Showing posts with label Banks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Banks. Show all posts

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Tax and Spend Banker

So the solution to Americas deficit problem whether Federal or State government would be to increase taxes...or so says the CEO of JP Morgan bank; Jamie Dimon.

JAMIE DIMON:
States have a lot of wherewithal, when you talk about this huge deficit, the deficit in California is equal to one percent of the GDP in California, so if they raise taxes one percent, they could pay their deficit. And that's true for some of the other states and they have the wherewithal
This should not surprise anyone, tax cuts and spending cuts are what got California in the mess its in still thanks to Proposition 13 back in the Seventies.

The most significant portion of the act is the first paragraph, which limited the tax rate for real estate:

Section 1. (a) The maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property shall not exceed one percent (1%) of the full cash value of such property. The one percent (1%) tax to be collected by the counties and apportioned according to law to the districts within the counties.


And now it has become the clarion call of the American right, reduce government, which means reducing public services such as education, health care, etc.

California public schools, which during the 1960s had been ranked nationally as among the best, have decreased to 48th in many surveys of student achievement.

Which when government can no longer provide them must then contract out the jobs, privatizing them, which leads to private profits at public expense.


And at the root of California's misery lies Proposition 13, the antitax measure that ignited the Reagan Revolution and the conservative era.

Proposition 13 was the brainchild of the late Howard Jarvis. The antitax crusader was a policy genius not unlike Franklin D. Roosevelt. Both shared an affinity for designing deep structural change that, once embedded in the political system, is nearly impossible to alter without a massive change of heart by voters.

Jarvis created a similarly impregnable institution. When he rode the wave of anger over skyrocketing property-tax assessments to pass Proposition 13 in 1978, he included a two-thirds vote requirement for the passage of any new taxes in California — an insurmountable obstacle built on populist allergy to any kind of new levy. Beholden to a tax-averse electorate, the state's liberals and moderates have attempted to live with Proposition 13 while continuing to provide the state services Californians expect — freeways, higher education, prisons, assistance to needy families and, very important, essential funding to local government and school districts that vanished after the antitax measure passed.



Thursday, February 17, 2011

RRSP Season No One Buying



Average Canadian family debt hits $100000

The report, released by the Vanier Institute of the Family on Thursday, suggests the debt-to-income ratio is a record 150 per cent.

Leads to this:

Banks are finding us RRSP-fatigued



Thursday, December 18, 2008

Criminal Capitalists:Madoff and Zell

Once again as financial markets collapse they reveal the truth that all capitalism is basically a ponzi scheme.

THE MADOFF AFFAIR: $50-BILLION PONZI SCHEME ALLEGED
Madoff put under house arrest as celebrities, charities, banks disclose exposure

It befits the close of one of the most bizarre years in international finance to look at the collapse of one of its most extraordinary villains, Bernard Madoff, a former chairman of the Nasdaq sharemarket and a Wall Street titan.The crisis in the world financial system has its roots in excessive greed, stupidity, poor regulation and disappearing capital, and the story of Madoff's downfall and a $US50 billion sting bears many of the same hallmarks.

When Enron and World Com collapsed it was revealed that they were in cahoots with their accounting firms, who not only checked their books, but helped them cook those books in order to avoid taxes and to make it appear they were more profitable than they really were. And at the same time the SEC was not doing its job in fact as this recent scandal reveals they acted not as regulators but enablers of Mr. Madoffs criminal scheme.

SEC investigators discovered Madoff violations in 2006: WSJ

We should be surprised by this I think not, after all capitalism began as a joint effort between merchant bankers, pirates and private mercenaries. Why should it be any different four hundred years later.

Bernard Madoff 's $50 billion Ponzi scheme was so breathtaking that investors have been left speechless. But the alleged crook -- universally described as "charming" -- would not have succeeded were it not for the unbelievable gullibility of supposedly sophisticated investors.Madoff knew that just because people were rich it did not not make them smart -- that was the source of his success. All you have to do is talk about an investment philosophy that is vague but sounds really authoritative. Give people nonsensical statements that they glance at quickly. Make sure that the statements indicate steady returns of 10% to 13% a year. Many CFOs, CIOs and portfolio managers were amazed that Madoff produced such steady returns for so long. They were mathematically impossible. Barron's raised questions in 2001 about whether Madoff was "front-running" trades, an allegation he denied. Still, Madoff's rich buddies stood by his side.Maddoff somehow managed to convince a slew of banks and hedge funds, billionaires such as Mets owner Fred Wilpon, Yeshiva University along with charities associated with Steven Spielberg and Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel that the laws of investing do not apply to them. The odds of anyone getting double-digit returns year after year are laughably small. They, of course, understood that, but figured why fix something that ain't broke. By turning a blind eye to fiscal reality, these victims showed almost as much greed as Madoff.


Madoffs clients are a who's who of the very financial institutions that lined up at the trough to be bailed out, and who claimed if they failed capitalism would collapse. In fact the whole collapse of America's financial market reveals that it was all a ponzi scheme.


After all, Madoff’s scheme -- at least in spirit, if not in its nefarious intent -- wasn’t much different than the business models at some of the nation’s largest failed financial institutions.
Back in May, four months before it collapsed, American International Group Inc. increased its dividend at the same time it unveiled plans to raise $12.5 billion in capital. Later, when its cash ran out, AIG got a government bailout, the size of which has expanded to about $150 billion.
Whether you call that a Ponzi scheme or something less sinister, AIG was paying old investors with money raised from new investors. The same could be said of many banks that blew through billions of dollars in freshly raised capital the past couple of years, continuing to pay large dividends even as their balance sheets quietly imploded. So why have other Ponzi-esque operators emerged scot-free (so far) with taxpayer bailouts, while Madoff gets pinched?


And one of these financial institutions caught up in the Madoff affair is UBS the Swiss banking company recently indited for using its banks in Canada to hide U.S. billionares fortunes offshore in its banks acounts top avoid taxes, which is itself illegal, but just another case of business as usual until we are caught.

Howewver while Mr. Madoff's actions have been declared illegal, another capitalist billionaire Sam Zell is able to do the same thing legally!!! And there really is no difference between them.

Sam Zell, Tribune's billionaire CEO, but rather the thousands of Tribune employees whose stock ownership plan was jerry-rigged to fund the company's buyout last year. Mr. Zell was the architect of the deal, but put up only around $300-million of his own money as a kind of option to later buy financial control of the company for as little as $500-million more. Under the mind-boggling structure Mr. Zell and his advisers came up with, the Tribune ESOP owns 100 per cent of the shares. What happens to them? The Chicago Tribune said it most starkly, quoting an employee conference call with Mr. Zell: “The ESOP, which Mr. Zell said a year ago offered employee “owners” the chance to share richly in Tribune Co.'s eventual success, could be wiped out, leaving thousands of Tribune Co. employees with no company retirement plan besides what they elect to save in a 401(k).”

Tribune’s Chapter 11 filing likely means a court delay for six current and ex-L.A. Times employees who are trying to oust billionaire owner Sam Zell from the board of directors. But in the meantime, they can point to Zell’s bankruptcy-protection filing as Exhibit A in the court of public opinion. “The sort of critique we made in the lawsuit has been borne out,” says plaintiff Henry Weinstein, the Times’ former legal affairs writer and now a professor at UCI’s new law school. In addition to the Times, Tribune’s assets include KTLA-TV, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Cubs. In late 2007 Zell took the company private by putting up $315 million and borrowing $8 billion. The class-action suit, filed in September, accused Zell of orchestrating a scam and burying the company in debt. Zell called the suit “a distraction that’s unnecessary.” Says Weinstein: “We are certainly going to try to be heard in the bankruptcy court. There are all sorts of employee interests” ...

The following is an official statement from Teamsters General President James P. Hoffa.
"When billionaire Sam Zell took Tribune private in an overleveraged, doomed deal that swiftly brought down the 161-year-old media giant, the risks involved were placed squarely on the shoulders of Tribune workers. Now, as Tribune's creditors head to bankruptcy court for payback, these workers should go directly to the front of the line.
By transferring 100 percent ownership of the company and some $13 billion of debt to an S-Corp Employee Stock Ownership Plan (ESOP) in the buyout, Zell insulated himself from tax responsibilities and mortgaged the future retirement savings of Tribune employees. Despite owning 100 percent of the company, employees were given no voice in the governance of the company or in the plan itself. They've had no say in the terms of their own debt obligations or decisions related to how best to service that debt.
Tribune contributions to employee retirement savings for employee-owners changed from a defined benefit plan to a defined contribution plan structured as the ESOP. Employees participating in the ESOP can't diversify their holdings until they reach age 55.
The first of the company's contributions to the ESOP was expected to happen in the first quarter, but now -- with the Tribune mired in Chapter 11 bankruptcy -- it's unclear whether that will happen or whether those shares will have any value.
Not everyone lost on the deal. Tribune executives made millions, including CEO Dennis FitzSimons, who engineered the deal with Zell and raked in $17.7 million in severance and other payments and cashed in his stock for $23.8 million. Shareholders traded in stock rated deep into junk territory for cash representing a 21 percent premium over the stock price just before the transaction. The banks that lent Tribune the money shared some $47 million in fees.
Citigroup and Merrill Lynch who advised Tribune on the deal received $35.8 million and $37 million respectively. And billionaire Zell, who put up only $315 million in the deal, is expected to stand ahead of employees in the creditors' line at bankruptcy court.


Unfortunately Mr. Zell will not be sharing a cell with Mr.Madoff nor with another Chicago paper baron; Lord Black. Though he should.

SEE:
Super Bubble Burst
Hedge Funds, Junk Bonds, Ponzi Schemes




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , ,
, , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, December 01, 2008

Alberta Loses Billions

Poor fiscal management is the heritage of the Tired Old Tories....as in Heritage Trust Fund lossing billions in investment interest and the Alberta Treasury Branches (the Socred Bank)losing billions in the toxic paper loans. Anywhere else heads would roll. Howerver in the province of the one party state those in charge just keep on keeping on, including rewarding themselves for bad management decisions.
And the Alberta Treasury Branch brass - who showered themselves with hefty bonuses last year - are getting their ducks for an "additional provision" to cover the toxic asset-backed commercial paper they lost Albertans' money on.
ATB Financial has made an additional $55.5-million provision for potential losses on its holdings of asset-backed commercial paper, bringing its total provisions for possible ABCP losses to $308.6 million.ATB's net income for the quarter ended Sept. 30 fell to $5.7 million, the financial services company said Friday in its latest quarterly report. That's down from $8.5 million in the year earlier period when ATB took a $77.6-million provision for potential losses for its holdings of asset-backed commercial paper. ATB's $1.14-billion principal investment in ABCP will be converted to longer-term notes that reach maturity in six to nine years. ATB will revalue the restructured ABCP investment upon closing. "Times are getting tougher, even in resilient economies such as Alberta's, and interest rate conditions and uncertainty in the marketplace continue to impact our business. But our continued growth and positive results mean Albertans can be confident in ATB," said Dave Mowat, ATB's President and CEO.
Knowing full well that Alberta taxpayers will bail you out.


SEE:



Wednesday, November 26, 2008

Subsidizing Criminal Capitalism

Why are we bailing these guys out with taxpayers money while they are guilty of being criminal capitalists. Of course hidden in their bad loan charges will be the costs of criminal charges as well. And in order to offset your criminal charges you can use loosy goosy accounting standards to cook the books. Wait a minute isn't that how we got into this mess in the first place? And there is still no real transparency in the operations of Canada's banks. A profit is still a profit and CEO stock options have not been cut back.

Canada Bails out its banks to the tune of over $1650 for every man women and child. Oh, and ATM fees are going up.

Ottawa to buy $50B in mortgages, hopes to spur loans

Royal Bank of Canada agrees to $10.7M settlement
The Justice Department said Tuesday that RBC Mortgage Co., a subsidiary of the Royal Bank of Canada, has agreed to pay the U.S. more than $10.7 million to settle allegations that the company falsified loan documentation.The Justice Department said the allegations concerned 219 federally insured loans for mortgages submitted to the Federal Housing Administration of the Department of Housing and Urban Development between 2001 and 2005.
CHICAGO - A Canadian bank holding company that purchased a former mortgage company in Rockford will pay the U.S. nearly $11 million to settle claims over bad loans. RBC Mortgage, formerly known as Prism Mortgage, had a lending office in Rockford. Three RBC Mortgage loan officers and 22 other people were convicted of knowlingly setting up 219 loans that failed in the Rockford and Freeport areas between February 2001 and April 2004. Each loan resulted in foreclosure causing financial loss to the government.
Bank of America, Royal Bank of Canada to bail out holders of auction-rate securities
Bank of America Corp. and Royal Bank of Canada will bail out customers stuck with $10.3 billion in auction-rate securities and pay fines to settle state and federal claims that they misled investors in selling the products. Bank of America will buy back $4.5 billion of the securities and pay a $50-million fine in agreements with the Securities and Exchange Commission and New York Atty. Gen. Andrew Cuomo that "closely mirror" a deal last month with Massachusetts. The bank will help clients dispose of an additional $5 billion, the SEC said. Royal Bank of Canada said it agreed to buy $850 million of the debt and pay a $9.8-million fine.Companies including Citigroup Inc., UBS and Merrill Lynch & Co. have agreed to repurchase more than $50 billion in debt to settle claims they touted the instruments as safe, cash-like investments.
RBC takes $1.6B hit on bad loans
RBC said it was avoiding even bigger charges by taking advantage of new looser accounting standards to reclassify impaired assets so the losses would not have to be acknowledged.
Charges cut profit, but RBC expects to make $1.1B in Q4
Gordon Nixon • Born, Jan. 25, 1957, Montreal • Chief executive officer, Royal Bank of Canada (TSX: RY)Years at company: 21 • Age: 51
2007 Earns $8,767,229 in compensation and bonus. Realizes gain of $29,033,072 on exercised stock options. “I think the industry, all of us, anticipated the ability of the markets to recover from those events and to move out of it much more quickly than it has actually happened,” Nixon says. “I think we’ve misjudged the severity of the liquidity crisis.”

Toronto Domion Bank Ex-Commerce Bank CEO to pay $4 mln to settle probe
WASHINGTON, Nov 17 (Reuters) - Vernon Hill, former chief executive of Commerce Bancorp Inc, agreed to pay $4 million to settle allegations of unsafe banking practices, regulators said on Monday.
Commerce forced Hill out in June 2007 after regulators complained about dealings between the bank and partnerships controlled by Hill as well as an architectural design firm run by Hill's wife, Shirley.
Under the settlement with the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC),
Hill must also pay $4 million to TD Bank, which acquired Commerce in March. But the iconoclastic banker incurred no fines or prohibitions in the settlement, paving the way for the launch of Metro Bank, a new venture based on the Commerce model of service and convenience. Meanwhile, a U.S. District Court judge in Camden issued an injunction Tuesday forbidding Hill to use materials reflecting Commerce signage and colors at a banking conference in Orlando, Fla. The injunction was sought by TD Bank, whose Canadian parent bank acquired Cherry Hill-based Commerce in March for $8.5 billion. The OCC said Hill failed to comply with sound corporate governance principles related to real estate purchases, leases and joint real estate development transactions involving Commerce that financially benefited him.The bank announced in August 2007 that Hill would receive an $11 million severance payment, subject to regulatory approval. After resigning, Hill started a private investment group that will invest in financial industry stocks. This past summer, he doled out $6 million to become and investor and consultant in Philadelphia’s Republic First Bancorp, which announced last week that it would be acquired by former Commerce affiliate Pennsylvania Commerce Bancorp of Harrisburg, Pa., for $109 million.
TD's capital ratio fell significantly on Nov. 1 under global banking rules, Basel II, that require it to change the way it counts its stake in TD Ameritrade. The decision to issue equity is a dramatic about-face for Mr. Clark, who told analysts on a conference call just Thursday that “raising common equity would be extremely difficult” at the moment. He signalled that the bank would rather increase its capital levels using other methods, such as issuing preferred shares. As a result, the bank had to count 50 per cent of its $4.6-billion stake in TD Ameritrade in its ratio. “That meant we immediately lost $2.3-billion of Tier 1 capital, and that's what brought our Tier 1 capital ratio down,” Mr. Clark said. TD had already raised $1.25-billion of Tier 1 capital during the quarter, Mr. Mihelic noted.TD still has room to issue “more than a couple billion dollars of preferred shares under the rules,” Mr. Clark said.The decision to issue common shares was made yesterday afternoon, because markets improved since Thursday and investors were signalling they wanted a higher capital ratio, he said. TD last week disclosed a surprising $350-million after-tax writedown from credit losses and further investment declines that will not show up in results because of new accounting rules.

Bank of Montreal Rogue gas trader admits to fraud A disgraced natural gas trader at the centre of Bank of Montreal's $853 million commodity trading scandal has pleaded guilty to intentionally mismarking his trading book in a "criminal scheme" to pad his bonus, Manhattan's district attorney announced yesterday ... The charges stem from a joint investigation by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and the New York Office of the FBI into Bank of Montreal's natural gas trading losses, which topped $850 million
BMO net rises 24%; dividend is frozen
BMO's high yield should set off warning bells Globe and Mail
First, those results weren't as good as they looked. The headlines say earnings were up 22 per cent to $1.06 a share. Nice, but considering, for example, that the tax rate was not low, not zero but negative, you have to take that with a grain of salt. Reclassifying assets as available for sale added $123-million to the bottom line. Only a very recent rule change allowed that - thank you regulators. Trading revenues were abnormally high too. And here's another reason: no one understands how a modern bank works. During yesterday's conference call, analysts were scratching their heads trying to understand the repercussions of the Apex commercial paper trust, which the bank sponsors; BMO has about $1.6-billion on the line there. If the investments and its attendant risks are hard for professional and experienced analysts to follow, they're practically incomprehensible for the average retail investor - and even some professional investors - to understand as they salivate over a juicy yield.
Bank of Montreal profit climbs The Gazette (Montreal)
Quarterly profit rose 24 per cent at the Bank of Montreal, helped by tax recoveries, higher profit at its Canadian retail banking unit and new accounting rules,
Bank of Montreal Profit Rises on Consumer Banking
Bank of Montreal, Canada’s fourth- biggest bank, said higher revenue from consumer banking helped boost fourth-quarter profit by 24 percent from a year ago, when it had debt writedowns and trading losses. Canadian consumer-banking profit rose 20 percent to C$344 million from a year earlier as personal loans rose 21 percent and it added more mortgages. Commercial loans and credit-card revenue also rose from a year earlier. Investment-banking profit soared to C$285 million from C$46 million a year earlier, when the firm had C$275 million in losses from trading, bad bets on natural-gas options contracts and writedowns on debt investments.
BMO head urges Ottawa to act decisively
Bank chiefs on Bay Street are urging Ottawa to commit to making a major injection of cash into the economy to help stem a rising tide of bad loans, after internal bank figures showed Canadians were increasingly struggling to make payments on money they've borrowed. Bill Downe, chief executive of BMO Financial, said strong and timely fiscal stimulus was needed from government, arguing it would be "positive for employment" and facilitate "constructive investment," while reviving growth for banks.

Let's not bank on the banks
Given this risk and the serious economic consequences of the banking crisis, it may be appropriate that premiere events at the Air Canada Centre are becoming notable for the scarcity of bank executives, who earn up to 500 times more than arena staff. Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of Canada, said yesterday he had been somewhat troubled by the nature of his conversations with chief executives during the last five years. He suggested in a BBC interview that bank chiefs should perhaps have spent more time reviewing their loan portfolios and less time thinking about the "opera or the ski slopes."
Carney signals more rate cuts
In a sign that the global credit crisis is seeping across Canada's borders, Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney warned yesterday that the country "has been importantly affected by global events" and hinted that another interest rate cut may be in the offing. Pointing to "a tightening in credit conditions," Carney said in a speech to the Canada-United Kingdom Chamber of Commerce in London that "the risks to growth and inflation in Canada identified (in October) appear to have shifted to the downside." He said the crisis has essentially ended for Canada's banks, and short of a complete global market failure, he expects financial and credit markets to improve in Canada
Canada Purchases C$1.05 Billion of Non-Mortgage Debt (Update1)
By Alexandre Deslongchamps and Greg Quinn
Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The Bank of Canada bought C$1.05 billion ($839 million) of securities from investors, less than the C$2 billion it offered to purchase, in an effort to restore normal trading in credit markets.
The central bank will hold the non-mortgage loan portfolio assets as collateral for 28-day loans. The bank has offered to buy C$8 billion or more of such securities by Dec. 9.
Bank of Canada Governor
Mark Carney and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said last week in separate speeches that they will take whatever steps are needed to shore up the economy and help mitigate the global credit crisis. The central bank has another program under which it will inject up to C$35 billion into the financial system this year through loans to major bond dealers.
Tomorrow, the Bank of Canada will offer loans of C$6 billion to major bond dealers, instead of the minimum of C$4 billion it announced on Nov. 3. On Nov. 27, the central bank will
sell C$1.45 billion of treasury bills, to offset the increased value of assets on its books from its special loans

Sympathy slight for banking blues
The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), for instance, announced yesterday that its estimated profits for the last three months plunged a frightful $200 million from a year ago. That left the nation's largest bank with a paltry profit of only $1.1 billion -- for its worst quarter of the year.
Putting it another way for those of us who can't quite fathom a billion of anything, the so-called credit crisis engulfing the globe has reduced the Royal to making a little over $12 million a day, including weekends when its branches aren't even open for business. One can only imagine the terminal indigestion all this must be causing in the bank's executive dining room these days.
Only a year ago, the Royal was boasting "a record-busting profit of almost $5.5 billion (for 2007), achieving the highest annual income ever for a Canadian bank despite global capital-market turmoil that has engulfed the entire industry." The Royal, for instance, reports a tidy $330-million increase in revenues over the past three months from an improved credit spread.

Turns out that while most public and media attention has been focused on the near-collapse of the financial system in the U.S. and overseas, the highly regulated Canadian big banks have escaped relatively unscathed. No matter. Nothing like a good global banking scare to sneak through a bit of consumer gouging here at home.
It started in the middle of the recent federal election when the Bank of Canada unexpectedly cut its key lending rate by a full half-percentage point after the first wave of the market meltdown.
The move was intended precisely to get the Canadian banks to cut their lending rates to consumers and businesses in an effort to keep the economy rolling.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the banks -- they decided to cut their rates by only a quarter-point, and keep the rest.
This was not an isolated bit of banking robbery.
According to Bank of Canada figures, its key lending rate has declined 45 per cent from a year ago, from 4.5 per cent to 2.5 per cent. But the prime business rate that banks lend money to their best commercial customers has only dropped 33 per cent -- from six per cent to four per cent.
But no one is getting burned more than consumers and, in particular, homeowners.
In the year that the central bank rate has dropped 45 per cent, the banks have passed along to consumers a tiny fraction of the savings.
For example, according to the Bank of Canada, the average five-year conventional mortgage that was 7.39 per cent a year ago, was being offered to homeowners in October at 7.20 per cent.
Even the average one-year mortgage dropped barely 12 per cent in the year, from an average 7.2 per cent to only 6.35 per cent in October.
All of which clearly helps to explain why Stephen Harper's government has generously provided the big banks with $75 billion of public money with which to further gouge, um, the same public. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said the move would help average Canadians by "making consumer and mortgage loans more affordable."


SEE:
UBScandal
Casino Capitalism
Money Laundering Canadian Style
Bank Theft
Credit Card Fraud
The Cone of Silence Bank Presidents and the RCMP
RBC Centre
Greedy Banks
BMO More ATM's Less People
A Day in the Life of Corporate Criminals

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Monday, November 10, 2008

Super Bubble Burst


As Eric Janzen in the February issue of Harpers Magazine warned this is a super bubble that just burst.

A financial bubble is a market aberration manufactured by government, finance, and industry, a shared speculative hallucination and then a crash, followed by depression. Bubbles were once very rare—one every hundred years or so was enough to motivate politicians, bearing the post-bubble ire of their newly destitute citizenry, to enact legislation that would prevent subsequent occurrences. After the dust settled from the 1720 crash of the South Sea Bubble, for instance, British Parliament passed the Bubble Act to forbid “raising or pretending to raise a transferable stock.” For a century this law did much to prevent the formation of new speculative swellings.

The housing bubble has left us in dire shape, worse than after the technology-stock bubble, when the Federal Reserve Funds Rate was 6 percent, the dollar was at a multi-decade peak, the federal government was running a surplus, and tax rates were relatively high, making reflation—interest-rate cuts, dollar depreciation, increased government spending, and tax cuts—relatively painless. Now the Funds Rate is only 4.5 percent, the dollar is at multi-decade lows, the federal budget is in deficit, and tax cuts are still in effect. The chronic trade deficit, the sudden depreciation of our currency, and the lack of foreign buyers willing to purchase its debt will require the United States government to print new money simply to fund its own operations and pay its 22 million employees.


But unlike the South Sea Bubble or the Tulip Bubble, or even the Dot Com Bubble this one has brought capitalism to its global knees.

Bank of Canada Governor Mark Carney underscored the deteriorating situation when he said Canada’s business conditions will worsen alongside other industrialized countries next year and the Canadian economy may slip into a recession for the first time since 1992.
“We are predicting very marginal growth in 2009,” Carney said in an interview with Bloomberg News, when asked if he thought a recession might happen. “By definition that’s close to negative growth, and if we have a balanced forecast you can see it going either side, so it’s a possibility."
Carney cut the Bank of Canada’s key interest rate to 2.25 per cent last month and said the world’s eighth-largest economy would shrink this quarter and stall in the first three months of 2009, just skirting the two quarters of contraction that most economists call a recession. He has said further rate cuts may be needed to prop up economic growth.
In Brazil, Flaherty also said the world is facing what appears to be a runaway economic downturn. He noted that the International Monetary Fund continues to lower its growth forecasts month by month. The IMF now predicts the major industrialized Group of 7 countries will fall into a recession next year - with the exception of Canada, which is forecast to post a minuscule 0.3 per cent growth.


For the leading spokespeople of capitalism to say they didn't see it coming well thats laughable. It could be excused as Hegelian black humour if the mouthpieces of capital were not so sincere in denying the obvious; recession and the dreaded follow through; depression.

Hegel remarks somewhere that history tends to repeat itself. He forgot to add: the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.

Karl Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (1852)





SEE:


And Then There Was One


Concessions Don't Work




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about: , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

STFU 'W'



If I was generous I would say that poor George W. spent the last year as the American economy tanked, viewing the pending crash through rose coloured blinders. As you have read here for the past two years I have predicted the pending crash that brought the market tumbling down last month. It was simple to read in the tea leaves of market excess, or market 'exuberance' as Greenspan called it. But for George W. it was all about denial. The market fundamentals were strong he asserted right up to a few weeks ago. America he had claimed for months is NOT in a recession, denying the obvious. In January oil began its upward spiral, and America was in its third month of downaward spiral. America was in a recession everyone knew it, only George continued to deny it.


Like WMD, which he beleived existed in Iraq, he also believed there was no recsssion, and hence no problem with the market, despite the year of declining housing prices and the ensuing subprime crash.


So it should come as no surprise that the guy who lied to the American people about WMD, could easily lie to himself, and hence the American people, about there being no recession.


Unlike the first U.S. President named George who created the myth of the Honest Presidency, with the allegorical fiction about the cherry tree, this President George has put to bed that myth. While the first George confessed to chooping down the tree this George denies there was a tree.


And so he should not be surprised that over the past three weeks every time he has assured Americans that they need not panic about a market crash, the market responds by crashing further.


It's poetic justice.


Everyone now accepts that W is either a compulsive liar, or a self-deluded fool. What a condemnation the market makes everytime W opens his mouth.


Someone should tell the lame duck to sit down and shut up.



President Bush Speaks on Ailing Economy
Friday Address Marks 10th Time Bush Has Recently Spoken About Volatile Markets
Oct. 10, 2008



President Bush tried to reassure the nation today that the economy is strong enough to weather the current crisis, but by the time Bush stopped speaking nine minutes later, the market had dropped another 107 points.


Following the previous nine times the president specifically addressed the economic crisis, the market ended the day on an upturn on five occasions and closed down the other four.

What the G-7 Should Be Doing To Fix the Financial Crisis

TIME - 10 Oct 2008

Global stock markets were sending an unmistakable signal too: panic. The Dow Jones industrial average finished its worst week ever, off about 22%. On Friday, the market swung wildly, dropping 500 points on three occasions, then vaulting into positive territory before coughing up its gains in the last half-hour of trading to finish the day down 128 at 8,451. The NASDAQ managed a small gain. But European and Asian markets were pummeled again.



DOW PLUNGES 733 POINTS ; Worst Decline Since 1987
Thursday, October 16, 2008
When President Bush speaks, many listen - but apparently investors haven't been reassured by his many speaches about the market meltdown this month.



SEE:



No Austrians In Foxholes



CRASH



Black Gold



The Return Of Hawley—Smoot



What Goes Up...



Wall Street Mantra



Bank Run



U.S. Economy Entering Twilight Zone



Tags



,, , , , , , , , , , , ,, , , , , , , ,






Saturday, October 25, 2008

Deja Vu

Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty and Mark Carney assured us that the economic fundamentals in Canada are sound, despite the current meltdown of international finance capitalism. Wearing Bush/McCain like rose coloured blinders they refuse to admit that Canada faces a pending recession and the government will likely incur a deficit. Something Harper and Flaherty denied during the election campaign. Instead they say steady as she goes.


Of all the leaders, Harper was most determined to stay the course.
"What leaders have to do is have a plan and not panic," he said. Revising the plan
based on new data was considered to be a sign of panic, not prudence.Harper, in
the dying days of the campaign, proclaimed that he would not run a deficit,
raise taxes or cut spending. That may be a difficult circle to square, and those
words may come back to haunt him.



Wait I have heard this before...why in 1929 when then PM William Lyon Mackenzie King said he would stay the course.....

October 24, 1929 went down in history as "Black Thursday". On that day, stock prices plummeted on the New York Stock Exchange, creating a domino effect on world stock markets. It signaled the beginning of the Great Depression.

Canada was one of the hardest hit by the economic crisis. The country relied heavily on its exports. Pulp and paper, wood and wheat represented two-thirds of Canadian exports and accounted for much of the country's prosperity.

Governments in Canada were slow to respond to the desperate economic and social conditions. Until the Great Depression, government intervened as little as possible, letting the free market take care of the economy. Social welfare was left to churches and charities.

When the Depression began William Lyon Mackenzie King was Prime Minister in 1930. He believed that the crisis would pass, refused to provide federal aid to the provinces, and only introduced moderate relief efforts.


Although unemployment was a national problem, federal administrations led by the Conservative R.B. BENNETT (1930-35) and the Liberal W.L. Mackenzie KING (from 1935 onwards) refused, for the most part, to provide work for the jobless and insisted that their care was primarily a local and provincial responsibility. The result was fiscal collapse for the 4 western provinces and hundreds of municipalities and haphazard, degrading standards of care for the jobless.


The Depression altered established perceptions of the economy and the role of the state. The faith shared by both the Bennett and King governments and most economists that a balanced budget, a sound dollar and changes in the tariff would allow the private marketplace to bring about recovery was misplaced.



Library and Archives Canada / C-000623
Bennett Buggy in the Great Depression in Canada


October 1929 – Stock Market Crash: Markets Suffer the Worst Losses in Canadian History
In the late 1920s, Canada’s economy and stock exchanges were booming. From 1921 to the autumn of 1929, the level of stock prices increased more than three times. But these heady days came to a swift end with the stock market crash on Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929, in New York, Toronto, Montréal and other financial centres in the world. Shareholders panicked and sold their stock for whatever they could get.
Overnight, individuals and companies were ruined. It was estimated that Canadian stocks lost a total value of $5 billion on paper in 1929. By mid-1930, the value of stocks for the 50 leading Canadian companies had fallen by over 50% from their peaks in 1929.
The stock market collapse affected all investors—individuals who had been persuaded to buy shares as well as speculators looking to make a fast dollar. Despite the market crash, 1929 was a good year for banks, mines, manufacturing and construction in Canada. All reported record profits at year-end.
Although the crash was sudden and deep, there were signs that it was coming. Earlier in 1929, stock prices had been volatile. Economic slowdowns in May and June hinted that the booming economy was heading for a recession. Export earnings were declining and the price of wheat plummeted.
Economists and historians are still debating what caused the crash. At the time of the crash, Canada had no monetary policy or central bank, so there was little government intervention in the market. (See 1934—Bank of Canada.) Canadian firms had healthy profits and did not expect the boom to end. Corporate profit expectations were inflated. Canadian corporations took advantage of the bull market to issue new stock, which overheated the supply. Banks gave out easy and cheap credit, and let people buy stocks on margin: buyers paid only a fraction of the share price and borrowed the rest. Speculation was rampant: bidding drove up the value of stocks as much as 40 times the companies’ annual earnings. Investors seemed to pay less attention to corporate earnings than to how much their shares would appreciate in value.
The economy could not sustain its rapid growth and the bubble burst. Investors lost confidence in the market. In the United States, the government was blamed for not controlling the speculative frenzy. Because Canada’s economy was so closely tied to that of the United States, the New York crash brought down Canadian markets, too.
It is widely felt that the stock market collapse started a chain of events that plunged Canada and the Western world into the decade-long Great Depression, which ended only with the outbreak of the Second World War.

1929 - 1939 —The Great Depression.
The Roaring Twenties saw boom times in Canada. Unemployment was low; earnings for individuals and companies were high. But prosperity came to a halt with the stock market collapse in New York, Toronto, Montréal and around the world in October 1929. The crash set off a chain of events that plunged Canada and the world into a decade-long depression. It was the beginning of the Dirty Thirties.
The Great Depression caused Canadian workers and companies great hardship. Prices deflated rapidly and deeply. Business activity fell sharply. There was massive unemployment—27% at the height of the Depression in 1933. Many businesses were wiped out: in Canada, corporate profits of $396 million in 1929 became corporate losses of $98 million in 1933. Between 1929 and that year, the gross national product dropped 43%. Families saw most or all of their assets disappear. Governments around the world, including Canada’s, put up high tariffs to protect their domestic manufacturers and businesses, but that only created weaker demand and made the Depression worse. Canadian exports shrank by 50% from 1929 to 1933.

THE CAUSE OF THE DEPRESSION

Many Canadians of the thirties felt that the depression wasn't brought about by the Wall Street Stock Market Crash, but by the enormous 1928 wheat crop crash. Due to this, many people were out of work and money and food began to run low. It was said by the Federal Department of Labor that a family needed between $1200 and $1500 a year to maintain the "minimum standard of decency." At that time, 60% of men and 82% of women made less than $1000 a year. The gross national product fell from $6.1 billion in 1929 to $3.5 billion in 1933 and the value of industrial production halved.
Unfortunately for the well being of Canada's economy prices continued to plummet and they even fell faster then wages until 1933, at that time, there was another wage cut, this time of 15%. For all the unemployed there was a relief program for families and all unemployed single men were sent packing by relief officers by boxcar to British Columbia. There were also work camps established for single men by Bennett's Government.
The Great Depression, also known as The Dirty Thirties, wasn't like an ordinary depression where savings vanished and city families went to the farm until it blew over. This depression effected everyone in some way and there was basically no way to escape it. J.S. Woodsworth told Parliament "If they went out today, they would meet another army of unemployed coming back from the country to the city." As the depression carried on 1 in 5 Canadians became dependent on government relief. 30% of the Labour Force was unemployed, where as the unemployment rate had previously never dropped below 12%.


It was estimated back in the thirties that 33% of Canada's Gross National Income came from exports; so the country was also greatly affected by the collapse of world trade. The four western prairie provinces were almost completely dependent on the export of wheat. The little money that they brought in for their wheat did not cover production costs, let alone farm taxes, depreciation and interest on the debts that farmers were building up. The net farm income fell from $417 million in 1929 to $109 million in 1933.


Canada suffered a major depression from 1929 to 1939. In terms of output it was
similar to the Great Depression in the United States. However, total factor productivity
(TFP) in Canada did not recover relative to trend, while in the United States TFP had
recovered by 1937. We find that the neoclassical growth model, with TFP treated as
exogenous, can account for over half of the decline in output relative to trend in Canada.
In contrast, we find that conventional explanations for the Great Depression - monetary
shocks, terms of trade shocks and labor market and competition policies – do not work
for Canada.

Our conclusion is that the reason that Canadian output per adult was still 30 percent below
trend in 1938 was that productivity failed to return to trend.

Relative to trend, consumption fell more in Canada, and remained below that of
the United States throughout the 1930s. Investment in Canada fell to 15 percent of its
trend value by 1933, and recovered very slowly in both countries (remaining roughly 50
percent below trend in 1939). Government purchases in the two countries followed a
similar pattern during the downturn, before diverging in the late 1930s when U.S.
government spending remained above trend, while in Canada it fluctuated about trend.

U.S. government output increased more relative to trend
than Canadian government output. A large part of the difference in government
expenditure can be attributed to different government policies towards providing
unemployment relief. In the United States, the government relied much more heavily
upon make-work projects (government relief projects) than in Canada. The fraction of the
workforce employed by the government doubled in the United States, while increasing by
less than 50 percent in Canada. The increase in U.S. government employment was mainly
due to public works, as nearly 7 percent of U.S. employment in the late 1930s was in
relief projects. Relief workers were never more than 1.5 percent of the total number of
employed people in Canada.

Canada was the first country to leave the gold standard, suspending gold
shipments in January 1929 (Bordo and Redish (1990)). Despite the suspension of
convertibility, the Canadian government took steps to prevent depreciation of the dollar,
motivated in part by a wish to maintain access to American capital markets to refinance
Dominion debt (Shearer and Clark (1984)). As a result, the government maintained the
advance rate at its 1928 level throughout 1930, despite the fall in world rates. This policy
was ultimately abandoned in 1931. Despite this, the Canadian dollar did depreciate
relative to the U.S. dollar by approximately 15 percent between 1929 and 1931, before
recovering to its 1929 level in 1935.

The “debt-deflation” view of the Great Depression asserts that deflation and high
private debt levels contributed to the Great Depression by reducing borrower wealth and
constraining lending. Haubrich (1990) argues that the debt crisis was much less severe in
Canada than in the United States. He argues that there is little evidence to suggest that the
debt crisis caused the Great Depression in Canada.

A common view is that banking crisis played a significant role in transforming the
1929 downturn into the Great Depression. For example, Bernanke (1983) states that “the
financial crisis of 1930-33 affected the macroeconomy by reducing the quantity of
financial services, primarily credit intermediation” (p. 262). As has been pointed out by
numerous authors, however, Canada did not experience any bank failures.

Can the usual explanations of the Great Depression account for the Great
Depression in Canada? Our answer to this question is no. As we show, money shocks,
policy shocks and terms of trade shocks cannot account for the 10-year depression.
Explanations based on these shocks fail because their effects are quantitatively too small
to explain the Great Depression.

Our findings in this paper tell us where to go next. Future research into the Great
Depression in Canada should focus on models in which changes in the level of trade
affect the level of productivity. Such models are consistent with the fact that Canada’s
TFP and trade both declined from 1929 to 33. Beginning in 1934, trade began to slowly
recover, and so did TFP. This also matches the fact that the only large shock that hit
Canada but not the United States was trade, while the main difference in macro
performance is the behavior of productivity.

Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: E30, N12, N42.
Key Words: Great Depression, Canada, productivity, terms of trade, deflation

Community Voices
GWINNETT COUNTY: Depression days brought to mind

By Rick Badie
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Elwood Hart lived in Canada during the Great Depression. He considers himself lucky. A Salvation Army was next to the family’s home in Hamilton, Ontario.
“Maybe it was a bowl of soup or a bologna sandwich, but I got something to eat,” said Hart, now a Lawrenceville resident. “If it weren’t for that, I don’t think we could have ever made it. We weren’t living in the United States, but the situation was the same all over.”
Comparisons and contrasts are being drawn between the current economic crisis and the Great Depression. Conventional wisdom says this is the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. Generally, experts say the odds of a full-blown depression are nonexistent. Let’s hope they are right.
Not many of us were around between 1929 and 1939, so we can’t compare the impact of that period’s economic crisis to today’s turmoil. Hart is now in his mid-80s, so his take on what he saw then and what he sees now carries weight.
We met years ago at the Gwinnett County Veterans War Museum, where his military career is on display. He served with the Canadian Army in Normandy during World War II. With the U.S. Army, he saw two tours of duty in Korea and Vietnam. He received an honorable discharge in 1967.
As for the Great Depression, “I remember it well,” Hart said. “People don’t realize what it was like back then.”
He remembers people lining up at food banks to get a hunk of cheese and powdered milk. He remembers stuffing newspapers in his shoes because they were way too big. And he remembers a white pet rabbit that just disappeared one day.
“I got up one morning and asked my dad where my rabbit was,” Hart told me. “He said, ‘It’s down your stomach. You had it for dinner.’ You ate anything you could get back then. There was no waste of clothes or food. Today, when I throw out trash, wild animals won’t find any food. I don’t throw it away.”
But how does that compare to today’s economic woes, particularly among everyday people barely making it?
Every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday morning, Hart drives to a local Publix to load his car with day-old breads, cakes and pastries. When he pulls up to the Salvation Army, where the goods are doled out, people are waiting.
“It’s gotten so bad right now that there are twice as many every day as there were a couple of months ago,” he said. “In fact, it’s so bad that, a lot of time, me or some of the women in the church have to stand there. We have a sign that says everyone is to get two loaves of bread and a pastry. If you don’t watch them, they will fill up on all they can get. That’s why I say things are getting bad, similar to the 1930s, I tell you.”
As a brass collector, Hart routinely visits Goodwill stores in search of treasures. He said he’s seen a noticeable uptick in the number of people buying clothes. And at his church, clothes donations have fallen off considerably.
“It’s not that bad yet now,” Hart said.
“But it’s getting there.”

SEE: