MONSTERS
OF THE WHITE HOUSE IN ACTION
About
two weeks into the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the United
States, and evidence of his involvement with the Wall Stret troupe is more than
proven. It is the reality of more than ever Wall Street in the US presidency by
election of the American people.
Wall
Street presides over the US supposedly from the White House if they want. Fact
is that it will be Wall Street tracing the fate of the US and most of the
world. What will happen is not known exactly but we know that Wall Street will
always win and want to lose is us, the American people and other peoples of the
world.
Read
on The New Yorker John Cassidy, already following. He knows very well what he
writes. Readers, be alert, the White House Monsters are in action.
Mark
Lane, in Washington DC for TA
FROM
“DRAIN THE SWAMP” TO GOVERNMENT SACHS
By John
Cassidy – The New Yorker
Until
now, Gary Cohn, the former president of Goldman Sachs, has been the invisible
member of the Trump Administration. Now we know why: he has been busy preparing
favors for his old pals on Wall Street. In an interviewwith the Wall Street Journal on
Thursday, Cohn said that Trump was preparing to sign an executive order
designed to pave the way for a broad rollback of the regulatory regime that the
Obama Administration and Congress introduced after the disastrous financial
crisis of 2008 and 2009.
Although
Cohn gave few specifics, his comments suggested that the Trump Administration
wants to hobble the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which Congress
created to protect the interests of ordinary Americans and
investors; reduce the amount of capital that big banks such as JPMorgan
Chase and Bank of America have to hold in reserve; spare some non-bank
financial firms—such as major insurers—from the enhanced scrutiny they have
been subjected to in recent years; and scythe away other key elements of the
2010 Dodd-Frank Act. “This is a table setter for a bunch of stuff that is
coming,” Cohn said in reference to the executive order, which Trump signed on
Friday.
During
last year’s campaign, Trump portrayed both Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton as pawns of Goldman Sachs. And after the self-described
“Leninist” Steve Bannon took over as his campaign C.E.O., Trump broadened his
critique, at one point depicting Lloyd Blankfein, Goldman’s C.E.O. and Cohn’s
old boss, as a member of a cabal of global financiers who had “robbed our
working class, stripped our country of its wealth, and put that money into
the pockets of a handful of large corporations and political
entities.” Even when it was happening, though, it was clear that all this
rabble-rousing was mainly for show.
Although
Trump campaigned as an economic populist, his brand of populism was simply
old-school Reaganomics—giveaways to the rich and pro-corporate
deregulation—rebranded with a nationalist and protectionist twist. After the
election, Trump stocked his Cabinet with Wall Street billionaires and
mega-millionaires—Wilbur Ross, Steve Mnuchin, Cohn—who had benefitted
personally from the lax regulatory regime that was in place before 2010. A week
after the election, I commented that
the Trump transition was “one of the biggest bait-and-switch operations in
recent history.”
Investors
took notice. For big trading houses like Goldman, Morgan Stanley, and JPMorgan,
the regulatory regime is a key driver of profitability. In the past six years,
higher capital requirements and other restrictions introduced as part of
Dodd-Frank helped drive down some banks’ return on equity—a measure of their
profitability—by more
than half. Partly in anticipation of upcoming regulatory relief, bank
stocks have been rising sharply since the election.
Indeed,
Michael Madowitz, an economist at the Center for American Progress, has calculated that
five financial stocks account for more than forty per cent of the rise in the
Dow Jones Industrial Average since November 8th. The jump in Goldman’s stock
alone accounts for a quarter of the over-all rise. On Friday morning, bank
stocks rose again. At noon, Goldman was up four per cent.
One
wonders what Trump voters in Michigan, Wisconsin, and western Pennsylvania
think of all this. Perhaps they have been distracted by his tough talk on
trade, his anti-Muslim travel ban, and his Twitter wars. Perhaps some even
believe that what is good for Wall Street is good for them, although that
wasn’t what Trump said during the campaign.
In
any case, Trump voters and everybody else will now get to watch as the
Administration guts a regulatory regime that was designed to prevent another
taxpayer bailout of Wall Street. Of course, the Trump Administration won’t present
things this way. As Cohn did in his interview with the Journal, they will
argue that they are simply removing some bits of the reform package that were
overdone and have proved counterproductive. “I’m not sitting here saying
we want to go back to the good old days,” Cohn said to the Journal. “We
don’t want to do it in an unregulated way. We want to do it in a smart,
regulated way.”
If
you are convinced by this, I’ve got a fabulous new synthetic subprime-mortgage
C.D.O. that you might be interested in investing in. The Dodd-Frank
reforms and the other rules that the Federal Reserve and its fellow-regulators
introduced after 2008 can’t be considered individually. They were designed to
work together as part of a new regulatory regime that reduced the level of risk
in the system. They did this by reducing leverage levels—i.e., how much banks
can borrow from other financial institutions—and by proscribing certain trading
activities, as well as by forcing big banks to draw up “living wills” that
would enable the government to wind them down, rather than bail them out, if
they got into trouble.
The new system isn’t perfect, but so far it
has been working. Big banks have a lot more capital and liquidity than they
used to have, and they are less liable to blow up at a moment’s notice. As Ben
Bernanke, the former head of the Federal Reserve, pointed out last year, the
reform process is an ongoing one. “A key element of the strategy is that it
gives banks strong incentives to shrink or otherwise restructure themselves to
reduce the risk they pose to the financial system,” Bernanke, who is now at the
Brookings Institution, wrote in a
blog post.
The
big banks, of course, don’t want to restructure or shrink further. They want
more freedom to increase the size of their balance sheets by borrowing more
money, to make risky trades, and to issue risky loans without busybodies from
the Fed and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau sticking their noses in. And
now, it appears, the banks will get what they want.
As
part of that process, it seems inevitable that Trump will have to get rid of
Bernanke’s successor, Janet Yellen, who is also a strong supporter of the
post-2008 regulatory regime. Unless the Fed reverses much of what it has done
since 2008, particularly its edicts forcing big banks to hold more capital,
there is only so much that the Trump Administration can do to free things up. But
Yellen’s presence is only a temporary roadblock. Her term is up next January,
and there are plenty of people on Wall Street who would be more than happy to
replace her.
*John
Cassidy has been a staff writer at The New Yorker since 1995. He also
writes a column about
politics, economics, and more for newyorker.com. More
Photo:
Gary Cohn (far right) has suggested that the Trump Administration will attempt
to significantly roll back post-2008 regulatory reform on Wall Street.PHOTOGRAPH
BY CHIP SOMODEVILLA / GETTY
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário