. In the past the US used both of > these institutions to secure US commercial > advantage around the world. If their power is > lessened, their commercial advantage is also > likely to be reduced. > > In my opinion, the US are facing multiple economic > catastrophes and the ripple effect of these are > bound to affect is in the UK. > > The US may survive, but I think the problems they > are facing are monumental and I wouldn't put money > on it. What has been the US economic power, been based upon, it?s might is right war machine. Now take a look at US base movements across the globe, to secure said economic power. Can you see a pattern yet?

StraferJack Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > NN has just picked up a fault in the AE35 unit. He > reckons it's going to go 100% failure in 72 > hours. Will I dream?

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > @NN: What rebuttal do I need beyond proving what I > have already - it's you who's making extraordinary > claims without any substantiation. It's you who is > persistently making assertions that turn out to be > incorrect. > > China is already a voting member of the IMF, and > controls approximately the same number of votes > (around 4%) as UK, France, Germany or Japan. > > The US only controls 16% of votes, so is in no way > able to call the shots. It's all very equitable, > and apart from the usual jockeying for position > trundles along quite nicely. > > The only thing you can see is your own crazed > vision of apocalypse - the only forecast that I > make is that we'll muddle through as we always do. > That's not denial, that's insight backed by > history. China has only just within the last few years been invited / corralled into the juicy meetings and international steering groups. Once they realize they are being stitched up, what do you think they are going to do? How to piss-off china in two moves, (QE) and Libya. Sorry I forgot one more, US bases

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yet more relentless negative speculation on issues > of which you demonstrate a very poor > understanding. > > It is clear that you 'cannot see how China could > get a fair deal' because you don't understand the > mechanisms or the motivations. > > Lots has indeed happened, and lots will happen, > and your silly apocalypse fantasy will continue to > be pointless dramatising and scare-mongering. You cannot construct a rebuttal, only scurry off down your rabbet hole of denial. Huguenot?s paradigm, if I cannot see it ? it?s not happening. ?Only a fool walks into the future backwards.?

Ps. SDR is a currency. If the IMF can and has - via SDR print into being $250 billion with QE, and that in turn can effect markets, that is a currency. For years the IMF did not have this power. No change of mind, no capitulation, no surrender.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > New Nexus, your doomsday scenario was based upon > the fact that China rejects use of Special Drawing > Rights and would destroy Society as we know it to > prevent their use. > > Are you now changing your mind? > > I'm reassured that finally you accept that SDR is > not a currency, but a loan system from a basket of > currencies. And of course the devaluation of the > US$ through QE is something I explicitly recognize > and support. There is no surprise that China are > unenthusiastic about it, but that's not the same > as the end of the world. > > Turns out I seem to understand what I'm talking > about eh? > > Pray tell, what else have you changed your mind > about? ;-) And china will reject it, when they find that they cannot negotiate favorable or fair transformation of the SDR.(Into a reserve unit) Given that the IMF and bank for international settlement will be the prime movers and shakers in this new reserve, how could china get a fair deal? Lots have already happened sense 2009, UN and IMF are and will remain the preserve of North America and EU. China may want to think about the saying ?Be careful what you wish for? or are they already thinking about it?

FT.com China calls for new reserve currency By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing Published: March 23 2009 12:16 | Last updated: March 24 2009 00:06 China?s central bank on Monday proposed replacing the US dollar as the international reserve currency with a new global system controlled by the International Monetary Fund. In an essay posted on the People?s Bank of China?s website, Zhou Xiaochuan, the central bank?s governor, said the goal would be to create a reserve currency ?that is disconnected from individual nations and is able to remain stable in the long run, thus removing the inherent deficiencies caused by using credit-based national currencies?. Analysts said the proposal was an indication of Beijing?s fears that actions being taken to save the domestic US economy would have a negative impact on China. ?This is a clear sign that China, as the largest holder of US dollar financial assets, is concerned about the potential inflationary risk of the US Federal Reserve printing money,? said Qu Hongbin, chief China economist for HSBC. Although Mr Zhou did not mention the US dollar, the essay gave a pointed critique of the current dollar-dominated monetary system. ?The outbreak of the [current] crisis and its spillover to the entire world reflected the inherent vulnerabilities and systemic risks in the existing international monetary system,? Mr Zhou wrote. China has little choice but to hold the bulk of its $2,000bn of foreign exchange reserves in US dollars, and this is unlikely to change in the near future. To replace the current system, Mr Zhou suggested expanding the role of special drawing rights, which were introduced by the IMF in 1969 to support the Bretton Woods fixed exchange rate regime but became less relevant once that collapsed in the 1970s. Today, the value of SDRs is based on a basket of four currencies ? the US dollar, yen, euro and sterling ? and they are used largely as a unit of account by the IMF and some other international organisations. China?s proposal would expand the basket of currencies forming the basis of SDR valuation to all major economies and set up a settlement system between SDRs and other currencies so they could be used in international trade and financial transactions. Countries would entrust a portion of their SDR reserves to the IMF to manage collectively on their behalf and SDRs would gradually replace existing reserve currencies. Mr Zhou said the proposal would require ?extraordinary political vision and courage? and acknowledged a debt to John Maynard Keynes, who made a similar suggestion in the 1940s.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Ha ha ha! NN, you think the arguments against your > conclusions are reductio ad absurdum? > > There's never been a clearer case of projection!! > Ha ha. :) > > Contrary to your assertion, it is the fact that so > many people have been prepared to consider your > 'paradigm that is outside the norms of mainstream > media' and under analysis have found it vacuous, > that has made you so furious. > > As I've said before, your arguments have been > scare-mongering based on very few facts and > demonstrably poor understanding. You've > persistently used fabricated quotes and > deliberately misinterpreted the views of other > commentators. You have made sweeping, ugly and > offensive generalisations about people in certain > professions. You've resorted to cutting and > pasting material from other websites and bulletin > boards without attribution (passing them off as > your own). > > Despite that, those who have argued against you > have done little more than point out that the > conclusions you have drawn are simply too extreme > and poorly supported to be rational. No-one has > said that there aren't bad seeds in banking and > politics, but they have said that that cannot > justify your extraordinary conclusions. > > It was your absolute refusal to accept any of > these points, together with the reiteration and > escalation of your pre-emptive claims of the > destruction of society as we know it that earned > you your reputation as a nutter. You really could have just said, Post-hoc ergo propter hoc.

Most if not all counter-arguments to my original posting, have clearly taken the form of reductio ad absurdum format, The ad hominem attacks, show a refusal to even consider a paradigm that is outside the norms of mainstream media, data Processing and conditioning. This was expected and predicted by professionals in anthropology.

Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Don't be an idiot. Someone has woken up all grumpy

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm fed up with this thread - I've not been able > to summon enough enthusiasm to point out the very > obvious failings in NNs and his / her supporter's > arguments. Loz and Hugenot have held the line but > it's time to close off this thread. > > One final quotation from a recognised and > reputable source - this thread was created by "a > poor player - That struts and frets his hour upon > the stage - And then is heard no more: it is a > tale - Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, - > Signifying nothing." Are we doing quotes now? You cannot, sir, take from me any thing that I will more willingly part withal: except my life.