From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Plunge Protection Team

Does anyone have access to the full text of the Wikipedia page that was "merged" into this one? I recall it had some references that would be worth including. --RayBirks 19:48, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Put "Plunge Protection Team" into the Wikipedia search field. The page Working Group on Financial Markets will come up. Near the top of the screen, just under the title, you'll see the words "(Redirected from Plunge Protection Team)". Click on the link for Plunge Protection Team to go to that page (or click on the earlier link in this post). You can then look at its history to go to an earlier version of the page. — Mateo SA (talk | contribs) 20:51, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --RayBirks 20:53, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Conspiracy Theory

The reason it is a conspiracy theory is that it is something that cannot be proven and is very far-fetched. The belief is that the Fed and/or Treasury are illegally buying S&P futures and stocks, with the underlying idea that they are in cahoots with Wall Street. Neither the Fed nor the Treasury are permitted to purchase stocks or futures for the government.

Also, I fixed the grammatical error 'an orchestrated', not 'a orchestrated'. Sposer (talk) 19:29, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, the referenced article even calls it a conspiracy theory, and that is what it is. It is ridiculous to call it anything else. Nobody is saying that the Fed or other parts of the Government do not provide deep "moral suasion", but this conspiracy theory is tied to the incorrect notions about the powers of various U.S. government institutions and the idea that the Treasury or the Fed are buying stocks and futures outright.Sposer (talk) 15:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] =

Conspiracy fact is more like it. You say "something that cannot be proven" when the working group openly admits to the manipulation. They openly "conspire" to prevent the market from declining. This article needs some serious attention. There are literally hundreds of articles that could be referenced to prove this fact. Too bad I don't have the time to put in the effort.

The Federal Reserve and U.S. Gov't manipulate interests rates, pump liquidity into the markets, bail out banks, change the way statistics are reported to make the economy look better than it is (M3, hedonic adjustments, GDP, inflation rate etc.), supress the price of gold http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Anti-Trust_Action_Committee and commodities through repurchase agreements and gold swaps thereby artificially propping up the $USD. Tell me then, why is it so hard to believe that they also manipulate other markets?

It's a travesty that a manipulation of this magnitude and proveability is relegated to a just a conspiracy theory on Wikipedia.

Ahh, GATA. I didn't know they were still around. Hedonics works both ways: Suppresses price increases, and the subsequent drops. And it is clearly noted in the statistics. The Treasury's (not the Fed's) currency interventions are ultimately announced as well, after the fact. The U.S. government has little control over long-term interest rates, and right now has little control of LIBOR (see the TED Spread). I am not saying that I think the Fed or the gov't has had it right nor am I necessarily agreeing or disagreeing with any of their actions, be it LTCM, etc. But, all of these things are public and known. The conspiracy theory is the extra stuff about the Fed or Treasury buying stock futures. My opinion is irrelevant anyway. But, the idea that the U.S. Gov't, through the Working Group, or any other mechanism, is buying stocks or stock futures and that they can stop or turn a market that isn't going to turn anyway, is just plain silly. Just ask the Bank of England. Sposer (talk) 02:39, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

As members of GATA have said the suppression of the gold price IS slowly failing. If they were sucessfull then prices would still be around $250 per ounce and not $900. I guess my point is that to use the label "conspiracy theory" in this day and age is pejorative and has the effect of a thought terminating cliche which prevents further investigation. Wikipedia should be about promoting further investigation and deeper understanding and not just label any poorly understood subject that challenges common belief a conspiracy theory.

It should be common knowledge that the Federal Reserve and many other central banks around the world are private banking cartels and the members of theses institions have powerful wealthy friends in the the financial world. These cartels do have the power to control markets...and sadly to their advantage. And the Fed does have a great deal of control over our gov't. I certainly didn't get to vote for Bernanke or Greenspan. Did you?

The facts are out there in rather common financial new sources which aren't necessarily the common news for the average person. It takes a long time and a lot of reading and an understanding of the big picture to see. The average Joe wouldn't be able to glean to truth from these sources, but if he wanted to learn the purpose of the PPT, he hopefully could come to Wikipedia and read a nice compact explanation. I would hope the truth could be exposed on a public resource such as Wikipedia and referenced to promote understanding.

Like I said I wish I had the time to expand the article because I know in my own cummulative daily reading over the years I have discovered facts which fly in the face of just theory. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.213.107.20 (talk) 00:25, 17 May 2008 (UTC)