1 Comment

The Brave & Free Can Fix This LIE MORE Economy

With the information coming out about the Libor-Barclay’s scandal, we are becoming increasingly aware of the collusion between politics and finance.  The fix is in on our LIE MORE economy and a monopoly is siphoning money out of our economy leaving us fighting among ourselves for a shrinking economic pie.  We debate safety nets, taxes, jobs, the deficit and stimulus spending when we should simply disconnect the siphon.

The derivatives market, of which the vast majority is made up of interest rate products, is one manifestation of the political-financial monopoly.  As Goldman Sach’s employee Fabrice Tourre so eloquently described in his emails to girlfriend Marrine Serres, he was the “fabulous Fab” creating “Frankenstein” products that were nothing more than “pure intellectual masturbation” for sale to unwitting clients.  The financial wizards of this monopoly include Wall Street banks, of which I will only highlight three.  These unregulated derivative products were very profitable and from 1998 to 2008, Bank of America reported profits of $135 billion, Citibank $145.8 billion and JP Morgan Chase $97.6 billion.  The political cronies of this monopoly included appointed and elected members of our federal government.  A few of the top federal government regulators who ignored the warning signs to regulate the derivatives were Greenspan, Rubin, Levitt, Geithner and Summers.  Obviously the White House and Congress were active participants in the monopoly because of the benefits this collusion brought to them:

  1. A smoke and mirrors prosperity for political re-election purposes.
  2. Campaign contributions (same 3-bank example contributed $49.8 million from 1998 – 2008)
  3. Lobbying (these three banks paid $139.1 million from 1998 – 2008)
  4. US Congress members benefit from abnormally positive returns on personal investments.
  5. Open Secrets profiled 849 people who work in the finance and investment industry as lobbyists who previously worked in the federal government (more work directly in lobbying industry).  As Abramoff explains, “unless we sever the link between serving the public and cashing in, no other reform will matter.”

The derivatives market grew at an alarming rate of nearly 1,000% since 1998 for a total size of $700 trillion, estimates the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).  Very bold legal protections were even put into place ensuring that the victims of this ponzi scheme could not get a crumb of that stolen pie back.  In 2005 a bankruptcy reform law was passed giving seniority in bankruptcy to these “Frankenstein” products.

Ten years after the warning sign by Long Term Capital Management of a $4 billion derivatives loss in 1998, we witnessed the failure of AIG and taxpayer bailout of $180 billion.  The taxpayers funneled money through AIG to pay off the bets they made with Wall Street Banks marking the beginning of the bailout bubble.  To continue with the previous three-bank example, Bank of America, Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase received $635 billion in taxpayer bailouts plus an unknown amount from the Federal Reserve’s $16 trillion in emergency programs.  We spent more to bail these three banks out than they made in profits for ten years – $378.4 billion in profits vs. $635 billion+ in bailouts.  Banks got a much higher return on their political investments than their financial investments.  These three only spent $189 million in campaign contributions and lobbying during the previous ten years.

Instead of crumbling under the pressure, the monopoly became stronger.  Indeed, the entire banking sector has continued a rapid consolidation in the last 10 years.  In 2002 the top 10 U.S. banks held 55% of the industry’s domestic assets and today they hold 77 percent.  As if that isn’t worrisome enough, according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, these three banks hold $187 trillion in derivatives.  The concentration of these contracts in the hands of a limited number of banks magnifies the risk.

For years now we have been hearing about financial reforms and new regulatory agencies, but clearly what we didn’t get was an attitude adjustment. We can throw all of the money, staffing and legal power we want at this problem, but until there is a commitment to eliminate this monopoly, the ponzi scheme continues.  Last month during the whale-watching tour, we realized that regulators can’t even catch a bank seemingly cornering a market.  Frighteningly, we are also observing that the bailouts are not a thing of the past.  While issuing a series of credit ratings downgrades, Moody’s Investors Service actually spells out in a handy bar graph that government “systemic support” is still a significant factor that elevates the credit rating of every big bank in its review.  As this tragic comedy plays out, one day after the downgrades, investors responded by sending up shares of the affected firms.  Dennis Kelleher, the president of Better Markets, explained that the market is ignoring the announcement and “counting on the Fed bailing every one out again.”  The market relies on the Fed because the numbers many banks are showing are known to be inaccurate.  The Switzerland-based Bank for International Settlements, which acts as a bank for the world’s central banks, said in its latest annual report, “As we have urged in previous reports, banks must adjust balance sheets to accurately reflect the value of assets.” The lack of transparency and credibility in banks’ balance sheets fuels a vicious cycle. When investors can’t trust the books, lenders can’t raise capital and may have to fall back on the taxpayers for a bail out. This further pressures public finances, which in turn weakens the banks even more.

The siphoning of wealth out of our economy doesn’t only occur through the taxpayer bailout costs and the “earnings” on the origination of these “Frankenstein” products, but also through the less visible pick-pocketing of savers through inflation, currency devaluation and low to negative real interest rates.  We are even being pick-pocketed by this monopoly through higher municipal taxes, rates and fees.  Our municipalities were ripped-off on municipal bonds because the banks colluded to rig the public bids, a business worth $3.7 trillion. The banks conspired to lower the interest rates that towns earned on these investments and therefore systematically stole from “virtually every state, district and territory in the United States”.   Now on the flipside of this deal, the taxpayers are again being hosed by the monopoly.  After the housing market crashed, the Federal Reserve cut the Fed Funds Rate to 0%. This triggered the interest rate swaps that cities entered into with the monopoly resulting in a high fixed rate.  The Federal Reserve is an indirect participant in every single swap trade and derivative trade.  Many US cities now have huge losses on these swap contracts. A study was published by the Refund Transit Coalition, entitled “Riding the Gravy Train,” and it found 1,100 swaps deals at more than 100 government agencies that are costing taxpayers $2.5 billion a year.

The monopoly bailed out the largest banks directly with taxpayer money allowing them to offload or restructure their most toxic holdings, including many derivatives like interest rate swaps.  No similar bailout was offered to local governments, however. The public has been left holding derivative contracts that are currently not much more than agreements to subsidize banks further with taxpayer dollars.

The structure of this system is not working for us citizens and the national dialogue is not addressing the monopoly problem.  We debate stimulus monies and pass packages doling out money to local governments who many times turn around and spend it on the interest rate-gouging to the bailed out banks.  We debate regulations and pass bills adding thousands of pages of laws and creating numerous additional agencies hiring countless new regulators to ignore the monopoly problem, handcuff the real job creators and stifle growth.  We debate the federal income tax rates and wring our hands in despair about the budget deficit instead of stopping the trillions of USD being siphoned out of our national economy by the monopoly.

This political-financial monopoly will not improve itself.  If we the citizens want an economy better than this dire crisis, we must act like the brave and the free that we are and courageously change this system.  From where I’m sitting as an average American citizen, the fact that the monopoly kingpins are still in position today and have gained even more power since 2008 is a clear signal that we are not on the path to a recovery.  Why haven’t all of those whistle-blowers who sounded alarms about this financial crisis been called on to lead us out of it?  They had the fortitude to protect our national economy at great personal losses and instead we have chosen to rely on the same corrupt robbers who stole from us to change.   Our elected officials aren’t appointing the right people and demanding the right direction with regulations and law enforcement because of the influence of money on them.  Why haven’t we cut them off from the influence of money?  Either we are the brave and the free, or we are not.

Leave a comment

Happy Independence Day!

Happy 4th of July To all!  The Founders of our great nation revolted against their British rulers to make America an independent country.  One of the starting points for this revolution was the Boston Tea Party.  Author Thom Hartmann notes in his book Unequal Protection, the Boston Tea Party was primarily a revolt against unfair trade and tax policies the Empire had bestowed upon the British East India Trading Company. The East India Company had strong links to the British Parliament:

Trade-dominance by the East India Company aroused the greatest passions of America’s Founders – every schoolboy knows how they dumped the Company’s tea into Boston harbour. At the time in Britain virtually all members of parliament were stockholders, a tenth had made their fortunes through the Company, and the Company funded parliamentary elections generously.

After the Revolution, the newly-formed American nation was not keen to return to the days where a powerful corporation like the East India Company could use its wealth to buy politicians and sway public policy.  Over the years though, we citizens have given up more and more of our political access and power.

The nineteenth century’s most famed president, Abraham Lincoln, saw the power of money rising before his eyes:

The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies, all who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.. corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money powers of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed.

On this Independence Day let us remember how far America has drifted from what was in many ways a much more pristine vision of our Republic – of the people and for the people!
Leave a comment

Overturning Montana Law Facilitates Decline In Economic Opportunity

Although we are in the full swing of an election year and all focus is on who will win, please remember that the influence of money in politics is about something far more important than who wins the next election.  Yes, in fact, there is something more important than who wins in November – the fairness of our system.

As ‘outsiders’ to the political process, we citizens can associate the functioning of this system much like the functioning of a business.  We are all familiar with franchises which leverage the standardization of processes for optimum and consistent results regardless of who is doing what job within the business.  Strict adherence to protocol is expected or the consequence for the person is departure.

We citizens have allowed the elected officials to manipulate the process and to eliminate the consequence.  Our focus should be on creating a system that consistently delivers the optimum result of constituency influence over money influence regardless of who is elected.  This is indeed in our best interest, isn’t it?  I would even go so far as to state that campaign finance reform is only partially about the election process and is mostly about the decision-making process during the act of legislating after being elected.  The effects on our economic system of the money-influenced political system are already appearing in the very fabric of our society.  Americans are responding to the economic system that is designed by our political players.

According to a poll, the public is not interested in pointing fingers at the “haves” and “have nots”, but instead, in economic fairness.  The percentage of Americans who agree with the statement, “most people who want to get ahead can make it if they are willing to work hard,” is 58% which is lower than at any point since the question was first asked in 1994.  At that time the percentage was 68% and remained there or higher for over a decade.  However, for the last five years we have observed a constant decline to the now 58%.  It is conceivable that within the next five years more Americans will disagree with this statement than agree.  The toll that this level of hopelessness and despair can have on a society is devastating.

The growing critical sentiment of the fairness of the economic system is reflected in the 61% of Americans who now say that the economic system in this country unfairly favors the wealthy.  Only 36% say that the system is generally fair to most Americans.  What would cause only 36% of Americans to believe that our national economic system is fair?  Isn’t ‘the land of opportunity’ our motto?  When the majority of Americans, 61%, believe that the economic system unfairly favors the wealthy, we need to examine the causes and improve the system.  After all, fairness of economic opportunity is the essence of our society.

The political system sets the ‘rules’ to the economic game in our country and certainly has the power to favor the wealthy.  Removing the influence of money on the political system will reduce the incentive for political players to make the economic rules that unfairly favor the wealthy.  The focus of the political system should be on the constituents, not on appeasing the wealthy for a constant flow of donations.  We have the power to create such a system.

Unfortunately, the ‘insiders’ who have a vested interest in the status quo system are advancing the influence that money can have on the political system, and consequently on the nation’s economic system. The U.S. Supreme Court decided yesterday to overturn a Montana law prohibiting corporate contributions in elections.  Unfortunately, the court did not even take this opportunity to address auxiliary transparency concerns.  In the Citizens United ruling over two years ago, the Supreme Court reasoned that disclosure of corporate dark money would “provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions.” During the last two years we have the experience to prove that disclosure laws currently on the books do not work. A corporation can use a 501(c) nonprofit as a shell to hide its electioneering activity. The public has no way of ever knowing if the money behind the ads came from a corporation, a wealthy individual, or even a foreign government.

More than a dozen amendment bills are now pending in the US Congress to address the Citizens United ruling.  The US Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing in July on amendment proposals.  Please find the details in a previous post.

2 Comments

Housing Crisis – Can We Do Something Already?

As an update to an earlier post that is continued below, there are more minds examining eminent domain and our real estate collective action problem.  It has been shown that when the value of a home falls below the value of the mortgage debt — when it is underwater — a person is much more likely to default on the mortgage.  A Cornell University law professor, Robert Hockett, completed an outline for the use of eminent domain by municipalities in resolving the mortgage debt impasse.  Professor Hockett argues that a government can seize certain, chosen mortgages, pay them off at fair value, or a little over that, with money from new investors, issuing new mortgages with smaller balances to the homeowners. Taxpayers are not involved, and no government deficit is incurred. Since homeowners are no longer underwater and have good credit, they are unlikely to default, so the new investors can expect to be repaid.  Now that we are over four years into this housing crisis, it might be time for us to stop the wishful thinking that the problem will solve itself through a spontaneous rally in home prices.

Original post on March 23, 2012:

Lauren Willis explains how eminent domain can be the tool used to launch us out of this housing crisis.  I understand that one perspective is that irresponsible homeowners are getting what they deserve with a foreclosure.  We are four years into this collapse already though.  The irresponsible homeowners have already lost their homes and underwater homeowners have certainly learned all they are going to learn.  Now we are all just being unfairly punished to keep the real culprits of this crisis from being held accountable at all.

As Lauren explains, “Homeowners trapped underwater threaten the welfare of our society. They cannot sell because they cannot afford to pay the mortgage balance that exceeds any price their houses could command in this market. Stuck in place, they cannot move to cheaper housing, better jobs, or training opportunities.

With so many Americans removed from the pool of potential buyers, those who own their homes with smaller mortgages, or even outright, cannot sell their homes for decent prices, trapping them too in place and forcing some to delay retirement. The low house prices do not even benefit buyers because banks refuse to lend.

Eventually, underwater homeowners will have too little income to make their payments or will give up trying. Further foreclosures will not only drag housing prices down further, but lead to property hazards, fires, crime, and other social costs, threatening the nation’s tranquility.”

Clearly the federal government is not inclined to resolve this issue, but our state governments can…if they are so inclined.

Leave a comment

Obama Responds to FEC Petition

I continue to be flabbergasted at the rationale behind funding federal enforcement agencies that do not enforce the laws.  Any excuse for not enforcing existing laws is unacceptable.  The hypocrisy of having laws and not enforcing them is more dangerous to a society than no rules at all.  The existing campaign finance regulations are woefully insufficient, but even those are not enforced by the agency charged with that responsibility, the Federal Election Commission.

The commission consists of six members – three Democrats and three Republicans, nominated by their respective parties.  Because that’s an even number, no ruling can have effect unless it gets at least a 4-2 vote. Getting that fourth vote is often impossible, but even when it does, the slap on the wrist ‘punishment’ is hardly newsworthy.  From fiscal 2006 to 2010, the average fine levied against campaigns, parties and political action committees for violating campaign finance law was only $42,000 (consider that the average winning campaign for the House costs $1.4Million and for the Senate costs $8Million).  This level of penalty doesn’t deter unlawful behavior at all.  The whole point of a penalty is to instill fear into those would-be violators of being caught.

This sub-par performance by the FEC isn’t even the problem of the day for this agency.  Five of the six current commissioners continue to serve despite expired terms, and three openly flaunt their routine refusal to enforce existing campaign finance laws, even where the FEC’s professional staff has called for an investigation.  The organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington coordinated a petition to President Obama that reached the threshold of 25,000 signatures before February 10, 2012.  According to the platform established by the White House, the petition would receive an official response.  Finally, after 5:00 pm last Friday four months later, the administration issued a vague, lackluster response.

President Obama had promised during the 2008 campaign to appoint new commissioners to the FEC who would be committed to enforcing our nation’s election laws. “With the 2012 elections right around the corner and millions of dollars flowing in to fund deceptive ads designed to mislead voters, the agency charged with regulating campaign spending – the FEC – is a useless mess,” said CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan.  “Assurances from the White House that the president really, really cares about campaign finance law are no substitute for real action.  The president needs to nominate new commissioners now.”

Congress and the President obviously have a selfish interest in preventing any reform of the FEC; after all, they are the targets of enforcement actions.  This is yet another example of our federal government being manipulated in an unethical and corrupt manner to allow elected officials to escape accountability.  The danger of unaccountable elite ruling our society cannot be overstated.

Leave a comment

STOCK Act revisited by CBS 60 Minutes

Last night Steve Kroft revisited the STOCK act on 60 Minutes at CBS.  The passage of this bill in April is merely a hollow action by Congress to placate the public.  The fact that elected officials are not automatically held accountable to the same laws as the people is alarming.

Even though the STOCK Act has passed, there is virtually no likelihood that anyone will be prosecuted because of the complete unwillingness of the SEC. After all, the SEC receives its funding by Congress and Congress clearly does not want to hold itself accountable to the insider trading laws because they delayed passage of the bill from 2006 to 2012 – only after significant public outcry.  As a last resort, Congress can always hide behind our Constitution for protection from this blatantly unethical thievery.  The “speech or debate” clause in the constitution protects congressmen from having to disclose conversations related to the legislative process. This could make it impossible to reconstruct when and how they learned what inside information.

Unfortunately it is still legal for  “political intelligence” firms to gather details about legislation and oversight activities from lawmakers and then sell it to investment firms and other clients.  If this is not insider trading, then what is?  Obviously this is an entire industry built on the premise of insider trading, and it is completely legal, courtesy of our Congress.

Insider trading certainly is not the only example of how members of Congress are exempt from the laws they impose onto the rest of us.  For any elected representative to flinch at all over complying with the laws of the land is an inexcusable and dangerous elitism.  We now live in a society where not only do elected officials live by different rules than the rest of us, but now they extend those privileges to selected classes of individuals.  Examples of this injustice include the political intelligence firms and the too big to fail financial institutions.

This obvious exploitation of power confirms that this country is now a society of ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’.  The politically-connected are abusing the power we have entrusted them with and are codifying into law the untouchable status of themselves and their economically-elite supporters.  The term ‘we the people’ is a romantic, nostalgic memory of how our society was intended to be organized.  The stark reality is that now ‘we the people’ is synonymous with ‘we the outsiders’ who have been stripped of the ‘land of opportunity’ because the ‘insiders’ have tilted the economic and political system in their favor like an unregulated casino house.

Leave a comment

Financial Regulators Crush Small Fry and Feed Big Whales

The Securities and Exchange Commission has taken the decades-old, stereotypical criticism of useless federal government regulators and owned it.  Time and time again the agency has chosen not to enforce rules against the most powerful institutions, has turned a blind eye as the institutions continue fraudulent behavior and has codified the injustice of an economically-elite and politically-connected class of institutions not being held accountable to the law.  At the same time that the Securities and Exchange Commission is not prosecuting the big whales, the agency is aggressively pursuing the small fry with regulatory violations.  The general population of the American citizenry is observing a no-win outcome of this agency’s strategy.  The taxpayers are paying for the failures of these powerful institutions, the taxpayers are suffering from the economic crisis caused by these powerful institutions, the taxpayers are funding the $1.321 Billion budget of the SEC and those taxpayers who engage in small-middle size business opportunities in this industry are paying dearly for minor regulatory violations.  This agency, quite frankly, is actively impeding the potentially bright economic future of our nation.

A few highlights from this SEC-sponsored horror show includes:

-          Failure to prosecute Fuld, CEO of Lehman Brothers, after Budde, former Lehman Brothers associate general counsel, provided documentation that he lied under oath about hiding hundreds of millions in compensation.

-          Failure to prosecute Lehman Brothers after Anton Valukas submitted a 2,200 page report stating that there was enough evidence for a prosecutor to bring a case against top Lehman officials and the Ernst & Young accounting firm for misleading government regulators and investors.

-          Failure to prosecute Moody’s after a March 2009 letter sent by Moody’s former senior vice president of compliance.

-          Failure to prosecute mortgage fraud after FBI publicly declares “epidemic” in 2004.

-          Failure to prosecute Chase on fraudulent credit card practices after whistleblower in 2010.

-          Failure to prosecute Citibank on fraudulent mortgages after whistleblower in 2011.

-          Failure to prosecute Stanford Financial Group on Ponzi scheme after whistleblower in 2003.

-          Failure to prosecute Countrywide Financial for mortgage fraud after whistleblower in 2007.

-          Failure to prosecute Bernard Madoff for the ponzi scheme after repeated whistleblowers.

-          Failure to prosecute JPMorgan Chase on illegal trading after whistleblower in 2004.

Clearly the lack of prosecution by the SEC and failure to uphold “justice for all” has resulted in a permanent behavior of fraud by powerful companies.  Comically, the New York Times even reported the most frequent “repeat” offenders receiving slaps on the wrist by the SEC:

American International Group, Ameriprise, Bank of America, Bear Stearns, Columbia Management, Deutsche Asset Management, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Putnam Investments, Raymond James, RBC Dain Rauscher, UBS and Wells Fargo/Wachovia.

The SEC is spending the $1.321 Billion in resources to prosecute small fry for violations such as registration revocations – these are failed public companies that let their registration paperwork lapse.  In 2011, the SEC attacked 121 small fry for these delinquent filings.

Where is the leadership to establish the priorities for this failed agency?  Our economic future depends on focusing on the real problems with our financial industry.  At this point we are held hostage not only by the too-big-to-fail institutions, but also, by the utterly useless federal government law enforcers like the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 35 other followers

%d bloggers like this: