Beta Monster: The Most Dangerous Banks In the World

The most leveraged bank by far is the-investment-bank-which-must-not-be-named. It is followed by J.P. Morgan on a percentage basis, but JPM is far larger nominally than these charts indicate because of its much larger capital base. Its in the nature of the difference between a cardshark (GS) and a pawnshop (JPM). Or perhaps just the capital requirements of the short versus the long con.

Luckily for the US financial system the big banks are incapable of making errors in risk management, and always seem to get by with a little helpful information from their friends, and a lot of money from the public.

We would ask Timmy for an explanation on how this could happen so soon after a crisis in which the Treasury had to ask Congress to stop financial armageddon overnight because of the perils of excessive leverage on dodgy capital, but he is taking dictation from Lloyd on line 1, and Jamie is on hold on line 2.

Mutual Funds Are at Cash Levels Not Seen Since the 2007 Market Top

Trend following beta monkeys (TFBM) using Other People's Money (OPM).

They'll never learn.

Because they don't care after they have collected their fees and bonuses.

Herd behaviour does not begin to describe this phenomenon.

The US financial system is designed to maximize financial management returns and encourage the mispricing of risk, and ultimately the distribution of wealth from the many to the few through fraud, fiduciary recklessness, and Ponzi schemes.

The root cause of the US's problems are with the distorted monetary policies of the Federal Reserve, and the regulatory failure of a government corrupted by its financial sector.

Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Is the award taxable?

Not if his Treasury Secretary does his tax returns.

Its not the most undeserved award ever granted. After all, Henry Kissinger also received the Nobel Peace Prize. And Schicklgruber was Time's Man of the Year in 1939.

What has he done? What has Obama actually done?

What has Obama actually done to merit the Nobel Peace Prize this early in his administration? Besides talking.

Well he did pay the US' tab at the UN. But other than that, he has done nothing to merit this award, except for talking a good game. And so, he cheapens it.

Why the Federal Government Seized the Monetary Gold in 1933

The question of confication reappears every time gold rallies, from those with enough history to be able to throw out a few facts and sound plausible, but not enough grounding in history and the law to actually place them in any sort of reasonable context.

Below is a 'reprise' of a blog entry we posted early this year on the topic.

The Feds acted on gold because at the time it WAS the currency of the country, and the government had some proper claims on it. When the US left the gold standard it relinquished all such claims, as gold became purely private property. Except perhaps if you are holding gold American eagles, which bear the patina of 'currency.'

It should also be noted that the sole action of the government was to ask for the gold, to withdraw convertibility of gold notes from the domestic public, and to monitor the activity of safe deposit boxes taking certain categories of gold, and essentially nothing else. There were no investigations, searches, or even active prosecutions for non-compliance.

The purpose of the confiscation was to prepare the way for a formal devaluation of the dollar while it was still on the gold standard.

Could the government try to confiscate the gold from private citizens again? Certainly. Although unless it is part of a return to the gold standard with adequate recompense, it would be little more than the theft of private property.

The government can also ask you to place an RFID chip in your head before you can buy anything or drive a car, ask for your children and place them in youth camps, bind you over to your creditors in indentured servitude, ask you to house homeland security troops in your home with no payment, and request your presence on a freight train for relocation to New Mexico.

There is a wide difference between what *could* be done, what is likely to be done, and what people might consider to be unreasonable enough to resist.

Talk of confiscation invariably occurs when gold rallies because it is a way for those who rode the rally to climb the wall of worry and those who missed the rally to feel better about their lost opportunity.


The Last Time the Feds Devalued the Dollar to Save the Banks
14 January 2009

We dipped once again into the Federal Reserve Bulletin Publication from June, 1934 to take a closer look at the growth of the monetary base, and found an interesting graphic that shows the accounting for the January 1934 devaluation of the dollar and the subsequent result on Bank Reserves in the Federal Reserve System.

As you will recall, the Gold Act, or more properly Executive Order 6102 of April 5, 1933, required Americans to surrender their gold coinage and certificates to the Federal Reserve Banks by May 1, 1933. There were no prosecutions for non-compliance except one benchmark case which was brought voluntarily by a person who wished to challenge the act in court.

After a substantial portion of the gold was turned in by US citizens and taken from their bank based safe deposit boxes, the government officially devalued the dollar from 20.67 to 35.00 per ounce in the Gold Reserve Act of January 31, 1934.

The proceeds from this devaluation were used to provide a significant boost to the Federal Reserve member bank positions as shown in the first chart below.

The inflation visited on the American people because of this action helped to take the CPI as it was then measured up 1200 basis points from about -8% to +4% by the end of 1933. To somewhat offset the monetary inflation the Fed also contracted the Monetary Base which served the nascent recovery in the real economy rather poorly and is viewed widely as one of a series of policy errors.

Considering that the actions did little for the employment situation this was painful medicine indeed to those who were dependent on wages.



Fortunately at the same time FDR was initiating the New Deal programs which, despite continual opposition from a Republican minority in Congress, managed to provide a small measure of relief for the 20+% public that was suffering from unemployment and wage stagnation.

People ask frequently "Will the government seize gold again?"

While there is no certainty involved in anything if a government begins to overturn the law and seize private property, one has to ask for the context and details first to understand what happened and why, to understand the precedent.

Technically, the government did not engage in a pure seize of private property, since at that time the US was on the gold standard, and much of the gold holdings of US citizens were in the form of gold coinage and certificates.

Governments always make the case that the currency is their property and that the user is merely holding it as a medium of exchange. The foundation of the argument was that the government required to recall its gold to strengthen the backing of the US dollar against the net outflows of gold for international trade. The devaluation helped with this as well, since dollars brought less gold for trade balances.

People also ask, "Why didn't the government just revalue the dollar without trying to recall all the gold from the American public?"

The answer would seem to be that this would have been more just, more equitable recompense for the public. The Treasury could have purchased gold from the public to support its foreign trade needs.

But it would have left much less liquidity for the banks.

One can make a better case that the recall of the gold, with the subsequent revaluation to benefit a small segment of the population in the Banks, was a form of seizure of wealth without due compensation. Hence the lack of active prosecutions.

So, will the government take back gold again to save the banks by devaluing the dollar?

Highly unlikely, because they not only do not need to this, since the dollar is no longer backed by gold, and is a form of secular property except perhaps for gold eagles, but they do not have to, because they are devaluing the dollar already to save the banks.

This time the confiscation of wealth to save the banks is called TARP.

If one thinks about it, US Dollars are being created and provided directly to the banks to boost their free reserves significantly, at a scale comparable and beyond to 1933-34.

The confiscation of wealth is being spread among all holders of US dollars and dollar assets, foreign and domestic, in the more subtle form of monetary inflation.

Granted, the government must be more opaque to mask their actions in order to sustain confidence in the dollar while the devaluation occurs, but this is exactly what is happening, and all that is required to happen in a fiat regime.

There is no need to seize widely held exogenous commodities like gold and oil, but merely dampen any bellwether signals that a significant devaluation of the dollar is once gain being perpetrated on the American people in order to save the banks.

Its fascinating to look carefully at this next chart below.



First, notice the big drop in gold in circulation of 9.8 million ounces, or roughly 36% of the measured inventory at the end of 1932. Think someone was front-running the dollar devaluation? We suspect that the order went out to start pulling in the gold stock to the banks.

The reduction in gold in circulation AFTER the announcement of the Gold Act in April would be about 3.9 million ounces, or roughly 22% of the gold remaining in circulation in March 1933.

Considering that all gold coinage held by banks in the vaults was automatically seized, the voluntary compliance rate is not all that impressive. We are not sure how much of this was being held in overseas hands by non-US entities.

But beyond a doubt, there was a unjust, if not illegal, seizure of wealth by requiring citizen to turn in their gold to the banks, which was then revalued at the beginning of 1934 by 69% from 20.67 to 35 dollars.

It would have been much more equitable to devalue the dollar and to change the basis for dollar/gold first, before requiring private citizens to surrender their holdings. But of course, this would have lessened the liquidity available for direct infusion into the Federal Reserve banks.

The Plan to De-dollarise the Oil Markets: Its Roots and Implications

The breakdown of US dollar reserves being held overseas in the attached article of news is interesting, even though estimated.

I am curious to see when Kevin Phillips and Chalmers Johnson start speaking to this as this sort of historic change is in their respective ballparks.

Of course, there is always the option to listen to those in the American financial media who dismiss the internationally respected and well-connected Robert Fisk as a commie crank, a liberal web spinner, and a tinfoil conspiracty theorist.

Not all opinions are created equal, but all must be substantiated by data and sustained by confirming evidence. On the other hand, willful ignorance, prejudice, and groupthink, also known as the herd mentality, may work in the day to day amongst a select group of chums and the like-minded, but their consequences can render a thoroughly discouraging experience in the markets, where no one really cares what you think and why.

Don't blindly feed your arms and legs to the sharks, especially out of a misplaced allegiance to a favorite theory or betting system, as it just encourages them and mucks up the water.

But do not rush out and react to this news story, because these types of adjustments take several years to occur. They are longer term macro-trends. But they do matter because they also occur slowly, not all at once at the end of a period of time.

These are lessons that every trader still standing must ultimately learn.

Here is some additional detail on this story in a video interview with Robert Fisk, in addition to the news story below.

The Independent
A financial revolution with profound political implications
By Robert Fisk
Wednesday, 7 October 2009

The plan to de-dollarise the oil market, discussed both in public and in secret for at least two years and widely denied yesterday by the usual suspects – Saudi Arabia being, as expected, the first among them – reflects a growing resentment in the Middle East, Europe and in China at America's decades-long political as well as economic world dominance.

Nowhere has this more symbolic importance than in the Middle East, where the United Arab Emirates alone holds $900bn (£566bn) of dollar reserves and where Saudi Arabia has been quietly co-ordinating its defence, armaments and oil policies with the Russians since 2007.

This does not indicate a trade war with America – not yet – but Arab Gulf regimes have been growing increasingly restive at their economic as well as political dependence on Washington for many years. Of the $7.2 trillion in international reserves, $2.1trn is held by Arab countries – China holds about $2.3trn – and the nations interested in moving away from dollar-trading in oil are believed to hold over 80 per cent of international dollar reserves....

Read the rest here.

Gold: Until the Banks Are Restrained and Balance Is Restored

Gold has apparently broken out of a big inverse Head and Shoulder formation, possibly an ascending triangle if you prefer that for reliability. In combination, as they often are, this is a powerful sign of buying pressure, accumulation and a sharp rise in price.

The targets we saw on the Gold Long Term chart posted here on September 15 call out a range of targets for this leg in the bull market from 1310 to 1350 level.



Here is a closer look at an updated chart showing the successful breakout from the Inverse H&S pattern. The target of 1310 now seems more confident for this leg of the gold bull market.

The formation will be in play as long as the 'secondary neckline' is not violated on a weekly close.



It is always more difficult to move from the charts to a more fundamental macro analysis and ask, "What does this mean? What is the market telling us with these sharp moves higher in gold and silver?"

And of course there is the most common question of all, "How far can it go?"

This is where the controversy begins, because gold is stepping on the toes of those who misunderstand the existing forces of demand deflation and monetary inflation in the United States, who fundamentally do not understand money and wealth, and their differences.

It is also bothering the financial commentators and analysts who, in addition to mouthing the words and sentiments that other people provide for them, sometimes have a thought of their own and must wonder, "Is what I am saying true? And if it is, why is gold doing this? Should I be fearful of my position if the markets fail?"

We have tried to portray some potential causes for the sweeping move in gold. One must first remember that this is nothing new. Gold is in an obvious and sustained bull market, that has it roots when the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan decided to print its way out of a series of crises beginning in the mid 1990's, and started rising in earnest with the Fed's monetary and regulatory errors in 2002.

Gold, despite the obvious efforts of the monied interests to disparage it publicly while accumulating it privately, is rising because the US dollar is being used badly, is being weakened by the failing schemes of a corrupt combination of the government and financial interests.

This is why there has been no serious reform, no meaningful investigations or indictments in what will surely be remembered in history as a financial fraud of a magnitude with the South Sea Bubble in England and the Mississippi Bubble in France.

There are going to be more crises, more dislocations associated with this, despite the best efforts of the financial engineers to paper it over, and the captive media to cover it up, dismiss it, and move along to the next asset bubble, this time in stocks.

This is what gold is telling us. It is saying that the era of the US Dollar as the world's reserve currency is over, with all that this implies in the balance of power in the world as it has existed since the end of the Second World War. And it is occurring for some very good reasons which the US media and the Congress seem to prefer to ignore.

Gold is where people put their wealth when they are confronted with uncertainty, with asymmetric information, when they are afraid; when the statists and the crony capitalists are preying on the savings of the people. Gold is a refuge, a safe haven, when there is good reason to be concerned about your currency, your wealth, and your future; when lies are in the ascendancy and truth and justice are scarce commodities.

This is because gold is one of the few stores of value that is compact, universal, portable, and contingent upon the full faith and credit of nothing but itself.

And so the rally in gold will likely continue until the banks are restrained, the financial system is reformed, and balance is restored to the economy. When the media once again speaks freely and truthfully and openly, when justice is done and the guilty are judged, and when the people can more reasonably place their confidence in the words and actions of those who hold the stewardship of their nation under the Constitution which they have sworn to uphold.

Or, when the Constitution is tossed, and freedom is extinguished, because it is no longer convenient to a people given over to self-deception, egoism, greed, mere anarchy, and nothingness.

"In Egypt's sandy silence, all alone,
Stands a gigantic leg, which far off throws
The only shadow that the Desert knows:
I am great Ozymandias, saith the stone,
The King of Kings; this mighty city shows
The wonders of my hand. The City's gone,
Nought but the leg remaining to disclose
The site of this forgotten Babylon.

We wonder, and some hunter may express
Wonder like ours, when thro' the wilderness
Where London stood, holding the wolf in chase,
He meets some fragments huge, and stops to guess
What powerful but unrecorded race
Once dwelt in that annihilated place."

Horace Smith, 1 February 1818

Latvia Goes "No Bid"

This bears watching. It may be nothing on the grander stage, but then again, there is a precedent for small events to trigger larger actions and reactions.

Latvia on the brink
By MarketWatch
Oct. 7, 2009, 10:04 a.m.

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- It's never good news when a government bond auction fails. It's particularly bad news when an auction fails for a note maturing in just six months. And it's really bad news when there isn't any bid at all.

Yet that's what happened Wednesday when Latvia tried to sell close to $17 million of paper. It's not hard to figure out why.

The Baltic country is squabbling with Western -- mostly Swedish -- leaders over spending cuts, and it's a very real possibility that the country may be forced to devalue its euro-pegged currency if emergency global funds don't arrive.

Were Latvia to devalue, that would hit economies in neighboring countries like Lithuania, and Swedish banks would rack up additional losses on the loans they have made throughout the region.

The real nightmare scenario would be the Swedish banks then pulling down other European banks, and then triggering Credit Crunch: Part 2.

There is, of course, a long way before that unwieldy scenario comes to pass. Latvia hasn't devalued -- yet - and, even if it does, that doesn't mean it would drag the Swedish banks under.

Lenders like Swedbank which has more branches in the Baltic countries and Ukraine than in Sweden -- have endured plenty of losses, and Swedbank, for one, just raised more than $2 billion to weather stormier times. See earlier story.

Still, investors might recall a minor matter involving teaser loans that only took down the entire world economy.

Not every domino falls. But there's one that's looking shaky.

Guest Post: Tavakoli On the Reserve Currency Discussions

Here is a commentary from Janet Tavakoli on the Robert Fisk article in yesterday's Independent.

It is remarkably well grounded and thoughtful in its analysis and is well worth reading.

This is a guest post at Le Café Américain, but links to her site and other important essays are contained herein.

Her insights are a welcome palliative to some of the astonishingly shallow commentary we have seen and heard from the financial media.

Of course we would agree that this discussion has been ongoing for many years, as such a discussion fills the void in the evolution of global finance after the breakdown of the original Bretton Woods Agreement, and the closing of the gold window by Richard Nixon.

The point which we have made, perhaps no nearly so well, is that the actions of the Fed and the Treasury over the last ten years have brought the world to what appears to be a tipping point, something that will finally precipitate a change in what has long been a de facto equilibrium; a sea change if you will.

A major precipitant to the current action appears to be the quinquennial rebalancing of the SDR, which will be occurring in 2010. That, and the widespread financial fraud which Wall Street perpetrated on foreign investors, which has been seriously underplayed by the American media.

This is the scenario which was forecast here in 2005, when it became apparent that Greenspan and his governors, together with the Treasury, were not going to act in a manner that would promote a sustainable environment for the status quo.

And further, that the serial sociopaths on Wall Street would keep pushing their luck to the limit, face-ripping their way around the world with our trading partners and creditors until they hit the wall in the form of a break in confidence and an irreparable loss of trust, triggering a significant financial blowback.

Although there was some hope that Obama and his economic team might be able to turn the tide, that hope is fading quickly. And so here we are today.


China Defaults, Currency Basket Threatens Dollar
TSF – October 6, 2009
By Janet Tavakoli

Robert Fisk exposed revived discussions by the Gulf States, China, France, Japan, Brazil, and Russia to replace the dollar as the benchmark oil trading currency with a basket of currencies including gold within 10 years.

This proposal is not new and discussions have been ongoing for decades. But other extraordinary moves in the capital markets suggest we should take this threat to the dollar’s position very seriously. For example, China has $2.3 trillion in currency reserves (about 70% in dollars), and China knows how to get its way.

In November 2008, Chinese banks said they would no longer play by our rules. Top tier banks (Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China) reneged on derivatives contracts. They failed to come up with billions in collateral on dollar/yen FX trades, which were out of the money after the yen’s October appreciation. This should have been headline news in every financial newspaper, but it wasn’t. Chinese banks defaulted.

They may have been partially motivated by U.S. malfeasance in the capital markets that caused losses in Asia. The U.S. squandered its credibility and our cover-ups have done nothing to restore it.

Most credit support annex agreements would say that closing out these trades would be an event of default, and then the cross default on all the trades would kick in with the same counterparty. But the credit of the Chinese banks was better than many of their counterparties. Everyone was forced to renegotiate contracts with the Chinese banks.

From the perspective of the derivatives markets, this is earth shattering. What would have happened if AIG had done the same thing? (Hey, Goldman, UBS, and others…you want your collateral? Well…Stuff It!)

At the end of August 2009, China signaled that state owned oil consumers: Air China, COSCO, and China Eastern could default on money-losing commodities derivatives contracts.

If we had been paying attention, the U.S. should have done everything in its power to correct our mistakes, clean up the mess in our financial system—instead of sweeping it under the carpet—and turned our efforts to maintaining the credibility of the capital markets and the credibility of the dollar.

Janet Tavakoli is the president of Tavakoli Structured Finance, a Chicago-based firm that provides
consulting to financial institutions and institutional investors. Ms. Tavakoli has more than 20 years of experience in senior investment banking positions, trading, structuring and marketing structured financial products. She is a former adjunct associate professor of derivatives at the University of Chicago's Graduate School of Business. Author of: Credit Derivatives & Synthetic Structures (1998, 2001), Collateralized Debt Obligations & Structured Finance (2003), Structured Finance & Collateralized Debt Obligations (John Wiley & Sons, September 2008).

Tavakoli’s book on the causes of the global financial meltdown and how to fix it is: Dear Mr. Buffett: What an Investor Learns 1,269 Miles from Wall Street (Wiley, 2009).

SDRs and the Endgame for the US Dollar Reserve

Our take on this is that there is NO question that the US dollar will lose its reserve currency status, and the Treasury and the Fed are aware of this.

The game being played now on the international stage, largely behind the scenes until recently, is with regard to what will take its place and how it will be implemented.

The talking heads on US financial television are largely talking their books even today, taking the position that nothing can replace the US dollar for the next fifteen years at least (Robert Altman-Bloomberg).

Most of the anchors and house commentators are just shallow, nervous in a giggly sort of way, and astoundingly naive which may be attributed to their relative youth and lack of relevant experience in anything beyond looking good and being often wrong but never in doubt.

The US and UK are pushing for Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) from the IMF as the replacement, with very minor rebalancing. There are those who prefer something that they feel is less neo-colonial, or at least more neutral, and reflective of a changing economic reality.

Much of what is hitting the news now is political jawboning ahead of the next realignment of the SDRs in 2010 after the recent summit in Istanbul to discuss this very topic that the news people in the US are denying ever even occurred.

"The basket composition is reviewed every five years by the Executive Board to ensure that it reflects the relative importance of currencies in the world’s trading and financial systems.

In the most recent review (in November 2005), the weights of the currencies in the SDR basket were revised based on the value of the exports of goods and services and the amount of reserves denominated in the respective currencies which were held by other members of the IMF.

These changes became effective on January 1, 2006. The next review will take place in late 2010"

The current composition of the SDR, as calculated in 2005, is:

"The value of the SDR was initially defined as equivalent to 0.888671 grams of fine gold—which, at the time, was also equivalent to one U.S. dollar. After the collapse of the Bretton Woods system in 1973, however, the SDR was redefined as a basket of currencies, today consisting of the euro, Japanese yen, pound sterling, and U.S. dollar."

"With effect from January 1, 2006, the IMF has determined that the four currencies that meet both selection criteria for inclusion in the SDR valuation basket will be assigned the following weights based on their roles in international trade and finance: U.S. dollar (44 percent), euro (34 percent), Japanese yen (11 percent), and pound sterling (11 percent)".

Here is a commentary from Max Keiser, an ex-patriate based in Paris. His analysis will seem harsh at times to American ears, more conditioned to the evening news. But this represents what a significant portion of the world now thinks, and it is worthwhile to at least listen to it.

Why would the US resist this? Because there is a huge overhang of dollars in the world, far beyond what can be sustained at current valuation if the dollar was NOT the reserve currency., artificially incenting countries to hold dollars, and to use them for some essential purchases such as oil.

The strong dollar is a huge benefit to the US financial sector and the government. It is a significant drawback to US industry and the non-military productive economy. This is why the Europeans are opposed to the Euro becoming the world's sole reserve currency. Their financial sector has not obtained a dominant influence over the government, and their predisposition to military adventurism is still tempered by their experiences with war in the 20th century. That could change, but not yet.

People talk about an artificial short in the dollar because of debt. That concept only works if the Fed does not exercise its printing press, which it said it would do, and is now doing. But the dollar overhang exists, and has become precariously unstable, and unsustainable.

Max Keiser is hearing that the target composition will be weighted to 50 percent gold, in a return to a system more in keeping with the original Bretton Woods agreement. This is most likely the position being taken by France, China and Russia. The US and UK are adamantly opposed and will fight a delaying game with 2020 as a target for a phased in approach that continues to favor the dollar.

He starts going 'off the rails' for my taste about four minutes into this interview, but it is a viewpoint that is becoming more widely held in parts of the world that are starting to matter to the US economy, blowback-wise, and Americans need to be more aware of this perhaps for practical considerations.



See Also: The Decline of the Dollar as the World's Reserve Currency