Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- This Is Cardboard. Also Entirely Recycled, Water and Fireproof, and Dirt Cheap.
- Sen. Sanders: Wall Street CEOs are the 'Faces of Class Warfare'
- Change Is Coming: Factory Farms' Days May Be Numbered
- The Rise of the Sharing Communities
- Sec. of State Hopeful Susan Rice Reportedly Holds 600k Stake in Keystone XL Decision
Popular content
Today's Top News
Fiscal Plan Fails both Markets and Taxpayers
Let's be clear: President Barack Obama inherited an economy in freefall and could not possibly have turned things around in the short time since his election. Unfortunately, what he is doing is not enough.
The real failings in the Obama recovery program lie not in the stimulus package -- though it is too heavily weighted toward tax cuts, and much of it merely offsets cutbacks by states -- but in its efforts to revive financial markets. America's failures provide important lessons to countries around the world that are or will be facing increasing problems with their banks:
- Delaying
bank restructuring is costly, in terms of both the eventual bailout
costs and the damage to the overall economy in the interim.
- Governments do not like to admit the full costs of the problem, so they give the banking system just enough to survive, but not enough to return it to health.
- Confidence
is important, but it must rest on sound fundamentals. Policies must not
be based on the fiction that good loans were made, and that the
business acumen of financial-market leaders and regulators will be
validated once confidence is restored.
- Bankers
can be expected to act in their self-interest on the basis of
incentives. Perverse incentives fueled excessive risk-taking, and banks
that are near collapse but are too big to fail will engage in even more
of it. Knowing that the government will pick up the pieces if
necessary, they will postpone resolving mortgages and pay out billions
in bonuses and dividends.
- Socializing
losses while privatizing gains is more worrisome than the consequences
of nationalizing banks. American taxpayers are getting an increasingly
bad deal. In the first round of cash infusions, they got about 67 cents
in assets for every dollar they gave (though the assets were almost
surely overvalued, and quickly fell in value). But in the recent cash
infusions, it is estimated that Americans are getting 25 cents, or
less, for every dollar. Bad terms mean a large national debt in the
future.
- Don't confuse
saving bankers and shareholders with saving banks. America could have
saved its banks, but let the shareholders go, for far less than it has
spent.
- Trickle-down
economics almost never works. Throwing money at the banks hasn't helped
homeowners: foreclosures continue to increase. Letting AIG fail might
have hurt some systemically important institutions, but dealing with
that would have been better than to gamble upwards of $150 billion and
hope that some of it might stick where it is important. One of the
reasons we may be getting bad terms is that if we got fair value for
our money, we would by now be the dominant shareholder in at least one
of the major banks.
- Lack of
transparency got America's financial system into this trouble. Lack of
transparency will not get it out. The Obama administration is promising
to pick up losses to persuade hedge funds and other private investors
to buy out banks' bad assets. But this will not establish ''market
prices,'' as the administration claims. Banks' losses have already
occurred, and their gains must now come at taxpayers' expense. Bringing
in hedge funds as third parties will simply increase the cost.
- Better to be forward looking than backward looking, focusing on reducing the risk of new loans and ensuring that funds create new lending capacity.
There is no ''mystique'' in finance: The era of believing that something can be created out of nothing should be over. Short-sighted responses by politicians -- who hope to get by with a deal that is small enough to please taxpayers and large enough to please the banks -- will merely prolong the problem.
An impasse is looming. More money will be needed, but Americans are in no mood to provide it -- certainly not on the terms that we have seen The well of money may be running dry, and so, too, may be America's legendary optimism and hope.
- Posted in
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...



75 Comments so far
Show AllSioux Rose
DUCK: Good analysis. Just a point, however, in your last paragraph I believe you meant to say we THROW (not through, that is how a piece of string comes through a needle) money against the problem.
I love the derivatives that have no underlying mortgages or collateral as their basis. Find a CMO or CDO that you like and clone it. When your model goes up, your clone goes up; when the model goes down, the clone goes down.
Or you can create an anti-clone. Bet against the model's success. The variations are many.
...the problem being, you do not recognize your part of the model since it has been so twisted out of shape by successive model makers.
It is not that the people do not know the big picture. They know exactly what they are doing. They pretend to be stupid or ignorant, because we do not prosecute people for stupidity, and we let people off for ignorance. The instruments are an easy way to make millions without producing anything tangible that benefits society. By selling the junk around the globe, they made it extremely difficult for the US government not to bail them out when the inevitable crash occurred.
Each model maker may be ignorant of the specifics of other models, but the big picture was and continues to be apparent to most people who take the little bit of time to work out the mechanics of this operation.
Time to dismantle this industry and ask those slavers to retrain themselves to produce something of value, just as they did to those factory workers who learnt a trade through hard work only to have their skills thrown out the window to increase the profit of a few corporations.
Expanding on his statement in the Washington Monthly last week, an interview with James Galbraith in Manager-Magazin (a publication of Der Spiegel) takes up the issue of bankruptcy. In an echo of Lyndon LaRouche, Galbraith says the key aspect of bankruptcy, in addition to clearing the books, is the installation of new management. "When a bank is insolvent ... they becomes perverse," he said. "The incumbent management has good reason to gamble excessively and to make capital losses," or to loot the institution, in the form of bonuses, before the losses can be discovered.
"The way it usually works in the U.S.A.," he said, "is that a bank is closed on Friday and re-opened on Monday under a new name, with a new leadership and with a team of examiners who are going through the books.... A change of management is essential, because firstly, the incumbents are responsible, whether they were culpable or not, and secondly, you need new people who are in line with the public purpose of this re-organization. It's the same principle in the Navy: When a ship runs aground, the captain is removed, no matter if he caused the accident or not."
The industry has come up with terms, like "liars loans," or his favorite "neutron loans" (which kill the people, but leave property intact), in order to avert the question of culpability. Even the notion of "systemic failure" and "bubble" tend to this direction. The reality of the financial crisis is that it was caused by a "culture of complicity," he said. "There are moments where the state has to assert its autonomy," and right now, "it's about time to make these bankers work for the public rather than having the public work for the bankers."
Henry, You state "In an echo of Lyndon LaRouche.." Are you familiar with this character? LaRouche is a former Marxist turned hardend neo-con who was sent to jail for all sorts of corrupt activities. While still a Marxist back in the early seventies he had several members of another faction of self-proclaimed Marxists severely beaten for having opposed his -- what he considered to be genuine Marxist ideals. Like a religous fundamentalist, only his views are genuine whether he be spewing "Marxism" as he claims to have been or the neo-con views he espouses today. I hear he and Limbaugh are great friends -- whether or not that's true, I don't know but they ARE cut from the same cloth.
what will truly help obama politically is to have his minions propose more and more proposals "to save the financial system" that are transparently outrageous in their trying to save the ultra-rich who are financially exposed to trillions in toxic investments.
and the left should welcome geithner's proposal as a great teaching moment regarding the fortunes the demoblicans are truly trying to save.
lazy leftists should stop proposing personnel to obama and finally make the effort to find out and publicize the names of the billionaires whom the demoblicans are trying to save with our taxpayer money.
this is the greatest chance offered to americans to learn who are the billionaires that wag the usa dog and to rebel against them and their bribed politicians, journalists, and economists.
the idiotic left should stop complaining about "WS and the banks" and ask the american people if they really want to bail out this or that individual billionaire.
the billions that geithner wants now are not "for the failed banks", they are meant to save the ultra-rich !
even publicizing crude macro-economic data about how many trillions in toxic assets are in the hands of say the richest 0.1% would be very game-changing as it would suffocate the obfuscations of the demoblicans that they are acting for the public good.
demoblicans blackmail americans by crying wolf about "saving the financial system" but they won't be able to blackmail anybody anymore if they are compelled to cry wolf about "saving the billionaires".
even conservatives will find it hard to defend spending trillions in "welfare programs" for gambling billionaires.
only once the citizenry will start saying that it does not want to pay for the financial gambling follies of the richest 0.1%, etc., it will become feasible for obama to go against the billionaires, since at that point taking him out won’t be worthwhile for the billionaires.
Were also you saying this when Bush and his "minions" bailed out Bear Stearns, then later came back for the $700. billion?
National ownership of the banks without control of the Federal Reserve system would be the worst move of all but Stiglitz explains this when he states "There is no ''mystique'' in finance: The era of believing that something can be created out of nothing should be over."
Who in the government is ready to manage all the banks?
We don't have socialism... only lemon Socialism for the Corporations "too big to fail". But they are too Big to succeed and are bringing down everybody with them.
Well, creating something out of nothing is exactly what the pyramid scheme of private monetary and financial system is built on... not only nothing but negative nothing, massive and growing debt.
Two words:
BUY GOLD!
We need a balanced budget, balanced trade, peaceful relations with all foreign states, and a consistently applied rule of law. We have none of these. The dems and repubs support none of these.
Having the working class pay to make the owning class whole after they made hundreds of trillions of dollars of bad decisions is absurd, criminal and treason. Hang (after due process of law) the politicians that have robbed the people.
Columbia class of 1978 and 1981
The U.S.A. could solve their money problems quite easily by selling a few assets. Russia would certainly be interested in buying back Alaska. Japan would be delighted to buy the Hawaiian Islands. Mexico could certainly make an offer for some land such as Texas. The price for Texas should be really cheap considering the Presidents which have come from there. Get rid of it. Guam could be sold to...? And Venezuala could buy Puerto Rico. There! Problem solved. Enough cash to re-capitalize the banks and make some house payments for sub-prime borrowers.
The tranparency part is exceptionally true but with congress being responsible(what laugh) to the people's interest don't count on pelosi or reid to do anything about tranparency much less those other much much needed congressional duties such as oversight, accountability, investigations(the private internet sites such as this, the center for investigative reporting and others would actually be the only places the public will get anything close to a full accounting of the dirty criminal tricks the corporate world with the help of congress will reach some people, the msm will NOT provide coverage of their favorite 'sons and daughters' of corporate crap) and regulation. As I have always said: 'it is all about grand larceny' and now I will start adding what has been said before: 'follow the money', doing that should expose a lot of the old school senators and representatives. But, most likely, even with our new president, nothing of the sort will ever get past the back door meetings where the discussion will be how to put-off, obfuscate and deprioritize all of what could help with a real economic recovery.
I also suspect that if the people actually woke up to the shafting that congress is giving them, along with obama's complicity with congress, that by 2 more presidental elections, people that seem to love pelosi and reid so much may actually vote them out but I also doubt that.
But I do want any and every body that have parts in this disaster to be brought up on charges and prosecuted and punished for their crimes.
Before going soft on Obama people should consider what the following article says. It's short enough, but packs important information, and important enough that no one should be ignorant of what Prof. Hudson reveals or repeats, whichever applies. It's information the "elites" would certainly prefer to keep secret, but the "cat's out of the bag" now.
Obama couldn't have prevented the economic crisis, which started before he was elected, but he evidently hasn't been providing any real help. So saying he's not doing enough is quite an understatement.
"The Real AIG Conspiracy", by Prof. Michael Hudson, Mar 18 2009
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12784
Stiglitz is right on every count (at least in salvaging capitalism), but it is Summers and Geithner who are calling the shots. Why? Summers locked out Stiglitz with whom he has a a decade long feud, and Krugman likewise was locked out of the Clinton administration for being unable to bite his tongue.
So why did Obama side with the same Wall Street interests that are at the heart of the Democratic Leadership Council and all the treacherous Democrats like Pelosi, Hoyer, Reed, and Emmanuel? He recently declared he is one of these "New Democrats", newly chastened and beholden like their New Labour counterparts to the financial elites.
These folks are paving the way for the rise of fascism of Weimarian proportions. While Bush played the part of the disastrous Kaiser Wilhelm II, Obama and Brown are already establishing the contours of a Weimar-era Depression regime. Scary.
Hi from Australia!
We need to make the case to "Joe the Plumber" that he is voting against his interests.
We're not all pacifist vegans. It's OK to be wrong, We were bombarded by 100 years of anti-communist propaganda.
That's the genius of Chomsky, Dean Baker and Stiglitz etc. Bring on the Progressive economists.
Kucinich for Prez!!
Thanks for joining us from Australia. Although from your comments you appear to be American.
We need to make the case to "Joe the Plumber" that he is voting against his interests.
Lol! JTP knows he is voting against his interests. After analyzing my talks with several conservatives, he likely believes at least one of the following:
1. The "higher ups" got there because they worked hard, are better than him, and deserve to make whatever money they are paid.
2. Some day he is going to get rich and powerful, and he can't have the government (or liberals) taking away his power and money to control other people.
"We" refers to progressives worldwide- I'm not a victim of cultural imperialism.
It seems to me that many workers have been convinced that their standard
of living is the result of the private sector; even though as Chomsky says-
technology was largely developed in the public sphere. That's what I was suggesting.
I'm recommending "The conservative nanny state" to most people I meet and trying to organize others in my electorate. It's such a shame so few artists/celebrities have endorsed Chomsky's ideas. Good luck to all you guys.
I couldn't simply assume you were Australian. If you were Australian, I wanted to congratulate you on the Australian cricket team winning the South African test series - no other implication intended.
Even if people do not neccessarily endorse Chomsky, I doubt you'll get much opposition on this site for organizing the electorate based on his social ideas.
Of course, I know nothing of high finance,only what I'm learning now, reading all of this...But ...
I watched the president last night... I'll have to say... It all sounded pretty good tome.
I mean, the way he answers, he takes apart the details, explains, uses examples. I get that some hear those numbers, trillions of debt for the future and it doesn't sound good. But, he's also right in saying we HAVE TO ADDRESS THE ENERGY PROBLEM, WHICH ALSO MEANS THE CLIMATE PROBLEM, WE HAVE TO MEET THE EDUCATION CHALLENGE, AND IT'S NOT HIS FAULT THAT THE BRIDGES AND ROADS IN THIS COUNTRY HAVE BEEN LEFT TO TEETER UNTIL THEY COLLASPE AND KILL PEOPLE ON THEIR WAY TO WORK.
So, in other words, all these issues could have been worked on over the last few decades. But noooooo... we all let it slide by because why? I'ts all too expensive. Well, it's just like letting your house go unrepaired, your bills pile up and your health go to pot. Then all of a sudden you wake up... and not what a mess you've gotten yourself into...
Sounded pretty rehearsed and scripted to me with a obligatory question regarding the bonuses.
The bonuses are a distraction from the real question of the historical transferral of wealth to wealth to sustain their lavish lifestyle and the draining of all our revenue to subsidize hedge fund gambling. We are the bank for the monied class while their front man talks about the problems of entitlements.
Not one question about Obama appointing all the crooks who started the wheels in motion, now driving the car into the ditch.
Right, so let's fix the roads, repair the schools, etc, NOT bail out the criminals who bankrupted us through their greed and fraud. Also, end the blood-sucking wars, and markedly reduce military spending. It's stupid and disingenuous to throw money at the banks without re-instituting the Glass-Steegle Act or some similar regulation. It's like trying to put band aid on an infected wound. And we MUST scrap the free trade agreement we have now, else the 'good jobs' will never come back; we'll be scrubbing toilets while cursing under our breaths (if we can even get those jobs). Ironically, Mexico may help break the free trade fiasco if it places tariffs on our goods. I predict it will happen sooner or later with China as well when they determine it is no longer profitable to finance our debt. Then we'll have to rebuild our decimated manufacturing base. It will be a slow painful process with much impoverishment ahead. Obama is a very likable guy, but that is not enough if he does not move quickly to break the choke hold of bad policy.
I am continually surprised by Economics Spokespersons who actually think there is a viable financially engineered solution to the US led world depression. Yes it is the US leading the world again. Mr Stiglitz takes the pure Economist view of the world far too seriously. The US current policy is the following.
Nothing will be done for income distribution inequality, or the instability of the economy that always had to grow at the expense of the environment and our future.
The taxpayer base and government income from taxes will shrivel up as the jobless rate soars. Even what little of Corporate tax that is actually collected will decrease.
International effects on major traders, for example Japan and China, will rebound back to the US and around the world.
In this world where all things are interconnected, there might even be the small slowdown in the accelarating rate of carbon emissions, much better than all fledgeling fake and fraudulent markets for emissions trading.
Another plus is economic activity reduction everywhere slow the rate of all other environmental destruction.
All we need now is to seriously attempt to curb population growth. This would be an effective way to reduce the future numbers of suffering people for the last generations of all left alive at the termination of our short remaining lease on planet Earth.
So carry on the Obama team, you are doing great work, at least on dismantling the Economy, with the US dollar and Empire to follow. Greed and Stupidity has to be made to work, since nothing else ever has, where foresight, science and ethics have completely failed to convince or motivate the behaviour of human masses.
It is a confusing mess. On one hand we have a pair of Nobel prize winning economists (Stiglitz and Krugman) and many other noted economists, including my favourite - the current prince of economists, Nouriel Roubini - advocating for temporary nationalisation of these decrepit financial institutions. On the other hand we have been tossing money at these financial institutions whereby the taxpayer effectively owns a big chunk of them already, without really knowing what the results are OR what is on their books.
As much as I hate to say this, I am in agreement with those advocating for temporary nationalisation. Take 'em over, clean 'em up, get 'em back on their feet and sell them back to the private sector when the mess has been dealt with.
Do it now, the longer we wait the worse the "surprises" will be.
SO WHAT DO WE DO IF THIS ACTUALLY APEARS?????????????
From what I understand a citizen's initiative will be posted in all the progressive sites within the next few days.
I think it deals with the issues that were posted on this discussion page as well as others that have been recurring themes since Obama's election.
Anyway - should be interesting to see if the real progressive left in this country can finally get out of its own way and actually get behind something
again.
The last time I felt this way was in 1968.
I think we should be like the republican machine and suddenly have a thousand people reading from the same talking points page.Can you imagine the news media and Obama's people running around like crazy trying to find out whats going on
"PROGRESSIVE LIBERAL GROUPS TO PRESENT LAUNDRY LIST TO PRESIDENT AND CONGRESS,
TAKE THESE ACTIONS OR FACE IMMEDIATE RECALL"
I can't wait to see senators and congress people faces when they are actually
commanded by ordinary citizen's to enact specific legislation.
Just to see this scene of crazed citizens with pitchforks and broom handles
on the steps of the capital would let me leave this world with a smile tattooed on my face.Something I thought I would never see in my lifetime again public dissent.
In fact I think I will become a talking points guy for the next couple of days
I hope no one got to Rush yet, this is going to be fun
is not about advisers and the bailout money is not "for failed banks". here is what a famous progressive economist told me today about who has been and will keep getting most of the bailout money.
"...the Congressional Research Service states that the wealthiest 1% increased their share of the returns from wealth from 37% ten years ago to 57% five years ago, [so] my estimate is 70% of the derivatives and other gambles are by the richest 1% today. And [...] my guess is that about 50% accrue to the top 0.1%."
the demoblicans are "saving the financial system" to save their billionaire friends...
only once the citizenry will start saying that it does not want to pay for the financial gambling follies of the richest 0.1%, etc., it will become feasible for obama to go against the billionaires, since at that point taking him out won’t make any difference for the billionaires.
but note that both the top demoblicans and their billionarie friends are people of the finest taste. so it's much better that they get to use our money than that we misuse it to buy tacky products...
upsetting you aside, it helps obama politically to have his minions come up with more and more proposals "to save the financial system" that are transparently outrageous in their trying to save the ultra-rich who are financially exposed to trillions in toxic investments.
and the left should welcome geithner's proposal as a great teaching moment regarding the fortunes the demoblicans are truly trying to save.
leftists should stop proposing personnel to obama and finally make the effort to find out and publicize the names of the billionaires whom the demoblicans are trying to save with our taxpayer money.
this is a once-in-a-lifetime chance offered to americans to learn who are the billionaires that wag the usa dog and to rebel against them and their bribed politicians, journalists, and economists.
the left should stop complaining about "WS and the banks" and ask the american people if they really want to bail out this or that individual billionaire.
even publicizing the crude macro-economic data above about how many trillions in toxic assets are in the hands of say the richest 0.1% would be very game-changing as it would make it impossible for the demoblicans to continue saying that they are acting for the public good.
demoblicans blackmail americans by crying wolf about "saving the financial system" but they won't be able to blackmail anybody anymore if they are compelled to cry wolf about "saving the billionaires".
even conservatives will find it hard to defend spending trillions in "welfare programs" for gambling billionaires.