Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Zombie Banks Are Devouring Our Public Money with No End in Sight

By Bill Moyers, Bill Moyers Journal. Posted March 4, 2009.


What needs to be done to protect the American taxpayer from the next round of multi-hundred billion dollar layoffs.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

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

In Special Coverage

Belief:
Nobel Laureate Slams the Bible, Calls It "A Catalogue of Cruelties"
Mario de Queiroz

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
As Foreclosure Nightmares Increase, Will More Homeowners Pay Off Their Bankers in Violence?
Scott Thill

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

Environment:
Why the End May Be Coming for Coal
Christine MacDonald

Food:
Despite Censorship By Beef Magnate, Michael Pollan Spreads Message About the Real Price of Cheap Food

Health and Wellness:
New York May Stop Heartless Health Insurers from Dropping Coverage When It Stops Being Profitable
William Ehart

Immigration:
NYC Marathon Raises Question of Who Is American Enough?
James E. Johnson, Jr.

Media and Technology:
Study Claims Even the Most Sophisticated Readers Can Be Manipulated
Melinda Burns

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

Politics:
What Michelle and Barack's Marriage Has in Common with 56 Million Other Ones
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Fetus-Shaped Potatoes? Going Undercover Inside the Weird World of Right-Wing Abortion Foes
Ann Neumann

Rights and Liberties:
"My Kids Want to Hide Their Identity; They're Scared Someone Will Attack Us": U.S. Muslims Being Targeted
Jaisal Noor

Sex and Relationships:
Instant Sex: Has the Digital Age Destroyed Relationships or Made Them Better?
Vanessa Richmond

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

Water:
Why Natural Gas Is Not a Clean Energy Panacea
Stan Cox

World:
With Unemployment at 40 Percent, Afghan Teens Enlist in Army, Police
Lal Aqa Sherin

More stories by Bill Moyers

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The following is a transcript from the Feb. 27 edition of Bill Moyers Journal.

Remember when economists poked fun at Ronald Reagan's voodoo economics? Well, now they are dead serious about so-called "zombie banks" - financial giants like Citigroup and Bank of America whose debts are greater than their assets, with stock worth less than zero, and they're only able to stay alive by devouring federal bailout bucks. Those banks, in turn, are terrified by talk that the government might come in and nationalize them. Well, some critics ask, why not? Given all this, I wanted to talk to a man with a clear-eyed perspective on the worldwide economic impact of this banking crisis.

Robert Johnson was once the Chief Economist of the Senate Banking Committee under the chairmanship of that fiercest of budget pit-bulls, the late Wisconsin Senator William Proxmire. Johnson became a Managing Director at Soros Fund Management, and now serves on a United Nations Commission recommending reforms of the international monetary and financial system. ...

Given what we know is happening around the world, are you scared?

Johnson: Yes I am.

Moyers: What scares you the most?

Johnson: That everybody will stand and watch and cater to past patterns of power. The banking system has been the dominant sector in our society and in our politics, which is heavily money driven, for a very long time. As they falter, we could stagnate, catering to their needs disproportionately while the system sinks.

Moyers: This week, a term came into play that I hadn't heard before. People refer to Citibank, Citigroup, as zombie banks. What's a zombie bank?

Johnson: A zombie bank is a bank that's insolvent that's allowed to continue its activity. It's allowed to go on living as a dead financial entity.

Moyers: And what's the threat to the financial system of a zombie bank?

Johnson: That the zombie will continue to lose more, and the taxpayer, kind of off the government's budget, will continue to experience larger and larger burden of future losses.

Moyers: So are these negotiations going on this week between Treasury and Citigroup crucial to this process?

Johnson: I think they're crucial to the process. I also think, if you're going to allow them to act as zombies, then the regulators need to be really fierce. To curtail the activities within the bank while it's motoring along, hoping for a rebound.

Moyers: This is what puzzles me. I mean, Citigroup executives who got that bank into this ditch, seem to have as much authority in dealing with the government, the Treasury, as the Treasury has in dealing with them. Does that seem right to you?

Johnson: It doesn't seem right, but it does seem real. When one looks at websites, like OpenSecrets.org, and looks at the scale of campaign contributions that come from Wall Street, one understands why Wall Street, how do I say -- when they talk, people listen.

On the other side of that issue, the flood lights are so bright now we're talking about $700 billion for TARP. Obama has asked for another $750 billion in the budget this week for the banks.

We're talking a trillion and a half dollars. People can't do sneaky things on the side as easily. Because the scrutiny, the watchdogs have now arrived. They understand this is a colossal problem. So I do think there's more scope for good public policy because it's such a large and deep crisis.

Moyers: What have you learned this week about the Obama plan that encourages you?

Johnson: What encourages me is they're talking about very profound changes in financial regulation. I have yet to see the details. But Mr. Obama made a statement, a couple days ago, that was very, very concrete about: the old rules don't work.

President Barack Obama: And I intend to hold these banks fully accountable for the assistance they receive, and this time they will have to clearly demonstrate how taxpayer dollars result in more lending for the American taxpayer. This time, this time CEOs won't be able to use taxpayer money to pad their paychecks or buy fancy drapes or disappear on a private jet. Those days are over.

Johnson: He also spoke about what you might call free market fundamentalism. Unfettered, unregulated markets as one pole, and what you might call administrative socialism as another pole. We've got to end up somewhere in the middle. Where the market's dynamism and flexibility is honored, but where you have real regulation and real enforcement. It's been a long time since the president has talked like that. So I think that's a hopeful sign.


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

See more stories tagged with: economy, bill moyers, robert johnson

Bill Moyers is the host of Bill Moyers Journal.

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:
Tax Payer Alert! ... Zombie Banks Could Take Big Risks Or Worse!
Posted by: mmckinl on Mar 4, 2009 12:34 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And why wouldn't they? They already know that they are for all intents and purposes bankrupt. With tax payer money they could make really risky bets trying to recover the lost money and lose hundreds of billions more of tax payer dollars!

This is why we need to nationalize or restructure, call it what you want, these banks, Citi, BAC, Wells and JP Morgan right now. The temptation to role the dice or even use one of these banks as a tax payer pigy bank for the others will be almost irresistible, if it hasn't happened already. We have already seen the Fed underwrite bankrupt AIG to dispense funds to these Wall Street Banks to the tune of tens of trillions of tax payer dollars.

These banks already have the vehicle to use Citi or BAC as their sacrificial cash cow to plunder. The company is called The Clearing House LLC. All four of these banks are on the board of this bank and the bank is the clearing house for their business together. One or two of these banks could be used to underwrite known losses for the others through cooked derivative or CDS trades and the tax payers would be on the hook for the damage.

Obama needs to "restructure" ( nationalize ) now. Then they need to check for cooked transactions ... We still don't know for a fact who got the AIG bailouts as the take over was held under the guise of the privately owned and operated Federal Reserve. Since the Fed is private the bailout recipients are held secret as " client privilege". Our money ... their secret!

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

» RE: 9/11 was an inside job Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» No, Ezra Pound was not Jewish. Posted by: GuitarBill
» Another Dufus that can't read Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Here's the quote: Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: Here's the quote: Posted by: inanaturallight
» Read the words! Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: ead the words! Posted by: EncinoM
» Only if you can't read Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Try again, Gold Bug. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Only if you can't read Posted by: EncinoM
» You're the one who can't read. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: You're the one who can't read. Posted by: inanaturallight
» I guess logic isn't your strong suit Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Logic? Riddle me this, Gold Bug. Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Logic? Riddle me this, Gold Bug. Posted by: ReallyBearish
» RE: wanna hear something funny? Posted by: Sister_Lauren
The banks aren't the only zombies
Posted by: Zeugitai on Mar 4, 2009 1:53 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
American taxpayers have been virtually comatose as these -- not zombies, but vampires -- suck trillions of dollars out of their financial veins. The people are thralls of the national ideology and will mount no real protest, like Lucy and Mina in Dracula. It would be unpatriotic to refuse to continue to allow American financial institutions (and the greedy vampires that haunt them) to "fail." It is mass insanity, and I find it impossible to pity the fools who go on slaving away day after day to feed an entire class of ruthless vampires.

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

» RE: Tin hat dude Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: Tin hat dude Posted by: amerimet
Tell It, Brother
Posted by: Revolutionary (Direct) Democracy on Mar 4, 2009 2:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Moyers: What scares you the most?

Johnson: That everybody will stand and watch and cater to past patterns of power.


FREE AMERICA

REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY

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

Zero tolerance
Posted by: mizipi on Mar 4, 2009 3:16 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In the War on Drugs, the government can seize the assets of those arrested or even accused, even before an indictment or conviction. So, if we seized the billion$ that have been looted from our banks - money that is now sitting in banks in the Caymen Islands, the Channel Islands and elsewhere, THEN I might have a shred of hope for our system here in the US. But, believe me, the rich will get richer, the middle-class and poor will lose assets and opportunity. Our entire executive and legislative branches of government need to be purged just like the tons of crawfish soon to be purged here in the South. We need to get rid of the mud and grit!

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

Do People REALLY THINK this is "For Our Own GOOD"?
Posted by: madmax427 on Mar 4, 2009 3:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Bankers" (more properly called Gamblers!) are ripping the People of the United States off at the biggest & fastest rate EVER, while "Little People" Like Me are being Censored by the N.S.A.! I have NOT been able to post but ONE entry on My website since 10 February, 2009 on My OWN Computer!! I have had to use My Friends to post!

www.whatsyourlifeworth2.info

LOOK around You! The 9/11 "Official Story" (blatantly Fictional), The Patriot Act, Bank Bailout after Bailout while Foreclosures take away Homes (like Mine!), "Homeland" Security (Straight from Nazi Germany!), FEMA "Camps" (as in Concentration Camps for U.S. Citizens!), The "Monsanto" take over of Our FOOD supply Enforced by "Homeland Security" no less.

A Friend of Mine put it like it truly is: "We the People" are acting like Lemmings: Blindly running to the edge of Our favorite Cliff!"!

In stead of living through this Revolting situation, We SHOULD be REVOLTING AGAINST IT! It is too late to GROW some balls, so BORROW SOME!

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

» Take back the media Posted by: weathered
» Effective communication Posted by: mizipi
» RE: Effective communication Posted by: tony_opmoc
» RE: ffective communication Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» I am sorry Posted by: mizipi
» RE: I am sorry Posted by: tony_opmoc
Who are the counterparties?
Posted by: Exile65 on Mar 4, 2009 5:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have read hundreds of stories about the amount of debt that the banks hold, bringing them into negative equity and zombiehood.

In my simplistic understanding of financial contracts, there are always two parties. If one party owes a debt, there is a second party to whom the money is owed. So if the banks owe hundreds of billions, and taxpayer money needs to be paid into them to cover those debts - who is receiving that money? Because whoever that is - they will have loads of money. Does that money go back into the economy?

Or is the "lost" money just money that was created by fiat by the bank as a new loan? So it has already gone back into the economy (people who took the loan went and bought stuff). And now the bank would like the loan back but it is not coming back? So who is the money owed to? The bank? Another zombie bank? The Fed? If a bank creates money out of thin air to make a loan, and the loan is not paid back, the bank fails to profit from that loan. But it is not as if the bank has lost money. Why not just write the loan off? Is it because it goes on the balance sheet as a negative asset? But if banks can create money out of thin air to make loans, why don't they just create money to loan to each other? An unpaid loan is inflationary - it adds to the money supply, someone spends it and does not pay it back to the originating bank. But it is not deflationary. And the loan money is out there in someone's pocket.

Where is all this TARP money going to go? Who gets it? Why won't the presence of all that money in the creditor's pocket help the solvency of that creditor, and the economy? Is the debt just fiat money that the banks owe to each other, and the problem is it is all frozen as debt because the banks have no liquidity? How can entities which can create money have no liquidity?

Sorry if this is a too obvious question. I just see the majority of taxpayer money now going to military contractors (the war/pentagon), going to banks (TARP) and going to rich bondholders and foreign governments (interest on the national debt). And I am wondering why that money is not recycling back through the economy.

This is a major transfer of money from the middle class (taxpayers) and small business to a very small group of already wealthy entities.

And I don't want an answer along the lines of "you need to be an expert to understand this". In my experience most financial issues are very straightforward ones that boil down to numbers adding up in both the "in" and the "out" column. When they don't add up, it means someone is cheating.

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

» RE: Who are the counterparties? Posted by: tony_opmoc
» As I understand it... Posted by: BlackBook
» RE: As I understand it... Posted by: Exile65
» RE: As I understand it... Posted by: Livemike
» http://www.chrismartenson.com/ Posted by: archivist
Means of Production?!
Posted by: inanaturallight on Mar 4, 2009 5:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The statement that nationalizing banks causes the government to own the means of production is a complete LIE!!! The ONLY thing that banks do is create money out of THIN AIR. Period. All money is created as debt by banks in this country, and then they get the interest on those debts. Industry, the work of people creating goods and services, is the means of production, and if the banks were nationalized then the financing to enable this production could be done without the cost of massive interest paid to bankers to create money out of thin air. Let "We the People" create the money out of thin air and thus receive the benefits of our efforts instead of those benefits all accruing to the rich bankers.
Don't buy the same old B.S. over and over again, understand that what is being proposed is the same old way. There have been truly prosperous times in this country that were not financed by debt to big banks, when the country itself was the bank. Study the history... and call the statements in this article what they are, which is putting lipstick on a pig and calling it the Queen of (insert your favorite monarchy here).

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

» RE: Means of Production?! Posted by: yesman
» RE: Means of Production?! Posted by: Livemike
Let Them Fail!
Posted by: faceinthecrowd on Mar 4, 2009 6:39 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let these banks fail.

Sell of their parts in bankruptcy, and let a successful bank that didn't make bad decisions come in and take over.

This is how we always solved this sort of problem in the past. Big Government coming in to try to "save" these banks is a pure power grab, and only prolongs the pain. HAHAHAHA As if the government could do anything well...what a joke.

Just get it over with and let them fail.

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

» RE: What's wrong with them Posted by: Sister_Lauren
» RE: What's wrong with them Posted by: Livemike
4 pages is too long
Posted by: pjnaltykins on Mar 4, 2009 6:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I may get flamed for this, but I'm probably not alone here... I have such limited time in the mornings before work to read the news articles, etc., that a 4 page article has to be abandoned after the first page. I always wonder if I am missing something important.

Call it short attention span or whatever... just some feedback that not everybody has hours every day to read (and comment on) Alternet. ;-)

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

» RE: what a whiny complaint Posted by: Sister_Lauren
Nationalize, restructure, bankruptcy words, words, and more words
Posted by: solrev on Mar 4, 2009 6:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The global problem was just touched on the last page, but it is the global problem that is dictating policy. One does not have to be an Einstein to figure out that the quickest and least painful thing to do would be to get out the knife and cut your losses. The unspoken truth is that the globalist virus has spread throughout the planet. If we cut our losses the rest of the world would be forced to cut their losses. The US is the biggest write off the rest of the world would be forced to make. Hello zero dollar. You can not buy oil for euros if no one will give you euros for dollars. With out oil you can not plant or harvest your food source. Without oil our military becomes a weak sister. The mechanisms and relationships for nationalism to replace globalism without all out war are nonexistent. We need to buy time at all costs. Did you ever wonder what all Obama’s college educated people are going to do in a globalist society? How much wealth does it create to colonize the moon and mars? The simple fact is that someday we will have to come back to this planet and clone it. Welcome to the revolution of 2012.

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

If you want to defeat the bullying banks, do what your ancestors did during the Great Depression.
Posted by: maxpayne on Mar 4, 2009 7:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Switch from banks to credit unions and spread the word. And what little limitations there are in CUs are negligible compared to all those ripoffs the banks are throwing at you. Yep, it's time to go local on finance too.

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

Obama, help?
Posted by: archivist on Mar 4, 2009 7:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama took more money from banks in two years than John McCain did in his entire career in Washington.

When I stepped to the booth I had a crisis of conscious, I couldn't vote for either of them.

The main reason I wouldn't vote for Obama is that his credibility, in my eyes, was greatly diminished by the amount of money he took from banks in his very short washington career. I hate banks and have always hated them. Bill Moyers, years ago, did a story on the World Bank and the way in which it used loans to developing countries to make them adjust thier policies to the business interest of multi-national corporations under the guise of humanitarian monetary aid.

My conscious is clear.

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

» RE: Obama, help? Posted by: monkeywrench
The true solution is a civilization freed from money...
Posted by: SevenStarHand on Mar 4, 2009 8:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most people are still stuck on the fallacy that money is the only way to manage a civilization. My discussions of this have been met by various levels of resistance, while people remain enslaved to the delusion that money is somehow a wise thing. Here are some other sources of information that also provide a path away from money. Hope this helps to open your eyes. Slavery is not a wise path through life and there are other positive ways out of this mess.

Venus Project - Redesign of a culture
THe Zeitgeist Movement
ZeitGeist Addendum Video

The above links to/about the related Zeitgeist Movement and The Venus Project provide physical solutions that would correspond nicely to the spiritual-conceptual solutions that I have been offering. Both will be necessary for success. Now the pieces of the puzzle of starting to come together to prove what I have been saying for many years. There are other ways that don't require money and living as proxy-slaves to those that control money. Wisdom and cooperation are the path to a better future for everyone, everywhere. A New Earth freed from the evils of money and deceptive leaders is possible and within reach. The time has arrived to think about true change without the fear of change that keeps certain people and concepts in power.

Money is the lifeblood of the powerful and the chains and key to human enslavement

Peace and Wisdom...

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

CLAIM THESE BANKS AND CEOs AS DEPENDENTS ON TAX RETURNS!
Posted by: barb123 on Mar 4, 2009 8:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To all taxpaying citizens: Let's Claim Ken Lewis and all the other greedy bank CEOs as dependents on our tax return. This is what we do with dependent children... and we are paying their salaries.

Also, inundate the CEOs offices with calls (if you have legitimate reasons, like having bad things happen to you due to negligence on their part (as I have with B of A)). I want to talk to the person whose salary I am paying to have them hear me and rectify their errors. Phone #s all over web.

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

MIT Economist Simon Johnson on bank nationalization
Posted by: Defenestrator on Mar 4, 2009 8:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
MIT Economist Simon Johnson on bank nationalization

The fact is that smaller banks are temporarily nationalized all the time, and that the large ones are basically already "nationalized" in that they would have crashed already were it not for the assumption that the Federal government will bail them out as much as need be.

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

Freedom to farm
Posted by: P.E.A.C.E. on Mar 4, 2009 8:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sorry Mr. Moyers, but without Cannabis agriculture in the resource mix, America is hogtied. You and I have never lived in an era of "free-trade." The chemically corroded banks are predictably piggish at the end of the feast, with the porkfried bureaucracy slopping the voracious chemoligarchy for as long as possible.

Where's the "free trade" in Cannabis prohibition? Why not let organic agriculture work, eliminate the DEA,Organic agriculture has been crippled for seventy years. The most agronomically beneficial, nutritioius, and potentially abundant crop on Earth is out of reach for American farmers.

The ONLY way to get out of the economic mess we're in is by exercising "essential civilian demand" for industrial hemp, as provided for in Executive Order 12919. Hemp has never been truly illegal because it's too valuable.

Because hemp is nutritionally unique and essential, no government can possibly claim rightful jurisdiction over it. Freedom to farm is the first test of religious freedom. Drugs don't make seeds. Herbs do.

I've publicly refused to pay any more money to the government until Cannabis prohibition is ended, and I suggest that you all do the same. If I am prevented from making a living, for no reason, then I cannot in good conscience afford to participate in the dysfunctional bureaucracy that results from essential resource scarcity leading to synergistic collapse and potentiating extinction.

There is no money on a burned out planet. "Global broiling" by increasing UV-B is a much more proximate threat than global warming, because UV-B is killing the indicator species and impacting everyone's health.

The good news is that Cannabis produces atmospheric aerosols that reflect solar radiation and seed cloud formation. HEY! No more chem-trails! Biogenic volatile organic compounds are a proportionate, globally available possible solution that's not being considered.

Because of 'marijuana' prohibition, industrial hemp agriculture is banned, because law enforcement "can't tell the difference between pot and rope" yet you can legally harvest therapeutic Cannabis, but not the kind we could be making into food, fuel, paper, etc.

How bad do things have to get before all solutions are considered?

Next week, the UN is meeting in Vienna to review ten years of failed drug policy. The UNGASS meeting is the perfect opportunity to eliminate the artificial distinctions between drug policy, food insecurity, malnutrition, and emergency climate change mitigation procedures.

I trust that someone out there will intuit the truth and respond in support.

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

My letter to the President
Posted by: robertmc on Mar 4, 2009 8:54 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear President Obama,
I am writing to you asking....begging you to put a stop the the Credit Default Swap monster that is destroying the capital markets, including the pensions of millions of Americans and bankrupting our country. How nervous would you get if I was able to buy $10 million in "fire insurance" against your $100,000 bungalow and then start stacking up gasoline cans in my driveway? This is EXACTLY what is happeneing now in the OTC CDS market right now. It is an absurd form of rigging the market. Without nightly margin supervision on CDS short positions (as it stands now in this 'shadow banking system'), these vehicles have turned into the means to launch monstrous focused attacks on specific companies; the buyer has limited risk and virtually unlimited reward. As a direct and proximate cause of this ability to distort the market it becomes possible to create self-fulfilling prophecies almost on demand, with the people doing it profiting handsomely - at the expense of American workers and otherwise-sound companies.
This form of exploitation of the market must stop. "The Bezzle", as it has become to be known as, WILL be removed from our financial system one way or another. The problem with what we're doing now - refusing to address this issue - means that we will see companies dismantled one-by-one using this "tool" until huge parts of our corporate structure are laid waste, whether they deserve it or not. Had CDS been "common" during the 2000-03 tech wreck Cisco and many other sound firms (Amazon anyone?) would not now exist as a public company as they would have been driven to zero by this very same vehicle.
President Obama: You can stop this with the stroke of a pen. Issue an executive order today that says:
* "Naked", that is, CDS that are not insuring an actual bond, which are not traded on a public exchange with nightly margin supervision, are uncollectable as contrary to the public interest.
* ALL CDS, covering a bond or not, are uncollectable six months hence unless they are traded on a public exchange with nightly margin supervision.
This will force all CDS onto a public exchange and stop OTC dealing in these instruments. It will stop dead the writing of these instruments without the capital behind them to pay. It will stop the speculative attacks right now, resolve most of the AIG issue immediately, and within six months put a stop to all abuse of the CDS marketplace. President Obama, if you fail to do this imminently we may not have a functioning capital market for long enough for Congress to act and put these provisions into a statute. I know the ISDA's members and some others would likely sue the government immediately claiming a "taking". Nonsense; this executive order would only delay collection until the contract is posted to a public exchange and both sides net against the central counterparty, not prevent collection, provided the writer is solvent. If the writer is not solvent then the money isn't there to pay in the first place and the arguing over "takings" is academic since the agreed actions in the contract cannot be performed. A contract to do an impossible thing is not a contract. Let 'em sue - doing so will force discovery of the solvency of the writer of these contracts along with the identification of exactly who owes who what. THAT isn't something that the "market participants" want out in the public, is it?
The insanity must stop now before the capital markets literally consume themselves, destroying not only the guilty firms but those that are otherwise solvent and able to operate through these rough economic times. Has the advice you've received by your advisors (some of whom caused this mess) actually helped anyone other than their cronies on Wall Street? If you do not act soon, confidence will never be restored in the market as there won't be much of a market left.
Sincerely,
Robert M

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

You also have the problem of banks engaging in illegal activities
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Mar 4, 2009 9:35 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
JP Morgan is falling all over itself to short precious metals on the futures exchanges. These trades are in all likelyhood illegal naked shorting, but our crack regulators never saw an illegal trade until years after it happened.

the idea is to keep the chump money in the stock market and not in precious metals, even though precious metals have out performed the stock market by a wide margin in the last 10 year period.

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

Good Advice
Posted by: wormfarmer on Mar 4, 2009 10:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why can't we re-establish regulation, the Glass Stegall act, nationalize the banks, We've been down this road before. The actions of the financiers put us here in the thirties. This criminal behavior must be stopped before we pass the point of no return. We, THE PEOPLE ARE TIRED OF GETTING SCREWED!

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

Black hole analogy
Posted by: willymack on Mar 4, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OK, I'm an astronomy nut, and have been since age eight; I'll admit it. The most exciting thing that's come along in recent years is the black hole, or what's left of a giant star which has exploded, and the core shrunk to a point (singularity) smaller than the period at the end of this sentence. This core is so dense that the normal laws of physics disappear, and even light can't escape from its deadly grip. Spacetime is warped to the extent that if you were just outside the event horizon and were watching an object falling into the black hole, you'd NEVER see it disappear, even if you watched until the end of time. On the other hand, if you were that object, you'd disappear in a nanosecond. This is a theroretical result of Einstein's General Relativity, later refined by superhero, Stephen Hawking. Black holes gobble everything within their sphere of influence ( event horizon), including gas, dust, and whole solar systems, while growing in the process, and that's how their presense became known,because before falling into the hole, the material becomes so hot, it emits radiation in many wavelengths. See where I'm going here? The robber barons who own the banks are nothing but black holes who'll gobble everything of value from every source there is, and never return a dime of it to anyone if allowed to get away with it as they have so far. The ONLY answer to their insatiable greed is seizure of their property and assets by the government, because they can't be reasoned with any more than a black hole can.

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

Oh dear, I voted against both candidates who voted on playing kissface with the banks and yet
Posted by: Jennifer Bedingfield on Mar 4, 2009 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
one of those two Big Bank shills "won" ! I feel sorry for you folks out there who voted Obama or Mccain.

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

Shadow banking system
Posted by: chance garden on Mar 4, 2009 11:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The term "shadow" should tell everybody everything they need to know about the current state of financial affairs..."shadow" is quite simply another way to say CORRUPT...

...It is a national disgrace that "the counterparties" are not exposed and brought to justice...finally, Congress may be starting to demand disclosure from the FED regarding to WHOM all the tarp dollars are going...

...the shadow system MUST see the clear light of day if we are to have a chance at ending this scam. Only by banning these "complex financial mechanisms" can we start to achieve some kind of reckoning and balance to the system...

...only by exposing the fraudulent nature of derivatives, CDS, parties and counterparties, can we ever move beyond it...problem is the pols are being intimidated by the wall street crooks...which make the pols pathetic and complicit in their crimes...

...the financial gurus may know how to scam the system, that is very obvious, what they don't know how to do is...run an honest economy that benefits all the earth's people, not just OUR GANG of crooks, or their neighborhood bully enforcers...

...this fraudulent international banking money syndicate system can only be maintained by war and murder...

...Are all the top international bankers economic war criminals?

...Why does the shadow system continue?

Why are the pols powerless to stop it?

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

Personal Responsibility
Posted by: yesman on Mar 4, 2009 3:32 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The so-called "conservatives" (who aren't really conservative at all) and Republicans are always lightning-quick to call out the "personal responsibility" mantra when it's poor people who are in danger. (e.g., "Welfare mothers" need to take personal responsibility for their children, etc.)

But when it comes to reckless bankers who have endangered the entire world economy and the entire world political system with their greed and foolishness, then they get to keep their jobs? How can that even be a question? Where's their "personal responsibility?" The executives of all zombie banks should be fired immediately and should be prosecuted for their misdeeds if possible. At the least, the assets gained by bank executives and shareholders during their period of criminal, treasonous avarice should be seized and used to replenish the public coffers which they now apparently regard as their own bottomless well of largesse.

Replublicans also like to talk about "entitlements." When did private banks become entitled to limitless bailout funds in the form of public dollars? Banks get to keep their "private" profits, but when they screw up royally, they get to socialize their losses--that is, pass their bad debts on to the public (you and me) for payment? I don't think so.

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

I think we can all agree that if nationalization takes place, the FED must be the first one in line
Posted by: CUnknown on Mar 4, 2009 8:39 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Nationalize the Fed. Take back control of our money and all our economic problems will be solved. Keep the Fed as is and we will never solve this problem, we will continue to slide into recession after recession until the US gov goes bankrupt.

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

Brrrrrrrainiins
Posted by: Eat Politicians on Mar 4, 2009 11:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
must eat brains.

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

I'll explain this so that a 3rd grader will understand
Posted by: ReallyBearish on Mar 5, 2009 12:09 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Evidently some of the posters here can't use simple logic regarding the Constitution's clause as to what the states can use as money. So I'll explain it as I would talking to a child.

If the states are forbidden to use anything but gold and silver coin in the payment of debts, it means that they have to use`gold and silver coin to pay off state bond holders. Bond are debt instruments and the Constitution says that states can't use anything but gold and silver coin to pay these off.

It means that state contractors have to be paid in gold or silver coin. State workers have to be paid in gold and silver coin. These are debts that the states have to pay, and the Constitution says that's how these debts have to be paid.

They can't be paid off in Federal Reserve Notes because the Constitution forbids them from using anything but gold and silver coin to pay debts, and Federal Reserve Notes are not gold or silver or converted into gold and silver.

This wasn't a problem back in 1913 because banknotes were convertible into gold and silver coin. Not so today. Simple logic that seems to excape some of you.

Now if you don't like what the Constitution says, AMEND IT. It's quite clear from history that the founding fathers did NOT want fiat money.

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

» Can the courts read? Posted by: ReallyBearish
» These are ad hominem arguments! Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Again, silly accusations. Posted by: ReallyBearish
» Go to Hell Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Go to Hell Posted by: ReallyBearish
would you like some cheese with that?
Posted by: drugs on Mar 5, 2009 8:18 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
nm

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

The regulatory cycle or why new rules aren't the answer.
Posted by: Livemike on Mar 5, 2009 11:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"What encourages me is they're talking about very profound changes in financial regulation."

Doesn't encourage me, here's why (long).

People saying that conclude that if deregulation caused the problem, regulation can solve it. Wrong.

To understand why you abandon the common, largely unconscious assumptions about regulatiors and production of regulation. People assume that wise, impartial regulators sit down, look at the facts, unswayed by intellectual fashion and the irrational exuberance or depression of the market and society, and make wise, impartial, objectively based decisions. Then why are such decisions are only made exactly when they are not needed, as is presently happening? The US and other governments are writing rules about overextending your company, investing too much in doubtful financial assets and everything nobody wants to do any more. It's like making sure everyone has cleaned the leaves out of their gutters after a bushfire has demolished half the town. To understand why they're passing such laws and regulations now, you must understand the financial regulatory cycle and how it trails the monetary cycle.

Stage 1: Crisis, caused by the excesses of monetary expansion. Crisis creates a demand for immediate action to combat the cause of the present catastrophe. The cause is however the state of the regulatory cycle some time in the past so correcting it has no immediate effect.

This causes Stage 2: Action. Regardless of the immediate effects of Action the monetary cycle moves on and things correct themselves. The Action may speed this up, slow it down, make it easier or harder, more expensive or cheaper.

Hence stage 3: Inefficency. Actions taken during more frantic times are observed to be hampering the markets efforts to create wealth. The market is still in recovering from a bust so few people are indulging in boomtime vices, so regulations aren't actually preventing bad behaviour anyway. Their effect is to impose large present costs for very small or nonexistant present gains.

Stage 4: Circumvention. Lobby to remove the restrictions placed in stage 2 occurs to the general apathy of the population. Few if any voters and politicians understand the present rules and why or even if they're important. Resistance to selective deregulation is low as the circumstances that led to the need for the regulation are gone. Firms also develop practices that go around the current rules while having largely the same effects as forbidden practices . This makes the original regulations even less important, even counterproductive if they simply shift activity to less transparent areas. Circumvention accelerates when during times of monetary expansion because caution and restraint are not seen as needed.

The monetary boom plus Circumvention above => Crisis.

Is this cycle inevitable? Might we act appropriately and promptly to prevent the next cycle? Why would we? The whole danger of an asset bubble is that nobody thinks caution is needed without this it doesn't happen.To impose or keep useful regulations regulators must go against the wishes of pretty much everyone who's paying attention to their activities. They can offer any evidence that their actions are warranted, predictions being notoriously difficult in economics. Those wanting to remove restrictions can point to solid evidence of costs in the here and now. In any case in many or even most cases they're right about the high costs and low benefits of regulation, because much of the regulation was passed in panic during stage 2 (Action) when it was felt there was little time to think through the costs and problems. A good case will be made that the actions in the Action stage were hasty and ill-considered and possibly now out of date. Only a general mood of caution and pessimism will defeat this case and that happens too late.

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

» Interesting Posted by: ReallyBearish
KOOK LIBS AGAIN
Posted by: reelman on Mar 6, 2009 11:42 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
THE POOR & HOMELESS

Seen the tape of the “poor and homeless” taking pics of Michelle Obama?…WITH THEIR CELL PHONES.
Eleven trillion of redistributed for the War on Poverty (aka the longest war ever from LBJ)…and here we are…
no time to train or look for a job…but time to find a socialist in power to take a picture of on your own camera phone.

http://conservablogs.com/theconservativecrawfish/

[« 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