Krugman Finds His Nut(s)?

by ilene - February 10th, 2010 7:25 pm

Krugman Finds His Nut(s)?

Courtesy of Karl Denninger at The Market Ticker

As in "a blind squirrel finds one - once in a while."

(With apologies to the person who posted it on TF under that title before I got to Tickering this - heh, I had to go get my teeth cleaned, so give me a break already! :))

But in fact Krugman hasn’t found his nut(s), although he should check. He’s groping around down there…. perhaps he could come up with something if he’d just take the next logical step from here:

The point is that these bank executives are not free agents who are earning big bucks in fair competition; they run companies that are essentially wards of the state. There’s good reason to feel outraged at the growing appearance that we’re running a system of lemon socialism, in which losses are public but gains are private.

No Paul, that’s not reality either. Your liberal mind just can’t get its tiny little wings around what really happened, so let me help you.

You can start with my Ticker entitled "The Audacity of Synthetics", in which I explain to the proletariat what any self-respecting "economist" (or "economic reporter") should already know about, but which I’ve yet to hear you opine upon:

But this leaves open the question of whether it is fair, just, or even legal to create a synthetic security that at it’s core comes into existence because someone believes that the reference is going to detonate, and then sell off pieces of that security to investors without prominently disclosing the source of the funding of the cash flow, that they proffered the criteria for inclusion in the reference and that the INTENT of their funding was to profit from an EXPECTED detonation of the reference securities.

It also leaves open the question of laying off that risk on an insurance company (whether in a regulated subsidiary or not) without similarly disclosing the above to them up front! That is, is it fair, just (or even legal) to buy fire insurance on a property when you have been told that someone expects a fire in that structure based on what they believe is credible analysis (e.g. a look at the wiring plan), without telling the insurance company about what you were told?

THAT is what happened Paul.

These Banksters didn’t just make bad bets, have them blow up in their face, and then come crying to the government.

Oh no.

They, for various purposes (all of which devolve down…

More on this topic (What's this?)

A Work in Progress – Get Ready for Boring (Rocket Science Investing - Excha..., 1/19/10)

Read more on Thai Capital Fund at Wikinvest

Tags: bank executives, Crony capitalism, derivatives, Fraud, Gambling, insurance company, Paul Krugman, Socialism

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Meredith Whitney: The government is “out of bullets”

by ilene - December 8th, 2009 8:24 pm

Meredith Whitney: The government is "out of bullets"

Courtesy of Edward Harrison at Credit Writedowns

Composite of lightning bolts and bullets

I am not sure I buy Meredith Whitney’s assertion that the government is “out of bullets” in its quest to prop up the economy. It’s a matter of political will more than anything else. Nevertheless, I do agree with her basic premise in the CNBC video below that the financial sector is likely to see a more unfavourable economic climate in 2009 than it has done in 2009.

In particular, a looming crisis at the state and local government level, coupled with continued distress at regional and local banks will mean a deadly combination of higher taxes, fewer jobs and less credit for households and small businesses. Unless we see a change in the political climate in Washington, now oriented toward deficit reduction over jobs, we are likely to see a double-dip recession late in 2010 or 2011.

Whitney says “the component parts don’t add up” in addressing the Obama Administration’s conflicting rhetoric on jobs, stimulus and deficit reduction. I have said Barack Obama gets it because we have confirmation that he understands that raising taxes or cutting spending is what leads to a double dip recession.

I will accept that not everyone believes we should avoid recession if it means more government spending because of the enormous debt loads in the private sector and the unfunded liabilities in the public sector. Fair enough. I have my own doubts due to concerns about crony capitalism. That is an ideological debate about the role of government.

But in executing actual policy, I believe the President’s words and actions are at odds in part due to the political landscape and the wishes of the corporate interests to which he is beholden.

Witness the duelling headlines today where Joe Klein points out a speech with elbows that the President delivered today. Michael Tomasky was equally impressed.

But, this was just a speech. When it comes to actual policy, Robert Reich was less impressed.

Barack Obama is trying once again for balance. On the one hand, he wants enough government spending to offset the timid spending of consumers and businesses. Otherwise, the jobs and wage recession could drag on for years. On the other hand, he doesn’t want to set off more alarm bells about the budget deficit. Otherwise, conservative Democrats might join forces with Republicans to block heath care. So what does he do? A little bit more stimulus spending,…

More on this topic (What's this?)

Meredith Whitney: The government is “out of bullets” (naked capitalism, 12/9/09)

Meredith Whitney: The U.S. Has Run Out of Bullets: Video (Shocked Investor, 12/8/09)

Meredith Whitney Video: US Government "Out of Bullets", Consumer in Trouble (Fund my Mutual Fund, 12/8/09)

Read more on Meredith Whitney at Wikinvest

Tags: Banks, Barack Obama, credit, Crony capitalism, double dip recession, financial sector, government, Meredith Whitney, TARP repayments

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

The Real Reasons Behind Fed Secrecy

by ilene - September 28th, 2009 2:58 pm

Political Moment: Texas Straight Talk

The Real Reasons Behind Fed Secrecy

Congressman Ron Paul By Ron Paul

Last week I was very pleased that the Financial Services Committee held a hearing on the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, HR 1207. The bill has 295 cosponsors and there is also strong support for the companion bill in the Senate. This hearing was a major step forward in getting the bill passed.

I was pleased that the hearing was well-attended, especially considering that it was held on a Friday at nine o’clock in the morning! I have been talking about the immense, unchecked power of the Federal Reserve for many years, while the attention of Congress was always on other things. It was gratifying to see my colleagues asking probing questions and demonstrating genuine concern about this important issue as well.

The witness testifying in favor of HR 1207 made some very strong points, which was no surprise considering the bill is simply common sense. It was also no surprise that the witness testifying against the bill had no good arguments as to why a full audit should not be conducted promptly. He attempted to make the case that the fed is already sufficiently accountable to Congress and that the current auditing policy is adequate. The fact is that the Fed comes to Congress and talks about only what it wants to talk about, and the GAO audits only what the current laws allow to be audited. The really important things however, are off limits. There are no convincing arguments that it is in the best interests of the American people for anything the Fed does to be off limits.

It has been argued that full disclosure of details of funding facilities like TALF and PDCF that enabled massive bailouts of Wall Street would damage the financial position of those firms and destabilize the economy. In other words, if the American people knew how rotten the books were at those banks and how terribly they messed up, they would never willingly invest in them, and they would fail. Failure is not an option for friends of the Fed. Therefore, the funds must be stolen from the people in the dark of night. This is not how a free country works. This is not how free markets work. That is crony corporatism and instead of being a force for economic stabilization, it totally undermines it.

If the Fed gave its actual arguments against a full audit, they would not have mentioned anything about political independence or economic stability. Instead they…

More on this topic (What's this?)

Guest Post: How Well Has The Federal Reserve Performed for America? (naked capitalism, 9/27/09)

Why Economists Rarely Say Bad Things About the Fed (naked capitalism, 9/10/09)

A Sector Where Few Dare to Go… (Investment U, 10/1/09)

Read more on Federal Reserve, Financial Services at Wikinvest

Tags: Americans, Audit the Fed, bankers, Crony capitalism, Economy, Fraud, Ron Paul, value of money

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Deregulation as crony capitalism

by ilene - August 20th, 2009 10:07 pm

Edward at Credit Writedowns had some interesting comments on the earlier post by Jesse at the Le Cafe.

Deregulation as crony capitalism

kleptocracy Courtesy of Edward Harrison at Credit Writedowns

Jesse of Jesse’s Café Américain posted on the important subject of deregulation in his last post, “Why the Austrian, Keynesian, Marxist, Monetarist, and Neo-Liberal Economists Are All Wrong.” In it, he opined that it is entirely wrong-headed to assume everything will be alright if we just let free markets work their magic. I want to take his thoughts one step further because I think there is a misperception about what the free market entails and why the deregulation movement went astray.

Kleptocracy defined

First, a framework.

Last March, I posted an article called “A populist interpretation of the latest Boom-Bust cycle” in which I used Jared’ Diamond’s viewpoint of stratified societies as Kleptocracies as a lens through which to understand the secular trends which have characterized the last generation of western economic history.

To review, Diamond won a Pulitzer Prize in 1998 for his book Guns, Germ and Steel, which is a narrative of how Eurasian societies as a whole have dominated others throughout the last 10,000-odd years. One of his basic premises is that Eurasian societies are stratified, and hence less egalitarian, allowing individuals to specialize. The hierarchy and specialization have combined to give these societies advantages that less stratified (and less resource-rich) societies do not have.

The corollary of this – and where I want to concentrate – is that advanced societies are not egalitarian. Some will de facto have more, and others will have less. Moreover, as Diamond asserts, this lack of equality becomes, in essence, a kleptocracy i.e. a reverse Robin Hood organization where the elites enrich themselves at the expense of the others.

This has been the reality in all advanced societies based on agriculture, manufacturing and services for the last 10,000-odd years. This social structure has been net beneficial to the societies employing it in comparison to more simple societies – a case of a rising tide lifting all boats. So, on some level, kleptocracy is nothing about which to get irate.

kleptocracy The problem is that not all kleptocracies are created equal. At some point, the ruling class overreaches in a way that subtracts from rather than adds to the overall prosperity of the society. Cries of “throw the bums out” are heard, an uprising ensues and a new elite is installed who themselves turn to the…

Tags: Crony capitalism, Deregulation, kleptocracy, regulatory oversight

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

If You Read Nothing Else About the Financial Crisis Read (and Remember) This…

by ilene - August 12th, 2009 6:04 pm

If You Read Nothing Else About the Financial Crisis Read (and Remember) This…

financial crisis, government capture Courtesy of Jesse’s Café Américain

"The crash has laid bare many unpleasant truths about the United States. One of the most alarming, says a former chief economist of the International Monetary Fund, is that the finance industry has effectively captured our government—a state of affairs that more typically describes emerging markets, and is at the center of many emerging-market crises.

If the IMF’s staff could speak freely about the U.S., it would tell us what it tells all countries in this situation: recovery will fail unless we break the financial oligarchy that is blocking essential reform. And if we are to prevent a true depression, we’re running out of time."

The Atlantic
The Quiet Coup
By Simon Johnson
May 2009

…But I must tell you, to IMF officials, all of these crises looked depressingly similar…

…The downward spiral that follows is remarkably steep. Enormous companies teeter on the brink of default, and the local banks that have lent to them collapse. Yesterday’s “public-private partnerships” are relabeled “crony capitalism.” With credit unavailable, economic paralysis ensues, and conditions just get worse and worse. The government is forced to draw down its foreign-currency reserves to pay for imports, service debt, and cover private losses. But these reserves will eventually run out. If the country cannot right itself before that happens, it will default on its sovereign debt and become an economic pariah. The government, in its race to stop the bleeding, will typically need to wipe out some of the national champions — now hemorrhaging cash — and usually restructure a banking system that’s gone badly out of balance. It will, in other words, need to squeeze at least some of its oligarchs.

Squeezing the oligarchs, though, is seldom the strategy of choice among emerging-market governments. Quite the contrary: at the outset of the crisis, the oligarchs are usually among the first to get extra help from the government, such as preferential access to foreign currency, or maybe a nice tax break, or—here’s a classic Kremlin bailout technique—the assumption of private debt obligations by the government. Under duress, generosity toward old friends takes many innovative forms. Meanwhile, needing to squeeze someone, most emerging-market governments look first to ordinary working folk—at least until the riots grow too large…

From this confluence of campaign finance, personal connections, and ideology there flowed, in just the past decade, a river of deregulatory policies that is,…

More on this topic (What's this?)

Guest Post: Greenspan Says Worst Financial Crisis EVER, INCLUDING the Great Depression (naked capitalism, 2/23/10)

The U.S. opts for the bailout hustle over the Swedish banking crisis response (naked capitalism, 2/22/10)

Elizabeth Warren Explains (Part of) the Financial Crisis So even 3rd Graders Can Understand (Fund my Mutual Fund, 2/2/10)

Read more on 2008 Financial Crisis at Wikinvest

Tags: Crony capitalism, IMF, public-private partnerships, Simon Johnson, The Quiet Coup

Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Property Rights Take a Hit

by ilene - June 14th, 2009 11:43 pm

For a free subscription to Phil’s Stock World, click here (it’s easy, no credit card required).

In this article, Peter Schiff discusses the practical problems with a government’s abrogation of contract and property rights for some "contrived greater good." That is deeply disturbing enough but it goes further. Our Constitution gave specific powers to different branches of government to hold the powers of government in check. The loss of these checks and balances goes beyond the financial world "twilight zone" horrors unfolding before us now, it undermines the entire structure of our governance. - Ilene

Property Rights Take a Hit

By Peter Schiff, writing at LewRockwell.com

“Crony capitalism” is a term often applied to foreign nations where government interference circumvents market forces. The practice is widely associated with tin-pot dictators and second-rate economies. In such a system, support for the ruling regime is the best and only path to economic success. Who you know supersedes what you know, and favoritism trumps the rule of law. Unfortunately, this week’s events demonstrate that the phrase now more aptly describes our own country.

On Monday, the Supreme Court refused to hear an appeal from Chrysler’s secured creditors based on the government’s argument that the needs of other stakeholders outweighed those of a few creditors. In this case, the Administration concluded the interests of the United Auto Workers outweighed the interests of the Indiana teachers and firemen whose pension fund sued to block the restructuring. Given the enormous financial support that the UAW poured into the Obama campaign, such partiality is hardly surprising.

When making their investment in Chrysler just a few months ago, the Indiana pension fund agreed to commit capital because of the specific assurances received from the company. In allowing this sham bankruptcy to be crammed through the courts, we have shredded the vital principal of the rule of law, and have become a nation of men, rather than one of laws.

The risk that legal contracts can now be arbitrarily set aside will make investors think twice before committing capital to distressed corporations. Oftentimes enforcing contracts imposes hardships. That’s precisely why we have contracts.

Without absolute faith that deals will be honored, it will be extremely difficult for U.S. companies to borrow money. This will be particularly true for those companies already struggling with too much debt. Without the ability to issue secured debt, how will such companies access the necessary capital to turn around? If secured creditors cannot…

Tags: Ben Bernanke, BofA shareholders, Chrysler, Crony capitalism, Ken Lewis, Peter Schiff, United Auto Workers

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

Phil's Stock World, Stock Options Trading & Information

Daily Stock and Options Tips & Updates; Get Our Daily Newsletter Here

Krugman Finds His Nut(s)?