Instead of trying to curb short selling, curb the uncertainty that comes from misleading and fraudulent reporting practices.
What Does Senator Bunning Know, And, More Relevantly, What Does The Just Disclosed Fed Whistleblower Know?Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/26/2010 19:59 -0500
Some intriguing details released by Senator Bunning and Congressman Issa earlier, indicate that the Fed has finally produced a whistleblower. What will be revealed? And how deep will the rabbit hole go? Or does Bunning already know something. Will Tim Geithner's number one fan pull something out of his sleeve to hopefully derail the destruction of America (aka Bernanke reconfirmation), or is it just more smoke and mirrors?
Dear Congressmen, please read this before your questioning of Tim Geithner tomorrow. A complete and thorough investigation by David Fiderer, into what is allegedly the greatest (Goldman-facilitated) taxpayer heist in history for the sole benefit of the self-proclaimed Masters of the Universe.
Also, Dear FRBNY general counsel Thomas Baxter - please tell us how the below is wrong? Because it would appear your proclamations of saving the world are not only self-serving, but flawed and hypocritical beyond measure:
"The party line, expressed in Too Big To Fail and elsewhere, is that an AIG bankruptcy posed a greater systemic risk than a Lehman bankruptcy, because AIG was so much bigger. But that analysis is highly superficial and very misleading. AIG itself was a holding company, which guaranteed the debt of its unregulated financial subsidiary, AIGFP. The lion's share of AIG's revenues and profits, and about 80% of its consolidated assets, were concentrated among its different insurance company subsidiaries. Those insurance companies were solvent. They did not pose any systemic risk. In fact, it's quite likely that they would have continued to operate outside of bankruptcy.
The only subsidiary with major problems was AIGFP, whose financial obligations were guaranteed by the parent. But AIGFP was only about one-third the size of Lehman. It's almost impossible to see how AIGFP ever posed a systemic risk, unless everyone's intention to provide a backdoor bailout to the banks. Put another way, it seems that the only reason that the government needed to step in for AIG was to provide a backdoor bailout to its banks."
Bankers are destroying Capitalism. Unfortunately, most Westerners won’t realize this until five years from now, when the middle class has been forcibly relegated to the ranks of the poor. And this isn’t just a situation that will afflict America but it will likely afflict Japan and many countries in the EU such as the UK, Spain, and Greece just to name a few.
A talking point that has gripped the media in light of the sudden weakness ahead of the Ben Bernanke reconfirmation process, is the question of who should succeed the Fed Chairman, should he fail to obtain the requisite number of votes to continue. Many have said "Ben is bad, but anyone that would come after him would likely be even worse." While this is true for any of the potential successors (Donald Kohn, ex-Morgan Stanley banker Kevin Warsh, community-banker Elizabeth Duke, Daniel Tarullo, or ex-Goldmanite Bill Dudley, and speaking of the New York Fed, where Jeff Immelt is a Class B director: did Jamie Dimon, whose membership expired on December 31, 2009, get the Goldman renewal vote?), this is not an exclusive case. Which is why Zero Hedge proposes the candidacy of Stanford economist, and "Taylor Rule" creator, John Taylor for the post of Chairman of the Federal Reserve.
So, What Does This Obama Stuff Really Mean for the Big Banks? You Know, From a Fundamental PerspectiveSubmitted by Reggie Middleton on 01/22/2010 08:21 -0500
Well, it looks like Blankein, Dimon, et. al. really should have tried harder to make that meeting with the President a couple of weeks ago. It appeared as if he may have had something important to discuss. Here is a clear break down of the how much principal and prop trading adds to the top and implied bottom lines of Goldman, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan and Bank of America.
Efficient Market Proponent Senator Kaufman Endorses Prop Trading Ban, 99 Other Senators Have No Idea What Prop Trading IsSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 01/21/2010 13:46 -0500
"Separating core banking franchise from speculative activities, imposing tighter leverage requirements and examining the complicated relationships between high frequency traders and banks constitute critical steps toward ensuring our financial markets are strong and stable.
By adopting these common-sense proposals, we can go a long way toward stabilizing our economy, restoring confidence in our markets and protecting the American people from a future bailout.
America cannot afford another financial meltdown and the American people are looking to Congress to ensure that that does not happen." - Ted Kaufman
"Compared with where we were in late 2008 and early 2009, financial markets have stabilized, and the prospect of a collapse of the financial system and a second Great Depression now seems extremely remote...What is fundamentally at issue here is not “turf,” but rather how we as a nation can best ensure that we never again re-live the events of the past few years—that the legitimate public interests associated with a safe, efficient and impartial banking and financial system are well served." - Fmr Goldman Chief US Economist Bill Dudley (and current New York Fed President)
Some more macro observations from Joe Saluzzi: Last "Friday's stock market was the biggest tell: when you saw an unemployment number come out like that, that tells you what an absolute joke the stock market is, and how it's a lagging indicator, not a leading indicator of what's going on... When you're in the basement you can't stay in the basement, you have to walk up the stairs to get out. We aren't walking up the stairs, we just stopped walking down the stairs... a $77 Estimate on the S&P, you are looking at a 15x forward multiple on that earnings, yet you are in an economy which is closer to the 80's which deserves a 10x P/E. Why do you give it a 15x P/E?... If California was a public corporation they would be the next Lehman Brothers: that's how bad this thing is. The government is saying 'We're not going to bail you outCalifornia.' We're they going to come out with the $9 billion that they owe?"
Hold on to your hat, the bond vigilantes will be out full force on Friday. And when the bond market goes 'boo', its chill will be felt across all asset classes.
It's going to be pretty hard extracting your metatarsus from your anus this time around. I mean, everyone makes mistakes with taxes, but the multi-billion dollar back door bailout that you tried to hide via EMAIL???!!! Come on, guys. If you're not smarter than that then you definitely won't be able to solve this financial situation thingy... Unless he knew absolutely nothing about the biggest bailout in the history of his country - under his watch, that is.
"The New York Fed continuously reviews the stress value estimates and recently identified and corrected a methodological error. The New York Fed has determined that as a result of this error, one legacy CMBS — CUSIP 059497AX5 — was accepted as collateral that would not have been accepted using the current methodology. However, the New York Fed continues to expect no losses on the loans backed by this CMBS because the stress value is based on extremely unlikely economic circumstances, and because the market value of this CMBS is well above the TALF loan amounts." - New York Fed
The top five shorts of the decade, the new champion and my take on the possible implications, partly supported by Dr. Marc Faber.
One of the key observations of 2009 has been that Primary Dealers, courtesy of their access to the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, and, of course, to the Discount Window, are the critical cog in the Fed's plan to push markets ever higher. In a fashion, the banks that make up the PD community are the designated proxies of the Federal Reserve, allowing it to execute its trading strategy when its own traders at 33 Liberty are having a Starbucks break. As the PDs can pledge any worthless asset to the Fed, for which they get a dollar equivalent of 100 cents on the dollar, the PDs can leverage whatever toxic residuals they have on their balance sheet massively without even using explicit leverage, merely thanks to the Fed's lax standards in accepting practically any collateral. We have had occasional glimpses into what "assets" make up the tri-party repo system that is the backbone of the US financial system, but absent a full blown evaluation and transparency of the Federal Reserve, only the Fed (and specifically its New York branch) and Jamie Dimon really know the state of affairs when it comes to pledge collateral. However, there is some information that we can glean on the broader sense of risk within the Primary Dealer community, which is possible courtesy of the NY Fed's disclosure of the PD's transactions and net holdings by various asset classes. Our focus in this post are the Primary Dealers' transactions and holdings in US Treasuries.
Study Finds That Of All Factors Determining The "Bailoutability" Of Crappy Banks, Ties To The Federal Reserve Are Most CriticalSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 12/21/2009 18:30 -0500
Adam Smith, Charles Darwin and George Washington are not only rolling in their graves, they are dancing the macarena. A new study by the UMich School of Business has found what everyone has known since the crisis began, if not centuries prior: that the biggest, crappiest banks were guaranteed to get more bailout funding the more political ties they had (and more kickbacks they had offered). Is this sufficient to claim that capitalism in its purest sense has been corrupted beyond repair, courtesy of political intervention and constant pandering? Probably not, but it sure makes a damn good argument. In any case, the data is sufficient for all bears to start keeping a track of which banks are increasing their lobbying efforts and funding: those are the ones where the greatest weakness is likely still to be uncovered (if it hasn't already). And while the political relationship probably is not a big surprise to any realistic readers, another finding of the study makes a solid case for abolition of the "apolitical" Federal Reserve:
A new study by Ross professors Ran Duchin and Denis Sosyura found that
banks with connections to members of congressional finance committees
and banks whose executives served on Federal Reserve boards were more
likely to receive funds from the Troubled Asset Relief Program, the
federal government's program to purchase assets and equity from
financial institutions to strengthen its financial sector.
The unsupervised Federal Reserve gets to make or break banks, presumably under the gun of its one and only master, Goldman Sachs, which has already destroyed its major historical competitors: Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers. This is a sufficient condition to not only audit the central bank but to immediately seek its abolition, and also to commence anti-trust proceedings against Goldman Sachs which is not only a monopoly, but by extension has veto power over the very regulatory mechanism that is supposed to keep it "fair and honest." The system is truly broken.