Do you remember
this little nugget from George Soros? He stated that "an orderly decline [of the dollar] is desirable." Then, in late July, he
shuttered his hedge fund to outside investors, citing that there were too many federal regulations in last year's
financial reform law for his liking. Seems the SEC would require him to reveal what he was doing. Hmmm.
Regulations for thee, but not for me.
In the reform law, in part written by the lobby group, Managed Funds Association, of which Soros is a member,
hedge fund regulations were weakened, and what better way for him to consolidate his power, than to exempt himself as a private, family-only hedge fund manager. It's perfectly legal, you know.
After all, that provision is in the law, signed by President Obama
.
Speaking of "orderly," did you know that
Title II of the same financial reform package includes something called, the
Orderly Liquidation Authority. Wow,
it almost sounds like the reformers and Soros are using the same language. Title II gives the federal government the power to liquidate financial institutions/insurance agencies it regards as "threatening to the financial stability of the U.S." Shut. Them. Down.
Ahh. The power of the State. Do the lawmakers ever even read these bills?
So, here comes the
S&P downgrade. Timing is everything. Have we not been on this spending binge for decades, unable to cut the size and scope of government? Have we not printed trillions of dollars in order to satisfy our need for more debt? Were we really deserving of a AAA rating all of this time?
So, the question is,
Why now? Could it be that all systems are finally in place for the completion of the fundamental
destruction transformation?
Who could be pulling the strings?
According to
a story in Examiner.com, about the same time as
Soros privatized his hedge fund, to escape the eyes of federal regulators, a "mystery investor" made a nearly $1 billion bet that the U.S. would lose its AAA credit rating, and about a week later... voila... the downgrade. The mystery investor stands to make a return of 1000%. That's $10 billion. This leads to serious questions about who the mystery trader is, and did they have insider information well beforehand. Some speculate it is Soros.
I have little doubt that this is all being orchestrated.
So orderly.
Since 2007, S&P, and other credit ratings agencies, have been criticized for giving their highest ratings to risky entities (Fannie and Freddie) and risky pools of loans (
CDOs,
ADPs, etc), since investors trusted their highest AAA ratings. Investors lost hundreds of millions of dollars in the housing crash and subsequent economic meltdown.
Some argue that the ratings agencies didn't just aid in the housing crash, they, along with Congress (
Community Reinvestment Act), and Fannie and Freddie (who S&P also recently downgraded) caused it, as congressional and financial "experts" manipulated reality at the expense of trusting Americans. The general public was uninformed and unsuspecting. But these "experts" knew the risks. They should have told the people.
Critics also point out that the ratings agencies are paid by the companies they rate, calling into question their objectivity, as the agencies are seemingly beholden to these companies.
And now these same ratings agencies are under federal
control, pressure, oversight, as part of last year's so-called
financial reform law.
Who else are the ratings agencies beholden to? Is S&P involved with those in power to bring about an orderly decline of the dollar?
Excerpt from Title IX of the financial reform law of July, 2010...
- Subtitle C - Improvements to the Regulation of Credit Rating Agencies
Recognizing credit ratings issued by credit rating agencies, including nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (NRSROs), are matters of national public interest, that credit rating agencies are critical “gatekeepers” in the debt market central to capital formation, investor confidence, and the efficient performance of the United States economy, Congress expanded regulation of credit rating agencies.[134]
Subtitle C cites findings of conflicts of interest and inaccuracies during the recent financial crisis contributed significantly to the mismanagement of risks by financial institutions and investors which in turn adversely impacted the health of the United States economy as factors necessitating increased accountability and transparency by credit rating agencies.[135]
Subtitle C mandates the creation by the SEC of an Office of Credit Ratings (OCR) to provide oversight over NRSROs and enhanced regulation of such entities.[136]
Securities and Exchange Commission
Subtitle C grants authority to the Commission to temporarily suspend or permanently revoke the registration of an NRSRO with respect to a particular class or subclass of securities if after notice and hearing the NRSRO lacks the resources to produce credit ratings with integrity.[137] Additional key provisions of the Act are:
- The Commission shall prescribe rules with respect to credit rating procedures and methodologies.
- OCR is required to conduct an examination of each NRSRO at least annually and shall produce a public inspection report.
- To facilitate transparency of credit ratings performance, the Commission shall require NRSROs to publicly disclose information on initial and revised credit ratings issued, including the credit rating methodology utilized and data relied on, to enable users to evaluate NRSROs.
Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations
Enhanced regulations of credit rating agencies include:
- NRSROs are required to establish, maintain, enforce and document an effective internal control structure governing the implementation of and adherence to policies, procedures, and methodologies for determining credit ratings.[137]
- Submit to the OCR an annual internal control report.
- Adhere to rules established by the Commission to prevent sales and marketing considerations from influencing the ratings issued by a NRSRO.
- Policies and procedures with regard to (1) certain employment transitions to avoid conflicts of interest, (2) the processing of complaints regarding NRSRO noncompliance, and (3) notification to users of identified significant errors are required.
- Compensation of the compliance officer may not be linked to the financial performance of the NRSRO.
- The duty to report to appropriate authorities credible allegations of unlawful conduct by issuers of securities.[137]
- The consideration of credible information about an issuer from sources other than the issuer or underwriter which is potentially significant to a rating decision.
- The Act establishes corporate governance, organizational, and management of conflict of interest guidelines. A minimum of 2 independent directors is required.[137]
In addition, Subtitle C requires the SEC to conduct a study on strengthening NRSRO independence and recommends the SEC utilize its rulemaking authority to establish guidelines to prevent improper conflicts of interest arising from the performance of services unrelated to the issuance of credit ratings such as consulting, advisory, and other services.[138] The Act requires the Comptroller General of the United States to conduct a study on alternative business models for compensating NRSROs[139]
