BACKDOC: YES, THEY ARE STARTING TO ADMIT THE GREAT REPRICING IS COMING! HEE HEE
THEY KNOW WHAT WE KNOW! DOC IMO
Thunderhawk: Backdoc Alert
Ted Cruz: Why a stock 'crash will be coming'
The Federal Reserve 's excessively easy monetary policies are "playing games with money" and are an ineffective way to "juice the system," GOP presidential candidate Ted Cruz told CNBC on Friday. Such actions "create bubbles," he said.
"The Fed has, for those with assets, driven up stock prices," he said in a wide-ranging " Squawk Box " interview
"But that's not built on anything real. It's not built on an increase in the intrinsic value of those assets," he said. "That's just playing games with money, which means a crash will be coming."
Cruz said Fed policy should not target a strong or a weak dollar. He said the U.S. needs monetary policy stability to end the dollar "roller coaster."
"I think we're far better having a rules-based monetary policy, ideally with some tie to gold, so that you have a stable dollar," he said. "So you know when you're investing a dollar today, you know that the dollar is going to keep a consistent worth."
Cruz also said he believes Wall Street firms fill an "important and valuable" role, "providing capital for new enterprises, helping the economic system operate."
"But it shouldn't be the case that Wall Street plays in rigged casinos, 'heads I win, tales I win,' where Wall Street can gamble with other people's money and the government bails them out if they lose," said Cruz, whose wife, Heidi Cruz, worked at Goldman Sachs.
"If you're taking risks, you should bare the consequences of the risk. And the taxpayer shouldn't be on the hook to bail you out," the Texas senator said.
BACKDOC: THE FED IS SUCKING UP DOLLARS OUT OF THE GLOBAL ECONOMY IN PREPARATION OR TRANSITION TO THE GLOBAL NEW REALITY! AS THESE COUNTRIES SPEND THEIR RESERVES THEY AREN'T BEING REPLACED AS EVIDENCE OF EGYPT HAVING TO DEVALUE ITS CURRENCY ONCE IT RAN DRY!
WITH CHINA STARTING TUESDAY WITH ITS' GOLD EXCHANGE MORE DOLLARS WILL SOON FIND THEIR WAY HOME! DOC IMO
Thunderhawk: Backdoc Alert
How 315 Billion Petrodollars Evaporated
The world’s top oil exporters are burning through their petrodollar assets at an accelerating pace, increasing the pressure to reach a deal to freeze production to bolster prices.
The 18 nations set to gather in Doha on Sunday to discuss a production freeze have spent $315 billion of their foreign-exchange reserves -- about a fifth of their total -- since the oil slump started in November 2014, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. In the last three months of 2015, reserves fell nearly $54 billion, the largest quarterly drop since the crisis started.
The petrodollar burn has consequences beyond the oil nations, affecting international fund managers like Aberdeen Asset Management Plc and global currencies markets. Oil nations have traditionally held their reserves in U.S. Treasuries and other liquid securities. Nonetheless, the impact in credit markets has been muted as central banks continue to buy debt.
"We expect 2016 to be yet another painful year for most of the oil states," said Abhishek Deshpande, oil analyst at Natixis SA in London.
The gathering in Doha will comprise both OPEC and non-OPEC states, though any deal to boost prices will probably be largely cosmetic as countries are already pumping nearly at record levels.
In a letter inviting countries to the Doha meeting, Qatar Energy Minister Mohammed Al Sada said oil countries need to stabilize the market in "the interest of a healthier world economy as the present low price is seen to be benefiting no one."
Saudi Arabia accounts for nearly half of the decline in foreign-exchange reserves among oil producers, with $138 billion -- or 23 percent of its total -- followed by Russia, Algeria, Libya and Nigeria. In the final three months of last year, Saudi Arabia burned through $38.1 billion, the biggest quarterly reduction in data going back to 1962.
More from Bloomberg.com: Asia’s Richest Man Is Building Chicago’s Priciest Penthouse
The oil slump started in November 2014 when the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, led by the Saudis, decided to fight for market share -- and bury U.S. producers -- rather than cut production to support prices as it had done in the past. The policy sent Brent crude, the global oil benchmark, down from an annual average of $111 a barrel in 2013 to an average of just $35 so far this year. The plunge forced producers to tap their rainy day funds.
Fitch Ratings on Tuesday lowered the credit rating of Saudi Arabia to AA-, following similar steps already taken by Standard & Poor’s as well as Moody’s Investors Service. Fitch said that Riyadh would face large fiscal deficits this year and a "large share of the government’s financing needs will be funded by disposing of foreign financial assets."
More from Bloomberg.com: Goldman's Blankfein Demands Deepest Cost Cuts in Years
The International Monetary Fund forecast that Saudi Arabia’s current-account shortfall will equal 10.2 percent of its gross domestic product this year, the most since 1998, when oil prices tumbled to $10 a barrel. Likewise, the United Arab Emirates is facing a balance of payments deficit this year for the first time since reliable statistics start in 1980, according to the IMF.
The total drop in petrodollar assets isn’t possible to calculate as some Middle East countries, including Kuwait and the U.A.E., don’t disclose timely data about their sovereign wealth funds.
Brent crude futures, which sank to a 12-year low in January, have climbed 30 percent since Saudi Arabia, Russia, Qatar and Venezuela reached a preliminary agreement to freeze output in February. This week, Russia said it sees a deal to freeze oil output as possible when it meets other producers, regardless of whether Iran -- which has said it plan to boost output -- joins the deal.
BACKDOC: WITH A QUADRILLION OF DEBT AMONG THE 5 BIGGEST BANKS THEY NEED TO TAKE IT SERIOUS! WHY ARE THEY BRINGING IT UP NOW? HEE HEE DOC IMO
Thunderhawk: Backdoc Alert
Why Banks Should Take Living Wills Seriously
U.S. banks are safer today than they were in 2007, but not yet as safe as they should be. For the second time in two years, regulators have found that some of the country's biggest banks can't adequately explain how they could go under -- should it come to that -- in an orderly fashion, at no cost to taxpayers, and without destabilizing the wider financial system.
The Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 told large financial institutions to draw up "living wills" -- plans for dismantling the enterprises if they go bust. This was seen as an extra safeguard, beyond requiring banks to pass stress tests and finance their lending with adequate capital. Stress tests can't cover every possibility, the thinking went, and even a well-capitalized bank can fail.
If that were to happen, its bankruptcy ought to cause as little damage as possible.
Banks have struggled to comply.
In 2014, the Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. sent the living wills back for more work. The regulators announced their judgment of that work this week. While noting some improvement, they found faults in all of the revised plans that eight systemically important U.S. banks filed in mid-2015. (Citigroup's plan, despite "shortcomings," was provisionally approved.) Five of the wills were deemed "not credible," which allows the regulators to impose changes -- including requiring more capital and even forcibly shrinking the banks -- if the deficiencies are not made good.
In judging these plans, one issue is whether banks have sufficient cash and other liquid assets to keep their businesses running while they are wound down or sold. Some experts believe that the needed liquidity could amount to hundreds of billions of dollars, as short-term creditors demand their money back and derivatives counterparties seek more collateral. Another question, even harder to judge, is whether the banks have staffed and organized themselves in such a way that this process would be well-managed, rather than causing panic.
Case by case, it's hard for investors to assess the plans, because only a small portion is made public. For the same reason, it's hard to know whether the regulators are being too demanding, as some banks argue, or not demanding enough. A valid complaint about Dodd-Frank is that it overcomplicated the regulatory system -- and one of the main reasons for demanding adequate capital is that other parts of the system could then be made simpler and less onerous.
Nonetheless, extra capital doesn't guarantee a bank against failure, and regulators need to consider what might happen in the worst and possibly unforeseen case. Ambitious, enterprising bankers want to concentrate on growing their businesses. They'd prefer not to think about winding them down. Bearing in mind the harm that a failing big bank can cause, regulators are right to insist.
Walkingstick: Urgent: The World Bank is considering to suspend financial aid to the Iraqi government because of the confusion made in the House of Representatives
Fri, 15 Apr 2016 19:40:11
BAGHDAD - observer newshead of the IMF mission in Iraq , Christian Gooch , said Friday that the fund is considering to suspend financial aid to the Iraqi government because of confusion happening in the House.
He said Gooch in apress statement, that an agreement is reached during the meetings that knot in Washington April / May, and between Gooch said that "Iraq will receive under the agreement to finance theestimated $ 15 billion , a third of the international Monetary Fund and the rest from international institutions and other donors."