No market for you products? Then create a “fake” market!

bankers perpetrated one of the greatest episodes of self-dealing in financial history.
Faced with increasing difficulty in selling the mortgage-backed securities that had been among their most lucrative products, the banks hit on a solution that preserved their quarterly earnings and huge bonuses:
They created fake demand.”

The best thing we could do is to rid ourselves of all regulations, knowing that when left to their own  self governance, corporate managers will always do the right thing. Sure they will!
This story, while not the least bit surprising, should blow another hole in any (libertarian) theory that the players in a “free market” will choose to be honest and will be preeminently concerned about maintaining their reputations in order to attract more (voluntary) business.

The looting of the American taxpayer remains unabated

An example  of “moral hazard” is when someone is shielded (and coddled) from experiencing the consequences of their imprudent (criminal) behaviors.

In the context of the present-day American economy,  that “someone” being shielded are the “too big to fail, too big to exist” banks.

Who is doing the protecting? By default, it’s the weary, tapped out, underemployed American taxpayers.  I don’t remember getting an “up or down” vote on whether of not I’d like to backstop the banks at the expense of my friends and family, did you?

What person wouldn’t take all the money they have to their names and fly to Las Vegas with the intent of gambling every penny of it if they knew the government would not only cover all of their losses but also find a way for them to profit monetarily from the experience?

This from Bloomberg

The Public-Private Investment Program was introduced in March by Geithner as a means of helping struggling banks by reviving the market for unpackaged loans and mortgage securities that aren’t backed by government-supported institutions, such as Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. Under the program, asset managers were supposed to raise money from investors and, with additional capital and loans from taxpayers, buy as much as $1 trillion in toxic assets from U.S. banks, freeing up money for lending.

It’s “absolutely ridiculous” that banks, which were expected to reduce their holding of such volatile mortgage securities, bought them before the government program was running and may now profit, said Michael Schlachter, managing director of Wilshire Associates, the Santa Monica, California- based investment-consulting firm. “Some of them created this mess, and they are making a killing undoing it.”

Obama sells his soul to Wall Street

Matt Taibbi’s piece in The Rolling Stone is an absolute must read. If you’re like me and you were wondering where the hell all the “change” is, this article will clarify for you why there hasn’t been any, nor will there be any,  financial reform in this country.  Obama has surrounded himself with the same  thieves and thugs that live and move and have their being in the corrupt self -designed Wall Street. Here’s some change for you. “Financial Reform” will be designed to keep the “too big to fail” parasites alive into perpetuity by using our tax dollars as a backstop.  Lesson learned. Fascism lives.

Morning, the National Mall, November 5th. A year to the day after Obama named Michael Froman to his transition team, his political “opposition” has descended upon the city. Republican teabaggers from all 50 states have showed up, a vast horde of frowning, pissed-off middle-aged white people with their idiot placards in hand, ready to do cultural battle. They are here to protest Obama’s “socialist” health care bill — you know, the one that even a bloodsucking capitalist interest group like Big Pharma spent $150 million to get passed.

These teabaggers don’t know that, however. All they know is that a big government program might end up using tax dollars to pay the medical bills of rapidly breeding Dominican immigrants. So they hate it. They’re also in a groove, knowing that at the polls a few days earlier, people like themselves had a big hand in ousting several Obama-allied Democrats, including a governor of New Jersey who just happened to be the former CEO of Goldman Sachs. A sign held up by New Jersey protesters bears the warning, “If You Vote For Obamacare, We Will Corzine You.”

I approach a woman named Pat Defillipis from Toms River, New Jersey, and ask her why she’s here. “To protest health care,” she answers. “And then amnesty. You know, immigration amnesty.”

I ask her if she’s aware that there’s a big hearing going on in the House today, where Barney Frank’s committee is marking up a bill to reform the financial regulatory system. She recognizes Frank’s name, wincing, but the rest of my question leaves her staring at me like I’m an alien.

“Do you care at all about economic regulation?” I ask. “There was sort of a big economic collapse last year. Do you have any ideas about how that whole deal should be fixed?”

“We got to slow down on spending,” she says. “We can’t afford it.”

“But what do we do about the rules governing Wall Street . . .”

She walks away. She doesn’t give a fuck. People like Pat aren’t aware of it, but they’re the best friends Obama has. They hate him, sure, but they don’t hate him for any reasons that make sense. When it comes down to it, most of them hate the president for all the usual reasons they hate “liberals” — because he uses big words, doesn’t believe in hell and doesn’t flip out at the sight of gay people holding hands. Additionally, of course, he’s black, and wasn’t born in America, and is married to a woman who secretly hates our country.

These are the kinds of voters whom Obama’s gang of Wall Street advisers is counting on: idiots. People whose votes depend not on whether the party in power delivers them jobs or protects them from economic villains, but on what cultural markers the candidate flashes on TV. Finance reform has become to Obama what Iraq War coffins were to Bush: something to be tucked safely out of sight.

Around the same time that finance reform was being watered down in Congress at the behest of his Treasury secretary, Obama was making a pit stop to raise money from Wall Street. On October 20th, the president went to the Mandarin Oriental Hotel in New York and addressed some 200 financiers and business moguls, each of whom paid the maximum allowable contribution of $30,400 to the Democratic Party. But an organizer of the event, Daniel Fass, announced in advance that support for the president might be lighter than expected — bailed-out firms like JP Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs were expected to contribute a meager $91,000 to the event — because bankers were tired of being lectured about their misdeeds.

“The investment community feels very put-upon,” Fass explained. “They feel there is no reason why they shouldn’t earn $1 million to $200 million a year, and they don’t want to be held responsible for the global financial meltdown.”

<!–


–>

Volker rips bankers

Now we know why Obama has marginalized Volker’s opinions. Can’t ruffle any feathers now can we?

The truth hurts!

One of the most senior figures in the financial world surprised a conference of high-level bankers yesterday when he criticised them for failing to grasp the magnitude of the financial crisis and belittled their suggested reforms.

Paul Volcker, a former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, berated the bankers for their failure to acknowledge a problem with personal rewards and questioned their claims for financial innovation.

On the subject of pay, he said: “Has there been one financial leader to say this is really excessive? Wake up, gentlemen. Your response, I can only say, has been inadequate.”

As bankers demanded that new regulation should not stifle innovation, a clearly irritated Mr Volcker said that the biggest innovation in the industry over the past 20 years had been the cash machine. He went on to attack the rise of complex products such as credit default

Read more here

Consumer’s mortgage choices become more limited.

I warned my state legislators AND my congressional representatives a few years ago that hammering on and making life miserable for  mortgage brokers would limit choice for the consumer. Did they listen? Hell no! Nor did they listen to any other experienced financial professionals on the front lines of the housing/mortgage meltdown.

Today it’s confirmed that the concerted effort to eliminate mortgage brokers (aka consumer options) is well underway and going according to plan…

Can someone please explain to me how reducing competition in the lending markets will ultimately result in a better deal for consumers?

Already, a few giant national banks-–which have lots of deposits and other sources of cash and so don’t rely on warehouse lenders–are tightening their grip on the home mortgage market. That means mortgage lending is likely to be less vulnerable to fraud as the giant banks impose their tighter legal standards and controls. But this transformation also heralds a less competitive market in which consumers may well pay higher interest rates and fees.

Profit margins already have increased: In the first nine months of this year, the difference between rates on mortgage securities and those paid by consumers on recently granted mortgage loans-– a rough measure of mortgage lenders’ profit margins – averaged 0.80 percentage point, up from a long-run average of about 0.60 point, according to Mahesh Swaminathan, a mortgage analyst at Credit Suisse.

In the first three months of this year, the three biggest mortgage lenders – Wells Fargo & Co., Bank of America Corp. and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. – accounted for 52% of new home mortgages, according to Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade publication. That’s up from a 37% share for the top three lenders in 2007.

“Ruthless defaulters…embracing the darkness of default”

Darkness descends!


The NYT’s has an article about “ruthless defaulters”…ie. those overwhelmed by debt that are simply walking away from their obligations.

Those on the front lines of the debt industry say there is a small but increasingly noticeable group of strapped consumers who, like Ms. Birks, are deciding they will simply stop paying. After loading up on debt eagerly provided by the card companies during the boom times, these people now find themselves trapped in an endless cycle where they are charged interest on interest and fees upon fees while the lenders get government bailouts.

They are upset — at the unyielding banks and often at their free-spending selves — and are pre-emptively defaulting. They could continue to pay for a while longer but instead are walking away. “You reach a point where you embrace the darkness of default,” said Adam Levin, chairman of the financial products Web site Credit.com.

Moral Hazard?


I’m wondering about the psychological effects that our recent financial sector bailouts are having on consumers. Is is it easier for consumers to rationalize away the moral obligation to pay their bills when they hear about the government using tax payer dollars to ensure that undeserving banks (and their CEO’s) are able to remain solvent and post record profits?

More trickle down


The rank and file struggle…while our political/financial elite insist on a top down approach to our economic recovery. Do they really…honestly believe that trickle down economics…aka “voodoo”…will save the day? When has the voodoo ever worked to help the rank and file?  Why not a moratorium on credit card payments? We’ve spent trillions making sure large corporations can pay their bills…how about something for Mr. and Mrs Joey Lunchbucket?

23.7 Trillion? Am I the only one that missed this…?

I can’t believe I’m the only one…did the main stream media even cover the fact that US taxpayers could be on the hook for almost  24 trillion? I suppose it’s not news worthy until we spend 25 or 30 trillion….is that it? No need for alarm…a trillion is the new billion…yes?

Funny…apparently the Obama administration wants to silence this Barofsky guy…the independent! inspector general of TARP by bringing him in house under Treasury Secretary Geithner. If the Justice Department can’t figure out a way to do that…they may have to hire a hit man to silence him. Think about it…a few months ago the corporate sponsored-grass roots Tea Tantrums attracted thousands because the participants had found out Obama spent a mere 700 billion to fund a plan designed to stimulate the economy. What will they do when they find out we’ve got almost 24 trillion committed to this mess?

U.S. taxpayers may be on the hook for as much as $23.7 trillion to bolster the economy and bail out financial companies, said Neil Barofsky, special inspector general for the Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program.

The Treasury’s $700 billion bank-investment program represents a fraction of all federal support to resuscitate the U.S. financial system, including $6.8 trillion in aid offered by the Federal Reserve, Barofsky said in a report released today.

“TARP has evolved into a program of unprecedented scope, scale and complexity,” Barofsky said in testimony prepared for a hearing tomorrow before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.