LyrArc Article Gist
Einsinger points out that Treasury Geithner's performance reflects the mindset of U.S. president Obama, reflected also in Obama's other appointments in his administration which favored one group over another. Change that Obama talked about in the 2008 election campaign that propelled his candidacy, turned out to be more at the margins than change and action that reflected a vision of the priorities for America's middle class and vast majority of average Americans. By leaving homeowners to a wave of foreclosures, the administration weakened a middle class at the lower end already hit by the lower wages from globalization in manufacturing, other changes in the global economy, high levels of student debt of over $1 trillion, and the lasting damage to unemployment from the global financial crisis.

LyrArc Article Gist
The SEC requirement that companies disclose the ratio between median worker pay and the pay of senior executives. The SEC says it is putting out the rule as part of implementing Dodd-Frank legislation to control excessive executive pay. Companies will be allowed to survey a fraction of their workforce as appropriate for companies with global operations. Executive pay will include pension benefits and stock options under the new rule. A WSJ chart using information from the University of Southern California and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, shows the ratio between what CEO's on average make and rank and file workers make remained at about 30 times in the post war period till about 1970, a period of rapid growth in the U.S. economy. By 1980 this climbed to about 60 times and exceeded 100 times by 1990. The period of stratospheric growth for CEO pay and extreme widening of the gap then occurs between 1990 and 2000. By 2000 the dot com boom- telecom boom and the internet- creates a surge in executive pay reaching over 500 times. This drops to about 280 times in 2008 and picks up again to reach about 320 times in 2011. Many of the poor business practices, the excessive leveraging and risktaking in the financial industry, take place against this background of excessive pay for senior executives. Some of that risk was passed on to others through such methods as securitization in the period leading to the 2008 financial crisis, so that executives were compensated with higher pay for taking excessive risk that they personally or their companies did not assume. Dodd-Frank legislation following the 2008 financial crisis sought to correct this imbalance by having pay information disclosed. The excessive pay has also coincided with an increase in the frequency of boom-bust cycles in the economy. The busts prompted the needs for intervention by the U.S. central bank, the Federal Reserve, to drop interest rates more than would otherwise have happened during this decade, culminating in the huge bond purchases and monetary easing by the Bernanke Fed. The SEC under Mary Jo White is mindful of these distortions in the economy as a result of misallocation of resources based on excessive executive pay, and the need to take action before the next crisis. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The FDIC acknowledges that it has not been able to get banks interested in a pilot program called the Legacy Loans Program. That program was designed to give the banks an opportunity to sell off $1 billion of troubled mortgages. Since November with the efforts of the Troubled Asset Program under Secretary Paulson to have the banks sell off these assets in an auction or some other way, the whole issue of getting the toxic or troubled assets off the books of the banks has been effectively shelved. The Obama administration's version of this was the Geithner Public Private Partnership program, but this like Paulson's TARP never really got off the ground. Instead several things have happened that have enabled banks to show higher profits and improve stock prices. The period from March 2009 to June 2009, a period of several months has seen bank stock prices recover and banks are now able to raise capital on their own from investors. The government's "stress tests" gave the banks credibility with investors and they were designed not to be so stringent as to affect confidence. The mark to market rule has also been relaxed so that banks are no longer required to show these toxic assets at prices that reflect large losses. Bank executives also are wary of the new executive compensation rules of the government. All of these things have combined to create asituation where some confidence has been restored, but at the same time experts are pointing out that the underlying problems of an estimated $1 trillion in troubled assets remains. Banks are even less likely to want to part with these assets at lower prices now that some semblence of confidence is returning, as they would then have to show large losses. What this implies is that if the economy suffered a setback, these problems would return and be just as intractable as ever....

LyrArc Article Gist
J.P. Morgan Chase announces $2 billion in trading losses in May 2012. The Chief Investment Office unit made a bet with a trading strategy that CEO Jamie Dimon said had grown very complex. These losses could grow or shrink during the rest of the year.

LyrArc Article Gist
Jon Huntsman, Republican candidate for President in 2012, calls for a fee on banks with a size that is above a certain percentage of the GDP. This would cover the cost banks impose on taxpayers when they are bailed out. It would eliminate the advantage banks gain from "too-big-to-fail," a subsidy Huntsman estimates to be one half percentage point in today's market. He points to efforts by the UK and Switzerland for more stringent financial standards than the U.S.

LyrArc Article Gist
John Hills, a law professor at Indiana University and author of "The Political Centrist," says tough political exchanges are endemic to the American political system. Others say putting crosshairs on representatives in Congress like Giffords on websites or its equivalent wasn't the practice since the times of Jefferson and Adams. We looked at the letters of George Washington during the long struggle with the British and it showed composure and civility even in dire circumstances and difficulties. Criticism by Washington of the lack of help and risks he was exposed to throughout the war was worded carefully, with civility and yet conveys the great urgency. What about the letters of Jefferson and Adams who were on opposite sides of the debates of that time, a time more infused with momentous issues because of the French revolutionary tide in those years? A letter to Abigail Adams, from Washington, June 13, 1804, gives a glimpse of that relationship: "The friendship with which you honored me has ever been valued, and fully reciprocated, and altho' events have been passing which may be trying to some minds, I never believed yours to be of that kind, nor felt that my own was. Neither my estimate of your character, nor the esteem founded on that, have ever been lessened for a single moment, although doubts whether it would be acceptable may have forbidden manifestations of it. Mr Adams friendship and mine began at an earlier date. It accompanied us thro' long and important scenes. The different conclusions that we had drawn from our political reading and reflections were not permitted to lessen mutual esteem, each party being conscious they were the result of an honest conviction in the other. Like differences of opinion existing among our fellow citizens attached them to the one or the other of us, and produced a rivalship in their minds which did not exist in ours." Jefferson in this letter says that one act of Adam's gave him a moment of personal displeasure, the last appointments by Adams as President "from among my most ardent political enemies." This says Jefferson "laid me under the embarrassment of acting thro' men whose views were to defeat mine, or to encounter the odium of putting others in their places...If my respect for him did not permit me to ascribe the whole blame on the influence of others, it left something for friendship to forgive, and after brooding over it for some little time, and not alwasys resisting the expression of it, I forgave it cordially, and returned to the same state of esteem and respect for him which had long subsisted...I maintain for him and shall carry into private life an unform and high measure of respect and goodwill, and for yourself a sincere attachment."...

LyrArc Article Gist
Gretchen Morgenson describes the issues of regulatory capture for Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner during the 2008 financial crisis and the first term of the Obama administration, which affected how Geithner treated homeowners and banks. Morgenson describes close ties to Citicorp.

LyrArc Article Gist
Areas in the "too big to fail" part of Dodd-Frank U.S. financial reform legislation where work remains to be done to prevent a future crisis include: the creation of living wills by the largest banks so that they can be dismantled in an orderly fashion, and the designation of which banks are systemic risks by the Financial Oversight Stability Council. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve have yet to finalize the rules for creating "living wills" for large banks. The rules are expected to be finalized by fall 2011. The FOSC is working on the designations and what criteria to use for selecting the non-bank firms that pose systemic risks. Progress has been made at the FDIC by finishing several rules for implementing a new system to wind down a large failing bank. The FDIC is hiring staff for a new office that focusses specifically on large complex financial firms. Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo has led the effort for higher capital reserve requirements for U.S. banks, requirements that would be closer to 14% for capital reserves. In an editorial on June 16, 2011, the Wall Street Journal said that if the Federal Reserve is serious about controlling systemic risk then it should support capital reserve requirements of 14%....

LyrArc Article Gist
The majority report of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commisssion says Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke, regulators, and several financial institutions were responsible for what was an "avoidable disaster." The report criticizes Mr Greenspan for advocating deregulation and considers the failure to stem the flow of toxic mortgages under his leadership at the central bank as a "prime example" of negligence. The report also says that the New York Fed under Timothy Geithner, now Treasury Secretary, also missed signs of trouble at Citigroup and Lehman. There are 6 Democrats and 4 Republicans on the Commission. The fourth Republican has his dissent, calling policies to promote home ownership, the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a major cause. The panel was hobbled by internal divisions and staff turnover, which have made what should have been a report of major significance into one marred by partisan differences. The majority report itself was heavily shaped by Phil Angelides, the committee's chairman, and it has many literary phrases. Overleveraging was a critical factor in the crisis. For every $40 in assets, the US's 5 largest investment banks had only $1 in capital to cover losses. The banks hid their leveraging with derivatives, off-balance sheet entities and other devices. The banks relied heavily on short-term debt which worsened the crisis. The report also said the Clinton adminstration's decision to exempt over-the counter derivatives from regulation- made in the last year of Clinton's term- also helped set up the ground for later events leading to the crisis....

LyrArc Article Gist
JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon's confidence in Ina Drew was based on her hands on abilities, especially demonstrated during the 2008 financial crisis. Current and former bankers in this account by the Times Silver-Greenberg and Schwartz, say things changed in the years that followed. In 2010 Ina Drew was ill with Lyme's disease. The conflicts between the risk taking propensities of traders at the London trading desk under Mr. Macris, and the more risk conscious New York trading desk under Ms. Duersten, had already led to shouting matches under Ina Drew. After her illness and her absence from the office for long periods this spilled out into the open. In early 2011 Ms. Duersten left Chase after 16 years. Her replacement who would be new to Chase could not restrain the risk taking propensities of Mr. Macris and the London trading desk, the way Duersten and Ina Drew had done earlier. Macris and a trader reporting to him, Mr Iksil (referred to as the "London Whale" for his massive trading positions and bets), were free to operate without any restraint in this environment. Ina Drew returned in 2011, but she was not the same hands on person after the illness. She moved to the corporate offices on the 48th floor, instead of being on the floor above the New York trading desk. In 2008 she had held daily meetings with traders required to defend their trading positions. This did not happen in 2011. Jamie Dimon learned about the London Whale in the Wall Street Journal, April 6, 2012. Dimon's efforts in pushing back against stricter regulation, stress tests, and other issues were to lead to the CEO of the 2008 crisis becoming a much more distracted person in 2011. He was taken unawares by the breakdown in the relationship between the London and New York offices of the Chief Investment Office, the changed situation of Ms. Drew, and that risk management controls at the bank were not in place. Risk management overly depended on one person and the trust of the CEO in that person, and was not institutionalized. At the same time it should be noted that Jamie Dimon became CEO of Chase after the acquisition of Bank One in 2005, and Ina Drew was hired in that year, only three years before the crisis of 2008. The merger of other banks into JP Morgan Chase created a bank with $360 billion investment portfolio- even Ina Drew had never previously handled a portfolio of this size and the complex risks brought in with the Washington Mutual portfolio....

LyrArc Article Gist
Details of the $825 billion stimulus plan. Renewable energy does well under the plan including production tax credit for renewables, with $32 billion for a "smart" electrical grid for which GE makes components and lobbied for. Renewable energy producers win an extension of production tax credits now convertible into cash for companies whose losses leave them unable to use the credits. Transportation infrastructure green projects did not do so well, with $32 billion for transportation projects and only $10 billion for mass transit projects.The Natural Resources Defense Council had compiled a list of more than 80 environmentally friendly infrastructure and transportation projects worth about $405 billion. Only a small number of these projects made it. What is in the stimulus to create jobs and stimulate capital investment? Businesses get bonus depreciation, which speeds up depreciation deductions for companies that invest in plant and equipment. The stimulus doubles the amount small businesses can immediately write off for capital investments and purchasing new eqipment, and gives incentives for businesses to invest in renewable energy. States get help with $90 billion going to increase the federal share of Medicaid payments, and an additional $79 billion to help states avoid cutbacks in education and other services. And there is a "Make Work Pay" tax credit for $500 per worer and $1000 per couple. Experts say the effects of the stimulus will be felt in the latter part of 2009 and into 2010. Which is one reason the view of economists that there would be a second half recovery does not reflect conditions on the ground. Goldman has revised its view to 2010 and even that may be optimistic. One example of what has happened in the stimulus in this respect is that the earlier optimistic view of largeinvestments in science and technology, broadband networks, and transportation projects for fast rail and transit have all been trimmed down. Part of the reason may be that the bill for the nation's banking system revival may be larger than realized as an additional amount of $15-20 billion is being negotiated for Bank of America and more money will go to Citigroup. $6 billion is shown for highspeed internet access for rural and underserved areas. Science facilities get $10 billion. Repair of public infrastructure (read roads and bridges) gets $31 billion. School modernization gets $21 billion. And modernization of health information technology systems gets $20 billion which its hoped will provide equivalent or higher returns to pay for some of the universal health care costs, and preventative care gets $4 billion. There is a tax credit for R&D work on energy innovations and renewable energy production of $20 billion, and $32 billion for a "smart electricity grid." These are the proactive parts of the stimulus that create something new and make improvements. They add up to $144 billion. So much money goes to shore up the existing services and supplement incomes, and to relieve stresses on the banking system, and other ways to shore up the system, that the proactive expenditures are only a small fraction or 17% of the $825 billion stimulus. And all the time the federal deficit and debt increases with these huge outlays just to shore up the system. The Heritage Foundation Data Analysis Director Mr. Beach told Congressmen at a discussion chaired by Congressman Cantor (R), on January 16, 2009, that the federal debt would reach 92% of the nation's GDP in 2009 from 58 billion or 70% in 2008, with the $825 billion for stimulus. The federal deficit would go up to $1.31 trillion or 9.2% of GDP up from $541 billion in 2008. See the research paper on the Heritage website. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Wall Street Journal analysis shows top earners at 38 U.S. banks and securities firms will get $145 billion in 2009, an 18% increase over 2008. This even after increasing public anger about exceedingly high levels of executive compensation with no relation to performance, and at a time of high unemployment.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Fed gets tougher on "too big to fail" but how tough? Does it have the guts to go after this problem asks Peter Eavis. If he does Bernake would go down in history as a hero says Eavis. Meanwhile Fed Governor Tarullo clearly point to the utterly inconceivable fact that after a crisis of these proportions with large banks being bailed out, the remaining banks and financial institutions are larger than before the crisis. And the banking lobby has stalled regulation to control the problems in derivatives trading and other areas. Splitting up or downsizing the banks and separating their social function as deposit takers in the economy from their trading desks and investment activity, is being advocated by central bankers from Volcker to Mervyn King. See links.

LyrArc Article Gist
Joseph Stiglitz describes policies and programs of the Obama administration that favor banks and avoid a government takeover of over leveraged and badly managed banks in the U.S. President Obama's policy transfers financial assets to banks on highly favorable terms even though some of the banks made bad decisions and highly overleveraged assets creating the 2008 global financial crisis. The policies avoid a government takeover of banks, policies which the U.S. aggressively pushed for in other countries such as S. Korea during the 1997 financial crisis with Rubin, Summers and Geithner at Treasury. These policies would come under strong criticism because it rewarded risk taking and kept in place an incentive system that led to such behaviours- creating "heads I win, tails you lose" psychology. It also delinks the performance-reward relationship that is the basis of free enterprise in western economies. A problem that would be left from the crisis and the Obama administration's response to it is "Too-Big-To-Fail," with banks larger than before. The FDIC and U.S. Fed's plans for banks to have living wills for an orderly windup under Dodd-Frank legislation only goes a part of the way in tackling this problem. In the U.S., and in Britain, France, Germany, Switzerland, the related problem of high bonuses continues into 2014, with RBS bank in Britain one of the egregious examples and highly unpopular with the British public. The lack of similiar government help to homeowners, advocated by Reagan economic advisor Martin Feldstein and FDIC chairwoman Sheila Bair from the beginnings of the crisis stands in sharp contrast to the response of the Obama administration. See the links for Barr, Feldstein and Hoenig. In an ultimate irony from the crisis handling much of the damage from foreclosures was done to minorities which supported the administration. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
This Wall Street Journal editorial comes out in favor of higher capital reserve requirements similiar to that suggested by Federal Reserve Board governor Daniel Tarullo. The Journal says that if regulators are serious in the U.S. about controlling systemic risk, then the 14% rule or a 15% rule for assets held in reserve by banks should be adopted. Daniel Tarullo had suggested a 14% capital reserve requirement. These requirements would be phased in gradually over several years. Basel III requirements require only a 7% requirement and is phased in over many years. Capital standards are likely to be gamed. For this reason the requirement for only Tier 1 capital to be eligible is essential. What about the Basel III standards and the European banks? Would this put them in a better position to earn higher returns. This should be a problem left for European taxpayers to tackle says the Journal. As long as U.S. taxpayers are supporting U.S. banks with an implicit subsidy to take on larger amounts of risk -because they will be saved in a crisis with taxpayer dollars- the Journal says it makes sense to require 10-14% in capital reserves. It cites the Japanese banks which were highly overleveraged with lower capital reserves compared to American banks, and fared poorly. The Dodd-Frank bill imposes a complicated set of regulatory requirements with regulators required to write new sets of rules. The editorial concludes that it is far better to tackle the problems in the banking system with a sufficiently high requirement for capital reserves to manage risks than to have the detailed rule making on every subject that Dodd-Frank suggests....

LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed Governor Kevin Warsh's views on the need for greater transparency and disclosure from the large U.S. banks and the risks to the financial system from "too-big-to-fail" banks in 2012-2013. He says the U.S. should not be dependent on the Basel standards for capital requirements and use its own system of stricter requirements similiar to the UK and Switzerland. His views are that the Dodd-Frank law puts too much dependence on regulators doing the right thing, information transparency is lacking for markets to impose discipline, and delegates too much to Basel standards which are not rigorous enough for protecting the U.S. economy.

LyrArc Article Gist
Warren Stephens, head of Stephens Inc, in Little Rock, Arkansas, says repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act was a mistake. U.S. banks should have a 5% cap on holdings of total deposits in the U.S., and no "grandfathering" of banks over the 5% limit. Five institutions controlling 50% of the deposits in the U.S. creates too much systemic risk in another financial crisis. Banks should be expected to be one or the other, commercial banks or investment banks, not both. These recommendations are not new. Bank of England Governor, Mervyn King, called for breaking up the largest banks or shrinking the size of the largest banks during the global financial crisis in 2008. This position for banks that are smaller in size is supported by veteran bankers Paul Volcker, Thomas Hoenig and other experts.

LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Frank writing about the public outrage about executive compensation quotes Bill Black, a Professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, who makes an important point. Beyond the size of this compensation there was something else happening that was perverse in its design and in its effects. Black says that at each point in the development of the disaster of mortgage securitization, it was the pay for performance systems that sent the wrong signals to loan officers, real estate appraisers, accountants, and bond rating agencies. The compensation or reward systems actually encouraged wrong, unethical and ultimately disastrous behaviours for the companies and the economy. Another way to look at it, the way it happened on Wall Street- especially at Merrill Lynch and some other financial institutions- the bonuses and other compensation was a way for executives to recklessly milk (loot is the other word) the companies for all they could yield regardless of the results afterwards. And as Black says, to do this through normal corporate mechanisms. A whole range of behaviours of this type took place in the final years of the boom. See other articles by Thomas Frank. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Systemic risks from "too big to fail" and the pushback on capital reserve requirements that leave banks with lower reserves. Ewing describes the role of the president of the Swiss Central Bank, Mr Hildebrand, in setting rules for higher capital reserves for Swiss banks than that of other countries and the pushback from the banks resisting the new regulations. "He will never find another job in Switzerland," a Swiss newspaper Der Sonntag quoted one banker saying this about Mr. Hildebrand. Losses at Swiss bank UBS during the financial crisis and the $2 billion loss at a UBS trading desk in 2011 have created a new awareness of systemic risk at banks. During the financial crisis banks used an optimistic estimate of "risk weighted assets" which led to insufficient capital reserves in a crisis even as the banks were shown to be well capitalized. A sense that banks in Europe and the U.S. will continue to have insufficient capital reserves at 3-4% of assets under new rules and with the longer phase in times for the new Basel III regulations of reserves at 7% of assets to after 2016....