Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Ghost Story: Put Banks Out of Their Misery

By Nicholas von Hoffman, The Nation. Posted February 18, 2009.


Decision-makers should bite the bullet and put the banks into receivership or some other form of bankruptcy.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Is Blind Faith in God and the Bible a Modern Invention?
Devilstower

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Can the Morass of the 1970s Tell Us About the Current Economic Crisis?
Alejandro Reuss

DrugReporter:
Lies About Marijuana Drive People to a Much More Harmful Drug -- Booze
Steve Fox

Environment:
Why Max Baucus' 'No' Vote on the Climate Bill May Really Help Its Passage
Jeff Mcmahon

Food:
Soda Helps Make Americans Unhealthy and Fat -- Will Soda Tax Prevail Despite Pushback by Beverage Industry?
Christine Spolar, Joseph Eaton

Health and Wellness:
Does the House Bill's Public Option Kill Off the Senate's?
Booman

Immigration:
Recent Democratic Victories May Grease the Wheels for Immigration Reform in Congress
Marcelo Balive

Media and Technology:
Focusing on Fort Hood Killer's Beliefs Is an Easy Out to Avoid the Deeper Reasons for the Massacre
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
What Obama Is Up Against in His Own Branch of Government
Russ Baker

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
"Precious" Star Claims the Spotlight
Emily Wilson

Rights and Liberties:
"Women Are Being Killed All Over the World": One Reporter's Fight Against So-Called "Honor Killings"
Robert S. Eshelman

Sex and Relationships:
9 Silly Things People Say When They Hear You Don't Want Kids (And Ways to Counter Them)
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Radioactive Wastewater in New York Raises More Concerns About Oil Drilling
Abrahm Lustgarten

World:
Egyptian Marine: Soldiers Often 'Racialize' the Enemy to Cope With Stress
Aaron Glantz

More stories by Nicholas von Hoffman

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Bakemonos are floating through the halls, offices and minds of the economists, business writers and policy wonks of Wall Street and Washington. Bakemono is a Japanese word for ghost.

These bakemonos are repeating reminders of Nippon's 1990s, the economically disastrous decade during which Japan suffered through a painful period of deflation and stagnation. In the 1970s and 1980s, it looked as though Japan had become the world's leader in business and applied technology. Built into that success was a bubble which, as bubbles are wont to do, popped, and then malaise set in.

Try as the nation would, it could not return to prosperity. According to almost everybody who has studied it, the reason Japan was unable to cure itself was its policy of propping up the country's major banks, which were largely insolvent.

For 10 years, these institutions were kept on life support, alive but unable to perform the indispensable function of making loans to businesses and consumers. Finally, Japan euthanized the banks by nationalization and bankruptcy. Only then did prosperity return.

Japan's story is a twice-told tale. American economists and financial businesspeople know the story of Japan's travails, of the reluctance of government to do what had to be done and the costs that followed delay and inaction.

And what of our situation now? The New York Times reports that, "students of the Japanese debacle say they see a similar train wreck heading for the United States." The paper goes on to say:

The Japanese first tried many of the same remedies that the Bush administration tried and the Obama administration is trying -- ultra-low interest rates, fiscal stimulus and ineffective cash infusions, among other things. The Japanese even tried to tap private capital to buy some of the bad assets from banks, as [Treasury Secretary Tim] Geithner proposed.
One reason Japan's leaders were so ineffectual for so long was their fear of stoking public outrage. With each act of the bailout, anger grew, making politicians more reluctant to force real reform, which only delayed the day of reckoning and increased the ultimate price tag.

As they did in Tokyo, they are doing in Washington: Refusing to accept that the nation's largest financial institutions -- with a couple of exceptions -- are insolvent, bankrupt, worthless, with debts that far outweigh their capacity to service them.

As was true in Japan, the trouble began with real estate loans, which, in one form or another, turned into those famous toxic assets. Geithner, like his predecessor Henry Paulson, is wrestling with how to get those assets out of the banks, which boils down to the question of how much should the government pay for them.

A free-market solution will not work if the object is to save the banks. Right now, the highest price the assets would fetch is about 22 cents on the dollar, even though in a few years they are likely to be worth much, much more. Buying them at that price would still leave the banks under water and struggling for air.

If the free market is to be suspended, then the government will have to set a price for the toxic assets, but administered pricing has a dismal history, which may be the reason why Paulson could not figure out a method to set one, and why Geithner apparently is doing no better. If Geithner does come up with a price, which is politically palatable but economically ridiculous, the banks will still be dysfunctional zombies.

Why then do the decision-makers not suck in their guts, bite the bullet, take the plunge and put the banks into receivership or some other form of bankruptcy? That's what the bakemonos are telling them to do.

Doubtless they are scared out of their wits at what that might do to the stock market. The market will take a big hit, but in due course it will bobble up again. That's what markets do.

They are scared of a financial landscape in which institutions such as Citigroup and Bank of America have been temporarily nationalized. Besides their own friends, the stockholders in these institutions include pension, hedge and mutual funds. These, as well as thousands of individual investors will be wiped out, erased, liquidated. The same may hold true for the bondholders. A lot of people, most of whom are undeserving of such treatment, are going to be badly hurt.

They will be less badly hurt if the deed is done now than they will after 10 painful, profitless and demoralizing years have passed, and so will the country as a whole. The damage done by stalling until 2020 will be as great to this society as it was to daily life in Japan.

Mercy-killing the insolvent financial institutions is scary. The lives and happiness of millions are at stake. All the more reason to listen to the bakemonos, because this ghost story is true.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: economy, obama, japan, bailout, financial crisis, geithner, the banks

Nicholas Von Hoffman is a columnist for the New York Observer and is an author, most recently, of Hoax (Nation Books, 2004).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Nice Column Nick ... Yawn ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Feb 18, 2009 12:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"the highest price the assets would fetch is about 22 cents on the dollar, even though in a few years they are likely to be worth much, much more."

Really? Defaulted loans are likely to be worth more later on? The average real estate cycle is about 10 years. We won't hit bottom until 2011 or 2012 by which time the underlying real estate will have been sold and the losses booked. This is just another of his ploys to speechify for his buddies, the bond holders.

He did get one thing correct, we need to nationalize the banks. Watch for him to vomit a plan to help the Bond Boys.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nationalization or bankruptcy?
Posted by: JayHaden on Feb 19, 2009 1:11 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As soon as Alan Greenspan came out in favor of nationalization of banks, I instinctively thought, "No, we need a stake through the heart, or taxpayers, as the new owners, will end up paying for all the bad debt." I don't know the exact difference between bankruptcy, receivership and nationalization, but I would now be more in favor of the first two over the latter.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nationalize now or later
Posted by: Democritus on Feb 19, 2009 3:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When William Grieder and Lindsay Graham agree on anything, it should be taken seriously. The "zombie" banks are going to be a drag on the economy. If we don't nationalize them now, we'll have to do it later. Now seems to be better.

By the way, I'm a shareholder in one of these zombies (Bank of America), but I think it's time to "take a hit" for the team.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ghost banks....
Posted by: carolcsme on Feb 21, 2009 7:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...Jarbalo, Kansas once had a bank, a gas station, a post office and two stores. And my uncle had a gas pump. It is now a "suburb" of another town. I recall three candies for a penny, later one, and finally 5 cents each, at the general store. The bank probably folded during the depression, if not before. The post office had small-sized individual mailboxes, but the grange hall was locked.

How odd. Where all the little towns emptied into the cities into the suburbs, and three or four generations living in the family home became replaced by 2-3 bedroom cottages, it seems we are up for another change...and no one has yet defined any likely outcomes. This is a good time for the creative artist who likes to ask "What if?"

Someone needs to explain very clearly how it is to our benefit to prop up banks which reward bad behavior with humongous bonuses. When anger turns to hopelessness, the results are not good, and our leadership seems to be divorced from that realistic understanding. How can ANYONE justify "slice-and-dice" mortgages which are "too complicated" to refi? Who ever heard of a real estate investment which turned into a debt? Losing a property, yes, but owing AFTER the loss? And our legislators allowed the lack of regulation which led to this.

The dead should lie still. If a bank is dead, bury it. If not, require responsible behavior. What kind of bonuses do banks give out when they do well?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement