| End of Collective Bargaining in California? A Vote Could Be Coming Soon; You Can Help Posted: 19 Oct 2011 09:57 PM PDT It is not often I side with economic professors. However, a proposal by Lanny Ebenstein to kill public union collective bargaining in California makes me stand up and salute. Please consider Benefit buster Lanny EbensteinLanny Ebenstein wants you to vote to kneecap the state's public workers unions by banning their right to collective bargaining. Other measures scrambling to qualify for the November 2012 ballot would drop the hammer specifically on public employees' pensions or increase their retirement age, but Ebenstein's may be the most uncompromising.
Ebenstein, a lecturer in economics at UC Santa Barbara, believes that it's too cozy for unions to be bargaining with bosses they've likely campaigned to elect -- and the state's economic doldrums are one result. An eight-year veteran of the Santa Barbara school board and the author of volumes about conservative economists Milton Friedman and Friedrich Hayek, he's now got a metaphorical book he wants to throw at public employee unions.
Interviewer Patt Morrison: Some people disagree with your numbers, and with your dislike of collective bargaining in the public sector. You cite a 1937 letter from FDR: "The process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service."
Ebenstein: I believe the principle of collective bargaining was never meant to pertain to public employees. The public sector unions have been able to exert undue influence on the political system to receive an undue share of resources from government.
Morrison: You're raising money so you can begin to collect signatures to put this on the ballot.
Ebenstein: We need $2 million. We are trying to get commitments of a million dollars. We only need two of those, but it's more like getting individuals to commit $100,000. We have several people who've committed $100,000 if we can get a million dollars.
Morrison: Are you asking the Koch brothers? They controversially put money against public employee unions in Wisconsin.
Ebenstein: We haven't gone to the Koch brothers yet, but we may. In the same way that the problem was created by Democrats and Republicans, the solution is going to be created by Democrats and Republicans. You have to unite Republicans who are concerned about taxes with Democrats who are concerned about public services. Bid FiledThe Sacramento Bee reports Lanny Ebenstein filed Initiatives to End Collective Bargaining for Public EmployeesThe first measure would ban recognition of all public-sector labor unions and prevent government authorities from collectively bargaining with them.
The second would impose a higher tax burden on pensions paid through CalPERS or CalSTRS.
The third would raise the retirement age for state employees to 65. Public safety workers would see their retirement age rise to 58.
A spokesman for a public employee group said he doubted Ebenstein's group could raise the money needed to campaign successfully for the three measures. Collective Bargaining Neither a Privilege Nor a RightI wish Ebenstein well. We all should. This is why: Collective Bargaining neither a Privilege nor a Right. Instead, collective bargaining drives up costs at taxpayer expense. Here is a recent case in point from the LA Times: New contract for California prison guards lifts cap on saved vacationGov. Jerry Brown negotiates a new contract for California's prison guards, who will be allowed to save unlimited amounts of vacation, potentially leading to massive payouts when officers retire. The track record proves public unions and union officials get in bed with corrupt politicians willing to buy votes, and that is why prison guards with only a high school education can make more in retirement than they do is a short career working. The same thing applies to bus drivers, transit workers, trash collectors, and every facet of public service. You Can HelpPlease consider making a tax-deductible contribution to the California Center for Public Policy headed by Lanny Ebenstein. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List 
|
| Leveraged EFSF Violates Maastricht Treaty; "Merkozy" Master Plan Comes Unglued Posted: 19 Oct 2011 02:55 PM PDT Steen Jakobsen, chief economist of Saxo Bank in Denmark just pinged me with the following email comments " Leveraged EFSF deemed violation of Maastricht. The Master Plan is coming apart!" Steen offers additional background: AIDLER and CHARLES FORELLE
BRUSSELS—European officials debating ways to increase the effectiveness of their bailout fund are focusing on using the fund to provide collateral to back up bond issues by troubled countries, according to people familiar with the matter.
Lawyers for governments and European institutions have warned that using the bailout fund to provide direct guarantees would violate the European Union's restrictions on bailouts, pouring cold water on the widely circulated notion that the European Financial Stability Facility on its own could simply stand as a guarantor for euro-zone bond issues.
Instead, under versions of the plan being discussed ahead of a critical weekend summit, these people said, countries who want to avail themselves of insurance would borrow an additional amount from the EFSF when they need to tap markets for financing. That extra amount would be kept aside to provide some compensation to creditors in the event of a default.
The collateral scheme would serve a similar purpose as the direct guarantee might have: giving investors an incentive to buy bonds from potentially-wobbly countries that need financing. The difference is that it would increase the volume of borrowing that those countries need to do.
An insurance plan of some variety would boost the effectiveness of the EFSF. That's because insuring, say, 20% of a country's bond issue consumes less of the EFSF's resources than buying 100% of the issue outright. Such a boost is a key pillar of a comprehensive package of crisis measures that European leaders are trying to forge at a meeting here this weekend. French President Nicolas Sarkozy flew Wednesday to Frankfurt to meet with his German counterpart and other top European officials to try to reach a consensus.
France has favored a different method of boosting the fund—allowing it to act as a bank and finance itself through the European Central Bank. But the ECB and Germany have rejected that option. That leaves an insurance scheme as the main contender.
The other major pillars of the weekend package are a new bailout for Greece and a broad call for recapitalization of European banks. The countries appear closer on the bank issue, but it is not clear that they'll be able to reach an accord on Greece. "Merkozy" Master Plan Comes Unglued The Merkel-Sarkozy "master plan" was nothing more than hot air all along. German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French president Nicolas Sarkozy hoped to put together a big bazooka by October 23 that would shock-and-awe the world. However, that bazooka quickly turned into a pea shooter as noted in Bailout Campaign Bogs Down in Bickering; Dead Before Arrival?Assuming the "Leveraged EFSF" idea is now dead, not only is there no bazooka, there is no pea shooter either. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List 
|
| Prepare for Another Plunge as Fear Recedes; Why the Wall Street "Occupy Movement" should Protest the Fed instead of Bank of America Posted: 19 Oct 2011 12:33 PM PDT Fear as measured by the cost of options and also by the $VIX remain elevated but well off the upper end of the range seen multiple times since August. Bloomberg reports Bank Puts Fall Most in S&P 500 as Profits Reduce Crisis PessimismThe cost of options protecting against losses in financial companies is falling faster than any other industry as earnings reassure investors that banks and brokerages will avoid a repeat of 2008.
Three-month puts on the Financial Select Sector SPDR Fund (XLF) cost 10.15 points more than calls, according to Bloomberg data on implied volatility. The price relationship known as skew has narrowed 16 percent since Oct. 3, the most among nine ETFs tracking Standard & Poor's 500 Index industries, as the gauge jumped 11 percent.
Results from Bank of America Corp. (BAC), Citigroup Inc. (C) and JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) are reducing pessimism after concern Europe's debt crisis would spread sent price-to-book ratios on financial companies to the lowest level since April 2009. Bank shares have gained 14 percent since Oct. 3 after falling 31 percent since the S&P 500's April 29 peak, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
The 10 financial companies that have reported results so far this season have exceeded the average analyst estimate by 14 percent, with Citigroup in New York and Charlotte, North Carolina-based Bank of America beating them the most.
Implied volatility, the key gauge of options prices, for the financial ETF's at-the-money options expiring in three months fell 30 percent since its Oct. 4 high to 39.18 yesterday.
The VIX, as the Chicago Board Options Exchange Volatility Index is known, declined 31 percent from its Oct. 3 peak to 31.56 yesterday. The volatility gauge remains above its 21-year average of 20.49.
"Financials haven't done well recently, and valuations are coming to a good level -- they're becoming more attractive," Giri Cherukuri, head trader for Oakbrook Investments, which manages $2.7 billion in Lisle, Illinois, said in a telephone interview yesterday. "Earnings reports are coming out now, so we're getting some clarity about the financial position of all these companies."
"People were protecting against cataclysmic losses," Alec Levine, an equity derivatives strategist Newedge Group SA in New York, said in a telephone interview yesterday. "The worst-case scenario was more than priced in -- now that we're past the earnings events people are taking their protection off." The Earnings LieIt's difficult to know whether to start with a rebuttal of nonsensical comments by Giri Cherukuri, head trader for Oakbrook Investments or a rebuttal of the equally nonsensical "worst case scenario" statements of Alec Levine, an equity derivatives strategist at Newedge Group SA. A mental flip of the coins says let's start with a look at earnings. Most of the recent bank "earnings" are totally fictional. No one still knows what bad assets banks are hiding because assets are not marked to market. During the financial crisis in 2008, the FASB issued a ruling that allowed banks to record a profit when the value of their debt collapsed. In other words banks report a profit when their credit-worthiness sinks. In theory banks can buy back their debt at a profit. In practice, banks are so capital impaired they can't. Common sense alone says recording a profit when credit-worthiness drops is ludicrous. Citigroup and Bank of America both used this gimmick to inflate profits. Citigroup also took a gain by lowering provisions for wrtedowns. Zerohedge breaks out the Citigroup farce in his report $3.8 Billion ($1.23/Share) In Reported "Earnings" Really $0.5 Billion Or $0.16/Share. Yesterday I noted that Bank of America just shifted $83 trillion in derivatives exposure to an insured deposits bucket. For details, please see Bank of America Moves a Merrill Lynch Derivatives Unit to an Insured Deposits Unit (Putting FDIC at Risk); Fed approves Move, FDIC Doesn'tI added an addendum to that post today. Aaron Krowne at Ml-Implode replies ... Interesting to note this was done under the auspices of a 23A exempt that had already expired, then which the Fed renewed to give fait accompli for such a move.
Totally demented; this is bailouts and propups exacerbating the original problem at its worst.
Obviously, BofA is now a de facto ward of the state, with the government allowing them to put deposits (and hence the public deposit insurance "fund") at stake simply in order to keep from unwinding derivatives. Worst Case Scenario The worst case scenario for Bank of America is a share price of $0 with bondholders wiped out. Indeed that is what should happen. At the very least a retest of the 2009 low below $3 seems likely enough.
Value Traps and Mush Thinking Those buying Bank of America and Citigroup based on PE valuations are not thinking clearly because bank earnings are fictional. The same can be said for the entire stock market. Many alleged "value plays" are going to get cheaper, much cheaper. Here are some pertinent posts about value traps and earnings expectations: February 07, 2011: Negative Annualized Stock Market Returns for the Next 10 Years or Longer? It's Far More Likely Than You ThinkMarch 15, 2011: Anatomy of Bubbles; Negative Returns for a Decade Revisited; Is Gold in a Bubble?June 20, 2011: Value Traps Galore (Including Financials and Berkshire); Dead Money for a DecadeAugust 17, 2011: Earnings Collapse Coming Up; Don't Worry Companies Will Still "Beat the Street"; Value Traps and Road to RuinAugust 23, 2011: Another "Lost Decade" Coming Up; Boomer Retirement Headwinds; P/E Expansion and Contraction Demographic Model; Negative Returns for a Decade RevisitedWhy the Wall Street "Occupy Movement" should Protest the Fed instead of Bank of AmericaThe "Occupy Wall Street" Movement would be better advised to protest the Fed and Congress rather than protest Wall Street and Bank of America because the Fed and Congress are responsible for the bailouts. Moreover, and more importantly, the Fed and Congress are responsible for the housing boom-bust in the first place! Wall Street profited, but the Fed and Congress are to blame. Meanwhile, with fear receding even though structural problems remain in the US, in Europe, and in Asia-Pacific especially China, the markets may be ready for the next leg lower. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List 
|
| Nouriel Roubini's Global Research Brand vs. Nouriel Roubini's Prescription for the Economy Posted: 19 Oct 2011 08:49 AM PDT Nouriel Roubini has called the economic crisis rather well. He gas gone on to turn success at RGE into an "economic brand". The Institutional Investor has an 8-page article on How Nouriel Roubini Became a Research Brand. The article also notes that Roubini has been in the inner economic circles at the World Economic Forum at Davos, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the U.S. Congress. Roubinbi served as a senior economist for international affairs at the Council of Economic Advisers, under the Clinton administration, and he spent a year working as lead adviser to Timothy Geithner, who was then undersecretary for international affairs. World Grateful for Roubini's Exit from Public PolicyRoubini describes the experience under Geithner as " one of the most fascinating periods of his career, but he wasn't prepared to give up academia for a life in public policy." The world can be grateful for Roubini's exit from public policy. If only he would give up his academic wonderland theories as well. As right as Roubini has been on the economy, he has been equally if not more wrong on what to do about it. Central bank manipulations, bailouts, and Keynesian claptrap are not cures for the global economy as Pater Tenebrarum describes in One of the Biggest Stock Market Collapses in HistoryBack when central banks were put in charge of manipulating interest rates and the money supply, one of the arguments forwarded by the supporters of central banking and fiat money was that a 'flexible currency' would allow the planners to avoid precisely what has now happened in Athens. We note that they weren't able to avoid a similar outcome in the early 1930's either, but that hasn't kept the supporters of the central bank-led fiat money system from continuing to claim that it is superior to a market chosen money the supply of which can not be manipulated by central planning agencies.
One recent example for this conceit has been provided by Nouriel Roubini, a prominent proponent of interventionism, who said last November in Here's Why a Gold Standard Won't Work "A gold standard would just make business cycles more extreme."
Roubini has it of course exactly the wrong way around. We sure wouldn't want to employ him as a stable boy – the cart would always end up being put in front of the horse.
What exacerbates business cycles is precisely the willy-nilly expansion of the money supply that the fiat money system allows to happen. The idea that central banks need to 'fight inflation or deflation' rests on the erroneous assumption that without central banks, there would actually be something to 'fight'. If we had a free banking system based on a sound (market-chosen) money, were to eschew fractional reserve banking and were instead to return to the traditional legal principles that have been a mainstay of European legal doctrine since antiquity, there simply could no longer be any inflation – and if there is no inflation, then there can not be any deflation either. After all, the big bogey-man deflation whom the Bernanke Fed has set out to battle is only possible if there are uncovered money substitutes, i.e., fiduciary media, in the banking system that can actually be extinguished – money the banks have created from thin air.
We want to refrain from commenting too extensively on the alleged ability of money printing to 'combat unemployment' – suffice it to say that the idea is theoretically untenable and that there exists not a shred of empirical evidence in its support either.
As it were, for an empiricist like Roubini, the Athens General Index should prove beyond a shadow of doubt that there must be a big problem with his assertions. The Gold Standard Never DiesLlewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr. also takes on Roubini in The Gold Standard Never DiesWelcome to the age of paper money, where governments and central banks can manufacture as much money as they want without limit. Gold was the last limit. Its banishment as a standard unleashed the inflation monster and leviathan itself, which has swelled beyond comprehension.
But guess what? Gold actually hasn't gone anywhere. It is still the hedge of choice, the thing that every investor embraces in time of trouble. It remains the most liquid, most stable, most fungible, most marketable, and most reliable store of wealth on the planet. It has a more dependable buy-sell spread than any other commodity in existence, given its value per unit of weight.
But is it dead as a monetary tool? Maybe not. Whenever the failures of paper become more-than-obvious, someone mentions gold and then look out for the hysteria. This is precisely what happened the other day when Robert Zoellick, head of the World Bank, made some vague noises in the direction of gold. He merely suggested that its price might be used as a metric for evaluating the quality of monetary policy.
What happened? The roof fell in. Brad DeLong of Keynesian fame called Zoellick "the stupidest man alive" and the New York Times trotted out a legion of experts to assure us that the gold standard would not fix things, would hamstring monetary policy, would bring more instability rather than less, would bring back the great depression, and lead to mass human suffering of all sorts.
One of the funniest explosions came from Nouriel Roubini, who listed a series of merits of gold without recognizing them as such: gold limits the flexibility and range of actions of central banks (check!); under gold, a central bank can't "stimulate growth and manage price stability" (check!); under gold, central banks can't provide lender of last resort support (check!); under gold, banks go belly-up rather than get bailed out (check!).
His only truly negative point was that under gold, we get more business cycles, but here he is completely wrong, as a quick look at the data demonstrates. And how can anyone say such a thing in the immediate wake of one of history's biggest bubbles and its explosion, which brought the world to the brink of calamity (and it still isn't over)? Newsflash: it wasn't the gold standard that gave us this disaster.
Roubini Embraces Bubbles of Ever-Increasing AmplitudeIf you are seeking investment advice, perhaps you can get it from Nouriel Roubini's "Research Brand". However, unless you specifically want bubbles of ever-expanding amplitude, bank bailouts, illegal actions by the Fed, increasing transfers of money to wall street and banks, more government intervention with a perfect track record of failure, and even more wealth disparity, then one of the last places you should seek economic cure advice from is the academic Nouriel Roubini. Just because someone sees a crisis before others, does not mean the same person has a clue as to what to do about it or for that matter what caused it. In this case, Roubini is clueless on both counts, offering nothing more than the same Keynesian cures coupled with support for government and Fed intervention that are the very cause of the global economic mess we are in. Mish vs. RoubiniI am sticking with what I said about gold and the cures I offered for the economy in Hugo Salinas Price and Michael Pettis on the Trade Imbalance Dilemma; Gold's Honest Discipline Revisited. In contrast, Roubini's Keynesian cures have a perfect track record of failure coupled with increasingly larger bubbles over time. Isn't it time we try something else? Addendum:Several people sent me emails regarding Roubini "Tweets". One pointed to an excellent post on the Economic Policy Journal: Roubini's Off the Wall History of Financial CrashesNouriel Roubini is continuing his mad streak of tweets attacking those who see dangers in central banking, in general, and the Federal Reserve in particular. His tweets distort the history of banking and crashes from the 1700's to modern day.
....
Nouriel Roubini is either ignorant of financial history, or attempting to keep the populace ignorant. Roubini should stop tweeting on history until he is willing to tweet the facts. The rest of us should continue to study history so that we will be aware when central bank propagandists are attempting to distort history in front of our very own eyes. The post on Economic Policy Journal is well worth a read for an excellent rebuttal to more Roubini nonsense. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List 
|
| A "Must See" Heart Wrenching Video of Moral Deterioration in China Posted: 19 Oct 2011 12:39 AM PDT Here is a "must-see" video that came my way a few days ago. Words cannot possibly describe the video, so please give it a play. Warning: Although I labeled it "must see", this is a very graphic video that some may find disturbing. The text below describes. Link if video does not play: http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMzEzMzMyMDQw.html I held off posting this until I could get some comments from a Chinese friend regarding the incident. "Kevin" writes ... Mish, my heart is filled with immense sorrow after watching this video - not only for the suffering of the little girl and her parents, but also because I know, sadly, that this is not an atypical event.
There are of course, many angles that how this could happen - I'll just provide two perspectives - moral deterioration and economic survivalism of the poor, which by themselves are intertwined too.
Economically, China went through amazing transformation in the last 3 decades, but the gap between have's and have-not's has increased many folds (especially with the last decade's 10 times increase of real estate value), with inflation playing a big role. Behind the facade of economic wonders, survivalism, pragmatism and materialism are the reality of many lower, middle and upper class Chinese families. The people at the bottom of the society struggle just to get by, and with the absence of social safety net and a poor justice system, many families are really just one accident / sickness / law suit / unemployment away from broken down.
The first driver in the video didn't come down, but tried to kill the little girl instead, because he knew that killing someone in an accident would probably involve a lump sum and maybe sometime in the prison, whereas being responsible for her medical bills would mean bankrupting his family. The legal system, which is enacted by and for the governing elites, is inefficient (at best) and corrupted, especially any level of governments are involved (and they are involved in almost everything). From their own observations, many people lose hope; many turn cynical; and even more just become numb. Avoiding uncertainty at all cost is not a bad strategy to protect oneself.
A media friend of ours who lives in Shanghai calls the current time in China "The Carnival before the Judgement Day". And indeed tension if built up inside and I won't be surprised it hits a wall soon. Unlike many more patriotic Chinese, I do not want China to become a new world power soon - at least not in the current form. The still growing economy is the only legitimacy left for this system to maintain in power, and I am actually hoping for an economic hard landing in China if that's what takes to wake people up to challenge the status quo for the better.
Some of your writings, and especially some comments by your readers expressed disappointments towards the system of the US - I am all up for you to challenge it for the better, but just know that as broken as it may seem to be, it is still one of the "better ones" in the world.
As you requested, here is some background from the video:
Oct 13, 5:30pm in a market in the city of Nanhai, a two year old girl Yueyue was hit and rolled over by a van. The driver did not come down to check her but drove over her with back wheels and ran away. Another car passed by and rolled over Yueyue. In the next several minutes 18 people passed by but nobody did anything, until an old lady who collects trash (for a living) moved her to the curb side and shouted for help. Her parents were devastated when they found out what happened. In the interview of the father, he mentioned someone called and offered to help financially. Initially he thought it was someone wanting to help and did not accept until the person identified himself as the driver. He could not control himself, refused the money asked the driver to throw himself to the police station and it was rejected by the driver. "I do not need money and no amount could be exchanged for my daughter's health." He said.
I really wish them the best - if you want to publish this, I'd like to request prayers from your readers for this family. "Kevin" is the person who previously sent articles in Chinese that I posted in China Loan Shark Market Crashes; Scores of Chinese Business Owners Unable to Pay Black Market Loans Commit Suicide or DisappearPay Up or DieI failed to get an email response from Bill Hopen, my sculptor friend in China, but I point you to something he said via email exchange in 2010, as posted in Ponzi "Shark Loans" Fuel China's Housing BubbleIf you get sick, you must have cash or you die if you cannot pay immediately for care, for hospital, for medicine. You are literally wheeled out into the corridor to die if you don't have money for oxygen. I am not exaggerating. There are no credit cards in peasant culture, but there is credit. For more on China from Bill Hopen, please see Inside China: A Sculptor's View. Addendum:Several people were upset at this video thinking it does not belong in an economic blog. They are mistaken. The perpetual story regarding China is that the country will grow without end, it will overtake the US, and rule the world. Instead I propose the China story is really about rampant credit expansion, malinvestments, unproductive assets, no free capital markets, centralized planning that people mistake for capitalism, no real legal system, no freedom of speech, and no respect for either property rights or human rights. All the people who think China is some sort of miracle savior for the world economy are going to find out otherwise. I thought the point was obvious, but judging from the number of emails I received, obviously it was not. Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Click Here To Scroll Thru My Recent Post List 
|
Postări
