Jim Rickards: Possible Run on the Gold Bank, Fed Insolvent, Currency Endgames in US Debt Crisis

"Somewhere ahead I expect to see a worldwide panic-scramble for gold as it dawns on the world population that they have been hoodwinked by the central banks' creation of so-called paper wealth. No central bank has ever produced a single element of true, sustainable wealth. In their heart of hearts, men know this. Which is why, in experiment after experiment with fiat money, gold has always turned out to be the last man standing." Richard Russell

The interview is refreshing because Mr. Rickards lays his thoughts out clearly and without excessive jargon. I found his rationale for China's desire to increase its gold holdings to be intriguing. The price objective of $5,000 - 10,000 is somewhat arbitrary, but directionally correct if it is not accompanied by a reissuance of the currency, which I think is much more probable. Essentially it works out to be the same, since the new currency is likely to be a factor of 1 for 100 exchange for current dollars. If this seems outlandish, it should be kept in mind that this is not all that far removed from the fairly recent post-empire experience of the Soviet Union.

Jim Rickards audio interview on King World News

Highlights (aka Cliff's Notes):

• There is obviously not enough gold and silver to cover the physical demand if holders of paper certificates in unallocated accounts demand delivery, and most likely only a small fraction could be covered with the practical supply available. Cash settlement will be enforced in the majority of cases.
• Cash settlements would be for a price as of a 'record date' which is likely to be much less than the current physical price which would continue to run higher
• There is more here than meets the eye - if you holding metal in an unallocated account you are likely to be considered an unsecured creditor
• 100:1 leverage is reckless no matter commodity or asset it involves - little room for error
• There is no way to pay off the existing real US debt without inflating the currency in which the debt is held, to the point of hyperinflation
• If the Fed's mortgage assets were marked to market the Fed itself would be insolvent
• Anything involving paper claims payable in dollars (stocks, bonds) are a 'rope of sand,' a complete illusion that is fraught with risk
• $5,500 per ounce of gold would be sufficient to back up the money supply (M1) as an alternative to hyperinflation and a reissuance of the currency. Target price is 5,000 - 10,000 per troy ounce in current issue US dollars
• The break point will be when the US debt can no longer be rolled over. US will not be able to finance its debt without taking drastic action on the backing or nature of the currency
• China needs to have about 4,000 tonnes of gold, and only has 1,000 tonnes today
• China cannot fulfill this goal by taking even all of its domestic production for the next 10 years. The Chinese people are showing a strong preference to hold gold themselves.
• From 1950 to 1980 the US gold supply declined from 20,000 to 8,000 tonnes, basically moving from the US mostly to Europe.
• The Chinese are frustrated that they cannot obtain sufficient gold at reasonable prices as Europe did, to withstand the currency wars and the reworking of international finance
• Holding your gold in a bank correlates you to the banking system, the very risks which you are trying to avoid

I was gratified to see that Mr. Rickards has come to the same conclusion as I had that the limiting factor on the Fed's ability to monetize debt will be the value and acceptance of the bond and the dollar.

I should add that although it is possible that some event might precipitate a series of events that could accelerate this, the scenario will otherwise take some years to play out. These types of changes happen slowly. The rally in precious metals has been going on for almost ten years now, and it might take another five to ten years for the resolution of these imbalances into a new equilibrium barring some precipitant, or 'trigger event.'

Mr. James G. Rickards is Senior Managing Director for Market Intelligence at Omnis, an applied research organization. He is also co-head of the firm's practice in Threat Finance & Market Intelligence and a member of the Board of Directors. Mr. Rickards is a senior counselor, investment banker and risk manager with extensive experience in capital markets including portfolio and risk management, product structure, financing and operations.

Prior to Omnis, Mr. Rickards held senior executive positions at "sell side" firms (Citibank and RBS Greenwich Capital Markets) and "buy side" firms (Long-Term Capital Management and Caxton Associates). Mr. Rickards has been a direct participant in many significant financial events including the 1981 release of U.S. hostages in Iran, the 1987 Stock Market Crash, the 1990 collapse of Drexel and the LTCM financial crisis of 1998 in which he was the principal negotiator of the government-sponsored rescue. He has been involved in the formation and successful launch of several hedge funds and fund-of-funds. His advisory clients have included private investment funds, investment banks and government directorates. Since 2001, Mr. Rickards has applied his financial expertise to a variety of tasks for the benefit of the national security community.

Mr. Rickards holds an LL.M. (Taxation) from the New York University School of Law; a J.D. from the University of Pennsylvania Law School; an M.A. in international economics from the JHU /SAIS, and a B.A. degree with honors from The Johns Hopkins University.

SP 500 Daily Chart Looking Toppy, Regulators Looking Sloppy

The SP 500 Chart is looking rather 'toppy' here as the rally extends higher, running on monetary inflation and technical trading, squeezing the shorts.

Make no mistake, if enough specs try to front run this to the short side the hedge funds and Wall Street Banks like JPM can run it higher, since selling volume has not yet picked up. And the government and the Fed are only too happy to facilitate a reflating of a stock bubble as a means of 'soft' market intervention.

This is a factor in how the Banks are making their substantial trading revenues these days, in a return to leverage and subsidized regulatory and monetary easing. Although the example presented here is with regard to commodities and ETFs, the principle applies very well to stock index ETFs.

"Much of this happens because the government is too stupid to see the inherent conflict of interest in what a broker-dealer does. Regulation will not stop gaming the law. Ethics do, and not everybody has ethics. So best you can do is prevent situations of conflict of interest, like the existence of Broker-dealer type entities. Either you trade for yourself, or you trade for others. Period...

You can never know intentions, and no one is bigger than the market, but the consequences of a lack of transparency and the free reign in which banks can tell half-truths to investors is a big factor in enabling strong hands to fleece weak hands with little market risk. It’s all a con game."

In defense of the stupidity of government, quite a few economists, analysts, and even bloggers do not 'get' the inherent conflict of interests involved in the current structure of the broker dealers, or do not care to see it for a variety of personal reasons. Stupidity can often be willfully obtained, bu always for a price. Some of the arguments against financial reform that I have seen appear to be similar to arguments that would be in favor of armed robbery because it stimulates the velocity of money.

The inherent problem with the dealer playing his own hand at the same table with the players, using the house bankroll, and looking at the cards as he deals them, would seem to be pretty much common sense, unless the casino is staffed with very restrained and scrupulous individuals, and some uncommonly good regulators equipped with the right equipment and a willingness to use effective deterrents.

But Wall Street banking is about as bad as it gets when it comes to ethical considerations and self-restraint. The regulators are too busy surfing porn, and the top politicians like Rahm Emmanual are compromised by free wheeling financiers and outrageously weak campaign contributions laws. That is why these lunatics need a strait-jacket like Glass-Steagall. The culture of greed is epidemic and overcomes all other considerations.

So for an opportunity to short this market, wait for it.

And as for serious financial reform, the Republicans are as bad or even worse than the Democrats. Mitch McConnell makes Chris Dodd look like Mahatma Ghandi, so don't hold your breath.

Several ProSharest ETFs Are Going to Have Reverse Splits This Week

The 'deflation trade' has been a tough row to hoe for the past year or so, compliments of the Fed's Balance Sheet.

It has been SO bad, that nine Proshares funds including several of the 'short ETFs' are going to have substantial reverse splits this week.

ProShares announced that it will execute reverse share splits on nine ProShares ETFs.



The splits take effect after the close on April 14. Here's the reason for doing the reverse splits according to ProShares:

For funds with lower nominal prices, bid-ask spreads represent a higher percentage of the transaction price than for higher-priced funds, increasing both costs and volatility — even when the spread is tight.

ProShares believes the reverse splits will adjust the share prices to a more cost-efficient level for the Funds' shareholders and that commissions charged by brokers who assess their clients on a per-share basis may be smaller, as investors will need to buy or sell fewer shares.

Read the rest of this article here.

Danger On the Horizon: The Systemic Pollution of The Big Banks

There are times for genuine concern in life, but the antics of Wall Street may be of less necessity than they would like us to imagine.

Goldman Sachs has not nearly enough societal value to balance its social pollution. They need to be cut off immediately from all government subsidy and restrained in their ability to game the system.

Excessive size and leverage breeds interdependent fraud, political corruption and inefficiency, and pseudo-scientific rationales for the ridiculous from domesticated economists.

Take the big Wall Street Banks apart into self-sufficient components, save the depositors, and start worrying about the things that really matter.



(h/t qqqbear and paine)

SP Futures Reach Apex of Fraud As Earnings Season Arrives and Bank Accounting Dodgy as Ever, Doing God's Work

"At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means shall we fortify against it? Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step the Ocean, and crush us at a blow?

Never! All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined, with all the treasure of the earth in their military chest; with a Bonaparte for a commander, could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point, then, is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide." Abraham Lincoln

Earnings season begins again this week in the States.

Investors remain skittish despite rosy predictions for earnings. This may be because of the suspicion that there are continuing misrepresentations of the true financial picture being permitted by the regulators, the ratings agencies, and the accountants.

For example, Bloomberg reports that if Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo were taking the appropriate reserves against loan losses, it would virtually wipe out all their expected profits for 2010. And I suggest that this loss estimate is likely to be conservative. But of course this is not going to happen in the land of 'extend and pretend.'

Reserves against losses? We don't need no stinking reserve, not while we have the Federal Reserve.

So don't get all short this market just yet, and provide grist for the mill as it might just grind higher. The good guys don't win until they get on their horses and do something. Wait for a key breakdown, probably triggered by some disclosures.

Misrepresentation of the facts and figures abounds. Through the years I noticed a common denominator amongst the kleptocracy and slippery sons of privilege: when the going gets tough, they cheat, even more than usual. And they become righteously indignant if you call them on it. As one pampered son said to me, "If the professors are not smart enough to stop me, why should you care?"

That is how they got through university, and how they get through life. They cheat on their taxes, on their wives, their community, their civic obligations, their business dealings, their friends, and even themselves. And they spend a lot of time and money stuffing the hole in their being with possessions, both things and people, to create the illusion of substance and self-worth. And so often they have learned this from their parents either through abuse or example. There must surely be a special place in hell for anyone who twists such a pathetic half-life out of the gift of a child.

Someone sent me the series currently playing on HBO, "The Pacific." They knew I would be interested because my father was one of those kids who, right after high school graduation, took their first trip away from home, from Cherry Point to Tokyo via hell. Its a brutal series, but worth watching if you want a less romanticized version of what war is like, without the self-indulgence excess of the anti-war movies. I enjoyed the exposure they give to John Basilone, the only NCO to win both the Medal of Honor, and the Navy Cross posthumously, in WWII. I used to attend the church in his hometown of Raritan, NJ where they still have a parade in his memory every year.

That experience and the Great Depression made all our fathers and uncles as tough as nails, reminiscent of the character in the movie Gran Torino. My father wasn't pretty. He was rather rough around the edges with a hard shell, did not suffer fools gladly, and had a truly remarkable command of rough language, as I understand is the custom among Marine Corps sergeants. But he always stood his ground, and did the right thing even when it hurt, out of a sense of duty, honor and pride. And he made sure that I knew that being honest, and honorable and truthful was the right thing, the only thing, to do. And I thank him for it. I am glad he is no longer around to see this triumph of the privileged, and the submission of the many, in a country that he loved. Semper Fi, dad.

Bloomberg
Bank Profits Dimmed by Prospect of Home-Equity Losses
By Dakin Campbell and David Henry

April 12 (Bloomberg) -- Bank of America Corp., JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Wells Fargo & Co. may have to set aside an additional $30 billion to cover possible losses on home-equity loans, an amount almost equal to analysts’ estimates of profit at the three banks this year.

The cost of these reserves was calculated by CreditSights Inc., a New York-based research firm whose prediction almost four years ago proved prescient after banks reported unprecedented mortgage-related writedowns. Recognizing the home- equity loan losses is unfinished business from the housing bubble, CreditSights said in a March 29 report.

Potential writedowns on the loans are casting a shadow over earnings, as analysts try to determine how much, and how quickly, loan-loss expenses will decline from the industrywide peak reached in June 2009. Banks led by New York-based JPMorgan begin reporting first-quarter results this week....

NY Post: Trader Blows Whistle On Gold and Silver Price Manipulation

"Every society gets the kind of criminal it deserves. What is equally true is that every community gets the kind of law enforcement it insists on." Robert Kennedy

The CFTC hearing in Washington was about safeguards against, and limits on, naked short selling at the COMEX. The LBMA in London is a 'cash market' and while short selling is accepted, large leverage and blatant naked short selling is not. The crux of the scandal is that the Banks and hedge funds have been selling what they do not have in order to manipulate the price and cheat investors, in this market as they have been shown repeatedly to have done in other markets.

The story gets sticky in the States because, as disclosed in the motions in a New Orleans trial, the players filed a motion claiming immunity because they were acting in partnership with the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, and other central banks who were not within the Court's jurisdiction.

Watch this story unfold, and then make up your own minds. But be prepared for smears, diversions, misconceptions, and false denials. The accused parties will consistently try to ignore this, and change the subject. The attempts to pressure the media to ignore tihs altogether are a 'tell' if there ever was one.

I am shocked at the extent to which the Banks influence and control the American media. This was testimony at a public hearing, and it has been largely squashed. Judging by history, this is going to get ugly.

Thanks to the NY Post for breaking ranks with the mainstream media. Despite some significant behind the scenes pressure, the Post is actually publishing some words that the Banks do not wish the American people to hear. And many Americans to not wish to hear it, because it shakes their faith in the system, and threatens them with the unknown. And too many, including economists and even bloggers, are only too willing to 'go along to get along' and be invited to the posh gatherings of the famous, and receive some sinecure from the monied interests.

I do not know if this is true or not, or what the truth may be. But I do have a strong passion for bringing the light of day to shine on this, and for these markets to be much more transparent, as a reform, to prevent frauds which we do know have occurred and most likely are still occurring. For me the light of day is not smearing the messenger and making their life dangerously miserable, but that is what too often passes for journalism in the US today, as is seen in the case of other whistleblowers, most famously in the Plame affair.

Naked short selling in size is a cancer in the financial markets. And the way in which the Banks are obstinately fighting against any and all reforms that attempt to limit naked short selling shows the objective observer that they are firmly committed to a status quo that is designed to distort the markets and the real economy for their short term advantage.

Let's be clear about this: naked short selling in size is not a trading strategy, it is a means to a fraud.

This may be the Madoff ponzi scheme writ large, the heart of the darkness in the financial fraud that is the US financial system. The crowning achievement of the financial engineers at the Fed, who have built a Ponzi economy and an empire of fraud.

NY Post
Metal$ are in the pits
By MICHAEL GRAY
4:33 AM, April 11, 2010

Trader blows whistle on gold & silver price manipulation

There is no silver lining to the activities of JPMorgan Chase and HSBC in the precious-metals market here and in London, says a 40-year veteran of the metal pits.

The banks, which do the Federal Reserve's bidding in the metals markets, have long been the government's lead actors in keeping down the prices of gold and silver, according to a former Goldman Sachs trader working at the London Bullion Market Association.

Maguire was scheduled to testify last week before the Commodities Futures Trade Commission, which is looking into the activities of large banks in the metals market, but was knocked off the list at the last moment. So, he went public.

Maguire -- in an exclusive interview with The Post -- explained JPMorgan's role in the metals pits in both London and here, and how they can generate a profit either way the market moves.

"JPMorgan acts as an agent for the Federal Reserve; they act to halt the rise of gold and silver against the US dollar. JPMorgan is insulated from potential losses [on their short positions] by the Fed and/or the US taxpayer," Maguire said.

In the gold pits, Maguire sees HSBC betting against the precious metal's price without having any skin in the game in the form of a naked short.

"HSBC conducts an ongoing manipulative concentrated naked short position in gold. Silver is much easier to manipulate due to its much smaller [market] size," Maguire added.

"No one at JPMorgan is familiar with Andrew Maguire," said Brian Marchiony, a company spokesman. HSBC declined to comment. (Maguire seems to be creeping into the corporate consciousness. Earlier, JPM tried to deny that he even existed. Now they admit he exists but no one there knows him, despite his have traded alongside them for 40 years, and traded at a sister firm, Goldman. HSBC has at least enough conscience to simply sulk. - Jesse)

Also during the CFTC hearing, Jeff Christian, founder of the commodities firm CPM Group, said that the LBMA, the physical delivery market for gold and silver in the UK, has been using leverage, which is another way to depress the price of gold and silver.

Christian said that the LBMA -- the same market Maguire trades in -- has leverage of about 100-1 on the gold bars settled on the exchange. In layman's terms, that means if 100 clients requested their bullion bars be delivered, the exchange could only give one client the precious metal. (Note: the LBMA is not a 'futures' market like the COMEX where naked short selling is an accepted, if not entirely explicit, practice. The CFTC hearing was essentially about safeguards against and limits on naked short selling on the COMEX, despite the noise and distractions surrounding it. - Jesse)

The remaining requests would have to be settled for cash equivalent. "That is tantamount to a default on the trade," says Bill Murphy, chairman of the Gold Antitrust Action committee...

Read the rest here.

Weekly Charts

SP 500 Weekly Chart



SP 500 Sentiment Indicators



Gold



Silver



US Dollar

Ohio Judge Tells Residents to 'Arm Themselves'

When asked what advice he would give to residents of Ashtabula County Ohio because of cutbacks in official law enforcement budgets, Judge Alfred Mackey said they should:

"arm themselves. Be very careful, be vigilant, get in touch with your neighbors, because we're going to have to look after each other."

WKYC
Ashtabula County Judge Tells Ohio Residents to "Arm themselves"
April 9, 2010

JEFFERSON -- In the ongoing financial crisis in Ashtabula County, the Sheriff's Department has been cut from 112 to 49 deputies. With deputies assigned to transport prisoners, serve warrants and other duties, only one patrol car is assigned to patrol the entire county of 720 square miles.

"I did the best with what they (the county commissioners) gave me. If it wasn't enough, don't blame me, don't blame this department," said Sheriff Billy Johnson.

Johnson said he is suing the commissioners to get a determination of whether he should use his limited budget to carry out obligations defined by law or put more patrol cars on the streets.

"I just can't do it anymore," he said. "I have to have the court explain to the commissioners and to me what my statutory duties are."

The Ashtabula County Jail has confined as many as 140 prisoners. It now houses only 30 because of reductions in the staff of corrections officers.

All told, 700 accused criminals are on a waiting list to serve time in the jail.

Are there dangerous people free among the 700 who cannot be locked up?

"There probably are," Sheriff Johnson said, "but I'm telling you, any known violent criminal, we're housing them. We've got murderers in there."

Ashtabula County is the largest county in Ohio by land area.

Ashtabula County Common Pleas Judge Alfred Mackey was asked what residents should do to protect themselves and their families with the severe cutback in law enforcement.

"Arm themselves," the judge said. "Be very careful, be vigilant, get in touch with your neighbors, because we're going to have to look after each other."

Ashtabula County gun dealers and firearms instructors tell WKYC their business has really picked up since the Sheriff's Department cutbacks began some months ago.

"That's exactly why they are coming, so that they can protect themselves," says Tracy Williams, a certified firearms instructor in Jefferson. "They don't feel that they are protected. They want to be able to protect themselves."

Williams says interest in his classes has doubled recently, and many of those coming are people who he would not normally expect to have interest in obtaining a concealed carry permit.

"And as far as him (Judge Mackey) telling you to arm yourselves and protect yourselves, you don't have any other option," Williams told WKYC. "We don't have the law enforcement out here to handle it right now..."

Most Wall Street Banks Using Lehman Style Accounting Trickery Enabled by the Fed to Hide Their Risk

"Progress is a nice word. But change is its motivator. And change has its enemies.” Robert F. Kennedy

This analysis from the Wall Street Journal indicates that most of the big US Banks are engaging in the same kind of repo accounting at the end of the quarter that Lehman Brothers was doing to hide their financial instability until deteriorating credit conditions and liquidity problems made them precipitously collapse, as all ponzi schemes and financial frauds do when the truth becomes known.

The basic exercise is to hold big leverage and dodgy debt, but swap it off your books with the Fed at the end of each quarter for a short period of time when you have to report your holdings.

This could easily be corrected by requiring banks to report four week averages of their holdings for example, rather than a snapshot when they can hide their true risk profiles so easily, compliments of that protector of consumers and investors, the Fed.

This is nothing new to us. Many of us have noted this sort of accounting trickery and market manipulation at key events especially at end of quarter.

It is facilitated by the Federal Reserve, and FASB, and the agencies.

"Their Fraud doth rarely falter, and is subsidized, instead,
for none dare call it bank fraud, if it's sanctioned by the Fed."
(apologies to Ovid)

The US is Lehman Brothers on a scale writ large. And when it is exposed by some series of events, the implosion could be more sudden than any can imagine. But in the meantime the US is still the 'superpower' of the world's financial system, through its currency, its banks, and its ratings agencies.

WSJ
Big Banks Mask Risk Levels
By KATE KELLY, TOM MCGINTY and DAN FITZPATRICK
April 9, 2010

Quarter-End Loan Figures Sit 42% Below Peak, Then Rise as New Period Progresses; SEC Review

Major banks have masked their risk levels in the past five quarters by temporarily lowering their debt just before reporting it to the public, according to data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

A group of 18 banks—which includes Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., Bank of America Corp. and Citigroup Inc.—understated the debt levels used to fund securities trades by lowering them an average of 42% at the end of each of the past five quarterly periods, the data show. The banks, which publicly release debt data each quarter, then boosted the debt levels in the middle of successive quarters.

Excessive borrowing by banks was one of the major causes of the financial crisis, leading to catastrophic bank runs in 2008 at firms including Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers. Since then, banks have become more sensitive about showing high levels of debt and risk, worried that their stocks and credit ratings could be punished.

That practice, while legal, can give investors a skewed impression of the level of risk that financial firms are taking the vast majority of the time.

You want your leverage to look better at quarter-end than it actually was during the quarter, to suggest that you're taking less risk," says William Tanona, a former Goldman analyst who now heads U.S. financials research at Collins Stewart, a U.K. investment bank.

Though some banks privately confirm that they temporarily reduce their borrowings at quarter's end, representatives at Goldman, Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan and Citigroup declined to comment specifically on the New York Fed data. Some noted that their firm's financial filings include language saying borrowing levels can fluctuate during the quarter.

"The efforts to manage the size of our balance sheet are appropriate and our policies are consistent with all applicable accounting and legal requirements," a Bank of America spokesman said.

The data highlight the banks' levels of short-term financing in the repurchase, or "repo," market. Financial firms use cash from the loans to buy securities, then use the purchased securities as collateral for other loans, and buy more securities. The loans boost the firms' trading power, or "leverage," allowing them to make big trades without putting up big money. This amplifies gains—and losses, which were disastrous in 2008.

According to the data, the banks' outstanding net repo borrowings at the end of each of the past five quarters were on average 42% below their peak in net borrowings in the same quarters. Though the repo market represents just a slice of banks' overall activities, it provides a window into the risks that financial institutions take to trade...

Read the rest here.

Here is an interactive visualization of the accounting deception.

The Intra-Day Pattern in Gold Trading

Nick Laird at sharelynx.com was kind enough to share this chart with us.

It shows the average pattern of gold trading intraday.

Nick has an amazing array of current and historic charts at his site, including many vintage charts from a variety of markets.

The pattern here seems a big regular. I have found it to be useful in picking entry points in certain positions.

A Pox on Both Their Houses: A Failing Presidency and a Country Adrift

An alternative title for this might be, "Of Rats and Sinking Ships."

Larry Summers is reportedly leaving later this year, and Andrew Cockburn reports that Rahm Emanuel, Obama's acutely verbal Chief of Staff is said to be looking for other employment, preferably a high paying job on Wall Street with little work and enormous perks and privileges.

This is the sort of thing that one would expect to be happening at the end of the first term of a President, five years into the job. Perhaps that event is being moved up because Obama is likely to be a one term president, in one of the most spectacular flame outs from high, and in retrospect misplaced, expectations since the Segway.

Obama was clearly the wrong man for the job. He might have been the kind of reformer for the good times, when you really do not need him, dedicated to getting the various squabbling parties to hold hands and sing Kumbaya. Unfortunately, a crisis demands leadership, and Obama is all fluff in that department. Leaders lead, they do not hold other people up as the leaders, and take them to task for their failure to do the risky things when their leader hides behind a non-existent consensus. I hate to say this, but both Clinton and W were far superior leaders, unfortunately with deeply flawed visions and moral compasses.

The Democrats are most likely looking at a November massacre in the election, unless some event occurs to pull the nation together such as an externally focused crisis.

The problem of course is that if one looks at the alternatives, there are none too attractive in the Republican Party which is also deeply tarnished with the financial corruption that actually came to full flower under their stewardship with George W. And part of the reason that legislation for reform languishes is that the Republicans are openly in the camp of the corporatocracy, and obstructing any nascent reform attempts from a small core of independent minded legislators.

Is it time for a Third Party as some have suggested? Maybe, although it seems more likely to me that it will take a much greater degree of pain and collapse for America to wake up and reform its system, from the Media to Washington to Wall Street. Splinter parties at the extremes appear probable in the short term.

And then who knows what might be slouching towards Pennsylvania Avenue, its moment come round at last?

CounterPunch
As Rahm Eyes Exit
Financial Reform Bids Collapse Into Farce
By ANDREW COCKBURN

Word from the White House is that Rahm Emanuel is still fishing around for a lucrative berth in the financial industry (“money first, then the deal” he reportedly barked at a recent industry caller discussing business possibilities in the private sector) so we needn’t hold our breath too hard waiting for the administration to bring law enforcement, or even its emasculated sibling “regulation reform,” to Wall Street anytime soon. Not that the banks have ever really felt threatened, given the conntemptuous ease, which I described here last December, with which they were able to gut the reform bill spawned last in the House of Representatives.

The retiring and long since neutered Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd has his own meek version of a financial reform program currently before the Senate, but this came pre-gutted on the issue of a Consumer Finance Protection Agency dedicated to protecting us from banker loan-sharks. Dodd’s proposed legislation consigns the putative CPFA to the bowels of the Federal Reserve, with a right of veto over any unappealing consumerist initiatives granted to a “Financial Stability Oversight Council” made up of banker-friendly regulators...

Read the rest here.

Derivatives Exposure Among US Commercial Banks

I have not looked at this in some time. The amounts are still quite impressive and highly concentrated in a handful of the TBTF banks.

As in the case of LTCM, leverage is a source of income, the higher the leverage, the greater the profits from which you can claim and take your salaries and bonuses.







Here is how things looked in the middle of 2008 Derivates Report June 30, 2008

"My Son...Went Inside There And Basically Saw that the Vault was Empty."

Every day when I think I am going to get a day off from this story, some revelation seems to come out, each as compelling, shocking, and suspicious as the others, but all fitting together in what looks like a nasty picture of reckless behaviour gone wrong developing.

Apparently some banks and brokers had been selling gold and silver which they do not have. We know it happens because Morgan Stanley was caught doing it, and was even charging storage fees from unsuspecting investors.

Do these banks not have auditors? Are the regulators sweeping this under the rug? Are the insiders and their spokespeople correct in just dismissing this as a problem, as was done with the subprime market even by Ben Bernanke himself before it collapsed into a bank run that shocked the financial system?

Now, we have to carefully distinguish between allocated metal, in which one holds a certificate and are assured of a firm ownership of actual metal, and an unallocated holding in which you hold basically a paper claim on metal, for which you may be an unsecured creditor, even if you are paying regular storage fees. But in the cases I am hearing about it is a firmly stated ownership of something that does not exist, and cannot be obtained at current prices.

This is important because although there is always shorting, and some fractional reserve aspect to all banking , even in the case of bullion banking, in this case the proportion or leverage of the selling of the assets starts to look more like a Ponzi scheme than a rational and efficient market. There is a point at which 'speculation' becomes fraud, and the fraud becomes large enough to start risking the health of the bank.

And in our under-regulated and excessively leveraged financial system, that becomes a problem because it all looks to be a pyramid scheme of sorts. JPM alone is holding derivatives with notional values approaching a very large portion of World GDP.

The banks seem to be pointing to bullion supplies elsewhere, such as the LBMA in London, or in this case Hong Kong, and saying, "See if certificate holders demand their bullion, we can easily fulfill their requests." The problem with this is that it appears that they are ALL doing this, overleveraging their supplies, becoming counterparties and potential sources of supply to each other, with few having a full supply of what they say they have.

Make what you will of this. It is important to understand what is stated by the bank or institution on the certificate for bullion that you hold. As outlined above, you might just be an unsecured creditor to an unallocated account. There is no fraud in that, only a risk of actual delivery should you ever ask for it.

I am sure more will be coming out, eventually. But for now this information is barely penetrating the radar of the mainstream media. These fellows may be wrong, but so far no one is denying specifically what they are saying with any persuasive proof. They just seem to be hiding behind secrecy and opaque transactions, saying 'Prove it, prove it.'

As I have stated before, the problem I have with this is the lack of transparency and auditing in these markets, which makes them absolutely ripe for fraud and excessive leverage by the usual suspects in the TBTF banks.

This seems to be exactly what caused the subprime crisis and the bank run in 2008: a lack of liquidity and the mispricing of risk. How can one not be suspicious? We have just seen it happening, even though the herd behaviour is to simply ignore it because it is too alarming, too inconvenient.

Let the truth come out. Let justice be done.

Have we learned nothing?

Today's FCIC Hearings: What a Disappointment

This morning when I tuned to Bloomberg's coverage of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission hearings, I thought Richard Belzer was questioning Alan Greenspan.

Mr. Belzer is an American actor, famous for his portrayal of a rather tough policeman, Detective John Munch, in the Law and Order series.

Alas, it was only Phil Angelides, the chairman of the FCIC.



It would take a Richard Belzer to pry the truth out of Greenspan, that fox.

Cox: Don't you even wonder why?
Munch: Why what?
Cox: Why he lied.
Munch: I'm a Homicide Detective. The only time I wonder why is when they tell me the truth.

Well, here comes a little emotional satisfaction. Jim Grant is reacting to the testimony now, and is just excoriating Greenspan's testimony as 'exculpating nonsense.'

If they are going to stage these shows for the public, that purport to actually achieve something, some progress towards the truth, perhaps they should hire famous actors to do the questioning.
The politicians and bankers are good enough actors to portray themselves.

This might be a commercially viable idea. If it becomes a hit reality show all I ask is a small creative fee, not nearly the amount that Sarah Palin is asking.

Entertainment is always good for filling the gaps that reality leaves.

What the American people voted for was this:



But what they got was this:



And even worse, this:

For Warren Mosler: A Primer on the Difference Between Honesty and Fraud

Warren Mosler is "an economist specializing in monetary policy and running for Senator Dodd's Senate seat in the November elections." He has written the following piece for the Huffington Post. He is so incredibly off the mark that I thought a bit of correction to that spin might help his thinking before he hits the campaign trail.

Mr. Mosler. I have been following this case closely. No one at GATA, or anyone else looking at the state of the regulatory climate in Washington and the quality and tarnished reputation of US markets, is complaining about the normal sort of trading that has been going on 'for thousands of years.' Most of the people with whom I have spoken and questioned are seasoned traders with a profound understanding of the commodity markets, and equity markets, and derivatives.

What many people are complaining about is fraud. In this case fraud can loosely be defined as doing something and then lying about it. Saying you did not do something, or disguising the nature of what you have been doing, can turn even a prima facie benign action into a fraud, depending on the intention and degree.

Many people around the world are not complaining that the US has lent out its gold, and the 'depositories are filled with paper,' which may some day be replaced by gold again. Although they do point out that it will be replaced at MUCH higher prices if their suspicions are correct. They are pointing out that government officials have said repeatedly that they have never lent it out in the first place but refuse to submit to audits and transparent accounting. And if it did occur, such lending may be of questionable legal status, which is why so many have denied it has occurred. Only the Congress can allow for the attachment of binding claims to sovereign assets. Have they? And if, in exercising some new presidential prerogative, the executive has done so, where is the public disclosure? Where is the law?

And further, in the case of commercial entities like the TBTF bullion banks JPM and HSBC, they are not complaining about short selling that is backed by physical metal, duly paid and accounted for. They are asking questions about what appear to be enormous naked short positions against silver, questionable ownership and claims to collateral, and naked shorting by banks using public funds and powerful influence over the regulators, with selling patterns indicating the intention of manipulating the price in order to gain from it. Sound familiar? It seems as though this has been the very basis of the US financial system since the repeal of Glass-Steagall.

Although your essay contains a number of factual errors, this does stand out as a particularly misleading statement:

"If you hold gold, lending it is a way to make extra money with very little risk."

Tell that to the miners like Barrick that took a multi-billion dollar bath on their hedge book. Derivatives and transactions involving naked shorting and selling the same thing multiple times are never, ever relatively riskless or easy. There is always the real risk of the mispricing of risk and miscalculation of probability, and counterparty failure, which at times can reach the point of becoming systemically risky, as we most recently have seen in the case of AIG et al. This is the story of all bubbles and bank runs. Reckless leverage and mispricing of risk.

Janet Tavakoli sounded the alarm that a short squeeze in gold could bring JPM and the banks to their knees, and risk the global markets again. JPM is dealing in trillions of derivatives exposure, with a leverage that is breath-taking. To dismiss the complaints and concerns about this is as reckless as some of the more outlandish assurances made by Greenspan,and then Bernanke, just prior to the credit crunch about the housing bubble.

In the end the Fed had Paulson come running to Congress pleading for $780 billion in taxpayer money with no strings attached, or face a complete and utter meltdown, riots and martial law. Oh well, and tra la, today is a new day, and back to gorging on risk again, eh? Not to worry.

At the end of the day its about honesty. And playing by the rules, the same rules for everyone. Its about justice, for all, and not just the powerful few. Not privatizing outlandish profits, and then socializing the mispricing of risk that is at the heart of the imbalances creating those outsized profits for a few in the first place. That is the very basis of fraud, and it requires secrecy and regulatory annulment to flourish.

"The very word 'secrecy' is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings." John F. Kennedy

So thank you for the primer on gold lending. I see you have also read the primer about answering the question you wish you had been asked, rather than the one which you have been asked, in order to divert the conversation away from something you do not wish to discuss at all.

Huffington Post
A Primer on Gold Lending

"Recently there have been a lot of what I believe to be gross misconceptions regarding the lending of gold and the absence of actual gold in various gold depositories. I'm writing this to clarify the lending process itself and the further ramifications of gold lending...

GATA (Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee) is complaining that the US govt. has lent gold and is therefore artificially keeping the price of gold lower than it would otherwise be. There is some truth to the idea that lending keeps spot gold prices lower than otherwise, as it keeps the spreads between spot an forward prices 'in line' but you can just as easily say that lenders selling spot and buying forward keep the forward prices higher than otherwise, giving gold producers a better price than otherwise.

So all that gold 'missing' from depositories is in the form of cash in the depositories and contracts to buy gold in the forward markets. And with gold being produced in large quantities for untold years into the future it's hard to say for sure that there isn't enough gold coming to market over that time to satisfy the demand. In fact, market theory would say the continuously changing clearing price means there is always exactly the right amount."

P.S. OMG, I cannot believe you resorted to the 'efficient market hypothesis' to attempt to prove that market fraud cannot exist, given all that has happened over the past ten years. That is truly embarrassing. Even Chris Dodd knows better than that. That prompted me to take a look at your CV. Word of advice. Peter Schiff is going to hammer you in the unlikely event you agree to debate him, unless you tighten up your thinking a bit.

"So all that gold 'missing' from depositories is in the form of cash in the
depositories and contracts to buy gold in the forward markets. And with gold
being produced in large quantities for untold years into the future it's hard to
say for sure that there isn't enough gold coming to market over that time to
satisfy the demand. In fact, market theory would say the continuously
changing clearing price means there is always exactly the right amount."

Like Daniel Drew said, "He who sells what isn't his'n, Must buy it back or go to prison." And it seems that lately the price the financiers have had to pay to buy it back, and make good on their promises, is punishingly higher than they have reserved, arranged or accounted for, especially when calculating their salaries and bonuses. This is the undercurrent of the frauds that have been perpetrated in this brave New World of innovative financing and dodgy derivatives and bonuses paid on the if-come. And the public is being forced to make up the difference and pay the price, for the good of the system, don'tcha know. And they are not even allowed to ask 'why?'

AIG Gets Away With It

Do you think the paper shredders and 'delete keys' were working overtime?

Do you think the Justice Department was highly motivated to nail the guy who could probably implicate the biggest of the TBTF banks and their enablers in the government?

Do you think the American President was just playing you when he said, "I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street."

Do you think Joe knows where a lot of the bodies are buried - on Wall Street and in London and Washington?

Do you think it pays to be a 'Friend of Lloyd' and a feeder source of campaign contributions to most of the Congress?

Do you think the people are just itching to vote out every incumbent in November?

Do you think the spineless lack of serious investigation and reform is setting the US up again for another, even bigger, fianncial scandal and crisis?

You might be right.

CBS News
No Criminal Charges Likely in AIG Collapse
By Armen Keteyian
April 2, 2010 6:43 PM

CBS NEWS has learned that former AIG executive Joseph Cassano - the prime focus of the investigation into its collapse - will meet with Department of Justice attorneys next week in what will likely be an end to the two year criminal investigation into the company.

Sources tell CBS News that the criminal case against Cassano - once called "the Man who Crashed the World" - has "hit a brick wall" - meaning that it is likely no one will be held criminally liable for the downfall of the company that triggered a $182 billion dollar federal bailout.

Sources tell CBS News federal investigators have been unable to uncover any evidence that Cassano lied to his bosses or shareholders about financial problems at AIG.

In recent months, Cassano's lawyers - citing internal documents - argued that he never broke the law. Instead, he simply got caught up in a financial tsunami that engulfed Wall Street.

Net Asset Value of Certain Precious Metal Funds and Trusts

The Sprott Physical Gold Trust continues to add bullion, and is now almost on a par with the Central Gold Trust, which is several years old.

SP Futures Daily Chart - Nasdaq 100 Futures Daily

Still reaching for that high note. Looks like 1200 may just be out of reach, and a big inhale is coming soon, maybe short of resistance at 1190.

The Fed still seems to be following the policy of blowing an asset bubble, and then using monetary policy to clean up afterwards. I had hoped they would have learned their lesson after the housing bubble, but that is apparently not the case.

The Fed is doing the same thing over and over, and each time they run through a cycle of bubble and collapse, more wealth is transferred from the real economy to a few oligarchs, and the result of the collapse is more debilitating on real production and jobs.

I don't think the Fed can stop, because they are fearful of the results. And their owners like the status quo. Obviously I cannot know how far the bubble can go this time, and it may just be an 'echo bubble' since the real economy seems incapable of responding to it. The next leg down will shake things up.

I am thinking they will do a 'wash and rinse' with short term reversals in stocks and bonds to churn up the specs and generate some fees and some food for the trading desks. But it will probably not break key support unless 'something happens.'

The Wall Street demimonde in the financial media is drooling all over themselves for Dow 11,000 which is an essentially meaningless number, but important as a lure to bring mom and pop back in for another shearing. Wall Street is the very definition of 'useless eaters,' but what they consume is the vitality of the nation.



Addendum at 3 PM EDT

The NDX is failing to surmount resistance.

I just put some shorts back on the US stock indices to balance my metals longs.

Is the Fed Likely to Act If There Is Another Stock Market Bubble?

That title is a bit of a rhetorical question, because I think the stock market bubble has already arrived, and the Fed is pumping the bellows. But let us not allow that detail to impede the progress of our discussion. Let's assume that only the next leg up in this monetary experiment will be breaching the limits of the bubblesphere.

Mark Thoma has 'reblogged' a review of Dean Baker's book False Profits from Brad DeLong Site at his own, The Economist's View.

Brad, the blogging professor from Berkley, takes issue with Dean Baker's book, concluding:

"But let me start by saying how I disagree with the book. I think that its story of the linkages between our current crisis and Federal Reserve policy is significantly overstated. Its argument about how excessively-low interest rates caused the housing bubble is exaggerated. I think that its belief that the Federal Reserve could have taken much more action to curb the housing bubble while is underway is also exaggerated..."

Well, at least he is consistent. In censuring my criticisms of Mr. Greenspan's monetary policy back in 2004 which I made as comments on his blog, Mr. DeLong said that Greenspan "never made a policy decision with which I disagreed." Although I was incredulous, I took him at his word.

Not even Greenspan apparently is willing to say that anymore. Although he is very willing to forget the activist role he took in promoting banking deregulation and the expansion of leverage and derivatives, and the rough treatment measured out to those who dared to disagree with the powerful bureaucrats at the Treasury and the Fed. Reich Levels Broadside at Greenspan, Rubin, Summers and Phony Financial Reform

But the comments to this blog were quite interesting and led me to another review of Dean Baker's book by 'Daniel' over a Crooked Timber.

I found the first comment after Daniel's review to be particularly interesting.

kevincure: 04.03.10 at 6:21 PM

"I was at the Fed in 2006. Everybody at the Fed was aware that there was a housing bubble. The fact that rents and house prices had diverged was known to all of the policymakers I interacted with.

The question was not, is there a bubble, but rather, can monetary policy improve welfare by popping that bubble. The general opinion was no. First, monetary policy is an economy-wide hammer, and housing in only one sector. Second, housing bubbles were prevalent worldwide, and in fact were stronger in many other countries than the US, so it was difficult to imagine that non-extreme changes in policy would affect the bubble. Third, “use policy to clean up the mess after the bubble pops” was, I think, absolutely the right policy in 1987 and 2000, so a model of housing bubbles would have needed to explain what was different this time – even now, lost wealth from housing price declines are not, as far as I know, greater than the wealth decline of the dot-com bubble. That is, the housing bubble in and of itself required no different monetary policy, even with perfect hindsight.

The difference was in the financial markets, where for a variety of reasons (high leverage ratios, principal-agent problems, etc.), the decline in house prices led to what was functionally a bank run. The Fed was not the primary regulator of investment banks in the US, and is one of at least five regulators of local banks (OCC, FDIC, OTS, and state regulators among the others). This isn’t to excuse the Fed – they should have had an office looking at systemic risk! – but merely to point out that very few people saw systemic risk as a major problem in 2006, primarily because of a belief that shareholders and managers were capable of taking better care of their own firms and jobs. This was wrong, but the common criticisms of Baker and Shiller and others about Fed policy and housing bubbles completely abstract away from the real cause of the crisis, which was financial.

In any case, a housing bubble – by itself – would have been straightforward to deal with ex post with policy. That was not the problem."

This is not some outlier comment, but an expression of what is a very mainstream thought among a certain class of American economists, especially those who covet positions of power with the US government.

The 'collateral damage' caused by the dot.com and housing bubbles, all those ruined lives and families, is really not a problem and can be addressed by monetary policy (inflation) after the bubble runs its course. The problem in this last financial crisis is that the housing collapse caused a bank run, and the banks themselves were injured, instead of profiting, in the bubble collapse. Talk about an unintended consequence. Good God, not the Banks! This is a fast being remedied by the enormous subsidies granted by the Fed, and their man Timmy at the Treasury, to set the Banks back up again at the roulette tables, bringing home those eight figure paydays.

If you think the Fed has learned anything, that they are somehow more prudent, more aware of the greater economy and the impact of their behaviour on the American people after this latest financial crisis, you are sadly mistaken. Their hubris is boundless, and they are able to rationalize almost any damage to the republic as a minor glitch in their experiments.

The answer to our initial question about a new stock market bubble is of course is "no." The Fed will allow a stock market bubble to develop, run its course, collapse, empty even more of the savings and retirement funds of mom and pop, and go happily along on its way as long as the banking sector is maintained in the manner to which it has become accustomed.

And if you think this latest financial crisis has stilled the animal spirits of the merry pranksters on Wall Street you are sadly mistaken. The sociopaths will continue to gamble the nation's future, and the propeller heads at the Fed will stand idly by waiting to clean up the mess, only afterwards. But the clean up will be carefully targeted to the FIRE sector, and the public will likely have to fend for itself.

And the Congress would like to make the Fed the overarching regulator and the primary owner of an expanded Consumer Protection Agency? Only afer huge amounts of lobbying contributions to assuage their consciences it must be said. To the Fed, the consumer is only grist for the mill from which the bankers obtain their bones to bake their bread.

Asset bubbles are a form of fraud, in that and mispresentation and deception are employed to circumvent genuine price discovery. And like most Ponzi schemes and financial frauds, they are an effective wealth transfer mechanism from the many to the few. And the few will do quite a bit to create them, and then keep them in place.

Some are critical of people like Robert Reich who 'tell it like it is' although in softer terms than they might desire to have them speak. Let me tell you, the establishment in the US is closing ranks, and is going to try to ostracize and silence anyone who speaks out against the status quo. And the intimidation of critics and witnesses continues.

Here is some knowledge, tempered by actual experience, from William K. Black, an economist and regulator involved in the Savings and Loan Scandal.







The banks must be restrained, and the financial system reformed, and the economy brought back into balance before there can be any sustained recovery.

Reich Levels Broadside at Greenspan, Rubin, and Summers, and Phony Financial Reform

"It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime." … Thomas Paine

In 1999 I started wondering what Robert Rubin might have said to Alan Greenspan in a private meeting in 1997 to cause him to reverse his policy bias shortly after his famous "irrational exuberance" speech. Greenspan embraced the monetary easing that led to the tech bubble, and joined the fight against regulation of derivatives, and the repeal of Glass-Steagall, in which the Fed was absolutely instrumental.

PBS Frontline - The Warning: The Roots of the Financial Crisis

This was no accident, in my opinion. This was no misplaced belief in 'the efficient market hypothesis.' This was not the culmination of the neo-liberal fascination with a mythology of human nature that would make Rousseau blush in its unthinking naiveté. And for Greenspan to say now, I am sorry, I guess I was mistaken, is more prevarication from the master dissembler.

There were plenty of enablers to this financial fraud. There always are many more people who do not act out of principle, or inside involvement and knowledge, but out of their own selfish bias and greed or craven fear that compels them to 'go with the flow.'

And there is little better example of this than the many people who are even now turning a willful eye away from the blatant government manipulation of the stock and commodity markets, in particular the silver market. They do not wish to believe it, so they ignore it, and even ridicule it depending on how deeply it affects their personal interests. But the overall body of evidence is compelling enough to provoke further investigation, and the refusal to allow audits and independent investigation starts to become an overwhelming sign of a coverup. I am not saying that it is correct, or that I know something, but I am saying to not investigate it thoroughly and to air all the details, is highly suspicious and not in the interests of the truth. I did not know, for example, that Madoff was conducting a Ponzi scheme, but the indications were all there and a simple investigation and disclosure would have revealed the truth, one way or the other.

"Fiat justitia ruat caelum." Let justice be done though the heaven's fall. This is the principle of English law that says that expediency, that appeals to a false 'national security,' that executive privilege and the secrecy of the powerful interests, are not to deter the light of exposure and the consequences of justice for all. This is the difference between a republic and a dictatorship of the oligarchy.

The military industrial complex came to power in the US on the back of the Red Scare and the smears and fear-mongering perpetrated by the Senator from Wisconsin who 'loved to hear the sound of his own voice, more than the truth,' and his minions in Roy Cohn, and the enablers in the press who were cowed into silence.

There will be smears and distractions, ridicule and old prejudices dug deep will be brought newly forward. False flags and scapegoats. Threats and warnings of collapse will be like bluffs run to encourage the people to hand over their liberty for safety. If you do not think this can happen you have not been paying attention.

The perpetrators of this latest fraud, this unleashing of darkness upon the world, will count on the fear and apathy of the many, and the cynical contempt of the fortunate for the disadvantaged, to make them all the unwitting accomplices in their own inevitable destruction. It has worked for them in the past.

One cannot fight this sort of evil with hatred and violence, or hysteria and intemperate accusations, for these are its creatures and it uses them always to further its ends. The only worthy adversary of the darkness is transparency, openness, justice, and truth based on facts, in the light of reason, with the guidance of the light of the world. We are not sufficient of ourselves to stand against it, and if we knock down the law, the Constitution, to chase it with expediency and private justice, what will protect us when it turns around to devour us?

But we should never be a willing victim, and even worse, a silent bystander or mocking accomplice. This is why were you born here and now, to stand witness to the truth, as you can find it and value it above all else.

It is not easy to find the truth, as it is a journey, a way that never ends. And without a proper guide and companionship, it may be all too easy to grow weary or panic, and lose one's bearings and one's heart. But sometimes it is easier to discover what is not the truth by its acts, its results, the fruit that it produces, and the darkness and secrecy in which it dwells.

And the truth is not with the financial system, and the web of deception and fraud, that has served it. "What is Truth?" he asked. And Pilate turned and washed his hands of it, and condemned himself, forever.

Robert Reich
Greenspan, Summers, and Why the Economy Is So Out of Whack
Sunday, April 4, 2010

"I’m in the “green room” at ABC News, waiting to join a roundtable panel discussion on ABC’s weekly Sunday news program, This Week.

Alan Greenspan is now being interviewed. He says he bore no responsibility for the housing bubble that catapulted the nation into a financial crisis in 2008 because no one could have known about the bubble when he chaired the Fed in the years before it burst. Larry Summers was interviewed just before Greenspan. He said the economy is expanding, that the Administration is doing everything it can to bring jobs back, and that the regulatory reform bills moving on the Hill will prevent another financial crisis.

What?

If any single person is most responsible for the financial crisis, it’s Alan Greenspan. He presided over a Fed that lowered interest rates to zero (adjusted for inflation) but failed to prevent banks from using essentially free money to speculate wildly. You do not have to be a brain surgeon to understand that if money is free, banks will take it and lend it out. And if oversight is inadequate, the banks will lend the money to anyone who can stand up straight and to many who cannot. The result will be a giant subprime lending bubble that will burst.

If any three people are most responsible for the failure of financial regulation, they are Greenspan, Larry Summers, and my former colleague, Bob Rubin. In 1999 they advised Congress to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act, which since 1933 had separated commercial from investment banking. By 1999, Wall Street was salivating over such a repeal because it wanted to create financial supermarkets that could use commercial deposits to place bets in the financial casino. That would yield the Street trillions.

At the same time, Greenspan, Summers, and Rubin also quashed the efforts of the Commodity Futures Trading Corporation to regulate derivatives, when its director began to worry that derivative trading already was getting out of control.

Yet Greenspan continues to take no responsibility for what occurred. In the interview he just completed he avoiding saying anything about the failure of the Fed under his watch to adequately oversee the banks, and the absence of sufficient financial regulation to begin with.

I dislike singling out individuals for blame or praise in a political system as complex as that of the United States but I worry the nation is not on the right economic road, and that these individuals — one of whom advises the President directly and the others who continue to exert substantial influence among policy makers — still don’t get it.

The direction financial reform is taking is not encouraging. Both the bill that emerged from the House and the one emerging from the Senate are filled with loopholes that continue to allow reckless trading of derivatives. Neither bill adequately prevents banks from becoming insolvent because of their reckless trades. Neither limits the size of banks or busts up the big ones. Neither resurrects the Glass-Steagall Act. Neither adequately regulates hedge funds.

More fundamentally, neither bill begins to rectify the basic distortion in the national economy whose rewards and incentives are grotesquely tipped toward Wall Street and financial entrepreneurialism, and away from Main Street and real entrepreneurialism. It was just reported, for example, that America’s top 25 hedge fund managers last year earned an average of $3 billion each. They continue to pay a federal income tax of 15 percent on most of that, by the way, because their lobbying efforts have been so successful.

Meanwhile, the so-called jobs bills emerging from Congress and the White House are puny relative to the challenge of restoring jobs in America. Last Friday’s jobs report, read most positively, showed 112,000 jobs added to the economy in March. But that’s below the number needed simply to keep up with an expanding population. In other words, we’re actually worse off now than we were a month ago. At the same time, the median wage of Americans with jobs keep dropping.

The American economy is seriously out of whack. The two people interviewed this morning don’t seem to understand how far."