The Credit Crunch

[Coffeehouse]

Well, realistically and in the short term, adopting the Norwegian krone is much more feasible than joining the EU, which Iceland has consistently been against, and adopting the euro, a long process, which not even Denmark, Sweden have completed yet. A currency union is complicated, but doable, while joining the EU would represent a shift that Icelanders may not be willing to take. F.ex., the Icelandic fishing industry is stauncly against membership, understandably, since it would open Icelandic waters to the fleet of fishing boats that roam the seas under Spanish, Portuguese and British flags. A currency union is also possible to dismantle when the time is right, while joining the EU would be a one-wayer.
According to Professor Thórólfur Matthiasson a currency union with Norway is certainly more realistic in that respect since our economies are quite similar, with great emphasis on the fishing industry and on the energy sector. We are also both in the EEC which means we already follow the same set of EU directives. We have a broad range of cultural, economic and geopolitical similarities.

[Jonathan]

No, a long process wouldn't necessarily have to forego an EU membership. Last week Olli Rehn, the EU commissioner for enlargement, concluded that the EU member states could very well speed up an Icelandic application process. Thus it would be possible for Iceland to adopt the euro 3 years from now.

But of course, as you say, the Icelanders might still oppose a membership.

[Coffeehouse]

That is 3 years, late 2011. The point of going for the Norwegian Krone would be that it could be implemented quite speedily. Let it be said though that for the Icelandic people this would be the lesser of two evils. Going into a currency union with us would be a cut into their sovereignty, albeit only in one part of the financial sector, the currency, with supervision by the Norwegian Bank. Iceland, being the size of a city in Norway, would be able to adopt our currency for a time and then possibly move away from it again. Joining the EU however is a completely different ballgame and covers every possible aspect of the Icelandic economy and society, specifically the fishing industry which is a national engine and pride. That said, some point in the future I see both Iceland and Norway (if one joins the other would follow most likely) joining the EU and adopting the euro, but there isn't a political or public will to do this now I think.

[sisterandcousinandaunt]

Sounds like a good year to try out that ice hotel.

[Coffeehouse]

Yep, the usually expensive Iceland is going to turn into a relatively cheap paradise of hot springs and freshly-served restaurant salmon.

[inked]

Here is a quick look into 3 former Fannie Mae executives who have brought down Wall Street.

1. Franklin Raines: was a Chairman and Chief Executive Officer at Fannie Mae. Raines was forced to retire from his position with Fannie Mae when auditing discovered severe reregulates in Fannie Mae's accounting activities. At the time of his departure The Wall Street Journal noted, "Raines, who long defended the company's accounting despite mounting evidence that it wasn't proper, issued a statement late Tuesday conceding that "mistakes were made" and saying he would assume responsibility as he had earlier promised. News reports indicate the company was under growing pressure from regulators to shake up its management in the wake of findings that the company's books ran afoul of generally accepted accounting principles for four years." Fannie Mae had to reduce its surplus by $9 billion.

Raines left with a "golden parachute valued at $240 Million in benefits. The Government filed suit against Raines when the depth of the accounting scandal became clear. http://housingdoom.com/2006/12/18/fannie-charges/ . The Government noted, "The 101 charges reveal how the individuals improperly manipulated earnings to maximize their bonuses, while knowingly neglecting accounting systems and internal controls, misapplying over twenty accounting principles and misleading the regulator and the public. The Notice explains how they submitted six years of misleading and inaccurate accounting statements and inaccurate capital reports that enabled them to grow Fannie Mae in an unsafe and unsound manner." These charges were made in 2006. The Court ordered Raines to return $50 Million Dollars he received in bonuses based on the miss-stated Fannie Mae profits.

2. Tim Howard: Was the Chief Financial Officer of Fannie Mae. Howard "was a strong internal proponent of using accounting strategies that would ensure a "stable pattern of earnings" at Fannie. In everyday English - he was cooking the books. The Government Investigation determined that, "Chief Financial Officer, Tim Howard, failed to provide adequate oversight to key control and reporting functions within Fannie Mae,"

On June 16, 2006, Rep. Richard Baker, R-La ., asked the Justice Department to investigate his allegations that two former Fannie Mae executives lied to Congress in October 2004 when they denied manipulating the mortgage-finance giant's income statement to achieve management pay bonuses. Investigations by federal regulators and the company's board of directors since concluded that management did manipulate 1998 earnings to trigger bonuses. Raines and Howard resigned under pressure in late 2004.

Howard's Golden Parachute was estimated at $20 Million!


3. Jim Johnson: A former executive at Lehman Brothers and who was later forced from his position as Fannie Mae CEO. A look at the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight's May 2006 report on mismanagement and corruption inside Fannie Mae, and you'll see some interesting things about Johnson. Investigators found that Fannie Mae had hidden a substantial amount of Johnson's 1998 compensation from the public, reporting that it was between $6 million and $7 million when it fact it was $21 million." Johnson is currently under investigation for taking illegal loans from Countrywide while serving as CEO of Fannie Mae.


Johnson's Golden Parachute was estimated at $28 Million.

WHERE ARE THEY NOW?



1. FRANKLIN RAINES? Raines works for the Obama Campaign as Chief Economic Advisor


2. TIM HOWARD? Howard is also a Chief Economic Advisor to Obama


3. JIM JOHNSON? Johnson hired as a Senior Obama Finance Advisor and was selected to run Obama's Vice Presidential Search Committee

IF OBAMA PLANS ON CLEANING UP THE MESS - HIS ADVISORS HAVE THE EXPERTISE - THEY MADE THE MESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. Would you trust the men who tore Wall Street down to build the New Wall Street?

[brownjenkins]

The stupid delay... that is completely pointless considering the post rate at entmoot these days... made me mispost.

[brownjenkins]

Good to see that Inked is still a master of selective reality.

Do a bit of research on Phil Gramm.

[GrayMouser]

Go here to see why everything that inked posted is totally false:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/fanniemae.asp

And BTW, inked, when you simply cut and paste someone else's words, even if it's from an anonymous e-mail smear, you're supposed to acknowledge that. Pretending that something that another person wrote is your own is called plagiarism.

[GrayMouser]

Or this, from FactCheck:

No, claims made in a chain e-mail are false. Jim Johnson advised on non-economic matters but quit after a week. Franklin Raines says he took a "couple of calls" but was never an adviser. We find no evidence Tim Howard ever had a connection to the Obama campaign.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec..._economic.html

And of course, inked, if you are in fact the original author of this anonymous chain e-mail, you have my apologies for the remarks above about plagiarism.

But, in that case, you should probably get over to Snopes, Factcheck, and wire.factcheck.org, and show them your original research pointing out where they are wrong

[Coffeehouse]

Originally Posted by GrayMouser

Or this, from FactCheck:




http://www.factcheck.org/askfactchec..._economic.html

And of course, inked, if you are in fact the original author of this anonymous chain e-mail, you have my apologies for the remarks above about plagiarism.

But, in that case, you should probably get over to Snopes, Factcheck, and wire.factcheck.org, and show them your original research pointing out where they are wrong

Lol... I rate that probability as low GM

[inked]

Ah, I see that people do fact check. I am impressed.

GM, Did you think that I wrote that? I am not sure whether I should be offended or not. It somehow lacks my pungency and wit. It is rather flat. You must have picked up on that immediately, what with your allegations of plagiarism. So you thought something askew and went for the jugular. Excellent.

So now you are "in the know" and so are Coffeehouse and myself. I am grateful. Any others reading must know that GM deserves kudos from me for correcting me.