Form of government and modes vary from culture to culture, but all submit to the ruling class whom always abuse their weaker citizens. Middle and lower class live in a different dimension – Busyness and complying with regulations, imposed by their ruling class keep them there… there they mostly remain oblivious to what is being planned or implemented by their ruling class, believing media spin designed to propagandize them. Only extreme events attract their attention.

Not so funny results that are not well published include these.

Citigroup banking families in the USA and Rothschild banking families in Europe financed government regimes. They were the primary source of financing provided to the Nazi regime, as it came into being. Politicians in the Nazi party had peculiar ideas of how they would repay their debt. They used other peoples money…and if they planned to take England and the Rothschild family assets….why repay dead creditors? Why not take assets and lands they surmised.

The IMF plays the same way as the Nazi party did. They take assets from nations, always have over many years. Ask Argentina how much the IMF has taken there. Ask about IMF assisted inflation and currency that wiped out their economy…. In Argentina the bad guys won. Ask about world wide water rights. Guess who is accumulating them.

Can anyone be so blind as we are in 2009.

Trusting the Fed bank or the IMF with our wealth, is like asking a fox to guard our hen house. SY Mike. mikejaeger@live.com

The problem is that money is assigned to states based only on the headquarters location of the recipient bank. For example, North Carolina “receives” over $50 billion in TARP funds simply because Bank of America is headquartered in Charlotte. Meanwhile the map shows Arizona as “receiving” only $4 million; Vermont and Montana have no TARP dollars assigned based on this approach.

For better or worse, our banking system is much more complicated than what is depicted here.

Large financial organizations like Bank of America do business in every community in the county – in fact even the location of BofA’s “headquarters” is somewhat of a fiction as it has business units, executives and hundreds of thousands of employees distributed across dozens of states.

The banking activity that the TARP money is intended to support takes place far beyond the communities where the banks have a physical presence. Countrywide, now part of BofA, is responsible for a substantial part of the mortgage lending that drove the housing bubble. Much of that lending activity happened in high-growth states like Arizona, Florida and Nevada, which are grossly under-represented in this map. Rampant real estate speculation in these areas was enabled by organizations headquartered elsewhere but very much a part of the local financial landscape.

As Fred and Scott point out, if you look at banks as being located where they hold deposits or make loans you see a very different picture of TARP impact. In fact, I helped create such a map this past spring (http://subsidyscope.com/projects/bailout/tarp/map/). It’s important to note that the actual flow of dollars can’t be mapped – despite what this article suggests it is impossible to say how many dollars any given community “received.” Instead, one way to frame the question is: to what extent does a community rely on banks that received funds? It is still an imperfect measure but far better than using the headquarters.

By mapping out the share of deposits, branches and loans you can begin to understand the vast market share held by a few very large banks. The story is not about the physical concentration of bank headquarters on Wall Street but rather the extent to which this handful of large institutions have become Main Street banks. This is a recent and significant change and one that has been insufficiently discussed as a causal factor in the financial crisis.

Unfortunately the final analysis provided in this article, “By any measure, the bailout has been massively concentrated geographically,” is completely backwards. Instead, we should be asking: how did so much of the county end up reliant on so few financial institutions? And import importantly, have we fully realized the consequences of this shift?