Is US Fed the only central bank in the world that actually withdraws liquidity?

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Is US Fed the only central bank in the world that actually withdraws liquidity?

I looked into that one a few days ago.
The bankruptcy of Gibson Guitars is a classic case of mismanagement at the top. Owner and CEO Juszkiewicz thought he could expand the brand into consumer electronics and borrowed $500 million dollars to acquire parts of Phillips electronics and Onkyo and TEAC. He turned one of the world's best guitar manufacturers into one of the worst consumer electronics manufacturers, instantly putting the company into direct competition with firms like Sony, LG, and Panasonic.

Of course he borrowed under poor terms, including springing liens that pulled debt forward at the first credit downgrades.
He made life miserable for his guitar dealer network, putting in new onerous requirements that caused dealers to flee. He also made life miserable for his employees.

An incompetent and foolish leader gained control and ended a great institution with blunder after blunder.

The guitar making operation will probably emerge from bankruptcy so Les Pauls and Hummingbirds will probably still be available.

[touchring]

Re: Is US Fed the only central bank in the world that actually withdraws liquidity?

An interesting read on how the Eurozone is still in deep shit and the USD will rally as a result.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-...g-rally-dollar

[dcarrigg]

Re: Is US Fed the only central bank in the world that actually withdraws liquidity?

The best I could think of after reading dcarrigg's prior post was "holy crap, it REALLY could be worse after all"
Wow...

And today, it got a little worse:

A divided Supreme Court ruled Monday that businesses can prohibit their workers from banding together in disputes over pay and conditions in the workplace, a decision that affects an estimated 25 million non-unionized employees.

With the court's five conservative members in the majority, the justices held that individual employees can be forced to use arbitration, not the courts, to air complaints about wages and overtime. Four dissenting liberal justices said the decision will hit low-wage, vulnerable workers especially hard.


While the complaints in Monday's decision involved pay issues, the outcome also might extend to workplace discrimination and other disputes if employee contracts specify that they must be dealt with in one-on-one arbitration.


Workers who want to take action against sexual harassment, pay discrimination, pregnancy discrimination and racial discrimination "may now be forced behind closed doors into an individual, costly - and often secret - arbitration process," said Fatima Goss Graves, president and CEO of the National Women's Law Center.

We've known for some time that those of a certain net-worth are above the law and not subject to prosecution. Now apparently immunity from rule of law is being extended even further to employers who are entitled to set up their own kangaroo courts and force their employees to abide by them. Thus the chasm grows. Eventually it will no longer be possible for anyone not born on the right side to make it across. Already, most don't stand a chance.

[jk]

Re: Is US Fed the only central bank in the world that actually withdraws liquidity?

arbitration in these situations is a really skewed process. while the employer might need to pay for arbitrators many times over a period of years, the individual on the other side of the table will likely never be back again. there is a big incentive for arbitrators to favor corporations and employers.