News   Jul 29, 2024
 157     0 
News   Jul 29, 2024
 310     0 
News   Jul 26, 2024
 1.6K     1 

Financial Crisis

We haven't cracked the top ten crash/corrections yet....

1932 86%
1937/38 49.1%
1906/07 48.5%
1929 47.9%
1919/21 46.6%
1901/03 46.1%
1973/74 45.1%
1939/42 40.4%
1916/17 40.1%
1932/33 37.5%

2008 33%
 
From Yahoo News:

Iceland teeters on the brink of bankruptcy

By JANE WARDELL, AP Business Writer Tue Oct 7, 3:40 PM ET

REYKJAVIK, Iceland - This volcanic island near the Arctic Circle is on the brink of becoming the first "national bankruptcy" of the global financial meltdown.
ADVERTISEMENT

Home to just 320,000 people on a territory the size of Kentucky, Iceland has formidable international reach because of an outsized banking sector that set out with Viking confidence to conquer swaths of the British economy — from fashion retailers to top soccer teams.

The strategy gave Icelanders one of the world's highest per capita incomes. But now they are watching helplessly as their economy implodes — their currency losing almost half its value, and their heavily exposed banks collapsing under the weight of debts incurred by lending in the boom times.

"Everything is closed. We couldn't sell our stock or take money from the bank," said Johann Sigurdsson as he left a branch of Landsbanki in downtown Reykjavik.

The government had earlier announced it had nationalized the bank under emergency laws enacted to deal with the crisis.

"We have been forced to take decisive action to save the country," Prime Minister Geir H. Haarde said of those sweeping new powers that allow the government to take over companies, limit the authority of boards, and call shareholder meetings.

A full-blown collapse of Iceland's financial system would send shock waves across Europe, given the heavy investment by Icelandic banks and companies across the continent.

One of Iceland's biggest companies, retailing investment group Baugur, owns or has stakes in dozens of major European retailers — including enough to make it the largest private company in Britain, where it owns a handful of stores such as the famous toy store Hamley's.

Kaupthing, Iceland's largest bank and one of those whose share trading was suspended last week to stop a huge sell-off, has also invested in European retail groups.

Thousands of Britons have accounts with Icesave, the online arm of Landsbanki that regulators said was likely to file for bankruptcy after it stopped permitting customers to withdraw money from their accounts Tuesday.

To try to wrest control of the spiraling situation, the government also loaned $680 million to Kaupthing to tide it over and said it was negotiating a $5.4 billion loan from Russia to shore up the nation's finances.

The speed of Iceland's downfall in the week since it announced it was nationalizing Glitnir bank, the country's third largest, caught many by surprise despite warnings that it was the "canary in the coal mine" of the global credit squeeze.

Famous for its cod fishing industry, geysers, moonscape and the Blue Lagoon, Iceland was the site of the Cold War showdown in which Bobby Fischer of the United States defeated Boris Spassky of the Soviet Union in 1972 for the world chess championship. Last year, Iceland won the U.N.'s "best country to live in" poll, with its residents deemed the most contented in the world.

No more.

Despite sunny skies Tuesday after three days of unseasonably cold weather, Reykjavik's mood remained grim — cafes were half-empty, real estate agents sat idle, and retailers reported few sales.

"I'm really starting to get worried now. Everything is bad news. I don't know what's happening," said retiree Helga Jonsdottir as she headed to a supermarket.

Icelanders are also beginning to question how a relative few were able to generate the disproportionate wealth — and associated debt — that Haarde has warned puts the entire country at risk of bankruptcy.

Iceland's reinvention from the poor cousin in Europe to one of the region's wealthiest countries dates to the deregulation of the banking industry and the creation of the domestic stock market in the mid-1990s.

Those free market reforms turned Iceland from a conservative, inward-looking country to one of a new generation of internationally educated young businessmen and women who were determined to give Iceland a modern profile far beyond its fishing base.

Entrepreneurs become its greatest export, as banks and companies marched across Europe and their acquisition wallets were filled by a stock market boom and a well-funded pension system. Among the purchases were the iconic Hamley's toy store and the West Ham soccer team.

Back home, the average family's wealth soared 45 percent in half a decade and gross domestic product rose at around 5 percent a year.

But the whole system was built on a shaky foundation of foreign debt.

The country's top four banks now hold foreign liabilities in excess of $100 billion, debts that dwarf Iceland's gross domestic product of $14 billion.

Those external liabilities mean the private sector has had great difficulty financing its debts, such as the more than $5.25 billion racked up by Kaupthing in five years to help fund British deals.

Iceland is unique "because the sheer size of its financial sector puts it in a vulnerable situation, and its currency has always been seen as a high risk and high yield," said Venla Sipila, a senior economist at Global Insight in London.

The krona is suffering in part from a withdrawal by a falloff in what are called carry trades — where investors borrow cheaply in a country with low rates, such as Japan, and invest in a country where returns, and often risks, are higher.

After watching the free-fall for several days, the Central Bank of Iceland stepped in Tuesday to fix the exchange rate of the currency at 175 — a level equal to 131 krona against the euro.

Haarde said he believed the measures had renewed confidence in the system. He also was critical of the lack of an Europe-wide response to the crisis, saying Iceland had been forced to adopt an "every-country-for-itself" mentality.

He acknowledged that Iceland's financial reputation was likely to suffer from both the crisis and the response despite strong fundamentals such as the fishing industry and clean and renewable energy resources.

As regular Icelanders begin to blame the government and market regulators, Haarde said the banks had been "victims of external circumstances."

Richard Portes of the London Business School agreed, noting the banks were well-capitalized and had not bought any of the toxic debt that has brought down banks elsewhere.

"I believe it is absolutely wrong to say these banks were reckless," said. "Quite the contrary. They were hugely unlucky."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081007...nd_meltdown;_ylt=AjyxkCPTU5WG_dsimUmgYH6s0NUE

AoD
 
I don't watch Fox or 'The View' so I don't know what you are referring to. The point I have made repeatedly is that the crisis is not a left/right policy issue. It is a good/bad policy issue. There have been folks on the left who have supported policy that has worked to counter stability (giving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac free reign to do anything). And folks on the right who have supported reduced regulation....lower capital requirements, lower credit standards, etc. Thus, everyone is to blame. You are being rather dense in reducing my statements to mere blanket support of Republican policy or a criticsm of affordable home ownership.




In this situation it's not just that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made homeownership affordable (nobody is criticizing that goal) it's that they went overboard and let uncreditworthy individuals buy homes they could not afford. I have said repeatedly that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should be nationalized and become state owned enterprises, just like CMHC. That's the only way to ensure that they achieve their goal of assisting poor families without lowering their standards. So arguing that these companies should not be privately operated makes me an ideologue who watches 'The View' watching and gets his talking points from Fox? And here I was thinking that I was supporting a rather left wing idea of nationalizing a key sector of the finance industry....



I strongly support good regulation. I just don't support stupid ones. The best regulations ensure a smoothly operating market and avoid distortions. I'll give you an example of bad regulation: Forcing companies to reveal to the public every detail of CEO salary packages. Sounds good in theory. It was highly backed by many labour advocates upset at the high wage differential between the CEO and the common worker. So what did companies do? Their boards moved to awarding stock options and other perks which could be concealed. So a policy that sought fairer wages ended up incentivizing the taking of risk. It also quite likely contributed to the current economic crisis. Is that the type of policy we want more of? Making policies hastily, based on crises and not thinking about the consequences leads to those kinds of situations.


Looks like you cannot give an example how the left helped cause the sub prime mortgage crisis. unless of course you think this is recognizable as evidence "There have been folks on the left who have supported policy that has worked to counter stability" I need to tell you, it's not.
 
I actually thought eFunds had a higher MER than I thought - so my unenthusiam is tempored a little. I am still building my list, but I would expect the MER to be from 0.20% to 0.50% at the high end of ETFs (probably higher in Canada. I am still building my list right now, but I know there is iShares, it redirects you to Canada - but then I go to Europe and finally back to the US site :p or if I rembered ahead of time I would just type us.ishares.com

Ok, I'm going to check out iShares.
 
Great the Trust our family invested in, mailed saying, you now owe them money.






I know its not Harper's fault, but Damn that man!!!
 
Ok, I'm going to check out iShares.

cacruden beat me to it !

ishares.ca and us.ishares.com

TD e-funds are still mutual funds, but with slightly lower MERs than their regular TD mutual funds. With e-funds, you are limited to placing orders online only - can't talk to mutual funds representatives.

ETFs allow for diversification just like MFs.
There's a plethora of categories.

You just have to determine your asset mix and how you much/frequent you may want to purchase since you cannot enroll in a monthly purchase plan, etc. so you have to be diligent about it.

As I previously noted, ETFs trade like stocks so you can place buy/sell/stop orders whenever you wish and even hedge your positions with options.
ETFs can be transacted via a discount brokerage account to minimize your commissions.

Good luck.

ps - forgot to mention others like DIA, QQQQ, IWM, XBD, TWM, QID, SDS, DXD, etc.
This may help you also:
http://www.tsx.com/en/pdf/ETF_Sector_Sheet.pdf
 
Looks like you cannot give an example how the left helped cause the sub prime mortgage crisis. unless of course you think this is recognizable as evidence "There have been folks on the left who have supported policy that has worked to counter stability" I need to tell you, it's not.

So pushing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to back mortgages largely on the basis of income and not credit worthiness is not a left wing construct. Or excusing paper work for those in low income areas is not a left wing idea? That's what I a mean when I say some on the left have supported poor policies. I am not blaming the whole crisis on the left here. But nor do I think it's entirely right to blame it on the right. How would people have reacted if Greenspan had left interest rates up there and pushed the economy into recession or possibly deflation? See what I mean? It's hard to blame someone. There are complex linkages in the economy and the law of unintended consequences have come home to roost. I have always disagreed with Bush's "ownership society" which was as bone headed as bringing democracy to Iraq. But we shouldn't forget that many liberals too loved that idea and saw it as a panacea to urban blight and poverty. The right fell for the same line of thought as well. And the herd charged for the cliff.....
 
My fear with the government throwing money around is that weak institutions will NOT FAIL. Recessions are bad for people, but are a necessary evil. They knock off weak uncompetitive companies and free up capital to invest in areas of strength. A recession every 7 years has some benefit. Problem is that this credit crisis could create a recession that is deeper and more destructive in nature. I hope we can avert the later - but not necessarily that confident.
 
My fear with the government throwing money around is that weak institutions will NOT FAIL. Recessions are bad for people, but are a necessary evil. They knock off weak uncompetitive companies and free up capital to invest in areas of strength. A recession every 7 years has some benefit. Problem is that this credit crisis could create a recession that is deeper and more destructive in nature. I hope we can avert the later - but not necessarily that confident.


I agree 110% ... it's the normal business cycle, which for some reason alot of people want to ignore.

Why reward incompetence and poor management by having the public coffers floating them ?

We've already dropped below my DOW 9,000 target for 2008 - kind of surprised by the rapid plunge. I think the DOW will have to hit 7,000 before things stabilize ... then it'll be pretty stagnant for awhile. :eek:
 
I agree 110% ... it's the normal business cycle, which for some reason alot of people want to ignore.

Why reward incompetence and poor management by having the public coffers floating them ?

We've already dropped below my DOW 9,000 target for 2008 - kind of surprised by the rapid plunge. I think the DOW will have to hit 7,000 before things stabilize ... then it'll be pretty stagnant for awhile. :eek:

Aren't there "circuit-breakers" that come into effect at a certain point? They'll freeze trading if things look really bad.
 

Back
Top