Archive for March 2, 2011

ATM glitch gives CBA customers ‘free’ cash

UPDATED Andrew Colley

A COMMONWEALTH Bank system outage today turned into a nightmare for the bank when its ATMs began dispensing large sums of cash to customers without funds.

Late this afternoon NSW Police reported that around 40 ATMs operated by a “major bank” were dispensing large amounts of excess cash.

A Commonwealth Bank spokesman late today confirmed that the rogue ATMs were operated by the bank and that the problems were linked to the system outage.

The bank spokesman said the affected ATMs were “not accidentally or randomly dispensing cash; our ATMs are currently operating and have been operating in standby mode.

“That means the ATM … can’t identify the customers’ account balance.

“Some have deliberately withdrawn more money than is in their account … and we will be recouping those funds.”

NSW Police state fraud chief Detective Superintendent Col Dyson today warned consumers who failed to return the money to the bank could face criminal charges.

“People should realise that even though an ATM has dispensed cash, they are not entitled to that money and are committing a criminal offence if they keep it,” Detective Superintendent Dyson said.

“They should also realise that ATM locations are covered extensively by surveillance”.

It’s understood that police have at least one ATM under police guard in Sydney’s west.

Earlier in the day the bank reported that the problem had left customers without access to its NetBank, Bpay and phone banking systems.

“The CBA is working to restore service as matter urgency. Full service is expected to resume this afternoon,” a bank spokeswoman said.

The bank said the problem was caused by a glitch during “routine database maintenance” overnight.

The bank was still trying to determine the extent of the customer impact, according to a CBA spokeswoman.

“We are working on it,” she said.

Australian consumers’ faith in electronic banking systems has recently been shaken by a series of high impact system outages.

Last year National Australia Bank had a catastrophic system outage which left thousands of customers without access to ATMs.

That outage was also caused by problems with overnight transaction processing. NAB’s transaction records were plunged into chaos by a corrupt file which was incorrectly loaded into NAB overnight processing systems.

IT departments at financial institutions such as CBA, Westpac, ANZ, HSBC, Citibank and Bank of Queensland went on high alert at the time when they did not receive daily records of NAB transactions.

The Commonwealth Bank today advised customers needing to conduct urgent fund transfers to visit their local branches.

The bank had not put on extra staff to manage increased loads at branches, the spokeswoman said.

“Customers can still access ATMs and Eftpos with branch staff available to handle any other requirements,” the spokeswoman said.

Police said that it was working with the CBA to determine the cause of the ATM malfunctions.

Earlier today the bank said it was hoping to restore all its services to normal by the end of the day.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/australian-it/cba-tech-glitch-hits-online-atm-systems/story-e6frgakx-1226014220924

Oman deploys Army to Squash Protests

Oman deployed troops north of the capital Muscat and near the border with the United Arab Emirates on Tuesday, following three straight days of anti-government protests, a government official said.

Oman, ruled by a powerful family dynasty, is the latest Arab nation to be swept up in a wave of regional unrest that has already brought down two leaders and threatened the rule of others.

The center of protests in Oman has been the port town of Sohar, about 120 miles (200 kilometers) northwest of Muscat, where demonstrators demanding higher salaries and jobs have clashed with security forces.

Police killed a protester in Sohar on Saturday, after demonstrations turned violent. Several government buildings and a supermarket were set on fire, local media reported.

Anticipating more unrest, the government deployed troops and military vehicles around the capital and near Oman’s border with the UAE, a government official said Tuesday. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to release information to the media

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_OMAN_PROTESTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-03-01-09-02-50

Shit is just getting more insane. Not only do they tax for everything even for dying, but now they will tax you on how much you spend. Are they TRYING to crash the economy? Do they seriously think any good will come of this. Why would you want to limit how much an individual spends? What’s it anyone’s business how much I or you spend. The banks job is not to decide how and how much money to spend, but to take your deposit, shut up, and put it in safe keeping. It’s bad enough they can take your money and throw it on the stock market and make a killing dispersing a measly .5% or less back to it’s “valued” customers. This will cause several things

1. Bank deposits will shrink

2. People will become broker

3. People will become enraged.

It’s almost like this is all being done on purpose. A third grader can get this right. This is common sense, how in the hell are these men running this country?

Big Banks May Impose Debit Card Purchase Limits

by Simon Zhen

Talks of the impending debit interchange fee caps are pushing big banks to consider imposing limits on debit card purchases.

According to the Federal Reserve, debit cards have become the most popular form of non-cash payments in the United States.

The Fed’s proposal to cap the interchange fees at 7 to 12 cents per debit transaction, which would reduce the particular channel of bank revenue by as much as 84 percent.

Banks Could Limit Debit Card Transactions

Most likely to take the biggest revenue losses are the largest banks including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Citigroup. They are deliberating the possibility of placing a limit on each debit card purchase to $50 – $100, if interchange fees are capped, reported ABC News.

As the public comment period on the Federal Reserve’s proposal came to a close on Feb. 22, banks implored Congress to reconsider due to the possible adverse effects that the changes would have on low-income consumers, the banking industry, and the U.S. payment systems.

With the chances of the big banks limiting the size of a debit card purchase, consumers would have to choose between the using traditional, inconvenient payment options such as cash and paper checks or the debt-burdening credit card. Banks would be happier if shoppers decide to use credit cards for larger purchases because the proposed interchange fee rules do not apply to credit card swipe transactions.

The Fed is expected to finalize the new rules from now until April. Revisions to the debit interchange fee caps remain possible and the big banks will most likely react accordingly in their best interest. It is just one more way that this particular provision of the Dodd-Frank Act can affect consumers directly.

http://www.mybanktracker.com/bank-news/2011/03/01/big-banks-impose-debit-card-purchase-limits/?utm_source=MyBankTracker.com&utm_campaign=6303358400-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email

This just in. Georgia STATE officials (legislators) have now put forth a bill 91 Republicans and 1 Democrat claiming President Obama is unfit for presidency due to not being able to prove birth records. First, people were voicing opinions but it has gotten so serious state officials are now debating this?! If anyone has anymore info please let me know.

ATLANTA (AP) — A group of Georgia lawmakers have proposed legislation that questions whether President Barack Obama was born in the U.S. The proposal has the backing of 92 representatives, all but one of them Republicans. So-called “birthers” have contended since 2008 that Obama is ineligible to be president despite public records and newspaper notices of his birth.

http://www.9and10news.com/Category/Story/?id=283355&cID=3

Obama has decided to concede on one issue of his forced healthcare. Changing the dates for opt out from 2017 to 2014. Whoopty shit. He is not hearing the voice of the people which right now 51% of the states are saying “Unconstitutional”.  He said well you (the state) can opt out “only” ONLY if you can mandate a similar care program for cheaper. So what he said was “If you can spin this same shit with a different name” I’ll let you do it. Well, 2012 is almost here and he’ll hopefully be gone and have this crapshoot repealed.

Obama Agrees to Minor Change to Healthcare Law—But Why?

Written by Michael Tennant  

   

The Associated Press reports that President Barack Obama made “a concession over his divisive health care overhaul” during a February 28 address to state governors. The “concession” was a mild one indeed: Instead of forcing states to wait until 2017 to opt out of ObamaCare, Obama will allow them to opt out beginning in 2014, the year the individual mandate takes effect.

Similarly, there is also much less to that opt-out provision than meets the eye. “If your state can create a plan that can cover as many people as affordably and comprehensively as the Affordable Care Act does, without increasing the deficit, you can implement that plan and we’ll work with you to do it,” Obama explained. In other words, for a state to opt out of the federal version of ObamaCare, it must institute its own version of the law — and get its version approved by Washington. Some choice.

The AP notes that “the idea to move up the date for state experimentation did not start with Obama. Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon and Massachusetts Republican Sen. Scott Brown have already proposed it in legislation. But the president gave it a prominent endorsement.”

Why, the curious observer might ask, is the President endorsing this change, minor though it may be?

Brian Montopoli of CBS News thinks he may have the answer. With half the states suing to overturn all or part of ObamaCare, and with judges variously ruling that portions of it are or are not constitutional, the administration, says Montopoli, may be “trying to find a way around the legal challenges to the law by changing it to make them moot.” The White House, after all, does not want to take a chance on the Supreme Court’s finding the law unconstitutional.

Gregory Magarian, a constitutional law expert — which, naturally, means that he believes ObamaCare is constitutional — and law professor at Washington University in St. Louis, described to Montopoli the possible reasoning behind the move and what effect it might have on state lawsuits:

The constitutional challenges depend on the idea that the Affordable Care Act violates states’ prerogatives under the 10th Amendment. Following that logic, the opt-out simply gives states the option of capitulating to federal policy or submitting to an intrusive federal bureaucracy that … holds the states to standards of the federal law. The challengers might even argue that the terms of the opt-out amount to ‘commandeering’ of state governments, which the Supreme Court recognizes as a different sort of 10th Amendment violation, because — in the challengers’ view — the alternative to the opt-out is unconstitutional.

For what it’s worth, “two senior administration officials,” writes Montopoli, denied that the change was “designed to address court challenges to the law.”

Montopoli also offers an analysis of the dilemma for Republicans in Congress if Wyden and Brown’s legislation, now endorsed by Obama, comes up for a vote:

The measure does put Republicans in a difficult position in terms of how to vote. On the one hand, they have railed against the individual mandate as an encroachment of liberty — and this proposal allows states, at least in theory, to avoid it. That would seem to be a reason to vote for the change. On the other hand, the price for opting out is so high that conservatives could see the proposal as an attempt to force an overreaching health care plan onto states by any means possible. And they certainly don’t want to change the law in a way that could keep it from being overturned by the Supreme Court.

In fact, because the legislation would change so little — merely advancing the date at which states can choose to institute their own brands of ObamaCare — it wouldn’t seem to present a big problem for the GOP. Republicans all voted against the healthcare bill the first time around; and since this legislation doesn’t change any fundamentals of the law, they have little to gain by voting for it. The law is, after all, patently unconstitutional. Changing one date doesn’t alter that in the slightest.

The fact that the administration may believe that it can tweak the law to avoid challenges to its constitutionality — and may succeed in doing so — underscores the necessity of pursuing repeal of the law at the federal level or nullification of it at the state level. Lawsuits are always dicey, and never more so than in federal courts in the 21st century. Even a successful challenge at the Supreme Court level might only overturn parts of ObamaCare, leaving other, equally dangerous portions intact. With repeal hardly an option as long as Obama is in the White House, “the real answer is for states to nullify” the law, as John McManus, president of The John Birch Society, told The New American’s Kelly Holt. “There is,” McManus added, “no alternative but nullification of ObamaCare.”

Clinton Tells Qaddafi “Surrender Now”; More Protests in Yemen, Bahrain, Oman

Libyan rebels now hold about 80% of the country. France is sending an airlift of medical supplies, including doctors and nurses to aid the rebels. Think anything else might be in those planes?

Regardless, Qaddafi is holed up in Tripoli with options growing smaller by the day. The only country that might take him is Venezuela. Why anyone would take him is beyond me.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has stepped up the rhetoric as International Pressure on Qaddafi Intensifies.

An international campaign to force Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi out of office gathered pace on Monday as the European Union adopted an arms embargo and other sanctions, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton bluntly told the Libyan leader to surrender power “now, without further violence or delay.”

Germany proposed a 60-day ban on financial transactions, and a spokeswoman for Catherine Ashton, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, said that contacts were being established with the opposition.

Italy’s foreign minister on Sunday suspended a nonaggression treaty with Libya on the grounds that the Libyan state “no longer exists,” while Mrs. Clinton said the United States was reaching out to the rebels to “offer any kind of assistance.”

France said it was sending medical aid. Prime Minister François Fillon said planes loaded with doctors, nurses and supplies were heading to the rebel-controlled eastern city of Benghazi, calling the airlift “the beginning of a massive operation of humanitarian support for the populations of liberated territories.”

Across the region, the tumult that has been threatening one autocratic government after another since the turn of the year continued unabated. In Yemen, protests drove President Ali Abdullah Saleh to make a bid for a unity government, but the political opposition rapidly refused. An opposition leader, Mohamed al-Sabry, said in a statement that the president’s proposal was a “desperate attempt” to counter major protests planned for Tuesday.

In Bahrain, protesters blocked access to Parliament, according to news agencies. In Oman, whose first major protests were reported over the weekend, demonstrations turned violent in the port city of Sohar, and spread for the first time to the capital, Muscat.

Third Night of Protests in Oman

Bloomberg reports Youth Protests Enter Third Night as Sultan Promises to Create Jobs

Hundreds of Omani protesters gathered in the city of Sohar for a third night, demanding that the government open talks on their demands for more jobs, higher pay and more representative political institutions.

Khaled Maqbuli, a leader of the protest, called on the demonstrators at a roundabout in the center of Sohar, north of the capital, Muscat, to stay peaceful and avoid confrontation with the army and the police. Two people were killed, several wounded and a supermarket set on fire over the past two days.

“We are peaceful, we have demands, we are not saboteurs,” Maqbuli, 26, said through a loudspeaker. “We want the government to send civilian people to discuss our demands; we have nothing to say to the military.”

Sultan Qaboos Bin Said, the country’s ruler since 1970, “has received the demands of the citizens in all the provinces and is giving them his attention,” state television reported.

If governments could easily create jobs they would. Look no further than the US for proof. Only private enterprise can create jobs, at least lasting ones.

Governments can only take wealth from one place and distribute it elsewhere, by taxation, by force, or by the hidden tax of inflation that comes from printing money. When the stimulus ends, so do the jobs, except the bureaucratic ones, where massive pension problems and needless bureaucrats remain.

Mike “Mish” Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com

Is China more free enterprise than the US? Does China have more financial knowledge than the USA? I believe so as it realizes paper can come and go but precious is forever and there is only so much of it. Wow, if China gets on the gold standard it is going to rock the world and the US, which has us by the leash so to speak, and massive trading deficit.

Communist China Embraces the Gold Standard
Written by Daniel Sayani   

In one of the most ironic and revealing moves in the unfolding of relations between the United States and China, China has announced that it is seeking a shift to the gold standard. According to the World Gold Council, the market development organization for the gold industry, China’s appetite for gold has been rapidly expanding: It consumed 175.2 tons of gold in the fourth quarter of 2010, bringing its grand total for the year to 579.5 tons, or 18.5 million ounces. By comparison, the United States consumed a mere 233.3 tons of gold in 2010. While it is unknown how much of China’s gold acquisitions were made by private citizens, industry, or central banks, speculations remain as to what the country’s true intentions are regarding its continued massive purchase and use of the gold.The financial news source The Street reports that many in the gold community theorize that China wants its yuan to become the world’s reserve currency, and is buying gold and silver in order to accomplish that goal:

A Chinese gold standard?

The idea is staggering and not to mention fraught with difficulties. China’s central bank currently holds 1,054 tons of gold, about 1.8% of its total reserves.

China currently holds $2.85 trillion in foreign reserves. This means the country would need to buy roughly 66,000 tons of gold to fully back its currency. Even if the country upped the ante to just 3%, the country would need to buy 1,000 tons.

China has also been telling its citizens to buy gold, promoting different gold funds, giving investors access to overseas products and launching a global gold contract based in yuan by Chinese Gold & Silver Exchange. The ICBC and World Gold Council recently teamed up for the creation of the Only Gold Gift Bar in China, where a customer can buy gold as a gift complete with engraving and can sell it back to the ICBC for cash.

China’s gambit for global dominance, therefore, rests upon the notion that it must impose economic policies that will boost its power, prosperity, and economic strength. While staying true to the theoretical foundations and assumptions of the communist state, including its commitment to the principles of Marxism-Leninism and Maoism, China realizes that in order for the communist state to be strengthened and prevail victorious, it must incorporate some classical principles and economic concepts associated with capitalism.

Karl Marx believed that all states progressed through a series of several economic stages, culminating in a communist state. Observing economic history in his native Germany, Marx believed that states proceeded from capitalism to socialism, and then culminated in outright communism. Since China never before had a Western-style communist economy, it is now embracing capitalism — not in its true laissez-faire, free-market form, but within the context of centrally-planned state capitalism. After the death of Mao Zedong in 1976, under Deng Jiaoping China began embracing elements of state capitalism, and in 2002, its pantheon of communist theory expanded to include Jiang Zemin’s Theory of Three Represents, which includes an emphasis on economic production, and “represents advanced social productive forces.”

China’s turn toward hard currency in the form of the gold standard is the latest development in its pursuit of wealth and power through state capitalism. This trend has rightly raised the concern of those who fear a dominant Red China, as reported in the Wall Street Journal:

Central to China’s approach are policies that champion state-owned firms and other so-called national champions, seek aggressively to obtain advanced technology, and manage its exchange rate to benefit exporters. It leverages state control of the financial system to channel low-cost capital to domestic industries — and to resource-rich foreign nations whose oil and minerals China needs to maintain rapid growth.

China’s policies are partly a product of its unique status: a developing country that is also a rising superpower. Its leaders don’t assume the market is preeminent. Rather, they see state power as essential to maintaining stability and growth, and thereby ensuring continued Communist Party rule.

It’s a model with a track record of getting things done, especially at a time when public faith in the efficacy of markets and the competence of politicians is shaken in much of the West. Already the world’s biggest exporter, China is on track to pass Japan this year as the second-biggest economy.

Western critics say China’s practices are a form of mercantilism aimed at piling up wealth by manipulating trade. They point to China’s $2.6 trillion in foreign-exchange reserves. The U.S. and the European Union have lodged a series of WTO cases and other trade actions targeting Beijing’s policies, and hammer China’s refusal to let its currency appreciate more quickly, which they argue fuels global economic imbalances.

Similar to China’s economic ascendancy is that of Russia, which has been described as embracing state capitalism as early as under the days of dictator Joseph Stalin’s rule, and to an even greater extent under the rule of its current leader, Vladimir Putin. Tony Cliff, in his book Russia: A Marxist Analysis, first identified Stalinism as a form of state capitalism in 1955, and most recently, Andrei Illarianov, Putin’s former economic adviser, defected from Russia to become a fellow at the Cato Institute, due to what he observed as state capitalism. Illarianov also cautioned that the West, especially the United States, is emboldening and enriching hostile regimes such as Russia and China, through continued investments and economic agreements:

“This is the usual state of affairs of the West. As strange as it may seem, in actuality the West during the course of two centuries, and, perhaps, even longer, has supported any regimes at all. What is important for the West is its own short-term interests. And the West supports relations, including commercial ones, as we know, with Russian special services generals, and with Chinese communists, and with Iranian ayatollahs, and with Saddamist generals… In the 1930s, the West actively cooperated with Hitler’s regime — the flow of French, American and British investments into Germany was huge.”

“…[s]o one simply needs to understand that that state of affairs which many of us remember from the period of the cold war, when partially certain western leaders — Reagan and Thatcher — took a moral political position in relation to the Soviet Union — such a phenomenon is historically still the exception, and not the rule. The west is extremely pragmatic and sufficiently lacking in principle in relation to external phenomena.”

Russia has also moved toward adopting the gold standard, as previously reported by The Telegraph:

Arkady Dvorkevich, the Kremlin’s chief economic adviser, said Russia would favour the inclusion of gold bullion in the basket-weighting of a new world currency based on Special Drawing Rights issued by the International Monetary Fund.

Chinese and Russian leaders both plan to open debate on an SDR-based reserve currency as an alternative to the US dollar at the G20 summit in London this week, although the world may not yet be ready for such a radical proposal.

Mr Dvorkevich said it was “logical” that the new currency should include the rouble and the yuan, adding that “we could also think about more effective use of gold in this system.”

Like Russia, which is seeking to strengthen its currency in order to overtake what economist Joseph Liu called dollar hegemony, China has been manipulating its currency and trying to beef up the yuan to make it a more viable global currency. The website of the People’s Bank of China says it is trying to allow banks and businesses in countries such as Russia and the U.S. to be able to make direct investments in the yuan, which essentially brings the once-isolated currency onto the world stage. The website explains that this move “better support[s] Chinese enterprises to go abroad and facilitate trades and investments.”

Even United States citizens realize the economic superiority of China over the beleaguered American economy, which consistently operates contrary to the capitalistic principles elevating China to wealth at America’s expense. While communist China moves in the direction of market reforms, decentralization, and privatization, including embracing the gold standard, the United States continues to pursue a destructive course of deficit spending, Keynesian economics, unsound and unsubstantiated currency, and economic nationalization. It seems as if Red China has embraced capitalism to a greater extent than the United States, and while Fort Knox remains empty, China has even begun investing in American gold reserves, as reported by The Street (which also notes that because both the United States and China are signatories to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) Articles of Agreement, Article IV, Amendment I, ratified in 1978, member countries are forbidden from switching over to a gold standard; they are not allowed to peg their currencies to gold):

But that doesn’t mean that China won’t try to legitimize its currency by ramping up its gold holdings. The U.S., which sports the current world reserve currency, holds more than 8,000 tons of gold, more than 8 times the size of the SPDR Gold Shares [the largest gold exchange traded product and second largest exchange-traded fund in the world by market capitalization, accounting for over 80 percent of the gold within the Exchange Traded Gold group].

Not only has China been furiously buying gold, but local gold producers have been looking outside the country to find more gold. State-controlled China National Gold Corp bought half of Coeur d’Alene Mines’ gold concentrates from its Kensington gold mine in Alaska.

This seems to be in fulfillment of Vladimir Lenin’s prophetic warning that Communists would “hang the capitalists with the rope they sell us,” as China economically surpasses the United States as it adopts the gold standard, using gold obtained from American mines. In fact, as far back as June 2009, China has been encouraging its citizens and companies to purchase as much American gold, assets, land, and commodities as possible, much of which China owns as part of America’s indebtedness to China. According to a Reuters report, then-head of the Chinese Communist Party Economic Department policy research office Li Lianzhong declared that Beijing should use more of its massive foreign exchange reserves to buy gold to support its aim of raising the international role of the yuan currency, and encourage domestic enterprises to acquire foreign energy and natural resource assets by using part of the foreign exchange reserves. Furthermore, Chinese state TV has been featuring numerous Chinese investors trading in yuan paper notes for bars of gold, with China becoming the world’s largest buyer of gold. To quote Wang Zhenying, an official from the People’s Bank of China:

China will likely develop more yuan-denominated gold investment products, thus utilizing the more than 30 trillion yuan in savings the country has. A currency’s international status depends on its being accepted in trade and settlement and having certain international commodities denominated in that currency helps China’s goal to internationalize the yuan. Gold is a good choice to have yuan trading.

It is a sad day for the United States when China adopts economic policies more capitalistic than the United States, and when Beijing is more willing to embrace the ideas of hard-currency advocates such as Murray Rothbard, Ludwig Von Mises, Lewis Lehrman, and Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) than is Washington, D.C. As long as America continues down its destructive path and allows Fort Knox to remain barren, China will keep on charging toward its goal of global hegemony, overpowering the United States — using the “rope” we sold them and utilizing the facilitating means we so easily surrendered.

Has anyone heard about the earthquake that just rocked Arkansas?! What is going on? It was on the scale of a 5.5. That is a huge magnitude especially for a flatland state. I used to live in asia where we were on the fault line and 5.5 was a good size for us. Does anyone have some info explaining?