Well produced video! But it's simplistic to blame the demise of these companies purely on speculators... Bear & Lehman were both stuck with vast quantities of worthless mortgage paper and were leveraged up to their eyeballs... that was the root problem. Shorters knew this & exploited it for huge gain. If more investors had seen thru their accounting skullduggery & shorted them sooner, maybe they wouldn't have gotten themselves into such dire straits in the 1st place.
Interesting, since the troubles began in the middle east we have suddenly been getting Al Jazeera on our satellite network. Today they announce the despicable Hedge funds in London are speculating on commodities such as food like RICE, WHEAT, CORN. They could well starve nations if I follow your information correctly. This must be stopped on a worldwide basis. By the way loved your video, been trying to follow this mess.
I have a few questions for you. Where does the housing securities fraud fit into this? Isn't that what these hedge funds exploited? Also, why would they want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg? It would do hedge fund managers no good to destroy the financial system they leech off. Finally, I once read that a transaction fee imposed on all hedge funds' transactions would stop them dead in their tracks and raise a good deal of revenue. Is that a good ideal?
3:36 - No exaggeration, I was watching this video all alone, and when that first picture slid in from the side, I actually screamed out "THAT'S A HOUSE??"
Wouldn't this be considered terrorism? A hand full of men can bring down the worlds largest financial system and do it in plain sight and the government looks the other way, who is to blame the guys who took down the system or the government who let them.
Excuse me for a moment, but if the gentlemen you mention are indeed responsible for stealing billions of dollars from investors, destroying the economy and costing thousands of jobs then... Why aren’t they dead? Serious question...
Most American's cannot comprehend any of this. It is easier to believe they destroyed the economy from overextending themselves. The country has been economically raped. I think there is going to be another "crisis" and another bailout next year inolving mortgage backed securities. "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office" Aesop
Unfortunately, this is over most American's heads. It is easier to just blame homeowners for not saving enought money and "buying homes they couldn't afford" The country was looted and they completely got away with it. In fact they are still looting and we will soon see another "crisis" that will require another bailout. "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office" --Aesop
hail the triumph of capitalism,the socialists are ruining this nation ,they are eroding the freedom of the capitalist to do what they do best........it is not a sustainable system......unavoidably corrupt to its core
As you say "banks operate on -10% capital reserves", that too is naked short selling. I cannot loan someone money I do not have, the only way that the banks can is because government 'guarantees them'. When the reality is that government, like the banks, have virtually no capital, when they 'guarantee' the banks, they are forced to print the money used to back up the total short position.
Leading to inflation, aka, stealing money from everyone who owns fiat currency.
@corruptiblelogistics I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theory of the fractional reserve system but it sure is a sub-optimal arrangement. Cobbled together from several pragmatic steps and using a lot of strings and spaghetti wires to control this behemoth. It seems some people do occasionally game the system successfully but overall, it has served progress of humanity well. To be sure, take a look at any developing country with few loans in their economy.
This video is offensive to me. It should not be a surprise that when companies are insolvent, they go bankrupt. Dick Fuld (CEO of Lehman) needed to sell divisions of his company to raise cash. He shopped around, but all the Private Equity firms/other banks gave him lowball offers for his assets as Fuld had zero negotiating power. Fuld did nothing and they went bankrupt due to overleveraging with crappy assets.
Using the logic of short selling is bad, why don't we kick it up a notch and force everybody to buy stock in insolvent banks. Unbelievable. The problem we have is that we built too many houses and took on too much debt. And when everybody tried to sell their homes and deleverage, liquidy/home prices plummeted. It'll take 5 more years (at least) to get us out of this mess. At present all we have are empty homes that took a lot of resources to build but now nobody will buy. To blame hedge funds
completely misses the point. That's like blaming the mailman for delivering bad news. The hedge funds made it clear that we screwed up. And they are right.
Since companies can pledge their own shares as security for loans, why not take the step of banning companies from pledging securities of their own company preventing banks from calling the loans. Wouldn't that solve the problem?
@InvestingToday I suspect that would have benefited the banks (Bear and Lehman) damaged by this attack. But it wouldn't have helped the many non-finance sector companies targeted by manipulative naked shorting over the years, where the process often persisted for very long periods of time. If any good came of the collapse it was jarring the SEC into action, forcing them to finally enforce prohibitions on a practice that was already illegal.
writerjudd: Wonderful video! Thank you! However, I must agree (sort of) with @Investing Today.
Short selling -- even naked shorts -- CANNOT bring down a company, UNLESS the company's working capital is dependent upon the price of its stock holdings.
Typically, that can only happen a company borrows money by using the prices of its own shares as collateral.
I'm a freshman in highschool and quite proud I understood about any of that, nice video even though a lot of it doesn't directly apply to me I'm honestly glad I watched it
@jimsutube123 that's the problem. full disclosure of who makes these types of transactions wasn't required. BUT as the poster of this video was saying only the hedge funds were in a position to be ABLE to do it (that we know of) all that's needed is 2 things. 1. A whole heck of alot of cash to pay the fee for the put and 2. a way to keep trades from being able to be completed (makign the IOU shares and thus to many share "holders")
Microeconomics classes have left at a bit of a loss here.
I understand that having a massive supply boost would drive down price. With that increase in shares, I assume the company still is paying out to each of them accordingly to percent (even the false shares?) but unless there is a minimum dividend which vastly exceeds the new one, I do not see how this leads to bankruptcy.
Also, how would short term profits come about? They are dead. I can only think of long-term profits (rival companies).
@Out4Blood4CA bankruptcy does not result from a dividend, but from the fact that Lehman and Bear had to use their cash reserves to pay down short-term loan balances for which they'd used their shares as collateral (in order to bring their collateral ratios back in line). This made them insolvent, which means bankrupt to a bank.
And I'm sorry but I don't understand the second part of your question (re: short v. long-term profits).
I'm not a writer and by no means am I good with words when it comes to more complicated topics such as this one, and on top of that I do not fully understand this one. Is there any help you can give with the actual words used in the letter?
@sJeGaJn to be completely honest, this doesn't matter as much these days since the passage of the FinReg legislation in June. Much more important now is a letter to your Rep. insisting that FinReg be amended such that the SEC can no longer claim it is exempt them from many Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The SEC is trying to be even less transparent and accountable and we cannot let that happen.
These have been great, but I still don't get it. Bear and Lehman had rich, powerful people behind them as well. And they failed. I also don't understand how the failure of two companies, no matter how big, can cause a global financial crisis. And finally, as someone else has posted, I don't understand why these transactions aren't traceable and prosecuteable. Thanks for your explanation of the Michael Moore thing; that bothered me too.
@toddzilla40 Banks lend each other large amounts of money. If bank A owes bank B but A suddenly goes bankrupt, some of B's cash goes with it. When banks operate on ~10% capital reserves, it doesn't take much to go insolvent, forcing surviving banks to hold on to their cash and make many fewer loans. Without credit, economic growth halts, which leads to recession (or worse).
@toddzilla40 They never explained how exactly Hedge funds benefit from ruining companies. Driving stock down make sense only if you can buy it undervalued and make profit. If the company is gone for good, stock is worthless.
@ssmusic214 the part your missing is in part 1, the section on "Puts"
short example: trader A thinks a $200 stock will drop, so he pays a fee for the right to sell 500 shares (i belive the naked part of this is if he only had 100 shares) at a $175.on a specific day (and here's the important part) REGARDLESS of what it's trading at at the time.
if the price goes up Trader A is just out the fee he paid. if the stock goes down to 50 he can still sell his shares @ $175
@ssmusic214 two extra things to consider, 1. when the "put" is up THAT"S when they get their money. 2. since the stock isn't worth that much at the time the company needs to give up it's cash reserves to pay the differance and that shift in the fundamentals can crash the faith in the stock alone.. ESPECIALLY on a scale this wide.
the premise is there. so how do we deal with the problem? is there anything the normal everyday citizien who doen'st use stocks can do to prevent this? or are we just sitting here, ready to let it happen again?
Uh, weren't these companies worthless because they had gorged themselves on packaged junk mortgages, and because they had sold way more insurance than they had cash for?
This short selling is just a parallel scam that happened to reveal that the companies were worthless to begin with? Or am I missing the point?
It is time to start thinking for yourselves. Almost everything dealing with paper assets is being run buy the same players as ALWAYS. Wall street. The markets are, and always have been a gamble. Even if you could bring these gentlemen into a courtroom, you and I both already know the outcome. It's as if someone has pushed you into the river and you're worrying about who pushed you rather than swimming to safety . Protect yourself. Start purchasing some tangible assets.
@5767ziegler The opposite of "wow" would probably be "mom". Anyway, you are one of several commenters to express concern over my request that viewers help call Michael Moore's attention to this problem. I will tell you what I've told the others: I'm no leftist, nor much a fan of Michael Moore's. But he was making a movie about the collapse and requested input. I'll never ask about one's politics before trying to educate them on this issue...it transcends political parties.
This shows that elected officials do not work "for the people". They work for corporate america. Auditors are still scratching their heads, with a deer in the headlights look, wondering "Why can't we account for all the money given to banks, wall street and defense contractors?" The people are the ones suffering - losing their homes, jobs and country. Where is the "change we can believe in?" The majority of voters were conned. The name is different, the con is the same. Wake up america.
Obama is a liar - bush stacked his cabinet with defense contractors and big oil execs (And ironically oil prices and went through the roof - Oil companies raked in record profits, defense contractors were elated at bush/cheney's no-bid contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan) obama said things would change. They did (sort of), his cabinet is stacked with wall street gurus and bankers and where did the bailout money go? Wall street and the bankers. What did they do with the money?
this series of videos failed to demonstrate true causation. It more clearly shows a race to leverage short selling by hedge funds before they could actually locate available shares. The NSS didn't cause the downward pressure, it was a reflection of the desire to participate in the downward pressure - growing as the downward velocity increased. Even your own charts demonstrated this.
So the collapse had nothing to do with the democratic party erasing all normal processes to get a mortgage and making it possible for ppl who couldnt afford to own a home to buy a home.... Ok
Without the govnt passing laws and creating fannie mae and freddie mac none of this would have ever happened.
Excellent videos, but if you think that Micheal Moore would make and objective, truthfull documentary about anything, then you are just as misguided and blind as the SEC. Just because he will make a piece of propaganda that supports some of your POV doesn't mean you should sell your soul to satan. You may have made the suggestion in good faith, but if you have seen any of his films you should have known better.
I think we have bigger fish to fry than these short-sellers. I might agree that the short selling expedited the collapse of those banks and the ensuing econ meltdown, but it was not the root cause. Indeed, this catastrophe was in the works well beforehand (Soros, Rogers, Schiff, etc were all screaming about it). IMHO, the root cause lies with Fannie/Freddie for starting the securitization of mortgages and Wall St greed for copying and taking it to a new level. SEC+rating agencies were enablers.
i don't quite understand... if hedge funds can be used to bankrupt lehman and bear through naked short selling, then couldn't it be used to bring down any company? y was lehman and bear targeted specifically?
@blablasometin8 Considering the events that followed their fall, it would not be hard to assume, when ever a recession hits the ones in the know make boocoos of money, it a money grab.
@gothicsolace well it's not like the financial collapse of 2008 wasn't unpredictable. people like peter schiff, ron paul, and other economists have been forecasting the crash years before it even happened. i still say the government had a lot to do with the crash but not how the video explains it.
Has anyone verified the email headers of those alleged communications between the hedge fund managers? It seems to me that, in the week of the anniversary of 9/11, there may well be a desire from our enemies to weaken this nation and cast blame. There are a few people or groups that might well have the resources to start the cascade of short trades required to bring Lehmann and Bear Sterns down.
I actually bought a penny share of Lehman, just to have one. I did the same for GM and Ford. The problem with the SEC is that they think that they're meant to help business, rather than regulate them. These bankers seem like children, they'll maximize their short term benefit, which is why we need to regulate them, like a parent, so they don't destroy our wealth.
can i use your videoas supplementary material for my presentation on the financial reform bill and its important to our financial market in my politic class. i am going to explain how subprime mortage and credit default swaps weakened the stability of the financial market and hedge fund trigger the financial crisis.
@DisposableWarrior Of course you can use it. In fact, send me a message with your email and I'll arrange for you to get a higher quality version in a single file.
There is a significant problem with your theory. The value of Lehman and Bear Stearns stock did not cause their bankruptcy. Whether someone is naked short selling or not to drive down the stock value, Lehman and Bear Stearns should not have had any of their own shares on their books as investments, but rather as treasury stock. If Lehman and Bear Stearns devalued to the point their value was zero all that would happen would be firing management. Collapse of subprime assets, however is fatal.
@jrhoadley You ask a good question. What makes Lehman and other banks different is their dependence on their own shares for use as collateral in the many short-term loans banks make to each other. When the value of this collateral drops, the creditor demands the loan balance be paid down in order to bring collateral ratios back in line. Doing so erodes cash reserves. If the share price continues falling, insolvency quickly follows.
@writerjudd Well then the fault for the failure of Lehman Brothers lies not with hedge funds, but with JP Morgan, because they issued margin calls for $8 billion when they knew Lehman didn't have it.
@jimmyV1919 I mentioned Michael Moore at the end of the video only because he was in the process of making his movie about Wall Street at the time and had asked for insights into "the real deal". I don't care what political party someone belongs to, if they're willing to listen, I'll talk to them about this problem.
As for me, I've been called a lot of things, but "Democrat" has never been one of them.
"Now they want to help craft the laws Congress will pass to fix our broken regulatory system. That's insane."
AND WE WON'T LET THEM!
Bankster Banks and the Congressional cronies that support them MUST have rules to follow to even the classes out, not drive them apart. The only reason they like to drive them apart is bc it concentrates ALL the money (including worst of all, "phantom money") into the hands of the inner circle of rich families worldwide.
this is bigger than just making a bunch of money....I dont know what, but there had to be something these guys want, there is a longer term goal here, that these guys are building a warchest for . My hope is that on their next safari flesheating bacteria enters their a..holes and has a feast.
to think that the U.S corporations, and the very program designed to dis-allow those corporations do manipulate the stock market (SEC), IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WORLDS GREAT RECESSION
This is very valuable and easy to understand. I was trying to send this link to Michael Moore with the e-mail address u left in the video, but it wouldnt send my e-mail to him. Any suggestions!!!
This is very valuable and easy to understand. I was trying to send this link to Michael Moore with the e-mail address u left in the video, but it wouldnt send my e-mail to him. Any suggestions!!!
Economy should be kept simple. There is no such thing as a "financial market". If goods and services trade hands, good, and sure we need money as the grease for the machinery, but anything above that is stupid bullshit nonsense. There is nothing to be gained in allowing profit in the absract "financial market". Profit in financial markets it kind of like crystal therapy. It does fuck nothing, it certainly wont cure your cancer, but you still have to pay for it.
will I do agreed with you about the nacked short selling but I do dissagree with you that it was the heagfunss and puting hope in obama and the congerss PLEASE THATS A JOCK PLEASE DO SOME MORE DIGING AND LERAN THAT IT WAS DEBT AND NOT PAYING IT BACK LIVEING ON LEST THEN THE GOVERMETNT HASE THAT GOT US IN TO THIS FREAKING MESS and stop prasing obama..
I don't understand your point. I would say that naked short selling is immoral, and that the immense quantity of it that you talk about would make someone a lot of money. But two questions: 1) What does that have to do with an economic meltdown, and 2) You certainly imply that Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers became defunct because the price of their stock was manipulated down to almost nothing; but a company doesn't go out of business because its stock price falls.
@ryanjody I'm in total agreement. One of the best books I've read in years. Gives a good sense for how utterly insane the system had become at its worst. Naked short selling, in my opinion, was a further symptom of the systemic madness.
Once again the regulators have failed the public. Just remember that the subprime mess was brought to us by the US Government policies of providing low income housing and cheap credit. The hedge fund managers saw opportunities and they profited from it. Although stock manipulation is a dangerous practice, without enforcement of the law, these guys will continue it indefinitely. I am willing to bet you that this will happen again because the government cannot effectively police wall street.
Well, maybe you had me. Maybe I need to watch all 3 parts again.
On first reading, the question in my mind was "Where is the proof/linkage regarding that $1.7M 1-week bet that points to hedge fund managers you named ...Was there proof that they were the ones that did the bet/manipulation"
When you mentioned Michael Moore, a red flag about mischaracterizing people and demonizing successful people went up. But I'll re-watch the series.
@canopeaz I can understand your concern about Michael Moore. I'm certainly no leftie, but when this video was made, he was the only person (and remains so to this day) making a movie on the collapse. I can't see the harm in trying to educate somebody...anybody...on a topic of such importance.
On the link between the Bear Stearns put options and the hedge fund managers I highlight: there is no direct evidence linking them, but there are very few with the resources required to pull it off.
@writerjudd i would wait until i see what he actually comes out with before throwing support at Moore. he has a way of slipping facts into his own claims to make them appear more legitimate. course he could always prove me wrong.
Its not that I don't understand bank to bank lending its that I'm not speaking only to you. This is a public forum and I don't want to talk over the heads of anyone who reads this and mistakenly buys into this video as accurate and supports legislation that puts so much regulation into the stock market that there becomes a total disconnect between share price and company value...
@aequitas2787 not exactly. Growing companies often need to raise money, by borrowing or secondary stock offerings. Because stock is often used as collateral when borrowing, low share price makes borrowing more expensive. It also limits secondaries. Financial companies use their stock as collateral in short term loans to each other. As stock price falls they need to dip into reserves to guarantee those loans. No reserves = insolvency = bankruptcy. That's what killed Lehman.
@writerjudd You are not totally wrong it is common to use stocks as collateral for short term debt but that is not what brought down either of these companies. They are major banks the stock was not what created the collateral problem and a $200 stock price would not have created enough collateral to save them. It was the collapse of their other assets that killed them not stock prices that is such a small part of the pie its a joke to insinuate that was what brought them down.
@aequitas2787 You're confusing actual events with the subsequent analysis of them. Ultimately, Lehman and Bear were likely doomed, thanks to the toxic waste on their balance sheets. But that's not what actually drained their reserves and left them without the cash needed to make good on their obligations and guarantee deposits on 3/15/08 and 9/18/08, respectively. It's murder even if the person you push off a cliff has a terminal illness. Bear and Lehman were pushed.
@writerjudd You are completely wrong. All they did was see a terminal man trying to buy life insurance and they told the insurance salesman that the guy had cancer. They did a service. It would have been worse to have let them sell all the stock they were holding at a fair price... then innocent people would have lost their money into the pit of failing assets. They provided a service by bringing the market price into line with reality.
@writerjudd These companies tend to own so little of the float that it pales in comparison to their other assets. Maybe with a start up tech company or something were they aren't profitable yet and need to do secondary offerings on a regular basis something like this could work but not a major investment bank. There is almost no real use of stock by such established companies and even if there was enough to be "significant" it wouldn't be enough to hurt a healthy company in this industry.
@aequitas2787 With respect, I don't think you understand banking. That's nothing to be ashamed of...it's not a very intuitive business, and the rules of enterprise that we're accustomed to don't apply. I'll say it again: in banking, no reserves = insolvency = bankruptcy. Find a way to quickly tap a bank's reserves and it's dead. Period. And another thing: when a company owns its own shares, by definition, they're not in the float.
@writerjudd To use your analogy they pushed a dead guy off a cliff because his family wouldn't stop wheeling him around and buying him shit even though he had been dead for a week. They didn't kill the company they informed everyone that it was dead and got paid for their services... they provide the market with information and turn a profit by doing so that is healthy!! Thats what we want. We don't want Japanese Zombie banks living on after they are dead eating up good capital.
@writerjudd, NO thats were you are wrong. This is not a person... It is not murder if you push a dieing company off a cliff its good business. People selling stock (whether they had any stock or not) is an informational action. The short selling only helped send the message to stockholders that the company was over valued. I can enter contracts to deliver oil at a higher or lower price than it currently is if I have information that the price is wrong... even if I don't have oil...
@aequitas2787 If we can't even agree on the illegality of stock manipulation, I don't think we'll agree on anything else. So...thanks for the interesting chat.
@writerjudd Listen... first I know that company owned stock isn't part of the float I spoke poorly my point is 1.) its not a significant portion of most companies balance sheets especially in financials. 2.) even if it is we don't want a company dumping large amounts of worthless stock on the market to soak up good capital just to buy them a few more weeks of solvency. I'm not saying that stock manipulation is right or legal I'm saying you are abusing the term in this case.
@aequitas2787 Again, you don't understand banking. Nobody's dumping stock. Maybe this will help: LEH borrows $X from ABC Bank, posting shares as collateral. Suddenly, LEH share price falls and ABC Bank says "The value of your collateral no longer meets the required ratio. You'll be in default if you don't buy in the loan or post more collateral (cash, not shares this time, thanks) immediately." So, LEH dips into its reserves. Again. And again. And again. And then there's nothing left.
@writerjudd Listen I am not dense and I'm not a moron! You talk to me like I'm a 12 year old I understand collateralization but what on earth do you think the point of collateral is?! We don't want insolvent banks soaking up liquidity. Thats what they would have done if the stock price stayed inflated. Even you admit that most stock based lending is short term lending. Maybe something like this would cause some problems with payroll but it wouldn't bankrupt a healthy institution!
@aequitas2787 Now I'm sure you don't understand. This has nothing to do with "collateralization". That word refers to bonding, not bank-to-bank lending. I think you know just enough to not know what you don't know.
@writerjudd The stock prices were going to fall as soon as everyone realized that the assets underlying the banks balance sheets were worthless! The only reason they hadn't tanked was that people didn't know the bank was going under. The only thing these guys did was prevent them from soaking up liquidity for another week or month or quarter until people realized that the bank was only worth $2 a share... and stock prices always over react thats not manipulation thats people getting scared.
@aequitas2787 Its not call "collateralization" but even you used the word "collateral" to describe the point of the shares. Its simpler to explain in terms people understand. The stock shares act as security for the lending. If the shares are artificially high then other banks lend them more than they should... the security or shares are worthless but the market doesn't know. That means they keep bailing out LEH with good capital setting up for a daisey chain of bank failures...
@aequitas2787 But if the other banks keep lending the dieing banks money then they are put at risk as well. They are now adding toxic assets to their books by lending on stock. If the stock is worthless but the market doesn't know we risk stable banks lending to LEH and others during the gap of time... the short selling isolates the failure and stops prevents the whole market from bleeding out... it acts like a tourniquet
@writerjudd The simple fact is that these guys didn't manipulate the stock. They brought the price in line with company value which is not manipulation. These companies were going under because they were holding huge amounts of worthless paper. It was a good thing that the stock price tanked and people figured it out sooner rather than later. There would have been more good capital destroyed if we had weighted longer. They didn't cause these banks to go down they were going down!
@aequitas2787 There's a pretty fundamental disagreement here, between you and me, and between you and the law. Many more people shared your opinion before the events described in this video happened, but not as many do these days. Even the SEC has filed suit against three naked short sellers since I made this video. Your opinion is sort of in the minority lately. But that's what's great about America: it's ok to have unpopular opinions. Anyway, I have to run. Thanks again for the feedback.
@writerjudd This is generally seen as a good thing because it smooths the curve. Pricing has to take into account time. We smooth supply and demand over time by including future price expectations into our valuations. By selling the stock and lowering the price the information simply made it into the market and the price adjusted more quickly to were it should have been. They didn't devalue the company they merely brought it to its proper price.
You people do know that stock price has almost no effect on company operations right? Just because a companies stock drops to a nickel doesn't mean the company has to file bankruptcy... Sounds like you might understand short selling in a technical sense but not the stock market in a broader sense.. the short selling was because the company was going under not the short selling that cause the company to go under... stock pressure is bad for investors but it doesn't effect the actual business
after watching all three of your vids, I have noticed you left out the roles of several democrat senators in your plot. you left out a LOT of interconnecting facts but you mentioned michael 'where did I put my crack' moore. lost ALL credibility with me. Chuck Schumer went to California and made a speech about Bear Steerns the week in March in which you question and yet you think there is no connection?
So most people are stocking up on sleeping pills for the day that might be coming when they can no longer feed their children & yet they still don't seize every last cent of these filthy animals?
Wasn't it Goldman Sachs who are at the bottom of this? Why can't we prosecute Goldman Sachs? I think all of the American people know who is causing this.
during a disaster people like these are the ones you see running down the street with a case full of money when people around them are dieing and thay find there case broke open and their contents fly out no one stops to help them so thay get trampled to death picking up what is important to them the guilty will pay for their crime its not our problem its their problem
I no longer invest in the stock market. What chance does a real "investor" have playing in a game where these criminals call the rules.
Once upon a time this country used to "invest" in things that built wealth. No this whole thing is now a casino with the paper pushers skimming off huge amounts for themselves. No wonder our national productivity and the economy with it has tanked.
Don't hold your breath waiting for any prosecutions.
How is it they could allow short selling at all. In my eyes thats the equivalent of writing a bad check without the possibility of getting nailed for it.
the first clip was right after watching the videos i was shocked and mad so i got all those out by emailing the rep. i never would of thought of emailing the rep when im barely 17 but it really made me mad or is it just my
Well,.. ya had me until you started talking about Micheal Moore... Please remove Moore from your film to retain your credability.. You are losing a HUGE audiance by his mention and gaining NOTHING by his inclusion.. Think about it...
Anyone who is stupid enough to change his mind about something at the mere mention of Michael Moore should probably not be participating in politics in the first place.
Rich get richer. Poor get poorer. Poor people think they are luckier than everyone else. The insiders know they are! Are all of the rest of you people stupid?
I have no problem with going after naked short sellers, like corrupt hedge funds, the incompetent SEC and Congress but Micheal Moore is not the knight in shinning armor that is gonna save us! Hes a capitalist hating commie pig who will take a cause and twist it for his own sorry political agenda. There has got to be someone better then a market hating pig to be the one to save the market! He bashes big business and thier propagnda while he rakes in millions for propoganda films...WTF???
all this is fine and dandy but unless the god damn motherfuckers are brought to justice and the their better halves in the SEC, this little movie doesn't mean shit. I mean it'll have to be we the people because the cops in charge of these crimes are all in on the gravy at our expense. If anybody finds these motherfuckers walking on the street, just open fire. We have to act or we'll end up like N Korea; that is, run by a small set of crime families, which is just how the republicans want it
something is happening... i noticed this month ALL my credit apr's increased a 7% increase advrage. I havent been late on a payment in 7 years and i was thankfull that i had a savings i payed them all off after they said they could do nothing about the increase. these are unstable times forget buying stocks/bonds or even gold or silver the commonity to buy is guns there gonna hold more value than your IRA in the next 20 years
Psh, the credit companies are fucking you over because of the new legislation going into effect soon, its got shit to do with unstable times. Yeah, for you, but do you think they are going to suffer? They gotta make that profit back somehow.
This is one of many scams that wall street launched during their financial coup d'etat. They have completely hijacked our system and bought off all off the politicians. The financial elite want to usher in a new era of neo serfdom for the masses under their control. Please watch Fall of the Republic. watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
I don't think you can narrow the problem down to the point where you can credibly blame one presidential administration or another. However, I'd say many of the conditions that made the naked shorting component of the economic meltdown possible were put in place under the Bush (43) administration. But the hyper-leveraging that has made the meltdown so enduring was largely a product of the Clinton years.
But to make this a partisan issue is a big mistake, in my opinion.
Ha ha...the other day I saw this video being discussed on a forum for Freemasons, none of which claimed to be familiar with my arguments before seeing it. I had to laugh, thinking: "this must be something really BIG if the *Masons* don't even know about it!"
Socialism has proven to be a failed experiment. So why try it again? I'm not some NWO conspiracy theorist. I understand that entrepreneurship is the engine that runs our economy, that real production and growth comes from savings and investment (not redistribution of the same wealth), that a sound currency is key to a stable economy, that lower taxes/less regulation= more growth, more innovation, and a better quality of life for all. Is this view really so radical?
If you interpreted this video as a call for socialism then either you weren't paying attention or I've completely failed as the video's creator.
Among the points I was trying to make was that we don't need more regulations...we just need the regulations we (mistakenly) assumed were being enforced to actually be enforced. See, there's the punchline: all along we thought we had a functioning SEC to protect us. But we didn't. Just ask Bernard Madoff. He'll back me up on this point.
You are correct on that point, the SEC does not protect us and realistically cannot protect us. Anyone who actually understands the complexity of financial markets should also understand that no government agency can possibly monitor the myriad of activity. You endorsed Barack Obama's financial "reform" efforts that are not much more than government takeover of the financial system. You also made a reference to Michael Moore who we all know explicitly hates the free market.
I didn't "endorse" Obama's financial reforms. However, he is the only President we have and I think we can all agree that this time last year he was talking the talk. That his walk has since not measured up is, unfortunately, something most everybody agrees now on.
As for Michael Moore...you can't blame me for trying to influence the process, can you? This video was made months before Moore's "Capitalism", back when it seemed he might actually be open to learning about what really happened.
Oh c'mon, Michael Moore has been promoting socialism for over 20 years. This talk of financial regulation only distracts us from the real problems we face, such as: a phony economy that has been financed entirely by borrowing and spending, the destruction of our currency from reckless fiscal/monetary policy, and a subsequent stagflation that is inevitably on the horizon. All this bashing and blaming of the free market is only going to speed up a train that was already headed off a cliff.
umm Idk the president is too concentrated on the health care reform. To me that is pointless... we need jobs... if we have a jobs we can pay for medicine even if its too expensive, otherwise we cant!!
@writerjudd I think I can add a tentative "amen." Instead of enforcement, laws, laws, and still more laws are piled one on top of the other as a "feel good" bone tossed to the public, instead of enforcing what we already have. This applies not only to finance, but many endeavors that government tries to "protect," and therefore wrecks with its ham-like fists.
In the 1990s Americans spent their money on imported products because we lacked the industrial capacity to produce ourselves, so money went abroad. That kept a lid on prices. Foreigners used those dollars that we created to bid up U.S. stocks that produced rising stock prices. When the stock market bubble burst, foreigners then recycled those dollars into the bond market. That a produced a rise in bond prices and dropped interest rates allowing Americans to bid up real estate prices.
Americans then used their home equity to borrow more money and send more dollars abroad, which foreigners then used to bid up natural resource prices that are necessary in the production process. Rising stock prices, rising real-estate prices, rising commodity prices are all a result of the result of the inflation that the Federal Reserve has been creating.
The Federal Reserve central bank, not a small group of hedge fund investors, destroyed our economy.
8-8-11 in bonds. 9-9-8 in stocks.
smartification1 5 months ago
Well produced video! But it's simplistic to blame the demise of these companies purely on speculators... Bear & Lehman were both stuck with vast quantities of worthless mortgage paper and were leveraged up to their eyeballs... that was the root problem. Shorters knew this & exploited it for huge gain. If more investors had seen thru their accounting skullduggery & shorted them sooner, maybe they wouldn't have gotten themselves into such dire straits in the 1st place.
Ainznando 7 months ago
Comment removed
Ainznando 7 months ago
Comment removed
Ainznando 7 months ago
The world is a joke!
hubeef 9 months ago
Interesting, since the troubles began in the middle east we have suddenly been getting Al Jazeera on our satellite network. Today they announce the despicable Hedge funds in London are speculating on commodities such as food like RICE, WHEAT, CORN. They could well starve nations if I follow your information correctly. This must be stopped on a worldwide basis. By the way loved your video, been trying to follow this mess.
oilpatchgirl 11 months ago
... and they shall grind the face of the poor.
darthspeaks 1 year ago
The new "regulations" make the too big to fails more powerful and more capable of eating up small banks, what a win!
JackOffVille 1 year ago
I have a few questions for you. Where does the housing securities fraud fit into this? Isn't that what these hedge funds exploited? Also, why would they want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg? It would do hedge fund managers no good to destroy the financial system they leech off. Finally, I once read that a transaction fee imposed on all hedge funds' transactions would stop them dead in their tracks and raise a good deal of revenue. Is that a good ideal?
frank47hammer 1 year ago
all the names that are with the countrys that when under is one name George Soros check this monster out
faceswithin 1 year ago
Comment removed
faceswithin 1 year ago
wow, so the economic colapse was orchestrated by the rich so they could get richer??!!!
Holy shit, i thought it was just the rich.
If this is really true, we need to find these people, and put them all to death for treason against the american people !
FlankerVT 1 year ago
3:36 - No exaggeration, I was watching this video all alone, and when that first picture slid in from the side, I actually screamed out "THAT'S A HOUSE??"
ATL45 1 year ago
Wouldn't this be considered terrorism? A hand full of men can bring down the worlds largest financial system and do it in plain sight and the government looks the other way, who is to blame the guys who took down the system or the government who let them.
CommonSensePeter 1 year ago
Excuse me for a moment, but if the gentlemen you mention are indeed responsible for stealing billions of dollars from investors, destroying the economy and costing thousands of jobs then... Why aren’t they dead? Serious question...
mpdp85 1 year ago
Most American's cannot comprehend any of this. It is easier to believe they destroyed the economy from overextending themselves. The country has been economically raped. I think there is going to be another "crisis" and another bailout next year inolving mortgage backed securities. "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office" Aesop
jiveturkeyusa 1 year ago
Unfortunately, this is over most American's heads. It is easier to just blame homeowners for not saving enought money and "buying homes they couldn't afford" The country was looted and they completely got away with it. In fact they are still looting and we will soon see another "crisis" that will require another bailout. "We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office" --Aesop
jiveturkeyusa 1 year ago
2 words......George Soros
sjstb03 1 year ago
hail the triumph of capitalism,the socialists are ruining this nation ,they are eroding the freedom of the capitalist to do what they do best........it is not a sustainable system......unavoidably corrupt to its core
55Deluxe 1 year ago
As you say "banks operate on -10% capital reserves", that too is naked short selling. I cannot loan someone money I do not have, the only way that the banks can is because government 'guarantees them'. When the reality is that government, like the banks, have virtually no capital, when they 'guarantee' the banks, they are forced to print the money used to back up the total short position.
Leading to inflation, aka, stealing money from everyone who owns fiat currency.
It's all fraud.
corruptiblelogistics 1 year ago 2
@corruptiblelogistics I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theory of the fractional reserve system but it sure is a sub-optimal arrangement. Cobbled together from several pragmatic steps and using a lot of strings and spaghetti wires to control this behemoth. It seems some people do occasionally game the system successfully but overall, it has served progress of humanity well. To be sure, take a look at any developing country with few loans in their economy.
kbgambrah 1 month ago
well done well done!!!!!!!!!
honestactionfilms 1 year ago
This video is offensive to me. It should not be a surprise that when companies are insolvent, they go bankrupt. Dick Fuld (CEO of Lehman) needed to sell divisions of his company to raise cash. He shopped around, but all the Private Equity firms/other banks gave him lowball offers for his assets as Fuld had zero negotiating power. Fuld did nothing and they went bankrupt due to overleveraging with crappy assets.
Strakha1 1 year ago
Using the logic of short selling is bad, why don't we kick it up a notch and force everybody to buy stock in insolvent banks. Unbelievable. The problem we have is that we built too many houses and took on too much debt. And when everybody tried to sell their homes and deleverage, liquidy/home prices plummeted. It'll take 5 more years (at least) to get us out of this mess. At present all we have are empty homes that took a lot of resources to build but now nobody will buy. To blame hedge funds
Strakha1 1 year ago
completely misses the point. That's like blaming the mailman for delivering bad news. The hedge funds made it clear that we screwed up. And they are right.
Strakha1 1 year ago
A Bullet to there heads and there goes there fuckin power
concrete1213 1 year ago
those assholes made my whole family unemployed
britney1456789 1 year ago
Since companies can pledge their own shares as security for loans, why not take the step of banning companies from pledging securities of their own company preventing banks from calling the loans. Wouldn't that solve the problem?
InvestingToday 1 year ago
@InvestingToday I suspect that would have benefited the banks (Bear and Lehman) damaged by this attack. But it wouldn't have helped the many non-finance sector companies targeted by manipulative naked shorting over the years, where the process often persisted for very long periods of time. If any good came of the collapse it was jarring the SEC into action, forcing them to finally enforce prohibitions on a practice that was already illegal.
writerjudd 1 year ago
Comment removed
markj90503 1 year ago
Comment removed
markj90503 1 year ago
writerjudd: Wonderful video! Thank you! However, I must agree (sort of) with @Investing Today.
Short selling -- even naked shorts -- CANNOT bring down a company, UNLESS the company's working capital is dependent upon the price of its stock holdings.
Typically, that can only happen a company borrows money by using the prices of its own shares as collateral.
markj90503 1 year ago
I'm a freshman in highschool and quite proud I understood about any of that, nice video even though a lot of it doesn't directly apply to me I'm honestly glad I watched it
goregrindmonstrosity 1 year ago
was this one or two people who were doing this naked short selling? is it a collective effort by a few to get rich and fuck over the world? anyone?
jimsutube123 1 year ago
@jimsutube123 that's the problem. full disclosure of who makes these types of transactions wasn't required. BUT as the poster of this video was saying only the hedge funds were in a position to be ABLE to do it (that we know of) all that's needed is 2 things. 1. A whole heck of alot of cash to pay the fee for the put and 2. a way to keep trades from being able to be completed (makign the IOU shares and thus to many share "holders")
I'm not explaining this well..
A: We "don't know" for "sure"
Skwiggs102 1 year ago
Microeconomics classes have left at a bit of a loss here.
I understand that having a massive supply boost would drive down price. With that increase in shares, I assume the company still is paying out to each of them accordingly to percent (even the false shares?) but unless there is a minimum dividend which vastly exceeds the new one, I do not see how this leads to bankruptcy.
Also, how would short term profits come about? They are dead. I can only think of long-term profits (rival companies).
Out4Blood4CA 1 year ago
@Out4Blood4CA bankruptcy does not result from a dividend, but from the fact that Lehman and Bear had to use their cash reserves to pay down short-term loan balances for which they'd used their shares as collateral (in order to bring their collateral ratios back in line). This made them insolvent, which means bankrupt to a bank.
And I'm sorry but I don't understand the second part of your question (re: short v. long-term profits).
writerjudd 1 year ago
@Out4Blood4CA
The people who manipulate buy "put" options, which is basically a bet that the stock will fall.....
when it indeed does fall they put options pay out exponentially...
vhp20 1 year ago
I'm not a writer and by no means am I good with words when it comes to more complicated topics such as this one, and on top of that I do not fully understand this one. Is there any help you can give with the actual words used in the letter?
sJeGaJn 1 year ago
@sJeGaJn The words used in which letter?
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd the one to my elected representative
sJeGaJn 1 year ago
@sJeGaJn to be completely honest, this doesn't matter as much these days since the passage of the FinReg legislation in June. Much more important now is a letter to your Rep. insisting that FinReg be amended such that the SEC can no longer claim it is exempt them from many Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. The SEC is trying to be even less transparent and accountable and we cannot let that happen.
writerjudd 1 year ago
These have been great, but I still don't get it. Bear and Lehman had rich, powerful people behind them as well. And they failed. I also don't understand how the failure of two companies, no matter how big, can cause a global financial crisis. And finally, as someone else has posted, I don't understand why these transactions aren't traceable and prosecuteable. Thanks for your explanation of the Michael Moore thing; that bothered me too.
toddzilla40 1 year ago
@toddzilla40 Banks lend each other large amounts of money. If bank A owes bank B but A suddenly goes bankrupt, some of B's cash goes with it. When banks operate on ~10% capital reserves, it doesn't take much to go insolvent, forcing surviving banks to hold on to their cash and make many fewer loans. Without credit, economic growth halts, which leads to recession (or worse).
writerjudd 1 year ago
@toddzilla40 They never explained how exactly Hedge funds benefit from ruining companies. Driving stock down make sense only if you can buy it undervalued and make profit. If the company is gone for good, stock is worthless.
ssmusic214 1 year ago
@ssmusic214 the part your missing is in part 1, the section on "Puts"
short example: trader A thinks a $200 stock will drop, so he pays a fee for the right to sell 500 shares (i belive the naked part of this is if he only had 100 shares) at a $175.on a specific day (and here's the important part) REGARDLESS of what it's trading at at the time.
if the price goes up Trader A is just out the fee he paid. if the stock goes down to 50 he can still sell his shares @ $175
does that help?
Skwiggs102 1 year ago
@ssmusic214 two extra things to consider, 1. when the "put" is up THAT"S when they get their money. 2. since the stock isn't worth that much at the time the company needs to give up it's cash reserves to pay the differance and that shift in the fundamentals can crash the faith in the stock alone.. ESPECIALLY on a scale this wide.
Skwiggs102 1 year ago
@toddzilla40
Lehman WAS the largest competitor to Goldman...enough said
otaseattle1 1 year ago
the premise is there. so how do we deal with the problem? is there anything the normal everyday citizien who doen'st use stocks can do to prevent this? or are we just sitting here, ready to let it happen again?
williamkendrick 1 year ago
primerica? anyone?
nuthing2du22 1 year ago
Uh, weren't these companies worthless because they had gorged themselves on packaged junk mortgages, and because they had sold way more insurance than they had cash for?
This short selling is just a parallel scam that happened to reveal that the companies were worthless to begin with? Or am I missing the point?
emilyek1 1 year ago
Genius, no other word for it really.
It's also criminal, but still genius! :D
rock3tcat 1 year ago
It is time to start thinking for yourselves. Almost everything dealing with paper assets is being run buy the same players as ALWAYS. Wall street. The markets are, and always have been a gamble. Even if you could bring these gentlemen into a courtroom, you and I both already know the outcome. It's as if someone has pushed you into the river and you're worrying about who pushed you rather than swimming to safety . Protect yourself. Start purchasing some tangible assets.
LegacyMicro 1 year ago
When's someone going to assassinate those three assholes? Better yet, fuckers that pull that shit need to be bagged.
Okamicurse 1 year ago
Comment removed
Okamicurse 1 year ago
Wow! until you mentioned Michael Moore. Then ....what is the opposite of 'Wow!'
5767ziegler 1 year ago 4
@5767ziegler The opposite of "wow" would probably be "mom". Anyway, you are one of several commenters to express concern over my request that viewers help call Michael Moore's attention to this problem. I will tell you what I've told the others: I'm no leftist, nor much a fan of Michael Moore's. But he was making a movie about the collapse and requested input. I'll never ask about one's politics before trying to educate them on this issue...it transcends political parties.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@5767ziegler Oh
Dwoodward47 1 year ago
This shows that elected officials do not work "for the people". They work for corporate america. Auditors are still scratching their heads, with a deer in the headlights look, wondering "Why can't we account for all the money given to banks, wall street and defense contractors?" The people are the ones suffering - losing their homes, jobs and country. Where is the "change we can believe in?" The majority of voters were conned. The name is different, the con is the same. Wake up america.
MrFastAl 1 year ago
Obama is a liar - bush stacked his cabinet with defense contractors and big oil execs (And ironically oil prices and went through the roof - Oil companies raked in record profits, defense contractors were elated at bush/cheney's no-bid contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan) obama said things would change. They did (sort of), his cabinet is stacked with wall street gurus and bankers and where did the bailout money go? Wall street and the bankers. What did they do with the money?
MrFastAl 1 year ago
this series of videos failed to demonstrate true causation. It more clearly shows a race to leverage short selling by hedge funds before they could actually locate available shares. The NSS didn't cause the downward pressure, it was a reflection of the desire to participate in the downward pressure - growing as the downward velocity increased. Even your own charts demonstrated this.
HovercontrolVideo 1 year ago
So the collapse had nothing to do with the democratic party erasing all normal processes to get a mortgage and making it possible for ppl who couldnt afford to own a home to buy a home.... Ok
Without the govnt passing laws and creating fannie mae and freddie mac none of this would have ever happened.
buffalobadass 1 year ago
Excellent videos, but if you think that Micheal Moore would make and objective, truthfull documentary about anything, then you are just as misguided and blind as the SEC. Just because he will make a piece of propaganda that supports some of your POV doesn't mean you should sell your soul to satan. You may have made the suggestion in good faith, but if you have seen any of his films you should have known better.
raymac2008 1 year ago
I think we have bigger fish to fry than these short-sellers. I might agree that the short selling expedited the collapse of those banks and the ensuing econ meltdown, but it was not the root cause. Indeed, this catastrophe was in the works well beforehand (Soros, Rogers, Schiff, etc were all screaming about it). IMHO, the root cause lies with Fannie/Freddie for starting the securitization of mortgages and Wall St greed for copying and taking it to a new level. SEC+rating agencies were enablers.
dab252 1 year ago 2
i don't quite understand... if hedge funds can be used to bankrupt lehman and bear through naked short selling, then couldn't it be used to bring down any company? y was lehman and bear targeted specifically?
blablasometin8 1 year ago
@blablasometin8 Considering the events that followed their fall, it would not be hard to assume, when ever a recession hits the ones in the know make boocoos of money, it a money grab.
gothicsolace 1 year ago
@gothicsolace well it's not like the financial collapse of 2008 wasn't unpredictable. people like peter schiff, ron paul, and other economists have been forecasting the crash years before it even happened. i still say the government had a lot to do with the crash but not how the video explains it.
blablasometin8 1 year ago
Good stuff, but I lol'd when you said they'd never have Congress in their pockets.
Its already happened.
CraigKramer 1 year ago 2
@CraigKramer
+1
amarrao95 1 year ago
Has anyone verified the email headers of those alleged communications between the hedge fund managers? It seems to me that, in the week of the anniversary of 9/11, there may well be a desire from our enemies to weaken this nation and cast blame. There are a few people or groups that might well have the resources to start the cascade of short trades required to bring Lehmann and Bear Sterns down.
rkwickstrom 1 year ago
makes me wish that i payed more attention in economics.
flamer221 1 year ago
Emerging oligarchy? I think the American oligarchs emerged a long time ago.
atypicalguy 1 year ago
I actually bought a penny share of Lehman, just to have one. I did the same for GM and Ford. The problem with the SEC is that they think that they're meant to help business, rather than regulate them. These bankers seem like children, they'll maximize their short term benefit, which is why we need to regulate them, like a parent, so they don't destroy our wealth.
rjbonacolta 1 year ago
Peter Out Farted Michael Moore
elmillon18 1 year ago
can i use your videoas supplementary material for my presentation on the financial reform bill and its important to our financial market in my politic class. i am going to explain how subprime mortage and credit default swaps weakened the stability of the financial market and hedge fund trigger the financial crisis.
DisposableWarrior 1 year ago
@DisposableWarrior Of course you can use it. In fact, send me a message with your email and I'll arrange for you to get a higher quality version in a single file.
writerjudd 1 year ago
There is a significant problem with your theory. The value of Lehman and Bear Stearns stock did not cause their bankruptcy. Whether someone is naked short selling or not to drive down the stock value, Lehman and Bear Stearns should not have had any of their own shares on their books as investments, but rather as treasury stock. If Lehman and Bear Stearns devalued to the point their value was zero all that would happen would be firing management. Collapse of subprime assets, however is fatal.
jrhoadley 1 year ago
@jrhoadley You ask a good question. What makes Lehman and other banks different is their dependence on their own shares for use as collateral in the many short-term loans banks make to each other. When the value of this collateral drops, the creditor demands the loan balance be paid down in order to bring collateral ratios back in line. Doing so erodes cash reserves. If the share price continues falling, insolvency quickly follows.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd Well then the fault for the failure of Lehman Brothers lies not with hedge funds, but with JP Morgan, because they issued margin calls for $8 billion when they knew Lehman didn't have it.
jrhoadley 1 year ago
Comment removed
jrhoadley 1 year ago
I can't believe this was all an add for michael moore, you had me till then
jimmyV1919 1 year ago
@jimmyV1919 I mentioned Michael Moore at the end of the video only because he was in the process of making his movie about Wall Street at the time and had asked for insights into "the real deal". I don't care what political party someone belongs to, if they're willing to listen, I'll talk to them about this problem.
As for me, I've been called a lot of things, but "Democrat" has never been one of them.
writerjudd 1 year ago 8
i vote we kill them when we have a civil war here
helpearthbounding 1 year ago
"Now they want to help craft the laws Congress will pass to fix our broken regulatory system. That's insane."
AND WE WON'T LET THEM!
Bankster Banks and the Congressional cronies that support them MUST have rules to follow to even the classes out, not drive them apart. The only reason they like to drive them apart is bc it concentrates ALL the money (including worst of all, "phantom money") into the hands of the inner circle of rich families worldwide.
1st step. remove money from politics
mjimih 1 year ago
I'd like to have the head of a hedge fund head on my plate along next to my stake and wine. Lets us eat!
dojokonojo 1 year ago
@dojokonojo
have a Hedge Hog Fund pork roast instead. I had one the other day mmmmmm
mjimih 1 year ago
this is bigger than just making a bunch of money....I dont know what, but there had to be something these guys want, there is a longer term goal here, that these guys are building a warchest for . My hope is that on their next safari flesheating bacteria enters their a..holes and has a feast.
dangermous1968 1 year ago
The SEC already has regulations that deal with naked short selling. Look up Regulation SHO, implemented in 2005. Obama should take a look at it too.
We don't need more government regulation; just enforce the rules already in place!
Libertas83 1 year ago
and i thought korea's economy was pretty green
chidori729 1 year ago
THIS VID FUCKEN BLEW MY MIND
to think that the U.S corporations, and the very program designed to dis-allow those corporations do manipulate the stock market (SEC), IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE WORLDS GREAT RECESSION
U.S IS A WORLD ENEMY, AND I LIVE HERE
rhcp4565 1 year ago
The people should do linching on wall street with these guys and I have been saying this for 30 plus years.
Stock market is nothing more the a gamle with your money and the dealer has the power to make you loose your money.
The ones at the top have the pull to take your money and get away with stealing from you investors.
This is nothing new, this has been going on for man many years....
warisbs 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is very valuable and easy to understand. I was trying to send this link to Michael Moore with the e-mail address u left in the video, but it wouldnt send my e-mail to him. Any suggestions!!!
mastewala 1 year ago
This is very valuable and easy to understand. I was trying to send this link to Michael Moore with the e-mail address u left in the video, but it wouldnt send my e-mail to him. Any suggestions!!!
mastewala 1 year ago
Illuminati are badasses
ShaktipatSeer 1 year ago
Economy should be kept simple. There is no such thing as a "financial market". If goods and services trade hands, good, and sure we need money as the grease for the machinery, but anything above that is stupid bullshit nonsense. There is nothing to be gained in allowing profit in the absract "financial market". Profit in financial markets it kind of like crystal therapy. It does fuck nothing, it certainly wont cure your cancer, but you still have to pay for it.
DrakeIcn 1 year ago
A good reason the SEC won't touch these schmucks is that they are COMPLICIT in these robberies!
-Oz
Ozlanthos 1 year ago
will I do agreed with you about the nacked short selling but I do dissagree with you that it was the heagfunss and puting hope in obama and the congerss PLEASE THATS A JOCK PLEASE DO SOME MORE DIGING AND LERAN THAT IT WAS DEBT AND NOT PAYING IT BACK LIVEING ON LEST THEN THE GOVERMETNT HASE THAT GOT US IN TO THIS FREAKING MESS and stop prasing obama..
animebondagfan 1 year ago
I don't understand your point. I would say that naked short selling is immoral, and that the immense quantity of it that you talk about would make someone a lot of money. But two questions: 1) What does that have to do with an economic meltdown, and 2) You certainly imply that Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers became defunct because the price of their stock was manipulated down to almost nothing; but a company doesn't go out of business because its stock price falls.
MrClarence1126 1 year ago
2:30 looks like part of the USA's flag =\
GGAlice1 1 year ago
Well, you had my attention until the Michael Moore thing... That guy's a friggin douche bag.
DG121480 1 year ago
President Obama is part of this conspiracy by the oligarchs. He is an oligarch.
luomio 1 year ago
Great video. I recommend reading "The Big Short" by Michael Lewis.
ryanjody 1 year ago
@ryanjody I'm in total agreement. One of the best books I've read in years. Gives a good sense for how utterly insane the system had become at its worst. Naked short selling, in my opinion, was a further symptom of the systemic madness.
writerjudd 1 year ago
No one person did all this naked short selling it was the collective effort of many hedge funds.
ATravestyOfJustice 1 year ago
informative... you got a subscriber sir
GodAthie 1 year ago
Once again the regulators have failed the public. Just remember that the subprime mess was brought to us by the US Government policies of providing low income housing and cheap credit. The hedge fund managers saw opportunities and they profited from it. Although stock manipulation is a dangerous practice, without enforcement of the law, these guys will continue it indefinitely. I am willing to bet you that this will happen again because the government cannot effectively police wall street.
falconxlc 1 year ago
You had me all the way until Michael Moore :(
Well, maybe you had me. Maybe I need to watch all 3 parts again.
On first reading, the question in my mind was "Where is the proof/linkage regarding that $1.7M 1-week bet that points to hedge fund managers you named ...Was there proof that they were the ones that did the bet/manipulation"
When you mentioned Michael Moore, a red flag about mischaracterizing people and demonizing successful people went up. But I'll re-watch the series.
canopeaz 1 year ago
@canopeaz I can understand your concern about Michael Moore. I'm certainly no leftie, but when this video was made, he was the only person (and remains so to this day) making a movie on the collapse. I can't see the harm in trying to educate somebody...anybody...on a topic of such importance.
On the link between the Bear Stearns put options and the hedge fund managers I highlight: there is no direct evidence linking them, but there are very few with the resources required to pull it off.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd i would wait until i see what he actually comes out with before throwing support at Moore. he has a way of slipping facts into his own claims to make them appear more legitimate. course he could always prove me wrong.
bassmanboe 1 year ago
Its not that I don't understand bank to bank lending its that I'm not speaking only to you. This is a public forum and I don't want to talk over the heads of anyone who reads this and mistakenly buys into this video as accurate and supports legislation that puts so much regulation into the stock market that there becomes a total disconnect between share price and company value...
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 not exactly. Growing companies often need to raise money, by borrowing or secondary stock offerings. Because stock is often used as collateral when borrowing, low share price makes borrowing more expensive. It also limits secondaries. Financial companies use their stock as collateral in short term loans to each other. As stock price falls they need to dip into reserves to guarantee those loans. No reserves = insolvency = bankruptcy. That's what killed Lehman.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd You are not totally wrong it is common to use stocks as collateral for short term debt but that is not what brought down either of these companies. They are major banks the stock was not what created the collateral problem and a $200 stock price would not have created enough collateral to save them. It was the collapse of their other assets that killed them not stock prices that is such a small part of the pie its a joke to insinuate that was what brought them down.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 You're confusing actual events with the subsequent analysis of them. Ultimately, Lehman and Bear were likely doomed, thanks to the toxic waste on their balance sheets. But that's not what actually drained their reserves and left them without the cash needed to make good on their obligations and guarantee deposits on 3/15/08 and 9/18/08, respectively. It's murder even if the person you push off a cliff has a terminal illness. Bear and Lehman were pushed.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd You are completely wrong. All they did was see a terminal man trying to buy life insurance and they told the insurance salesman that the guy had cancer. They did a service. It would have been worse to have let them sell all the stock they were holding at a fair price... then innocent people would have lost their money into the pit of failing assets. They provided a service by bringing the market price into line with reality.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@writerjudd These companies tend to own so little of the float that it pales in comparison to their other assets. Maybe with a start up tech company or something were they aren't profitable yet and need to do secondary offerings on a regular basis something like this could work but not a major investment bank. There is almost no real use of stock by such established companies and even if there was enough to be "significant" it wouldn't be enough to hurt a healthy company in this industry.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 With respect, I don't think you understand banking. That's nothing to be ashamed of...it's not a very intuitive business, and the rules of enterprise that we're accustomed to don't apply. I'll say it again: in banking, no reserves = insolvency = bankruptcy. Find a way to quickly tap a bank's reserves and it's dead. Period. And another thing: when a company owns its own shares, by definition, they're not in the float.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd To use your analogy they pushed a dead guy off a cliff because his family wouldn't stop wheeling him around and buying him shit even though he had been dead for a week. They didn't kill the company they informed everyone that it was dead and got paid for their services... they provide the market with information and turn a profit by doing so that is healthy!! Thats what we want. We don't want Japanese Zombie banks living on after they are dead eating up good capital.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@writerjudd, NO thats were you are wrong. This is not a person... It is not murder if you push a dieing company off a cliff its good business. People selling stock (whether they had any stock or not) is an informational action. The short selling only helped send the message to stockholders that the company was over valued. I can enter contracts to deliver oil at a higher or lower price than it currently is if I have information that the price is wrong... even if I don't have oil...
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 If we can't even agree on the illegality of stock manipulation, I don't think we'll agree on anything else. So...thanks for the interesting chat.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd Listen... first I know that company owned stock isn't part of the float I spoke poorly my point is 1.) its not a significant portion of most companies balance sheets especially in financials. 2.) even if it is we don't want a company dumping large amounts of worthless stock on the market to soak up good capital just to buy them a few more weeks of solvency. I'm not saying that stock manipulation is right or legal I'm saying you are abusing the term in this case.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 Again, you don't understand banking. Nobody's dumping stock. Maybe this will help: LEH borrows $X from ABC Bank, posting shares as collateral. Suddenly, LEH share price falls and ABC Bank says "The value of your collateral no longer meets the required ratio. You'll be in default if you don't buy in the loan or post more collateral (cash, not shares this time, thanks) immediately." So, LEH dips into its reserves. Again. And again. And again. And then there's nothing left.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd Listen I am not dense and I'm not a moron! You talk to me like I'm a 12 year old I understand collateralization but what on earth do you think the point of collateral is?! We don't want insolvent banks soaking up liquidity. Thats what they would have done if the stock price stayed inflated. Even you admit that most stock based lending is short term lending. Maybe something like this would cause some problems with payroll but it wouldn't bankrupt a healthy institution!
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 Now I'm sure you don't understand. This has nothing to do with "collateralization". That word refers to bonding, not bank-to-bank lending. I think you know just enough to not know what you don't know.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd The stock prices were going to fall as soon as everyone realized that the assets underlying the banks balance sheets were worthless! The only reason they hadn't tanked was that people didn't know the bank was going under. The only thing these guys did was prevent them from soaking up liquidity for another week or month or quarter until people realized that the bank was only worth $2 a share... and stock prices always over react thats not manipulation thats people getting scared.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 Its not call "collateralization" but even you used the word "collateral" to describe the point of the shares. Its simpler to explain in terms people understand. The stock shares act as security for the lending. If the shares are artificially high then other banks lend them more than they should... the security or shares are worthless but the market doesn't know. That means they keep bailing out LEH with good capital setting up for a daisey chain of bank failures...
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 But if the other banks keep lending the dieing banks money then they are put at risk as well. They are now adding toxic assets to their books by lending on stock. If the stock is worthless but the market doesn't know we risk stable banks lending to LEH and others during the gap of time... the short selling isolates the failure and stops prevents the whole market from bleeding out... it acts like a tourniquet
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@writerjudd The simple fact is that these guys didn't manipulate the stock. They brought the price in line with company value which is not manipulation. These companies were going under because they were holding huge amounts of worthless paper. It was a good thing that the stock price tanked and people figured it out sooner rather than later. There would have been more good capital destroyed if we had weighted longer. They didn't cause these banks to go down they were going down!
aequitas2787 1 year ago
@aequitas2787 There's a pretty fundamental disagreement here, between you and me, and between you and the law. Many more people shared your opinion before the events described in this video happened, but not as many do these days. Even the SEC has filed suit against three naked short sellers since I made this video. Your opinion is sort of in the minority lately. But that's what's great about America: it's ok to have unpopular opinions. Anyway, I have to run. Thanks again for the feedback.
writerjudd 1 year ago
@writerjudd This is generally seen as a good thing because it smooths the curve. Pricing has to take into account time. We smooth supply and demand over time by including future price expectations into our valuations. By selling the stock and lowering the price the information simply made it into the market and the price adjusted more quickly to were it should have been. They didn't devalue the company they merely brought it to its proper price.
aequitas2787 1 year ago
You people do know that stock price has almost no effect on company operations right? Just because a companies stock drops to a nickel doesn't mean the company has to file bankruptcy... Sounds like you might understand short selling in a technical sense but not the stock market in a broader sense.. the short selling was because the company was going under not the short selling that cause the company to go under... stock pressure is bad for investors but it doesn't effect the actual business
aequitas2787 1 year ago
after watching all three of your vids, I have noticed you left out the roles of several democrat senators in your plot. you left out a LOT of interconnecting facts but you mentioned michael 'where did I put my crack' moore. lost ALL credibility with me. Chuck Schumer went to California and made a speech about Bear Steerns the week in March in which you question and yet you think there is no connection?
am60mo 1 year ago
So most people are stocking up on sleeping pills for the day that might be coming when they can no longer feed their children & yet they still don't seize every last cent of these filthy animals?
IronicallyVague 1 year ago
The funny thing about globalization is these guys can leave the country after killing it, and infect other countries.
tHecOmMeNtErSrEtUrN 1 year ago
Wasn't it Goldman Sachs who are at the bottom of this? Why can't we prosecute Goldman Sachs? I think all of the American people know who is causing this.
vcoonrod 1 year ago
all jews
1GUNSQUIRREL 1 year ago
Comment removed
1GUNSQUIRREL 1 year ago
Thank you for these informative and disturbing videos - they were very professional for YouTube.
IrreplacablePerry 1 year ago
Great video.
Who is the music by?
IndigoVagrant 1 year ago
@IndigoVagrant the soundtrack is listed near the end, at 9:53. You'll probably need to hit pause a few times to catch it all.
writerjudd 1 year ago
during a disaster people like these are the ones you see running down the street with a case full of money when people around them are dieing and thay find there case broke open and their contents fly out no one stops to help them so thay get trampled to death picking up what is important to them the guilty will pay for their crime its not our problem its their problem
kinbigbird 1 year ago
Nice job on this video.
I no longer invest in the stock market. What chance does a real "investor" have playing in a game where these criminals call the rules.
Once upon a time this country used to "invest" in things that built wealth. No this whole thing is now a casino with the paper pushers skimming off huge amounts for themselves. No wonder our national productivity and the economy with it has tanked.
Don't hold your breath waiting for any prosecutions.
endtheillusion 1 year ago
How is it they could allow short selling at all. In my eyes thats the equivalent of writing a bad check without the possibility of getting nailed for it.
itsrich10 1 year ago
Comment removed
itsrich10 1 year ago
Comment removed
itsrich10 1 year ago
the first clip was right after watching the videos i was shocked and mad so i got all those out by emailing the rep. i never would of thought of emailing the rep when im barely 17 but it really made me mad or is it just my
hayfit 1 year ago
Well,.. ya had me until you started talking about Micheal Moore... Please remove Moore from your film to retain your credability.. You are losing a HUGE audiance by his mention and gaining NOTHING by his inclusion.. Think about it...
flyndad123 1 year ago
@flyndad123 get over it
aslekay 1 year ago
@flyndad123
Anyone who is stupid enough to change his mind about something at the mere mention of Michael Moore should probably not be participating in politics in the first place.
frellthat 1 year ago
Rich get richer. Poor get poorer. Poor people think they are luckier than everyone else. The insiders know they are! Are all of the rest of you people stupid?
coolestdude80 1 year ago
I have no problem with going after naked short sellers, like corrupt hedge funds, the incompetent SEC and Congress but Micheal Moore is not the knight in shinning armor that is gonna save us! Hes a capitalist hating commie pig who will take a cause and twist it for his own sorry political agenda. There has got to be someone better then a market hating pig to be the one to save the market! He bashes big business and thier propagnda while he rakes in millions for propoganda films...WTF???
DK0526 1 year ago
all this is fine and dandy but unless the god damn motherfuckers are brought to justice and the their better halves in the SEC, this little movie doesn't mean shit. I mean it'll have to be we the people because the cops in charge of these crimes are all in on the gravy at our expense. If anybody finds these motherfuckers walking on the street, just open fire. We have to act or we'll end up like N Korea; that is, run by a small set of crime families, which is just how the republicans want it
paragshah2112 1 year ago 2
wow, very clear and effective video. I did not know all about this until now.
lamrof 2 years ago 7
well done very informatve and easy to understand
linkin622 2 years ago 7
something is happening... i noticed this month ALL my credit apr's increased a 7% increase advrage. I havent been late on a payment in 7 years and i was thankfull that i had a savings i payed them all off after they said they could do nothing about the increase. these are unstable times forget buying stocks/bonds or even gold or silver the commonity to buy is guns there gonna hold more value than your IRA in the next 20 years
rduncan999 2 years ago
Psh, the credit companies are fucking you over because of the new legislation going into effect soon, its got shit to do with unstable times. Yeah, for you, but do you think they are going to suffer? They gotta make that profit back somehow.
SeanyPancakes 2 years ago
This is one of many scams that wall street launched during their financial coup d'etat. They have completely hijacked our system and bought off all off the politicians. The financial elite want to usher in a new era of neo serfdom for the masses under their control. Please watch Fall of the Republic. watch?v=VebOTc-7shU
tauren2005 2 years ago
as ive rad the comments
i realizeed something.......
britian took colonists' money and made 1 central bank wher colonists could only borrow money hence the term 'loans'
the more money that was out the more taxes rose
hence the term 'inflation' which caused
DEBT
the same thing happens today
its an endless cycle of debt
no matter what
mrpotatfacemn8675309 2 years ago
so the Bush administration is not to blame?
chefextra 2 years ago
I don't think you can narrow the problem down to the point where you can credibly blame one presidential administration or another. However, I'd say many of the conditions that made the naked shorting component of the economic meltdown possible were put in place under the Bush (43) administration. But the hyper-leveraging that has made the meltdown so enduring was largely a product of the Clinton years.
But to make this a partisan issue is a big mistake, in my opinion.
writerjudd 2 years ago
thanks for your reply and for the informative videos, i have subscribed to your channel
chefextra 2 years ago
wait-a-minute! so the Rothschild's weren't involved in the global melt down!?
There goes the whole NWO/ Illuminati conspiracy aspect!
....unless they are behind Chanos and the hedge funds!!
I Knew It! Curse you Rothschild!!!!!!
servicetradescom 2 years ago
Ha ha...the other day I saw this video being discussed on a forum for Freemasons, none of which claimed to be familiar with my arguments before seeing it. I had to laugh, thinking: "this must be something really BIG if the *Masons* don't even know about it!"
writerjudd 2 years ago
Socialism has proven to be a failed experiment. So why try it again? I'm not some NWO conspiracy theorist. I understand that entrepreneurship is the engine that runs our economy, that real production and growth comes from savings and investment (not redistribution of the same wealth), that a sound currency is key to a stable economy, that lower taxes/less regulation= more growth, more innovation, and a better quality of life for all. Is this view really so radical?
BikiniBabe1985 2 years ago
If you interpreted this video as a call for socialism then either you weren't paying attention or I've completely failed as the video's creator.
Among the points I was trying to make was that we don't need more regulations...we just need the regulations we (mistakenly) assumed were being enforced to actually be enforced. See, there's the punchline: all along we thought we had a functioning SEC to protect us. But we didn't. Just ask Bernard Madoff. He'll back me up on this point.
writerjudd 2 years ago
You are correct on that point, the SEC does not protect us and realistically cannot protect us. Anyone who actually understands the complexity of financial markets should also understand that no government agency can possibly monitor the myriad of activity. You endorsed Barack Obama's financial "reform" efforts that are not much more than government takeover of the financial system. You also made a reference to Michael Moore who we all know explicitly hates the free market.
BikiniBabe1985 2 years ago
I didn't "endorse" Obama's financial reforms. However, he is the only President we have and I think we can all agree that this time last year he was talking the talk. That his walk has since not measured up is, unfortunately, something most everybody agrees now on.
As for Michael Moore...you can't blame me for trying to influence the process, can you? This video was made months before Moore's "Capitalism", back when it seemed he might actually be open to learning about what really happened.
writerjudd 2 years ago
Oh c'mon, Michael Moore has been promoting socialism for over 20 years. This talk of financial regulation only distracts us from the real problems we face, such as: a phony economy that has been financed entirely by borrowing and spending, the destruction of our currency from reckless fiscal/monetary policy, and a subsequent stagflation that is inevitably on the horizon. All this bashing and blaming of the free market is only going to speed up a train that was already headed off a cliff.
BikiniBabe1985 2 years ago 2
umm Idk the president is too concentrated on the health care reform. To me that is pointless... we need jobs... if we have a jobs we can pay for medicine even if its too expensive, otherwise we cant!!
fesebuv 2 years ago
@writerjudd I think I can add a tentative "amen." Instead of enforcement, laws, laws, and still more laws are piled one on top of the other as a "feel good" bone tossed to the public, instead of enforcing what we already have. This applies not only to finance, but many endeavors that government tries to "protect," and therefore wrecks with its ham-like fists.
mbabist01 2 years ago
nuthing runs the economy engine, if the economy engine siezed
ambinautic 2 years ago
In the 1990s Americans spent their money on imported products because we lacked the industrial capacity to produce ourselves, so money went abroad. That kept a lid on prices. Foreigners used those dollars that we created to bid up U.S. stocks that produced rising stock prices. When the stock market bubble burst, foreigners then recycled those dollars into the bond market. That a produced a rise in bond prices and dropped interest rates allowing Americans to bid up real estate prices.
BikiniBabe1985 2 years ago
Americans then used their home equity to borrow more money and send more dollars abroad, which foreigners then used to bid up natural resource prices that are necessary in the production process. Rising stock prices, rising real-estate prices, rising commodity prices are all a result of the result of the inflation that the Federal Reserve has been creating.
The Federal Reserve central bank, not a small group of hedge fund investors, destroyed our economy.