February 2009

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Art of War

  • Art of War #70
    For some time now I have struggled with the juxtaposition of art and war. Sometimes a stark black and white photo isn't enough of a dramatization of war. I believe that the effects of war and conflict become more dramatic when juxtaposed with something beautiful. It is more of a reminder that with death and destruction we forever lose the beauty that is life. Is there life after death? Perhaps, but I can imagine nothing more beautiful than what I witness on this planet. I, for one, would rather spend my moments living a beautiful life just in case the end is really the end. Each image in the series will have a different look, dependent wholly upon my emotions at the time of creation. No image is meant to malign the victims, but rather bring a new perspective on the constant cycle of destruction by humankind.

Critical Thinkers and Instigators of Change

FAIR USE

  • This blog contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been authorized. Such material is provided for educational and research purposes only, is distributed without profit, and constitutes 'fair use' as per Title 17 U.S.C. section 107 of the US Copyright Law.

Financial Armeggedon

Friday, November 14, 2008

Democrats Considering Nationalizing 401(k)s - Get Out Now!

From: http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/dems-target-private-retirement-accounts.html

Carolina Journal Exclusives
Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts
Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs

By Karen McMahan

November 04, 2008

RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.

Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.

The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.

Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.”

Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA.

Mandating Equality

Ghilarducci’s plan first appeared in a paper for the Economic Policy Institute: Agenda for Shared Prosperity on Nov. 20, 2007, in which she said GRAs will rescue the flawed American retirement income system (www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204/bp204.pdf).

The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”

Lauding GRAs as a way to effectively increase retirement savings, Ghilarducci wrote that savings incentives are unequal for rich and poor families because tax deferrals “provide a much larger ‘carrot’ to wealthy families than to middle-class families — and none whatsoever for families too poor to owe taxes.”

GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.

In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”

All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.

Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.

Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”

What the survey actually reported was that 33 percent of Americans wanted the government to “enforce additional private savings,” a vastly different meaning than mandatory government-run savings. Of the four potential sources of retirement support, which were government, employer, family, and self, the majority of Americans said “self” was the most important contributor, followed by “government.” When broken out by family income, low-income U.S. households said the “government” was the most important retirement support, whereas high-income families ranked “government” last and “self” first (www.hsbc.com/retirement).

On Oct. 22, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Argentinean government had seized all private pension and retirement accounts to fund government programs and to address a ballooning deficit. Fearing an economic collapse, foreign investors quickly pulled out, forcing the Argentinean stock market to shut down several times. More than 10 years ago, nationalization of private savings sent Argentina’s economy into a long-term downward spiral.

Income and Wealth Redistribution

The majority of witness testimony during recent hearings before the House Committee on Education and Labor showed that congressional Democrats intend to address income and wealth inequality through redistribution.

On July 31, 2008, Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, testified before the subcommittee on workforce protections that “from the standpoint of equal treatment of people with different incomes, there is a fundamental flaw” in tax code incentives because they are “provided in the form of deductions, exemptions, and exclusions rather than in the form of refundable tax credits.”

Even people who don’t pay taxes should get money from the government, paid for by higher-income Americans, he said. “There is no obvious reason why lower-income taxpayers or people who do not file income taxes should get smaller incentives (or no tax incentives at all),” Greenstein said.

“Moving to refundable tax credits for promoting socially worthwhile activities would be an important step toward enhancing progressivity in the tax code in a way that would improve economic efficiency and performance at the same time,” Greenstein said, and “reducing barriers to labor organizing, preserving the real value of the minimum wage, and the other workforce security concerns . . . would contribute to an economy with less glaring and sharply widening inequality.”

When asked whether committee members seriously were considering Ghilarducci’s proposal for GSAs, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the Committee on Education and Labor, said Miller and other members were listening to all ideas.

Miller’s biggest priority has been on legislation aimed at greater transparency in 401(k)s and other retirement plan administration, specifically regarding fees, Albright said, and he sent a link to a Fox News interview of Miller on Oct. 24, 2008, to show that the congressman had not made a decision.

After repeated questions asked by Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Miller said he would not be in favor of “killing the 401(k)” or of “killing the tax advantages for 401(k)s.”

Arguing against liberal prescriptions, William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, testified on Oct. 24 that the “roots of the current crisis are firmly planted in public policy mistakes” by the Federal Reserve and Congress. He cautioned Congress against raising taxes, increasing burdensome regulations, or withdrawing from international product or capital markets. “Congress can ill afford to repeat the awesome errors of its predecessor in the early days of the Great Depression,” Beach said.

Instead, Beach said, Congress could best address the financial crisis by making the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003 permanent, stopping dependence on demand-side stimulus, lowering the corporate profits tax, and reducing or eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends.

Testifying before the same committee in early October, Jerry Bramlett, president and CEO of BenefitStreet, Inc., an independent 401(k) plan administrator, said one of the best ways to ensure retirement security would be to have the U.S. Department of Labor develop educational materials for workers so they could make better investment decisions, not exchange equity investments in retirement accounts for Treasury bills, as proposed in the GSAs.

Should Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, congressional Democrats might have stronger support for their “spreading the wealth” agenda. On Oct. 27, the American Thinker posted a video of an interview with Obama on public radio station WBEZ-FM from 2001.

In the interview, Obama said, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” The Constitution says only what “the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,” and Obama added that the Warren Court wasn’t that radical.

Although in 2001 Obama said he was not “optimistic about bringing major redistributive change through the courts,” as president, he would likely have the opportunity to appoint one or more Supreme Court justices.

“The real tragedy of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused that I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change,” Obama said.

Karen McMahan is a contributing editor of Carolina Journal.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008

The Treasury Morphs Into A Hedgefund

The Treasury Morphs Into A Hedgefund

Moon of Alabama

September 23, 2008

The Mother of All Bailouts plan gives the Treasury not only authority to buy and sell Mortgage Backed Securities, but allows it to deal
 in any financial instruments including leveraged derivatives.

This evolved over the various versions.

The original Paulson proposal said:

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.-- The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.
...
Sec. 12. Definitions.

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.--The term "mortgage-related assets" means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

All media reports and blogs I have read about this assume that the Treasury under this plan would only buy Mortgage Backed Securities, i.e. bonds backed my mortgage payments.

But the above language also includes Credit Default Swaps. Insurance contracts or derivatives, that guarantee the recoverability of MBS and change their value in relation to an MBS' value.

The language in the Treasury Fact Sheed on the proposal is even wider:

Treasury will have authority to issue up to $700 billion of Treasury securities to finance the purchase of troubled assets. The purchases are intended to be residential and commercial mortgage-related assets, which may include mortgage-backed securities and whole loans. The Secretary will have the discretion, in consultation with the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, to purchase other assets, as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets.

It seems like the fact sheed exceeds the breadth of the released proposal.

Oh, you say, the Democrats in Congress will prevent the Treasury from morphing into a investment bank backed by $700 billion of taxpayer capital?

Here is Senator Dodd's expanded proposal of the Paulson plan. The language is even worse than in the original:

SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE TROUBLED ASSETS.

(a) OFFICES; AUTHORITY.—

(1) AUTHORITY.—The Secretary is authorized to establish a program to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase troubled assets from any financial institution, on such terms and conditions as are determined by the Secretary, and in accordance with policies and procedures developed by the Secretary.
...
SEC. 21. DEFINITIONS.

(7) TROUBLED ASSETS.—The term ''troubled assets’’ means—

(A) residential or commercial mortgages, and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case were originated or issued on or before March 14, 2008; and

(B) upon the determination of the Secretary, in consultation with the Chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, any other financial instrument, as the Secretary determines necessary to promote financial market stability.

The Dodd version gets lauded by Krugman, DeLong and other 'liberal' luminaries.

This while the bailout language morphed from "mortgage related assets" to "any financial instrument."

The Dodd version added some nice little extras for a homeowners in distress and some oversight provision. But it also extended the scope of the Paulson plan far beyond housing and mortgages towards an all encompassing bailout for any financial issue.

Since 2003 Dodd collected over $4 million in contributions from Securities and Investment companies. His top five doners include Citibank, SAC Capital Partners and Royal Bank of Scotland. That may well be the reason why he does not want to keep the bill restricted to mortgage related assets but wants to include any financial instrument.

If this becomes law, Paulson and whoever replaces him in January will have the authority to buy Asset Backed Securities from car loans and credit card loans. He will be able to buy and sell derivatives based on ABS that have build in leverage effects. The Treasury may even deal in synthetic Collateral Debt Obligations and derivatives base on those. It can buy and sell shares of public dealt companies, precious metals, future contracts on these and it can speculate on interest moves of Russian government bonds.

Are there any big long future positions on the Canadian dollar the U.S. president does not like? Just get the Treasury buy them up. Congress is giving it the right to do so.

With a capital of $700 billion and the authority to buy and sell any highly leveraged financial instruments, the Treasury will become one gigantic hedge fund that can and may well act to move multi-trillions.

If such an entity makes one wrong move, it can bankrupt its owners within a few hours. The Treasury is too knowledgeable to make such mistakes? So were two Nobel Price winners at LTCM.

 


       
        :: Article nr. 47444 sent on 23-sep-2008 19:39 ECT
www.uruknet.info?p=47444

Link: www.moonofalabama.org/2008/09/the-treasury-mo.html

A financial controlled demolotion just like 9/11

Afshin Rattansi in Tehran talks to Max Keiser in Paris about the end of Wall Street, dollars and toilet paper - and Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs no longer being investment banks...

Sunday, September 21, 2008

Legislative Proposal for the Treasury Authority to Purchase Mortgage-Related Assets

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY

TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

Section 1. Short Title.

This Act may be cited as ____________________.

Sec. 2. Purchases of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Authority to Purchase.--The Secretary is authorized to purchase, and to make and fund commitments to purchase, on such terms and conditions as determined by the Secretary, mortgage-related assets from any financial institution having its headquarters in the United States.

(b) Necessary Actions.--The Secretary is authorized to take such actions as the Secretary deems necessary to carry out the authorities in this Act, including, without limitation:

(1) appointing such employees as may be required to carry out the authorities in this Act and defining their duties;

(2) entering into contracts, including contracts for services authorized by section 3109 of title 5, United States Code, without regard to any other provision of law regarding public contracts;

(3) designating financial institutions as financial agents of the Government, and they shall perform all such reasonable duties related to this Act as financial agents of the Government as may be required of them;

(4) establishing vehicles that are authorized, subject to supervision by the Secretary, to purchase mortgage-related assets and issue obligations; and

(5) issuing such regulations and other guidance as may be necessary or appropriate to define terms or carry out the authorities of this Act.

Sec. 3. Considerations.

In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration means for--

(1) providing stability or preventing disruption to the financial markets or banking system; and

(2) protecting the taxpayer.

Sec. 4. Reports to Congress.

Within three months of the first exercise of the authority granted in section 2(a), and semiannually thereafter, the Secretary shall report to the Committees on the Budget, Financial Services, and Ways and Means of the House of Representatives and the Committees on the Budget, Finance, and Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs of the Senate with respect to the authorities exercised under this Act and the considerations required by section 3.

Sec. 5. Rights; Management; Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.

(a) Exercise of Rights.--The Secretary may, at any time, exercise any rights received in connection with mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act.

(b) Management of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary shall have authority to manage mortgage-related assets purchased under this Act, including revenues and portfolio risks therefrom.

(c) Sale of Mortgage-Related Assets.--The Secretary may, at any time, upon terms and conditions and at prices determined by the Secretary, sell, or enter into securities loans, repurchase transactions or other financial transactions in regard to, any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act.

(d) Application of Sunset to Mortgage-Related Assets.--The authority of the Secretary to hold any mortgage-related asset purchased under this Act before the termination date in section 9, or to purchase or fund the purchase of a mortgage-related asset under a commitment entered into before the termination date in section 9, is not subject to the provisions of section 9.

Sec. 6. Maximum Amount of Authorized Purchases.

The Secretary's authority to purchase mortgage-related assets under this Act shall be limited to $700,000,000,000 outstanding at any one time

Sec. 7. Funding.

For the purpose of the authorities granted in this Act, and for the costs of administering those authorities, the Secretary may use the proceeds of the sale of any securities issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, and the purposes for which securities may be issued under chapter 31 of title 31, United States Code, are extended to include actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses. Any funds expended for actions authorized by this Act, including the payment of administrative expenses, shall be deemed appropriated at the time of such expenditure.

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

Sec. 9. Termination of Authority.

The authorities under this Act, with the exception of authorities granted in sections 2(b)(5), 5 and 7, shall terminate two years from the date of enactment of this Act.

Sec. 10. Increase in Statutory Limit on the Public Debt.

Subsection (b) of section 3101 of title 31, United States Code, is amended by striking out the dollar limitation contained in such subsection and inserting in lieu thereof $11,315,000,000,000.

Sec. 11. Credit Reform.

The costs of purchases of mortgage-related assets made under section 2(a) of this Act shall be determined as provided under the Federal Credit Reform Act of 1990, as applicable.

Sec. 12. Definitions.

For purposes of this section, the following definitions shall apply:

(1) Mortgage-Related Assets.--The term "mortgage-related assets" means residential or commercial mortgages and any securities, obligations, or other instruments that are based on or related to such mortgages, that in each case was originated or issued on or before September 17, 2008.

(2) Secretary.--The term "Secretary" means the Secretary of the Treasury.

(3) United States.--The term "United States" means the States, territories, and possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia.

Friday, September 19, 2008

Federal Lawsuit to Stop AIG Bailout

Read the complaint here.

http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/Update/Update2008-09-18.htm

On the day following the 221st anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution, WTP Chairman and constitutional activist Robert Schulz today filed a federal lawsuit in United States District Court in Albany seeking to halt the execution of the emergency bailout of American International Group, Inc. (AIG) by the United States Government and the Federal Reserve.

The lawsuit asserts that the commitment of public funds and credit for the direct benefit of privately owned AIG is an ultra vires action by the United States Government and Federal Reserve, i.e., beyond the limited legal authority granted by the Constitution. The lawsuit asks for a "show cause" hearing demanding that the Government produce evidence of its legal authority to commit public funds for such a purpose, as well as emergency and permanent injunctions halting the bailout transaction.

Beyond the Constitutional deficiencies, the bailout establishes a dangerous precedent enabling the Fed and/or Government to nationalize virtually any business or property within the United States without legal authority or congressional approval.

The defendants include the Federal Reserve System, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanki, the U.S. Treasury, Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson Jr. and the United States Government.

The WTP Foundation today issued a press release citing Schulz:

"Beyond the moral hazard and dangerous precedent established by this action, it is of vital importance that the American people recognize that the present financial crisis is a direct and predictable result of decades of constitutional violations by the Federal  Government.  Through a long-standing policy of disinformation and collusion with the Federal Reserve and Wall Street financial elite, the United States Federal Government has denied public access to information about the secretive operations of the privately owned and operated Federal Reserve and its monopoly control of America’s money system.

"This monopoly control of our currency by a private banking cartel has resulted in increasing distortion, volatility and cyclical (boom and bust) economic conditions in the U.S. and abroad.  America’s fiat currency (produced from thin air) is manipulated by the Federal Reserve for the benefit of its owners, major Wall Street financial institutions and the Federal Government and is not unaccountable to the taxpayers. These abuses of the Constitution have taken our financial system to edge of the abyss. The chickens have come home to roost."  

Click here to read the Complaint, the Memorandum of Law supporting the TRO, and Schulz's Declaration which includes several recent articles from the New York Times.

Is your bank keeping you in the markets against your will?

I am very fortunate in many ways. It's hard to complain when you are handed gifts of fortunes that just happen to be worth a fortune.

I was adopted by my step-father when I was seventeen. I hadn't known him all that long before my sisters and I were adopted, but he was a good person and much needed in my life at that time. My father was killed a year later, a scene from a bad soap opera. I didn't know that I would receive a trust fund upon his death. He mentioned inheritance a few times, telling us kids would be rich when he was dead. It was an odd thing to say. I knew there was family money, but no other details.

Each month I receive dividends from trust funds that I became heir to upon my father's death. It's enough that I have a little more freedom to say no to bad working conditions, not enough to change my socioeconomic position. It truly is a blessing. I try to do good things with the money.

As such, I have often been reticent about speaking out when I saw the trusts managed in a way that cause me embarrassment when showing the portfolio to financial professionals. My trusts were and are invested in stocks and bonds that do not meet or exceed the rate of inflation. Some call it conservative, some call it prudent, and some call it a loss. I suppose it depends upon your perspective, which leads me to the point of this missive. I feel fortunate to have this money, so I have remained quiet until now.

I am at odds with PNC Wealth Management, the current fiduciary trustee of my trusts. The gang at PNC and one of my trustees unanimously agree that the U.S. economy is not going to crash, the stock market is not going to crash, that there might be a few hardships here and there, but they have full faith in the economic recovery of the United States. I had a conference call yesterday where I was tag teamed by five people from PNC and one trustee, but in the end, not one could substantiate why the U.S. economy would turn around. They are repeating the mantra of their Chief Investment Strategist and their pathetic monthly Investor Outlook newsletter. "We can send you a copy of our analysis," said a few, "But you have already made up your mind." 

Damn right I have! Just weeks before the implosions of Fannie and Freddie, Lehman Brothers and AIG, their Chief Strategist was telling clients that these market fluctuations were just a result of irrational fear. He even had the audacity to quote Hunter S. Thompson. How I wish I could emulate his prose for this piece. Unfortunately, I don't have the newsletter because my cat left a giant yellow hairball on the paper. Who says animals aren't capable of analysis?

I want to continue to have a check each month, which is why I want my portfolio liquidate and be moved into gold stored outside of the United States. That is the most defensive position I can take in these worthless markets.

The short of it is that PNC will not do this. They said even if my other trustee agreed, they would not do it. They tried to toss around legal reasons, but the trusts have no limitations as to how they may be invested – real estate, stocks, bonds, business start ups – all are valid investment instruments. PNC Wealth Management tried to claim that according to Pennsylvania law, they couldn't invest my trust in gold because it was "speculative" and "risky" and not diversified. However, there is no law that supersedes the trust, and the trust does not prohibit such an investment. Nor is bullion speculative. I already know this, as I have spoken with other banks about my investment desires and they had no problem with my portfolio recommendations.

In essence, PNC lied to me when they said they were prohibited in investing my trust as I wanted.

They no doubt think I am a belligerent buffoon, a Mogambo Guru wannabee incoherently speaking in manic run on sentences and wildly interrupting them because my head felt just like the JP Morgan derivatives portfolio. Surely an aneurism was coming on as I paced wildly back in forth across the back patio of my store, screaming in to the telephone. "I respect your opinion," mocked the patronizing guy. I wanted to reach through the satellite signal and slap a pile of cash in front of him and say, "Put your money where your mouth is. How much of your own savings do you want to wager on the likely recovery of the U.S. economy?" I mean, it would be like taking candy from a baby, as this guy said he had full faith in the recovery of the U.S. economy. But I didn't do that because it is impossible to reach through the skies to slap some money in front of someone, and I wouldn't be able to just slap some money down because most of what is in my purse is…let’s just say it would take me about 15 minutes to figure out how much I actually had in my purse because I can't find anything in my purse. It's gotten out of hand. My purse and my conversation with the PNC gang.

Instead, I loudly proclaimed that one of us is right and one of us is wrong and I have a better track record. Seriously. I have given the bank proposals over the years that would have made HUGE profits, enough to counteract the years of damage from lack of oversight and care on the part of PNC.  I asked to invest in gold at $300. I suggested LNG (liquid natural gas) options and positions in Hyundai (shipbuilding for the LNG tankers). I suggested Apple stock just before it took off. More importantly, I begged and pleaded to get out of certain stocks, like Fannie Mae. We got out of Fannie Mae with a loss a few years ago. Five years ago I was telling the bank to dump the stock, that it was a dog. Instead of selling it then and taking a profit, they waited a few years and took a loss. Same with Clear Channel. And BP. Why were we in BP, generally known as the worst oil company on the planet, and not Conoco Phillips? We would have made 100 % ROI had we invested in Conoco Phillips five years ago per my request. I almost forgot Krispy Kreme. It would have been a great stock for the first year, but what did I know, a woman who fantasizes about yeast doughnuts traveling under beautiful sugar waterfall and inserted into my mouth seconds later…

It took my bank a year of analysis before deciding not to buy Yahoo because it was trading to high. In the meantime, we missed 400 percent growth.

Every time they recite their dogma of looking out for my investments and exercising prudence, I want to scream. Sometimes I do scream.  In fact, almost nothing upsets me more than dealing with my "free money". It's a gift horse and yet those managing my trust are squandering it away by staying in bad investments and staying in the dollar. Oh, the dollar. That brings back memories of when I asked the bank to put on a euro play back when the euro and dollar were at parity. Wouldn't be prudent. Ten percent ROI per year is not prudent.

I mentioned that one of our municipal bonds was under water. Bonds are safe because you always have the value of the bond, said a male.

"What if the municipality goes bankrupt?"

"You always have the value of the bond."

"Not if they are bankrupt. There have already been defaults on municipals. Some states are bankrupt. Florida is next." 

If you could only hear the patronizing sighs of the participants. Here this little trust fund baby was telling these fancy drones that municipal bonds weren't backed by anything. But it's true. As I said in an earlier letter to Kelly Jelly, my Investment Advisor who parrots the PNC line and will not provide a rebuttal to my points about the economy: "Are you aware that one of our municipal bonds has an unrealized loss? What happens if Arizona, Florida an/or New Hampshire go bankrupt? Where does that leave us? May I claim a stake of an Arizona highway as my own? Maybe I could set up a toll booth and recoup my losses, or maybe I'll garnish the wages of a state employee in New Hampshire. We have no recourse if these states default on their debt, which is likely."

No response. Imagine my surprise.

In a few months, the State of Florida is going to have problems making its pension payments. They were heavily invested in Lehman Brothers. Maybe it has something to do with Jeb Bush, who worked with Lehman Brothers. Anything the Bush boys touch disintegrates into bankruptcy after they have raided the companies. Always short Bush employers' stock an you are sure to profit by the time they leave the company. Is it any wonder that Lehman Brothers went bankrupt then?

The PNC guys think I am off my rocker.

We talk about gold. It's speculative they say. Traditionally it's been called a safe haven, and The Times refers to it as such today. 

PNC

does not want me to own gold.

Someone says using my logic, they should go out and buy a silo of grain and whole up for Armageddon. Thank the dog he was 3000 miles away because I just wanted to bitch slap him. Gold is not speculative. Gold is not grain. Gold has been used as currency for thousands of years. A silo of grain is useless after a year. A silo of gold ensures that you will rule the world. I hope that asshole is the first to lose his job. I hope he has to pay huge alternative minimum tax on worthless stock options from his lousy bank that deserves to go under.

I want to scream. Not only do I want to scream, but I want to scream obscenities because any banker who believes we are not headed for a Depression is a fucking idiot. Yes, I have gone and insulted just about everyone I spoke with on the phone, because obviously I do not value their opinions. I might value their opinions if they had been able to back up their statements regarding the health and recovery of the U.S. economy. I asked. I asked again. And again and again and again. They referred me to the report produced by the Chief Investment Strategist. I said I didn't want to read the report, that I wanted one person to take five minutes and do a quick run down on how it is the U.S. is going to recover from the collapse of the banking sector and its debt. Silence. Then someone said, "I can't do that." Yet I am told to have faith.

This is my frustration. I suggest something that will make the trust money and the bank says no. Then the bank turns around and loses money on trades.

I did end up resorting to profanity, but it was seriously unavoidable. You see, there are no stops on my stocks. Not one. And there is no one monitoring my account. We went a year without an investment advisor overseeing the account! I am pretty sure that is a huge breech of fiduciary responsibility.

I asked what would happen if the market crashed and there were no stops.

No answer. Is this prudent? You have no one monitoring the accounts, no stops and so what happens when AIG or Lehman Brothers takes a freefall? How many PNC Wealth Management clients just lost a large chunk of their portfolio because PNC Wealth Management was too busy collecting obscene fees yet not monitoring the accounts? My recollections are a bit hazy as this point, but I think I said , "There are no fucking stops on my stocks!" and thus heralded the end of the conversation.

We do not need stops because the stock market is not going to crash. I repeat, the stock market is not going to crash according to the boys at PNC, so I don't have to worry that there are no stops on my account.

"What if you're wrong and the market crashes?" Silence. They were all probably thinking about their underwater mortgages and the possibility that they would be looking for a job at a Circle K next year.

"The market is not going to crash and we have full faith that the U.S. economy will recover and this ends our conversation," snapped an agitated man. Well, Mr. Agitated Man, we'll see about that. In the meantime, Mr. Agitated Man couldn't give me on example of how or why that would happen, hence the reason he was now Mr. Agitated Man as opposed to Mr. Patronizing Man. I think I won that round. No one could rebut anything I had to say about the U.S. economy, at least with facts and figures as opposed to the wishful daydreams of bankers with manicures.

The good thing is that PNC consented to be released as trustee. The bad part is I may not have a trust fund left to transfer because of PNC Wealth Management's refusal to grasp reality. If the stock market crashes before I can get away from PNC, I am toast. 

I believe that there is huge pressure to keep people from liquidating their portfolios. I was told by one person at PNC that even if both my trustees opted for my gold position, they would stop it. They don't have the votes to do it, but short of getting a court order, there wouldn't be much I could do in the meantime.

They said they would stop me from liquidating my account into a cash position. It makes absolutely no sense to stay in a position when you know the economy is going to sink. Both PNC and one of my trustees are betting that the economy will recover. They refuse to capture profits. They refuse to let me liquidate positions now, even thought this is the best time for them to pay the capital gains, as they are at their lowest levels ever. I am the only beneficiary and I have no heirs. I am going to have to pay the taxes someday. I want to pay them now. That wouldn't be prudent, they say, and with those words, I am about to get screwed.

So I send this out as a warning. I want PNC Wealth Management clients to make sure they have stops in their portfolios. See what happens if you try to liquidate positions. See what happens when you try to put in a stop. What kind of pressure will you get from the bank? How quickly will they make the trade?

As an aside, a friend of ours recently liquidated her U.S. bank account. Her bank manager, whom she considered a friend, went off on her, attacking her for taking her money out of the country.

I promised PNC that I would continue to send them annoying emails requesting they move my portfolio in gold so that when the market crashes, I have some recourse. I want to loudly publicize thatPNC Welath Mangement refuses to admit that the economy is worsening. In fact, their forecasts are the most upbeat of any banks. They are even contradicting Allan Greenspan! I think their positive forecasts are designed to keep people from liquidating their positions. It makes no sense to tell your clients to stay in a bad market and the writing is on the wall…the market is about to go way down. So why stay in stocks? Why did the bank tell me they would fight me if my trustees agreed in just liquidating it into cash? 

Something isn't right here.

I am posting my emails to the bank on my blog, hoping that their contact PNC and demand to know how it is that the United States will recover. Ask to see specifics. Ask them how the debt figures in. Bombard them with information so that you might have some recourse when the market does crash– even if recourse amounts to nothing more than a loud "I told you so".

This might also be the time to start finding a new fiduciary trustee, because the ones at PNC Wealth Management aren't doing a stellar job. Just remember, PNC Wealth Management said you don't need stops because the market isn't going to crash. They don't have a plan if the market crashes because the market just isn't going to crash.

If  PNC is wrong and the market crashes, bye bye trust fund.

These are the things PNC Wealth Management is not telling you:

The Federal Reserve is broke.

The Federal Reserve has announced a series of lending and liquidity initiatives during the past several quarters intended to address heightened liquidity pressures in the financial market, including enhancing its liquidity facilities this week. To manage the balance sheet impact of these efforts, the Federal Reserve has taken a number of actions, including redeeming and selling securities from the System Open Market Account portfolio.

The Treasury Department announced today the initiation of a temporary Supplementary Financing Program at the request of the Federal Reserve. The program will consist of a series of Treasury bills, apart from Treasury’s current borrowing program, which will provide cash for use in the Federal Reserve initiatives.

Announcements of and participation in auctions conducted under the Supplementary Financing Program will be governed by existing Treasury auction rules. Treasury will provide as much advance notification as possible regarding the timing, size, and maturity of any bills auctioned for Supplementary Financing Program purposes.'’ 

 “The Treasury is setting up a temporary financing program at the Fed’s request. The program will auction Treasury bills to raise cash for the Fed’s use. The initiative aims to help the Fed manage its balance sheet following its efforts to enhance its liquidity facilities over the previous few quarters.”

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/its_the_derivatives.php

The FDIC is broke.

How many banks will go under? It's hard to say. Regardless, as of January 1, 2008, the FDIC had $52 billion. Now it says that the Washington Mutual collapse could wipeout the fund.

The US government is broke.

Our national debt is $9.2 Trillion dollars, and growing each day. Unfunded liabilities - pensions, Social Security, Medicare, municipal bonds -are estimated to be $90 trillion and growing. That equates to more than $388,000 per American citizen. That's assuming no other catastrophes pop up and no further debt is created. This is 6 times the current GDP of the United States.  When Argentina collapsed, its debt load was not nearly as high as the U.S.  . No other country has ever seen this level of debt and recovered.

There are $5 trillion worth of critical infrastructure components that must be replaced in the United States: levees, bridges, airports, roads, dams, sewers, water filtration plants, utilities and the like. These critical infrastructure needs have not been calculated into the future liabilities. Nor has the cost of hurricanes, earthquakes, violence, or any other catastrophe that could and will befall the U.S.

There is no way to pay this debt. The PNC Chief Strategist has obviously not included the U.S. debt in his rosy economic forecast because there is no way Americans can or will service this kind of debt load.

By the way, the Federal Reserve is the third bank of the United States and a large portion of Americans are calling for its dissolution. It is a private consortium of banks and in violation of the U.S. Constitution. This was a major theme of the Ron Paul Presidential campaign. Tens of millions of Americans are aware of this fraud and the majority of Americans believe the U.S. should dissolve itself form its own debt and move on. Obviously the bankers don't want this

Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve is trying to consolidate more power. In our teleconference, someone alluded to that were people "fixing" the problems to prevent the economy from collapsing. What he was referring to is the Blueprint, which gives the Federal Reserve power over everything. Congress is about to continue to abdicate its Constitutional responsibilities by allowing the Federal Reserve to become the very the ultimate hallmark of fascism.

US Treasuries are at risk.

On October 1st, the U.S. finds itself in a new fiscal year for which funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as costs associated wit Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have not been budgeted for or funded. The U.S.government will have to issue more debt to pay for more war. Whether anyone will show up at the auction is unknown.


Worst Crisis Since '30s, With No End Yet in Sight.

These alarmist headlines come from the Wall Street Journal. 

 

Money Markets Lose Money! Bye Bye Safe Investments!

Putnam Investments has closed a $12.3 billion money-market fund to limit losses to its investors, the large mutual fund company said today. The highly unusual announcement is the latest sign that tremendous financial pressures are now threatening even some of the safest kinds of investments.

The Prime Money Market Fund was open only to institutional investors. Putnam said in a statement that its board decided to close the fund last night after receiving a large number of redemption requests. The company said it could honor those requests only by selling assets at a loss, reducing the value of the remaining shares.

Putnam said it decided instead to liquidate the fund and spread any losses evenly among all the investors. "We wanted to treat all shareholders equally," said spokeswoman Laura McNamara. She said it was "premature" to discuss how much of a loss, if any, shareholders will incur.



Continue reading "Is your bank keeping you in the markets against your will?" »

Sunday, September 07, 2008

The Rigging of the Silver and Gold Markets

TED BUTLER COMMENTARY

September 2, 2008

Fact Versus Speculation

(This essay was written by silver analyst Theodore Butler, an independent consultant. Investment Rarities does not necessarily endorse these views, which may or may not prove to be correct.)

What’s happening in the silver and gold markets is, without a doubt, the most sordid scheme in the history of finance. It makes a mockery of financial regulation and the rule of law. It allows a large financial entity, or entities, to rip off the investing public and gouge them for obscene profits.

It is cronyism, back-room dealing, market fixing and inside information at its worst. I am terribly disappointed and dismayed that such a thing could happen in our great country.

In the following paragraphs I will outline and explain how a major bank or banks, in likely concert with the U.S. government, pulled off financial shenanigans that will literally take your breath away. This is an outrage that cannot be allowed to stand.

The recent revelations in the CFTC’s Bank Participation Report for August provided stunning proof of concentration and manipulation in the COMEX silver and gold futures markets. Two U.S. banks held a short position in COMEX silver futures, as of August 5, of 33,805 contracts, or almost 170 million ounces, an increase of 138 million ounces in one month. That increase is equal to 20% of the world mine production. If one or two entities bought or sold 20% of the annual world production of oil or wheat in a month, it would bring about a congressional feeding frenzy.

In gold, no more than 3 U.S. banks sold short in one month more than 10% of world annual mine production. This was the largest short position in gold and silver ever recorded by U.S. banks. After the massive and concentrated silver and gold short position was established by these U.S. banks, the markets experienced a historic decline in price. It all took place during the first widespread retail silver shortage in history. It is completely at odds how the law of supply and demand works.

The facts are so clear that the CFTC should have provided an immediate explanation as to why this doesn’t constitute manipulation. They should move against the manipulators just as promptly. Silence is not an option. The U.S. banks (or bank) in question are at the top of the financial food chain when it comes to size, power and importance. They are publicly owned by millions of investors. These banks are generally open about their financial dealings, which are closely scrutinized. There is an archaic rule that prevents the CFTC from revealing the identity of these banks. But there is no rule preventing these banks acknowledging they were responsible for these silver and gold short sales and explaining the economic justification behind them. These are material transactions that should be disclosed to their shareholders. Apparently transparency does not apply to manipulative transactions.

One U.S. Bank?

While the report lists two U.S. banks in silver and three in gold, it may be that only one bank, and perhaps the same bank, held the greatest amount of the total short position in silver and gold. The published data is not specific enough, but objective analysis raises the strong probability that just one bank held 30,000 or more short silver contracts (150 million ounces), and 75,000 gold contracts in the current report. What are the odds of two or three banks suddenly deciding to short unprecedented amounts of silver and gold contracts spontaneously? If it were two or three banks it would raise the issue of collusion. If it was just one U.S. bank, it would mean that bank held 34% of the entire COMEX silver market and 30% of the gold market. Such a concentration would be manipulation to any reasonable person.

The Bank Participation Report is a monthly snapshot on a predetermined single date. Therefore, it is unlikely to capture the extreme high or low holdings of participants. Based upon the weekly Commitment of Traders Report (COT) for positions as of July 22, the 4 largest traders, including the big U.S. banks, held a record net short position of 63,740 silver contracts, or 7,779 more contracts than they held for the COT and Bank Participation Reports of 8/5. Thus, it is almost certain that the big U.S. bank(s) held a substantially larger position on 7/22 than it held in the Bank Participation Report of August 5. That would mean the true net percentage of the entire market possibly held by one U.S. bank could be even higher than 34%, and may in fact, exceed 40%. That is truly shocking.

I have a simple solution to determine if what I am suggesting is true. Let the CFTC tell us. I’m not asking them to violate the rule that they and the big traders hide behind, the one that protects the identity of the traders. I’m asking something else entirely. Instead of telling us what two or three U.S. banks held, as they do in the Bank Participation Report, or what the 4 or 8 largest traders may hold, as they do in the COT report, just tell us what the one largest trader held in silver and gold. That will settle the matter. Let them protect the identity, just tell us how many contracts the big U.S. bank held on July 22 and August 5.

This is a perfectly reasonable request. There is no taxpayer cost involved. It will take one employee only a few minutes to determine this. There is no valid reason why the CFTC, in the interest of monitoring concentration and preventing manipulation, should not disclose what the very largest trader in every market held. The CFTC should answer forthwith. If they don’t, we must make them, through our elected representatives. They will try to weasel out of this reasonable request. We can’t let them.

A U.S. Government Silver Intervention?

For many years, I have openly alleged an ongoing manipulation in the silver (and gold) market. As that message became more believable to growing numbers of readers, their feedback indicated that their most popular motive behind the manipulation was some type of U.S. Government involvement. I rejected these "conspiracy" theories, preferring instead my simple explanation of control by big financial firms.

There were a few things I didn’t report on in my previous article, "The Smoking Gun" (By the way, since so many have referred to that article, let me acknowledge and thank Carl Loeb for his valuable contributions to that article.) It wasn’t just that 2 U.S. banks were short almost 34,000 silver futures contracts, as of August 5. It was also that they replaced what the other big financial entities had been short. The key here is the replacement angle. The data in the weekly COTs, and in the monthly Bank Participation Report, confirm this. What does this data mean?

I am going to speculate based upon the known facts. Maybe I will be proven correct, maybe not. However, the nature of this speculation is so disturbing, that I hope I am wrong. But I need to state it because if I am close to the mark, the implications for the silver market are profound.

I think the data in the COT and the Bank Participation Reports indicate that the U.S. Government may have bailed out the biggest COMEX silver short by arranging for a U.S. bank to take over their position. This coincides with JP Morgan’s takeover of Bear Stearns. In fact, it would not surprise me if the bailout was JP Morgan taking over Bear Stearns‘ short silver position, at the government‘s request. While this silver bailout (if it happened) was no doubt undertaken with financial system stability in mind, it has disturbing implications of legality and equity.

JP Morgan has been mentioned as a possible big silver and gold short. If it’s not them, it is someone like them. How many big U.S. banks fit the profile? Certainly, if JP Morgan isn’t one of the big silver or gold shorts, they can instantly dismiss such talk by stating so.

Logically, there would appear to be no way that a big money center U.S. bank would choose this time and place to suddenly decide to short 150 million ounces of silver and 7 million ounces of gold voluntarily. The banks are hemorrhaging losses due to poor quality mortgages and other ill-advised bets. They’ve cut back credit and are circling the wagons. A CEO, like Jamie Dimon, is not going to risk the wrath of shareholders with a massive and dangerous impromptu bet on the short side of precious metals. No bank CEO would, as it is too reckless to contemplate. And no CEO would do it without prior approval from the regulators.

I believe the bank involved did not seek approval, but merely followed the request of the U.S. Government to sell quantities of silver and gold to bailout the former big short. If that former big short bought back this position, we would have seen $50 or $100 silver in a flash. If my speculation is correct, someone in the government wished to prevent that. Worse, the government (most likely Treasury and the Federal Reserve) allowed the new short to further rig the market to the downside with a variety of dirty tricks.

In other words, it was the U.S. Government that arranged and sanctioned the sell-off. That the government might undermine confidence in our markets and sanction manipulation and illegal market behavior for any reason is beyond my understanding. I love this country. But I certainly don’t love our government. Nor do I trust them. What to do about it?

Well, a start is to insist that the CFTC disclose how many contracts the largest trader held short in COMEX silver and gold futures on 7/22 and 8/5. Ask them and ask your elected officials to ask them. I’m including the e-mail addresses of the commissioners and the Inspector General.

Wlukken@cftc.gov
Mdunn@cftc,gov
Bchilton@cftc.gov
Jsommers@cftc.gov
Alavik@cftc.gov

Now that the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Group is the new owner of the NYMEX/COMEX, they should be notified of the alleged manipulation and also asked to provide the number of contracts held net short by the largest short position holder on 7/22 and 8/5. I’m including the e-mail address of the Chief Regulatory Officer. Dean.payton@cmegroup.com

If my speculation is close to the mark that the U.S. Government is now involved in the silver manipulation, does this mean the manipulation can be extended indefinitely? In my opinion, the answer is no. In the end, what will terminate the manipulation will be a lack of adequate wholesale supplies of silver to the industrial users. It’s similar to what is now happening in the retail market. Uncle Sam does not have any silver, and is powerless to secretly subsidize the users. Additionally, the government is more subject to scrutiny than others. The single inevitable solution to this manipulation is higher prices; sharply higher prices.

What I’ve explained here, if true, cannot be condoned for any reason. It’s illegal and contrary to everything that America stands for.

Best Quotes of August 2008

Best Quotes of August 2008

9/4/2008
by John Rubino

Gene Arensberg, Resource Investor
Everyone can look at the data and form their own conclusions. But when silver is in short physical supply, commanding injuriously high premiums and difficult to locate; when investors are piling into the silver ETF in droves, a 40% silver price plunge is not only not warranted, it smells.

It is difficult to imagine a legitimate reason that two U.S. banks could quickly and systematically amass a net short position on the COMEX which amounts to over a quarter of the entire action on that bourse. It will not be surprising at all if we learn that these two U.S. banks are taken to task by regulators for their actions. It will be even less surprising to learn that they have become the target of multi-billion dollar class action lawsuits by hungry lawyers representing silver investors everywhere.

Futures markets are supposed to answer the actual physical markets, not the other way around. In other words, futures markets are supposed to be a place where producers or large holders of a commodity can lay off price risk to speculators and thereby hedge against unforeseen adverse movements in the price of the commodity. Futures markets are definitely not supposed to be a place where a couple of well connected and well funded entities can bully the market with their own heavy handed trading.

If silver really was just taken down by a couple of very big U.S. banks to irrationally low levels, it won’t be long before the laws of supply and demand reassert themselves. Got silver?

Frank Barbera, Gold Stock Technician
Even more to that point, we wonder at what point does an institution such as the Fed lose its credibility? At what point does an institution become irrelevant? The answer to that question is when events have taken on a life of their own, and when their words no longer have any real impact. We have fortunately not reached this point yet, but for all appearances seem to be heading in this direction at a rapid pace. The socialization of financial market bad debts has forced the Fed to act as the lender of last resort, placing its own balance sheet on the line for the ineptitudes which were sewn over so many years of the Greenspan Fed. How dare Mr. Greenspan comment on perils of the current collapse when he was the chief architect of the events now unfolding each and every week.

Bob Chapman, International Forecaster
Why should gold go down if the dollar goes up? If the dollar goes up substantially, that means the euro is going down substantially, so gold should be exploding in the Euro Zone. If anything, a weaker euro should be more supportive of gold than a weaker dollar as there are just as many euros out there as there are dollars now, and because the people of Europe are far more attuned to the uses and purposes of precious metals than are their US counterparts. We sure hope the people in the Euro Zone loaded up on precious metals, which are now skyrocketing in their currency as the euro has gone from 1.60 dollars to 1.50 dollars in rather rapid succession. All fiat currencies will continue to lose against gold, including the dollar, so it is time to load up on the bargains you have been so graciously gifted with by your evil government and the Wall Street fraudsters!!!

Another scheme that financial companies have employed during the crisis is to regularly reclassify assets from Level 2 to Level 3 and vice versa. Level 3 assets have no market so values have to be guessed. Level 2 assets are ‘marked by model according to tangible data.’ Ergo if you have a beneficial model you move assets from Level 3 to Level 2 to generate better marks and earnings.

Which leads us to JP Morgan – For most of the US financial crisis the media and pundits hailed JP Morgan as having a ‘fortress-like balance sheet’ even though it has over $80 trillion of derivatives. JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon has been portrayed as the Financial Wizard of Oz.

So for the past several months most investors and people assumed that JP Morgan somehow managed to avoid all the crappy paper and ancillary problems that plague the industry. One group that thought otherwise averred that the Bear Stearns bailout was engineered to help JP Morgan obfuscate its problems and borrow massively from the Fed without public concern.

But the revelation of a relatively miniscule $1.5B write-down has destroyed the illusion of JP Morgan’s imperviousness to the financial mess. This has led analysts, investors and wise guys to re-examine JPM.

One disconcerting JPM fundamental is the amount of its Level 2 assets. An astute money manager alerted us that, “The market is obsessed with Level 3 assets levels but forgot to notice that of JPM's total $1.775 trillion in assets, $1.575 trillion are Level 2 or mark to model. The whole loan, MBS and Level 2 are what presents the real danger when the raters finally get there.”

Gary Dorsch, Global Money Trends
Trading in foreign currencies is akin to judging a reverse beauty contest, and suddenly, the US-dollar's was looking a little less ugly than its peers.

Ambrose Evans-Prichard, Telegraph UK
My guess is that political protest will mark the next phase of this drama. Almost half a million people have lost their jobs in Spain alone over the last year. At some point, the feeling of national impotence in the face of monetary rule from Frankfurt will erupt into popular fury. The ECB will swallow its pride and opt for a weak euro policy, or face its own destruction.

What we are about to see is a race to the bottom by the world's major currencies as each tries to devalue against others in a beggar-thy-neighbor policy to shore up exports, or indeed simply because they have to cut rates frantically to stave off the consequences of debt-deleveraging and the risk of an outright Slump. When that happens - if it is not already happening - it will become clear that the both pillars of the global monetary system [the dollar and the euro] are unstable, infested with the dry rot of excess debt.

Gold bugs, you ain't seen nothing yet. Gold at $800 looks like a bargain in the new world currency disorder.

Bill Fleckenstein, Fleckenstein Capital
In any case, if we saw (as it appeared) heavy selling or short-selling in the futures market while demand for gold in the physical world was rising, that historically would be a very bullish development.
What does seem quite clear is that some portion of gold's weakness has been a function of the dollar's strength. The dollar's violent rally owes to folks' beliefs that the economy is improving in the U.S., that the Federal Reserve intends to raise interest rates and that the rest of the world economy is slowing down.

The rest of the world may in fact be slowing down. But our economy is not about to get better, and the Fed is not about to tighten rates. Just the thought of the Fed increasing rates is laughable.

Eric Janszen, iTulip
The current recession is more serious than all previous recessions since the early 1980s. This time inflation, unemployment, and a credit crunch are cutting into demand. Demand, in the economic sense, is the combined desire of consumers to spend and the availability of the cash they need to act on that desire. Recessions with declining demand tend to be self-reinforcing as falling demand leads to falling consumption leading businesses to reduce labor costs by laying off employees, leading to falling incomes and further reductions in demand.

Another unusual aspect of this recession is that traditional Keynesian techniques to stimulate demand by expanding credit through interest rates cuts is hobbled by a moribund housing market; housing has for decades been the primary mechanism for transmitting interest cuts to consumers by reducing a household's primary interest expense, their mortgage. The freed up money acts much like tax cut. Now, however, interest rates are rising, especially for those homeowners who took Greenspan's advice in 2005 and took out an adjustable rate mortgage when fixed rate mortgages were at 40 year lows, and tightening lending standards are cutting off home mortgage refinancing for millions.

Finally, a weak dollar since 2001 means "oil prices drive up the cost of everything that requires oil to grow, be dug up, blown, packed, scrubbed, crushed, shaken, warmed, cooled, pickled, packaged, processed, or moved – that is, everything on God’s green earth including your own hair and the hot water you used to wash it this morning." The only way to reduce that impact short term is to use less oil. A recession will help, as long as the dollar doesn't fall faster than oil demand.

Jack Lifton, Resource Investor
As the 2008 political season nears its quadrennial crescendo and rock stars and war heroes are vying to be selected for the most militarily powerful job in the world it would seem that no one, certainly no politician, is willing to admit that America’s world economic-leadership is eroding at an almost perceptible daily rate. Candidates, and office holders, remind us that each of the U.S. Navy’s 12 carrier battle-groups is, by itself, more powerful than any other single nation’s entire navy! Yet they fail to mention that we cannot build armoured ships or vehicles, small arms, artillery, armour piercing ammunition, missile guidance, night vision equipment, computers, displays, or, believe it or not, nuclear propulsion systems, or aircraft of any kind, civilian or military, without minor metals, such as the rare earths. Most of which we are now, 100%, dependent on nations unfriendly to America, which, notwithstanding their being unfriendly, already practice resource nationalism. Some of them, such as China, have already openly begun to restrict the export — or utilization for items for export—of key industrial minor metals, so as to reinforce their own self sufficiency in these materials.

Bob Moriarty, 321Gold
Homestake declined about 21% from the crash in late October 1929 through the end of that year, but through the entire decade of the 1930s Homestake was the highest gaining stock on the New York Stock Exchange. So, it’s entirely possible the market could crash and gold stocks go up. At some point in time, people are going to recognize the precious metals stocks, not all metal stocks, are the safest place to be.

Doug Noland, Prudent Bear
It is not the nature of dislocated markets to let fundamentals get in the way of price movement. Markets, after all, live on fear and greed. Sinking energy prices and a short squeeze ignited U.S. stocks this week. And surging stock prices always entice the optimistic viewpoint, with many viewing runs in stocks and the dollar as confirmation that the worst of the financial and economic crisis is behind us. The bursting of the so-called Energy/Commodities Bubble is also viewed in positive light.

Yet if the key dynamic is instead a Bursting Leveraged Speculating Community Bubble, entirely different dynamics are now in play. Enormous short positions have built up, the vast majority as part of “market neutral,” “quant” and myriad risk hedging strategies. If today’s dislocation develops into a significant unwind of these positions, the market immediately then becomes vulnerable to a disorderly “melt-up” followed almost inevitably by a sharp reversal and disorderly decline. The unwind of bearish speculations and hedges would be a most problematic market development, unleashing a final bout of speculative excess and disorder that would set the stage for a major market crisis.

It is now clear that many within the leveraged speculating community have suffered huge losses over the past few weeks. For a “community” that was already suffering a difficult year, blowups in the popular energy, commodities and short dollar trades were a decisive backbreaker. Huge rallies in heavily shorted stocks and sectors have added further pain. One can now expect major redemptions at quarter and year-ends, a dynamic that likely ensures recent near-chaotic market conditions become the norm for awhile.

Jim Puplava, Financial Sense
The US Mint has suspended the production of US Eagles. I was told by one dealer this morning, checking with him, they’re telling people delivery dates for silver Eagles won’t be till January, February of next year. One dealer I was talking to said that they can’t even get the plates – so what they were doing is they were ordering thousand ounce bars and they were melting the bars down to make one ounce coins because most people are buying either silver rounds – and I was told delivery dates right now are two months out. So this is August, probably late October. That’s how scarce it is. So, the other thing is get your physical metals because there is a gross discrepancy and divergence between trying to drive down the paper market price of silver. One dealer told me in July his sales were up four fold last year; and this month alone, his sales are up eight fold. One dealer was telling me today that he had never seen anything like this in his lifetime. On this Friday I just bought a ton of silver and I’ve been told it’s going to take two months to take delivery on that ton. And if the price goes lower, I’ll buy another ton. I’ve got a couple of dealers who store my bullion for me until it’s shipped overseas.

James Quinn, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
We have outsourced our savings to the emerging economies, along with our manufacturing jobs. The Chinese are saving the money we’ve paid them for flat screen TVs and the Middle Eastern countries are saving the money we’ve paid them for oil. You need savings in order to increase investment. The emerging markets are making the vast majority of the investments in the world. While the U.S. endlessly debates drilling and construction of nuclear plants (none built in U.S. since 1987) and oil refineries (none built in U.S. since 1977), China brought four oil refineries online in 2008 and plans to build 30 nuclear reactors in the next twelve years. The Asian Century has begun, but the U.S. has tried to keep up by using debt. It will not work. If anything, this has accelerated the shift of power to Asia.

Nouriel Roubini, RGE Monitor
Barron's: Unfortunately for the rest of us, you have a pretty good track record. How much more misery lies ahead?

Roubini: We are in the second inning of a severe, protracted recession, which started in the first quarter of this year and is going to last at least 18 months, through the middle of next year. A systemic banking crisis will go on for awhile, with hundreds of banks going belly up. The taxpayer's bill is going to be huge. I estimate this financial crisis will lead to credit losses of at least $1 trillion and most likely closer to $2 trillion. When I made this analysis in February everybody thought I was a lunatic. But a few weeks later the International Monetary Fund came out with an estimate of $945 billion, Goldman Sachs (GS) estimated $1.1 trillion and UBS (UBS) $1 trillion. Hedge-fund manager John Paulson recently estimated the losses would be $1.3 trillion, and late last month Bridgewater Associates came up with an estimate of $1.6 trillion. So, at this point $1 trillion isn't a ceiling, it's a floor. And the banks, as I've said, have written down only about $300 billion of subprime debt. I think $2 trillion is too high, but the number will definitely be huge.


Franklin Sanders, Money Changer
Either this is the greatest silver and gold buying opportunity of all time, or the end of a bull market.

But it is NOT the end of a bull market. Time alone argues that. A bull market runs 10 - 20 years, and this one has run only 7, since 2001. Those who think silver & gold have fallen into the "bursting of the commodity bubble" completely misunderstand what drives them in the first place. Silver & gold are not commodities; they are money. When investors pile into silver & gold, it's not any commodity bubble forcing them there, but monetary demand. They aren't buying metals because they think all the Indian ladies are going to be wearing two nose rings instead of one this season, or that the American bourgeoisie will suddenly begin stockpiling sterling silver forks again.

They are buying metals because -- listen to this, get it straight once & forever -- they distrust fiat central bank currencies (or if you prefer, national currencies). The dollar is trash, the yen is trash, the euro is trash; all are equally insolvent, equally unbacked by anything expect a politician's or central banker's promise, which is not nearly as good as that of any madame at any bordello anywhere.

The dollar is rising? So, why? Did it become better, acquire more gold backing, solve its chronic balance of payments deficit last night? Come on. Did the euro get worse overnight? The yen? How much worse could it get? You are seeing competitive devaluations, all very much worked out collegially in advance by central bankers. Fundamentally meaningless.

What is NOT meaningless is that the Great Alternative Currencies, silver & gold, have long been advancing against ALL national currencies. All markets swing like pendulums, too far one way, then too far the other. Silver & gold prices became overbought -- a lot of people short dollars were long silver & gold. The dollar rallied, oil & commodities fell, sucking down silver & gold money. Look at the numbers. Even with gold down to $787.50 today, that's only a 21.5% correction, while always more volatile silver is down 37.4%. Friends, these are normal, not outlandish, corrections. Sober up.

Julian D. W. Phillips, Gold Forecaster
The huge gap between the value of gold and the value of money must narrow. Whether it is through the rise in the value of gold and silver or through the fall of the value of money dictates the future of the financial system. Either way, gold and silver will prove to be the safe-haven it has been since money was part of man’s world. And the second half of this year is likely to be as dramatic as the first half but with a golden or silver sheen to it.

Steve Saville, Speculative Investor
Many people will be asking the question: why is the US$ rallying when its fundamentals are so terrible? From our perspective, however, a more reasonable question is: why has it taken so long for the US$ to rally against the euro given that the US$ is extremely under-valued relative to the euro and the euro's fundamentals are just as bad?

The answer, we think, is that the currency market has believed that the US Federal Reserve would be as 'easy' as it needed to be to help the banking system through its crisis, while the ECB would continue to focus on minimizing currency depreciation. We think the market was/is right to believe that the Fed will do whatever it takes to maintain the solvency of the major banks, but traders now appear to be coming around to the view that the ECB will also be loosening the monetary reins. Take away the interest-rate 'prop' and the euro suddenly becomes free to fall under the weight of its own over-valuation.

Mike Shedlock, Mish’s Global Economic Trend Analysis
It's NEVER "practical" for the Fed, the SEC, Banks, CEOs in general, the FDIC, Congress, the Treasury Department, or the President to tell the truth. This is what it all boils down to: Somehow it's never "practical" to stop a drunken credit-financed orgy, yet when the party ends, it's never "practical" to discuss the consequences. In this case, the credit orgy lasted so long, and there were so many players, that the most important truth right now that needs open, honest discussion is that the entire US Banking System Is Insolvent.

Government stupidity is the most liquid of all assets, spreading everywhere at the slightest provocation. Look for more of it and you won't be disappointed.

James Turk, Freemarket Gold and Money Report
The time-bomb is ticking. The federal government is liquid because as its consolidated accounts state, it has “the power to print additional currency.” And print it will for one simple reason. The federal government is insolvent. Its debt obligations far exceed its financial capacity to repay those debts without debasing the dollar. Eventually it will take one ounce of gold or so to buy the Dow Jones Industrial Average. At that time I will recommend selling gold and buying the DJIA to ride the next cycle. But the DJIA still has to lose about 90% of its price in terms of gold for that to happen.

Christopher Whalen, Institutional Risk Analyst
We're not sure who's going to win the presidency in November, but we are very sure that the safety and soundness of the nation's banking system is going to be an issue in this election - perhaps as prominent an issue as energy prices. Indeed, we think that the president-elect will be forced to meet with President George Bush and both men will ask the Congress to move on providing funding and new legal authority to backstop the FDIC. In the near-term Uncle Sam is going to be forced to get even more involved to head off a catastrophic contraction in the availability of credit to the private economy.

Jim Willie, Hat Trick Letter
The US banks are fast approaching the early warning season in early to middle September. They are required (Wall Street firms excluded) to come forward and provide guidance on their earnings, their balance sheet damage (called impairment, since sounds better), and their profits (nonexistent, as in extinct). Wall Street firms have almost no stock or bond issuance, no private equity packaging, so business is largely dominated by management of their demise, along with management of their propaganda messages that seem shrill lately. The US banks will in my estimation announce bigger Q3 losses than Q2. Their BS-stories continue since they are actively seeking cash to shore up balance sheets. Their mortgage related losses will be ongoing, but now those losses will be joined by prime mortgage losses, commercial loan losses, car loan losses, credit card losses, and more. The USGovt can claim the economy is in good shape, that exports are booming, but a grand disconnect has occurred. Something like 460 thousand jobs have been lost this year, and most job gains are on paper, from the Birth Death Model nonsense. More paper deception, this of the labor market. Consumers might spend less if they were keenly aware of US-based unemployment running over 14%. The steep decline in USGovt tax receipts testifies to a recession. Most statistics testify to recession, like the Leading Economic Indicators. Reverse gear for the USEconomy is bad news for the USDollar. And all the horrendous disasters coming from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac acid pits cannot be good.

Sunday, August 31, 2008

Bank Failures

An excerpt from Urban Survival:

I've explained for subscribers, but it bears repeating: The danger in all these bank failures is not just the potential for depositors to lose their shirts and savings.  If that were the case, the Feds would likely be upset, but not nearly as worried about 'systemic integrity'.

The real problem that crops up is the whole notion of cascading bank failures.'  The way this scenario paints out is very simple.  Picture all the banks in the world as being players sitting in a gigantic circle, each bank having a pile of receivables from their bank on the right and owing a bunch of payables to the bank of their left.

These inter-bank obligation instruments, have tow kinds of values.  One in a 'notional value' and the other is an 'actual value'.  They are derivatives and other piles of paper debt that have previously been taken at face value.  But, all that is now changing.

The problem THE WHOLE WORLD has is that if the orderly transfer of dough from the players to the right - to the player in the middle - to the player on the left (in a manner of speaking) seizes up, there will be NO MORE FINANCIAL WORLD as we know it today.  Pure and simple.

All it takes is just one bank to renounce its 'turn' and suddenly the whole global economic system can lock up.  In other words, there is no way for the floating craps game that is  the global derivatives and debt market to act in an adaptive manner because the underlying instruments are so horribly complex.  You might have a pile of this kind of pseudo-bond (let's say a collection of mortgages) that was paying 'x' interest, and you decide to swap ownership of thatr for something that will pay you a spread and that in turn is based on some other piece of paper or variable rate on some exchange somewhere.

You should be getting the picture that everything is stitched together in a manner that makes it impossible to move positions about.  You can just 'move' the whole world financial system around to accommodate the needs of a few players because underlying the global financial systems is a global pile of 'lawyer-drafted contracts' which would make your head spin.  There is no way all that 'paper asset' and 'paper debt' legal work to be rewritten every couple of weeks (and becoming more regular lately, and becoming the norm this fall) fast enough to keep global economic collapse at bay.

Continue reading "Bank Failures" »

Saturday, August 30, 2008

Irony in the Morning: Integrity Bank Fails

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2008/pr08074.html

Integrity Bank, Alpharetta, Georgia, with $1.1 billion in total assets and $974.0 million in total deposits as of June 30, 2008, was closed today by the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation was named receiver.

The FDIC Board of Directors today approved the assumption of all the deposits of Integrity Bank by Regions Bank, Birmingham, Alabama. All depositors of Integrity Bank, including those with deposits in excess of the FDIC's insurance limits, will automatically become depositors of Regions Bank for the full amount of their deposits, and they will continue to have uninterrupted access to their deposits. Depositors will continue to be insured with Regions Bank so there is no need for customers to change their banking relationship to retain their deposit insurance.

The failed bank's five offices will reopen Tuesday, September 2nd, as branches of Regions Bank. However, for the time being, customers of both banks should use their existing branches until Regions Bank can fully integrate the deposit records of Integrity Bank.

Regions Bank has agreed to pay a total premium of 1.012 percent for the failed bank's deposits. In addition, Regions Bank will purchase approximately $34.4 million of Integrity Bank's assets, consisting of cash and cash equivalents. The FDIC will retain the remaining assets for later disposition.

Customers with questions about today's transaction or who would like more information about the failure of Integrity Bank can visit the FDIC's Web site at http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/failed/integrity.html, or call the FDIC toll-free at 1-800-523-0640, today from 5 p.m. until 9 p.m., Eastern Time, on Saturday from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., on Sunday from 11 a.m. to 5 p.m., and thereafter from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.

The FDIC estimates that the cost to its Deposit Insurance Fund will be between $250 million and $350 million. Regions Bank's acquisition of all deposits was the "least costly" resolution for the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund compared to all alternatives because the expected losses to uninsured depositors were fully covered by the premium paid for the failed bank's franchise.

Integrity Bank is the tenth FDIC-insured bank to fail this year, and the first in Georgia since NetBank in Alpharetta on September 28, 2007.