Showing posts with label theft. Show all posts
Showing posts with label theft. Show all posts

Monday, February 11, 2013

Indebted

Greetings good citizen,

Took a mental health day yesterday but the madness just keeps on coming…with the difference being I didn’t write about it.

Hopefully today’s topic will prove therapeutic. Instead of just pointing to the problem, today I’m also going to provide the solution!

So we begin with something that has been drummed into your head since childhood, the concept of ‘debt’…and how others take advantage of this ‘mis-education’.

Thought debtor prison ended in the 18th century? Think again.
February 3, 2013 |

Editor's note: America has a long history of treating the poor like criminals, from legislation banning the transportation of poor people across state lines to anti-vagrancy laws that could land you in jail if you didn't have a job or a home. We've come to rely on the criminal justice system to deal with the poor, even as more and more Americans fall into poverty. The following is part of a series that looks at the diverse ways poverty is criminalized in America, such as laws targeting the homeless, the surveillance of welfare recipients, the re-emergence of debtor's prisons, and extreme policing tactics like stop-and-frisk.

Let’s consider for a moment something you have been taught was impossible, imagine (if you can) a world without debt.

It actually should be easy to do. MOTHER NATURE DOESN’T HAVE A CASH REGISTER!

The (alleged) ‘owner’ of resources doesn’t have to pay for them so why should you?

(Stupid question, the owner makes his money selling what you need to you! (If nobody needs it what’s the point in owning it? Talk about carts and horses!)

EVERYTHING ON THIS PLANET is ‘free’…but it is not ‘infinite’…and that’s where they get you!

Money is the ‘regulator’ that is supposed to insure everybody gets their ‘fair share’…but that’s not how it works, does it?

Especially when money is used to ‘penalize’.

[Note: This can get real confusing quite quickly so I’m going to intentionally keep the variables to a minimum.]

The truly insidious part comes in when pay is linked to the ‘class’ of a worker as opposed to the kind of work they do.

A woman is paid less than a man and a colored is paid less than a white.

When neither one has anything to do with anything except the prejudices of (…mostly, the personnel department!) Why they are not prosecuted for their crimes remains a mystery…

But the desperate need to redefine the term criminal is the subject of another essay!

Possibly the next essay.

So debt is created when one’s source of income does not meet one’s needs. Which makes for a pretty damning statistic when 45% of the nation’s households qualify for and receive SNAP (supplemental nutrition assistance…program.)

But this isn’t the EMPLOYER’S problem…it’s YOURS! (For not preventing the employers from buying the politicians...)

And no, that time I didn’t digress.

So who among us treats you like a criminal if you owe them money? It’s the employer’s financial partner, the Banker.

Now the employer owns the politician and the banker owns the employer…which makes for a pretty ‘unholy alliance’ doesn’t it? Remember the politicians control public servants and public servants control the justice system along with who does (or doesn’t) become a judge.

Does anyone else see a problem here…considering current ‘conditions on the ground’?

So how do we solve this ‘daisy-chained’ problem? Lawyers are Judge wannabes and politicians are nothing more than greedy actors and bankers…let’s not go there because there’s no ‘reason’ behind a bankers actions that can’t be chalked up to a single motivation…greed.

Because money makes this whole circus go round, how do we put the brakes on this rampant corruption?

We put an end to ‘elected officials’. They only exist to keep YOU out of the decision making loop!

Now let’s ‘solve’ the debt problem (and unemployment while we’re at it.)

Since the ‘purpose of commerce’ is to provide ‘the public’ (and that means ‘all’ of the public) with the goods and services it needs to live as comfortably as possible. (Yeah, my definition is a little more ‘generous’ than the typical ‘more for me’ capitalist is comfortable with. But that’s what we’re trying to solve, isn’t it?)

Debt should be (and will become under A Simple Plan) illegal. You won’t be able to pay anyone for anything because there won’t be any cash to pay them with.

Which is to point out that we would also ‘solve’ crime in one fell swoop and marvel at why we didn’t do it sooner…and the method is to outlaw ‘cash’ and all of its ‘substitutes’.

If you’re caught using ‘script’ you’ll be exiled.

IOU’s, Walnuts, acorns, seashells…they’ll all buy you a one way trip to the badlands if you’re caught trading them! (Just don’t do it.)

YOUR MONEY IS FOR YOU! You will be paid to do what you do by the profession you have chosen to work for…just as EVERYBODY ELSE will be paid by their profession SO THERE’S NO NEED FOR YOU TO PAY THEM TOO!

The proverbial ‘stack of lumber’ will be a ‘gimme’. Maintained by the people who do that for a living…at no cost to you!

How can we do this? MOTHER NATURE DOESN’T HAVE A CASH REGISTER! It’s all FREE!

We do what we do because it needs doing…why oh why should we allow a few pinheads to get rich while the rest of us bust our backsides to make ends meet?

And it all starts with throwing the politicians out of office! [I’m all for making the lot of ‘em ‘take the walk’ too but throwing them out and making them all get honest jobs SHOULD BE punishment enough.]

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner


Wednesday, January 16, 2013

Only in America!

Greetings good citizen,

In yet another jaw dropping example of capitalism at its finest we have a citizen using his garden hose as a flame-thrower after a nearby fracking operation contaminated his water well.

Which is not nearly as disturbing as what the EPA did when confronted with this, er, ‘intelligence’.

I cannot stress enough that the loss of control over our justice system indicates the loss of control over our society itself, and the extent to which treason has permeated the public realm.

(The people elected to serve us are NOT serving the public but those who funded their election, the One Percent…and that is ‘treason’…which has a long standing punishment.)

Again I ask what is it going to take before you reject this greedy grasping and punish the criminals who have impoverished the rest of us for so long?

How long must we suffer before you are willing to act?
The case isn't the first in which the EPA initially linked a hydraulic fracturing operation to water contamination and then softened its position after the industry protested. A similar dispute unfolded in west-central Wyoming in late 2011, when the EPA released an initial report that showed hydraulic fracturing could have contaminated groundwater. After industry and GOP leaders went on the attack, the agency said it had decided to do more testing. It has yet to announce a final conclusion.

Hydraulic fracturing — often called "fracking" — allows drillers to tap into oil and gas reserves that were once considered out of reach because they were locked in deep layers of rock. The method has contributed to a surge in natural gas drilling nationwide, but environmental activists and some scientists believe it can contaminate groundwater. The industry insists the practice is safe.

Range Resources, a leading independent player in the natural gas boom, has hundreds of gas wells throughout Texas, Pennsylvania and other mineral-rich areas of the United States. Among them is a production site — now owned by Legend Natural Gas — in a wooded area about a mile from Lipsky's home in Weatherford, about a half-hour drive west of Fort Worth.
Geez, what a surprise, the EPA backed off once the conservo-loonies got into the act!

Color me shocked…(yawn.) Welcome to midnight in America, and they say the darkest hour is just before dawn…so you ain’t seen nothing yet.

Understand good citizen it is precisely this practice (of contaminating groundwater) that is projected to put the US back on top of the energy exporting world…because we won’t be using it here! (Or at least that’s the plan.)

Which is the ‘sidebar’ to the bizarre predictions of the worlds first country to tap out its energy reserves will suddenly ‘resume’ its role as the world’s biggest energy exporter.

What does that tell you about the rest of the world?

It should be teaching you a boatload about the ‘funniness of money’. You won’t have enough to of it to buy energy but others will (cuz they is keepin’ massa’s factories running!)

Does ANYBODY see the ‘end game’ here?

How about a little taste of today’s business headlines?
Wednesday, January 16, 2013 Last Update: 10:30 AM ET

Deepening Crisis for the Dreamliner
By HIROKO TABUCHI and BETTINA WASSENER 6:41 AM ET

The two largest Japanese airlines said they would ground their Boeing 787 aircraft after a string of problems was capped by an emergency landing in western Japan.

Yet more proof of the stunning failure caused by globalization mixed with a generous portion of unbridled greed!

And speaking of unbridled greed:
DealBook
JPMorgan Cuts Dimon’s Pay, Even as Profit Surges
By JESSICA SILVER-GREENBERG 37 minutes ago

JPMorgan Chase touted a strong quarter, but still chose to sharply cut the pay of the chief executive, Jamie Dimon, in light of a multibillion-dollar trading loss last year.

DealBook: JPMorgan Report on Trading Loss Takes Aim at Top Executives 50 minutes ago
Funny how we start off with corruption in government and it leads us straight to the now defunct engine of the US economy:
DealBook
Goldman Sachs Earnings Soar
By SUSANNE CRAIG 49 minutes ago

Goldman Sachs reported a fourth-quarter profit of $2.89 billion, or $5.60 a share, beating analysts’ estimates.

DealBook: Goldman Profit Blows Through Expectations 8:56 AM ET
Stocks Pull Back Despite Bank Earnings 53 minutes ago
Does anyone else find it curious how the customerless banking sector manages to make record profits as the global economy founders helplessly?

Share prices keep rising but for no discernable reason…is it theft, fraud or both?

Which leads us to the next article:
Walmart Plans to Buy American More Often
By STEPHANIE CLIFFORD

The retailer’s 10-year commitment, totaling $50 billion, comes as it is under pressure over its overseas sourcing following a deadly fire in November in Bangladesh.
So a little ‘bad press’ and Walmart is suddenly humble and contrite are they?

Somehow I don’t think it would be that easy, just like the idiots who believe peaceful protests are the solution.

If we don’t start burning things down, nothing is going to change (and if we don’t burn most of it down what does change will be all bad!
American Airlines Reports a Profit
By JAD MOUAWAD 55 minutes ago

Lower costs helped the airline, which is operating under bankruptcy court protection, post a profit, compared with a loss a year ago.
And how did AA post a profit? They did it the ‘old fashioned way’ they wrung the savings out of their employees!

Lastly we have this story that begs the question of who thought it was a good idea to rescue these idiots in the first place (sadly, it was Hank Paulson and his successor Lloyd Blankfein!)
A.I.G. Seeks Approval to File More Bank Suits
By MARY WILLIAMS WALSH

A.I.G. must win a court fight with an entity run by the New York Fed, which the insurer says is blocking its efforts to go after banks that harmed it financially.

Only in America, good citizen could you read such a litany of woe and not think the bottom was going to fall out tomorrow due to public outrage…and believe you-me, the public is plenty outraged…they just can’t narrow it down to who…yet.

But fear not! The corporate owned media will offer up a scapegoat quicker than you can say debt ceiling! (Another grossly mis-reported story of politicians playing the public for chumps with the ‘assistance’ of the bought and paid for media.

But I have kept you beyond your time, good citizen and for that I apologize.

Try and remember when ‘Only in America’ was a good thing…(despite it being a lie then too.)

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner




Friday, October 19, 2012

HSC

Greetings good citizen,

Um, markets ‘slid’ today giving back their inexplicable gains they made earlier this week.

Funny little game these Wall Streeters’ play but it has zero relationship to the ‘real’ economy.

Which brings us back to the basic Human social contract

What’s that you ask?

It is an important understanding between people that libertarians and the like say is a fairy tale.

Anyone who advocates ‘bootstrapping’ and YOYOism likes to pretend the human social contract doesn’t exist.

Ironically, it was the violating of this allegedly non-existent contract that resulted in ‘The Terror’ of the French Revolution.

Let us take a moment to lay down some background first:
Japan is quite different from the U.S. and Europe, with a homogeneous populace and a culture rooted in Confucian values and social hierarchies. Despite the many differences, including definitions of depression, I think it is self-evident that the rising insecurity and workplace changes in Japan result from long-term economic stagnation.

I suspect "new-type depression" may have some universal aspects, as rising insecurity and new demands in the workplace characterize Western economies as well.

New-type depression--NTD--(also called modern-type) is not a classic depression. It does not respond to anti-depressant medications, and it is triggered by events in the workplace--usually criticism from superiors. Those who exhibit the symptoms--difficulty focusing at work, physical symptoms of stress, etc.--tend to be in their 20s and 30s.

What we see here are the emerging effects of a people who tap dance on a landmine every day.

They don’t know from one day to the next if they will be able to support themselves.

Now our Libbies and their kissing cousins the Conservo-loonies, bootstrappers one and all, are calling the appearance of this malaise ‘a weakness’ in the individuals displaying the symptoms.

This would be incorrect. The reaction is caused by the violation of the human social contract, the REASON WHY we DON’T KILL ONE ANOTHER ON SIGHT!

Just stop for a second and let that sink in.

Why DON’T WE kill one another on sight? We are the ‘alpha predator’, it’s only natural that we ‘ought to’ eliminate competitors from our turf.

But wait, something’s wrong here. We are only top dog when we act ‘in concert’. All alone we are easily killed by goddamn viruses!

Hell, if it got the jump on you, a dog could kick your ass and kill you. In fact, on your own, there is a long list of wildlife that has the upper hand in a one on one encounter.

So we don’t dare to kill one another on sight. We only prevail in, er, ‘packs’.

But why do incidents like the terror occur?

Well, under those circumstances one ‘pack’ of humans oversteps it’s bounds and neglects its responsibility to the other…’packs’, if you will.

They take all of the ‘good stuff’ for themselves, leaving next to nothing for anyone else.

Now, the ‘unwritten contract’ states that we suffer or prosper TOGETHER.

But the greedheads don’t like that idea. They subscribe to the ‘I was here first’ principle.

If there is any suffering to be done it will fall upon those who didn’t grab what they could, when they could.

But that’s not the deal!

The deal is share and share alike!

So you can see how these little ‘impasses’ end up in the streets running in blood.

Because the people, looking for their share, now have to go out and take it from those who took it unjustly.

And yeah, it’s still ‘crowd vs. crowd.’

And my how that crowd has grown under the false prosperity sown to hide the theft.

Worse, it’s a not a question of ‘if’ we are about to hit the wall but ‘when’?

Again there will be cries of shock, ‘why is this happening’ when we saw it begin all of those years ago…and stood motionless as they whispered ‘it’s different this time’.

It’s NEVER different…and it’s not different this time.

What has to happen, since they pretty much walked away unscathed the last time, is they have to be, er, ‘taught’ not to violate the contract all over again.

Like they were taught in 1789…and why we are here again so soon after 1929 because we DIDN’T ‘make them pay’ then.

We won’t enjoy that luxury this time. Although that’s what they’re counting on, that we’re ‘too civilized’ to punish them…the way that they punish tin pot dictators who object to their ‘machinations’.

We are rapidly approaching a time when we can no longer tolerate the few to prey upon the rest of us.

Those who fail to appreciate the benefits of the human social contract will have those benefits (forcibly) withdrawn from them.

Like it or not, we are all in this together.

Thus do we need to decide, together, what we should do next.

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner


Tuesday, January 5, 2010

Get the Hell out of Dodge!

Greetings good citizen,

After yesterday’s, er, ‘stellar’ performance, today’s markets couldn’t get out of their own way…which isn’t particularly surprising.

You see, I’m not the only one who has serious misgivings about the, er, ‘soundness’ of today’s financial markets. As I have stated before, only a fool would risk their own money in today’s extremely, er, ‘gamed/rigged’ markets.

Worse good citizen…what we’re seeing…what’s being ‘passed off’ as market activity is actually nothing more than the ‘remote control’ machinations of the big trading desks, playing with public funds.

Why isn’t anyone raising a stink? Well, technically, this isn’t illegal.

Um, once again this is another ‘unsettling’ instance of Ilargi and I ‘channeling’ one another…

[Hattip: The Automatic Earth]

January 4 2010: Get the hell out of Dodge

Ilargi: Right, Americans and their economy. Well, it's an ideal situation, isn’t it? Every marketeer’s wet dream. That is, through appealing to people's need and desire for hope and good tidings, you succeed in making them believe that they will benefit from the very things that hurt them more than anything else in the world. You have them convinced that black is white. This is what the US government, media, and big industry are pulling off, and since they do it so well, nary a soul is any the wiser for it. You use their very own cash to deceive them, by boosting markets for a while, which makes them believe the future is rosy, and you can use the resulting economic lull to take as much of their wealth as you can possibly carry.

All it takes to convey the positive message and image are rising stock markets and still bad but slightly less awful unemployment and housing numbers. That’s how desperate people are for their hope. They’ll believe just about anything. They don’t even want to know that these somewhat positive numbers have been bought with their own money. That banks haven't tumbled yet simply and only because their losses have been transferred to public accounts.

And you've got to give it to the marketeers: it's not yet 100% sure that the US economy will crash, and all hope asks for is a 1% window. At least theoretically, the US can still get out from underneath its debt yoke. It would probably have to grow its economy by over 10% or so for the next three decades or so, which is, to put it mildly, not bleeding likely, but it's not 100% impossible. Play your story line the right way, hand them some words they can believe in who are so eager to believe, and the people will let you rob them blind in broad daylight. And give you an encouraging smile and pat on the back for working so hard while you're at it.

There is no better way to summarize the year we just left behind, 2009, nor the way 2010 has started. And it's brilliant.

It's of course nothing new that once inside the government, you can get to play with lots of other people's money, but still, for those that run these games and marketing campaigns it must have been a profound Aha-Erlebnis, a Eureka moment, when they realized there really wasn't any restriction that would force them to stop when the average US citizen's balance sheet read zero. That that was just the beginning, and taking control of the government effectively means you can push the average US citizens' balance sheet into breathtakingly deep negative territory, nobody has even pointed out a limit yet, so deep that you can plunge Americans into far greater debt than they will ever be able to pay off in their entire lives, just by assuming control of the government. America as a bottomless pit. As long as they don't notice it, or don’t recognize it for what it is, and as long as you tell them it’s for their own good, you can keep at it for quite a while. Need a higher debt ceiling? Congress will never vote you down, because the show must go on. And if you can't be bothered with Congress, there's always Christmas Eve.

And whether it’s the fact that about one in 50 Americans now lives in a household with a reported income that consists of nothing but a food-stamp card (on top of the many millions who get only a $200-$300 monthly unemployment benefit), or whether it's the Christmas Eve move to free Fannie and Freddie from all monetary constraints, or the recent measures to prevent an apparently expected and feared run on money market funds from materializing, all of it fits one and the same playbook. If you choose to not understand that, and instead focus on another fleeting high on Wall Street, I would by now be mighty tempted to say that you are welcome to what you got coming.

You can sell a president through an effective marketing campaign. You can also sell his policies the same way. Neither the man nor the measures need truthfully be anything like the image you paint of them, no more than a car or a detergent need anything but a feel-good recognition factor. Both the person and the acts only need to resemble as much as possible what people would like them to be. The best liar wins. The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing…if you can fake that, you've got it made, said Groucho. That’s not some sort of accident, it's what the country was built on.

And they only need to do it for as long as it takes to move all gambling debt magically off the books of the players and onto the national public balance sheet. Then when the loot has been loaded into the get-away planes, trains and automobiles, they will get the hell out of Dodge and slip away like so many thieves in the night as literally as they can. Après ça, le deluge.


Hopefully it is clear how Ilargi ‘echoes’ the sentiments I voiced in last night’s piece. We, the public, are being systematically ‘ripped off’ because the safeguards against such an unlikely event have been defeated.

Uh, here we enter the world of speculation…because we are left to wrestle with the idea of what can be gained by robbing a bankrupt nation?

Then we have the other side of the same blade…that which was stolen can easily be ‘de-monetized’, negating the loss. This move will definitely, er, ‘rile up’ our creditors but if the choice is ‘half a loaf vs. nothing’ they should be willing to be reasonable.

So, in order for the ‘rip-off’ to be successful (even temporarily) SOMEONE has to stay behind to insure that what has been stolen remains ‘money good’ until it can be converted into an asset that can’t be (easily) ‘de-monetized’.

At the end of the day it’s all about ‘the greater fool’ and it will ultimately hinge upon ‘retribution’.

Will ‘society’ pay the price or will the perps get punished? Interestingly enough, the answer is likely a mixed bag. The ‘disruption’ of the financial network will inflict huge losses upon the fabric of society, which in turn will punish those responsible through the law of unintended consequences.

Which is to say the foolish perps will lose far more than they gain…but so will everyone else.

Share the pain…it’s not nearly as ‘amusing’ as it seems…

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner

Monday, December 7, 2009

Forked tongues

Greetings good citizen,

I hope everyone had a lovely weekend, we experienced the first snowfall of the season (just a dusting) here North of Boston and it snowed a little more earlier this evening. I guess that’s the ugly reality of winter, once it starts snowing it doesn’t stop and if it rains on top of the snow it only makes things worse.

While many fret over ‘global warming’ we only had one ‘heat wave’ in Boston this summer and I was, er, restricted to my (hospital) bed (freezing my ass off) for the entire time. Add that to a spring that was so wet most crops rotted in the fields due to lack of sunshine and you’ve captured the general mood of the nation good citizen.

Things are grim and getting grimmer…except for the damn ‘Stupidity Index’ and I suspect that is frightening more people than it’s providing ‘cover’ for.

Anyway, tonight’s offering is yet another example of a corporate owned media spewing ‘happy talk’ that has zero basis in fact.


U.S. Forecasts Smaller Loss From Bailout of Banks

By JACKIE CALMES
Published: December 6, 2009

WASHINGTON — The Treasury Department expects to recover all but $42 billion of the $370 billion it has lent to ailing companies since the financial crisis began last year, with the portion lent to banks actually showing a slight profit, according to a new Treasury report. [What $370 billion was this? The Tarp was $700 billion and the ‘total’ tally of funds either lent or guaranteed by the ‘Treasury/Taxpayer’ is roughly $24 Trillion, so what’s this psycho-babble about only losing $42 billion? This thing is only just getting started so it’s a little early to be estimating losses…]

[The caption beneath an accompanying photo of GW Bush said:]

The bank bailout has been unpopular since it was created in October 2008 by former President George W. Bush and (the, by that time, Democratically controlled) Congress. [WTF! Clarification: Gegner is neither a Republican nor a Democrat, Gegner is an Anarchist who believes in ‘rules without rulers!’ The elimination of the individual from the decision making process IS tyranny!]

Treasury officials said the government had lost roughly $30 billion to the insurance giant American International Group. The new assessment of the $700 billion bailout program, provided by two Treasury officials on Sunday ahead of a report to Congress on Monday, is vastly improved from the Obama administration’s estimates last summer of $341 billion in potential losses from the Troubled Asset Relief Program. That figure anticipated more financial troubles requiring intervention. [Um, wait a minute Slim, Obama didn’t take office until January of this year…yes Summer is over but it looks like they are talking about the year before the administration came to power…which would be pretty freaky.]

The [unidentified] officials said the government could ultimately lose $100 billion more from the bailout program in new loans to banks, aid to troubled homeowners and credit to small businesses. [Which is really bad news considering ‘the government’ when framed this way, means you and me…not Biff & Buffy Fatcat.]

Still, the new estimates would lower the administration’s deficit forecast for this fiscal year, which began in October, to about $1.3 trillion, from $1.5 trillion. [The ‘qualifier’ here is ‘optimistically speaking’…a lot of things have to go exceedingly well to achieve that $200 billion dollar savings…and it looks a lot tougher to hit when phrased that way, doesn’t it?]

The report could tamp down some of the public anger directed against both parties over the bailouts. [More unwarranted optimism] Congressional leaders are already planning to use some of the program’s money for economic stimulus and job creation. [Although not one of them has a clue how to go about it.]

Of course, the government’s potential losses extend beyond the Treasury program. The Federal Reserve, for example, still holds a trillion-dollar portfolio of mortgage-backed securities whose market value is unknown.

The improved picture of the Treasury program is the result of higher-than-expected returns on the loans and the fact that, as the financial sector has recovered from its free fall last year, the government has not had to use much more of its $700 billion in lending authority this year, according to the Treasury officials, who declined to be identified as discussing the report before it was presented to Congress. [I don’t know about you but the whole damn thing looks like a ‘strategic leak’ (read ‘intentional misdirection’) to me.]

Last week, Bank of America became the latest big bank to say that it was raising private capital and would soon repay its $45 billion bailout loan. Once that payment is made, Citigroup will be the last big bank tethered to the state. [Um, notice how there is zero mention of the ‘shellac’ing’ the taxpayer took on these so-call ‘preferred stocks’ the got in exchange for ‘interest free’ loans from John & Jane Q Public…]

The estimated $42 billion in losses is a net figure that accounts for some profits to offset the losses. The Treasury officials said the government had lost about $60 billion, roughly half to Chrysler and General Motors and the other half to the insurance giant American International Group. [Some of you will remember how AIG was going to sell itself to a private equity firm for $40 billion…right before the government (Hank Paulson) stepped in with $80 Billion from you and me…and now they’re into us for what…$120 billion? Probably more…]

But the government is projecting a $19 billion profit and perhaps more on the $245 billion lent to banks, through interest, dividends and the sale of warrants the government received as collateral. [Wait a minute Slim…here they go again, we, the taxpayers, are on the hook for $24 Trillion dollars…so a $19 billion ‘profit’ is actually ‘chickenfeed’ and more like chicken shit.]

Aside from the rare good news for the federal deficit, the latest bailout accounting could have political and legislative ramifications.

Politically, the Treasury program has been unpopular ever since it was created in October 2008 by former President George W. Bush and a Congress controlled by Democrats. It has grown only more reviled over time as a symbol for many Americans of the government’s perceived favoritism toward Wall Street, which is making money, over Main Street, which continues to struggle and shed jobs. [Only ‘perceived’ good citizen? You don’t suppose Mr. Calmes’ job is hanging in the balance here, do you?]

An anti-Washington anger is disturbing both parties as they approach a midterm election year, and some Republican lawmakers have drawn primary opponents largely because of their votes last year in favor of the bailout program. [Wouldn’t possibly have anything to do with their persistent obstructionism and their complete failure to act in the public’s interest, would it?]

It was unclear how that climate might be altered as taxpayers realize they did not actually lose $700 billion to help big banks. At most, the Treasury officials said, the ultimate losses will be one-fifth of that amount and probably less. [This is ‘moving the goal posts’ big time! The public got screwed on both sides of the bailout and now they’re back to using ‘creative accounting’ in a feeble attempt to turn a pig’s ear into a silk purse! Again, good citizen, I remind you that this is nowhere near being over…if anything, it’s only getting started!]

Democrats in Congress have already decided to divert about $70 billion from what is left in the bailout fund to the cost of additional road-building and other construction projects, credit to small businesses and further aid to state and local governments. [A much larger problem than this exercise in wishful thinking acknowledges…]

The administration had wanted to dedicate unspent bailout money to the deficit but signaled to Congressional leaders late last week that it would not oppose their plans. President Obama is expected to touch on those ideas and others in an economic speech on Tuesday. [Just one more ‘dangerous’ (and reckless) ‘about face’ for the Obama Administration.]

The bailout program is due to expire at the end of the year, but the Treasury has indicated it will use the authority it was granted by Congress to extend it into 2010. [Um, is anyone else wondering why we bother to elect a ‘president’?]

The Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, testified last week to a Senate committee that “nothing would make me happier than to end this as quickly as possible,” but he added, “we’re not quite there yet.” [What Timmy is really waiting for is the day he steps out of the limelight and into the Shadows known as Goldman Sachs, never to be heard from again.]

Mr. Geithner, who has become the administration’s lightning rod for anger among both liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, said “there are parts of the system that are still very damaged” — in banking, housing, commercial real estate and credit-starved small businesses. [So why aren’t you and Ben doing anything to help these crucial sectors of the economy? Is it because the only place where the US remains ‘competitive’ is in ‘financial products’…even if they do blow up?]

He said the administration would propose within weeks when and how to end the program safely. [You know and I know that HE KNOWS this isn’t over, they aren’t ‘ending’ anything, they’ve simply run out the clock, the crap is about to hit the rotational device and the only thing left to do is stand clear!]

At that hearing, he hinted at the Treasury’s improved forecast for the program, saying “we’re going to be able to return very, very substantial amounts of money to address the critical economic needs, long-term fiscal needs, of this country.” [What is this retard babbling about? Isn’t he supposed to say ‘Hocus Pocus’ either before or after making these wildass claims?]

That prediction contrasts with the administration’s planning soon after Mr. Obama took office in January. Fearing that additional bank failures could exhaust the entire $700 billion fund, they proposed up to $500 billion more in federal lending authority in the administration’s first budget in February.

Instead, just $7 billion more in bailout money has gone out to banks since Mr. Obama became president, making a second loan authorization unnecessary. Meanwhile, banks have raised 16 times as much, $114 billion, in private capital, according to the Treasury. {Um, again, I didn’t see no ‘hocus pocus’…nor should there be as there was no magic involved…the gun and the mask have even become optional in case you’re wondering where that $114 billion came from.]

Since the Treasury subjected big banks to “stress tests” last winter to determine how much private capital they must raise to withstand future financial shocks, the financial institutions have been eager to do so, in order to repay the government and thereby exit the Treasury’s rescue program — not least to escape the restrictions on executive compensation that come with it.

Mr. Geithner now says that banks will repay $175 billion by the end of next year. To date, counting Bank of America’s promised payment, banks have repaid $116 billion, according to the Treasury. Also, in coming weeks the Treasury will sell more of the government’s bank warrants to investors.



At last look the Dow was up but the S&P and the Nasdaq were down…and that was a couple of hours before the close. All three European exchanges closed in negative territory…I could go look but it wouldn’t matter. Market performance tells as much as the ‘happy talk’ in this article does, would that it were!

Perhaps more disturbing is the growing reliance on ‘happy talk’ and ‘positive thinking’ while both fly in the face of actual conditions.

In fact, if you want to see some grim realities you can visit this link over at Financial Armageddon or this story over at Jesse’s Crossroads Café.

Me…this crisis is still very ‘fixable’ but the first step towards putting our species back on the right track is to wrest control of our nations from the self-interested bootlickers who have sold us out for their own enrichment…a la ‘Adam Smith’.

Personal greed seldom ends well for anyone, especially the society that fails to stop it.

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

American Excess

Greetings good citizen,

Once again we are seeing the markets respond to some pretty ‘nebulous’ data. Apparently ‘consumer sentiment is ‘up’ (although many of the sources for this are saying it isn’t up much) as conditions are still deteriorating…although the ‘alleged’ upsurge in sentiment is attributed to the ‘bottom’ being in sight.

Perhaps consumers think the new Keppler telescope will find us a new trading partner.

I, naturally, have a different theory. If we posit that the stock markets indicate how the investor class is faring (as the wealth of our society is tied up in stocks, bonds and their ‘derivatives’) the subsequent ‘happy talk’ serves as justification of wealth that doesn’t (never has and never will) exist.

Am I calling ‘Emperor’s new clothes here’? You bet I am.

Try to wrap your head around a quadrillion of anything…even if you use beach sand, you’d be staring at a mountain (the technical definition of a mountain is a hill over a thousand feet in elevation.)

Now turn that sand into dollar bills and you begin to get a grasp of the scope of the problem.

Somebody is ‘exaggerating’ big time! (Value is ‘relative’) and so we arrive at "tonight’s offering>

The reader should be forewarned that what follows is both ‘autobiographical’ AND a pitch for a newly released book. [Hat tip:Some Assembly Required>]

American excess: A Wall Street trader tells all

Fine wines, lobster lunches and million-dollar salaries – life as a Wall Street shark was thrilling at first. But amid the extravagance, Philipp Meyer was sickened by a moral deficit at the heart of America’s financial system

I’d been working for the bank for about five weeks when I woke up on the balcony of a ski resort in the Swiss Alps. It was midnight and I was drunk. One of my fellow management trainees was urinating onto the skylight of the lobby below us; another was hurling wine glasses into the courtyard.

Behind us, someone had stolen the hotel’s shoe-polishing machine and carried it into the room; there were a line of drunken bankers waiting to use it. Half of them were dripping wet, having gone swimming in all their clothes and been too drunk to remember to take them off. It took several more weeks of this before the bank considered us properly trained.

I didn’t fit the typical profile of a trader. I was an English major working on a novel at night. Most everyone else was a math or economics major, most everyone else had relatives or family in banking. I’d spent a year walking around studying flashcards with math problems, multiplying random license-plate numbers in my head, just to prepare for the interviews. I memorized The Wall Street Journal every morning. I didn’t care what I had to do. At Cornell University it was well known that after five years on Wall Street, you could expect to be making half a million a year in salary and bonus; after 10 years you could expect a million or more. I had 60 grand of university debt and my parents had no retirement. I needed that money.

UBS apparently thought pretty highly of me, because despite my lack of a financial background, they put me onto the derivatives trading desk. This was a coveted spot - the derivatives traders were viewed as the elite - the baddest of the bad-asses. Derivatives are financial contracts, the value of which is based on (derives from) something else, say the price of a stock or the price of a bushel of wheat. They were originally created to provide stability and allocate capital to industry, farmers, and the like, and, for a long time, derivatives allowed businesses to eliminate certain financial risks, say in currency, which provided stability to the business, its management, and its workers. If you were a factory worker back in the day, you benefited from your employer’s use of derivatives to smooth out their cash flows during the year, hedge against the risk of selling goods abroad. For about a hundred years, derivatives were a sort of lubricant in the world financial machine.

By the time I arrived on Wall Street in 1999, the link between derivatives and the real world had broken down. Instead of being used to reduce risk, 95 per cent of their use was speculation - a polite term for gambling. And leveraging - which means taking a large amount of risk for a small amount of money. So while derivatives, and the financial industry more broadly, had started out serving industry, by the late 1990s the situation had reversed. The Market had become a near-religious force in our culture; industry, society, and politicians all bowed down to it. [The word society has many different ‘interpretations’, methinks society here means the ‘monied classes’ rather than the public at large.]

It was pretty clear what The Market didn’t like. It didn’t like being closely watched. It didn’t like rules that governed its behaviour. It didn’t like goods produced in First-World countries or workers who made high wages, with the notable exception of financial sector employees. This last point bothered me especially.

I’d grown up in a working class neighborhood in Baltimore, a place hard hit by the off-shoring of numerous heavy industries - steel, textile, shipbuilding. My parents weren’t mill workers - they were recovering hippies - but we were always struggling for money and so my brother and I lived a sort of split existence. Inside the house, I read constantly and my brother listened to classical music. Outside the house, like all the other kids in the neighbourhood, we got into fights and caused trouble. At 16 I dropped out of school and spent five years working as a bicycle mechanic and volunteering in a Trauma Centre before ultimately deciding to go to university. I earned high marks at various local colleges and eventually, after three tries at applying to the Ivy League, I got into Cornell.

My first job out of Cornell was on the trading floor at UBS. So when news would hit the wire about an American company closing a domestic factory, I felt a good deal of conflict as I watched the company’s stock price go up as a result. Those sorts of factory closings had ruined my neighbourhood, my city, and many of the people I’d grown up with. I was not alone in this feeling, but there were not many of us, either. One of my British friends from the training programme, who later became a currency trader, once told me: “I mean Christ, mate, every time they close a factory in Wales the goddamn market goes up. The whole system’s a little fucked, don’t you think?” And of course it was. The question was how to deal with it.

The easiest thing was buy into the system, [we] convinced ourselves that there was no other way to live. A few semesters worth of economics classes certainly helped; the in-house economics classes taught by the bank helped even more. The financial markets operate on the principle that, at our core, we’re all basically shit: selfish, self-interested creatures. There’s a whole branch of economics devoted to proving that if you help someone, say, run in front of a speeding train to push another person out of the way, you are actually acting out of self-interest, not altruism; that what most of us would consider humankind’s cardinal virtues - love, honor, compassion - do not actually exist.

The idea that we’re nothing more than selfish animals is an attractive philosophy to a person pulling down a few million dollars a year. It is a philosophy that negates guilt. The guilty feeling a normal person gets while visiting a Third World country is the same feeling a senior investment banker gets when they see a working class neighborhood in Birmingham or Philadelphia.When your paycheck could cover the salaries of a few hundred nurses or teachers, you need some explanation for why that’s okay. The only one that really works is that life is a pure meritocracy. That whether rich or poor, we’re all getting what we deserve. [No irony should be lost on the fact that it is this ‘mindset’ that separates the men from the beasts, ‘the beasts’ are compelled to ‘justify’ their existence.]

The fact is, I became pretty good at making this argument myself. Until a roommate of mine, a guy named Mark Brewin, asked me: “So is that really what you want to be? A selfish animal?” “It’s not like we have a choice,” I said. “No,” he said. “You always have a choice. It’s just easier to pretend that you don’t.” Ouch. The strangest thing was, this thing I’d wanted for so long, this chance to become wealthy, was causing me more internal conflict than anything I’d ever done. I began writing a second novel, about a kid from the provinces who comes to Wall Street and is both drawn in and horrified by the culture of excess.

I understood it well. I put on 45 pounds in my first year at the bank, and, as you might guess, it was not from eating McDonalds. Occasionally I ate stuff like sushi, but mostly it was steak. We went to the good places like Sparks, Peter Luger’s, and the Strip House. We tended to look down on chains like Morton’s and Ruth’s Chris-they were for car dealers or stock brokers, not traders. Regardless of where we ate, we ate in quantity. My standard strategy was to order half a dozen appetisers, plus a steak and lobster, plus a few desserts and much wine as I could drink, as long it was under a few hundred dollars a bottle. Followed by a digestif, typically a 30-year-old port. There’s not any way to justify this except to say I was trying to catch up to my colleagues. We would treat those restaurants like Roman vomitoriums. And it wasn’t the food so much as the wine. Being a junior employee, I couldn’t really order bottles that cost more than a few hundred dollars, but the senior guys could get nicer stuff - Opus One, Chateau Latour. As long as we were out with a client, the bank paid. I remember being stunned the first time I saw a dinner bill for ten grand. But that was just the beginning.

What it boiled down to was austerity for everyone else and rampant consumption for ourselves. I never saw anyone literally set fire to money, but I did drink most of a bottle of 1983 Margaux ($2,000). [I’m no ‘wine expert’ but is any bottle of ‘fermented grape juice’ really worth $2,000? Not to me it’s not! This is conceit; it is conspicuous consumption at it’s worst!]

The mornings after, with our thousand-dollar hangovers, my colleagues in corporate finance would set up deals and make a few hundred factory workers redundant. I helped build derivatives that funneled income to offshore holding companies so rich people and big corporations didn’t have to pay taxes. We had lawyers on retainer in the Cayman Islands and Jersey – a quick phone call and it was all set, no more taxes. My guilt from doing this became so intense that on a whim I once went to a protest against the World Bank. I got sprayed with a little pepper gas and it felt good.

***

My conflicted feelings manifested themselves in a variety of other ways, most of which involved avoiding work - this seemed to make me less culpable. In addition to my trading duties, I’d got myself installed as head of recruiting for UBS at Cornell, a job my bosses were grateful to me for taking, because the last thing they wanted to do was worry about talking to kids at university. I loved it; it allowed me to return to the Cornell campus, the last place I’d really been happy with my life. I walked around Ithaca, worked on my novel in the library, interviewed undergraduates for jobs. Occasionally I’d spot one like me, liberal-arts with a type-A personality, the sort I knew would make it in banking. I’d give them interviews in which I tried to talk them into doing something else. But of course all they could see was the money, same as me.

Gradually, I was descending into the strange social isolation of my colleagues. I spent less and less time with normal people and more time with people from the bank. I could feel myself slowly detaching from reality as lived by the average citizen. Four nights a week I stayed home and wrote my novel but the other nights I went out with a vengance.

One evening, a close friend from the bank, an art history major from Princeton, took a bunch of recruits out with me. I did my normal trick of ordering nearly everything on the menu. There were piles of raw fish, shrimp, paté, sauces that had taken hours to prepare. It was far more food than anyone could eat and I could see some of the recruits were a little stunned at the quantities of uneaten shrimp and oysters being shovelled into the bin. I ate a big steak, put down a few bottles of red wine at $400-a-bottle and we hopped into a minibus we’d chartered for the night (gauche, but we couldn’t find a large enough limo). We stopped somewhere and bought a mixed case of Veuve Clicquot and Moet. Try the difference between these two, I demanded, but by then the recruits were all so drunk they barely touched it. I could tell they were getting a little scared. This stuff is bottom of the line, I told them. You ought to try the vintages. I downed at least two of the bottles in rapid succession. Some of the recruits would not look at me. They did not want to be there anymore. We stopped at a bar. I realised I was going to be sick, made sure my colleague had things under control, caught a cab, and promptly began vomiting out the window. Because of the quantity of wine and red meat I’d consumed, it looked like I was spitting up blood. The cab driver pulled over, certain I was about to die in his backseat. A finely dressed couple opened the door and I clambered out and vomited on their shoes. I don’t remember how I got home. The next morning I discovered a dozen cigars stuffed in my pockets, probably from the restaurant. I told my colleagues what had happened, looking for some moral bearing, secretly hoping to be chastised, but they all thought I was a hero. The vomiting on strangers was their favourite part. My boss, for fun, would sometimes throw cocktail olives, sushi, things of that nature, across the room in restaurants, always at people we didn’t know.

***

In addition to the physical effects - my ballooning waistline and cholesterol levels - I had become an extremely angry person. On the trading floor the best way to win an argument was with overpowering aggression. Right or wrong, you protected your PnL [profit and loss account] with the fury of the righteous. But of course this approach to problem-solving leaks into other parts of your life. I became a raving idiot when I got behind the wheel of the car, screaming at other drivers for the slightest infractions.

Meanwhile, I kept plugging away at the writing. Once every few months, when I really felt like treating myself, I’d take a sick day and stay home and write. Those were my best days. I was making good progress on the novel about the young trader with the lost soul. The bank had me on a management track, which meant I was being rotated in different areas, learning different skills. After a year of derivative structuring I was sent to the NASDAQ trading desk. I quickly discovered that NASDAQ traders worked much shorter days, 8 hours as opposed to 12, and I suddenly had an enormous amount of time to write. It was one of the luckiest things that ever happened to me, because writing was one of the few things that kept my life in perspective.

Near the end of my second year at the bank, I decided to take a week of vacation and rebuild the engine in my Volkswagen. Naturally, I didn’t tell my colleagues what I was doing because they would have thought I was insane. I drove down to Baltimore to a friend’s repair shop and spent the week working in a spare bay. It was satisfying to use my hands again, to be around people who didn’t talk about the stock market and I began to feel very acutely exactly how much I hated my job. Everyone hates their job, I reminded myself. You’re getting paid a lot of money to complain. Looking around at my friends in the shop, it occurred to me that by the time I became a senior trader, I’d be making more money every year than they would make in their entire careers. And for what? Basically, for helping to break apart the lives of the sort of people I’d grown up with.

Which brings me to my earlier point. One of the reasons we allowed the financial industry so much control over our lives, starting in the 1990s and continuing until the meltdown of 2008, is the propaganda smokescreen of The Market. This idea of the God-like Market - all-seeing, all-knowing, and beyond question - is what allows CEOs to put a few thousand people out of work while giving themselves a $40m paycheck. It’s what allows certain hedge fund managers to take home half a billion (yes - billion) in a good year, while schools and bridges fall apart.

In reality, The Market is nothing more than the people who comprise it. Access to trading markets is very tightly controlled - it is not like a shopping mall. And it is certainly not magic. It’s just people. A very small number of people, in fact.

To give some perspective, even as a junior trader I might get an order to put on a two million share position - that’s shares, not dollars - and I’d do it several times a day. Advertisements for online trading companies try to imply that the market is made up of people like your Cousin Vinny, who buys a hundred shares here and there, but the truth is that Cousin Vinny is irrelevant.

Markets are driven by a very small number of very large investors - traders at banks, hedge funds, and mutual funds - who drive nice cars and drink expensive wine. We need them - the financial markets, that is. They are a necessary part of modern civilization. What is unnecessary, and extremely unusual, is that the people who run them are paid so disproportionately to the rest of us. [A topic I’ll tackle a the end of this, er, ‘tell all’]

It is crucial to realise that what motivates those people - collecting their million or hundred million dollar bonuses - has nothing to do with the job they actually perform. People used to do it for a lot less and it’s not like there’s a shortage of candidates - I turned away 10 good recruits at Cornell for every one we hired.

The reason we’ve ended up in the spot we’re in today is not so much our failure to understand economics as our failure to understand human nature.

Give a small number of people the power to enrich themselves beyond everyone’s wildest dreams, a philosophical rationale to explain all the damage they’re causing, and they will not stop until they’ve run the world economy off a cliff.

It’s not that people in the City or on Wall Street are necessarily bad people, it’s just that they, like almost anyone, will do anything to keep their million or ten million dollar paycheck. They’ll creatively interpret data, they’ll understate risks, they’ll put the best spin on things. Some will lie, cheat, and steal. But most of them, like most of us, will simply resist looking at the world from any perspective other than their own. And if we are intelligent, we will keep a careful watch on them - both now and into the distant future.

Like any big decision, my choice to leave the bank felt pretty easy once I’d made it. My girlfriend at the time was considering going to law school at Harvard; I asked my boss and some other senior people to ask around for hedge fund jobs in Boston. But the moment I began to consider leaving UBS, it was like a dam breaking. I did not want another job in finance. I did not care about money. I cared about people, I cared about their stories. I cared about what makes us who we are.

I left the bank in late 2001, with my second novel partially written. By 2004, things were not exactly going to plan. I was broke and the second novel had been rejected by every literary agent in America. The book I’d spent three years toiling over turned out to be an apprentice-level work. It was a hard blow but I kept writing. I moved back to the old neighborhood in Baltimore and took jobs that allowed me to reconnect with the people I’d grown up with - working in construction and driving an ambulance.

In 2005 I began a third novel, American Rust, about the way that our circumstances, whether poor or wealthy, can so completely shape our morality and our way of looking at things. I was fascinated by the lost generation in America - the people whose towns and hopes have been wiped out by outsourcing - people for whom the American Dream has ceased to be relevant. As Steinbeck did in The Grapes of Wrath, I wanted to show the inner lives, for better and worse, of the new lost generation. I wanted readers to think about exactly what it means to be human. What is at the core of us? Where do our morals come from? What differentiates us from the other animals on earth? What measures do we use to define our friends and family and how far are we willing to go to protect them?

Of course these are questions for broader society, not just literature. Maybe it’s only in crises like this that we get shaken up enough to ask ourselves those larger questions - who are we, what is important to us, how should we define our humanity. The answers we choose will determine the sort of world we live in for the coming decades.


Since our little saga begins in 1999 and it’s 2009, the ‘protagonist’ is today in his early thirties. This isn’t so much the exception as the rule, it seems you don’t need a finely tuned moral compass to handle multi million dollar transactions.

I suspect for the same reason the military prefers to recruit them straight out of High School, their ‘moral compass’ (their ability to think for themselves) isn’t yet fully developed.

I’m also going to posit that our protagonist’s story isn’t unique, it doesn’t look like the kind of job you grow old in. Once you’ve grow a pair I suspect most young bankers realize the kids coming up behind them are eating their lunch and it’s time to take what you’ve squirreled away and establish your next career.

This is what is so striking about this piece…they hire kids with virtually no clue what they’re doing. Why? Because they will do what they’re told without asking questions!

Worse, they are ‘impressionable’ enough to be molded with a sense of entitlement. A certain degree of ‘superiority’ that is reinforced with these extravagant displays of unbridled debauchery.

Let us examine the central theme put forth in this, um, work…why are bankers, lawyers and accountants…institutional investors, paid like princes?

The logic is that all of these people ‘handle’ your money…if they aren’t well compensated they might be tempted to ‘help themselves’.

Then there is ‘the power of information’ to consider. A well connected trader knows what’s going on and that knowledge is worth a fortune, not just to the bank but to the banks ‘prime customers’.

Does anyone else find it odd that nobody has gone to jail for ‘insider trading’ since Martha Stewart? Apparently the NSA is too busy spying on you to be paying attention to the phone traffic in and out of Wall Street everyday.

Then there is the real story behind why CDO’s were created…it’s real simple if you consider who ended up with most of them…the institutional investors that manage retirement fund portfolios. (This is why trash was given an AAA rating.)

Sadly lawyers and bankers regularly engineer deals that throw thousands of workers out the door while generating millions of dollars in profits for themselves and their ‘employers’.

The accountants identify the targets, the lawyers negotiate the deals, the traders draw up the IPO and the bankers provide the financing…and everybody gets a tidy cut of the action.

Between robbing working people of their retirement funds and hollowing out the nation’s economic backbone, the bankers, lawyers and accountants ‘earn’ their heavenly paychecks.

Let’s not ignore how Wall Street coerces publicly traded companies to ‘restructure’ by putting a sell rating on their stocks if they don’t go along.

So we return to the issue of ‘artificial value’. A sharp drop in your company’s share price can put you out of business virtually overnight (while nothing ‘fundamental has changed. Look at Bear Sterns and Lehman.)

I could go on all night about how crooked our financial system is but I’ll spare you what you likely already know.

One issue that cropped up in the back of my mind was how most readers will tend to think that young Mr. Meyers has, um, ‘embellished’ his account of corporate profligacy.

For what it’s worth, I have witnessed (not partaken mind you, but seen) precisely this sort of behavior taking place.

He’s not exaggerating.

This is likely what John Edwards meant by ‘two Americas.’ One for the uber-rich and the one where the rest of us live in comparative squalor!

Thanks for letting me inside your head,

Gegner