America's Financial Crisis

[Armenian]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Integration into a global system is not bad per se. Trade and investment and the flow of capital should be encouraged and is in fact necessary in this mode of economics. The key for other countries was that they had relied too much on the dollar.

Well, that is why I made the point to Skhara that other nation are doing badly today (including Russia) because of their full integration into the global financial system which is lead by the largest economy on earth, America, and because of their dependence on the dollar. In essence, we have not had a free market economy. What we have had for a long time is 'one' economic/military/political/cultural superpower setting standards and trends for everyone else. The this superpower suffers so will the rest of the world. That is the fundamental problem I see. This is the fundamental problem we need to remedy. But things are gradually changing. Question is what will the resulting mess look like... And you are right, Japan, China, Germany, Saudi Arabia, etc., prolonged the inevitable, perhaps even made it much worst.

Too bad this man couldn't be president. Wisdom.

Wisdom, indeed. A great man. It's a total shame that the current system automatically rejects these types of individuals. He is also of a caliber the vast majority of Americans today will not and cannot understand. What a sad time for this country.

[Armenian]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Merkel Calls U.S. Irresponsible

The U.S. government was irresponsible in regard to world markets when it allowed its largest banks and financial institutions to operate without sufficient oversight, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at a meeting of conservative leaders in Linz, Austria, the Associated Press reports. "Anyone who makes a real product knows how it is supposed to look and what standards are expected. In financial markets you also need to know what is being traded. Otherwise, things happen that we all end up paying for," Merkel said. Somewhat earlier, in an interview with German media, Merkel said that she sympathizes with people who wonder if the world economy is “fair.” Problems on the mortgage market and interbank crediting practically paralyzed the U.S. financial system earlier this year and caused a number of large companies to close. Federal authorities closed the IndyMac bank, with assets of $32 billion, in July. On September 15, Lehmann Brothers, one of the oldest American investment banks, filed for bankruptcy. The U.S. government nationalized major mortgage companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to avoid the collapse of credit markets. Along with the bad news in the United States, a series of painful collapses began around the world. The Russian stock market was rescued from danger by massive financial support from the government and Central Bank.

Source: http://www.kommersant.com/p-13260/wo...onomic_crisis/

[Armenian]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

The American Empire: Too Big to Fail?

Who gets bailed out – and who doesn't by Justin Raimondo

In reading about the federal bailout of all those financial wheeler-dealer outfits that are supposedly "too big to fail," the layman may be forgiven for failing to comprehend the intricacies of the arcane financial instruments currently backfiring on their whiz-kid inventors. Such exotic creatures as "credit default swaps" may elude the understanding of the hoi polloi, but one thing the man in the street does know: he'll never be "too big to fail," of that he can be sure. He's just not the Bear-Stearns type, and Congress would never shell out a penny before he loses his savings and his home, which – due to the propaganda of Panglossian economics, whereby houses stopped being homes and became investments – amount to pretty much the same thing. The paper-pushers of Wall Street made untold trillions out of a policy that was doomed to fail [.pdf] in advance, and whose critics have long predicted would end in precisely the manner our tale of economic woe is unfolding.

The policy of bank credit expansion, which enriches the already wealthy at the expense of the rest of us, has a fatal allure. It induces an initial euphoria, the false promise of permanent prosperity. This Panglossian view is the perfect economic system for an emerging empire, especially one with such inflated pretensions as ours. It is the economics of hubris – the same grandiosity that let us imagine we could implant "democracy" in the arid soil of Iraq and make the desert bloom. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. bestrode the earth like a colossus, America's stock was rising, and the pride that goeth before a fall imbued our leaders with the illusion that they couldn't fail. The American empire, they thought, is too big to fail. It's the end of history – and the rest will just be a mopping-up operation, that will be well worth the costs. The failed policies that led to our current economic predicament – the whole system of central banking and fiat currency – are precisely those policies that benefited those who are now demanding to be bailed out. They may have bankrupted the country, but you can be damned sure they aren't going down with the rest of us, no sirree!

This outrageous rip-off is mirrored in the foreign policy realm, where the very same crowd that dragged us waist-deep into the Middle Eastern quicksand are lecturing us from every podium. The neocons who brought us the Iraq war are directing John McCain's campaign, hanging on to power for dear life, shamelessly touting their alleged "success" even as the $3 trillion bill comes in and the people ask "For what?' These are the real dead-enders, the ones who believe that George W. Bush never implemented his self-proclaimed "global democratic revolution," but they will. The same foreign lobbyists who pushed for the overthrow of Saddam Hussein by U.S. force of arms have now turned their sights on Iran. The same newspaper columnists and professional know-it-alls who imagined that we would have a quick victory in Iraq – that it would be a "cakewalk," as one of the more arrogant neocons once put it – are still dominating the official discourse with their calls to action on this front and that. Bill Kristol, the little Lenin of the neocons, who made the Iraq war his vocation, was awarded a coveted pulpit on the op-ed page of the New York Times. Other people are demoted for advocating failed policies, but members in good standing of the War Party are promoted. They, too, are too big to fail. When the bill comes due, American taxpayers – and grieving parents and loved ones of the fallen – will have to pay, while the authors of our suicidal foreign policy get off scot-free.

The war profiteers aren't just the arms manufacturers, the Halliburtons, and the "private" international security firms who do the empire's dirty work. Key to the War Party are the intellectuals who gain prestige and real power over policymaking and public opinion on the strength of their reputations as paladins of interventionism. In some cases, these two types are embodied in the same people, Richard Perle being the exemplar. In any event, what's becoming increasingly clear is that the bailout brothers are all members of the same clan: think of them as a Mafia family, with a strict hierarchy of authority and command, albeit an informal one. At the top is the Don, finance capital, which controls the engine and sits at the dashboard pressing buttons according to a pattern: first inflation, then deflation, boom then bust, peace and then war again. But the bailout boys always parachute to safety before disaster envelopes the rest of us. Which is why failure only emboldens them. Our rulers really do believe their empire is too big to fail, but of all the would-be lords of creation, our own ruling elite may have the shortest reign – and the hardest fall. The engine that runs the machinery of imperialism is breaking down at key junctures, and the whole structure is teetering and creaking ominously, as if to presage the coming implosion.

For the truth of the matter is that the very bigness of the American Imperium, the sheer scope of its rulers' ambition, is precisely what is fated to bring about its downfall, and a very messy and painful descent it will surely be. As I relate in Reclaiming the American Right: The Lost Legacy of the Conservative Movement, during Rose Wilder Lane's eye-opening trip to the Soviet Union in the 1920s she met a Russian peasant who predicted, with perfect accuracy, the fate of the commissars some 70 years later: "'It's too big,' he said. 'Too big. At the top, it is too small. It will not work. In Moscow, there are only men, and man is not God. A man has only a man's head, and one hundred heads together do not make one great head. No. Only God can know Russia.'" The problem is that some men think they are gods. In the end, however, we will all pay the price for their hubris – the guilty as well as the innocent – as the American empire meets the fate of its Soviet predecessor, and for the same reason.

Source: http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13489

[Sip]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

... And you are right, Japan, China, Germany, Saudi Arabia, etc., prolonged the inevitable, perhaps even made it much worst.

In any addiction scenario, you have the dealers and you have the junkies. They both benefit for a while until the junkie ends up in rehab (or worse).

[freakyfreaky]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Could be a good time to be long on gold and short on the U.S. dollar.

[Lernakan]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Here is an interesting documentary they showed on dutch tv a few days ago. Only the first minute or so you will hear dutch after that it's mostly in english.
"Sponsors for Uncle Sam" Link:

http://player.omroep.nl/?aflID=7933615

first you'll see an advertisement after that the documentary will start and you can watch it big screen.

[Armenian]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Here is an interesting documentary they showed on dutch tv a few days ago.

"the more the world loans us money to consume the deeper the problems gonna get. We are just gonna keep on borrowing and keep on spending. We are like a heroin addict. You know, the solution isn't to keep supplying of some more heroin, the solution is to cut us off, let us go through the withdrawal..."

Thank you enker, deeply naive individuals like Sheep boy and Sip, should watch this sobering report. I wonder why we Americans don't have the right (or the privilege) to see these types of programing on mainstream television? Instead we are forced to watch a tacky three ring circus - CNN, MSNBC and FOX...

[Anoush]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Well, I just saw on Channel 60 that they're now talking about 700 Billion dollars deficit and they say that they have found a solution to ask from every household to pay up to $10,000. That is, the taxpayers have to come up with that money. How nice and how interesting for the lower and middle class people who happen to have budgetted and very limited income.

OPEN LETTER TO CONGRESS ON THE $700 BILLION PAULSON BAILOUT PLAN

Dear Congress

Treasury Secretary Paulson is asking you to rush through a $700 billion package because "we're literally maybe days away from a complete meltdown of our financial system".

Paulson states that it must be done quickly and that it is better than the alternatives. Fed Chairman Bernanke agrees.

The firsy question Congress should ask is how would Paulson or Bernanke know?

It was only a month ago Paulson was reiterating to anyone who would listen how sound our banking system is. The fact of the matter is that neither Paulson nor Bernanke saw this coming, yet now Congress is supposed to trust they now "know" the solution.

Problem Defined

Before one can work out a solution, the first step is to identify the problem. The problem is not a lack of liquidity, it is not a lack of trust, it is not lack of consumer confidence, it is not subprime lending, and in fact the problem is not housing at all.

The problem is consumers and corporations are deep in debt with no way to service that debt.

Attempts to bail out banks and brokers at taxpayer expense will do nothing but add to consumer debt, weaken the US dollar, and literally waste $700+ billion dollars that can and should go to more productive uses.

What Caused the Problem?

* The Fed
* Congress
* Fractional Reserve Lending
* The Treasury

The root cause of this problem is the Fed micromanaging interest rates, the Treasury cheerleading every step of the way, and Congressional sponsored spending that went wild. The critical issue that ties everything together is fractional reserve lending allows banks to borrow money (credit really) into existence with insane amounts of leverage.

To top it all off, Greenspan slashed rates to 1% fueling the biggest global housing bubble the world has ever seen. Congress needs to figure out a way to eliminate the Fed.

Fed Uncertainty Principle

I kindly ask of you to please read the Fed Uncertainty Principle written April 03, 2008 before any hint of this meltdown occurred. Here is Corollary Number Two.

Uncertainty Principle Corollary Number Two:

The government/quasi-government body most responsible for creating this mess (the Fed), will attempt a big power grab, purportedly to fix whatever problems it creates. The bigger the mess it creates, the more power it will attempt to grab. Over time this leads to dangerously concentrated power into the hands of those who have already proven they do not know what they are doing.

Why The Paulson Solution Fails

The Paulson solution fails because it does not help consumers or businesses service debt, it does not create any jobs, it increases the national debt, and it encourages more reckless lending by banks. Attempting to bail out banks on the back of cash strapped consumers is simply doomed to fail.

If printing money was the solution to all problems, Zimbabwe would be the most prosperous country in the world.

The Barney Frank Non-Solution

"We're going to be buying up a lot of mortgage paper" said House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank.

Sadly, that will not do a single thing in and of itself to stop foreclosures. All that will do is bail out banks and brokers at taxpayer expense.

Barney Frank also stated "We should be more willing to write down the mortgages. We'll become the lender. The government will wind up in a controlling position so that we can reduce the number of foreclosures."

Congress needs to ask "How much extra will Barney Frank's proposal cost taxpayers?"

Where does the madness end?

As stated earlier the problem is not housing in the first place, and besides taxpayers who pay their mortgages on time should not be subsidizing those who don't!

Banks Need To Recapitalize

Paulson wants to recapitalize banks so they can keep lending. Ironically, one of the problems is lending. The US has been on a credit binge to such an extent that I have to ask what more do we need? More Pizza Huts? More Home Depots? More Houses? More Nail Salons? More Car Dealers? What?

What is the urgent need to lend still more?

We are in this mess because of too much reckless lending. We do not need more lending, we need more saving!

Paulson's idea that more lending is needed is ass backwards. Paulson's proposal cheapens the dollar, and discourage the one thing that is desperately needed: saving.

Alternatives Discussed

In the mad rush to push through this package, Paulson states it is beter than the alternatives. That is an interesting statement because no alternative have even been presented to Congress, let alone discussed.

Shouldn't there be a discussion of alternatives before doing a mad dash to sign a $700 billion package?

Paulson is attempting to hoodwink Congress to pass his plan without any discussion of alternatives. I believe the Paulson proposal is the worst of all solutions in that it bails out banks at the expense of the taxpayer and the taxpayer gets virtually nothing out of the deal: no jobs, no tax relief, no health care.

Paulson claims that taxpayer will benefit by the bailout indirectly because once the government owns the debt, servicers will be more willing to negotiate terms. Once again, it will be taxpayers on the hook for any negotiation granted. Paulson conveniently ignores this cost as does Barney Frank.

Taxpayer Gets Nothing From Current Bailout Proposals

The taxpayer gets nothing for this bailout $700 billion. Actually the taxpayer gets a negative benefit because the Paulson and Frank proposals will cheapen the US dollar, increase the deficit, and ultimately cause prices of imported goods to rise for everyone, while saving a relative few.

The solution is to address the recapitalization of banks in a fair way that does not jeopardize the taxpayer but instead puts the onus of responsibility on banks making reckless lending.

Recapitalizing Banks

Banks are undercapitalized. They need funding badly. Here is what I propose.

* Reduce the capital gains tax by 50% for any investor willing to cash out stocks and invest in 5 year bank CDs.
* Eliminate the difference between long term and short term capital gains.
* Eliminate taxable interest on savings accounts, CDs, and US treasuries.

The above would promote saving rather over speculation and provide a big boost in government revenues as well. Stock prices will not be affected over the long haul by these measures.

Jobs, Jobs, Jobs

I am a libertarian. I do not believe in makeshift government proposals. However, I would rather get something than nothing for $700 Billion. Paulson's proposal scores a big fat zero in term of providing any jobs or any real economic stimulus.

It is no secret that infrastructure in the US is decaying and needs to be fixed. A collapsing bridge in Minnesota is one key example. And what out our aging energy grid? Instead of giving $700 Billion to banks that deserve to go under, I would rather give half that for jobs programs.

To create as many jobs as possible at the least cost Congress needs to scrap the Davis-Bacon Act. It would be better to create 3 construction jobs at $12 an hour than 1 job at $36 an hour. The idea here is to get as most bang for the buck and create as many jobs as possible for the money spent.

Waste In Iraq

We need to admit the mistakes in Iraq. The public never supported this war and the public was correct. The war in Iraq easily cost $1 trillion dollars if you count future medical bills. That is $1 trillion dollars that could have been spent right here in the US.

I propose we decalre the war won and get out, totally and completely. Offer returning veterans first crack at any infrastructure rebuilding jobs. It is the least we can do to those who are likely going to be emotionally if not physically scarred for the rest of their lives fighting a war that never should have been fought.

Congressional Spending

Congress needs to admit its own role in this mess. Congress passed hundresds of programs to make housing more affordable. They all failed including the biggest failure of all : Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

It should not be the role of Congress to promote housing vs. renting. The very act of doing so creates an artificial demand for housing. Ownership society madness culminated with many financially unqualified to buy a house buying house anyway because Congress and the White House promoted the idea.

Congress is also directly responsible for deficit spending and that weakened the US dollar. Indeed there was virtually a panic out of dollars for this reason. Adding another $700 Billion to the deficit as Paulson is asking you to do is adding insult upon injury. Don't do it.

Instead balance the budget. It can be done.

Who am I to suggest what Congress should do? I am nobody. However, this nobody and a bunch of fellow nobody bloggers and bunch of nobody fund managers who I respect all saw this all coming 3-4 years ago. Paulson did not, Bernanke did not, and almost everyone in Congress did not.

So the choice Congress needs to make is who to believe. Congress can believe Bernanke and Paulson who have been totally wrong about everything for years, or Congress can listen to people who not only understand what is happening but predicted it.

Desire To Believe

You desperately want to believe that Paulson and Bernanke are telling the truth. You have for years put your faith and trust in them. It is a very difficult thing to do to admit you are wrong.

However, it is critical that you look at the simple facts for what they are.

The fact is Paulson is grasping at straw in a tornado. So is Bernanke. Problems cannot be cured by printing money, and problems cannot be on the backs of already overburdened consumers.

No problem is fixed by madly and blindly rushing into solutins where no alternatives are discussed. You now have alternatives.

I will also offer one more alternative but it is not from me. I kindly ask Congress to consider An Open Letter to the U.S. Congress Regarding the Current Financial Crisis by John P. Hussman, Ph.D., an economist and investment manager whose opinion I trust.

Hussman too has an opinion as to how to address this issue without impacitng the taxpayer. For the record, I have no idea what he might think of my proposal.

However, between the Hussman proposal and mine, I am sure there is fertile ground for further discussion and for doing something other than what I believe to be the worst possible alternative, the proposal submitted by Treasury Secretary Paulson.

No problem is too big that a solution has to be rushed into without considering the alternatives. I ask that you consider these alternative proposals either over an extended session or by letting the next Congress tackle the issue.

Heaven help us if recess is more important than taking the time to seriously consider all reasonable alternatives.

Sincerely

Mish
GlobalEconomicAnalysis.blogspot.com

[Anoush]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Thank you enker, deeply naive individuals like Sheep boy and Sip, should watch this sobering report. I wonder why we Americans don't have the right (or the privilege) to see these types of programing on mainstream television? Instead we are forced to watch a tacky three ring circus - CNN, MSNBC and FOX...

Dear Armenian,

Unfortunately the American media is controlled by a few and they put out what they want you to see.

However, if Americans want to listen the real and truthful news they should seek it elsewhere; btw, British and European news media. Then they'll really know the actual facts and what's really going on in the world.

[yerazhishda]

Re: America's Financial Crisis

Doesn't this bailout seem all too familiar to the weeks preceding the Iraq War. i.e. *certainly* we have to approve the bailout without question and immediately because if we don't there will be "dire consequences"? They're creating a sense of fear in the American public and then telling the public what they "need" to quell the problem. Of course it is only to achieve their own interests - which have yet to be fully and completely understood.