“The trouble with modern warfare is that it doesn’t give anyone a chance to kill the right people.”
– Anonymous wag.
“The trouble with modern warfare is that it doesn’t give anyone a chance to kill the right people.”
– Anonymous wag.
The Paulson plan for the bail out of insurance giant AIG is to going be implemented over the next week, through we are likely to hear some more details this weekend. The piece is at Lew Rockwell and Counterpunch.
Putting Lipstick On An AIG
Hockey moms aren’t the only ones wearing Maybelline. Pigs come in cherry gloss too.
Like the porkers at Wall Street lining up with their lips in a pucker behind Washington’s plush behind. Having pigged out at the public trough for years, they now want their sticky little trotters washed down in the righteous waters of the Potomac.
Tarting up comes natural to our Wall Street-walkers. Turns out these great big masters of the universe were really, well, girly men who couldn’t balance their check-books and put out more than they took in… like any working girl.
Lipstick is especially right for Goldman Sachs, which likes to cross-dress as a devout public servant in after-hours and has at least one set of heels working the floor of the Treasury department during any crisis. Yep, I’m pretty sure Hank Paulson would look good in high-gloss plum. You see, lip shtick is just what Hank’s good at. He was out on Monday flapping his lips with the kind of plummy platitudes you’d expect from semantically challenged mental health workers, not from a Treasury Secretary. A Treas. Sec., mind you, who was once a Goldman CEO not above inserting carefully chosen knives into the ribs of colleagues.
“We need to put this behind us,” quoth Hank. “We must move forward.”
“We need to work through this.”
“We need to heal.”
We, of course, need to do nothing. There is no we here. This is a Wall Street crisis. And the usual suspects on Wall Street need to line up, bend over and get caned for their misdeeds. Barring that, they need to take the market’s medicine like men.
Instead, they were out in full therapeutic mode, pouting and whining for a change of their soggy diapers by dear Nanny Washington.
And Nanny obliged.
First there was Fannie and Freddie, the terrible twins, who were taken lovingly into the conservatorship of the state. Translation: they went belly up and the funeral expenses were billed to the tax-payer, though the estate had been sold at private auction a long time before.
Oh, those twins.
Inhaling the swampy fumes of government but croaking from the terra firma of the market. Owned by individuals, backed by the state. The formula of the managed economy – privatized profits and socialized losses.
Created by Congress to expand home ownership by making finance available to a bigger part of the population, the two companies own (or guarantee) around 40 percent of the $8.5 trillion U.S. residential mortgage market. They are the biggest single borrowers in the US, after the federal government. In 2006 they were hit with a $350 million dollar fine, one of the biggest ever assessed by the SEC, as a penalty for accounting malpractice.
Then Fannie even got caught trying to pull Nanny’s strings to discredit the regulator. Which strings were those? We can only guess.
Quote: “Goldman Sachs was one of several institutions actively involved in the accounting fraud, its contribution being earnings manipulation through the creation of MBS’s – mortgage-backed securities – in Fannie’s portfolio, a strategy remarkably similar to Goldman’s actions on behalf of Enron. Of note also is the fact that in 2005, while the investigation was ongoing, Congress placed Fannie directly under the Federal Reserve, raising the specter of a surreptitious government bail-out outside the public eye, at some point.”
[That’s from an investment report I did on Goldman Sachs in August 2006.
The only thing wrong in it was that the government bail-out took place in full view of the public].
That is to say, while Hank blubbers on about how we need more regulation, that’s only now, during bust-time. Way back in bubble-time, Hank’s old firm was busy dabbing rouge on the pork in Fannie’s books and playing hopscotch with regulations.
O tempora, O mores.
Why, back in bubble time, even the former Fed chairman, the all-but-sainted Alan Greenspan was more prescient. He noted that failure to smack down the bratty twins could lead to “systemic risk” in the capital markets.
Of course, he said that after first telling Jane Citizen to go forth and borrow. But that’s because, like the monetary philanthropist he was, Greenspan believed in the widespread giving of ARMs.
As public servant Hank today, so public servant Greenspan back then.
Greenspan too liked dabbing rouge on pork. He relished painting market bottoms with the varnish of cheap money. It made them look plumper and rosier than they really were. Eventually the bottoms looked up and turned into booms, he reminded us.
The rouge worked. Books got beautified. Risky turned risqué.
“The image of Fannie Mae as one of the lowest-risk and ‘best in class’ institutions was a facade,” said James B. Lockhart, the acting director of the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight (OFHEO) when it released its report in May 2006.
In other words Fannie was a pig, even with the lipstick.
Of course, Goldman’s not the only one on Wall Street with a wicked hand for make-up artistry. The ratings agencies haven’t been too bad themselves, with all that triple A gloss they plastered on gangrenous sub-prime debt. What was that about? A little make- over for the corpse before the public viewing?
Truth be told. Goldman got good at putting lipstick on porkers long before they dabbed it on Fannie and Freddie. They were doing it in 1999 in ole Hank’s CEO days. Goldman helped Enron’s “smart guys” conduct massive energy futures trading and its leverage, like Enron’s, ballooned. [They had their leverage thang going in those days too].
Then, in 1993 Goldman invented a special accounting scheme to perk up Enron’s books – “Monthly income preferred shares” (or MIPS) they called it. MIPS let Enron sell fifty-year securities through specially created off-shore companies. To the IRS, Enron described the preferred stock as “debt” and claimed tax deductions on the interest payments. To shareholders, Enron called the same stock “equity” and counted it in the company’s capital value. Goldman took home massive underwriting fees from the scheme
In one year, Goldman had helped 17 companies besides Enron sell 2.7 billion MIPS. There was an offering every week, each dodging IRS rules with more and more finesse. Average commission and interest rates on MIPS ran much higher than on normal debt – between 1 and 1.2%. Goldman made tens of millions.
When the IRS, Treasury and the SEC decided to plug the loophole that was costing them hundreds of millions of dollars a year, Goldman and Merrill Lynch, along with the industry trade group, the Bond Market Association, began big time lobbying. Then
Goldman CEO Jon Corzine (later a US senator and NY Jersey governor) made sure the legislation got nipped in the bud and Goldman’s little accounting number actually ended up a chart-busting hit on the financial circuit.
So when Hank Paulson rushes to put together a bail-out for Merrill Lynch but brushes Lehman aside, he’s just remembering who he used to jam with in the old days. (Of course, buying up Merrill shares trading at $17 for $29 might not be most people’s idea of a bail-out. But that’s another story).
It could be also that when he’s not actually slitting throats, Hank just likes to lend a helping hand to old Goldmanites, like Merrill’s John Thain (a Goldman COO, CFO and President). You see, our Hank is a helping kind of guy. Like the time he helped Thain help himself to Dick Grasso’s seat at the head of the New York Stock Exchange. Oh, those public servants. Never a moment of rest from the helping.
That’s probably why Hank is helping out A.I.G.
Turns out Maurice (“Hank”) Greenberg, the former chair of A.I.G., is an old friend of John Whitehead, another former Goldman head.
The pranks of these Hanks get to be almost as complex as those derivative deals that melt hedge-funds like marshmallows on a grill. But the short of it seems to be that Greenberg jumped ship at AIG after Eliot Spitzer, crusading heavy of the SEC, came sniffing around in 2005. Improprieties,…bid rigging… hissed Spitzer, turning on the heat. Hank (G.) denied it stoutly, but AIG had to restate some of its numbers. It got so warm that even Hank (P.) who left his roost at Goldman Sachs in 2006 to perch at Treasury could smell the flames.
The operative word here is Treasury. That is to say, in the normal run of things, hookers and pols having always gone together like dill and pickles, a married man’s booty calls would provoke no more than a yawn. They certainly wouldn’t have come to the attention of the revenue department. But Spitzer’s zeal had aroused the ire of the banking mafia. And thus it was that no sooner did things get really toasty on Wall Street, then along comes an IRS probe that turns up Spitzer’s sins of the flesh. And thus the public was regaled with the seedy drama of the Emperor’s Club and Eliot. And thus also Wall Street dethroned the hated securities czar and sent him scurrying back to his former life as a mere real estate billionaire.
But now, with Hank (G., not P.) defending AIG as a national treasure fully deserving of taxpayer TLC, you begin to wonder about it all. If AIG was such a treasure, why did Greenberg ever leave? Why did he rail against his successor? And why defend AIG now? Was he thinking about the shares he still has at AIG?
[Maybe he was taking a leaf out of the book of yet another Goldman CEO, Robert Rubin, slated to be Obama’s economic point man, a man who’s made an art out of jumping ship at the right time (read, Citigroup) leaving his successors to hold the sub-prime bag.
It’s a trick Rubin worked at as Secretary of the Treasury in the 1990s, when he (along with St. Alan) was responsible as much as anyone else for blocking regulation of the over the counter derivative trade and for consolidating the banks – misdeeds for which the rest of the financial industry is now paying].
And what about the Starr Foundation, the charity that Greenberg headed, and which Spitzer claimed he also misused? Turns out Spitzer wasn’t so wrong. Greenberg seems to have been using public funds to pursue his own agenda. Maybe Starr is another national treasure in the making… Or is national just what comes in after treasure goes out? You wonder some more.
Just this March, before AIG took ill, Hank (P, not G) came up with a proposal for insurance reform that amounted to an end run by the big insurance players around the state insurance system. Now your wondering becomes positively thunderous.
There is no bigger player than AIG. Yet no private bids were considered. Had they been, AIG would surely have found private buyers. Lehman did.
Instead the Fed bailed it out. Actually, it was the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the most important of the 12 federal reserve banks and the one responsible for carrying out the Fed’s exchange rate policy, i.e. for buying and selling dollars. It was the same NY Fed which cobbled together the rescue of Bear Stearns. On NY Fed chairman Geithner’s board of directors sits another Goldman chief, Stephen Friedman. Geithner also takes unofficial advice from Goldman alums Gerald Corrigan and the aforementioned John Thain. Then, of course, there’s the man whose bidding Geithner is bound officially to do, the Treas. Sec. himself, His Holiness Hank, servant of the people.
However you cut it, that’s a lot of Goldman.
Which means that however you cut it, the bail-out of the giants of finance is not just a bail out of the economy…or of the banking system….
It’s an evisceration of some banks by others…. a cannibalistic binge billed to the tax-payer.
No matter how much rosy gloss gets slathered on it, it’s a pig-out at the public trough.
Seen on an Indian blog, suggesting why it’s better for Indians to let Kashmir go:”
Military: Their neighbours will be India, Pakistan and China. No country can claim such a host of dangerously unstable, nuclear armed, overambitious, territorially hungry nations. Even NATO membership won’t save you. As Georgia is still finding out.
Economy: It saves us the blank cheque that we write them every year, and we can actually have greater control over them since we will be their biggest and only trading partner (no routes in from China, and Pakistan doesn’t have an economy). We will control the only safe air routes into Srinagar, and the only all weather road and train link into Kashmir. Man, we can make them dance like a monkey on a stick. Maybe they’ll even provide as much entertainment as the erstwhile “Royal” Nepal.
Politics: Watch as Geelani and his ilk find that fasts, bandhs, marches, strikes, threats to sign up with militants is not exactly a popular way to run a Government. It’ll be great fun on a slow news day.
They get to keep Arundhati Roy.”
[Arundati is a noisy fan of ‘let Kashmir go.’]
Read the rest at Churumuri.
Thanks to writer-engineer Kash Agarwal, on whose blog I recently discovered this gem of Babu English:
“A School Master from a remote rural area in Bihar was
transferred to a new School in Mumbai.
He reported for duty two days after the actual
date of joining.
Consequently he was asked for an explanation in
writing…
____________ _________ _________
Deer sur,
If small small mistakes getting inside my letter, I
big you pardon, ass I am not a good englis speaker.
This is my fist vijit to Bombai. Stickly speaking, I
wanted to joint your school more fastly,
but for the following region, too much time
lost in getting slipper reservation in three-tyre
compartment.
I tolded
I has head ache problem due to migration. Still the
clerk rejected to give ticket to I and my sun.
I putted a complain on station masterji.
He said I to go to the lady clerk.
At first she also rejected. I then pressed for long
time and finally with great difficulty
she gave a birth to my sun.
Anyway I thanked the station master also
because he was phully responsible for getting birth
of my son…”
And more in that vein.
“The usual Jeeves story is as follows: Bertie gets in hot water, goes bleating to Jeeves, who brings to bear his infinite sagacity to rescue his master. While doing so, he also extracts a victory of sorts — making Bertie give up something — now a jacket, now a tie, another time his moustache! The story ends with a restored Bertie Wooster calling for a restorative brandy and soda, only to find the effects already at his elbow. Jeeves is perfect.
Unsuitable romantic dalliances are one thing, calling for no more than minor strictures as above, but a permanent change in the status-quo is a different matter altogether. In such instances, Jeeves can be ruthless, as when Wooster contemplates having his sister and her three daughters move in with him (“it will be nice to hear the pitter-patter of little feet about the place, Jeeves“, or words to that effect). Jeeves realizes that immediate and salutary measures are called for. In an unforgettable episode (the only one written in Jeeves’ hand rather than Wooster’s), he puts Bertie before an audience of schoolgirls, from which Wooster emerges a chastened man, cured of his illusions about how charming the young ladies are.
Something similar occurred last month, when Sen. Bertie Wooster (D-IL) was asked about a ripe idea (assumed, naturally, to have emanated from Jeeves). Instead of paying tribute to the great man (“from the collar upward, he stands alone” would have been mot juste), he instead chose to take the tack of I was reluctantly compelled to hand the misguided blighter the mitten……”
Read the rest at Niranjan Ramakrishna’s blogogram.
My Comment (posted at blogogram):
Hey Niranjan –
Good piece. Barack as Bertie, I’ll let fly. But Jeremiah is not Jeeves. He’s some one much more tyrannical and pompous. I’d say, Sir Roderick Spode.
For those who don’t know Wodehouse, here’s a profile of Spode from wiki:
“Spode….. marches his followers around London and the countryside, preaching loudly to the public on the dissoluteness of modern society until a heckler hits him in the eye with a potato….”
And how does Jeeves deflate Spode?
“Before Spode inherited the title of Earl of Sidcup from his uncle, he made a living as the “founder and proprietor of the emporium in Bond Street known as Eulalie Soeurs”, a famed designer of ladies’ lingerie.[1] Out of embarrassment, Spode had long attempted to keep his ownership of the business a secret, though Jeeves discovered the fact in the Junior Ganymede Club’s official Book, where one of Spode’s former valets had inscribed it. In The Code of the Woosters, this discovery allowed Bertie to threaten Spode with public embarrassment and prevent being coshed: as Bertie says, “You can’t be a successful Dictator and design women’s underclothing. One or the other. Not both.” Indeed, whenever Bertie mentions the name “Eulalie” throughout the book, Spode instantly becomes meek and acquiescing….”
“The marriage of Naveen, an engineer in Florida, hit rock bottom in mere five months. “I just asked her why she was in touch with her boyfriend. She tried to harm herself with a knife. We returned to India and I suggested she stay with her parents for some time. As soon as I was back in the US, she filed a 498-A case against my family and me. My parents were jailed for three days,” said Naveen, a case against whom is on in India and an Interpol Red Corner Notice pending abroad. Anupama Singh, the secretary of Rakshak that has raked up such cases, said the voluntary organisation has received over 700 such complaints, half of them from the US alone.
“We don’t say all these are genuine cases, but many are. The government is not really concerned. It’s futile to talk about the plight of men and their families by the women they marry. “In contrast, the cases of women being tortured by their husbands abroad have been overplayed with the government claiming that 30,000 brides — 15,000 from Punjab’s Doab region alone — had been abandoned abroad,” she said.
But in 2005, the government said in Parliament that only 100 such complaints had been received. The ministry of overseas Indian affairs (MOIA) recently revised the figure to 152. The trend, therefore, is more of vanishing brides and abandoned grooms abroad, Singh added.”
Comment
That’s from the Times of India last year, describing the ongoing barrage of domestic abuse of non-resident Indian males (especially high-status, high-earning males) by their delicately-nurtured, oh-so-domestic, docile, doe-eyed, dosa-making desi brides).
No surprise. Whenever the state starts “doing-good” with its right hand, its left hand has the thumb pressed into the pan of the scales. Dowry laws were cooked up to protect victimized wives. But after gender feminists got done with the recipe, a new set of victims had been trussed up for carving on the marital altar – husbands.
Topping my recently opened female-of-the-species-is-more-deadly-than-the-male file, this, from an Indian site (I’ve changed some of the language for clarity):
How to Improve Gender Sensitivity in India:
1) Women must not be imprisoned even if they kill. They need to be put into reformatories.
2) As soon as a woman marries, she should get 50% rights to her husband’s property.
3) Large scale single parenting by woman (with maintenance provided by husband) is the norm. Research shows that children who are not allowed to see their fathers after divorce for years grow up to be very healthy. In India, Gender Sensitive judges alone should decide if the women should allow the father to see the child after divorce or not. Or if he should ever see them.
4) Any violence committed by woman against others (including murder) should be considered self-defense.
5) The disparity between life expectancy rates in men and women needs to be raised to the levels in developed countries. In India, women live 2.4 years more than men on an average. This difference has to be improved to the levels in the US and Europe where women live more than 6 years than men on an average.
6) If a man cancels an engagement, he need to be punished by imprisonment of upto 5 months. On the other hand, if a woman cancels an engagement, she should be compensated with 30% or more of the man’s yearly income.
7) For any woman who commits suicide within 7 years of marriage, a dowry harassment (or other harassment) case against the husband should be filed by default. He should be imprisoned for at least a year for not taking care of his wife.
8) If a woman complains of domestic violence, the man should be imprisoned immediately and bail only granted by a court. All their joint bank accounts need to be frozen at once. The woman also has the to right to stay on in the “matrimonial home” (i.e., the husband’s house), until she gets a divorce. If the women has an adulterous relation that is proved beyond doubt, the husband must still allow her to live in his house, or provide alternate accommodation of equal quality. The benchmark case is in the movie, “Hum Dil De Chuke Sanam.” The husband is even expected to help the women achieve her adulterous goals. If he cannot directly help, he must provide one-third of his salary towards the wife until she marries the other man.
9) A man must do half of all household work, even if his wife is not working. But he must always work full-time. If he does not, even if he does all house work, he should be labeled lazy, improvident, pathetic, and derelict, certainly in private, and preferably in public where it will cause maximum humiliation and pain either to him or to his relatives. If a woman does not work either outside the house or in, she is nonetheless entitled to all consideration and respect and anything less than deferential treatment of all her needs, demands, whims, and psychiatric moods should be considered a violation of her human rights.
10) After marriage, a man must not stay with his parents or allow his parents to stay for a prolonged period with him (“prolonged” to be decided by the woman and subject to revision at any time on request by her, her friends, or her relatives however distant and uneducated). He must allow her in-laws to stay in his house for at least the same length of time his parents stay in his house. If he violates any of these fundamental human rights of a woman, he can be imprisoned for neglect and abuse of his in-laws.
11) If in-laws of a man “feel” their daughter (or they) are not properly treated, the man should be thoroughly counseled and sensitized to his failure. If he does not mend his ways, stringent laws must be passed (with provision even for administering a good lashing) that will rectify his behavior.
12) The ratio of male:female suicide rates in India should be brought to the levels in the West. In India, 50%(about 25,000) more men commit suicide than women. This is much lower than western standards, where about 150% more men commit suicide than women.
13) The richer and the more educated the men are, the more pressure should be placed on them. They should provide the wife with a lifestyle equivalent to their status….. and they must also spend quality time with family (See 9, 10, 11 above). If this is still impossible, see 12.
14) By definition, Bangalore techies (since they work with software) are required to be softer than others. Since they are also paid more than most, they should deposit 20% of their monthly salary, at least, in their wives’ names.
15) If the wife of a techie complains of dowry harassment (or any other harassment), he must be sacked from the job immediately (that is, after he gets out of jail on bail).
16) If the wife and husband are both techies, then the wife must not spend any part of her salary towards household or personal expenses. All expenses must be born by the man.
17) Streedhan given as a gift to the daughter during marriage must also be considered dowry.
18) Rural women and poor women are ignorant and can’t afford legal help. So, clearly the laws are really meant for urban India. Rural women should actually be discouraged from approaching the police or the courts since they don’t have the money anyway. Instead, they should be empowered in other ways – by better employment and by continuing to live in the traditional family system where they respect the decisions of elders. That will show everyone that that women’s rights laws are really UNDERUSED and (more importantly) will encourage urban women to MISUSE the law and file false cases. That makes for good business for feminist and Human Rights lawyers and keep bribe-giving at a healthy level, the booty being divided between the police and the women’s organizations. Currently, the rate of extortion for a techie is upto 1 lac and for an NRI (non-resident Indian) it goes upto 4 lacs.
19) Since, rural women do not suffer from domestic violence (see 18), domestic violence laws must be used mostly – and most stringently – in urban India. Quod Erat Demostrandum.
More here in the archives of one of many new blogs on the feminist abuse of dowry and domestic abuse laws in India.
It would be funny if it were not another grim reminder of the way statutory remedies by the state end up creating more problems than remedies. Ultimately, both the men’s movement and the feminists are right….only in different places and ways. The feminists are more right (generally) about rural, uneducated women…..and the men’s movements is more right (generally) about urban, well-educated women.. But even then, each individual case is unique.
Racism, sexism and exist, but only as useful terms for analysis.. Down in the marrow, it’s all about power and relative power.
And when it holds power, the fairer sex is also the fiercer sex…
Read more here on the abuse of dowry laws and some advice for expatriate men who want to return home to be married:
498A victims offer the following advice for men getting married in India:
• When the bride and groom’s families exchange gifts, keep a written record of everything received and given.
• If you are traveling to India, make copies of your passport, visa and all credit cards and leave the copies with a trusted friend or relative.
• Don’t give anyone your tickets or passport.
• Register with the local Foreigners Registration Office upon arrival in India, and let them know your expected date of departure as well.
• “Don’t sign any blank checks.”
• Consider a prenuptial agreement.
• Keep aware of any bank activity by monitoring your bank statements.
• Print out and save any emails that may help your case. Under India’s recent cyber-laws, the emails may be admissible as evidence.
For more information, contact the following:
• Yahoo! Groups: Misusedowryact and Nridivorce
• www.sangyabalya.org (site is not always operational; alternatively, call them in Bangalore at 011-91-80-5696-9850 or email them at victimsof498a@rediffmail.com.
• The FBI’s local Indian staff can be reached through the American embassy in New Delhi: 011-91-11-2419-8000
• A few blogs are online, such as batteredmen.fullhydblogs.com, batteredmen.rediffblogs.com and batteredmen.blogspot.com.
“Such is the agenda of A. J. Jacobs’ achingly funny memoir The Year of Living Biblically. Jacobs, the author of The Know-It All, begins by describing himself as a secular Jew. (“I’m Jewish in the same way the Olive Garden is an Italian restaurant. Which is to say: Not very.”) In spite of his own detachment from religion, he is increasingly curious about the ways it influences 21st-century American life. Rather than standing on the sidelines or casting himself as an aloof pundit, he dives in head first and decides to spend a year living all the commandments of the Bible—that’s right, all of them. A sampling:
He hires an earnest New York shatnez tester to ensure that his garments don’t mix wool and linen (Deut. 22:11).
He can’t utter the names of false gods (Exodus 23:13), which means that “I’ll have lunch with you on Thursday” or “let’s get the kids together for a play date on Wednesday” are flat out, since Thursday and Wednesday honor Thor and Woden, respectively.
He won’t touch his wife during and just after her period—or any woman, for that matter (Lev. 15:19). He can’t even sit on a chair a menstruating woman has occupied, which makes navigating the Manhattan subway a bit tricky.
He allows the sides of his hair to grow uncut (Lev. 19:27), and by the end of the year the fashion-challenged combination of his long earlocks and all-white garments (Eccl. 9:8) causes people to cross to the other side of the street rather than encounter him….”
More here.
Nothing can keep Ron Paul
From making his biggest house call:
So, let Obama girl shake it,
And Hillary fake it-
Bet the Doc cleans their clocks next fall.