Sign the Petition
Audit The Fed
Donate
Freedom isn't free!
Please help FedUpUSA stay online.


FedUpUSA in the Media

FedUpUSA YouTube Channel

The FedUpUSA Video

Karl Denninger (TickerGuy) on CNBC

Karl Denninger (TickerGuy) on Glenn Beck

FedUpUSA Co-Founder and Coordinator of the Washington DC Toilet Bowl Protest interviewed by the AP

FedUpUSA Founder Stephanie Jasky interviewed on Plains Radio

FedUpUSA Founder Stephanie Jasky's article 912 Protest Washington DC - What Was It All About? as seen on The Right Side of Life
Calendar
February 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan   Mar »
 1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031  

Archive for February 1st, 2010

Calling Out Obama: Bankster ‘Reforms’

 

Calling Out Obama: Bankster “Reforms”

Posted by Karl Denninger

Now comes the banksters with their lobbyists and bribes, er, “campaign contributions” to say that:

A proposal by former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker to limit bank’s proprietary trading will be either be dropped or significantly modified in the Senate, lawmakers and staffers told dealReporter.

Senate Banking Committee ranking member Richard Shelby (R-AL) said he opposes the so-called Volcker rule and the Obama administration’s call to levy a USD 90bn tax on banks.

A Dodd staffer said the senator is likely to quietly drop or modify many of the recommendations in the Volcker rule to ensure Republican support for regulatory reform.

Well it ain’t gonna be quiet no more!

These goons on Wall Street think they can keep this up.  They might want to pay attention to the fact that there’s this thing called “an Election” coming in November, and the people are pissed, as noted in this Bloomberg article:

Feb. 1 (Bloomberg) — Politicians under pressure from angry voters to show progress on financial reform are losing patience with bankers waiting to reach global harmony on new rules.

Yep.

The people are still short of endorsing clanedestine neck tie parties, but I suspect it’s not by much.  When President Obama said that he was “all that was standing between the banksters and people with pitchforks and torches” he wasn’t kidding.

The idea that the people of this nation will simply sit still while the looting continues is somewhat of a fantasy on the part of those on Wall Street.  Thus far the retaliatory actions have been both peaceful and lawful – mostly – such as “Move Your Money” and the like.

But there’s no guarantee that will remain the case, and the simple reality is that much of what went on during the 2000s was not “an error” or “bad judgment”, it was a blatant heist, and the people are wising up to what really happened.

Where the line resides is not something I can accurately predict.  I can only note our Founding Fathers seemed to have a good grasp of things in The Declaration:

…all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.

Indeed we have tolerated far more than we probably should have.  But then The Founders warned….

But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Where and when does that line get crossed?  How many people get thrown out of their homes, have 30% credit card interest rates, watch the banksters literally grab over a trillion dollars in printed money and claim “profits” for themselves of over $100 billion in bonuses, evade mandates on long-term holding of those bonuses in the form of stock to prevent cashing out before the sustainability of their practices can be proved up and more?

I do not know where the line is.

I only know that history says that it exists, that no man, no bankster and no government knows exactly where it is, but that once crossed it cannot be “un-crossed” just as an egg cannot be unscrambled.

We need solid, real financial reform.  We must renounce “bubble-nomincs.”  We must shut down the fraud-laced “securitization” machine permanently, prosecute those who have unlawfully concealed risks and lied about asset quality and return our economy to stable, productive output instead of financial speculation.

The Banksters all claim that if we were to do this that society would collapse and that our economy could not survive.

They’re wrong, just as Henry Paulson was wrong when he said he had “no choice” when, allegedly (according to his book) the Chinese and Russians threatened to collapse Fannie and Freddie.

Hank had a choice, assuming he’s not lying of course.  He could have told the Russians and Chinese to bite him – on national television, with George Bush at his side.  He could have told them that if they tried it that the United States Treasury would, by executive order, declare their Treasury Holdings worthless

Yes, that would have stopped the “gravy train” of being able to spend more than we make in the government.  Yes, this would have forced immediate austerity and facing of the truth

Is that bad?

What have we done since?  Added what – $2 trillion+ to the national debt – more debt we don’t have and can’t pay?  Emitted another budget proposal, just today, to add $1.6 trillion more?  Built yet another artifice – another fraud – on top of the previous ones?  Written more “Option ARMs” on our children and grandchildren’s backs to prop up a cabal of banksters on Wall Street who then fawn all over The Senate with their “campaign contributions” so they can keep skimming off huge parts of our economic structure for a few thousand residing on Wall Street?

How’s that going to work out folks? 

How will we settle up and ultimately pay this debt load down?

We won’t, of course.  Neither will anyone else.  Greece, Spain, the UK – all are lessons for us, if we choose to learn them before we get to live them.

Watch those nations.  If you think this is just about Greece you’re nuts.  The public employee pensions there are ridiculous.  Guess what – they’re ridiculous here too.  In the closest “little city” to here there are many retired police officers and firemen who have pensions north of $100,000/year.  There are many places where six-figure pensions are considered “normal” or “reasonable” – for public safety workers and teachers.  We don’t have the money, we can’t afford to gold-plate the steering wheels of the cop cars and despite all the bleating the fact remains that the primary function of the police department is to write traffic tickets and take a report after you are burglarized, raped or robbed.

Are these functions important?  Yes.  Do they call for better than a middle-class wage?  Nope.  Is a middle-class wage $100,000 a year?  Nope.  The 2008 Median Household income for California is $61,021.  For Florida, $47,778.  For New York, $56,033.

So why are we paying out pensions of double that to what should be middle-class employees in retirement?

Let’s face the facts folks – we can either stop the plundering across society – by both banksters and public employees – or we will face a crisis similar to what Greece is dealing with now.

It will be more pleasant for us to take our medicine voluntarily rather than having it forced down our gullet, but doing so starts with chaining the banksters and their penchant for offloading risk to others and, for those who refuse, jailing them outright, lest the public get ahold of them and not bother with the pleasantries (and constitutional right) of a trial by jury before handing up a sentence.

At the same time we must fix the public employee entitlement mentality, by firing them and replacing them with unemployed Americans if necessary.  We have 1 in 5 working-age men between 25 and 54 out of work - there is no shortage of available people to take these jobs.

It is time to pay the check folks, before we are literally forced to eat it.

Dylan Ratigan: The Big TARP Lie

Why the Government Wants to Hijack Your 401(k)

 

Why the Government Wants to Hijack Your 401(k)

By Keith Fitz-Gerald, Chief Investment Strategist, Money Morning

It’s bad enough that we’ve been forced to bail out Wall Street. But now the Obama administration is hatching plans to raid our retirement savings, too.

To say that I’m “outraged” doesn’t come close to describing the emotions I experience every time I think about the government’s latest hare-brained scheme.

According to widespread media reports, both the U.S. Treasury Department and the Department of Labor plan are planning to stage a public-comment period before implementing regulations that would require U.S. savers to invest portions of their 401(k) savings plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) into annuities or other “steady” payment streams backed by U.S. government bonds.

Folks, there’s only one reason these agencies would do such a thing – the nation’s creditors think that U.S. government bonds are a bad bet and don’t want to buy them anymore. So like a grifter who’s down to his last dollar, the administration is hoping to get its hands on our hard-earned savings before the American people realize they’ve had the wool pulled over their eyes … once again.

It’s easy to understand why.

Facing a $14 trillion fiscal hangover, the Treasury can no longer count countries such as Japan and China to be dependable buyers of U.S. government debt. Not only have those nations dramatically reduced their purchasing of U.S. bonds, most of our largest creditors are now actively diversifying their reserves away from greenback-based investments in favor of other reliable stores of value – like oil, gold and other commodities.

This growing reluctance couldn’t come at a worse time. Just yesterday (Tuesday), in fact, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that the U.S. budget deficit would hit $1.35 trillion this year. And that’s not the only shortfall the Treasury has to address. The U.S. Federal Reserve is supposed to stop buying Treasury bonds for its asset portfolio, a program the central bank put in place last year.

The upshot: The Obama administration has to find other ways sell government debt – without raising interest rates, a move that would almost certainly jeopardize the country’s super-weak economic recovery.

Facing an uphill battle and increasingly skeptical buyers, the government is changing tactics and targeting the biggest pile of money available as a means of dealing with its fiscal follies – the $3.6 trillion sitting in U.S. retirement plans, including 401(k) plans.

The way I see it, the Obama administration can see the financial train wreck that’s going to occur. So it’s rushing to crack open the safe that holds our retirement money before anyone realizes that they’ve been robbed.

And if this plan becomes reality, that’s just what it will be – robbery. American retail investors didn’t sign up for the financial-crisis roller-coaster ride we’ve been on since 2008. We didn’t approve the nation’s five-fold increase in lending capacity. And we certainly didn’t volunteer to help pay down a national debt that’s doubled.

Few people realize that the federal government spent an estimated $17,000 to $25,000 per U.S. household in 2009 (the final figures haven’t been calculated, yet). But that’s no surprise: “We the people” didn’t approve it.

At a point where it’s spending money like a drunken sailor, Washington seems more interested in appropriating and redistributing our retirement savings than it is in fixing a system that’s badly broken. If you add in all the stimulus spending that the taxpayers must now repay, the average government-agency-spending tab has zoomed more than 50% in the last couple of years. That’s right – 50%.

So it’s only logical that the administration would go after our 401(k) and IRA savings plans.

Disgusting, but logical.

Here’s how the argument is likely to be framed.

The system we presently have in place is what’s commonly called a “defined contribution plan.” Under such a plan, the benefits we enjoy during retirement aren’t determined in advance. Instead, those benefits are determined by how much money we contribute while working, and by the performance of the investments that we choose. The 401(k) is almost exclusively a defined contribution plan.

Years ago, Americans depended more upon “defined benefit plans” that promised a steady stream of income at a future date – with the actual amounts determined by our years of service or our earnings history. Old-fashioned company pension plans and even U.S. Social Security are examples of defined benefit plans.

By laying claim to our retirement assets in exchange for 30-year Treasury bonds, annuities or other payout streams, the government will try to persuade us that we’re not capable of managing our own money, that the stock market is too risky a place for most Americans, and that we need Big Brother to hold our hands and protect our futures.

What we need, the administration is going to tell us, is a defined benefit plan.

So expect a big snow job. But here’s the problem.

Defined benefit plans are great only as long as they are well funded. Unfortunately, most aren’t.

In fact, according to various studies, pension funds could already be underfunded by as much as $5.3 trillion. Add that to the $14 trillion we’ve already got on the table and we’re talking a staggering $19.3 trillion – and that’s with no escalators, no cost-of-living adjustments and no interest-rate increases. And that’s assuming we don’t need another round of stimulus.

Here’s what the government isn’t going to tell you. When pension funds transition from defined contribution plans to defined benefit plans, the only backing they have is the underlying assets themselves and the company or entity that’s responsible for the plans – which in this case would be the U.S. government.

If the prospects of your entire future being placed in the hands of the federal government doesn’t scare the daylights out of you after all we’ve experienced so far, I suspect that nothing will.

Our elected leaders, appointed government guardians, and Wall Street have together demonstrated a total inability to manage what they already control. There’s no reason on the planet why they should be allowed to get their hands on our hard-won savings. All that will do is punish the thrifty, disciplined and far-sighted investor, while rewarding – or at the very least protecting – the inept politicians and career bureaucrats who allowed this crisis to occur in the first place.

By backing their plan with 30-year Treasuries, government backers of this plan are betting that you and I won’t notice that the trouble with annuities and long bonds is that they tend to get annihilated by inflation. That’s why even the most jaded professionals will tell you that investing in such instruments right now when interest rates are being artificially held down near 0.00% is bad juju: Interest rates have only one direction to travel – up, which tends to crush bond prices.

Right now, Americans are apparently smarter than the administration believes. In fact, a survey by the Investment Company Institute found that more than 70% of all households disagreed with the idea of requiring a retiree to buy an annuity with a portion of their assets. And it didn’t matter whether the annuity was offered by an insurance company or by the government.

Let’s hope that the full-court press that the administration is getting ready to deploy doesn’t snow American investors. If the government succeeds, we’ll look back and see that they pulled a pretty slick trick to get our support.

Unfortunately, it won’t be the last trick they play with our retirement money. That last trick will come after they have control of our savings – when they make our retirements disappear.

The Treasury Is Soliciting Your Feedback Regarding The Proposed Annuitization Of 401(k)

 

The Treasury Is Soliciting Your Feedback Regarding The Proposed Annuitization Of 401(k)

Submitted by Tyler Durden

Yes, slowly but surely it is happening. In a federal notice filed earlier, the DOL and Treasury are soliciting a response on what has been on many investors’ mind, namely the process of converting 401(k)s into annuity-like products. To wit:

The Department of Labor and the Department of the Treasury (the “Agencies”) are currently reviewing the rules under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and the plan qualification rules under the Internal Revenue Code (Code) to determine whether, and, if so, how, the Agencies could or should enhance, by regulation or otherwise, the retirement security of participants in employer-sponsored retirement plans and in individual retirement arrangements (IRAs) by facilitating access to, and use of, lifetime income or other arrangements designed to provide a lifetime stream of income after retirement. The purpose of this request for information is to solicit views, suggestions and comments from plan participants, employers and other plan sponsors, plan service providers, and members of the financial community, as well as the general public, on this important issue.

A cursory read of the document does not seem to ask about a flat out regulatory requirement for annuitization. We point your attention to item 13:

13. Should some form of lifetime income distribution option be required for defined contribution plans (in addition to money purchase pension plans)? If so, should that option be the default distribution option, and should it apply to the entire account balance? To what extent would such a requirement encourage or discourage plan sponsorship?

For readers who feel compelled to respond to this increasignly socialistic and ludicrous development, we suggest you voice your anger at the following address:

  • e-ORI@dol.gov. Include RIN 1210-AB33 in the subject line of the message

Full notice

Foreign Central Bank Treasury Holdings At The Fed Decline In January For The First Time In Years

 

Foreign Central Bank Treasury Holdings At The Fed Decline In January For The First Time In Years

Submitted by Tyler Durden

The last thing that the fixed income market needs now, with ever greater uncertainty out of European bond land,  is weakness where it hurts the most: the US balance sheet. Yet last Thursday’s H.4.1 report indicated something which could be more troubling than even Greece’s credit crisis morphing into a liquidity one, namely, that foreign central banks’ UST holdings at the Fed declined for the first time in over two years.

What could be precipitating this? Quite a few factors have emerged recently:

1) A seemingly endless supply of Treasuries (especially the 2,5, and 7 Y) for which the indirect take down continues to be over 50%. This alone is confusing in light of the custody decline.

2) Concerns over developed country sovereign risk: last week S&P downgraded it Japan outlook and issued a scathing report on UK sovereign and financial risk.

3) Kansas Fed’s Hoenig dissent on tightening monetary policy. This is the proverbial first shot across the Fed’s bow. Hoenig’s “believed that economic and financial conditions had changed sufficiently that the expectation of exceptionally low levels of the federal funds rate for an extended period was no longer warranted.”

4) Economic conditions have taken a decidedly bearish tone. JPM’s EASI index of economic surprises (lower means greater amount of negative surprises) just took a dramatic turn lower.

5) Flattening and outright inversion in a variety of financial corp spreads in the 5s10s bracket.

6) AAA CMBS spreads widened by 30 bps. If sovereign risk is in question, why should insolvent REITs be any better?

Regardless of which specific set of news may have precipitated the January Treasury effect, this is truly a scary observation, which however does not jive with the indirect take down continuing to be as strong as ever: if indeed the custody data is correct, then all the indirect bid data has to be taken with not just a dash of salt, but as Rosenberg says, an entire salt shaker.

FedUpUSA Twitter

FedUpUSA Twitter


FedUpUSA Facebook
FedUpUSA Forum

Join the
FedUpUSA Forum

graciously hosted by:

The Market Ticker Forums
FedUpUSA Gear

Get Your Official FedUpUSA Gear Today!

FedUpUSA Gear