Why is FDIC not being held accountable for its failure in supervision
but praised for its efficiency in shutting down banks? Why is FDIC
practically using our tax money to share losses and wiping out
shareholders because it failed its job to supervise properly?

"Regulators shut down the John Warner Bank of Clinton, Ill.; the First
State Bank of Winchester in Winchester, Ill.; the Rock River Bank of
Oregon, Ill.; the Elizabeth State Bank of Elizabeth, Ill.; the First
National Bank of Danville in Danville, Ill.; the Founders Bank of
Worth, Ill.; and Millennium State Bank of Texas, based in Dallas."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/03/business/03banks.html?ref=business

"The FDIC and The First National Bank of Beardstown entered into a
loss-share transaction on approximately $20 million of The First State
Bank of Winchester's assets."
http://www.istockanalyst.com/article/viewiStockNews/articleid/3330752

All these banks except for First National Bank fell under FDIC
supervision (Class NM)
*NM = commercial bank, state charter and Fed nonmember, supervised by
the FDIC*
http://www2.fdic.gov/idasp/main.asp

This is the first page of the latest failed bank list on the FDIC
website; 11 out of 20 were under its supervision.
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/banklist.html

Mirae Bank (NM) June 26, 2009
MetroPacific Bank (NM)
Horizon Bank (NM)
Neighborhood Community Bank
Community Bank of West Georgia
First National Bank of Anthony
Cooperative Bank (NM)
Southern Community Bank (NM)
Bank of Lincolnwood (NM)
Citizens National Bank
Strategic Capital Bank (NM)
BankUnited, FSB
Westsound Bank (NM)
America West Bank (NM)
Citizens Community Bank (NM)
Silverton Bank, NA
First Bank of Idaho
First Bank of Beverly Hills (NM)
Michigan Heritage Bank
American Southern Bank (NM) April 24, 2009

Why would anyone want to buy any bank? As long as our regulators don't
follow rules nobody would want to deal with the government. Sheila
Bair now says these private investors must maintain a tier I capital
ratio of at least 15% but back when Wamu had a tier I capital ratio of
8.4% (yes not as high as 15% but a pretty good number at that time)
she still seized it.

"The FDIC today released a memorandum designed to provide guidlines to
private equity firms looking to own banks.  A summary is (emphasis
mine):

Pursuant to the proposed policy statement, the Investors’ holding
company will be expected to provide for the capital support of the
acquired or de novo depository institution through a strong initial
capital contribution – maintaining a minimum 15 percent Tier 1
leverage ratio for a period of at least 3 years. Staff believes that
up-front capital protection for the depository institution would
provide an effective cushion that could have a lasting impact...

Now, some might recall that banks were judged on their Tier 1 ratio
once upon a time.  Regulators then swung to tangible common equity and
settled into tangible capital.  But now that the danger has passed and
all is better (right?), the FDIC swings back to tier 1 and well
capitalized (recall that WaMu and WB were "well capitalized when they
were defacto siezed)."
http://seekingalpha.com/instablog/153397-boneyard/11078-fdic-shepardi...

FDIC now has the power to borrow up to $500 billion, and is that not
tax money? Bair's original proposal was to collect only $27 billion
from special assessment fees this year so how long do you think it
will take FDIC to pay back whatever it borrows? Its DIF ratio
continues to plummet; as of last quarter, it was at 0.27%. That means
for every $100 you deposit you can really only get $0.27 back.

Wait, did I forget to mention FDIC is also backing over $300 billion
of bank bonds for Goldman Sachs etc? Its great GS is paying back TARP
but why should it give out record bonus this year when the US
government is still backing its bonds?

*imho*