I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men.
We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
-Woodrow Wilson
Sources: Famous Quotations On Banking, PBS, Rescue America, Youtube
The US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a voluminous report last Wednesday on the Wall Street crash of 2008 that documents the fraud and criminality that pervade the entire financial system and its relations with the government.
The 650-page report is the outcome of a two-year investigation that involved over 150 interviews and depositions as well as the examination of subpoenaed emails and internal documents of major banks, government regulatory agencies and credit rating firms. The report, entitled “Wall Street and the Financial Crisis: Anatomy of a Financial Collapse,” establishes that the financial crash and ensuing recession were the result of systemic fraud and deception on the part of the mortgage lenders and banks, carried out with the collusion of the credit rating corporations and the complicity of the government and its bank regulatory agencies.
The World Socialist Web Site will analyze the contents of this important document in detail in the coming days. However, its basic thrust is clear. As the executive summary states: “The investigation found that the crisis was not a natural disaster, but the result of high-risk, complex financial products; undisclosed conflicts of interest; and the failure of regulators, the credit rating agencies, and the market itself to rein in the excesses of Wall Street.”
At a press conference Wednesday and in subsequent interviews, Senator Carl Levin (Democrat from Michigan), the chairman of the subcommittee, was even more explicit. “Using emails, memos and other internal documents,” he said, “this report tells the inside story of an economic assault that cost millions of Americans their jobs and homes, while wiping out investors, good businesses and markets. High-risk lending, regulatory failures, inflated credit ratings and Wall Street firms engaging in massive conflicts of interest contaminated the US financial system with toxic mortgages and undermined public trust in US markets.
“Using their own words in documents subpoenaed by the subcommittee, the report discloses how financial firms deliberately took advantage of their clients and investors, how credit rating agencies assigned AAA ratings to high-risk securities, and how regulators sat on their hands instead of reining in the unsafe and unsound practices all around them. Rampant conflicts of interest are the threads that run through every chapter of this sordid story.”
Levin went on to say that the investigation had found “a financial snake pit rife with greed, conflicts of interest, and wrongdoing.” He told the New York Times: “The overwhelming evidence is that those institutions deceived their clients and deceived the public, and they were aided and abetted by deferential regulators and credit ratings agencies who had conflicts of interest.”
The report is divided into four sections, each focusing on a different contributor to the network of fraud and abuse: the mortgage lenders, the regulators, the credit rating firms and the Wall Street investment banks. The first section takes Washington Mutual (WaMu) as its case history, detailing the predatory and deceptive lending practices and accounting and reporting subterfuges that led, following the implosion of the subprime mortgage market, to the bank’s collapse and takeover by JPMorgan Chase in September of 2008.
The second examines the corrupt role of the federal Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS), which oversaw three of the biggest financial failures in US history—Washington Mutual, IndyMac and Countrywide Financial. “Over a five-year period from 2004 to 2008,” the report states, “OTS identified over 500 serious deficiencies at WaMu, yet failed to take action to force the bank to improve its lending operations and even impeded oversight by the bank’s backup regulator, the FDIC.”
The third section documents the systematic manner in which the rating firms Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s gave top credit ratings to collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and other complex securities backed by subprime and other toxic mortgages, enabling the banks to make billions of dollars by palming off these junk securities as top-grade investments. In return, the rating companies raked in huge profits for their services.
As the report states: “Credit rating agencies were paid by Wall Street firms that sought their ratings and profited from the financial products being rated… The ratings agencies weakened their standards as each competed to provide the most favorable rating to win business and greater market share. The result was a race to the bottom.”
The final section examines the fraud and deception perpetrated by the major investment banks as they profited first from the inflation of the US housing market and then from its implosion. It takes as its examples Goldman Sachs and Deutsche Bank. Goldman began betting heavily in 2007 that the housing market would collapse, packaging and selling subprime mortgage-backed CDOs even as it secretly bet that the same securities would plummet in value.
The report cites emails by Deutsche Bank’s top global CDO trader, Gregg Lippman, calling risky mortgage securities marketed by the bank “crap” and “pigs” and the bank’s operations a “CDO machine,” which he characterized as a “Ponzi scheme.”
The document points to the central role of the big Wall Street banks in promulgating the fraud, stating: “Investment banks were the driving force behind the structured finance products that provided a steady stream of funding for lenders originating high-risk, poor-quality loans and that magnified risk throughout the US financial system. The investment banks that engineered, sold, traded and profited from mortgage-related structured finance products were a major cause of the financial crisis.”
The overall picture is one of criminality on the part of the entire financial establishment that, with all levels of government serving as its co-conspirator, systematically looted the economy in order to further enrich itself. The result is a social tragedy for tens of millions of people in the US and many millions more around the world. And yet, the result of this historic crime is that the bankers and speculators are richer and more powerful than ever.
Not a single senior executive at a major US bank, hedge fund, mortgage firm or insurance company has gone to jail. Not one has even been prosecuted.
There is every indication that none will be criminally indicted in the future. As with the similarly damning report released in January by the US Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, the Senate report has been largely buried by the mass media. It was reported perfunctorily on the inside pages of some of the major newspapers and barely mentioned by the broadcast and cable networks, and then dropped.
One day after the release of the Senate report, the New York Times published a long article on the failure to prosecute any of the Wall Street criminals. It recounted a private meeting between the then-president of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (now Obama’s treasury secretary) Timothy Geithner and then-New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo in October 2008 at which Geithner urged Cuomo to back off on investigations of the banks and rating agencies.
The article contrasted the absence of criminal charges against bankers today with the aftermath of the savings and loan debacle of the late 1980s, when government task forces referred 1,100 cases to prosecutors and more than 800 bank officials went to jail. It noted the precipitous decline in referrals by bank regulators to the FBI, from 1,837 cases in 1995 to 75 in 2006. Over the ensuing four years, at the height of the financial crisis, an average of only 72 a year have been referred for criminal prosecution.
The Office of Thrift Supervision has not referred a single case to the Justice Department since 2000, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, a unit of the Treasury Department, has referred only three in the last decade.
How is this to be explained? Why are Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, the former CEO of Washington Mutual, Kerry Killinger, as well as Treasury Secretary Geithner and his predecessor, Henry Paulson (previously CEO of Goldman), not in prison?
Such financial manipulators are being shielded while workers are being stripped of their jobs, wages, homes and basic social services to pay for the debts resulting from the transfer of trillions in public funds to the banks. Collective resistance to this attack is being criminalized in the form of anti-strike laws, imposing fines and jail terms for workers who fight back.
One reason for the absence of prosecutions is the power of the individuals involved, all of whom wield immense influence over politicians, the media and the legal system. But it goes deeper than the status of individuals, just as the sordid state of affairs as a whole arises not from individual greed, but rather from a profound crisis of the entire system.
The criminalization of the American ruling class is the outcome of more than three decades in which the accumulation of wealth by the corporate-financial elite has become increasingly separated from real production. In its pursuit of profit, the ruling class has dismantled huge sections of industry and turned ever more decisively to financial manipulation and speculation.
The ascendancy of the most parasitic sections of the capitalist class has been accompanied by a sharp decline in the living standards of the working class. The richest and most powerful layers have acquired staggering levels of wealth by plundering society.
The ruling class itself senses that to prosecute any of the leading figures in the defrauding of the American people (and the rest of humankind) would rapidly expose the criminality of the entire system. It would mean putting the capitalist system itself on trial.
Five days after the US Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a voluminous report detailing the criminal activities of the banks and credit rating firms that precipitated the 2008 Wall Street crash and global recession, one of the named culprits, Standard & Poor's Credit Ratings Services, issued an ultimatum to the White House and Congress demanding an agreement on savage austerity measures ahead of the 2012 elections.
In lowering its outlook from "stable" to "negative" on the top AAA rating for US Treasury bonds, S&P spoke Monday for the entire financial mafia that is headquartered on Wall Street. The ratings firm declared in a press release that failure to reach an agreement in the coming months to reduce the federal deficit by at least $4 trillion over the next decade "could lead us to lower the rating."
This amounts to a threat to crash the US and global economy and undermine the status of the dollar as the world reserve currency. The move is part of an internationally orchestrated drive by the major banks and speculators to push through devastating attacks on the living standards of the American working class.
They are applying to the United States the extortionate methods used previously to stoke up speculative attacks on the sovereign debt of a number of European countries, including Greece, Ireland, Portugal and Spain. S&P and its major ratings rivals Moody's and Fitch have issued strategically timed credit warnings and downgrades to create a crisis atmosphere, which governments have then utilized to override popular opposition and impose mass layoffs and wage cuts and shred social programs.
John Chambers, chairman of the sovereign ratings committee at S&P, virtually admitted as much, according to a report in Tuesday’s Wall Street Journal. The Journal wrote: “If the US reaches a British-style resolution, S&P will restore the US outlook to stable, Mr. Chambers said.”
In May of 2009, S&P lowered Britain’s credit outlook. It reversed the action 17 months later after the newly elected Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government announced a program of draconian cuts that will shatter the country’s social safety net.
Readers can make their own judgment as to S&P’s standing to be issuing such ultimatums. The Senate report on the Wall Street crash describes the corrupt process by which S&P routinely slapped AAA ratings on worthless securities marketed by the banks as follows: “Credit rating agencies were paid by Wall Street firms that sought their ratings and profited from the financial products being rated… The ratings agencies weakened their standards as each competed to provide the most favorable rating to win business and greater market share. The result was a race to the bottom.”
Senator Carl Levin, the chairman of the subcommittee, described what the investigation uncovered as “a financial snake pit rife with greed, conflicts of interest and wrongdoing.”
By rights, the top S&P executives who presided over this fraud and pocketed multi-million-dollar salaries in the process should be sitting in prison. Instead, still at their posts and having suffered no consequences, they are using the disaster of their own making to gut bedrock social programs such as Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security upon which tens of millions of people depend.
The statement issued by S&P on Monday described both the Republican fiscal year 2012 budget plan and that outlined by President Obama last week as a basis for cutting the federal deficit by $4 trillion. However, the two sides had to come to an agreement before the national election in 2012, the company insisted.
This demand underscores the anti-democratic character of the so-called budget debate. It is an elaborate charade, behind which stands the dictatorship of the banks. The deal to eviscerate what is left of the social reforms of the 20th century has to be sealed before the elections to make sure that the vote in no way becomes a referendum on austerity and the electorate has absolutely no say in the matter.
The mass opposition to the measures being proposed by both parties is well known to Wall Street and its political servants in Washington. On Monday, the same day as the S&P announcement, McClatchy Newspapers published the results of a McClatchy-Marist poll showing that voters by a margin of 2-to-1 support raising taxes on incomes above $250,000, with 64 percent in favor and 33 percent opposed. They oppose cutting Medicare and Medicaid by 80-18 percent.
S&P intervened at the behest of the banks to shift the phony budget debate even further to the right and create the conditions for even deeper cuts than those being currently proposed. Interviewed Monday on Bloomberg Television, David Beers, S&P’s global head of sovereign finance ratings, said the $4 trillion deficit-cutting target was “not enough to ultimately halt the rising trajectory of US debt.” It was, he said, merely “a useful starting point.”
The establishment media immediately signaled that it had gotten the message. The Los Angeles Times editorialized that “Congress and the White House can’t afford to ignore this warning shot.” The Financial Times of London published an editorial that declared, “S&P’s warning shot should galvanise America’s leaders.”
Democratic leaders rushed to reassure Wall Street that they were on board. Speaking at a community college in Virginia Tuesday, Obama said, “I believe that Democrats and Republicans can come together to get this done.”
Steny Hoyer of Maryland, the No. 2 Democrat in the House of Representative, said Monday, “Today’s revised outlook shows the urgent, bipartisan action needed to put our nation on a serious path to reduce deficits.”
Erskine Bowles, a former White House chief of staff for Bill Clinton and co-chair of last year’s bipartisan fiscal commission, was even more emphatic. Speaking to the Financial Times, he said S&P had been “absolutely right” in lowering its outlook on US debt. “If anything, they understate the extent of the problem,” he said.
Only a mass, independent movement of implacable opposition by the working class can defeat this criminal conspiracy. The World Socialist Web Site and the Socialist Equality Party urge workers and young people to reject the entire framework of the so-called budget debate. There must be uncompromising opposition to any cuts in jobs, wages or social programs and services. The working class bears no responsibility for the crisis of the capitalist system.
We propose an alternate policy. As a down payment, to begin to recoup the wealth plundered by the financial elite, we propose a 50 percent tax surcharge on all household wealth over $5 million.
This should be supplemented by raising the income tax on households taking in more than $500,000 a year to 90 percent.
These measures will not only generate hundreds of billions of dollars for jobs, schools, health care, housing and pensions, they will attack the profligate squandering of resources and contribute mightily to the moral as well as the economic health of society.
These initial steps lead inexorably to the nationalization of the banks and major corporations and their transformation into public utilities under the democratic control of the working population. This is a socialist program. It requires that the working class break politically from the two parties of big business and build a mass movement to fight for a workers’ government.
Stocks around the world fell sharply Thursday on intensifying investor fears about a slowdown in global economic growth and worries about Europe’s ongoing debt crisis, which is centered now on Italy and Spain.
Stock market indexes in the United States and Europe dropped more than 4 percent as Japan intervened to weaken its currency and the European Central Bank began buying bonds to try to calm markets.
At the close, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index was down 60.27 points, or 4.78 percent, to 1,200.07. The Dow Jones industrial average was off 512.76 points, or 4.31 percent, to 11,383.68, and the Nasdaq was down 136.68, or 5.08 percent, to 2,556.39.
It was the biggest percentage drop since February 2009.
Following accelerating falls over the past two weeks, the stock market is now officially in “correction” territory, defined as a drop of 10 percent to 20 percent since the latest peak.
The S.&P. 500 has fallen 10.6 percent since its recent high of 1,363.61 on April 29, underlining the new negative investment sentiment about the economy and Europe.
“We are now in correction mode,” said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at Standard & Poor’s. “We could have another couple of weeks to go before it bottoms.”
The last time the market was in a correction was last summer, when it fell 16 percent before recovering.
A fear haunting markets is that the United States economy may be heading for a double-dip recession. And even after a second major rescue package for Greece and the agreement to raise the debt ceiling in the United States, investors are concerned that world leaders have not done enough to address fragile underlying economic growth, while Europe’s debt problems have moved on to the much bigger economies of Italy and Spain.
Mohamed El-Erian, chief executive of the bond giant Pimco, said investors were selling risky assets like stocks “globally prompted by concerns about the weakening economic outlook, spreading contagion in Europe and insufficient policy responses.”
With Thursday’s dive, the three major American indexes had erased all of the gains made so far in 2011, with the S.&P. and Nasdaq markedly below the start of the year.
In afternoon trading, the Dow, an index of 30 blue-chip stocks, was about 9.4 percent off of its most recent closing high of 12,810.54, reached on April 29. But it was 18 percent below its all-time high of 14,164.53, on Oct. 9, 2007.
Since the beginning of 2008, there have been 17 days with drops of 4 percent or more – 13 in 2008 and 4 in 2009.
Unnerved by policymakers’ apparent inability to get ahead of Europe’s festering debt crisis, European stock markets turned sharply negative across the board.
In Britain, stocks closed down 3.43 percent. In Germany, the DAX index dropped 3.4 percent. In France, the CAC 40 closed down 3.9 percent.
“This is the worst it has been in Europe,” said Jens Nordvig, currency economist at Nomura Securities in New York. “The current rescue package was not enough to cope with the size of the problems posed by Italy and Spain. We need a new framework that can cope with those two countries, and without it markets are on their own and are falling.”
Major indexes in Italy, Spain, France and Switzerland all closed Thursday more than 20 percent below their 2011 highs, while Germany was off nearly 15 percent and Britain’s decline was more than 11 percent.
The selling has extended to many other markets. Mexican stocks are off almost 14 percent from their highs earlier this year, and Brazil’s major index has lost more than a quarter of its value.
Yields on Italian government bonds, already above 6 percent, rose sharply, adding to concerns that the nation’s current debt position is unsustainable. Yields on Spanish debt also increased. This was despite large-scale intervention by the European Central Bank, which for the first time since March began buying bonds in an apparent attempt to prevent the region’s sovereign debt crisis from engulfing Italy.
The markets had expected some concrete action from Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on Italian’s worsening debt situation in public remarks late Wednesday. But they were disappointed when he defended the country’s fundamentals and said current packages were enough to foster economic growth. The Italian stock market opened up but then slipped sharply.
Since many of Europe’s banks hold the bonds of countries like Italy and Spain, concern is turning to the health of the banking system as these bonds drop in value. With warning signs flashing that some European banks are struggling to fund themselves in increasingly expensive credit markets, the E.C.B. also moved to help weaker banks by expanding its lending to institutions in the euro area at the benchmark interest rate. Bank stocks nevertheless fell sharply in Europe.
Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the E.C.B., said the bank had acted in response to “renewed tensions in some financial markets in the euro area.”
He said that uncertainty created by the debate in the United States to raise the debt ceiling had unnerved European markets as United States investors had become increasingly reluctant to lend to European banks. “It’s clear the entire world is intertwined,” he said. “What happens in the U.S. influences the rest of the world.”
But the E.C.B.’s steps were not enough to help Europe’s bond markets.
Laurent Bilke, an analyst at Nomura in London, said the E.C.B. had been buying government debt of Portugal and Ireland in order to calm these markets. But it had not been buying Italian and Spanish government debt, and that had unnerved investors.
He said the E.C.B. council had also not been united in its decision to take extraordinary measures to intervene in the markets, and that fact had spooked markets.
President Obama said Friday that regulatory authorities are "evaluating" Thursday's wild swings in the stock market with an eye toward protecting investors and preventing something like that from happening again.
A computerized sell-off sent the Dow Jones industrial average plummeting by a near-record 1,000 points within about a half-hour Thursday afternoon. Fear that the European debt crisis could spread was a factor. The market regained two-thirds of that loss before the end of trading.
Obama characterized the swing as "unusual market activity" and said that regulatory authorities would make findings of their review public along with recommendations for "appropriate action."
The Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission said they were working with other regulators to review "unusual trading activity," the Wall Street Journal reported.
The major U.S. stock exchanges said they were looking for trading glitches and examining potentially erroneous trades in multiple stocks. Major exchanges said they will cancel erroneous trades that occurred during the selloff, the newspaper reported.
Obama said he spoke Friday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel about the economic situation in Europe. He says they agreed on the need for a strong response by the affected countries and the international community.
A strong set of U.S. Jobs data Friday failed to shore up confidence in world markets following days of extreme volatility amid mounting fears that Europe's debt crisis could spread and derail the global economic recovery.
In Britain, where investors were grappling with uncertain general election results, the FTSE 100 index was down 108.48 points, or 2.1 percent, at 5,152.51, while the pound oscillated wildly.
Germany's DAX fell 105.24 points, or 1.8 percent, at 5,800.02 while the CAC-40 in France was 79.91 points, or 2.3 percent, lower at 3,476.20.
And on Wall Street, the Dow Jones industrial average was down 59.85 points, or 0.6 percent, at 10,460.47 soon after the open while the broader Standard & Poor's 500 index fell 11.04 points, or 1,117.11.
There had been hopes that Wall Street would open higher after strong U.S. jobs data helped push other concerns, primarily centered on Europe's debt crisis, aside for a while.
Figures from the U.S. Labor Department showed that employers expanded payrolls by 290,000. That's the most in four years and more than the 200,000 anticipated. However, the jobless rate rose to 9.9 percent from 9.7 percent, mainly because 805,000 jobseekers — perhaps feeling better about their prospects — resumed their searches for work.
Though the data showed the U.S. economy started the second quarter of the year robustly, economists warned that the debt crisis, among other issues, could change everything.
Sovereign Debt crisis
"There are still major risks to the global economy from the sovereign debt crisis in the eurozone and high unemployment acting as a drag on consumer spending in the U.S.," said Charles Davis, senior economist at the Centre for Economic and Business Research.
Davis also said that there was a risk that the U.S. Federal Reserve may start to raise interest rates earlier than planned, possibly as soon as the third quarter of 2010, if the jobs outlook continues to improve — the threat higher borrowing costs causes jitters in the markets.
Friday's stock market declines come a day after dramatic events on Wall Street, when a trading error had pushed the Dow Jones industrial average down 1,000 points at one stage, though it did recover to end "only" 347.8 points lower.
The primary focus in the markets though remains on whether the trouble in the eurozone will spread from Greece.
Many economists say Greece may be insolvent in the end despite an EU-IMF bailout, and there are fears that other countries will face bond market skepticism — and higher borrowing costs that will worsen their finances in a vicious spiral. That could undermine markets and consumer confidence just as Europe crawls out of recession.
Finance ministers from the Group of Seven nations are holding a teleconference to discuss the situation, Japan's finance minister Naoto Kan said.
Stock markets weren't alone in seeing massive swings — in the currency markets, the dollar was down a massive 6 yen at 88.68 yen one stage, while the euro dropped to $1.2520, its lowest level in 14 months. The retreats were reversed though and the dollar was trading 0.8 percent higher on the day at 91.49 yen while the euro was up 0.2 percent at $1.2658.
"Contagion has smashed risk appetite and created panic while a 'fat finger' glitch has created mayhem in equities," said Neil Mackinnon, global macro strategist at VTB Capital.
"Caution remains the watchword especially in front of the G7 conference call where markets will be wary of support/intervention action," said Mackinnon.
As if all that wasn't enough, investors, particularly in London, had to grapple with the inconclusive outcome of the British general election.
With the counting of the votes coming to an end, it's clear than no party has won enough seats to control Parliament. Without an overall winner, the parties are assessing the situation to see if any alliances can be concluded or whether the Conservative Party, which won the most seats and votes, will go it alone.
The uncertainty — markets don't like uncertainty — was most evident in the currency markets where the pound tumbled 1.8 percent to a year low of $1.4481 at one stage before recovering somewhat to be trading 0.5 percent lower on the day at $1.4678.
Across Asia, stocks were hit hard even though the government debt crisis is centered on Europe — all the main indexes ended lower with Taiwan, Indonesia, Thailand and New Zealand down sharply. China's Shanghai Composite Index closed 1.9 percent lower while Hong Kong's Hang Seng index ended around 1.1 percent down.
The most dramatic retreat was seen on Japan's benchmark Nikkei index, which closed 3.1 percent down at 10,364.59
"Financial markets have begun to over-run policymakers' ability to implement measures to stem the crisis," said Sean Darby, a strategist with Nomura in Hong Kong. "A strong dollar and the flight to quality mean that Asian equities have also been drawn into the contagion."
Oil markets were also oscillating wildly — benchmark crude for June delivery was down 28 cents to $77.83 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange. That modest rise follows the $2.86 slide on Thursday.
Goldman Sachs is preparing its most detailed defense yet to allegations that it misled clients in its mortgage securities business, arguing that the firm was unsure whether housing prices would rise or fall and did not take any action at odds with the interests of its clients.
An internal Goldman document, prepared for senior executives and obtained by The Washington Post, addresses the criticism that the bank invested its own money betting against the housing market while simultaneously urging clients to invest in securities that would increase in value only if the housing market did.
Those concerns over possible double-dealing spiked a week ago as the Securities and Exchange Commission filed a fraud suit against Goldman, alleging that it misled clients by selling them mortgage-related securities secretly designed to fail.
Goldman prepared the 11-page document to serve as the basis for testimony that chief executive Lloyd Blankfein is scheduled to deliver Tuesday before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.
The Goldman paper describes debates among top executives in 2006 and 2007 over whether the firm should make investment decisions based on the belief that the mortgage market would continue to prosper. The document details meetings and e-mails that ultimately resulted in a decision to reduce the company's exposure to the mortgage market, especially subprime loans, by making new investments that would pay off if housing prices fell.
Subprime Risk
Over the past few years, other financial firms and some in the media have complained that Goldman recognized the risks of the subprime mortgage market early on and, without telling clients, developed financial products that would allow the bank to bet against mortgages with its own money. At the same time, Goldman continued to sell mortgage-related investments to clients who expected the subprime loan business to remain vibrant, critics have alleged.
While the firm moved to significantly reduce its losses when the housing market cratered, the impression conveyed by the document is that Goldman was confused, like many other financial firms, over how bad the collapse would be and suffered losses as a result.
The document also reprises Goldman's frequent explanation that it was not investing its own money in financial transactions to make a trading profit but to help investors who wanted to do a deal and could not easily find someone else to trade with. That role, commonly played by investment banks, is known as being a market maker.
A spokesman for the Senate subcommittee declined Friday evening to comment on Goldman's defense.
"Our investigation has found that investment banks such as Goldman Sachs were not market makers helping clients," Sen. Carl M. Levin (D-Mich.), who heads the panel, said Friday. "They were self-interested promoters of risky and complicated financial schemes that were a major part of the 2008 crisis."
In the paper, Goldman argues that it was a relatively small player in the mortgage market, bringing in only $500 million from its residential mortgage business in 2007, less than 1 percent of the firm's overall revenues.
Still, the bank's mortgage investments were large enough that executives began to worry in 2006 that it was betting too heavily on the health of the housing market.
According to the document, the concerns arose in late 2006, when Dan Sparks, the head of the mortgage unit, wrote to top executives that the "subprime market [was] getting hit hard," with the firm losing $20 million in one day.
On Dec. 14, 2006, financial officer David Viniar called Goldman's mortgage traders and risk managers into a meeting to discuss investing strategy. They concluded that they would reduce the firm's overall exposure to the subprime mortgage market.
But the prevailing view of executives, as described in the paper, was not that the housing market was headed into a prolonged decline. They were not looking to short the market overall. That would have entailed making such large bets against mortgage securities that the firm would turn a profit if the market as a whole collapsed, which in fact it did.
The document acknowledges that Goldman at times shorted the overall market but describes those periods as temporary while the firm was rebalancing its portfolio to limit losses if mortgage securities were to lose more value.
At some moments, executives were actually considering making new bets, buying potentially undervalued securities that could pay off when the mortgage market turned around. A day after Viniar met with traders and risk managers, he wrote to Tom Montan, co-head of the securities division, saying, "There will be very good opportunities as the markets goes into what is likely to be even greater distress and we want to be in position to take advantage of them."
The back-and-forth over which way the market would go, and how to invest in it, continued into 2007.
On March 14, Goldman co-president Jon Winkelried e-mailed Sparks and others asking what the bank was doing to protect itself from a decline in prices of not just subprime loans but also of other loans traditionally considered less risky. Sparks replied that the firm was trying to have "smaller" exposure to those loans also.
But managing director Richard Ruzika took issue with that answer a few days later, saying that Goldman might be overestimating the decline in housing. "It does feel to me like the market in general underestimated how bad it could get. And now could be overestimating where we are heading," he wrote in an e-mail. "While undoubtedly there will be some continued spillover, I'm not so convinced this is a total death spiral. In fact, we may have terrific opportunities."
Sparks later endorsed that optimistic view, suggesting as late as August 2007 that Goldman begin buying more mortgage securities.
The bank did not immediately follow that path, and by Nov. 30, 2007, Goldman had largely canceled out its exposure to subprime mortgages by increasing its bets that the market would continue to slide, according to the document.
But by that account, Goldman also continued to have $13.5 billion in exposure to safer, prime mortgages. That cost the bank. In 2008, the firm lost $1.7 billion on investments in residential mortgages.
Dubai Stocks fall! Wall Street took stock prices lower on worries about potential fallout from crushing debt in Dubai. The Washington Post's Neil Irwin explains.
As world markets absorbed the shock of Dubai's debt crisis, the ruler of the once-booming city-state left town for an important meeting in a desert palace. His hosts: the leaders of neighboring Abu Dhabi whose balance sheets are flush with oil revenue.
It's not known what promises were made inside the halls in Al Ain during the parade of visitors for an important Islamic feast day on Friday. But their new relationship is clear. Abu Dhabi has the cash and cache to be Dubai's white knight — in a Gulf version of a too-big-to-fail bailout or to help calm markets with promises to intervene if Dubai's fiscal mess deepens.
The direction Abu Dhabi takes will likely set the tone for the coming week as analysts try to sort out what banks and institutions have the most at stake in the money crunch — which has suddenly shifted Dubai's image from a desert dream factory of indoor ski slopes and a "seven-star" hotel to a reckless spender sideswiped by the recession and unable to pay its bills.
Just this month, Dubai's ruler, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid Al-Maktoum, assured international investors that all was well with Dubai's finances and told media critics to "shut up."
"Depleting market confidence in Dubai carries serious risks for Abu Dhabi," said Hani Sabra of Eurasia Group, a U.S.-based research firm that assesses political risk for foreign investors in Dubai and the Gulf.
"Differences between the two city-states remain on how to approach the economy and the financial crisis," Sabra added. "But now Abu Dhabi is obviously the more dominant emirate."
Dubai's empty pockets — mostly drained by collapsing real estate prices and over-ambitious development plans — touched off panic selling across world markets on fears that the reckoning from the global recession is not over.
$3.5 billion due Dec. 14
In a surprise announcement Wednesday, Dubai said it seeks a six-month delay in paying creditors on nearly $60 billion in debt held by its main development arm, Dubai World, whose holdings range from port operations around the world, Dubai's iconic palm-shaped island and the luxury retailer Barneys New York. The next tranche was a $3.52 billion bond due Dec. 14 by Dubai World's troubled real estate division, Nakheel.
On Friday, the Dow Jones industrial average suffered its biggest drop in nearly a month — closing down 154.48, or 1.5 percent, to 10,309.92, in a shorted trading day because of the Thanksgiving break. Asian exchanges fell sharply for a second day, but European markets bounced back on confidence the Dubai damage would not spread to other Gulf economies.
Dubai and other Middle East financial markets reopen Monday after an Islamic holiday.
But much attention will remain on Abu Dhabi's response. It stepped in earlier this year with a $10 billion bailout for Dubai when the first blast of the recession hit. Dubai ruler Sheik Mohammed has stressed the close bonds between the two most powerful emirates in the UAE, which celebrates its national day on Wednesday and offers a perfect forum to display unity.
An editorial in The National newspaper — which is bankrolled by Abu Dhabi and closely reflects the opinions of its rulers — said Dubai's infrastructure is sound and pointed out General Motors' revival after receiving a U.S.-backed bailout in comments that suggested an unchecked Dubai meltdown could harm the entire country.
"Confidence is a fragile commodity," said the Friday editorial.
Yet Abu Dhabi's largesse may be reaching some limits. On the same day that Dubai announced its debt payment "standstill," two Abu Dhabi-controlled banks bought $5 billion in Dubai bonds for a stopgap cash infusion, but went no further.
"I guess Abu Dhabi is saying there will be no blank check for Dubai," said Jane Kinninmont, a London-based specialist on Gulf economies at the Economist Intelligence Unit.
What Abu Dhabi could get for their money, however, is greater long-term influence over Dubai's development policies. That would essentially mean giving the wealthy and more conservative rulers in the UAE's capital the task of trying to rein in Dubai after years of living beyond its means.
Dubai crash landed about a year ago as the global economic downturn ended a sizzling property boom, which saw prices skyrocket and investors lining up for new projects. The state-backed Dubai World led the charge with a catalog brimming with ever-bigger ideas and the bold motto: "The sun never sets on Dubai World."
Some were completed before the bubble burst, such as the Palm Jumeirah island that included a Hollywood A-list opening of the Atlantis resort in November 2008. But dozens of major projects, including entire mini-cities in the desert, have been shelved.
Abu Dhabi has moved ahead with more caution — comfortable in the fact it has vast oil wealth that Dubai does not enjoy.
Its rulers have concentrated on what they see as attempts to gain global stature as hub for culture and innovation: funding an alternative energy research center and building satellite museums for the Louvre and Guggenheim. The Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund is constantly on the hunt for new investments, including U.S. companies such as Citigroup Inc.
Abu Dhabi's strategists are expected to dig deeper into Dubai World's books before deciding their next move, analysts say.
Dubai officials said plans to restructure Dubai World will not include its profitable ports management division, DP World, which has a presence in nearly 50 facilities around the world. The main retooling will be to Dubai World's battered real estate units, led by Nakheel.
A report from Goldman Sachs said the lenders HSBC Holdings PLC and Standard Chartered PLC could have the most exposure to Dubai debt, but the potential credit losses appeared relatively small. The deeper risks could directly hit Emirates' banks and investment firms.
Christopher Davidson, an expert in Emirate affairs at Britain's Durham University, wondered if Abu Dhabi wanted to become too deeply involved in lifting Dubai from its fiscal wreckage.
"There is no point throwing good money into Dubai's black holes," Davidson said. "These are mistakes of Sheik Mohammed and he needs to deal with them."
Welcome to the BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog. (Established 2008)
My name is Laurel. (Author & Publisher)
I Blog with a focus on POLITICS, Business, and occasionally Entertainment.
FACTS ABOUT LAUREL:
Wife,
Mother of a U.S. Soldier,
Sister,
Woman of GOD,
Loyal Friend,
Creative,
Blood-related to a nationally known Charlotte Politician.
Black Female, Intelligent,
Married,
Love to Travel,
Credentialed by the RNC and DNC.
Political Blogger/ Commentator
Grassroots Activist,
PROFESSIONAL STATUS:
Credential Political Blogger/ Commentator,
Registered Independent Voter
Original Native of BROOKLYN, NY
Currently reside in CHARLOTTE, NC
I’m Nice but don’t get it twisted because my Mind is Sharp!
Since You’ve Chosen to Visit and Read the Contents of this Blog by Personal Choice, and of Your Own Free Will,
Please don’t ask me to Compensate you for Expressing individual commentary/ Posted Articles, which are protected by the First Amendment, citing Freedom of Speech & Freedom of Expression.
No Intentionally Malicious Slander, Libel or Defamation of Character content will be published and I will always Credit all Sources.
NOTE TO ALL ELECTED OFFICIALS, APPOINTED OFFICIALS & PUBLIC FIGURES:
Per the Landmark U.S. Supreme Court Case: 1964 case of New York Times v. Sullivan………
The Public has a Right to Criticize the People who Govern them, so the least Protection from Defamation is given to Public Officials. When officials are accused of something that involves their behavior in office, they have to prove all of the above elements of defamation and they must also prove that the defendant acted with “actual malice.” (For a definition of actual malice, see the “History of Defamation and the First Amendment, below.”)
People who aren’t Elected but who are Still Public Figures because they are influential or famous — like Actors, Actresses, Movie Stars, Singers & Entertainers, Journalists, TV Hosts, Bloggers, etc., — also have to Prove that Defamatory statements were made with Actual Malice, in most cases.
To the Associated Press and other Media Organizations:
When I use your Content Links., I’m also citing the Fair Use Doctrine (Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107) for further Copyright permission.
Posts and Links published on Black Political Buzz are not endorsed by Black Political Buzz Blog Author Laurel’s Employer, nor the Employers of other Black Political Buzz employees.
This includes Links, Posts and Comments posted on Black Political Buzz’s Facebook and Twitter account pages.
Comments, Links and Opinions of site visitors are Independently-Owned and not endorsed by Black Political Buzz employees, Blog Author Laurel or Laurel’s Employer.)
(No Personal Offense intended) Please know that Black Political Buzz is not responsible for nor do I endorse Requests for Donations from Third Parties on this Blog.
I will Only Endorse Requests for Donations made on behalf of BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ Blog for Business Purposes & Operating Expenses.
I will also Only Endorse Requests for Donations on behalf of Legitimate Politicians and Legitimate Political Candidates. PERIOD!!
If anyone else or another Organization wishes to post a link to Request Donations, I am NOT endorsing ANY of those Requests!
Unless I receive a personal Request to do so and I have Professionally Confirmed that the Third Party Organization or Charity is indeed a Legitimate Entity.
NOTE: Anyone who chooses to give to any Third Party Organization NOT Endorsed by BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ is doing so at his or her own risk.
BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ does NOT Discriminate against Politicians, Political Candidates, Organizations or Charities based on Race, Color, Nationality, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexual Orientation, Religion, Faith, Disability, Political Affiliation, Creed, Education, Social Status, Age.
This disclaimer applies to ANY and All requests for Donations on this Blog. Thanks for understanding. Again No Personal Offense intended.
For Story Tips….Corrections…….. or Requests for Endorsements:
Please contact me via e-mail: blackpoliticalbuzz@gmail.com
or via my Facebook page: facebook.com/blackpoliticalbuzz
Thanks for stopping by
God Bless
Laurel @BLACK POLITICAL BUZZ
LINKS: POLITICAL PERSPECTIVE & INFORMATIONAL SITES
.jpg)
