LyrArc Article Gist
Former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin's role along with CEO Prince at Citigroup in relaxing strict oversight and risk controls to pursue riskier investments and increase profits at Citigroup. This led to the $65 billion in losses on mortgage related investments that caused its share price to collapse to $3.77 by November 21, 2008. About 75,000 jobs are already lost from 375,000 worldwide and Citi is in talks with government officials in emergency meetings this weekend before the markets open on Monday November 24, 2008. This time Citi is in crisis mode and a lot can happen in the coming days.

LyrArc Article Gist
The first significant action to help homeowners threatened with foreclosure comes from Sheila Bair, Chairman of the Federal Deposit insurance Corporation, one of the few people after Bernanke and Paulson who have shown initiative and foresight in the current crisis. Bernanke and Paulson had the foresight to open the Fed lending window to investment firms like Lehman Brothers and others but little has been done for homeowners to have significant impact. When interviewed on television in the days surrounding the Bear Stearns crisis Sheila has shown a good grasp of the issues and courage to take the initiative. This action is similiar in line to what Martin Feldstein has suggested on the pages of the WSJ for some time now. Martin wanted the Federal government to step in to loan homeowners the 20% of their outstanding loan and work towards bringing the homeowners payment to an affordable sum. According to Feldstein's calculation this would be about the right amount as a percentage of their loan so that homeowners rationally would not be better off walking away from the loan as the best possible decision under the circumstances. If the rational option was taken under a scenario that homeowners would get no direct help here is what would happen even though it may be intuitively read in one's mind. Homeowners would walk away in increasing numbers, it would become the popular option, one that has happened in prior housing crises in Colorado for example but this time it would be spread out across America, making it dangerous. This would launch a downward spiral or cycle in which the more homeowners walk way, or default the more house prices drop, and the more house prices drop a new group of homeowners who previously had enough equity in the house now because of the last price drop enter the category of homeowners who would be better off just walking away as a rational option. During the next wave this gorup would default and set the spiral or cycle moving again to lead to further price declines and another group of homeowners finding not enough equity in their homes to justify making payments and this group would walk away. At each turn of this spiral another cycle would be set in motion which is why it is so dangerous once it gets started, and the need for timely but also well thought out plan and good execution. This cycle is that of the economic system as a whole. As house prices drop at each turn of this cycle, it would have a serious impact on consumption for an already indebted American consumer. A drop in consumption means fewer product purchases by consumers, and the falling demand means factories would close as companies consolidate operations around the remaining factories to keep capacity utilization at reasonable levels, and this would mean layoffs and cuts in investment and other spending. The layoffs in turn would add another layer of homeowners leaving their homes through foreclosures adding to the pool of homeowners who have left their homes, and adding to the downward pressure on house prices. The pickup in inflation would bite at exactly the worst time as this would mean consumers would have to spend even more carefully. The price of oil which normally would respond to changes such as a fleet of cars with higher mileage on American roads would take a longer time to respond as this fleet change would take a few years to occur. It would respond to lower demand for oil in American factories but the considerable demand in Asia and other countries where the economies are likely to slow down but still be growing at rates to accomodate the large number of people who have not benefited from the market economy, would make the price decline in oil a gradual affair. The weaker dollar would add to the price of imports adding to the inflation. This bite from inflation would lower consumption even further in the economic cycle. And this would mean lower production in factories and even more layoffs at the next turn of the economic cycle. The Federal Reserve would find itself having difficult choices between maintaining confidence in the dollar, for which Capman and McKinnon argue on the pages of the WSJ recently and lowering rates but not achieving much in terms of stimulating either consumption or investment as this would take time to work itself out and all the Fed could achieve by its interest rate making tool is to buy time to weather these adjustments in an orderly manner. There is almost a consensus among experts that interest rate reductions in the current climate of inflationary movements in prices and the current currency exchange rates moving towards a loss of confidence in the dollar is something to be done very carefully and each action taken only with careful understanding of the possible consequences. A look at the proposal itsel shows that it gets around the whole issue of moral hazard by having the cost paid for in this manner. The mortgage investors will pay for the 5 years of interest on the 20% of the loan the government provides. The homeowner takes over after that. The mortgage investors cannot add deferred interest, prepayment penalties or other ways to make the homeowner pay some of the interest charges. And the homeowners payment has to be afforadable so mortgage investors have to show that the payment is not more than 35% of income of the homeownercalled the debt to income ratio (DTI). And only homeowners with mortgage payments above 40% DTI are eligible. And the government would raise the money needed through a $50 billion offering. To show there is no moral hazard that is the government bailing out any of the parties involved, the government will get back all of its money or intends to do so, the government will have the first rights to the money should a home foreclose and before anybody else is paid. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former Fed chairman Paul Volcker has opinion about the financial crisis that is deeply felt. He wants the wall that separates banks that take in federally insured deposits from the public separated from the risky trading activities of investment banking houses. That would essentially put us back to the situation that existed before Glass Steagall Act of 1933 was revoked in the 1999. The lessons of the thirties apply today. Says Volcker "people say I am old-fashioned and banks can no longer be seaprated from nonbank activity, but that argument brought us back to where we are today." The Obama advisers like Geithner and Summers are close to the bankers- see the links to Geithner and Summers- and believe that extensively regulating the banks would prevent the banks from engaging in risky practices. However as this reporter Louis Uchitelle of the NYT has not pointed out, the problem is that this is more easily said than done. The very fact that there were close ties between Geithner and Summers and the bankers during the Clinton Administration and Geithner as head of the New York Fed under the Bush administration, and the aggressive lobbying by the investment banks like Goldman and others who are now banks to water down any regulation on derivatives trading and on other supervision, can only lead to a situation where neither Volcker's solution or the Obama people's solution is put into effect. THis will only invite another crisis. With the public anger even worse as the bonuses and compensation from trading profits by Goldman and other banks come through cheap money created by the Fed- see links- for the purpose of addressing the financial crisis. Volcker would separate JP Morgan and Bear Stearns trading operations and separate Merrill from BofA, and Goldman would revert from abank holding company to a investment banking house. Volcker believes that the pay on Wall Street "has gotten grotesquely large." Volcker believes that the separation of deposit taking institutions from investment banking would reduce trading profits and consequently automatically reduce these large bonuses. So is Volcker being ignored by the Obama administration, even as his glow helped the Obama people win public support as a better steward of the economy than McCain during the election campaign? During the crisis Volcker headed the president's Economic Recovery Advisory Board. Today he is rarely seen in his Washington office, he talks to administration officials mostly on the phone, at 82 he is not knocking on doors, and the advisory board has been assigned to look at the tax law on overseas corporate profits. Volcker agrees with most of the Obama plan on financial regulation including higher capital requirements and and pay guidelines, but if this is not enacted because of lobbying by bankers then the nation will have the benefit of neither the Volcker Plan or the Obama Plan. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The top 1% of Americans owns more wealth than the 90% at the bottom, according to the Economic Policy Institute. The Economic Mobility Project points out that the U.S. provides less intergenerational mobility than most other industrialized countries. A key factor is less educational investments to give better educational opportunities to the less advantaged. Michael Spence, a nobel prize winning economist, says we have in America gone from one propertied man, one vote; to providing voting rights to all regardless of color or gender or property, and back to where it is now one vote for so many dollars. The financing of political campaigns has made good policy decisions for the financial sector based on merits and wise judgement impossible, as Congress and the White House are beholden to interests that finance political campaigns, says a former head of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

LyrArc Article Gist
Facebook briefly reaches the $38 price of its IPO offering in July 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
Bank of America's profitable mortgage business in 4th quarter 2012 with over $1 billion in revenue. Bank of America worked with its own customers to tighten oversight and turned down mortgage purchases from other banks. Lending to borrowers under the government HARP program was more profitable. As refinancings under the HARP program shrink from the 800,000 reached in the first ten months of 2012, the revenues and margins are likely to decline, say analysts.

LyrArc Article Gist
A series of voicemails and emails in court documents now disclosed, show that AstraZeneca tried to suppress findings about diabetes after effects in taking its psychiatric drug Seroquel. In an August 15, 2005, voicemail sent to company salespeople an employee Christine Ney, followed up on a"weight and diabetes sell sheet" they had recently sent. It said that the salespeople should assuage doctors' fears about their patients' weight gains, telling them that the data did not show any causal link between diabetes and the drug. "Our objective is to neutralize customer objections to Seroquel's weight and diabetes profile", Ms Ney said in the voice mail message. She instructed representatives to "refocus the call" away from diabetes to the drug's tolerability. While all this was going on and years before this, Astra Zeneca concealed a drug safety expert's own assessment of Seroquel's relation to diabetes. In a 2000 position paper about the safety of Seroquel sent to Dutch regulatory authorites, an AstraZeneca doctor named Wayne Geller wote that there was a relationship between the drug and diabetes. He wrote " there is reasonable evidence to suggest that Seroquel therapy can cause impaired glucose regulation including diabetes melliutus in certain individuals."...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Economist asks whether the government can have the resolve to take strong action where necessary with the banks. The feeling is that the government was too close to the banks during the boom, and banks like Goldman have so much influence in the government and many bankers work inside the government, making it difficult to separate the public interest from the interest of the banks. This makes it more difficult to take necessary action when it comes to the banks.

LyrArc Article Gist
William Dudley who spent 20 years at Goldman Sachs and was its Chief Economist, before his position as executive vice president of the Fed's markets group, will now head the New York Federal Reserve Bank.

LyrArc Article Gist
Would hedge funds that short Lehman's stock want to create an environment of perceptions of uncertainty around Lehman. ts quite possible. Lehman's CEO Fuld flew back from India over the weekend and went on the offensive to dispel perceptions of weakness. According to this report Bear Stearns had $33 billion in total liquidity compared to $169 billion for lehmans which compares with $169 billion for Goldman Sachs. Of this Lehman has $35 billion in cash and liquid assets and $160 billion in unencumbered assets like loans and securities backed by commercial mortgages that it use as collateral to borrow more. Lehman has the highest percentage of liquidity at 25% of total assets compared to other major brokers according to Buckingham Research Associates the source for these numbers. Its here that the Fed's recent decision to lend to the largest investment firms comes into play. As Mr Fuld stated the Fed's decision to create a lending facility for these primary dealers like Lehmanand permit a broad range of investment grade securities o serve as collateral improves the liquidity picture and in his view takes the liquidity issue for the entire industry off the table. Those looking at the downside point to the Level 3 assets of no observable value of $42 billion and the $37 billion in residential mortgages in Lehman Brothers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Two realities are affecting exchanges. One is that trading commodities and derivatives is a $600 trillion business worldwide and is more profitable than trading in corporate shares. This shows in the value of ICE and NYSE in the stock market. In April 2011 ICE was valued at $1.5 billion less than NYSE, in Dec 2012 ICE was valued at $4 billion more that NYSE as it makes its bid to merge with NYSE. The other is that the Dodd-Frank financial system overhaul in the U.S. after the 2008 financial crisis has created a new model for derivatives trading providing advantages to regulated electronic exchanges and clearinghouses that handle derivatives trades with transparency. Jeffrey Sprecher, CEO of ICE, the IntercontinentalExchange, which handles derivatives trading through its clearinghouse operations, says: "For the past decade, our solutions made our markets increasingly electronic and increasingly clear. Today, financial reform is imposing that vision on many markets through a rule-making process." Bart Chilton, a member of the CFTC which regulates derivatives trading says Dodd-Frank legislation supports the business model of derivatives exchanges. This is especially true for Mr Sprecher and ICE. Sprecher has a good relationship with regulators with whom he talks directly, and is supportive of CFTC efforts to close loopholes as he is confident he can make money as long as the rules are clear. His confidence stems from his model which is technology based from day one, with its own clearinghouse and technology based transparency of the ICE data vault, information it shares with regulators. Sprecher stumbled upon this opportunity. He is an executive in the power industry. Working on developing power plants Sprecher found it was difficult for power firms to hedge investments in energy with financial contracts because there was no well organized, clear and transparent market for such contracts. This he set out to do by buying a little know exchange in Atlanta for buying and selling electricity, later getting the the backing of BP, and investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, to form ICE in 2000. Banks liked the idea of a having an organized clear place to buy and sell derivatives in oil and other commodities, and having an alternative to the Chicago Mercantile Exchange in futures trading. Swaps trading under Dodd Frank supervision is converting to old style futures contracts where there is less competition for ICE's futures trading creating new opportunity. ICE setup its own clearinghouse, and acquired the Clearing Corporation, which was the base for a derivative called credit-default swap. To make derivatives trading transparent and reduce systemic risk Dodd-Frank legislation required exchanges to provide information to data warehouses which would then share the information with regulators. ICE setup its own data warehouse to do this called ICE Trade Vault. Dood-Frank rules envisioned the formation of clearinghouses and exchange such a ICE to provide a clear process, transparency and reduce systemic risk in derivatives trading. ICE under Sprecher by making this vision its own and using technology has created new opportunity. ...