Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

    Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’: The Entire Global Financial System is at Risk

    US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner has unveiled his long-awaited plan to put the US banking system back in order. In doing so, he has refused to tell the ‘dirty little secret’ of the present financial crisis. By refusing to do so, he is trying to save de facto bankrupt US banks that threaten to bring the entire global system down in a new more devastating phase of wealth destruction.

    The Geithner Plan, his so-called Public-Private Partnership Investment Program or PPPIP, as we have noted previously is designed not to restore a healthy lending system which would funnel credit to business and consumers. Rather it is yet another intricate scheme to pour even more hundreds of billions directly to the leading banks and Wall Street firms responsible for the current mess in world credit markets without demanding they change their business model. Yet, one might say, won’t this eventually help the problem by getting the banks back to health?

    Not the way the Obama Administration is proceeding. In defending his plan on US TV recently, Geithner, a protégé of Henry Kissinger who previously was CEO of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, argued that his intent was ‘not to sustain weak banks at the expense of strong.’ Yet this is precisely what the PPPIP does. The weak banks are the five largest banks in the system.

    The ‘dirty little secret’ which Geithner is going to great degrees to obscure from the public is very simple. There are only at most perhaps five US banks which are the source of the toxic poison that is causing such dislocation in the world financial system. What Geithner is desperately trying to protect is that reality. The heart of the present problem and the reason ordinary loan losses as in prior bank crises are not the problem, is a variety of exotic financial derivatives, most especially so-called Credit Default Swaps.

    In 2000 the Clinton Administration then-Treasury Secretary was a man named Larry Summers. Summers had just been promoted from No. 2 under Wall Street Goldman Sachs banker Robert Rubin to be No. 1 when Rubin left Washington to take up the post of Vice Chairman of Citigroup. As I describe in detail in my new book, Power of Money: The Rise and Fall of the American Century, to be released this summer, Summers convinced President Bill Clinton to sign several Republican bills into law which opened the floodgates for banks to abuse their powers. The fact that the Wall Street big banks spent some $5 billion in lobbying for these changes after 1998 was likely not lost on Clinton.

    One significant law was the repeal of the 1933 Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act that prohibited mergers of commercial banks, insurance companies and brokerage firms like Merrill Lynch or Goldman Sachs. A second law backed by Treasury Secretary Summers in 2000 was an obscure but deadly important Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000. That law prevented the responsible US Government regulatory agency, Commodity Futures Trading Corporation (CFTC), from having any oversight over the trading of financial derivatives. The new CFMA law stipulated that so-called Over-the-Counter (OTC) derivatives like Credit Default Swaps, such as those involved in the AIG insurance disaster, (which investor Warren Buffett once called ‘weapons of mass financial destruction’), be free from Government regulation.

    At the time Summers was busy opening the floodgates of financial abuse for the Wall Street Money Trust, his assistant was none other than Tim Geithner, the man who today is US Treasury Secretary. Today, Geithner’s old boss, Larry Summers, is President Obama’s chief economic adviser, as head of the White House Economic Council. To have Geithner and Summers responsible for cleaning up the financial mess is tantamount to putting the proverbial fox in to guard the henhouse.

    The ‘Dirty Little Secret’

    What Geithner does not want the public to understand, his ‘dirty little secret’ is that the repeal of Glass-Steagall and the passage of the Commodity Futures Modernization Act in 2000 allowed the creation of a tiny handful of banks that would virtually monopolize key parts of the global ‘off-balance sheet’ or Over-The-Counter derivatives issuance.

    Today five US banks according to data in the just-released Federal Office of Comptroller of the Currency’s Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activity, hold 96% of all US bank derivatives positions in terms of nominal values, and an eye-popping 81% of the total net credit risk exposure in event of default.

    The five are, in declining order of importance: JPMorgan Chase which holds a staggering $88 trillion in derivatives (€66 trillion!). Morgan Chase is followed by Bank of America with $38 trillion in derivatives, and Citibank with $32 trillion. Number four in the derivatives sweepstakes is Goldman Sachs with a ‘mere’ $30 trillion in derivatives. Number five, the merged Wells Fargo-Wachovia Bank, drops dramatically in size to $5 trillion. Number six, Britain’s HSBC Bank USA has $3.7 trillion.

    After that the size of US bank exposure to these explosive off-balance-sheet unregulated derivative obligations falls off dramatically.
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .

  • #2
    Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

    Great Post, Rajiv. This in-your-face concentration of finance capital will, I'm confident, join the herd of mastodons in America's parlor.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

      http://www.thenation.com/blogs/edcut...nced?rel=hpbox

      Very good article about how Greenspan and Rubin conspired to shut up/down Brooksley Born, head of CFTC.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’



        Off with their heads, I say; Off with their heads!!!

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

          The solution to this crisis is one of these:

          To nationalize the banks. To let the american standards of living fall through the floor, eigher through issuance of a gold backed currency and a default, or through a complete devaluation of the dollar, wipe out the middle class and get back to basics. Some proponents of the gold standard seems to think there is an alternative to have deflation and keep the inflated living standards, but that don't work. The living standard have to fall, as it was built on a phony service economy, that only last as long as the credit game is working.

          The other solution is to try a combination of devaluation of the dollar, inflating a lot, push up inflation to a rather high level 10-15 % year on year, keep the banking system going without nationalisation as and keep the credit momentum going through the inflation momentum. However, what the Obama administration is doing is to attemt so halfway solution, where they don't inflate enough, and don't adress the problems with the banks forcefully enough. It's a complete disaster, that they meddle with these halfway solutions that is largely built upon wishful thinking. You can't have low inflation an achieve full employment in the current enviroment, you need the 10 % plus inflation.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

            Engdahl writes a lot, I don't know he how finds the time for it.

            Here are some articles in Geman language
            http://info.kopp-verlag.de/redakteur...m-engdahl.html
            Last edited by D-Mack; March 30, 2009, 09:30 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

              Originally posted by godraz View Post


              Off with their heads, I say; Off with their heads!!!
              Clearly Geithner is the executioner, and the Cheshire Cat represents the ever elusive bankers, in this scenario...
              ...When she got back to the Cheshire Cat, she was surprised to find quite a large crowd collected round it: there was a dispute going on between the executioner, the King, and the Queen, who were all talking at once, while all the rest were quite silent, and looked very uncomfortable.

              The moment Alice appeared, she was appealed to by all three to settle the question, and they repeated their arguments to her, though, as they all spoke at once, she found it very hard indeed to make out exactly what they said.

              The executioner's argument was, that you couldn't cut off a head unless there was a body to cut it off from: that he had never had to do such a thing before, and he wasn't going to begin at HIS time of life.

              The King's argument was, that anything that had a head could be beheaded, and that you weren't to talk nonsense.

              The Queen's argument was, that if something wasn't done about it in less than no time she'd have everybody executed, all round...

              ...The Cat's head began fading away the moment he was gone, and, by the time he had disappeared; so the King and the executioner ran wildly up and down looking for it, while the rest of the party went back to the game...

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
                Clearly Geithner is the executioner, and the Cheshire Cat represents the ever elusive bankers, in this scenario...
                ...When she got back to the Cheshire Cat, she was surprised to find quite a large crowd collected round it: there was a dispute going on between the executioner, the King, and the Queen, who were all talking at once, while all the rest were quite silent, and looked very uncomfortable.

                The moment Alice appeared, she was appealed to by all three to settle the question, and they repeated their arguments to her, though, as they all spoke at once, she found it very hard indeed to make out exactly what they said.

                The executioner's argument was, that you couldn't cut off a head unless there was a body to cut it off from: that he had never had to do such a thing before, and he wasn't going to begin at HIS time of life.

                The King's argument was, that anything that had a head could be beheaded, and that you weren't to talk nonsense.

                The Queen's argument was, that if something wasn't done about it in less than no time she'd have everybody executed, all round...

                ...The Cat's head began fading away the moment he was gone, and, by the time he had disappeared; so the King and the executioner ran wildly up and down looking for it, while the rest of the party went back to the game...
                Precisely!

                Unfortunately, the "game" being played here is one where we continually lose our shirts, pants, wallets, and life's savings even as we attempt to keep our heads! :eek:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                  Originally posted by godraz View Post
                  Precisely!

                  Unfortunately, the "game" being played here is one where we continually lose our shirts, pants, wallets, and life's savings even as we attempt to keep our heads! :eek:
                  "But I don't want to go among mad people," Alice remarked. "Oh, you can't help that," said the Cat: "we're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad." "How do you know I'm mad?" said Alice. "You must be," said the Cat, "or you wouldn't have come here."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                    Anybody notice this?
                    GEITHNER'S TOXIC RECYCLING PLAN NIXED BY BIG FUND

                    Last updated: 4:28 am
                    April 2, 2009
                    Posted: 3:10 am
                    April 2, 2009

                    Bridgewater Associates, the $71 billion money-management firm, has come out against participating in Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner's plan to get private investors to buy banks' toxic assets -- a week after saying it was interested in it.

                    In an investor note obtained by The Post, Bridgewater founder Ray Dalio gave Geithner's plan two thumbs-down, arguing that the hopes of would-be buyers probably won't be met by what the government is offering, especially when it comes to the sale of so-called legacy securities.

                    In the note, which is entitled, "Why We Decided Against Buying in the PPIP and Why We Doubt That It Will be Broadly Subscribed," Dalio cited economic and political concerns with Geithner's Public-Private Investment Program, dubbed PPIP, saying the numbers just don't add up -- at least when it comes to PIPP's legacy-securities program.

                    PPIP aims to remove toxic assets from the system by giving private investors, such as hedge funds and mutual funds, leverage to buy assets through two programs. The legacy-securities program enables those investors to buy older residential and commercial mortgage-backed securities that have been at the heart of many banks' troubles.

                    "When the program was first announced, we were originally interested" because the leverage the government was promising made the assets cheaper. "However, as things now stand, very little leverage is actually being offered via the 'Legacy Securities Program,' " Dalio wrote, pointing out that the leverage offered is just 1-to-1.

                    He also blasted the program for its initial design, saying it is ripe for conflicts, pointing to the plan to hire five asset managers to run everything on behalf of themselves, the government and the other investors.

                    "The managers are clearly in a conflict-of-interest position because they have both the government and the investors to please and because they will get their fees regardless of how these investments turn out," Dalio wrote.

                    Bridgewater's investors include pension funds, endowments and foreign governments.

                    He also questioned the political risks that the program's design could create, saying the limited number of managers "raises possibilities (or at least perceived possibilities) of them colluding because they all know each other."

                    And so regardless of whether the investments make or lose money, "there will be reasons for politicians to complain and to focus on the five winners to see how they 'abused' the system," he wrote.

                    Dalio's criticism of the program is sure to raise eyebrows, as his firm is one of just a handful that would have likely met Treasury's requirements for participation. What's more, Dalio is widely regarded as an influential expert, and recently was named by Alpha Magazine as the fifth-best money maker in the hedge-fund world, behind George Soros.

                    To be sure, Dalio doesn't slam everything about PIPP. Indeed, he doesn't slam the legacy-loan program, in which investors buy loans instead of securities and offers leverage of between 6-to-1 and 12-to-1.

                    But, "we aren't interested in illiquid loans," he said in his note.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                      This should be viewed as shocking news for Geithner, since I believe Bridgewater was only one of 6 or 8 firms eligible, including PIMCO and Blackrock, correct?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                        Originally posted by nero3 View Post
                        The solution to this crisis is one of these:

                        To nationalize the banks. To let the american standards of living fall through the floor, eigher through issuance of a gold backed currency and a default, or through a complete devaluation of the dollar, wipe out the middle class and get back to basics. Some proponents of the gold standard seems to think there is an alternative to have deflation and keep the inflated living standards, but that don't work. The living standard have to fall, as it was built on a phony service economy, that only last as long as the credit game is working.

                        The other solution is to try a combination of devaluation of the dollar, inflating a lot, push up inflation to a rather high level 10-15 % year on year, keep the banking system going without nationalisation as and keep the credit momentum going through the inflation momentum. However, what the Obama administration is doing is to attemt so halfway solution, where they don't inflate enough, and don't adress the problems with the banks forcefully enough. It's a complete disaster, that they meddle with these halfway solutions that is largely built upon wishful thinking. You can't have low inflation an achieve full employment in the current enviroment, you need the 10 % plus inflation.
                        How about another solution. Put JP morgan, Citi, BOA, Goldman and Wells into FDIC recievership (not nationalization but liquidation). Take all the junk and settle it ALA Lehman. Let the smaller regional banks bid for the deposits and branches. Use the TARP TALF and PPIP and any other accronym they can think of as the short term bridge loan facility to healthy regionals to purchase these good assets until the storm passes. This will take care of the deposits as the healthy regionals who did not get involved with the toxic stuff and have shown better managemnt skills will become stronger and lend to real people in their communities. It is called relationship banking where you know your borrower and can lend to qualified people. The larger superbanks/Hedgefunds and speculators who did no due diligence(at best and fraud at worst) when investing would lose. Taxpayers would win as they would not be pumping up dead banks but securing their deposits and transfering them to healthly institutions who will then be able to lend to them instead of inflating away their savings while the five largest servicers who got us in this mess are being given the opportunity to make more money through PIPP with no recourse and gauranteed fees. Nero3 10-15% inflation is not the solution it is another problem that will cause more pain then letting the people who made these bad bets pay for their losses. I agree with GRG55 we are all MAD now.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’

                          http://www.latimes.com/business/nati...1,171777.story

                          Treasury extends deadline for toxic asset program, loosens criteria for participation




                          5:53 AM PDT, April 6, 2009
                          WASHINGTON (AP) — The Treasury Department is trying to ensure broader participation from hedge funds and other private investors in its bad asset purchase program by loosening the criteria for those who want to take part.

                          Treasury on Monday relaxed a requirement that companies have at least $10 billion in capital under management in order to participate, and emphasized that the program is open to small and women- and minority-owned firms.
                          The department also said it's extending the application deadline for private fund managers by two weeks until April 24.

                          The capital requirement was one of three criteria the department listed for evaluating private investment managers when it announced the public-private investment partnership last month. The partnership is intended to spur purchases of distressed real-estate related assets by private investors to remove them from banks' balance sheets.

                          Analysts estimate banks hold hundreds of billions of dollars in toxic assets that are causing them to hoard capital and pull back on lending.


                          The three criteria will be viewed "holistically," the department said Monday, meaning private firms won't have to satisfy all three. The other two are: a demonstrated ability to raise at least $500 million of new capital and demonstrated experience in investing in mortgage-backed securities.

                          The department will match the capital raised by private investors and will provide government guarantees, reducing the risk for private investors.

                          Treasury also said it will consider opening the investment partnership to other assets besides mortgage-backed securities, but did not provide further details.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Geithner’s ‘Dirty Little Secret’


                            If this keeps up, will treasury allow investment clubs to bid?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X