Economy Fixed, Everyone Can Go Home Now

fullmetalfan720

CAGiversary!
Feedback
11 (100%)
On the heels of too many people saying the economy is all fixed now, a senior investment strategist at Goldman says the same.
Aug. 17 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. recession is ending “right now,” said Abby Joseph Cohen, a senior investment strategist at Goldman Sachs Group Inc.
The economy may grow by 3 percent in the next couple of quarters and expand by 1.5 percent to 2 percent next year, Cohen said. While consumer spending is likely to rise, it probably won’t increase as fast as at the end of prior periods when the U.S. was emerging from a recession, she said.
“Clearly the economy is on the mend,” Cohen said in an interview with Bloomberg Radio. “We do think that profit growth will be more substantial going forward.”
Cohen, known for her optimistic forecasts for stocks during the 1990s stock-market rally, was replaced in March 2008 as the bank’s chief forecaster for the U.S. equity market. She predicted in a May 1 interview that the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index might jump 20 percent to 1,050 in the next 6 to 12 months. The index climbed 15 percent to 1,010.48 through Aug. 7 before retreating 0.6 percent last week.
The S&P 500 has rallied 48 percent from a 12-year low on March 9 as 76 percent of companies in the benchmark reported better-than-estimated second quarter results and economic reports showed improvement. Equities fell last week for the first time in five weeks as a drop in consumer confidence fueled concern the steepest rally since the 1930s isn’t justified by economic prospects.
So-called fair value for the S&P 500 is between 1,050 and 1,100, Cohen said. David Kostin, who replaced Cohen as Goldman Sachs’s chief U.S. market forecaster, estimates the index will end the year at 1,060 and earn $52 a share for 2009.
“The bottom line looks pretty good,” she said. “The companies that are still in business are showing that they have pretty good margins.”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=a0sLU2hOmYZ0

Who cares about the other bubbles in waiting, the trillions of new dollars printed, or the fact that the effective jobless rate is still hovering around 19%. IT'S ALL FIXED!
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']On the heels of too many people saying the economy is all fixed now[/QUOTE]

...now who in tarnation said that?
 
so let me get this straight.... we're harping on the news media for making some positive remarks... be it true or not... since we've all been harping how dreadful this recession has been going on (in the media) and they keep going on with fear tactics???

And 2 sources isn't alot of people...
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32205933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/[/quote]

"The economy remains fragile. But the fact that some Fed regions reported signs of activity beginning to level out raises hope that the recession, which started in December 2007, is drawing to a close."


"It was the first Fed meeting since the economy has flashed more definitive signs of turning a corner. But dangers lurk."


"President Obama, armed with welcome -- and somewhat surprising -- evidence of an economic recovery to brandish against his critics, declared this afternoon that "the worst may be behind us."

"Today we're pointed in the right direction," he said in the White House's Rose Garden, asserting that job losses are at half the rate when he took office in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

He also noted that a week ago, the gross domestic product dropped just 1 percent in the second quarter."

Yeah. Real strong evidence that "the economy is all fixed now."

:roll:
 
[quote name='xycury']so let me get this straight.... we're harping on the news media for making some positive remarks... be it true or not... since we've all been harping how dreadful this recession has been going on (in the media) and they keep going on with fear tactics???

And 2 sources isn't alot of people...[/QUOTE]
This recession is dreadful. We have Great Depression level unemployment figures (I'm taking about the effective jobless rate). Profits are down as much as 50%:
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ups-profit-down-49-on-fewer-shipments-2009-07-23
It's worse than most think.
Then we have these idiots saying, "We're in a jobless recovery."
Yeah, bullshit. You don't have a jobless recovery when we are such a consumer spending oriented economy.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcon...-Deener_17bus.ART.State.Edition1.3cf30a7.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leo-hindery-jr/what-a-jobless-recovery-i_b_261667.html
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/12/pa...umer-opinions-columnists-nouriel-roubini.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leo-hindery-jr/its-all-about-jobs_b_251302.html
[quote name='mykevermin']"The economy remains fragile. But the fact that some Fed regions reported signs of activity beginning to level out raises hope that the recession, which started in December 2007, is drawing to a close."



"It was the first Fed meeting since the economy has flashed more definitive signs of turning a corner. But dangers lurk."



"President Obama, armed with welcome -- and somewhat surprising -- evidence of an economic recovery to brandish against his critics, declared this afternoon that "the worst may be behind us."

"Today we're pointed in the right direction," he said in the White House's Rose Garden, asserting that job losses are at half the rate when he took office in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

He also noted that a week ago, the gross domestic product dropped just 1 percent in the second quarter."

Yeah. Real strong evidence that "the economy is all fixed now."

:roll:[/QUOTE]
Jeez, myke, surely you've heard of hyperbole?:roll:
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Jeez, myke, surely you've heard of hyperbole?:roll:[/QUOTE]

Yes. I also have the exclusive claim to say that, between you and I, I've also heard of functional illiteracy.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Yes. I also have the exclusive claim to say that, between you and I, I've also heard of functional illiteracy.[/QUOTE]
Great. Personal fucking attacks. What are you msut?
 
Don't go there. You made a thread taking articles out of context...for what purpose?

Either you want us to take them at face value (that the economy is showing mild signs of recovery, but they're all short term, so don't break out the party hats yet)...but if that's the case, again, why start a thread?

Or you are not using hyperbole to describe the reaction to subtle shifts in economic indicators, intend on us to take this to be further government ignorance/obfuscation, and when asked for sources on who says "the economy is fixed," cite sources that don't even meekly begin to substantiate your claims - in the end, faltering back to some sort of weak-willed after-the-fact "I was just exaggerating, guys" bullshit claim.

Guess which of the two I think you're doing?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Don't go there. You made a thread taking articles out of context...for what purpose?

Either you want us to take them at face value (that the economy is showing mild signs of recovery, but they're all short term, so don't break out the party hats yet)...but if that's the case, again, why start a thread?

Or you are not using hyperbole to describe the reaction to subtle shifts in economic indicators, intend on us to take this to be further government ignorance/obfuscation, and when asked for sources on who says "the economy is fixed," cite sources that don't even meekly begin to substantiate your claims - in the end, faltering back to some sort of weak-willed after-the-fact "I was just exaggerating, guys" bullshit claim.

Guess which of the two I think you're doing?[/QUOTE]
Always jumping to conclusions. I created this thread to highlight the fact that the idea that the economy is recovering, which is being perpetuated by the media, is a lie. I happened to use hyperbole in making this claim, which is something the media loves to do. All evidence points to the fact this isn't anywhere near over yet. I'm sorry that you suck at sensing hyperbole.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']Always jumping to conclusions. I created this thread to highlight the fact that the idea that the economy is recovering, which is being perpetuated by the media, is a lie. I happened to use hyperbole in making this claim, which is something the media loves to do. All evidence points to the fact this isn't anywhere near over yet. I'm sorry that you suck at sensing hyperbole.[/QUOTE]

You have nothing. I asked you to cite such cheerleading media sources, and the best you came up with were those three articles, all of which pointed to economic indicators that are showing signs that the recession is slowing - something you can't deny, but, perhaps, want to - at the same time that all of the articles you cited cautioned that mild improvement in economic indicators are both short term changes in long term trends, and also weak shifts, so they were nothing to get too excited about.

If that's a "lie," then I stand by my claim that you are functionally illiterate. That is not hyperbole.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']You have nothing. I asked you to cite such cheerleading media sources, and the best you came up with were those three articles, all of which pointed to economic indicators that are showing signs that the recession is slowing[/QUOTE]
The recession isn't slowing. Of course, if you manipulate data enough, you can say it is.
It ticked down by 0.1 percent last month not because more people found jobs, but because 450,000 people withdrew from the labor market. They stopped looking, so they weren’t counted as unemployed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/opinion/11herbert.html
That guy spells it out very well. They say unemployment was down, but that is really just a lie. The people are still unemployed, or underemployed, but because of the way the "official" unemployment rate is calculated, they aren't counted. Let me give you an analogy so you can understand it. It's like if the amount of people looking for homes went down, and someone claimed, "homelessness is down!", when really some people just decided to live under a bridge somewhere.
President Obama, armed with welcome -- and somewhat surprising -- evidence of an economic recovery to brandish against his critics, declared this afternoon that "the worst may be behind us."
"The dip in the unemployment rate in July is a welcome sign that President Obama’s economic recovery package is starting to blunt the impact of the most severe recession in a generation. By refusing to listen to the naysayers, the President and Congress have helped to avert a total financial meltdown -- despite much continuing pain. We still have a long way to go until our economy is growing and creating good jobs at a healthy rate -- and we will need decisive and timely action from our government in the meantime," Sweeney said in a statement.
What the guy is basically saying, is the only way to fix the economy is to keep pumping government money into it. That is simply unsustainable. It just inflates a new bubble, that has the potential to be worse than the housing bubble. The bailout bubble, as some call it, will pop. Then things will be much worse.
The Fed also noted Wednesday that conditions in financial markets “have improved further.”
Just because Wall Street is up off cutting workers and banks claiming toxic assets as "profits!", doesn't mean the economy is getting better.
The Fed said it would gradually slow the pace of its program to buy $300 billion worth of Treasury securities so that it will shut down at the end of October, a month later than previously scheduled. It has bought $253 billion of the securities so far.
Treasury securities are government debt. When the government is spending money to "fix the economy," it is financed through the sale of Treasury securities. If the Fed is not buying these anymore, that means the US government has to either find different buyers, or stop spending so much. The Fed buying up government debt helps prop up this "bailout bubble."
Many analysts believe the economy — which logged a mild contraction in the second quarter after a dizzying free-fall in the prior six months — is growing now.
How is the economy growing when we are still losing jobs?
that the economy should start growing in the second half of this year
Many economists also believe that the U.S. could start growing as soon as the current quarter.
Sure. Even though the fundamentals of the economy are NOT strong.

You know what, keep calling me functionally illiterate. That makes a lot of sense, when your solution to the economy is, "throw money at it."
 
[quote name='mykevermin']...now who in tarnation said that?[/QUOTE]

Well, Newsweek's cover a couple of weeks ago was "The Recession is over...."

But of course the subtitle was something like "....will you survive the recovery."

Article (by Daniel Gross I think) basically arguing that the recession is over as on the large scale things won't get worse, but that the recovery will be slow and long and there will still be a lot of people hurting for a long time.
 
mission-accomplished.jpg
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Right. My point was that I certainly wouldn't call any of these cynically optimistic assessments cheerleading or incorrect.[/QUOTE]
You don't pay much attention, do you?
 
Is a punch in the face an improvement over a kick in the dick? Sure. Is it something to cheer about? Only if you're tired of getting kicked in the dick.

You seek your conclusion in everything you encounter, so much that, when I pointed out that the articles you linked weren't making the claims you thought they were, the best you could do to follow that up was deconstruct and opinion-editorial from the NYT.

I see articles that show extreme reserve in their reporting, but fairly point to economic indicators that suggest things are improving, but also fairly point out that there's a ton of reason to be cautious.

You, on the other hand, seem to be wanting them to inject some kind of paranoid bias into the mix.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Is a punch in the face an improvement over a kick in the dick? Sure. Is it something to cheer about? Only if you're tired of getting kicked in the dick.

You seek your conclusion in everything you encounter, so much that, when I pointed out that the articles you linked weren't making the claims you thought they were, the best you could do to follow that up was deconstruct and opinion-editorial from the NYT.[/quote]
Those weren't quotes from an op-ed. They were quotes from the articles I posted earlier.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2009/08/the_end_of_the.html
President Obama, armed with welcome -- and somewhat surprising -- evidence of an economic recovery to brandish against his critics, declared this afternoon that "the worst may be behind us."
"The dip in the unemployment rate in July is a welcome sign that President Obama’s economic recovery package is starting to blunt the impact of the most severe recession in a generation. By refusing to listen to the naysayers, the President and Congress have helped to avert a total financial meltdown -- despite much continuing pain. We still have a long way to go until our economy is growing and creating good jobs at a healthy rate -- and we will need decisive and timely action from our government in the meantime," Sweeney said in a statement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32384579/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/
The Fed also noted Wednesday that conditions in financial markets “have improved further.”
The Fed said it would gradually slow the pace of its program to buy $300 billion worth of Treasury securities so that it will shut down at the end of October, a month later than previously scheduled. It has bought $253 billion of the securities so far.
Many analysts believe the economy — which logged a mild contraction in the second quarter after a dizzying free-fall in the prior six months — is growing now.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32205933/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/
that the economy should start growing in the second half of this year
Many economists also believe that the U.S. could start growing as soon as the current quarter.
I see articles that show extreme reserve in their reporting, but fairly point to economic indicators that suggest things are improving, but also fairly point out that there's a ton of reason to be cautious.

You, on the other hand, seem to be wanting them to inject some kind of paranoid bias into the mix.
So, I suppose, if you go to the doctor, and he tells you that you have cancer, you tell him he is paranoid, a conspiracy theorist, and just yell at him? Or do you ask him how best to treat it? I've already outlined how all of these "economic indicators that suggest things are improving," are false hope. You seem to ignore this, and you also ignore the fact that the health care bill is a scam. I see a pattern developing here.
 
Right. And I already pointed out that those articles have gems like these:

"Today we're pointed in the right direction," [Obama] said in the White House's Rose Garden, asserting that job losses are at half the rate when he took office in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

Which means we're losing fewer jobs per month than earlier in the year, but still losing jobs. I don't see how you can read these any other way, unless you are functionally illiterate.

EDIT: Let's work with your cancer analogy: what you're doing to these articles is akin to seeing the doctor after an initial prognosis of cancerous cells being found in your body, and experiencing several months of experimental and somewhat controversial treatment. The doctor tells you that the cancerous growth is slowing and showing signs of going into remission. Do you tell him you're going to die anyway? Or just blame the Federal Reserve?
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Right. And I already pointed out that those articles have gems like these:

"Today we're pointed in the right direction," [Obama] said in the White House's Rose Garden, asserting that job losses are at half the rate when he took office in the worst recession since the Great Depression.

Which means we're losing fewer jobs per month than earlier in the year, but still losing jobs. I don't see how you can read these any other way, unless you are functionally illiterate.[/QUOTE]
And if we are still losing jobs in the hundreds of thousands per month, and having hundreds of thousands more each month stop looking, we aren't recovering.
EDIT: Let's work with your cancer analogy: what you're doing to these articles is akin to seeing the doctor after an initial prognosis of cancerous cells being found in your body, and experiencing several months of experimental and somewhat controversial treatment. The doctor tells you that the cancerous growth is slowing and showing signs of going into remission. Do you tell him you're going to die anyway? Or just blame the Federal Reserve?
Here's the problem with your analogy. The signs that the recession are slowing aren't really signs at all. 450,000 withdrew from the labor market in July. Those are people who simply cannot find jobs, and have given up. Sure, the unemployment rate is down, but that doesn't tell the full story, because it doesn't include people who have left the labor market.
 
[quote name='fullmetalfan720']And if we are still losing jobs in the hundreds of thousands per month, and having hundreds of thousands more each month stop looking, we aren't recovering.[/QUOTE]

Ok, I've figured out why we're having so much trouble communicating with each other.

You don't understand longitudinal trends.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Right. My point was that I certainly wouldn't call any of these cynically optimistic assessments cheerleading or incorrect.[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I was brief as I was busy.

My point was people see Cover's like that and don't read even the subtitle, much less the actual article and thus get the wrong idea.

Or just try to inject their paranoia into everything as you point out.

And I agree, nothing wrong with stating things are getting better--they are. We're just not out of the woods yet. But I don't think we'll see another huge down turn economically barring some crisis like a major war etc.

But it's going to take a while to get unemployment shrinking rather than rising slower, state government budgets back on track etc. etc.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Ok, I've figured out why we're having so much trouble communicating with each other.

You don't understand longitudinal trends.[/QUOTE]
I understand longitudinal trends.
[quote name='dmaul1114']Sorry, I was brief as I was busy.

My point was people see Cover's like that and don't read even the subtitle, much less the actual article and thus get the wrong idea.

Or just try to inject their paranoia into everything as you point out.

And I agree, nothing wrong with stating things are getting better--they are. We're just not out of the woods yet. But I don't think we'll see another huge down turn economically barring some crisis like a major war etc.[/QUOTE]
You know, the economic collapse may be in remission, but we aren't heading up. No, we are heading down. Look at the amount of foreclosures lately:
Orlando July Foreclosures Up 37%
http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/stories/2009/08/10/daily31.html
NJ foreclosures up 30 percent in first half of '09
http://www.philly.com/philly/wires/...njforeclosuresup30percentinfirsthalfof09.html
Banks Ramp Up Foreclosures
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123975395670518941.html
U.S. foreclosures rose 7% in July compared to the prior month, a 32% rise from July 2008
http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/foreclosures--july/
Foreclosures up: 1 in 84 homes affected in first half of year
There were 1.9 million foreclosure filings in the first six months of this year, a 15% increase from the first six months of 2008, according to a report today from RealtyTrac. One in 84 homes received a foreclosure filing in the first half of the year.
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/housing/2009-07-15-home-mortgages-foreclosure_N.htm
Then, you've got the possibility of the commercial real estate bubble bursting:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/05/28/news/commercial.mortgages.fortune/index.htm
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2009/08/18/Commercial-real-estate-bubble-looms/UPI-89211250607446/
"We seem to be nearing the end of the recession but the situation in the commercial real estate market is getting worse," analyst Patrick Newport told USA Today Tuesday.
Then there is the so called "bailout bubble"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/30884871 Articles are behind spoiler tags
As the Federal Reserve throws more and more money at the economic crisis and holds interest rates down at historic lows, it could be inflating a devastating ‘bailout bubble,’ Gerald Celente, director of Trends Research Institute, told CNBC.

“We’re looking at a bailout bubble that’s way bigger than the dotcom bubble before it and the real-estate bubble that we’re now getting out of, or attempting to,” Celente said.
“This is unprecedented; the economic system is being restructured,” he said.
The real-estate bubble was born out of the aftermath of the dotcom bubble because the Fed slashed interest rates and made more funds available, according to Celente.
But because the US government now has a vast equity position in financial institutions, it could mean that there is no bouncing back if a bailout-induced bubble bursts, Celente said.
“When this bubble bursts, there’s no reinflating it because of the government intervention into it so deeply,” he said.
“As you look through history, it seems like governments become emboldened by their failures,” he added.
Celente pointed out that according to the Italian fascist leader Benito Mussolini, the merger of state and corporate powers was called fascism.
“We could call this fascism lite,” he said, referring to the government involvement in free enterprise. “After these kind of catastrophic collapses, sometimes they’re followed by war.”
http://moneynews.newsmax.com/streettalk/buffett_banana_republic/2009/08/19/249871.html
Warren Buffett says the growing mountain of U.S. debt could turn the country into a banana republic.

“Unchecked carbon emissions will likely cause icebergs to melt,” Buffett writes in The New York Times.

“Unchecked greenback emissions will certainly cause the purchasing power of currency to melt.”

The U.S. economy appears to be on a slow path to recovery, Buffett notes, but “enormous dosages of monetary medicine continue to be administered,” creating an annual deficit more than twice any since 1920 aside from war-impacted years of 1942-1946.

Most of the effects of this are still invisible, but “their threat may be as ominous as that posed by the financial crisis itself.”

Congress, Buffett says, must end the rise in the debt-to-GDP ratio and bring U.S. growth in obligations back in line with U.S. growth in resources.

Even if much of this debt were covered by foreign investors and by Americans saving substantially more than they have done in years, Buffett estimates Treasury would have to find $900 billion to finance the remainder of the debt it is issuing.

“We don’t want our country to evolve into the banana-republic economy described by Keynes,” he says.

China reduced its holdings of U.S. government debt by the largest margin in nearly nine years in June, cutting its holdings by nearly 3 percent, according to data from the Department of Treasury.

In 2008, the Chinese increased their holdings in U.S. debt by 52 percent over 12 months.
And, the fact that toxic assets are still a problem:
http://money.cnn.com/2009/08/18/news/banks.buyers.fortune/?postversion=2009081813
Facing mounting bank failures, regulators are putting a new twist on a familiar idea: splitting a bank's good assets from the bad ones.The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. said last month it would consider splitting the toxic assets of a failed bank from its more valuable parts, such as deposits and loans that aren't going sour.........................
..........So far in 2009, 77 banks have failed -- more than triple the 2008 toll. The FDIC has taken on some assets in many of those deals, and it has failed to find takers of any kind for six banks -- including the giant correspondent bank Silverton, which went under in April with $4.1 billion in assets.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/795b7d7e-86d7-11de-9e8e-00144feabdc0.html
Banks suffered after the Congressional Oversight Panel, the body that runs the Troubled Asset Relief Program, warned the US Treasury had not done enough to relieve them of toxic assets.
http://www.reuters.com/article/businessNews/idUSTRE57A0JO20090811?sp=true
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury Department should consider expanding programs to cleanse troubled assets from bank balance sheets if current efforts fail to restart markets or if economic conditions worsen, a U.S. bailout watchdog panel said on Tuesday.
The Congressional Oversight Panel said in its latest monthly report that toxic loans and securities continue to pose a threat to the financial system, particularly for smaller banks that face mounting losses on commercial real estate loans.
These banks may need similar stress tests and capital support afforded to larger institutions, the panel added.
It also advocated that stress tests for the largest 19 institutions be repeated if the economy worsens beyond the worst-case assumptions used in initial tests conducted in April.
Despite improved financial market conditions, the panel said a "continuing uncertainty is whether the troubled assets that remain on bank balance sheets can again become the trigger for instability."
In an interview on Reuters Television, the chairman of the congressional oversight panel, Elizabeth Warren, said no one even knows the value of the toxic assets still on banks' books.
VALUE OF TOXIC ASSETS UNKNOWN
"No one has a good handle how much is out there," Warren said. "Here we are 10 months into this crisis...and we can't tell you what the dollar value is."
Estimates are that "somewhere between $600 billion and $1.5 trillion in toxic assets (is) spread across the balance sheets of the small and the large banks," Warren said, adding: "That's a lot."
In its report, the panel said the Treasury needs to either assure that a robust program is available for handling toxic assets as they go into default or else consider a different strategy for restarting markets for the assets.
The critical report comes as the Treasury prepares to launch a significantly scaled-down version of its toxic asset program, a series of public-private investment funds to purchase toxic mortgage securities with $30 billion in government subsidies.
Last October, the entire $700 billion U.S. bailout program was aimed at buying up the toxic assets that threatened to bring down the financial system. But due to the plan's complexity and with market confidence rapidly deteriorating, then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson quickly shifted gears to use the money for direct capital injections into banks.
Since then, Paulson's successor, Timothy Geithner, announced plans to entice private investors to buy "legacy" securities and whole loans from banks. But accounting forbearance that allowed banks to avoid recognizing losses on these assets combined with large institutions' ability to raise capital after regulator "stress tests" in May reduced investor angst over toxic assets.
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TIME BOMB
The Congressional Oversight Panel said, however, that smaller U.S. banks faced billions of dollars in losses from delinquent commercial property loans and were far less able to raise capital and absorb losses than their larger counterparts.
An analysis done by the panel showed that under a scenario 20 percent worse than assumptions used in the Federal Reserve's stress tests, about 719 banks with assets between $600 million and $100 billion would need to raise some $21 billion in new capital to offset loan losses.
"Treasury must be prepared to turn its attention to small banks in crafting solutions to the growing problem of troubled whole loans," the panel said, adding that it should consider using similar stress tests -- along with pledges for additional capital -- on smaller institutions.
It said triggers for further supportive actions could come if unemployment remains high and residential foreclosures continued to mount.
The five-member panel approved the report by a 4 to 1 vote, with a dissent by U.S. Rep. Jeb Hensarling, a Texas Republican and the committee's only sitting congressman.
Hensarling said he could not approve the report because it advocated intervention with additional government funds when that may not be necessary.
"It is possible that the toxic asset market is already beginning to heal itself and that the intervention proposed by the Panel could be inappropriate -- if not counterproductive.
"For this reason, I think it premature to endorse one or more of the approaches proposed by the Panel, but, instead, suggest that Treasury and the Fed continue to monitor the toxic asset market," Hensarling said in an addendum to the report.
http://www.thealarmclock.com/mt/archives/2009/07/wells_fargos_to.html
http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/06/02/banks-toxic-assets/
Remember the infamous leaked Vikram S. Pandit memo we wrote to you about awhile back that suddenly saw Citigroup Inc. (NYSE: C) turn a profit on nothing more than vapors?
Stay tuned: We’re about to see more of these puffed-up profits. JPMorgan Chase & Co. (NYSE: JPM), Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC) and PNC Financial Services Inc. (NYSE: PNC) will reportedly be booking as much as $56 billion in windfall profits using similar financial chicanery in the months ahead.
Sadly, millions of investors will likely interpret this as a sign that the U.S. financial sector is once again a viable “profit” play - when the reality is that Wall Street hasn’t learned a single darned thing from the financial crisis and is up to its old tricks once again.
This time around, the biggest U.S. banks - including JPMorgan, BofA, and PNC - will employ an obscure accounting rule to magically transform the “toxic debt” that they obtained from such “zombie banks” as Wachovia Corp., Countrywide Financial Corp., National City Corp., and Washington Mutual Inc. (OTC: WAMUQ) into actual income.
Yes, you heard me correctly - income. It makes me furious. This is kind of a corporate accounting version of “the dog ate my homework.” Only this time around, the joke is on us - the taxpayers - since we’re the ones who are bailing these bozos out.
Called “accretable yield,” these mega banks will book income on loans that have “reduced credit quality” by recognizing - hang with me on this one, it’s tough to believe - the value of the bonds on their balance sheets and the cash flow those securities are expected to earn. Please understand, we’re not talking about cash that’s already been earned, and not cash in the bank … we’re talking about cash flow those banks are expected to earn.
Talk about making a silk purse out of a sow’s ear. This is an obscene abuse of the accounting system - whether it’s legal or not. No wonder nobody ever went broke using accrual accounting. These guys need to be forced to recognize the money they have actually earned - not the amount they can account for using clever financial trickery.
To understand just how absurd this actually is, let’s take a close look at JPMorgan Chase - which alone reportedly stands to reap as much as $29 billion in windfall income. It started when JPMorgan literally bought WaMu from the dumpster (technically acting as something called “the receiver”) last year for $1.9 billion, and was allowed to mark the toxic debt that came with it down to “fair value” - which was 25% less than the $118.2 billion it was officially carried on the books for, or $88.65 billion. But now, the bank says that those same debts may appreciate by some $29.1 billion over the life of the loans. That’s before taxes and expenses, of course.
According to Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) rules, buyers such as JP Morgan Chase carry these loans on their books at fair value. Then, as borrowers repay those loans they are allowed to book profits. Therefore, by keeping the value of the loans low, the profits on such a small base are obviously king-sized.
The incentive, as I noted when I reviewed a similar tax loophole regarding BofA’s Countrywide Financial purchase back in February, is to write down the value of the loans so aggressively that they are practically worthless. That way, when the buyer folds them into its business, the returns are huge.
JPMorgan’s spokesman, Thomas Kelly, told Bloomberg News that “the accretion is driven by prevailing interest rates.” That said, JPMorgan said first quarter gains from the WaMu loans resulted in $1.26 billion in interest income and made it possible for the bank to reap additional potential income of $29.1 billion.
The other factor that’s not being talked about - at least openly - is the impact that an economic turnaround could have. You see, the eroding economy contributed to the erosion in the value of the securities. Conversely, when U.S. economic activity picks back up, we could see an accompanying improvement in the value of these securities being carried on the company’s balance sheet.
In an April 22 interview with Bloomberg, Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE: WFC) Chief Executive Officer Howard I. Atkins said that “to the extent that the customers’ experience is better or we can modify the loans, and the loans become more current, that could help recapture some of the write-down.”
That will lead to massive “profits.”
In other words, if the government is successful in reducing mortgage rates and the housing markets stabilize, the banks get to make up entirely new numbers and “bring more of [the loans] current” which is bank speak for being able to assign whatever brand new values they can to the very same toxic slime these same banks wrote down only months ago during the purchasing process.
Naturally - and I think you can see where I’m going with this - the more these guys wrote down these securities as part of the acquisition process, the higher they can write them “up” in the months ahead - and the more powerful the “profit” surge we’ll see.
Not surprisingly, JPMorgan wouldn’t comment when I called - nor would any of the other big banks - so it’s especially difficult to get to the bottom of exactly when this will come to a head and how much of an outsized “manufactured” profit we could be looking at.
But we can guess as to their motivation:

  • First, the banking industry remains in a state of chaos. Despite widespread attempts to calm things down, the banks don’t trust each other and the public trusts them even less. So profits - whether illusory or not - would go a long way to reestablishing some sense of the ordinary.
  • Second, to the degree that the banks remain on the federal dole and their balance sheets a wreck, the ability to add new earnings is a lifesaver. Not only does this practice give them the ability to smooth out earnings, but it also arguably makes their stock more attractive because of the apparent “growth” potential that exists going forward. Never mind that the growth is nothing more than a paper shuffling and some fancy accounting; under FASB regs, this practice is completely legal.
  • Third, because newly accreted earnings will flow directly to income and the banks have stockpiled a huge war chest of write-downs, financial institutions maintain a substantial buffer that can be used at their discretion whenever they need to goose their earnings. One brokerage house chief financial officer told me privately years ago that it was his goal to maintain enough of a buffer that he could swing earnings by as much as 10% in any given quarter - depending on what the company “needed.”
Now for the trillion-dollar question: What can we do about this?
Sadly, when it comes to changing the legally approved accounting nonsense component, the answer right now is “not much.”
While an investor wanting to capture this “growth” could buy shares in the banks or in any one of a half a dozen financial exchange-traded funds (ETFs), I think a better choice is to buy LEAP options on each of the banks. Not only are long-term options frequently mis-priced, but the risks for any investor buying them are strictly limited to the capital used to buy them and the returns can be proportionately higher for options buyers than for the straight-stock alternatives available at the moment.
And those profits are real enough for me - even without accretion.
http://www.moneymorning.com/2009/03/10/citigroup-profit/
In a letter sent to employees Monday, Citigroup Inc. (C) Chief Executive Officer Vikram Pandit said the bank has been operating at a profit through the first two months of the year for the first time since the third quarter of 2007 - the last time it recorded a profit.
But even as the news was hitting Wall Street, a report revealed that regulators are “contingency planning” ways to further stabilize Citigroup if needed. And yet another report said major banks could face “catastrophic” losses on derivatives if the economy worsens.
I am most encouraged with the strength of our business so far in 2009,” Pandit wrote in an internal memorandum obtained by Bloomberg. “In fact, we are profitable through the first two months of 2009 and are having our best quarter-to-date performance since the third quarter of 2007.”
Pandit said the first-quarter performance so far is based on historical revenue and expense rates. Citi’s projected earnings before taxes and one-time charges would be about $8.3 billion for the full quarter.
Citigroup’s shares rose 38.1% on the news in trading yesterday (Tuesday) to close at $1.45 a share.
However, the report was tempered by an article in the Wall Street Journal that outlined how the bank is still in the sights of federal regulators who are guarding against further losses. Even though Federal officials aren’t expecting a sudden turn for the worse, they are examining what fresh steps they might need to take to stabilize the bank if its problems mount, the Journal reported, citing anonymous sources.
Further clouding the outlook for the financial sector, a report by McClatchy Newspapers contends that America’s five largest banks, which already have received $145 billion in taxpayer bailout dollars, still “face potentially catastrophic losses from exotic investments if economic conditions substantially worsen.”
Based on an in-depth review of end-of-year regulatory filings, the report says that “current” net loss risks from derivatives held by Citibank, a unit of Citigroup, Bank of America Corp. (BAC), HSBC Bank USA (HBA-Z, ADR: HBC), Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) surged to $587 billion as of Dec. 31, a jump of 49% in just 90 days.
Fueling the concerns are the banks’ holdings of credit-default swaps - insurance-like bets tied to a loan or other underlying assets - which can provide protection against defaults on subprime mortgages or guarantee payments for borrowers who walk away from their debts.
Money Morning Contributing Editor Martin Hutchinson said last week that trading in credit-default swaps is tantamount to “casino capitalism,” because they are bought and sold in a murky, private market that is largely beyond the control of federal regulators. Except for those actually trading the instruments, no one knows who owes what to whom.
“I don’t trust any numbers on them,” said David Wyss, the chief economist for New York credit-rating agency Standard & Poor’s.
The risks of these off-the-balance-sheet holdings became crystal clear when investment banker Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (OTC: LEHMQ) and insurer American International Group (AIG) - both major swap dealers - collapsed last September. Their failures led to a massive pullback from risk, spawning the current credit crisis.
Christopher Whalen, a managing director of Institutional Risk Analytics, a company that grades banks on potential for loss risk, calls the big banks’ credit-default swap holdings “a ticking time bomb,” noting the derivatives hold face values in the trillions of dollars. He notes that future losses will be determined by the fate of the overall economy.
Citibank now reports 60% of its $301 billion in potential losses from derivatives are in the highest-risk category, up from 40% in early 2007.
Citigroup has racked up five straight quarters of losses totaling more than $37.5 billion since 2007. The company’s shares fell below $1 in New York trading last week as shares of banks fell to their lowest levels in decades amid broad stock and bond market declines.
At the same time, the cost of insuring against defaults by financial institutions wheeling and dealing in the credit-default-swap market is soaring. The action reflects a lack of investor confidence on the heels of repeated bailouts of financial companies.
So, yeah you can call that paranoid, but I think that there are still some real problems with the economy. Especially when you are having months where 450,000 people leave the labor market because they can't find jobs. Just remember, during the early parts of the Great Depression, there were times when many people thought there was going to be a recovery.
But it's going to take a while to get unemployment shrinking rather than rising slower, state government budgets back on track etc. etc.
In a country where consumer spending makes up 72% of the GDP, you don't have a recovery until unemployment is much lower.
 
I'm no expert economists-dude, but I like to pretend that, instead of a great recession, our economy is just "resetting" itself to a more sustainable level. Don't think we're there yet.
 
bread's done
Back
Top