Price fixing in the bond market by the Fed?

Interesting observation on the Yahoo! Message Board (UltraShort Lehman 20+ Trsy ProShares), December 31, 2008:

It seems as if one branch of the government (Treasury) needs money, so they auction off T-bills and T-notes. Obviously, the lower the interest rate, the better (less interest for us taxpayers to have to pay).

So now, another pseudo-branch of the government (Federal Reserve Bank – chartered by Congress in 1913) is now buying most of these T-bills and T-notes and putting them on their balance sheet. They are doing so in a scheme to keep the interest rates as low as possible. In other words, they have stepped in front of the market and now ARE the market for T-bills and notes. There are other buyers and sellers of T-notes and bills, but due to the size of the Federal Reserve, and the depth of their pockets, they are elbowing everyone else out of the market.

How is this even possible? Isn’t this price-fixing? The government is essentially selling T-bills and notes to itself in order to fix the interest rate? Shouldn’t this be illegal? This certainly seems to have more than a whiff of fraud to it, and yet our entire economic system is based on the premise of government selling debt instruments to itself? I am new to the bond market (certainly not an insider, and not someone who has “seen it all” by any means). But my reaction as an outsider looking in, is that this is a “scam”, a “scheme”, or whatever derogatory noun you would like to place upon it.

We charge Bernie Madoff for conducting a ponzi scheme. Is this “scheme” any less fraudulent than Bernie Madoff’s simply because two agencies of the Federal Government are the ones running it?

Seriously, what am I missing? I would appreciate it if someone would step forward and tell me “hey, wait a minute. You’ve missed something here (some very important fact about this arrangement) and this is why this is all legitimate.”

Thanks in advance. I am trying to understand this crazy world we live in…

Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul: The Wall Street Ponzi Scheme Called Fractional Reserve Banking

Bernie Madoff showed us how it was done, but his Ponzi scheme was small compared to one that has been perpetrated for hundreds of years by the banking system itself. What distinguishes the legal scheme known as “fractional reserve” lending from the illegal schemes of Madoff and his ilk is that the bankers’ scheme is protected by government charter and backstopped with government funds. The sheer size of the bailout efforts today, however, indicates that the banking scheme has reached its mathematical limits and needs to be superseded by something more sustainable.

Read more:   http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/ponzi.php

GROUND ZERO ON WALL STREET: FED FUNDS AND TREASURY BILLS HIT 0% INTEREST

The federal funds rate and the interest on 3-month Treasury bills both just hit ZERO percent. This means banks and the government are borrowing money for free. Yet demand for the T-bills at auction was four times the available supply! Who is clamoring to buy the debt of the world’s most insolvent debtor for no return at all — and why?

Read more  —  http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/zero_percent_t-bills.php

Sustainable Government: Banking for a “New” New Deal

Even before taking office, Obama has started his version of the “fireside chats” (updated from radio to online video) given by Roosevelt nearly weekly to reassure the public. He said on November 22 that he plans to create 2.5 million new jobs by 2011 and kick-start the economy by building roads and bridges, modernizing schools, and creating technology and infrastructure for renewable energy. These are excellent ideas, but what will they be funded with—more government debt?

Read morehttp://www.yesmagazine.org/article.asp?id=3162

“Oops, We Meant $7 TRILLION!” What Hank and Ben Are Up to and How They Plan to Pay for It All

The $700 billion that was arm-twisted from Congress in October was just the camel’s nose under the tent. The Paulson/Bernanke team is now prepared to pay $7.76 trillion to rescue the financial system. Prepared to pay how? Congress has not raised its debt ceiling to that level, and the Fed doesn’t have the funds on its books . . .

Read whole article here — http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/oops.php

All Is Well in Stepfordville: More on the Pre-election Chicanery of the Plunge Protection Team

It was another surreal week on Wall Street, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average rising a thousand points while the economy continued to sink into its worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. More evidence of the Plunge Protection Team at work? The election was only days away . . .

Read more — http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/stepfordville.php

THE NOT-SO-INVISIBLE HAND: HOW THE PLUNGE PROTECTION TEAM KILLED CAPITALISM

October 24 marks the 79th anniversary of the October 1929 stock market crash.  Many feared a repeat of this disaster on Friday, October 24, 2008; but remarkably, disaster was averted.  How?  Suspicious observers saw the hand of the Plunge Protection Team pulling strings behind the scenes . . .

Read more

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/manipulation.php

THE COLLAPSE OF A 300 YEAR PONZI SCHEME: THE REAL DEBATE IS CRONY SOCIALISM OR FINANCIAL SOVEREIGNTY

Last night, the Presidential candidates had their last debate before the election. They talked of the baleful state of the economy and the stock market; but omitted from the discussion was what actually caused the credit freeze, and whether the banks should be nationalized as Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson is now proceeding to do. The omission was probably excusable, since the financial landscape has been changing so fast that it is hard to keep up. A year ago, the Dow Jones Industrial Average broke through 14,000 to make a new all-time high. Anyone predicting then that a year later the Dow would drop nearly by half and the Treasury would move to nationalize the banks would have been regarded with amused disbelief. But that is where we are today.

Read more —

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/modest_proposal.php

The Fed Now Owns the World’s Largest Insurance Company — But Who Owns the Fed?

The Federal Reserve has assumed sweeping new powers in the last year. These increasingly controversial encroachments on the public purse warrant a closer look at the central banking scheme itself.  Who owns the Federal Reserve, who actually controls it, where does it get its money, and whose interests is it serving?

Read more . . .

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/time_to_buy_the_fed.php

It’s the Derivatives, Stupid! Why Fannie, Freddie and AIG All Had to Be Bailed Out

Why the extraordinary bailout measures for Fannie, Freddie and AIG? The answer may have less to do with saving the insurance business, the housing market, or the Chinese investors clamoring for a bailout than with the greatest Ponzi scheme in history, one that is holding up the entire private global banking system. What had to be saved at all costs was not housing or the dollar but the financial derivatives industry; and the precipice from which it had to be saved was an “event of default” that could have collapsed a quadrillion dollar derivatives bubble, a collapse that could take the entire global banking system down with it.

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/its_the_derivatives.php

Take a Load Off Fannie: Bailout or Nationalization for the Mortgage Giants?

The U.S. Treasury recently sought and was granted an unlimited credit line for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with the authority to buy their stock, effectively nationalizing them; but this could mean $5 trillion more in liabilities for the federal government, causing it to lose its own triple-A rating. What to do? There is a solution that would salvage the mortgage giants and cost the taxpayers nothing . . .

Read more —

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/take_a_load_off_fannie.php

WAG THE DOG: HOW TO CONCEAL MASSIVE ECONOMIC COLLAPSE

Last week, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac had just announced record losses, and so had most reporting corporations. Unemployment was mounting, the foreclosure crisis was deepening, state budgets were in shambles, and massive bailouts were everywhere. Investors had every reason to expect the dollar and the stock market to plummet, and gold and oil to shoot up. Strangely, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 300 points, the dollar strengthened, and gold and oil were crushed. What happened?

Read more . . .

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/wag_the_dog.php

FANNIE AND FREDDIE: GIVING AWAY THE FARM

Last week, Congress passed a housing bill that gave the Treasury Department a blank check to inject billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars into mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, snatching them from insolvency. To accommodate this blank check, Congress obligingly raised its debt ceiling by $800 billion. Ouch! That’s nearly a trillion dollars. Why was it necessary to incur this potentially crippling public debt to bail out two completely private, for-profit behemoths, which have run themselves into bankruptcy with their own risky investment schemes? Policymakers said it was essential to maintain the country’s creditworthiness with foreign lenders, which today hold about one-fifth of Fannie and Freddie securities. According to a July 21 report by Heather Timmons in The New York Times. . .

Read more . . .

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/fannie_and_freddie.php

Standing up to the banks: how to challenge your foreclosure

In response to an article I posted recently called “Standing Up to the Banks,” www.webofdebt.com/articles, a number of people have written to ask for help in defending their foreclosure actions.  I started to put together materials, when I discovered that it had already been done.  The Consumer Warning Network is an excellent website providing specific directions on how to raise the produce-the-note defense — 

http://www.consumerwarningnetwork.com/2008/06/19/produce-the-note-how-to/

It states: 

Using the “produce the note” strategy is something all homeowners facing foreclosure can do. If you believe you’ve been treated unfairly, fight back. We have created templates for a legal request, a letter to your lender and a motion to compel to help you through the process.

WHO OWNS THE NOTE?

Your goal is to make certain the institution suing you is, in fact, the owner of the note (see steps to follow below). There is only one original note for your mortgage that has your signature on it. This is the document that proves you owe the debt.

During the lending boom, most mortgages were flipped and sold to another lender or servicer or sliced up and sold to investors as securitized packages on Wall Street. In the rush to turn these over as fast as possible to make the most money, many of the new lenders did not get the proper paperwork to show they own the note and mortgage. This is the key to the produce the note strategy. Now, many lenders are moving to foreclose on homeowners, resulting in part from problems they created, and don’t have the proper paperwork to prove they have a right to foreclose.

THE HARM

If you don’t challenge your lender, the court will simply allow the foreclosure to proceed. It’s important to hold lenders accountable for their carelessness. This is the biggest asset in your life. It’s just a piece of paper to them, and one they likely either lost or destroyed.

When you get a copy of the foreclosure suit, many lenders now automatically include a count to re-establish the note. It often reads like this: “…the Mortgage note has either been lost or destroyed and the Plaintiff is unable to state the manner in which this occurred.” In other words, they are admitting they don’t have the note that proves they have a right to foreclose.

If the lender is allowed to proceed without that proof, there is a possibility another institution, which may have bought your note along the way, will also try to collect the same debt from you again.

A Tennessee borrower recently had precisely that happen to her. Her lender, Ameriquest, foreclosed on her in July of 2007. About three months later, another bank sent her a default notice for the mortgage on the house she just lost. She called to find out what was going on. After being transferred from place to place and left on hold for lengthy periods of time, no one could explain what happened. They said they would get back to her, but never did. Now, she faces the risk of having her credit continually damaged for a debt she no longer owes.

FIGHT FOR FAIRNESS

This process is not intended to help you get your house for free. The primary goal is to delay the foreclosure and put pressure on the lender to negotiate. Despite all the hype about lenders wanting to help homeowners avoid foreclosure, most borrowers know that’s not the reality.

Too many homeowners have experienced lender resistance to their efforts to work out a payment structure to keep them in their homes. Many lenders bear responsibility for these defaults, because they put borrowers into unfair loans using deceptive, hard-sell practices and then made the problem worse with predatory servicing.

Most homeowners just want these lenders to give them reasonable terms on their mortgages, many of which were predatory to begin with. With the help of judges who see through these predatory practices, lenders will feel the pressure to work with borrowers to keep them in their homes. Don’t forget lenders made incredible amounts of money by using irresponsible practices to issue and service these loans. That greed led to the foreclosure crisis we’re in today. Allowing lenders to continue foreclosing on home after home, destroying our neighborhoods and our economy hurts us all. So, make it hard for your lender to take your home. Make ‘em produce the note!

STEPS TO FOLLOW

A. If your lender has already filed suit to foreclose on your home:

  1. Use the first form. It’s a fill-in-the-blank legal request to your lender asking that the original note be produced, before it can proceed with the foreclosure. In some jurisdictions, the courts require the original request to be filed with the clerk of court and a copy of the request to be sent to the attorney representing the lender. To find out the rules where you live, call the Clerk of Court in your jurisdiction.
  2. If the lender’s attorney does not respond within 30 days, file a motion to compel with the court and request that the court set a hearing on your motion. That, in effect, asks the judge to order the lender to produce the documents.
  3. The judge will issue a ruling at your hearing. Many judges around the country are becoming more sympathetic to homeowners, because of the prevalence of predatory lending and servicing. In the past, many lenders have relied upon using lost note affidavits, but in many cases, that’s no longer enough to satisfy the judge. They are holding the lender to the letter of the law, requiring them to produce evidence that they are the true owners of the note. For example:
  • In October 2007, Ohio Federal Court Judge Christopher Boyko dismissed 14 foreclosure cases brought by investors, ruling they failed to prove they owned the properties they were trying to seize.

B. If you are in default, but your lender has not yet filed suit against you:

  1. Use the second form. It’s a fill-in-the-blank letter to your lender which also requests they produce the original note, before taking foreclosure action against you.
  2. If the lender does not respond and files suit against you to foreclose, follow the steps above.
UPDATE: CNN features The Consumer Warning Network and the “Produce The Note” strategy. Borrowers are putting this plan into action and getting results!

Consumer Warning Network Featured on CNN

THE LATEST: Borrower wins more time to fight foreclosure! At a court hearing Tuesday, a Pinellas County, Florida Judge denied Wachovia the right to proceed with its foreclosure against borrower Jacqueline O’Brien (profiled in the CNN story).  Instead, O’Brien was granted a continuance, as she pursues the produce the note strategy.  Wachovia expressed interest in renegotiating the terms of the loan, rather than continuing the court battle. 
_______________
Chris Hoyer adds in an email:
When people ask for individual lawyers we either refer them to their local bar referral system or, when they can’t afford a lawyer (most often), we give them this link : http://www.lsc.gov/map/lscprogramdirectory.asp
which allows them to find free legal advice in their area.  We have had lots of people show success recently from the feedback we have gotten.

PUTTING THE “FEDERAL” BACK IN THE FEDERAL RESERVE

In a July 19 Wall Street Journal article titled “Why No Outrage?”, James Grant notes that financial behavior that would have been met with outrage in the 19th century is now met with near-silence from a too-tolerant populace. Why? He suggests that the lack of outrage may be because the old 19th century Populists actually won . . . .

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/federal-back-fr.php

Time for New Rules

Paul Mason, “Fannie Mae: The Credit Crunch Meets the F-word,” BBC News, July 12 2008 — 

“The panic on Friday about the two US mortgage giants, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is followed by the collapse of California’s IndyMac, a regional mortgage lender. . . .

“All over the world, slowly but surely, the state is becoming exposed to the debts and liabilities of the finance system. . . . On this basis I will make a prediction. Soon the ideology will move into line with the practice. Soon somebody will argue that a state-backed finance system, with much heavier regulation, is better than the one the world’s leaders have been trying to patch together at the G8 summit. . . .

“Roosevelt and his allies did not start out with a coherent vision of what to do in the face of the crisis. They improvised . . . I am not advocating a return to Rooseveltian state capitalism – but I do think the evolution of FDR’s thought is worth studying. Because what basically happened was that a coalition of interests determined to stop the finance sector from destroying the world economy found a leader prepared to go beyond muddling through and to envision a new kind of market economy where the state’s mission was to defend the little guy against the steamroller of unemployment, hunger and speculation.”

Read more: http://xrl.us/kk2o7

Let the Lawsuits Begin: Banks Brace for a Storm of Litigation

Lawsuits threaten the banks from all sides – from state attorneys general, consumer class actions, and investor backlash. Shifting liability for the subprime debacle back to the banks could bankrupt even the biggest banks. But that might not be the end of the world . . .

http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/bracing-storm.php

THE SUBPRIME TRUMP CARD: STANDING UP TO THE BANKS


More than 1.5 million homeowners are expected to enter foreclosure this year, and about half of them are expected to have their homes repossessed.  If the dire consequences Jefferson warned of 200 years ago have been slow in coming, it is because they have been concealed by what Jerome a Paris calls the Anglo Disease – “the highly unequal economy whereby the rich and the financial sector . . . capture most of the income but hide it by providing cheap debt to the middle classes so that they can continue to spend.” . . . . 

Read more here: http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/subprime_defense.php

IS SPECULATION DRIVING UP FOOD AND OIL?

This question is hotly contested. Traders in commodities futures say futures trading cannot drive up the physical price. It is the physical price that ultimately determines the futures price rather than the reverse. But there seems to be more to it than that. A number of good recent articles suggest that speculation is indeed largely responsible for the massive inflation in food and oil today.  See, e.g. —   

 

 

John Mauldin, “Colliding Bubbles, US Unemployment, the Credit Crisis and Oil Price Surge,” June 7, 2008 —

. . . I have been pondering for a few weeks about whether the long-only commodity index funds are really affecting the markets. Basically, these funds have become a huge part of the commodities market. It is clear that enough buying and in size will affect any market, but these funds do not take delivery. They “roll” their exposure as they get close to expiration, so they are not involved in the spot price. In theory, the spot price should be a function of immediate supply and demand.

But, it is not that simple, as Louis Gave reminded me. Looking at recent CFTC data, investors known as “commercials” were long 827 million barrels of oil. In the early part of the decade it was 3-400 million barrels. Commercials are supposed to be those who are hedging their production of oil. But large oil companies rarely hedge, and smaller producers only hedge a portion of their oil (see more below). Has supply increased over 100%? I think not.

Where is the increase in commercial interest coming from? The clear answer is long-only commodity index funds and ETFs. They simply buy baskets of commodities at whatever the price is, speculating on the rise in the price of the overall commodity market. It is a one-way trade . . . .

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4987.html

_________________________________________

See also —

Sam Pizzigati, “Oil Prices: A Case of Supply, Demand, and Speculation,” June 9, 2008 —

Looking for villains around the gas pump? Try looking behind the hedges to the shadowy investment world where the super-rich make bets with billions — and regular people always lose. . . .

Grand concentrations of private wealth, history tells us, have a nasty little habit of nurturing wasteful and witless speculation. Wasteful and witless speculation, news reports last week revealed, just happens to be the economic joker in the deck that’s turbocharging our current surge in crude oil prices.

The speculation now doing so much damage at America’s gas pumps comes mostly out of hedge funds, those shadowy mutual funds on steroids open only to the deepest of deep-pocket investors. This special status largely frees hedge funds from any federal financial oversight and regulation.

Hedge funds can essentially do whatever they choose. They typically make their money playing games with money. In the oil market, for instance, they have no interest in ever using the oil they sign “futures” contracts to buy. Instead, they buy and sell the futures contracts — with borrowed money. . . .

 http://www.alternet.org/workplace/87474/

_________________________________
And other good articles:

Philip Davis, “Commodities Prices: Speculation Exposed,” seekingalpha.com, May 21, 2008

“ICE, ICE, Baby”, Star-Telegram, May 19, 2008

Mario Osava, “Agriculture: What Is Really Causing ‘Agflation’? Ipsnews.net, May 4, 2008.

Community Currency Goes Global

This was posted by Robert Taft of Upton, Wyoming on the “Join in the Debate” page, but it adds an interesting ferment to the debate and bears repeating here.  Noting that Ithaca Hours (local community currency) are  expanding as far as China, he suggests that both interest AND gold act as a break on trade, and that neither is necessary for a freely circulating medium of exchange.  This is what I’ve been trying to say about a truly “national” bank — if the national community owned the bank rather private bankers, the bank could be a profit-free, interest-free venture that simply provided ready credit to the people.  Controls would have to be imposed (no interest-free credit for speculation, etc.), but basically we would just be monetizing our own promises to repay.  That is, in fact, the credit system we have now, except that parasitic privateers get to draw a perpetual tribute off the top.  Robert Taft writes:

According to the Ithacahours website http://www.ithacahours.com their debt-free money is going global. Great slap at the central banksters. While they may not state it in wording they have apparently discovered the basic axiom for debt-free money:

“There is a basic axiom on money that is either unknown by monetarists or ignored in favor of the many schemes used to enrich the few at the expense of the many. It goes like this:

“As universal prosperity is dependent upon the ability of Money to flow (its “velocity”), nothing may be done to money that would in any way impede that flow.”

“This would exclude things like using commodities for money (gold, silver), adding bankers’ gimmicks like interest to money, or in giving money additional uses beyond its sole legitimate use as a “medium of exchange.”

“Money needs to be “created” into circulation by a system’s wealth producers, never “borrowed” or “spent” into circulation by its bankers or consumers. It needs nothing backing it but the integrity of its issuers (in a second-rate democracy there can be no integrity).

“That is the rule, though it cannot be applied in this time and place. Money issuance is government’s most sovereign prerogative, yet in honest form is as unobtainable as is the only workable FORM of self-government, a Republic.

“Had we a Republic, one of the very few prerogatives granted to the upper levels of government would be money issuance, a completely worthless medium of exchange, which being worthless would never be hoarded but would be quickly spent for something that one coveted for its intrinsic value. This velocity is what produces UNIVERSAL prosperity. Lack of velocity is what creates wealthy and impoverished classes of people, plus the struggling middle class that actually produces the wealth, and unfortunately, their ranks are constantly diminishing.”

While debt-free money cannot be instituted at this time by corrupt governments, obviously it can and is being utilized by some communities around the world. This is the biggest advance in monetary policy since the ’30s when thousands of communities and counties across America issued currency that circulated during the Roosevelt bank holiday. Damn shame they quit it when the banks reopened. They proved we don’t need the banksters leeching off our productivity. Another great advantage with Ithicahours or any local currency is that it is not acceptable outside the local economy and is therefore not siphoned off like a national or international currency would inevitably be. Central banks, including and since the first Bank of the US started by Hamilton do nothing for local economies but allow wealth concentration in the hands of the few while impoverishing the many.

This budding concept needs widespread distribution. It must be instituted when present governmental structures and the monetary systems they spawn collapse of their own internal rot and putrefaction.