Federal Reserve losing control

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby Byrne » Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:33 pm

GOT AN ACCOUNT WITH CITIBANK?

Posted By: Il_Bagattel
Date: Tuesday, 8 January 2008, 3:05 p.m.

<snip>


This is from last night's www.lemetropolecafe.com Midas Report:

CITIBANK

--Here's a story that's flown under the radar. Citibank is in serious trouble. You probably already knew that, given the fact the banks' been begging for billions from SWFs. But did you know that in late December Citibank quietly announced a restriction on wire transfers? The bank told customers that outgoing wire transfers from the banks accounts would be limited to just US$2k per day. Hmmn.

--But wait. There's more. Last week, under the guise of responding to a wave of fraud from automated cash machines, Citi also announced a limit on cash withdrawls from its ATMs in New York City. And you thought the money in your bank account was yours.

--There could be a perfectly reasonable explanation for all of this. But the simplest explanation is almost always the best. Citibank is in desperate need of its capital. The best way to keep your customers money is to prevent them from taking it out of the bank. It's a kind of low-level, mild-mannered capital control.

--How has the Treasury managed the Citi crisis differently than the way the Bank of England managed Northern Rock? And what will the end result be for Citi? Stay tuned.

--Here's the most nonsensical headline of the day: 'Banks face rates dilemma as oil price soars'. "Pressure is growing on the Bank of England for another cut in interest rates next week. Consumers face soaring petrol bills while their spending is being squeezed by higher mortgage payments and rising energy bills," writes Nick Goodway in the Evening Standard.

--Lower interest rates are not going to bring oil prices down, we're pretty sure of that. But the writer notices the problem faced by consumers in the Western world. Energy prices are rising. Interest rates want to rise, increasing the cost of carrying a lot of debt (nearly as popular as oil in the West.)

--The trouble is that the rising oil price is already a result of interest rates that were too low for long. Oil now has a fundamental economic momentum of its own. People everywhere want it. But it's harder to find. And so the price rises. Central bankers can't do much about that, and cutting rates won't make a lick of difference.

--So 2008 begins much as 2007 ended. Investors are whistling past the proverbial grave yard, hoping that 10 years of credit-driven speculation in financial markets will go bust quietly, without any real economic consequences. Oil and gold prices tell us that there are already consequences.

<snip>
User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 955
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby antiaristo » Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:55 am

.

anti sed:
What happens when the figure drops to zero, then goes negative?

That means that in aggregate the US banking system is insolvent.



Answer.
They sell themselves to the terrists.

THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 2008
On Merrill's and Citi's Quest for More Dough

Forgive comparatively terse comments tonight.

The Wall Street Journal reports that Citi and Merrill could have additional losses of up to $25 billion between them and are scrambling to secure foreign funding commitments of $3-$4 billion at Merrill and up to $10 billion at Citi While the article doesn't say so clearly, the goal is to secure comitments before the two banks have to announce 4Q results (Citi on Tuesday, Merrill next Thursday).

The article discusses how the foreign investment are getting so large that they are soon to run afoul of formal and informal restrictions on foreign stakes. The story fails to contemplate what happens when these losses at major financial firms deepen (just think at the black hole if MBIA and Ambac are downgraded) and foreign concerns are the only game in town as far as funding is concerned. This is a likely scenario that no one seems prepared to deal with.


http://www.talkr.com/app/fetch.app?feed ... -more.html


And these clowns are STILL paying themselves bonuses :shock:
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

its fascinating

Postby smiths » Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:07 pm

its fascinating,

when all of this started grinding towards collapse well over a year ago i was convinced and became incrreasingly so, that the banking system would collapse, that a lot of the middle classs would get wiped out and thered be a few rich anglos left standing,

what is quite clear now is that the peoples and bankers are going to wake up in a year or so, and discover that as anti just pointed out, wealthy arabs, chinese and russians own them,

my pondering now is, exactly how well the chinese bankers will treat the british and american peoples at thier disposal

it wouldnt surprise me if the chinese declare england to be a free opium zone, shove it in their by the boat load, and destroy the nation,
and for america, i think the arabs might encourage a totalitarian extremist christian state where the mass are kept in poverty and a few do business with 'world leaders'

may we live in interesting times eh?
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

more

Postby smiths » Thu Jan 10, 2008 9:50 pm

Sovereign wealth funds have been buying up stakes in troubled U.S. and European money-center banks, brokers and other financial institutions at such a rapid pace that you have to wonder: Do they know something other investors don't or are they just spending too much, too fast?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid= ... refer=home

At the end of 2006, estimates on the investments held by SWFs vary between one and seven trillion US dollars, depending on how widely the net is cast (foreign exchange reserves account for around $4.5 trillion of the total ). According to the Economist SWFs market capitalization is about $2.5 trillion, However this number is highly uncertain because of the difficulty of counting SWF holdings. For comparison the total market capitalization of hedge funds might be only $1.6 trillion, although this figure is also highly uncertain (these are not assets, so in principle it excludes leverage).

ADIA (Abu Dhabi Investment Authority) is named as one of the "Super Seven" funds, all of which have assets over $100 billion. These funds are: The Government Pension Fund of Norway($322 billion); Government of Singapore Investment Corporation ($330 billion); Kuwait Investment Authority ($213 billion); China Investment Corporation ($200 billion); The Stabilisation Fund of the Russian Federation ($127.5 billion); and Singapore's Temasek Holdings ($108 billion). As a proportion of GDP the five largest funds are ADIA, Brunei ($30 billion); Kuwait, the Qatar Investment Authority QIA ($60 billion) and Singapore's GIC.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_funds
User avatar
smiths
 
Posts: 2205
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 4:18 am
Location: perth, western australia
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Byrne » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:35 am

U.S. economy teeters on the brink
Bush and Federal Reserve chairman endorse $100-billion package in effort to prevent recession as housing mess hammers banks, consumers and investors
BARRIE MCKENNA

Globe and Mail

January 17, 2008 at 7:59 PM EST

WASHINGTON — In a bid to save the world's largest economy from recession, U.S. President George W. Bush and central bank chief Ben Bernanke yesterday endorsed a $100-billion stimulus package as the spreading housing mess continued to hammer banks, consumers and investors.

The rare plug for fiscal action comes as a growing number of economists say the United States is either in recession or perilously close to it. “The United States has now effectively entered into a serious and painful recession,” said economist Nouriel Roubini of New York University.

Prof. Roubini said all of the keys to economic health are headed in the wrong direction, including the housing market, credit availability, the job market and business spending. Add to that a run-up in oil and gas prices, and the consumer is likely to take it on the chin in 2008, he said.

Another major Wall Street investment bank acknowledged yesterday that it vastly underestimated the cost of its misadventures in the subprime mortgage market. Merrill Lynch & Co. – the world's largest stockbroker and one of the major backers of mortgage bonds – reported the worst quarter in its history, losing $9.8-billion (U.S.) in the final three months of last year and wiping more than $16-billion worth of bad loans off its books. That raises Merrill's housing-related losses to nearly $24-billion in 2007.

And the U.S. housing slump apparently isn't over. Builders broke ground on new homes at an annual rate of a million homes in December – the lowest level since 1991 and a 14.2-per-cent drop from November, according to U.S. data released yesterday.

Since the start of the year, a sense of gloom has taken hold on Wall Street amid worries that the housing slump is infecting the broader economy. In the past couple of weeks alone, stocks have quickly shed virtually all of last year's gains. Spooked by the hefty Merrill Lynch loss, investors sent the blue-chip Dow Jones industrial average down 306.95, or 2.46 per cent, to finish the day at 12,159.21.

The S&P/TSX fell 279 points, after dropping 232 points on Wednesday and 382 on Tuesday.

It is typically difficult to determine whether an economy is in recession – generally defined as two consecutive quarters of shrinking economic activity – until it's almost over. The latest figures show that the U.S. economy, like the Canadian economy, was still growing as 2007 ended.

A U.S. recession would have serious consequences for Canada, which sends the bulk of its exports south of the border.

Testifying before a U.S. congressional committee, Mr. Bernanke said that a proposed stimulus package of $100-billion or more would provide a “significant” and “measurable” lift to the economy.

The key, he told the House budget committee, is to put “money into the hands of households and firms in the short term” and make the measures temporary so they don't compound the government's already significant fiscal problems. That means giving consumers and businesses a break this year, he said.

Without endorsing any particular measure, Mr. Bernanke agreed that targeted tax cuts or spending would bolster the U.S. Federal Reserve Board's efforts to stoke the economy with lower interest rates. The Fed has cut its key interest rate by a full percentage point since the summer, and many analysts expect another half- percentage-point reduction at the bank's next meeting on Jan. 30.

“Fiscal action could be helpful in principle” and may provide “broader support for the economy,” he said.

Mr. Bush also agreed that the weakening economy could use a boost.

White House spokesman Tony Fratto said the President has begun talks with congressional leaders on what the plan might look like.

Economist Alec Phillips of Goldman Sachs said Mr. Bernanke's endorsement has raised the likelihood that Congress will act soon.

“There is enough momentum behind it that a deal looks more likely than not,” Mr. Phillips said.

But he cautioned that differences between Democrats and Republicans in Congress could stall or delay fiscal measures. He pointed out that Congress took four months to pass a stimulus package after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

“You know central bankers are concerned about the economy when they condone stimulative fiscal policy,” BMO Nesbitt Burns economist Michael Gregory remarked in a note to clients.

Among the measures on the table: a $600 per household tax rebate, an extension of unemployment benefits by up to 26 weeks, a targeted housing tax break, a research tax credit and an instant tax break for businesses.

Mortgage losses have left several major Wall Street brokers scrambling to shore up their finances with cash infusions from Middle Eastern and Asian investors. Merrill Lynch, for example, raised $6.6-billion this week by selling preferred shares to the Kuwait Investment Authority, a Japanese bank and other investors – part of a $40-billion Wall Street fire sale triggered by mortgage losses.

Merrill Lynch, Citibank, Bear Stearns and others were part of a once-lucrative business of packaging high-risk mortgages into bonds. But as U.S. house prices tumbled and teaser introductory interest rates expired, many borrowers stopped paying their mortgages and the value of those bonds collapsed.

The major Wall Street banks have already racked up losses of $100-billion in the subprime debacle. That's still less than the roughly $170-billion banks lost in the savings-and-loans crisis of the 1980s, or the $2-trillion that investors lost when the technology bubble burst in 2001.

Some experts have predicted that banks could ultimately write off as much as $500-billion in investments.

The toll on household wealth, however, would be much greater. A 10-per-cent decline in house prices would wipe out $2-trillion worth of household wealth.

Earlier this week, Citigroup, the world's largest bank, reported a $9.8-billion fourth-quarter loss. It also wrote down the value of its mortgage-related investments by $18.1-billion.


User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 955
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby antiaristo » Fri Jan 18, 2008 10:53 am

.

Glad you brought this one back, Byrne.

I can't resist this, given the title of the thread...


“I think Bernanke is in a very difficult situation. Too many bubbles have been going on for too long. The Fed is not really in control of the situation.

Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker (Chairman from 1979 to 1987) to Roger Lowenstein.


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/magaz ... ref=slogin
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby IanEye » Fri Jan 18, 2008 11:58 am

antiaristo wrote:.

“I think Bernanke is in a very difficult situation. Too many bubbles have been going on for too long. The Fed is not really in control of the situation.

Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker (Chairman from 1979 to 1987) to Roger Lowenstein.




i always find myself wishing for a direct connection between former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker and William Volker of the William Volker Fund. But i guess that would just be too perfect. So, I'll settle for the Ayn Rand/Greenspan connection instead.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Volker_Fund

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker
User avatar
IanEye
 
Posts: 4865
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:33 pm
Blog: View Blog (29)

Postby Byrne » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:00 pm

The Financial Tsunami: The Financial Foundations of the American Century

by F. William Engdahl
Global Research, January 16, 2008

Part II

[Part I The Financial Tsunami: Sub-Prime Mortgage Debt is but the Tip of the Iceberg]


The financial foundations of the American Century

The ongoing and deepening global financial crisis, nominally triggered in July 2007 by an event involving a small German bank holding securitized assets backed by USA sub-prime real estate mortgages, can best be understood as an essential part of an historical process dating back to the end of the Second World War—the rise and decline of the American Century.

The American Century, proudly proclaimed by Time-Life founder and establishment insider, Henry Luce in a famous 1941 Life magazine editorial, was built on the preeminent role of New York banks and Wall Street investment banks which had by then clearly replaced the City of London as the center of gravity of global finance. Luce’s American Century was to be built in a far more calculated manner than the British Empire it replaced.1

A then top-secret Council on Foreign Relations postwar planning group, The War & Peace Studies Group, led by Johns Hopkins President and geo-political geographer, Isaiah Bowman, laid out a series of studies designed to lay the foundations of their postwar world, already beginning 1939, well before German tanks had rolled into Poland. The American Empire was to be an empire indeed. But it would not make the fatal mistake of the British or other European empires before, namely to be an empire of open colonial conquest with costly troops in permanent military occupation.

Instead, the American Century would be packaged and sold to the world, above all the emerging countries of Africa, Latin America and Asia, as the guardian of liberty, democracy. It would clothe itself as the foremost advocate of end to colonial rule, a stance which uniquely benefited the only major power without large colonies—namely, the United States.

The new American Century world was to be led by the champion of free trade everywhere, which also uniquely benefited the strongest economy in the early postwar years, the United States. It was a brilliant, if fatally flawed concept. As State Department planning head, George F. Kennan wrote in a confidential internal memo in 1948, “We have about 50% of the world’s wealth but only 6.3% of its population…Our real task in the coming period is to devise a pattern of relationships which will permit us to maintain this position of disparity without positive detriment to our national security.” 2

The core of the War & Peace Studies, which were designed for and implemented by the US State Department after 1944, was to be the creation of a United Nations organization to replace the British-dominated League of Nations. A central part of that new UN organization, which would serve as the preserver of the US-friendly postwar status quo, was creation of what were originally referred to as the Bretton Woods institutions—the International Monetary Fund and the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development or World Bank.3 The GATT multinational trade agreements were later added.

The US negotiators in Bretton Woods New Hampshire, led by US Treasury deputy Secretary Harry Dexter White, imposed a design on the IMF and World Bank which insured the two would remain essentially instruments of an “informal” US empire, an empire, initially based on credit, and later, after about 1973, on debt.

New York and the New York Federal Reserve Bank were the heart of the new empire in 1945. The United States held the overwhelming majority of world central bank monetary gold reserves. The postwar Bretton Woods Gold Exchange Standard uniquely benefited the role of the US dollar, then and even now world reserve currency.

All IMF member country currencies were to be fixed in value to the US dollar. In turn, the US dollar, but only the US dollar was fixed to a preset weight of gold at $35 per ounce of gold. At this fixed rate, foreign governments and central banks could exchange dollars for gold.

Bretton Woods established a system of payments based on the dollar, in which all currencies were defined in relation to the dollar. It was ingenious and uniquely favorable to the emerging financial power of New York, whose bankers actively shaped the final agreements.

In those days, in stark contrast to the present, the dollar was “as good as gold." The US currency was effectively the world currency, the standard to which every other currency was pegged. As the world's key currency, most international transactions were denominated in dollars.

Maintaining the role of the US dollar as world reserve currency has been the foremost pillar of the American Century since 1945, related to but more strategic even than US military superiority. How that dollar primacy has been maintained to now encompassed the history of countless postwar wars, financial warfare, debt crises, and threats of nuclear war to the present.

Important to place the emergence of the asset securitization revolution in global finance which is now impacting the world financial system in wave after wave of new shocks and dislocations, and to appreciate Alan Greenspan’s substantial contribution to preserving the dominance of the dollar as world reserve well beyond the point the US economy ceased being the world’s most productive industrial manufacturer, a brief review of the distinct phases in postwar dollar hegemony is useful.

The Golden Years of America’s Century

The first phase, which we might call the postwar “golden years,” saw the US emerge from the ashes of World War II as the unchallenged global economic Colossus. The US was the dominant world power; no one even came close. Over half of all international money transactions were financed in terms of dollar. The US produced more than half the world output. The US also owned about two thirds of the official gold reserves in the world in 1940.

When various European countries had reserve surpluses, they converted the surpluses into dollar reserves rather than gold because they could earn interest on dollar assets such as US Treasury bonds and dollars could always be converted into gold at $35 per ounce whenever it became necessary. The US dollar was at the center of this system.

American industry, led by General Motors, Ford and Chrysler Motors, the Big Three, were the world class leaders—no one was even close back then. US Steel (before it became USX), machine tool manufacture, aluminum, aircraft and related industries all set the benchmark for global excellence well into the 1950’s.

Above all, the American oil giants—Mobil, Standard Oil of New Jersey, Texaco, Gulf Oil—those key companies dominated the unique energy source which was to become essential to unprecedented postwar growth rates in Europe, Japan and the rest of the postwar world—petroleum.4

In this early postwar period demand for dollars in the world to finance reconstruction was so great that the primary economic problem faced in the 1950’s in Europe, Japan, South Korea and elsewhere was dollar shortages to finance imports of needed US capital equipment, its oil, its consumer products.

The US monetary gold stocks reached a record $24.6 billion in 1949, a huge sum that was comparable today to $211 billion, as gold from abroad poured into the US to pay the deficits in trade run up by foreign nations. New York, backed by gold reserves, was the unchallenged world banker.

This process began to deteriorate after a steep postwar recession in 1957-58. That recession should have been the alarm bell to US economic policy planners and industry that the unique period of profiting from the relative economic dislocation of a war-torn world was at its outer limits. Beginning 1957 the US economy was in need of a substantial regeneration, were it to remain globally competitive. That was not to happen.

By the time of the November 1967 British Sterling crisis, where the British Government was forced to violate IMF rules and devalue Sterling by 14% to maintain their economy amid severe recession, the focus turned on the fact that President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society and disastrous Vietnam War costs were causing the US government to run record budget deficits. The dollar was vulnerable to a run on US gold for the first time since the 1930’s.

To hide the extent of those deficits, the Johnson Administration introduced creative accounting. For the first time the Budget director added the funds paid by working Americans into the Federal Social Security Trust Fund, a surplus that was to have been set aside to pay future retirement and related benefits for most Americans, to the Consolidated General Budget—a start to budget fakery which by the early years of the next century were to become huge.

Johnson also began manipulation of key government economic statistics used to compute everything from unemployment to inflation to GDP. The statistical manipulations, for reasons of obvious if fateful political opportunism, were endorsed silently by every succeeding Administration, the most egregious of them being the present Bush-Cheney Administration. 5

The 1971 dollar coup

Despite all the manipulations, by 1971 US monetary gold reserves had reached a precarious low as foreign trade surplus nations, led by France, had demanded payment in hard gold from the US Federal Reserve for their dollar surpluses. Reality could not so easily be manipulated as government statistics. Europe had emerged, along with Japan, as powerful trade surplus, modern, fast-growing economies.

The United States was becoming a vast rustbelt of decaying, obsolescent manufacture. The spin-doctors of Wall Street and select think-tanks such as the Ford and Rockefeller foundations came up with a linguistic euphemism calling it the “post industrial society,” but linguistics did not change the reality. By the late 1960’s America’s once-booming industrial centers from Detroit to Pittsburgh to Chicago had become sprawling slums of decay, crime and rising unemployment.

Were the United States to lose its last gold reserves, the role of the dollar as unique world reserve currency—the pillar, along with US military superiority, of its postwar American Century imperium—would end abruptly.

To avert such a calamity, in August 1971 President Nixon huddled with his closest advisers, among them a US Treasury official named Paul Volcker, then Under-Secretary of the Treasury for International Monetary Affairs, and a long-time associate of David Rockefeller and the Rockefeller family.

Their task was to come up with a solution. Volcker’s “solution” to the massive demand to redeem US dollars for gold was to be as simple as it was to prove destructive to world economic health.

Nixon announced to a startled world on August 15, 1971 that from that day, the United States would not longer honor its international treaty obligations under the Bretton Woods Agreement. Nixon had suspended convertibility of the dollar into gold. The New York Fed’s Gold Discount Window was locked shut. World currencies went into a free float against an uncertain dollar, a so-called fiat currency. The dollar now was not backed by gold or even silver but only the “full faith and credit” of the US government, a commodity whose marketable value was beginning to be questioned.

Debt becomes the vehicle

Soon, with the implicit threat of withdrawing its nuclear shield as its prime persuasion, successive US Administrations realized that rather than depending on its role as the world’s creditor as it had until 1971, the American Century could theoretically thrive as the world’s greatest debtor, so long as American finance and the dollar dominated world finance.

As long as major US postwar satrapies 6 such as Japan, South Korea or Germany, were forced to depend on the US security umbrella, it was relatively simple to pressure their Treasuries into using their US dollar trade surpluses to buy US government debt. In the process, the US bond or debt markets became far and away the world’s largest. Wall Street primary bond dealers were replacing Pittsburg steel and Detroit car manufacture as the “business of America.”

To paraphrase the famous quip of former GM president Charles Wilson from the 1950’s, the new mantra was, “What’s good for Wall Street is good for America.” It wasn’t. The name financial “industry” even became commonplace, as if to designate money as the legitimate successor to production of real physical wealth in the economy.

Debt—dollar debt—was to be the vehicle for a new role of New York banks, led by David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan and Walter Wriston’s Citibank. Their idea was to extend hundreds of billions of dollars in newly acquired OPEC and other petrodollars, which they “persuaded” Saudi and other OPEC governments to bank their new oil surpluses in London or New York banks. Then those dollar deposits from OPEC, called by Henry Kissinger and others at the time, “petrodollars” went in the form of recycled loans to oil importing and dollar-starved Third World economies. 7

The Carter dollar confidence crisis

This second phase, the post-gold era, fuelled by the manipulated 1973 oil shock and US pressure on Saudi Arabia and OPEC to price oil exclusively in dollars, Kissinger’s “petro-dollar recycling,”8 rolled along without major trouble until early 1979 when the dollar faced a major foreign sell-off during the end of the Jimmy Carter Presidency. The American Century faced one of its greatest challenges at that juncture. German, Japanese even Saudi Arabian central banks began dumping US Treasury holdings in what was called a loss of “confidence” in Carter’s world leadership role.

In August 1979, to restore world “confidence” in the dollar, President Jimmy Carter, himself a hand-picked protégé of David Rockefeller’s Trilateral Commission, was forced by the big New York banks, led by David Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan, to accept Paul Volcker, a protégé of Rockefeller’s from Chase Manhattan Bank, as new Chairman of the Federal Reserve with an open mandate to do what was necessary to save the dollar as reserve currency.

On taking office, Volcker bluntly announced, "the standard of living for the average American has to decline." He was Rockefeller’s hand-picked choice to save the New York financial markets and the dollar at the expense of the nation’s welfare.

The Volcker ‘shock therapy’

Volcker’s shock therapy, begun in October 1979, lasted until August 1982. Interest rates shot through the roof to double digits. The US and world economies were plunged into a monster recession, the worst since World War II. Within a year, the prime rate had shot up to the unheard-of level of 21.5%, compared to an average of 7.6% for the fourteen previous years, a more than threefold rise in weeks. Official US unemployment peaked at 11%, while unofficially when those who simply had given up seeking work were counted, it was far higher.


Image
Source: AngryBearBlogspot.com

The Shock Therapy of Volcker doubled US official unemployment

The Latin American debt crisis, an ominous foretaste of today’s USA sub-prime crisis, erupted as a direct result of the Volcker shock. In August 1982 Mexico announced it could no longer pay in dollars the interest rate service on its staggering debt. It, as most of the Third World from Argentina to Brazil, from Nigeria to Congo, from Poland to Yugoslavia, had fallen for the New York banks’ debt trap. The trap was in borrowing what amounted to recycled OPEC petrodollars invested in the major New York and London banks, the Eurodollar banks, which lent the dollars to desperate Third World borrowers initially at “floating rates” tied to London LIBOR rates.

When Libor rose some 300% within months as a result of the Volcker shock therapy, those debtor countries were unable to continue. The IMF was brought in and the greatest looting binge in world history, misnamed the Third World Debt Crisis, was on. Volcker’s shock policy, predictably, triggered the crisis.

After seven years of relentlessly high interest rates by the Volcker Fed, sold to the gullible public as “squeezing inflation out of the US economy,” by 1986 the internal state of the US economy was horrendous. Much of America came to resemble a Third World country, with its growing slums, double-digit unemployment and growing crime and drug addiction problems. A Federal Reserve study showed that 55% of all American families were net debtors. Federal budget deficits were running at then-unheard-of levels of more than $200 billion annually.

In reality, Volcker, a personal protégé of David Rockefeller from Rockefeller’s Chase Manhattan Bank, had been sent to Washington to do one thing—save the dollar from a free fall collapse that threatened the role of the US dollar as global reserve currency.

That dollar reserve currency role was the hidden key to American financial power.

By letting US interest rates go through the roof, foreign investors flooded in to reap the gains by buying US bonds. Bonds were and are the heart of the financial system. Volcker’s shock therapy for the economy meant soaring profits for the New York financial community.

Volcker succeeded only too well in his mission.

The dollar rose to all-time highs against the currencies of Germany, Japan, Canada and other countries from 1979 through the end of 1985. The over-valued US dollar made US manufactured exports prohibitively expensive on world markets and led to a dramatic decline in US industrial exports.

Already high interest rates from the Volcker Fed since October 1979 had led to a major decline in domestic construction, the ultimate ruin of the US automobile industry and with it, steel, as American manufacturers moved to outsource production offshore where the cost advantages were greater. Referring to Paul Volcker and his free-market backers inside the Reagan White House, Republican Robert O. Andersen, then chairman of Atlantic Richfield Oil Co. complained, “they’ve done more to dismantle American industry than any other group in history. And yet they go around saying everything is great. It’s like the Wizard of Oz.” 9

By early 1987 the nation’s traditional mortgage banks, the Savings & Loan banks, were in a liquidity crisis that was to ultimately cost US Taxpayers hundreds of billions in government bailouts. The Congress’ GAO watchdog agency declared that the Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation, the guarantor against S&L bank panic, was insolvent. Yet under pressure from the S&Ls, huge bank losses were allowed to build as insolvent institutions were allowed to remain open and grow, allowing ever increasing losses to accumulate. The ultimate cost of the 1980’s S&L debacle came to more than $160 billion. Some calculated real costs to the economy ran as high as $900 billion. Between 1986 and 1991, the number of new homes constructed dropped from 1.8 to 1 million, the lowest rate since World War II.

America’s Second Revolution: the eyes on the Prize

Federal Reserve monetary policy has been typically misrepresented as a series of ad hoc pragmatic responses to recurring crises in post-war banking and finance. The reality is that it has faithfully followed a coherent hidden thread of policy that was first laid out in 1973 by the spokesman then for America’s most powerful establishment family.

The policy was outlined in a little-noted book titled, ominously enough, “The Second American Revolution.” It was written by John D. Rockefeller III, scion of the powerful Standard Oil and Chase Manhattan Bank empire, and, along with his three brothers—David, Nelson and Laurance—architect of the world arrangement after 1945 known as the American Century.

In his book, Rockefeller declared the establishment’s determination to roll back concessions grudgingly granted by the wealthy and powerful during the Great Depression. Rockefeller issued the call in 1973, long before Jimmy Carter or Margaret Thatcher came to office to implement it. He called for a “deliberate, consistent, long-term policy to decentralize and privatize many government functions…to diffuse power throughout the society.” 10 The latter was a witting deception as his intent was not to diffuse power, but just the opposite—to concentrate that economic and banking power into the hands of a tight-knit elite.

Privatization of essential and socially useful government functions that had been established often with great social agitation and political pressure during the difficult crises of the 1930’s, was the Rockefeller agenda. In brief, it was the removal of Depression era government regulations on all aspects of economic and social life in America.

Above all, deregulation of Wall Street and financial markets was the goal, along with a radical reduction in the equalizing of wealth, as seen by Rockefeller and friends, inherent in such programs as Social Security. The George W. Bush “tax cuts for the wealthy” were just a continuation of a three decade agenda of the powerful establishment circles.

Hard as it may be to believe, all major US policy from the 1970’s through the misnamed sub-prime crisis today, had a connecting continuous thread. Key Fed and Treasury and other US policymakers always held their “eyes on the Prize.”

The “Prize” was untold financial gains to be won through a rollback of major concessions to the working blue collar and middle income Americans, concessions granted during the Great Depression by powerful establishment circles led by the Rockefeller and Morgan banking groups, to forestall a more radical revolt.

Social Security was one target for rollback. Financial deregulation and above all repeal of the 1933 Glass-Steagall Act, was another. Here a well-connected Wall Street banker named Alan Greenspan was to play the decisive role on behalf of the financial deregulation agenda in his tenure as Federal Reserve Chairman lasting from 1987 through 2006. Securitization of sub-prime or junk mortgages was to have been his crowning legacy. As it looks at this writing, it certainly will be, though perhaps not as he and others in Wall Street intended. It will more likely be a crown of disgrace.



(Part III will deal with the Greenspan creation of the securitization revolution and its subsequent demise)



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTES


1 Luce, Henry, The American Century, reprinted in The Ambiguous Legacy, M. J. Hogan, ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

2 Kennan, George F., 1948, “PPS/23: Review of Current Trends in U.S. Foreign Policy”, Foreign Relations of the United States, Volume I.

3 New York Council on Foreign Relations, undated, The War & Peace Studies, http://www.cfr.org.

4 Engdahl, F. William, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, London, Pluto Press, 2004, pp. 88-9.

5 For an excellent historical account of the impact of those systematic government statistical manipulations, see John Williams’ http://www.shadowstats.com/. John has been tracking the manipulations for well over two decades, the only systematic attempt I know of.

6 The term “satrapy” to describe US relations with Japan, Germany and other postwar allies is used by Zbigniew Brzezinski in his book, The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives, New York, Basic Books, 1997.

7 The best treatment of this new role of endless debt creation backed by US military power as the foundation for the US domination, see the excellent personal account in the remarkable work by Michael Hudson, Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire, London, Pluto Press, 2nd Ed.2003, www.michael-hudson.com. p.289 ff.

8 See Engdahl, op.cit., pp.130-141 for an unusual account of the role of then-Secretary of State Kissinger in the events leading to the 400% OPEC oil price rise in 1974.

9 Anderson, Robert O., cited in Greider, William, Secrets of the Temple: How the Federal Reserve runs the country, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1987, p. 648.

10 Rockefeller, John D. III, The Second American Revolution, Harper & Row, New York, 1973.



F. William Engdahl is the author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order,Pluto Press. His most recent book published by Global Research is Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation, www.GlobalResearch.ca.

Contact at: www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net


User avatar
Byrne
 
Posts: 955
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2005 2:45 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:01 pm

The next banking crisis on the way

(...)

The banks and other financials have more losses from the subprime-mortgage mess on their books that they haven't yet confessed. Worse, the mortgage debacle has spread to other types of debt, with banks and other financial companies reporting mounting losses in their credit card and auto loan portfolios. And worst of all, the next big leg of the crisis -- the one I think will mark the true bottom -- has just started.

As the economy slows, the default rate is rising for corporate debt, especially for the high-risk, high-yield corporate debt called "junk" by many of us. That's opening a Pandora's box of potential write-downs that could dwarf the losses in the mortgage market.

(continues at the link)
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Sat Jan 19, 2008 2:58 pm

Bernanke's Message to Americans: Run, Run for Your Lives!
by Linda Keenan

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke delivered some classic Fed-speak to homeowners, shareholders and Congress on Thursday..

As a former economics writer, I thought I'd translate what Chairman Bernanke said to struggling Americans, and what I heard.

What Bernanke Said: "The virtual shutdown of the subprime mortgage market and a widening of spreads on jumbo mortgage loans have further reduced the demand for housing, while foreclosures are adding to the already-elevated inventory of unsold homes."

What I Heard: "I'm crapping my pants, you should be, too."

What Bernanke Said: "As investors lost confidence in their ability to value complex financial products, they became increasingly unwilling to hold such instruments. As a result, flows of credit through these vehicles have contracted significantly."

What I Heard: "Banks have no clue how bad this is, and you know what, Sherlock? I don't have a fuh-REAKING clue either. Think you're getting a new HELOC for a shiny new kitchen? Forget it, sucker."

What Bernanke Said: "....a number of factors, including continuing increases in energy prices, lower equity prices, and softening home values, seem likely to weigh on consumer spending as we move into 2008."

What I Heard: "Remember the late '70s? No, of course not. You know nothing about a real recession. Tell you what. Ask Gramps to get out those big-ass sweaters from the Carter years, forget about the mall, and snuggle on up in your newly chilly McMansion, which is losing value by the minute."

What Bernanke Said: "..any tendency of inflation expectations to become unmoored or for the Fed's inflation-fighting credibility to be eroded could greatly complicate the task of sustaining price stability and reduce the central bank's policy flexibility to counter shortfalls in growth in the future."

What I Heard: "Go ask Gramps what STAGFLATION means. In two words, it sucks."

What Bernanke Said: "To be useful, a fiscal stimulus package should be implemented quickly...

What I Heard: "I need help from Congress, like, right now. Like, right the F--- NOW. Can I go back to being a professor now? Please? None of this is my damn fault! Say to together, people: take your bitchin' and moanin' and belly achin' and big bad toxic mortgage to GREENSPAN. I'll get you his number."
'
What Bernanke Said: "Market participants still express considerable uncertainty about the appropriate valuation of complex financial assets and about the extent of additional losses that may be disclosed in the future. On the whole, despite improvements in some areas, the financial situation remains fragile "

What I Heard: "Did you look at what your 401K did today? For the year? I dare ya. I double dog dare ya. Start lovin' you some of those canned goods, everyone. Peace out."
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ninakat » Sun Jan 20, 2008 9:17 pm

Bernanke from his recent Congressional testimony:

Image
Image
User avatar
ninakat
 
Posts: 2904
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 1:38 pm
Location: "Nothing he's got he really needs."
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Sweejak » Mon Jan 21, 2008 1:59 am

Mike Whitney:
435-member army of lacquer-haired political jacklegs


http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1724
User avatar
Sweejak
 
Posts: 3250
Joined: Sat Jul 02, 2005 7:40 pm
Location: Border Region 5
Blog: View Blog (0)

Northern Rock has effectively been nationalised

Postby slow_dazzle » Mon Jan 21, 2008 4:40 am

An announcement was made just over an hour ago. No link as yet.

WTF does this have to do with the Fed? Well, it shows that the UK government has lost control too. Either that or there is something more sinister at work. Let's skim through the possibilities.

Maybe this is the only way of preventing complete collapse and the risk of a wider crisis of confidence in the financial sector. But the government could have sold off the assets and recouped a bit of the investment it put up to bail out NR. However, the shareholders would have to kiss their investments goodbye. So what? They took the risk so they stand to lose as well as gain; that's the name of the investment game - risk.

Which makes the selling of bonds to raise capital a real sweet deal for investors...the UK government is going to guarantee the bonds so it's a win-win situation for buyers, underwritten by the UK taxpayer.

I wonder if any politician will be able to stand up in Parliament and extol the virtues of the "free" (cough) market in future.

This is evidence that the market has failed. It's an act of desperation with the usual winners riding on the backs of the majority of us.
On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.

John Perry Barlow - A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
slow_dazzle
 
Posts: 1132
Joined: Sat Nov 11, 2006 3:19 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby schadenfreude » Mon Jan 21, 2008 8:00 am

I think by look of the stock markets today, the news of one of the monolines downgrading on Friday may be beginning to sink in.

Hey Anti, you published this link a while ago:

http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/release/2007-120a.pdf

but it seems to have mysteriously disapperaed. You don't have a copy of the pdf by any chance, do you?
schadenfreude
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 2:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby antiaristo » Mon Jan 21, 2008 11:15 am

schadenfreude wrote:I think by look of the stock markets today, the news of one of the monolines downgrading on Friday may be beginning to sink in.

Hey Anti, you published this link a while ago:

http://www.occ.treas.gov/ftp/release/2007-120a.pdf

but it seems to have mysteriously disapperaed. You don't have a copy of the pdf by any chance, do you?


schad, are you sure?
Works fine for me.


By the way, I also posted something about non-borrowed reserves of banks, which fell off a cliff at the start of January.

Well, the number has gone negative.
That means, in aggregate, all the loss reserves of the US banking system have gone.

There is HUGE nervousness about this, but you won't read about it in the press.

I reckon these last two presidencies will be known as the "Don't ask. Don't tell." period of American financial history.
antiaristo
 
Posts: 2555
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 9:50 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 175 guests