Tuesday, July 5, 2011

Global Innovation Index 2011: Euro-socialists win again

So once again, in international rankings related to business savvy, we see two Euro-socialist states taking 1st and 2nd place, and five Euro-socialist states in the top 10, plus another two semi-socialist states (Canada and Britain).

I have a strong suspicion we won't see Investors Business Daily, Larry Kudlow, Lou Dobbs or Neil Cavuto mentioning these results, much less trying to explain them.



1 Switzerland 63.82
2 Sweden 62.12
3 Singapore 59.64
4 Hong Kong (SAR), China 58.8
5 Finland 57.5
6 Denmark 56.96
7 United States of America 56.57
8 Canada 56.33
9 Netherlands 56.31
10 United Kingdom 55.96

S**tburgers served up by unfettered free markets



Actually, thank Zombie Reagan for shitburgers.

By the way, those Reaganite necrophiliacs, er, hagiographers at the Committee to Name Everything After Reagan just erected another statue of him in London; meanwhile his deregulation is killing more Americans every year than died on 9/11.


By Yasha Levine
June 22, 2011 | The Exiled

MB360: Fed's balance sheet at $2.84 trillion (20% of GDP)

Posted by mybudget360 | July 5, 2011

The Federal Reserve is primarily concerned with one thing and that is to protect the interests of the banking industry. The Fed has no desire or need to protect the underlying economy. If they can get away with allowing banks to jump from one bubble to another they will do so. The success of the overall economy is only consequential if it aligns with the deeper interests of the banking cabal.

This weekend former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan mentioned that simply bailing out Greece was a temporary measure. When pressed he went back into "Greenspeak" and rambled on in his typical obtuse language. The reason why global banks fear Greece is not because of the country itself, but because the country has billions of dollars in debt that global banks hold. These banks do not want to pay for their bad bets and would rather shift the cost to the overall population in general. The Fed balance sheet here in the U.S. is now up to $2.84 trillion, another record that gets no airtime in the press. The Federal Reserve continues with clandestine bailouts only to protect the interests of the banking elite.

Fed balance sheet reaches $2.84 trillion

federal reserve balance sheet

The Federal Reserve balance sheet is now up to $2.84 trillion. The Fed has become the silo for shadow bailouts including bailouts for the commercial real estate industry, toxic residential loans, mortgage backed securities, and even loans that have no business being on its books. Yet all this is seen as providing more liquidity for the banking system in the country. Since the crisis started four years ago little benefit has been seen in the underlying economy. Keep in mind the fiscal stimulus which is a fraction of what the Fed now holds on its balance sheet is what many Americans see on infrastructure projects. The total amount spent since August of 2008 approximates $550 billion (roughly 3 percent of GDP). On the other hand the Federal Reserve balance sheet specifically targeted to the banks now is up to 20 percent of GDP.

Of course little is discussed in the press about the Fed balance sheet. The Federal Reserve has specially focused on bailing out the banking sector and this has worked well. The too big to fail banks are now larger and profits are back to record levels. Their biggest success was ripping off the public and more specifically have kept most of their hidden secrets buried deep in the belly of the un-audited Federal Reserve balance sheet. We know that the Fed is holding $2.84 trillion in various "assets" but what exactly is being held? They would like the public to believe that only pristine assets are being held in exchange for U.S. Treasuries but in reality the Fed is purchasing every questionable asset under the sun. The Fed is ignoring the needs of the economy and simply focusing on protecting the interests of the banking elite.

Case and point with commercial real estate

commercial real estate 2011

Source: MIT

Commercial real estate values have plummeted by 50 percent since their peak. The crash has been monumental and devastating for the industry. Yet banks have shifted many of these bad loans fixed to CRE and have "temporarily" placed them at the Federal Reserve. This isn't a tiny industry. The CRE sector at its peak reached a nominal value of $6.5 trillion. Today the value has fallen closer to $3 trillion. Many of the CRE properties are solidly underwater yet the Fed has given the banks time to figure out ways to stuff their bad loans into the belly of the Fed balance sheet.

The banking system has plenty of money to lend out to the public:

excess reserves

The above chart shows how much money banks currently have that is readily available to lend to the public. Yet these too big to fail banks would rather keep the funds at the Fed and earn 0.25 percent on the money while they decide what other bubble they will jump into next. The too big to fail banks have nearly $1.6 trillion in excess money to lend to the American public! This is money that back in 2007 they claimed they needed to help small businesses and keep credit going. All of that was a lie and what really was the main purpose of the bailouts was to save the banking industry on the backs of taxpayers. As the chart clearly shows, the banking system is simply looking for their next big profit machine and all that excess reserves has come from the Fed being friendly with their banking cronies.

Squeezing the working and middle class

The line out of Wall Street banks has now shifted from:

-(2007) We need money from the Fed to keep money going to American families and small businesses.

And the new line now follows:

-(2011) We need to cut spending and wages to keep competitive in the global marketplace.

What happened to lending to American families and small businesses, the actual reason for the bailouts? These financial liars of course will say anything to steal more taxpayer money. Now it is a narrative of more stealing. These bankers of course don't follow that line of cutting their own wages but then again, what do expect from the new oligarchy sponsored by the Fed?

The stats show something very different:

gains in wages

Source: Mother Jones

I'm glad the middle class battle is now being picked up by more places. If median household incomes had kept pace with the productivity of the economy the median household should now be earning $92,000 a year instead of $50,000. As the chart above clearly shows, the vast majority of productivity gains have gone to the top 1 percent who have seen average income soar by over 240% since 1979 while average overall wages for working and middle class families have gone up roughly 10 percent in real terms.

The Fed and its banking cabal would like you to believe that now, everyone needs to live on wages slightly above minimum wage while the pinstriped suit bankers continually squeeze out more and more profits through bailouts, rip offs, financial alchemy, or simply by robbing taxpayers. This is the new business model. The Federal Reserve has failed its mission in many facets because when push comes to shove it is willing to sacrifice the economy for the sake of the elite banking sector. Banks should become like a utility and strictly regulated with force. Commercial and investment banking should be completely split. Hedge funds should receive no special privileges especially when many make money by creating investments that sink the economy and also receive bailouts thanks to political connections. You wonder why unemployment is still too high and wages continue to fall? Look no further than the beast that is the Federal Reserve.

Rich: Last chance for Obama to grow a sack


I'm done hoping Obama will realize who his true friends are, and find his manly courage to fight -- not soothe -- his sworn political enemies who are out to destroy him. He is a passive tool of "the best and brightest [Ivy League] white guys" whom he obviously aspired to be like at Harvard: Jamie Dimon, Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, Tim Geithner, and the rest. Obama is a nice guy who means well but in the end toms to his "betters," those NE-coast pedigreed whites.

UPDATE (07.06.11): Matt Taibbi summarized well Obama's "central failure" as described by Rich:

"Rich in this way describes the central failure of the Obama presidency. Obama entered the White House in the middle of a great economic crisis, and his Geithner/Rubin solution was to spend mind-boggling amounts bailing out Wall Street, while extracting no conditions or reforms in exchange, and punishing no one. Then, by abandoning jobs programs and taking up the Tea Party’s 'austerity' model, he essentially asked ordinary Americans to foot the bill for this no-strings-attached rescue program."


The president's failure to demand a reckoning from the moneyed interests who brought the economy down has cursed his first term, and could prevent a second.
By Frank Rich
July 3, 2011 | New York Magazine

[...]

What haunts the Obama administration is what still haunts the country: the stunning lack of accountability for the greed and misdeeds that brought America to its gravest financial crisis since the Great Depression. There has been no legal, moral, or financial reckoning for the most powerful wrongdoers. Nor have there been meaningful reforms that might prevent a repeat catastrophe. Time may heal most wounds, but not these. Chronic unemployment remains a constant, painful reminder of the havoc inflicted on the bust's innocent victims. As the ghost of Hamlet's father might have it, America will be stalked by its foul and unresolved crimes until they "are burnt and purged away."

After the 1929 crash, and thanks in part to the legendary Ferdinand Pecora's fierce thirties Senate hearings, America gained a Securities and Exchange Commission, the Public Utility Holding Company Act, and the Glass-Steagall Act to forestall a rerun. After the savings-and-loan debacle of the eighties, some 800 miscreants went to jail. But those who ran the central financial institutions of our fiasco escaped culpability (as did most of the institutions). As the indefatigable Matt Taibbi has tabulated, law enforcement on Obama's watch rounded up 393,000 illegal immigrants last year and zero bankers. The Justice Department's bally­hooed Operation Broken Trust has broken still more trust by chasing mainly low-echelon, one-off Madoff wannabes. You almost have to feel sorry for the era's designated Goldman scapegoat, 32-year-old flunky "Fabulous Fab" Fabrice Tourre, who may yet take the fall for everyone else. It's as if the Watergate investigation were halted after the cops nabbed the nudniks who did the break-in.

Even now, on the heels of Bank of America's reluctant $8.5 billion settlement with investors who held its mortgage-backed securities, the Obama administration may be handing it and its peers new get-out-of-jail-free cards. With the Department of Justice's blessing, the Iowa attorney general, Tom Miller, is pushing the 49 other states to sign on to a national financial settlement ending their investigations of the biggest mortgage lenders. What some call a settlement others may find a cover-up. Time reported in April that the lawyer negotiating with Miller for Moynihan's Bank of America just happened to be a contributor to his 2010 Iowa reelection campaign. If the deal is struck, any truly aggressive state attorneys general, like Eric Schneiderman of New York, will be shut down before they can dig into the full and still mostly uninvestigated daisy chain of get-rich-quick rackets practiced by banks as they repackaged junk mortgages into junk securities.

Those in executive suites at the top of that chain have long since fled the scene with the proceeds, while bleeding shareholders, investors, homeowners, and ­cashiered employees were left with the bills. The weak Dodd-Frank financial-reform law that rose from the ruins remains largely inoperative, since the actual rule-writing was delegated to understaffed agencies now under siege by banking lobbyists and their well-greased congressional overlords. The administration's much-hyped Consumer Financial Protection Bureau is being sabotaged by Washington Republicans intent on blocking any White House nominee, whether Elizabeth Warren or some malleable hack, to lead it. "We can't let special interests win this fight," said Obama when he proposed the agency in October 2009. Well, he missed his moment to fight for both it and Warren, and the special interests won without breaking a sweat.

Rather than purge the crash's crimes, Wall Street's leaders are sticking to their alibi: Everyone was guilty of fomenting this "perfect storm," and so no one is. Too-big-to-fail banks are bigger than ever, and ­Masters of the Universe swagger is back. Even Jamie Dimon of JPMorgan Chase, about the only bank chief not to be caught with a suspect balance sheet or a $1,400 office trash can, has taken to channeling Schwarzman. In June, he publicly challenged Ben Bernanke about the intolerable burdens of potential regulation—this despite a 67 percent surge in JPMorgan's first-quarter profits and a 1,500 percent raise in his own compensation from 2009 to 2010. As good times roar back for corporate America, it's bad enough that CEOs are collectively sitting on some $1.9 trillion in cash—much of it parked out of the IRS's reach overseas—instead of hiring. (How many jobs can you buy for $1.9 trillion? America's total expenditure on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars over a decade has been $1.3 trillion.) But what's most galling is how many of these executives are sore winners, crying all the way to Palm Beach while raking in record profits and paying some of the lowest tax rates over the past 50 years.

The fallout has left Obama in the worst imaginable political bind. No good deed he's done for Wall Street has gone unpunished. He is vilified as an anti-capitalist zealot not just by Republican foes but even by some former backers. What has he done to deserve it? All anyone can point to is his December 2009 60 Minutes swipe at "fat-cat bankers on Wall Street"—an inept and anomalous Ed Schultz seizure that he retracted just weeks later by praising Dimon and Lloyd Blankfein as "very savvy businessmen."

Obama can win reelection without carrying 10021 or Greenwich in any case. The bigger political problem is that a far larger share of the American electorate views him as a tool of the very fat-cat elite that despises him. Given Obama's humble background, his history as a mostly liberal Democrat, and his famous résumé as a community organizer, this would also seem a reach. But the president has no one to blame but himself for the caricature. While he has never lusted after money—he'd rather get his hands on the latest novel by Morrison or Franzen—he is an elitist of a certain sort. For all the lurid fantasies of the birthers, the dirty secret of Obama's background is that the values of Harvard, not of Kenya or Indonesia or Bill Ayers, have most colored his governing style. He falls hard for the best and the brightest white guys.

[...]

Not until March 2010 did the White House get its first explicit, modest jobs bill through Congress. [...] The White House's repeated argument that the stimulus saved as many as 3 million jobs, accurate though it may be, is another nonstarter when 14 million Americans are looking for work.

[...]

There's not much Obama can do to alter the economy by 2012, given the debt-ceiling fight, the long campaign, and nihilistic Capitol Hill antagonists opposed to any government spending that might create jobs and, by extension, help Obama keep his own. But the central question before the nation couldn't be clearer: Who pays? The taxpayers bailed out the elite; now it's the elite's turn to return the favor. Massive cuts to the safety net combined with scant sacrifice from those at the top is wrong ethically and politically. It is, in the truest sense, un-American. Obama knows this, and he hit a welcome note last week when he urged some higher corporate taxes for hedge funds and the like. But his forays in this direction are tentative and sporadic. You have to wonder why he isn't seizing the moment to articulate and fight for the big picture instead of playing a lose-lose game of rope-a-dope with the Republicans on their budgetary turf.

[...]

"A nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous," Obama declared at his inauguration. What he said on that bright January morning is no less true or stirring now. For all his failings since, he is the only one who can make this case. There's nothing but his own passivity to stop him from doing so—and from shaking up the administration team that, well beyond the halfway-out-the-door Geithner and his Treasury Department, has showered too many favors on the prosperous. This will mean turning on his own cadre of the liberal elite. But it's essential if he is to call the bluff of a fake man-of-the-people like Romney. To differentiate himself from the discredited Establishment, he will have to mount the fight he has ducked for the past three years.

The alternative is a failure of historic proportions. Those who gamed the economy to near devastation—so much so that the nation turned to an untried young leader in desperation and in hope—would once again inherit the Earth. Unless and until there's a purging of the crimes that brought our president to his unlikely Inauguration Day, much more in America than the second term of his administration will be at stake.

U.S. torture: Past, present & future

Aint much difference.

It looks like the more they deny it, the more likely they're doing it. Kind of like Anthony Weiner.

Seriously though, Bush & Cheney were bad but Obama seems just as determined to continue torturing, despite his lofty oratory to the contrary.

We Americans cannot rely on politicians, the military, or the CIA to do the right thing; we need a national conversation about our values and the law, then we must demand the truth about what evil, sadistic acts they are performing in our name, supposedly for our safety.

Like it or not, we are all accessories to illegal imprisonment and torture, including torture resulting in homicide. Are we OK with that?

Happy Independence Day... for some.


By Dan Froomkin
July 4, 2011 | Huffington Post