| The term red pill and its opposite, blue pill, are pop culture terms that have become a common symbol for the choice between the blissful ignorance of illusion (blue) and embracing the sometimes painful truth of reality (red). |
| Take The Journey |
|
|
- Talk of a Greek Exit Gets Louder
- Doug Casey on Taxes and Freedom, Part II
- Is Facebook the Rusty Hinge of the Stock Market?
- Fitch Downgrades Japan
- Doug Casey on Taxes and Freedom
- Greeks Run on Banks as Euro-Confidence Wanes
- To the Class of 2012
- Hedge Funds Bail On Euro Now
- Expatriation in the Wake of the Facebook IPO
What They Got Away With
Chief executives at big banks take on big risks, and for that, they are paid millions. But what happens when the risks don’t pay off? Should CEOs still get to walk away from the wreckage with gilded severance packages while employees lumber off with boxes and broken dreams? Don’t taxpayers deserve a refund of multi-million-dollar payouts for paying billions to bail out these firms? Almost all these CEOs say no, but lately, Congress and federal regulators seems to be saying yes. Some compensation has been cut, and some could be capped under proposed regulations. Some ex-CEOs may face fraud charges, and a few have been hauled before Congress–such as those at AIG, which was lambasted by lawmakers for sending executives to a $440,000 junket after getting an $85 billion government bailout. Despite all this scrutiny, plenty of chiefs are still walking away with mountains of money. A look at some of these golden parachuters.
Continue reading
Banks Seen Dangerous Defying Obama’s Too-Big-to-Fail Move
Two years after President Barack Obama vowed to eliminate the danger of financial institutions becoming “too big to fail,” the nation’s largest banks are bigger than they were before the nation’s credit markets seized up and required unprecedented bailouts by the government.
Five banks — JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Citigroup Inc., Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC), and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. — held $8.5 trillion in assets at the end of 2011, equal to 56 percent of the U.S. economy, according to central bankers at the Federal Reserve.
Five years earlier, before the financial crisis, the largest banks’ assets amounted to 43 percent of U.S. output. The Big Five today are about twice as large as they were a decade ago relative to the economy, sparking concern that trouble at a major bank would rock the financial system and force the government to step in as it did in 2008 with the Fed-assisted rescue of Bear Stearns Cos. by JPMorgan and with Citigroup and Bank of America after the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy, the largest in U.S. history.
“Market participants believe that nothing has changed, that too-big-to-fail is fully intact,” said Gary Stern, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
Continue reading
Gretchen Morgenson: Wall Street Really Does Enjoy a Different Set of Rules Than the Rest of Us
Gretchen Morgenson has earned a Pulitzer-winning career from exposing abuse and conflicts of interest on Wall Street. In this interview, she confirms that there is indeed a second set of rules enjoyed by our elite financial institutions, largely unfettered by the constraints that apply to the rest of us.
Consequences for failure and fraud are very different under this second set of rules — in fact, they’re practically rewarded. Accountability, by all prudent measures, has become non-existent. The extraordinary measures the U.S. deployed to deal with the great contraction in 2008 only served to exacerbate these imbalances.
What’s sorely needed now is a national dialogue on whether we’re willing to allow this to continue. What benefits are we receiving by enabling these elite to enjoy such different standards? What type of system and rules might work better for our interests?
Sadly, beyond the disorganized Occupy Wall Street outrage that has waned in visibility, there is no real cogent, organized public debate focused on this right now. A big reason is that Washington is actively avoiding such a dialogue. It was fundamentally complicit in creating the underlying factors resulting in the ’08 collapse and it doesn’t want brighter light helping the public understand that more clearly.
As a populace we have a decision to make: Are we going to get more engaged and start articulating the reform we want to see? For if not, we’re making a passive decision to allow the wealth gap to widen further.
In the meantime, Gretchen sees a lot of instability in financial markets that have been allowed to balloon further even though the underlying causes of the ’08 crash haven’t been resolved. She cautions investors to avoid risk (despite the Fed’s encouragements), pay down debt, and have a defensive plan in place should the markets suffer another serious correction in the near future.
Continue reading
Edith O’Brien, MF Global Executive, Subpoenaed By Congress
WASHINGTON — A congressional panel has voted to subpoena an MF Global executive to testify about what took place at the brokerage firm before it collapsed last fall.
The House Financial Services oversight subcommittee voted Wednesday to subpoena Edith O’Brien, who was an assistant treasurer at the firm. O’Brien declined to appear voluntarily at a hearing scheduled for next week. She worked in the office charged with ensuring customer accounts were properly handled, the subcommittee says.
MF Global filed for bankruptcy protection Oct. 31. About $1.6 billion of customers’ money hasn’t been recovered.
Former Sen. Jon Corzine led the firm until last fall. He testified before three congressional panels in December.
Also scheduled to testify at the hearing are MF Global Chief Financial Officer Henri Steenkamp, General Counsel Laurie Ferber, and Christine Serwinski, chief financial officer for North America.
According to CME Group, the financial exchange operator that oversaw MF Global, O’Brien and Serwinski told an auditor that about $700 million was transferred from customer accounts to the firm’s brokerage operations to meet cash needs.
O’Brien couldn’t be reached for comment. A spokeswoman for MF Global didn’t return calls seeking comment.
Steenkamp testified in December that he didn’t authorize, approve… Continue reading
Student Loan Debt Hits $1 Trillion, Deemed ‘Too Big To Fail’ By One Federal Agency
The student loan debt market is now “too big to fail”, says Rohit Chopra, the student loan ombudsman for the newly created Consumer Finance Protection Bureau.
Speaking on Wednesday to a conference hosted by the Consumer Bankers Association in Austin, Texas, Chopra highlighted the sobering news that total student loan debt in the United States now exceeds an eye-popping $1 trillion, a record high. In prepared remarks published on the CFPB’s blog, Chopra writes:
Students borrowed $117 billion in just federal student loans last year. And students continue to borrow private student loans, which lack the income-based repayment and deferment options of federal student loans. If current trends continue, there will be consequences not just for young people, but for all of us.
If that wasn’t disturbing enough, now comes news that the interest rate on new subsidized student loans from the federal government, called Stafford loans, are set to double to 6.8 percent on July 1 if Congress does not prevent the federal program keeping those interest rates low from expiring.
If interest rates on new subsidized student loans double, the average student loan borrower on the standard 10-year plan will need to pay $2,800 more… Continue reading
J.P. Morgan Chase’s Ugly Family Secrets Revealed
In a story that should be getting lots of attention, American Banker has released an excellent and disturbing exposé of J.P. Morgan Chase’s credit card services division, relying on multiple current and former Chase employees. One of them, Linda Almonte, is a whistleblower whom I’ve known since last September; I’m working on a recount of her story for my next book.
One of the things we were promised by the lawmakers who passed the Dodd-Frank reform bill a few years back is that this would be a new era for whistleblowers who come forward to tell the world about problems in our financial infrastructure. This story now looms as a test case for that proposition. American Banker reporter Jeff Horwitz did an outstanding job in this story detailing the sweeping irregularities in-house at Chase, but his very thoroughness means the news may have ramifications for Linda, which is why I’m urging people to pay attention to this story in the upcoming weeks.
The Cliff’s Notes version of the story goes something like this: Late in 2009, Chase’s credit card services division sold a parcel of nearly $200 million worth of credit card judgments to a debt collector at a discount. This common practice in the credit-card industry is a little like a bookie selling the outstanding debts of his delinquent gamblers to a leg-breaker for 25 cents on the dollar. If the leg-breaker gets half the delinquents to pay, the deal works out for both sides — the bookie gets 25 percent of money he wasn’t going to collect, and the leg-breaker makes a 100 percent profit.
In the case of credit cards, of course, you’re selling the debts to collection agents, not leg-breakers, but aside from that unpleasantly minor distinction the process is the same. The most valuable kinds of sales in this world are sales of credit card judgments, in other words accounts in which the debtor has already been successfully brought to court. That, ostensibly, is what this bloc of accounts Chase sold in 2009 involved.
Almonte came to Chase in the summer of 2009 as a mid-level executive in the credit card services division’s offices in San Antonio, and was quickly put in charge of preparing the documentation for this enormous sale of credit card judgments. When Chase regional offices from places like southern California and Illinois began sending in the papers for these “judgments,” Almonte very soon found out that something was seriously wrong. From Horwitz’s piece:
Nearly half of the files [Linda's] team sampled were missing proofs of judgment or other essential information, she wrote to colleagues. Even more worrisome, she alleged in her wrongful-termination suit, nearly a quarter of the files misstated how much the borrower owed.
In the “vast majority” of those instances, the actual debt was “lower that what Chase was representing,” her suit stated.
