|
|
The Big Takeover
by Matt Taibbi
The global economic crisis isn't about money - it's about power. How Wall
Street insiders are using the bailout to stage a revolution
It's over — we're
officially, royally fucked. No empire can survive being rendered a permanent
laughingstock, which is what happened as of a few weeks ago, when the
buffoons who have been running things in this country finally went one step
too far. It happened when Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner was forced to
admit that he was once again going to have to stuff billions of taxpayer
dollars into a dying insurance giant called AIG, itself a profound symbol of
our national decline — a corporation that got rich insuring the concrete and
steel of American industry in the country's heyday, only to destroy itself
chasing phantom fortunes at the Wall Street card tables, like a dissolute
nobleman gambling away the family estate in the waning days of the British
Empire.
The latest bailout came as AIG admitted to having just
posted the largest quarterly loss in American corporate history — some $61.7
billion. In the final three months of last year, the company lost more than
$27 million every hour. That's $465,000 a minute, a yearly income
for a median American household every six seconds, roughly $7,750 a second.
And all this happened at the end of eight straight years that America
devoted to frantically chasing the shadow of a terrorist threat to no avail,
eight years spent stopping every citizen at every airport to search every
purse, bag, crotch and briefcase for juice boxes and explosive tubes of
toothpaste. Yet in the end, our government had no mechanism for searching
the balance sheets of companies that held life-or-death power over our
society and was unable to spot holes in the national economy the size of
Libya (whose entire GDP last year was smaller than AIG's 2008 losses).
So it's time to admit it: We're fools, protagonists in
a kind of gruesome comedy about the marriage of greed and stupidity. And the
worst part about it is that we're still in denial — we still think this is
some kind of unfortunate accident, not something that was created by the
group of psychopaths on Wall Street whom we allowed to gang-rape the
American Dream. When Geithner announced the new $30 billion bailout, the
party line was that poor AIG was just a victim of a lot of shitty luck — bad
year for business, you know, what with the financial crisis and all. Edward
Liddy, the company's CEO, actually compared it to catching a cold: "The
marketplace is a pretty crummy place to be right now," he said. "When the
world catches pneumonia, we get it too." In a pathetic attempt at
name-dropping, he even whined that AIG was being "consumed by the same
issues that are driving house prices down and 401K statements down and
Warren Buffet's investment portfolio down."
Liddy made AIG sound like an orphan begging in a soup
line, hungry and sick from being left out in someone else's financial
weather. He conveniently forgot to mention that AIG had spent more than a
decade systematically scheming to evade U.S. and international regulators,
or that one of the causes of its "pneumonia" was making colossal,
world-sinking $500 billion bets with money it didn't have, in a toxic and
completely unregulated derivatives market.
Nor did anyone mention that when AIG finally got up
from its seat at the Wall Street casino, broke and busted in the afterdawn
light, it owed money all over town — and that a huge chunk of your taxpayer
dollars in this particular bailout scam will be going to pay off the other
high rollers at its table. Or that this was a casino unique among all
casinos, one where middle-class taxpayers cover the bets of billionaires.
People are pissed off about this financial crisis, and
about this bailout, but they're not pissed off enough. The reality is that
the worldwide economic meltdown and the bailout that followed were together
a kind of revolution, a coup d'état. They cemented and formalized a
political trend that has been snowballing for decades: the gradual takeover
of the government by a small class of connected insiders, who used money to
control elections, buy influence and systematically weaken financial
regulations.
The crisis was the coup de grâce: Given virtually free
rein over the economy, these same insiders first wrecked the financial
world, then cunningly granted themselves nearly unlimited emergency powers
to clean up their own mess. And so the gambling-addict leaders of companies
like AIG end up not penniless and in jail, but with an Alien-style
death grip on the Treasury and the Federal Reserve — "our partners in the
government," as Liddy put it with a shockingly casual matter-of-factness
after the most recent bailout.
The mistake most people make in looking at the
financial crisis is thinking of it in terms of money,
a habit that might lead you to look at the unfolding mess as a huge
bonus-killing downer for the Wall Street class. But if you look at it in
purely Machiavellian terms, what you see is a colossal power grab that
threatens to turn the federal government into a kind of giant Enron — a
huge, impenetrable black box filled with self-dealing insiders whose scheme
is the securing of individual profits at the expense of an ocean of
unwitting involuntary shareholders, previously known as taxpayers.
I. PATIENT ZERO
The best way to
understand the financial crisis is to understand the meltdown at AIG. AIG is
what happens when short, bald managers of otherwise boring financial
bureaucracies start seeing Brad Pitt in the mirror. This is a company that
built a giant fortune across more than a century by betting on
safety-conscious policyholders — people who wear seat belts and build houses
on high ground — and then blew it all in a year or two by turning their
entire balance sheet over to a guy who acted like making huge bets with
other people's money would make his dick bigger.
That guy — the Patient Zero of the global economic
meltdown — was one Joseph Cassano, the head of a tiny, 400-person unit
within the company called AIG Financial Products, or AIGFP. Cassano, a
pudgy, balding Brooklyn College grad with beady eyes and way too much
forehead, cut his teeth in the Eighties working for Mike Milken, the
granddaddy of modern Wall Street debt alchemists. Milken, who pioneered the
creative use of junk bonds, relied on messianic genius and a whole array of
insider schemes to evade detection while wreaking financial disaster.
Cassano, by contrast, was just a greedy little turd with a knack for
selective accounting who ran his scam right out in the open, thanks to
Washington 's deregulation of the Wall Street casino. "It's all about the
regulatory environment," says a government source involved with the AIG
bailout. "These guys look for holes in the system, for ways they can do
trades without government interference. Whatever is unregulated, all the
action is going to pile into that."
The mess Cassano created had its roots in an investment
boom fueled in part by a relatively new type of financial instrument called
a collateralized-debt obligation. A CDO is like a box full of diced-up
assets. They can be anything: mortgages, corporate loans, aircraft loans,
credit-card loans, even other CDOs. So as X mortgage holder pays his bill,
and Y corporate debtor pays his bill, and Z credit-card debtor pays his
bill, money flows into the box.
The key idea behind a CDO is that there will always be
at least some money in the box, regardless of how dicey the individual
assets inside it are. No matter how you look at a single unemployed ex-con
trying to pay the note on a six-bedroom house, he looks like a bad
investment. But dump his loan in a box with a smorgasbord of auto loans,
credit-card debt, corporate bonds and other crap, and you can be reasonably
sure that somebody is going to pay up. Say $100 is supposed to come
into the box every month. Even in an apocalypse, when $90 in payments might
default, you'll still get $10. What the inventors of the CDO did is divide
up the box into groups of investors and put that $10 into its own level, or
"tranche." They then convinced ratings agencies like Moody's and S&P to give
that top tranche the highest AAA rating — meaning it has close to zero
credit risk.
Suddenly, thanks to this financial seal of approval,
banks had a way to turn their shittiest mortgages and other financial waste
into investment-grade paper and sell them to institutional investors like
pensions and insurance companies, which were forced by regulators to keep
their portfolios as safe as possible. Because CDOs offered higher rates of
return than truly safe products like Treasury bills, it was a win-win: Banks
made a fortune selling CDOs, and big investors made much more holding them.
The problem was, none of this was based on reality.
"The banks knew they were selling crap," says a London-based trader from one
of the bailed-out companies. To get AAA ratings, the CDOs relied not on
their actual underlying assets but on crazy mathematical formulas that the
banks cooked up to make the investments look safer than they really were.
"They had some back room somewhere where a bunch of Indian guys who'd been
doing nothing but math for God knows how many years would come up with some
kind of model saying that this or that combination of debtors would only
default once every 10,000 years," says one young trader who sold CDOs for a
major investment bank. "It was nuts."
Now that even the crappiest mortgages could be sold to
conservative investors, the CDOs spurred a massive explosion of
irresponsible and predatory lending. In fact, there was such a crush to
underwrite CDOs that it became hard to find enough subprime mortgages —
read: enough unemployed meth dealers willing to buy million-dollar homes for
no money down — to fill them all. As banks and investors of all kinds took
on more and more in CDOs and similar instruments, they needed some way to
hedge their massive bets — some kind of insurance policy, in case the
housing bubble burst and all that debt went south at the same time. This was
particularly true for investment banks, many of which got stuck holding or
"warehousing" CDOs when they wrote more than they could sell. And that's
were Joe Cassano came in.
Known for his boldness and arrogance, Cassano took over
as chief of AIGFP in 2001. He was the favorite of Maurice "Hank" Greenberg,
the head of AIG, who admired the younger man's hard-driving ways, even if
neither he nor his successors fully understood exactly what it was that
Cassano did. According to a source familiar with AIG's internal operations,
Cassano basically told senior management, "You know insurance, I know
investments, so you do what you do, and I'll do what I do — leave me alone."
Given a free hand within the company, Cassano set out from his offices in
London to sell a lucrative form of "insurance" to all those investors
holding lots of CDOs. His tool of choice was another new financial
instrument known as a credit-default swap, or CDS.
The CDS was popularized by J.P. Morgan, in particular
by a group of young, creative bankers who would later become known as the
"Morgan Mafia," as many of them would go on to assume influential positions
in the finance world. In 1994, in between booze and games of tennis at a
resort in Boca Raton, Florida, the Morgan gang plotted a way to help boost
the bank's returns. One of their goals was to find a way to lend more money,
while working around regulations that required them to keep a set amount of
cash in reserve to back those loans. What they came up with was an early
version of the credit-default swap.
In its simplest form, a CDS is just a bet on an
outcome. Say Bank A writes a million-dollar mortgage to the Pope for a town
house in the West Village. Bank A wants to hedge its mortgage risk in case
the Pope can't make his monthly payments, so it buys CDS protection from
Bank B, wherein it agrees to pay Bank B a premium of $1,000 a month for five
years. In return, Bank B agrees to pay Bank A the full million-dollar value
of the Pope's mortgage if he defaults. In theory, Bank A is covered if the
Pope goes on a meth binge and loses his job.
When Morgan presented their plans for credit swaps to
regulators in the late Nineties, they argued that if they bought CDS
protection for enough of the investments in their portfolio, they had
effectively moved the risk off their books. Therefore, they argued, they
should be allowed to lend more, without keeping more cash in reserve. A
whole host of regulators — from the Federal Reserve to the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency — accepted the argument, and Morgan was allowed
to put more money on the street.
What Cassano did was to transform the credit swaps that
Morgan popularized into the world's largest bet on the housing boom. In
theory, at least, there's nothing wrong with buying a CDS to insure your
investments. Investors paid a premium to AIGFP, and in return the company
promised to pick up the tab if the mortgage-backed CDOs went bust. But as
Cassano went on a selling spree, the deals he made differed from traditional
insurance in several significant ways. First, the party selling CDS
protection didn't have to post any money upfront. When a $100 corporate bond
is sold, for example, someone has to show 100 actual dollars. But when you
sell a $100 CDS guarantee, you don't have to show a dime. So Cassano could
sell investment banks billions in guarantees without having any single asset
to back it up.
Secondly, Cassano was selling so-called "naked" CDS
deals. In a "naked" CDS, neither party actually holds the underlying loan.
In other words, Bank B not only sells CDS protection to Bank A for its
mortgage on the Pope — it turns around and sells protection to Bank C for
the very same mortgage. This could go on ad nauseam: You could have Banks D
through Z also betting on Bank A's mortgage. Unlike traditional insurance,
Cassano was offering investors an opportunity to bet that someone else's
house would burn down, or take out a term life policy on the guy with AIDS
down the street. It was no different from gambling, the Wall Street version
of a bunch of frat brothers betting on Jay Feely to make a field goal.
Cassano was taking book for every bank that bet short on the housing market,
but he didn't have the cash to pay off if the kick went wide.
In a span of only seven years, Cassano sold some $500
billion worth of CDS protection, with at least $64 billion of that tied to
the subprime mortgage market. AIG didn't have even a fraction of that amount
of cash on hand to cover its bets, but neither did it expect it would ever
need any reserves. So long as defaults on the underlying securities remained
a highly unlikely proposition, AIG was essentially collecting huge and
steadily climbing premiums by selling insurance for the disaster it thought
would never come.
Initially, at least, the revenues were enormous:
AIGFP's returns went from $737 million in 1999 to $3.2 billion in 2005. Over
the past seven years, the subsidiary's 400 employees were paid a total of
$3.5 billion; Cassano himself pocketed at least $280 million in
compensation. Everyone made their money — and then it all went to shit.
II. THE REGULATORS
Cassano's
outrageous gamble wouldn't have been possible had he not had the good
fortune to take over AIGFP just as Sen. Phil Gramm — a grinning,
laissez-faire ideologue from Texas — had finished engineering the most
dramatic deregulation of the financial industry since Emperor Hien Tsung
invented paper money in 806 A.D. For years, Washington had kept a watchful
eye on the nation's banks. Ever since the Great Depression, commercial banks
— those that kept money on deposit for individuals and businesses — had not
been allowed to double as investment banks, which raise money by issuing and
selling securities. The Glass-Steagall Act, passed during the Depression,
also prevented banks of any kind from getting into the insurance business.
But in the late Nineties, a few years before Cassano
took over AIGFP, all that changed. The Democrats, tired of getting
slaughtered in the fundraising arena by Republicans, decided to throw off
their old reliance on unions and interest groups and become more
"business-friendly." Wall Street responded by flooding Washington with
money, buying allies in both parties. In the 10-year period beginning in
1998, financial companies spent $1.7 billion on federal campaign
contributions and another $3.4 billion on lobbyists. They quickly got what
they paid for. In 1999, Gramm co-sponsored a bill that repealed key aspects
of the Glass-Steagall Act, smoothing the way for the creation of financial
megafirms like Citigroup. The move did away with the built-in protections
afforded by smaller banks. In the old days, a local banker knew the people
whose loans were on his balance sheet: He wasn't going to give a
million-dollar mortgage to a homeless meth addict, since he would have to
keep that loan on his books. But a giant merged bank might write that loan
and then sell it off to some fool in China, and who cared?
The very next year, Gramm compounded the problem by
writing a sweeping new law called the Commodity Futures Modernization Act
that made it impossible to regulate credit swaps as either gambling or
securities. Commercial banks — which, thanks to Gramm, were now competing
directly with investment banks for customers — were driven to buy credit
swaps to loosen capital in search of higher yields. "By ruling that
credit-default swaps were not gaming and not a security, the way was cleared
for the growth of the market," said Eric Dinallo, head of the New York State
Insurance Department.
The blanket exemption meant that Joe Cassano could now
sell as many CDS contracts as he wanted, building up as huge a position as
he wanted, without anyone in government saying a word. "You have to
remember, investment banks aren't in the business of making huge directional
bets," says the government source involved in the AIG bailout. When
investment banks write CDS deals, they hedge them. But insurance companies
don't have to hedge. And that's what AIG did. "They just bet massively long
on the housing market," says the source. "Billions and billions."
In the biggest joke of all, Cassano's wheeling and
dealing was regulated by the Office of Thrift Supervision, an agency that
would prove to be defiantly uninterested in keeping watch over his
operations. How a behemoth like AIG came to be regulated by the little-known
and relatively small OTS is yet another triumph of the deregulatory
instinct. Under another law passed in 1999, certain kinds of holding
companies could choose the OTS as their regulator, provided they owned one
or more thrifts (better known as savings-and-loans). Because the OTS was
viewed as more compliant than the Fed or the Securities and Exchange
Commission, companies rushed to reclassify themselves as thrifts. In 1999,
AIG purchased a thrift in Delaware and managed to get approval for OTS
regulation of its entire operation.
Making matters even more hilarious, AIGFP — a
London-based subsidiary of an American insurance company — ought to have
been regulated by one of Europe's more stringent regulators, like Britain 's
Financial Services Authority. But the OTS managed to convince the Europeans
that it had the muscle to regulate these giant companies. By 2007, the EU
had conferred legitimacy to OTS supervision of three mammoth firms — GE, AIG
and Ameriprise.
That same year, as the subprime crisis was exploding,
the Government Accountability Office criticized the OTS, noting a "disparity
between the size of the agency and the diverse firms it oversees." Among
other things, the GAO report noted that the entire OTS had only one
insurance specialist on staff — and this despite the fact that it was the
primary regulator for the world's largest insurer!
"There's this notion that the regulators couldn't do
anything to stop AIG," says a government official who was present during the
bailout. "That's bullshit. What you have to understand is that these
regulators have ultimate power. They can send you a letter and say, 'You
don't exist anymore,' and that's basically that. They don't even really need
due process. The OTS could have said, 'We're going to pull your charter;
we're going to pull your license; we're going to sue you.' And getting sued
by your primary regulator is the kiss of death."
When AIG finally blew up, the OTS regulator ostensibly
in charge of overseeing the insurance giant — a guy named C.K. Lee —
basically admitted that he had blown it. His mistake, Lee said, was that he
believed all those credit swaps in Cassano's portfolio were "fairly benign
products." Why? Because the company told him so. "The judgment the company
was making was that there was no big credit risk," he explained. (Lee now
works as Midwest region director of the OTS; the agency declined to make him
available for an interview.)
In early March, after the latest bailout of AIG,
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner took what seemed to be a thinly veiled
shot at the OTS, calling AIG a "huge, complex global insurance company
attached to a very complicated investment bank/hedge fund that was allowed
to build up without any adult supervision." But even without that "adult
supervision," AIG might have been OK had it not been for a complete lack of
internal controls. For six months before its meltdown, according to
insiders, the company had been searching for a full-time chief financial
officer and a chief risk-assessment officer, but never got around to hiring
either. That meant that the 18th-largest company in the world had no one
checking to make sure its balance sheet was safe and no one keeping track of
how much cash and assets the firm had on hand. The situation was so bad that
when outside consultants were called in a few weeks before the bailout,
senior executives were unable to answer even the most basic questions about
their company — like, for instance, how much exposure the firm had to the
residential-mortgage market.
III. THE CRASH
Ironically, when
reality finally caught up to Cassano, it wasn't because the housing market
crapped but because of AIG itself. Before 2005, the company's debt was rated
triple-A, meaning he didn't need to post much cash to sell CDS protection:
The solid creditworthiness of AIG's name was guarantee enough. But the
company's crummy accounting practices eventually caused its credit rating to
be downgraded, triggering clauses in the CDS contracts that forced Cassano
to post substantially more collateral to back his deals.
By the fall of 2007, it was evident that AIGFP's
portfolio had turned poisonous, but like every good Wall Street huckster,
Cassano schemed to keep his insane, Earth-swallowing gamble hidden from
public view. That August, balls bulging, he announced to investors on a
conference call that "it is hard for us, without being flippant, to even see
a scenario within any kind of realm of reason that would see us losing $1 in
any of those transactions." As he spoke, his CDS portfolio was racking up
$352 million in losses.
When the growing credit crunch prompted senior AIG
executives to re-examine its liabilities, a company accountant named Joseph
St. Denis became "gravely concerned" about the CDS deals and their potential
for mass destruction. Cassano responded by personally forcing the poor sap
out of the firm, telling him he was "deliberately excluded" from the
financial review for fear that he might "pollute the process."
The following February, when AIG posted $11.5 billion
in annual losses, it announced the resignation of Cassano as head of AIGFP,
saying an auditor had found a "material weakness" in the CDS portfolio. But
amazingly, the company not only allowed Cassano to keep $34 million in
bonuses, it kept him on as a consultant for $1 million a month. In fact,
Cassano remained on the payroll and kept collecting his monthly million
through the end of September 2008, even after taxpayers had been forced to
hand AIG $85 billion to patch up his fuck-ups. When asked in October why the
company still retained Cassano at his $1 million-a-month rate despite his
role in the probable downfall of Western civilization, CEO Martin Sullivan
told Congress with a straight face that AIG wanted to "retain the 20-year
knowledge that Mr. Cassano had." (Cassano, who is apparently hiding out in
his lavish town house near Harrods in London, could not be reached for
comment.)
What sank AIG in the end was another credit downgrade.
Cassano had written so many CDS deals that when the company was facing
another downgrade to its credit rating last September, from AA to A, it
needed to post billions in collateral — not only more cash than it had on
its balance sheet but more cash than it could raise even if it sold off
every single one of its liquid assets. Even so, management dithered for
days, not believing the company was in serious trouble. AIG was a dried-up
prune, sapped of any real value, and its top executives didn't even know it.
On the weekend of September 13th, AIG's senior leaders
were summoned to the offices of the New York Federal Reserve. Regulators
from Dinallo's insurance office were there, as was Geithner, then chief of
the New York Fed. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson, who spent most of the
weekend preoccupied with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, came in and out.
Also present, for reasons that would emerge later, was Lloyd Blankfein, CEO
of Goldman Sachs. The only relevant government office that wasn't
represented was the regulator that should have been there all along: the
OTS.
"We sat down with Paulson, Geithner and Dinallo," says
a person present at the negotiations. "I didn't see the OTS even once."
On September 14th, according to another person present,
Treasury officials presented Blankfein and other bankers in attendance with
an absurd proposal: "They basically asked them to spend a day and check to
see if they could raise the money privately." The laughably short time span
to complete the mammoth task made the answer a foregone conclusion. At the
end of the day, the bankers came back and told the government officials,
gee, we checked, but we can't raise that much. And the bailout was on.
A short time later, it came out that AIG was planning
to pay some $90 million in deferred compensation to former executives, and
to accelerate the payout of $277 million in bonuses to others — a move the
company insisted was necessary to "retain key employees." When Congress
balked, AIG canceled the $90 million in payments.
Then, in January 2009, the company did it again. After
all those years letting Cassano run wild, and after already getting caught
paying out insane bonuses while on the public till, AIG decided to pay out
another $450 million in bonuses. And to whom? To the 400 or so employees in
Cassano's old unit, AIGFP, which is due to go out of business shortly! Yes,
that's right, an average of $1.1 million in taxpayer-backed money apiece, to
the very people who spent the past decade or so punching a hole in the
fabric of the universe!
"We, uh, needed to keep these highly expert
people in their seats," AIG spokeswoman Christina Pretto says to me in early
February.
"But didn't these 'highly expert people' basically
destroy your company?" I ask.
Pretto protests, says this isn't fair. The employees at
AIGFP have already taken pay cuts, she says. Not retaining them would dilute
the value of the company even further, make it harder to wrap up the unit's
operations in an orderly fashion.
The bonuses are a nice comic touch highlighting one of
the more outrageous tangents of the bailout age, namely the fact that, even
with the planet in flames, some members of the Wall Street class can't even
get used to the tragedy of having to fly coach. "These people need their
trips to Baja, their spa treatments, their hand jobs," says an official
involved in the AIG bailout, a serious look on his face, apparently not even
half-kidding. "They don't function well without them."
IV. THE POWER GRAB
So that's the first step in wall
street's power grab: making up things like credit-default swaps and
collateralized-debt obligations, financial products so complex and
inscrutable that ordinary American dumb people — to say nothing of federal
regulators and even the CEOs of major corporations like AIG — are too
intimidated to even try to understand them. That, combined with wise
political investments, enabled the nation's top bankers to effectively scrap
any meaningful oversight of the financial industry. In 1997 and 1998, the
years leading up to the passage of Phil Gramm's fateful act that gutted
Glass-Steagall, the banking, brokerage and insurance industries spent $350
million on political contributions and lobbying. Gramm alone — then the
chairman of the Senate Banking Committee — collected $2.6 million in only
five years. The law passed 90-8 in the Senate, with the support of 38
Democrats, including some names that might surprise you: Joe Biden, John
Kerry, Tom Daschle, Dick Durbin, even John Edwards.
The act helped create the too-big-to-fail financial
behemoths like Citigroup, AIG and Bank of America — and in turn helped those
companies slowly crush their smaller competitors, leaving the major Wall
Street firms with even more money and power to lobby for further
deregulatory measures. "We're moving to an oligopolistic situation," Kenneth
Guenther, a top executive with the Independent Community Bankers of America,
lamented after the Gramm measure was passed.
The situation worsened in 2004, in an extraordinary
move toward deregulation that never even got to a vote. At the time, the
European Union was threatening to more strictly regulate the foreign
operations of America 's big investment banks if the U.S. didn't strengthen
its own oversight. So the top five investment banks got together on April
28th of that year and — with the helpful assistance of then-Goldman Sachs
chief and future Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson — made a pitch to George
Bush's SEC chief at the time, William Donaldson, himself a former investment
banker. The banks generously volunteered to submit to new rules restricting
them from engaging in excessively risky activity. In exchange, they asked to
be released from any lending restrictions. The discussion about the new
rules lasted just 55 minutes, and there was not a single representative of a
major media outlet there to record the fateful decision.
Donaldson OK'd the proposal, and the new rules were
enough to get the EU to drop its threat to regulate the five firms. The only
catch was, neither Donaldson nor his successor, Christopher Cox, actually
did any regulating of the banks. They named a commission of seven people to
oversee the five companies, whose combined assets came to total more than $4
trillion. But in the last year and a half of Cox's tenure, the group had no
director and did not complete a single inspection. Great deal for the banks,
which originally complained about being regulated by both Europe and the
SEC, and ended up being regulated by no one.
Once the capital requirements were gone, those top five
banks went hog-wild, jumping ass-first into the then-raging housing bubble.
One of those was Bear Stearns, which used its freedom to drown itself in bad
mortgage loans. In the short period between the 2004 change and Bear's
collapse, the firm's debt-to-equity ratio soared from 12-1 to an insane
33-1. Another culprit was Goldman Sachs, which also had the good fortune,
around then, to see its CEO, a bald-headed Frankensteinian goon named Hank
Paulson (who received an estimated $200 million tax deferral by joining the
government), ascend to Treasury secretary.
Freed from all capital restraints, sitting pretty with
its man running the Treasury, Goldman jumped into the housing craze just
like everyone else on Wall Street. Although it famously scored an $11
billion coup in 2007 when one of its trading units smartly shorted the
housing market, the move didn't tell the whole story. In truth, Goldman
still had a huge exposure come that fateful summer of 2008 — to none other
than Joe Cassano.
Goldman Sachs, it turns out, was Cassano's biggest
customer, with $20 billion of exposure in Cassano's CDS book. Which might
explain why Goldman chief Lloyd Blankfein was in the room with ex-Goldmanite
Hank Paulson that weekend of September 13th, when the federal government was
supposedly bailing out AIG.
When asked why Blankfein was there, one of the
government officials who was in the meeting shrugs. "One might say that it's
because Goldman had so much exposure to AIGFP's portfolio," he says. "You'll
never prove that, but one might suppose."
Market analyst Eric Salzman is more blunt. "If AIG went
down," he says, "there was a good chance Goldman would not be able to
collect." The AIG bailout, in effect, was Goldman bailing out Goldman.
Eventually, Paulson went a step further, elevating
another ex-Goldmanite named Edward Liddy to run AIG — a company whose
bailout money would be coming, in part, from the newly created TARP program,
administered by another Goldman banker named Neel Kashkari.
V. REPO MEN
There are plenty
of people who have noticed, in recent years, that when they lost their homes
to foreclosure or were forced into bankruptcy because of crippling
credit-card debt, no one in the government was there to rescue them. But
when Goldman Sachs — a company whose average employee still made more than
$350,000 last year, even in the midst of a depression — was suddenly faced
with the possibility of losing money on the unregulated insurance deals it
bought for its insane housing bets, the government was there in an instant
to patch the hole. That's the essence of the bailout: rich bankers bailing
out rich bankers, using the taxpayers' credit card.
The people who have spent their lives cloistered in
this Wall Street community aren't much for sharing information with the
great unwashed. Because all of this shit is complicated, because most of us
mortals don't know what the hell LIBOR is or how a REIT works or how to use
the word "zero coupon bond" in a sentence without sounding stupid — well,
then, the people who do speak this idiotic language cannot under any
circumstances be bothered to explain it to us and instead spend a lot of
time rolling their eyes and asking us to trust them.
That roll of the eyes is a key part of the psychology
of Paulsonism. The state is now being asked not just to call off its
regulators or give tax breaks or funnel a few contracts to connected
companies; it is intervening directly in the economy, for the sole purpose
of preserving the influence of the megafirms. In essence, Paulson used the
bailout to transform the government into a giant bureaucracy of entitled
assholedom, one that would socialize "toxic" risks but keep both the profits
and the management of the bailed-out firms in private hands. Moreover, this
whole process would be done in secret, away from the prying eyes of NASCAR
dads, broke-ass liberals who read translations of French novels, subprime
mortgage holders and other such financial losers.
Some aspects of the bailout were secretive to the point
of absurdity. In fact, if you look closely at just a few lines in the
Federal Reserve's weekly public disclosures, you can literally see the
moment where a big chunk of your money disappeared for good. The H4 report
(called "Factors Affecting Reserve Balances") summarizes the activities of
the Fed each week. You can find it online, and it's pretty much the only
thing the Fed ever tells the world about what it does. For the week ending
February 18th, the number under the heading "Repurchase Agreements" on the
table is zero. It's a significant number.
Why? In the pre-crisis days, the Fed used to manage the
money supply by periodically buying and selling securities on the open
market through so-called Repurchase Agreements, or Repos. The Fed would
typically dump $25 billion or so in cash onto the market every week, buying
up Treasury bills, U.S. securities and even mortgage-backed securities from
institutions like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan, who would then "repurchase"
them in a short period of time, usually one to seven days. This was the
Fed's primary mechanism for controlling interest rates: Buying up securities
gives banks more money to lend, which makes interest rates go down. Selling
the securities back to the banks reduces the money available for lending,
which makes interest rates go up.
If you look at the weekly H4 reports going back to the
summer of 2007, you start to notice something alarming. At the start of the
credit crunch, around August of that year, you see the Fed buying a few more
Repos than usual — $33 billion or so. By November, as private-bank reserves
were dwindling to alarmingly low levels, the Fed started injecting even more
cash than usual into the economy: $48 billion. By late December, the number
was up to $58 billion; by the following March, around the time of the Bear
Stearns rescue, the Repo number had jumped to $77 billion. In the week of
May 1st, 2008, the number was $115 billion — "out of control now," according
to one congressional aide. For the rest of 2008, the numbers remained
similarly in the stratosphere, the Fed pumping as much as $125 billion of
these short-term loans into the economy — until suddenly, at the start of
this year, the number drops to nothing. Zero.
The reason the number has dropped to nothing is that
the Fed had simply stopped using relatively transparent devices like
repurchase agreements to pump its money into the hands of private companies.
By early 2009, a whole series of new government operations had been invented
to inject cash into the economy, most all of them completely secretive and
with names you've never heard of. There is the Term Auction Facility, the
Term Securities Lending Facility, the Primary Dealer Credit Facility, the
Commercial Paper Funding Facility and a monster called the Asset-Backed
Commercial Paper Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility (boasting the
chat-room horror-show acronym ABCPMMMFLF). For good measure, there's also
something called a Money Market Investor Funding Facility, plus three
facilities called Maiden Lane I, II and III to aid bailout recipients like
Bear Stearns and AIG.
While the rest of America, and most of Congress, have
been bugging out about the $700 billion bailout program called TARP, all of
these newly created organisms in the Federal Reserve zoo have quietly been
pumping not billions but trillions of dollars into the hands of private
companies (at least $3 trillion so far in loans, with as much as $5.7
trillion more in guarantees of private investments). Although this
technically isn't taxpayer money, it still affects taxpayers directly,
because the activities of the Fed impact the economy as a whole. And this
new, secretive activity by the Fed completely eclipses the TARP program in
terms of its influence on the economy.
No one knows who's getting that money or exactly how
much of it is disappearing through these new holes in the hull of America 's
credit rating. Moreover, no one can really be sure if these new institutions
are even temporary at all — or whether they are being set up as permanent,
state-aided crutches to Wall Street, designed to systematically suck bad
investments off the ledgers of irresponsible lenders.
"They're supposed to be temporary," says Paul-Martin
Foss, an aide to Rep. Ron Paul. "But we keep getting notices every six
months or so that they're being renewed. They just sort of quietly announce
it."
None other than disgraced senator Ted Stevens was the
poor sap who made the unpleasant discovery that if Congress didn't like the
Fed handing trillions of dollars to banks without any oversight, Congress
could apparently go fuck itself — or so said the law. When Stevens asked the
GAO about what authority Congress has to monitor the Fed, he got back a
letter citing an obscure statute that nobody had ever heard of before: the
Accounting and Auditing Act of 1950. The relevant section, 31 USC 714(b),
dictated that congressional audits of the Federal Reserve may not include
"deliberations, decisions and actions on monetary policy matters." The
exemption, as Foss notes, "basically includes everything." According to the
law, in other words, the Fed simply cannot be audited by Congress. Or by
anyone else, for that matter.
VI. WINNERS AND LOSERS
Stevens isn't
the only person in Congress to be given the finger by the Fed. In January,
when Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida asked Federal Reserve vice chairman Donald
Kohn where all the money went — only $1.2 trillion had vanished by then —
Kohn gave Grayson a classic eye roll, saying he would be "very hesitant" to
name names because it might discourage banks from taking the money.
"Has that ever happened?" Grayson asked. "Have people
ever said, 'We will not take your $100 billion because people will find out
about it?'"
"Well, we said we would not publish the names of the
borrowers, so we have no test of that," Kohn answered, visibly annoyed with
Grayson's meddling.
Grayson pressed on, demanding to know on what terms the
Fed was lending the money. Presumably it was buying assets and making loans,
but no one knew how it was pricing those assets — in other words, no one
knew what kind of deal it was striking on behalf of taxpayers. So when
Grayson asked if the purchased assets were "marked to market" — a
methodology that assigns a concrete value to assets, based on the market
rate on the day they are traded — Kohn answered, mysteriously, "The ones
that have market values are marked to market." The implication was that the
Fed was purchasing derivatives like credit swaps or other instruments that
were basically impossible to value objectively — paying real money for God
knows what.
"Well, how much of them don't have market values?"
asked Grayson. "How much of them are worthless?"
"None are worthless," Kohn snapped.
"Then why don't you mark them to market?" Grayson
demanded.
"Well," Kohn sighed, "we are marking the ones to market
that have market values."
In essence, the Fed was telling Congress to lay off and
let the experts handle things. "It's like buying a car in a used-car lot
without opening the hood, and saying, 'I think it's fine,'" says Dan Fuss,
an analyst with the investment firm Loomis Sayles. "The salesman says,
'Don't worry about it. Trust me.' It'll probably get us out of the lot, but
how much farther? None of us knows."
When one considers the comparatively extensive system
of congressional checks and balances that goes into the spending of every
dollar in the budget via the normal appropriations process, what's happening
in the Fed amounts to something truly revolutionary — a kind of shadow
government with a budget many times the size of the normal federal outlay,
administered dictatorially by one man, Fed chairman Ben Bernanke. "We spend
hours and hours and hours arguing over $10 million amendments on the floor
of the Senate, but there has been no discussion about who has been receiving
this $3 trillion," says Sen. Bernie Sanders. "It is beyond comprehension."
Count Sanders among those who don't buy the argument
that Wall Street firms shouldn't have to face being outed as recipients of
public funds, that making this information public might cause investors to
panic and dump their holdings in these firms. "I guess if we made that
public, they'd go on strike or something," he muses.
And the Fed isn't the only arm of the bailout that has
closed ranks. The Treasury, too, has maintained incredible secrecy
surrounding its implementation even of the TARP program, which was mandated
by Congress. To this date, no one knows exactly what criteria the Treasury
Department used to determine which banks received bailout funds and which
didn't — particularly the first $350 billion given out under Bush appointee
Hank Paulson.
The situation with the first TARP payments grew so
absurd that when the Congressional Oversight Panel, charged with monitoring
the bailout money, sent a query to Paulson asking how he decided whom to
give money to, Treasury responded — and this isn't a joke — by directing the
panel to a copy of the TARP application form on its website. Elizabeth
Warren, the chair of the Congressional Oversight Panel, was struck nearly
speechless by the response.
"Do you believe that?" she says incredulously. "That's
not what we had in mind."
Another member of Congress, who asked not to be named,
offers his own theory about the TARP process. "I think basically if you knew
Hank Paulson, you got the money," he says.
This cozy arrangement created yet another opportunity
for big banks to devour market share at the expense of smaller regional
lenders. While all the bigwigs at Citi and Goldman and Bank of America who
had Paulson on speed-dial got bailed out right away — remember that TARP was
originally passed because money had to be lent right now, that day, that
minute, to stave off emergency — many small banks are still waiting for
help. Five months into the TARP program, some not only haven't received any
funds, they haven't even gotten a call back about their applications.
"There's definitely a feeling among community bankers
that no one up there cares much if they make it or not," says Tanya
Wheeless, president of the Arizona Bankers Association.
Which, of course, is exactly the opposite of what
should be happening, since small, regional banks are far less guilty of the
kinds of predatory lending that sank the economy. "They're not giving out
subprime loans or easy credit," says Wheeless. "At the community level, it's
much more bread-and-butter banking."
Nonetheless, the lion's share of the bailout money has
gone to the larger, so-called "systemically important" banks. "It's like
Treasury is picking winners and losers," says one state banking official who
asked not to be identified.
This itself is a hugely important political
development. In essence, the bailout accelerated the decline of regional
community lenders by boosting the political power of their giant national
competitors.
Which, when you think about it, is insane: What had
brought us to the brink of collapse in the first place was this relentless
instinct for building ever-larger megacompanies, passing deregulatory
measures to gradually feed all the little fish in the sea to an
ever-shrinking pool of Bigger Fish. To fix this problem, the government
should have slowly liquidated these monster, too-big-to-fail firms and
broken them down to smaller, more manageable companies. Instead, federal
regulators closed ranks and used an almost completely secret bailout process
to double down on the same faulty, merger-happy thinking that got us here in
the first place, creating a constellation of megafirms under government
control that are even bigger, more unwieldy and more crammed to the gills
with systemic risk.
In essence, Paulson and his cronies turned the federal
government into one gigantic, half-opaque holding company, one whose balance
sheet includes the world's most appallingly large and risky hedge fund, a
controlling stake in a dying insurance giant, huge investments in a group of
teetering megabanks, and shares here and there in various auto-finance
companies, student loans, and other failing businesses. Like AIG, this new
federal holding company is a firm that has no mechanism for auditing itself
and is run by leaders who have very little grasp of the daily operations of
its disparate subsidiary operations.
In other words, it's AIG's rip-roaringly shitty
business model writ almost inconceivably massive — to echo Geithner, a huge,
complex global company attached to a very complicated investment bank/hedge
fund that's been allowed to build up without adult supervision. How much of
what kinds of crap is actually on our balance sheet, and what did we pay for
it? When exactly will the rent come due, when will the money run out? Does
anyone know what the hell is going on? And on the linear spectrum of
capitalism to socialism, where exactly are we now? Is there a dictionary
word that even describes what we are now? It would be funny, if it weren't
such a nightmare.
VII. YOU DON'T GET IT
The real
question from here is whether the Obama administration is going to move to
bring the financial system back to a place where sanity is restored and the
general public can have a say in things or whether the new financial
bureaucracy will remain obscure, secretive and hopelessly complex. It might
not bode well that Geithner, Obama's Treasury secretary, is one of the
architects of the Paulson bailouts; as chief of the New York Fed, he helped
orchestrate the Goldman-friendly AIG bailout and the secretive Maiden Lane
facilities used to funnel funds to the dying company. Neither did it look
good when Geithner — himself a protégé of notorious Goldman alum John Thain,
the Merrill Lynch chief who paid out billions in bonuses after the state
spent billions bailing out his firm — picked a former Goldman lobbyist named
Mark Patterson to be his top aide.
In fact, most of Geithner's early moves reek strongly
of Paulsonism. He has continually talked about partnering with private
investors to create a so-called "bad bank" that would systemically relieve
private lenders of bad assets — the kind of massive, opaque, quasi-private
bureaucratic nightmare that Paulson specialized in. Geithner even refloated
a Paulson proposal to use TALF, one of the Fed's new facilities, to
essentially lend cheap money to hedge funds to invest in troubled banks
while practically guaranteeing them enormous profits.
God knows exactly what this does for the taxpayer, but
hedge-fund managers sure love the idea. "This is exactly what the financial
system needs," said Andrew Feldstein, CEO of Blue Mountain Capital and one
of the Morgan Mafia. Strangely, there aren't many people who don't run hedge
funds who have expressed anything like that kind of enthusiasm for
Geithner's ideas.
As complex as all the finances are, the politics aren't
hard to follow. By creating an urgent crisis that can only be solved by
those fluent in a language too complex for ordinary people to understand,
the Wall Street crowd has turned the vast majority of Americans into
non-participants in their own political future. There is a reason it used to
be a crime in the Confederate states to teach a slave to read: Literacy is
power. In the age of the CDS and CDO, most of us are financial illiterates.
By making an already too-complex economy even more complex, Wall Street has
used the crisis to effect a historic, revolutionary change in our political
system — transforming a democracy into a two-tiered state, one with
plugged-in financial bureaucrats above and clueless customers below.
The most galling thing about this financial crisis is
that so many Wall Street types think they actually deserve not only their
huge bonuses and lavish lifestyles but the awesome political power their own
mistakes have left them in possession of. When challenged, they talk about
how hard they work, the 90-hour weeks, the stress, the failed marriages, the
haemorrhoids and gallstones they all get before they hit 40.
"But wait a minute," you say to them. "No one ever
asked you to stay up all night eight days a week trying to get filthy rich
shorting what's left of the American auto industry or selling $600 billion
in toxic, irredeemable mortgages to ex-strippers on work release and Taco
Bell clerks. Actually, come to think of it, why are we even giving taxpayer
money to you people? Why are we not throwing your ass in jail
instead?"
But before you even finish saying that, they're rolling
their eyes, because You Don't Get It. These people were never about anything
except turning money into money, in order to get more money; valueswise
they're on par with crack addicts, or obsessive sexual deviants who burgle
homes to steal panties. Yet these are the people in whose hands our entire
political future now rests.
Good luck with that, America. And enjoy tax season.
JACANA HOME PAGE
|
CLASSIC VIDEO CLIPS
|
JACANA GREAT LIVES SITE
|
JACANA MOVIE INFO PAGE
JACANA PHOTO LIBRARY |
OLD MAUN PHOTO GALLERY |
MAUN PHONE DIRECTORY
FREE FONTS |
PIC OF THE DAY
|
GENERAL LIBRARY |
MAP LIBRARY |
TECHNICAL LIBRARY
HOUSE PLANS LIBRARY
|
MAUN E-MAIL, WEBSITE & SKYPE LIST
|
BOTSWANA GPS CO-ORDINATES
JACANA ASTRONOMY SITE
|
MAUN SAFARI WEB LINKS |
FREE SOFTWARE |
JACANA WEATHER PAGE
JACANA CROSSWORD LIBRARY |
JACANA CARTOON PAGE |
DEMOTIVATIONAL POSTERS
              |
|