July 2010

Video: Balatro’s Skinner Says Stress Test Methods `Pretty Weak’

July 26, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Chris Skinner, chief executive officer of Balatro Ltd., a banking industry research firm, talks about the criteria used to conduct stress tests on 91 European banks. European Union stress tests found banks need to raise 3.5 billion euros ($4.5 billion) of capital, leaving doubts about whether regulators were tough enough. Skinner speaks with Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.”

Read the full article →

Video: Rabobank’s Foster Discusses European Bank Stress Tests: Video

July 26, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Adrian Foster, head of financial-markets research for Asia at Rabobank Groep NV in Hong Kong, talks with Bloomberg’s Linzie Janis about the results of stress tests on European banks and the outlook for the region’s economies. European regulators found that seven banks need to raise a combined 3.5 billion euros ($4.5 billion) of capital. Germany’s Hypo Real Estate Holding AG, Agricultural Bank of Greece SA and five Spanish savings banks didn’t have adequate reserves to maintain a Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 6 percent in the event of a recession and sovereign-debt crisis, lenders and regulators said on July 23. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Lynch Says BP Action on Hayward Would Ease U.S. Anger

July 26, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Andy Lynch, portfolio manager at Schroder Investment Management Ltd., talks about the outlook for BP Plc shares and the possible appointment of Robert Dudley to take over as chief executive officer from Tony Hayward. He speaks with Ryan Chilcote on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.”

Read the full article →

Video: Redmayne’s McGregor Sees `Clean Sheet’ for BP’s New CEO

July 26, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Nick McGregor, an investment manager at Redmayne Bentley Stockbrokers, talks about the outlook for BP Plc’s second-quarter results and the prospect of Chief Executive Officer Tony Hayward being replaced. He speaks with Ryan Chilcote on Bloomberg Television’s “Start Up.”

Read the full article →

Video: Vietnam’s Low Costs Luring Manufacturers Away from China: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin reports on Vietnam’s attractiveness to manufacturers as a low-cost production base. The communist nation drew 13.5 percent of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations’ foreign direct investment pool in 2008, up from 4.4 percent two years earlier, according to the 10-member group. Bloomberg’s Susan Li also speaks. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Redeker Says Stress Tests Give Analysts `Important’ Data

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Hans-Guenter Redeker, global head of currency strategy at BNP Paribas SA, talks about the results of the European bank stress tests. He speaks from London with Maryam Nemazee on Bloomberg Television’s “Countdown.”

Read the full article →

Video: Barclays’ Forrester Sees Futher Downside Risks for Euro: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — David Forrester, a currency economist at Barclays Capital in Singapore, talks with Bloomberg’s Linzie Janis about the outlook for the euro. ¶ After tracking the euro’s slide from about $1.45 at the beginning of 2010, the median forecast of currency strategists has stayed within two cents of $1.20 since the start of June, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Forrester, speaking from Singapore, also discusses the results of stress tests on European banks released last week. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Al Eisele: A Very Good Week for a Small Town Newspaper Publisher

July 25, 2010

Nick Benton probably would be the first to admit that he’s not everybody’s cup of tea, especially in a conservative small town in Virginia whose citizens he’s been both informing and outraging in equal measure since March 28, 1991. As founder, owner and editor-in-chief of the Falls Church News-Press, Benton and some 150 of his friends and faithul readers, myself included, celebrated the publication of the 1,000th consecutive issue of his weekly newspaper by sharing pizza, liquid refreshments and memories of life in this suburban Washington community named after an 18th century Anglican church.. As usual, ever since the banner headline of his first issue proclaimed, “Rancorous Public Hearing on School Cuts, Tax Increase,” the latest issue of July 22, 2010 deals with the nitty-gritty of representative self-government at the local level, in this case whether the city of a little over 11,000 residents can continue funding a local bus system that can’t survive without a tax increase, and the newly elected mayor’s and city council’s efforts to overhaul ordinances governing commerical versus residential development. “F.C.’s Local Bus System GEORGE Once Again on the Chopping Block,” the paper’s 1000th issue announced to readers of its 30,500 press run, along with a story suggesting that the new mayor and aldermen may want some “minor tweaks” rather than a major overhaul of the city’s government operations. Both stories carried the byline of Nicholas F. Benton, which I suspect but don’t know, is typical of every one of the paper’s 1000 issues. Benton is a crusading editor in the finest tradition of American journalism, as he reminded readers in his editorial, titled “A Celebration of the First Amendment.” “Authored by none other than Virginia’s own George Mason [who with George Washington was a vestryman at the Falls Church], the First Amendment and its guarantee of free speech is the cornerstone of America’s great experiment in democracy,” he writes. “It’s the first thing to go when political repression arises or when control of the transmission means of its effective exercise wind up in the hands of the too few and the too powerful.” But, as I said, Benton isn’t everybody’s cup of tea. First of all, he’s an unabashed liberal who delights in bashing Republicans and boosting President Obama, as he did in his weekly editorial page column – he writes almost half of every issue – “A Very Bad Week for the GOP.” He also regularly runs the columns of New York Time’s columnists Paul Krugman, David Brooks and Maureen Dowd, as well as that of Hearst’s Helen Thomas, until her incendiary comments about Jewish-Palestinian relations cost her a front row seat at White House press conferences. Second, he’s not your average suburbanite. He’s openly gay – not that there’s anything wrong with that – and his paper features a regular gay columnist whose views on gay and lesbian issues appear alongside the local Democratic congressman’s column and that of a local County Board of Supervisors member’s “News of Greater Falls Church.” Benton got into a huge fight several years ago with the local Episcopal Church – where George Washington once worshipped – after the columnist described a local teenage student’s coming out. And third, he’s a former acolyte of bizarro economist and perennial fringe presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche – he worked for the LaRouche organization from 1974 and well into the 1980′s, first as a political organizer and then Washington bureau chief and White House correspondent of LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence Review before severing his ties with LaRouche. He even ran for governor of California against Jerry Brown in 1978 as the candidate of the LaRouche-backed U.S. Labor Party. As he explained in a June 27, 2007 column, “Maybe it was always bad, but by the late 1970′s, LaRouche’s movement had turned decidely ugly, into something existing only for the purposes of LaRouche’s own aggrandizement and the twisted agendas of too many sinister forces that seemed to influence him.” A California native, Benton earned a degree in English from Westmont College in 1966, where he had an athletic scholarship, and a master of divinity degree in 1969 from the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, where he began a lifetime crusade as an antiwar, anti-poverty and gay and civil rights activist, motivated in part by the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy. He became a contributor to the alternative Berkley Barb, helped found the Berkeley Gay Liberation Front and wrote the first editorial for the newspaper Gay Sunshine, which proclaimed that gay liberation would represent “those who understand themselves as oppressed — politically oppressed by an oppressor that not only is down on homosexuality, but equally down on all things that are not white, straight, middle class, pro-establishment… It should harken to a greater cause — the cause of human liberation, of which homosexual liberation is just one aspect — and on that level take its stand.” Benton, who has been divorced three times but has no children and lives with his cat Mimi, says his “dearest friend” is an ex-wife who lives in Falls Church. He describes himself on his MySpace page as a “relentless if imperfect warior against the ‘vast right wing conspiracy,’” whose mission as a journalist is “tirelessly warring against the religious right, promoting the confluence of interests between good development and community concerns, and playing a role in the cultural shift the the region, overall, toward more progressive and fair-minded virtues.” Benton displayed his penchant for non-conformist thinking in a column a week ago by suggesting that the current worldwide economic crisis may have vindicated the legacy of Marxism, a view that drew shocked responses from readers and probably explains why the new mayor declined to congratulate him on his journalistic milestone. But Benton is unapolgetic. When I asked him which of his 1,000 issues had the greatest impact, “other than the Marxist column,” he couldn’t cite any one example, but later wrote that the paper’s “best story” was its successful effort in the mid-1990′s wotking with the Chamber of Commerce, when he was its president, to end years a acrimony between Falls Church’s business and residential communities. “Through our editorial and other efforts, we caused a paradigm shift in Falls Church where each of these two components suddenly realized the value of each to the other,” he said. “It introduced an era that led to the most aggressive new development in the city’s history, which has helped bouy the city’s ability to maintain its excellent schools and services in tough economic times.” Benton, who employs a bevy of student journalists, also pointed with pride to his paper’s weekly publications of community and school news, from a crime blotter to local sports teams to reviews of local restaurants, as the secret to its success. “It is also the newspaper’s role to particularly stand up on behalf of the under-represented in society,” he added. As a journalist myself and longtime resident of Falls Church, it’s nice to know that my hometown newspaper is thriving at a time when almost every other newspaper is struggling to survive. And better yet to know that the newspaper’s owner believes, as H. L. Mencken put it, that a newspaper’s role in society is to “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.”

Read the full article →

Video: CIMB’s Loong Discusses U.S.-China Trade Relationship: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Pauline Loong, politics and policy risk analyst at CIMB Securities in Hong Kong, talks with Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin about the trade relationship between China and the U.S. Loong also discusses China’s currency policy. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Alan Schram: Thoughts on the Business Cycle

July 25, 2010

Lately, almost everyone seems melancholy about the prospects of the economy. So I thought I might share some anecdotal data points that suggest otherwise: • The yield curve is still steep, which induces credit creation. Historically, a steep yield curve has been an excellent predictor of economic growth. The Federal Reserve expects GDP to grow 3.5% this year. • M1 Money Multiplier, which tracks creation of new money by bank reserves, is up to 86.5 (compared to 83 a month ago) and steadily improving. • Rail shipments are higher than last year and growing every month. • Industrial companies Caterpillar and 3M both reported strong earnings last week, indicating their respective industries are not dipping back into recession. • Companies are flush with cash: Non-financial companies in the S&P 500 have $1.8 trillion in cash, higher than any other time in the last 50 years (per the Federal Reserve). When they start spending that cash, the impact will dwarf any government stimulus, and it will be more durable. • The WSJ ran a front page article a few weeks ago saying small investors lost faith in stocks. Exasperated with high volatility and low returns, people are fleeing equities, having developed a cautious mentality similar to that prevalent in the 1970′s. No bells are rung when major shifts in market psychology occur, but the crowds bailing out on stocks is probably as close as it comes to campanology. Meanwhile, smart money is doing the opposite: Bill Gross of PIMCO, aka the King of Bonds, is launching a new large cap equity fund, a new line of business for PIMCO. I doubt that is merely a coincidence. • Most importantly, valuations of equities are appealing. Of the 25 largest companies in the S&P 500, more than half (13) trade at P/E’s of 10 or lower (2011 forecast earnings). The earnings yield on the S&P 500 is 8.3%, more than 5 percentage points higher than a 10 year Treasury. The last time the gap between the two was that high was in the late 1970′s (!). The S&P 500 index has fallen at an annualized rate of 3% over the past 10 years, including dividends and adjusting for inflation. Gold is up 10% a year and treasury bonds gained 5% a year during that same period, after inflation. People extrapolate those trends forward and are therefore dubious of equities. However, even in the unlikely event that we face an extended period of no real growth in GDP, consider the numbers: • If inflation runs at just 1.5% annually and the typical US corporation does not grow at all, in five years earnings would be almost 8% higher, and if by then P/E’s rose to their historical level of 15, stocks would have risen 5.5% a year plus 2.5% in annual dividends, or a total return of 8% annually. That would be in line with the historical long term return for stocks, all the while paying more cash than 10 year treasuries do. • If in addition to the conservative scenario above companies use their excess cash to buy back stock, shareholders would have extra returns. And if earnings grow at 5% annually, then even if the P/E ratio remains below the long-term average, five year returns would be in the mid teens. So even under the most conservative assumptions, returns from here are not at all bad. The late 1980′s saw a major wave of defaults in Latin America, not unlike events in Europe now. Then came the S&L crisis, which was a major shock to the country and its psyche. People were generally negative, and that’s exactly when a major bull market for stocks started, and it lasted through the 1990′s. Markets reflect expectations. Investors need to know what expectations are discounted in the prevailing prices. By the time it is obvious the economy is doing better, stocks will already be expensive. As it turns out, ten years ago the best strategy was to buy bonds and avoid all stocks. It is probably the exact opposite now. Alan Schram is the Managing Partner of Wellcap Partners, a Los Angeles based investment firm. Email at aschram@wellcappartners.com.

Read the full article →

Video: U.S., South Korean Forces Begin Military Exercises: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Bloomberg’s Zeb Eckert reports on joint naval exercises by the U.S. and South Korea that began yesterday off the eastern coast of the Korean Peninsula, maneuvers North Korea threatened to “counter.” The drills involve 20 vessels and 200 aircraft, including the USS George Washington, a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and will be held until July 28. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: William Pesek Discusses Australia’s `Seinfeld Election’: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Bloomberg’s William Pesek speaks from Tokyo with Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin about next month’s Australian election. Australian opposition leader Tony Abbott and Prime Minister Julia Gillard have placed management of the economy at the top of their election campaigns before a national vote next month largely being fought over how much taxes companies pay and who gets to come to Australia. (William Pesek is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own. Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: Bernstein Is `Bullish’ on Asian Stocks in Second Half: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Steve Bernstein, chief executive officer and senior managing director of Oppenheimer Investments in Asia, talks with Bloomberg’s Haslinda Amin about his investment strategy for Asian stocks. ¶ Bernstein, speaking in Hong Kong, also discusses the outlook for Chinese banks and initial public offerings. (Excerpt. Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Video: IBM’s Davidson Says China CEOs Face `Double Complexity’: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Steven Davidson, partner at International Business Machines Corp.’s Global Business Services unit, talks with Bloomberg’s Susan Li about the company’s survey of 1,500 corporate chief executive officers globally on business sentiment and growth strategy. The vast majority of CEOs anticipate even greater complexity in the future, and more than half doubt their ability to manage it, according to the survey. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Kevin L. Kearns: FedEx’s Campaign of Distortion

July 25, 2010

We are about to find out yet again whether we are a nation of laws or men. The U.S. Senate will be voting perhaps as early as Tuesday on the FAA Reauthorization Act, including whether House-passed Section 806 will remain part of the bill. FedEx and its CEO Fred Smith have railed against Section 806 for several years now, claiming that it will lead to unionization of their Express division and endless labor strife, affecting the entire U.S. economy. These claims are all self-interested bluster, of course. Section 806 is really about equal application of the laws of our country to all similarly situated businesses — which should rise or fall in the marketplace based on their competitive abilities, not favoritism by the Congress. But perhaps we are after all a nation of CEOs: the current recession has exposed the out-of-bounds thinking and actions of many CEOs of large banks and corporations, which is too often aimed at manipulating the legal and political processes for personal and corporate gain. In this case, FedEx and Smith have carried on a shameless campaign of lies and intimidation seeking to exclude Section 806. They have falsely labeled their main rival in the package delivery industry, UPS, as seeking a “brown bailout” for supporting Section 806, thus turning the English language on its head. In fact, it is FedEx Express that has been “bailed out” for the last 15 years by special interest language passed in 1996. FedEx Express truck drivers are the only drivers in the nation’s package delivery industry covered under the Railway Labor Act, instead of being properly governed by the National Labor Relations Act. Section 806 puts an end to this misclassification and places all delivery drivers under the same law, the NLRA. FedEx Express drivers are in the same industry, do the same work, and should be covered by the same law as all other package delivery drivers in the country. In spite of FedEx’s claims that it will be easier for the Teamsters to unionize its drivers if they are placed under the NLRA, the issue here is not about unionization or how easy or difficult that might be, or what the results might be. The question again is whether success in business should come through market-driven competition or whether success should be the result of political influence and legislative favor. Since FedEx is consistently rated one of the very best companies for which to work, there is little likelihood that an organizing drive by the Teamsters will be successful. FedEx employees are overwhelmingly satisfied with their current non-union status. This situation is shown by two important facts: (1) over 120,000 FedEx employees are currently covered by the NLRA and not one is unionized; and (2) the comments of many FedEx employees on Section 806 appear on various web sites covering the issue and only a tiny minority appears to favor unionization. Ironically, the only FedEx employees who are unionized are its pilots, who are covered by the RLA. Thus even if some Senators dislike labor unions, their fears of the potential unionization of FedEx if Section 806 is passed are unfounded. In any case, liking or disliking organized labor is not an appropriate ground to void the basic constitutional principle of equal treatment under law. How does misclassification of its drivers under the RLA give FedEx an unfair competitive advantage? Simple. FedEx uses that status to woo customers on the grounds that it is “strike-proof.” Presumably this strategy/business practice is very profitable because FedEx is spending vast sums of money to defend its current special interest status. Its deceptive “Brown Bailout” campaign ads now blanket the Internet, exploiting that medium’s lack of Truth-in-Advertising standards to disseminate patently false content. Meanwhile, editorial pieces by Smith, other FedEx officials, and friendly journalists and business owners offer misleading and sometimes hysterical reasoning for the special treatment of FedEx Express drivers. Among them: FedEx makes a big deal out of the fact that it was founded as an airline, and UPS as a trucking company. The correct response is, “So what?” Both companies have evolved considerably during their respective existences, and both use a combination of airplanes, trucks, and other vehicles, including boats, to carry out their businesses. What should matter is their entire business structure today, not 40 or 100 years ago. Incidentally, UPS was founded in 1907 as a foot messenger service. Should its drivers therefore be held only to pedestrian traffic regulations and be free to ignore both the RLA and the NRLA, which came a generation later? FedEx Express claims that it carries 85 percent of its packages by air and that UPS carries 85 percent by truck. Again, so what? The classification of FedEx Express delivery drivers is the issue. They have nothing to do with air operations, that is flying, maintaining, or servicing aircraft – jobs that Congress covered when it amended the RLA. FedEx Express drivers pick up and deliver packages in trucks. All FedEx Express packages move by truck. It’s that simple. FedEx claims that Federal courts, specifically the 9th Circuit, have found that FedEx trucks are an integral part of the company. Yet the specific case cited is irrelevant to the labor law classification issue. It is not on point as it examined whether a California state agency had the power to regulate FedEx trucks. (There are also two strong and persuasive dissents FedEx fails to mention.) FedEx also claims that putative NLRA-produced unionization could allow a strike at a single distribution hub to paralyze FedEx Express’s delivery service and much of the U.S. economy. But this oft-repeated claim doesn’t even pass the laugh test. After all, disruptions hit the delivery industry every day – in the form of bad weather and malfunctioning equipment. Yet the industry has learned to be nimble and adjust to disruptions. Isolated labor unrest, if any, would be overcome with equal skill. FedEx CEO Smith says that even the slightly increased odds of unionization under the NLRA will cause him to cancel aircraft orders and gut the FedEx Express business. And, of course, valuable American jobs would be lost in the process. But FedEx Express is the core business and main revenue source of FDX Corporation. Why on earth would Smith even propose this crackpot idea? And why would his Board of Directors and shareholders go along with it? The Senate is duty-bound to see that American law is applied fairly and uniformly. It should eliminate the 1996 special interest provision handing FedEx a carve-out, stop holding up an FAA Reauthorization bill containing many important air travel safety provisions – some the result of the Colgan Air disaster, and get the measure to the President’s desk before the August recess. Neither transportation safety nor fundamental American legal principles should be held hostage to the campaign of distortion being carried on by Fred Smith and FedEx. The Senate should defeat any filibuster effort and pass Section 806 into law. Kevin L. Kearns is president of the U.S. Business and Industry Council, and serves as the director of the Same3 Coalition, a group formed in 2009 to support federal legislative efforts to create fair competition in the trucking industry.

Read the full article →

Video: Lee Says Osim on Track to Meet China Expansion Target: Video

July 25, 2010

July 26 (Bloomberg) — Peter Lee, chief financial officer of Osim International Ltd., Asia’s biggest maker of massage chairs outside of Japan, talks with Bloomberg’s Susan Li from Singapore about the company’s business strategy. Osim said July 20 second-quarter net income more than doubled to S$12.1 million. Sales in the three months rose 12 percent to S$131 million. The company said March 9 it will add as many as 80 stores annually in China in the next three-to-five years to tap growing demand in the world’s most populous country. (Source: Bloomberg)

Read the full article →

Malcolm Wittenberg: Restoring Consumer Confidence in Essential Foods

July 25, 2010

For many years, consumers’ chief concern over the food supply was nutritional value. Calories … saturated fat … artificial coloring … sugar. But lately, their primary concern has shifted to food safety. According to IBM Research in 2009, 60% of today’s consumers are concerned about the safety of the foods they eat. Less than 20% trust food companies to produce and sell safe foods. From peanut butter to beef and from listeria to E. coli and melamine in milk products from China, it seems as though consumers are inundated with news on one “food scare” after another. It’s true, they are. A 2010 study by Deloitte & Touche indicates that the number of food safety news reports has grown five-fold in the last five years. Five fold!! No wonder consumers are feeling a little anxious. Governments are attempting to address the situation: the same IBM Research found that in 2009 U.S. state legislatures introduced over 600 bills addressing food safety alone. But the really good news is that new science and services are coming together to enable consumers to buy with confidence both at their grocer, and in their favorite restaurant. One example is in is seafood. Consumers’ concern over seafood is centered on mercury contamination. This concern has caused many consumers to abandon seafood. Rather than risk consuming a small amount of mercury (albeit an extremely toxic substance) they have moved to poultry, beef, pasta and other substitutes. Problem is, despite the low risk of mercury contamination, seafood is one of the healthiest foods on the planet. It’s rich in essential omega oils and vitamins. And the American Heart Association recommends seafood as an integral part of a healthy lifestyle and diet. The science on mercury consumption is clear, at least for some groups of consumers. Mercury is a toxin, one of the most potent toxins known to man. Because of that, even small amounts ingested can be dangerous. The EPA recommends that pregnant women and children under the age of six dramatically limit, if not avoid, consumption of seafood. But for healthy adults, the situation is less clear. Although mercury consumption should be avoided, it shouldn’t necessarily be avoided at all cost. As humans, we tend to be risk averse. We tend to value potential losses (mercury contamination) more dearly than potential gains (healthy heart). Caution is compounded by high-profile news such as Jeremy Piven’s mercury poisoning, and speculation about the effects of the tragic oil spill in the Gulf. As such, many consumers will forgo the known benefits associated with seafood consumption because of the potential risk of excessive mercury ingestion. This uncertainty can be eliminated by precisely and efficiently testing the mercury content of individual fish, and certifying for the seller and the consumer only seafood that meets or exceeds well-defined, acceptable standards. Once the risk of excessive mercury is eliminated, the benefits remain and consumers can consume seafood with confidence. Safe Harbor is restoring confidence in seafood in precisely this way. Through a simple, reliable and inexpensive process, Safe Harbor tests and certifies the mercury content in seafood and can be used to ensure standards far higher than those of the FDA or EPA. At the food counter and on the menu, the Safe Harbor Certification label is the customers’ sign of confidence. We hope the developers of other promising technologies for restoring consumer confidence in essential foods will be encouraged by the response to Safe Harbor by consumers, restaurateurs and retailers alike. “Consumers and guests are educated, and their confidence in seafood is undermined by so much of what they read and hear,” Chef Geno Bernardo of Las Vegas hotspot Nove Italiano told me recently. “The Safe Harbor Certification helps restore confidence in seafood, which is good for everybody.”

Read the full article →

Martin Wolf: The Political Genius Of Supply-Side Economics

July 25, 2010

The future of fiscal policy was intensely debated in the FT last week. In this Exchange, I want to examine what is going on in the US and, in particular, what is going on inside the Republican party. This matters for the US and, because the US remains the world’s most important economy, it also matters greatly for the world. My reading of contemporary Republican thinking is that there is no chance of any attempt to arrest adverse long-term fiscal trends should they return to power. Moreover, since the Republicans have no interest in doing anything sensible, the Democrats will gain nothing from trying to do much either. That is the lesson Democrats have to draw from the Clinton era’s successful frugality, which merely gave George W. Bush the opportunity to make massive (irresponsible and unsustainable) tax cuts. In practice, then, nothing will be done.

Read the full article →

Robert Kuttner: Women on the Verge

July 25, 2010

The campaign to get Elizabeth Warren appointed to head the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau got me thinking — why is it that so many of the heroic leaders who have pushed the Obama administration to be more steadfastly progressive on financial issues just happen to be female? That honor roll would begin with Warren; it would include Sheila Bair, who heads the FDIC; House Speaker Nancy Pelosi; Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington State; former commodities regulator Brooksley Born; and Heather Booth who spearheaded Americans for Financial Reform. Inside the administration, the member of the senior economics team who has pushed hardest for a more expansive approach to economic recovery is the chair of President Obama’s Economic Council, Christina Romer. What these people have in common is that they are not members of the financial old boys’ club, in both senses. They are neither one of the boys, nor did they come out of the Wall Street milieu. And two of the three Republican senators who broke ranks to provide the sixty votes to pass financial reform, Senators Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine, are also women. The third, Senator Scott Brown, who must run for re-election in liberal Massachusetts in 2012, in less fluky circumstances than the special election of January 2010, is not so much a profile in courage as an expedient politician. It’s not that all the good guys are female — Rich Trumka and Damon Silvers of the AFL-CIO have played a heroic role, too; as has Paul Volcker; as well as other leading Senate progressives such as Dick Durban, Jeff Merkley, and Ted Kaufman. But Warren and the other female members of the Administration’s loyal opposition have displayed real bravery. Warren surely knew that when she was asking hard questions of Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, she was reducing the chances that she would be welcomed into the administration. But she never pulled her punches. Sheila Bair, when she was resisting Geithner’s plans to bail out and prop up banks without drastically reforming them at the same time, made herself the odd woman out. Read any of the several books on the financial crisis that rely on insider background interviews, and you will read the same putdowns of Bair emanating from the Geithner camp. Yet Bair has remained steadfast. Gender, of course, is no guarantee of progressive politics, clear thinking, or political bravery. One of the odd things of our era is that two generations after radical feminists began battering down barriers to full participation, some of the most visible beneficiaries are rightwing women, many of them truly whacked out in their views. The fact that Sarah Palin can thank Gloria Steinem is small comfort. For instance, the prize for the most disingenuous commentary on the Shirley Sherrod affair has to go to that female pioneer, Peggy Noonan, former speechwriter for Ronald Reagan. Writing in Saturday’s Wall Street Journal, and spinning the Sherrod affair to suggest symmetrical blame, Noonan began, “She was smeared by rightwing media, condemned by the NAACP, and canned by the Obama Administration. It wasn’t pretty, what was done this week to Shirley Sherrod.” But in the entire piece, which took up nearly half of the Journal’s op-ed page, you never learn what actually happened. The details of the doctored video and the Fox pile-on are left out, suggesting that the entire establishment just happened to gang up on poor Sherrod, while good old Noonan, a paladin of the respectable right, is seeking lessons of redemption. Shamelessness evidently knows no bounds of gender. Sherrod, by contrast, was a picture of dignity and bravery, as she has been throughout her career. It would be comforting believe that greater gender equality, per se, will produce a more constructive substantive politics. Linda Tarr-Whelan has written an important book titled Women Lead the Way . Her research demonstrates that when women hit a tipping point of about 30 percent in leadership roles in organizations of all kinds, the dynamic changes and there is more receptivity to fresh thinking. But we are a long way from that magic number in the House or the Senate, nor in large corporations, nor among President Obama’s top financial officials. (Still, it is to Obama’s credit that his first two selections for the Supreme Court have been women, as have two of his three recent appointees to the powerful Federal Reserve Board.) The Atlantic recently ran one of its patented cover pieces that combine serious exploration of a complex topic with pop-culture hyperbole. This one , titled “The End of Men,” speculated that something about post-industrial society at last will overthrow male dominance (“What if the economics of the new era are better suited to women?”), and that the displacement of males is already well advanced. But this breathless proclamation of writer Hanna Rosin may be a bit premature. Wall Street, after all, is the ultimate post-industrial redoubt — they don’t make anything, they just manipulate paper — and it doesn’t get much more male. The typical trading floor is pure frat-house. And the crowd making financial policy in Washington are only a shade more in touch with their inner-woman. Elizabeth Warren would be a serious offset to the usual financial Animal House . Alas, that’s why her nomination remains something of a long shot. Robert Kuttner’s new book is A Presidency in Peril. He is co-editor of The American Prospect and a senior fellow at Demos.

Read the full article →

Paul Abrams: An Entrepreneur Speaks: No Impact of Tax Rate Increases on New Business Investment. None. Zero. Nada.

July 25, 2010

For nearly two decades I have been an entrepreneur, founding, running and also investing my own money in new technology start-up businesses. Tax rates have never played a role, positively or negatively, in the ability to raise capital or decisions to invest it. Other general economic factors surely have, but not tax rates. As shall be explained below, there are a few tweaks to tax policy that might make a difference, but keeping these tax rates where they are, or letting them rise, is not one of them. Never ones to miss an opportunity to lie about taxes, however, Republican chicken-littles are using the slow-growth in job creation–while far ahead of Ronald Reagan’s at this stage in the recovery–to push rightwing claptrap that the pending rise of 4.6% in ordinary income tax and of 5% in capital gains tax rates is a sword of Damocles ready to fall on January 1, 2010 to choke off new investment. Never ones to miss an opportunity to cower before rightwing claptrap, some Democrats are beginning to swallow those nostrums. Although a larger discussion of the truths and falsehoods about tax policy is being prepared, this one is limited to the subject of the impending tax rate increases to capital formation and investment in new and early-stage enterprises, the place — I do agree (which is why I like my industry) — from which a job recovery is likely to be launched and sustained. Let me be clear. I have a syndrome that, every April 15th, causes the muscles of my right hand to cramp. I would like to pay lower taxes, but I do not want to see people out of work, or denied healthcare, or see teachers or police laid off, or travel over bridges at risk to collapse, or spend an extra hour in traffic, or see my water, food or medications become unsafe, or have the elderly become part of my private health insurance that would raise my rates because of their increased likelihood of becoming seriously ill, nor live in a country that does not take care of basic necessities for those beyond working age,and so forth… just because it would relieve my muscle cramps on that day. Moreover, even if I considered only my individual, financial self-interest, I do far better paying more taxes to build the foundations for a sustained, stronger economy. My salaries are higher, it is easier to attract capital when more people are doing well, and the value of what I am doing is worth more. It is not that my own expertise is better or worse — merely, that I would be playing on a better team. So, it is time for an entrepreneur to speak “the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly” about the relationship of the impending tax rate increases to investment: they will have no impact at all on new business investment. None. Zero. Zorch. Nada. They may begin to heal the deep wounds the disastrous Bush Administration’s tax cuts for the wealthy permanently inflicted on the country’s fiscal security, and, in that sense, improve confidence critical for capital raising, but that would be indirect affects and difficult to measure because so many other factors impact confidence. As this graph from the Center for Public Policy & Budget, based upon Congressional Budget Office figures, shows, the Bush tax cuts were, and will continue to be, devastating to our fiscal health. So, let me explain very simply why these tax changes are totally irrelevant to investment in new and/or growing businesses, the engine for job creation. Entrepreneurs invest in (what they hope are) exciting new enterprises, or those in early-stages of growth. Once companies become profitable, their needs for risky investments recede. An entrepreneur wants to start these new businesses because he/she has an awesome, amazing, neat, cool, nifty, revolutionary, game-changing idea, concept, invention or approach to a market. These people do not care about tax rates, they want to see their ideas flower. What were the tax rates when Bill Gates started Microsoft, or Steve Jobs created Apple? There are two answers to that question. One is the rates — 70% on ordinary income, 28% on capital gains, both far higher than what they will rise to when the Bush cuts expire. The other, more important answer — neither Gates nor Jobs likely knew, and certainly did not care. Investors, for their part, invest because they think the returns on that investment will be many multiples of their initial stake and because they like what the company is doing. The uncertainty of those future predictions dwarfs to the point of irrelevancy the tax changes’ impacts on their ultimate return. These tax effects are, at most, “rounding error”. In fact, the economic climate on the day the investment becomes liquid (either by doing a public offering or selling the company) is a much more important variable than tax rates. That is not to say that there are not some matters of tax policy that impact the ability to raise capital for such investments. Probably the most important is that there is a differential between an ordinary income tax rate and the capital gains rate. The second way to impact short-term capital raising and deployment for rapid growth of job-creating businesses is to provide a short-term benefit for capital deployed, say, in the next 18 months: zero percent tax for investments made in the next 12 months, 6% for those in the following six months. That is because we Americans like ‘deals’ (see, e.g., new homebuyers’ credit and cash-for-clunkers), and it would force idle capital into a decision about how long to remain idle. There are two tax policies changes that could have a long-term impact on increasing investments in American job-creating enterprises. The first is make it more attractive to hire Americans by moving social security and medicare taxes from salaries to a progressive sales’ tax on all goods and services, thus equalizing the tax burden for products/services made in the US and abroad. The second is to provide a differential capital gains rate for investments in newly-issued equity (the money goes to the company) where 100% of the workforce is American than to gains from trading in secondary markets (money is exchanged between investors, no net job creation), say 14% for the former, 25% for the latter. But, the 4.6-5% rate rises that will occur when the Bush tax cuts expire will have no impact whatsoever. They will simply be the new rates people will be paying, and not even be a factor in decisions to invest in our economic future, unless, as indicated above, they indirectly improve confidence that the US can make some hard decisions to improve its fiscal condition. Speaking of those Bush tax cuts, by the way, it might be worth making the obvious point that those tax cuts are in place now . President Obama is actually overly generous to his predecessor when he talks about not “going back” to those failed policies. They do not expire until year-end. And, they have been killing our fiscal security by ballooning our deficits for the last seven years. The most important factor in fostering investments in new industries is confidence. Confidence is a psychological matter, but it has to be based on realistic assessments of the future. Foisting phony assertions about bogus effects on investments in new companies of small tax rate increases upon the public is a major, major disservice to the country.

Read the full article →

Sheila Tendy: Love on the Other Side of The Street – Can Hope Conquer Wall Street’s Woes?

July 25, 2010

The world is in the midst of an intense struggle for survival – Good versus Evil, Dark versus Light. We feel the grit of our times. So much of our focus has been on bank bailouts, regulatory reform and massive fraud. Bernie Madoff will live out his days in prison, yet investors are no less devastated. None of it matters if we don’t feel a reason to hope for the future. We are worn out by the global economic crisis. We are tired of floundering rescue plans and masters of the universe gone awry. We are tired of watching friends in tears over lost jobs, lost homes, and lost dreams. We are tired of witnessing global economic devastation. While this mess will be messy for a good while longer, we may have found one reason to hope in the most unlikely of places. Rich folks hit hard by the economic crisis are turning towards each other as never before. Tough times have made it chic for the uber-privileged to rely on friends and family for practical support. Conversations can be overheard everywhere about how to join forces to handle the things that many can no longer afford. People are trading off on childcare, sharing their tales of woe over cheaper lattes while thinking carefully about expenses. Some are even considering communal living. One of the biggest problems with living a life of excess is that you can pay for everything – McMansions, full time housekeepers, round the clock childcare, gourmet cooks, chauffer driven cars, boats, and fancy clothes. You really don’t NEED anyone if you can pay someone else to take care of it for you. We live in a society where love is viewed much more as an esoteric feeling as opposed to the actions we take in support of that feeling. Nothing like being out of work to remind us of how much you really do need other people. When life is lived with no need to turn towards anyone for help, the absence of need, strangely, comes into high relief. People are becoming each other’s cheerleaders when there is nothing to cheer about. That all by itself is a reason to hope. In an attempt to restore my own hope, I gathered with friends to bring some Love to Wall Street. The purposeful venue was the terrace of 15 Broad Street in New York City, formerly the headquarters of JP Morgan and once at the vortex of the banking industry in the United States. The building overlooks the New York Stock Exchange and has amazing historic significance for our economy. The agreement to form the New York Stock Exchange was signed in front of this spot under a Buttonwood Tree in 1792. Since that is where it all began, panning the lense way back seemed apropos. The collective unconscious of the history of this country’s economy seemed palpable as we overlooked the New York Stock Exchange by the light of the Moon. At eye level in the pediment we faced the imposing marble sculpture by John Quincy Adams Ward, above six tall Corinthian capitals called “Integrity Protecting the Works of Man.” Integrity Protecting the Works of Man… When there is nothing left to do, love is usually the answer. We’ve heard it said that love conquers all, but can love conquer Wall Street’s woes? It seemed like it had a better shot of helping the economy than any plan I’ve read about in the papers. Call it meditation, call it prayer or just a desperate attempt to feel better, but it was a packed house. Did my gathering make a difference? Well, the market is still insanely unpredictable and the global economic fallout continues to play out each day. However, while the economic trauma was apparent, everyone wanted to change their perspective on Wall Street from one of fear and mistrust to hope for positive transformation. There was no Cool-Aid to drink. We face more than an economic crisis in these troubling times. We have suffered a breach of trust so deep that it feels impossible to ever collectively heal. None of us can accept this reality as our fate. So send some good vibes to the Street, and Treasury, and even AIG. While we still feel betrayed, one mind at a time, one heart at a time, one life at a time, we can give each other a reason to survive by tapping into the most basic human instinct – HOPE.

Read the full article →

Timothy Geithner: Allow Bush Tax Cuts For The Wealthy To Expire (VIDEO)

July 25, 2010

WASHINGTON — Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said that allowing tax cuts for the wealthy to expire would be “the responsible thing to do.” This is the last year for the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush. Republicans have generally favored extending all of them. While Democrats are divided on the issue, President Barack Obama has favored allowing the expiration of cuts he says have applied to the wealthiest people. “It’s responsible to let the tax cuts expire that just go to 2 percent to 3 percent of Americans, the highest earning Americans,” Geithner told ABC’s “This Week” in an interview broadcast Sunday. Doing so would show the world that the U.S. is “willing as a country now to start to make some progress” reducing long-term budget deficits, he said. Geithner said he does not believe that higher taxes for those high earners will hurt economic growth. He also said he “absolutely” believes Congress will act on taxes before the election. That’s a touchy issue for Democrats, some of whom may not be eager to address a hot-button issue like taxes so close to Election Day. WATCH: Speaking on NBC News’ “Meet the Press,” Geithner says he supports allowing the top capital gains tax rate to revert to 20 percent. It’s 15 percent now. He also addressed the future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage buyers whose bailout has cost taxpayers $145 billion so far. The financial overhaul didn’t address their future. The Obama administration has said it wants to wait until next year to determine their future. “I think we’re not going to preserve Fannie and Freddie in anything like the current form,” Geithner said on “Meet the Press.” “We’re going to have to bring fundamental change to that market.”

Read the full article →

BP CEO Tony Hayward To RESIGN Before Tuesday: Reports

July 25, 2010

BP CEO Tony Hawyard , who’s quickly become the public face of the Gulf Oil spill, will be stepping down within days, according to reports in the British press. The move is expected to come in anticipation of the company’s announcement of its first-half results on Tuesday. BP will announce that it has made approximately $10 billion this year, even while contending with the largest oil spill in history, the U.K.’s Telegraph reports. Here’s Telegraph : The chief executive of BP, Tony Hayward, is finalising the details of his imminent exit from BP this weekend as the oil giant prepares to make an announcement on the chief executive’s future possibly within the next 48 hours. After a weekend of detailed negotiations over Mr Hayward’s severance package, it now appears almost certain that he will announce his departure ahead of BP’s half year results on Tuesday. The Wall Street Journal reports that BP is currently discussing Hayward’s departure : Under the plan being discussed, Mr. Hayward would not necessarily depart immediately, these people said, giving the company time to settle on a successor and devise and orderly transition. It is possible, however, that the board could move more quickly in tapping a new chief. The U.K.’s Guardian also relays news of Hayward’s imminent departure, and reports that he will be replaced by Bob Dudley . Dudley is managing the day-to-day Gulf Oil spill operations. But in a statement issued to Dow Jones Newswires, a BP spokesman said : “Tony Hayward is the chief executive and has the confidence of the board and senior management.”

Read the full article →

David Fiderer: Goldman’s Half Trillion With A Hedge Fund Is Too Big To Ignore

July 24, 2010

In June 2008, Goldman Sachs wasn’t subject to the kind of regulatory scrutiny imposed on commercial banks. If it were, a government auditor from would have asked a very obvious question: “What are you doing with half a trillion dollars in notional exposure to a hedge fund?” Specifically, Goldman’s fourth largest counterparty exposure for credit derivatives, about $590 billion, was to a hedge fund called Blue Mountain Credit Alternatives Master Fund, L.P. According to numbers compiled by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission , Goldman did more credit derivatives business with this hedge fund than with JPMorgan Chase, UBS or Barclays. Derivatives exposure can be measured all sorts of different ways, so Goldman might claim that the net number is, in fact, much smaller. For instance, Goldman bought $566 million in credit protection on AIG from Blue Mountain, but it also sold $581 million in credit protection to Blue Mountain. So if AIG had gone bankrupt, Goldman would have owed $15 million to Blue Mountain. The net is reasonably small. Even so, that kind of execution risk on a single hedge fund, founded in 2003 with 115 employees, would set off alarm bells with most auditors. Blue Mountain had $3.2 billion in funds under management as of January 1, 2007. The FCIC should dig much deeper. The primary reason why the amount looks so weird is that derivatives trading is dominated by the too-big-to-fail crowd, global banks like Deutsche and Barclays, plus, (before we learned that Lehman was too big to fail) large U.S. brokerage firms. The Office of Currency Control, while compiles exposures on all U.S. bank holding companies, showed that by year-end 2008, U.S. banks held $15 trillion in notional exposure on credit derivatives. About 90% of that total, or $13.4 trillion, was concentrated among the big three –JPMorgan Chase, Citibank, and Bank of America. Three months later, when Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and Merrill Lynch (embedded within BofA) were added to the list, the aggregate number doubled to $30 trillion . Almost all the exposure was concentrated among the big five. Look at the trading counterparties with whom Goldman bought and sold credit default swaps on AIG. The big numbers are all with huge global financial institutions, except for Blue Mountain. This is very suspicious because credit default swaps offer all sorts of opportunities for insider trading and market manipulation. A CDS is very different from an interest rate or foreign currency derivative, which references a vast impersonal financial market. It would be very hard for a single bank or hedge fund to manipulate the yield curve or the price of the yen. A credit default swap is the bet on the failure of a single entity, such as AIG, Greece or a CDO. Because there is no transparency in credit derivatives trading, there are opportunities for, among other things, round tripping, wherein trades go back and forth in order to establish trumped-up price quotes. With a credit default swap, you can lose 100% of the notional amount. The OCC quarterly report, which also compiles the derivative trading revenues of all bank holding companies, discredits the testimony of Goldman CFO David Viniar , who told the FCIC that his firm did not break down derivative exposures. And now that Goldman’s story about being fully hedged on AIG seems to be falling apart, there’s no reason why we should take anything they say at face value.

Read the full article →

Al Franken Endorses Elizabeth Warren For Consumer Protection Bureau

July 24, 2010

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) joined the effort to persuade President Obama to appoint Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Bureau in an interview with the Huffington Post on Saturday. Earlier that day, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) said he was endorsing Warren for the position and has made his position known to the White House, as has Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). More than 60 House members have called on the president to nominate Warren and more than 160,000 people have signed an online petition. “I really like Elizabeth Warren,” said Franken, adding that he often had her on as a guest on his talk-radio show. “Her work on bankruptcy is what put her on our radar at the show in 2005.” Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) has questioned whether she’d be able to get 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, though the statute would allow the president to appoint her on an indefinite basis until a nominee is confirmed. Franken said he wasn’t sure whether the White House wanted the fight. “The White House has to decide if they want a confirmation fight. I don’t know what their considerations are. In my consideration, I think Elizabeth would be the best,” he said.

Read the full article →

Al Franken Endorses Elizabeth Warren For Consumer Protection Bureau

July 24, 2010

Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) joined the effort to persuade President Obama to appoint Elizabeth Warren to head the Consumer Financial Bureau in an interview with the Huffington Post on Saturday. Earlier that day, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) said he was endorsing Warren for the position and has made his position known to the White House, as has Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). More than 60 House members have called on the president to nominate Warren and more than 160,000 people have signed an online petition. “I really like Elizabeth Warren,” said Franken, adding that he often had her on as a guest on his talk-radio show. “Her work on bankruptcy is what put her on our radar at the show in 2005.” Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) has questioned whether she’d be able to get 60 votes to overcome a filibuster, though the statute would allow the president to appoint her on an indefinite basis until a nominee is confirmed. Franken said he wasn’t sure whether the White House wanted the fight. “The White House has to decide if they want a confirmation fight. I don’t know what their considerations are. In my consideration, I think Elizabeth would be the best,” he said.

Read the full article →

Gretchen Morgenson: Wall Street Refused To Stop Shady Practices In Order To Keep Profits Flowing

July 24, 2010

“WHAT did they know, and when did they know it?” Those are questions investigators invariably ask when trying to determine who’s responsible for an offense or a misdeed.

Read the full article →

Jeff Merkley For Warren: I’ve Told The White House To Appoint Her

July 24, 2010

The gathering of online and progressive activists at the Netroots Nation convention this year has produced a fairly overt and direct campaign to get Elizabeth Warren appointed as the first head of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Of the speakers addressing the recently passed regulatory reform bill, nearly every one has said the Harvard professor is best suited to head the board that she originally conceived. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, for example, called Warren the only choice to head the consumer agency. Since this remains a political appointment, such advocacy matters only to the extent that it influences the president, the man who will ultimately make the choice, as well as the Senate, the body who will likely have to vote on Warren’s candidacy. On the latter front, Warren’s defenders got a bit of a boost on Saturday, with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) making a forceful case for her appointment and disclosing that he’s been lobbying the administration on this front “I support Elizabeth Warren,” the Oregon Democrat said in an interview with the Huffington Post. “I have advocated for the administration to back her. She has both the clarity of the need for an agency that has as its top mission protecting citizens against tricks, traps and scams, and she has the ability to articulate that vision. She has the leadership skills and the knowledge of the financial world. She has the full set of requirements to be an effective leader. So I certainly hope the administration will [take my advice].” With an appointment to the consumer board coming, in all likelihood, in the near future, Merkley’s endorsement is one of the first publicly offered by a sitting Senator. Indeed, there has been as much concern raised over Warren’s confirmation prospects as there has been advocacy on her behalf. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said recently that he wasn’t sure if Warren would get the 60 votes necessary for confirmation. For Merkley, the case for Warren is not just about the individual attributes she’d bring to the post, but also the various shortcomings of the just-passed regulatory reform legislation. A leading proponent of stricter rules to clamp down on the financial services industry, Merkley acknowledged feeling trepidation that the final legislative product left too much power to the judgment of the regulators. Having a strong advocate in a key post, in short, had become a vital ingredient to the legislation’s success. Warren, he said, would be that type of regulator.

Read the full article →

Jeff Merkley For Warren: I’ve Told The White House To Appoint Her

July 24, 2010

The gathering of online and progressive activists at the Netroots Nation convention this year has produced a fairly overt and direct campaign to get Elizabeth Warren appointed as the first head of the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Of the speakers addressing the recently passed regulatory reform bill, nearly every one has said the Harvard professor is best suited to head the board that she originally conceived. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka, for example, called Warren the only choice to head the consumer agency. Since this remains a political appointment, such advocacy matters only to the extent that it influences the president, the man who will ultimately make the choice, as well as the Senate, the body who will likely have to vote on Warren’s candidacy. On the latter front, Warren’s defenders got a bit of a boost on Saturday, with Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) making a forceful case for her appointment and disclosing that he’s been lobbying the administration on this front “I support Elizabeth Warren,” the Oregon Democrat said in an interview with the Huffington Post. “I have advocated for the administration to back her. She has both the clarity of the need for an agency that has as its top mission protecting citizens against tricks, traps and scams, and she has the ability to articulate that vision. She has the leadership skills and the knowledge of the financial world. She has the full set of requirements to be an effective leader. So I certainly hope the administration will [take my advice].” With an appointment to the consumer board coming, in all likelihood, in the near future, Merkley’s endorsement is one of the first publicly offered by a sitting Senator. Indeed, there has been as much concern raised over Warren’s confirmation prospects as there has been advocacy on her behalf. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) said recently that he wasn’t sure if Warren would get the 60 votes necessary for confirmation. For Merkley, the case for Warren is not just about the individual attributes she’d bring to the post, but also the various shortcomings of the just-passed regulatory reform legislation. A leading proponent of stricter rules to clamp down on the financial services industry, Merkley acknowledged feeling trepidation that the final legislative product left too much power to the judgment of the regulators. Having a strong advocate in a key post, in short, had become a vital ingredient to the legislation’s success. Warren, he said, would be that type of regulator.

Read the full article →

Goldman Sachs Commissions, Will Oversee Internal Documentary About … Goldman Sachs

July 24, 2010

Get ready for “Goldman Sachs: The Movie.” That isn’t a real movie title. But filmmaker Ric Burns, who created the PBS series “The Civil War” with his brother Ken, is shooting a documentary about the Wall Street firm. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. is paying for the film, has editorial control and is overseeing the project through its marketing department, a Goldman spokesman said. Mr. Burns, who didn’t return phone calls seeking comment, was approached by Goldman in 2007 and has been tackling the documentary on and off since then. The company’s history goes all the way back to the day in 1869 when German immigrant Marcus Goldman opened a one-room office on Pine Street in lower Manhattan, near the firm’s new headquarters.

Read the full article →

Rep. Paul Hodes: GOP Deficit Hawks Are ‘Extremist Obstructionist Lying Hypocrites’

July 24, 2010

When Democrats in the House of Representatives stumbled attempting to reauthorize unemployment insurance in May, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) observed that the unforeseen wave of Democratic deficit hysteria had organic roots: It came from members who represented districts with low unemployment rates. New Hampshire Democrat Paul Hodes, a musician who campaigned in 2004 on a “Rock and Roll Back the Deficit Tour” and who represents a state with unemployment well below the national average, did not join in the calls for deficit reduction. Hodes, who is running for Senate, would prefer to differentiate himself from the Republicans who ultimately filibustered jobless aid for nearly two months. “We are dealing with extremist, obstructionist, lying hypocrites who think you don’t have to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest but are holding up help for the neediest,” Hodes told HuffPost during an interview at the Netroots Nation conference in Las Vegas. “Believe me, I understand the long-term deficit crisis. We gotta get to address it. To get there, we have to focus on the short-term jobs crisis we’ve got and support the fragile economic recovery we’re in.” That’s a view shared by many economists — including Mark Zandi, a former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) — and by most registered voters , too. Nevertheless, Republicans insisted that the $33-billion cost of reauthorizing the unemployment benefits be “paid for” and not added to the deficit. The GOP is not applying the same fiscal discipline to the estimated $678-billion deficit cost of reauthorizing soon-to-expire tax cuts for the wealthy. Hodes said the deficit debate, which for 50 days prevented more than 2.5 million long-term unemployed from receiving checks, is about more than just deficits. “It’s a fundamental question — ‘What is the role of federal government?’ — that is beneath questions about fiscal responsibility and spending,” he said. Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.) told HuffPost a few weeks ago that the demands for spending cuts to offset the cost of the federally-funded extended benefits — which have never been fully offset with spending cuts — amounted to an assault on the New Deal. “The Social Security Act of 1935 made these entitlements, Social Security and unemployment insurance and welfare,” he said. “The Republicans have been after all three of those programs ever since 1935. They got welfare a few years ago, because that’s poor people. They could jump on them. But unemployment and Social Security is middle-class people — they haven’t been able to get them, but it isn’t because they’re not willing to try.” But Hodes said he does not actually oppose the concept of paying for unemployment benefits. “I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time. I think it is viable to do as much as we can to cut wasteful spending,” he said. “Politically it’s difficult because of the way things get polarized. The problem with the spending cuts often is they are longer-term policy debates that we are having in the context of a continuing economic crisis.” Hodes said he’s open to reforming the Senate. “I’m sympathetic to a close look at what has to happen with things like anonymous holds, with things like the filibuster,” he said. “It’s not constitutional, it’s not statutory. It’s a rule.” Republicans in the Senate were aided in their filibuster of unemployment benefits by Nebraska Democrat Ben Nelson , who simply said all along that he was looking out for his constituents. “One of the jobs of a senator,” said Hodes, “is to properly balance the parochial interest with the interests of the nation.”

Read the full article →

AIG Failure Would Have Meant Big Losses For Goldman Sachs, Documents Show

July 24, 2010

Since the United States government stepped in to rescue the American International Group in the fall of 2008, Goldman Sachs has maintained that it would have faced few if any losses had the insurer failed. Though it was the insurer’s biggest trading partner, Goldman contended that it had bought credit insurance from financial institutions that would have protected it, but it declined to identify the institutions. A Congressional document released late Friday lists those institutions and shows that Goldman was exposed to losses in an A.I.G. default because some of the investment bank’s trading partners, such as Citibank and Lehman Brothers, were financially unstable and might have been unable to make good on large claims from Goldman.

Read the full article →

U.S. Bank Failures In 2010 Surpass 100

July 24, 2010

WASHINGTON — U.S. bank failures this year have surpassed a bleak milestone of 100 as regulators shut down banks in Georgia, Florida, South Carolina, Kansas, Nevada, Minnesota and Oregon. The seven bank seizures announced Friday bring to 103 the failures so far in 2010. The pace of bank closures this year is well ahead of that of 2009, which saw a total of 140 banks shuttered amid the recession and mounting loan defaults. That was the highest annual tally since 1992, at the height of the savings and loan crisis. The pace has accelerated as banks’ losses mount on loans made for commercial property and development. Many companies have shut down in the recession, vacating shopping malls and office buildings financed by the loans. That has brought delinquent loan payments and defaults by commercial developers. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said it took over Crescent Bank and Trust Co., based in Jasper, Ga., with about $1 billion in assets; Sterling Bank of Lantana, Fla., with $407.9 million in assets; Williamsburg First National Bank of Kingstree, S.C., $139.3 million in assets; Thunder Bank of Sylvan Grove, Kan., $32.6 million; SouthwestUSA Bank, with one branch in Las Vegas, $214 million; Community Security Bank of New Prague, Minn., $108 million; and Home Valley Bank of Cave Junction, Ore., $251.8 million. Renasant Bank, based in Tupelo, Miss., agreed to assume the assets and deposits of Crescent Bank and Trust. Iberiabank of Lafayette, La., is acquiring the assets and deposits of Sterling Bank. First Citizens Bank and Trust Co. of Columbia, S.C., is assuming the assets and deposits of Williamsburg First National Bank, while Bennington State Bank in Salina, Kan., is taking the assets and deposits of Thunder Bank. Roundbank of Waseca, Minn., is assuming those of Community Security Bank. Plaza Bank, based in Irvine, Calif., is acquiring the deposits of SouthwestUSA Bank and $137.3 million of the assets. The FDIC will retain the rest for eventual sale. South Valley Bank & Trust in Klamath Falls, Ore., is assuming the assets and deposits of Home Valley Bank. The failure of Crescent Bank and Trust is expected to cost the deposit insurance fund about $242.4 million. The resolution of Sterling Bank is estimated to cost $45.5 million; that of Williamsburg First National Bank, $8.8 million; Thunder Bank, $4.5 million; SouthwestUSA Bank, $74.1 million; Community Security Bank, $18.6 million; and Home Valley Bank, $37.1 million. By this time last year, regulators had closed 64 banks. The number of bank failures is expected to peak this year and be slightly higher than the 140 that fell in 2009. Twenty-five banks failed in 2008, the year the financial crisis struck with force, and only three succumbed in 2007. The growing bank failures have sapped billions of dollars out of the deposit insurance fund. It fell into the red last year, and its deficit stood at $20.7 billion as of March 31. The number of banks on the FDIC’s confidential “problem” list jumped to 775 in the first quarter, from 702 three months earlier, even as the industry as a whole had its best quarter in two years. A majority of institutions posted profit gains in the January-March quarter. But many small and midsized banks are likely to continue to suffer distress in the coming months and years, especially from soured loans for office buildings and development projects. The FDIC expects the cost of resolving failed banks to total around $60 billion from 2010 through 2014. The agency mandated last year that banks prepay about $45 billion in premiums, for 2010 through 2012, to replenish the insurance fund. Depositors’ money – insured up to $250,000 per account – is not at risk, with the FDIC backed by the government. That insurance cap was made permanent in the financial overhaul legislation signed this week by President Barack Obama.

Read the full article →

How Far $400,000 Goes In America’s Biggest Real Estate Markets: Trulia (PHOTOS)

July 24, 2010

We won’t bore you with that all-too familiar real estate cliche that begins with the word “location” — but suffice to say that home buyers across the nation face some very different options. A few examples: A home buyer in foreclosure-addled Florida can get a home with a price that’s advertised as being actually lower than 1999 levels . For the same price, the eager home shopper in New York City can get a studio apartment , albeit one in a building with a doorman, an art deco lobby and access to a roof terrace. In the interest of seeing just how far your real estate dime goes in different cities across the country, we decided to compare similarly-priced home listings in major cities like Chicago, San Francisco, Seattle and Baltimore. Not surprisingly, there was a huge variation. Courtesy of Trulia, one of the most comprehensive real estate sites one the web , below we’ve compiled some of the most appealing homes you can buy for $400,000 . Which city offers the best value? Check out the homes below. And visit Trulia for more information on these and other homes.

Read the full article →

CAPTRUST Hires Aon Vet

July 24, 2010

CAPTRUST Financial Advisors has appointed Grant Verhaeghe as director of investment research within the firms consulting research group

Read the full article →