12 Warning Signs of U.S. Hyperinflation

[Nordic]

jack, you're smarter than that, not sure why you're trying to pretend you aren't, to bullshit us? pm's aren't just another commodity, theyre considered money. real money. people aren't "buying" pm's, theyre converting funny money into real money. because they don't have faith in the fiat stuff.

and its not just speculators, investors, and the usual suspects, it's entire countries and governments doing this. nobody wants the funny money now. they want the real thing.

why is that? and is anyone addressing this? no. that's why it continues.

seriously, does anyone see any trend, anywhere, where anybody is taking charge and restoring any faith to the system? all i see are bandaids on a violently hemmoraging patient. not unlike the disaster in japan.

[Canadian_watcher]

didn't want to start a new thread, but the developments are bothering me.

-- Soros' Bretton Woods II scheduled for this weekend
-- Possible US federal government shut-down this weekend.

I just don't like it.

[vanlose kid]

Guest Post: Bullion Bank Trading – A Closely Guarded Secret
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/07/2011 14:30 -0400

Adrian Douglas submits: The latest LBMA clearing statistics (Feb 2011) reveal that the LBMA bullion bank members traded a total average net daily gold volume of 18.1 million ounces with a value of $24.8 billion. Some analysts have in the past estimated that the gross volume is likely to be 3-4 times the net volume giving potentially over 70 million ounces of gross gold trading worth 100 billion dollars. This would be equivalent to trading all the gold that is mined in world each year each and every day! Clearly the majority of this trading is unbacked by physical gold. The bullion banks only make a ledger entry for gold sold or bought and as long as the client never asks for delivery the bank never has to have the gold. I have through my studies indicated that probably 45 ounces of gold have been sold for each one that exists. The bullion banking business is very opaque but it struck me that if the members of the LBMA are collectively trading a net value of $6.2 trillion annually this should be laid out and explained in the bullion banks annual reports. In analyzing the Annual reports of the major bullion banks I made some astonishing discoveries. For most of these banks their bullion banking business is entirely hidden from the accounting. In the text there is almost no mention of gold, silver, bullion, or precious metals. In fact it is impossible to know that these banks are even in the bullion banking business let alone know anything about their trades, assets and liabilities. The only exception is Scotia Mocatta (see below). The bullion banking business is completely obscured from view in the annual reports. We know from our discussion that there should be revenues of $1.2 trillion annually reported which would make the activity the largest activity in any of the banks, yet instead it is entirely missing! How could such trading and references to it be almost entirely absent from these reports?

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest- ... k-trading-–-closely-guarded-secret

*

Surprising Observations From TrimTabs: "Are Central Bankers Loading Up On Gold?"
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/07/2011 13:02 -0400

When it comes to following the trail of money, capital flows specialist TrimTabs has traditionally focused on the stock market. In the past, TrimTabs' Charles Biderman has discussed how according to any reasonable calculations, there appears to be a key buyer missing among the usual market participant suspects, leading Biderman to conclude that the Fed may be buying stocks directly (or indirectly through Citadel as the case may be). To our surprise, in its most recent release, TrimTabs takes a look at the buyers in the gold market, and ends up with the same question: "Gold prices hit a record high in nominal terms for the second consecutive day. We are not sure who is driving up prices." The speculative conclusion: "Are central bankers loading up on gold as they crank up the printing presses and keep interest rates ridiculously low?" Of course, at first glance this would be preposterous as it has long been accepted that for the Fed a jump in surge prices is a very adverse development. Well, is it? Traditionally rising gold prices have been merely indicative of abnormally high inflation, which for the Fed was a "bad" thing in the past. Not so much any more, or at least since the advent of the "wealth effect" experiment. Recall that it is now the Fed's "goal" to give the impression of inflation (and reality for those who eat and use energy). This is based on Bernanke's false assumption that inflation is much more easily controllable (15 minutes...) than deflation. So while on the surface this may appear to be a preposterous claim, in reality there is nothing that prohibits a gold price surge in the context of the Fed's third mandate.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/surpri ... ading-gold

*



*

[vanlose kid]

didn't want to start a new thread, but the developments are bothering me.

-- Soros' Bretton Woods II scheduled for this weekend
-- Possible US federal government shut-down this weekend.

I just don't like it.

*

With One Day Left, Reid "Not Nearly Optimistic" Shutdown Can Be Avoided: A Run Down Through The Implications
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/07/2011 10:32 -0400

The picture for the ongoing operation of US government is looking bleaker by the day. According to The Hill, "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said that he'd grown pessimistic since last night's meeting at the White House about the chances to avoid a government shutdown. During a speech on the Senate floor, Reid said that in the hours since a meeting last night at the White House with President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), he'd grown less optimistic that a deal could be reached to avoid a shutdown. "I am not nearly as optimistic -- and that's an understatement -- as I was 11 hours ago," Reid said." And while the adverse effects of a government shutdown are appreciated by all, the good thing is that such a move will likely freeze the financial picture of the government at a snapshot of Friday's terms. This will be in advance of a week of heavy bond issuance, amount to over $70 billion. If one were to add $20-30 billion in refund issuance, the debt ceiling (and we mean the real deal - based on debt subject to the limit) which now has an $84 billion buffer until breach as of yesterday, could be busted as soon as next week. What better way to prevent that than to shut down the government completely.

And for those wondering what would be affected in a shutdown, here is a convenient summary from Stone McCarthy:

Obviously, the longer a government shutdown lasts, the more disruptive it will be. Many government services would continue despite a government shutdown, including those related to law enforcement, defense and national security. Most benefits, including Social Security would be paid, although those claiming benefits for the first time or requiring other assistance from the Social Security Administration would probably be out of luck.

Many other services that citizens may take for granted would also stop. For example, it wouldn't be possible to get a passport or visa. According to an Administration official who briefed the press this morning, the IRS would suspend processing of tax returns that are not filed electronically. At this point in the tax refund season, that suspension would affect a lot of returns. As the tax season progresses, the number of returns that are filed electronically tends to decline. Borrowers seeking mortgages insured by the FHA would have to wait for the shutdown to end. The Small Business Administration would also stop processing loan applications

Some economic releases would be disrupted under a prolonged government shutdown.

The release of economic data that is compiled by government agencies would likely be delayed. As a consequence of the 1995-1996 government shutdown, the December 1995 employment data wasn't released until January 19, and December 1995 retail sales data wasn't reported until January 30. (The blizzard of early '96 may have also played a role.) In some cases, it took a month or two for a normal release schedule to resume, even after the government shutdown ended. Economic data compiled by the Federal Reserve wouldn't be affected since the Fed isn't funded through the Congressional appropriations process. Also, data releases compiled by non-government entities wouldn't be impacted. An example would be existing home sales, which is reported by the National Association of Realtors.

Treasury auctions would not be affected.

According to a memo written by former Reagan budget director David Stockman in 1981, activities exempt from a shutdown include those "essential to the preservation of the essential elements of the money and banking system of the United States, including borrowing and tax collection activities of the Treasury." That memo was in effect, according to the Congressional Research Service in 1996, and we assume it would provide guidance for any shutdown that might occur in the current environment.

Significant numbers of federal workers could be furloughed.

In the five-day government shutdown of November 1995, 800,000 workers were furloughed. That number of workers amounted to just under 40% of the federal workforce of 2.04 million employees (excluding Postal workers, who would not be affected.) That shutdown wasn't a "full" government shutdown because three of 13 appropriations bills had been passed.

In the longer government shutdown of December 1995-January 1996, only 280,000 workers were placed on furlough; that's because another four appropriations bills had been passed since the November 1995 shutdown.

The White House official that briefed the press this morning said that about 800,000 workers would be affected by any shutdown that occurs after Friday. That seems to be smaller share of the federal workforce than was affected in 1995-1996 shutdowns, which were partial. Perhaps a larger number of federal workers are now deemed as essential, which wouldn't be surprising, given stepped up security efforts and our involvement in two wars. (Recall in 1995-1996, there was no Department of Homeland Security.)

Those workers who are furloughed during a shutdown don't get paid (Congress and the President still get paid) during the shutdown. In the past, they have received retroactive pay once they return to work, although our understanding is that Congress must act to make that happen. In other words, the retroactive pay is not automatic.

In other words: the POMO/equity MOMO party will most certainly continue even as most non-stock market speculators find their lives just modestly inconvenienced.

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/one-da ... mplication


More Details On What Government Shut Down Would Look Like
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/06/2011 13:01 -0400

*DJ Obama Admin Says IRS Would Shut Down If Budget Not Passed
*DJ Obama Admin Says National Parks, Smithsonian Would Close
*DJ Obama Admin: Cherry Blossom Festival Wouldn't Happen If Budget Not Passed
*DJ Obama Admin: Roughly 800,000 Govt Employees Would Be Affected By Shutdown
*DJ Obama Admin: EPA Permitting Would Stop If Budget Not Passed
*DJ Obama Admin: Social Security Beneficiaries Would Continue To Receive Payments
*DJ Obama Admin: Electronic Tax Refunds, Collections Would Continue
*DJ Obama Admin: Military, Law Enforcement Will Continue To Function
*DJ Obama Admin: Military Personnel Would Earn Paychecks, But Not Receive Them Immediately
*DJ Obama Admin: White House Staffing Would Be Lower During Shutdown
*ZH: POMO will continue come rain or snow: Russell 36,000 will not be denied, US bankruptcy notwithstanding

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/more-d ... would-look


Gates, in Iraq, Talks of Effects of Budget Fight

By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Published: April 7, 2011

BAGHDAD — On what he described as probably his final visit to Iraq, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Thursday turned from eight years of war here to the fight raging at home. If the United States government shuts down this weekend and into next week, he told American troops, there would be a delay in their pay...

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/08/world ... ss&emc=rss

*

[Alfred Joe's Boy]

I don't know how to post a video, so here is a link to Cryptogon and a fine rant by Gerald Celente:
http://cryptogon.com/?p=21679

[2012 Countdown]

Apr 7, 2011
Silver's streak: Is silver the new gold?
Price at 31-year high as investors see it as a good hedge against uncertainty
By Aaron Low, Economics Correspondent



Entrepreneur Joshua Thia holding an American Silver Eagle coin. The 26-year-old runs a business importing silver coins and bars and selling them to individual investors, and says he would not be surprised if silver doubles in value in the next few years -- ST PHOTO: SAMUEL HE

SILVER is glittering more brightly than gold for many investors, even though its price lags far behind that of the more glamorous metal.

Gold, though, has lost none of its lustre, rallying yesterday to a record high of US$1,461.20 after rising 3 per cent since the start of the year.

But the shinier metal in terms of recent percentage gains is undoubtedly silver, which broke a 31-year-old record by reaching US$39.52 an ounce yesterday.

Its price has outpaced gold's by a mile, doubling since last year and rising 30 per cent since January this year.

Analysts said investors have been buying up the two metals as a hedge against uncertainty in the Arab world, rising inflation and sliding major currency values.

'It is unquestionable that the demand for these precious metals derives from the devaluation of the leading currencies, the dollar, the pound and the euro,' Mr Angelos Damaskos, a fund manager at Sector Investment Managers, told Reuters. 'Investors are looking for an alternative store of value, and one of those is the precious metals.'

Read the full story in Thursday's edition of The Straits Times.

http://www.straitstimes.com/BreakingNew ... 53964.html

[JackRiddler]

jack, you're smarter than that, not sure why you're trying to pretend you aren't, to bullshit us? pm's aren't just another commodity, theyre considered money. real money. people aren't "buying" pm's, theyre converting funny money into real money. because they don't have faith in the fiat stuff.

and its not just speculators, investors, and the usual suspects, it's entire countries and governments doing this. nobody wants the funny money now. they want the real thing.

why is that? and is anyone addressing this? no. that's why it continues.

seriously, does anyone see any trend, anywhere, where anybody is taking charge and restoring any faith to the system? all i see are bandaids on a violently hemmoraging patient. not unlike the disaster in japan.

I guess I'm not smarter than that then!

If central bank notes are "fiat," then gold is "fetish." Half of one, six dozen of the other. It's all about faith. Neither is exactly "real" and both can be "funny." Physical metal can and has been diluted or otherwise turned nominal by changes in the accepted weight unit. You can stamp a different denomination on the coin, and if people accept it, it's "real."

Nothing in natural law makes any money "real." All money is social contract. It's money because of a consensus to accept it as such. After their apocalypse happens, the PM-bugs may be surprised to find that there won't necessarily be a universal consensus to view their heavy coins as a medium of exchange. People may be more interested in bartering food, cigarettes, skilled labor, fuel, tools, water and other things they actually need. If you foresee a collapse to the point where the dollar-money is meaningless, by what magic do you imagine that silver becomes meaningful, or edible? And why do you think everyone else who didn't accumulate the shiny stuff in physical form is going to accept that the new ownership class happens to consist of whatever smart bozos did? Seriously. It's been a long time since the vast majority were under the spell of believing that PMs have a magic-money quality to them that nothing else can match. Furthermore, there's a reason why Uncle Karl called it the "money commodity" (MC). There were a lot of insights into money he didn't quite make, but that money itself is a commodity as well as a medium of exchange was obvious enough to him, and this was at a time when PMs were money. PMs are a commodity and they're rising in price because of demand.

The latter 19th century saw whole classes of people impoverished by the deflationary nature of PM money. The first modern populists in this country were calling for greenbacks! They understood that a gold mine shouldn't be the source of wealth and power in the world -- any more than a banking cartel should be today.

My stupidity perhaps is to keep thinking in the limited realm of the rational. Why the hell should possession of a metal make you rich, or allow you to call the shots? Why shouldn't we as a society be able to plan how money is distributed for the purpose of running the economy we need and want? For example, why shouldn't we be able to look at a sector that should grow, and stick money into that by fiat? It's all a game, and the sooner we can all learn a set of common civilized rules that empower us, the better. It won't be, "he who has the gold, wins."

Anyway, this thread's run its course for me, we've pretty much covered the angles and each of us has come out of it probably thinking exactly what we did when we came in, except (if it was worth it) slightly more confused. I'm going to be assimilating some more of it into the Wall Street thread (my "daily diary of the American dream," as the old Wall Street Journal slogan went) and hanging out there, and the gold swap can continue over here without me.

.

[anothershamus]

JackRiddler wrote:

All money is social contract. It's money because of a consensus to accept it as such. After their apocalypse happens, the PM-bugs may be surprised to find that there won't necessarily be a universal consensus to view their heavy coins as a medium of exchange. People may be more interested in bartering food, cigarettes, skilled labor, fuel, tools, water and other things they actually need. If you foresee a collapse to the point where the dollar-money is meaningless, by what magic do you imagine that silver becomes meaningful, or edible? And why do you think everyone else who didn't accumulate the shiny stuff in physical form is going to accept that the new ownership class happens to consist of whatever smart bozos did? Seriously

You are missing the point jack, when the shit goes down and Frank needs food, and Bill needs cigarettes, and they are on opposite sides of the town, whomever has the metal, will become the trader, and eventually the bank!

[JackRiddler]

JackRiddler wrote:

All money is social contract. It's money because of a consensus to accept it as such. After their apocalypse happens, the PM-bugs may be surprised to find that there won't necessarily be a universal consensus to view their heavy coins as a medium of exchange. People may be more interested in bartering food, cigarettes, skilled labor, fuel, tools, water and other things they actually need. If you foresee a collapse to the point where the dollar-money is meaningless, by what magic do you imagine that silver becomes meaningful, or edible? And why do you think everyone else who didn't accumulate the shiny stuff in physical form is going to accept that the new ownership class happens to consist of whatever smart bozos did? Seriously

You are missing the point jack, when the shit goes down and Frank needs food, and Bill needs cigarettes, and they are on opposite sides of the town, whomever has the metal, will become the trader, and eventually the bank!

This is faith. Again, why should it be metal? What magic do people still see in the stuff? That's you guys who believe in it that way, and who think mere possession of it will make you universally acknowledged kings of the new order. But if the currency or society melts down to zero overnight, you'll find people will renegotiate with each other on a constant basis what they are willing to use for exchange. If this scenario really happens, people will find various solutions, including issuing their own scrip or just using the old monopoly money, bargaining over how many dollars they'll want to accept for what goods. Its commodity value would be down to zero, but it could still be used for exchange.

These scenarios are unknowable. First of all, is there food and water in this town or what? Because if there isn't, the metal will be most useful as a potential projectile. And who's in physical control of that? And what's functioning and what's not? This is not stuff one can foresee. Reality will be renegotiated by the hour. Anyway, I wish the PM believers all the luck in the world.

.

[2012 Countdown]

Jack needs to get him a roll of the precious. Just a roll. I recommend ASEs. Government issue, highly liquid.
Silver just touched $40, fyi.

(Just ribbing ya, jack)

[2012 Countdown]

JackRiddler wrote:

All money is social contract. It's money because of a consensus to accept it as such. After their apocalypse happens, the PM-bugs may be surprised to find that there won't necessarily be a universal consensus to view their heavy coins as a medium of exchange. People may be more interested in bartering food, cigarettes, skilled labor, fuel, tools, water and other things they actually need. If you foresee a collapse to the point where the dollar-money is meaningless, by what magic do you imagine that silver becomes meaningful, or edible? And why do you think everyone else who didn't accumulate the shiny stuff in physical form is going to accept that the new ownership class happens to consist of whatever smart bozos did? Seriously

You are missing the point jack, when the shit goes down and Frank needs food, and Bill needs cigarettes, and they are on opposite sides of the town, whomever has the metal, will become the trader, and eventually the bank!

This is faith. Again, why should it be metal? What magic do people still see in the stuff? That's you guys who believe in it that way, and who think mere possession of it will make you universally acknowledged kings of the new order. But if the currency or society melts down to zero overnight, you'll find people will renegotiate with each other on a constant basis what they are willing to use for exchange. If this scenario really happens, people will find various solutions, including issuing their own scrip or just using the old monopoly money, bargaining over how many dollars they'll want to accept for what goods. Its commodity value would be down to zero, but it could still be used for exchange.

These scenarios are unknowable. First of all, is there food and water in this town or what? Because if there isn't, the metal will be most useful as a potential projectile. And who's in physical control of that? And what's functioning and what's not? This is not stuff one can foresee. Reality will be renegotiated by the hour. Anyway, I wish the PM believers all the luck in the world.

.

It isn't about 'ruling the world'. Its about surviving. Thats it. Its their game. We cockroaches best learn how to take precautions. I have water purification as well. Food stock, etc. You do what you think will protect you and help you survive. This isn't about creating a new paradigm. Again, this is about living to fight another day.

[Nordic]

so, jack, why do you think gold and silver has been used as money for thousands of years and by various cultures of the world? was it just coincidence? accident?

the way you think the world should be is irrelavent to how it actually is. and for thousands of years gold and silver have been "real" money. money that can cross borders, won't rot in storage, is impossible to counterfeit or simply manufacture, and can be readily melted down and cast into new shapes and sizes. its certainly not just another commodity.

[gnosticheresy_2]

so, jack, why do you think gold and silver has been used as money for thousands of years and by various cultures of the world? was it just coincidence? accident?

the way you think the world should be is irrelavent to how it actually is. and for thousands of years gold and silver have been "real" money. money that can cross borders, won't rot in storage, is impossible to counterfeit or simply manufacture, and can be readily melted down and cast into new shapes and sizes. its certainly not just another commodity.

And who do you think attributes value to the reasons you list? God? Human beings decide that PMs have value, they have no intrinsic value in and of themselves. All that's being argued is that, when the shit hits the fan, what if people decide that seeing as you can't eat PMs, they can't pull a plough, they weigh a lot etc then they're worth fuck all? Just because you want to believe things will break down and those people hoarding gold and silver will suddenly become the richest people in our lovely post-apolcalyptic world doesn't mean that's necessarily going to happen.

[Forgetting2]

So, for those of us left running around in animal skins and plastic tarps, hunting and scavenging, those pretty pieces of metal around our necks will only finally come in handy as gifts to appease our new alien overlords when they come looking to acquire land. Sweeten the deal to get them to remove the iodine-131 and cesium-137 from the water in an attempt to get back to something resembling bipedal hominids with only one head.

I would guess the value of PMs would likely come back to use depending on how far down we've gone and how much hope there is for a return to some sort of wider than one's own homestead of commerce.

[vanlose kid]

Goldman Sachs CEO's pay nearly doubles despite slump in profits
Goldman's chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, takes home $9m more for a year in which bank's profits dropped 38%

Andrew Clark
guardian.co.uk, Saturday 2 April 2011 13.12 BST

An era of bonus "restraint" at Goldman Sachs came to a shuddering halt as the Wall Street bank almost doubled the pay package of its chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, to $18.6m (£11.5m) for 2010 in spite of a slump in profits.

Blankfein, 56, who once quipped that his firm does "God's work", received share awards of $12.6m on top of a $5.4m performance-related cash bonus, and a salary of $600,000. He also received additional benefits worth $464,000, according to a filing by Goldman at the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The postal worker's son from Brooklyn became a lightning rod for controversy over the banking industry's excesses during the financial crisis. Goldman was obliged to pay $550m in July to settle fraud charges laid by US prosecutors over the alleged mis-selling of toxic mortgage-related derivatives. Blankfein described being hit by the charges as "one of the worst days in my professional life".

Blankfein's pay was still far below the record $68m that he received for 2007, before the credit crunch began to bite. But his earnings are almost double last year's $9.8m – when Goldman declared it was exercising "restraint" in response to public and political pressure over the size of bonuses.

"The fact that they would return to a more market-based pay is probably not surprising," Rose Marie Orens, a senior partner at Compensation Advisory Partners in New York, told Bloomberg News. "They're not quite back to anything remotely like what they paid in prior years."

It was the first time in three years that Goldman paid a cash bonus to Blankfein. His top lieutenants – including chief financial officer David Viniar and chief operating officer Gary Cohn – got identical $5.4m payouts. This was despite a 38% drop in profits to $7.71bn due to a sharp fall in income from trading and investment banking.

Goldman is renowned for being the most hard-driving bank on Wall Street. It has a fiercely competitive ethos but rewards its employees better than any of its rivals. Unlike other top banks, it sensed the imminent implosion in US mortgages in 2007 and heavily hedged its position to protect itself against the credit crunch. Its bonus pool, shared by 35,700 employees worldwide,, including 5,000 in London, amounted to $15.3bn this year – equivalent to nearly $430,000 per person.

Blankfein's remuneration comfortably outstrips the £6.5m bonus paid to Barclays' chief executive Bob Diamond, who is the highest-paid of Britain's banking chiefs. In a sign of Goldman's culture of rewards, even Blankfein's driver appears to have done well – the bank paid out $185,110 for the CEO's car and chauffeur, more than double last year's figure. And Blankfein's son, also at Goldman, was paid $170,000.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011 ... ay-bonuses

*

JP Morgan head Jamie Dimon pockets 51% pay rise
Wall Street firm gives chief executive a $5m cash bonus and pays for family's move from Chicago

Graeme Wearden
guardian.co.uk, Friday 8 April 2011 11.49 BST

Jamie Dimon, the head of JP Morgan Chase, received a pay rise of about 51% last year including a $5m (£3m) cash bonus, a move that angered campaigners for a levy on the banking industry.

Dimon's remuneration package, disclosed by the bank on Thursday night, is the latest sign that pay on Wall Street is returning to pre-crash levels as its biggest players post higher profits.

The 55-year-old chief executive was awarded stock options worth $17m and a "cash incentive" of $5m in 2010, on top of his basic salary of $1m. The previous year he had received no cash bonus and stock awards of just above $14.1m. In 2008, the year of the financial crisis and the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Dimon received just his base salary.

Dimon has run JP Morgan since December 2005. The bank fared much better than its Wall Street rivals during the financial crisis, acquiring Bear Stearns in 2007 and Washington Mutual a year later. The bank made a net profit of $17.4bn in 2010, almost 50% higher than a year ago.

David Hillman, spokesperson for the Robin Hood Tax campaign, described Dimon's pay deal as "the latest example of the bloated pay and profits of the banking sector."

"Banks that have escaped the consequences of an economic crisis they caused should be made to pay a Robin Hood Tax to help those still struggling with its effects," Hillman added.

A Robin Hood, or transactional, tax would involve a very small levy on each financial transaction conducted by a bank. Supporters say it would raise about £20bn in the UK.

Documents filed with the US Securities and Exchange Commission also show JP Morgan paid Dimon $421,458 in moving expenses, $95,293 to cover "personal use of aircraft" and $45,730 for "personal use of car".

JP Morgan explained the Dimon family had moved from Chicago to New York in 2007 after their children finished high school, but only found a buyer for their old house in 2010. The moving expenses include more than $300,000 in real estate agency commission and fees, but do not cover the likely fall in the value of the house due to the slump in the US housing market.

"It is not the firm's policy to reimburse employees for losses incurred on the sale of a home in connection with a relocation and no such reimbursement is included in the amounts listed as moving expense," JP Morgan said.

The details of Dimon's pay package came just a week after it emerged that Goldman Sachs had almost doubled the pay of its CEO, Lloyd Blankfein, to $18.6m. That included a $5.4m performance-related cash bonus.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011 ... -dimon-pay

*

And In The Meantime, The Adjusted Monetary Base....
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 04/07/2011 19:29 -0400

...is up by $51 billion in two weeks. But, once again, before people freak out that this is some crazy scheme to flood the market with money (nothing crazy about that scheme: it has been going on for 2 years), keep in mind: this is merely the delayed catch up of the SFP program unwind and the ongoing increase in Treasury holdings by the Federal Reserve Capital, ULC. Nonetheless, it is disturbing that the gradual phase out in the build up of the Adjusted Monetary Base, exclusively due to the rise in Excess Bank Reserves, is still proceeding at a 100%+ CAGR.



The variance between the accumulation in Excess Reserves (Fed liabilities) and Security Holdings (Fed assets) since the start of QE2, can be seen on the chart below. Whereas two months ago reserves were lagging the build out in assets by up to $170 billion, this has since flipped and there has been a dramatic build out in reserves to the tune of $74 billion more than assets.



Once again, there is little mystery here: the question is how much will the market discount these electronic 1 and 0s eventually entering the market, and being an inflationary force, and secondly, just how effective will an IOER hike be in order to prevent $1.7 trillion in excess reserves at the time of QE2 end (on $970 billion of currency in circulation) from becoming a hyperinflationary juggernaut.

Where there is mystery, however, is what actually comprises the Fed's "Other Assets" account which in the last week hit a new all time record of $123 billion.