Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Crisis That Could Bring Down Obama
Goldman Sachs reports better-than-expected profits this quarter. Wells Fargo cleared record profits last week. The President, understandably, points to signs of hope and encourages Americans to be optimistic about the economy. But when do we move from healthy confidence to a confidence game? The banks are reporting profits thanks to massive infusions of taxpayer bailout funds. It's simply silly to be lulled by cheery-sounding reports when the institutions are actually insolvent. At some point we have to take a clear-eyed look at the massive failure of our financial system. Ignoring it won't make it go away.
That's more or less what Elizabeth Warren, the distinguished chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, says in her panel's six-month report on the bank bailout. Warren, the government's watchdog, concedes that there are differences of opinion on her panel, which probably accounts for her very carefully couched discussion of the crisis. Although she told The Observer that it is "preposterous" that the government hasn't fired the bank managers who are responsible for the derivatives disaster, her panel's report is cautious, with a scholarly explanation of the crisis in her video introduction. Nonetheless, the underlying criticism is obvious.
In a financial crisis like the current one, Warren explains, the government has three choices: 1. Liquidate failed banks. (That's what happened in the S&L crisis. The government took over institutions, fired the managers, wiped out investors, but protected depositors. A lot of savings and loans simply went out of business.) 2. Put them in receivership. (That's what Sweden did in the 1990s: failed managers were fired and replaced, depositors were protected, and the banks were returned to private hands under new management with healthier balance sheets.) or 3. Subsidize the banks. This last option is what led Japan to its "lost decade"--the real value of bank assets are obscured, as the government funnels tax money into insolvent banks, propping them up indefinitely. This last is the approach the United States is now taking.
If you want to hear someone absolutely destroy that approach to the current crisis, check out a round of recent interviews with William Black, the professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri who was deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp. during the S&L crisis in the 1980s. Black, who liquidated a few banks in his time and earned the eternal enmity of Charles Keating, minces no words in describing the massive fraud by bankers and the regulators, including Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, whom he describes as abetting them.
"This whole bank scandal makes Teapot Dome look like some kind of kids' doll set," Black told the investors' journal Barron's in an interview published in the print edition on April 13. (The interview appeared online on April 9, but you need a paid subscription to access the site). He covers the same points in a highly watchable interview on Bill Moyer's Journal..
"We have lost the ability to be blunt," Black tells Barrons. He is talking about the person he describes to Bill Moyers as a "failed regulator," Geithner. "Now we have a situation where Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner can speak of a $2 trillion hole in the banking system, at the same time all the major banks report they are well capitalized. And you have seen no regulatory action against what amounts to a $2 trillion accounting fraud. The reason we don't see it--aren't told about it--is that if they were honest, prompt corrective action would kick in, and then they would have to deal with the problem banks."
In other words, the banks are insolvent. That's why they must rely on the Troubled Assets Relief Program. But at the same time, they are claiming to be healthy. Both things can't be true.
So we get smiley-face reports about how Goldman and Wells Fargo are posting record profits. Investors and citizens are supposed to be excited to see those profit numbers--comprised of their own tax dollars plus the banks refusing to accurately value their toxic assets.
This is more than an unfortunate downturn, Black says. It is the result of massive, pervasive fraud, and a deregulatory culture that has nurtured criminal behavior by very highly paid bank executives.
The whole culture is rotten. And the regulators come right out of that corrupt, Wall Street culture.
"No one has to tell someone to stretch the numbers," Black says of the way corruption trickles down through these institutions. "It is all around them. It is in the rank-or-yank performance and retention systems advocated by top business executives. Here, the top 20 percent get the bulk of the benefits and the bottom 10 percent get fired. You don't directly tell your employees to lie or cheat. You set up an atmosphere of results at any cost."
Yet we live in a broader culture so enamored of the money-making magicians of Wall Street that a front-page story in the Sunday New York Times is still lamenting the "brain drain" on Wall Street. The lead anecdote features former UBS employee (whose firm's major screw-ups turned it into a prime TARP welfare recipient). He is so disturbed by shrinking bonuses and a climate of gloom in his old gig that he has moved to the high-rolling Aladdin Capital. That's the real name. As in Poof! There goes your money!
It's time for real regulation to stop all this, says Black. Geithner must go.
"Unless the current administration changes course pretty drastically, the scandal will destroy Barack Obama's presidency," he predicts.
The beauty part: real regulators will have no trouble getting through Congress, Black tells Moyers, because they pay their taxes.




176 Comments so far
Show AllSioux Rose
In ancient allegories like Oedipus the chief character in spite of enormous efforts proves unable to avoid his fate. Could that be true of Obama? Have all his principles been co-opted to ensure that his presidency would placate all the "right" people and prove a success? Did he understand what would be asked of him in the way of "going along to get along" in the corrupt DC culture before taking office? Was the glow of a darker hue blinding enough to offset the policy determinations he would have to make while occupying the Oval Office?
It almost seems that the well-intentioned first Black president has been cast to go down with the wrecked ship of state. Sure Clinton allowed Phil Gramm to set the deregulations into place that were essentially the torpedo to the American economy. And Bush's ridiculous tax policies and wars of waste added to the debt burden. No doubt Obama inherited a mess (to the 10th power); yet he seems to be falling into an ambush of fate by enabling the very persons who orchestrated the worst of excesses (guaranteeing the ship of state would sink) to continue on their paths of destruction.
Perhaps the mystery of our times will be whether Obama fully understood the degree to which he's betrayed America's future, or if he was destined to serve as the proverbial fall guy?
Could a man of Obama's intelligence be that naive?...OR is he just part of the plan?
The criminals running the country (into the ground) are well organized.
let's see if his parachute is golden or cement.
I have lost all confidence in Obama. His appointees are the same guys that got us into this failed state situation, he has to know they are the problem. His decision to not hold bush accountable as regards torture is just more of the same, now we are looking at, NOT 8 years of criminal administration but 12 years or more.
Fascinating analysis of Obama as possibly a tragic hero in the Oedipal mold. Does anyone remember enough of ancient history (about a year ago) when Rush Limbaugh was trying to tinker with the Democratic primary process and was saying that maybe it would "good" if a Democrat were elected President and the party was thoroughly discredited, after which the "permanent majority" of Republican rule that Rush so craved would sweep back into power? (Kind of like the Gingrich revival of 1994 all over again, only better?)
There's another layer of tragedy that you don't cover: the tragedy of black Americans who so rightly celebrated the triumph of one of their own in a presidential election; only to see the Triumphant One go down as the sacrificial fall-guy in an administration doomed to failure. Shakespeare, where are you when we need you?
Do not rule out Jeb in 2012.
In any case, I'll return to my original inquiry...is any politician this naive?...black, green or orange...or is it part of the plan.?........In which case, the tragedy is just the story playing itself out.
Sorry, no more Bush's. Jeb is too late and would come with far too much baggage.
It dawned on me the other day that Obama was explicitly chosen to sell the NEW WORLD ORDER to brown people the world over. It's a tragedy, alright.
Were Shakespeare alive today, I think he would first and foremost be interested in George Wanker Bush and Cheesedick Cheney. He would write devastating plays about those two monumental scumbags and capture their warped, blackened souls. Obama would come later.
Sioux Rose
Jerry thank you for the compliment. Nothing like a background in English Lit to lend metaphorical flavor to this forum!
I think by the time this presidency is over, we may find several tragic parallels with great literature.
Snobama isn't going to hire any REAL regulators.
Sioux Rose:
Fascinating analysis of Obama as perhaps a tragic figure of Oepidal dimensions. Does anybody remember ancient history (about a year ago) when Rush Limbaugh was trying to manipulate the outcome of the Democratic primary and made some statements about how it would be perhaps a "good" thing if a Democratic president were elected, after which this person would go down with an inherited mess of problems, ushering in the return of a pemanent Republican majority which he so greatly craved? (Kind of like the 1994 Gingrich "revolution" against Clinton, only better.)
Another dimension of tragedy that you don't cover is the possible tragedy of black Americans, who with good reason invested so much personal pride in "one of their own" becoming President, only to see him go down as the sacrificial scapegoat for a failing political system? Raise hopes to the roof-tops and dash them to the ground; a tragic recipe but also a recipe for extreme reaction.
Shakespeare, where are you when we need you?
"It almost seems that the well-intentioned first Black president has been cast to go down with the wrecked ship of state."
I hope this isn't a set up but I've been saying it since he won. I don't think he would have won the presidency if the econ and general atmosphere of the state was in a positive situation. I don't think the GOP or the Dems really wanted the garbage that Bush left to be cleaned up. I'm really hoping that Obama is not gonna end up as a GOP and/or Dem scapegoat much like Carter was in his first term. I even wonder if it's possible for Obama to pull the US out of it's current situations in four years. If he does it he will be hailed as one of the greatest presidents in U.S. history, if he can't do it, it will be a sad day for all minorities because I'm sure many will associate his failure with his race. What a sad day that would be.
This is one of the reasons why regardless of the the small consessions he had been giving to the GOP and Corperate America I still suport him. The presure he is under is greater than any president before him (xept maybe FDR) becouse not only is America dependent on his performance so is the general american attitude twords minorities in power.
I wish him luck. I know he needs it.
Nice post SR, ..."wars of waste", that has a ring to it!
Oedipus and Obama? I don't know. Oedipus was a tragic bloke. Don't shed any tears yet for Obama. All he has to do is keep his head down and the cheques flowing to the banks and he is in like flint. Heck, Bush was your worst leader ever and how much is he raking in on the rubber chicken circuit?
Sioux Rose
Pretty good analysis, but though he did inherit "a mess (to the 10th power" the choices he is making now are his. He selected his staff and is responsible for his own decisions. If he goes down, I'd put it down to arrogance, bad judgement in over reaching in policy and his folks (Tim boy, Holder, Rahm, Summers, et al.
Things that work well at the Congressional level don't at the National level.
Talking to someone and smiling, giving something up for nothing is not diplomacy.
"Perhaps the mystery of our times will be whether Obama fully understood the degree to which he's betrayed America's future, or if he was destined to serve as the proverbial fall guy?"
He is no fall guy, but I believe he actually believes its his destiny to change the country,make it into something entirly different. He believes the advice he is getting and wants to believe his vision is shared by the majority of Americans, It is not.
To Siouxrose April 16th, 2009 10:50 am:
A very nice and well written posting.
How does one decide whether Obama "seems to be falling into an ambush of fate" or whether he is merely a very cunning and manipulative politician?
Sioux Rose
ABENDLAND: You have asked the crucial (albeit quintessential) question. I do NOT know the answer. I hope Obama does.
THOMAS MORE: I totally recognize that his decisions are his own. Sometimes we think we're the ones electing those choices when we're ensconced in a web that leads us to the same inevitable ends regardless of the path/strand we choose.
One of today's headlines (on Yahoo) is that Obama his heading to Mexico to show his solidarity FOR the drug wars. How about our optimistic little CD posting party the other day when the times seemed auspicious for decriminalization of the peace herb? In almost every instance where Obama could move things forward instead he shows fealty to the ones that brung him... the tragedy of America's fate is in part based on the momentum of AWFUL decisions, unlawful policies, of at least ONE administration... the fact that Obama is not correcting the wheels on the big wagon train as it teeters near the cliff's edge is daunting indeed. Can he be so blind? Have the lights of stardom wrecked his vision? Was he a sell-out and groomed for the part not told history will judge him as the really fallen one? He cannot possibly see in his appointing the Chicago School banksters to "fix" the economy (what the rest of us note more accurately as THE FIX being in) a remedial course for the American citizen. Perhaps he is an enigma.
Sioux Rose
An enigma wrapped in a.........
Could very well be. You are really rolling today!
Don't know if you saw my comment a few days ago, but I thought one of your best posts was a little one where you listed what you were doing in preparation for economic hard times. It was great!
Sioux Rose
Hi Thomas, we had some VERY wild weather and I had to get off-line. I have not had a chance to look at the previous days' postings. Hopefully I'll catch up in the next few days. (I had 300 pages of book galleys to review the past 3 weeks, and some of the corrections I made to my hard disk did NOT translate! I talked to two other writers who had the same thing happen. Does Bill Gates know about this SIGNIFICANT design flaw? Pain in the neck doesn't begin to describe it.)
Hate to hear about computer trouble! Its like an itch you can't scratch! I bet ole Bill is enjoying his semi retirement.
Obama is part of the snowball I made reference to above. Though intelligent on a certain level, his actions are largely unconscious, even if well-meaning. It's not surprising that we have so many wars and battles outwardly when, inwardly, we are constantly battling with ourselves. Everything is framed as a 'fight,' 'battle,' against this or that foe, real or imagined. No wonder mankind is in the mess it's in. Ego ALWAYS loves a good fight; it must create enemies to attack to remain in in tact.
It is funny to perceive us attempting to use egoic forms to create transformation out of our troubles, as in struggling to swim back ashore against the rip tide.
We need to take a break, commune with nature -- and learn to leisurely swim AND orthogonally to the forces of nature ( and ego ).
Having met you CHESSGAMES here on CD, it is as though we've always known each other -- and we're coming home.
Namaste
Abendland,
"How does one decide whether Obama "seems to be falling into an ambush of fate" or whether he is merely a very cunning and manipulative politician?"
The answer to your question is pretty simple: look at his actions, don't believe his words.
"How does one decide whether Obama "seems to be falling into an ambush of fate" or whether he is merely a very cunning and manipulative politician?"
Abendland,
Many of us are still contemplating this question. The Obama Code is a difficult one to decipher.
I dont care about Obama's daddy complex. I care about the daddy complex of the American liberal. They marched in lockstep when Bush said that daddy will save them from Saddam. Now they are marching in lockstep because daddy will save them from Bush.
There is nothing wrong with trillion dollar scams, and genocidal wars. We just want a well dressed, and articulate daddy to lead us to them.
The captains of the Wall Street pirate ships and Geithner are not the only ones who need to be fired. In addition to unloading trillions of taxpayers' money into the hands of the financial industry thieves, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke has been institutionalizing the criminal monetary policy that was refined by his predecessor, Alan Greenspan. Bernanke should have been fired during Obama's first 5 days.
Now you are talking about some big time Pirates! Nice analogy.
Siouxrose,
You miss the point, it is not Mr. Obama who has run up against his fate, it is the people of the USA.
For decades, we have played the happy fool, taking what we have not earned; stolen from the the land, cheated other nations, and acted in ways which makes a lie to our "exceptional-ism."
The fault is ours, not Mr. Obama's. The hubris is his.
Sioux Rose
Listen Hoyty toyty, you get on my nerves. You always try to condescend to others as if you OWN the last word. It is my analogy and I'll run it as I please! Ultimately his fate, as current head of the nation also influences the nation's fate; so there is no real disconnect here. You love to split hairs, that should be your occupation.
Your perspective gives power to the ruler. But, it is the people who rule, and the people are responsible.
If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.
Listen hoyt,
If you want to make a point that corruption has spread from the ruling class to us all, no problem. However, just blaming us while leaving the pols "free" to keep screwing us is totally uncalled for.
At some risk I would step in here to offer that Mr. Douglas has a history of posts here and they do not seem to excuse the leaders only to make the point that we the people are indeed the ultimate responsible party.
Ah, thanks for the correction. I think he meant no harm. At times I can understand the frustrating feeling one has to face when the majority went out of its ways to pick the wrong pols. I think that's what is troubling Douglas as well. God, I too wish the electorate wasn't so ignorant.
Is it truly ignorance? That most people exercise their political duty by voting once every two years is pretty obvious. Working jobs, raising kids, washing the car are all more popular options than is blogging here or elsewhere. Folks are just used to handing off to their elected representatives and allowing them to do the thinking.
This is not a way to ensure the democratic process obviously and our history certainly shows this plain enough. But, in addition, we face a very well organized ,financed, and publicized opposition to any mention of the irregularities, illegalities or unconstitutional acts of our govt. Our electorate is less ignorant and more manipulated I would say.
The thing is, Ms. Bedingfield, what has kept me going for almost five decades of political activism is the belief that our nation and its people are worth the effort.
Sioux Rose, why on earth would you assume that Obama didn't know exactly what he was doing? The man is constantly praised for his supposed brilliance. Yet when it comes to his actual decisions, his supporters lament "bad advice" from those who surround him -- as if he, in his brilliance, didn't choose those people knowing full well their background and instincts. Why assume that he is well-intentioned or that his "principles have been co-opted"? Don't you get it? He hasn't been "ambushed by fate." His is not brilliance, and certainly not wisdom. It's an excess of cleverness. He thought all he had to do was make everyone simultaneously believe he was doing what they wanted him to, no matter how contradictory their wishes. He thought the last thing he would have to do was take a principled stand. That's what the "bipartisanship" is really about -- avoiding ever drawing a line in the sand and saying, "here I stand." That would be leadership, not cleverness.
Sioux Rose
DICONOCLAST: You put words in my mouth. I assumed nothing. I was putting forth rhetorical questions. I am not a fan of the man nor his policies, but there are enigmatic elements in evidence. And anyone who presumes to speak for another is an arrogant fool.
Remember that Ms Coniff wirites for the liberal - not left, Progressive Magazine here.
To DaveBronstein April 16th, 2009 11:00 am:
I am afraid there is a lot of truth in what you're saying.
It's true that we should not lose sight of the fact that Obama did appoint these dirtbags.
Don't give Congress too much credit. They let let all those people who didn't pay their taxes through. If they hadn't maybe we wouldn't be in this deepening mess.
I don't think Obama is stupid. But I'm wondering if he's craven or if he just sold his soul for the presidency. Considering who owns America, maybe the only way to become president is to sell your soul. So being president means you have to sell out the taxpayers to the bankers and kill women and children in far off places.
Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Dave, you are correct about the real kings of this country. I think it was in his address to Congress not too long ago that Obama said that the country runs on credit. I thought "There's your problem".
Now he says he wants to Grow the Economy, when what we really should be concentrating on is how to live with a lot less, or even just sustaining what we now have.
And I just want to mention how much I hate the phrase "grow your ____", as in "I have to hire illegal workers in order to grow my business". That just sets my teeth on edge.
Though I don't believe President Obama has sold his soul to the Devil, I pretty much agree with the above. Both Dave and elainem.
No President or government can grow an economy, never happened before, not likely to happen now. They can hurt an economy by overtaxing or under taxing, by not regulasting it enough or by trying to control it, by over spending.......but they cannot produce anything. They can't make productive jobs.
Our parents built a great country on thrift, careful spending and the limited use of credit.
Thomas More, What is with the tea party business? The US gov has been running deficits for years, record deficits. How can, even the most obtuse American, get worked up about the numbers Obama is racking up, when they were onboard with Bush's budgets?
jlocke
I don't know much about the "Tea Parties" except what my Republican friends have told me this morning and what we've all seen on the news reports.
I have been told that most of the folks they were with knew exactly what they were protesting. It didn't exclude the Republicans at all. Many that attended didn't seem to be Republicans.
Also it wasn't just the Federal taxes, it was State and local too. (no state tax in Texas)
Obam's numbers are far, far past anything the Republicans did though and a number of his proposals are nothing but disguised taxes some mentioned.
I believe its the aggregate total these folks are upset about (that seems to be what they were saying). The last 15 years or so for sure. And taxes to bail out the banks and wall street are not what they had in mind when Obama was elected.
I took note in the footage I saw there were few signs condemning Obama....more congress and government.
But this is strictly my opinion. No real knowledge to base it on.
I wonder if all these folks protesting higher taxes understand that they are tool of the wealthy who now fear their free tax ride might be threatened so they start a movement to lower all taxes. Its called getting lost in the shuffle.
Do we the people need a primer as to why taxes are necessary? Do we also need a more equitable tax code, certainly we do, but lets not lose the baby with the bath water. From those according to their ability, to those according to their need. Tax people equally and equitably, close corporate tax loopholes, heck, end corporate personhood status too.
Now lets slash that damn military budget. Where the hell is our common sense?
"From those according to their ability, to those according to their need."
That has never worked and I frankly don't see it happening without a lobotamy for the entire race.
Now as to the rest.....lets see you disagree with this......YEP!
Never worked you say. Study, if you would, the way cradle to grave health care is available in many nations, the way education is free to all even through graduate schools, underwritten public transportation as well. Tax roles in many nations graduate to very high levels because those taxed at that rate can afford it.
Speaking of lobotomies, Thomas, refusing to think, research or learn seems to make such a procedure unnecessary. What the hell is so wrong with aspiring to such an ideal? What makes it a hope of brain dead people, what the hell is wrong with your ability dream and aspire? Why do you continually rant and rave about poor and desperate people coming here to survive yet refuse to even consider equity for our own?
Are you really this closed minded?
I would ask first how large these countries are, what is the size of their populations and how long these policies have been in effect? Next I'd ask how long you believe they will be able to continue these polices? Other than my opinion that they are not very big, have petite populations that have been homogeneous and cannot sustain these policies much longer for everyone, I personally have no interest it becoming a socialist democracy like the ones you describe in Europe. They are stagnant.
Been there, seen them, nice place to vacation but I'll take my country, warts and all.
Aspiring to a ideal like that wrong? I don't believe I said that if you check. What I said was it has never worked.
Rant and rave? About illegal immigrants? I believe all my arguments are fairly reasoned and presented in a logical manner. Equity for our citizens is exactly what that is about. Nothing else.
I would agree refusing to learn, to research, defending a position that has no rational defensible tenets is closed minded. The question is, who is it? I of course disagree with your conclusion.
C'mon Thomas why do I have to do your legwork for you? You make a false statement and then demand that I show you proof, where the hell was your original citation certified?
Your remarks above are borderline dishonest frankly. Are you having a bad day? Week? Decade? This nation you love so much ( but not enough to face the truth that it is in dire need of salvation)is practically alone in not having cradle to grave health care for all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care
Further if you intend to display this growing stupidity as :
"I personally have no interest it becoming a socialist democracy like the ones you describe in Europe. They are stagnant."
then you and I are going to end this cycle of conversations. I do not tolerate intellectual dishonesty and laziness from one I respect. What the fuck is stagnant about free education to the doctoral level? What the fuck is stagnant about free public transportation? You are going further into incomprehensibility with this crap,Mr. More, you do need a gut check.
Get well soon.
My guts are just fine. Never in doubt since I was a young man. Nor my moral "guts" either.
My opinion is that you cannot transfer systems from small countries to one as large and diverse as ours. It simply won't work. Europe is nopt exactly the most diverse population around and as they have become less so, they have had plenty of troubles lately.
Neither can just "anyone" get a Doctorate. If anyone should understand how people are excluded you should.
Stagnant in the manner of what exactly have they produced in the last 30 years in the way of innovation? Try to open a business in France or Germany like you can here. I could never have accomplished there what I did here, The opportunity is simply not there for average people.
I've never been dushonest in my life, about anything and I resent the suggestion.
Thats my opinion.