Thursday, July 31, 2014

Runaway Shadow Bank System

You Can't Taper a Ponzi Scheme: 

Time to Reboot

Monday, 28 July 2014 09:53By Ellen BrownThe Web of Debt Blog | News Analysis
Federal Reserve Borad Chairwoman Janet Yellen speaks at a news conference on the state of the economy, in Washington, March 19, 2014. (Photo: Gabriella Demczuk / The New York Times)Federal Reserve Board Chairwoman Janet Yellen speaks at a news conference on the state of the economy, in Washington, March 19, 2014. (Photo: Gabriella Demczuk / The New York Times)


One thing to be said for the women now heading the Federal Reserve and the IMF: compared to some of their predecessors, they are refreshingly honest. The Wall Street Journal reported on July 2nd:

Two of the world’s most powerful women of finance sat down for a lengthy discussion Wednesday on the future of monetary policy in a post-crisis world: U.S. Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen and International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde. Before a veritable who’s-who in international economics packing the IMF’s largest conference hall, the two covered all the hottest topics in debate among the world’s central bankers, financiers and economists.
Among those hot topics was the runaway shadow banking system, defined by Investopedia as “The financial intermediaries involved in facilitating the creation of credit across the global financial system, but whose members are not subject to regulatory oversight. The shadow banking system also refers to unregulated activities by regulated institutions.” Examples given include hedge funds, derivatives and credit default swaps.

Conventional banks also engage in “shadow banking.” One way is by using their cash cushion as collateral in the repo market, where they can borrow to invest in the stock market and other speculative ventures. As explained by Bill Frezza in a January 2013 Huffington Post article titled “Too-Big-To-Fail Banks Gamble With Bernanke Bucks”:

If you think [the cash cushion from excess deposits] makes the banks less vulnerable to shock, think again. Much of this balance sheet cash has been hypothecated in the repo market, laundered through the off-the-books shadow banking system. This allows the proprietary trading desks at these “banks” to use that cash as collateral to TAKE OUT LOANS to GAMBLE with. In a process called hyper-hypothecation this pledged collateral gets pyramided, creating a ticking time bomb ready to go kablooey when the next panic comes around.

Addressing the ticking time bomb of the shadow banking system, here is what two of the world’s most powerful women had to say:

MS. LAGARDE: . . . You’ve beautifully demonstrated the efforts that have been undertaken . . . in terms of THE UNIVERSE that you have under your jurisdiction. But this universe . . . has generated the creation of parallel universes. And . . . with the toolbox with all the attributes that you have — what can you do about the shadow banking at large? . . .

MS. YELLEN: So I think you’re pointing to something that is an enormous challenge. And we simply have to expect that when we draw regulatory boundaries and supervise intensely within them, that there is the prospect that activities will move outside those boundaries and we won’t be able to detect them. And if we can, we won’t be — we won’t have adequate regulatory tools. And that is going to be a huge challenge to which I don’t have a great answer.

Limited to her tools, there probably is no great answer. All the king’s horses and all the king’s men could not rein in the growth of the shadow banking system, despite the 828-page Dodd-Frank Act. Instead, the derivatives pyramid has CONTINUED to explode under its watch, to a notional value now estimated to be as high as $2 quadrillion.

At one time, manipulating interest rates was the Fed’s stock in trade for managing the money supply; but that tool too has lost its cutting edge. Rates are now at zero, as low as they can go – unless they go negative, meaning the bank charges the depositor interest rather than the reverse. That desperate idea is actually being discussed. Meanwhile, rates are unlikely to be raised any time soon. On July 23rd, Bloomberg reported that the Fed could keep rates at zero through 2015.

One reason rates are unlikely to be raised is that they would make the interest tab on the burgeoning federal debt something taxpayers could not support. According to the Treasury’s website, taxpayers pay about $400 billion a year in interest on thefederal debt, just as they did in 2006 — although the debt has nearly doubled, from $9 trillion to over $16 trillion.  The total interest is kept low by extremely LOW INTEREST RATES.

Worse, raising interest rates could implode the monster derivatives scheme. Michael Snyder observes that the biggest banks have written over $400 trillion in interest rate derivatives contracts, betting that interest rates will not shoot up. If they do, it will be the equivalent of an insurance company writing trillions of dollars in LIFE INSURANCE contracts and having all the insureds die at once. The banks would quickly become insolvent. And it will be our deposits that get confiscated to recapitalize them, under the new “bail in” scheme approved by Janet Yellen as one of the Fed’s more promising tools (called “resolution planning” in Fed-speak).

As Max Keiser observes, “You can’t taper a Ponzi scheme.” You can only turn off the tap and let it collapse, or watch the PARASITE consume its food source and perish of its own accord.

Collapse or Metamorphosis?
The question being hotly debated in the blogosphere is, “What then?”  Will economies collapse globally? Will life as we know it be a thing of the past?
Not likely, argues John Michael Greer in a March 2014 article called “American Delusionalism, or Why History Matters.” If history is any indication, governments will simply, once again, change the rules.

In fact, the rules of money and banking have changed every 20 or 30 years for the past three centuries, in an ongoing trial-and-error experiment in evolving a financial system, and an ongoing battle over whose interests it will serve. To present that timeline in full will take another article, but in a nutshell we have gone from PRECIOUS METAL coins, to government-issued paper scrip, to privately-issued banknotes, to checkbook money, to gold-backed Federal Reserve Notes, to unbacked Federal Reserve Notes, to the “near money” created by the shadow banking system. Money has evolved from being “stored” in the form of a physical commodity, to paper representations of value, to COMPUTER bits storing information about credits and debits.
The rules have been changed before and can be changed again. DEPRESSIONS, credit crises and financial collapse are not acts of God but are induced by mechanical flaws or corruption in the financial system. Credit may stop flowing, but the workers, materials and markets are still there. The system just needs a reboot.

Hopefully the next PROGRAM that gets run will last more than 20 or 30 years. Ideally, we might mimic the ancient Mesopotamians, the oldest and most long-lasting civilization in history, and devise an economic system that lasts for millennia. How they did it, along with some other promising models, will be the subject of another article. For more on this, see The Public Bank Solution.

About Those Derivatives
How to kill the derivatives cancer without killing the patient? Without presuming to have more insight into that question than the head of the Fed or the IMF, I will just list some promising suggestions from a variety of experts in the field (explored in more depth in my earlier article here):

  • Eliminate the superpriority granted to derivatives in the 2005 Bankruptcy Reform Act, the highly favorable protective legislation that has allowed the derivatives bubble to mushroom.
  • Restore the Glass-Steagall Act separating depository BANKING FROMinvestment banking.
  • Break up the giant derivatives banks.
  • Alternatively, nationalize the too-big-to-fail banks.
  • Make derivatives illegal and unwind them by netting them out, declaring them null and void.
  • Impose a financial transactions tax on Wall Street trading.
  • To protect the deposits of citizens and local governments, establish postal SAVINGS BANKS and state-owned banks on the model of the Bank of North Dakota, the only state to completely escape the 2008 banking crisis.
These alternatives are all viable possibilities. Our financial leaders, in conjunction with our political leaders, have CONTINUALLY re-created the web of money and credit that knits our economy together. But they have often taken only their own interests and those of the wealthiest citizens into account, not those of the general public. It is up to us to educate ourselves about money and banking, and to demand a system that is accountable to the people and serves our long-term interests.

ELLEN BROWN

Organizing Labor is a Human Right


Representatives Keith Ellison and John Lewis plan to introduce a bill Wednesday that would amend the National Labor Relations Act to include protections found under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to include labor organizing as a fundamental right.
Representative Keith Ellison wants to make forming a union a civil right.
THENATION.COM

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

System of World-wide Foreclosures

The Language of Expulsion

Wednesday, 30 July 2014 10:27By Saskia SassenTruthout |
2014 730 exp sw(Photo: Zoriiah / Flickr)When we discuss rising inequality, poverty, imprisonment, FORECLOSED HOMESand other injustices, simply engaging in familiar discussions about these increases in disparities does not capture the larger reality we must face. We need new language. I use the term "expulsions" to mark the radicalness of that necessary shift. [1]

For instance, we need new language to express the fact that a growing number of adult men in poor neighborhoods in the United States have not ever held a JOB; the phrase "long-term unemployment" is much too vague and fails to capture a radical structural condition. Our language must recognize that the 52 million people identified by The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) as "displaced people" are almost never returning home, because their "homes" have been replaced by a new luxury building, a plantation, a war zone. Both the long-termUNEMPLOYED and the long-term displaced have, in fact, been expelled from society.

These, and many other expulsions take on specific forms in each location of the world, and they have specific contents in diverse domains: economy, society, politics. Indeed, they are so specific in each place and domain - and are usually studied in these very specific contexts - that it is difficult to see that they might be the surface manifestations of deeper trends that today cut across the familiar divisions. To return to the two examples mentioned here: Experts on long-term unemployment in the 

Global North do not really study the displaced in the Global South, and vice-versa. And yet, at ground level, these displacements share a simple, common element: There are people being (usually permanently) cast out of what had been their lives.

We must find ways to discuss the systemic edges hidden deep inside the territory of the national. These edges are not to be confused with national borders or other politico-administrative divisions, even though they may coincide in some cases. Further, once the unemployed or the displaced, or so many other versions of the expelled, cross this systemic edge, they become a bit invisible; they are less likely to be counted in measures of GDP per capita or in a census. This is BECOMING a bit invisible as it applies to people, places, failed small businesses, neighborhoods destroyed by hurricanes, neighborhoods destroyed by MORTGAGE FORECLOSURES, and more.

All these expulsions, and so many others not mentioned here, coexist with growth in "the" economy, even if the space of that economy is shrinking. This coexistence of growth (as conventionally measured) and these expulsions further add to the invisibility of those who are expelled from job and home.

Complex forms of knowledge we admire come into play in many of these expulsions - notably, advanced mathematics for the algorithms of finance and complex legal innovations to enable the massive land-grabs that took off in 2006. I see this mal-deployment of knowledge as a major issue in our current global political economy. It brings to the fore the fact that forms of knowledge and intelligence we respect and admire are often at the origin of long transaction chains that can end in simple brutalities. One example of a simple expulsion would be the low-paid unhealthy JOBS that are part of the complex logistics of outsourcing. These complex forms of knowledge produce grand expulsions, as when one builds an enormous dam that buries whole villages and farmlands, thereby making visible its destructive side.

Certain extreme cases make that mal-deployment of knowledge sharply visible. For instance, the so-called subprime mortgage developed in the 2000s was a financial project aimed at developing new types of asset-backed securities and collateralized DEBT. It is not to be confused with the state-sponsored, sub-prime MORTGAGES of an earlier period, aimed at genuinely helping modest-income families to own a home.

The new versions of subprime mortgages used the modest homes involved TO MEET the growing demand for asset-backed securities by investors, in a market where the outstanding value of derivatives was $630 trillion, or 14 times the value of global GDP.

Investors were clamoring for some real assets backing securities, not just derivatives on interest rates and so on in long chains of hypotheticals. The complexity offinancial engineering was deployed to de-link the actual (modest) value of the house and of the mortgage from the asset-backed security aimed at the high-finance circuit. Various financial maneuvers were used to camouflage the modesty of the actual material assets. A high-finance instrument was developed on the backs of "the little people." The challenge was to delink such that even if the buyers of the house could not pay, it really did not matter - the high-investment circuit would have made its money, and only those who had held on to the mortgages would suffer with the eventual crisis.  

When this short and brutal history was over in 2010, over 13 million such contracts had been signed and 9 million households - that could be about 30 million people or more - had lost their homes, according to the Federal Reserve. Now this instrument is circulating in Europe, where every year several hundred thousand households are losing their homes. Some of the highest numbers of FORECLOSURES IN Europe are happening in Germany, the country we think of as having avoided all forms of the crisis.

When we consider them all together, the diverse expulsions across countries may well have a greater impact on the shaping of our world than the rapid economic growth in India, China and a few other countries. Indeed, such expulsions can coexist with economic growth as counted by standard measures.

These expulsions don't simply happen; they are made. The instruments for this "making" range from elementary policies to complex techniques requiring specialized knowledge and intricate organizational formats. And the channels for expulsion vary greatly. They include austerity policies that have helped shrink the economies of Greece and Spain, and environmental policies that overlook the toxic emissions from enormous mining operations.
Historically, the oppressed have often risen against their "masters." Today, despite movements of resistance around the globe, such opposition is often prevented by the way in which the oppressed have been expelled and survive at a great distance from their oppressors. Addressing this reality full on will require recognizing the radical character of these expulsions - a bit more JOB growth, a bit more help with housing: None of this will be enough to restore a measure of social justice in this world.

[1] This essay and the talk for the Disposable Life series is based on my latest book,Expulsions: Brutality and Complexity in the Global Economy (Harvard University Press/Belknap 2014).
SASKIA SASSEN    is the Robert S. Lynd Professor of Sociology and cohair of The Committee on Global Thought, Columbia University (www.saskiasassen.com). Her books include The Global City, Guests and Aliens, Globalization and its Discontents, and more. She has received diverse awards, ranging from multiple doctor honoris causa to named lectures and selection for various honors lists. Her new book isExpulsions: Brutality and Complexity in th

Teamster Labor Hero Jimmy Hoffa Sr.

Jimmy Hoffa Went Missing 39 Years Ago Today 

| Wed Jul. 30, 2014 6:00 AM EDT
Teamsters Union President James R. Hoffa, left, stands with Anthony Provenzano, right, and fellow union members during Hoffa's visit to New Jersey. AP
 
On this date in 1975, Jimmy Hoffa was last seen around 2:45 p.m. outside a Detroit area restaurant. His unlocked car was found at the restaurant, but there were no other signs of his whereabouts. Hoffa's disappearance sparked numerous theories as to what might have happened to him, and where he might be buried. In 1982, on the seventh anniversary of his disappearance, Hoffa was legally declared dead.
 
Jimmy Hoffa poses for a photo on July 24, 1975, just six days before his disappearance.  Tony Spina/MCT/ZUMA Press

Tuesday, July 29, 2014

Pensions Refunded by Labor Board


Labor board orders L.A. Council to rescind pension cuts for workers

A Five-member panel that handles labor complaints at Los Angeles City Hall handed a stinging defeat to the city's political leaders on Monday, voting to strike down Los Angeles' bid to rein in retirement costs for civilian employees.
The Employee Relations Board voted unanimously Monday to order the City Council to rescind a 2012 law scaling back pension benefits for new employees of the Coalition of L.A. City Unions, on the grounds that the changes were not properly negotiated. That law, backed by Mayor Eric Garcetti when he was a Councilman, was expected to cut retirement costs by up to $309 million over a decade, according to city analysts.
Ellen Greenstone, a lawyer for the labor coalition, described the vote as a “huge, big deal” -- one that shows the city could not unilaterally impose changes in pension benefits on its workforce.
Coalition chairwoman Cheryl Parisi said in a statement that the reduction in benefits, which included a hike in the employee retirement age, “devalues middle-class city workers and their dedication to serving the residents of Los Angeles.
"It's appalling that city officials continue to try to make city workers pay for the city's bad financial decisions," Parisi said in a prepared statement.
Garcetti is on vacation and his spokesman has refused to say where he is. A lawyer in City Atty. Mike Feuer's office could not immediately say how the city would respond. City Administrative Officer Miguel Santana, a high-level budget advisor, said the 2012 cuts had been a critical part of "bringing the city back to fiscal stability."
"The city will explore all of its options," he said.
The city’s labor board is a quasi-judicial body that reviews complaints from unions, managers and individual employees. Under the city’s labor ordinance, the panel has the power to invalidate decisions by the council, said the board's executive director, Robert Bergeson.
If council members do not agree with Monday’s decision, they can file legal paperwork seeking to have a judge overturn it, Bergeson said.
City officials have previously argued that changes in the RETIREMENT BENEFITS of future employees do not need to be negotiated. The 2012 law rolling back benefits applied only to employees hired after July 1, 2013. Budget officials had hoped that the reductions would trim the city's retirement costs by more than $4 billion over a 30-year period.
The board’s decision comes as the city's contributions for civilian employee retirement costs have climbed from $260 million in 2005 to an estimated $410 million this year, according to a recent budget report.
Garcetti and Council members could now find themselves attempting to negotiate cuts in pension costs at the same time they are also trying to reach salary agreements with coalition representatives. The city has been trying to keep a lid on raises -- yet another strategy for containing growing retirement costs.
The coalition's contract expired on July 1.

Tuesday, July 15, 2014

Obama Must Veto CISA

July 15, 2014 | By Nadia Kayyali

EFF Joins 35 Organizations, Companies, and Security Experts Calling on President Obama to 

Veto CISA

EFF joined a group of thirty-five civil society organizations, companies, and security experts that sent a letter on Monday encouraging President Obama to veto S. 2588, the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (“CISA”) of 2014. The letter states:
CISA fails to offer a comprehensive solution to cybersecurity threats. Further, the bill contains inadequate protections for privacy and civil liberties. Accordingly, we request that you promptly pledge to veto CISA.
Bad cybersecurity bills appear to be habit-forming for Congress. CISA, which is appropriately being called a “zombie bill” by privacy advocates and journalists, rehashes two similar (and equally flawed) bills: the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act (CISPA) of 2012 and CISPA of 2013. Both bills were soundly defeated after major outcries on the Internet and distaste in the Senate for a bill with insufficient privacy protections.

But some lawmakers aren’t getting the message. The letter points out that, while CISA has made a small number of cosmetic changes to CISPA:
CISA presents many of the same problems the Administration previously identified with CISPA in its veto threat. Privacy experts have pointed out how CISA would damage the privacy and civil liberties of users.
As we've emphasized in the past, the bill fails to provide privacy protections for Internet users and allows information sharing in a wide variety of circumstances that could potentially harm journalists and whistleblowers. Like its previous iterations, it also contains overbroad immunity from lawsuits for corporations that share information. As the letter points out, it even contains “a broad new categorical exemption from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act, the first since the Act’s passage in 1966.”

You can read the full text of the letter and see the signatories here. You can also take action today: tell your Senator to vote no on a bill that fails to make the Internet safer and invades the privacy and civil liberties of everyday Internet users.