Fwd: LEAP/E2020 Press Review on the Global Systemic Crisis

GLOBAL SYSTEMIC CRISIS In This Issue: •  The untenable irresponsibility of QE in summer 2012 - the US, British and Japanese central banks out of the game •  2012-2013: End of Euroland's consolidation of its budget-finance operations / Launching of the first pro-active common socio-economic policies / Acceleration of the distinction between Euroland-EU •  BOK unexpectedly cuts key rate to 3% •  Case for US and Global Recession Right Here, Right Now; Recognizing the Limits of Madness; Permabears? •  One-on-One with Robert Shiller •  The Political Anticipation Method©: 10 week online training course •  Brazil Industry Continues in Slide •  Disaster Declared in 26 States as Drought Sears U.S. •  Potential Pentagon cuts cloud Farnborough mood •  Gold the answer to currency wars •  PSA supprime 8 000 emplois en France, dont 6 500 nets •  U.S. moving submersibles to Persian Gulf to oppose Iran •  'For Russia, it's about more than just Syria' •  San Bernardino Becomes Third California City Seeking Bankruptcy •  USDA Slashes Corn Outlook; Forecast Sends Prices Surging •  A very promising e-democracy project, particularly adapted for Euroland future democratic challenges! Featured Links •  LEAP / Europe 2020 •  GlobalEurope Anticipation Bulletin (website) •  Global systemic crisis - All our selected news •  GlobalEurope Press Review (NM blog)         The untenable irresponsibility of QE in summer 2012 - the US, British and Japanese central banks out of the game As we had shown last January in the GEAB N°61, the US Federal Reserve is facing an unsolvable dilemma from now on, whether or not to launch QE3: «Will the Fed have the means to launch a QE3? The answer is "yes" if one takes only the legal, financial and economic factors into account. The way the Fed works in theory allows it to freely take this kind of decision. But even under the conditions of a "traditional" decision, QE3 will not be a choice made with a glad heart. A new cycle of monetization will only be the product of a US sovereign debt downgrade put under the pressure of the credit rating agencies or investors. Will the banks agree to finance the Fed? Such a question is of little relevance. In an idling financial market, lending funds to the Fed will still be a good deal. Admittedly, interest rates are weak, but the risk is zero. However, if one considers the question from the geopolitical and political angle, the answer is "no". LEAP/E2020 - Exerpt GEAB N°66 (June 2012)   2012-2013: End of Euroland's consolidation of its budget-finance operations / Launching of the first pro-active common socio-economic policies / Acceleration of the distinction between Euroland-EU By mid-2012, as we have already indicated in preceding GEAB issues, Euroland will be endowed with a whole set of new national leaders (Spain, Italy, Greece, France, Slovenia, Belgium,…) and the following months there will be elections in Germany. Euroland will thus be led by men and women who, for the most part, came to power after the start of the crisis. LEAP/E2020- Excerpt GEAB N°62 (February 2012)   BOK unexpectedly cuts key rate to 3% Korea's central bank cut the key interest rate for the first time in more than three years on Thursday, underscoring its urgency to cushion the bitter impact of the eurozone debt crisis on the local economy. Bank of Korea (BOK) Gov. Kim Choong-soo and his six fellow policymakers lowered the benchmark 7-day repo rate by a quarter percentage point to 3 percent for July. It marked the first rate cut since February 2009. Korea Times   Case for US and Global Recession Right Here, Right Now; Recognizing the Limits of Madness; Permabears? I think the entire global economy is in recession and said so on July 6, 2012 in Plunging New Orders Suggest Global Recession Has Arrived. However, we need to define the term "recession". Contrary to popular myth, recession does not mean two consecutive quarters of economic contraction. Rather, two consecutive quarters of economic contraction is a sufficient, but not necessary condition. Mish's   One-on-One with Robert Shiller The One-on-One series continues with Yale Professor Robert Shiller. He predicted the current housing meltdown which is now five years old. If you think we are at the bottom, think again. When asked, "If the current housing crisis was a baseball game, what inning would it be?" Shiller replied, "Maybe we're in the fourth." USA Watchdog   The Political Anticipation Method©: 10 week online training course LEAP/E2020 is re-launching its political anticipation© training courses! Henceforth these will be completely on line and in three languages (German, English and French) to begin with (Spanish will be added to the list shortly thereafter). LEAP/FEFAP   Brazil Industry Continues in Slide Despite a raft of recent stimulus measures, data released last week showed Brazilian industry continuing to perform poorly over recent months, as it reacts to the crisis in Europe and lower global demand for commodity exports. Industrial production shrank in May for the third consecutive month according to data released by the Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE, Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics). The Rio Times   Disaster Declared in 26 States as Drought Sears U.S. The declaration makes farmers and ranchers in 1,016 counties -- about a third of those in the entire country -- eligible for low-interest loans to help them weather the drought, wildfires and other disasters, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said today. The USDA is also changing procedures to allow disaster claims to be processed more quickly and reducing the penalty ranchers are assessed for allowing livestock to graze on land set aside for conservation. Bloomberg   Potential Pentagon cuts cloud Farnborough mood The threat of massive cuts to the U.S. Defense Department budget come early January is casting a cloud of uncertainty over the Farnborough International Airshow taking place this week. In a process known as sequestration, automatic cuts of around a half trillion dollar over the next 10 years will hit the Pentagon unless lawmakers and the White House take action. The cuts would be in addition to a roughly $487 billion scaling back of military spending over the next decade that is already under way. Market Watch   Gold the answer to currency wars Hedge fund manager says yellow metal should be an integral part of investor portfolios. Global capital markets specialist and best-selling author James Rickards says that the ongoing currency wars are a combination of deflationary and inflationary factors that could leave painful scars on the global economy. China Daily   PSA supprime 8 000 emplois en France, dont 6 500 nets Le 1er constructeur automobile français, PSA Peugeot Citroën, a provoqué un choc jeudi en annonçant la fin de la production de voitures en 2014 à l'usine d'Aulnay (Seine-Saint-Denis), où travaillent plus de 3 000 salariés, et un plan global de 8 000 suppressions de postes en France. Libération   U.S. moving submersibles to Persian Gulf to oppose Iran The Navy is rushing dozens of unmanned underwater craft to the Persian Gulf to help detect and destroy mines in a major military buildup aimed at preventing Iran from closing the strategic Strait of Hormuz in the event of a crisis, U.S. officials said... Chicago Tribune   'For Russia, it's about more than just Syria' The conflict in Syria is increasingly putting a strain on relations between Russia and the West. However, experts agree that at the heart of the matter is not just the future of Syria. It's become somewhat of a ritual. If, once in a while, the Russian government does criticize Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Western media and politicians immediately celebrate it as a change of course. Deutsche Welle   San Bernardino Becomes Third California City Seeking Bankruptcy The city council of San Bernardino, California, voted on Tuesday to file for bankruptcy, marking the third time in recent weeks a city in the most populous U.S. state has opted to seek protection from its creditors. The decision by the leaders of San Bernardino, a city of about 210,000 residents approximately 65 miles east of Los Angeles, followed a report by city staff that said the city faced an imminent financial crisis. CNBC   USDA Slashes Corn Outlook; Forecast Sends Prices Surging A scorching drought across the Midwest will slash corn yields by much more than most analysts had expected, the government said in a report that reignited a record rally in grain prices. Field corn plants with wilted and dying leaves stand in a dry field in Idaville, Indiana, U.S. The U.S. Department of Agriculture said the crop will average just 146.0 bushels an acre, down 20 bushels from its June estimate... CNBC   A very promising e-democracy project, particularly adapted for Euroland future democratic challenges! Voxe.org is an international team of young innovators that build online tools that help contextualize, compare and debate political platforms. Their search for country partners.. Voxe.org   This special Press Review reviews articles from the French and Engligh-speaking international online media relating to the unfolding global crisis. It is delivered freely on a weekly basis to 60,000 recipients worldwide. Subscription / Contact: centre@europe2020.org To unsubscribe: click below

Unsubscribe.



--
sobre crisis financiera global
http://www.betaggarcian.blogspot.com/

john b.taylor:dual mandate..

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-09-16/end-the-fed-s-dual-mandate-and-focus-on-prices-john-b-taylor.html

Fwd: The Recession of 2011? - John Mauldin's Weekly E-Letter

The Recession of 2011? By John Mauldin | August 20, 2011 In this issue: The Recession of 2011? The Streettalk/Mauldin Economic Output Index Is There a Recession in Our Future? The Bright Side of Europe’s Dysfunctionality The “Treasonous” Fed Some Final Thoughts Some Hope and Needed Help, Plus Travels The data this week was just ugly. Even the uptick in the leading economic indicators, seized upon by so many talking heads, must have a large asterisk beside it. This week we look at the increasing probability that we are headed for recession, and the follow-on implications. Then I take a perilous and speculative journey into the realm of the political, commenting on Texas (and my) Governor Rick Perry’s rather interesting comments about the Fed and Ben Bernanke. There is a lot to cover, and lots of charts, so we will jump right in. But please read at the end about two events coming up in the next few months that you might be very interested in attending. The Recession of 2011? It was relatively easy for me to forecast the recessions of 2001 and late 2007 over a year in advance. We had an inverted yield curve for 90 days at levels that have ALWAYS heralded a recession in the US. Plus there were numerous other less accurate (in terms of consistency) indicators that were “flashing red.” (For new readers, an inverted yield curve is where long-term rates go below short-term rates, a [thankfully] rare condition.) And since stocks drop on average more than 40% in a recession, suggesting that you get out of the stock market was not such a challenging call. Although, when Nouriel Roubini and I were on Larry Kudlow’s show in August of 2006, we got beaten up for our bearish views. And you know what? The stock market then proceeded to go up another 20% in the next six months. Ouch. That interview is still on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AUoB7x2mxE. Timing can be a real, um, problem. There is no exact way to time markets or recessions. My view then was based on the inverted yield curve (as an article of faith) and, not much later in 2006, my growing alarm as I realized the extent of the folly of the subprime debt debacle and how severe a crisis it would become. I changed my assessment from a mild recession to a serious one in early 2007 as my research revealed more and more fault lines and the damning interconnection of the global banking system (which has NOT been fixed, only made worse since then). I should note that my early views were rather Pollyannaish, as I thought (originally) that losses to US banks would only be in the $400 billion range. I keep telling people that I am an optimist. With the Fed artificially holding down rates on the short end of the curve, we are not going to get an inverted yield curve this time, so we have to look for other indicators to come up with a forecast for the US economy. We grew at less than 1% in the first half of the year. That is close to stall speed. And that was with a full dose of QE2! So now, let’s look at a series of charts that cause me to be very concerned about the near-term health of the economy. Then we turn to Europe and problems compounding there. The Streettalk/Mauldin Economic Output Index Last year I was having a discussion with Lance Roberts of Streettalk Advisors in Houston about how to build an indicator that might give us a clue as to the direction of the economy. Most indicators use one or two data points and thus can be suspect. For instance, the Philly Fed Economic Index went from 3.2 in July to -30.7 in August, helping to tank the market. Almost every subcomponent (new orders, employment, etc.) was not just down but negative. This was truly a shocker. You can see the gory details at http://www.philadelphiafed.org/research-and-data/regional-economy/business-outlook-survey/2011/bos0811.cfm. The Empire Index (New York) went from -3.8 to -7.7. The Empire Index suggests that the August ISM manufacturing number will be 49, or in a state of negative growth. The Philly Index suggests a very dismal 42, which if true would suggest we are already in recession. But these are regional indexes. Now, just for fun, let’s look at a combined index that David Rosenberg created from the Philly Index plus the Michigan Consumer Confidence Index. (Those of us old enough can remember Jack Nicholson playing the Joker in Batman back in 1989. When Batman escaped with the help of something from his tool kit, Nicholson said, “Where does he get all those wonderful toys?” When I read Rosie’s newsletter, I have the same reaction. “Where does he get all those wonderful charts?” He swears he makes them himself. I stand in awe.) Notice that with Rosie’s combined index where it is today, we are either at the beginning of a recession or already in one. And the Philly Fed Index is consistent with a 90% chance of a recession. And that is again consistent with the following chart from Rich Yamarone, which I used last month but that bears looking at again. Rich is chief economist at Bloomberg. (By the way, for Conversation subscribers, I just recorded a powerhouse session with Rich, which will be available as soon as we can get it transcribed.) Is There a Recession in Our Future? I previously wrote, in late July: “And the last chart is one I had not seen before, and is interesting. Rich notes that if year-over-year GDP growth dips below 2%, a recession always follows. It is now at 2.3%.” Oops. Last week David Rosenberg updated that chart. This from Rosie: If Rich is right, then the next revisions to second-quarter GDP will be down from an already abysmal 1.3%. And the growth in the second half is not going to be all that good for jobs and consumer spending But these are charts of single data points. You can quibble that the Philly Fed could be influenced by something local or that the 1.6% number might be different this time. So Lance Roberts of Streettalk Advisors (with me looking over his shoulder) created an index that combines a number of economic indexes in an effort to build an index that is not subject to single (or double) indicators. The Streettalk/Mauldin Economic Output Index is composed of a weighted average of the following indexes: Chicago Fed National Activity Index Chicago PMI The Streettalk ISM Composite Index Richmond Fed Manufacturing Survey Philly Fed Survey Dallas Fed Survey Kansas City Fed Survey The National Federation of Independent Business Survey Leading economic indicators Note that there are six regional and national indicators, plus the NFIB survey, which is national. Lance’s index is not driven by one region or index or survey. When the combined indicator falls below 30, it has always indicated either that we are in a recession or about to be in one. The chart is overlaid, below, against GDP and LEI (leading economic indicators) – both tend to have a fairly high correlation to our Economic Output Composite Index. And LEI is currently supported by the yield spread and money supply (more on that below). A few quick notes before the chart. First, note the increases in the index with the onset of QE1 and QE2 and the sharp drops when QE ends. The red at the end of the chart is the recent drop, and it takes us into recession territory. Recessions are indicated by gray bands Note: I will be speaking at the Streettalk conference on October 14 in Houston, and tickets are currently on sale at www.streettalklive.com. David Rosenberg will also be speaking. They put on a very good conference at a reasonable price. Now, a comment on the uptick in the leading economic indicators this week. Even the ECRI noted that it was because two of the financial components added to the positive numbers. One was the sharp rise in M2 money supply. But a lot of that is because people are going to cash, which is not all that positive from a macro viewpoint. The other is the steepness of the yield curve, which is being manipulated at the short end. Without their positive contributions, the index would be down 0.5%, down three of the last four months, and in a pattern that led to a recession in late 2007. Coincidence? One last chart from Batman, I mean Rosie. Here he gives us the latest data from Larry Meyer’s Macroeconomic Advisers, where they track the real GDP index (inflation-adjusted). It is also in recession territory. Housing is terrible. Existing-home sales were bad. The inventory for homes for sale grew, even as mortgage rates are at all-time lows. A 30-year mortgage is at 4.15%. It is possible we could see a 30-year mortgage with a “3” handle if we slip into recession. I could go on and on about the negative data, and may do so in future letters, but I will resist writing another book tonight, as we have a few other topics to cover. The Bright Side of Europe’s Dysfunctionality To say that the government of Europe is dysfunctional is an no-brainer. The bright side is that it makes the US government look slightly better, and that’s not saying a lot. This past week Nicholas Sarkozy asked Angela Merkel out, so they could decide what to do about the euro crisis. What they said was, we need yet another eurozone governing body overseeing fiscal debt and promises by governments not to run large deficits – like that has ever worked. And they unequivocally said “non” and “nein” to the idea of eurobonds, which everyone else says is vital if the euro is to survive. Oh, and we will harmonize our tax structures within five years. As if that solves the crisis today. Note to Nick and Angela: the problem is not tax structures, it is debt that cannot be repaid. Lars Frisell is the chief economist for the Swedish group that regulates that nation’s banking system. Yesterday he was quoted as saying: “It won’t take much for the interbank market to collapse. It’s not that serious at the moment, but it feels like it could very easily become that way and that everything will freeze.” (hat tip, Art Cashin) My friend Porter Stansberry wrote today: “In Europe, the problem is a bit different … and slightly more technical. Most of the debt in Europe is held by the big banks, not the sovereigns. Look at just two French banks, for example. Credit Agricole and BNP Paribas have combined deposits of a little more than 1 trillion euro. But they hold assets of 2.5 trillion euro. Those assets equal France's entire GDP. “And those are only two of France's banks. Right now, the tangible capital ratios of these banks have fallen to levels that suggest they are probably bankrupt – like UniCredit in Italy and Deutsche Bank in Germany. BNP's tangible equity ratio is 2.85%. Credit Agricole's tangible equity ratio is 1.41%. (UniCredit's is 4.42%, and Deutsche Bank's is 1.92%). “These banks have long been instruments of state policy in Europe. They've funded all kinds of government projects and favored industries. Making loans is far more popular with politicians than demanding repayment for loans. As a result, these banks are left with nothing in the kitty to repay their depositors. If there's a run on these banks (and there will be), how will they come up with money that's owed?” I totally agree (although Porter is wrong about US debt). If there is a sovereign debt credit crisis in Europe, it is entirely possible that 80% of Europe’s banks will be technically insolvent, depending on the level of the crisis. Frisell could be eerily prescient. We gave them subprime; they may pay us back with their own crisis and in spades, as Dad used to say. I really need to do a whole letter on Europe again soon. The next real crisis in Europe that is not bought off with yet more debt will push the world into recession. It is that serious. That is why the ECB keeps ignoring its charter and taking on bank debt and buying sovereign debt they know will be marked down. The entire world economy now swings on the German voters and whether they will take on all of Europe’s debt, risking their own AAA status and putting themselves at serious risk. Supposedly, Finland wants collateral from Greece if it contributes its portion of a guarantee. Think every other country will not want some of that action? I simply do not have the space to go into it tonight, but this is VERY serious. Maybe next week. And just as I was getting ready to hit the send button, economy.com sent me an email entitled “Article: Europe's Leaders Know the Way but Lack the Will, by Tu Packard. Summary: The stability facility lacks credibility.” That more than sums it up. Dysfunctional indeed. We now need to turn to Governor Perry, our newest candidate for president. The “Treasonous” Fed I have been asked many times what I think about Governor Perry getting into the presidential race. Over six months ago he told me personally there was no way he would run, and he was serious when he said it. I believed him. But what I think happened in the interim is that he looked at the field of candidates and said, “I can play in that league.” And as long as he can keep from making any more gaffs like he did with his Fed comments, he can indeed play in the current field. He has the charm of being plainspoken and blunt, and that might just play well this year. Whether the country is ready for another Texan is a different question. (Sidebar: my personal bet is that there are at least two and possibly three other potential candidates who would be taken seriously if they got into the race. They, too, have got to be saying, “Is this all I’m up against? I can play in this league. In fact, I might just be the MVP.” The lure of the presidency is a powerful one. My bet is we have not seen the final field of candidates. And it is not impossible that a challenger emerges on the Democratic side as well. Obama’s poll numbers, even among Democrats, are not good. This is a very interesting political year and as wide open as I can remember.) But however injudicious Perry’s actual remarks were, he is right to call into question Fed actions. Why do I as your humble analyst get that right and politicians don’t? Let me be clear. I want a VERY independent Fed. I do not want Congress or the President dictating Fed policy. I do not like Senators holding up Fed nominations for political gain, whether it was Dodd fighting Bush over his nominees or current GOP senators fighting Obama over his. That is simply wrong in every way. But I think Fed actions are fair game for comment and disagreement. And I agree with Perry that QE2 was not helpful. It was not very wise policy – but that is a long way from “treasonous.” Let’s see if the electorate gives him a “mulligan” on that comment. Think about this. The Fed announced this week that it would extend low rates until 2013. They are practically pushing people into higher-risk assets in a search for yield, at PRECISELY the time we may be slipping into recession, which will put those assets at their highest risk. I think this could end in tears and land those who are close to retirement in even worse shape. Note to Governor Perry: If you want to learn how to properly criticize the Fed and the US government, go read the last ten speeches of another Texan, Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher (who should be the next Fed chair!). Let’s take a look at a few paragraphs from his latest speech, this week (again, hat tip Art Cashin). “I have spoken to this many times in public. Those with the capacity to hire American workers―small businesses as well as large, publicly traded or private―are immobilized. Not because they lack entrepreneurial zeal or do not wish to grow; not because they can’t access cheap and available credit. Rather, they simply cannot budget or manage for the uncertainty of fiscal and regulatory policy. In an environment where they are already uncertain of potential growth in demand for their goods and services and have yet to see a significant pickup in top-line revenue, there is palpable angst surrounding the cost of doing business. According to my business contacts, the opera buffa of the debt ceiling negotiations compounded this uncertainty, leaving business decision makers frozen in their tracks. {Mauldin note: Opera buffa (Italian; plural, opere buffe) is a genre of opera. It was first used as an informal description of Italian comic operas variously classified by their authors as ‘commedia in musica.’ Us Texans have our literary abilities.} “I would suggest that unless you were on another planet, no consumer with access to a television, radio or the Internet could have escaped hearing their president, senators and their congressperson telling them the sky was falling. With the leadership of the nation―Republicans and Democrats alike―and every talking head in the media making clear hour after hour, day after day in the run-up to Aug. 2 that a financial disaster was lurking around the corner, it does not take much imagination to envision consumers deciding to forego or delay some discretionary expenditure they had planned. “Instead, they might well be inclined to hunker down to weather the perfect storm they were being warned was rapidly approaching. Watching the drama as it unfolded, I could imagine consumers turning to each other in millions of households, saying: ‘Honey, we need to cancel that trip we were planning and that gizmo or service we wanted to buy. We better save more and spend less.’ Small wonder that, following the somewhat encouraging retail activity reported in July, the Michigan survey measure of consumer sentiment released just recently had a distinctly sour tone. “Importantly, from a business operator’s perspective, nothing was clarified, except that there will be undefined change in taxes, spending and subsidies and other fiscal incentives or disincentives. The message was simply that some combination of revenue enhancement and spending growth cutbacks will take place. The particulars are left to one’s imagination and the outcome of deliberations among 12 members of the Legislature. “Now, put yourself in the shoes of a business operator. On the revenue side, you have yet to see a robust recovery in demand; growing your top-line revenue is vexing. You have been driving profits or just maintaining your margins through cost reduction and achieving maximum operating efficiency. You have money in your pocket or a banker increasingly willing to give you credit if and when you decide to expand. “But you have no idea where the government will be cutting back on spending, what measures will be taken on the taxation front and how all this will affect your cost structure or customer base. Your most likely reaction is to cross your arms, plant your feet and say: ‘Show me. I am not going to hire new workers or build a new plant until I have been shown what will come out of this agreement.’ “Moreover, you might now say to yourself, ‘I understand from the Federal Reserve that I don’t have to worry about the cost of borrowing for another two years. Given that I don’t know how I am going to be hit by whatever new initiatives the Congress will come up with, but I do know that credit will remain cheap through the next election, what incentive do I have to invest and expand now? Why shouldn’t I wait until the sky is clear?’” You can read the whole speech at http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2011/fs110817.cfm. In addition to his reasoning for his latest dissent at the Fed, Fisher also goes into detail about the Texas job-growth machine, which is what Perry will be touting. Again from Art Cashin: Bullard, of the St. Louis Fed, said “Policy should be set by the state of the economy, not according to the calendar,” pointing to the Fed’s decision to stand pat until mid-2013. Next came the Philly Fed’s Plosser, who said, “There is a price to be paid” for monetary policy and that the Fed’s decision was “inappropriate policy at an inappropriate time.” Now that, Rick, is how to take the Fed to task. Some Final Thoughts If we are headed into recession, and I think we are, then the stock market has a long way to go to reach its next bottom, as do many risk assets. Income is going to be king, as well as cash (and cash is a position, as I often remind readers). If we go into recession, we’ll know several things. Recessions are by definition deflationary. Yields on bonds will go down, much further than the market thinks today. And while the Fed may decide to invoke QE3 to fight a deflation scare, the problem is not one of liquidity; it is a debt problem. It is not unusual for a recession to last a year, which means it could well take us into next summer and election season. And while the NBER (the people who are the “official” recession scorecard keepers) will tell us when the recession started, about nine months after it has, it is unlikely they will give an all-clear before the election. There is little stomach for more fiscal stimulus. The drive is to cut spending. Fed policy is impotent. Unemployment will rise yet again and tax receipts will fall and expenses related to unemployment benefits will rise, putting further pressure on the deficit. Already, 40 million of our citizens are on food stamps. Wal-Mart notes that shoppers come into their stores late at night on the last day of the month and wait until midnight, when their new allotment of food stamps is activated. It is hard to see at this moment what pulls us out, other than the blood, sweat, and tears of American entrepreneurs. Fisher is right; the US government should create certainty, create policies to foster new business, and get out of the way. So, I guess I am going out on a limb, without any help from an inverted yield curve, and saying that we will be in recession within 12 months, if we are not already in one. This will be unlike any recession we have seen, as there is not much that can be done, other than to just get through it as best we can. Sit down and think about your own situation and prepare. And frankly, for those of us who are entrepreneurs, this will offer some very interesting opportunities. I am not one for digging a hole and crawling in it. Stay aware of what can be done and create your own solutions! Some Hope and Needed Help, Plus Travels I will be the keynote speaker and honoree in Atlanta at the Hedge Funds Care Southeast Benefit on November 9th. The online registration link is http://www.hedgefundscare.org/event.asp?eventID=74. This group raises money for abused children, and their numbers are growing as the economy gets worse. You participation is appreciated. They are doing a special small private lunch with me as well, so take a look. I will also be speaking at the Singularity Summit in New York, October 15-16. Rather than focusing on the bad news, this conference looks at how wonderful and bright our future is. I love these guys and am honored to be included. You can find out more and register at http://www.singularitysummit.com/program. If you are interested at all in the future, you should consider coming. I am home for another 30+ days, and I need it. Starting in late September, my schedule once again gets crazy. Europe (Ireland for four days on a fact-finding trip, as I think Ireland is the true “ground zero” in Europe; but that’s just me) plus Geneva and London. It looks like a quick trip to South Africa (seeing Dubai as a long layover on the way), Houston, New York, New Orleans, San Francisco, some place in Maryland, and then Atlanta. I am enjoying my time in Dallas. One of the twins (Amanda) and her husband moved down last week, so now six of seven kids are near Dad. Just one more to go, and she should graduate in December. Even being home, this has been a very busy week and tough all the way around. It seems that the demands on my personal bandwidth just keep increasing, even as my growing staff takes on more and more of the load. Without them I would crash and burn. I am not complaining, as many in our industry are looking for work. I know I am blessed beyond any reasonable measure. There are 243 emails in my personal inbox. If one of them is yours, I will try and get to it as soon as I can. But I do enjoy hearing from my readers, as it keeps me grounded. I intend to catch up some this weekend, even while making it to the gym. I am taking the time while home to make sure I get into the gym. Have a great week. And remember, we get through this. Time passes faster every year. We will get through this decade and then be set up for the biggest bull market of our lives. Patience, grasshopper. Your wishing he had better news analyst, John Mauldin John@FrontlineThoughts.com Copyright 2011 John Mauldin. All Rights Reserved.

Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Fed’s Secret Loans

Wall Street Aristocracy Got $1.2 Trillion in Fed's Secret Loans

Q

By Bradley Keoun and Phil Kuntz - Aug 22, 2011 7:19 AM GMT-0500

Citigroup Inc. (C) and Bank of America Corp. (BAC) were the reigning champions of finance in 2006 as home prices peaked, leading the 10 biggest U.S. banks and brokerage firms to their best year ever with $104 billion of profits.

By 2008, the housing market's collapse forced those companies to take more than six times as much, $669 billion, in emergency loans from the U.S. Federal Reserve. The loans dwarfed the $160 billion in public bailouts the top 10 got from the U.S. Treasury, yet until now the full amounts have remained secret.

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke's unprecedented effort to keep the economy from plunging into depression included lending banks and other companies as much as $1.2 trillion of public money, about the same amount U.S. homeowners currently owe on 6.5 million delinquent and foreclosed mortgages. The largest borrower, Morgan Stanley (MS), got as much as $107.3 billion, while Citigroup took $99.5 billion and Bank of America $91.4 billion, according to a Bloomberg News compilation of data obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, months of litigation and an act of Congress.

"These are all whopping numbers," said Robert Litan, a former Justice Department official who in the 1990s served on a commission probing the causes of the savings and loan crisis. "You're talking about the aristocracy of American finance going down the tubes without the federal money."

(View the Bloomberg interactive graphic to chart the Fed's financial bailout.)

Foreign Borrowers

It wasn't just American finance. Almost half of the Fed's top 30 borrowers, measured by peak balances, were European firms. They included Edinburgh-based Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, which took $84.5 billion, the most of any non-U.S. lender, and Zurich-based UBS AG (UBSN), which got $77.2 billion. Germany's Hypo Real Estate Holding AG borrowed $28.7 billion, an average of $21 million for each of its 1,366 employees.

The largest borrowers also included Dexia SA (DEXB), Belgium's biggest bank by assets, and Societe Generale SA, based in Paris, whose bond-insurance prices have surged in the past month as investors speculated that the spreading sovereign debt crisis in Europe might increase their chances of default.

The $1.2 trillion peak on Dec. 5, 2008 -- the combined outstanding balance under the seven programs tallied by Bloomberg -- was almost three times the size of the U.S. federal budget deficit that year and more than the total earnings of all federally insured banks in the U.S. for the decade through 2010, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Peak Balance

The balance was more than 25 times the Fed's pre-crisis lending peak of $46 billion on Sept. 12, 2001, the day after terrorists attacked the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon. Denominated in $1 bills, the $1.2 trillion would fill 539 Olympic-size swimming pools.

The Fed has said it had "no credit losses" on any of the emergency programs, and a report by Federal Reserve Bank of New York staffers in February said the central bank netted $13 billion in interest and fee income from the programs from August 2007 through December 2009.

"We designed our broad-based emergency programs to both effectively stem the crisis and minimize the financial risks to the U.S. taxpayer," said James Clouse, deputy director of the Fed's division of monetary affairs in Washington. "Nearly all of our emergency-lending programs have been closed. We have incurred no losses and expect no losses."

While the 18-month U.S. recession that ended in June 2009 after a 5.1 percent contraction in gross domestic product was nowhere near the four-year, 27 percent decline between August 1929 and March 1933, banks and the economy remain stressed.

Odds of Recession

The odds of another recession have climbed during the past six months, according to five of nine economists on the Business Cycle Dating Committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an academic panel that dates recessions.

Bank of America's bond-insurance prices last week surged to a rate of $342,040 a year for coverage on $10 million of debt, above whereLehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (LEHMQ)'s bond insurance was priced at the start of the week before the firm collapsed. Citigroup's shares are trading below the split-adjusted price of $28 that they hit on the day the bank's Fed loans peaked in January 2009. The U.S. unemployment rate was at 9.1 percent in July, compared with 4.7 percent in November 2007, before the recession began.

Homeowners are more than 30 days past due on their mortgage payments on 4.38 million properties in the U.S., and 2.16 million more properties are in foreclosure, representing a combined $1.27 trillion of unpaid principal, estimates Jacksonville, Florida-based Lender Processing Services Inc.

Liquidity Requirements

"Why in hell does the Federal Reserve seem to be able to find the way to help these entities that are gigantic?" U.S. Representative Walter B. Jones, a Republican from North Carolina, said at a June 1 congressional hearing in Washington on Fed lending disclosure. "They get help when the average businessperson down in eastern North Carolina, and probably across America, they can't even go to a bank they've been banking with for 15 or 20 years and get a loan."

The sheer size of the Fed loans bolsters the case for minimum liquidity requirements that global regulators last year agreed to impose on banks for the first time, said Litan, now a vice president at the Kansas City, Missouri-based Kauffman Foundation, which supports entrepreneurship research. Liquidity refers to the daily funds a bank needs to operate, including cash to cover depositor withdrawals.

The rules, which mandate that banks keep enough cash and easily liquidated assets on hand to survive a 30-day crisis, don't take effect until 2015. Another proposed requirement for lenders to keep "stable funding" for a one-year horizon was postponed until at least 2018 after banks showed they'd have to raise as much as $6 trillion in new long-term debt to comply.

`Stark Illustration'

Regulators are "not going to go far enough to prevent this from happening again," said Kenneth Rogoff, a former chief economist at theInternational Monetary Fund and now an economics professor at Harvard University.

Reforms undertaken since the crisis might not insulate U.S. markets and financial institutions from the sovereign budget and debt crises facing Greece, Ireland and Portugal, according to the U.S. Financial Stability Oversight Council, a 10-member body created by the Dodd-Frank Act and led by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner.

"The recent financial crisis provides a stark illustration of how quickly confidence can erode and financial contagion can spread," the council said in its July 26 report.

21,000 Transactions

Any new rescues by the U.S. central bank would be governed by transparency laws adopted in 2010 that require the Fed to disclose borrowers after two years.

Fed officials argued for more than two years that releasing the identities of borrowers and the terms of their loans would stigmatize banks, damaging stock prices or leading to depositor runs. A group of the biggest commercial banks last year asked the U.S. Supreme Court to keep at least some Fed borrowings secret. In March, the high court declined to hear that appeal, and the central bank made an unprecedented release of records.

Data gleaned from 29,346 pages of documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and from other Fed databases of more than 21,000 transactions make clear for the first time how deeply the world's largest banks depended on the U.S. central bank to stave off cash shortfalls. Even as the firms asserted in news releases or earnings calls that they had ample cash, they drew Fed funding in secret, avoiding the stigma of weakness.

Morgan Stanley Borrowing

Two weeks after Lehman's bankruptcy in September 2008, Morgan Stanley countered concerns that it might be next to go by announcing it had "strong capital and liquidity positions." The statement, in a Sept. 29, 2008, press release about a $9 billion investment from Tokyo-based Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc., said nothing about Morgan Stanley's Fed loans.

That was the same day as the firm's $107.3 billion peak in borrowing from the central bank, which was the source of almost all of Morgan Stanley's available cash, according to the lending data and documents released more than two years later by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. The amount was almost three times the company's total profits over the past decade, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Mark Lake, a spokesman for New York-based Morgan Stanley, said the crisis caused the industry to "fundamentally re- evaluate" the way it manages its cash.

"We have taken the lessons we learned from that period and applied them to our liquidity-management program to protect both our franchise and our clients going forward," Lake said. He declined to say what changes the bank had made.

Acceptable Collateral

In most cases, the Fed demanded collateral for its loans -- Treasuries or corporate bonds and mortgage bonds that could be seized and sold if the money wasn't repaid. That meant the central bank's main risk was that collateral pledged by banks that collapsed would be worth less than the amount borrowed.

As the crisis deepened, the Fed relaxed its standards for acceptable collateral. Typically, the central bank accepts only bonds with the highest credit grades, such as U.S. Treasuries. By late 2008, it was accepting "junk" bonds, those rated below investment grade. It even took stocks, which are first to get wiped out in a liquidation.

Morgan Stanley borrowed $61.3 billion from one Fed program in September 2008, pledging a total of $66.5 billion of collateral, according to Fed documents. Securities pledged included $21.5 billion of stocks, $6.68 billion of bonds with a junk credit rating and $19.5 billion of assets with an "unknown rating," according to the documents. About 25 percent of the collateral was foreign-denominated.

`Willingness to Lend'

"What you're looking at is a willingness to lend against just about anything," said Robert Eisenbeis, a former research director at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and now chief monetary economist in Atlanta for Sarasota, Florida-based Cumberland Advisors Inc.

The lack of private-market alternatives for lending shows how skeptical trading partners and depositors were about the value of the banks' capital and collateral, Eisenbeis said.

"The markets were just plain shut," said Tanya Azarchs, former head of bank research at Standard & Poor's and now an independent consultant in Briarcliff Manor, New York. "If you needed liquidity, there was only one place to go."

Even banks that survived the crisis without government capital injections tapped the Fed through programs that promised confidentiality. London-based Barclays Plc (BARC) borrowed $64.9 billion and Frankfurt-based Deutsche Bank AG (DBK) got $66 billion. Sarah MacDonald, a spokeswoman for Barclays, and John Gallagher, a spokesman for Deutsche Bank, declined to comment.

Below-Market Rates

While the Fed's last-resort lending programs generally charge above-market interest rates to deter routine borrowing, that practice sometimes flipped during the crisis. On Oct. 20, 2008, for example, the central bank agreed to make $113.3 billion of 28-day loans through itsTerm Auction Facility at a rate of 1.1 percent, according to a press release at the time.

The rate was less than a third of the 3.8 percent that banks were charging each other to make one-month loans on that day. Bank of America and Wachovia Corp. each got $15 billion of the 1.1 percent TAF loans, followed by Royal Bank of Scotland's RBS Citizens NA unit with $10 billion, Fed data show.

JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM), the New York-based lender that touted its "fortress balance sheet" at least 16 times in press releases and conference calls from October 2007 through February 2010, took as much as $48 billion in February 2009 from TAF. The facility, set up in December 2007, was a temporary alternative to the discount window, the central bank's 97-year-old primary lending program to help banks in a cash squeeze.

`Larger Than TARP'

Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), which in 2007 was the most profitable securities firm in Wall Street history, borrowed $69 billion from the Fed on Dec. 31, 2008. Among the programs New York-based Goldman Sachs tapped after the Lehman bankruptcy was the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, or PDCF, designed to lend money to brokerage firms ineligible for the Fed's bank-lending programs.

Michael Duvally, a spokesman for Goldman Sachs, declined to comment.

The Fed's liquidity lifelines may increase the chances that banks engage in excessive risk-taking with borrowed money, Rogoff said. Such a phenomenon, known as moral hazard, occurs if banks assume the Fed will be there when they need it, he said. The size of bank borrowings "certainly shows the Fed bailout was in many ways much larger than TARP," Rogoff said.

TARP is the Treasury Department's Troubled Asset Relief Program, a $700 billion bank-bailout fund that provided capital injections of $45 billion each to Citigroup and Bank of America, and $10 billion to Morgan Stanley. Because most of the Treasury's investments were made in the form of preferred stock, they were considered riskier than the Fed's loans, a type of senior debt.

Dodd-Frank Requirement

In December, in response to the Dodd-Frank Act, the Fed released 18 databases detailing its temporary emergency-lending programs.

Congress required the disclosure after the Fed rejected requests in 2008 from the late Bloomberg News reporter Mark Pittman and other media companies that sought details of its loans under the Freedom of Information Act. After fighting to keep the data secret, the central bank released unprecedented information about its discount window and other programs under court order in March 2011.

Bloomberg News combined Fed databases made available in December and July with the discount-window records released in March to produce daily totals for banks across all the programs, including the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility, Commercial Paper Funding Facility, discount window, PDCF, TAF, Term Securities Lending Facility and single-tranche open market operations. The programs supplied loans from August 2007 through April 2010.

Rolling Crisis

The result is a timeline illustrating how the credit crisis rolled from one bank to another as financial contagion spread.

Fed borrowings by Societe Generale (GLE), France's second-biggest bank, peaked at $17.4 billion in May 2008, four months after the Paris-based lender announced a record 4.9 billion-euro ($7.2 billion) loss on unauthorized stock-index futures bets by former trader Jerome Kerviel.

Morgan Stanley's top borrowing came four months later, after Lehman's bankruptcy. Citigroup crested in January 2009, as did 43 other banks, the largest number of peak borrowings for any month during the crisis. Bank of America's heaviest borrowings came two months after that.

Sixteen banks, including Plano, Texas-based Beal Financial Corp. and Jacksonville, Florida-based EverBank Financial Corp., didn't hit their peaks until February or March 2010.

Using Subsidiaries

"At no point was there a material risk to the Fed or the taxpayer, as the loan required collateralization," said Reshma Fernandes, a spokeswoman for EverBank, which borrowed as much as $250 million.

Banks maximized their borrowings by using subsidiaries to tap Fed programs at the same time. In March 2009, Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America drew $78 billion from one facility through two banking units and $11.8 billion more from two other programs through its broker-dealer, Bank of America Securities LLC.

Banks also shifted balances among Fed programs. Many preferred the TAF because it carried less of the stigma associated with the discount window, often seen as the last resort for lenders in distress, according to a January 2011 paper by researchers at the New York Fed.

After the Lehman bankruptcy, hedge funds began pulling their cash out of Morgan Stanley, fearing it might be the next to collapse, the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission said in a January report, citing interviews with former Chief Executive Officer John Mack and then-Treasurer David Wong.

Borrowings Surge

Morgan Stanley's borrowings from the PDCF surged to $61.3 billion on Sept. 29 from zero on Sept. 14. At the same time, its loans from the Term Securities Lending Facility, or TSLF, rose to $36 billion from $3.5 billion. Morgan Stanley treasury reports released by the FCIC show the firm had $99.8 billion of liquidity on Sept. 29, a figure that included Fed borrowings.

"The cash flow was all drying up," said Roger Lister, a former Fed economist who's now head of financial-institutions coverage at credit-rating firm DBRS Inc. in New York. "Did they have enough resources to cope with it? The answer would be yes, but they needed the Fed."

While Morgan Stanley's Fed demands were the most acute, Citigroup was the most chronic borrower among the largest U.S. banks. The New York-based company borrowed $10 million from the TAF on the program's first day in December 2007 and had more than $25 billion outstanding under all programs by May 2008, according to Bloomberg data.

Tapping Six Programs

By Nov. 21, when Citigroup began talks with the government to get a $20 billion capital injection on top of the $25 billion received a month earlier, its Fed borrowings had doubled to about $50 billion.

Over the next two months the amount almost doubled again. On Jan. 20, as the stock sank below $3 for the first time in 16 years amid investor concerns that the lender's capital cushion might be inadequate, Citigroup was tapping six Fed programs at once. Its total borrowings amounted to more than twice the federal Department of Education's 2011 budget.

Citigroup was in debt to the Fed on seven out of every 10 days from August 2007 through April 2010, the most frequent U.S. borrower among the 100 biggest publicly traded firms by pre- crisis market valuation. On average, the bank had a daily balance at the Fed of almost $20 billion.

`Help Motivate Others'

"Citibank basically was sustained by the Fed for a very long time," said Richard Herring, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia who has studied financial crises.

Jon Diat, a Citigroup spokesman, said the bank made use of programs that "achieved the goal of instilling confidence in the markets."

JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said in a letter to shareholders last year that his bank avoided many government programs. It did use TAF, Dimon said in the letter, "but this was done at the request of the Federal Reserve to help motivate others to use the system."

The bank, the second-largest in the U.S. by assets, first tapped the TAF in May 2008, six months after the program debuted, and then zeroed out its borrowings in September 2008. The next month, it started using TAF again.

On Feb. 26, 2009, more than a year after TAF's creation, JPMorgan's borrowings under the program climbed to $48 billion. On that day, the overall TAF balance for all banks hit its peak, $493.2 billion. Two weeks later, the figure began declining.

"Our prior comment is accurate," said Howard Opinsky, a spokesman for JPMorgan.

`The Cheapest Source'

Herring, the University of Pennsylvania professor, said some banks may have used the program to maximize profits by borrowing "from the cheapest source, because this was supposed to be secret and never revealed."

Whether banks needed the Fed's money for survival or used it because it offered advantageous rates, the central bank's lender-of-last-resort role amounts to a free insurance policy for banks guaranteeing the arrival of funds in a disaster, Herring said.

An IMF report last October said regulators should consider charging banks for the right to access central bank funds.

"The extent of official intervention is clear evidence that systemic liquidity risks were under-recognized and mispriced by both the private and public sectors," the IMF said in a separate report in April.

Access to Fed backup support "leads you to subject yourself to greater risks," Herring said. "If it's not there, you're not going to take the risks that would put you in trouble and require you to have access to that kind of funding."

To contact the reporters on this story: Bradley Keoun in New York at bkeoun@bloomberg.net; Phil Kuntz in New York at Pkuntz1@bloomberg.net.

__._,_.___