SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: geode00 who wrote (78916)2/11/2009 8:43:17 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1--compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1...

newsweek.com

By Fareed Zakaria
Columnist
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Feb 16, 2009

The legendary editor of The New Republic, Michael Kinsley, once held a "Boring Headline Contest" and decided that the winner was "Worthwhile Canadian Initiative." Twenty-two years later, the magazine was rescued from its economic troubles by a Canadian media company, which should have taught us Americans to be a bit more humble. Now there is even more striking evidence of Canada's virtues. Guess which country, alone in the industrialized world, has not faced a single bank failure, calls for bailouts or government intervention in the financial or mortgage sectors. Yup, it's Canada. In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada's banking system the healthiest in the world. America's ranked 40th, Britain's 44th.

Canada has done more than survive this financial crisis. The country is positively thriving in it. Canadian banks are well capitalized and poised to take advantage of opportunities that American and European banks cannot seize. The Toronto Dominion Bank, for example, was the 15th-largest bank in North America one year ago. Now it is the fifth-largest. It hasn't grown in size; the others have all shrunk.

So what accounts for the genius of the Canadians? Common sense. Over the past 15 years, as the United States and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries, the Canadians refused to follow suit, seeing the old rules as useful shock absorbers. Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1—compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1 and European banks at a frightening 61 to 1. Partly this reflects Canada's more risk-averse business culture, but it is also a product of old-fashioned rules on banking.

Canada has also been shielded from the worst aspects of this crisis because its housing prices have not fluctuated as wildly as those in the United States. Home prices are down 25 percent in the United States, but only half as much in Canada. Why? Well, the Canadian tax code does not provide the massive incentive for overconsumption that the U.S. code does: interest on your mortgage isn't deductible up north. In addition, home loans in the United States are "non-recourse," which basically means that if you go belly up on a bad mortgage, it's mostly the bank's problem. In Canada, it's yours. Ah, but you've heard American politicians wax eloquent on the need for these expensive programs—interest deductibility alone costs the federal government $100 billion a year—because they allow the average Joe to fulfill the American Dream of owning a home. Sixty-eight percent of Americans own their own homes. And the rate of Canadian homeownership? It's 68.4 percent.

Canada has been remarkably responsible over the past decade or so. It has had 12 years of budget surpluses, and can now spend money to fuel a recovery from a strong position. The government has restructured the national pension system, placing it on a firm fiscal footing, unlike our own insolvent Social Security. Its health-care system is cheaper than America's by far (accounting for 9.7 percent of GDP, versus 15.2 percent here), and yet does better on all major indexes. Life expectancy in Canada is 81 years, versus 78 in the United States; "healthy life expectancy" is 72 years, versus 69. American car companies have moved so many jobs to Canada to take advantage of lower health-care costs that since 2004, Ontario and not Michigan has been North America's largest car-producing region.

I could go on. The U.S. currently has a brain-dead immigration system. We issue a small number of work visas and green cards, turning away from our shores thousands of talented students who want to stay and work here. Canada, by contrast, has no limit on the number of skilled migrants who can move to the country. They can apply on their own for a Canadian Skilled Worker Visa, which allows them to become perfectly legal "permanent residents" in Canada—no need for a sponsoring employer, or even a job. Visas are awarded based on education level, work experience, age and language abilities. If a prospective immigrant earns 67 points out of 100 total (holding a Ph.D. is worth 25 points, for instance), he or she can become a full-time, legal resident of Canada.

Companies are noticing. In 2007 Microsoft, frustrated by its inability to hire foreign graduate students in the United States, decided to open a research center in Vancouver. The company's announcement noted that it would staff the center with "highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S." So the brightest Chinese and Indian software engineers are attracted to the United States, trained by American universities, then thrown out of the country and picked up by Canada—where most of them will work, innovate and pay taxes for the rest of their lives.

If President Obama is looking for smart government, there is much he, and all of us, could learn from our quiet—OK, sometimes boring—neighbor to the north. Meanwhile, in the councils of the financial world, Canada is pushing for new rules for financial institutions that would reflect its approach. This strikes me as, well, a worthwhile Canadian initiative.



To: geode00 who wrote (78916)2/11/2009 9:45:33 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 89467
 
U.S. Homeowners Will Lose Up to $10 Trillion, Talbott Estimates

by James Pressley

Feb. 12 (Bloomberg) -- John R. Talbott, a former Goldman Sachs banker, calls himself both an optimist and a realist. When it comes to U.S. housing, the realist has the upper hand.

His new book, “Contagion,” predicts that prices are only halfway through a potential decline that will see homeowners lose up to $10 trillion. Values will fall for four to five more years, he says, as defaults move from subprime to prime mortgages.

When I reviewed the book last week, some readers called the author courageous. Others accused him of being a doomsayer. I put their questions to Talbott, 54, in a telephone interview.

Pressley: Are you spreading doom and gloom?

Talbott: While I’ve been an optimist all my life, I’m also a realist. And for the past five or six years, I’ve been painting a fairly ugly story about how bad this might get.

Pressley: One reader suggested that you’re understating the price decline. He says homes that fetched $225,000 to $275,000 in Lee County, Florida, three years ago now sell for about $40,000, which he calls 1970 to 1980 prices.

Talbott: He makes a good point. The national average of home prices is already off 23 percent to 24 percent. But realize that this is an average and that the epicenter is primarily in California and Florida, with Phoenix and Las Vegas thrown in. You are going to see areas that are off at least 50 percent and I wouldn’t be shocked to find cities that are off 60 to 65 percent.

Back to 1997

Pressley: You say real prices should return to average 1997 levels, adjusted for inflation. Why 1997?

Talbott: I’m trying to get back to a more normal time -- before the explosive growth in home prices, before the crazy bank financing, and -- oh, yes -- before the Internet bubble.

Pressley: The greatest price appreciations during the boom were in America’s wealthiest cities, you say.

Talbott: It’s striking. Middle-income homes in the middle of the U.S. still sell for $100,000 to $150,000. Louisville barely beat the consumer price index over the past 20 to 30 years. Your wealthy cities -- San Diego, Manhattan, Miami, Beverly Hills --went up three- and four- and five-fold in real terms.

Pressley: You predict homeowners will lose $8 trillion to $10 trillion. How so?

Talbott: There was at the 2006 peak about $25 trillion of residential home value. Today, that’s off almost 25 percent. That takes it down to the $18 trillion range, which is a $7 trillion loss. But in a deep recession, home prices might trade even lower than fair value given the high unemployment that exists.

‘Sit Tight’

Pressley: One reader in his 30s bought a home during the peak between 2004 and 2007. What do you advise such people to do?

Talbott: If your mortgage value isn’t terribly different from what you conservatively estimate your home to be worth -- and by that I mean what homes are selling for down the street -- then go ahead, if you’re comfortable in the home, and lock in the interest rates. Make sure you get a 30-year deal at something like 4.5 percent to 5 percent, participate in whatever government plans to lower your principal that Barack Obama and Congress offer, and sit tight. It won’t be the best investment you’ve ever made, but it won’t bankrupt you.

Pressley: One real-estate broker reminds you that housing slumps don’t last forever.

Talbott: When I wrote my first book on housing in 2003, I heard from almost every real-estate broker in the country. They all insisted that housing booms do last forever!

They are right that housing busts don’t last. But there’s no way prices are going to bounce back to where they were. The reason is simple: Banks were funding houses at eight and nine times a married couple’s combined income. They were doing that through CDOs and government-guaranteed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac loans. Those funding sources are gone. Now they are lending at four to five times combined incomes.

‘Pay the Piper’

Pressley: A reader notes that the Fed has vastly expanded the monetary base. Won’t the resulting inflation work against falling house prices?

Talbott: He’s right in the long term. Governments around the world are printing money to try to save their banks. It’s being masked by real price declines of things like $400 Ralph Lauren sunglasses. And so you’re seeing some deflation. But in the long term we’ll have to pay the piper and inflation will reignite.

Pressley: One reader says the root cause of the bubble lies in inflated real-estate appraisals, in “massive fraud” in the industry.

Talbott: The fraud reached its zenith in the real-estate industry, but it was everywhere. The appraisers couldn’t have done it by themselves. The most massive fraud was by the rating agencies. Dentists were charging $50,000 for $4,000 worth of work. You name the industry, and we were in a funny world in which everybody so valued money and status that they were doing fairly unethical things.

“Contagion” is from Wiley (256 pages, $24.95, 15.99 pounds, 19.20 euros).

(James Pressley writes for Bloomberg News. The opinions expressed are his own. This interview was condensed from a longer conversation.)

To contact the writer on the story: James Pressley in Brussels at jpressley@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: February 11, 2009 19:00 EST



To: geode00 who wrote (78916)2/12/2009 12:52:03 AM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 89467
 
Michael Moore Asks Bankers To Help Prove Bailout Is A ‘Swindle’

By Pat Wechsler

Feb. 12 (Bloomberg) -- Filmmaker Michael Moore, who says the Wall Street bailout is “the biggest swindle in American history,” is asking bankers to help him make a movie proving it.

The 55-year-old Michigan native posted an open letter on his Web site yesterday seeking volunteers to “step up as an American and do your duty of shedding some light” on the almost $1.1 trillion in losses and writedowns globally. Moore also sent the letter to people on his e-mail list.

While some bankers may be tempted to get involved with the filmmaker who pilloried former President George W. Bush’s response to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S., they should think before they contact Moore, said Davia Temin, chief executive officer of crisis-management firm Temin & Co.

“When you’re in a firestorm, you don’t stand up,” she said. “You duck. I’m sure Moore will keep names confidential, but these things have a way of boomeranging when you tell a friend because you’re excited about being on a movie set.”

Moore declined to comment, according to a spokesman for Overture Films LLC, who asked to remain unidentified because he doesn’t represent the filmmaker directly. The company is owned by Starz LLC, part of cable billionaire John Malone’s holdings, and is the movie’s distributor for North America. A release date hasn’t been announced.

The filmmaker, whose documentaries skewered General Motors Corp. and the U.S. health-care industry, is in the middle of shooting the movie, according to his Web site, michaelmoore.com. He made his name with the 1989 release of “Roger & Me,” documenting Moore’s unsuccessful efforts to confront former GM CEO Roger Smith about his management of what then was the world’s biggest automaker.

Moore’s Reputation

“Moore’s reputation is locked in,” said Howard Rubenstein, president of Rubenstein Associates Inc. a New York- based public-relations firms that advises hedge funds, private- equity firms and banks. “Whatever he touches gets gored. Wall Street better gird itself. The Huns are invading.”

Bankers should counter potential fallout from Moore’s venture by assembling a rescue program to buy houses going into foreclosure and give them back to their owners, Temin said.

“Popular culture has always had a love-hate relationship with Wall Street,” she said in a phone interview from her New York office. “Now that we see that much of what people were paid was based on vapor, that needle has moved to hate. Wall Street needs to figure that out and respond to it.”

While the Overture spokesman wouldn’t comment on the title of Moore’s movie, the filmmaker asked in his e-mail for responses to be sent to bailout@michaelmoore.com.

Moore claimed on his Web site to have heard from a “few brave people” already.

‘The Real Deal’

“Based on those who have contacted me, I believe there are a number of you who know ‘the real deal,’” he wrote. “You have information that the American people need to hear. I am humbly asking you for a moment of courage, to be a hero.”

John Thain, the former chief executive officer of Merrill Lynch & Co., has been subpoenaed by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo to testify about $3.6 billion in bonuses the firm distributed to employees before its takeover by Bank of America Corp. Thain declined to comment, according to a spokesman, who said he was not authorized to release his name.

“Everybody I know on Wall Street is ducking into bomb shelters these days,” Rubenstein said. “It may be the next hot business.”

Moore’s project was announced at the Cannes Film Festival last May. It’s being financed by Overture and Paramount Vantage, a unit of Viacom Inc.’s Paramount Pictures Corp. handling distribution outside North America, according to the Overture spokesman.

The filmmaker’s works include “Slacker Uprising” in 2008, documenting his efforts to get more Americans to vote. He also made “‘Fahrenheit 9/11” about the 2001 terrorist attack; “Bowling for Columbine” following the 1999 shootings by students at a high school in Jefferson County, Colorado; and “Sicko,” which scrutinized U.S. health care.

To contact the reporter on this story: Pat Wechsler in New York at pwechsler@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: February 12, 2009 00:01 EST