“I have to think this train is probably going to leave the station soon and we need to focus our efforts on explaining the story as best we can. There were too many people involved in the deals — too many counterparties, too many lawyers and advisors, too many people from AIG — to keep a determined Congress from the information.” James P. Bergin, NY Fed, in an email to his Fed colleagues


‘Though it is hard to divine much understanding from the unredacted filing, it has become clear that Goldman had more involvement than previously believed: In addition to the credit default swaps it bought from AIG, the filing shows that Goldman Sachs also originated many of the underlying assets that AIG and the New York Fed bought back from Société Générale.

The American people have the right to know how their tax dollars were spent and who benefited most from this back-door bailout,” said Kurt Bardella, spokesman for Issa. “Now that it’s public, let’s see if the sky really does fall as the New York Fed said it would to justify its coverup.”

Other lawmakers believed that the New York Fed was trying to hide its ties to Goldman Sachs.’ AIG Reveals the Story – CNN


“Wednesday’s hearing described a secretive group deploying billions of dollars to favored banks, operating with little oversight by the public or elected officials.

We’re talking about the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, whose role as the most influential part of the federal-reserve system — apart from the matter of AIG’s bailout — deserves further congressional scrutiny…

By pursuing this line of inquiry, the hearing revealed some of the inner workings of the New York Fed and the outsized role it plays in banking. This insight is especially valuable given that the New York Fed is a quasi-governmental institution that isn’t subject to citizen intrusions such as freedom of information requests, unlike the Federal Reserve.

This impenetrability comes in handy since the bank is the preferred vehicle for many of the Fed’s bailout programs. It’s as though the New York Fed was a black-ops outfit for the nation’s central bank

New York Fed staff and outside lawyers from Davis Polk & Wardell edited AIG communications to investors and intervened with the Securities and Exchange Commission to shield details about the buyout transactions, according to a report by Issa.

That the New York Fed, a quasi-governmental body, was able to push around the SEC, an executive-branch agency, deserves a congressional hearing all by itself.” Secret Banking Cabal Emerges From AIG Shadows – Reilly – Bloomberg

Hat Tip to : Jesse

NY Fed Conspired to Hide Details of AIG Bailouts from Public and Congress

 

The Chinese government just did what some Americans would like to do: pull the plug on Avatar and replace it with more patriotic fare. Only in China, “patriotic” means a state-sponsored biopic of Confucius, currently under renovation as an icon of Chinese moral and cultural superiority.

I enjoyed the spectacle of Avatar but like many other Americans was annoyed by its portrayal of my 22nd-century countrymen as ruthless capitalists and mercenaries raping a pure, sylvan planet called Pandora. But of course, it was this aspect that won Avatar a spot on the list of 20 U.S. films allowed into China each year. The State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT) prefers films that show America in a negative light.

Today, rumor has it that SARFT’s selection of Avatar has backfired. Both China Daily and CCTV-International report audiences interpreting the scene where the invaders bulldoze the sacred forest of Pandora as an allegory for forced evictions carried out by ruthless developers in their own country. As one blogger wrote, “I am wondering whether [director James] Cameron lived in China before coming up with such an idea.”

Taken at face value, these reports suggest that Cameron is a hero, not only for sticking it to America but also for striking a blow for free speech in China. But the story is a bit more complicated, because at work here is a calculation by the Chinese Communist Party that is based on a mixture of propaganda and profit motives that is alien to most Americans.

On the propaganda side, Chinese New Year is approaching and millions of ordinary Chinese are about to splurge on movie tickets. So the Party has clearly decided that the best film for the masses to see is the uplifting, patriotic Confucius. At the same time, Avatar continues to play in high-priced 3-D and Imax theaters – no doubt because the Party does not want to deprive affluent elites of the chance to visit Cameron’s extraterrestrial (and anti-American) paradise.

On the profit side, the calculation is probably that Chinese films do well among the masses, so Confucius will hold its own, while Avatar continues to rake it in among the sort of audiences whose property is not being bulldozed. Avatar has grossed $75.6 million in China, breaking all previous box-office records, and some of that goes to the local distributor, China Film Group, which like all Chinese media companies is directed by the Party.

As for the reports of Chinese viewers finding subversive meaning in Avatar, most of these appeared in the outward-facing English-language organs of China’s tightly controlled news media. Here the calculation is more subtle: whenever Chinese censorship hits the global headlines, as it has been doing recently (can you Google “Google”?), the Party tries to distract the foreign press with a carefully orchestrated dust-up that gives the appearance of free speech. And for this purpose, what better topic than the inner meaning of a blockbuster film, about which no one will agree anyway?

More…


 

It may be the start of the biggest oil job in the world. Each day, 20 workers from BP and China National Petroleum Corp. (CNPC) buckle down to the task of prepping the Rumaila oil field in southern Iraq for rapid development. In industry lingo, Rumaila is a “supergiant”—a 50-mile-long deposit of sweet crude with estimated reserves of 16 billion barrels, whose output may someday rank second only to Saudi Arabia’s vast Ghawar field. The Saudis, though, have carefully managed their oil assets for decades. In contrast, Rumaila, a lightly inhabited expanse of date groves and Bedouin encampments, has not had a proper upgrade since the 1970s. The Iraqis contracted with BP and CNPC last year (BP) to juice Rumaila’s production from 1.06 million barrels a day to 2.85 million, all in seven years. No one has ever tried such a ramp-up at a field as huge as this one. Putting Rumaila back in full working order will take tens of thousands of workers, 1,000 new wells, and billions in investment.

BP is the largest partner in the venture, but only by a dipstick: It has a 38% stake, while the Chinese hold 37% (the rest is owned by an Iraqi company). The media focus has been on BP’s decision to take up the Rumaila challenge for a low fee of only $2 for every barrel the venture produces. But the more important story could be China’s role. “CNPC’s involvement brings together the country with the most rapid growth in energy demand in history with the country that plans the greatest buildup of production capacity ever,” says Alex Munton, an Iraq specialist at Edinburgh-based oil consultants Wood Mackenzie.

China has moved fast. In a little over a year, CNPC, China’s main oil producer with revenues of more than $188 billion and a 1.5 million-worker payroll, has won large stakes in three Iraqi oil fields. The total production target for those fields is around 3.5 million barrels per day—close to China’s domestic output. In two of the ventures, China is the controlling partner. Over two decades or so, CNPC may spend some $20 billion on the fields, the most of any oil company in Iraq since Saddam Hussein fell. For China’s oil industry, “Iraq is a game-changer,” says Wenrang Jiang, an authority on the country’s energy thirst who teaches at Canada’s University of Alberta.

Red Star Over Iraq Business Week (hat tip to Naked Capitalism)

 

Originally published at Robert Reich’s Blog

For almost a year now, Democratic pollsters have been pointing out how much the public hates the bank bailout and despises Wall Street. But there was no reason for Democratic leaders in Congress or the White House to pay much attention. After all, it was a Republican president and a Republican Congress that came up with the bank bailout plan to begin with. Some stalwart Republicans had grumbled about it, of course, but Republicans have always been on the side of Wall Street and big business and  weren’t likely to call for strong measures to prevent the Street from getting into trouble again.

Larry Summers and Tim Geithner scuttled Paul Volcker’s plan to separate the banks’ commercial and investment functions, and didn’t want to limit the size of banks or the risks they could take on. Summers and Geithner have wanted to get the banks back to profitability as soon as possible. And Dems in Congress have had no stomach to take on Wall Street, a major source of campaign funding.

But suddenly the winds are blowing in a different direction over the Potomac. The 2010 midterms are getting closer, and the Dems are scared. Their polls are plummeting. The upsurge in mad-as-hell populism requires that Democrats become indignant on behalf of Americans, and indignation is meaningless without a target. They can’t target big government because Republicans do that one better, especially when they’re out of power. So what’s the alternative? Wall Street.

Perhaps I’m being too cynical. Maybe the Obama and congressional Democrats are now ready to give up Wall Street trickle-down economics and focus on Main Street trickle-up. “There are two ideas of government,” said William Jennings Bryan at the Democratic National Convention in Chicago in 1896. “There are those who believe that you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.” He couldn’t have said it better.



 

Last week Iranian activist Abed Tavancheh was sentenced to one year in prison for giving an interview to SPIEGEL about student protests. His lawyer Naser Zarafshan says his client doesn’t regret speaking out.

SPIEGEL: Your client Abed Tavancheh was supposed to have been arrested last Tuesday. What do the authorities in Iran accuse him of having done?

Naser Zarafshan: Abed Tavancheh fights for freedom of expression and democracy. He had already been arrested four times and sentenced to eight months’ imprisonment. A part of the current allegations against him relate to these activities. The primary charge, though, has to do with an interview he did with SPIEGEL in September about the tense atmosphere in the universities. The state prosecutor says that by doing this he spread “propaganda against the holy order of the Islamic Republic” and that he “incited unrest.”

SPIEGEL: How did the authorities become aware of the interview?

Zarafshan: Immediately after the publication of the interview, a “special report” was published in a large, extremely conservative daily newspaper. The report labeled SPIEGEL a “Zionist magazine” and Tavancheh was harshly attacked as a “US-oriented left winger.” Subsequently the state prosecutor summoned him.

SPIEGEL: Did the case go to trial?

Zarafshan: The interrogation was followed by three hearings before a revolutionary tribunal. I was even not summoned to two of the hearings. One cannot hope for justice there. We cited the right to freedom of expression which is guaranteed in our constitution. Nevertheless the court considered the interview to be a “violation of national security.” For this, Tavancheh got a new prison sentence of one year.

SPIEGEL: Did your client accept the verdict?

Zarafshan: No, we don’t recognize this verdict, which wasn’t even given to us in writing. Because my client assumed he would be arrested, he quickly left the courtroom.

SPIEGEL: Now the authorities are looking for Tavancheh. Does he now regret having given the interview?

Zarafshan: My client knew what he was getting into. He stands by every sentence.

 

A Greenpeace activist dressed as an egg plant, or aubergine, protests in Bangalore, India on Friday against Bt brinjal, a genetically modified (GM) egg plant crop. The Indian government is organizing a series of public consultations to decide on whether to approve it as India’s first GM crop.
 

he big banks have gotten plenty of help with their debts. But what about struggling households and non-financial institutions? Roosevelt Institute Braintruster Marshall Auerback investigates.

Once all the TARPs are tidied up and the quarterly profits no longer a revelation, American consumers will still be swaddled in debt.  What’s to stop them from just walking away from it–and who’s to say, if the banks keep this kind of behavior up, we don’t want them to?

In The Holy Grail of Macroeconomics, an account of post-bubble Japan, Richard C. Koo illustrates that highly-indebted corporations with depressed asset holdings and a positive cash flow will embark on sustained debt repayment until their balance sheets are healthy once again. He argues that this happened in Japan over the last two decades and also happened in the U.S. over the four years of the Great Depression. This ongoing debt repayment created decades of economic stagnation, particularly because the fiscal response was so fitful and inconsistently applied.

But does it follow that sustained debt repayment will be the response of a household sector in the U.S. with destroyed asset holdings and high debt? To our way of thinking, it is unclear. This is especially the case with respect to mortgage indebtedness; U. S. households have non-recourse mortgage loans and can walk away from their debts rather than pay them down.

Public opinion polls reveal that Americans are angry about the current economic, healthcare, housing and environmental crises. Polls also document that a significant majority of Americans want the federal government to do something to fix these problems. But you’ve also got the makings of a huge neo-populist anger brewing, largely because (in the words of Frank Rich), “What disturbs Americans of all ideological persuasions is the fear that almost everything, not just government, is fixed or manipulated by some powerful hidden hand, from commercial transactions as trivial as the sales of prime concert tickets to cultural forces as pervasive as the news media.” In other words, even the feds might not be able to help.

The approach to financial reform that the Obama Administration has hitherto adopted is a classic illustration of this problem. Financial institutions are now back to business as usual and have provided limited help to the non-financial sector. In fact, some of them are clearly committed to worsen households’ financial position and have oriented their activity toward this end in order to maximize their profitability. Yet, they have received commitments from the taxpayer totaling $23.7 trillion.

Marshall Auerback argues that a debtor’s revolt would be a good thing.

H/T to Naked Capitalism

 

As a daily nyc subway rider, this is very edifying for me….John Brian

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A new pro-God ad campaign will reach 1,00 subway cars in New York starting tomorrow with the message of God’s love.  Times Square Church, which is located in the heart of Times Square in New York City, is sponsoring the campaign.  In addition to the subway cars, the ads will appear on 50 platform posters in many Manhattan stations.

Ads will boldly feature the words “God is” in the center,surrounded by words describing God’s qualities in colorful fonts. Among the “God is” attributes are: with you, willing to help, able to protect, a father, a husband to the widow, your friend, aware of your struggle, a good listener, the one who loves you, power to change, incredible, ready to forgive, there when no one else is, looking at you, Jesus.

“We want to encourage people to seek God and prove that indeed He is,” explains Carter Conlon, senior pastor of Times Square Church. “The ads describe God in just a few of the infinite ways He proves His presence to us every day.”

This is not the first outreach effort by Times Square Church; this past September the church hosted “Prayer in the Square” in which over 300 churches and 65 youth organizations gathered for an hour of prayer in Times Square.

With this new effort, the church is hoping to not only reach unbelievers but those who have left the faith.  “We are praying that people who don’t know God and would like to know Him, would be moved by these ads to visit Times Square Church or any Bible believing church in New York City and find God through the forgiveness freely offered through His Son, Jesus Christ,” Conlon said. “And to those who once knew God and need to get back to God, we want to say simply this: His arms are open wide always ready to welcome you home.”

A photo of the ads appears below.

God Is ad Times Square Church

 

The real economy is still deflating. Just look at the jobs situation. Far from slowing or stabilizing, 2009 was the worst year yet for job losses – ’07…’08 …and ’09…each year has produced greater losses. Even James Grant, who predicted a “barn burning recovery” now admits that his forecast has gone up in flames. He was “either early or wrong,” he says.

And just look at the real estate market. “Home prices are softening again,” says David Rosenberg. As for commercial real estate, here’s Kenneth Laub, who’s been in the business for 50 years, as reported by Bloomberg:

“He says the current downturn will overshadow all of the others…

“‘It won’t be a typical part of a cycle where we’re down for two or three years and things recover,’ says Laub, 70, whose New York firm, Kenneth D. Laub & Co., says it has handled more than $40 billion of real estate transactions since its inception in 1969. ‘It will be longer than we’ve gone through before.’

“As in past slumps, the weak US economy is curbing demand for commercial space, increasing vacancies and causing rents and property values to fall. The key difference today is the explosion in debt financing and related derivatives that fueled a run-up in commercial real estate prices in the 2000s, Laub says. That’s left property owners struggling to make mortgage payments. The overhang of debt will delay any recovery, he says.

“‘It’s not a supply-demand thing; it’s an overleveraged condition,’ Laub says.

“Laub expects a wave of restructurings by troubled commercial borrowers as hundreds of billions of dollars of loans come due annually during the next few years. Commercial real estate may still be recovering a decade from now, he says. ‘What you’re going to see is a tremendously long workout period unprecedented in commercial real estate in this country,’ Laub says. ‘That’s where we’re going, and it’s just beginning.’”

 
Otherwise-obscure central bankers spent an unprecedented amount of time in the global limelight last year. As the crisis brought down not only banking behemoths, but also macroeconomic axioms, the expansionary measures enacted by the Fed’s Ben Bernanke, the European Central Bank’s Jean-Claude Trichet, and the Bank of England’s Mervyn King have been credited, at least for now, with preventing a second coming of the Great Depression. And for that they have been hailed: Bernanke is both Time’s Person of the Year and Foreign Policy’s top global thinker, while Trichet wields tangible power in an otherwise diffuse EU and King has expressed ideas that are likely to influence future financial architecture more than those emanating from 10 Downing Street. But an epic battle unleashed last week between the Argentine government and its central bank is an apt reminder that the most challenging times for central bankers may lay not in the recent past, but in a more problematic future.

Argentina is usually singled out in textbooks as an example of what not to do with a country. Coup d’états and contradictory economic models have turned the fifth richest economy a century ago into the largest-ever sovereign debt defaulter in 2001. It is a tragic story. Since their accession to power in 2003, Néstor and Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, the country’s former and current president, respectively, seemed intent on changing Argentina’s direction post-default. Yet they soon revealed themselves to be another pair of messiahs turned into despots.

As in most developed nations, Argentina’s central bank is, by charter, independent of the country’s executive. The Harvard-educated, intellectually impressive current governor, Martín Redrado, has largely stood behind the Kirchners’ heterodox economic program, which favors export-driven growth as well as interventionist policies, including price controls and active resistance against peso revaluation. He was so supportive that in 2006 he provided central bank reserves to pay back all of Argentina’s outstanding debts with the IMF. As the country has remained largely cut off from capital markets since the default, paying back loans that accrued low single-digit interest (the IMF’s) while continuing to pay double-digit interest rates for “patriotic” bonds financed by their closest regional ally (none other than Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez) was clearly a political decision. For the Kirchners, hatred of the Washington Consensus weights more than the burden of interest.

In their second administration, however, the Kirchners’ authoritarian style has run them into trouble; in the midst of the global crisis, they sought to secure future sources of government spending in what became a true “asset grab.” First, they tried to radically increase taxes on agro-exports (rather sensationally, it was the government’s own vice-president who defeated the bill after a Senate tie). Then, in late 2008, the president pushed for the nationalization of all private pension funds, bringing an additional $25 billion under government control. Everyone saw it for what it was: a scramble for liquidity. Such moves have destroyed what was left of the ruling couple’s international reputation, and also much of their domestic political capital.

But it was only last week that the Kirchners’ hubris provoked a fully-fledged institutional crisis. Sidestepping an increasingly critical Parliament, the president took advantage of a legislative summer recess to issue a decree ordering Redrado to transfer $6.5 billion of bank reserves (around a quarter of the total, depending on the calculation) to the Treasury’s “Bicentennial Fund.” The purpose of such a euphemistically-baptized vehicle was to guarantee outright all 2010 foreign debt payments, in the hope that capital markets would welcome back the government and that fresh funds would revitalize the administration ahead of the 2011 presidential elections.

Reflecting changing political tides, however, Redrado refused to wire reserves to the Treasury, warning that they may be subject to confiscation abroad. After all, many of those bondholders hurt by the 2001 default have yet to settle their cases in international courts. But while the opposition attempted to convene an extraordinary parliamentary session to shoot down Kirchner’s decree, the administration doubled down: Through another decree, it fired the central bank governor. Hence they made a former key ally into a political martyr (and, odds are, a future paladin of the opposition).

How NOT to Manage a Central Bank Pierpaolo Barbieri


Related article:

What Bernanke’s Confirmation Hearing Tells Us About the Future of the Fed

 

Google to defy China
Google announces an end to censored search results in China following alleged cyber attacks. Is Google.cn finished?

 

By Richard Alford, a former economist at the New York Fed. Since then, he has worked in the financial industry as a trading floor economist and strategist on both the sell side and the buy side.

A week ago, in Atlanta, Bernanke responded to his critics, including John Taylor of Taylor Rule fame (the Taylor Rule is a benchmark widely used by central banks in setting their “policy” interest rates). Bernanke asserted that monetary/interest policy has been appropriate-and was not” too low for too long” from 2001-2006. Taylor responded in a WSJ Op-Ed piece on January 11th reasserting his position that interest rates were “too low for too long”. A very public debate has been joined. Taylor’s view is based on his chosen variant of the Taylor Rule, while Bernanke cites his own chosen variant of the Taylor rule.

This post establishes that interest rates were “too low for too long” (from 1996-2006) while dispensing with the Taylor Rule and its sensitivity to choices of inputs and assumptions. It does so in a framework that employs definitions and measures favored by Bernanke. The frame work of the analysis is then used to answer other questions about economic policy in the past and going forward.

The Deflationary Threat?

Price stability/inflation targeting has been center stage of interest rate policy since Japan began its lost decades. Fear of deflation dominated the thinking of the Fed. This was especially evident in the response to the recession of 2001. The decidedly expansionary monetary policy adopted at the time was justified in terms of preventing a deflationary episode like Japan’s. In a February 2002 speech titled “Deflation: Making Sure ‘It’ Doesn’t Happen Here.” Bernanke defined deflation as:

“Deflation is a general decline in prices, with emphasis on the word “general”.

Bernanke was drawing a distinction between changes in relative prices of some goods on the one hand and deflation – pervasive declines in prices – on the other. Later in the speech, Bernanke re-emphasized the point: “Deflation per se occurs only when price declines are so widespread that broad-based indexes of prices register ongoing declines.” However, Bernanke and the Fed allow for exceptions. For example, food and energy inflation/deflation have been ignored even when changes in food and energy prices registered on broad-based indexes.

In the speech, Bernanke also specified the cause of deflation: “Deflation is in almost all cases a side effect of a collapse of aggregate demand –a drop in spending so severe that producers must cut prices…to find buyers.” In a footnote, Bernanke added:” I don’t know of any unambiguous example of a supply-side deflation, although China in recent years is a possible case.”

Bernanke therefore defines a deflation as a generalized, broad-based, widespread decline in prices brought on by a severe drop in spending. The 425 bps of rate cuts in the Fed funds target during 2001 was presented as necessary to prevent a demand-lead deflationary spiral.

However, a simple decomposition of Bernanke’s favorite inflation measure, the PCE, for the bubble years 1996-2006 indicates that price declines were not broad-based, widespread, or “general”, but localized even as they introduced disinflation to the broad-based price indexes. Furthermore, there is evidence that demand by US-based economic agents did not drop below the level implied by full employment.
Chart (I) is of the PCE (and its components) price deflator(s). It clearly indicates that deflationary pressure was far from broad-based or generalized. The deflationary pressure was confined to the consumer durable goods component of PCE. The durable goods component had a weight between 12 to 13% during the period 2001-2006.

“Why Bernanke’s Defense of Super Low Interest Rates Does Not Hold

 

….the rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.

True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish.

The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.

Happiness lies not in the mere possession of money; it lies in the joy of achievement, in the thrill of creative effort. The joy and moral stimulation of work no longer must be forgotten in the mad chase of evanescent profits. These dark days will be worth all they cost us if they teach us that our true destiny is not to be ministered unto but to minister to ourselves and to our fellow men.

Recognition of the falsity of material wealth as the standard of success goes hand in hand with the abandonment of the false belief that public office and high political position are to be valued only by the standards of pride of place and personal profit; and there must be an end to a conduct in banking and in business which too often has given to a sacred trust the likeness of callous and selfish wrongdoing.

FDR’s first inaugural address

Sic transit America?

 A Growing List Of One Term Presidents, A State of Distress, A Time To Repent, AIG and all that....., “the Greenspan doctrine”, Back to the basics, Collateral Damage, Coming Social Unrest, Commercial Real Estate Bust, Consumption Ran the Old Economy, Coup d'etat in America, Death of the Dollar, Deflation-Inflation-Stagflation, Devaluation, Dismal Science-Ignorant Scientists?, Even the Terminator Can't Help California, Federal Reserve-Discussion, Figures don't lie but Liars can figure, Integrity and Responsibility, Is The Market Rally Real?, It Is Nice To Be Part of the Elite!, It starts with a foundation, IT'S ALL ABOUT POWER AND MONEY, Monetary Policy - Discussion, Our phony middle class, Patience is a virtue...Delusion is a vice, Political Chaos, Politicians, Prostitutes and Pimps All Rhyme, Small Business-Bedrock of America, Sub-Prime anytime, TARP fruit loops, The Arrogance of Power, The Consequences of Greed, The Democrats Blew It Again, The End of American Capitalism As We Know It? - Discuss, The excellent adventures of Ben Bernanke, The Financial Elite, The Global Economy, The Habits of Hedge Funds, The Importance of Strategic Planning, The Inherent Disorder of Empires, The Intrusion of UNLAWFUL Authority, The Judeo-Christian Political Coalition, The New American Socialism, The Sorry State Of American Manufacturing, Time For A New Third Party, Truth In Charity, Unemployment Catastrophe, US Trade Imbalance, USA Is the New Japan, We Are All Cooked, We Are All Guilty, We Have Become Beggars To The World  No Responses »
Jan 162010
 
An American sailor stands on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington
Flagging: a US sailor stands on the flight deck of the aircraft carrier USS George Washington

If a week is a long time in politics, a decade is starting to look like an age in geopolitics. Comparing the America that began the 21st century with the America of today is to witness a country that has in some ways quite radically altered its view of itself and its relationship to the world.

In short, the metallic rust of decline has crept into the American soul. “You could argue that the first decade of the 21st century was the last decade of the American century,” says David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official and student of US foreign policy. “We are now entering the multipolar century.”

Self-doubt tarnishes Brand America

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42E2fAWM6rA

 

Bill Bonner writes at The Daily Reckoning:

The stock market has not been corrected. It could easily get cut in half in the next six months. (We’re leaving our ‘Crash Alert’ flying over the building with the gold balls…until stocks reach bargain prices.)

The bond market could crash any time. The US is borrowing more money than ever before – trillions more. With such a huge increase in supply, demand…and prices…it should crack, sooner or later. Higher bond yields would send the whole economy into a much deeper depression.

Even our gold holdings could lose 20%-30% of their value. And gold stocks? They could get killed in the next stock market downswing.

Despite a truly monumental (albeit imbecilic) effort to revive the economy…the latest figures show the weakest post-recession recovery ever. Jobs are missing. Consumer credit is shrinking. Inflation is going negative. There is no real recovery…it’s a mirage created by government spending.

Monetary policy is useless (banks won’t lend; consumers won’t borrow). And fiscal policy, while apparently more effective, destroys wealth; it doesn’t add to it.

The more the government increases spending, to offset the correction, the more the economy becomes addicted to it. It’s like trying to cure an alcoholic by introducing him to heroin. Take away the government spending – as Japan tried to do – and the economy collapses into a deeper depression. Not only that, but the budget deficit actually grows!

In other words, the feds spend money they don’t have trying to fight a correction. This creates huge budget deficits, but it makes it look like the economy is recovering. So they slack off. Then, they discover that their fiscal stimulus didn’t really create any genuine economic activity. Take away the fiscal stimulus and the economy collapses again…reducing tax receipts and widening the deficit. In effect, the cure became a disease of its own! Now they can’t cut government spending. The economy depends on it. Instead, they’re locked into a debt spiral…more and more deficits…higher and higher debt…down, down, down, until…

..until the whole thing finally crashes.

Japan faced this problem in the ’90s. It eased off its stimulus program…and the economy collapsed. Now, it’s become hooked on government spending. Where does it lead? We repeat this prescient note from The Telegraph, which we sent you yesterday:

“This is the year when Tokyo finds it can no longer borrow at 1pc from a captive bond market, and when it must foot the bill for all those fiscal packages that seemed such a good idea at the time…

“Once the dam breaks, debt service costs will tear the budget to pieces. The Bank of Japan will pull the emergency lever on QE [quantitative easing...aka 'printing money']. The country will flip from deflation to incipient hyperinflation…”

But we’re not worried. Somehow it will all work out. Americans are still trying to get even. They still believe that the stock market will recover – fully. They still think the Fed is in control…and that our economists know what they are doing. They are delusional, in other words.

© 2012 New Jersey CFO Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha