Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Business/Finance
See other Business/Finance Articles

Title: 79% OF AMERICANS BELIEVE WE'RE HEADED FOR DEPRESSION LASTING SEVERAL YEARS - USA Today Poll
Source: USA Today
URL Source: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washin ... 3-17-economy-poll_N.htm#discov
Published: Mar 18, 2008
Author: Richard Wolf
Post Date: 2008-03-24 00:03:27 by Uncle Bill
Keywords: Abolish, Federal, Reserve
Views: 4757
Comments: 20

Front Page:

Poll: 3 in 4 think USA is in a recession

USA Today
By Richard Wolf
March 18, 2008

WASHINGTON — More than three in four Americans think the country is in a recession, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll over the weekend shows, reflecting a crisis of confidence that economists say could make the economy worse. As the Federal Reserve expanded credit to securities dealers and President Bush said his administration had taken "strong and decisive action," the poll revealed pessimism about the economy's direction.

Seventy-six percent of those polled said the economy is in recession, compared to 22% who said it's not. Not since September 1992, two months before President George H.W. Bush lost re-election, have so many Americans said the economy was in such bad shape.

"Recessions are almost always crises of confidence, and that's what we're having right now," said David Wyss, chief economist at Standard & Poor's.

Asked if the nation could slip into a depression lasting several years, 59% said it was likely, and 79% said they were worried about it. A recession is an economic downturn that usually lasts at least six months; a depression is longer, deeper and more broadly dispersed.

The poll of 1,025 adults was completed Sunday, the day the Federal Reserve financially backed JPMorgan Chase's buyout of venerable investment bank Bear Stearns. It was one in a series of actions meant to stabilize world financial markets and give investors renewed confidence, including a cut in the interest rate on direct loans to banks and a new line of credit for securities dealers.

"When people experience higher gasoline prices, higher heating costs, fewer employment opportunities, housing prices going down … then the common sense conclusion is things aren't very good," said Brian Bethune of economic forecaster Global Insight. Their pessimism "creates more problems," he said.

Jared Bernstein, senior economist at the liberal Economic Policy Institute, said a recession can become a self-fulfilling prophesy: "If folks don't feel confident enough to make that purchase, to take the vacation, even to go out to eat, that obviously reverberates negatively throughout the economy."

To counter that cycle, President Bush briefly invited reporters into his normally private policy meeting with economic advisers Monday. "One thing is for certain, we're in challenging times," Bush said. But he said that the government "is on top of the situation," adding, "in the long run, our economy is going to be fine."

After meeting a second time with Bush on Monday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told reporters that the administration is seeking to take actions "that are going to increase confidence in our economy."

Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan sounded more downbeat. Today's financial problems could likely be seen as "the most wrenching since the end of the second world war," Greenspan wrote in the Financial Times on Monday.

Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton urged greater action. Obama, campaigning in Pennsylvania, said the economy "is heading toward recession. We probably already are in one." He said "we must focus on what we can do to restore the public's confidence in the market."

Clinton was more cautious. Calling it a time of "stress and uncertainty," she said there was "urgency" to continue monetary policies like those taken Sunday. "We are in the soup, and we better get ourselves out of it before the consequences get drastic," Clinton said in Washington.

Presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain was in Iraq Monday. His top economic adviser, Douglas Holtz-Eakin, said McCain has confidence in the Federal Reserve's action to shore up the nation's financial system. But while that action may have been necessary, he said, it's imperative to "ensure that Main Street America does not bail out financial speculators."


Truckers Broke, Will Strike Across America

Spectre of Coming Depression haunts Federal Reserve

Recession is a given. Can we avoid depression
When economist Robert Parks predicted early last week that there was more than a 60 percent probability the current financial meltdown in the United States would lead to the "Bush depression," his phone began ringing like crazy with calls from the media."

With banks collapsing, the dollar reeling, the Federal Reserve making up new rules as it goes and observers discussing a new Great Depression, the presidential candidates are still on scripts they wrote a year ago.

MERRILL LYNCH TO LOSE 15 BILLION (again)

A financial crisis unmatched since the Great Depression

UK facing worst financial crisis 'in decades'

Closer To Financial Meltdown

In this pdf file, Table 1 is as follows:

As the article states:

The undeniable truth: In the grand casino of derivatives trading, JPMorgan Chase is overwhelmingly and unabashedly the biggest player of them all. As you can plainly see in the table above, it controls ...

$91.7 trillion in derivatives, or over 53% of all derivatives held by U.S. commercial banks, among which are ...

Nearly $7.8 trillion in the oft-inflammable credit derivatives, or 55.6% of the total.

And all with little more than $1.2 trillion in assets!

JPMorgan Chase will be going down in flames.

"God wouldn't have made sheep if he didn't expect them to be sheared." - J.P. Morgan

How poetic. (2 images)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Uncle Bill (#0)

What is the technical difference between a R and D?

(That's "Recession" and "Depression", not "Republican" and "Democrat", btw...)

Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec

Pinguinite  posted on  2008-03-24   0:09:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Pinguinite (#1)

Your answer is in here

Thanks.

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   0:13:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: christine, Jethro Tull (#2)

AMERICANS VERY AFRAID OF FINANCIAL MELTDOWN UNDERWAY

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   0:40:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: christine, Jethro Tull (#3)

When they start putting these articles in papers like the Seattle PI, then, well, it's far worse than most expect:

How to invest in a time of panic
"In a complete meltdown, for example during world wars and revolutions, it is hard to find anything that keeps its value. Stock markets collapse. Governments default on their debt. Private property is no longer respected, either because governments seize the assets or because goods cannot be protected from criminals."


This is an old video, but the principles still hold true. It's all over, sooner instead of later.

The Crash: The Coming Collapse of America

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   0:54:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Uncle Bill (#0)

Good links. I am forwarding them to one of our local papers. I was talking to the business editors on Friday and they weren't aware of a lot of this stuff. But they focus local developments and local problems. They can give you all the dirt on the local contractors but they don't realize the markets are collapsing.

.

...  posted on  2008-03-24   1:04:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: ... (#5)

Wall Street Firms Cut 34,000 Jobs, Most Since 2001 Dot-Com Bust

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   5:23:57 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: christine, Jethro Tull, All (#6)

"There is absolutely no truth to the rumors of liquidity problems that circulated today in the market. Bear Stearns' balance sheet, liquidity and capital remain strong."
Alan Schwartz, Bear Stearns CEO, March 10, 2008

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   5:35:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Uncle Bill (#0)

I don' think we'll ever have a Great Depression again but this time it's going to hurt. Everyone at work was just informed we have to take a $50 a week paycut. Good thing I'm stocked up on the rice and beans.

Scratch a leftist and you'll find a fascist or Communist or Nazi everytime.

YertleTurtle  posted on  2008-03-24   8:06:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: YertleTurtle (#8)

I don' think we'll ever have a Great Depression again

Dont bet your squirrel rifle on that.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-24   9:19:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Uncle Bill, Jethro Tull (#4)

When they start putting these articles in papers like the Seattle PI, then, well, it's far worse than most expect

it's spam time! ;)

christine  posted on  2008-03-24   9:55:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: YertleTurtle (#8)

I don' think we'll ever have a Great Depression again but this time it's going to hurt.

Recession, and local disruptions to economies, are the natural consequence of the freedom to take risks and the inevitable fact that bad people are going to get into business and mislead the uninformed, thereby maladjusting their risk knowledge and levels of risk aversion.

Hard recessions and depressions result from a leadership meddling in the monetary structure of economies, promising alleviation of economic "pain" in return for their retention of power. It's an impossible promise to keep, but they can put off the reckoning long enough in many instances to stay in until retirement, death or another career.

Whether or not we have a depression is moot, it's a question of when we'll have it. We're at the point where the "alleviation of pain" is going to take, from the politicians standpoint, a radical transformation of society which will be sharply to the downside for any who love freedom and unfettered life.

If we don't "have a depression", you can bet that the actions that "forestall it" will be a brutal managed economy, little to no private property rights, state directed career paths, restrictive to no firearms rights, shortages of goods, and a policy of employment that involves shuffling off the disaffected youth to foreign lands to manage "threats" to the state.

Make a mental note. If this ends up merely being a recession check afterwards to see if it's any easier to get a mortgage, if there's less regulation, lower or no inflation, less taxes, etc. I wouldn't take odds against that, the economic incrementalism of totalitarianism marches ever onwards...

Government blows and that which governs least blows least...

Axenolith  posted on  2008-03-24   10:13:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Uncle Bill (#7)

"There is absolutely no truth to the rumors of liquidity problems that circulated today in the market. Bear Stearns' balance sheet, liquidity and capital remain strong."

When the economy is not based on real money, it's based on mere faith. This statement was an effort to keep the faith going a little longer.

In other words, it was a diliberate fabrication (lie) made in an attempt to make others believe it so the problems would go away.

It obviously didn't work.

Pinguinite.com EcuadorTreasures.ec

Pinguinite  posted on  2008-03-24   10:49:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: Cynicom (#9)

"It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brush fires of freedom in the minds of men." -- Samuel Adams (1722-1803)‡

ghostdogtxn  posted on  2008-03-24   10:58:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: ghostdogtxn (#13)

Theres a reason Turtle feeds the squirrels all summer, cause he shoots them all winter.

Cynicom  posted on  2008-03-24   11:06:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Uncle Bill (#0)

The situation with truckers IS a national emergency...this is how FOOD gets to the grocery stores, people...wake up!

Remember...G-d saved more animals than people on the ark. www.siameserescue.org

who knows what evil  posted on  2008-03-24   11:11:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: christine, Jethro Tull (#13)

Bernanke's "Nuclear Option"

The Financial Destruction Of The Average Man

The Financial Destruction Of The Average Man

MineSet
Jim Sinclair
March 23, 2008

This weekend’s meeting of four heads of central banks communicates the size of the OTC derivative disaster. It is a system that is broken. A bailout will require the printing of trillions of dollars worth of monetary stimulation making Bernanke’s helicopter drop look like chump change.

The dollar number of pending derivative bankruptcies is the size of the mountain of garbage paper issued by just those who are to be bailed out. That number is greater than the total world economies.

There simply isn’t enough money in the world for central banks to buy up the mountain of worthless paper sold by those who need bailouts; all of which made fortunes for their directors, officers and key people.

When an OTC derivative fails to perform, notional value becomes real value.

The notional value of all OTC derivatives exceeds $500 trillion.

Credit default swaps (OTC derivatives) alone account for over $20 trillion dollars of notional value and are failing. Major dealers in these items, Lehman and JP Morgan, had their debt downgraded last week.

Maintaining the AAA rating on debt of public companies primarily issuing default swaps as credit guarantees is a sick JOKE of fabrication. This is a JOKE that in all probability will lead to litigation that destroys the rating companies.

You can be absolutely sure that all the biggies have their money out.

No one mentions these firms being bailed out are the ones who created this disaster, making billions for their economic sin. You can be sure the big boys have their money out of the now on-the-rocks international institutions.

No one mentions that bailing out the bankers will leave the average man victimized and paying for the pleasure of the economic rape.

Meanwhile Derivative Traders (salesmen of perdition, not traders) and their hedge fund managers are all in Greenwich Connecticut with their hundreds of millions and billions, now retired playing tennis on their indoor courts at their waterfront mansions as the mess deepens.

Litigation against the officers and directors of these international banking firms, both against the biggies personally as well as the company, will make the biggies occupation one of defending against litigation for the rest of their lives.

For those biggies in these companies who trust no one and therefore have wives with no money will lose everything. Some of them I know. What goes around certainly comes around.

Litigation against OTC derivatives are slam-dunk victories for the injured plaintiffs. The biggies will pay.

This is the greatest act in history of “Public Be Damned” and “Let them Eat Cake.” It will not come about because in the USA it is already the hottest political potato.

The problem is that the plan of the US legislative is down right STUPID. It is an embarrassment that legislators are so publicly moronic when it comes to economics.

The problem that no one is focusing on right now is the tracking of the mortgage itself to the structured product, which has broken down. That means in these items many can’t connect the underlying mortgage to the structured investment product (derivative).

So far courts have held that the only entity that can foreclose is the entity that actually lent the money. The average guy does not know that with an attorney to protect him he has a free house!

The entity that actually lent the money has sold the mortgage and been paid. Therefore where is the incentive for original lender to foreclose? The answer is there is none. Bankers do not help bankers in the same way that sharks do not help sharks.

Conclusion:

Because of the unthinkable size of the problem it is impossible to construct a Resurrection Trust to buy all these worthless and never to be anything but worthless items.

Should any item surface to do this it will destroy all the National currency of the central banks that participate.

If there were an attempt to construct such an entity with the cooperation of the USA, the US dollar would go much lower than .5200. Gold would go to many thousands of US dollars.

Anyone who last week assumed the problem was over and we would be improving from there on out is simply nuts.


ANATOMY OF A PANIC: "There are $750 trillion worth of credit derivatives"

Even the blind start to rub the sleep out of their eyes:

Fed's rescue halted a derivatives Chernobyl


Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   16:21:48 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: All (#16)

Don't trust the Wall St rally

Food stamp use hits all-time high in Ohio

Let's see, we have 750 trillion of credit derivatives trading on global markets, and a former Fed vice chairman, who holds a doctorate in economics from M.I.T. says he has only a “modest understanding” of complex derivatives. “I know the basic understanding of how they work,” he said, “but if you presented me with one and asked me to put a market value on it, I’d be guessing.”

Searching for the cause of the crisis on Wall Street

International Herald Tribune
Searching for the cause of the crisis on Wall Street
Monday, March 24, 2008

NEW YORK: Like Noah building his ark as thunderheads gathered, Bill Gross has spent the past two years anticipating the flood that swamped Bear Stearns nearly two weeks ago. As manager of the world's biggest bond fund and custodian of nearly a trillion dollars in assets, Gross amassed a cash hoard of $50 billion in case trading partners suddenly demanded payment from his firm, Pacific Investment Management Co.

And every day for the past three weeks he has convened meetings in a war room in Pimco's headquarters in Newport Beach, California, "to make sure the ark doesn't have any leaks," Gross said. "We come in every day at 3:30 a.m. and leave at 6 p.m. I'm not used to setting my alarm for 2:45 a.m., but these are extraordinary times."

Even though Gross, 63, is a market veteran who has lived through the collapse of other banks and brokerage firms, the 1987 stock market crash and the near meltdown of the Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund a decade ago, he said the current crisis feels different - in both size and significance.

The U.S. Federal Reserve has not only taken action unprecedented since the Great Depression - by lending money directly to major investment banks - it has also put taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars in questionable trades that these same bankers made when the good times were rolling.

"Bear Stearns has made it obvious that things have gone too far," said Gross, who planned to use some of his cash to bargain-shop. "The investment community has morphed into something beyond banks and something beyond regulation. We call it the shadow banking system."

It is the private trading of complex instruments that lurk in the financial shadows that worries regulators and Wall Street. Economic downturns and panics have occurred before, of course. Few, however, have posed such a serious threat to the entire financial system that regulators have responded as if they were confronting a potential epidemic.

As the U.S. Congress and Republican and Democratic presidential administrations pushed for financial deregulation over the past decade, the biggest banks and brokerage firms created a dizzying array of innovative products that experts now admit were hard to understand and even harder to value.

On Wall Street, of course, what you do not see can hurt you. In the past decade, there has been an explosion in complex derivative instruments, like collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps, that were intended primarily to transfer risk.

These products are virtually hidden from investors, analysts and regulators, even though they have become among Wall Street's most outsized profit engines. They do not trade openly on public exchanges, and financial services firms disclose few details about them. Wall Street dynamite

Used judiciously, derivatives can limit the damage from financial miscues and uncertainty, greasing the wheels of commerce. Used unwisely - when greed and the urge to gamble with borrowed money overtake sensible risk-taking - derivatives can become Wall Street's version of nitroglycerin.

Bear Stearns's vast portfolio of these instruments was among the main reasons for the bank's collapse, but derivatives are buried in the accounts of just about every Wall Street company, as well as those of major commercial banks like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase. What is more, these exotic investments have been exported all over the globe.

With Bear Stearns forced into a sale and the entire financial system still under the threat of further losses, Wall Street executives, regulators and politicians are scrambling to figure out what went wrong and how it can be fixed.

But because the forces that have collided in recent weeks were set in motion long before the subprime mortgage mess first made news last year, solutions will not come easily or quickly, analysts say.

In fact, while home loans to risky borrowers were among the first to go bad, analysts say that the crisis did not stem from the housing market alone and that it certainly will not end there.

"The problem has been spreading its wings and taking in markets very far afield from mortgages," Alan Blinder, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve and now an economics professor at Princeton, said. "It's a failure at a lot of levels. It's hard to find a piece of the system that actually worked well in the lead-up to the bust."

Stung by the new focus on their complex products, advocates of the derivatives trade say they are unfairly being made scapegoats for the recent panic on Wall Street. "Some people want to blame our industry because they have a vested interest in doing so," said Robert Pickel, chief executive of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, a trade group. "We believe that there are good investment decisions and bad investment decisions. We don't decry motor vehicles because some have been involved in accidents."

Already, legislators in Washington are offering detailed plans for new regulations, including ones to treat Wall Street banks like their more heavily regulated commercial brethren. At the same time, normally wary corporate leaders like James Dimon, the chief executive of JPMorgan Chase, are beginning to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, new regulations are necessary.

"We have a terribly global world and, over all, financial regulation has not kept up with that," Dimon said on March 17, the day after his bank agreed to take over Bear Stearns. "I can't even describe the seriousness of that. I always talk about how bad things can happen that you can't expect. I didn't fathom this event."

Two months before he resigned as chief executive of Citigroup last year amid nearly $20 billion in write-downs, Charles Prince 3rd sat down in Washington with Representative Barney Frank, chairman of the Financial Services Committee of the House of Representatives. Among the topics they discussed were investment vehicles that allowed Citigroup and other banks to keep billions of dollars in potential liabilities off of their balance sheets - and away from the scrutiny of investors and analysts.

"Why aren't they on your balance sheet?" asked Frank, a Democrat of Massachusetts. Frank recalled that Prince had said doing so would have put Citigroup at a disadvantage with Wall Street investment banks that were more loosely regulated and were allowed to take far greater risks. (A spokeswoman for Prince confirmed the conversation.)

It was at that moment, Frank said, that he first realized just how much freedom Wall Street companies had, and how lightly regulated they were in comparison with commercial banks, which have to answer to an alphabet soup of government agencies like the Federal Reserve and the comptroller of the currency.

"Not only did Wall Street have so much freedom, but it gave commercial banks an incentive to try and evade their regulations," Frank said. When it came to Wall Street, he said, "we thought we didn't need regulation." Forgotten lessons

In fact, Washington has long followed the financial industry's lead in supporting deregulation, even as newly minted but little-understood products like derivatives proliferated.

During the late 1990s, Wall Street fought bitterly against any attempt to regulate the emerging derivatives market, recalled Michael Greenberger, a former senior regulator at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Although the Long-Term Capital debacle in 1998 alerted regulators and bankers alike to the dangers of big bets with borrowed money, a rescue effort engineered by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York prevented the damage from spreading.

"After that, all was forgotten," said Greenberger, now a professor at the University of Maryland. At the same time, derivatives were being praised as a boon that would make the economy more stable.

Speaking in Boca Raton, Florida, in March 1999, Alan Greenspan, then the Fed chairman, told the Futures Industry Association, a Wall Street trade group, that "these instruments enhance the ability to differentiate risk and allocate it to those investors most able and willing to take it."

Although Greenspan acknowledged that the "possibility of increased systemic risk does appear to be an issue that requires fuller understanding," he argued that new regulations "would be a major mistake."

"Regulatory risk measurement schemes," he added, "are simpler and much less accurate than banks' risk measurement models."

Greenberger, still concerned about regulatory battles he lost a decade ago, said that Greenspan "felt derivatives would spread the risk in the economy."

"In reality," Greenberger added, "it spread a virus through the economy because these products are so opaque and hard to value." A representative for Greenspan said he was preparing to travel and could not comment.

A milestone in the deregulation effort came in the autumn of 2000, when a lame-duck session of Congress passed a little-noticed piece of legislation called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act. The bill effectively kept much of the market for derivatives and other exotic instruments off-limits to agencies that regulate more conventional assets like stocks, bonds and futures contracts.

Supported by Phil Gramm, then a Republican senator from Texas and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, the legislation was a 262-page amendment to a far larger appropriations bill. It was signed into law by President Bill Clinton that December.

Gramm, now the vice chairman of UBS, the Swiss investment banking giant, was unavailable for comment. (UBS has recently seen its fortunes hammered by ill- considered derivative investments.)

"I don't believe anybody understood the significance of this," said Greenberger, describing the bill's impact.

By the beginning of this decade, according to Frank and Blinder, Greenspan resisted suggestions that the Fed use its powers to regulate the mortgage market or to crack down on practices like providing loans to borrowers with little, if any, documentation.

"Greenspan specifically refused to act," Frank said. "He had the authority, but he didn't use it."

Others on Capitol Hill, like Representative Scott Garrett, a Republican of New Jersey and a member of the Financial Services banking subcommittee, reject the idea that loosening financial rules helped to create the current crisis.

"I don't think deregulation was the cause," he said. "And had we had additional regulation in place, I'm not sure what we're experiencing now would have been averted." Nips and tucks

Regardless, with profit margins shrinking in traditional businesses like underwriting and trading, Wall Street companies rushed into the new frontier of lucrative financial products like derivatives.

Three years ago, many of Wall Street's best and brightest gathered to assess the landscape of financial risk. Top executives from companies like Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers and Citigroup - calling themselves the Counterparty Risk Management Policy Group II - debated the likelihood of an event that could send a seismic wave across financial markets.

The group's conclusion, detailed in a 153-page report, was that the chances of a systemic upheaval had declined sharply after the Long-Term Capital bailout. Members recommended some nips and tucks around the market's edges, to ensure that trades were cleared and settled more efficiently. They also recommended that secretive hedge funds volunteer more information about their activities. Yet, over all, they concluded that financial markets were more stable than they had been just a few years earlier.

Few could argue. Wall Street banks were happy. They were posting record profits and had healthy capital cushions. Money flowed easily as corporate default rates were practically nil and the few bumps that occurred in the market were readily absorbed.

More important, innovative products designed to mitigate risk were seen as having reduced the likelihood that a financial cataclysm could put the entire system at risk.

"With the 2005 report, my hope at the time was that that work would help in dealing with future financial shocks, and I confess to being quite frustrated that it didn't do as much as I had hoped," said E. Gerald Corrigan, a managing director at Goldman Sachs and a former New York Fed president, who was chairman of the policy group. "Still, I shudder to think what today would look like if not for the fact that some of the changes were, in fact, implemented." Stealth market

One of the fastest-growing and most lucrative businesses on Wall Street in the past decade has been in derivatives - a sector that boomed after the near collapse of Long-Term Capital.

It is a stealth market that relies on trades conducted by phone between Wall Street dealer desks, away from open securities exchanges.

How much changes hands or who holds what is ultimately unknown to analysts, investors and regulators.

Credit rating agencies, which banks paid to grade some of the new products, slapped high ratings on many of them, despite having only a loose familiarity with the quality of the assets behind these instruments.

Even the people running Wall Street companies did not really understand what they were buying and selling, said Byron Wien, a 40-year veteran of the stock market who is now the chief investment strategist of Pequot Capital, a hedge fund. "These are ordinary folks who know a spreadsheet, but they are not steeped in the sophistication of these kind of models," Wien said. "You put a lot of equations in front of them with little Greek letters on their sides, and they won't know what they're looking at."

Blinder, the former Fed vice chairman, holds a doctorate in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology but said that he had only a "modest understanding" of complex derivatives. "I know the basic understanding of how they work," he said, "but if you presented me with one and asked me to put a market value on it, I'd be guessing."

Such uncertainty led some to single out derivatives for greater scrutiny and caution. Most famous, perhaps, was Warren Buffett, the legendary investor and chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, who in 2003 said derivatives were potential "weapons of mass destruction."

Behind the scenes, however, there was another player who was scrambling to assess the growing power, use and dangers of derivatives.

Timothy Geithner, a career civil servant who took over as president of the New York Fed in 2003, was trying to solve a variety of global crises while at the Treasury Department. As a Fed president, he tried to get a handle on hedge fund activities and the use of leverage on Wall Street, and he zeroed in on the credit derivatives market.

Geithner brought together leaders of Wall Street companies in a series of meetings in 2005 and 2006 to discuss credit derivatives, and he pushed many of them to clear and settle derivatives trading electronically, hoping to eliminate a large paper backlog that had clogged the system.

Even so, Geithner had one hand tied behind his back. While the Fed regulated large commercial banks like Citigroup and JPMorgan, it had no oversight on activities of the investment banks, hedge funds and other participants in the burgeoning derivatives market. And the industry and sympathetic politicians in Washington fought attempts to regulate the products, arguing that it would force the lucrative business overseas.

Geithner declined an interview request for this article. 'The shot across the bow'

In a May 2006 speech about credit derivatives, Geithner praised the benefits of the products: improved risk management and distribution, as well as enhanced market efficiency and resiliency. As he had on earlier occasions, he also warned that the "formidable complexity of measuring the scale of potential exposure" to derivatives made it hard to monitor the products and to gauge the financial vulnerability of individual banks, brokerage firms and other institutions.

When increased defaults in subprime mortgages began crushing mortgage-linked securities last summer, several credit markets and many companies that play substantial roles in those markets were sideswiped because of a rapid loss of faith in the value of the products.

Two large Bear Stearns hedge funds collapsed because of bad subprime mortgage bets. The losses were amplified by a hefty dollop of borrowed money that was used to try to juice returns in one of the funds.

All around Wall Street, dealers were having trouble moving exotic securities linked to subprime mortgages, particularly CDOs, which were backed by pools of bonds. Within days, the once-booming and actively traded CDO market - which in three short years had seen issues triple in size, to $486 billion - ground to a halt.

Jeremy Grantham, chairman and chief investment strategist at GMO, a Boston investment firm, said: "When we had the shot across the bow and people realized something was going wrong with subprime, I said: 'Treat this as a dress rehearsal. Stress-test your portfolios because the next time or the time after, the shot won't be across the bow.' "

In the autumn, the Treasury Department and several Wall Street banks scrambled to try to put together a bailout plan to save up to $80 billion in troubled securities. The bailout fell apart, quickly replaced by another aimed at major bond guarantors. That crisis was averted after the guarantors raised fresh capital.

Yet each near miss brought with it growing fears that the stakes were growing bigger and the risks more dangerous. Wall Street banks, as well as banks abroad, took billions of dollars in write-downs, and the chiefs of UBS, Merrill Lynch and Citigroup were all ousted because of huge losses.

"It was like watching a slow-motion train wreck," Grantham said. "After all of the write-downs at the banks in June, July and August, we were in a full- fledged credit crisis with CEOs of top banks running around like headless chickens. And the U.S. equity market's peak in October? What sort of denial were they in?"

Finally, last week, with Wall Street about to take a direct hit, the Fed stepped in and bailed out Bear Stearns.

Amid the regulatory swirl surrounding Bear Stearns, analysts have questioned why the Securities and Exchange Commission did not send up any flares about looming problems at that firm or others on Wall Street. After all, they say, it was the SEC, not the Federal Reserve, that was Bear's primary regulator.

Although SEC officials were unavailable for comment, its chairman, Christopher Cox, has maintained that the agency has effectively carried out its regulatory duties. In a letter last week to the nongovernmental Basel Committee of Banking Supervision, Cox attributed the collapse of Bear to "a lack of confidence, not a lack of capital."

It is still too early to assess whether the Federal Reserve's actions have succeeded in protecting the broader economic system. And experts are debating whether the government's intervention in the Bear Stearns debacle will ultimately encourage riskier behavior on the Street.

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-24   16:39:04 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Cynicom (#9)

Dont bet your squirrel rifle on that.

Scratch a leftist and you'll find a fascist or Communist or Nazi everytime.

YertleTurtle  posted on  2008-03-24   19:41:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: ... (#5)

Germans Fear Meltdown of Financial System


Hmmmmm, now why would they do this:

FDIC Plans Staff Boost of 60% for Bank Failures

Press 1 for English, Press 2 for English, Press 3 for deportation

Death of Habeas Corpus: “Your words are lies, Sir.”

Uncle Bill  posted on  2008-03-26   16:38:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Uncle Bill (#19)


What North American Union? ~~~~~ Have you seen THIS yet? Pass it around...

FOH  posted on  2008-03-26   16:39:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest