I'm a bit blog happy today. Just couldn't resist this one. :) Granted, they'd never pull out wholesale, but there's a concerted effort to diversify.
By Pedro Nicolaci da Costa
Reuters
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSN1228045520070613
NEW YORK — There is little reason to fear a wholesale pullout by China out of U.S. government bonds, former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said on Tuesday.
While expressing concerns about China’s runaway growth rate and what he described as overvalued stocks, Greenspan played down the prospect that Chinese authorities would sell Treasuries in earnest, forcing a sharp spike in U.S. interest rates.
Asked at a commercial real estate conference if investors should be worried about this oft-cited concern, Greenspan said: “I wouldn’t be — no.”
Still, Greenspan said the reason such a withdrawal was unlikely was that China would not have anyone to sell the securities to, hardly the sort of comfort jittery bond investors were seeking.
U.S. government debt has been under severe pressure over the past week, with yields rising sharply on anxiety over the likelihood that global credit conditions would tighten as the year progresses. Bond prices move inversely to yields.
Greenspan reinforced the nervousness, saying that a global liquidity boom which he traced back to the end of the Cold War would not go on forever.
“Enjoy it while it lasts,” he told the audience.
Now a private-sector consultant following more than 18 years at the U.S. central bank, Greenspan reiterated his prediction that China’s latest growth spurt had come too far, too fast.
“We cannot continue this rate of growth in China and the Third World. This cannot continue indefinitely,” Greenspan said in a speech. “Some of these price/earnings ratios are discounting nirvana.”
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Chinese bank would expand into U.S. and Russia
Here's a nice follow-up to my earlier post.
By Jamil Anderlini
Financial Times, London
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3b314b7a-1913-11dc-a961-000b5df10621.html
HONG KONG — Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, the country’s largest lender, has applied for banking licences in the US and Russia as it seeks to expand outside its home market, the bank’s chairman said on Tuesday.
“We have applied to regulatory authorities in the US, Russia, and other places to set up operations,” Jiang Jianqing, ICBC’s chairman, said after the bank’s annual general meeting. “Global investors are all looking at the BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, India, and China — and we are very interested in increasing our operations in these markets too.”
The bank’s global ambitions represent a sea-change from just four years ago, when the country’s state-owned lenders were struggling with mountains of bad loans and poor management.
“Many of the country’s banks were insolvent just a few years ago and it is only very recently that they have begun to clean up their act,” said Charlene Chu, banking analyst at Fitch Ratings.
In recent years Beijing has bailed out the country’s largest lenders to the tune of $430 billion (£218.4 billion) through direct equity injections and carving out bad loans.
The banks have also sold a further $70 billion worth of shares to foreign strategic investors and the public through initial public offerings in Shanghai and Hong Kong, and insist they have improved vastly their non-performing loan ratios, corporate governance, and risk management systems.
“We expect ICBC will be looking to do a lot more acquisitions because they have a lot of money and they definitely want to go global,” said May Yan, China banking analyst at Moody’s rating agency.
But the bank faces opposition to its plan to expand in the US because of concerns it does not meet American regulatory standards. The issue has been raised in the bilateral Strategic Economic Dialogue, with the US agreeing last month to consider Chinese bank applications to open US branches under “the principle of national treatment.”
While foreign banks have been making significant inroads into China in recent years and are pushing hard for greater access, Chinese banks are largely excluded from foreign markets because of a history of poor risk management and corporate governance.
Bank of China, which has the largest overseas operations of any Chinese bank, agreed to pay a fine of $20 million to US and Chinese authorities in 2002 for alleged misconduct at one of its New York branches, which included charges of fraud and preferential treatment for customers with personal relationships with bank officials.
ICBC does not have plans to expand in the UK but has seen “very positive developments” in its London operations, Mr Jiang said.
By Jamil Anderlini
Financial Times, London
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/3b314b7a-1913-11dc-a961-000b5df10621.html
HONG KONG — Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, the country’s largest lender, has applied for banking licences in the US and Russia as it seeks to expand outside its home market, the bank’s chairman said on Tuesday.
“We have applied to regulatory authorities in the US, Russia, and other places to set up operations,” Jiang Jianqing, ICBC’s chairman, said after the bank’s annual general meeting. “Global investors are all looking at the BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, India, and China — and we are very interested in increasing our operations in these markets too.”
The bank’s global ambitions represent a sea-change from just four years ago, when the country’s state-owned lenders were struggling with mountains of bad loans and poor management.
“Many of the country’s banks were insolvent just a few years ago and it is only very recently that they have begun to clean up their act,” said Charlene Chu, banking analyst at Fitch Ratings.
In recent years Beijing has bailed out the country’s largest lenders to the tune of $430 billion (£218.4 billion) through direct equity injections and carving out bad loans.
The banks have also sold a further $70 billion worth of shares to foreign strategic investors and the public through initial public offerings in Shanghai and Hong Kong, and insist they have improved vastly their non-performing loan ratios, corporate governance, and risk management systems.
“We expect ICBC will be looking to do a lot more acquisitions because they have a lot of money and they definitely want to go global,” said May Yan, China banking analyst at Moody’s rating agency.
But the bank faces opposition to its plan to expand in the US because of concerns it does not meet American regulatory standards. The issue has been raised in the bilateral Strategic Economic Dialogue, with the US agreeing last month to consider Chinese bank applications to open US branches under “the principle of national treatment.”
While foreign banks have been making significant inroads into China in recent years and are pushing hard for greater access, Chinese banks are largely excluded from foreign markets because of a history of poor risk management and corporate governance.
Bank of China, which has the largest overseas operations of any Chinese bank, agreed to pay a fine of $20 million to US and Chinese authorities in 2002 for alleged misconduct at one of its New York branches, which included charges of fraud and preferential treatment for customers with personal relationships with bank officials.
ICBC does not have plans to expand in the UK but has seen “very positive developments” in its London operations, Mr Jiang said.
Caught you!
By REUTERS
Published: June 13, 2007
Morgan Stanley will pay $4.4 million to settle a class-action lawsuit with brokerage clients who bought precious metals and paid storage fees, according to a court filing.
The proposed settlement, which is subject to approval by the Federal District Court in Manhattan, includes $1.5 million in cash and other benefits valued at about $2.9 million, according to a court filing on Monday.
The suit, filed in August 2005, asserted that Morgan Stanley told clients it was selling them precious metals that they would own in full and that the company would store.
But Morgan Stanley either made no investment specifically on behalf of those clients, or made entirely different investments of lesser value and security, according to the complaint.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/13/business/13morgan.html?_r=1&dlbk&oref=slogin
Thank you GATA!
Published: June 13, 2007
Morgan Stanley will pay $4.4 million to settle a class-action lawsuit with brokerage clients who bought precious metals and paid storage fees, according to a court filing.
The proposed settlement, which is subject to approval by the Federal District Court in Manhattan, includes $1.5 million in cash and other benefits valued at about $2.9 million, according to a court filing on Monday.
The suit, filed in August 2005, asserted that Morgan Stanley told clients it was selling them precious metals that they would own in full and that the company would store.
But Morgan Stanley either made no investment specifically on behalf of those clients, or made entirely different investments of lesser value and security, according to the complaint.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/13/business/13morgan.html?_r=1&dlbk&oref=slogin
Thank you GATA!
US Dollar Purchased by China and Japan
For Immediate Release
Awksedgreep,
The Coordinated Press
In some rather odd news today the US Dollar has been purchased by China and Japan. Now owning 53% of the bonds issued as reserves for the currency. While the new owners have yet to exert major influence on the company, insiders say it is just a matter of time. One of the reasons cited by the new owners is the belligerent existing senior team, which will likely all be asked to resign and may well be brought up on corruption charges. One noted Austrian economist and Presidential candidate, Ron Paul, suggested that this is just one of many hints that restructure and reform is needed. This would also imply that the end of the monopoly/hegemony has already taken place.
The financial team is scrambling with hostile takeovers and many threats to keep the status quo, but so far the rhetoric has not been successful. It is likely that the financial team will be relieved of its duties and conservative alternatives put in their place.
The senior team is being charged with corruption and analysts predict that this hardship will last at least 20 years and will affect the entire company. This will likely cause massive layoffs and result in the largest corporate downsizing in history.
The US Dollar company is a fascist, for profit, institution which should exist by the people for the people and provide for the common good. This had been the case until 1913 when a new financial team was hired to keep the books, but have since run the business into the ground. The press office can be reached at press@whitehouse.gov
Awksedgreep,
The Coordinated Press
In some rather odd news today the US Dollar has been purchased by China and Japan. Now owning 53% of the bonds issued as reserves for the currency. While the new owners have yet to exert major influence on the company, insiders say it is just a matter of time. One of the reasons cited by the new owners is the belligerent existing senior team, which will likely all be asked to resign and may well be brought up on corruption charges. One noted Austrian economist and Presidential candidate, Ron Paul, suggested that this is just one of many hints that restructure and reform is needed. This would also imply that the end of the monopoly/hegemony has already taken place.
The financial team is scrambling with hostile takeovers and many threats to keep the status quo, but so far the rhetoric has not been successful. It is likely that the financial team will be relieved of its duties and conservative alternatives put in their place.
The senior team is being charged with corruption and analysts predict that this hardship will last at least 20 years and will affect the entire company. This will likely cause massive layoffs and result in the largest corporate downsizing in history.
The US Dollar company is a fascist, for profit, institution which should exist by the people for the people and provide for the common good. This had been the case until 1913 when a new financial team was hired to keep the books, but have since run the business into the ground. The press office can be reached at press@whitehouse.gov
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Pay it forward
Having already spent quite a bit on the campaign I keep thinking about how much this all could possibly cost us . . . but then I realize . . .
How much I'd be saving on the inflation tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on the income tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on the big government tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on my personal liberties . . .
when Ron Paul is elected president . . .
So giving more becomes a no-brainer!
How much I'd be saving on the inflation tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on the income tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on the big government tax . . .
How much I'd be saving on my personal liberties . . .
when Ron Paul is elected president . . .
So giving more becomes a no-brainer!
Pyramids made of concrete, not pre-cut limestone blocks
Fascinating article, it seems feasible to me.
The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids
Snippet:
The stones also had a high water content-unusual for the normally dry, natural limestone found on the Giza plateau-and the cementing phases, in both the inner and outer casing stones, were amorphous, in other words, their atoms were not arranged in a regular and periodic array. Sedimentary rocks such as limestone are seldom, if ever, amorphous.
The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. "Therefore," says Barsoum, "it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block."
More startlingly, Barsoum and another of his graduate students, Aaron Sakulich, recently discovered the presence of silicon dioxide nanoscale spheres (with diameters only billionths of a meter across) in one of the samples. This discovery further confirms that these blocks are not natural limestone.
The Surprising Truth Behind the Construction of the Great Pyramids
Snippet:
The stones also had a high water content-unusual for the normally dry, natural limestone found on the Giza plateau-and the cementing phases, in both the inner and outer casing stones, were amorphous, in other words, their atoms were not arranged in a regular and periodic array. Sedimentary rocks such as limestone are seldom, if ever, amorphous.
The sample chemistries the researchers found do not exist anywhere in nature. "Therefore," says Barsoum, "it's very improbable that the outer and inner casing stones that we examined were chiseled from a natural limestone block."
More startlingly, Barsoum and another of his graduate students, Aaron Sakulich, recently discovered the presence of silicon dioxide nanoscale spheres (with diameters only billionths of a meter across) in one of the samples. This discovery further confirms that these blocks are not natural limestone.
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Size and Shape of the Military Industrial Complex
Great article on Lew Rockwell . com about the US Military Industrial Complex . . .
U.S. Takes Gold in Arms Olympics
Snippet:
Hey, aren't we the most exceptional nation in history? George Bush and his pals thought so – and they were in a great American tradition of exceptionalism. Of course, they were imagining us as the most exceptional empire in history (or maybe at the end of it), the ultimate New Rome. Anyway, explain this to me: Among all the exceptional things we claim to do, how come we never take credit for what may be the most exceptional of all, our success of successes, the thing that makes us uniquely ourselves on this war-ridden planet – peddling more arms to Earthlings than anyone else in the neighborhood? Why do we hide this rare talent under a bushel? In the interest of shining a proud light on an under-rated national skill, I asked Frida Berrigan to return the United States to its rightful place in the Pantheon of arms-dealing nations. ~ Tom
U.S. Takes Gold in Arms Olympics
Snippet:
Hey, aren't we the most exceptional nation in history? George Bush and his pals thought so – and they were in a great American tradition of exceptionalism. Of course, they were imagining us as the most exceptional empire in history (or maybe at the end of it), the ultimate New Rome. Anyway, explain this to me: Among all the exceptional things we claim to do, how come we never take credit for what may be the most exceptional of all, our success of successes, the thing that makes us uniquely ourselves on this war-ridden planet – peddling more arms to Earthlings than anyone else in the neighborhood? Why do we hide this rare talent under a bushel? In the interest of shining a proud light on an under-rated national skill, I asked Frida Berrigan to return the United States to its rightful place in the Pantheon of arms-dealing nations. ~ Tom
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
