Showing posts with label Economic Meltdown. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economic Meltdown. Show all posts

Thursday, March 17, 2011

Meltdowns

References:
(1) "Inside Job," documentary.
(2) "All the Devils are Here," book.
It was the conservative idea of laissez-faire capitalism that ultimately caused the financial meltdown that has ruined many American lives; current and future lives. The dictionary defines laissez-faire as “a policy or attitude of letting things take their own course, without interfering,” especially in economical matters. Alan Greenspan was the the most important person and chief advocate of economic laissez-faire in the government from 1987 to 2007 as the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, the Central Bank of the United States. He told Congress every chance he got to “deregulate.” He said banks could “regulate themselves. They didn't need government to regulate them.” And, if Congress didn't deregulate, he did it from his seat at The Fed and through his influence at the U. S. Treasury. Deregulation is a big deal for libertarians like Greenspan, and Republicans, not only in finance, but in all of industry.
Deregulation began in earnest in the early 1980s. Wall Street finally had a sympathetic president, Ronald Reagan, in the White House. Donald Regan, a Merrill Lynch chairman and CEO, became Secretary of Treasury in 1981. Regan said, “Wall Street is in full agreement with this President.” On Wall Street, new financial tools were invented; the derivative, based on mathematical equations concocted by physicists. A new job title was invented; the Financial Engineer. Regulators turned their backs on bank mergers that conflicted with the Glass-Steagall Act and God said, “it is good.” The people became convinced. Alan Greenspan, who worked for Charles Keating at the time, became a White House regular adviser. Deregulation first effected Savings & Loan pseudo-banks, and greed took over. Charles Keating went to jail for Savings & Loan fraud. The “Keating Five,” Senators Alan Cranston (D-CA), Dennis DeConcini (D-AZ), John McCain (R-AZ), John Glenn (D-OH) and Donald Riegle (D-MI), were charged with ethic violations and investigated. Only John McCain managed to keep his job. Neil Bush, son of the Vice-President G. H. W. Bush, was on the board of the Silverado Savings & Loan and it cost U.S. Taxpayers $1.3 Billion to save its customers. Neil Bush wiggled out of the fraud charges against him and was only slapped on the wrist by the Office of Thrift Supervision for “breaches of...fiduciary duties involving multiple conflicts of interest.” Then, people forgot, history was changed, and everyone said “this too, will pass.” And, it did. Alan Greenspan was appointed Chairman, Federal Reserve. He became God.
In the early 1990s, as derivatives such as the Collateral Debt Obligation (CDO) and Credit Default Swaps began to be used more and more, and banks began to merge into global "too big to fail" banks with overseas locations, Greenspan turned his eyes away from the risky loans banks began making as much as he could. His Fed position really required him, by law, to oversee banks to a certain degree and to make sure that the banks had enough cash (capital) on hand for the loans they were making. He was certainly supposed to intervene if banks began lending too much to borrowers who had poor credit ratings, the sub-prime market. But, he turned his back on the problem so that banks didn't have to worry about violating the Glass-Steagall Act that strictly forbid commercial banks from risky “investment” gambling in markets. When banks absolutely couldn't avoid the Glass-Steagall Act, they got around the law by having their overseas branches and subsidiaries handle all derivative transactions. This not only hid the bank's Wall Street activity, it also helped the bank avoid paying corporate taxes.
While deregulation was gradually taking place, either by law or “getting around the law,” another laissez-faire idea was becoming the norm around the world: Privatization . This idea was to privatize government programs under private corporations. A number of countries followed suit by doing both, deregulating and privatizing, including Ireland, Greece, Mexico, New Zealand and Iceland, some with the help of huge loans from big U.S. investment banks such as Goldman Sachs, J. P. Morgan and Merrill Lynch. These banks securitized the loans to countries into bonds and Fitch, Moody's and Standard & Poor's all rated the bonds as AAA, the highest credit rating. And then the investment banks bought Credit Default Swaps, as insurance, to make sure they would get their money back in case any country defaulted on its loan.
Mexico, it turned out, was a bad risk in the 1990s. It wasn't quite the AAA rating everyone thought it was and it nearly defaulted on its sovereign debt. It was the high credit rating that was the primary reason that everyone agreed to the loans in the first place, and the big banks and credit rating companies received huge fees for giving it a high rating. The reason that Mexico went bust, however, was that privatization and deregulation didn't pan out like they thought it would. The Mexican Government had to pay for a program whether it was done by the government or by a corporation. While everyone says that corporations are efficient and governments are not, the truth is that corporations are hugely more expensive than government workers are. And, too, Mexican banks began risky derivative gambling as well. So, in order to save Mexico, the U.S. Government bailed out Mexico with a U.S. Guaranteed loan of $20 Billion in 1994, most of which was funneled back to the investment banks as loan payments. So, Goldman Sachs still got its money.
New Zealand appears to be a different case. It didn't need investment bank loans since it had a surplus and had no outstanding loans when it privatized. It also began deregulating much quicker than the United States did, and New Zealand's newly unregulated banks began taking on the same risky loans that American banks were taking on. Subsequently, New Zealand went into a six-year recession from 1991 through 1998 due to its liberalization of corporate regulations and privatization, and with the following 2008 global recession, it has one of the weakest economies in the world. Its businesses are still unregulated and it is becoming a poorer country as each year passes.
Other countries began to fail in the 1990s too, primarily because they adopted the American Capitalistic model; the laissez-faire privatization and deregulation. Mexico first, then came Russia, Asia, Latin America, Egypt, South Africa, the Ukraine, and others all in a short span of time. In all of those cases, three men led the battle to keep deregulation and privatization going; Alan Greenspan, Robert Rubin and Larry Summers. Rubin was the Secretary of Treasury under President Clinton at the time and Larry Summers was his deputy. These three men were called The Committee to Save the World.” The same committee had to save the United States' economy from a super-large hedge fund collapse in 1998 when the high-flying Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund collapsed. It was heavily invested in derivatives.
Only one person in the Clinton Administration dared to challenge the three saviors, Brooksley Born. Clinton appointed her as the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman from 1996 to 1999. Until then, Republican Senator Phil Gramm of Texas had prevented any regulation of derivatives by getting a law passed. But, Born saw that the law was limited only to certain derivatives, not to the stuff the banks were creating, so she attempted to regulate them, which would have put a damper on sub-prime lending and securitization of mortgages which, in turn, would have prevented the 2008 recession. But, the big banks and The Committee to Save the World went ballistic. They wouldn't hear of it and they attacked her with anger and ridicule and everything else they could think of. She lost the battle and the war in front of Congress when Republicans led by Senator Phil Gramm joined the three attacking her. Gramm eventually got the Glass-Steagall Act repealed in 1999; the final straw in deregulating the banks. After the meltdown, Brooksley Born testified to the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission on April 7, 2010, on Alan Greenspan's policies. She gave him What for,” calling him a “failure.” But, it was much too late and even then Greenspan wouldn't admit his failures. He said he only failed “30% of the time.” It was a huge thirty percent!
To Greenspan, laissez-faire is a religion and he adheres to his cult-like belief to the end. For Rubin and Summers it appears to be a matter of pride of association; they saw themselves as smarter than everyone else simply because they hung around with people like Greenspan and they were connected to some of the most powerful bankers in the world. They had also held very high positions in the banking industry. It was all an old boys club, and they all considered themselves smarter than everyone else. As for the big bankers, they laughed all the way to the bank at Greenspan. While he preached ideology, they took the money.
In 2001 sub-prime mortgages caused a smaller meltdown, named “sub-prime one,” that got the attention of a number of states and cities and their state and city attorneys. By that time, Washington D. C. couldn't do anything about the banks since the Bush Administration had taken over. The only people who cared in Washington were Senator Paul Sarbanes and Sheila Bair, a Treasury under-secretary, and neither of them had enough power to do anything. Cleveland, Ohio attempted to stop predatory lending by outlawing adjustable-rate and balloon payment loans and mandating counseling for borrowers. But, Countrywide, Ameriquest, Citibank, J. P. Morgan and other banks lobbied the Ohio legislature to overrule Cleveland's city council with a weak state law.
A number of other states and cities were also trying to control and stop predatory lending and all passed consumer protection laws. Eliot Spitzer, New York's Attorney General, tried to take on Wall Street directly, but he was spurned at every turn and banks refused to respond to his subpoenas for data, and the government backed the banks, saying that the banks didn't have to answer Spitzer's subpoenas. It was Georgia's consumer protection laws that finally got the Federal Government involved again. But the Government, led by Greenspan, Rubin and Summers protected the banks, not the consumers. Under the Bush Administration, the Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC) and the Office of the Thrift Commission (OTS) were the primary Bush bank regulators who took up the issue. They came out with regulations that said no state or city had jurisdiction over nationally registered banks, which caused all companies giving mortgages to sub-prime lenders to register as nationally registered banks. This was called the “Preemption” regulation and it allowed banks to do anything they wanted to and states and cities couldn't interfere. They preempted state and local laws to make their money, the laissez-faire banking attack.
Then, maybe one of the screwiest things happened. OCC and OTS began competing for banks to regulate. Banks were actually given a “choice” on which agency they wanted to regulate them. They “advertized for banks.” So, in effect, the OCC and OTS relaxed regulations even more too attract more banks, they became “buddies” with the banks, told Congress about their increased workloads and Congress gave them more money and people to regulate their list of banks. In effect, it doubled the size of the two agencies regulating banks and each were doing the same tasks. Instead of smaller government, the Republicans doubled it.
In 2000, Iceland had one of the highest standard of living in the world. It had one of the most pristine environments and beautiful landscapes. It got 100% of its power from renewable natural geothermal sources. It did not use coal, oil or nuclear power. Its environment was clean and pure. It had zero poverty. In 2001, Iceland began the purest experiment in American Capitalism. It privatized its three banks and deregulated all in one sweep of its banking laws. The banks began loaning money. Construction companies began ripping up the landscape for power oil and coal power plants. Polluting belching factories moved in. And so, by 2008 when the recession hit, the three banks owed over $100 Billion, over 7.5 times Iceland's Gross Domestic Product of $13 Billion and 11 times its government revenue from taxes. There was no way for Iceland to save its people from poverty. Iceland's populace were furious. They refused to bail out its banks and, instead, forced all of those who got it into debt to pay off the debt. By December 2010, Iceland's recession was finally said to be over. It was pulling itself out of the recession. Iceland is going back to its more socialist ways, and like Denmark and Sweden, its standard of living is coming back again. Iceland's banks were not "too big to fail," and I wonder whether that "too big to fail" idea wasn't just one more laissez-faire scam sold to us.
It seems to me that deregulation always seems to result in “meltdowns.” Today we have another type of meltdown; a nuclear power plant in Japan. And, while the power plant is melting down, our Republican House of Representatives are busy passing deregulating laws; such as the one that prevents the Environmental Protection Agency to control “green-house gases.” In fact, the House has passed a number of bills in the past week to prevent the EPA from doing a number of things that protect the environment, including regulating nuclear power plants.
Japan probably has the strictest nuclear power plant regulations on Earth, since it has more experience with the effects of nuclear radiation of any country on Earth. Yet, there is panic all around from the power plant meltdown. It is ironic that the Republican Party's voice, Fox News, and specifically Glenn Beck, are causing more panic than they are soothing people's nerves about the plant meltdown. But, that may be a Republican strategy too; to keep the population in a panic and therefore ignorant of the truth, and their eyes misdirected away from what's going on in Congress. It's just another diversion.
Someone should go to jail for meltdowns.
Dave

Friday, December 3, 2010

Reagan-Thatcher Supply-Sided (American) Capitalism and Ireland's Fall

You would think that Ireland should have seen its economic disaster coming early. There were plenty of prophetic examples from other parts of the world by the time Ireland adopted American style capitalism. New Zealand may have been one of the earliest examples. It adopted the Reagan-Thatcher conservative economic ideology in the early 1980s, ideology that is cited as the primary cause for New Zealand's economic collapse in this report(pdf). If you read this report, you'll see that New Zealand followed the typical GOP conservative, libertarian approach to economic and fiscal governing. And, it did New Zealand in. Even Britain, just across the Irish Sea, had experienced an economic meltdown in the 1980s because of Thatcher's follow-Reagan economic plan; small government, privatization of government services, low corporate tax, anything-goes market, voodoo economics. And, of course, there is Japan's 1990s economic collapse because it followed American style capitalism, although it didn't adopt the whole hog, but only the hindquarters, such as deep corporate tax cuts. That was enough to do its economy in. It turns out that in every country, including our own, where the American style GOP, libertarian capitalism is adopted, it fails. Here is when I stick my tongue firmly in my cheek and facetiously say, "Imagine that!" Poppy "read my lips - no tax increase" Bush was right. It is voodoo economics.

So, what's happening to Ireland. For one thing, Ireland's workforce is on the move again. I guess we can go all the way back to the Potato Famine to see that when things get to a point where people can't live, they leave where they're living for another, and hopefully, better place. Ireland seems to have that particular situation recur in its history over and over. And, it's a damn shame. It was only a few years ago that everyone, even Thomas Friedman, thought Ireland was the poster-country of prosperity, as in this column. Friedman said Ireland's booming economy in 2005 proved that Germany's more moderate and labor-favoring approach was wrong. In fact, Friedman says that Ireland's Irish-British model is "the way of the future." Some future! Now, in 2010, i.e., "the future," Ireland is nearly bankrupt while Germany is healthy and is one of the countries bailing Ireland out.

My Irish immigrant friend also passed this little blogger gem, "Ireland Then and Now," by Jonathan Chait, which suggests that Ireland's economic and fiscal policies caused the mess, which is true, except the article contradicts itself so much that's it boggles the mind. Chait starts his article saying, "It was not long ago that Ireland was every American conservative's beau ideal of a European state. Low taxes, low regulation, it was the perfect case study in the success of free market policies..." and "How has Ireland become a "Celtic tiger" (a la Hong Kong, Taiwan and Singapore, the earlier "tiger" economies in Asia)? Simple: By clinging for dear life to the coattails of the American economy. The Irish have basically set themselves up as a free enterprise zone for U.S. companies wanting a base in Europe, rolling out a business-friendly red carpet." Yep. That's what Ireland did.

What's really ironic is the references Mr. Chait uses to document "why" Ireland is falling. From 2003 through 2007, Chait cites Cato Institute and The Heritage Foundation reports, both conservative organizations, that gloat about Ireland deregulating and lowering corporate taxes (from 50% to 12.5%), attracting American companies and the "greenback," privatizing government services, and generally releasing the free-market dogs. Ireland, Cato and Heritage said, "was the model free-market state." It all was going along gloriously until Ireland hit the Great Recession wall, and then everything went to hell.

So, what did Ireland do? It did the opposite of what President Obama encouraged at the G-20 Conference in 2009. Obama encouraged "stimulus," but Ireland chose deficit reduction, following the Reagan-Supply-Side economic model of free markets, deregulation, let 'em fail, policies of the GOP Republicans in America. It tightened its belt, laid people off, eliminated government jobs and services. Even then, as late as June 2010, the Cato Institute was bragging about Ireland's 2009-2010 policies at the same time as it was deriding Obama's "stimulus" policies. But, the belt tightening didn't work. It created a worse condition, as most economists predicted when they said that the economy "needed stimulus" to get the economy moving before deficit reduction.

Ireland is now accepting bailouts from its European Union members so it can survive. And, Cato and Heritage are now turning on themselves, since reading on in Chait's blog shows that now that Ireland is deeply in trouble, Cato and Heritage are blaming Ireland's government big-government and big-spending for the problem even when its government followed the fiscal and economic policies that Cato and Heritage were bragging about only a few years before.

But, the EU bailout is not helping Ireland's people NOW. They need work NOW, not next year. They're leaving Ireland, as this Washington Post article notes. So, Ireland, following the grand Republican scheme is broken and broke and evacuating the sinking ship.

After our November 2nd Republican Coup d'etat, we're next. Stand by for heavy rolls. Perhaps Barney Frank's take on the the Republican's perspective on unemployment says it best. Thanks to my Irish buddy, I have this quote:

“The Republicans are joining the Central Bank of China in criticizing [Fed Chairman] Ben Bernanke ” Mr. Frank said Monday during an interview on Bloomberg Television. “This is really distressing to me.” ... Mr. Frank said complaints about currency manipulation from Chinese central bankers “is like being called silly by the Three Stooges. And then to have Republican leaders in Congress agree with those complaints is bizarre,” Mr. Frank said. “The Republicans are arguing that the Fed should not even be concerned about unemployment.”

Dave

Monday, October 25, 2010

How it Happened

Richard Wolf, Economics Professor, has an excellent description of the melt down, and the reason it happened.