Banks Behaving Badly

“We’re doing what a bank is supposed to do.” That’s JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon before a US Senate Committee after a two billion dollar gambling loss that has since grown to nearly six billion and is forecast to hit even higher numbers. Dimon was much harder on himself than were the Senators, or the members of a House Committee in a subsequent hearing. 

No surprise, members of Congress have good reason to be friendly. Dimon has pitched millions into Congressional war chests -more to Republicans, but lots to go around. The committee members understandably tossed softball questions. Dimon was decked out in cuff links with the presidential seal just so everyone would know where he was coming from. 

Unbelievably nobody called him on his, “We’re doing what a bank is supposed to do” line. This from a “Bankster,” as the Economist has labeled the out-of-control leaders of our financial sector. The billions lost on bad bets placed by one of its traders (AKA gamblers) in London are the least of the problems Dimon is facing. 

Chase is ensnared in the evolving Libor scandal that has a group of international banksters fixing interbank lending rates, impacting every loan rate imaginable. 

The incredibly complex Libor rate fixing scheme crosses civil and criminal legal lines. Dimon was fully aware of his bank’s involvement in this racket when he delivered his “What a bank is supposed to do” line; so we must assume that he thinks juggling interest rates worldwide is what banks do. 

That isn’t even the worst it. When Dimon was flaunting his control over those we send to Washington to do our business, he was fully aware that Chase had just shelled out a seventy-five million dollar fine for rigging a bid on a three billion dollar sewer bond deal that pushed Birmingham, Alabama into bankruptcy. A deal they cinched with a three million dollar bribe to Goldman Sachs. Chase and a host of other banksters have been rigging municipal bond auctions for decades.

This all came out when the Feds convicted three minor players from GE Capital they nailed rigging bond auctions. The Feds got their hands on recordings of telephone conversations between banksters making highly illegal deals to pass municipal bond business around among the banks. In addition to the bankster types from GE who are going to jail, scores of others from virtually every major bank in America and many international banks as well have taken a plea deal. 

Let’s be clear about what’s going on here. 

Between the Libor racket and the municipal bond rigging scam- the banksters have ripped off everyone in America to the tune of untold billions. JP Morgan Chase is not alone in these Mafia style rackets, but if that’s what Jamie Dimon thinks “banks do” then he has a different ethical standard than most of us hold.

They’re Back – 
Run For Your Lives!

What do you think our leaders would do when confronted by the imminent collapse of a sector of our economy whose assets are equal to 56% of our GDP? Given what they did in 2008 –properly we think– we can safely assume they would prop up the institutions at risk. Are you surprised that five of the banks we rescued in 2008 now have assets equal to 56% of our GDP*? In 2006 -before the collapse- these same five banks’ combined assets equaled 47% of our GDP*.

Bank of America, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, five of the players whose reckless actions drove the world economy off the cliff, are lined up to do it again. Their assets grew more than 40% from 2006 through 2011*. Why? That’s no mystery, the banks know and investors know that if there’s another collapse we will bail the Zombies out again. With the taxpayers on the hook, big banks are gambling with the same risky stuff that led to the 2008 collapse –derivatives, swaps etc., the stuff the bankers refer to as “crap.”

If it goes all wrong, the bankers and their investors have the taxpayers ready to bail them out again. Where else would investors put their bucks, high returns no risk? Published reports say all three rating services along with a covey of regional Federal Reserve presidents, see a bailout for the Zombie Banks down the road. Meanwhile, your neighborhood community bank –the bank down the street on the corner– doesn’t have an investment (AKA gambling hall) division; putting them at a distinct disadvantage in finding investors and customers.

We know how to solve this problem, been there, done that. Eighty years ago when the wheels fell off our economy our nation faced the same dilemma. They busted up the big banks and made them choose the sector of the banking world in which they wanted to operate. The Glass-Steagall Act separated investment banks from the regular commercial banks that we ordinary folk deal with.

During the 1990s’ deregulation frenzy the investment banks –Goldman Sachs in particular– pressed hard to break down this wall. In 1999 they succeeded Glass-Steagall was repealed. Then they convinced the Congress to exempt them from the gambling laws and they were off to the races. Take any risk, bet on any crazy thing, as long as you could call it an investment – it is legal. Within a few years they distorted the derivative and commodity markets turning them into Zombie bank gambling halls. Here’s the catch. They know they can’t lose. They know the suckers (AKA customers) take the losses. Worse comes to worse the taxpayers will be stuck with the mess. The bankers and investors will be just fine.

We all know what happened in the decade following the repeal of Glass-Steagall. We had to bail the banks out and now they are fine; back doing the exact same things that drove us off the cliff. Meanwhile the rest of America –and the world– is working its way out the hole they left us in. They are not doing anything illegal; however, ethically it stinks. It’s time to break up the Zombie banks and put them back in their cages, investment banks on one side of the business and commercial banks on the other. If not, we’ll be bailing them out again. They are counting on it

 *Bloomberg 04.19.12

That Greasy Sleazy Feeling

 

As we pull out of the gas station these days, in addition to the empty spot in our wallets there’s a scent of sleaze in the air. It’s not our friendly gas station dude, he’s just trying to get by like a lot of us; it’s more complicated than that. The more we drill down, we discover that it has little to do with the price of oil. But isn’t oil scarce, aren’t we importing more than ever before? No, actually we are producing about 80% of our needs. All that new drilling that fired up over the last few years combined with reductions in usage, has narrowed that gap. Don’t say anything out loud, but America is even exporting oil. What’s the problem then?

There are many factors from the seasonal bump we see this time every year, to the capacity of our refineries, to unrest in the Middle East. While the latter does not seem to be a real factor given how little we need from those folks, there is no doubt that it is a factor. Not in the way you might think, however. No less an authority than Goldman Sachs has found a culprit that adds at least $.56 to the price of every gallon of gasoline. It’s the casino called Wall Street.

The commodities market was designed to stabilize the price of grain, cattle, pork and other things including oil. The idea is to assure the producer’s pricing when the fruits of their labor hits the market. But of course it turns out that you don’t have to be a buyer or seller of these commodities to get into the game. You just have to have the bucks and the free pass that the Congress gave Wall Street, immunity from gambling laws. Add something like instability in the Middle East and give their roulette wheel a spin; we always lose.

Now the commodities market is flooded with all kinds of financial instruments, things like “swaps,” the fun stuff that helped toss the world economy into the dumpster. Speculating on commodities has always been around but until recently the end users and producers controlled over two-thirds of the contracts. Today that number has flipped and two-thirds are in the hands of speculators. Not the players in the oil market that have traditionally dominated this game. Today a frighteningly small number of Wall Street types hold the price of oil in their hands; playing with what we pay at the pump.

You can figure that seven to eight bucks is pocketed by the Wall Street types every time you fill up, ten bucks or more if you drive a bigger vehicle. The average price for a gallon would be a little over three bucks without Wall Street’s “take.” Given the rare peek we got into the wonderful world of Wall Street when one of its own, Greg Smith, laid out his reasons for leaving Goldman Sachs in an OP-ED, you can imagine the nicknames the Wall Street types pin on us. While most businesses, in fact most folks are trying to do the right thing, pond scum like Goldman and their ilk have no concept of the ethical life.

A Glimmer Of Justice

Last week (2.9), we finally got a deal for a few big banks to make a $25 billion down payment on what they owe America. You’ll recall that less than a decade after they conned Congress into dumping the Glass-Steagall Act passed in 1932 to protect Americans from reckless bankers, reckless bankers drove most of the world off a cliff. A cliff created through their relentless efforts to profit from packages of securitized mortgages. They lured naïve folks into mortgages the bankers and their cronies knew they couldn’t afford. When the bottom fell out did the bankers use the money we gave them 2008 to help those they had enticed?

Nope, but the alarm bells were set off by Hank Paulsen, plucked by George Bush from his post as CEO of Goldman Sachs –perhaps the most reckless and devious nest of bankers on the planet– to become Secretary of the Treasury. The Congress passed the $700 Billion TARP Act (largely crafted by Paulson) to save the banks. At the same time – unbeknownst to most of us until earlier this year– the Federal Reserve poured about ten times that much into the banks, interest free. The $25 billion –chump change for these banks– will help a few of the millions who owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth. Others, pushed out of their homes erroneously may get a few bucks.

The deal, in the works forever, was held up by two State Attorneys General who refused to sign because the banks got protection against future prosecution. California AG Kamala Harris and New York’s Eric Schneiderman booted the get-out-of-jail-free-cards. Housing Secretary Shaun Donovan brokered the deal over Super Bowl week and last Friday (2.10) announced that 49 states, the Justice Department, and other Federal entities had signed onto the deal. Ally Financial (formerly GMAC), Bank of America, Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, the biggest mortgage servicers, are coming up with the$25 billion.

It better be a down payment; the bankers received hundreds of billions from the American taxpayers. Up to now they have used our money mostly to return to the reckless risks that got us into this mess in the first place. An outcome Mr. Paulson could have forestalled, had there been any real conditions attached to the bailout bucks. But why would he? Could it be because Paulson had his hand on the tiller at Goldman while they were raking in billions selling crap (their term), all-the-while betting against their customers with the idiots at AIG? The same AIG we bailed out only to have Goldman suck up a ton of that bailout, collecting on the sure losers they hung on AIG.

Before sundown the day the $25 billion deal went public Schneiderman sued three big banks: Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, along with the MERS system. The banks set up and control MERS cloaking the foreclosure world. The banking entities and some of the individuals involved left the ethical line far behind in this display of unbridled greed.

The Goldman SEC Case

The merits of the SEC case against Goldman Sachs aside, the ethical issues are crystal clear. Pushing investments that have a high probability of failure is just plain wrong. Blaming the rating agencies for putting their stamp of approval on these bundles of soon to be worthless mortgages is disingenuous at best.

Given the “pay grade” of those selling these investments wouldn’t you think they would do some due diligence on their value? Instead, those peddling this junk were said to be relying on the idea that real estate prices were going to rise forever.

Even if that dicey concept were true, much of what was in these packages could not stand the light of day. People in houses miles beyond their means; a $14,000 dollar a year farm laborer in a $750,000 house, others all across the country enticed by no money down, no closing costs, low payments for a few months and then wham! a recipe for disaster. Anyone who cared enough to look could see these bundles were a time bomb waiting to explode.

The banks, pension funds and other “sophisticated” types who bought this junk; should they have done their due diligence? You bet. People on all sides of this deal who were being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars, sometimes millions each year should have seen the risk.

Truth is much of this marketplace has nothing to do with investing. It is pure and simple gambling. Those involved didn’t even own the bundles of mortgages; they just bet on their value. It’s like picking out a house you don’t own and betting someone it will burn down. Goldman’s position is that they were just the bookie. The SEC thinks Goldman knew the house on was on fire. Thereon lies the case; fraud or not.

Who cares, other than the little old ladies, retired workers and other pensioners who lost their savings, not to mention the taxpayers worldwide who had to bail Goldman and other banks out when the world economy went south in large part because of these –too big to fail- bank’s gambling problems. In case you are wondering, why banks and others in the wonderful world of stocks, bonds, commodities and such are allowed to gamble in this manner when the rest of us have to go to a casino, there is a reason. When it comes to these securities Wall Street really is a casino, a legal casino.

The Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 along with a 1992 Act overturned reforms enacted following the 1907 bank panic. That turned our financial system noted for its transparency and security into –well– an unregulated casino. So it may very well be that Goldman Sachs –and perhaps other big banks– did nothing illegal. Fleecing the suckers may be perfectly legal. Ethics, however are another matter.

Everyone from the folks who coached the $14,000 a year farm laborer on how to get a loan he could never repay, to the bank that originated the loan, to those who sold and resold it and those who bundled it with a bunch of other bad loans, and finally those in the too-big-to fail banks who acted as bookies or bet the savings of pensioners on these loans, every single individual in that chain was ethically bankrupt.

Let’s move away from the smarmy little characters at the beginning of each of these human tragedies who pushed foolish dreamers into deals that would ruin them. Let’s move up to the six and seven figure folk in their $3,000 outfits who turned these individual travesties into a nightmare.

Take Goldman Sachs forinstance. As a publically traded company under Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) they are required to offer ethics training to their employees. It would be hard to imagine how anyone involved in this high flying flimflam could have considered any part of it ethical. Let alone how Goldman Sachs’ management could believe they have fulfilled their SOX mandated ethics training obligations.

The Goldna Sachs Saga

“Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them.”

George Santayana

Marcus Goldman and his family launched their company in 1869, building a reputation highlighted in 1896 with an invitation to join the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and in 1906 to manage the initial public offering (IPO) for Sears Roebuck.

A couple decades later the partners launched Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation. It was basically a Ponzi scheme that made tons of money before the bottom fell out in 1929. At that point former office boy, Sidney Weinberg, took the helm and spent a quarter century rebuilding their reputation. In 1956 Goldman Sachs landed the IPO of the century, Ford Motor Company.

Even as Weinberg rebuilt Goldman’s reputation, however, others in the firm lost sight of their role: putting the Capital into Capitalism. Along with much of the banking world, Goldman Sachs moved increasingly into trading, crossing a line long considered a conflict of interest; a world of strange financial products, often with no societal value. They, of course, didn’t see it that way given the astronomical amounts the firm pocketed.

This world rapidly evolved into little more than a gambling den. The virtual Casino on Wall Street had become a reality. The bankers’ political clout (read contributions) generated legislation in 1992 and 2000 exempting derivatives –including their high risk cousins, synthetic derivatives and credit default swaps– from gambling laws.

From there on it was a race to disaster. In 2003 legendary investor Warren Buffett warned that derivatives could become “Financial weapons of mass destruction;” a warning soon to become fact. They became a root cause of the global financial sector collapse.

In the midst of this Goldman Sachs got involved in a smarmy deal. The SEC says they peddled some scummy bundles of mortgage derivatives to pension fund managers, European banks, and other large “sophisticated” investors. Legally the case is said to be on shaky ground. But why would Goldman Sachs (and other banks) ever let it get onto legal ground?

We don’t know if the course they have been following is legal, but it is anything but ethical. Under Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) publically traded companies are required to offer those in their employ ethics training. It would be hard to imagine how anyone involved in this high flying flimflam could have considered any part of it ethical. Let alone how Goldman Sachs’ management could believe they fulfilled their SOX mandated ethics training obligation.

In a business built on trust and reputation, how could Goldman Sachs forget how long it took Sidney Weinberg to restore their reputation when it tanked in the 1920s? Or a famous quote from their largest shareholder Warren Buffett, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.”