Blue Commonwealth Logo

Advanced Search

Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?

Become a Supporter
Like Blue Commonwealth? Want to help keep it running?
Contribute Today, and help keep our blog ad free!

Blog Roll
7 West
Albo Must Go
Anonymous is a Woman
Article XI
Assembly Access
Augusta Free Press
Bacon's Rebellion
Blue Ridge Data
Blue Virginia
Byrne-ing Up the Internet
Central VA Progressive
Coarse Cracked Corn
The Daily Dogwood
Dem Bones
Equality Loudoun
Fairfax City Dems
WaPo - The Fix
Getting Around
Great Blue Heron
The Green Miles
Heartland of Va
Leesburg Tomorrow
Left of the Hill
New Dominion Project
Not Larry Sabato
Ox Road South Blog
Penning Thoughts
Powhatan Democrats
Renaissance Ruminations
River City Rapids
Rule .303
Shad Plank
Southeast Virginia
Star City Harbinger
Too Progressive
United States of Jamerica
VB Dems
VB Progressives
Virginia Dem
The Virginia Democrat
WaPo - Virginia Politics Blog
Vivian Paige
Waldo Jaquith
Waldo's VA Political Blogroll

Winners and Losers in The Game

by: Teddy Goodson

Fri Mar 12, 2010 at 18:25:09 PM EST

In any situation, and I do mean any, there are always some people who make money, or find a way to profit, even in desperate times when the mass misery index has to be high. Nowhere is that more evident than right here in the United States. This is where the Bush bailouts, which the incoming President Obama followed through on, in a desperate move to save the system from its own excesses and prevent a killing collapse of the economy (or so every commentator assures us, whether from the right or left), has actually helped the already wealthy become more so. The galling thing is, Wall Street insiders are openly crowing. Read what a highly rated investment newsletter, Taipan Insider for Thursday, 11 March, says (my emphasis is added--- the quote is extensive because it is so very revealing):
Teddy Goodson :: Winners and Losers in The Game
"Who says the American economy is in a rough patch? Sure, if you ask the 10% or so of the nation's workers out of a job, you may not hear a grandiose take on the situation. But if you ask the growing number of American millionaires their view of the "Great Recession," they may tell you it's the opportunity they were waiting for.

According to a  report this week in The Wall Street Journal, the number of American households with a net worth (not including their primary home) surpassing the million-dollar mark managed to surge by over 15% in 2009. At the same time the Obama administration was pouring hundreds of billions of borrowed dollars into the nation's economy, 7.8 million Americans managed to find a spot in the millionaires' club.

Even more inspiring, the numbers of ultra-high net worth households - $5 million or more in assets - rose by 17%, to hit 980,000.

Who says times are tough?

Is it possible Washington's stimulus efforts had something to do with the sudden surge in wealth? According to my research, it's not only plausible, it's probable.

Just look at Goldman Sachs (GS:NYSE). It's busy these days handling all sorts of government-backed bonds issues, helping Greece hide its debt woes and underwriting the acquisition of huge amounts of capital sourcing.
This week, the bailed-out behemoth is getting attention because of the amount of money it is making as a major underwriter of Washington's Build America Bonds. In yet another example of how government interference creates a wasteful market, Goldman Sachs has been able to charge significantly higher underwriting fees because the bonds are subsidized by you and me, the taxpayer.

In a recent Bloomberg article, Matt Fabian of Municipal Market Advisors wrote, "the large subsidy gives [Goldman] leeway to charge more because the issuer probably cares less about the underwriting fee." In other words, fees don't matter because Uncle Sam's writing the check.
So far, the added fees add up to more than $100 million worth of desperately needed cash that could be used to patch severe local-level budget shortfalls. Instead, it is funneling straight to the wallets of the nation's richest and smartest.

As investors, we really have no reason to complain about the situation. As long as money is trading hands, we have opportunities to jump in and get our fair share's worth. If Goldman is doing it, why can't you?"

The Too Big To Fail banks were hastily bailed out by Bush, Bernancke, and Obama because we had a "liquidity crisis" meaning credit dried up, loans were not being made, and no one trusted anyone, least of all banks trusting each other. Pouring those TARP funds from us taxpayers into the banks was supposed to restore liquidity, and goose the banks into lending again to Main Street. This has not happened. What has happened is that banks have ramped up doing the exact thing that brought on the meltdown in the first place---- using the cheap money from Uncle Sam to engage in risky casino behavior with derivatives, a kind of internal carry trade, if you will.... all the while loudly complaining about Democrats' "out of control spending," and warning about the inevitable collapse of the dollar if a huge new entitlement is passed (i.e., health care).

Hypocrisy? It would seem so. But in the meantime, they are raking in the shekels with abandon; when asked why they are not lending to Main Street, they protest righteously that no one is qualified right now, and no one wants to take out a loan in such an uncertain economy.  The famous market, in other words, is just not there.

What is happening, according to reports from non-mass media, is micro-lending. Since the big banks have only contempt for the born losers of Main Street, private lenders and local banks are doing what third world countries have tried: making small loans to local entrepreneurs, performing a function originally undertaken by little savings and loans (until Reagan de-regulated them, when they got delusions of grandeur and tried to emulate big banks, ending up with the Savings and Loan Crisis of the 1980's).

It is, IMO, more and more evident that we must break up big banks and do some heavy re-regulating. We do not want to lose the global clout and expertise of Goldman Sachs, for example, but they absolutely must be reined in. I would point out that global finance is all a game to the practitioners, they even refer to an investment as "a play." We have rules for every game humankind plays. Why not for finance?    

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Check Out Kaufman's Speech
Joe Biden's replacement - unfortunately not running again - Edward Kaufman of Delaware - gave a fantastic speech March 11 on the floor of the Senate. (Available on Kaufman's website.) He understands exactly what is needed to follow up on the bailouts that, unfortunately, had to be done to avoid a meltdown that would have rivaled the 1930's.

The key to making sure that this doesn't happen again in a decade or so is hard-hitting reform and re-regulation of these bloodsuckers.

I feel that better regulation reform than Chris Dodd would like to see may be more possible not that the truth is coming out about how Lehman Bros. cooked their books...with the collusion of their auditors and a little help from British lawyers.

Kaufman is great. I wish he would re-think agreeing not to run so that Beau Biden might have a shot to run for his Dad's seat, a run he has declined to make.

Senator Kaufman
makes good points, such as restoring Glass-Steagall or something similar. The link to his web site and speech is:

Much of what he says has been dealt with by Joseph Stiglitz in his new book FreeFall. When Obama ignored Stiglitz (and Paul Krugman) and appointed Geithner I knew we were in for trouble, and that, in his apparent zeal to calm the financial markets and reassure Wall Street, Obama in essence betrayed his promises, the promises which got him elected---- in effect, he went over to the enemy.

He may have thought this was a gesture to bipartisanship, and would encourage Republicans to join him in a national government. This was a foolish, even fatal idea, as has been proven, over-proven by the conduct of Republicans as they game the system in order to destroy Obama's presidency and negate the election. That fact alone is why I do not believe we can manage any serious re-regulation or reformation of the system. Window-dressing, yes. Real reform, no.

[ Parent ]
Recent Comments

Blue Commonwealth is a community forum for the discussion of political issues of interest to Virginians.
The opinions expressed by users of this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Blue Commonwealth or its editors.
Powered by: SoapBlox