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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Rock_nj who wrote (161654)2/25/2009 12:52:13 AM
From: koan  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 362340
 
>>Speaking of the economy. Perhaps we should look at our standard of living instead of the ups and downs of the economy. I'd say all Americans, rich and poor, are better off than they were say 25 years ago. Our standard of living has improved. So what if we have to cut back on personal spending for another year during the economic downturn. We're better off than ever on balance.<<

I do not agree. We had almost no deficit 25 years ago and a person could work their way through college. We also had 3 times as many unions and a much larger middle class.

We have been substituting good industrial jobs for fast food work.



To: Rock_nj who wrote (161654)2/25/2009 2:21:50 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 362340
 
Obama Casts Crisis as Chance to Overhaul Banking & Health Care

By Hans Nichols and Julianna Goldman

Feb. 25 (Bloomberg) -- President Barack Obama framed the U.S. economic crisis as an opportunity to solve some of the nation’s most intractable issues and signaled that more taxpayer money would be needed to end the credit crunch.

In his first address to a joint session of Congress, Obama said last night the staggering economy has left “our confidence shaken” and promised “we will rebuild, we will recover, and the United States of America will emerge stronger than before.”

He tried to strike a balance between describing the symptoms of the U.S.’s financial woes and prescribing a cure. That prescription went well beyond the crisis that has forced banks such as Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp. to seek billions of dollars in federal aid, to include the expansion of the government’s role in health care, energy and education.

His speech was “pointing out the light at the end of the tunnel,” said Mark Gertler, a New York University economics professor who has collaborated on research with Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben S. Bernanke. “That hadn’t been done yet.”

The president, a Democrat, challenged Republicans in Congress to join him in a dramatic change of course. “The cost of action will be great,” he said. “I can assure you that the cost of inaction will be far greater.”

Republicans rejected the call to join forces. In the party’s official reply following the president’s speech, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal called Obama’s economic- stimulus plan “irresponsible” and said it will increase taxes and “saddle future generations with debt.”

Courting Skeptics

Obama, 47, anticipated such opposition, saying, “I understand your skepticism.” He promised to appoint Vice President Joe Biden to oversee how federal money is spent.

Obama, who has been in office little more than a month, is confronting a deepening economic crisis, with reports showing consumer confidence collapsed this month and home values plunged in December. Fed Chairman Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee yesterday the U.S. is in a “severe” contraction and the recession may last into 2010 unless the financial system is stabilized.

While Obama pressed for immediate action on the crisis, he also called for sweeping initiatives on energy, health care and education, saying they are “absolutely critical to our economic future.”

‘Big Ideas’

“History reminds us that, at every moment of economic upheaval and transformation, this nation has responded with bold action and big ideas,” he said.

He called for a “market-based” cap on carbon emissions, which he said would lower U.S. production of greenhouse gases. He pledged to spend $15 billion a year to develop wind and solar power, biofuels, clean coal technology, and research into fuel-efficient vehicles.

The country also can’t afford to delay revamping the health-care system, he said.

“Health-care reform cannot wait, it must not wait, and it will not wait another year,” Obama said. The White House will hold a summit on the issue next week.

On education, the president set a goal for the U.S. to have the world’s highest proportion of college graduates by 2020. “In a global economy, where the most valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer a pathway to opportunity -- it is a prerequisite,” he said.

Government’s ‘Full Force’

Still, the economic crisis dominated his speech. He vowed to use “the full force of the federal government” to shore up the banking system and suggested that fixing the credit crisis will cost more than the $700 billion already committed.

The announcement may provide a boost to the nation’s lenders, whose share prices have fluctuated over speculation that they may need to be nationalized to ensure their survival.

“We now know that more money’s coming,” said Brian Gardner, a Washington policy analyst at Keefe Bruyette & Woods Inc. “There will be a political fight over it, but I think it was significant that he mentioned it.”

Obama’s advisers declined to say what marker they would use to indicate progress.

“I don’t think there’s any one indicator that’s going to say, ‘Aha, we’re out of the woods,’” senior adviser David Axelrod said in an interview. “I don’t think the American people expect miracles.”

Credit Markets Key

Clogged credit markets must be opened or “our recovery will be choked off before it even begins,” said Obama. The economic crisis stems from what he described as a short-sighted attitude that infected Main Street, Wall Street and Washington.

“We have lived through an era where, too often, short- term gains were prized over long-term prosperity; where we failed to look beyond the next payment, the next quarter, or the next election,” he said.

Polls show Obama holding onto his high approval ratings, although his numbers have declined since his inauguration. A Feb. 21-23 Gallup tracking poll showed Obama’s ratings dropping below 60 percent for the first time since Jan. 20.

In a nod to the populist uproar over Wall Street bonuses and lavish office decorating with taxpayer funds, Obama said, “I get it.

“I will not spend a single penny for the purpose of rewarding a single Wall Street executive, but I will do whatever it takes to help the small business that can’t pay its workers or the family that has saved and still can’t get a mortgage,” he said. “That’s what this is about. It’s not about helping banks -- it’s about helping people.”

Greater Accountability

Obama said his administration’s bank-rescue plan is “not about helping banks -- it’s about helping people” by opening up credit to individuals to let them buy homes and businesses to hire workers.

To make sure the financial crisis won’t be repeated, he called on Congress to act on legislation to reform the system of rules and regulations for markets.

He sought to temper his warnings about the severity of the crisis with optimism that it can be overcome. He insisted that the tools to revive growth are within reach.

“They exist in our laboratories and universities; in our fields and our factories; in the imaginations of our entrepreneurs and the pride of the hardest-working people on Earth,” he said. “What is required now is for this country to pull together, confront boldly the challenges we face, and take responsibility for our future once more.”

GM, Chrysler

Obama also touched on the struggles of General Motors Corp. and Chrysler LLC.

“We should not, and will not, protect them from their own bad practices,” he said. “But we are committed to the goal of a re-tooled, re-imagined auto industry that can compete and win. Millions of jobs depend on it.”

GM, the largest U.S. auto company, is seeking as much as $16.6 billion in federal loans in addition to the $13.4 billion it has already received. Chrysler, the third-largest U.S. automaker, has asked for $5 billion more after getting $4 billion. The companies face a March 31 deadline to show the government they can revamp operations, return to profit and repay the money they owe the government.

To contact the reporters on this story: Hans Nichols in Washington at hnichols2@bloomberg.net; Julianna Goldman in Washington at jgoldman6@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: February 25, 2009 01:38 EST



To: Rock_nj who wrote (161654)2/25/2009 4:53:39 AM
From: stockman_scott1 Recommendation  Respond to of 362340
 
OPM Addiction: Why the government needs to restrict Wall Street firms from playing with Other People's Money.

By William R. Gruver
The New Republic
Wednesday, February 25, 2009

In his first inauguration speech, President Franklin D. Roosevelt observed that the titans of Wall Street "have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization"--an apt description for the lashing of Wall Street leaders this month in front of the House Financial Services Committee. Chairman Barney Frank and the members of his committee were less eloquent than FDR in their criticisms of the current Wall Street CEOs, but the point was the same--the public has lost faith in the leadership of our financial community. How have we come full circle over 75 years after FDR? And how can Wall Street avoid a future return to this ignominious position in our society?

If March 4, 1933, and February 11, 2009, marked the nadirs of public confidence in Wall Street, then the years 1928 and 1999 marked the zeniths, when Goldman Sachs sold shares to the public for the only two times in its history. In December 1928, the partners of Goldman Sachs sold shares in a subsidiary called Goldman Sachs Trading Corporation--for its day, a complex, highly leveraged instrument with many layers that made transparency all but impossible. By the time of Roosevelt's inauguration in 1933, the shares were nearly worthless. For the next 70 years, burned by that experience and FDR's excoriation in 1933, the firm's partners retreated to their roots as a private partnership, using their own personal capital with only modest leverage to advance their role as a financial intermediary.

By 1999, Goldman's reputation had recovered to its previous zenith--to the point that a public offering again was possible. Its partners had debated the merits of such a change for years, and, even when the decision was made to go forward, the decision was reached only after vigorous debate and much disagreement. In favor of going public were those partners who saw a need for a larger capital base to allow the firm to compete in the increasingly globalized economy with the larger players both in the U.S. and overseas. Furthermore, once a public market was established for its shares, Goldman would have a currency other than cash with which to acquire other businesses and grow into financial services it could not afford to enter as a private partnership. On the other side of the argument were those partners who were worried about the impact that transition to a public firm would have on the firm's culture. Heretofore, the firm had been known for its low ego and gang-tackling ethos, with aggressive personalities kept in check by the partnership potential that was strongly linked to both productivity and cultural fit.

What neither the firm's partners nor outside observers were able to foresee was the resulting change in the firm's risk tolerance. Goldman Sachs was the last of the major Wall Street houses to go public. (Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette had been the first in 1970.) As of May 4, 1999, all of Wall Street were now playing with other people's money (whose acronym, OPM, is not coincidentally pronounced "opium" in financial circles). When Goldman was a private partnership, its partners faced unlimited personal liability when making capital allocation decisions; post IPO, their much more limited liability was identical to that of any other senior executive in a public corporation. One of the largest market participants was now prepared to play without the self-imposed restrictions that had been present in its earlier form.

The consequences of the Goldman IPO have been eerily similar to 1929--increasingly complex financial instruments and increased leverage. Those conditions have been among the key factors that have brought us to a world strikingly similar to what it was in 1933--a stock market crash that has led to an economy that could be entering a Depression.

Shortly after his inaugural address, FDR began substantively rebuilding America's trust in Wall Street with his New Deal securities legislation (the '33 Securities Act, the '33 Banking Act and the '34 Securities Exchange Act), which, among other things, created the Securities Exchange Commission. Certainly, a major rethinking of our securities regulation is in order today. If we are to avoid repeating history yet again, however, it might also be wise to restrict Wall Street to private ownership so that the risks are born by the participants and their risk tolerances are accordingly restrained. When FDR said during that same 1933 inaugural address "that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," he had it only partially correct: We should also fear financiers operating with other people's capital.

*William R. Gruver, a former general partner at Goldman Sachs, is the Distinguished Clinical Professor of Management at Bucknell University.