You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.

Guest Post: The Banker Bonus Diversion

Tyler Durden's picture




Submitted by Deadhead

I am so tired of the absolute nonsensical and foolish approach in regards to Banker Bonuses taken by both the Obama administration as well as the bankers themselves.   Here's what is really going on and what should should be going on if we lived in a world that was dependent on telling the truth, prudent financial management, reduction of systemic risk, and if a cure to our banking system malady is genuinely being sought.

If one accepts the postulation that the primary core of our banking system problem is the fact that many our our banks, including the group of 19 tagged as “Too Big to Fail”, have severe capital shortfalls, then one is forced to accept the fact that the solution to the problem requires a rebuilding of capital on the balance sheet.  Gee, that's fairly complex, isn't it?

Here's the deal in a nutshell:

1.    Banks have significant capital shortfalls that are being masked by FASB FAS 157 modifications that allow marking of assets to bank “models” versus a mark to market. Got a pile of CDOs or RMBS paper worth 30 cents on the dollar?  No problem, mark it at 90 cents and watch the profits roll in.  The egregious matter here is that both banks and U.S. Regulators continue to tout the high capital ratios of the group of 19 yet conveniently fail to mention that FASB 157 is the primary reason for this illusion. Do you guys think that these assets are going to magically run back up to par in the future? Do you guys think that a lot of this garbage is going to cash flow?

2.    While on the subject of capital shortfalls, FASB FAS 166/167 provisions became effective November 2009 (after being postponed from November 2008, interestingly) for Q1 2010. ZH readers are aware that this requires that banks bring off balance sheet assets back on to the balance sheet and it is unlikely that this tsunami of garbage paper is worth anywhere near 100 cents on the dollar.  With bank profits quite handsome for Q4, and capital accounts woefully inadequate,  it would be prudent to allocate this profit to capital accounts to reserve for losses on this incoming pile of fecal matter, but, no, let's just kick the can down the road further.  The FDIC has decided to give a pass to the banks for one and one half years to begin the process of allocating capital in regards these assets. Read it yourself:  http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2009/pr09230.html

3.    With multiple billions of profit earned (engineered?) in Q4 2009, the bankers have decided to abandon prudent balance sheet management and put the vast majority of these profits in their pockets.  This is the ultimate in piggishness as well as a dereliction of fiduciary responsibility to properly manage a balance sheet on the behalf of the bank's owners and bondholders.  Then again, I'm not so sure that bank equity owners and bondholders are the smartest group in the world, as their investment rests on the good “graces” of the Obama administration regulatory ineptness and the Federal Reserve Bank, an organization with a track record that leaves much to be desired.  Caveat Emptor.

4.    U.S. Regulators have decided that they simply are not going to require the profits to be allocated to capital accounts for loan loss provisioning either.  The  citizenry of the USA have loaned and given (via Fed balance sheet purchases and who else knows what) the banks trillions of assistance because of these capital shortfalls and now that some money from profits is available for balance sheet reconstruction, our regulators have simply put their fingers in their ears and started yelling “La, La, La, La, I can't hear you”.  This is a total and epic failure of the banking regulatory authorities in the U.S. 

5.    The Obama administration, now that the bankers are going to pocket the money, has decided to tax some of this money to fund stimulus version X.0, “X” being a number somewhere between the current number of stimulus items and the eventual Minsky moment.  The point of the matter is that Obama's wall street endeared team (it's not political kids, it's the same group that ran the show under Bush, Clinton and many other Presidents) has, once again, failed in its responsibility to ensure proper bank capital standards and, once again, has left the door open for systemic risk.  Helluva job, guys and gals!

Here's the simple answer folks.

The bankers should have taken every nickel of profit and allocated it to capital accounts to provision for loan losses: past, present, and future.  The regulators should force every nickel on to the balance sheet irrespective of the menagerie of FASB FAS 157.  The government should not be taking this needed capital from the banking system.  If we follow this path for a few years, maybe we'll have a chance to avoid a complete zombification of our banking system.

I cannot believe after what we have been through since the lessons of Bear Stearns and Lehman that we are simply not fixing a not so complex matter.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:31 | Link to Comment Don Smith
Don Smith's picture

Hear, hear, DH.  I'll be tweeting this article out and hoping it finds an audience.  (My 50 followers are sure to send it viral).

I, too, fail to see how they banksters were able to scrape so much money out of the taxpayer trough and pretend it was nothing more than their own hard work and great investing that earned that money. 

Full disclosure, I work for US Bank, and I truly believe that of the 19 TBTFs, not only are we the most prudent, but we are also probably the only remaining TBTF that TPTB would let fail.  It's pretty frustrating competing against ghosts.  (Or, zombies, as the case may be).  Our bonus pool ain't nothing compared to the Squid.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:34 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

thanks for your disclosure Don.  Over the years (i worked for one of the 19 for many years, a big regional) I had always respected the prudent approach taken by USB and admired what I would call an old fashioned, conservative approach to lending.  I simply don't know enough about their current balance sheet and what they were up to when banks started getting out of hand in the early 2000 era. 

by the way, TPTB won't let USB fail as long as Warren Buffett retains his enormous stake.  Warren is simply part of the oligarchy and he is surely tied in tightly to Obama and his crew.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:15 | Link to Comment rangerider
rangerider's picture

DH great job .....

does anyone have the computer firepower,

and knowhow to create a spreadsheet for these 19 .....

i.e., 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, 2009 for the relevant balance sheets & accounts .....

so we know the total amount of de-crapifying that is needed .....

     http://moveyourmoney.info/ 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 13:16 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:28 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 13:52 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

thanks, please keep in touch on this.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:35 | Link to Comment Harbourcity
Harbourcity's picture

When your political aspirations depend on the amount of money you can generate, invariably, the best source of money is going to motivate your actions.  If Obama really wanted change, he would have relegated himself to a single term and made difficult decisions knowing that his own aspirations needed to be forgotten so that he could make the needed change.

All this anger at the bankers is misdirected.  Don't blame the player, blame the game.  The real crime is that Obama hasn't changed the game and so he has done nothing to improve the financial environment for the average US citizens.

Until the average US citizen gives Obama a reason to enact change, he won't.  This is the same for whomever is elected in 2010 and 2012 ad naseum.

 

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:47 | Link to Comment Harbourcity
Harbourcity's picture

Ironic, don't you think. 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 13:22 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 21:59 | Link to Comment JohnKing
JohnKing's picture

If Obama really wanted change, he would have relegated himself to a single term and made difficult decisions knowing that his own aspirations needed to be forgotten so that he could make the needed change.

 

Dead nuts on.

 

Obama heckled off the stage:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/17/obama-coakley-speech-pres_n_426...

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:13 | Link to Comment SRV - ES339
SRV - ES339's picture

To follow up on your point Harbourcity... (IMO) one of the many needed changes required  is a single six year term for President, removing the systemic barrier to change that requires second term campaign planning on day one.

Ban professional lobbying, and limit and cover presidential / congressional campaign costs with public funds, and maybe just maybe we set the stage for real change.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 10:01 | Link to Comment suteibu
suteibu's picture

The current 4-year term is fine.  Look at the history; Johnson didn't run in 68, Ford lost in 76, as did Bush I.  Clinton changed the direction of his policies in order to face re-election.

It's great to have change, but it's also nice to alter mistakes made every 4 years instead of giving a blank check to someone for 6 years. 

I agree about the lobbying as it supercedes the populace who do not organize as lobbyists.  No public funds for elections as it takes a freedom away from those whose political voice is heard by not speaking.  However, a limit on the total amount spent might be productive, particularly for incumbants who are playing with the house's money from the start.  And what the hell is this thing called "bundling"?  It's akin to lobbying and should be banned.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 07:57 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:36 | Link to Comment Reggie Middleton
Reggie Middleton's picture

There you go again, acting like banks are run like real businesses...

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:08 | Link to Comment greased up deaf guy
greased up deaf guy's picture

amen, dh.

unfortunately, the administration, regulators, et al, suspended or bent the rules and made all decisions in the banks' favor assuming the banks would behave nicely to prepare for the rainy day (understatement) which is still imminent. instead, the banks are biting the hand that feeds and everyone is claiming to be powerless to prevent it. in a perfect world, the administration's reaction would be to enforce all fasb rules, pull the plug on all backstops and other forms of support and let the cards fall as they may. of course, this will never happen because the administration is bought and paid for. truly disgusting.

always enjoy your posts. regards.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:49 | Link to Comment Absinthe Minded
Absinthe Minded's picture

How the SEC or some other government entity cannot see this is either utter incompetency or criminal behavior. The fact that they are willing to take that much bonus money shows they could not give a shit less whether the bank survives or not. They know the whole thing is a charade and they are trying to siphon as much cash out of us as they can before it all implodes. Guns, silver, gold and non-hybrid seeds, as much as it seems implausible, I can't see it continuing to go on. I think China is due for some kind of defiant action. They seem like they are sick of our all high and mighty bullshit. We may be a military superpower but we're like the guy at work that keeps bumming cigarettes but never brings any of his own, sooner or later he's told to go shit in his hat. 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:05 | Link to Comment RowdyRoddyPiper
RowdyRoddyPiper's picture

+.  Catchy handle. 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:06 | Link to Comment RowdyRoddyPiper
RowdyRoddyPiper's picture

+.  Catchy handle. 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:57 | Link to Comment anynonmous
anynonmous's picture

this Coakley person in Mass is a piece of work (right now she's bashing the bonuses the banksters got - what hypocrisy)

watch live now with Obama

http://www.c-span.org/flvPop.aspx?src=org1&s=637.114&e=-1&live=F&pop=Y&s...

 

(I junked myself by accident)

                          ↓

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:01 | Link to Comment Careless Whisper
Careless Whisper's picture

(I junked myself by accident) 

too funny anon. a little wake and bake today? hehe

coakley is done. put a fork in that nasty bitch. downtown scotty brown has the momentum. he's the real deal and deserves a seat at the table.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:52 | Link to Comment BS Inc.
BS Inc.'s picture

The analogy that comes to mind when I think of what Wall Street is doing to the American taxpayer is that of the Russian "oligarchs" who profited so enormously from the collapse of the Soviet Union. It is beyond belief what these people are getting away with.

One of my favorite quotes is David Hume's "Nothing is more surprising than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few". "Nothing", indeed.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 16:54 | Link to Comment Harbourcity
Harbourcity's picture

One of my favorite quotes is David Hume's "Nothing is more surprising than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few".

It is also surprising how much abuse the many will take before they stand up to the few.

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 21:35 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 08:50 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

While the aspect of the few having many guns will always be a major part of the story, the guns aren't primarily what keeps the many in line. It's the self policing (mentally and physically) of the many that keeps the many in line.

The few can not possibly rule without the consent of the many. This is true regardless of the force used by the few. They simply can't control the many without the cooperation of the vast majority of the many. This is done using many methods, such as propaganda, indoctrination and mind control as well as using portions of the many (police, military, bureaucracy etc) to corral the many.

Even though we may be many in numbers, we have effectively been isolated and marginalized one mind at a time through the control system's structures, beginning at home with our parents (who teach us to submit and conform just as they did) progressing through the schools (which teach us to submit and conform through repitition and indoctrination) then the corporate power structure and our social hierarchy.

Extremely complex and beautifully simple, these techniques have been honed through thousands of years of live on-the-run practice. Don't make the mistake of assuming we can topple the control system by toppling the government. We are the control system. This is why old governments are replaced with new governments that either already are or rapidly become just as oppressive as the old one was. 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 13:24 | Link to Comment EB
EB's picture

4 legs good.  2 legs bad.  Still waiting for the sequel..was told it would be a year.

Good to see you on the byline DH.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 15:11 | Link to Comment Slewburger
Slewburger's picture

Your comment backs up your name.... well done sir.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 21:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 23:32 | Link to Comment strike for retu...
strike for return to reality's picture

I agree with your comparison (Wall St as Russian robber barrons).

So to which country will our Abramovichs flee? 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 01:02 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:14 | Link to Comment EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

India? Really? I don't mean to be a smart ass or be condescending to you or any Indians frequenting this site, but that sounds like another hopium at its best. Sir/Ma'am, have you visited India for an extended period of time. You put forth four points that seems to suggest that they will be beneficial to the subcontinent.

Modern Infrastructure
- Outside of the 10 large cities, where the infrastructure is less "sucking", infrastructure in most Indian cities just S-U-C-K-S. Most of those large cities are bursting at their seams. The most basic amenities- power and clean water - are in short supplies in most Indian cities. There are places, where even a dial up connection is extremely difficult to come by. No, I am not talking about villages, they are capitals of Indian states where this problem is encountered. And even if the dial up connection is available, because of power failures your plans are rendered useless.

Education in many place - Okay I give you this. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Centre-to-derecognize-44-deemed...
And that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Caste System - You put forth the proposition that caste system is good for India's future? Nothign more to say there.

And, finally, Government - Of 159 countries surveyed, India secured a lowly spot at number 88 of the most corrupt places on the planet, along with unlikely companion countries such as Gabon, Mali, Moldova, Tanzania and Iran. (Times of India). I can name hundreds of politician who are milking the system, but I'll name just one. Mayawati.

http://www.countercurrents.org/darapuri040408.htm
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Mayawatis_wealth_is_just_affection_/r...

Need I say more?

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 04:35 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:02 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:13 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

The first thought that comes to my mind is that the proposed penalty tax will just be passed on to bank customers.

Bank ALCO (asset, liability pricing committee) models being worked on already I am confident.  Couple of bps drop in deposit rates, couple of bps increase in loan rates covers this stuff.  Robo's infamous grandma vultures will be the only ones to notice that their bank money market accounts went from 0.30% to 0.26%. hey, another good reason to invest in US Treasury and start saving like Obama and Geithner have been promoting.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:02 | Link to Comment buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

D.C. is controlled by NYC, who get their taxes from the farce of a banking system, that I understand. The funny thing is that CA and the rest are really getting hosed by their own corrupt reps otherwise they would demand bigger bailouts for the states.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:26 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 01/19/2010 - 14:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:41 | Link to Comment Wondering
Wondering's picture

In addition, the historical underpinnings of these compensation plan designs was formed back when the majority of the profit making arms of the banks were manned by partners who as individuals at the top of their profession made the difference in the levels of profits.

Not so these days. Millions of dollars in infrastructure and instutitonal advantages in information capture mean that a much higher percentage of the profit difference are institutional and infrastructure advantages...not a reflection of individual "talent"

For the same reason that selling a new kind of software is rewarded with a higher commission rate than the sales rep who sells an industry standard; or selling for a start up Soda Beverage should be paid a higher commission than selling for Coke or Pepsi, selling stuff for one of the five TBTF is not the individual struggle (I am not saying they do not work just as hard...just that the mix of institutional and Indivdual advantages that leads to success has changed) it used to be. imho.

Lastly, of course, is it talent or just the ability to spin "working for this moment in this best of all possible worlds packages of complexity and jargon" that separates the top earners from the average? Or the Institutions ability to cover elsewhere/other instruments what ever bets it makes for its clients?

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:38 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:25 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

I am by no means an expert on these areas but will take a stab and hope that more qualified folks (reggie would be a good one, certainly chris whalen, and I know Meredith hangs around here and we haven't forgotten about that lunch in july with sheila bair I might add) chirp in.

FASB 166/167 requires that the assets be shown on the balance sheet as of Q1 2010.  As to the details (or vagueries as the case may be) I simply don't know.  Certainly they can be marked according to the current FASB 157 paradigm, but there is also a requirement that a mark to market value be disclosed in the financial statement as I understand. I recall someone writing about RF's balance sheet and that when their book was marked to market per their own financial statement, they were pretty toasty.

It will be interesting to see the Q1 statements broken down by the analytic types (independent analysts, that is, not the sell side pumpers on bianco's bac/ml team that is more overweight the financials for 2010 than the entire cast of that "biggest loser" show).

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:34 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:54 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:56 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

Obama knows his future is tied to the bankers' bonuses............ The bankers, on the other hand, flush with record bonuses, will be more than happy to fill Obama's coffers so long as he keeps their gravy train on track. He will.

I cannot say that I disagree with your statement as it certainly gone this way and if past history is a window to the future......

The other side of the coin, which is definitely and clearly in play, is that even among his most loyal base (he's already losing independents big time), there is an enormous disgust and dissatisfaction with Obama's actions in regards to the banks and wall street.  It has become plainly obvious by perusing the main stream media that Obama's rather amateurish attempts to respond to the anti bank populism (the Federal Hall speech on credit cards was simply an embarrassment to the office of the Presidency, i.e. "hey, can you guys please cut it out?  hey, how about if you guys volunteer to stop the credit card shenanigans before the new law?") is pretty weak sauce, lots of flowery words but no bite.

I read the lib blogs alot to see what his own say and spend most of that time on HuffPo, which I view as Obama worshipper central numero uno.  That crew of his supporters and worshippers are becoming vicious against him due to the actions of geithner, summers, bernanke (they lose the "it's all bush's fault" argument big time on Obama's re-nomination of Bernanke). 

Obama will likely play both sides of the fence, i.e. keep the status quo by being the Treserve puppet and avoid making the hard decisions to fix this mess because it will cause some pain as well as continuing to jawbone the banks publicly to give some raw meat to the base.

I gotta say (and I'll probably be wrong, I'll certainly get blasted by a number of ZHers for my "naivete") that I think we have hit a tipping point in the USA as far as Americans figuring out that they have gotten phucked by the Treserve/Banking/Wall street club and that the citizenry is not going to let this one go.  Political victory in the mid terms and next Presidential election belongs to those candidates that will genuinely stand up to the Treserve/Wall Street complex and acknowledge to Americans that they have been screwed, explain how it has been done, promise to prosecute, and offer a course of action that returns banking to its former role in a glass steagall type of environment.

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:09 | Link to Comment jesus
jesus's picture

Obama is not stupid, he is a great politician. Like any politician, he also knows that crushing the banksters is THE trump card of all time. If you are a pol and have that kind of trump card, why would you play it now when you are so far from re-election? I think their current strategy of extend+pretend is just that. If things magically work out and we get growth, Obama becomes popular again right in time for re-election. If they don't, Obama comes down hard on the banksters and becomes popular again right in time for the re-election. Any top-grade politician would do the exact same thing.

 

 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 04:56 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 00:51 | Link to Comment Assetman
Assetman's picture

Great reply and great original post, deadhead.

The Obama Administration is trying to diffuse a much larger issue by thowing populist rhetoric for a very short term gain.  Unfortunately for them, it appears that voter rage is buliding-- and the upcoming Massachusetts election will be very telling on what should be expected in November.  If an incumbent Democrat loses this state, hoo-boy...

I'm hoping that those in the alternative media continue to focus on the massive cover-up taking place, especially with the players in the Treserve.  Interestingly enough, even MSM is picking up a little bit on this massive theft that is being quietly endorsed by our political duopoly.

The key is keeping the eye on the ball-- and as deadhead correctly points out-- there will be many tricks up this administration's sleeves to divert attention from the real crimes.

Again, nice job.

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:58 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 10:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 14:25 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

197110 said:

And the original posts makes a number of silly statements... like "mark them to 90 and let the profits roll in".. (so these bond have no cash flow problems, why mark them lower?). or "no one actually thinks this stuff will return to par":

Based on the entirety of your comment, I've decided not to spend time debating with you.  Quickly, though, my "mark them to 90, etc" statement describes exactly what happened for Q1 2009 earnings for many banks.  A magnificent example is the approach WFC took on this matter with their now infamous Q1 2009 earnings pre-announcement on a Friday afternoon and the subsequent information detailed in their quarterly statement. 

Lastly, I suspect that a number of these impaired items are experiencing cash flow problems....

though you seem to be a real tool/troll, i do wish you the best and invite you to come back when you have something to offer that approaches the realm of sanity.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 14:18 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

J Dimon - bankster of the decade, CNBS golden boy went on record to say by MID-2010 banks will be OVER capitalized. How does that fit into your formula DH?

Dimon did make a statement to that effect and i recall reading it last week.

As I and numerous others who are more adept at bank balance sheet analysis than me have already noted, these statements by the bankers (as well as the regulators, Treserve) are predicated on the current FASB FAS 157 mods that allow a mark to model, not market. 

If you own a home in a development with similar structures and you purchased the home for 600k like your neighbors and the ones that are selling now go for 300k, it is probably not unreasonable to mark your personal balance sheet with a 300k residential real estate asset.  If you seek a loan on that house, certainly an appraiser is going to use the comps in your development and come up very close to the current selling price.  I'll bet you anything that James Dimon will not give you a loan for any more than 300k at the absolute max. The difference between the homeowner and JPM et. al. is that they CAN value the exact same home (actually the current mortgage on such) at the original mortgage value, which in most cases was probably in the 570-600k range. 

I would be interested to see Mr. Dimon's answer if someone had asked if his overcapitalized statement was predicated on 157, but nobody has asked.  Then again, they don't need to ask because the mark to model is now sanctioned by FASB as well as US regulatory authorities, which one could reasonably say is the current 'law of the land' so to speak. If one believes that marking bank assets in this fashion can go on forever without negative side effects, they are welcome to that opinion.  I think there are and will be reactions to these actions, which goes to your question of:

What if the banks continue to grow their curve/vol riding investments and "grow" out of the last 3 trillion in writedowns?

If they are able to grow out of the 3 trillion, then ultimately things will be fine as the "grow out" phrase assumes the debt will either eventually be paid or written down.  if the debt is paid, that's fantastic for the entire system and would be ideal in my view: I also think that it is foolish to believe in that scenario as some percentage will default, be written off.  Certainly the Treserve complex and the banks have shown that this "grow out of the mess" strategy is clearly their plan.  My question back to you is how are they going to grow out of the mess if the profits they make are NOT going back to the capital accounts but are removed from the bank as personal compensation to the bankers?  or dividends for that matter?  one must also take into consideration length of time (it will be long) and the conundrum of an economy highly dependend on credit expansion and a banking system that takes a blow to the balance sheet (reserving) every time they make a loan?

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 17:59 | Link to Comment jm
jm's picture

Deadhead: 

Thank you.  I have some additional ideas.

What could have fixed the problem:  equity holders of these banks get wiped out and senior creditors take over shepherding these whores out of bankruptcy.

Here's another marvelous fix for today: the shareholders of these banks get a brain and vote every board member out.  First action item: start with making a new management team.

Capitalism does work if you let it.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:32 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

I would add that shareholders dumping their common equity might get some attention as well.

the "move your money" campaign has caught on, has some virality, and definitely pisses the banks off because losing core deposits and core depositors is the low fruit on the tree of profitability.

once people realize that most of their mutual funds and 401k funds own bank stocks, and if this is tied into the "move your money" campaign, it could be a real doozy.

 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 09:25 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"once people realize that most of their mutual funds and 401k funds own bank stocks, and if this is tied into the "move your money" campaign, it could be a real doozy."

Let's open our minds for a second and ponder what I'm about to lay out. It's just an idea and I could be way off base. But it's clear to me and many others that there is no banking/economic system fix being implemented, just extend and pretend. So what is the end game for the powers that be, the so called powers behind the throne?

Consider this. They understand they walk a fine line between panicking the public into doing their bidding and panicking the public into revolt. So if they understand that the system is not being fixed (because they aren't trying) and by extension is even more susceptible to collapse (after layer upon layer of public debit has been added to the stinking heap) then after "they" have made whatever moves they must be making to protect themselves, how will they let the system collapse in such a way that it does not show their manipulation, thus attracting the lynchings their way?

This is one way they could do it. By encouraging the citizens to collapse the system, or at least the appearance of the citizens collapsing the system. Then, once each citizen has blood on their hands, the powers that be rush in with a "new and improved" global financial system (which is their end goal all along) to help the citizens out of the mess the citizens created when they began boycotting the banks and then pulling their money out of the stock and bond markets in protest of the "bad" banker bonuses and general greed and corruption.

This is an old method of manipulation, used quite successfully for centuries, to get the mobs to destroy themselves (and any enemies the powers that be might have along the way) before swooping back in to save the citizens from themselves. I'm very suspicious of this "move your money" movement because of the people behind it. Governments have always infiltrated and/or precipitated populous movements. For example, look at the infiltrations into the Black Panthers and the Labor movements of the 60's and 70's as proof. How many "terrorist" attack arrests would have happened during the past 8 years without the authorities using "agent provocateurs" to fan the flames.

Let's keep our eyes wide open here folks and not assume any grass roots efforts are what they appear to be.

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 04:18 | Link to Comment boiow
boiow's picture

too true, at this stage of the collapse they must be steering it towards an "endgame" of some sort. what i would like to know is what. they hate gold and silver so it makes me think they will use it in some way, not just market manipulation, (etf's etc).

 because the ponzi scheme was ' pulled ' with the drawdown of 550 billion on sept 2008 it is only logical that the end result is meticulously planned (they are far too control freakish to just 'wing it')

lets be honest , if it can be worked out, the people that contribute here have a head start. imho

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 11:12 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

"they hate gold and silver so it makes me think they will use it in some way, not just market manipulation, (etf's etc)."

I absolutely think they have a plan for Gold and Silver. Once the currencies have been collapsed, they will need to introduce a new currency. One of the methods they can use to get the population to buy into this new currency is to back it with some Gold and Silver.

It doesn't need to be fully back by the PM's, just enough to give the new currency more credibility than the old currency. Do you want that week old stinking rotten corpse over there or this fresh kill I have in the refrigerator?

Hmmmmmm........ let me think about it. I know, I'll take the fresh kill backed by some Gold and Silver.

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 09:29 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

CD - Why would anyone that subscribes to the notion of failed institutions suddenly subscribe to the notion that those who led these failed institutions are the answer? Conditioning? Desire for "safety and security" when it was the lack of safety & security that led to the loss of belief in various institutions and more importantly, the systems and those that manipulate them that led to their corruption?

I suspect that the classic formulas won't work as well this time around.  After all, the evidence of these failures is all around us....

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 10:30 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Miles,

You raise a good point. And in a rational and calm world, people might/should/may use their higher brain functions to think through what led to the failed institutions and why. I agree that classic formulas won't work as well this time around. So I suspect "they" might feel the need to push people closer to the brink in order to get what they want. And it's now clear to me they will do so with little, if any, remorse.

Alas, we have Haiti as an example of what happens to society when it's severely disrupted. I use Haiti only as an example of the worse case to illustrate how mechanisms, social order and logic break down under severe stress. And as the event plays out over days and weeks, it gets even worse before it incrementally gets better.

Stress the population enough with an economic collapse/breakdown and people revert back to lower level thinking and logic. Think Maslow's hierarchy of needs and then think about what happened during the market crash of Sept, Oct and Nov of 2008 and how people threw reason and logic out the door and panicked.

I often say that chaos and anarchy (even in America, especially in America) is only 6 missed meals away.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:38 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 08:14 | Link to Comment jm
jm's picture

Just wait til the tax burden kicks in.

And no, I wouldn't be.  If you invested in 2007 common stock, you are still at a loss even though the govt recapitalized your investment, handed them assets on a platter, and they don't even have to mark to market.  

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:00 | Link to Comment Winisk
Winisk's picture

The only silver lining on this disgusting dark cloud is that maybe Obama inadvertently gave the bankers enough rope to hang themselves with.

The bankers and politicians are sociopaths who are empty inside.  Over reacting?  Perhaps, but then I ask myself if decent folk would behave in this manner.  DH wouldn't.  So they merely act the part they think the commoners want to see until their distorted view loses all contact with reality and they are morally adrift.  The natural ability that you and I have to intuit the feelings of other people is lacking so the politicians and bankers are always behind the curve in that respect.  Their responses are always too little and too late, and strikes normal people as more than a little false.  Only by allowing their pathology to manifest itself without the natural checks and balances can it be easily observed.

So there it is in plain view for all who want to see it.  Blatant acts of selfishness that defy the common sense solutions proposed in this humble post.  The lack of a clear intent to fix the system is no longer shocking to us.  It's getting old and tiresome.  Rage and resignation now mingle with each other.  I'm feeling that the only way there will be meaningful change is to let this sucker die, and perhaps a new attitude will be encouraged in the aftermath of the failed policies and fraud.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:29 | Link to Comment harveywalbinger
harveywalbinger's picture

Excellent point.  You eloquently put into words what many of us have been thinking.  A massive fraud has been perpetrated out there for everyone to see and yet the perps have no fear of consequence.  Everyday we learn that, as deep as the corruption runs, there's a new email exchange discovery,etc., etc., providing evidence that it's actually much worse than we had suspected.  The complicity, fraud, moral hazard... is of epic proportions.  

I'm not sure anything better will come out of  the inevitable collapse though, unless new faces come to power that haven't been co-opted by big money.  Unfortunately, I can only think of a couple in our Federal government of whom I believe that to be the case.  I wouldn't be surprised if the end game is to force a global reset.  Then out of the ashes the N W O will emerge to "save" us.  Never let a crisis go to waste, right ?

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 09:55 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

Winisk,

You are speaking of an ancient and wise teaching handed down for thousands of years, something that is repeated again and again in ancient philosophical, religious and historical texts from every country, region and period of time.

Give evil wide berth. Do not directly oppose it for evil feeds upon your resistance, the energy expended in the resistance all good men and women feel is their duty to mount. Instead, allow evil to turn upon itself for nourishment once it's normal energy source, our resistance, is removed.

This is a path I'm beginning to understand is the only way out of this mess. In order to take it, we must first comes to terms with the idea that we will never go back to what we had and the way things were. We must concede defeat so that we may win, just as an alcoholic must concede that s/he is powerless over alcohol, that s/he can't control it. Only then does the force of alcohol loose it's control over the alcoholic.

S/he finds that their obsession, their huge will and desire to control, was energizing the force. By removing the will to control, there is nothing left that needed to be controlled. The effort expended in attempting to control was simply being turned back against the controller. Their huge effort to control, their action was creating an equal and opposite reaction.

Once this threshold is crossed, we learn that in order to see all the other open doors around us, we must first stop trying to force open the locked door directly in front of us. Only by giving up our attempt to control do we gain the understanding that to attempt to control an uncontrollable object means that we are controlled by that object. Letting go of our need to control allows us to do everything else except that which we obsessed over and tried to control. 

We are supplying 100% of the energy being used against us.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:02 | Link to Comment Eric W
Eric W's picture

Thank you for an interesting comment. Do you happen to have any pointers to reading more about "the ancient and wise teaching?"

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 21:17 | Link to Comment Bob
Bob's picture

You completely lost me on this one, CD: whut?

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 04:30 | Link to Comment boiow
boiow's picture

the death of 'this sucker' is gaurenteed , its the replacement they're going to offer is what im worried about.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:43 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 18:53 | Link to Comment Fish Gone Bad
Fish Gone Bad's picture

No one can borrow their way to prosperity.  With all states being flat broke, and then some, how is it that banks have any money at all?  Frontrunning and HFT can not account for all the money the banks have earned.  If I had to guess, I would say it came from more accounting tricks.

Eventually the states are going to have to let a lot of their employees (including teachers) go.  These people will eat through their savings, IRAs, 401Ks, and lose their homes and cars.  There are a lot of shoes to still fall.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:45 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:14 | Link to Comment pros
pros's picture

"I cannot believe after what we have been through since the lessons of Bear Stearns and Lehman that we are simply not fixing a not so complex matter."

 

Where have you been?

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 20:37 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:18 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

From the President today in Boston, talking about Wall Street. 

"Martha's opponent already is walking in lockstep with Washington Republicans," Obama said, criticizing Brown for opposing the president's proposed tax on banks that received federal bailout money. "She's got your back, her opponent's got Wall Street's back. Bankers don't need another vote in the United States Senate. They've got plenty. Where's yours?"

Ah, yes, frame the issue for the masses as one of Republicans versus Democrats, as opposed to the truth that Wall Street/Banking dominates and steers both parties.

I will say that President Obama is spot on truthful when he says: "Bankers don't need another vote in the United States Senate."

You absolutely, undoubtedly, and clearly are correct with this statement President Obama.  Your team of Summers, Geithner, and your nominee as Fed Chair, Bernanke, ably abetted by Mary Schapiro of the SEC and a host of former Goldman Sachs employees now working (for) your team, do not need another vote in the US Senate because they have you. 

And they really, really do have you Mr. Obama.

 

 

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:19 | Link to Comment Molon Labe
Molon Labe's picture

Well said.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:27 | Link to Comment buzzsaw99
buzzsaw99's picture

BarriO, man of the people. LMAO!!!

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:28 | Link to Comment Screwball
Screwball's picture

Deadhead, thanks for your efforts, much appreciated.  Keep'em coming please.  Your a valuable asset to the ZH family.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 20:24 | Link to Comment mnevins2
mnevins2's picture

DH, sigh, Amen!

I keep telling my teenagers, who are keen lovers of history, we might unfortunately be living in a period where you'll tell YOUR CHILDREN about YOUR experiences.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:32 | Link to Comment JohnKing
JohnKing's picture

Great post DH. It's amazing how good the TPTB are at moving the discussion. Of course they own MSM so it's not that hard.

Warren Buffet = Gannett newspapers...oh and don't forget Comcast (anyone wondering why CNBS is being bought by them)..hehe..

Uncle Warren is the kindly uncle/molester no one wants to talk about.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:46 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 23:19 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

A comment about GCI.

BRK ownership numbers as you have laid them out speak for themselves....i don't think that ~1.5% ownership is something to scoff at, particularly if it is Warren Buffett.  Buffett's 1.5% share is leveraged due to the fact that he is Buffett and his words carry more weight than many other institutional investors in my view.

Interesting is the most dominant holder of GCI, the Ariel group (around 15%), which is Chicago big time and its CEO (among others) is tied in real tight with Obama.  The CEO was a co chair of the Obama Inaugural and I can't be bothered to look it up, but I suspect one would find lots of Chicago fundraising activity had taken place prior to that Inauguration gig.

It's no surprise that Buffett is tied in pretty tight with the Obama administration and he has also become a full fledged squid to the tune of about 5 billion.

Just connecting a few more dots.

 

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 19:53 | Link to Comment Zippyin Annapolis
Zippyin Annapolis's picture

Most Excellent post DH---the bank regulators are on regulatory Fantasy Island waiting for "De Plane,  Da Plane" full of $$$ to materialize out of thin air. Voila' everyone is solvent and the con job heads into double overtime. The best way to"create solvency" out of thin air is Phony Accounting. This scheme has now been elevated to an Art Form. The banksters are just well--pigs.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 20:22 | Link to Comment Ned Zeppelin
Ned Zeppelin's picture

Kudos, DH.  The number of FRNs from Goldman Sux directed at O pre-election spoke volumes then  - I was frankly horrified, and dismayed when i first heard it, then he picked Timmah, Summers, etc. all horrendous decisions IMHO - and his lack of action now against the Wall Street corruption contagion is speaking volumes now. When I get solicitations from the O Man's voracious fundraisers these days, I simply reply "as soon as he fixes his Wall Street problem." But firing Timmah or Ben is not enough - it's who he replaces Timmah with and the policies he (or she, if Sheila or another) brings to the table.  In the best of lights, O Man has unfortunately deferred to the "experts," but time to end that. Nuff said.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 20:33 | Link to Comment AN0NYM0US
AN0NYM0US's picture

very cool chart from the Economist on global housing prices (interactive)

 

http://www.economist.com/media/houseprice2/Economist_HPI_July_09_Chart.swf

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 21:48 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Sun, 01/17/2010 - 22:18 | Link to Comment jharry
jharry's picture

Bob Chapman basically said the same thing you  have -- weeks ago.  As I understand him, he said that the banksters have rigged the books for this year and thus have "earned" extraordinary profits.  However, next year will be an entirely different matter.

Sun, 01/17/2010 - 23:48 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 00:38 | Link to Comment colonial
colonial's picture

I agree with this concept, but the author fails to provide the mechanism for the process.  My guess is that it occured when the TARP legislation was contemplated.  Of course since TARP was poorly conceived and drafted the opportunity for the government to limit the bonus process was lost.  (By the way where was the brilliant and pontificating Barney Frank back then?  Barney, with your incredible vision, vision reminecent of Al Gore years back, how come you didn't realize that TARP would generate huge revenues for bankers which would lead to these bonuses?) 

Those who live inside the Beltway focus their attention on creating federal debt financed through Treasury securities; and then sheepishly vote to raise the US debt limit.  Capitalists in New York focus on corporate debt and equity.  We have endured the credit crisis in corporate America.  The next crisis will be in US Treasury debt as the beltway denizons believe the ability to issue Treasury securities, and US dollars, is limitless. 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 00:41 | Link to Comment colonial
colonial's picture

I agree with this concept, but the author fails to provide the mechanism for the process.  My guess is that it occurred when TARP was contemplated.  Of course since TARP was poorly conceived and drafted, the opportunity for the government to limit the bonus process was lost.  (By the way where was the brilliant and pontificating Barney Frank back then?  Barney, with your incredible vision, vision reminiscent of Al Gore years back, how come you didn't realize TARP would generate huge revenues for bankers which would lead to these bonuses?) 

Those who live inside the Beltway focus their attention on creating federal debt financed through Treasury securities; and then sheepishly vote to raise the US debt limit.  Capitalists in New York focus on corporate debt and equity.  We have endured the credit crisis in corporate America.  The next crisis will be in US Treasury debt as the beltway denizens still believe the ability to issue Treasury securities, and US dollars, is limitless. 

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 00:50 | Link to Comment loup garou
loup garou's picture

“Political victory in the mid terms and next Presidential election belongs to those candidates that will genuinely stand up to the Treserve/Wall Street complex…”
~deadhead

 

Don’t assume anything of the sort. President Acorn and his merry band have other plans, and plenty of tricks up their sleeves…

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/what_the_dems_know_universal_v.html

In January, Chuck Schumer and Barney Frank will propose universal voter registration.

 

 

Universal registration would register people who don’t even want to be registered so their votes could be harvested by Democrat political machines.

 

 

Every existing list of people would be registered. Rahm’s Census. Library cards. Tax rolls. Welfare rolls. Drivers licenses. Patients. Customers. Mailing lists. ACORN lists. Gitmo detainees. The Seven Dwarves. Eight is Enough. Nine Inch Nails. Ten Most Wanted. Eleven Pipers Palin-ing. Twelve Angry Men. Santa Claus’ list of naughty and nice kids. And he won’t be allowed to check it once, let alone twice.

 

If you own property in more than one place, you’re registered in both. If you moved several times, you are registered at all your addresses. If you are a foreign national here legally or illegally, on any list, you’re registered. Same with felons. Are you a foreigner who illegally contributed to Obama’s campaign last year from your throne room in Saggy Arabica? On the list! Dead? How can you be dead…you’re right here on our list! And we hope you feel better soon!

 

 

This would doubtless be accompanied by the abolition of ID requirements.

 

This, as well as amnesty for illegals (system redundancy), will create tens of millions of new loyal Democrat voters out of thin air.

 

Everything the current Democrat rulership is doing is designed to cement their power for decades to come. Between the stimulus and TARP funds under their control, and their "win by any means necessary" mentality, don't underestimate them.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 04:49 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 05:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 16:13 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 02:05 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

DH - Fact remains that we are working on "fixing" the situation.... and cannot but help to take up the sport that out elected representatives and governing systems provide. The nature of this beast will require certain measures to bring it to heel and either these measures will be adopted or ruin will ensue since the very nature of this beast is self destructive.  As long as folks are busy talking about TARP, TARP tax and making everything "even" the rest of the trillions fade from view. Good read.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 02:01 | Link to Comment lawton
lawton's picture

That is why they are called the masters of the universe - because they seem to make all the true decisions no matter what the President and Congress say to the public....

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 04:15 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 05:48 | Link to Comment theprofromdover
theprofromdover's picture

The power still rests with mainstream media.

Until such times as they choose to change sides, none of this anger and thirst for reform exists.

Until they expose the greed right into your front room, every hour on the hour, all this remains merely foreplay.

Your congressman and senator will wait in the wings to see which way the wind blows, they are not agents for change.

The editorial committees on the major network news are the people to work on.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 09:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 07:52 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 08:01 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 08:13 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 10:05 | Link to Comment Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive Dissonance's picture

That must be some fine weed you're smoking Dude. Don't bogart that joint my friend. Pass it over to me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeHeTm_Rv7Q

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 10:38 | Link to Comment EhKnowKneeMass
EhKnowKneeMass's picture

LMAO. This anonymous has a great sense of "Sherlock".

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:20 | Link to Comment deadhead
deadhead's picture

The second group are the ones who want to blame the Obama administration for this recession that has been in the making for many, many years. And for a site that is just loaded with intelligent people, they seem to miss this part of the narrative time and time again.

This statement of yours is simply incorrect.

Very, very few, if any, ZH community members are part of your group two.  The vast majority at ZH recognize that it is not a dem vs repub issue and certainly anyone with even several brain cells recognizes that Barack Obama had nothing to do with the onsetting causes of the mess we are in: a couple of years ago he was a state senator in Illinois for pete's sake and you are correct that the mess has been in the making for many, many years. 

 

Tue, 01/19/2010 - 15:12 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 15:57 | Link to Comment Hammer59
Hammer59's picture

+1000! Amen, Anon#197074-

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 09:56 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 10:32 | Link to Comment agrotera
agrotera's picture

Nice work DH!

 

It is however, too bad that there is even a discussion of "whether or not" the bonuses are OK.

 

In my opinion, the big blackhole banks should have been blessed with congressional approval to nationalize temporarily--and all who want to work there get civil servant pay--then the Glass Act should have been reinstated urgently.  And, instead of the lies we were fed about the need to avoid "nationalizing the banks" we might have been told the truth and that is that with all the fraud that ran rampant, the cheapest and most righteous way of trying to right this scenario is to temporarily nationalize the banks that "needed" to be saved.

We would have seen that it was GS, MS, MER, and C--i doubt that BAC would have been in the mix because they were just a big sacrificial lamb for the salvation of MER.

We definitely live in a banana republic and it is just sickening, but who knows what we can do about it--it is like being stuck with no boat in an ocean of lies and deceit( our government that is captured by the privately held federal reserve and their massive cartel.)

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:08 | Link to Comment Miles Kendig
Miles Kendig's picture

I have missed your voice agrotera.  As far as what we can do please just keep on being yourself.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 12:04 | Link to Comment agrotera
agrotera's picture

Thank you MK!  I always take comfort in your words and always so glad to hear you too!

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:05 | Link to Comment HEHEHE
HEHEHE's picture

They are putting it in their pockets because they know this is likely the last payday.  The mainstream backlash on Wall Street and their paid minions in Congress is going to make any future bailout much more problematic to pull off. In other words nobody is going to buy another Bernanke/Paulson money grab.

Mon, 01/18/2010 - 11:29 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 01/19/2010 - 10:42 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Mon, 01/18/2010 - 12:27 | Link to Comment Anonymous
Tue, 01/19/2010 - 00:43 | Link to Comment tom a taxpayer
tom a taxpayer's picture

DH - Excellent, powerful work. Thank you.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!