Five Treasury Secretaries Warn

Investment Analysis Clubs Macro Economic Trends and Risks
21

Robert Reuben, Alan Greenspan & Larry Summers
They were there to carry water for Goldman Sachs metal.

In the devastating aftermath of the economic meltdown, FRONTLINE sifts the ashes for clues about why it happened and examines critical moments when it might have gone much differently. Looking back into the 1990s, veteran FRONTLINE producer/director Michael Kirk (Inside the Meltdown, Breaking the Bank ) discovers early warnings of the crash, reveals an intense battle among high-ranking members of the Clinton administration, and uncovers a concerted effort not to regulate the emerging, highly complex, and lucrative derivatives markets, which would become the ticking time-bomb within the American economy.

Brooksley Born
https://www.liquisearch.com/brooksley_born/born_and_the_otc_derivatives_market
Born was particularly concerned about swaps, financial instruments that are traded over the counter between banks, insurance companies or other funds or companies, and thus have no transparency except to the two counterparties and the counterparties’ regulators, if any. CFTC regulation was strenuously opposed by Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, and by Treasury Secretaries Robert Rubin and Lawrence Summers. On May 7, 1998, former SEC Chairman Arthur Levitt joined Rubin and Greenspan in objecting to the issuance of the CFTC’s concept release. Their response dismissed Born’s analysis and focused on the hypothetical possibility that CFTC regulation of swaps and other OTC derivative instruments could create a “legal uncertainty” regarding such financial instruments, hypothetically reducing the value of the instruments. They argued that the imposition of regulatory costs would “stifle financial innovation” and encourage financial capital to transfer its transactions offshore. The disagreement between Born and the Executive Office’s top economic policy advisors has been described not only as a classic Washington turf war, but also a war of ideologies, insofar as it is possible to argue that Born’s actions were consistent with Keynesian and neoclassical economics while Greenspan, Rubin, Levitt, and Summers consistently espoused neoliberal, and neoconservative policies.

Born declined to publicly comment on the unfolding 2008 crisis until March 2009, when she said: “The market grew so enormously, with so little oversight and regulation, that it made the financial crisis much deeper and more pervasive than it otherwise would have been.” She also lamented the influence of Wall Street lobbyists on the process and the refusal of regulators to discuss even modest reforms.

2 Likes
22

I guess you could invest in foreign treasuries or CDs. But that would require a foreign account and foreign income with all the tax complications that go along with that.

23

And assume currency fluctuation risks.

24

As I continue hearing the shots being fired in this evolving civil war Winston Churchill’s quip came to mind, “Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else.”

The good news is that the war is being fought in the judiciary and not on battlefield. Checks and Balances doing their job. The good news is that government will likely become more transparent, at least for a time.

I have no objection to the former Treasury Secretaries speaking up, dialog goes a long way to clear things up. The legal battles will be fun to watch.

The Captain

4 Likes
25

From Portugal.

IP,
in order to meet the 20 min character will state the obvious that I am not having fun

6 Likes
26

A poll released by CBS “news” shows 53% approve of recent actions. Buckle up.

Steve

2 Likes
27

We already know that half the country is insane. That’s how we got here. What’s your point?

28

Captain I see an iceberg. Captain! Captain?

If the Supremes uphold TI right to decide which bills get paid…bonds and the interest won’t be paid.

TI does not want to confiscate your money. You won’t have much to confiscate.

Of course all of this is possibilities. Odds etc…but we have never been this stupid before.

29

People have not been put off by recent actions. They apparently like the roundups of brown people, and the DOJ protecting Christians.

Steve

30

The polls are bought. The propaganda machine keeps rolling.

But the 538 poll of polls shows the beginning of a decline.

The Great Depression now coming will change their minds.

32

And Edward VIII was similarly alleged
to have “Admired Mr. Mussolini because he made the trains run on time”…with similar scant evidence for either utterance. Joining Yogi Berra, Mark Twain, Quentin Crisp etc in the “known to have said…but probably didn’t” Hall of Fame.

And about those “fun to watch” shenanigans…I’m a bit too young and not alone enough to be tempted to bust out the popcorn just yet.

1 Like
33

The perception of mass deportations. Or should I say the deception of mass deportations. He has fooled both his supporters and detractors.

Even still, if deportations continue at their current rate, it would take around 28 years to deliver on the president’s promise to repatriate upwards of 11 million people.

2 Likes
34

American progressives of the era were attracted by the idea of a planned society.

In the North American Review in 1934, the progressive writer Roger Shaw described the New Deal as “Fascist means to gain liberal ends.” He wasn’t hallucinating. FDR’s adviser Rexford Tugwell wrote in his diary that Mussolini had done “many of the things which seem to me necessary.” Lorena Hickok, a close confidante of Eleanor Roosevelt who lived in the White House for a spell, wrote approvingly of a local official who had said, “If [President] Roosevelt were actually a dictator, we might get somewhere.” She added that if she were younger, she’d like to lead “the Fascist Movement in the United States.” At the National Recovery Administration (NRA), the cartel-creating agency at the heart of the early New Deal, one report declared forthrightly, “The Fascist Principles are very similar to those we have been evolving here in America.”
https://www.cato.org/commentary/hitler-mussolini-roosevelt

DB2

1 Like
35

In 1930 President Hoover had private companies deliver the mail by air.

In 1933 the airlines carried several million pounds of mail on 26 routes covering almost 25,000 miles (40,000 km) of airways. Transported mostly by night, the mail was carried in modern passenger planes equipped with modern flight instruments and radios, using ground-based beam transmitters as navigation aids.

Without consulting either Army Chief of Staff Douglas MacArthur or Chief of the Air Corps Major General Benjamin Foulois, Secretary of War George H. Dern at a cabinet meeting on the morning of February 9, 1934, assured President Roosevelt that the Air Corps could deliver the mail. That same morning, shortly after conclusion of the cabinet meeting, second assistant postmaster general Harllee Branch called Foulois to his office. A conference between members of the Air Corps, the Post Office, and the Aeronautics Branch of the Commerce Department ensued in which Foulois, asked if the Air Corps could deliver the mail in winter, casually assured Branch that the Air Corps could be ready in a week or ten days.[20]

US military pilots not familiar with flying aircraft with great loads and likely unbalanced loads died.
Charles Lindberg sent a 275 word telegram of protest to the president, while also releasing a copy to the press, with his statement generating huge public attention.[1]

President Roosevelt, publicly embarrassed, ordered a meeting with Foulois that resulted in a reduction of routes and schedules (which were already only 60% of that flown by the airlines), and strict flight safety rules.

On March 8 and 9, 1934, four more pilots died in crashes,[n 14] totaling ten fatalities in less than one million miles of flying the mail. (Meanwhile, the crash of an American Airlines airliner on March 9, also killing four, went virtually unnoticed in the press.)[4] Rickenbacker was quoted as calling the program “legalized murder”,[27] which became a catchphrase for criticism of the Roosevelt administration’s handling of the crisis.

“To lessen the attacks on Roosevelt and Farley, Democratic leaders in both houses of Congress and Post Office officials placed the blame for all that had gone wrong on the shoulders of Foulois.”[4] Other supporters of the president outside of the government muted criticism of the administration by focusing on and excoriating Lindbergh, who had also made headlines by publicly protesting the cancellation of the contracts two days after they were announced, “as if his telegram had caused the deaths.”

[1]American Pravda: Charles A. Lindbergh and the America First Movement, by Ron Unz - The Unz Review

37

“A poll released by CBS “news” shows 53% approve of recent actions. Buckle up.”

I’m trying to avoid social media hotspots, but it’s hard,lol.
I’m seeing a whole lot of chortling approval for the new Gulf of America. The promises of lowering the cost of eggs, and all other groceries seem to have been forgotten.

It’ll be interesting when driving season gets here. If the price of gas hots $3.50 or $4 a gallon, will TI’s fanboys and fangirls still luv him ?

38

The polls are paid for.

The 538 average of polls shows fewer people in support than the 49.8% vote in November.

The election campaign crap continues on.

The Great Depression will change more minds than anything else.

39

The party has no leader or a message on how to improve lives of Americans. The party is seen as supporting illegal immigration and corruption.

The demonstrations opposing DOGE are a good visual for everyone to see.

2 Likes
40

Just like moving to the Colonies.

41

I recently was tapped to answer a poll. The questions were so biased to get a specific answer, that I told them to remove my number from their list and refused to answer.

IP

6 Likes
42

The polls are paid for campaign propaganda.

The polling averages show he is dropping support.