"Nagging worries" about the banks

That's the word Jack Healy uses to describe the 4.3% sell off in the S&P today (S. & P. Down More Than 4% as Financial Fears Return)

Those concerns were fueled by a few things:

1. The realization that BoA's 'earnings' were mostly due to accounting changes and one-time events, neither of which is sustainable
2. The Goldman accounting gimmickry from last week which was so obvious to all really sunk in over the weekend. Trust in Goldman is shaken, even on Wall St, and folks wonder why the gimmick was buried on page 7 of their earnings report
3. The Obama plan floated in the Times today to convert existing loans to banks to common stock is really just shuffling deck chairs, and does absolutely nothing about underlying insolvencies
4. Ken Lewis being frank for the first time in a while in announcing that credit conditions will get significantly worse
5. The realization that the consumer is really in bad shape, which has been obvious, but which has been overlooked. Housing is not bottoming, retail is hideous, employment will continue to weaken, home equity is gone, savings have been stripped, etc etc....

Thing is, these 'nagging' worries will continue to nag until some form of the inevitable and overdue nationalization takes place, alas.

<>

The only things holding this back are 1. fear of political repercussions (Socialist!) and 2. hope that the economy is improving, and banks will heal as consumers do. But consumers aren't healing, and once the next round of badness blows in in July, august, September, the failure to have taken dramatic action will appear to have been the bigger political (and economic) miscalculation...

Goldmansachs666.com

Barry Ritholtz says it best this morning:

Today, I added a new blog to the blog roll for the first time in months.


I urge you to do the same.

Why? Because they were sued by GS for criticizing the firm:

• 
  “Goldman Sachs Group Inc. has been called many things over the years. Plenty of people have raged against its power and wealth. If you spend decades as the most successful investment bank, it goes with the territory. Calling it the devil may be going a bit far, though, even for the flinty-hearted employees of the New York-based bank.
  Last month, a blog called Goldmansachs666.com was set up. Goldman Sachs has taken legal action against the site, alleging it infringes a trademark in the phrase “Goldman Sachs.” The owner of the site, investment adviser Mike Morgan of Jensen Beach, Florida, has promised to contest the litigation and pursue similar campaigns against other banks.
  “They might think it is just a Mickey Mouse Web site, but we’re coming after them,” Morgan said in a telephone interview. “It would be really stupid for the banks to try and stop us. But banks do stupid things all the time.”

Let’s review your tax dollars at work: Godlman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson lobbied the SEC to allow the 5 largest iBanks to be exempt from net capital rules, and then leverage up 40 to 1. Which they did, especially with Mortgage-backed paper and derivatives. Then he becomes Treasury Secretary, and transfers from the taxpayers to these same iBanks — some directly, and some thru AIG — trillions of dollars.


Now, the taxpayer subsidized disaster creator is thin skinned about criticism. Note that the trademark claim is bullshit — its well settled law, via WalmartSucks.com. This 2000 case was originally found in favor of Wal-Mart by World Intellectual Property Organization but later reversed. Walmartsucks.com is no longer operating, but a new site, Walmartsucks.org appears to be run by author Kenneth J. Harvey. As another example of the legality of the “–sucks.com” sites, see also, disney-sucks.com.
>

No one seems to ever learn: If you want to close a critical site down, you ignore — you don’t sue them.


Thus, we add Goldmansachs666.com to the blog roll. If you have a blog, I STRONGLY suggest you do the same.