He is packing it in and packing it up
And sneaking away and buggering up
And chickening out and pissing off home,
Yes, bravely he is throwing in the sponge.
Posted on 04/03/2008 9:22:59 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
April 3, 2008
Ben Bernanke admits Bear Stearns was hours from collapse
Dearbail Jordan
US Federal Reserve chairman, Ben Bernanke, today revealed that Bear Stearns was just one day away from going bust when the central bank stepped in to save the Wall Street bank to prevent chaos and a "severe" impact on confidence.
Speaking for a second day in front of US Congress, Mr Bernanke attempted to justify JP Morgan Chase's rescue of Bear Stearns, in a deal that included the US Fed agreeing to back $29 billion of the troubled investment bank's assets.
Mr Bernanke said: "... on March 13, Bear Stearns advised the Federal Reserve and other government agencies that its liquidity position had significantly deteriorated and that it would have to file for bankruptcy the next day unless alternative sources of funds became available."
The Fed chairman said that the central bank was forced to step in because the US financial system is "extremely complex and interconnected", and the collapse of Bear Stearns would have led to a "chaotic unwinding of positions in those markets are could have severely shaken confidence".
Mr Bernanke added: "Given the exceptional pressures on the global economy and financial system, the damage caused by a default by Bear Stearns could have been severe and extremely difficult to contain."
JP Morgan Chase agreed to acquire Bear Stearns for an initial $2 a share, valuing the lender at just $240 million. However, an investor outcry forced JP Morgan to increase the offer to $10 a share, as well as taking on $1 billion of Bear Stearns' assets with the remaining $29 billion backed by the US Fed.
Jamie Dimon, chief executive at JP Morgan, who was also appearing before Congress today, said the bank would not have offered to buy Bear Stearns if the Fed had not agreed to back the assets. His co-speaker, Alan Schwartz, chief executive at Bear Stearns, said today that the bank was not involved in negotiations between JP Morgan and the government regarding the $30 billion asset deal.
Mr Schwartz also maintained, as he said days before Bear Stearns nearly went bust last month, that the run that brought the lender to its knees was due to a lack of confidence and not because of a lack of capital or liquidity.
Mr Bernanke today reiterated his forecast that the US economy would slow in the first half before staging a recovery in the second half. However, like yesterday, Mr Bernanke refused to label the current economic situation as a recession.
It emerged today that US unemployment claims unexpectedly spiked last week by 38,000 to the highest rate since September 2005, alarming investors ahead of monthly jobless figures due out tomorrow.
New data revealed that the number of unemployment claims rose to 407,000 for the week ended March 29, above an expected 370,000 and the previous week's total of 369,000.
The sudden rise in benefit claims sent the Dow Jones industrial average down 48.6 points at 12,556.7 as investor grew nervous that today's figures are an indication of employment numbers that are due out tomorrow that are expected to show non-farm pay rolls for March have fallen by 60,000.
Oh...."just that," which is a quote from "just this"?:
Treasury Agrees to Absorb any Losses to the Fed from Bear StearnsSo............according to your deluded mind....excerpts and quotations from articles and media sources, somehow transfer ownership, according to YOU, and become MY OWN CLAIMS and MY OWN WORDS, even when the words and claims quoted have been sourced, cited, linked to, and formatted to show it's a quote?
Video from CNBC (hat tip idoc)
CNBC's Steve Liesman reports on a letter from Treasury Secretary Paulson to New York Fed President Tim Geithner (PDF). In the letter, Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses from the Bear Stearns deal.
Is that how things work in your world? Have you ever heard of the word "plagiarism"? Are you aware of the MULTIPLE restrictions on FR against posters being able to QUOTE from media sources on FR? Do you suppose they know something about ownership of words that you don't?
FOFLMAO!
Ummmmmm.....I read your PDF. It didn't say, "Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses from the Bear Stearns deal"
Try again? Maybe give us the exact words that prove your claim?
You have the letter, show us the words. LOL!
So do you agree with the claim or not?
This one, "In the letter, Treasury agrees that the Fed can bill Treasury for any losses from the Bear Stearns deal."
Correct or not?
And the material from an outside source looks like this.
And your posts are so much doomer diarrhea that I go cross-eyed every time I see one of you data dumps.
Sorry I confused your source's claim for yours.
Now that that's out of the way, do you agree with it or not?
I get it, you posted something you disagree with. Clever. LOL!
The claim that wasn't yours. The claim that you didn't plagiarize.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plagiarism
http://mw4.m-w.com/dictionary/drone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism
He is packing it in and packing it up
And sneaking away and buggering up
And chickening out and pissing off home,
Yes, bravely he is throwing in the sponge.
well stated.
Try this, so you won't look so full of flummery, repeat after me: "I can't recall, I can't recall". Hey, it worked for the Clintons.
Where do you get your links? Foolmeonce.con?
Most people post a quotation from a fellow FReeper in italics.
Some *splat* or **double splat** with asterisks, but mostly it's italics
Now as an example in post #154 you quoted me, in italics like so: Null and void: "Translation: the tax payers will get stuck with the bill."
But then, typically, you attributed what I said to nicmarlo, and demanded that she defend my words that you put in her mouth.
I also note that although you quoted me by screen name, you somehow neglected to ping me. I'm certain that this is an oversight on your part, I wouldn't want to think that you were deliberately violating the rules of netiquette.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.