Slick Willy Rewrites the History of the Financial Crisis and Regulation, Blames His Advisors

The hypocrisy of the oligarchs knows no bounds.

Bill Clinton conveniently forgets the hundreds of millions of campaign contributions that he and Hillary so famously raised from Wall Street for the Democrats. They taught their party, always a bit chaotic but left dispirited after the Kennedy assassinations, that 'greed is good.,' and it certainly pays well. You can put up $1000 and obtain a return of $100,000 in a futures market of which you know nothing, and do nothing, if you know the right people.

The price of their perfidy was the overturning of Glass-Steagall and the planting of the seeds of the bubbles and financial crises that the US is still experiencing today.

There is no doubt that George W. Bush hatched the egg, and nurtured it into a ferocious buzzard of fraud and greed. But Bill Clinton laid the egg. And Obama continues to feed the beast, and maintains the very same advisors that Clinton blames in the Rubin proteges Larry Summers and Tim Geithner.

Americans embrace the "CEO defense." Hey, everyone makes mistakes. All you have to do is say, "Oops, I made a mistake" and all is forgiven, from Greenspan to Clinton.

When you make a big enough mistake, or a series of mistakes, and profit by it, and your actions have the stench of corruption, you should be sacked, disgraced, and shunned for a decent period of time.

The elite media is in a panic. I had the opportunity to watch "The Chris Matthews Show" and the comparisons of Tim McVeigh, Ruby Ridge, and Waco to the Tea Party Movement went way over the top, suggesting the possibility of imminent crisis. I can almost see the over-reaction and paranoia coming over the horizon.

There is a tremendous temptation for the old media, and even the bloggers, to go along to get along, to deal only with the 'safe subjects' and reforms, and to play the party line for the status quo. It provides the admittance to the powers, and the venues where they pose for the press. It brings connections and praise from those in power. All you have to do is say thing, or deal with this legitimate problem but in the way we suggest. And ignore these other things.

It does happen. It is not always obvious, but it is there. And if you say 'no' you are attacked or shunned. And being your own person, not taking 'sides' in distorting the facts in one direction or the other, puts one is in the 'grays' always caught between black and white. It sounds noble, but it is a lonely watch.

I am absolutely no follower or even admirer of Sarah Palin. I think she is a shameless opportunist playing to the crowd, saying whatever will deliver money and power. She is the Bill Clinton of the right, or even worse, a Huey Long. And the Tea Party crowd is badly in need of adult supervision. And Fox News is too often blatant propaganda, and pandering to and inflaming extremism for commercial gain. I often suspect that they are part of the Hegelian dialectic, the means of defusing legitimate reform into ineffective noise.

Bear in mind I was a conservative before 'conservatism' was cool, going back to the Goldwater movement and the traditional and principal conservatism embodied by Edmund Burke and James Burnham. These Fox conservatives for the most part are the worst of breed. But such is the quality of discourse and action in the States as it declines.

But having said all that, the grievances are legitimate, the Congress is corrupted by the current campaign contribution laws, the US financial system is rife with fraud, the economy is dysfunctional as a price discovery and capital allocation system, and the inequality of power and wealth is a significant obstacle to progress and domestic tranquility.

Obama is leaving a leadership vacuum by his indolent style of leading by indirection, trying to build a consensus to do the right thing, teaching the Congress to fish. I have great sympathy for the challenge he faces. The problem is that the Congress cannot even find the stream for hitting one another with their poles. There are serious and fundamental flaws in the political and economic structure in the US that become more acute and systemically threatening with each false recovery.

How all this resolves is difficult to see. A new financial crisis will almost certainly bring things to a head, but it remains to be seen how America will react to the realization that they have been badly used, and are expected to suffer, in some cases greatly, for it. But before America the jackals appear to be descending on Europe. And Europe, and especially the UK, may provide us with some insight into the future of the world's greatest but declining superpower.

Bloomberg
Clinton Says He Had Bad Advice on Derivatives
By Joshua Zumbrun

April 18 (Bloomberg) -- Former President Bill Clinton said he should have pushed for regulation of financial derivatives when he was president, rejecting the advice of top economic advisers Robert Rubin and Larry Summers.

The argument was that derivatives didn’t need transparency because they were “expensive and sophisticated and only a handful of people would buy them,” Clinton said on ABC’s “This Week” program. “The flaw in this argument was that first of all, sometimes people with a lot of money make stupid decisions and make it without transparency.”

“Even if less than 1 percent of the total investment community is involved in derivative exchanges, so much money was involved that if they went bad, they could affect 100 percent of the investments,” Clinton said. The show was taped yesterday for broadcast today.

Tighter regulation of derivatives trading is part of a package of financial reforms being pushed by the Obama administration against Republican opposition. The Senate is debating a bill introduced by Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd that would also give the federal government the authority to unravel institutions whose failure threatens the financial system.

Bush Blamed

Clinton also said the Bush administration contributed to the financial crisis with lax regulation.

“I think what happened was the SEC and the whole regulatory apparatus after I left office was just let go,” Clinton said. If Clinton’s head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, Arthur Levitt, had remained in that job, “an enormous percentage of what we’ve been through in the last eight years would not have happened,” Clinton said.

Levitt is a director of Bloomberg LP, parent of Bloomberg News.

Clinton also said that Republicans who controlled Congress would have stopped him from trying to regulate derivatives. “I wish I had been caught trying,” Clinton said. “I mean, that was a mistake I made.”

"Do you think he is so unskillful in his craft, as to ask you openly and plainly to join him in his warfare against the Truth?

No; he offers you baits to tempt you. He promises you civil liberty; he promises you equality; he promises you trade and wealth; he promises you a remission of taxes; he promises you reform. He promises you illumination, he offers you knowledge, science, philosophy, enlargement of mind.

He scoffs at times gone by; he scoffs at every institution which reveres them. He prompts you what to say, and then listens to you, and praises you, and encourages you. He bids you mount aloft. He shows you how to become as gods.

Then he laughs and jokes with you, and gets intimate with you; he takes your hand, and gets his fingers between yours, and grasps them, and then you are his."

John Henry Newman, The Antichrist

Janet Tavakoli: Did Goldman Sachs Commit Fraud?

Highlights:

Yes. The only thing that was surprising how long the SEC took to do it.

The complaint does not go quite far enough. It was a blatant fraud, more than just a failure to disclose information.

And this may be the beginning of a lot of questions about a lot of investment banks. It has massive implications IF the SEC does its job right, which they have not done in the past.

Tavakoli Structured Finance

Weekly Metals WrapUp with Ted Butler on King World News

Ted Butler April 16 Metals Review mp3

• The weekly change all occurred on Friday, related to the Goldman Sachs fraud scandal.
  
  
• GLD holdings are high or near the highs. But there are continuing noticeable withdrawals in SLV making a sharp decline in the metal claimed to back the silver exchange-traded fund SLV. This may signify that the metal is needed somewhere else amid a worsening shortage of metal that is at worst neutral and most likely bullish.
  
  
• Market analyst Jim Rickards' interview last week with King World News was important for citing the lack of transparency of the London Bullion Market Association and confirmed Ted's judgement. It's as "far away from transparency as you can get without being completely opaque." "You can't depend on anything the LBMA says," Butler complains, adding that the LBMA discloses "nothing verifiable" and "I wouldn't trust anything from the LBMA."
  
  
• Having sued Goldman Sachs for fraud on Friday, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission may give some backbone to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission to act against Goldman and J. P. Morgan and other banks in their manipulation of the precious metals and commodities markets. The SEC action is a real 'cage rattler' in the financial reform discussions in Washington.
  
  
• The only question is that maybe the 'commercial crooks' can work the metals market lower in the short term, but silver looks well set up to take off in the not too distant future.

Wealth Dispersion and General Thoughts on the Future of Economics on a Saturday Afternoon

Here is an interesting graph of wealth distribution, or dispersion, as I call it from Cherchez La Verite.

I am not sure I agree with his conclusions or even his premise, not because I disagree but because it requires some thinking and leisure to digest it. But the data is most interesting.

I wonder if any of the quant economists have performed simulations on virtual populations, and then examined the results of varying different tax rates, and concentrations of wealth because of fiscal policy and regulatory structure, among other things.

I have an hypothesis that great concentrations of wealth lead to economic stagnation, but I am afraid that I have not the means or the talent anymore to conduct that type of research.

The difficulty in a study like this is that the assumptions are greatly magnified into the results. If you assume certain buying, spending, and savings behaviours, the downstream impact can greatly alter, and even distort, the outcomes.

And when people reason through this verbally, rather than perform a structured simulation based on transactions, the distortions increase by an order of magnitude or more based on their own biases.

I used to create simulations like this all the time, for industrial and commercial purposes, and also did a decent amount of econometric modeling. So I am sure someone is doing it somewhere. But I suspect they are doing it in think tanks and places where the outcome is predetermined by the basis of their grant.

Concentrated wealth magnifies the needs and predispositions of the holder. Since the amount they require for basic necessities can only consume so much, one would think that the amount spend on the aggregate of necessities will eventually be reduced. And what they do with their excess of necessity wealth is going to be greatly influenced by their character. Are they a gambler, who inherited the wealth? Are they productive and beneficent? Are they dissolute and venal?

And what about government? Taxation can concentrate enormous wealth in the government. What sort of government does one have, or does one assume? Are they warlike, productive, redistributive, and how corrupt? What about corporations? They can be like small governments, and levy taxes through monopoly and persistent frauds. How are they managed? Corporations are not rational machines, as the efficient market hypothesis would probably presume. Indeed, corporations are often much worse than governments in terms of sheer blockheadedness, greed, and short-termism.

Hard to say. But there is a related field of study in decision making theory, which looks not at wealth but the distribution of decision making power in organizations. It is concerned with the validity and effectiveness of decisions made across a range of broader consensus to a narrow oligopoly and even a great man dictatorship.

The general observation I came to in this study was that decisions tend to be more valid depending on the quality of the information, the facility of the evaluation of it, or intelligence/learning/experience, less the biases and distortions.

A decision becomes a little better if the information is more widely dispersed and a variety of actors can exchange freely in increasing and refining it. There is a point of decision dispersion where the returns not only diminish, but become counterproductive because of the noise and inability of new actors to add value, and actually detract from the process. But finally what I found interesting is that in the aggregate personal error, bias and distortions tends to diminish quickly as a detractor from the result, assuming a non-homogeneous population with some independence of thought.

So too this same sort of study can be applied to the concentration of wealth, since wealth is power. But it is even more interesting because spending habits will vary since the percentage of spending on essentials changes much more slowly than wealth can increase.

And how one assesses the outcomes is also essential. What is thought to be a 'good outcome?' Not necessarily in a rough measure like aggregate GDP, but perhaps GDP with modifiers like the median wage, and a poverty level of essential spending. This is important because so often economic policy arguments are presented with the goal of optimizing short term GDP.

Alas, I have little hope that this will be done now, for the US has had a leadership role in quantitative economic studies, and their work has been twisted generally into the service of whores, robber barons, and gamblers as the speculative society reaches a crescendo. But some day this too will change.

SP 500 Daily Chart: Hanging On to Support

"Don't believe them, don't fear them, don't ask anything of them."
Alexander Solzhenitsyn

The pom poms and nearly everything else was swinging wildly in the breeze this morning as the American financial press was wildly cheering the earnings news from Bank of America and their brilliant acquisition of Merrill Lynch.

Does anyone bother to notice that none of these banks are making any money from traditional banking activity? You know, the kind that is supposed to be supporting the capital allocation process and growth in the real economy? Its as if all the carpenters, plumbers, engineers and teachers left their real work and became carnies and professional gamblers, or even worse, politicians. We're celebrating that as a sign of a rensaissance and economic recovery.

I wonder if Sir Alan provided any counsel to the Paulson fund on that Abacus deal with Goldman Sachs that just blew up in their faces. Greenspan is one of their advisors, after all.

The Michigan Sentiment number came in at a very disappointing 69.0 versus expectations in the 75 range. What is wrong with the public, don't they see that the stock market is hitting new highs almost every day? This is what the anchorperson asked this morning on Bloomberg TV. But she was obviously not chosen for her analytical skills.

The news on the Goldman fraud took the wind out of their sails, at least temporarily. I thought it was cute that the SEC chose to announce this on a stock option expiration day.

The spin maachine is working overtime to digest this latest scandal, and turn it into something more palatable for the folks at home. But really, it looks pretty grim here. What happens when you are in the middle of a crowded con game, and someone yells, "Fraud!"

"Goldman Sachs Are Scum:" Max Keiser on Goldman Sachs From July 2009

Here is a video interview on France 24 television with Max Keiser speaking on Goldman Sachs from almost one year ago.

By the way, NO ONE who is a serious player on Wall Street is legitimately surprised by this, and probably no one in regulatory bodies are either, unless they are just showing up to collect a paycheck and obtain free Internet access.

The antics of Goldman Sachs have been getting by on a 'wink and a nod' from the regulators and the market for some time. Why? Because they are powerful, and because like Lehman and their off balance sheet frauds, they are almost ALL doing it on Wall Street as part of the franchise. Goldman has just been a pig about it, and probably burned some insiders and powerful investors in their fraudulent Abacus trade.

The excuses being made for Goldman by some on Bloomberg Television and CNBC are setting new lows in journalism. It was just a simple failure to disclosure Paulson's involvement right? Almost a technicality. No one forced the customers to buy those fraudulently packaged and labeled assets or stocks (this was a favorite excuse from Joe Kernan during the Internet/tech bubble collapse). No involvement from the Ratings Agencies in the purposeful crafting of a fraudulent financial instrument. Guest Calls Cramer a 'PR Man for Goldman Sachs' and is ejected from the show by the resident money honey.

As you may recall, Mr. Cramer represents himself as highly experienced in manipulating stocks using CNBC reporters from his days as a hedge fund manager. So it might not be so outre to inquire if he is working the other side of that Wall Street scam these days.

Why, these derivatives were SO complex that the poor Goldman management barely understood them themselves. They were tricked by Paulson. Tourre is a rogue trader. Bernie Madoff ate their Series 7 cheatsheets. Compliance was seconded to the Riviera. Lloyd was busy doing missionary work in Bangkok. More regulation will just hurt the recovery.

Don't just regulate them. Break them up. And audit the Fed.



I am glad the professor is from HEC. I did my international business MBA sequence (an extended field trip for adults, but the refreshments were good) at the 'other' business school in Paris at La Defense, ESSEC.

Max Keiser

SEC Formally Charges Goldman Sachs In Derivatives Fraud with Paulson and Company - another 'Rogue Trader at Work?'

“Only fraud and falsehood dread examination. Truth invites it.”
Dr. Samuel Johnson

The SEC is formally charging Goldman Sachs with fraud in the derivatives markets, specifically with regard to Collateralized Debt Obligations related to subprime mortgages.

Investors in Goldman's Abacus CDO lost one billion dollars.

In addition to the company, an individual VP in Goldman's international group is being charged, Fabrice Tourre.

Paulson and Company, a major hedge fund, paid Goldman to structure a CDO based on mortgages that Paulson selected, so that they could bet against it.

"The product was new and complex, but the deception and conflicts are old and simple. Goldman wrongly permitted a client that was betting against the mortgage market to heavily influence which mortgage securities to include in an investment portfolio, while telling other investors that the securities were selected by an independent, objective third party,” said Robert Khuzami, director of the division of enforcement.

This could be construed as a deft way of throwing red meat to the angry mob, nailing a specific individual at Goldman while limiting the criminal charges against the company although there will be significant civil cases, and dealing with the billionaire hedge fund owner Paulson who made a fortune betting against the subprime market.

This could be more damaging if this includes other Goldman bets against its customers on products it represented and created, and it shows an overall intent to create fraudulent products for the purpose of shorting them. For now the SEC will not say if this fraud is a singular event or more systemic.

Goldman will almost certainly attempt to spin this as the actions of a 'rogue trader' who was an aggressive exception.

Last week the White House asked Jamie Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein to 'cool it' on their intense lobbying efforts against derivatives and financial reform.

Perhaps this will help them in their decision.

This is just the tip of the iceberg. The Wall Street Banks are knee deep in fraud.

No one can obtain the kind of consistently odds defying returns that Goldman was producing without either cooking the books or engaging in some type of gaming the system, which is a polite word for fraud. That is the same 'tell' as the steady and outsized returns that Madoff is producing.

Let's see if this goes any deeper, and if serious punishments and reforms result.

The SEC can only enforce the Securities Laws, but cannot bring criminal charges. Since Paulson is not being charged, since he made no representations regarding the products, only Goldman is being sued by the SEC. Their alleged gain in this is $15 million dollars, the fees it obtained from Goldman. And Goldman will say that they were only serving their customer, Paulson.

Certainly Goldman will be subject to civil lawsuits and discovery. But the real test of the Obama government will be any role that the Justice Department does or does not take in this. They could of course defer, using the show trials of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission as a rationale to take no action.

This is blatant fraud and white collar crime being conducted by an organization that is paying contributions to half the Congress and the Administration, and staffing key positions in the government with its employees. Do you really think it will be brought to full disclosure and equal justice?

In a statement Goldman says that "The SEC’s charges are completely unfounded in law and fact and we will vigorously contest them and defend the firm and its reputation." Fabrice Tourre was last seen being thrown under a bus, and could not be reached for comment.

Watch the Justice Department and the Obama Administration to see what they do or do not do, and you will be able to know their character and intents. But in fairness the big Broker-Dealers in the US are RARELY indicted for anything. They virtually own the country's political and justice system.

"I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street." Barack Obama to CBS News.

Time do something besides talk the US to death about what you are going to do, and how the Republicans and lobbyists are getting in your way, and how great it will be when you finally do it. The SEC is relatively toothless, and probably by design. The FCIC will be tramping in the weeds for the rest of the year.

You do not need the Republicans, and you do not need the Congress, to fully engage the Justice Department and the FBI in investigating this fraud, Mr. Obama.

The most likely outcome will be a disgorgement of profits and a wristslap, and a promise by Goldman to change its business practices, while admitting no wrong. That will be the 'business as usual' outcome, and a sign that reform is an illusion.

Meanwhile, the market manipulation continues. I thought it was cute the way in which the metals bears used this news to sell the market in an attempt to sustian their huge naked short positions. "Never waste a crisis."

The US Congress reacts to the scandalous news.


Breaking news on breaking the rules, more to follow.

Eric Sprott on the Economy, the Markets, and the PHYS Gold Trust

UBS Shareholders Vote to Hold Top Management Personally Responsible for Losses

This is the way to start putting some 'teeth' into financial reform.

Bank managers must be held accountable for their actions, preferably by shareholders. The Swiss are showing the way on this.

SwissInfo.CH
UBS has “witnessed a Waterloo”
By Time Neville
Apr 15, 2010

Swiss newspapers on Thursday morning were full of praise for UBS shareholders who voted to hold 2007 executives partially responsible for the bank’s near collapse.

Commentators say the decision not to exonerate former CEO Marcel Ospel and other top managers of allowing the bank to suffer record losses and reputational damage is nothing short of historic.

“Shareholders yesterday preferred honesty over immediate profit,” the Geneva-based Le Temps newspaper said in an article titled, “Shareholder courage”.

“It was a courageous and responsible decision.”

During the big bank’s annual shareholder meeting in Basel, some 4,700 stockholders representing 1.7 billion shares, voted by a margin of 53 per cent to reject recommendations by the current board to absolve executives from all responsibility for the bank’s staggering subprime losses that prompted a SFr 60 billion federal bailout.

The decision means former managers are now exposed to potential lawsuits.

“This is something that no one for a long time thought possible,” said Blick. “By standing up to the board, the owners of UBS have written economic history.”

Shareholder democracy

The Tages-Anzeiger newspaper said the vote serves as a “slap” to top executives and represents a turning point that the bank cannot deny.

“With this ‘no’ chairman of the board Kaspar Villiger and UBS have witnessed a Waterloo,” the paper wrote. “Although this means little to nothing in concrete terms, symbolically it means much.”

The paper went on to say the vote is a “triumph for shareholder democracy”, and notes it was the first time shareholders of a large public company succeeded in going against the will of the executive board “not only to send a signal” but also in doing so with a majority of votes.

“Imagine: Managers selling their own shares worth SFr150 million at high market conditions through the summer…and then presenting SFr50 billion in losses. To absolve them of that, that’s too much for even the most good-natured shareholder,” the paper said.

That may be true but it was no knee-jerk reaction, countered the Neue Zürcher Zeitung.

“By agreeing with most of the board’s recommendations – such as 85 per cent agreeing that the current UBS top brass should be absolved of responsibility – the majority of shareowners are implying they do not want to hobble the bank despite their displeasure.”

What next?

“And now?” asked Le Temps.

The NZZ says the bank would be “well advised” not to go back to business as usual.

The Tages Anzeiger argues that to “really draw a line under the past”, Villiger must consider whether to prepare a case against former managers. At best, it’s a job for a “neutral judge” to decide whether "the old UBS" broke the law, it said.

“That way, [Grübel and Villiger] can take care of the new UBS uninhibited.”

Le Temps says it seems “unimaginable” that the board would stick to the status quo, after a vote akin to “the mutiny of the Bounty”.

“Yesterday’s vote will have consequences beyond the bank,” it argued, saying the era of powerful shareholder democracy has been crowned “with spectacular force”.

“But be careful,” it warned. “Shareholder democracy can’t regulate everything, in particular in the banking realm, where the central question of systemic risk remains intact.”

The paper’s cross-town rival, the Tribune de Genève, put it more bluntly. It shot down an argument that Ospel and company would never go before a civil or criminal court because such a suit would be too expensive or an exercise in futility.

“Whatever!” it said. “The penalty imposed yesterday has a symbolic significance far greater than all the judgments of the convoluted world. Swiss economic democracy has finally succeeded in overthrowing a regime. For that it is thanked.”

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?'