Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

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

  • Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

    Brooksley E. Born is a former American public official who, from August 26, 1996, to June 1, 1999, was chairperson of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal agency which oversees the futures and commodity options markets as well as the individuals who participate in those markets.

    In 1965 she joined, as an associate, the Washington-based international law firm of Arnold & Porter, where she subsequently rose to a partner. Her appointment as a member of the CFTC, on April 15, 1994, came after a career as head of the firm's derivatives practice, where she represented clients in numerous complex litigation and arbitration cases involving financial market transactions.

    While on the commission and after becoming its chair two years later, Born sought comments on the need to regulate derivatives, specifically swaps that are traded at no central exchange, known as the dark market, and thus have no transparency except to the two counter-parties (no actual regulatory scheme was proposed at the time). The request for comments, called the "Concept Release," stated that the growth of trade in derivatives had prompted the CFTC to re-examine its regulatory scheme.

    The request for comments was opposed by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers. Specifically, on May 7, 1998, former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt joined the other members of the President’s Working Group – Treasury Secretary Rubin and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Greenspan – in objecting to the issuance of the CFTC’s concept release, in which Born attempted to shed light on the dark market, citing grave concerns about the possible consequences of the CFTC’s action.

    In particular, these concerns focused on the risk that such discussion would increase legal uncertainty concerning swaps and other OTC derivative instruments and, thus, destabilize what had become a significant global financial market. They claimed potential turmoil created by the report and concerns about the imposition of new regulatory costs also might have stifled innovation and pushed transactions offshore.

    As the financial crisis of 2008 gained momentum, newspapers began reporting on what might be some of its causes, including the adversarial relationship Greenspan, Rubin and Levitt had with Brooksley Born, with Greenspan leading the opposition, and how Born's recommendations were suppressed.

    She is retired from Arnold & Porter and until recently had declined to comment on the unfolding crisis and her efforts to rein in the growing market for derivatives. "The market grew so enormously, with so little oversight and regulation, that it made the financial crisis much deeper and more pervasive than it otherwise would have been." The disagreement has been described as a classic Washington turf war. She now laments the influence of Wall Street lobbyists on the process and the refusal of regulators to discuss even modest reforms.
    Last edited by bobola; April 03, 2009, 02:31 PM. Reason: accuracy...

  • #2
    Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

    What has to me become absolutely fascinating is that the more you put the capital of a nation into this form of trading pot, the less you have available for the rest of the nation to use to underpin their own prosperity. I have lost count of the number of individuals I have met over the last decade that have reported their instinctive feeling that they were becoming ever poorer. As more and more capital was drained away into derivative trading, the illusion of prosperity was maintained by the vast wave of "Leverage" going on in the background...

    But it one only needs to be able to understand simple arithmetic to be able to conclude that all the leverage will do is dilute the rest of the nations prosperity ever more.

    What no one seems to have realised is the ordinary citizen is being hit twice; once with the decline in the value of their prosperity that has already occurred over the last decade or so and then a second time with the rapid increase in the bailouts.

    Why do I say that? It seems to me everyone has overlooked the simple fact that the full import of the built in deflation in the value of the ordinary capital base of the nation's citizens has not even started to come through the haze of stimulation. And the stimulation can only devalue their prosperity even more.

    I am beginning to dread the next decade.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

      I remember this 'news' coming out some time ago and the MSM basically ignoring it... as usual.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

        Yes he can be trusted, to Loot The Treasury:

        Among the firms that paid Summers large amounts in speaking fees include J.P. Morgan Chase. That bank offered the former Harvard president and Treasury Secretary $67,500 for a February 1, 2008 engagement. It has received $25 billion in government bailout funds.

        Citigroup, which has received $50 billion in taxpayer help, paid Summers $45,000 for a speech in March 2008 and another $54,000 for a speech that May.

        Goldman Sachs, which has received $10 million in bailout funds, paid Summers $135,000 for a speech on April 16, 2008 and another $67,500 for a speech on June 18, 2008.

        Summers also received about $5.2 million over the past year in salary from the major hedge fund D.E. Shaw.

        The speech payments will undoubtedly raise questions as to the impartiality of the economic advice Summers is providing to the president. Already viewed as too favorably disposed to Wall Street interests, the lavish payments for speeches will provide further fodder for those who think the administration has been forgiving in their approach to the banking industry.
        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_183058.html

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

          Summers co-authored a piece called "Gibson's Paradox" in the 90's when Robert Rubin was Treasury Secretary. The main thesis of that, as I understand it, is that the gold price moves inverse to the real interest rate. It is the contention of GATA that Rubin's "Strong dollar policy" was a term used to describe the suppression of the gold price starting circa 1995, as evidenced by a long term gold vs. interest rate chart showing the long term relationship between the two diverging at that point.
          The following is an article that better explains what GATA believes has happened and how. The article goes back and pieces together statements from various treasury and FED officials over the years in an attempt to show the reader how they came to the conclusion that the manipulation of the gold price was necessary. It's not possible to find out the truth of the matter as the various institutions refuse to comply with FOIA requests. It may be of further interest that a recently discovered paper by William McChesney Martin, former Fed Governor, written in 1961, outlines in detail a plan to suppress gold and support the USD. The article is lengthy and on a paysite, so I'm unable to post a link. Below this first article link is the opening brief for that article.

          http://www.safehaven.com/article-4800.htm

          "
          An important document buried in the Federal Reserve’s archives has been discovered by writer and researcher Elaine Supkis. This document is posted on her blog at: http://emsnews2.wordpress.com/2009/01/15/1961-top- secret-fed-reserve-gold-exchange-report/
          The document, which is marked “Confidential”, is from the papers of William McChesney Martin, Jr., and this collection is held by the Missouri Historical Society. A scanned image of the original document is posted by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis at the following link: http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/docs/histor ical/martin/23_06_19610405.pdf
          Martin was the longest-serving chairman of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and worked there under five U.S. presidents from April 1951 to January 1970. It was during his tenure that the dollar devolved from “as good as gold” to a perennially inflated fiat currency backed by nothing but government promises, which makes one ponder what could have happened to the dollar had Martin been an advocate of sound money dedicated to preserving the dollar’s link to gold. Instead, during his tenure the US Gold Reserve declined by nearly one-half from 633.2 million ounces to 339.5 million ounces, while M3, the total quantity of dollar currency, soared more than three-fold from $190.0 billion to $616.1 billion.
          The author of this Federal Reserve document is not clear, but was obviously written by a senior staffer who was not only familiar with the Fed’s operation and that of the Treasury, but also well attuned to their policies and procedures. It appears to have been written by someone in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, given the obvious familiarity and extensive knowledge of the writer with that branch’s trading desk that executes trades for the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, which explains why this document is so interesting and important.
          It was written in April 1961, and the run on the dollar had already begun. It was becoming increasingly clear that the U.S. government was not managing the dollar according to the rules and the intended goals of the 1944 Bretton Woods Agreement. The dollar was being debased under Martin’s chairmanship, and as a consequence, gold had begun to flow out of the U.S. Treasury as dollar holders realized that one ounce of gold was worth more than $35, the fixed exchange rate then in place. By April 1961, the US Gold Reserve had already declined significantly from the beginning of Martin’s tenure to 498.1 million ounces.
          So the warning signs for the dollar were already apparent, not only to dollar holders, but also to the U.S. government. As this document makes clear, the government realized that the monetary course it was pursuing could not be sustained. Consequently, policy makers realized that something would need to be done, and this “Confidential” Federal Reserve memo was obviously prepared to analyze one of the alternatives available to policy makers.
          The document does not explain the different alternatives, but there were three. It is the same three alternatives all governments have when deviating from the rules of the gold standard.
          First, the government could follow the aims intended from Bretton Woods and raise interest rates to reduce new loan creation and the quantity of dollars. This action would dampen economic activity, and reverse the outflow of gold, thereby enabling the gold standard to be maintained.
          Second, it could devalue the dollar as Franklin Roosevelt had done. In this way, the remaining weight of gold in the US Gold Reserve would provide sufficient backing to the dollar, which would stop the redemption of dollars for gold.
          Third, it could try experimenting with a course not taken before – government intervention to force the market to bend to government will. This alternative was the worst of the three, and unfortunately, it is the one chosen by the government, which brings me back to this newly discovered confidential document of the Federal Reserve.
          In short, it lays out what the Treasury and Federal Reserve needed to do in order to begin intervening in the foreign exchange markets, but there is even more. This document plainly shows what happens when government operates behind closed doors. It also makes clear the motivations of the operators of dollar policy long described by GATA <www.gata.org> and its supporters, namely, that the government would pursue intervention rather than a policy of free markets unfettered by government activity. The run to redeem dollars for gold had put the government at a crossroads, forcing it to make a decision about the future course of dollar policy. This paper describes what the government would need to do by choosing the interventionist alternative."

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

            Originally posted by doom&gloom View Post
            I remember this 'news' coming out some time ago and the MSM basically ignoring it... as usual.
            The knives are starting to come out...
            Ex-employee says she warned Harvard of risky moves

            Endowment staffer fired after letter to president

            Back in 2002, a new employee of Harvard University's endowment manager named Iris Mack wrote a letter to the school's president, Lawrence Summers, that would ultimately get her fired.

            In the letter, dated May 12 of that year, Mack told Summers that she was "deeply troubled and surprised" by things she had seen in her new job as a quantitative analyst at Harvard Management Co.

            She would go on to say, in later e-mails and conversations, that she felt the endowment was taking on too much risk in derivatives investments, and that she suspected some of her colleagues were engaging in insider trading, according to a separate letter written by her lawyer that summarized the correspondence.


            On July 2 Mack was fired. But six years later, the kinds of investments she allegedly warned about did blow up on Harvard. The endowment plunged 22 percent last summer, in part due to the collapse of the credit markets. As a result, the school is cutting costs and under criticism that it took on too much risk in its investment portfolio.


            Mack, who holds a doctorate in mathematics from Harvard, had been with Harvard Management for just four months when she approached Summers. She asked him to keep her communications confidential, or risk making her life "a living hell."


            But on July 1, Mack was called into a meeting by her boss, Jack Meyer, then the chief of Harvard Management.


            The next day Meyer fired her...

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

              Well that story makes him seem like a trustworthy guy.

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                Originally posted by cjppjc View Post
                Well that story makes him seem like a trustworthy guy.
                Huh!

                He most likely did not hold the communications confidential, and did nothing to curb the risky investments, and the whistle blower got fired -- that is trustworthy?

                She would go on to say, in later e-mails and conversations, that she felt the endowment was taking on too much risk in derivatives investments, and that she suspected some of her colleagues were engaging in insider trading, according to a separate letter written by her lawyer that summarized the correspondence.

                .
                .
                .
                .
                She asked him to keep her communications confidential, or risk making her life "a living hell."


                But on July 1, Mack was called into a meeting by her boss, Jack Meyer, then the chief of Harvard Management.


                The next day Meyer fired her...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                  Sarcasm Rajiv...sarcasm...from cjppjc

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                    Originally posted by Rajiv View Post
                    Huh!

                    He most likely did not hold the communications confidential, and did nothing to curb the risky investments, and the whistle blower got fired -- that is trustworthy?

                    A joke:cool:

                    Too subtle?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                      Originally posted by The Outback Oracle View Post
                      Sarcasm Rajiv...sarcasm...from cjppjc
                      summers' fave snack...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                        A smiley would have sufficed! I thought you had somehow misread the article!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Lawrence Summers - can this guy be trusted...???

                          This is a great thread.....

                          Sarcasm is often used at this site, yet it does not belong in these posts without warning. It certainly does not belong in emails as my wife has brought to my attention. She knows me best, but still she can not immediately see my sarcasm.
                          I agree, a smiley face or something is necessary on occasion.

                          This particular case was easily recognized, but I must say that I have at times been confused while reading other threads.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X