The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United
States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance
The Financial Crisis: A look behind the wizard’s curtain
By
Bruce Wiseman Thursday,
March 19, 2009
I’m tired of hearing about subprime mortgages.
It’s as if these things were living entities that had spawned an
epidemic of economic pornography.
Subprime mortgages are as much a cause of the current financial
chaos as bullets were for the death of JFK.
Someone planned the assassination and someone pulled the trigger.
The media, J. Edgar Hoover and the Warren Commission tried to push
Lee Harvey Oswald off on the American public. They didn’t buy it.
They shouldn’t buy subprime mortgages either.
Someone planned the assassination and someone pulled the trigger.
Only this time the target is the international financial structure
and the bullets are still being fired.
Oh yes, people took out adjustable-rate mortgages they could ill
afford, that were then sold to Wall Street bankers. The
bankers bundled them up like gift wrappers at Nordstrom’s during the
Holidays and sold them to other banks after raking off billions in
fees. The fees? They were for…well…they were for wrapping the
mortgages in the haute couture of Wall Street.
But it didn’t start there. No, no, not by a long shot.
And as the late, great Paul Harvey would say, “And now you’re
going to hear the Rest of the Story.”
Are subprime mortgages part of some larger agenda?
And if so, what is it?
Stay with me here, because Alice is about to slide down the rabbit
hole into the looking-glass world of international finance.
EASY MONEY ALAN
There are various places we could start this story, but we will
begin with the 1987 ascendency of Rockefeller/Rothschild homeboy
Alan Greenspan from the Board of Directors of J.P. Morgan to the
throne of Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank (a position he was to
hold for twenty years).
From the beginning of his term, Greenspan was a strong advocate for
deregulating the financial services industry: letting the cowboys of
Wall Street sow their wild financial oats, so to speak.
He also kept interest rates artificially low as if he had sprayed
the boardroom of the Federal Reserve Bank with some kind of fiscal
aspartame.
While aspartame (an artificial sweetener branded as “Equal” and
“NutraSweet”) keeps the calories down, it has this itty-bitty side
effect of converting to formaldehyde in the human body and creating
brain lesions.
As we are dealing here with a gruesomely tortured metaphor, let me
explain: I am not suggesting that Chairman Greenspan put Equal in
his morning coffee, but rather that by his direct influence,
interest rates were forced artificially low resulting in an orgy of
borrowing and toxic side effects for the entire economy.
THE COMMUNITY REINVESTMENT ACT
Greenspan had been the Fed Chairman for seven years when, in 1994, a
bill called the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was rewritten by
Congress. The new version had the purpose of providing loans to help
deserving minorities afford homes. Nice thought, but the new
legislation opened the door to loans that set aside certain lending
criteria: little things like a down payment, enough income to
service the mortgage and a good credit record.
With CRA’s facelift, we have in place two of the five elements of
the perfect financial storm: Alan (Easy Money) Greenspan at the helm
of the Fed and a piece of legislation that turned mortgage lenders
into a division of the Salvation Army.
Perhaps you can see the pot beginning to boil here. But the real
fuel to the fire was yet to come.
GLASS-STEAGALL
To understand the third element of the storm, we travel back in time
to the Great Depression and the 1933 passage of a federal law called
the Glass-Steagall Act. As excess speculation by banks was one of
the key factors of the banking collapse of 1929, this law forbade
commercial banks from underwriting (promoting and selling) stocks
and bonds.
That activity was left to the purview of “Investment Banks” (names
of major investment banks you might recognize include Goldman Sachs,
Morgan Stanley and the recently deceased Lehman Brothers).
Commercial banks could take deposits and make loans to people.
Investment banks underwrote (facilitated the issuing of) stocks and
bonds.
To repeat, this law was put in place to prevent the banking
speculation that caused the Great Depression. Among other
regulations, Glass-Steagall kept commercial banks out of the
securities.
Greenspan’s role in our not-so-little drama is made clear in one of
his first speeches before Congress in 1987 in which he calls for the
repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. In other words, he’s trying to get
rid of the legislation that kept a lid on banks speculating in
financial markets with securities.
He continued to push for the repeal until 1999 when New York banks
successfully lobbied Congress to repeal the Glass-Steagall Act.
Easy-Money Alan hailed the repeal as a revolution in finance.
Yeah, Baby!
A revolution was coming.
With Glass-Steagall gone, and the permissible mergers of commercial
banks with investment banks, there was nothing to prevent these
combined financial institutions from packaging up the subprime CRA
mortgages with normal prime loans and selling them off as
mortgage-backed securities through a different arm of the same
financial institution. No external due diligence required.
You now have three of the five Horsemen of the Fiscal Apocalypse:
Greenspan, CRA mortgages and repeal of Glass-Steagall.
WAIVER OF CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
Enter Hammering Hank Paulson.
In April of 2004, a group of five investment banks met with the
regulators at the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and
convinced them to waive a rule that required the banks to maintain a
certain level of reserves.
This freed up an enormous reservoir of capital, which the investment
banks were able to use to purchase oceans of Mortgage-Backed
Securities (cleverly spiked with the subprime CRA loans like a
martini in a Bond movie). The banks kept some of these packages for
their own portfolios but also sold them by the bucketload to willing
buyers from every corner of the globe.
The investment bank that took the lead in getting the SEC to waive
the regulation was Goldman Sachs. The person responsible for
securing the waiver was Goldman’s Chairman, a man named Henry
Paulson.
With the reserve rule now removed, Paulson became Wall Street’s most
aggressive player, leveraging the relaxed regulatory environment
into a sales and marketing jihad of mortgage-backed securities and
similar instruments.
Goldman made billions. And Hammering Hank? According to Forbes
magazine, his partnership interest in Goldman in 2006 was worth $632
million. This on top of his $15 million per year in annual
compensation. Despite his glistening dome, let’s say Hank was having
a good hair day.
In case this isn’t clear, it was Paulson who, more than anyone else
on Wall Street, was responsible for the boom in selling the toxic
mortgage-backed securities to anyone who could write a check.
Many of you may recognize the name Hank Paulson. It was Paulson who
left the Goldman Sachs’ chairmanship and came to Washington in
mid-2006 as George Bush’s Secretary of the Treasury.
And it was Paulson who bludgeoned Congress out of $700 billion of
so-called stimulus money with threats of public riots and financial
Armageddon if they did not cough up the dough. He then used $300
billion to “bail out” his Wall Street homeboys to whom he had sold
the toxic paper in the first place. All at taxpayer expense.
Makes you feel warm all over, doesn’t it?
Congress has its own responsibility for this fiscal madness, but
that’s another story.
This one still has one more piece—the pièce de résistance.
BASEL II
Greenspan, the Community Reinvestment Act, the repeal of Glass-
Steagall, and Paulson getting the SEC to waive the capital rule for
investment banks have all set the stage: the economy is screaming
along, real estate is in a decade-long boom and the stock market is
reaching new highs. Paychecks are fat.
But by the first quarter of 2007, the first nigglings that all was
not well in the land of the mortgage-backed securities began to
filter into the press. And like a chilled whisper rustling through
the forest, mentions of rising delinquencies and foreclosures began
to be heard.
Still, the stock market continued to rise, with the Dow Jones
reaching a high of 14,164 on October 9, 2007. It stayed in the
13,000 range through the month, but in November, a major stock
market crash commenced from which we have yet to recover.
It’s not just the U.S. stock market that has crashed, however. Stock
exchanges around the world have fallen like a rock off a tall
building. Most have lost half their value, wiping out countless
trillions.
If it were just stock markets, that would be bad enough; but, let’s
be frank, the entire financial structure of the planet has gone into
a tailspin and it has yet to hit ground zero.
While there surely would have been losses, truth be told, the U.S.
banking system would likely have gotten through this, as would have
the rest of the world, had it not been for an accounting rule called
Basel II promulgated by the Bank for International Settlements.
Who? What?
That’s right, I said an accounting rule.
The final nail in the coffin—and this was really the wooden spike
through the heart of the financial markets—was delivered in Basel,
Switzerland, at the Bank for International Settlements (BIS).
Never heard of it? Neither have most people; so, let me pull back
the wizard’s curtain.
Central banks are privately owned financial institutions that govern
a country’s monetary policy and create the country’s money.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS), located in Basel,
Switzerland, is the central banker’s bank. There are 55 central
banks around the planet that are members, but the bank is controlled
by a board of directors, which is comprised of the elite central
bankers of 11 different countries (U.S., UK, Belgium, Canada,
France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Switzerland, the Netherlands and
Sweden).
Created in 1930, the BIS is owned by its member central banks,
which, again, are private entities. The buildings and surroundings
that are used for the purpose of the bank are inviolable. No agent
of the Swiss public authorities may enter the premises without the
express consent of the bank. The bank exercises supervision and
police power over its premises. The bank enjoys immunity from
criminal and administrative jurisdiction.
In short, they are above the law.
This is the ultra-secret world of the planet’s central bankers and
the top of the food chain in international finance. The board
members fly into Switzerland for once-a-month meetings, which they
hold in secret.
In 1988 the BIS issued a set of recommendations on how much capital
commercial banks should have. This standard, referred to as Basel I,
was adopted worldwide.
In January of 2004 our boys got together again and issued new rules
about the capitalization of banks (for those that are not fluent in
bank-speak, this is essentially what the bank has in reserves to
protect itself and its depositors).
This was called Basel II.
Within Basel II was an accounting rule that required banks to adjust
the value of their marketable securities (such as mortgage-backed
securities) to the “market price” of the security. This is called
mark to the market. There can be some rationality to this in certain
circumstances, but here’s what happened.
THE MEDIA AND MARK TO THE MARKET
As news and rumors began to circulate about some of the subprime CRA
loans in the packages of mortgage-backed securities, the press,
always at the ready to forward the most salacious and destructive
information available, started promoting these problems.
As a result, the value of these securities fell. And when one
particular bank did seek to sell some of these securities, they got
bargain basement prices.
Instantly, per Basel II, that meant that the hundreds of billions of
dollars of these securities being held by banks around the world had
to be marked down—marked to the market.
It didn’t matter that the vast majority of the loans (90% +) in
these portfolios were paying on time. If, say, Lehman Brothers had
gotten fire-sale prices for their mortgage-backed securities, the
other banks, which held these assets on their books, now had to mark
to the market, driving their financial statements into the toilet.
Again, it didn’t matter that the banks were receiving payments (cash
flow) from their loan portfolios; the value of the package of loans
had to be written down.
A rough example would be if the houses on your street were all worth
about $400,000. You owe $300,000 on your place and so have $100,000
in equity. Your neighbor, Bill, in selling his house, uncovered a
massive invasion of termites. He had to sell the house in a hurry
and wound up with $200,000, half the real value.
Shortly thereafter, you get a demand letter from your bank for
$100,000 because your house is only worth $200,000 according to “the
market.” Your house doesn’t have termites, or perhaps just a few.
Doesn’t matter.
Of course, if the value of your home goes below the loan value,
banks can’t make you cough up the difference.
But if you are a bank, Basel II says you must adjust the value of
your mortgage-backed securities if another bank sold for
less—termites or no.
When the value of their assets were marked down, it dramatically
reduced their capital (reserves), and this—their capital—determined
the amount of loans they could make.
The result? Banks couldn’t lend. The credit markets froze.
Someone recently said that credit was the life blood of the economy.
This happens to be a lie. Hard work, production, and the creation of
products that are needed and wanted by others—these are the true
life blood of an economy.
But, let’s be honest, credit does drive much of the current U.S.
economy: home mortgages, auto loans and Visas in more flavors than a
Baskin-Robbins store.
That is, until the banks had to mark to the market and turn the IV
off.
THE CRISIS
Mortgage lending slammed to a halt as if it had run headlong into a
cement wall, credit lines were cancelled and credit card limits were
reduced and in some cases eliminated altogether. In short, with
their balance sheets butchered by Basel II, banks were themselves
going under and those that weren’t simply stopped lending. The
results were like something from a financial horror film—if there
were such a thing.
Prof. Peter Spencer, one of Britain’s leading economists, makes it
very clear that the Basel II regulations “…are at the root cause of
the crunch…” and that “…if the authorities retain the strict Basel
regulations, the full scale of the eventual credit crunch and
economic slump could be disastrous.”
“The consequences for the macro-economy,” he says “of not relaxing
[the Basel regulations] are unthinkable.”
Spencer isn’t the only one who sees this. There have been calls in
both the U.S. and abroad to, at least, relax Basel II until the
crisis is over. But the Boys from Basel haven’t budged an inch. The
U.S did modify these rules somewhat a year after the devastation had
taken place here, but the rules are still fully in place in the rest
of the world and the results are appalling.
The credit crisis that started in the U.S. has spread around the
globe with the speed that only the digital universe could make
possible. You’d think Mr. Freeze from the 2004 Batman movie was at
work.
We have already noted that stock markets around the world have lost
half of their value, erasing trillions. Some selected planet-wide
stats make it clear that it is not just stock values that have
crashed.
China’s industrial production fell 12% last year, while Japan’s
exports to China fell 45% and Taiwan’s were off 55%. South Korea’s
overseas shipments decreased 17%, while their economy shrank 5.6%.
Singapore’s exports were off the most in 33 years and Hong Kong’s
exports plunged the most in 50 years.
Germany had a 7.3% decline in exports in the fourth quarter of last
year, while Great Britain’s real estate market declined 18% in the
last quarter compared to a year earlier.
Australia’s manufacturing contracted at a record pace last month
bringing the index to the lowest level on record.
There’s much more, but I think it is obvious that credit pipe can no
longer be smoked.
Welcome to planetary cold turkey.
ODDITIES
It is fascinating to look at the date coincidence of the crash in
the U.S. Earlier I noted that the stock market continued to rise
throughout 2007, peaking in October of 2007. The dip in October
turned to a route in November.
The Basel II standards were implemented here by the U.S. Financial
Accounting Standards on November 15, 2007.
There are more oddities.
Despite the fact that Hammering Hank dished out hundreds of billions
to his banker buddies to “stimulate” the economy and defrost the
credit markets, the recipients of these taxpayer bailout billions
have made it clear that they will be reducing the amount of money
they will be lending over the next 18 months by as much as $2
trillion to conform to Basel II.
What do you think—Hank, with his Harvard MBA, didn’t know? The
former chairman of the most successful investment bank in the world
didn’t know that the Basel II regulations would inhibit his homies
from turning the lending back on?
Maybe it slipped his mind.
Like the provision he put into his magnum opus, the $700 billion
bailout called TARP. It carried a provision for the Federal Reserve
to start paying interest on money banks deposited with it.
Think this through for a minute. The apparent problem is that the
credit markets are frozen. Banks aren’t lending. They can’t use the
money from TARP to lend because Basel II says they can’t. On top of
this, Paulson’s bailout lets the Fed pay interest on funds they
deposit there.
If I am the president of a bank, and let’s say that I’m not Basel II
impaired, why in the world am I going to lend to customers in the
midst of the worst financial crisis in human history when I can
click a mouse and deposit my funds with the Fed and sit back and
earn interest from them until the chaos subsides?
But, hey, maybe Hank’s been putting aspartame in his coffee.
No, this stuff is as obvious as the neon signs on Broadway to the
folks who play this game. This is banking 101.
So, given the provisions of Basel II and the refusal of the BIS to
lift or suspend the regulations when they are clearly the driving
force behind the planet-wide credit crisis, and considering the lack
of provisions in Paulson’s bailout bill to mandate that taxpayer
funds given to banks must actually be lent, and given the added
incentive in the bill for banks to deposit their bread with the Fed,
one gets the idea that maybe, just maybe, these programs weren’t
designed to cure this crisis; maybe they were designed to create it.
Indeed, my friends, this is crisis by design.
Someone planned the assassination and someone pulled the trigger.
THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD
All of which begs the question, How come?
Why drive the planet into the throws of fiscal withdraw—of job
losses, vaporized home equity, and pillaged 401ks and IRAs?
Because when the pain is bad enough, when the stock markets are in
shambles, when the cities are teaming with the unemployed, when the
streets are awash with riots, when governments are drenched in the
sweat of eviction and overthrow, then the doctor will come with the
needle of International Financial Control.
This string of ineffective solutions put forth by people who know
better are convincing bankers, investors, corporations and
governments of one thing: the system failed and even the U.S.
government—the anchor of international finance (which is blamed for
causing the disaster)—has lost its credibility.
The purpose of this financial crisis is to take down the United
States and the U.S. dollar as the stable datum of planetary finance
and, in the midst of the resulting confusion, put in its place a
Global Monetary Authority—a planetary financial control organization
to “ensure this never happens again.”
Sound Orwellian? Sound conspiratorial? Sound too evil or too vast to
be real?
This entity is being moved forward by world leaders “as we speak.”
It is coming and the pace is quickening.
A year ago, I saw an article in which the president of the New York
Federal Reserve bank was calling for a “Global Monetary Authority”
or GMA to deal with the world’s financial crisis. While I have been
following international banking institutions for some time, this was
the clue that they were making their move. I wrote an article on it
at the time.
By the way, as some may recall, the president of the New York Fed
last year was a man named Timothy Geithner. Geithner was very
involved in structuring the booby-trapped TARP bailout with Paulson
and Bernanke.
Of course, now, he is the Secretary of the Treasury of the United
States.
Change we can believe in.
Once Geithner started to push a global financial authority as the
solution to the world’s financial troubles, other world leaders and
opinion-leading voices in international finance began to forward
this message. It has been a PR campaign of growing intensity.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, the international bankers are keeping
their hands on the throat of the credit markets choking off lending
while the planet’s financial markets asphyxiate and become more and
more desperate for a solution.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who has taken the point on
this, has said that the world needs a “new Bretton Woods.” This is
the positioning. (Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, was the location
where world leaders met after the Second World War and established
the international financial organizations called the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank to help provide lending to
countries in need after the war.)
Sir Evelyn de Rothschild called for improved (international)
regulations, while the Managing Director of the IMF suggested a
“high level of ministers capable of reaching agreements and
implementing them.”
The former director of the IMF, Michael Camdessus, called on “the
global village” to “urgently and radically” implement international
regulations.
As the crisis has intensified, so too have calls for a global
financial policeman, and of late, the PR has been directed in favor
of—surprise—the Bank of International Settlements.
The person at the BIS who was primarily responsible for the creation
of Basle II is Jaime Caruana. The BIS Board has now appointed him as
the General Manager, the bank’s chief executive position, where he
will be in charge of dealing with the current financial crisis which
he had no small part in creating.
A few well-chosen sound bites tell the story.
Following a recent IMF function, discussion centered on the fact
that the BIS could provide effective market regulation, while the
Global Investor magazine opined that “…perhaps the Bank of
International Settlements in Basel...” could undertake the task of
best dealing with the crisis in the financial markets.
The UK Telegraph is right out front with it.
“A new global solution is needed because the machinery of global
economic governance barely exists…it’s time for a Bretton Woods for
this century.
“The big question is whether it is time to establish a global
economic ‘policeman’ to ensure the crash of 2008 can never be
repeated.”
….
“The answer might be staring us in the face in the form of the Bank
of International Settlements (BIS). The BIS has been spot on
throughout this.”
And so you see, this was a drill. This was a strategy: bring in Easy
Money Alan to loosen the credit screws; open the floodgates to
mortgage loans to the seriously unqualified with the CRA, bundle
these as securities, repeal Glass-Steagall and waive capital
requirements for investment banks so the mortgage-backed securities
could be sold far and wide, wait until the loans matured a bit and
some became delinquent and ensure the media spread this news as if
Heidi Fleiss had had a sex-change operation, then slam in an
international accounting rule that was guaranteed to choke off all
credit and crash the leading economies of the world.
Ensure the right people were in the key places at the right
time—Greenspan, Paulson, Geithner and Caruana.
When the economic pain was bad enough, promote the theory that the
existing financial structures did not work and that a Global
Monetary Authority—a Bretton Woods for the 21st century—was needed
to solve the crisis and ensure this does not happen again.
Which is exactly where we are right now.
WHAT DO YOU DO?
Let me preface this section by saying that this is advice designed
to help you orient your assets, i.e., your reserves, your retirement
plans, etc., to the Brave New World of international finance. It is
not meant as advice about what you do with your business or your
job, or your personal life.
Those things are all senior to this subject, which has a very narrow
focus. There is an embarrassment of riches of materials that you can
use to stay ahead of and on top of this crisis. Use them to flourish
and prosper. This article is not a call to cut back or contract. It
is to provide you information so you know what is going on and can
plan.
Enough said.
First of all, while not likely, but just in case Timothy Geithner is
shocked into some New Age epiphany and Ben Bernanke grows some real
wisdom in his polished dome, this is what the government should do:
1) Cancel any aspects of Basel II that are causing banks to
misevaluate their assets.
2) Remove the provision of TARP that permits the Fed to pay interest
on deposits.
3) Mandate that any funds given under the TARP bailout or that are
to be given to banks in the future must be used to lend to deserving
borrowers.
4) Repeal the Community Reinvestment Act.
5) Reinstate Glass-Steagall.
6) Restore mandated capital requirements to investment banks.
7) And in case Congress decides to cease being a flock of frightened
sheep and take responsibility for the country’s monetary policy,
they should get rid of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank and
establish a monetary system based on production and property.
8) But if a global monetary authority is put in place, it should not
be controlled by central bankers. It should be fully controlled
directly by governments with real oversight over it and with a
system of checks and balances. This you can communicate when this
matter hits Congress or the White House or both (which it almost
certainly will).
And what do you do with your reserves in this Brave New World of
international finance?
Modesty aside, please do what I have been recommending for a few
years now: get liquid (out of the stock and bond markets) and put
some of your assets into precious metals, gold and silver, but more
heavily into silver.
Keep the rest in cash (CDs and T-bills) and perhaps a small bit in
some stronger foreign currencies like the Chinese yuan (also
referred to as the RMB, which is short for renminbi)
And remember that my recommendations are based on my 30 years of
experience in banking, finance and investments but I have no crystal
ball and make no guarantees regarding my recommendations.
We are living in the most challenging economic times this planet has
ever seen. I hope this article has helped shed some light on what is
currently happening on the international financial scene. I didn’t
cover everything, as I don’t have time to write another book right
now. Nor did I cover everyone involved, but these are the broad
strokes.
If you want to follow these shenanigans, log on to
The Road to London Summit. It will all look and sound very
reasonable—all about saving jobs and homes—but you have seen behind
the wizard’s curtain and the above is what is really going on.
Keep your powder dry.
Bruce Wiseman is the co-founder of a company that oversees the
business and financial affairs of some of the biggest names in
Hollywood. He writes and speaks on matters of international finance
and banking with particular attention to the oppressive activities
of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Bruce has
also been an advisor and consultant on the subject of market
research, branding and positioning.
He writes a market research newsletter on market research and
positioning for such publications as Government Technology and Hotel
and Motel Management.
He is also a published fiction author under the pen name,
John Truman Wolfe .
Bruce holds a Masters Degree with Honors from the California State
University at San Jose and is the former Chairman of the Department
of History at John F. Kennedy