Common Ground Common Sense > Economic and Financial News

These are dark times. While you were sleeping the cockroaches were busy about their work, rummaging through the US Constitution, and putting the finishing touches on a scheme to assert absolute power over the nation's financial markets and the country's economic future. Industry representative Henry Paulson has submitted legislation to Congress that will finally end the pretense that Bush controls anything more than reading the lines from a 4' by 6' teleprompter situated just inches from his lifeless pupils. Paulson is in charge now, and the coronation is set for sometime early next week. He rose to power in a stealthily-executed Banksters’ Coup in which he, and his coterie of dodgy friends, declared martial law on the US economy while elevating himself to supreme leader.

"All Hail Caesar!" The days of the republic are over.

Section 8 of the proposed legislation says it all:

"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."

Right; "non-reviewable" supremacy.

Congress, of course, is more than eager to abdicate whatever little authority they have left. They're infinitely grateful for their purely ceremonial role, the equivalent of Caligula's horse, albeit, with considerably less dignity. Has even one senator spoken out against this madness, which--according to informal internet polls--is resoundingly rejected by the voters? Maybe Shelby of Alabama, the only Republican to vote against the repeal of Glass-Steagall in 1999. Does it concern the members of congress at all, that the present financial crisis was brought on by the proliferation and sale of trillions of dollars of mortgage-banked garbage which were fraudulently represented as Triple A rated bonds by the very same people who now claim to need unprecedented and dictatorial powers to fix the problem? Or are they more worried that the steady torrent of contributions which flows from Wall Street to congressional campaign coffers will be inconveniently disrupted if they fail to ratify this latest assault on democratic governance? The House of Representatives is one big steaming dungheap that should be leveled and turned into an amusement park instead of a taxpayer-funded knocking shop. What a pathetic collection of cowards and scumbags.

Bloomberg News:

"The Bush administration sought unchecked power from Congress to buy $700 billion in bad mortgage investments from financial companies in what would be an unprecedented government intrusion into the markets. Through his plan, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson aims to avert a credit freeze that would bring the financial system and the world's largest economy to a standstill. The bill would prevent courts from reviewing actions taken under its authority.

“‘He’s asking for a huge amount of power,’'' said Nouriel Roubini an economist at New York University. ``He's saying, ‘Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy." (Bloomberg)

The banksters own this country, always have; only now they've decided to strip away the curtain and reveal the ghoulish visage of the puppet-master. It ain't pretty.

Paulson decided that the financial markets needed an emergency trillion dollar face-lift just weeks before his former business partners at G-Sax were dragged off to the chopping block. Was that the reason? Everyone on Wall Street knew that the bulls-eye had already been ripped from Lehman's bloody back and was about to be fastened on Goldman's. Now, it looks like they will escape their day of reckoning due to Paulson's eleventh-hour reprieve. Nice touch, eh?

From the proposed legislation:

LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL FOR TREASURY AUTHORITY TO PURCHASE MORTGAGE-RELATED ASSETS

"(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."

Market Ticker's Karl Denninger summed this up best:

"This is the de facto nationalization of the entire banking, insurance and related financial system..That's right - every bank and other financial institution in the United States has just become a de-facto organ of the United States Government, if Hank Paulson thinks they should be, and he may order them to do virtually anything that he claims is in furtherance of this act.....The bill gives Paulson the ability to nationalize unlimited amount of private debt and force you and your children to pay for it."

Denninger again:

"The claim is that this is intended to 'promote confidence and stability' in the financial markets. It will do no such thing. It will instead strike terror into the hearts of investors worldwide who hold any sort of paper, whether it be preferred stock, common stock or debt, in any financial entity that happens to be domiciled in the United States, never mind the potential impact on Treasury yields and the United States sovereign credit rating.

I predict that if this passes it will precipitate the mother and father of all financial panics." (Market Ticker)

Amen. The transformation from a free market to an economy run by men whose judgment and credibility is already greatly in doubt; does not auger well for the markets or the country. Anyone with a lick of sense would cash in their chips first thing Monday and look for capital's Elysium Fields overseas or as far as possible from the circus sideshow now run by G-Sax ringleader, Colonel Klink.

Let's hope the American people are made of sterner stuff than Congress and will reject this charade. The conversation should be shifted from conceding more authority to hucksters in pin-stripes to indictments for securities fraud. Even the most economically-challenged nation ought to be able to afford a few sets of leg-irons and a couple hundred jail cells. That's all it will take.

Paulson's plan to revive the banking system by buying up hundreds of billions of dollars of illiquid mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and other equally poisonous debt-instruments; ignores the fact these complex bonds have already been "marked to market" in the recent firesale by Merrill Lynch. Just weeks ago, Merrill sold $31 billion of these CDOs for roughly $.20 on the dollar and provided 75 percent of the financing, which means that the CDOs were really worth approximately $.06 on the dollar. If this is the settlement that Paulson has in mind, than the taxpayer will be well served. But this will not recapitalize the banks balance sheets or mop up the ocean of red ink which is flooding the financial system. No, Paulson intends to hand out lavish treats to his banker buddies, while interest rates soar, pension funds collapse, the housing market crashes, and the dollar does a last, looping swan-dive into a pool of molten lava. Thanks, Hank.

Economist and author Henry Liu summarized the current maneuvering like this: "The Fed is merely trying to inject money to keep prices not supported by fundamentals from falling. It is a prescription for hyperinflation. The only way to keep price of worthless assets high is to lower the value of money. And that appears to be the Fed unspoken strategy."

Indeed. The Fed and Treasury have decided to backstop the entire global financial system (foreign banks can access the Fed's facilities, too!) with paper money which is rapidly losing its value. Watch the greenback tumble tomorrow in currency trading.

Congress is getting steamrolled and the American people are getting snookered. Consumer confidence--already at historic lows--is headed for the wood-chipper feet-first. Something has got to give.

One minute everything is hunky-dory; the subprime meltdown is "contained" and "the fundamentals of our economy are strong".(Paulson) And, less than a week later, congress is forced to surrender their constitutionally-mandated right to oversee spending in order to forestall economic Armageddon. Which is it? Or is the real objective just to keep the country on an emotional teeter-totter long enough for all state-power to be subsumed by the Wall Street Politburo?

No one knows what will happen next. We are in uncharted waters. And no one knows what the political landscape will look like after the dust settles from this outrageous power grab. According to Paulson, things are so dire, the entire nation will be reduced to smoldering rubble and twisted iron. But can we trust him this time after his long litany of lies?

Isn't it about time to send the cockroaches scuttling back to their hideouts and bring in the cleaning crew to hose the whole place down?

Don't let the prospect of a national crisis trick you into giving up your liberty, America. The people behind this scam are the same landsharks and flim-flam men who polluted the global marketplace with their snake oil and toxic sludge. These are the fraudsters who manufactured the crisis to begin with. Be resolute. Don't budge. Our economic foundations may be crumbling, but or determination is not. This is our country, not Goldman Sach's. The people who destroyed America must be held to account. Their time is coming. Justice first.

Mike Whitney lives in Washington state and can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 08:49 AM

Will the Cure be Worse Than the Crisis?

[b]The Paulson-Bernanke Bank Bailout Plan [/b]
By MICHAEL HUDSON

Saturday’s $700 billion junk mortgage bailout is the largest and worst giveaway since a corrupt Congress gave land grants to the railroad barons a century and a half ago. If it goes through, it will shape the coming century by giving finance unprecedented power over debtors – homebuyers, industry, state and local government, and the federal government as well.

But what threatens to be even worse is the government’s move to let the financial sector make even higher, unprecedented gains by working its way out of negative equity to “make taxpayers whole” by repaying the government’s bailout by bleeding the economy at large. nticipating congressional capitulation in this license to engage in predatory credit, the latest Sunday evening surprise is that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s own firm, Goldman Sachs, is to become bank holding company picking up the financial wreckage now that the government is covering the bad loans and investment gambles Wall Street has made.

What Mr. Paulson did not say in his weekend TV interviews, organized as what he hoped would be a series of victory laps. Neither he nor Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke nor any other Wall Street spokesman has acknowledged that the government has helped promote today’s $46 trillion debt bomb. This enormous overhead consists of the product that banks are selling – interest-bearing debt that is being added to real estate, corporate industry and personal income to price the U.S. economy out of world markets.

We have heard nothing about how Wall Street lobbyists have succeeded in killing the financial cops on Wall Street – and done the same with the consumer cops on Main Street. There is no public recognition of the fact that more money in tax cuts went to the top 1% than the bottom 80% combined.

So how much credence should we give the newest proposals for the United States to commit economic suicide by turning over the powers of government in effect to Wall Street? When they talk about “making taxpayers whole,” what really is their game?

At first glance it may sound appealing to taxpayers for banks to be told to use their future earnings to pay back the $700 billion dollars in junk mortgages, bad hedge-fund bets and other gambles that the Treasury promised on September 20 to pick up at face value, no loss incurred. To provide a sense of proportion, this money could have funded the next forty or fifty years of Social Security. It could have funded health care for all Americans. It could have made a big step toward rebuilding the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. But that is another story. For now the major question is just how the banks, insurance companies and financial conglomerates are to raise the money to pay off this bailout.

The last time the government let banks earn their way out of negative equity was in 1980. Interest rates to bank customers topped 20 percent, driving down prices for real estate, stocks and bonds so low that the leading U.S. banks saw their net worth wiped out. Their debts to depositors and bondholders exceeded the collateral they held in their reserves to back these deposit obligations. But as soon as Ronald Reagan led the Republicans back into office, the Federal Reserve began to flood the economy with free credit, driving down the interest rates that banks had to pay. They were allowed to act as a monopoly and keep credit-card interest rates high, at 20 percent, and above 30 percent with penalties, thanks to the fact that America’s high post-Vietnam interest rates led state after state to repeal anti-usury laws to keep credit flowing.

So the banks did “earn their way out of debt.” But if you were a taxpayer who needed to use a credit card, you paid through the nose. The banks earned their way out of debt at your expense. And by the way, if you really did pay an income tax, you probably did not own commercial real estate or significant financial assets. The Internal Revenue Service made commercial real estate and a large swath of finance (at least for the wealthiest investors) income-tax free by generating tax credits that could be applied against income across the board. The capital-gains tax was lowered to a fraction of the income tax, leading investors to pay out whatever income their investments generated as interest on loans to buy property they expected to sell at a markup. And with Alan Greenspan appointed the head the Federal Reserve Board in 1987, the age of asset-price inflation had arrived.

Cities and states vied with each other to slash property taxes, replacing them with income and sales taxes that fall mainly on labor and consumers. The upshot is that wealth has polarized to an unprecedented degree. According to statistics collected by the Congressional Budget Office, the wealthiest 1% now own 57% of the nation’s returns to wealth (interest, dividends and capital gains) and the richest 10% own no less than 77%.

With this background in mind, it looks like the Paulson-Bernanke plan for the Wall Street investment banks and other predatory lenders – and insurers such as A.I.G. – to “earn their way out of debt” will be at the economy’s expense. The bailout is to be achieved by letting Wall Street’s post-Glass-Steagall financial conglomerates charge their customers exorbitant financial charges. As Britain’s Conservative Party leader Margaret Thatcher put it in her favorite phrase, TINA: There is no alternative. And as Lady Macbeth said, if the deed is to be done, let it be done fast. After all, it is a once-in-a-lifetime chance for every financial institution in America to cash out with a fortune!

For Mr. Paulson this means not giving Congress a chance to represent the public interest in designing the terms of this giant bailout. Sec. 8 of the Treasury plan bans any Congressional review, giving him unprecedented power by: “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.” Under cover of emergency force majeur conditions, the plan is to take the money and run, preferably without permitting any Congressional debate.

It is bad enough for the government to buy $700 billion of bad bank investments at prices that no private-sector investor has been willing to approach. This itself is an undeserved giveaway to the financial institutions that caused the problem by living recklessly in the short run. But making them – and indeed, helping them – pay back this gift with the aid of favorable tax and deregulatory policies will simply shift the cost off their shoulders onto those of bank depositors, credit-card users, mortgage borrowers and hapless pension-fund contributors to the money managers who have taken most of the current income in the form of commissions, salaries and bonuses to themselves. This will sharply add to the price of doing business in the United States, and specifically to the economy’s debt overhead by the banks making even more predatory loans.

It gets worse. In order for the existing junk mortgages to be “made good,” real estate prices must be raised further above the ability to pay for this year’s five million homeowners in arrears and facing default. Is this a good thing? Is it good to raise access prices for housing even more, forcing new homebuyers to go further into debt than ever before to gain access to housing? Mr. Paulson has directed the Federal Reserve, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the FHA (Federal Housing Authority) to re-inflate the real estate market. They are to pump nearly a trillion dollars into the mortgage market.

Fiscal policy is also to be brought to bear to turn the real estate market around by pressuring cities and states to “help homeowners pay their mortgage debts” by cutting property taxes. The idea is to leave more revenue available for property owners to pay mortgage bankers. Unfortunately, this will oblige cities to make up these cuts by taxing labor and sales, running deeper into debt than they already are, or cutting back their spending on basic infrastructure, education and public services and continue shortchanging their pension funds. This is the price to be exacted to “protect the taxpayer’s interest” by bailing out irresponsible banks. The solution is to let them make even more money by acting in a yet more predatory way.

This is not industrial capitalism; it is asset stripping. The closest analogy I can think of would be to give the Mafia free reign to start a new crime wave “in the taxpayers’ interest” so as to raise enough money to pay its fines to the Justice Department. Imagine how our

world would look like if the economy had been turned over to Al Capone as head political capo and to Mafia financial manager Meyer Lansky as Treasury Secretary in the 1930s, with the pyramid schemer Carlo Ponzi heading the Federal Reserve and bank robber Willie Sutton as Attorney General.

The last thing the economy needs is a new real estate bubble. To prevent it, local property taxes need to be raised, not lowered. But this is not the Treasury’s plan. Instead of representing the national interest, it is representing the banking sector whose profits come from making more and bigger loans. This is just the opposite from what a well-run economy needs to recover its growth and competitive power. It needs debt write-downs to what homeowners can pay.

But Mr. Paulson has made it clear that aid for homeowners is not part of the Treasury’s plan. On Sunday, September 21, he resisted suggestions that his program be amended to include further relief for homeowners facing mortgage foreclosures. Because financial markets remain under severe stress, he claimed, there is an urgent need for Congress to act quickly without adding other measures that could slow down passage. “We need this to be clean and to be quick,” he said in an interview on ABC’s “This Week.” He expressed concern that debate over adding all of those proposals would slow the economy down, delaying the rescue effort that is so urgently needed to get financial markets moving again. "The biggest help we can give the American people right now is to stabilize the financial system," Mr. Paulson said.

If you doubt that this is the government’s ideal plan, just look at what it is rejecting. You hear no talk from Mr. Paulson or Mr. Bernanke about bailing out homeowners by writing down their debts to match their ability to pay. This is what economies have done from time immemorial. Instead, the Republicans – along with their allied Wall Street Democrats – have chosen to bail out investors in junk mortgages presently far exceeding the debtor’s ability to pay, and far in excess of the current (or reasonable) market price. The Treasury and Fed have opted to keep fictitious capital claims alive, forgetting the living debtors saddled with exploding adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) and toxic “negative amortization” mortgages that keep adding on the interest (and penalties) to the existing above-market balance.

The question to be asked is just how much will the economy’s debt overhead grow, and what will it cost debtors (a.k.a. “taxpayers”)? And how will the economy look when the dust settles?

Economically the act gives a new meaning to the classical concept of circular flow. The traditional textbook meaning has referred to the circulation between producers and consumers, from wage payments by industrial companies to their employees, who use their wages to buy what they produce. This is why Henry Ford famously paid his workers the then-towering $5 a day. This was Say’s law: Income paid for production is finds its counterpart in consumption to maintain equilibrium in a way that enables the economy to keep on growing. The new circular flow runs from the Fed and Treasury to Wall Street in the form of bailouts, and then back to Republicans in Washington in the form of campaign contributions. The money circulates without having to go through the “real” economy of production and consumption at all.

The Treasury Department issued a fact sheet on the proposal on Saturday evening: “Removing troubled assets will begin to restore the strength of our financial system so it can again finance economic growth.” In everyday language the euphemism “removing troubled assets” means buying junk mortgages at way above current market price, as if the banks didn’t know all along that they were junk but hoped to pawn them off on their clients. The problem is that the banks have not been financing growth in the form of tangible capital investment, but have found their quickest profits to lie in a combination of asset stripping and asset-price inflation.

On Sunday a BBC World Service reporter asked me to list three things that the financial sector would like to see. Taking the open-ended question on the highest philosophical plane, I said, first of all, the banks would love to free themselves of all deposit liabilities – simply to keep the money for themselves. That is their objective when they see a client, after all: How much of the client’s earnings and money can they shift into their own pockets. Second, they would like to see politicians elected directly by the amount of money they could raise, thereby doing away with the actual problem of elections. If politics is going to be privatized, this is the way to do it. Rome’s voting system was organized along these lines. Third, the financial sector prefers not to have to report any data at all or pay any taxes. It has lobbied Congress to block collection of statistics, on the premise that what is not seen will not be taxed. And at present, banks and brokerage houses are still screaming to repeal Sarbanes-Oxley bill calling for full and honest accounting. For financial ideologues this is an equivalent watershed dragon to Rowe vs. Wade, now that they have repealed the Glass-Steagall Act that had separated banks from casinos.

Somewhat taken aback by the rawness of these principles, the reporter asked what outcome was most likely. If Congress does what it is supposed to do, there should be quite a showdown. But how unlikely to be achieved is the above scenario? A few hours earlier on Sunday my friend Eric Janszen of itulip.com sent me a note he had received from a fund manager attesting to the lack of care for clients of financial institutions, giving a flavor of the predatory spirit guiding the bailout’s planners and its beneficiaries:

RAIDS OF INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS

This is so important a topic, that it deserves top billing!!! Hidden inside the AIG bailout funding package, surely hastily cobbled together, but carefully enough to include a totally corrupt clause, was a handy dandy clause that permits raids. The conglomerate financial firms are permitted at this point to use private individual brokerage account funds to relieve their own liquidity pressures. This represents unauthorized loans of your stock account assets. So next, if the conglomerate fails, your stock account is part of the bankruptcy process. ...

The actual evidence for legalized stock account raids by the financial firms can be found in recent articles in Financial Times and Wall Street Journal. So this is not a wild claim. The September 14th article on the Wall Street Journal entitled "Wall Street Crisis Hits Stocks" was the first exposure.

The runs on US banks are in progress. See Washington Mutual, where private email messages have been shared by WaMu bank officers. WaMu alone could deplete the entire Federal Deposit Insurance Corp fund for bank deposit coverage. Eventually the FDIC will compete for USGovt federal money for bailouts and nationalizations, which would be funded by the US Govt because they will not let FDIC run dry.

My Kucinich-campaign colleague David Kelley and I agree on how Wall Street’s action plan ideally would work. The Republicans will take the $800 billion of U.S. Treasury securities presently earmarked for the Social Security Administration accounts, and achieve the privatization that Pres. Bush and his backers have been pressing for so hard for the past eight years. Under emergency conditions – today’s 9/21 as the modern analogue to 9/11 just seven years ago (the well-known natural lifespan of locusts) – will swap these Treasury bonds for junk mortgages, at face value of course. Then, a few months from now (after the new president takes office in February, or perhaps a few days before to achieve the usual political clean slate) the government will tell prospective retirees and workers who have been suffering FICA withholding all these years, “Oops, the government has just lost all your money. Well, that just shows how government planning is the road to serfdom. Next time save yourself by handling your own accounts – or at least choosing whether to consign your forced retirement savings to Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns or kindred predatory money managers. If only we could have done this a few months ago, there would have been no meltdown and Wall Street would have been doing just fine.”

If you are going to take such a step, you of course say you are doing it to “save” the economy. You even proclaim yourself to be a hero. This is how the nation’s newspaper and TV media responded after news of the bailout of AIG and, more to the point, the Wall Street gamblers and derivatives traders whose gains and losses – that is, the ability of trillions of dollars worth of computer-driven trading gambles – to collect their winnings and avoid losses.

Today’s financial markets are well personified in the classic Hollywood westerns. They typically are about towns taken over and run by a banker (“Wall Street” in miniature), for whom a retinue of outlaws and their gangs work (the boys in the back room). The banker runs the town, usually doing business from its biggest building, the local saloon or casino where most of the action occurs. It has a brothel upstairs (the usual Hollywood simile for Congress). The good-hearted prostitute (sometimes the madam) with a heart of gold usually is the movie’s only honest secondary character (a stand-in for one of the bleeding-heart Congressmen on the finance or mortgage-credit committees lisping well-scripted lines promising that all new legislation will benefit homeowners, not predatory mortgage lenders).

There also is a good-hearted investigative newspaper publisher-journalist. He almost always gets killed and his printing press destroyed. (Today his paper is simply bought out by a conglomerate and merged into the pro-Wall Street mass media.) The banker’s gang appoints the sheriff (on today’s larger scale, the Federal Reserve and Justice Department), and also the mayor (who rarely is seen except to sign papers). The sheriff’s job is the same as in today’s world: to evict debtors from homes and properties on which the land-greedy banker is foreclosing. This is the common theme of westerns, after all: They are all about the great American land grab – situated out West so as to protect the identities of the guilty here in the East on Wall Street.

Attentive readers will notice that I have left out of this script the hero. His role is to fight the banker/land grabber and the gang he has brought into town. Wearing a white hat, he rides into town to clean it up, and in the final showdown shoots the head gunslinger (or perhaps the banker himself, who is done for in any event). This is the position that Mr. Paulson portrays himself. But what the audience doesn’t see (at first) is that the bullets he is shooting are merely blanks. It is in fact only a movie after all! The showdown is staged! He works for the banker himself! Goldman Sachs turns itself into a big-fish bank and gobbles up all the little fish in a great financial squeeze.

An alien class of financial mock-heroic poseurs has taken over – land grabbers and banksters of various stripes. Almost unnoticed, an invasion of government snatchers, bank snatchers, money snatchers pretending to be Main Street, pretending to be “the economy” and now claiming to need to be rescued – at the cost of saying goodbye to public finance as we have known it, goodbye to Social Security, to peoples’ hope for upward economic mobility.

It looks like Wall Street will receive government support at Main Street’s expense. This is hardly surprising when you look at who the major campaign contributors are – to both parties. Understandably, Mr. Paulson and Mr. Bernanke are trying to muddy the issue for their financial constituency. Hedge fund traders and kindred banksters have metamorphosized into “the financial system to be saved” and hence “the economy” itself. As if it is necessary to save peoples’ savings deposits and bank accounts by rescuing the casino companies with which the banks have merged – the predatory mortgage brokers, the insurance companies with their fraudulent accounting, the crooked asset-management firms, all of which have merged into conglomerates “too large to fail.” If they are too large, simply un-merge them. Restore Glass-Steagall, which worked for 65 years to prevent this kind of problem from erupting.

The most egregious pretense is that the problem is only temporary, not structural. We are merely “freeing up” the market for new loans. This is precisely the opposite of what the classical economists meant by “free markets.” What America has is a bad debt problem, not a “liquidity” problem. There is no “illiquidity” when people refuse to buy a junk mortgage on a property worth only a fraction of the mortgage’s face value. Many of these bad mortgage loans are fraudulent. The Treasury bailout seeks to make $700 billion of fictitious financial claims “real” – that is, way overvalued as compared to their actual worth(lessness).

What is reducing real estate and corporate stocks and bonds to junk is the exponential growth in the economy’s debt overhead. Debts that cannot be paid have little market value at any price. The nation must make a choice: If the government bails out the large financial institutions for having made bad loans – or to be more precise, for not being able to pawn off these bad loans on foreigners or other financial prey in a timely fashion – then the only way in which the government (or other new creditors) can be paid back is by not forgiving the debts owed by strapped homeowners. This would tighten the debt terms on debtors at the bottom of the food chain – those against whom the bank-sponsored new bankruptcy has been aimed. This is why I deplore the government bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for the junk mortgages it has been packaging from predatory lenders such as Countrywide Financial, Washington Mutual and other deceptive lenders. The wrong parties have been gifted.

I should add that the solution does not lie simply in creating a new regulatory system, much less a single regulatory agency. After all, it was at Wall Street’s command that the Bush Administration installed deregulators in all the key regulatory positions. This meant that regulations didn’t matter at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), at the Fed under Alan Greenspan, at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under Mr. Cox (after William H. Donaldson resigned when the White House would not let him regulate as much as he thought necessary) or at the Department of Justice under Bush yes-men such as Alberto Gonzales. Politics and people have turned out to be more important than the law. We have seen the Supreme Court scrap the Constitution in the 2000 election – with acquiescence from the Democrats, starting with Mr. Gore’s refusal to contest Florida.

To appoint a single regulator would prevent all other regulators – and law enforcement officers, attorneys general, the SEC and so forth – from enforcing honest financial policies in the event that an incoming president should appoint another Greenspan, Gonzales or other ideological extremist averse to the idea of applying existing regulations and honest laws. Under these conditions “consolidated regulation” would mean a free ride for crooks much like J. Edgar Hoover gave the Mafia under his tenure.

My alternative solutions are as simple as Mr. Paulson’s, but of course are quite different. The public interest does indeed call for maintaining the economy’s basic credit, money-transfer, credit card and depository checking and savings functions. But not under the current venal and predatory management practices. It is this management that has lobbied so hard for deregulation, and whose industry representatives have insisted so strongly to place extremist ideological deregulators into the economy’s major positions. Therefore, the Treasury only should buy junk mortgages at current market price. The losses should be taken in order to re-even out the wealth pyramid that has become so much steeper under the Greenspan-Bernanke ploys. The banks knew full well that these mortgages lacked underlying value. The price of making use of this borrowing facility is to forfeit all equity stock to the government. The Treasury should prohibit any financial institution that sells or swaps securities to the Fed from paying any dividends to shareholders or stock options and bonuses to managers. It also should give the government priority over other creditors. Otherwise, firms that have negative equity will benefit purely at public expense, using the money to pay dividends, bonuses and exorbitant salaries.

Second, we need to restore the Glass-Steagall separation of commercial banks from risk-taking investment banks, mortgage brokers and other financial-sector flotsam and jetsam. Break up the mergers between banks and casino sell-side financial and real estate institutions. Just the opposite is occurring: On Monday, Sept. 22, the financial universe was transformed by the announcement that Mr. Paulson’s Wall Street firm, Goldman Sachs, was transforming itself into a bank holding company. The casinos are to take over the banking system as big fish eat little fish in the present financial emergency. It looks like new giants are emerging, already larger than the government in terms of the magnitude of the debts they have run up – and certainly in their earning power. Indeed, who is to say that extracting interest from the U.S. economy will not emerge as the new form of taxation?

Third, re-write the bankruptcy laws to favor debtors once again, not creditors. This means reversing the current bankruptcy code sponsored by lobbies from the credit-card companies. The interests of the five million mortgage debtors faced with foreclosure and expropriation this year should rightly be placed above the interest (literally) of predatory creditors.

Fourth, sharply increase property taxes, shifting them back off labor and sales. We need to return to the classical idea of taxing unearned and unproductive income instead of adding to the price of labor and industry. What has been freed from the tax collector by the shift of taxes off property has not lowered the cost of housing and other real estate, or corporate costs of doing business. The income “freed” has ended up being paid to the banks as interest. The government still has had to raise money – but in the form of taxes that fall on labor’s wages and industry’s profits. So labor and industry now pay twice for what they formerly paid only once. They still pay the same overall amount of taxes, but also pay an equivalent amount of interest. The financial system is crowding out the government.

In the fifth place, we need to start discussing whether we really need a banking system that behaves in the way the present one does. In recent decades banks have made loans mainly to inflate asset prices by loading real estate and industry with interest-bearing debt. What if all banks were to be organized along the lines of savings banks, with 100% reserves. This is the Chicago Plan from the 1930s (currently revived by the American Monetary Institute, which holds its annual meeting this week in Chicago, by the way). This at least would go back to basics to provide a foundation from which to re-begin to discuss just what kind of credit the economy needs and what would be the best terms on which to structure financial markets.

Any solution does indeed need to be radical. But it can be much less radical than Mr. Paulson’s power grab for his Morgan Stanley firm and the rest of Wall Street in the closing days of the Bush administration just before the Republicans look like losing power. The indicated solution is to reverse predatory finance, not bail it out at permanent taxpayer expense. Government funds are not unlimited. Is it worth wiping out hopes for Social Security and public health care, for renewed national infrastructure spending and industrial restructuring in order to bail out a banking and financial system that has not contributed to economic growth but has weighed it down with reckless debt regardless of the economy’s ability to pay?

Is it right to blame the five million homeowners now in arrears and facing foreclosure, but rewarding the irresponsible bankers and outright fraudulent institutions who have used Enron accounting to make a once-in-a-lifetime rip-off? That is what Mr. Paulson would do in insisting that Congress pass his legislation without taking time to discuss the issue and above all without “assigning blame.” But without such assignation, how do we know where to go from the current mess caused by financial deregulation, repeal of Glass-Steagall, the financial system’s Enron-style accounting and predatory mortgage lending?

Before leaving from his post as Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan’s speeches sounded like “Apres moi, le deluge.” We are living in a world whose economic and political pressures are much like those in the interregnum between Louis XIV and the French Revolution. Where are the revolutionists today?

Michael Hudson is a former Wall Street economist specializing in the balance of payments and real estate at the Chase Manhattan Bank (now JPMorgan Chase & Co.), Arthur Anderson, and later at the Hudson Institute (no relation). In 1990 he helped established the world’s first sovereign debt fund for Scudder Stevens & Clark. Dr. Hudson was Dennis Kucinich’s Chief Economic Advisor in the recent Democratic primary presidential campaign, and has advised the U.S., Canadian, Mexican and Latvian governments, as well as the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR). A Distinguished Research Professor at University of Missouri, Kansas City (UMKC), he is the author of many books, including Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire (new ed., Pluto Press, 2002) He can be reached via his website, mh@michael-hudson.com

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 08:51 AM

Grasping at Straws
by Mike Whitney / September 22nd, 2008 (12)

On Friday morning, Senator Christopher Dodd, the head of the Senate Banking Committee, was interviewed on ABC’s Good Morning America. Dodd revealed that just hours earlier at an emergency meeting convened by Secretary of the Treasury Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, lawmakers were told that, “We’re literally maybe days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system.” Dodd added somberly, that in his three decades of serving in public office, he had “never heard language like this.”

The system is at the breaking point, and despite Wall Street’s elation from the proposed $1 trillion dollar bailout …

(Full article …)

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 08:52 AM

Sen. Clinton: 'The country should look at some Great Depression-era type of governmental entity'...

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 08:57 AM

9/23/2008
Currency's Dive Points to Further Pain
- Washington Post 9/23/2008

Plan May Push National Debt to Post-WWII Levels
- Bloomberg 9/23/2008

Lennar Calls for Govt Help for U.S. Builders
- MarketWatch 9/23/2008

Nations Pledge Support, but Not Financing
- New York Times 9/23/2008

Fannie, Freddie Takeovers Cost Banks Billions
- Wall Street Journal 9/23/2008

Gold May Surge as Investors Seek `Insurance'
- Bloomberg 9/23/2008

Back from the Dead, Tokyo Banks Buy Into Wall St.
- Reuters 9/23/2008

More Pain at WaMu
- Business Week 9/23/2008

Fitch Downgrades GM's Credit Rating
- Chicago Tribune 9/23/2008

More Americans Strain to Meet Housing Costs
- USA Today 9/23/2008

Retirees Filling the Front Line in Market Fears
- New York Times 9/23/2008

Retail Trade Group Forecasts Weak Holiday Sales
- Los Angeles Times

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 08:59 AM

Paulson Goes All In

Just three days ago, after looking at the prospect of bailing a string of distressed financial institution in the country, the government seemingly drew a line in the sand, and refused to bail out Lehman Brothers. The authorities clearly saw Lehman’s demise as a trial balloon to see how the markets would react if the government stayed on the sidelines. That trial balloon quickly turned into the Hindenburg. Immediately reversing course, the Government has decided to go “all in” and bail out every institution with financial exposure to U.S. mortgages. Simply put, Americans will not be allowed to visibly suffer losses after the greatest asset bubble in U.S. history. But make no mistake, the losses are real and Americans will pay one way or another.

Moving beyond the guided munitions of selective bailouts, the Government is now trying the financial equivalent of carpet bombing (for AIG, Merrill Lynch, and especially Lehman Brothers, this gives new meaning to being a day late and a dollar short). To continue with the military analogies, Paulson's bazooka turned out to be a nuclear tipped ballistic missile.

By committing trillions of tax payer dollars (not the “hundreds of billions” that Paulson predicts), the plan will save commercial and investment banks from certain bankruptcy. In his statement today, Paulson made clear that Congress must pass new legislation to allow the Government to acquire even those loans too poorly collateralized to currently qualify for GSE or FHA absorption. The losses baked into these mortgage products, which Wall Street has been reluctant to even estimate, will now be borne wholly by taxpayers.

In his press conference, Paulson assured us that this plan was designed to safeguard our savings. But in typical government fashion, the plan will have the reverse effect as savings will be wiped out through inflation. He also claims that the plan will safeguard home equity by keeping real estate prices high. Since when did high home prices become a strategic national priority? If the plan succeeds, the gains for home sellers will simply be matched by losses for homebuyers, who end up paying inflated prices, and taxpayers, who get stuck with the losses when those buyers default.

Paulson’s distress and confusion was clearly evident when he fielded questions from reporters. The first asked Paulson to describe his fears regarding the probable economic consequences of government inaction. Paulson provided no answer and promptly exited stage right.

When the U.S. government owns all mortgages, the real estate market will be completely subject to political, rather than financial, concerns. Will foreclosures be outlawed? Will loan term easements and principal reductions become standard campaign issues?

While it is dizzying to predict how this plan will be implemented, it is fairly simple to foresee the macroeconomic consequences. The U.S. dollar will be shattered beyond repair. The government simply has no means to make good on the trillions of new liabilities. Interestingly, while both Paulson and President Bush acknowledge that the plan will put “significant amounts of taxpayer dollars on the line,” they did not mention any tax increases. Given the politics, no such move is forthcoming. The printing press is their only solution.

The government has also decided to insure all money market funds, adding trillions more in unfunded liabilities to the Federal balance sheet in the blink of an eye. Of course, since bad real estate loans are not the only toxic assets on the balance sheets of financial institution, we will also need to absorb other classes of asset-backed securities, such as those backed by credit card debt and auto loans. So while the move ensures that depositors will not lose money, is does insure that the money itself will lose value. Is the trade-off really worth it? Washington thinks so.

Further, since I assume the plan will apply to all mortgage debt, U.S. taxpayers will also be on the hook to bail out foreign institutions that loaded up on the financial sludge. However, once the government takes them off the hook, do not expect them to re-invest the windfall back into other U.S. dollar denominated assets. This get-out-of-jail free card will likely scare them straight. The global mass exodus from the U.S. dollar and Treasury debt is about to begin: do not get caught in the stampede.

Although gold initially sold off as the apparent need for a financial safe haven ebbed, look for a spectacular rally to commence as its traditional role as an inflation hedge returns with a vengeance.

For a more in depth analysis of our financial problems and the inherent dangers they pose for the U.S. economy and U.S. dollar denominated investments, read my new book “Crash Proof: How to Profit from the Coming Economic Collapse.”

http://www.europac.net/externalframeset.as...me&id=14065

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:00 AM

Monday, September 22, 2008

An Interventionist Crisis
by Jacob G. Hornberger

It’s amusing to see liberals exclaiming against the bailout of the Wall Street big wigs. After decades of using government to take from the rich and middle class to give to the poor, did they honestly believe that politicians and bureaucrats would not use their welfare-state powers to take from the poor and middle class to give to the rich? What’s fascinating is that some liberals are able to recognize the fundamental immorality of using government force to fleece the American people for the benefit of Wall Street friends and cronies, but they still maintain a blind spot when it comes to using government force to accomplish the same thing for the “poor, needy, and disadvantaged.”

Of course, it’s also amusing watching conservatives come up with all sorts of rationales for using taxpayer money to bail out their buddies and contributors in the financial sector. “Oh, it could be another Great Depression! Oh, we’re so worried! Oh, we’re facing a worldwide financial collapse! Oh, woe is us!”

Give me a break. Aren’t these the guys who were just recently exclaiming against Hugo Chavez’s government takeovers of Venezuelan businesses? Didn’t they call that socialism? What’s the difference in principle between what Washington politicians and bureaucrats are doing and what Chavez has been doing?

Unlike liberals and conservatives, who continue to claim that the crisis is due to “greed,” “unfettered capitalism,” or “deregulation,” we libertarians know that what has once again failed is socialism and interventionism.

The current financial crisis is a classic example of Ludwig von Mises’s point about interventionism — that one government intervention into economic activity inevitably leads to more interventions. Why? Because the initial intervention inevitably brings about a crisis, which then motivates the politicians and bureaucrats to enact a new intervention, which then causes another crisis. Ultimately, the long series of interventions lead to omnipotent government — a total control of economic affairs on the part of the federal government.

For decades, the federal government has intervened in the housing market, enacting laws, rules, regulations, agencies, and tax benefits to encourage everyone in America to own a house. That’s what Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were all about — using the federal government to encourage banks to lend money for home ownership. That’s what all those regulations requiring banks to lend money to bad-risk customers were all about too. That’s what the mortgage deduction from income taxes is all about.

Now that the bubble from all this interventionist malinvestment has burst, what is the response of the interventionists? To enact a new comprehensive intervention entailing hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money in the hopes of keeping the entire house of cards propped up for another round of interventions down the road. Moreover, the plan to vest the Treasury secretary with unprecedented powers moves our nation closer to the omnipotent, dictatorial government to which Mises referred.

What is the answer to all this socialism and interventionism? Eradicate the disease entirely with major surgery. Restore a libertarian paradigm to our nation. No more interventions and no more socialism. No more income taxation or income-tax deductions. Leave everyone free to keep his own money and do what he wants with it. No government insurance, bailouts, or welfare. No economic regulations. No more paternalism.

If someone loses his money by investing in the wrong stock or picking the wrong bank, then he bears the responsibility for his choices. He cannot expect the government to plunder others to pay for his losses. He cannot expect government to take care of him in any way, including retirement, healthcare, or education.

Replace the coercion that comes with the welfare state and regulated economy with such voluntary principles as individual responsibility, free markets, and private charity.

Finally, let all the malinvestment that has taken place over decades work its way out of the system with bankruptcies, insolvencies, or mergers.

Alas, the American people are not there yet. Hope springs eternal and they’re still hoping for the perfect socialist plan or intervention. They’re still thinking that their beloved politicians and bureaucrats are looking out for them, much as a child continues to look to his parents to take care of him no matter how abusive they are.

Maybe — just maybe — as the American people discover what this new round of socialism and interventionism is going to cost them (on top of Iraq and Afghanistan and the domestic welfare state), a sufficient number of them will achieve the breakthrough that we libertarians have achieved and will help us restore genuine free-market, libertarian principles to our nation.

Jacob Hornberger is founder and president of The Future of Freedom Foundation.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:02 AM

Paulson and Bernanke urge approval of bail-out
By James Politi in Washington

Published: September 23 2008 13:58 | Last updated: September 23 2008 15:38

function floatContent(){var paraNum = "3" paraNum = paraNum - 1;var tb = document.getElementById('floating-con');var nl = document.getElementById('floating-target');if(tb.getElementsByTagName("div").length> 0){if (nl.getElementsByTagName("p").length>= paraNum){nl.insertBefore(tb,nl.getElementsByTagName("p")[paraNum]);}else {if (nl.getElementsByTagName("p").length == 3){nl.insertBefore(tb,nl.getElementsByTagName("p")[2]);}else {nl.insertBefore(tb,nl.getElementsByTagName("p")[0]);}}}}Hank Paulson, US treasury secretary, and Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, on Tuesday urged Congress to rapidly approve their $700bn government intervention to rescue the US financial system from collapse.

In remarks released ahead of a hearing before legislators on the Senate banking committee, Mr Paulson defended the plan, saying it would “avoid a series of financial institution failures and frozen credit markets that threaten American families’ financial well-being, the viability of businesses both small and large, and the very health of our economy.”

Mr Bernanke said global financial markets remained under “extraordinary stress” and congressional action was “urgently required”.

The Bush administration and congressional leaders are engaged in frenzied negotiations over the details of the rescue plan, with Democrats pushing for tighter oversight, curbs on executive compensation of banks participating in the bail-out plan, and additional economic stimulus legislation.

Hopes for a quick deal were threatened on Monday night when Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate banking committee, questioned whether the plan made any sense at all. “I am concerned that Treasury’s proposal is neither workable nor comprehensive, despite its enormous price tag,” Mr Shelby said.

Although the Democratic leadership in Congress has been broadly supportive of the need for a rescue plan, some senior lawmakers in the party have raised doubts about its structure. Henry Waxman, chairman of the House oversight and government reform committee, said it “completely eviscerates the concept of moral hazard. It would enrich the Wall Street executives whose reckless investments caused the financial crisis.”

Nonetheless, in his testimony, Mr Paulson said that it was “clear” there was bipartisan support for “an urgent legislative solution”. But he warned that “we need to build upon this spirit to enact this bill quickly and cleanly, and avoid slowing it down with other provisions that are unrelated or don’t have broad support.”

In his opening statement on Tuesday, Chris Dodd, the Democratic chairman of the senate banking committee and a key player in the talks with the Bush administration, said the US government now “runs, supports or outright owns vast swathes of the financial sector.” He added that American taxpayers “deserve to know how we arrived at this moment, and how architects of this new economic landscape will put us back on sound financial footing and restore American confidence and optimism.”

Mr Shelby said this “may be the most important hearing our committee has conducted in the twenty two years I have been a member,” before reiterating his opposition to the plan. “Without question, our markets and financial institutions need serious attention. I do not believe, however, that we can solve this crisis by spending a massive amount of money on bad securities,” Mr Shelby said.

Meanwhile, Christopher Cox, the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, urged legislators to immediately address the absence of regulation in the huge market for credit default swaps.

The $58 trillion sector of the derivatives market has become a significant part of the overall financial system, yet it lacks transparency and is completely unregulated. Investors have the ability to profit from the default of a company’s debt or bonds through the CDS market.

Mr Cox said in prepared testimony that the “potential for unfettered naked shorting“ in this market was a “cause for great concern.” He added: “Neither the SEC nor any regulator has authority over the CDS market, even to require minimal disclosure to the market.”

Enforcement officials have stepped up their focus on the CDS market as part of its investigations into potential market manipulation of the securities of financial institutions.

Additional reporting by Joanna Chung in New York

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

Lex: Cleaning up CDS - Sep-23

Full coverage: Global financial crisis - Sep-16

Full text: Paulson and Bernanke’s testimony - Sep-23

Asian markets lock in profits - Sep-23

Video: John Authers on market response - Sep-16

Comment: Washington must heed alarm bell - Sep-22

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:03 AM

Fears emerge over $700bn rescue

Wrangle on US rescue oversight intensifies

All sorts claim piece of pie

New York to regulate credit derivatives

Other G7 members have no plans to follow US

One size fits all

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:04 AM

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:04 AM

No Recession for Arms Sales
U.S. arms sales are up, columnist Frida Berrigan reports, and still the military contractors are worried that the government might cut Pentagon spending.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:08 AM

Financial Bailout: America's Own Kleptocracy - by Michael Hudson - 2008-09-20 Overnight, the U.S. Treasury and Federal Reserve have radically changed the character of American capitalism

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:08 AM

Global Financial Meltdown - by Michel Chossudovsky - 2008-09-18 The Most Serious Financial Crisis since the 1929 Wall Street Crash...

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:09 AM

FDIC Running out of Cash: No Bank is Safe in this Alarming Atmosphere - 2008-09-19

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:09 AM

The Paulson-Bernanke Bank Bailout: Will the Cure be Worse than the Disease?- by Michael Hudson - 2008-09-22

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:10 AM

Financial System at the Brink of Collapse: The Point of No Return - by Mike Whitney - 2008-09-20

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:10 AM

Impacts of the Financial Crisis: The U.S. Is Becoming an Impoverished Nation- by Richard C. Cook - 2008-09-19

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:11 AM

"Plunder: Investigating Our Economic Calamity and the Subprime Scandal" Review of Danny Schechter's book- by Stephen Lendman - 2008-09-18

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:12 AM

The Killers Are With The Patient
By: Darryl Robert Schoon
Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan’s surrogate successor at the Federal Reserve is using Greenspan’s discredited playbook to hopefully resuscitate America’s economy. But pouring more credit into America’s stalled economy will not restart the US economy anymore than pouring gasoline into a flooded engine will restart an engine.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:13 AM

The End of an Era
By: Gary North, Mises on Money
Investors last week began to figure it out. A lot more investors are going to figure it out. They are going to have two years to figure it out. This is if things go well. They may have three years to figure it out. Whoever is elected President in November is going to preside over the worst financial disaster in American history in the postwar era. Some lucky soul is going to lose this election. You had better batten down the hatches.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:13 AM

Your Bill for the Bailouts
By: Joe Schembrie
The Federal Reserve System's bailout of American International Group will cost $85 billion. After the expense is apportioned among three hundred million American citizens, your personal bill for AIG's bailout will be $280. If you have a family of four, their share is $1100.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:15 AM

<h2 class="title">Following the Bailout Hearing</h2> New York Times By Mike Nizza “Now there’sa natural give and take when it comes to the legislative process,” Mr. Bush said in brief remarks with the president of Pakistan, Asif Ali Zardari. “There are good ideas that need to be listened to in order to get a good bill ... US House leader aims for bailout action by Friday Reuters Bernanke urges fast action from Congress MarketWatch

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:16 AM

<h2 class="title">Bush To Address Financial Markets In UN Speech</h2> CBS News - ‎
By Ryan Grim (The Politico) White House spokesman Tony Fratto briefed reporters Tuesday morning on the negotiations with Congress over a $700000000000 bailout proposal. Congress showed some reluctance Monday to rubber stamp the plan as written by ...

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:17 AM

US Tax Payers To Bail Out Foreign Banks

Paulson: Foreign Banks can use U.S. Rescue Plan

By Mark Felsenthal

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Sunday that foreign banks will be able to unload bad financial assets under a $700 billion U.S. proposal aimed at restoring order during a devastating financial crisis. Continue

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:17 AM

U.S. Orgy of Debt

By ERIC MARGOLIS

America has reveled for two decades in an orgy of debt. The U.S. national debt is now twice its net worth. From Wall Street's "masters of the universe" financial powerhouses such as Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Lehman, and Morgan Stanley, to the humblest homeowners, America's national motto became "borrow to the hilt and bet." Continue

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:17 AM

The New New Deal

We're Footing the Bill and Holding the Bag

By Mike Rivage-Seul

Presently (following the Great Crash of 2008), we’re in the midst of yet another reshuffling and redistribution of cards – another New Deal. But whereas 30s version shifted money from the haves to the have-nots, the re-run promises an income redistribution from the disappearing middle class to the super-rich. They’re the gambling addicts who got us here in the first place. Continue

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:18 AM

Default by the US government is no longer unthinkable: But September 2008 marks the moment when the scale of our excesses, the extent of our debts and the moral bankruptcy of our financial regulatory system finally began to be truly exposed.

Fury at $2.5bn Lehman bonus: STAFF at Lehman’s New York office who helped to cause the world’s biggest corporate bankruptcy are to share in a $2.5 billion bonanza.

BAD MONEY: RECKLESS FINANCE, FAILED POLITICS, AND THE GLOBAL CRISIS OF AMERICAN CAPITALISM: Video and transcript: Bill Moyers sits down with former Nixon White House strategist and political and economic critic Kevin Phillips.They explores the role that the crumbling financial sector played in the now-fragile American economy.

$1,000,000,000,000: The astonishing cost of US government's desperate bid to rid the economy of toxic debt: There are some members of Congress who are unhappy at the thought of the taxpayer taking on hundreds of billions of dollars of currently worthless debt. But the leader of the Democrats in the House of Representatives, Steney Hoyer, said he expected quick action

Treasury Seeks Asset-Buying Power Unchecked by Courts: ``He's asking for a huge amount of power,'' said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University. ``He's saying, `Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.''

Many economists skeptical of bailout: Many of the same economists and opinion-makers who'd provided a bipartisan sheen of consensus to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's previous moves have quickly begun casting doubts on the wisdom of a policy that would allow Treasury to purchase without oversight hundreds of billions of dollars of difficult-to-price assets from financial institutions.

Bank of China buys into Rothschild bank: BANK of China said yesterday it will buy a 20 percent stake in La Compagnie Financiere Edmond de Rothschild for 236.3 million euros (US$340 million) and the two will develop private banking and asset-management services.

Snuffysmith

Sep 23 2008, 09:19 AM

Paulson Bailout Plan a Historic Swindle
By William Greider

Financial-market wise guys, who had been seized with fear, are suddenly drunk with hope. They are rallying explosively because they think they have successfully stampeded Washington into accepting the Wall Street Journal solution to the crisis: dump it all on the taxpayers. Continue

What's Really Bankrupt