Thursday, July 16, 2009

Robert Reich: Naming Names

Robert Reich's latest post on his web site tells how the Obama administration is allowing the banks that are "too big to fail" to get even bigger feasting on free money from US taxpayers:
Goldman and JPMorgan -- The Two Winners When The Rest of America is Losing

Besides Goldman Sachs, the Street's other surviving behemoth is JPMorgan. Today it posted second-quarter earnings up a stunning 36 percent from the first quarter, to $2.7 billion.

The resurgence of JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs gives both banks more financial clout than any other players on the Street -- allowing both firms to lure talent from everywhere else on the Street with multi-million pay packages, giving both firms enough economic power to charge clients whopping fees, and bestowing on both firms even more political heft in Washington.

Where are the antitrusters when we need them? Alternatively, why isn't the government charging Goldman and JPMorgan a large insurance fee for classifying both firms as "too big to fail" and therefore automatically bailed out if the risks they take turn sour? Instead, we've ended up with two giants that now have most of the casino to themselves, are playing with poker chips backed by taxpayers, and have a big say in what the rules of the game are to be.

When JP Morgan repaid its federal bailout of $25 billion last month it was, like Goldman, freed from stricter government oversight. The freedom has also allowed JP, like Goldman, to take tougher and more vocal stands in Washington against proposed financial regulations they dislike.

JP is mounting a furious lobbying campaign against regulations that would funnel derivatives trading through exchanges where regulators can monitor them, and thereby crimp JP's profits. Now the Street's biggest derivatives player, JP has generated billions helping clients navigate these contracts and assuming counter-party risk in such transactions. Its derivatives contracts were valued at roughly $81 trillion at the end of the first quarter, representing 40 percent of the derivatives held by all banks, according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. JP has played down its potential risk exposure from these derivatives contracts, of course, but anyone who's been paying attention over the last ten months knows that unregulated derivatives have been at the center of the storm.



The tumult on the Street has also given both firms extraordinary market power. That's where much of the current profits are coming from. JP used the crisis to snap up Bear Stearns in March and Washington Mutual last fall, with the amiable assistance of the Treasury. The deals have boosted JP's dominance in retail banking and prime brokerage, enabling it to charge its corporate clients heftier fees for lending and other financial services, and to corner more of the market in fixed-income and equities. JP also bolstered its earnings by helping other financial companies raise capital following the stress test results in May.

Antitrust law was designed to prevent just this sort of market power and political heft. The Justice Department or the Federal Trade Commission should investigate the new-found dominance of Goldman and JP -- and, if warranted, break them up. Alternatively, Congress should impose a surtax on the newly-exclusive group of Wall Street firms, most notably Goldman and JPMorgan, which are now backed by implicit government bailout insurance guaranteeing that, should they get into trouble, taxpayers will keep them afloat. The surtax would approximate the economic benefit to these firms of such government largesse, which I'd estimate to be at least 50 percent of their profits from here on.
I have lost all faith in Obama when it comes to the financial crisis, the banks, the housing crisis, and unemployment. I'm fast losing any belief that he will manage to not screw up health care reform in the US. He wants to be a "nice guy". But he is being taken to the cleaners by hard-nosed Republicans and all the big corporation lobbyists. It is so sad to see. It was a once in a hundred year chance to fix problems, and he has blown it because he wants to be "Lincoln" and magically bridge the gulf between the Right and the Left. Instead he has mad a mess in the middle.

1 comment:

Unknown said...

There must come a time when you have to get out of the middle and pick a side at least on some issues. I think it has more to do with his place in history and who paid for his election, than trying to be centrist. But, to truly be middle of the road will draw more ire, and perhaps stones, from both sides of the street. There is an old quote by Eisenhower to this affect if I could just remember the exact words..

I lose respect for Obama on a daily basis, it seems. I don't care if he is a centrist or a pragmatist or a devil worshipper; I just want him to do his job and lead this country. I want him to do what he promised and do what is right, then I might regain some respect and hope.