Aftermath News

Entries categorized as ‘Banking Cartels’

Profligate spender Obama goes to pay respects to his Beijing bankers

November 15, 2009 · 1 Comment

Hkg2777003

Liu Mingjie (C) and a customer discuss Liu’s bag and t-shirt ‘Oba Mao’designs in which he superimposed the face of US President Barack Obama over that of China’s late revolutionary leader Mao Zedong for sale at his shop in the tourist Houhai district of Beijing on September 23, 2009. The entrepreneur who goes by the English name Stefan is a former engineer who worked for Germany’s Siemens AG and US-based Cisco Systems before starting his business three years ago, according to state media, introduced the Oba Mao design bags and t-shirts, including coin purses, earlier this summer and says the shirts have been selling well. Getty Images

China’s Role as U.S. Lender Alters Dynamics for Obama

NY Times | Nov 15, 2009

by Helene Cooper, Michael Wines and David E. Sanger.

When President Obama visits China for the first time on Sunday, he will, in many ways, be assuming the role of profligate spender coming to pay his respects to his banker.

That stark fact — China is the largest foreign lender to the United States — has changed the core of the relationship between the United States and the only country with a reasonable chance of challenging its status as the world’s sole superpower.

The result: unlike his immediate predecessors, who publicly pushed and prodded China to follow the Western model and become more open politically and economically, Mr. Obama will be spending less time exhorting Beijing and more time reassuring it.

In a July meeting, Chinese officials asked their American counterparts detailed questions about the health care legislation making its way through Congress. The president’s budget director, Peter R. Orszag, answered most of their questions. But the Chinese were not particularly interested in the public option or universal care for all Americans.

“They wanted to know, in painstaking detail, how the health care plan would affect the deficit,” one participant in the conversation recalled. Chinese officials expect that they will help finance whatever Congress and the White House settle on, mostly through buying Treasury debt, and like any banker, they wanted evidence that the United States had a plan to pay them back.

It is a long way from the days when President George W. Bush hectored China about currency manipulation, or when President Bill Clinton exhorted the Chinese to improve human rights.

Mr. Obama has struck a mollifying note with China. He pointedly singled out the emerging dynamic at play between the United States and China during a wide-ranging speech in Tokyo on Saturday that was meant to outline a new American relationship with Asia.

“The United States does not seek to contain China,” Mr. Obama said. “On the contrary, the rise of a strong, prosperous China can be a source of strength for the community of nations.”

He alluded to human rights but did not get specific. “We will not agree on every issue,” he said, “and the United States will never waver in speaking up for the fundamental values that we hold dear — and that includes respect for the religion and cultures of all people.”

White House officials have been working for months to make sure that Mr. Obama’s three-day visit to Shanghai and Beijing conveys a conciliatory image. For instance, in June, the White House told the Dalai Lama that while Mr. Obama would meet him at some point, he would not do so in October, when the Tibetan spiritual leader visited Washington, because it was too close to Mr. Obama’s visit to China.

Greeting the Dalai Lama, whom China condemns as a separatist, weeks before Mr. Obama’s first presidential trip to the country could alienate Beijing, administration officials said. Every president since George H. W. Bush in 1991 has met the Dalai Lama when he visited Washington, usually in private encounters at the White House, although in 2007 George W. Bush became the first president to welcome him publicly, bestowing the Congressional Gold Medal on him at the Capitol. Mr. Obama met the Dalai Lama as a senator.

Similarly, while he was campaigning for the presidency, Mr. Obama several times accused China of manipulating its currency, an allegation that the current Treasury secretary, Timothy F. Geithner, repeated during his confirmation hearings. But in April, the Treasury Department retreated from that criticism, issuing a report that said China was not manipulating its currency to increase its exports.

While American officials said privately that they remained frustrated that China’s currency policies lowered the cost of Chinese goods and made American products more expensive in foreign markets, they said that they were relieved that China was fighting the global recession with an enormous fiscal stimulus program to spur domestic growth, and added that now was not the time to antagonize Beijing.

China is not viewed as a trouble spot for the United States. But this administration, like its predecessor, has had difficulty grappling with a rising power that seems eager to avoid direct clashes with the United States but affects its interests in many areas, including currency policy, nuclear proliferation, climate change and military spending.

In that regard, two members of Mr. Obama’s foreign policy team said that the United States’ interactions with the Chinese had been far too narrow in past years, focusing on counterterrorism and North Korea. Too little was done, they said, to address China’s energy and environmental policies, or its expansion of influence in Southeast Asia, South Asia and Africa, where China has invested heavily and used billions of dollars in aid to advance its political influence.

One hint of the Obama administration’s new approach came in a speech this fall by James B. Steinberg, the deputy secretary of state, who has deep roots in China policy. He argued that China needed to adopt a policy of “strategic reassurance” to the rest of the world, a phrase that appeared intended to be the successor to the framework of the Bush era, when China was urged to embrace a role as a “responsible stakeholder.”

“Strategic reassurance rests on a core, if tacit, bargain,” Mr. Steinberg said. “Just as we and our allies must make clear that we are prepared to welcome China’s ‘arrival,’ ” he argued, the Chinese “must reassure the rest of the world that its development and growing global role will not come at the expense of security and well-being of others.”

The Chinese reaction has been mixed, at best. The official China Daily newspaper ran a column just before Mr. Obama’s arrival suggesting that the United States needed to provide some assurance of its own — to “respect China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity,” code words for entirely backing away from the issues of how China deals with Taiwan and Tibet.

In the United States, the phrase “strategic reassurance” has been attacked by conservative commentators, who argue that any reassurance that the United States provides to China would be an acknowledgment of a decline in American power.

In an op-ed article in The Washington Post, the analysts Robert Kagan and Dan Blumenthal argued that the policy had echoes of Europe “ceding the Western Hemisphere to American hegemony” a century ago. “Lingering behind this concept is an assumption of America’s inevitable decline,” they wrote. White House officials shot back, insisting that it is China that needs to do the reassurance, not the United States.

In China, Mr. Obama will meet with local political leaders and will host an American-style town hall meeting with students in Shanghai. He will then spend two days in Beijing meeting with President Hu Jintao.

It seems unlikely that Mr. Obama will get the same celebrity-type reception in Beijing that he received in Cairo, Ghana, Paris and London. China seems mostly immune to the Obama fever that swept other parts of the world, and the Chinese are growing more confident that their country has the wherewithal to compete with the United States on the world stage, analysts say.

“Obama is still a positive guy, and all over the world most people think he’s more energetic, more sincere, than Bush, more a reformist,” said Shi Yinhong, a professor and an expert on United States-China relations at People’s University in Beijing. “But in China, Obama’s popularity is less than in Europe, than Japan or Southeast Asia.” In China, he said, “there is no worship of Obama.”

For instance, during the Bush and Clinton years, China might release a few political dissidents on the eve of a visit by the president as a good-will gesture. This time, American officials say, they do not expect any similar gestures, although they say that Mr. Obama will raise human rights issues privately with Mr. Hu.

“This time China will agree to have a human rights dialogue with the U.S. on some cases,” Mr. Shi said, but “the arguments have changed compared to the past. Now we say, ‘We are a different country, we have our own system, our own culture.’ ”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Communism · Crime & Corruption · Economic Meltdown · Financial Scandals · Obama · Order Out Of Chaos · Social Engineering · Socialism · Sovietization · Treason · Wealth Redistribution

Leading bankers study Pope’s encyclical on social teaching in the City of London

October 22, 2009 · 2 Comments

Leading bankers study Pope’s encyclical on social teaching

indcatholicnews.com | Oct 21, 2009

city-of-london-armsA private seminar was held this morning at Schroders Bank to explore the relevance of the Pope’s encyclical on social teaching, Caritas in Veritate, for the financial sector.

The seminar was organised by Archbishop Vincent Nichols and brought together a number of leading figures in the City to look at issues of ethics and values in the light of the moral principles of Catholic social teaching, and the various challenges facing leaders of the financial sector in the UK.

A message  from Cardinal Bertone, Secretary of State  to Pope Benedict,  said: ‘The Holy Father was pleased to be informed of the meeting .. he sends his cordial greetings to all participants. He is gratified to learn that leading figures in the world of finance  are responding to the challenge to explore ways of building ‘authentically human social relationships of friendship, solidarity and reciprocity.’ And he encourages them always to promote the integral human development that is rooted in a transcendent vision of the person. He assures all those taking part in the seminar of his blessing and prayers.’

Related

Inequality is good, says Goldman Sachs chief, Lord Griffiths

All participants attended in a personal capacity. They were (listed alphabetically): Marcus Agius, Chairman, Barclays Bank; Helen Alexander, President, CBI; Bishop John Arnold, Auxiliary Bishop in Westminster; Ben Andradi, Managing Partner, Syntel and Trustee of Catholic Trust for England and Wales; Sir Win Bischoff, Chairman, Lloyds TSB; Geoff Boisi, Chairman and CEO, Roundtable Investment Partners; Gavin Boyle, CEO, Tudor Capital UK; Robin Buchanan, Senior Adviser, Bain & Co; Mel Carvill, President, PPF Partners Ltd; Dominic Casserley, Managing Partner UK and Ireland, McKinsey & Co; Sr Catherine Cowley, Lecturer in Christian Ethics, Heythrop College, University of London; Michael Dobson, Chief Executive, Schroders; Stephen Green, Group Chairman, HSBC Holdings; Lord Brian Griffiths, Vice Chairman, Goldman Sachs International;  Field Marshal Lord Peter Inge, former Chief of the Defence Staff; Louis Jordan, Vice Chairman, Deloitte;  Rt  Hon John McFall, MP Chairman, Treasury Select Committee; George Mallinckcrodt, W KBE, President, Schroders; Philip Mallinckrodt, Group Head of Private Banking, Schroders;  Paul Marshall, Founder and Chairman, Marshall Wace; Archbishop Vincent Nichols, President, Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales; Andrea Ponti, Global Head, Healthcare JP Morgan; Anthony Salz, Director, Rothschild’s; Archbishop Peter Smith, Vice-President, Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales; Keith Wade, Chief Economist, Schroders; Charles Wookey, Assistant General Secretary, Catholic Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales;  and Professor Stefano Zamagni, Professor of Economics, University of Bologna, adviser to the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace on Caritas in Veritate.

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Economic Meltdown · Financial Scandals · Vatican

Inequality is good, says Goldman Sachs chief, Lord Griffiths

October 22, 2009 · 2 Comments

Lord Griffiths

Lord Griffiths has echoed the ‘Greed is good’ maxim by Gordon Gekko, played by Michael Douglas in the film Wall Street, by saying inequality is good

Inequality is good, says Goldman chief, echoing Gordon Gekko as he defends huge bank bonuses

Daily Mail | Oct 21, 2009

By Rupert Steiner

The vice-chairman of Goldman Sachs has launched an astonishing defence of bumper bonuses just a year after bankers brought the world’s economy to the brink of collapse.

In a speech likely to recall fictional banker Gordon Gekko in the film Wall Street – whose mantra ‘greed is good’ came to sum up the excesses of the 1980s – Lord Griffiths claimed taxpayers should ‘tolerate the inequality’.

And he insisted that banks should not be ashamed of rewarding staff.

His comments came as it was revealed that President Barack Obama is set to slash bonus payouts by as much as 90 per cent to executives at Wall Street banks that received billions of dollars in taxpayers’ cash.

Last week, Goldman Sachs provoked anger after revealing that it planned to lavish a record £13.4billion in pay and bonuses on its staff.

Around 5,500 of its employees work in London and are in line to pocket an average of £440,000 each after the bank revealed a sharp rise in profits.

Lord Griffiths, who was speaking at a debate on ethics held at St Paul’s Cathedral, said: ‘We have to accept that inequality is a way of achieving greater opportunity and prosperity for all.

‘We should not be ashamed of offering compensation in an internationally competitive market to ensure that businesses stay here and employ British people.’

The 67-year- old, a former adviser to Lady Thatcher, also said government attempts to rein in bonuses would only result in banks quitting Britain, causing huge damage to the economy.

‘We should think about the mediumterm common good and make sure that going forward we have one cluster of industry here in London – the financial sector,’ he said.

Lord Griffiths’s comments will be a major embarrassment for Chancellor Alistair Darling and Treasury minister Lord Myners, who have already promised to slam the brakes on corporate excesses.

They are also likely to enrage millions of credit-starved businesses and families hit by the credit crunch.

Full Story

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Crime & Corruption · Feudalism & Neofeudalism · Financial Scandals · Illuminati · Wealth Redistribution

JPMorgan Chase Reports Surprisingly Strong Profit of $3.6 Billion As Financial System is Brought to its Knees

October 15, 2009 · Leave a Comment

NY Times | Oct 14, 2009

By ERIC DASH

A year after the financial system was brought to its knees, a resurgent JPMorgan Chase reported a second consecutive quarter of surprisingly strong profit on Wednesday, solidifying its position at the pinnacle of American banking.

JPMorgan’s results — $3.6 billion in profit for the third quarter — fanned hopes on Wall Street that the nation’s financial sector was entering a new period of prosperity, despite lingering troubles. The bank’s robust showing, amid tentative signs that its consumer loan losses might soon peak, has set the pace for other big banks that will report results in coming days.

JPMorgan’s profit was powered by its investment banking division, where earnings more than doubled from the period a year earlier because of trading in the fixed-income markets and a flurry of deals. The unit’s results more than offset the bank’s losses on credit card loans and home mortgages, which continued to rise as consumers struggled with a weak economy.

The earnings seemed to light a fire under Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrial average rose 144.80 points, closing above 10,000 for the first time in a year.

Although the recession weighed heavily on its businesses, JPMorgan appeared to be taking advantage of the financial crisis to leapfrog investment banking rivals in the rankings and expand its consumer lending franchise. Meanwhile, it added $2 billion to its consumer credit reserves for future losses, bringing the total amount it has set aside to $31.5 billion.

Net income rose to 82 cents a share, far surpassing analysts’ estimates for the third quarter. The bank reported a profit of $527 million, or 9 cents a share, in the third quarter of 2008.

“The revenue growth was very impressive,” said Anthony Polini, an analyst at Raymond James & Associates. “They’re benefiting from a turn in the economy, and they’re asserting their dominance.”

The results also reflected the broader rebound in once-stymied financial markets, with companies again issuing stock, raising money from bond markets and signing merger deals. After being forced to take huge write-downs on the value of some its assets a year ago, JPMorgan said it booked about a $400 million gain on the sale of mortgage securities and buyout loans.

Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan’s chairman and chief executive, said the earnings reflected growth across several business lines, but he gave only a cautious outlook. “While we are seeing some initial signs of consumer credit stability, we are not yet certain that this trend will continue,” he said in a statement.

Consumer loss rates remain high, but there were upbeat signs in the bank’s numbers. Bank officials said they saw “a little bit of stabilization” in home values, especially for lower price properties and in states like California. And while delinquencies remain high, fewer borrowers were falling behind on mortgages.

Michael J. Cavanagh, the bank’s chief financial officer, called that a “hopeful sign” but stopped short of declaring that heavy losses were over. “We have to watch the economy and see where it heads,” he said in a conference call with reporters.

JPMorgan was the first of the nation’s biggest banks to report third-quarter earnings. Bank of America, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs also release results this week. As one of the first major banks to warn of troubles with subprime mortgages, home equity loans and credit cards, JPMorgan is seen as a bellwether for the financial industry.

Although the housing market and economy remain weak, analysts expect to see a slowdown in consumer loan losses at the biggest banks and for them to start setting aside less money in their reserves. Meanwhile, the troubles are quickly moving to commercial real estate loans, which will place a heavier burden on smaller lenders.

Mr. Dimon still must contend with several problems. His decision last month to replace the two co-heads of the investment banking division with a single leader, James E. Staley, raised concern within the ranks. JPMorgan’s credit card division is unlikely to turn a profit until 2011, and, like most of the industry, its consumer franchise has seen a fall-off in new mortgage lending.

Mr. Dimon also faces obstacles in Washington. He must balance paying bonuses to JPMorgan investment bankers based on blow-out earnings with public furor over Wall Street pay. New regulations on credit cards threaten to lower the profitability of that business, and lenders face other legislative efforts to curb bank fees and derivatives trading.

Despite repaying its $25 billion taxpayer investment in June, JPMorgan is still waiting for the government to sell warrants it was given last year. Their value, now at nearly $2 billion, has risen almost $800 million since rivals like Goldman Sachs cut deals to buy them back this summer, according to Linus Wilson, a finance professor at the University of Louisiana at Lafayette. That could be a windfall for taxpayers but would not affect the bank’s capital.

Even so, JPMorgan is emerging from the crisis with renewed confidence. Its investment bank, which posted a $1.9 billion profit, reported strong trading revenue, though short of the record levels earlier this year when the markets were in constant flux and prices skyrocketed.

The bank’s consumer businesses are still bleeding from bad loans. Its mortgage and consumer banking operations posted a narrow $7 million profit, while its credit card division lost $700 million in the quarter. By next year, charge-offs could reach 11 percent of loan balances.

“You are seeing the underlying earnings power is there, albeit challenged by the need in this quarter to add to reserves,” Mr. Cavanagh said. “Stabilization is just the first phase; we need losses to return to more normalized levels.”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Economic Meltdown · Financial Scandals

Lord Mandelson and Nat Rothschild share Brazilian ambitions

October 11, 2009 · Leave a Comment

When Lord Mandelson pays tribute to President Lula of Brazil at the Banqueting House in Whitehall on Bonfire Night, his Brazilian-born boyfriend, Reinaldo da Silva, will not be the only one hoping for friendships to sparkle. The Business Secretary’s holiday host Nat Rothschild has decided to expand massively his interests in Brazil.

Telegraph | Oct 10, 2009

By Richard Eden

Lord Rothschild’s heir has invested £75 million in BR Properties to take advantage of Brazil’s booming economy.

Nat, from whose villa in Corfu Peter Mandelson reportedly ran Britain while Gordon Brown was on holiday in August, is expected to take a seat on the board of BR Properties. His father is the chairman of the RIT Capital investment group, which is also taking a minority stake in the company.

Nat’s previous property interests centred on Montenegro, where he is investing with another of Mandelson’s chums, Oleg Deripaska, the controversial Russian oligarch.

Mandelson’s relationship with Nat became a major talking point when Mandrake disclosed last year that the former European trade commissioner had, while staying with Nat in Corfu, been entertained aboard the yacht of Deripaska, an aluminium tycoon, whose businesses benefited from tariffs the commission set.

Nat, who is the co-chairman of the hedge fund Atticus Capital, has been linked to the son of the Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi, Saif al-Islam Muammar al-Gaddafi. In 2009, Saif threw his 37th birthday party at the Splendid Hotel in Becici, Montenegro.

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Crime & Corruption · Dictators · Globalization · Illuminati

US economic decline forges New World Order

October 5, 2009 · Leave a Comment

Agence France-Presse | Oct 4, 2009

The crisis is redrawing the world map of economic power as the influence of US consumer spending declines and major emerging markets like China and India take the lead, finance chiefs said.

“One of the legacies of this crisis may be a recognition of changed economic power relations,” World Bank president Robert Zoellick said Friday in Istanbul ahead of annual meetings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

“Recent forecasts show that China and India are helping to pull the global economy out of recession…. A multipolar economy less reliant on the US consumer will be a more stable world economy,” he added.

Consumer spending accounts for around two-thirds of economic activity in the United States — by far the world’s biggest economy — and experts say lower spending could have radical effects on the US’s world standing.

The IMF on Thursday forecast emerging and developing economies would grow 5.1 percent in 2010 — in contrast with just 1.3 percent in advanced economies.

China’s economy was projected to grow by 9.0 percent next year and India’s by 6.4 percent — far ahead of 1.5 percent expansion in the US economy.

“The American engine is not as strong as it was before,” IMF managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said in a speech in which he called for emerging markets to be given more say in the IMF’s decisions.

“Emerging economies are becoming more and more the real partners,” he said.

In a BBC World debate on the crisis held in Istanbul, Niall Ferguson, a professor of business administration at Harvard Business School in the United States, said: “The crisis has accelerated a shift from west to east.”

“That means rebalancing not only economically… but rebalancing geopolitically, which I think makes some people nervous,” Ferguson said.

“For the foreseeable future the US will be growing at a much lower rate while China is in fact growing at a much faster rate,” he added.

The shift is having far-reaching effects around the world.

In Latin America, IMF economists said the crisis is affecting countries differently depending on whether, like Mexico, they are more closely tied to the United States or, like Brazil, they have more links with China.

“If it was not for China we wouldn’t have seen positive growth in the second quarter in Brazil,” Ilan Goldfajn, chief economist at Brazilian bank Itau Unibanco, said at an IMF-organised conference in Istanbul.

Goldfajn said the world would now start to “rebalance towards Asia.”

Marek Belka, head of the IMF’s European department, cautioned however that for European countries, “demand from Asia is not enough — the recovery rests on the shoulders of European consumers and investors.”

This upheaval is changing institutions too, with the G20 group of developed and emerging economies turning into the main forum for international economic policy and strengthening the IMF as a guarantor of global stability.

The IMF has bailed out countries around the world in recent months and its members have tripled its lending resources to 750 billion dollars (515 billion euros).

Strauss-Kahn has more ambitious plans yet and is seeking more funding to strengthen the IMF’s role as a global lender of last resort.

“Our ultimate goal is financial and economic stability,” he said in a speech in Istanbul at which he outlined plans to even out global economic imbalances.

The G20 summit in the US city of Pittsburgh last month also agreed to give more voting shares to emerging and developing economies in the IMF and the World Bank — a reflection of the shift in economic power.

The World Bank’s Zoellick has also argued that developing countries in Southeast Asia, Latin Amercia, the Middle East and Africa should be seen as future “engines of growth” rather than recipients of charity from rich nations.

In a recent speech in Washington, Zoellick said: “The old international economic order was struggling to keep up with change before the crisis…. It is time we caught up and moved ahead.”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Economic Meltdown · Global Government · Globalization · New World Order · Order Out Of Chaos · Wealth Redistribution

IMF seeks role as “global central bank”

October 5, 2009 · Leave a Comment

IMF Gets New Role of Serving the G-20

WSJ | Oct 5, 2009

By BOB DAVIS

ISTANBUL — International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn is using the IMF’s annual meeting here to campaign for turning the fund into a kind of global central bank with at least $1 trillion for lending developing nations in a crisis.

But a very different reality is taking shape: The IMF is essentially being turned into the staff of the Group of 20, an organization of industrialized and developing nations that doesn’t have a headquarters, staff or rules for membership. With the leaders of the G-20 effectively functioning as the board of directors of the global economy, they need the IMF’s help to carry out their role.

While the IMF’s new assignment was discussed at the G-20 leaders’ summit in Pittsburgh recently, it was more fully fleshed out — and widely endorsed by non-G-20 countries — in Istanbul over the weekend. It was also backed by finance ministers from some of the world’s largest industrialized countries and won a nod from an IMF policy committee that convenes at the annual meeting. And while Mr. Strauss-Kahn would like the IMF to do more, he too has embraced the emerging G-20 role.

Related

IMF Stakes Claim To Be Everybody’s Central Bank

Essentially the arrangement is designed to answer problems faced by both the IMF and the G-20. The IMF has long responded to requests from its largest shareholders — such as pressing China over currency issues at the behest of the U.S. But the assignments were often met by grumbling among IMF staff and led developing countries to see the IMF as a tool of U.S. foreign policy.

Significant now are the breadth of the G-20 move and the fact that it is seen as truly multilateral — coming from a larger group of major countries. And it addresses a continuing political failure: The IMF’s biggest shareholders often ignore its advice.

Now the G-20 will handle the politics of the global economy, largely by member countries peer-reviewing each other’s policies — and by pressing countries to stick to their pledges. In the case of China, that means relying less on exports — and by implication letting its currency appreciate — and in the case of the U.S., cutting its long-term debt.

For the G-20, relying on the IMF’s staff also could relieve political pressure, in this case from nations that aren’t members of the club. Egyptian Finance Minister Youssef Boutros-Ghali, who chairs the IMF’s policy committee, said, “What’s the role [at the G-20] of the [IMF's] other 165 nations? That’s two billion people” being left out. He said he thought those members would be satisfied if IMF staff working for the G-20 went through the IMF’s regular channels — such as presenting documents for review to the fund’s executive board, which represents all IMF members.

But Israeli central banker Stanley Fischer, a former IMF deputy managing director, said deeper change is needed. Eventually, he said, the G-20 should become the governing board of the IMF and have the responsibility of representing the IMF’s other members.

The G-20 finance ministers plan to start figuring out the precise procedures during a November meeting in Scotland.

Among tasks already assigned to the IMF is the analysis of plans by G-20 nations to boost growth and monitoring whether nations are carrying them out. Along with the Financial Stability Board, an organization of central bankers and regulators, the IMF will perform similar work on regulatory proposals. The G-20 is also counting on the IMF to develop early warnings of asset bubbles and other major problems.

European Central Bank governing-council member Axel Weber was skeptical of Mr. Strauss-Kahn’s goal of turning the IMF into a global lender of last resort. But Mr. Strauss-Kahn said he had made progress in winning support, pointing to a policy-committee recommendation that the IMF should “review its mandate.”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Big Government · Economic Meltdown · Global Government · Globalization · Order Out Of Chaos · Wealth Redistribution

IMF takes on bigger role, seeks more funds

October 5, 2009 · 1 Comment

AFP | Oct 4, 2009

By Veronica Smith

ISTANBUL — The International Monetary Fund took on a bigger global role Sunday as its 186 member nations accepted the mantle of guiding a lasting economic recovery from the 20 largest economies.

The IMF’s steering committee endorsed the Group of 20 summit plan for sustainable growth after the worst economic crisis in decades, including an increase in voting rights of at least five percent for under-represented countries.

At their Pittsburgh summit a little more than a week ago, the G20 largest rich and emerging-market economies, asked the IMF to help them shape a robust global economy and reform the fragile financial system.

The International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC), representing all members, backed the plan at a meeting in Istanbul ahead of the annual meetings of the IMF and World Bank that open Tuesday.

The panel vowed to maintain stimulus support of growth “until a durable recovery is secured” and take further steps as needed “to revive credit, recover lost jobs, and reverse setbacks in poverty reduction.”

IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn said that with the IMFC meeting, “we are off to the right start — building on the commitment to sustain cooperation and extending it to a far broader group of countries.”

He said the meetings offered “a unique opportunity to reshape the post-crisis world, to usher in a new era of collaborative global governance.”

Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury secretary, said the United States, effectively the only member with veto power in the Washington-based institution, is looking to the IMF “to play a key role in assisting the assessment of G20 economic and financial policies.”

Not all were satisfied with the IMF steering committee’s approval of the G20 request for a shift in the allocation of quotas, or voting power, to mainly developing countries.

“There will be no ‘new IMF’ without a more representative and democratic governance structure,” said Argentina’s finance minister, Amado Boudou.

“To achieve this goal, the voice and representation of developing countries, including the poorest, must be significantly increased,” said Boudou, who also represents Bolivia, Chile, Peru, Paraguay and Uruguay on the IMFC.

International aid agency Oxfam director Bernice Romero agreed, calling the quota shift “shameful,” and adding that “rich countries are still making decisions for the rest of the world.”

China’s deputy central bank governor, Yi Gang, said successful governance reforms, including a “significant” quota realignment, were key to “the capacity of the fund to deliver” by enhancing its legitimacy and effectiveness.

Strauss-Kahn called for a “substantial increase” in resources from members after the IMFC opened the door for action to reduce so-called global imbalances blamed for the current crisis.

The IMF managing director said the fund’s new Flexible Credit Line had provided important support to emerging-market economies amid the global economic crisis, with Mexico, Poland and Colombia signing up earlier this year.

But the credit line, offered at a fee for access to the fund’s reserves, is limited in scope and concerns only a certain category of countries, the former French Socialist finance minister said.

“Now we need to reflect and think about an extension of this idea of insurance” to fix the so-called global imbalances where some countries accumulate huge reserves and others build up huge deficits, he said.

“If you want to avoid countries, including China, to build such big reserves, contributing to global imbalances, we need to find another system,” he said.

An IMF pool of reserves that members could tap could serve as an international guarantee against financial shocks, he said.

“The communique opens the door for the IMF to think about it, and I think it’s very important for the post-crisis world because it’s one possible way to contribute to solving this global imbalances problem.”

In a speech Friday in Istanbul, Strauss-Kahn appealed for more resources so the fund could become a credible global lender of last resort, suggesting a trillion dollars or more may be needed.

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Big Government · Economic Meltdown · Global Government · Globalization · Social Engineering · Wealth Redistribution

World Bank welcomes New Economic Order from the ashes of crisis

October 5, 2009 · Leave a Comment

masonic_phoenix

China and India set to become established global powers

Euro and renminbi tipped to join dollar as reserve currencies

Observer | Oct 4, 2009

by Larry Elliott in Istanbul

The wrenching financial crisis of the past two years will provide the catalyst for a profound change in the global economy – which, according to the man running the World Bank, will see China and India become established centres of power, the dollar eclipsed as the sole reserve currency, and Latin America, south-east Asia and Africa emerge as new sources of growth.

But as he surveys the wreckage caused by what the bank and its sister organisation, the International Monetary Fund, agree is the most severe crisis since the devastation caused by the second world war, Robert Zoellick is surprisingly upbeat about the future.

Asked by the Observer how he envisages the global economy in 20 years’ time, Zoellick says: “There will certainly be a larger role for the emerging powers, there will be multipolar sources of growth, there will be more south-south trade between developing countries.

“The crisis gives us the opportunity to hasten this process. If we are concerned about the past reliance for growth on the US consumer, we have to make sure consumers in developing countries have enough finance to buy.”

Zoellick says that, while this does not mean the end of the US as a big player on the world stage, it has brought the curtain down on the unipolar world that followed the collapse of communism 20 years ago.

Developing countries were on the rise before the credit crunch and, as the latest snapshot of the global economy released last week illustrates, their position has been strengthened by their ability to keep growing as the west teetered on the brink of a 1930s-style Depression.

“We have reached a tipping point in global economic affairs,” says Stephen King, chief economist of HSBC. “While there are some encouraging signs of recovery in the developed world, the real economic action is taking place elsewhere. For both cyclical and structural reasons, the emerging nations are set to dominate world economic activity in the years ahead.”

America, Zoellick says, can no longer rely on the dollar ruling the roost. The euro and the Chinese renminbi are candidates to become reserve currencies.

Tellingly, this year’s annual meetings of the Bank and Fund take place in Istanbul, the point where Europe meets Asia and for almost two millennia a melting pot for cultures and religions. The view of both Zoellick and Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the IMF, is that there is a discernible shift in power and influence eastwards.

“These annual meetings take place at a defining moment in global governance,” Strauss-Kahn says. “We have experienced unparalleled economic co-operation in the last 12 months. It has never happened in history.”

While noting that there is a risk of the consensus vanishing now the immediate threat of economic meltdown has receded, Strauss-Kahn says it is the will of world leaders to continue collaborating in the years ahead. The days of the G7 – an elite gathering of policymakers from the US, Britain, Japan, Germany, France, Italy and Canada – are over. Power has shifted to the G20, which includes the G7 plus a number of leading developing countries such as China, India, Mexico, Brazil and South Africa.

John Hawksworth, head of macro-economics at PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) in the UK, says political influence will result from the increased economic clout of the big developing countries. Within two decades, he says, China may have overtaken the US as the world’s biggest economy once the lower cost of living is taken into account. “The E7 [Emerging Seven] – China, India, Brazil, Russia, Turkey, Indonesia and Mexico – could be a lot bigger than the current G7,” he adds.

PwC estimates that the global economy will double in size by the end of the 2020s to $143tn (£90tn) at today’s prices, with the E7 accounting for almost 40% of GDP and the G7 30%. “The E7 is already not that far behind the G7 and that process has been accelerated by the current crisis, which has hit the developed world harder than the big emerging economies,” says Hawksworth.

Like Zoellick, he thinks the dollar will no longer be the dominant currency. “The dollar, the euro and the renminbi will form a basket of currencies. The world will be different. The recession has accelerated that process.”

The IMF and the World Bank are still set in their original mould, he says. “Voting shares are going to have to change and it will be a gradual process. But it is possible that there will be a Chinese head of the fund or bank by that time.”

Such an outcome would symbolise the changing of the guard. There has been a gentlemen’s agreement that the head of the World Bank should be chosen by the Americans, the single biggest shareholder in the two institutions, while the managing director of the fund is picked by the Europeans. Zoellick is a former US trade representative; Strauss-Kahn was once France’s finance minister.

“There is an inevitability about this [shift in power to Asia],” says Hawksworth. “You can already see it in the business world, as witnessed by the HSBC decision. The centre of economic gravity is shifting and will continue to shift.”

Zoellick says the spread of prosperity to the poor parts of Asia, Latin America and Africa will be accelerated by investment in infrastructure, social safety nets and manufacturing.

Critics say the bank and the fund have too rosy a view of the future. One threat, recognised by the IMF, is that the 3.1% growth pencilled in for 2010 following the first year of global economic contraction since 1945 will prove a false dawn. Once the artificial stimulus of public borrowing wears off, the fear is that a rationing of credit by enfeebled banks will prevent the private sector from taking up the baton.

Another issue is the willingness of the old world to cede power. The IMF and World Bank were set up at the Bretton Woods conference in 1944 and their governance still reflects the dynamics of the 1940s. Reforms are being undertaken, but they are neither radical nor rapid enough to satisfy campaigners.

Peter Chowla of the Bretton Woods Project, a London-based NGO, says the changes amount to a “lick of paint on rotten foundations”.

Finally, there are those who believe the determination of the bank and fund to return as quickly as possible to the high levels of growth seen earlier this decade ignores the elephant in the room – that, by 2029, traditional fossil fuel stocks will be running dry.

Andrew Simms, head of policy at the New Economics Foundation thinktank, says: “One major thing that will describe the landscape in 2029 is that we will be beyond the point of peak oil. That will be the trigger for so many dominoes to fall.” Decisions made in the next few years, he adds, will be critical. “There is the risk of enormous knock-on effects on trade and food supply, with the food price volatility of the last year looking like a vicar’s tea party.”

He believes food security will replace gross domestic product as the yardstick of success, and there will be an emphasis on the new “three Rs” – reduce, repair, recycle.

In one respect, Zoellick, Strauss-Kahn and Simms are in full agreement: decisions taken in the next two or three years will shape the next two or three decades.

“We are balanced on a knife edge,” Simms says. “The potentialities are wonderful; the probabilities deeply disturbing.”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Big Government · Financial Scandals · Global Government · Globalization · Hegelian Dialectic · New World Order · Order Out Of Chaos · Social Degeneration · Wealth Redistribution

Lawmakers would curb Federal Reserve’s power, not expand it

October 2, 2009 · 2 Comments

Ben Bernanke

“There’s nobody more sick and tired of bailouts than me,” Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke told the House Financial Services Committee. He reiterated his belief that the central bank was best suited for supervising large financial institutions that pose a risk to the economy. (Evan Vucci / Associated Press / October 1, 2009)

Fed chief Ben Bernanke, appearing on Capitol Hill on Thursday, faced skeptics as he backed the Obama administration plan for an oversight panel that would enhance the central bank’s authority.

Los Angeles Times | Oct 2, 2009

By Jim Puzzanghera

Reporting from Washington

The Federal Reserve has dramatically expanded its role in the economy over the last 18 months, and the Obama administration has proposed enhancing that authority as part of an overhaul of financial regulations.

But many members of Congress — Democrats and Republicans — are seeking to curtail the central bank’s authority instead of expand it.

Worried about the increased power of the complex and mysterious Fed, and upset it did not do more to prevent the deep recession, Capitol Hill has focused its anger over the financial crisis and its aftermath on the central bank. The Fed finds itself at the center of a collision of traditional political concerns — conservatives’ fears of heavy-handed government intervention in free markets, and liberals’ complaints of regulators who favor corporate executives over average Americans.

More than two-thirds of the House of Representatives has signed on to a bill that would subject the central bank to increased congressional oversight through expanded audits. A key senator wants to strip the Fed of its authority to regulate banks. And the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee wants to rein in the Fed’s emergency lending power, which it used to help engineer the sale of Bear Stearns Cos. and bail out American International Group Inc.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke defended the central bank during a congressional hearing Thursday. He reiterated his belief that the Fed was best suited for taking on the major new role the administration had proposed for it — supervising large financial institutions that pose a risk to the entire economy.

But Bernanke also acknowledged the criticism of the Fed’s actions during the financial crisis, saying he shared congressional frustration.

“There’s nobody more sick and tired of bailouts than me,” Bernanke said.

Still, he appears to be fighting an uphill battle for increased power as Congress works to finish the regulatory overhaul this year.

“There just aren’t a lot of cheerleaders here for expanding the authority of the Federal Reserve,” said Kirstin Brost, a spokeswoman for the Senate Banking Committee.

The Obama administration wants to add to the Fed’s portfolio by giving it the task of supervising large financial firms, such as investment banks, that currently fall outside government banking regulation. That increased power would be offset somewhat by the administration’s proposal to take away the Fed’s authority to write and enforce consumer protection rules for financial products. That power would go to a new consumer agency.

Although the Fed still could end up securing new authority, Bernanke has his hands full just trying to keep his agency from losing power, said Jaret Seiberg, a financial policy analyst with Concept Capital’s Washington Research Group.

“The Fed is running into unprecedented opposition on Capitol Hill,” he said.

“In the Senate, there’s open hostility toward any expansion of the Federal Reserve’s authority. And in the House, you certainly have Republicans looking to focus the Fed solely on monetary policy and strip it of any larger role in financial regulation.”

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, told Bernanke on Thursday that the panel “will be putting some limitations” on the Fed’s powers. Among those would be increasing congressional authority to audit the Fed and creating the Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

The Federal Reserve is largely known for its often cryptic pronouncements on the economy and its pivotal role in setting interest rates. But the central bank also is a sizable government agency with about 2,100 employees that is a key player in regulating the financial sector. With 12 regional operations, the Fed is also responsible for supervising key parts of the banking system, including bank holding companies, and drafting consumer protection rules.

Critics have complained that the Fed faltered on all fronts leading up to the crisis. Years of low interest rates helped fuel the housing bubble, and lax oversight of financial institutions allowed consumers and banks to engage in increasingly risky behavior.

“If you look at the record here of the failure of the regulatory bodies . . . all roads seem to lead to the Federal Reserve,” said Sen. Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.).

The Fed is being hit from both sides of the ideological spectrum.

Liberals have sharply criticized it for taking 14 years — from 1994 to 2008 — to adopt rules to protect consumers from unscrupulous mortgage lending. The Obama administration has hammered the Fed on that point as well, a major reason it has proposed shifting consumer protection powers from the Fed and other regulators to the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency.

Bernanke has acknowledged the Fed’s failures on consumer protection, which took place largely before he became chairman in 2006, but opposes creation of the agency. Still, he realizes damage has been done to the Fed’s reputation in that area.

“I think the issue is essentially the confidence that Congress has in our focus going forward,” he said.

Rep. Melvin Watt (D-N.C.) didn’t show much confidence, chiding Bernanke for devoting little of his opening remarks at Thursday’s hearing to consumer protection and for later referring to “the minutiae of consumer law.”

At the same time, conservatives have strongly opposed the Fed’s interventions in the economy, which they said have put trillions of taxpayer dollars at risk by vastly expanding the central bank’s lending authority to bail out companies and back other commercial transactions to keep credit flowing.

House Republicans want to scale back the Fed’s power so the bank focuses on monetary policy. And many have opposed the administration’s proposal to give the Fed the new role of supervising large financial institutions, such as AIG, that are not traditional banks but pose a risk to the economy if they fail.

“I’m not alone with my concerns about the Fed as a systemic regulator,” said Rep. Scott Garrett (R-N.J.). Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.) has similar concerns, as do others on his panel. In fact, Dodd has proposed stripping the Fed of all of its bank oversight functions as part of his plan for creating a single banking regulatory agency.

Former Fed Gov. Alice M. Rivlin also said it would be a mistake to increase the Fed’s regulatory powers because it would distract from the central bank’s monetary policy role.

“Do we want to augment the regulatory authority of the Fed? . . . My answer is no,” said Rivlin, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “My sense is many people would be nervous about that augmentation.”

Bernanke tried to allay some congressional concerns Thursday. He endorsed the administration’s proposed creation of an oversight council of regulators to monitor the entire economy for risks, such as that of too many banks overextending themselves with credit-default swaps. But he did not go as far as some wanted.

Some lawmakers have said the proposed Financial Services Oversight Council — not the Fed — should have the additional task of supervising large financial firms that are not banks. The council would be headed by the Treasury secretary and include the Fed chairman and other regulators.

Bernanke, however, was steadfast in saying the Fed should supervise those large firms.

Rep. Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) said the Fed was less revered on Capitol Hill after the crisis, but there still was a worry that failing to follow its advice could lead to more trouble for the struggling economy.

“The Fed is very powerful, and it comes chiefly from fear and awe,” he said.

“I think there’s more fear and less awe than there used to be.”

Categories: Banking Cartels · Banksters · Controlled Opposition · Economic Meltdown · PR, Propaganda and Spin