collateralized loans immediately then goldman sachs an issue called fetiches collateralized loan secured bonds to sell to european banks put them on their balance sheets and then six years from now they'll write the sort of aaa rated fed a back collateralized mortgage bond anymore i mean our banks being pretty sorry general and the bank year is plain mean we're bankrupt no you just haven't collateralized enough cheese this is the big problem in italy when other earthquake a lot of parmesan cheese was destroyed that's the collateral for the entire telling banking system that's the real tragedy going on there well the local joke in athens is that marfan popular bank which is part of marfan investment group there is a joke that m.i. g.e. which they referred to the company as it stands for money is gone now greek banks require thirty to fifty billion euros in bailout and this guy vege enough pulis denies any wrongdoing but his travails shed light on a factor largely overlooked in the narrative of the greek economic crisis which is now threatening to force athens out of the euro zone and unra

before that the rating agencies would require you to post collateral in market to market. this was the first one in which they rated the bonds and said, the cash flow from the underlying mortgages has to be able to be sufficient to cover the interest on the debt and that's the way all other securitizations were done after that. then in the 1980s we had the basel risk requirements. now, having deposit insurance lowered your capital requirement from what had been historically a market rate of 16% down to 8% and that's what bob always called banks have a dueling charter with fannie mae and freddie mac. but regulatory arbitrage cut it from 8% to 4%. beyond that if you securitized it, you could get the same cash flows down to only 2% capital. with your debt costs not going up, if you increase your leverage eight-fold, you return your increase. or you're magnifying with leverage. if you lose money, you will lose eight times as much money. the regulatory arbitrage was all there. we just took it to new heights in later years. basically the lessons from the 1980s private label secu

it puts increased pressure on the big bank earnings, and it could trigger a collateral call for each talking about morgan stanley as an example. when i interviewed citigroup's ceo, he pushed out all capital deployment for another year. he even pushed out any expectation of the company paying a dividends by telling me he will not even decide what to do about dividends until the end of this year. it will be at least 2013. then of course is the regulatory environment. many parts of dodd-frank are still being written as we speak, including the effort to try and define proprietary trading and ban it. i have said in the past, i do not believe they will be able to define it. it's very tough to define it, making this key aspect of the law impossible to enforce. but until that's actually sorted out and the banking sector actually understands and has a clear idea of where this regulatory environment goes, we could be watching these stocks as dead money regardless of what moody's does or doesn't do tonight. we are waiting on that downgrade. we were told it happens at 4 p.m. eastern. we'll be wa

we are aware, of course, of collateral damage, and there are places where there can be minimal collateral damage. armed rebels can fight and defend their own communities. it is a combination of things that need to be tried. i really believe that the discussion is not about intervention or non intervention. it is more about intervention or intervention light. this is what i think senator mccain pointed out when he said we are moving beyond the decision, moving forward. we need to realize that time is not on our side. for this reason, we should be speeding up. i want to briefly acknowledge the fact that we do have a couple of people that actually could help shed light on this. they do not come here often and i think their presence is very important. for all the problems about the division, actually, there is a lot of coordination also quietly that happens between all the different political factions. today we have in our midst a group of syrian opposition members. there is a group representing liberal independents. my colleague is from the national assembly, and we also have my colleague wh

blew up because they had no collateral current quite the opposite virtual security of no collateral all of the recent j.p. morgan's two billion dollars or ten billion dollar loss of the policy had to do a training securities that had no collateral they're just training thin air now i can't i can't totally blame barack obama because after all he gets all of his information from reading the new york times and the new york times or paul krugman and paul krugman is an academic who believes the multiplier effect of money even though makes absolutely no economic or academic or logical sense and he had bit of a dust up with paul recently i think basically had a bit of a debate he is continuing to be interviewed and outlets around the world as you are too steve but how does paul krugman survive his his ideology which is clearly completely corrupt. probably close he lives in little fantasy world of people who are white and call it theory but then there are a sickle school of economics is actually one of the most radical on all but i suspect they get receipt of armchair notions cinemark sharing y

world what is this but them the banks discovering that they actually hold a lot of counterfeit collateral a counterfeit assets they're not real and what are they doing they're passing it off to the governments on our behalf knowing full well that they hold counterfeit collateral and they're giving it to our governments look at the case of ireland well anglo-irish knew all of their collateral was bogus it was counterfeit they gave it to the irish people where is where are the twenty year sentences prison sentences are standing the groom why are they standing there group against counterfeiters rise up there used to be the bond vigilantes remember them they were the guys who were in the economy started to look shaky they would start dumping their bonds forcing interest rates up which would impose some discipline but they've all been bought off with the so-called quantitative easing program so the central banks the central planners have figured out oh you know what we can have these bond vigilantes any oxygen so we're going to buy all the bonds that we issue kind of like a dog eating its own

fortress balance sheet and i'm glad to hear you say we should take comfort that banks are more collateral liezed. but in saying so, one way to think about this is, i wonder what your views do you regret calling the efforts to require banks to hold more money, quote, un-american, end quote. today you site the balance sheet of your bank as a way to prevent against the challenges, yet you railed against us when we were trying to pursue greater capital lieization of these banks. >> i supported parts of regulation and reform. i supported higher capital and liquidity. we supported standardized derivatives going to clearinghouses. we supported a lot of the things that you requested. we did not fight everything. when i mentioned the anti-american thing, i was talking about between dodd-frank and boz l, things being skewed against american banks. and american banks can't have preferred stock like foreign banks can have. >> did you not specifically say as part of your un-american comment that the requirement for banks to hold more money was un-american? >> i did not. >> well, you know, i'd be happy

we are aware of collateral damage. there are places where air strikes can be carried out with minimal collateral damage. the rest is by arming rebels they can defend and fight the wrong community. it's a combination of things that need to be tried. i believe the case right now about intervention. the discussion is not about intervention or not intervention. it's more intervention or intervention light. i think this is what senator mccain pointed out when he said we are moving beyond -- they have moved a little bit forward. you need to realize time isn't on our side. the partitioning is taking place. for this reason we should speed up the scenarios. we do have a couple of people that actually could help shed light on this. there are -- they don't come here often. i think their presence is very important because it also shows something about the syrian opposition. for all the talk about the divisions and problems within the snc and so forth, actually there is a lot of coordination. also that happens between the different

a purchase of real estate will count as collateral. pretty much, at wells fargo, we have this process streamlined. i am the front end. after i review the alone, i put it together, put it into underwriting. they will review the file and see if there is a loan file. then you have the of loan) who works with you through the end. so the average time for a 7a loan, which is my focus, about 35, 45 days. if there are other things that need to be looked at, 45 days to 60 days. we are preferred lending partner. we are able to approve a loan up front, close the loan, and then we go back to get the guarantee. i do not have the exact numbers. i should. i do not know how many loans we did last year. it was a lot. i know we were the first lender -- i do not know, historically -- mark, maybe you can help me. wells fargo is the largest in dollar amount by the country and in california, and bay area. we are trying to do our part. we are easy to work with. i have been doing this for four years now. i am pretty good where i can look of something and real

. -- and accepted the collateral. were you aware of the effort by senior risk management to see compliance confirmation from mf global? >> not the time, i wasn't. >> why did jpmorgan chase relent and allow the transfer? >> i think the transfer had been made and we were doing a follow-up letter which was not required. we were asking them to make sure they had done the right things, you are saying that even though you had placed some of global on debit alert and you ltd. -- you increase the collateral requirements, when they ask you to transfer the money, there was no conversation about whether this money was segregated funds? you just transferred head? >> they transferred it to us. >> it was within your transport. >> it was covered from the prior day. >> the real question here -- you guys were concerned about mf global and you know the industry better than anybody sitting up here. you knew what was going down with mf global because you put them on the alert. they have requested money to be pulled out of your facility t

so how about selling forward that i mean to be worth more than the collateral when they could credit default swap well let's talk about christine lagarde are tax free i.m.f. salaries inflated the international monetary fund has long been considered a good place to work salaries are high and benefits are plentiful ask christine legarde who's getting a pay package worth about five hundred fifty thousand dollars in her new role as managing director the guard's pay is drawn some scrutiny to the i.m.f. perks and not for the first time critics have complained for decades that the funds employees and other counterparts at the world bank are allowed to live large at taxpayer expense in one thousand nine hundred eighty eight u.s. representative spencer baucus in alabama republican objected to increasing funding for the i.m.f. by reciting a list of perks given to the funds employees we are asking the u.s. taxpayer in this funding requests to reimburse the employees of the i.m.f. for income taxes for private school costs for tuition and not only that but for salaries higher than those paid by t

they moved on collateral today.er that the big central banks are not prepared to come in and massively inject liquidity. when we were speaking on friday, i thought if the greek election went the wrong way that on sunday night they would all be out and they would be massively pumping liquidity. they didn't do that and now the market has to focus back on the growth dynamic and that of course is negative. that would be my take. >> real quick. three things. i agree with you. no quantitative easing. let's shoot fireworks. i agree with anna schwartz. it doesn't do a lot. second issue in terms of being constructive, you know, i understand where you are going. the last thing i'll leave you with is i heard the same thing said before. bear stearns before lehman and being constructive leads to destructive ends. i say be realistic. we didn't make this mess. it's our job to report it. you can't wallpaper over termites. back to you. >> i think that's a good point in terms of the expectations because it was almost as if you wanted

>> number one, more collateral. morgan stanley has a lot of collateral. the other two issues that are really out there are structured derivatives. some of the counterparties want to slow that down. number three is clients. that all said, i think it's important to recognize that these are earnings issues, not balance sheet issues for the company. >> deborah, fred is right. what is it it for the stock? is there more to come? >> you have seen this stock get beaten up. it's been slapped down. it's lost about 50% of its value. if it does get that downgrade, you're going to see it get spanked again so it could drop down to some of the financial crisis lows, 10.05. >> what about the other financials? if morgan declines that much, does it drag the others with it? >> the whole group will probably get downgraded so they are all in it together. i think he's right, morgan has made a lot of changes and they are certainly not taking the risk that some of their other friends are taking but they are all going to get thrown out together. unfortunately, they are probably g

they want there to be assets and collateral. we do not need collateral. credit scores, we do not. >> reporter: because collateral is not required interest rate are 15%, higher than for most small business loans. their program is work. grameen reports a default rate around 1%. >> i don't think anybody else gave them the opportunity our believed in them and trust them that they were going to take the money and make it work for hem and make it prosper for them and their family. >> reporter: the average loan is $1500, small change to a bank, a lifeline for those fighting poverty. >> o'donnell: ahead, china's elite go golf crazy, giving the game new drive. that story is next. [ slap! ] [ slap! slap! slap! ] [ male announcer ] your favorite foods fighting you? fight back fast with tums. calcium rich tums goes to work in seconds. nothing works faster. ♪ tum tum tum tum tums [ male announcer ] you get in the zone long before the race. get your head right. and focus. on race day you don't leave anything to chance. ♪ get set every morning with gillette fusion progl

is now lowering its collateral guidelines to be able to borrow. and not have to depend upon the ratings agencies because ratings agencies are lowering the. ratings of all the sovereign debt in europe as in the euro zone so you can do stuff like that and keep this whole ball rolling so i don't make those three and then the whole thing is over i think that you know it's going to continue on like this for a long time yet you put it as extend and pretend measures so when someone like george soros comes out with their own plan is he operating under his own kind of pretend they can't extend do. i'm saying measures that his kind of policy unofficial policy i think what's happening is that you know what he's saying basically he's making a very dark. sense that either you do the right thing now or you know it could be calamity really you can extend and pretend that's the middle route the right thing to do would be what i'm saying you should do and if you don't do that then bad things will happen or in reality this is the route in the middle where you can s

on the books of these banks so now their asset prices are going up the collaterals up they can make loans against that so they're more winning on that as well so once again germany wins heads they went elsewhere loses i don't see any major here i don't see how germany loses losing i mean you say the germans are quirky people and whatnot you know but they nevertheless have a long history of being able to finesse their way through these crises in one way or another and come out in relatively good shape so this to me it appears once again that there is there that people are underestimating what the terms are up to i think you are quite correct about the property prices collation in germany but it's foreign body it's like capital a second thing about that is that's going to obviously be depended on germany continuing as a safe haven but if the debt that we're talking about takes place which you're talking about takes place germany's debt to g.d.p. same if they create these eurozone bones then the total debt in the eurozone is about ten and a half trillion now this is you. we split that

will reiterate that i do not think the superior court ruling on this issue provides any sort of collateral. i think there is no probity between parties. i think you folks are a completely different body, and you can decide this issue for yourselves. we believe the superior court wrongly decides the issue. i submit. >> having reviewed the brief, and having reviewed the video, i think the video is admissible. i think that, under the case law, it does qualify as an excited utterance. i think it also could be admissible to indicate physical injury and describe it. i welcome the views of my fellow commissioners on the admissibility of the lopez video. commissioner liu? commissioner liu: i agree we are not bound by the superior court. but i also agree that, in reviewing the video and the case authority cited in the brief, that it does meet the criteria for the perce exception under evidence code 1240. she was cheerful, emotional, and holding in her speech. i do not think it is very different from what was described in the case cited by the mayor's office. >> just from the perspective of a lay pe

he will be released if he can pay a bondsman $2,600 plus collateral. >> 2,600.just hung up. >> barnes next reaches out to a family member. >> okay, well, can you just call my dad and tell him to look for someone who has collateral. i really appreciate it. i'll check back in with you tomorrow. all right. i need somebody with collateral. >> until he makes bail barnes will reside in one of the jail's low-security housing units. but some inmates pose a greater threat to security. they're housed in the confinement unit where they're locked down 23 hours a day. today 180 will be moved to a new confinement unit and staff is taking an abundance of caution. >> good morning. today we'll relocate the inmates from 3 delta to 1 delta concluding the housing of the housing for refurbishment. we will be moving our most problematic inmates today. as you know the majority of inmates down there have histories of assaulting us and are disciplinary management problems. you will have binder chains available to you unless they require a box chain. there's about ten of them down there

>> i do not want to be in a position where people are trying to set up impeachment on some collateral issue, some irrelevant issue the commission has already determined is irrelevant. >> while i certainly want to get this record right, we spent a lot of time on this. i am hesitant to open the door to revisiting rulings we made, and the notion of going back through all the declarations at the end of the testimony is not something i would support. i do not know if you had anything particular in mind, about things we have excluded. >> i did not necessarily have anything in particular. you used the magic phrase that all trial lawyers worry about. that is "opens the door." when i read some of the statements that were made in ms. lopez's declaration, it does raise a question in my mind. they are putting that document in. we have ruled earlier on some of the subject matter. if counsel for the sheriff puts it in their document, the it in their document, the classic argument is that has

what do you make of that argument whether collateral damages is up for debate i mean obviously we've launched strikes and we've killed more than we set out to more people have died and more damage has been done that we had desired or sought but look at this whole issue right now is problematic inside the united states we say we're killing all of these dangerous people and yet more and more dangerous people seem to emerge in other words when you make a dent by sort of targeting people from a distance and killing them so i think we are we're actually cultivating lots of enemies as opposed to necessarily eliminating the ball and the second point is who are these people we don't really know you and i can't talk about it we're not privileged to that kind of information do these people represent an immediate threat to the united states and its interests i don't know but i have suspicions that in many cases if these people were not killed it wouldn't make a great deal of difference to us our problems in the united states had to do with our failure to secure our borders our failures to deal