I'm still waiting for your explanation or links to show where you think the money comes from???? I have provided you with links regarding how fractional reserve lending works and you blow them off and don't even bother to read them because you would have to admit you are wrong. The term itself makes it quite clear that they can lend beyond their actual reserves, if they couldn't it would be called 'full reserve lending' which is a different system that is in use in some other countries..... Ohhhh, I see... They are too heavily regulated to loan themselves money, but not not so aggressively reagualted such that they can "create money out of thin air" as they deem necessary.
And dozens of times you have been wrong. Go shout it from the rooftops if you like, it is still wrong. If your logic makes you believe 2 separate entities ruled by 2 different acts are identical or one set of regs applies to the other you may need a brain scan.As for the zero reserve policy in Canada, as I have indicated literally dozens of times now, the BOC has a reserve requirement and if they deal with the institutional banks in any way via loans, then by extension, the institutional banks have that policy heaped upon them indirectly.
Yeah, right back at ya. You haven't backed up anything you say and want to launch personal attacks to prove you are right. What, do you work in govt??BTW - I highlighted one of the important distinction for ya... Now, it is up to you to apply some critical analysis in working through the logic on this.... What the hell am I saying; you haven't been wearing your hockey helmet consistently... You have no logic.
As the questions are related so are the answers. AIG worked as an insurer of debt, somewhat like CMHC, and had heavy liabilities in the derivative markets on bad debt. As the economy failed and huge CMFs (thats consolidated mortgage funds if you don't know) started to go bad AIG become on the hook not only to pay out losses on the debts but also pay out on the derivatives that were placed on the funds. It became quite clear very rapidly that there was no way for AIG to do this and remain solvent as they had backed too many bad debts that were falsely given AAA or AA ratings and had taken on excessive risk from the derivatives placed on them.Why did AIG almost go titters (technically, they were bankrupt)?
What was AIG's primary role in the real estate market? (related to Q1).
No, I have a clear understanding. AIG along with the banks decided to play games in a system of Vegas style gambling on derivatives and debt and rolled snake-eyes. They lost everything and then got the govt to put those losses on those they gambled against. It was the biggest rip-off of the people in history and they managed to get the govt to help them do it.Generate a comprehensive understanding of the issue and things will become clear. Your biggest problem is that you read words on a page, apply your own narrow interpretation and consider it to be unrelated to any of the other multiple variables in the equation.
Another personal attack to back up your claims????Actually, your biggest problem is recurring head trauma that could easily be prevented by wearing your hockey helmet, but we know that you won't go that far in wearing this protective head gear..
Sure, here is a slightly older article. Most estimates now put the number at around 500-700 billion.Got a link to this, or is it your imagination at it again?
Canada's 75 Billion Dollar Bank Bailout
I am sure you will try and blow this one off too and ignore the direct quotes from Harper and Flaherty but I will give it too you anyway. More than you do to back up what you say.
Wrong again, but keep up the personal attacks thinking they validate what you say.Of course you believe that Nick.. You despise anyone or any group that accomplishes and "has" more than you... That is the socialist in you which envies accomplishment and shuns individual responsibility.
I despise anyone or group that mismanages their business to the point of bankruptcy and then tricks the govt into making them solvent again. I despise a system that allows the people who mismanaged these businesses to receive multi-million dollar bonuses from the taxpayer for doing it. I despise people who lie, cheat and steal through manipulation of the system and govt. I despise people who believe all the lies and buy into the bullsh*t excuses put forward by the banks too.
If someone works hard and is productive and gets more than me I'm just fine with it. As for personal responsibility, I have plenty and live up to it, I have worked hard my whole life to get what I have and support my family. Maybe you should turn some personal responsibility on the people who bankrupted the banking system too.