Archives: January 2011

11% of Homes in US Sit Empty – CNBC

I usually find the quarterly homeowner vacancy and homeownership report from Census pretty lackluster, but the latest one released this morning was anything but.

America’s home ownership rate, after holding steady for a while, took a pretty big plunge in Q4, from 66.9 percent to 66.5 percent. That’s down from the 2004 peak of 69.2 percent and the lowest level since 1998.

Homeownership is falling at an alarming pace, despite the fact that home prices have fallen, affordability is much improved and inventories of new and existing homes are still running quite high.

Bargains abound, but few are interested or eligible to take advantage.

More concerning than the home ownership rate is the vacancy rate. The Census tables don’t tell the entire story, but they tell a lot of it. Of the nearly 131 million housing units in this country, 112.5 million are occupied. 74.8 million are owned, and that’s only dropped by about 30 thousand in the past year. 38 million are rented, but that’s up by over a million year over year. That means more new households are choosing to rent.

Now to vacancies. There were 18.4 million vacant homes in the U.S. in Q4 ’10 (11 percent of all housing units vacant all year round), which is actually an improvement of 427,000 from a year ago, but not for the reasons you’d think.

The number of vacant homes for rent fell by 493 thousand, as rental demand rose. 471,000 homes are listed as “Held off Market” about half for temporary use, but the other half are likely foreclosures. And no, the shadow inventory isn’t just 200,000, it’s far higher than that.

So think about it. Eleven percent of the houses in America are empty. This as builders start to get more bullish, and renting apartments becomes ever more popular. Vacancies in the apartment sector have been falling steadily and dramatically, why? Because we’re still recovering emotionally from the toll of the housing crash.

Younger Americans have seen what home ownership has done to their friends and families, and many want no part of it. Credit has become very nearly elitist. Home prices, whatever your particular data provider preference might be, are still falling.

Banks, Fannie [FNM  0.487  -0.003  (-0.61%)   ] and Freddie [FRE  0.0030  ---  UNCH  (0)   ] are holding on to hundreds of thousands of properties, and we don’t know exactly when or how they’ll sell them.

Brent Crude Trades over $100/bbl on Egyptian Unrest

Published on: 01/31/2011
Comments: No Comments

Oil prices broke through the $100 a barrel level for the first time in more than two years, amid market fears that Egypt’s turmoil will hit oil flows.

Although both the Suez Canal and a pipeline linking the Red Sea with the Mediterranean continue to operate, the popular uprising to unseat Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s president, has brought much of the rest of the economy to a halt.

The army said on Monday it would not use force against Egyptians staging protests demanding President Mubarak step down, a statement said. It said “freedom of expression” was guaranteed to all citizens using peaceful means.

This is the first such explicit confirmation by the army that it would not fire at demonstrators who have taken to the streets of Egypt since last week to try to force Mr Mubarak to quit.

Egypt’s new vice-president Omar Suleiman said on Monday he had been asked to start dialogue with “all political forces” – including on constitutional and legislative reform, a key demand voiced by anti-Mubarak protesters.

The constitutional amendments include easing restrictions on those who eligible to run in presidential election. “The president has asked me today to immediately hold contacts with the political forces to start a dialogue about all raised issues that also involve constitutional and legislative reforms in a form that will result in clear proposed amendments and a specific timetable for its implementation,” Mr Suleiman said in a televised address.

Local and foreign companies have suspended operations, while holidaymakers are rushing to airports in an effort to evacuate the country.

As the stand-off between protesters and Mr Mubarak escalates, activists are preparing for what some have dubbed a million-strong march today.

At entrances to Tahrir square in Cairo, young men held up signs saying “One million march. 10am. Down with Mubarak.”

Mr Mubarak, who is facing the gravest threat to his 30-year rule over the Arab world’s most populous country, named a new cabinet to replace ministers close to his son, and presumed heir, Gamal.
More FT video

“The people are calling for regime change, not for a change of government,” said Osama el-Ghazali Harb, leader of the opposition Democratic Front party. “These are all moves to buy time.” Although Egypt is itself a small oil producer, the Suez Canal is an important waterway for shipments of Middle Eastern oil. A detour around the southern tip of Africa would add about 6,000 miles to transit routes from the Middle East to Europe and the US.

Brent crude, the global benchmark, surged to an intraday high of $101.19 per barrel, the highest since September 2008.

“It is something that we are, as you can imagine for our economy and for the recovery of the global economy, watching quite closely,” said Robert Gibbs, White House press secretary.

“We are extremely concerned about the Middle East situation,” said Marco Dunand, chief executive of Geneva-based Mercuria, one of the world’s biggest oil traders. “This is going to increase volatility substantially.”

Lawrence Eagles, head of oil research at JPMorgan, said that the primary risk from the turmoil was its “potential to act as a catalyst [for] unrest in countries that are otherwise seen as stable”, including Saudi Arabia, the world’s largest oil exporter, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates.

Fearing a contagion effect, Arab leaders have shown support for Mr Mubarak, hoping that he can quell the fury on the streets. On Monday the embattled president named a retired police investigator to take over the interior ministry.

Police have been blamed for more than 100 deaths since Egypt’s uprising erupted a week ago and forces melted away on the weekend, leaving residents in major cities to face looters and criminals released from prisons.

Samir Radwan, a respected development economist, was appointed the new finance minister. Acknowledging that his tenure might be short-lived, he told the Financial Times: “Let us hope we can save the situation and bring stability to our country. We owe a lot to the people on the street, and will respond to their calls. That’s the only reason I accepted the job.”

But analysts said the government has in mind the small legal parties, rather than the group of young activists, intellectuals and parties, including the Muslim Brotherhood, which have been co-operating with Mohamed ElBaradei, the reform advocate and Nobel laureate who has taken on a leading role in the protests.

Politicians working with Mr ElBaradei said that, in any case, they were not interested in talks with the prime minister in any case. “Of course we would not go to talks,” said Mr el-Ghazali Harb.

Additional reporting by Daniel Dombey in Washington

Egypt and Tunisia Usher in the New Era of Global Food Revolutions

Published on: 01/30/2011
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard – UK Telegraph

If you insist on joining the emerging market party at this stage of the agflation blow-off, avoid countries with an accelerating gap between rich and poor. Cairo’s EGX stock index has dropped 20pc in nine trading sessions.

Events have moved briskly since a Tunisian fruit vendor with a handcart set fire to himself six weeks ago, and in doing so lit the fuse that has detonated Egypt and threatens to topple the political order of the Maghreb, Yemen, and beyond.

As we sit glued to Al-Jazeera watching authority crumble in the cultural and political capital of the Arab world, exhilaration can turn quickly to foreboding.

This is nothing like the fall of the Berlin Wall. The triumph of secular democracy was hardly in doubt in central Europe. Whatever the mix of aspirations of those on the streets of Cairo, such uprisings are easy prey for tight-knit organizations – known in the revolutionary lexicon as Leninist vanguard parties.

In Egypt this means the Muslim Brotherhood, whether or not Nobel laureate Mohammed El Baradei ever served as figleaf. The Brotherhood is of course a different kettle of fish from Iran’s Ayatollahs; and Turkey shows that an ‘Islamic leaning’ government can be part of the liberal world – though Turkish premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan once let slip that democracy was a tram “you ride until you arrive at your destination, then you step off.”

It does not take a febrile imagination to guess what the Brotherhood’s ascendancy might mean for Israel, and for strategic stability in the Mid-East. Asia has as much to lose if this goes wrong as the West. China’s energy intensity per unit of GDP is double US levels, and triple the UK.

The surge in global food prices since the summer – since Ben Bernanke signalled a fresh dollar blitz, as it happens – is not the underlying cause of Arab revolt, any more than bad harvests in 1788 were the cause of the French Revolution.

Yet they are the trigger, and have set off a vicious circle. Vulnerable governments are scrambling to lock up world supplies of grain while they can. Algeria bought 800,000 tonnes of wheat last week, and Indonesia has ordered 800,000 tonnes of rice, both greatly exceeding their normal pace of purchases. Saudi Arabia, Libya, and Bangladesh, are trying to secure extra grain supplies.

The UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) said its global food index has surpassed the all-time high of 2008, both in nominal and real terms. The cereals index has risen 39pc in the last year, the oil and fats index 55pc.

The FAO implored goverments to avoid panic responses that “aggravate the situation”. If you are Hosni Mubarak hanging on in Cairo’s presidential palace, do care about such niceties?

France’s Nicolas Sarkozy blames the commodity spike on hedge funds, speculators, and the derivatives market (largely in London). He vowed to use his G20 presidency to smash the racket, but then Mr Sarkozy has a penchant for witchhunts against easy targets.

The European Commission has been hunting for proof to support his claims, without success. Its draft report – to be released last Wednesday, but withdrawn under pressure from Paris – reached exactly the same conclusion as investigators from the IMF, and US and British regulators.

“There is little evidence that the price formation process on commodity markets has changed in recent years with the growing importance of derivatives markets”, it said.

As Jeff Currie from Goldman Sachs tirelessly points out, future contracts are neutral. For every trader making money by going long on wheat, sugar, pork bellies, zinc, or crude oil, there is a trader losing money on the other side. It is a paper transfer between financial players.

You have to buy and hoard the vast amounts of these bulk commodities to have much impact on the price, which is costly and difficult to do, though people do park crude on floating tankers sometimes, and Chinese firms allegedly stashed copper in warehouses last year.

But that is not what commodity index funds with $150bn are actually doing with food, base metals, and energy. Only governments have strategic petroleum and grain reserves big enough to make a difference.

The immediate cause of this food spike was the worst drought in Russia and the Black Sea region for 130 years, lasting long enough to damage winter planting as well as the summer harvest. Russia imposed an export ban on grains. This was compounded by late rains in Canada, Nina disruptions in Argentina, and a series of acreage downgrades in the US. The world’s stocks-to-use ratio for corn is nearing a 30-year low of 12.8pc, according to Rabobank.

The deeper causes are well-known: an annual rise in global population by 73m; the “exhaustion” of the Green Revolution as the gains in crop yields fade, to cite the World Bank; diet shifts in Asia as the rising middle class switch to animal-protein diets, requiring 3-5 kilos of grain feed for every kilo of meat produced; the biofuel mandates that have diverted a third of the US corn crop into ethanol for cars.

Add the loss of farmland to Asia’s urban sprawl, and the depletion of the non-renewable acquivers for irrigation of North China’s plains, and the geopolitics of global food supply starts to look neuralgic.

Can the world head off mass famine? Yes, with leadership. The regions of the ex-Soviet Union farm 30m hectares less today than in the Khrushchev era, and yields are half western levels.

There are tapped hinterlands in Brazil, and in Africa where land titles and access to credit could unleash a great leap forward. The global reservoir of unforested cropland is 445m hectares, compared to 1.5 billion in production. But the low-lying fruit has already gone, and the vast investment needed will not come soon enough to avoid a menacing shift in the terms of trade between the land and the urban poor.

We are on a thinner margin of food security, as North Africa is discovering painfully, and China understands all too well. Perhaps it is a little too early to write off farm-rich Europe and America.

Brazil-China Trade Tensions Rise

Published on: 01/30/2011
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments

Trade tensions between Brazil and China are expected to increase after the Asian country emerged last year as the biggest foreign direct investor in Latin America’s largest economy.

Analysis of data from Brazil’s central bank shows that China accounted for about $17bn of Brazil’s total FDI inflows in 2010 of $48.46bn, up from less than $300m in 2009, according to Sobeet, a Brazilian think-tank on transnational companies.

“This is the first time we have had so much investment from China,” Luis Afonso Lima, president of Sobeet, told the Financial Times. Exports of commodities, such as iron ore and the “soya complex” of beans, oil and meal, to China helped to keep Brazil’s economy afloat during the financial crisis.

However, tensions have surfaced after China last year also emerged as one of the biggest sources of cheap imports into Brazil, helped by a surge in the value of the real, which is undermining the competitiveness of domestic industry.

This prompted Guido Mantega, finance minister, this year to call for a revaluation of the renminbi.

Brazilian newspaper Folha de S.Paulo last week reported that the government was considering restrictions on FDI in mining, including imposing minimum domestic supply quotas and screening transactions based on “the investor’s profile”.

Mr Lima said most of China’s FDI into Brazil, much of which was channelled through tax havens such as Luxembourg, was related to commodities.

The biggest transaction was Chinese oil major Sinopec’s $7.1bn purchase of a 40 per cent stake in Repsol Brazil.

Most of the Chinese investment would lead to little transfer of technology for Brazilian industry, Mr Lima said.

Who Says Crime Doesn’t Pay???

Published on: 01/29/2011
Categories: Current Events
Comments: No Comments

Goldman Sachs awarded its chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, $12.6m in restricted stock and more than trebled his annual salary, in a sign the public backlash against the bank’s pay practices may have waned.

The stock award, part of Mr Blankfein’s 2010 bonus, and pay rise come after one of the most tumultuous years in Goldman’s history. The bank settled civil charges from the Securities & Exchange Commission, saw US lawmakers rewrite hundreds of rules governing the financial services industry, and endured a tepid year in trading activity that crimped Goldman’s profits and stymied its stock price.

Goldman had granted Mr Blankfein $9m in restricted shares a year ago, well below the bonuses he had received before the financial crisis, despite reporting record profits. But the bank and its peers were under intense pressure from regulators and politicians to rein in pay.

The bank’s performance before the crisis – it paid Mr Blankfein $68m in cash, stock and options in 2007 – and stunning recovery has helped make the company a bellwether for Wall Street compensation.

Goldman upped the salaries of top executives for the first time since the bank’s 1999 IPO. Mr Blankfein’s annual pay climbed to $2m from $600,000. Gary Cohn, Goldman’s president, will be paid $1.85m this year, also up from $600,000.

Michael Evans and John Weinberg, two of the bank’s vice-chairmen, and David Viniar, chief financial officer, will also receive $1.85m each.

The bank granted Mr Blankfein 78,111 restricted stock units, which are paid out over three years and cannot be sold for five.

All four deputies received the same number of restricted stock units as their boss: 78,111.

Michael Sherwood, a third vice chairman who co-heads Goldman’s European operations, was granted 89,270 restricted shares, valued at $14.4m.

Goldman shares fell $2.26, or 1.4 per cent, to $161.77 in New York trading. The stock has climbed 5.5 per cent in the past year.

The bank will offer additional details on its top executives’ year-end pay-outs in its annual proxy statement.

A Goldman spokesman declined to comment.

Average Credit Card Rates Near Record

Published on: 01/28/2011
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: No Comments

Editor’s Note: This is how the banksters thank the taxpayer for the bailouts. They can get money from the Fed for essentially nothing, then charge an average of 15%. How nice. Take out your credit cards, cut them up, pay off the balance, and never use them again.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) — Interest rates are now hovering near record highs, at an average rate of 14.72%. And if your credit is bad enough, you could even end up with a rate as high as 59.9% APR.

That’s because while the CARD Act helped crack down on certain fees and requires more disclosures, it didn’t cap every credit card holder’s worst enemy: interest rates.

Sure, the new rules prevent banks from raising most interest rates retroactively, but there’s no limit on the rates they can charge new customers.

“Rates are going up because card issuers know that once you get a card they can’t raise the rates, so they’re raising rates on the front end to ensure they get the revenue from that interest,” said Beverly Harzog, credit card expert at Credit.com.

APRs have climbed more than 20% over the past two years and hit an all-time high of an average 14.78% in mid-November, based on weekly data CreditCards.com collects from 100 of the nation’s top credit card issuers.

And there’s no end in sight. While interest rate caps have been proposed — including a proposal earlier this month from New York Congressman Maurice Hinchey that would limit rates at 15% — none have been passed into law so far.

So what do record high interest rates mean for you? If you have a terrible credit score, opening a credit card is going to be painful. Though rates vary depending on the card you apply for, with a score below 599 you’ll likely be stuck facing an APR of 24% or higher, said Harzog. If you can get a card at all.

In fact, First Premier Bank offers a Gold MasterCard with a whopping 59.9% rate for those people with “less than perfect credit”, according to its website. And that rate is actually down from the 79.9% rate it originally charged.

Even with a credit score between 600 to 649 — still considered poor, but not terrible — you’re probably looking at rates around 20%.

Harzog recommends staying away from interest rates above 20% and instead getting a secured card from a lender like Orchard Bank as a way to build up credit so that you can eventually get a card with a decent rate.

With a secured card, you deposit money into an account and can use the card like a credit card — and it impacts your credit just like a credit card does. But if you don’t make payments, the bank will just take your own money out of the account.

“I don’t suggest people ever carry a balance at such high interest rates,” Harzog said. “A secured card is like a credit card on training wheels, so it will help you get your credit back on track.”

With a credit score between 650 and 699, you’re on your way to finding better interest rates, likely ranging between 15% and 19%.

Capital One’s Classic Platinum is a good option for people with fair credit. Its rate starts at 17.9%, with a 0% introductory APR until October.

But because 17.9% is still a pretty high rate, Harzog suggests using the introductory rate as a cushion to get your balances paid off. That way, once you hit 17.9%, you’re not financing anything and you can simply use the card as a way to build your credit and look for a better rate.

If you have what is typically considered a good score — between 700 and 749 — you should be able to get rates between 13% and 15% depending where you fall in that range. Meanwhile, an excellent score — 750 and up — will qualify you for the lowest rates out there.

The Chase Sapphire card offers an ongoing APR of 13.24% for excellent or good credit, while the Citi Platinum Select MasterCard comes with a starting rate of 11.99% and a 0% APR on purchases for the first 12 months.

If your credit is squeaky clean, check out the 7.25% Simmons Visa Platinum card from Simmons First Bank, which is located in Arkansas but serves customers nationwide. Pentagon Federal Credit Union’s PenFed Promise Visa card is another good option, with an ongoing rate of 9.99% and only 7.49% for the first three years.

“If you have excellent credit, you have some really great choices,” Harzog said. “But once you get down to the bad levels you’re going to have to go with those really high levels of 24.95%.” To top of page

The New Humpty Dumpty

Published on: 01/28/2011
Comments: No Comments

Irony is a wonderful thing sometimes. It has a habit of framing things exactly the way they need to be framed. Unfortunately, this is a knife that cuts both ways and irony sometimes points out awful realities. I am not a political animal per se, but I find it incredibly ironic how the avalanche of bad news on the deficit, Social Security, and essentially most of the things wrong with our economy was saved until after Tuesday’s SOTU speech. Make no mistake, this has happened before, and each time I find the timing to be absolutely incredible. It is very clear at least at this point that our leaders prefer to pay lip service to the idea of reducing the deficit rather than actually trying to rectify the situation. I say this because, with very few exceptions, the rhetoric centers around a silver bullet solution that will allow programs and spending to remain pretty much on the same path as what got us here, but at the same time, ‘fixing’ things.

We are learning a very hard lesson that it isn’t always about what you make, but what you spend. For all the talk about decreased Federal tax revenues, one would think that alone would command lower spending. Not so as we once again flirt with the statutory debt limit on the largest credit card in the world. For many years we depended on the world to absorb these excesses, selling trillions in Treasury bonds to the four corners of the Earth. Now that engine is stalling (quickly) and the Federal Reserve has stepped in to pick up the slack and even their overt monetization has not changed the tone in Washington with regard to debt. It certainly gives credence to the argument made by many non-mainstream economists that the problem of debt is already too big to be fixed. We are sitting on the world’s biggest Humpty Dumpty. Let’s take a look for a few minutes at some of the updates on the worsening fiscal front.

Social Security in the Red

This wasn’t supposed to happen until 2016. And I remember when that prediction came out that it was considered a ‘worst case’ date. Amazingly, the early descent into insolvency is now being blamed on the economy rather than horrible actuarial prognostications and the lack of political will to remedy the situation when something still could have been done.

“The massive retirement program has been suffering from the effects of the struggling economy for several years. It first went into deficit last year but had been projected to post surpluses for a few more years before permanently slipping into the red in 2016.” – AP

This gargantuan program will be $45 billion in the hole during 2011, but we should rest assured. Congress has pledged to replace revenues lost from the recently passed tax cuts. This stance alone is prima facie evidence that our leaders are clueless. IF Congress had a piggy bank of savings, then we could at least only be forced to ask how long it would take to eat up the savings. But Humpty Dumpty has no savings. Humpty is flat broke. So to read this correctly, what it means is that Congress will have the Federal Reserve monetize whatever revenue shortfalls occur from the tax cuts and then plug the borrowed dollars back into Social Security and everything will be fine. This is the type of ridiculous nonsense that passes for leadership today – from BOTH parties. And we wonder why no one wants to buy our bonds?

The Irresistible Force versus the Immovable Object

In what has been called a game of chicken recently, the Treasury is once again running out of room with regard to the statutory debt limit. Each time it gets about 6 months from hitting the ceiling the Treasury Secy. goes hat in hand to Congress, usually in the form of a letter, explaining that yes, they need to up the limit on the national credit card. No, we can’t stop spending because if we do, GDP will collapse.. Yes, you’ll need to raise this ceiling again in the near future because you won’t raise it enough this time.. No, Dr. Paul, you can’t fire me.. And that is about how it goes. Generally after a good deal of political posturing, Congress raises the limit saying they have no choice and that the world will end if the limit is not raised. But we are going to tackle spending now that the debt ceiling has been raised and this time we mean it (with thumping of fists).

Normally this wouldn’t even be worth writing about because it is so commonplace, however, this time things are a tad different. A whole bunch of new Congressfolks have been sworn in and some of them are having their feet held to the fire on spending and are balking at granting another increase. They’re demanding specific and defined spending cuts before another increase in the ceiling is given. I have no doubt that they will in fact increase the ceiling before the deadline, but it is kind of humorous to watch the Treasury scramble to re-arrange its deck chairs.

However, there is a very interesting tidbit in here. I’ve asked Martin Crutsinger, the AP author of this piece for clarification, but have not gotten and don’t expect an answer. Note the following:

“Treasury officials said that starting next week they will gradually decrease the $200 billion the government has borrowed in a special program conducted for the Federal Reserve, lowering that amount to around $5 billion.

That will provide the government with an extra $195 billion that it can devote to its regular borrowing needs.”

What I’d like to know is what ‘special program’ the Treasury is running for the Fed at a $200 Billion cost to the taxpayer? I would say the Fed has plenty of its own money. It certainly has plenty when it is time to buy FFF- bonds from Wall Street. It certainly has plenty of money when it is time to setup emergency facilities to bail out its owners. Yes you read that right – its owners. I’d love to know why the US taxpayer is having another $200 Billion borrowed on its behalf to do ANYTHING for the Fed.

Japan – Where Debt Matters?

I have often joked with clients and subscribers about the ratings agencies here in the US. Whether it was taking ridiculous subprime mortgage tranches and slapping an AAA rating on them for resale, the same type of occurrence in the commercial RE market, or the constant, but never delivered upon threats to downgrade the USGoverment’s credit rating, S&P and Moody’s have earned themselves quite a distinction of being ratings agencies for hire.

However, when it comes to Japan, the rating cut was swift and decisive. S&P cut Japan to 4 notches below that of the US this week making the island nation government’s credit rating the same as China’s. This is laughable in and of itself considering that China is the lender to the world. What is even more hilarious is the fact that S&P still assigns the US Government a pristine AAA rating. It gets better.

The stated reason for the cut of Japan’s rating was its debt load. Its budget deficit is roughly 200% of GDP, which essentially means that Japan borrows $2 for every $1 of economic activity. Obviously, this is an awful situation and has been persistently blamed on deflation, which has had the country firmly in its grip for over a decade now. Japan’s total debt load is roughly $11 Trillion.

A sane person would properly ask how the US can maintain a AAA rating given that our national debt is $14 Trillion and that using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, our fiscal gap is well over $200 Trillion. S&P would have you believe that it is because America’s budget deficit at $1.5 Trillion is only a tad over 10% of GDP. That isn’t entirely accurate. When GDP is calculated (and yes, we’ve done this before), it includes all government spending – even the borrowed dollars. So FY2011’s total GDP will count the $1.5 trillion that was borrowed and spent, plus whatever else was spent. When we hold the budget to the GAAP standard, the actual deficit gets much larger due to the accrued unfunded liabilities. That is also not counted in the deficit/GDP ratio. FY2010’s deficit was somewhere in the neighborhood of 40-45% of GDP when the numbers are looked at honestly. Granted this is not Japan’s 200%, but one would think that given our larger total stated debt and massive fiscal gap, this would be good for at least a single tier cut. Nope. The rating agencies have lost all credibility because it is obvious that their ratings in many cases are geopolitically driven.

When we take a look at these factors and ask whether we are closer to the beginning than to the end of the debt crisis, the answer can only be that we haven’t even started. The vast majority in leadership positions and the media are still trying to convince the American people that we need to cut the deficit, but can do so without laying even a finger on the sacrosanct welfare state programs namely Social Security and it’s insolvent cousin Medicare. We have recently been told that the only way to cut the deficit is to spend more money. If we were going to spend that on building a productive economic base, I would be in agreement. But we aren’t planning on doing that at all. We appear to only be interested in kicking the can down the road.

AP – Treasury to Adjust Borrowing as Ceiling Looms

Editor’s Note: What special program is the Treasury running for the Fed? They Fed can create its money at will – why are taxpayers being further encumbered with debt to supply the criminal Fed with money????

AP:WASHINGTON) The government said Thursday it will alter its borrowing strategy to buy some time before hitting the $14.3 trillion debt ceiling.

Treasury officials said that starting next week they will gradually decrease the $200 billion the government has borrowed in a special program conducted for the Federal Reserve, lowering that amount to around $5 billion.

That will provide the government with an extra $195 billion that it can devote to its regular borrowing needs.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said in a Jan. 6 letter that the government will reach its current borrowing limit between March 31 and May 16, and that it was critical for Congress to raise that limit.

But Republicans are demanding cuts in spending before they will agree to raising the debt limit.

The government is currently $279 billion below the limit. Treasury officials said that the actions announced Thursday had been contemplated when Geithner made his estimate earlier this month.

They said that other actions will be taken in coming weeks but that they still expected the limit to be hit in the time frame laid out in the letter.

Geithner warned in his letter to congressional leaders that a failure to raise the debt limit would mean the government would not be able to make current debt payments. That would lead to an unprecedented default on the national debt.

A failure by the government to meet its debt obligations would drive up the government’s borrowing costs and also raise borrowing costs for private U.S. companies and consumers.

CBO Says 2011 Budget Deficit to Top $1.5 Trillion

Published on: 01/26/2011
Categories: Current Events, Economics
Comments: 1 Comment

Editor’s Note: AP actually recognizes the point that our deficits continue to worsen despite the ‘bailouts’ being over and the money ‘repaid’. One must ask if any money was even repaid or if our leaders have gotten that much better at burning money.

WASHINGTON – Far from slowing, the government’s deficit spending will surge to a record $1.5 trillion flood of red ink this year, congressional budget experts estimated Wednesday, blaming the slow economic recovery and last month’s tax-cut law.

The report was sobering new evidence that it will take more than President Barack Obama’s proposed freeze on some agencies to stem the nation’s extraordinary budget woes. Republicans say they want big budget cuts but so far are light on specifics.

Wednesday’s Congressional Budget Office estimates indicate the government will have to borrow 40 cents for every dollar it spends this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30. Tax revenues are projected to drop to their lowest levels since 1950, when measured against the size of the economy.

The report, full of nasty news, also says that after decades of Social Security surpluses, the vast program’s costs are no longer covered by payroll taxes.

The budget estimates will add fuel to the already-raging debate over spending and looming legislation that would allow the government to borrow more money as the national debt nears the $14.3 trillion cap set by law. Republicans controlling the House say there’s no way they’ll raise the limit without significant budget cuts, starting with a government funding bill that will advance next month.

Democrats and Republicans agree that stern anti-deficit steps are needed, but neither Obama nor his resurgent GOP rivals on Capitol Hill are — so far — willing to put on the table cuts to popular benefit programs such as Medicare, farm subsidies and Social Security. The need to pass legislation to fund the government and prevent a first-ever default on U.S. debt obligations seems sure to drive the two sides into negotiations.

Though the analysis predicts the economy will grow by 3.1 percent this year, it foresees unemployment remaining above 9 percent.

Dauntingly for Obama, the nonpartisan agency estimates a nationwide jobless rate of 8.2 percent on Election Day in 2012. That’s higher that the rates that contributed to losses by Presidents Jimmy Carter (7.5 percent) and George H.W. Bush (7.4 percent). The nation isn’t projected to be at full employment — considered to be a jobless rate of about 5 percent — until 2016.

The latest deficit figures are up from previous estimates because of bipartisan legislation passed in December that extended George W. Bush-era tax cuts and unemployment benefits for the long-term jobless and provided a 2 percentage point Social Security payroll tax cut this year.

That measure added almost $400 billion to this year’s deficit, CBO says.

The deficit is on track to beat the record of $1.4 trillion set in 2009. The budget experts predict the deficit will drop to $1.1 trillion next year, still very high by historical standards.

Republicans focus on Obama’s contributions to the deficit: his $821 billion economic stimulus plan, boosts for domestic programs and his signature health care overhaul. Obama points out that he inherited deficits that would have exceeded $1 trillion a year anyway.

The chilling figures came the day after Obama called for a five-year freeze on optional spending in domestic agency budgets passed by Congress each year.

Republicans were quick to blame Obama for the rising red ink. Rep. Jeb Hensarllng of Texas, chairman of the House Republican Conference, said the report “paints a picture that is more dangerous than most Americans could anticipate.”

“What is our leader in the White House doing about it? Asking Congress to raise the debt ceiling, proposing new spending and sticking future generations with a multi-trillion dollar tab,” Hensarling said.

Democrat Kent Conrad, chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, pointed to a problem lawmakers are sure to keep facing:

“When the American people are asked what they want done and to prioritize what they want, they want the deficits and debt dealt with. But when they are asked very specifically, will they support changes in Social Security, the polls say no. Changes in Medicare? The polls say no. Changes in defense spending? The polls say no.”

“I would’ve liked very much if the president would have spent a bit more time helping the American people understand how really big this problem is,” added Conrad, D-N.D.

Republicans are calling for deeper cuts for education, housing and the FBI — among many programs — to return them to the 2008 levels in place before Obama took office.

But those nondefense programs make up just 12 or so percent of the $3.7 trillion budget, which means any upcoming deficit reduction package — at least one that begins to significantly slow the gush of red ink — will require politically dangerous curbs to popular benefit programs. That includes Social Security, Medicare, the Medicaid health care program for the poor and disabled, and food stamps.

Neither Obama nor his GOP rivals on Capitol Hill have yet come forward with specific proposals for cutting such benefit programs. Successful efforts to curb the deficit always require active, engaged presidential leadership, but Obama’s unwillingness to thus far take chances has deficit hawks discouraged. Obama will release his 2012 budget proposal next month.

“The proposals we’ve seen so far from the president and congressional Republicans amount to little more than tinkering around the edges,” said Concord Coalition Executive Director Bob Bixby.

“Somebody is going to have to bite the bullet and get this process going,” said Maya MacGuineas of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, a bipartisan group that advocates fiscal responsibility. “And that somebody has to be the president.”

Obama has steered clear of the recommendations of his deficit commission, which in December called for difficult moves such as increasing the Social Security retirement age and reducing future increases in benefits. It also proposed a 15-cents-a-gallon increase in the gasoline tax and eliminating or scaling back tax breaks — including the child tax credit, mortgage interest deduction and deduction claimed by employers who provide health insurance — in exchange for rate cuts on corporate and income taxes.

CBO predicts that the deficit will fall to $551 billion by 2015 — a sustainable 3 percent of the economy — but only if the Bush tax cuts are wiped off the books. Under its rules, CBO assumes the recently extended cuts in taxes on income, investment and people inheriting large estates will expire in two years. If those tax cuts, and numerous others, are extended, the deficit for that year would be almost three times as large.

Tax revenues, which dropped significantly in 2009 because of the recession, have stabilized. But revenue growth will continue to be constrained. CBO projects revenues to be 6 percent higher in 2011 than they were two years ago, which will not keep pace with the growth in spending.

Bankers Party Hearty on Bailout Money at Davos

Published on: 01/25/2011
Comments: No Comments

As Wall Street chief executive officers flock to the World Economic Forum, they’ll be breathing a sigh of relief along with the Swiss mountain air: There are no panels on compensation or redesigning financial regulation.

After spending much of last year’s meeting defending the industry and debating proposed rules, bankers plan to focus on wooing clients and winning business, according to executives at three Wall Street companies, who spoke anonymously because they weren’t authorized to comment publicly.

The bankers will be coming to Davos, Switzerland, with a renewed sense of confidence. JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s profits last year were the highest in the bank’s history, and Citigroup Inc. returned money to the U.S. Treasury and reported its first full- year profit since 2007. Governments have so far opted against breaking up or levying extra taxes on banks deemed too big to fail, and the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which sets global financial-regulatory guidelines, isn’t requiring lenders to meet new capital standards until 2015.

“It will feel less acute,” said Anne M. Finucane, Bank of America Corp.’s chief strategy and marketing officer, who attended with CEO Brian T. Moynihan for the first time last year and is returning this week. “The level of angst should have dissipated some given that there is movement in the economy.”

Goldman, Morgan Stanley

Two years ago, after the 2008 financial crisis, the CEOs of Bank of America, Citigroup and Morgan Stanley stayed away from the annual forum. This year the only major Wall Street banks that aren’t sending CEOs are Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley, instead represented by President Gary D. Cohn, 50, and Chairman John J. Mack, 66, respectively.

That means banks will be spending on parties. JPMorgan upgraded its cocktail reception to the Kirchner Museum from last year’s event at the Tonic Piano Bar at Hotel Europe Davos. Bank of America’s Moynihan and the firm’s other top executives will meet clients for drinks on Jan. 27 at the Steigenberger Grandhotel Belvedere — the same night Morgan Stanley’s Mack is hosting a private dinner at restaurant Gasthaus in den Islen. Standard Chartered Plc and Deutsche Bank AG are both hosting events at the Belvedere the following night.

Nomura Holdings Inc. is having a British journalist and a newspaper editor speak at a dinner for clients, the first such event the Tokyo-based bank has held in Davos, according to a person familiar with the planning. Barclays Plc will again hold its annual client dinner at the Hotel Schatzalp, and Credit Suisse Group AG is hosting two client lunches, one discussing financial regulation and the other focused on emerging markets.

‘Cup of Coffee’

As always, much of the action at Davos will happen at meetings and parties that aren’t on the official program.

“The most useful thing for us is really just to spend time with key clients over there, even if it’s just a cup of coffee for 20 minutes or so,” said William Vereker, the London-based joint global head of Nomura’s investment banking division.

For bankers like Vereker, in contrast with this year’s Davos theme of “Shared Norms for a New Reality,” the old reality is back.

“They’re out there to make money for shareholders and trying to do that the best way they can under a system they helped design,” said Simon Johnson, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management and a Bloomberg News columnist. “We’re just going through the same cycle again with pretty much the same incentives and power structures. Why would one expect anything different?”

Co-Chair Kochhar

One thing different this year is that none of the heads of big western banks is among the event’s six co-chairs. Chanda D. Kochhar, the 49-year-old CEO of ICICI Bank Ltd., India’s second- biggest lender, is replacing Deutsche Bank CEO Josef Ackermann and Standard Chartered CEO Peter A. Sands, who represented the industry last year.

Kochhar’s bank, unlike many of its western counterparts, remained profitable throughout the financial crisis and this week reported a record profit for the three months ending Dec. 31. Her salary, bonus, expenses and pension contributions for the year ending March 31, 2010, totaled 20.9 million rupees ($457,500), the Mumbai-based bank’s annual report showed, less than half the $1 million base salary paid to JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who is returning to Davos after skipping last year.

A survey released today by New York-based public relations firm Edelman showed the percentage of respondents in India who said they trusted banks rose to 87 percent, while in Germany, Ireland, the U.K. and U.S., trust in banks tumbled to 25 percent or less. In China, trust in banks soared to 90 percent, the study showed.

Lessons Learned

Finucane and other senior bankers said the lessons learned from the financial crisis aren’t forgotten. They also said the reform process isn’t finished. Many of the rules required by the U.S.’s Dodd-Frank financial legislation have yet to be written, and Basel still has to craft rules for too-big-to-fail banks and capital requirements for trading units.

“The way that Dodd-Frank is implemented is still up for grabs,” said Jane R. Gladstone, who leads the financial- services corporate advisory practice at New York-based investment bank Evercore Partners Inc. and is going to Davos for the third time. “There is a chance that we still have some important sessions and regulatory meetings at Davos.”

This year the discussion at Davos will probably move to different topics such as economic stimulus, monetary policy and the role played by emerging markets, Finucane said.

Geithner, Cantor

Timothy F. Geithner is scheduled to be in Davos, the first time in more than a decade that a sitting U.S. Treasury secretary has flown to Switzerland for the conference. The leaders of France, Germany and the U.K. will also appear, as will seven members of the U.S. Congress, including Republican Majority Leader Eric I. Cantor and Massachusetts Democratic Congressman Barney Frank.

None of the U.S.’s main financial regulators, such as Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Mary L. Schapiro or U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chairman Gary Gensler are on the list of participants.

“Last year there were a lot of conversations about who to blame, how to blame them, and how to re-jigger the industry,” said Yury Spektorov, a Moscow-based partner in Bain & Co.’s mergers and acquisitions practice. “It’s not a hot topic anymore. Some people probably learned their lessons, some probably didn’t, but they will discuss how to move forward.”

Back on Track

Goldman Sachs’s Cohn and Standard Chartered’s Sands are scheduled to participate in one of the first panels tomorrow, discussing “The International Financial System: Back on Track?” The discussion will also include Liu Mingkang, chairman of the China Banking Regulatory Commission, as well as London- based lawyer David R. Childs and hedge-fund manager Frank P. Brosens. That session is closed to the press.

JPMorgan’s Dimon, 54, will make a more public appearance the following morning on a panel titled “The Next Shock: Are We Better Prepared?” Dimon is the only financial-industry participant in that discussion, which also includes Israeli President Shimon Peres and the leaders of consulting firm McKinsey & Co., Alcoa Inc. and Paris-based advertising company Publicis Groupe SA.

Pandit, Diamond

Other appearances by top bank executives are less likely to focus on Wall Street and regulation. Citigroup’s Vikram S. Pandit is on a panel about expanding financial services to the poor; Bank of America’s Moynihan will talk about currency devaluations; and Barclays’s Robert E. Diamond Jr. will discuss the global economy in a session that features World Bank President Robert B. Zoellick and the finance or economy ministers from three countries.

Jonathan Chenevix-Trench, who spent 23 years at Morgan Stanley and went to Davos in 2006 and 2007, said the event could be more useful than ever if executives used the time with politicians and regulators to address unsolved problems in the financial system.

“There will always be client meetings, that’s what they’re there to do, so absolutely they’ll be doing that,” said Chenevix-Trench, 59, who co-founded London-based African Century Group, which invests in sub-Saharan Africa. Still, “we’ve not solved this conundrum of bankers making hay when the times are good and taxpayers picking up the tab when times are bad, and that model, everyone’s got to look at it very carefully.”

page 1 of 3 »

Welcome , today is Wednesday, 02/22/2012