Late Night Post: Oddities
Posted: August 25, 2011 Filed under: open thread | Tags: Gadhafi loves Condi, Planet made of diamonds, Spilled Bull Seman causes havoc on Tennessee HIghway, weird news 2 CommentsHere’s a few kewl things I found today while reading things around the web.
The new planet is far denser than any other known so far and consists largely of carbon. Because it is so dense, scientists calculate the carbon must be crystalline, so a large part of this strange world will effectively be diamond.
“The evolutionary history and amazing density of the planet all suggest it is comprised of carbon — i.e. a massive diamond orbiting a neutron star every two hours in an orbit so tight it would fit inside our own Sun,” said Matthew Bailes of Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne.
Lying 4,000 light years away, or around an eighth of the way toward the center of the Milky Way from the Earth, the planet is probably the remnant of a once-massive star that has lost its outer layers to the so-called pulsar star it orbits.
Gadhafi has a thing for Condoleeza Rice
“Deeply bizarre and deeply creepy.”
That’s how the State Department is describing a surprising find inside the compound of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi: a photo album with pictures of Condoleezza Rice.
Rebel fighters who ransacked Gadhafi’s Bab al-Aziziya compound have been turning up some bizarre loot, including the Libyan leader’s eccentric fashion accessories and his daughter’s golden mermaid couch. The latest discovery is a photo album filled with page after page of pictures of Rice, the former secretary of state who visited Tripoli in 2008.
“I support my darling black African woman,” he said. “I admire and am very proud of the way she leans back and gives orders to the Arab leaders. … Leezza, Leezza, Leezza. … I love her very much. I admire her, and I’m proud of her, because she’s a black woman of African origin.”
Okay, this is my last entry and it’s really weird! A Bull semen spill caused a scare and closed highway a highway near Nashville Tennessee.
A spill of frozen bull semen bound for a breeder in the state of Texas triggered a scare on Tuesday that temporarily shut down a U.S. interstate highway during the morning rush hour.
The incident began when the driver of a Greyhound bus carrying the freight alerted the fire department he had lost a part of his load while negotiating the ramp on a highway near Nashville.
“We didn’t know what it was, but we were told (the canisters) were non-toxic,” said Maggie Lawrence, a fire department spokeswoman.
When firefighters arrived on the ramp, they saw “four small propane-sized canisters (that) began to emit a light vapor,” Lawrence said.
In addition to the vapor, the canisters also let off an unpleasant odor and the ramp was closed while emergency personnel tried to determine what was in the containers.
The bus driver turned around to retrieve the canisters. Once emergency personnel learned the smoking canisters were nothing hazardous and that they simply contained frozen bull semen that had been stored on dry ice, Tennessee Department of Transportation and fire department workers cleared the ramp.
So, this is an open thread!! Any weird things have happened to you today?
Finally, but is it for real?
Posted: August 25, 2011 Filed under: 2012 presidential campaign, Economy, unemployment, voodoo economics | Tags: bad economy, joblessness, lousy poll numbers, Obama 10 Comments
When Obama swept into office, there was an ongoing, left-over Bush program in place to rescue the financial system which focused on getting banks recapitalized through the Fed. Despite worsening unemployment and rising bankruptcies, a stimulus that was top heavy in worthless tax cuts was hurried to congress and a program–that was more of a plea to banks than an actual program–was pasted together to focus on refinancing underwater mortgage holders. The stimulus may have changed the momentum of GDP growth and the FED program definitely stabilized the banking system, but the programs for homeowners and the unemployed were less-than-successful. The President was itching to put something together on health care to prove that he could do something that hadn’t been achieved by the Clintons. It looks now like his primary economic advisers were warning him that just feeding tax breaks to choice businesses and and cheap loans to banks was not going to solve a major financial crisis. Obama’s focus never really appeared to be on things that mattered at the time. As a result, serious improvement in key areas of the economy never materialized.
It’s not a surprise to any of us around here that Obama’s handling of the US economy is souring voters. James Carville’s mantra–it’s the economy stupid–has never been more relevant to the vast majority of Americans who have been made worse off by the policies of the last ten years.
Americans’ views on the economy have dimmed this summer. But so far, the growing pessimism doesn’t seem to be taking a toll on President Barack Obama’s re-election prospects.
More people now believe the country is headed in the wrong direction, a new Associated Press-GfK poll shows, and confidence in Obama’s handling of the economy has slipped from just a few months ago, notably among fellow Democrats.
The survey found that 86 percent of adults see the economy as “poor,” up from 80 percent in June. About half — 49 percent — said it worsened just in the past month. Only 27 percent responded that way in the June survey.
That can’t be good news for a president revving up his re-election campaign.
There’s a good chance that GDP–now growing at a miserably slow rate–may go into negative territories shortly, forcing the NBER to date the
start of yet another recession when the recovery from this one has not really taken hold. There’s indications in the market that another crash could be on the horizon. After all, businesses can only wring so much profit out of restructuring debt to take advantage of cheap interest rates and cutting costs primarily by dumping workers. Here’s some really frightening news on reinsurance on banks which is also causing weird stuff in the CDS market. That’s the same damned market that messed up the economies of Europe and US the last time around which really needs some restructuring, standardization, and reform that has not been done despite Dodd-Frank and similar efforts on the other side of the pond. Bankers have fought new regulation and we’re likely to see the same problems revisit us in a different sector of the same market for the same kinds of vehicles.
Insurance on the debt of several major European banks has now hit historic levels, higher even than those recorded during financial crisis caused by the US financial group’s implosion nearly three years ago.
Credit default swaps on the bonds of Royal Bank of Scotland, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo, among others, flashed warning signals on Wednesday. Credit default swaps (CDS) on RBS were trading at 343.54 basis points, meaning the annual cost to insure £10m of the state-backed lender’s bonds against default is now £343,540.
The cost of insuring RBS bonds is now higher than before the taxpayer was forced to step in and rescue the bank in October 2008, and shows the recent dramatic downturn in sentiment among credit investors towards banks.
“The problem is a shortage of liquidity – that is what is causing the problems with the banks. It feels exactly as it felt in 2008,” said one senior London-based bank executive.
“I think we are heading for a market shock in September or October that will match anything we have ever seen before,” said a senior credit banker at a major European bank.
While Obama is on vacation, White House gnomes are pasting together two programs for the poll-beleaguered President to announce when Congress gets back into session. The first is a “jobs” package. The second is a plan for massive mortgage refinancing. This is something that should’ve been on the front burner years ago so now I’m actually wondering if it’s going to work in time to stymy the right wing nut jobs coming up through the Republican primary process or it’s actually going to be serious rather than some lame ass attempt at some neoReaganesque policy that will move farther right when Republicans start saying no to clearly Republican policy.
Here’s the “Contours of Obama jobs package” via Reuters.
The president is widely expected to repeat his calls for an extension of a payroll tax cut, push for patent reform and bilateral free trade deals, and suggest an infrastructure bank to upgrade the country’s roads, airports and other facilities.
Retrofitting schools with energy efficient technology would allow the government to directly hire for labor-intensive work and also give a boost to the clean energy sector that Obama has said could be an important U.S. economic motor.
Other measures being considered, according to economists who have advised the White House, include tax credits for firms hiring more workers, funds for local governments to hire teachers, and retraining help for the long-term unemployed. Steps to boost the ailing housing market are also under review.
“What’s going to be included in this plan are some reasonable ideas that could have a tangible impact on improving our economy and creating jobs … the kinds of things that Republicans should be able to support,” Earnest said. “These are bipartisan ideas that the president is going to offer up.”
Republicans have made it perfectly clear that their only priority is to make Obama a one term president. So, in yet another attempt at trying to look above the fray instead of fighting for what is right, we’re going to see another lukewarm policy that won’t have any immediate effect and will undoubtedly be pushed further to the right and further into the ineffective zone. Plus, it will probably just be offset by other spending cuts in key areas which are likely to have stronger recessionary multiplier effects attached than any positive multiplier effect of the new legislation. I still can’t figure out what the obsession is with tax cuts for new employees. The big cost of new employees is health insurance for one and you can avoid that cost by going any where in the developed and developing world BUT the US. Plus, no business is going to hire any one when the have no customers. I feel like a broke record on the number of repeats on that one. Having spent my life doing strategic planning and budgeting for corporations and having one of my PhD field areas in corporate finance, I can tell you that the US looks like one of those offshore tax havens right now for most major corporations. Also, more ‘free trade’ deals are likely to have just the opposite effect on unemployment anyway as prices tend to equilibriate in the countries involved and we’re the cheap capital market, not the cheap labor market part of that equation. (Hence, in our country, incomes to capital go up and incomes to labor go down as the market goes towards price parity for our country.)
So, the second program is no a way for the US to back mortgage refinancing. This is also something that should’ve been done years ago.
One proposal would allow millions of homeowners with government-backed mortgages to refinance them at today’s lower interest rates, about 4 percent, according to two people briefed on the administration’s discussions who asked not to be identified because they were not allowed to talk about the information.
A wave of refinancing could be a strong stimulus to the economy, because it would lower consumers’ mortgage bills right away and allow them to spend elsewhere. But such a sweeping change could face opposition from the regulator who oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and from investors in government-backed mortgage bonds.
Administration officials said on Wednesday that they were weighing a range of proposals, including changes to its previous refinancing programs to increase the number of homeowners taking part. They are also working on a home rental program that would try to shore up housing prices by preventing hundreds of thousands of foreclosed homes from flooding the market. That program is further along — the administration requested ideas for execution from the private sector earlier this month.
But refinancing could have far greater breadth, saving homeowners, by one estimate, $85 billion a year. Despite record low interest rates, many homeowners have been unable to refinance their loans either because they owe more than their houses are now worth or because their credit is tarnished.
I’ve already looked into refinancing my FHA/VA loan from 7% to 4%. I have good credit and my loan balance is about one half of what my house is worth–even with the recent decrease in home prices–because I’ve owned it for 11 years. I didn’t follow through because the points charged by Wells Fargo–who processes my mortgage at the moment–were ridiculous. They’d have to pick up the fees or points to intrigue me, frankly. The people with the worst problems are the ones that are now strategically defaulting because they are underwater. Interesting enough, I’m set to discuss just that topic this fall in the Denver FMA meetings using this Philadelphia FED working paper. Their findings suggest that people have the ability to pay these mortgages but they are defaulting anyway because they are underwater. The weird thing is they are defaulting on first mortgages while keeping their second liens current. This means they are ‘strategically’ defaulting to get rid of the house because it’s a stupid investment for them. Any plan that doesn’t deal directly with underwater mortgage holders specifically will not work. Banks really don’t have any incentive to work with them now because they get more fee income from processing defaults than they do from renegotiating the mortgage. The incentives on both sides of the market are totally warped at this point in time. Again, quoting from the NYT article, this isn’t in the plan.
A broader criticism of a refinancing expansion is that it would not do enough to address the two main drivers of foreclosures: homes worth less than their mortgages, and a sudden loss of income, like unemployment. American homeowners currently owe some $700 billion more than their homes are worth.
I don’t see how the issues in the housing market are going to be solved until you solve this problem. Dumping houses on the market is going to continually depress prices and cause this problem to regenerate.
So, this gets back to sort’ve my main point about both these big ideas. First, they are a little too little and way too late. The inside and outside lags on these kinds of fiscal policy measures are long and getting them through congress and into fruition is likely to lag-filled. We’re also likely to get a lecture and ransom demand from the austerity demons. So, is this a real effort or a symbolic effort? Second, the policy prescriptions are anemic. Neither of them focus on the real problems or the known solutions. So, again, is this a real effort or symbolic effort? Third, these aren’t very aggressive policies nor or they what you would call traditionally Democratic policies so who are they really aimed at? Again, it seems like a symbolic offering to voters. If you’re getting the impression that I’m not impressed at all with this, you’re right. I suppose this is all to make the confidence fairy come home to roost. It still seems to me that she’s on her honey moon with the high priest of voodoo economics. Imaginary beings are symbolic too.
Is Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein Facing Possible Prison Time?
Posted: August 24, 2011 Filed under: Corporate Crime, Crime, The Bonus Class, U.S. Economy, U.S. Politics | Tags: corporate crime, corruption, Goldman Sachs, Lloyd Blankfein, Naomi Prins, Reid Weingarten, Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations 4 CommentsThat’s the question Naomi Prins, a former managing director of Goldman Sachs and author of It Takes a Pillage: Behind the Bonuses, Bailouts, and Backroom Deals From Washington to Wall Street, asked yesterday at The Daily Beast.
I posted in a comment yesterday that I’d heard Blankfein hired a well-known Washington criminal defense attorney. Since then, the business media has been buzzing about why Blankfein hired attorney Reid Weingarten.
Big-shot Washington defense attorney Reid Weingarten, of the firm Steptoe & Johnson LLC, has represented former Enron chief accounting officer Richard Causey (who pleaded out), former Rite Aid vice chairman and chief counsel Franklin Brown (found guilty by a jury on 10 counts of conspiring to falsely inflate his company’s value), and former WorldCom CEO Bernie Ebbers (convicted on nine felony counts by a jury). All three are in jail. Two of them, Ebbers and Causey, had undergone congressional panel investigations beforehand. Another of Weingarten’s clients, former Tyco counsel Mark Belnick, was acquitted, though Tyco CEO Dennis Kozlowski, who was not represented by Weingarten, was convicted and remains in jail.
Prins speculates that Blankfein may be in trouble for two possible reasons. The first is because of his own “loose lips,” when he testified before the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in April.
Recall that Blankfein emphatically told the subcommittee, “We didn’t have a massive short against the housing market, and we certainly did not bet against our clients.” The 650-page subcommittee report (PDF) presented on April 13, 2011, which cites Blankfein 79 times, begs to differ.
The report accused Goldman of trading against its clients by simultaneously shorting certain subprime mortgage securities (a.k.a. “cats and dogs”) while stuffing them into the collateralized debt obligations it sold. It also suggested that Goldman executives, including Blankfein, misled Congress in testimony surrounding the Abacus CDO, Hudson, Timberwolf, and other deals, by saying it didn’t have a big short.
The second possibility is that Blankfein’s colleagues are distancing themselves from him in order to protect themselves and Goldman Sachs. Prins writes:
The top lesson I learned before leaving Goldman in the wake of Enron was Goldman’s foremost internal policy is to protect Goldman. It’s also to protect the most powerful members. When cracks manifest in the corporate armor, those two policies are at odds.
The executives running Goldman are exceedingly wealthy, not least because when the firm faced its darkest hour and lowest stock price in years during the bank-created crisis of fall 2008, the government provided it billions of dollars in the form of cheap loans, FDIC debt guarantees, TARP, AIG make-wholes, and a late-night moniker change from investment bank to bank holding company, giving the firm access to excessive Federal Reserve aid.
After the news came out that Blankfein had hired Weingarten, Goldman’s shares fell 6%, and according to Prins, that kind of thing is “frowned upon.” So Blankfein may be be trying to protect himself from being stabbed in the back by his co-workers in addition to fighting anything the Justice Department has planned for him.
I doubt if Obama and Geithner will let Blankfein go to prison, but it will be fun to watch him and the wealthy Goldman partners feeling a little bit of discomfort.
Two Reuters columnists speculated about this story today. Leigh Jones writes:
If you need to hire Reid Weingarten, your career has probably hit a rough patch.
The rule now applies to Goldman Sachs (GS.N) CEO Lloyd Blankfein, who Reuters reported on Monday has retained Weingarten, a partner at Steptoe & Johnson in Washington.
With that move, Blankfein becomes the latest in a long line of executives and high-profile people in trouble who have turned to Weingarten for help. They range from Tyco (TYC.N) corporate counsel Mark Belnick, for whom Weingarten won an acquittal, to ex-Enron accounting officer Richard Causey, who pleaded guilty to fraud and conspiracy, to film director Roman Polanski, who tapped Weingarten to fight extradition to the Unites States for sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 1977.
Jones spends most of the piece providing background on Weingarten, but he also points out that Blankfein’s choice of attorney is telling, and like Prins he notes the market reaction:
Blankfein’s choice of Weingarten as his lawyer has raised questions about what kind of trouble the Goldman Sachs CEO might be in. The DOJ, where Weingarten once worked, is investigating the bank for mortgage-related investments it made.
While it is not unusual for company leaders to arm themselves with their own lawyers, Weingarten’s reputation as a litigator — as opposed to a lawyer who guides clients through investigations — is making Goldman investors nervous. The day that Blankfein’s hiring of Weingarten broke, the bank’s stock dropped nearly 5 percent to its lowest level since March 2009. By late Wednesday afternoon, the shares were at $109.92, up 3.2 percent from Monday’s close at $106.51.
Alison Frankel is more sanguine, arguing that Blankfein hiring an outside attorney is really no big deal.
The market assumed the worst on Monday after Reuters’ great scoop on Goldman Sachs (GS.N) CEO Lloyd Blankfein bringing in Reid Weingarten of Steptoe & Johnson to represent him in the Justice Department’s investigation of the bank. Goldman’s share price fell almost 5 percent on the fear that Weingarten’s entrance signals that DOJ is getting serious about its follow-up to the April 2011 Senate subcommittee report on the financial crisis.
In one sense, that’s reading way too much into the mere fact that Blankfein has brought in his own lawyer. It’s standard operating procedure for corporate executives at companies under investigation to have separate counsel. Consider the example of other alleged villains of the financial meltdown. Richard Fuld of Lehman (LEHKQ.PK), Joseph Cassano of AIG (AIG.N), Angelo Mozilo and David Sambol of Countrywide, John Thain of Merrill Lynch, Kenneth Lewis of Bank of America (BAC.N): They all have their own lawyers, and none of them have faced any criminal charges. Only Mozilo and Sambol even had to answer to the SEC.
She provides a number of examples of other executives doing just that. But…
Nevertheless, Blankfein’s choice of Weingarten is very intriguing. Weingarten is a great lawyer with close ties to the Justice Department, where he once worked in the Public Integrity section, and to Attorney General Eric Holder, whom he actually represented when Congress grilled Holder about President Bill Clinton’s eleven-hour pardon of financier Marc Rich. Weingarten is not, however, part of the club of white-collar defense counsel who typically get referrals from New York firms like S&C. (That group includes Andrew Levander of Dechert; Mary Jo White of Debevoise & Plimpton; Patricia Hynes of Allen & Overy; and Gary Naftalis of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel, all of whom represent high-profile Wall Streeters in financial crisis cases.)
One white-collar defense lawyer who gets referrals from Wall Street firms told me it could be significant that Blankfein went outside the usual circle, turning to a lawyer best known for his trial work. “For many people, the choice of Reid Weingarten would be unusual to represent someone in a simple interview,” he said. “He’s often retained when an investigation is going to lead to a case that would go to trial.”
Hmmmm…. Okay, I’ll believe it when I see it, but I can dream, can’t I?









Recent Comments