Showing posts with label oligarchy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oligarchy. Show all posts

19 August 2012

John Ralston Saul: The Collapse of Globalism


"The transnational corporations and the money markets have declared the era of human-designed regulations over. Now the market must reign. Because few people in the business community are paid to think about phrases such as 'western civilization,' they don't seem to realize that they are proposing the arbitrary denial of 2,500 years of human experience...

Ever since the democratic systems permitted their various courts to give corporations the status of persons, the individual as citizen has been on the defensive. How could it be otherwise? If you are a person before the law and Exxon or Ford is also a person, it is clear that the concept of democratic legitimacy lying with the individual has been mortally wounded...

If allowed to run free of the social system, capitalism will attempt to corrupt and undermine democracy, which is, after all, not a natural state...Capitalism was reasonably content under Hitler, happy under Mussolini, very happy under Franco and delirious under General Pinochet."

John Ralston Saul


“The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences."

Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope

Globalism, or globalization, is the theory that the world marketplace should be free of local, nation, and regional limits. It is founded on the belief that unregulated markets are the epitome and center of rational decision making, described as the most profit maximizing in the aggregate and therefore the most 'efficient.'

Globalism elevates economic measures as the arbiters of policy, and subordinates society and individuals to economic outcomes. Its value system is dominated by money and corporations, which are monetary organizations, in contrast to nations which are organizations of people.



"Bankers: Pillars of society who are going to hell if there is a God and He has been accurately quoted."

John Ralston Saul


11 August 2012

Michael Parenti: Functions of Fascism and Capitalism's Self Inflicted Wounds



One thing that Parenti does not discuss is the similarity between state communism and fascism in their anti-humanism, central planning, and self-destructive fanaticism.

Many thinkers distinguish between fascism and communism in their attitude toward globalization: the fascists are nationalists and the communists are internationalists.

I believe that my model of the socio-political continuum bridges that gap by referencing the extremes against a measure of their attitude towards the individual as a reference, and not in their approach to how they might organize a world government to which they all seem to aspire.

It also helps to explain how easily parties can cross the divide between the extremes. A Hitler can take a workers party like the NSDAP and turn it into a fascist dictatorship. The neo-cons can morph from far left to far right.

Extremes call out to their opposite extremes. Communism breeds fascism, and vice versa.  Extremes breed extremes, and crowd out the balanced approach to life of the mind, body, and spirit. 

And those on the extremes can no longer see the middle ground;  everything becomes 'the other.'  And so they first fail by avoiding all compromise as a sign of weakness in their increasing ideological rigidity, and then compound error upon extreme error as they silence their critics.  Their errors compounded, they finally take themselves and their followers into the abyss of their own excess.

Parenti is certainly further to the left of my own views.  He seems to be a progressive by much more comfortable with the role of government.   And yet government has a role.

One may not make the poor better off by destroying the rich, but one can certainly help the greater part of the public from becoming poor by restraining the rich and the powerful with the rule of law, transparency and enforcement,  and equal justice for all.  And that requires a good government with the power and willingness to enforce the law.

Great wealth unexplained is often the accumulation of a series of crimes and illegalities undiscovered, from insider trading to market manipulation, monopolies and official corruption, occasionally mixed in with sheer dumb luck and ruthless disregard for the law.

That is why the wealthy are rarely the great artists, athletes, or inventors who they hold up as the example of excellence to which they can hardly presume. They modern wealthy generally create nothing except a climate of injustice, fraud, and corruption.
"Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime
oublié, parce qu' il a été proprement fait."

"The secret of a great success for which you are at a loss to account
is a crime that has never been found out, because it was well executed."

Honoré de Balzac, Le Père Goriot
















13 July 2012

Spain Has Its 'Let Them Eat Cake' Moment - Another Milestone Reached


Technically the pampered princess of Spain's elite said, 'screw them all' rather than 'let them eat cake.' She is only saying what most of the Western elite are thinking about 'the problem of the hoi polloi.'

After the brazen theft of customer money by a well-connected financier, I said I was waiting for another shoe to drop, another milestone to be reached on this cycle of history.

I should add that a single instance of something obviously does not make a trend.  It is the trend that is of significance.  Do the perpetrators become emboldened, or does a horror of recognition bring things back into balance?  No one wakes up one morning and decides, "I think I shall become a monster." Evil is a process of abnormality with which one becomes increasingly familiar, accepting,-- comfortable.

The next step in the rise of statism is capital controls, media suppression, and the increased repression of dissent by physical means and censorship. After that is the singling out of certain ethnic and religious groups for 'special treatment,' and campaigns to establish the 'otherness' of select targets. This could also be related to some age or class group, or even the disabled.

And then murder, first occasional and then systematic. It may take the form of starvation, denial of medical treatment, non-elective abortion, or euthanasia at first. Hopefully we will not progress as far on the cycle as any of these latter stage developments.

Here is a note from a friend about a news item that has not penetrated the Anglo-American news media yet.

Spain is implementing its latest austerity package. Spanish PM Mariano Rajoy Raises VAT 3pc in Shock U-Turn

When the Prime Minister Rajoy said to their National Assembly that they must cut benefits to Spain's unemployed, Miss Fabra was apparently caught on video shouting, "Screw them all."

The damage control groups are now trying to explain that Miss Fabra was not saying 'screw them' to the unemployed, who the Prime Minister was talking about, but rather 'the Socialists,' who favor things like benefits for the unemployed.

This is sparking quite a bit of anger in Spain, as one might imagine, which is suffering under very high levels of unemployment and facing further austerity cuts.

Spain's oligarchy appears to be a bit backward and thuggish. Rather than clumsily rigging lotteries and construction projects, they would be better off forming a banking cartel, rigging market prices, and stealing a little from everyone, every day, on every transaction. Then you can be a Very Important Person, dress well, have Congressmen publicly kiss your ring, and still gorge yourself at the trough of public corruption without marring your cufflinks.

In every one of these troubled countries that I examine, although the blame tends to fall on the 'lazy and foolish' many, if one scratches beneath the surface they find a corrupt core of greedy insiders, oligarchs, who have been inflicting economic distortions and pain on the public in the service of their own sense of entitlement.
"It should come as no surprise to anyone that major commercial banks manipulate Libor submissions for their own benefit. The OTC derivatives markets was designed by the big banks, for the big banks, to ensure that as they set up their own private securities exchanges - away from regulatory scrutiny - they could control the interest rate settings. Money center commercial banks did not want the "truth" of market prices to determine their loan rates. Rather, they wanted an oligopolistically controlled subjective survey rate to be the basis for their lending businesses."

David Zervos
Jefferies & Co
That is sophisticated financial corruption. That is progress.

From an erudite friend in Europe:
"Yesterday, after PM Rajoy announced that the government was going to cut the benefits the unemployed receive, a PP congresswoman, Andrea Fabra, daughter of Carlos Fabra, was caught on camera applauding and shouting "Que se jodan" - which translates roughly to screw them all.

Miss Fabra was appointed Parliamentary Advisor at the age of 24, straight out of university. Her father has "won" the lottery at least 7 times, and is under multiple investigations for corruption.

'Qu’ils mangent de la brioche.' France, late 18th century

'Que se jodan!' Spain, early 21st century

At least, back then, they had better manners."

04 May 2012

Ritholtz: An Uncompromised View of Contemporary American Politics and Economics


The excerpts from this interview are to the point, and it is a rather sharp point at that.

I somehow missed them the first time around, probably due to a family illness, but someone sent this extended set of excerpts from the two interviews that Jonathan Miller did with Barry Ritholtz.

To say that Barry Ritholtz 'pulls no punches' is like saying that Joe Louis had a nice right cross.

Its a good read for a Non-Farm Payrolls Friday. Forgive me if you have already seen it.

Enjoy.

"I have libertarian friends who are always bitching about government. I always say to them, when a dog bites you in the ass... that's what dogs do - don't blame the dog. Look up the leash and see who is holding the handle. When you look at Congress - Congress is the snapping dog.

But they are somebody's bitch. You have to see who is holding the leash. Very often it is banks and Wall Street and the financial sector having Congress do its bidding. Most of the things that got us into trouble have been done at the bequest of the banks...

I don't want to say Congress are whores, that go to these corporate executives with knee pads and lip-gloss. Congress is corrupt. Politicians in both parties are worthless...They don't even hide how corrupt they are anymore. It just came out that one of the new guys had sent out a note to CFO's asking them what legislation they would like to see changed. They will do anything for any kind of campaign contribution... (Not coincidentally most politicians are also lawyers - Jesse)

To me, if you give up your virtue for money, you are a prostitute. Credit rating agencies are prostitutes...

There is no such thing as rogue traders. There are only rogue banks. If you are that grossly negligent that you have to be rescued by the government, then I guarantee you they are doing lots of other things wrong. If you have an entity that messed up so badly that it can't survive... how are you going to go out and run a marathon? Jamie Dimon is the next CEO who needs a humbling...

Putting Rubin, Summers and Geithner in power was the tragedy of the Obama administration. Obama and Bush were both given an opportunity to be transformational - a Churchill, a Roosevelt. Obama's problem was that he sought out the biggest asshole in America - Robert Rubin... (Note, he later recants and nominates Larry Summers - Jesse)

Greenspan has to go down in history as the worst Fed Chairman... (He has my vote - Jesse)

I look at bankers like 5 year olds - if you give a 5 year old a bowl of chocolate bars and say they can have one... As soon as you leave the room they will eat until they are sick. Bankers are no different. As soon as you say, 'You're a big boy... we trust you not to blow up the economy and send the world to the precipice...' They are so short-term focused, they will do whatever is necessary to get that bonus, and then will let the world go to hell and let it be someone else's problem. (History of the World, Part 3 - Jesse)

The whole run-up from 2003-2007 was make-believe, (Ponzi scheme, control fraud, take your pick - Jesse) based on risk not mattering. If risk doesn't matter, you mash your foot to the carpet and let the speedometer go up to 250. When the driver hits the wall he kills himself. The difference is the driver kills himself, but the bankers take everyone with them."

Jonathan Miller, Interview with Barry Ritholtz

The first decade of this century is founded on official corruption, control frauds, the madness of a people incited by the propaganda of fear and ideology, leverage, and the conscious mispricing of risk.  Everything else is commentary.


10 December 2011

The Big Question: Are Funds At US Financial Firms Safe?



The short answer is 'maybe.' It is more of a buyer beware situation than most had thought, and still think.

It is nice to see someone in the mainstream media addressing this situation intelligently and without making an apology for what is apparently a criminal act and surely an egregious abuse of the public trust.

It is an axiom that it is not the initial crime that does the greatest and most widespread damage, although in this case it appears likely that someone in MF Global is due for jail time.

The damage is going to be to the US and British financial systems, Wall Street and the City of London, and in a large part because of the capture of political process by the monied interests.

This week the Senate led by Richard Shelby turned down the appointment of Richard Cordray to head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.  They have vowed to block any appointee until they can change the law that authorized the Bureau in the wake of the financial crisis in order to provide 'accountability.'  For them that means the ability to control the Bureau and starve it of funds in order to protect their banking cronies on Wall Street.  

Nothing is ever perfectly safe in this world. But some things are safer than others and there are steps one can take to diversify their wealth and avoid higher risks.
'A wise person does at once, what a fool does at last. Both do the same thing; only at different times.' 

Lord Acton
If I am correct, there are even bigger scandals to come when the tide goes out again, although there will be great efforts made to cover them up and excuse them 'for the sake of public confidence in the system.'    The derivatives market is a scandal-in-process, and is likely to rock the US banking system and the Dollar to their foundations when it topples. 

There may be even larger losses and anxiety for the unsuspecting who have misplaced their trust in false ideologies, slogans and theories promoted by a self-serving oligarchy.

NYT
A Risk Once Unthinkable
By James B. Stewart
December 9, 2011

Are customer accounts at brokerage firms safe?

Until the collapse of MF Global, that’s a question I thought I’d never have to ask.

Brokerage firms are required by law to maintain segregated accounts holding all client assets, including stocks, bonds, mutual funds, money market funds and cash. The law was passed after the 1929 crash, in the depths of the Depression, to make sure that customer assets were there at all times, ready to be disbursed even if everyone asked for their money at once...

I had always assumed it was impossible and that strict internal controls existed at all brokerage firms so that firm officials couldn’t tap segregated customer funds even if they were willing to break the law.  Thanks to MF Global, it’s now apparent that isn’t necessarily true. “If people are determined to misuse customer funds, they will misuse them,” said Ananda Radhakrishnan, the director of the division of clearing and risk at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission.

That’s because the commodities and securities industry is mostly self-regulating, and self-regulation ultimately depends on the integrity of the regulated. Broker-dealers — securities firms that execute trades of stocks, bonds and other assets for customers — are overseen by the S.E.C., while futures commission merchants, which trade commodities, derivatives and futures, are regulated by the C.F.T.C. Like most large brokerage firms, MF Global was both a broker-dealer and a futures commission merchant, though its primary business was commodities futures trading...

Typically, this requires transfers from segregated accounts (other than at the customer’s request) to be approved by multiple officials, including in many cases, the firm’s chief financial officer and chief compliance officer.

It’s not a low-level functionary,” a regulator said. “It’s someone who has real standing. Most customer assets are held at the biggest firms and they have scores of people involved in this process....”

The law also allows commodities firms like MF Global to use segregated customer funds as a source of low-cost financing for their own operations, but they are required to replace any customer assets taken from segregated accounts with supposedly ultrasafe collateral of the same value, typically United States Treasuries, municipal obligations and obligations whose payments of principal and interest are guaranteed by the government.

This week, the C.F.T.C. issued new rules restricting how client assets can be invested, which had grown under C.F.T.C. interpretations to include sovereign debt and transactions known as “in-house repos,” or repurchase agreements, in which a firm contracts with itself to use customer assets as, in effect, interest-free loans to finance its inventory of Treasury bonds. MF Global was apparently a heavy user of in-house repos, and before his firm collapsed, Mr. Corzine had argued strenuously against the C.F.T.C.’s proposal to ban them.

Making bad bets on European sovereign debt — like making bad bets on United States mortgage-backed securities — isn’t a crime, but improperly transferring segregated customer assets is a potential criminal violation of the securities laws and a relatively straightforward one at that. (The United States attorney’s office in Manhattan is in the early stages of investigating the removal of customer assets from MF Global.)

I spoke this week to several people involved in the MF Global investigation. No one has reached any firm conclusions about how the assets were transferred, but possible innocent explanations have dwindled to almost none. And James B. Kobak Jr., a lawyer for the MF Global trustee, said in court on Friday that there were “suspicious” trades made from customer accounts. If that’s the case, there may have been a deliberate and concerted effort to override MF Global’s internal controls to gain access to segregated customer assets, and if that can be proved, those responsible should be prosecuted and, if convicted, go to jail.

Unfortunately for MF Global’s customers — and future victims of similar crimes, if that’s what it turns out to be — there’s no easy remedy and it will most likely be months or even years before they recover their money. The Securities and Investor Protection Corporation explicitly warns that it’s “not uncommon for delays to take place when the troubled brokerage firm or its principals were involved in fraud.”

SIPC will replace up to $500,000 of securities and cash (but not futures contracts) missing from customer accounts at member firms. A measure of the magnitude of the problem is that since its creation in 1970, SIPC has advanced $1.6 billion to make possible the recovery of $109.3 billion in assets for an estimated 739,000 investors (through the end of 2010).

Meanwhile, the C.F.T.C.’s enforcement capabilities, like the S.E.C.’s, have been starved for lack of funding...

Read the entire article here.

11 February 2011

Mubarak Resigns, Hands Power to Military Government



Certainly well received by the crowds in the Cairo square, and of course the US equity market.


Mubarak Resigns as Egyptian President, Hands Power to Military


But the real work of reform is yet to come. This victory is perhaps more symbolic than substantial. Vice President Omar Suleiman is waiting in the wings, and the alternative is rule by the military.  As the Americans and English recently learned, one can throw out the scoundrels, but another version creeps in, if the overall climate of corruption remains intact.

The first step is to realize that one is not free.  This is not always so simple given some of the subtleties of modern tyranny. The next step is to be willing to do something about it, to peacefully stand for change, and demand freedom and reform.

Many other people can take this lesson from this. And they will. This is the forecast set out here for several years, and it all seems to be coming to pass, but slowly.

The spirit of Indignez-vous may provide an unsettling summer in Europe.  Change is in the wind, but it is not always predictable and constructive.  It moves like a force of nature-- sometimes a life giving rain, but at other times a tsunami.

Are you old enough to remember the euphoria surrounding the liberation of Paris?  Most likely not, but perhaps the more recent collapse of the Wall in Berlin?  Tonight reminds me of those times when hearts sang. 

But one must also consider, in this latest turn of the drama between the will to power and the spirit, what is the empire that crumbles?  And behind the scenes, who plays Gorbachev, and what overweening power does he serve?

I wish the Egyptian people well in their coming efforts and difficulties. Now the real work begins.  For freedom is not an achievement, or even a destination, but a way of life.

Although for tonight, a celebration.



19 December 2010

Greed Is Not Good


With regards to the global financial crisis, imposing austerity is not the answer. That is like starving the slaves to improve their condition by making the plantation more profitable.   Looting the 'great house' and the barns to feed the slaves, at least temporarily, is not the answer either. The problem is obviously in the system itself.

But either expedient solution suits the external moneyed interests promoting the system who seek only to plunder and drain the assets and labor of others who are all their common prey, whether they feel their kinship or not. An unjust and unsustainable system tarnishes all participants and leaves them vulnerable to exploitation and decay.

It is the root causes of the debt and the imbalances in the system that must be addressed to make any reform sustainable. And this obviously includes addressing abuses such as the promotion of a global trade regime that is inherently unjust and imbalanced to the favor of the oligarchs of whatever political wrappings around the world who hold the greater profit to themselves and leave their people relatively impoverished and exploited.  And it also includes the waging of unfunded wars to protect and promote privileged commercial interests, and a political funding system that is little more than soft graft and an open invitation to corruption by special interests.

It begins with a debilitating system of taxation by the moneyed interests on every commercial transaction in the form of fees and commissions, and the abuse of a money system that is little more than a fraud perpetrated by private interests for the benefit of a few at the expense of the many. If you wish a simple measure of this, then look to the median wage.

Greed is not good.  Greed is a disease, an aberration of simple honest ambition and necessary provision taken to excess.  This simple distinction may be lost on a people no longer able to distinguish between virtue and sin, honor and expediency, appetite and gluttony, the means and the ends.  Every great religion, every school of philosophy has cautioned throughout history on the perils of unbridled and unregulated greed.  

And yet this generation would make a god of it, although they may not understand, or care, what it is that they are doing, and whom it is they serve. And yet they will be held to account for their willfulness, foolishness, and casual disregard for others.

Greed, often in company with hubris and fear, is a handmaiden of the corrupting influence of power and triumph of the will. Greed is contagious, and attacks the very contentment of society at its heart, turning it towards oligarchy and oppression.

"Greed is a bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an endless effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction." Erich Fromm
Any system that promotes greed, gluttony, and insatiability as its highest goods and fundamental ideals is a cult of perversion and addiction on a scale with ancient Rome, an imbalanced insult to the natural law, with a fatal attraction to overreach, failure and self-destruction. What the US has today is not market capitalism that rewards the merits and work of individuals, but rather is the product of dishonest and disordered minds, a system of fraud and plunder by privileged oligarchs masquerading as fair and honest markets of legitimate valuation and price discovery.
"Because the free market system is so weak politically, the forms of capitalism that are experienced in many countries are very far from the ideal. They are a corrupted version, in which powerful interests prevent competition from playing its natural, healthy role." Raghuram G. Rajan
The Banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, with balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery.

Financial Interests Dictate Sovereign Policy
By Michael Hudson
December 18, 2010

"...The economic problem is not caused by sovereign debt but by bad bank loans, deceptive financial practice and neoliberal bank deregulation. Iceland’s Viking raiders, Ireland’s Anglo-Irish bank and other foreign banks are trying to avoid taking losses on financial claims that are largely fictitious, inasmuch as they exceed the ability of indebted economies to pay. The ‘crisis’ can be solved by making the banks write down their debt claims to realistic ‘junk’ valuations. There is no need to wreck economies by subjecting them to financial asset-stripping.

In such cases there’s a basic principle at work: Debts that can’t be paid, won’t be. The question is, just how won’t they be paid? As matters stand, countries are being told to subject themselves to massive foreclosure – not only a forfeiture of homes, but of national policy.

In this respect the sovereign crisis is a crisis of sovereignty itself: Who shall be in charge of the economy, its tax philosophy and public spending: elected officials acting in the public interest, or an intrusive financial oligarchy? The EU was wrong to tell governments to pay for following its advice – and pressure – to trust financial crooks and deregulate bank oversight. The European Central Bank should reimburse victimized governments for the bailouts that have been paid. This reimbursement can be done by levying a progressive tax policy and creating a central bank to help finance governments.

The proper aim of a national economy is to promote capital formation and rising living standards for the population as a whole. not a narrowing financial class at the top of the pyramid. So I see two major policies to lead the way out of this mess:

First, shift taxes back onto land and resource rent, and onto financial and capital gains. This will prevent another real estate bubble from being inflated by debt leveraging. By holding down housing prices, it will save labor from having to pay an equivalent amount in income tax. Low real estate taxes (under 1% until just recently) have not saved homeowners money in Latvia. Low property taxes merely have left more rental income to be pledged to banks, to capitalize into large mortgage loans.

Second, de-privatize basic utilities and natural monopolies to save Europe from rentiers turning it into a tollbooth economy. Europe needs a central bank that can do what central banks are supposed to do: create money to finance government deficits. But the European Central Bank and article 123 of the European Constitution as amended by the Lisbon Treaty prevents the central bank from lending to governments. This forces governments to levy taxes to pay interest to banks – for creating electronic credit that a real central bank could just as well create on its own computer keyboards.

Government banking is not necessarily inflationary. It finances what is necessary for economies to grow: investment in infrastructure and capital formation to raise productivity and minimize the cost of doing business.

What turns out to be inflationary is commercial bank lending. It inflates asset prices – unproductively. Banks lend mainly against real estate and other assets already in place, and stocks and bonds already issued. This is unproductive credit, not real wealth creation. The only way to keep this unproductive debt overhead solvent is to inflate asset prices more – by untaxing assets to leave more revenue to pay bankers on exponentially growing debts.

It doesn’t have to be this way. The recent 30 years of financial polarization is reversible. The alternative is to succumb to neoliberal austerity."

I think that most people know what needs to be done in their conscience, but their hearts have become so hardened over the past twenty years that the message will be ignored until after they undergo a period of suffering on the scale of the worst of the twentieth century. May God have mercy on us all.



Unless the Lord builds the house, the builders labor in vain.
Unless the Lord watches over the city, the guards stand watch in vain.
In vain you rise early and stay up late,
toiling for food to eat—
for he grants sleep only to those he loves.

Psalm 127

08 August 2010

The Fall of the American Republic: The Quiet Coup By Simon Johnson


"From 1973 to 1985, the financial sector never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. In 1986, that figure reached 19 percent. In the 1990s, it oscillated between 21 percent and 30 percent, higher than it had ever been in the postwar period. This decade, it reached 41 percent."

Now might be a good time to re-read The Quiet Coup by Simon Johnson which appeared in The Atlantic Magazine.

Although he keeps using the term "emerging market governments" in fact he is discussing a post bubble country that has experienced a period of express, fostered by a partnership between business and government that is known as crony capitalism.

Here is his description of the rise of the financial sector in the US from his book, 13 Bankers, which describes how the rise of concentrated financial power poses a threat to economic well-being is a must read as well.
"The financial industry has not always enjoyed such favored treatment. But for the past 25 years or so, finance has boomed, becoming ever more powerful. The boom began with the Reagan years, and it only gained strength with the deregulatory policies of the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. Several other factors helped fuel the financial industry’s ascent. Paul Volcker’s monetary policy in the 1980s, and the increased volatility in interest rates that accompanied it, made bond trading much more lucrative. The invention of securitization, interest-rate swaps, and credit-default swaps greatly increased the volume of transactions that bankers could make money on. And an aging and increasingly wealthy population invested more and more money in securities, helped by the invention of the IRA and the 401(k) plan. Together, these developments vastly increased the profit opportunities in financial services.

Not surprisingly, Wall Street ran with these opportunities. From 1973 to 1985, the financial sector never earned more than 16 percent of domestic corporate profits. In 1986, that figure reached 19 percent. In the 1990s, it oscillated between 21 percent and 30 percent, higher than it had ever been in the postwar period. This decade, it reached 41 percent. Pay rose just as dramatically. From 1948 to 1982, average compensation in the financial sector ranged between 99 percent and 108 percent of the average for all domestic private industries. From 1983, it shot upward, reaching 181 percent in 2007."

I have not read his book yet, but it's on my list. I hope he includes some information on the decade long campaign to repeal Glass-Steagall, led by Sandy Weill and Robert Rubin, which opened Pandora's box in 1999. It is a mistake to view what happened as some accident, or a natural development. It was a pre-meditated campaign to subvert the economy and the political protections of the vast majority of US citizens.

In the meanwhile, here are a few quotes from his piece in Atlantic Magazine which is a prelude piece to his book.
Typically, these countries are in a desperate economic situation for one simple reason—the powerful elites within them overreached in good times and took too many risks. Emerging-market governments and their private-sector allies commonly form a tight-knit—and, most of the time, genteel—oligarchy, running the country rather like a profit-seeking company in which they are the controlling shareholders.
But inevitably, emerging-market oligarchs get carried away; they waste money and build massive business empires on a mountain of debt. Local banks, sometimes pressured by the government, become too willing to extend credit to the elite and to those who depend on them. Overborrowing always ends badly, whether for an individual, a company, or a country. Sooner or later, credit conditions become tighter and no one will lend you money on anything close to affordable terms.
"Squeezing the oligarchs, though, is seldom the strategy of choice among emerging-market governments. Quite the contrary: at the outset of the crisis, the oligarchs are usually among the first to get extra help from the government, such as preferential access to foreign currency, or maybe a nice tax break, or—here’s a classic Kremlin bailout technique—the assumption of private debt obligations by the government. Under duress, generosity toward old friends takes many innovative forms. Meanwhile, needing to squeeze someone, most emerging-market governments look first to ordinary working folk—at least until the riots grow too large."

The Banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, with balance restored to the economy, before there can be any sustained recovery.

I am not so optimistic that this reform is possible, because there has in fact been a soft coup d'etat in the US, which now exists in a state of crony corporatism that wields enormous influence over the media and within the government.  To be clear about this, the oligarchs are flush with victory, and feel that they are firmly in control, able to subvert and direct any popular movement to the support of their own ends and unslakable will to power.
 
This is the contempt in which they hold the majority of American people and the political process: the common people are easily led fools, and everyone else who is smart enough to know better has their price. And they would beggar every middle class voter in the US before they will voluntarily give up one dime of their ill gotten gains.
 
But my model says that the oligarchs will continue to press their advantages, being flushed with victory, until they provoke a strong reaction that frightens everyone, like a wake up call, and the tide then turns to genuine reform.

27 January 2010

Memories of Beijing Ten Years Past


Below is a brief note from a friend abroad about his trip to Beijing and his experiences there with the retail gold trade which I found to be interesting. It is a sharp contrast to my last trip there over ten years ago.

The last time I was in Beijing was in 1998, and it must seem to be a different world there now. Back then there were few cars and a sea of bicycles. As a friend and I took a pedicab back from the Forbidden City to our hotel, it did seem as though we were in an ocean of moving people, bicyclists weaving about in ever shifting traffic patterns, with order maintained by some unspoken set of rules and deferences. There was no air pollution to speak of, and the sky was a deep blue, and the breeze crisp even on a sunny day.

Beijing was a sharp contrast to the great cities of the south. Vibrant Hong Kong nestled on the coast, and Shanghai, an expanding mass of grey on gray, concrete bristling with construction cranes. The sprawling capital seemed almost pristine, delicate. Especially if you did not see the huddle of one story concrete block villages on the outskirts of the main thoroughfares. But even they were more rural and underdeveloped than squalid like similar dwellings of the lower caste workers in the West. There was no litter or disorder, anywhere.

A major access highway was being constructed for the Olympics which the city hoped to host, which they did roughly ten years later. We marveled at the complete lack of heavy machinery, the mass of hand tools, and spiderworks of tied bamboo scaffolding.

The hotel was marvelous, with the kind of extravagant niceties that only a developing country can effortlessly provide to the prospective export trade. A twenty piece orchestra of excellent musicians in the spacious hotel lobby while you drink your coffee and tea in the afternoon is something that one rarely sees in a European hotel. And in the States, it is always impersonal, mass produced, and perfunctory. Welcome to the cult of death. Have a nice day.

Lovely people really, but the hardships of the countryside marked the faces of the peasants as we traveled outside the city to the Great Wall with our guide, Big Mah, so noted by his stature, which was average by European standards. The Wall itself runs the hilltops, clinging to mountainsides with remarkable tenacity. One does not walk the wall except for brief spans, and then you climb. The inclination is astonishing and the steps really large blocks, so it is an effort to lift your legs high enough from one to the next.

We labor to the top, to obtain a souvenir 'chop' on our paperwork at the summit, a symbol of our resolve. We are oddities again, some of the few Westerners. Crowds though of Chinese tourists exploring their heritage.

I am tired and sweating, regretting the lunch I ate earlier that day before the climb, and shamed by a young Buddhist monk who bounds up the incline like a gazelle, enigmatic smile spreading across his face, large straw hat in a fluid motion with his robes. I wonder why he is there. Do monks go on vacation? All he carries is a small leather purse and a stick.

Beyond that top point is the Wall unrestored, a shambles really, a recognizable collection of stone but not much more. Hardly a wall, more like a resilient pile of manmade things with a sort of quiet endurance, waiting for its renewal and the restoration provided by a Ten Year Plan, or not.

The visit to the cloisonné factory revealed a large showroom with small shops in the back staffed by women, intent as they worked in appalling, dirty conditions on ancient looking machinery. No health and safety inspections here. This is the ideal capitalism as Bill Gates described it after his own visit to the People's Republic. Keep your head down and your mouth shut.

At the tombs of the emperors we saw great stone rooms, empty of any furnishings or artifacts, stripped of all decadence during the Cultural Revolution. At least they have not despoiled the tomb of the great Qin Shi Huangdi, which sits in brooding solitude under its man made mountain on the plain. Is it truly superstition that prevents its excavation, or a fearful respect for what is recorded to have been the labor of tens of thousands of men in burying their first great Emperor in what is said to have been astonishing opulence, rivaling and perhaps surpassing that of the Pharaohs.

At the nearly deserted Friendship Store we watched a man slowly and painstakingly painting the insides of small medicine bottles with intricate strokes from a brush that seemed to consist of a few hairs. I have several of them still, on a shelf in my study. I sometimes wonder what became of him, and his quiet obeisance to art and the dignity of craftsmanship. It is good to surround yourself with little reminders of people whom you have known, for their spirits are all that will remain when the last stars flicker out.

There were few tourists, and my Italian chief engineer and I would draw more than a few stares from the passersby as we walked down the broad avenue towards Tiananmen Square. There was a McDonalds but it was closed for lack of interest. Groups of people crowded around what looked like newspapers posted on public boards, a primitive version of the Internet cafe.

We watched a football match one evening in the hotel bar via satellite, Italy versus the Czech Republic. I pretended to sympathize with my friend in the Italian loss, which for him was disgrazia e disonore, for the Italians to lose to such a team as mine, but I secretly reveled in the win. There was nothing else to do, as they had no grappa on hand to ease his suffering. It was the only thing that would absolve such an indignity, except time.

As a guest of the government we dined one evening in an official restaurant, with doors guarded by soldiers. Dinner was a treat, but the attempts to playfully intimidate me with a still lively lobster 'sushi' were misspent, as I had done my time in Tokyo and the small places off the Ginza playing that same game with my Japanese friend Shino san. I am a citizen of the world, and nothing is alien to me except sin.

Afterwards they had group karaoke and dancing marked by a charming innocence. The old gold toothed host challenged me to a drinking contest, with something that tasted like distilled kerosene served in a heavy white ceramic teapot that in Chinese was called the alcoholic's friend. I refused to be shamed into it and deferred, as I had to get up at 5 AM the next day for a flight that could not be missed, as it only ran twice a week as a nonstop to Scandinavia. If missed, it meant a lengthy flight with a connection through Bombay. No time for hangovers.

One of the young ladies remarked about a recent film she had seen, The Bridges of Madison County. I had never seen it, and still haven't. She was impressed that American men could be so sensitive, as she had been led to believe that we were barbarians. I did not have the heart to tell her that despite some finer moments, we really are. And so are hers.

Everywhere the clerks were polite but restrained, obviously pained to please, but especially when changing money. Slogans in Chinese were everywhere, urging the populace to work hard to achieve the award of hosting the Olympic games, to the point of civic obsession.

The airport was a nightmare of people and traffic. The line to enter the departure area was a clotted mass of people surging towards a tiny female guard. After facing down her fierce glare and outstretched hand, I learned what was required from a young German tourist with backpack and halting English, directing me to first purchase a departure tax coupon at the other end of the terminal. Don't panic, just get it done.

Once past that narrows of official release, there were piles of luggage and a small stand, barely a cardboard table and marked by a tiny sign, where one checked in for the non-stop flight to Copenhagen. I was so worried about missing the flight that I took my carry-on to the gate and sat on it, forgetting to exchange my Chinese money on departure, in violation of their currency controls. The money was a key plank in their ten year plan, like the exhortations on the walls.

It's all different now. China seems to be making the great leap forward. I have heard that the sea of bicycles is gone, replaced by impersonal masses of metal moving in linear formations. They even have smog in the city, an innocence lost.

And where is the West going? Is there some force that is causing the wealth of the people to seek a level, flowing from West to East, to bring all to the lowest common denominator? Or are the elite powers merely leveling the common people under their governance and the will to power? Are the great world civilizations converging around the individual, to crush his spirit?

And what price freedom.

Just returned last night from Beijing. While on standby at airport from 11:30 AM until 6:30 PM (all classes of all half-hourly flights of all airlines were overbooked and loaded full, and so asia mile / marco polo gold membership were ineffective in attempts to cut in the queue). Beijing-HK air travel business must be good.

To kill time, I extracted paper cash from atm network and exchanged same for little one troy ounce monetary gold wafer at airport sub-branch of bank of china. The staff were courteous, and the sub-branch manager spent 5 minutes with me to explain the way to buy and sell back gold.

Each wafer is individually numbered, and registered.

China is progressing fast in its re-engagement with gold. Wonderful. It is interesting that gold seems to be everywhere now at the China retail level, legally bought, kept, sold back, and all tax free, at transparent pricing, in alignment with gold reform that was two decades in planning, implementation, and rollout.


Now that is market capitalism, which the US banking system is now sadly lacking. A free market is not dominated by opaque complexity, endless frauds and limited choices, with high rents extracted by government license, feeding on productive effort, placing toll booths across fundamentally simple transactions with a nightmarish private bureaucracy and regressive taxation. That is feudalism, or more recently, crony capitalism.

Capitalism is about the creation and the adding of value, satisfying customer demands, thereby making them -- happy. It is not the taking of inordinate fees through legalistic snares and artificial complexity, obstacles and contrivances, government sanctioned monopolies and corporate racketeering.

The Banks and politicians no longer respond to the people, their customers, because they have merged their interests to the exclusion of all others, serving themselves, undermining the fundamental basis of social relationships and trust. The starting point of regulatory reform is no longer what the people need, but rather, what Wall Street requires. This is the same model as the US health care system. The corruption starts its financiers, but has its roots in Washington.

And so perhaps we may have a global recovery, even prosperity, and a return to the discipline of the market, if we bury our would-be emperors, the Banks, with their terra cotta army of regulators and politicians.

A Tale of Two Economies and The Myth of Recovery: Thoughts Before the State of the Union Address


Economist Michel Hudson frames the current situation with the US national economy in his most recent essay, The Myth of Recovery, in a way that is strikingly different from the conventional view.

Sometimes we become locked into a model of thinking that leads us to engage in repeated errors, because of a flaw in the model, and not in the actual detailed decisions that lead us to those errors.

I think it is worth reading, and herein is a protracted excerpt from it. It cuts to the heart of what we have said, that there will be no sustained recovery until the real wage increases. The outsized financial sector is strangling the real recovery by diverting resources to itself, and taxing whatever is provided to the real economy.

Mike Hudson takes a more Keynesian approach than I would because of his background and training. That is a legitimate difference. My personal approach would begin with a reform and reshaping of the financial system first and foremost, and a recognition that the current structure of global trade is a game that is rigged against the American working class.


There are two economies – and the extractive FIRE sector dominates the “real” economy

When listening to the State of the Union speech, one should ask just which economy Obama means when he talks about recovery. Most wage earners and taxpayers will think of the “real” economy of production and consumption. But Obama believes that this “Economy #1” is dependent on that of Wall Street. His major campaign contributors and “wealth creators” in the FIRE sector – Economy #2, wrapped around the “real” Economy #1.

Economy #2 is the “balance sheet” economy of property and debt. The wealthiest 10 per cent lend out their savings to become debts owed by the bottom 90 per cent. A rising share of gains are made in extractive ways, by charging rent and interest, by financial speculation (“capital gains”), and by shifting taxes off itself onto the “real” Economy #1.

John Edwards talked about “the two economies,” but never explained what he meant operationally. Back in the 1960s when Michael Harrington wrote The Other America, the term meant affluent vs. poor America. For 19th-century novelists such as Charles Dickens and Benjamin Disraeli, it referred to property owners vs. renters. Today, it is finance vs. debtors. Any discussion of economic polarization between rich and poor must focus on the deepening indebtedness of most families, companies, real estate, cities and states to an emerging financial oligarchy.

Financial oligarchy is antithetical to democracy. That is what the political fight in Washington is all about today. The Corporate Democrats are trying to get democratically elected to bring about oligarchy. I hope that this is a political oxymoron, but I worry about how many people buy into the idea that “wealth creation” requires debt creation. While wealth gushes upward through the Wall Street financial siphon, trickle-down economic ideology fuels a Bubble Economy via debt-leveraged asset-price inflation.

The role of public spending – and hence budget deficits – no longer means taxing citizens to spend on improving their well-being within Economy #1. Since the 2008 financial meltdown the enormous rise in national debt has resulted from the reimbursing of Wall Street for its bad gambles on derivatives, collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps that had little to do with the “real” economy. They could have been wiped out without bringing down the economy. That was an idle threat. A.I.G.’s swap insurance department could have collapsed (it was largely in London anyway) while keeping its normal insurance activities unscathed. But the government paid off the financial sector’s bad speculative debts by taking them onto the public balance sheet.

The economy is best viewed as the FIRE sector wrapped around the production and consumption core, extracting financial and rent charges that are not technologically or economically necessary costs.

Say’s Law of markets, taught to every economics student, states that workers and their employers use their wages and profits to buy what they produce (consumer goods and capital goods). Profits are earned by employing labor to produce goods and services to sell at a markup. (M – C – M’ to the initiated.)

The financial and property sector is wrapped around this core, siphoning off revenue from this circular flow. This FIRE sector is extractive. Its revenue takes the form of what classical economists called “economic rent,” a broad category that includes interest, monopoly super-profits (price gouging) and land rent, as well as “capital” gains. (These are mainly land-price gains and stock-market gains, not gains from industrial capital as such.) Economic rent and capital gains are income without a corresponding necessary cost of production (M – M’ to the initiated).

Banks have lent increasingly to buy up these rentier rights to extract interest, and less and less to promote industrial capital formation. Wealth creation” FIRE-style consists most easily of privatizing the public domain and erecting tollbooths to charge access fees for basic necessities such as health insurance, land sites, home ownership, the communication spectrum (cable and phone rights), patent medicine, water and electricity, and other public utilities, including the use of convenient money (credit cards), or the credit needed to get by. This kind of wealth is not what Adam Smith described in The Wealth of Nations. It is a form of overhead, not a means of production. The revenue it extracts is a zero-sum economic activity, meaning that one party’s gain (that of Wall Street usually) is another’s loss.

Debt deflation resulting from a distorted “financialized” economy

The problem that Obama faces is one that he cannot voice politically without offending his political constituency. The Bubble Economy has left families, companies, real estate and government so heavily indebted that they must use current income to pay banks and bondholders. The U.S. economy is in a debt deflation. The debt service they pay is not available for spending on goods and services. This is why sales are falling, shops are closing down and employment continues to be cut back.

Banks evidently do not believe that the debt problem can be solved. That is why they have taken the $13 trillion in bailout money and run – paying it out in bonuses, or buying other banks and foreign affiliates. They see the domestic economy as being all loaned up. The game is over. Why would they make yet more loans against real estate already in negative equity, with mortgage debt in excess of the market price that can be recovered? Banks are not writing more “equity lines of credit” against homes or making second mortgages in today’s market, so consumers cannot use rising mortgage debt to fuel their spending.

Banks also are cutting back their credit card limits. They are “earning their way out of debt,” making up for the bad gambles they have taken with depositor funds, by raising interest rates, penalties and fees, by borrowing low-interest credit from the Federal Reserve and investing it abroad – preferably in currencies rising against the dollar. This is what Japan did in the “carry trade.” It kept the yen’s exchange rate down, and it is lowering the dollar’s exchange rate today. This threatens to raise prices for imports, on which domestic consumer prices are based. So easy credit for Wall Street means a cost squeeze for consumers.

The President needs a better set of advisors. But Wall Street has obtained veto power over just who they should be. Control over the President’s ear time has been part of the financial sector’s takeover of government. Wall Street has threatened that the stock market will plunge if oligarch-friendly Fed Chairman Bernanke is not reappointed. Obama insists on keeping him on board, in the belief that what’s good for Wall Street is good for the economy at large.

But what’s good for the banks is a larger market for their credit – more debt for the families and companies that are their customers, higher fees and penalties, no truth-in-lending laws, harsher bankruptcy terms, and further deregulation and bailouts.

This is the program that Bernanke has advised Washington to follow. Wall Street hopes that he will be kept on board. Bernanke’s advice has helped bolster that of Tim Geithner at Treasury and Larry Summers as chief advisor to convince Pres. Obama that “recovery” requires more credit.

Going down this road will make the debt overhead heavier, raising the cost of living and doing business. So we must beware of the President using the term “recovery” in his State of the Union speech to mean a recovery of debt and giving more money to Wall Street Jobs cannot revive without consumers having more to spend. And consumer demand (a hateful, jargon word, because only Wall Street and the Pentagon’s military-industrial complex really make demands) cannot be revived without reducing the debt burden. Bankers are refusing to write down mortgages and other debts to reflect the ability to pay. That act of economic realism would mean taking a loss on their bad debts. So they have asked the government to lend new buyers enough credit to re-inflate housing prices. This is the aim of the housing subsidy to new homebuyers. It leaves more revenue to be capitalized into higher mortgage loans to support prices for real estate fallen into negative equity.

The pretense is that this is subsidizing the middle class, but homebuyers are only the intermediaries for government credit (debt to be paid off by taxpayers) to mortgage bankers. Nearly 90 per cent of new home mortgages are being funded or guaranteed by the FHA, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac – all providing a concealed subsidy to Wall Street.

Obama’s most dangerous belief is in the myth that the economy needs the financial sector to lead its recovery by providing credit. Every economy needs a means of payment, which is why Wall Street has been able to threaten to wreck the economy if the government does not give in to its demands. But the monetary function should not be confused with predatory lending and casino gambling, not to mention Wall Street’s use of bailout funds on lobbying efforts to spread its gospel.

Deficit reduction

It seems absurd for politicians to worry that running a deficit from health care or Social Security can cause serious economic problems, after having given away $13 trillion to Wall Street and a blank check to the Pentagon. The “stimulus package” was only about 5 per cent of this amount. But Obama has announced that he intends on Tuesday to close the barn door by proposing a bipartisan Senate Budget Commission to recommend how to limit future deficits – now that Congress is unwilling to give away any more money to Wall Street.

Republican approval would set the stage for Wednesday’s State of the Union message promising to press for “fiscal responsibility,” as if a lower deficit will help recovery. I suspect that Republicans will have little interest in joining. They see the aim as being to co-opt their criticism of Democratic spending plans. But in view of the rising and well-subsidized efforts of Harold Ford and his fellow Corporate Democrats, the actual “bipartisan” aim seems to be to provide political cover for cutting spending on labor and on social services. Obama already has sent up trial balloons about needing to address the Social Security and Medicare deficits, as if they should not be financed out of the general budget by taxpayers including the higher brackets (presently exempted from FICA paycheck withholding).

Traditionally, running deficits is supposed to help pull economies out of recession. But today, spending money on public services is deemed “bad,” because it may be “inflationary” – that is, threatening to raise wages. Talk of cutting deficits thus is class-war talk – on behalf of the FIRE sector.

The economy needs deficit spending to avoid unemployment and poverty, to increase social spending to deal with the present economic shrinkage, and to maintain their capital infrastructure. The federal government also needs to increase revenue sharing with states forced to slash their budgets in response to falling tax revenue and rising unemployment insurance.

But the deficits that the Bush-Obama administration have run are nothing like the familiar old Keynesian-style deficits to help the economy recover. Running up public debt to pay Wall Street in the hope that much of this credit will be lent out to inflate asset prices is deemed good. This belief will form the context for Wednesday’s State of the Union speech. So we are brought back to the idea of economic recovery and just what is to be recovered.

Financial lobbyists are hoping to get the government to fill the gap in domestic demand below full-employment levels by providing bank credit. When governments spend money to help increase economic activity, this does not help the banks sell more interest bearing debt. Wall Street’s golden age occurred under Bill Clinton, whose budget surplus was more than offset by an explosion of commercial bank lending.

The pro-financial mass media reiterate that deficits are inflationary and bankrupt economies. The reality is that Keynesian-style deficits raise wage levels relative to the price of property (the cost of obtaining housing, and of buying stocks and bonds to yield a retirement income). The aim of running a “Wall Street deficit” is just the reverse: It is to re-inflate property prices relative to wages.

A generation of financial “ideological engineering” has told people to welcome asset-price inflation (the Bubble Economy). People became accustomed to imagine that they were getting richer when the price of their homes rose. The problem is that real estate is worth what banks will lend – and mortgage loans are a form of debt, which needs to be repaid.

18 January 2010

The Banking Oligarchy Must Be Restrained For a Recovery to Be Sustained


Brilliant article really, in its simplicity.

Despite Obama's recent brave words, the US is lagging the world recognition that because of systemic distortions in the financial system the banks are in fact exercising a tax on the real economy that is impeding global recovery. As recently noted in London's Financial Times regarding the structural imbalances in the financial system:

"...as long as they are not addressed, the banks will make profits – or more accurately, extract rents – out of all proportion to any contribution they make to the wider economy."

The US is going in absolutely the wrong direction, lessening competition and strenghtening the grip of a financial oligarchy through its policy of focusing relief efforts on a small group of Too Big To Fail Banks, at the expense of the broad economy. Despite assurances to the contrary, this is the policy being administered by Washington.

This institutionalization of distortion was easier to understand under the Bush Administration with Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson guiding policy, and the Clinton Administration under banking insider Robert Rubin. But why this sort of response from the new reform government? The answer most likely is centered on three men: Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, and Ben Bernanke. None of the three has practical experience in business. All three are creatures of the banking system, and are heavily indebted to the status quo.

The first practical step for Obama would be to dismiss Summers and Geithner, and if he is wise, the person or persons who recommended them. He also should encourage the Congress to investigate the bank bailouts in general, and tie this to Bernanke's reappointment to the Chairmanship and the movement to audit the Fed.

The most recent scandal regarding the collusion between the government and the Fed to mask the backdoor bailouts to a few big banks via AIG should be proof enough that the Fed has no intentions of acting honestly and openly, and is far exceeding its mandates in its aggressive expanding its balance sheet and the selective monetization of private debts.

There are disturbing indications that the US is using a few of its large banks as elements of its policy to achieve certain objectives in the world markets. Such collusion between the corporate and the government sectors is the prelude to fascism.

We should keep in mind that financial crisis was indeed created during both Democratic and Republican administrations, and that simply replacing the Democrats with traditional opponents is unlikely to achieve genuine change.

Change is what is required. But while the foul stench of corruption hangs over the political process in Washington, where Big Money readily buys influence and control over legislation and regulation, there will be no significant changes, and no economic recovery. Recovery will be in appearance only.


Financial Times
How the big banks rigged the market

By Philip Stephens
18 January 2010

When Lloyd Blankfein met politicians in London a little while ago he brushed aside warnings that investment banks faced higher taxes if they ignored the rising public outcry about multibillion-dollar bonus pools. The Goldman chief executive seemed to believe governments would not dare.
That misjudgment – a measure of the breathtaking hubris that, even after all that has happened, continues to separate bankers from just about everyone else – may explain Goldman’s response to the British government’s decision to apply a 50 per cent tax to this year’s payouts

In the description of Whitehall insiders, Goldman executives reacted with anger and aggression. The threat was that the bank would scale back its business in London. For a moment it seemed Gordon Brown’s administration might wobble. In the event, Goldman’s lobbying failed to persuade it to soften the impact of the tax.

Britain, of course, is not alone. France has imposed its own bonus tax. Barack Obama’s administration has just announced a levy to recover an estimated $90bn (£55bn, €63bn) over 10 years. The centre-right government in Sweden has gone further by introducing a permanent “stability levy” to discourage excessive risk-taking.

It is a measure of how far the political debate has shifted against the financial plutocrats that George Osborne, the Tory shadow chancellor, has applauded the Swedish plan. If the Tories win the coming general election, they would support a worldwide levy along similar lines. It is “unacceptable”, Mr Osborne remarked the other day, for the banks to be paying big bonuses rather than building resilience against future crises.

So far, so encouraging. But the process cannot end here. Irritating as it may be to Mr Blankfein, a one-off bonus tax is not going to change anything in the medium to long term. Levies such as that in Sweden mark a recognition that the profits and remuneration policies of the banks are more than a fleeting problem. But forcing bankers to strengthen balance sheets with money they would rather put in their own pockets addresses only part of the problem.

The next stage must be scrutiny of the structural distortions that allow these institutions to rack up such huge profits. Broadly speaking, the leading players in at least three areas of investment banking – wholesale markets, underwriting and mergers and acquisitions – have been operating natural oligopolies.

Their profits have been in significant part a reflection of the absence of robust competition. There are different reasons for this in the different areas of business – what economists call asymmetries in some and market dominance in others. But as long as they are not addressed, the banks will make profits – or more accurately, extract rents – out of all proportion to any contribution they make to the wider economy.

Read the rest of this article here.


17 October 2009

Charles Walters: New Wealth and the Productive Economy


Here is an essay that explores the historical concept of "New Wealth" and what we call 'the productive economy.'

For us, there is a real place in the general economy for lawyers, bankers, merchants, and those who enable the organization and distribution of 'new wealth.'

It is a matter of balance. When one segment dominates the other destructive imbalance results.

When labor dominates, the economy will often slide into long periods of slow growth and cultural narrowing or even stagnation, with a badly lagging industrial development and technological innovation.

When the organizers dominate, the wealth transfer from the many to the few tends to strangle economic growth with the onset of weak-minded successors and heirs, leading to periods of degeneration as it overreaches its capability. The society becomes stratified into elites, enablers, systemic serfs, and free rabble. The imbalance of stratification stresses social cooperation and tranquility and leads to a change in governance as the organization collapses. The American Revolution was an example of this, the beginning of the end for the British Empire.

As communication and information technology improves, and behavioural persuasion becomes more sophisticated, the organizers and oligarchists can extend their domination to ever larger portions of the world population. The control of currency and commerce are almost as important as military power to the maintenance of empire. The Fall of Rome was as much an artifact of technological shortcomings, despite significant advances and innovations in the prime of the empire, exacerbated by a general weakening of governance through a corruption of leadership.

This essay is offered as a stimulus for thought and is not intended as a general endorsement of this author or his organization.

Enjoy your weekend.

THE PRIMACY OF NEW WEALTH
By Charles Walters

So 2008 is gone, leaving in its wake the end of an era conceived in iniquity, nursed along in delusion with religious propitiation to the capricious god called high finance. As promised in these newsletters and other editorials, we have already started making drastic adjustments in our political and institutional arrangements. A fuller version of the entire story is contained in my semi-autobiographical, fully historical novel, A Beast of Muddy Brain, which was released at the recent Acres U.S.A. Conference in St. Louis.

Usually the passage of an era is viewed in terms of leaders and military people who hog the pages of history. This is not the case with Beast. Here the nearly century-long story unfolds as the life of a single farmer and his family.

In this column, however, a small part of the story brought into focus by recent events lays out a few lessons found in unopened books.

Military Industrial Complex

By the time Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of a military-industrial complex in his farewell address, the complex was already a reality. Ike wanted to say, "Congressional-industrial- military complex," but his advisors convinced him to delete any reference to the "honorable ones," this in spite of their penchant for both hidden and open bribery.

The military-industrial complex was in fact launched February 27, 1947, in the White House cabinet room. The cast of characters included Secretary of State Dean Atchison, a few congressional leaders, including Republican Senator Arthur Vandenberg. The product of that meeting was the replacement of the republic with a national security state and a public policy of waging "perpetual war for perpetual peace," the last phrase a Gore Vidal quote. The first of these became characterized as cold. It became hot in Korea and tepid in terms of scale into the now present.

It was Senator Vandenberg who in effect told Harry S. Truman he could have his militarized economy if he employed the canard that the Russians were on the way. This dark secret was dressed up as the Truman Doctrine, war being the engine of credit used to save Greece, Turkey, then Europe and the rest of the world from the nearly prostrate Soviet Union.

Mark that date --- February 27, 1947. Align it with the buildup drive to pass new farm legislation and the full implementation of the new-fangled Bretton-Woods Agreement. Bretton Woods has already been described fully in this column (October 2008). The infamous farm act of 1948-1949 (the Aiken bill) has been the subject of commentary as long as this paper has been published.

The 80th Congress

Truman called the 80th Congress the worst in history. And yet its action in the matter of the Aiken bill fit hand in glove with the destruction of the simple and obvious system mandated by the U.S. Constitution. The end result that swung from the neck of the nation like a dead albatross was a provision called "60 percent of parity."

The military-industrial complex decreed that the nation's commissary could be maintained by underpaying agriculture by 40 percent, thereby releasing millions from the farms for factory work, military factory work included.

In perhaps another 50 years, economists may rediscover the awesome truth that a steady decline in farm income translated into a steady decline in national income, the ratio being 1 for agriculture, 7 for national income --- a ratio fixed by the state of the arts.

The shortfall in farm and national income became so uncomfortable during the second Eisenhower term, an injection of $72 billion was decreed for the military-industrial (and now university) complex status quo for agriculture. By the time rumblings that formed the National Farmers Organization became evident in 1955, hogs were selling for 10 cents a pound, corn 10 cents a bushel. War was ever triumphant in those days. There was a Communist under every stone, as is the case now with terrorists. Loyalty pledges were demanded, and neighbors were invited to fink on each other. By the mid-1960s, some 2,400 farms were closed down each week, the land and other assets being transferred into "a few strong hands."

What Was Wrong?

What indeed, was wrong with this equation? Agriculture --- Farm Bureau, agribusiness and academia excepted ---appealed to physics in its role as a new wealth industry and commonsense while institutional arrangements were being dismantled, and new ones constructed that were suitable to finance, esoteric manipulations, and a dream as old as Genghis Khan --- one world. Representative government of, by and for the people is now no more than a footnote in history. Only corporate America and a compliant military have true representation in Congress, the bribe is that powerful, whether paid in the dark or openly as an obscene fee for a speech while either in or out of office. The two-party vote has become so repugnant hardly half those eligible even bother with the exercise.

The Source

"The land is the source or the substance from which wealth is drawn;" wrote Richard Cantillon in Essai sur la Nature du Commerce en General, and he continues, "the work of man is the form which produces it, and wealth in itself is nothing other than food, commodities and the amenities of life."

Cantillon's treatise described the source of new earned income at a time when John Law ruled the economy of France. Cantillon and Law clashed, chiefly over the real character of money.

Law established the Banque Generale in 1715 and had it converted to a state bank three years later. His every move was designed to drive raw materials prices down while he, John Law, furnished substitutes to repair the deficit. In his own way, he developed a war against poverty, created make-work projects such as digging a canal at Briare, and he took steps to make Paris a seaport town. All tolls were abolished so that the grain trade could be "freed." Import duties were reduced on oil, leather, tallow and wines so that free trade could furnish France with cheap imports. Commodities fell in price. And new money issues were constructed by the Banque Generale, which simply monetized collateral. It took this economy only two years to explode.

After the dust settled, about the only thing left was Richard Cantillon's Essai, the masterpiece that reached the purity of theory in one lesson and limited itself to the possibilities of life in the next.

New wealth is not easily comprehended in a society addicted to wealth on the gaming table, at the end of a stock trade or embodied in currency created out of thin air by institutional arrangements that no longer ask the questions of a child: Where does it come from? Where does it go? The transition from the simple business equation to some idea of earned income at the national level that can emerge as national profits (social surplus) and savings leaves most people and most economists bewildered. They see the CEO who walks off with, say, $10 million after scuttling his company as wealth, and so it is in terms of the individual. But he has left in his wake disturbing exchange consequences and no direct effect on buildup of national profits and savings. The parasite creates no new wealth, and usually debilitates new wealth creation, because the predator merely transfers money from one pocket to another, and in terms of physics creates nothing.

There are close to one million lawyers in the United States. They transfer a great deal of money from their clients and victims into their own coffers. This transfer is called earnings. It adds to national income, but it adds nothing to national profits and savings.

Wal-Mart is said to be the largest corporation in the nation if not the world. Bentonville billionaires are now a part of American legend. Yet Wal-Mart produces no new national wealth. Like the baseball game or the professional football contest, it transfers the money called wealth by talk show hosts from one pocket to the next, but the net effect of these enterprises is to enable new wealth industries to fabricate things like baseball bats from lumber, helmets and gear from plastic --- all sourced from raw materials --- to stimulate economic activity, but adds little or no national profits and savings for stable investment.

To find the source of new wealth, we are required to examine new wealth industries.
Financial services are not new wealth creators. Quite the contrary, they make the stable dollar a relic of yesteryear because in the main they create money, but do not create the interest required to make this super-grift appear real. The grift called debt may enable instant gratification, but it also transfers the wealth of a nation into the hands of a few. That is why the interest mill delivers nations into convulsions at regular intervals in history.

In turn, debt is enabled by anything less than broad-spectrum distribution of landed resources and money income. Further, as new wealth industries are deprived of parity earnings, either instant depression or deferred depression (deferred by debt) must follow in the fullness of time.

Those French philosophers of the 18th century not only reasoned well, they forecast the inevitable as the court and its syncophants installed debauchery as public policy. Finance based on debt creation has replaced the court in our day, purchased the Congress and trapped the American worker into virtual indentured servitude. Finance now bills itself as a prime mover, not as a grim reaper that inevitably destroys the simple and obvious system gifted posterity by the Founding Fathers.

What, then, are the new wealth industries on which national solvency depends?

New Wealth Industries

It can be seen that even the making of a lead pencil involves a staggering complement of services, know-how, sales efforts, even advertising. The only part that meets the test of new wealth is the raw material component --- the lumber, the graphite, the ink for printing, all of which invite a look at nature's gift. Depending on the state of the arts, the raw materials component in products for the sales floor use up to eight times more labor than raw materials. Therefore we speak of new wealth industries as those that require a heavy raw material input.
Food to stoke the metabolic furnace of human beings comes first. It takes some 2,000 calories a day to feed a hard-working human being. That is why agriculture is the largest new wealth industry, accounting for fully 70 percent of the raw materials used to operate the economy.

Fuel, minerals, lumber, gravel, fossil fuels, fish all together account for approximately 30 percent of the raw materials used to run the economy.

The lumber used to make that No. 2 lead pencil may be a small component in the manufacture of the end product, but it is most important because along with graphite it accounts for the lion's share of national profits and savings possible based on the pencil's fabrication. People taking in each other's laundry can create employment, transferring money wealth from one pocket to the next, but that trade-off is strictly neutral in creating the profits and savings needed for sound investment and sound expansion.

Is Labor Primary?

The answer is "yes" --- but that "yes" has a codicil.

The only source for national profits and savings is the raw material input as monetized by the agency of price. That is physics speaking, once you trace those profits and savings back to their origin. That is why national profits and savings rely on new wealth industries.

It is hard not to belabor the point. Take the baseball stadium that Chamber of Commerce types chest-thump into being at the taxpayer's expense, usually with the declaration that a home team generates so-and-so much income. At the local level, it is made to look that way. But from the plane of observation called national profits and savings, the game creates nothing except the few dollars involved in bat, glove and paraphernalia manufacture and the little titanium used to mark base lines.

It is labor that enables the use of raw materials. It is labor that harvests the lumber, mines the minerals, catches the fish, grows the crop. Producers, processors, and an improved state of the arts all are essential. The apparatus of economy pyramids into national income, but not national profits and savings. The policeman, the fireman, we require their service, and their salaries help that pyramid called national income stand on its raw materials base. All facilitate civilization. But they create no national profits or savings. That chore is left to the food they eat, the clothes they wear and the gift from the planet traced to raw physical product.

The Attack

Why, then, do civilizations try to cut the legs from under the source of new wealth? It may seem an assault on the intelligence of the reader to point out that the worldwide scramble is for the control of raw materials, food included. This much stated, we have to wonder aloud why public policy always seems to cut off the nation's legs at the knees by underpricing all of agriculture and many of its other raw materials. In modern times we exacerbate this delusion by ignoring the values embodied in recyclables. The above expresses itself in food's role in energy transfer from the sun to plant to human metabolic necessity. The cycle has to replicate itself daily, monthly, annually!

Finance and debt appear to be prime movers, but they cannot substitute for national profits and savings based on raw materials without engineering convulsion at regular historical intervals.

We now know that interest doubles a debt very quickly. At 10 percent, the doubling time is seven years; at 7 percent, it is 10 years. It is interest that builds a collapse position in 80 to 90 years.

The Fed will be 100 years old on December 23, 2013.

This article is reproduced from Acres U.S.A. The Voice of Eco-Agriculture Volume 39, Number 1, January 2009.
AcresUSA.com

01 October 2009

Iceland's Failure: Not All Banana Republics Deal in Bananas


Here is a nice snapshot of an oligarchy at work in a small country. It is a microcosm of the United States. One only has to substitute "major corporations" for power individuals and the parallel becomes more obvious.

It appears to outsiders that in the US, rather than reform or change, rival organizations are in conflict with each other in the US for the spoils of corruption, and alternatively exchange political power to provide the appearance of change, but never relinquishing the primary mission of transferring wealth from the many to their own particular constituents.

The solution in Iceland is for a third party, a progressive party, to rise up and be supported in the elections, despite the stiff opposition from the status quo. Iceland is a small country and its citizens on average reasonably well educated and easily reached. They simply need to get seriously concerned for the future of their children and grandchildren and take control of their country back from the political elite.

It is a much more daunting task for a third party to bring reform to a large country with diverse population, often easily managed into conflict with each other by propaganda from a co-opted mainstream media. Potential leaders often have large egos, and in the States bloggers too often tend to enjoy squabbling with each other over relatively inconsequential things, rather than the primary task at hand. I wonder if it is the same way in Iceland?

UK Telegraph
David Oddsson's ascent to Iceland's editor in chief splits opinion as bloggers gain ground
By Rowena Mason
September 29th, 2009

Plus ca change! And I thought Iceland was moving on from a society where the same elite that caused the financial crash held an iron grip on public life,” groaned one resident of Reykjavik.

The cause of her dismay was the news that David Oddsson, the former prime minister and central bank governor has been appointed editor of the country’s best-respected newspaper.

Only six months ago, shortly after a change in government, he was forced out of the central bank as campaigners lobbied for a new order to help the country recover from the failure of its banking system a year ago.

Mr Oddsson – whose Thatcherite policies led to the privatisation of Iceland’s three big banks in the 1990s – inspires both extreme devotion and antipathy in his home country.

Many blame him for de-regulation of the financial system in the years before the collapse that sparked a domino of corporate bankruptcies, rising unemployment and an investigation into “suspicions of criminal activity” at the failed banks.

Others, including one reader who emailed me this morning, believe the appointment of Mr Oddsson will be a steady force for good behind the many excellent reporters uncovering suspected corruption in Iceland’s financial system.

A couple of Morgunbladid journalists I spoke to were ambivalent – surprised by the choice, but willing to give Mr Oddsson a chance as an editor who must hold those who contributed to the crash responsible.

However this flamboyant politician chooses to sit in his editorial chair, the fact remains that almost a year after the crash Iceland has not yet quite escaped the financial and political powers who have a strong interest in maintaining the status quo and protecting their reputations.

One of the main factors behind Iceland’s financial implosion – an extreme microcosm for the problems in the rest of the world – is the secrecy, interconnection and conflicts of interest in its public life.

That the major shareholders of the banks also owned much of the non-state media undoubtedly helped to perpetuate many myths about Iceland’s economic strength.

Frettabladid, a free newspaper distributed to every home, and Channel 2 television, are both still owned by Jon Asgeir Johannesson – whose companies are strongly linked to Glitnir, one of the collapsed banks, and Baugur, the failed retail giant that owned dozens of British high street shops.

Another television channel, Skjareinn, is backed by the brothers that owned the biggest share of Kaupthing, Iceland’s biggest failed bank.

And Morgunbladid itself was previously owned by Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson, one of a billionaire father and son team behind the third collapsed bank, Landsbanki. It is now in the hands of fishing magnates, who fiercely oppose Iceland’s entry to the European Union out of fear that quotas may be restricted.

One consequence of the links between big business and the media has been that the Icelandic public’s faith in traditional and official sources of news has started to erode, increasing reliance on blogs to provide news services, spread gossip and provide a discussion forum.

This has increasingly irritated some of Iceland’s financiers. Lydur Gudmundsson, one of the two brothers who backed Kaupthing, has publicly blamed bloggers for creating a negative atmosphere and pointing too many fingers.

It’s a sure sign that these new media journalists, empowered by the internet, are digging around in the right back yards.