A man who barely made it through a particularly brutal day in the market called his financial advisor the next day and asked: "May I please speak to Artie, my advisor?" The operator replied: "I'm sorry. Artie is deceased. Can anyone else help you?" The man said no and hung up.
Ten minutes later he called again and asked for Artie, his advisor. The operator said: "You just called a few minutes ago, didn't you? Artie died. I'm not making this up." The man hung up again.
Fifteen minutes later he called a third time and asked for Artie. By this time, the operator was fuming. "I've told you twice already. Artie is dead. He's not here! Why do you keep asking for him when I say he's dead?"
The man replied: "I just like hearing it."
masqara
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
THE STREETS OF REYKJAVIK HOT UP AS FINANCIAL MELTDOWN HITS ICELAND
“Even on TV and radio phone-ins callers are saying that maybe anarchy isn’t such a bad idea after all,” Siggi Pönk, lead vocalist of Icelandic punk band Dís explains, “people are saying capitalism in Iceland is dead, kill capitalism.”
The crisis facing the global economy is particularly acute in Iceland. Before the credit crunch Icelanders were, per capita, the world’s fifth richest population. According to the UN Iceland is the most developed country in the world (whatever that means). Unemployment and homelessness was virtually unknown; the island of just over 300,000 people was one of the greatest success stories of neo-liberalism. Now, precisely because of the Thatcher inspired ‘good years’, the odds are strong on it being the first ‘developed’ country to collapse into full economic depression.
So it’s fair to say that Icelanders are mildly angry. There’s been an upsurge in grassroots mobilisation as the scale of the damage to the economy has become apparent. Approximately 9,000 people (3% of the population) hit the streets in the last weekly anti-government-bank-billionaire demonstration. Open forums discussing the current situation are packed out - and politicians aren’t allowed through the door - unless they’re ordered to attend. New political groups are everywhere - 500 people even physically attacked Reykjavik’s main Police station and broke out a political prisoner. The collapse of capitalism in Iceland seems to have re-awakened the island’s traditional spirit of independence.
Precisely who caused this crash is the main unanswered question. What is perfectly clear is that it was the governments free market economic policy in the 80’s and 90’s which caused the nosedive. The Independence Party has ruled in every government since Iceland won it’s sovereignty in 1944. Now, for the first time, it has had to hire private bodyguards for it’s members, not least for Davíð Oddson (Mayor of Reykjavik 1982-1991; Prime Minister 1991-2005; Governor of Central Bank 2005-present), its most vigorous exponent of neo-liberal policies.
Unlike other Scandinavian countries, Iceland closely followed a Thatcherite route of privatising all its major industries and banks; slashing or abolishing corporate, inheritance, net wealth, income and company turnover taxes; signing National Accords (suicide pacts) with trade unions. The right-wing thinktank Economic Freedom of the World's annual survey rated Iceland 53rd of the 72 'free-est' (read deregulated) economies in 1975, while it was one of the poorest countries in Western Europe; by 2006 it had risen to be the 12th out of 141 and was amongst the richest on the planet. (Britain went from 23rd to 5th in the same period).
How does being 'economically free' translate into being ridiculously rich? Any fishmonger will tell you that no matter how many tax cuts you get, selling fish, Iceland’s main export, hardly makes you a millionaire. Instead their wealth came from debt. Icelandic bankers stuck their interest rates high so that foreign investors would leave their money with them. They then went on spending sprees across the world, especially in the UK and Denmark. Amongst the UK companies bought by the Icelandic Baugur group were Topshop, Debenhams, Iceland (the supermarket, for novelty value) and the biggest toy shop in Europe - Hamleys (well if you’re a billionaire you can’t just buy your kid an action man). Iceland’s glorious wealth however, was based on borrowed money.
Then the credit crunch bit the world, investors wanted their money back and it became blindingly obvious that the Icelandic bankers couldn’t pay. When all three of its main banks collapsed and were nationalised in the beginning of October (keeping most of the same management, of course), it was revealed that Iceland owed foreign investors $60 billion, 12 times their GDP! But, as these banks were now owned by the nation, it fell on the population as a whole, not the bankers and billionaires who’d taken out these loans, to repay. That’s a debt of about $100,000 per person! And of course, with foreign debts there’s interest and exchange rates to add on. The children of todays Icelanders will still be facing the hangover of the Good Years.
SLUMS GONE TO ICELAND
Out of the $11 billion package to ‘rescue’ its banks, the Icelandic government signed a $2.1 billion “International Monetary Foundation (IMF) conditionality agreement”. In Godfather like tones the IMF once described themselves as “the credit community’s enforcer.” Whereas the logic of investment is usually based on getting money for the risks you take, just like betting on Kazakhstan winning the World Cup would make you rich if they came through but would hit you in the face if they didn’t; the IMF guarantees that it will get its investment back regardless, like someone who bets on Kazakhstan and then points a gun at the bookie to demand their ‘winnings’ when they lose.
The IMF has ruined countless poorer countries with its debt-enforcement, forcing countries to repay loans by raising interest rates; increasing tax whilst reducing public spending; selling off public industries and property; removing restrictions on the movement of money; taking out more loans...and so on. In short it’ll be business as usual for the current Icelandic government, which is probably why their only comments on the conditions for the loan (there are always conditions to IMF loans) were that they wouldn’t have to do anything they wouldn’t have needed to do anyway. Meanwhile they raised interest rates to 18% - step one of the programme. With billions of pounds of British cash nestling in the now decimated Icelandic banks the government has frozen assets using anti-terrorism laws. The Icelandic government was distinctly unimpressed, but has bigger issues to deal with on the home front.
ICE BREAKER
The movement that’s erupted in response to all of this has some unifying demands. 1) Immediate elections - for individuals instead of parties. 2) The entire Icelandic elite be jailed and forced to pay their debts themselves. 3) The entire finance regulatory organisation be replaced, including Davið Oddson, now the most hated man in over a millennium of history. 4) That nobody should lose their home - after Christmas unemployment is predicted to jump to 7% and you can bet that under the gaze of the IMF the already inadequate benefits will be cut.
One shred of good news is that the last 15 years of ecological devastation on the island is grinding to a halt. There’s simply no money to build more mega-dams, geothermal energy plants and aluminum smelters, especially as the aluminum industry itself has gone belly up from the credit crisis.
On a recent demonstration someone climbed on top of the Icelandic parliament and hoisted the symbolic flag of the billionaire Baugur Group, a grinning fat pink piggybank - the logo of their supermarket Bónus. The idea being that Iceland’s recent and hard won parliament was nothing more than an office for the arrogant super-rich and so it should fly its own flag. But while on a university trip to Parliament two weeks later, the same protester was spotted by an MP who got him nicked and locked up for an action against the aluminum industry that he participated in two years ago.
Word spread and 500 people turned up outside the police station, at first demanding his release and then forcing their way in, lobbing stones at the building’s windows and ramming its doors down with poles. Police responded with teargas. Someone paid for his release because a giant group of riot cops were forming behind the station to attack supporters. Once out of nick, the protester gave a speech to the cheering crowd, shouting “Such unity and power that you were upholding in front of this station should not be focused on getting some punk out of a prison cell. I’d rather you used this energy to bring the government to their knees. Launch a complete and general and immediate revolution!”
All this, and yet, the effects of the crisis have yet to even set in…
link
The crisis facing the global economy is particularly acute in Iceland. Before the credit crunch Icelanders were, per capita, the world’s fifth richest population. According to the UN Iceland is the most developed country in the world (whatever that means). Unemployment and homelessness was virtually unknown; the island of just over 300,000 people was one of the greatest success stories of neo-liberalism. Now, precisely because of the Thatcher inspired ‘good years’, the odds are strong on it being the first ‘developed’ country to collapse into full economic depression.
So it’s fair to say that Icelanders are mildly angry. There’s been an upsurge in grassroots mobilisation as the scale of the damage to the economy has become apparent. Approximately 9,000 people (3% of the population) hit the streets in the last weekly anti-government-bank-billionaire demonstration. Open forums discussing the current situation are packed out - and politicians aren’t allowed through the door - unless they’re ordered to attend. New political groups are everywhere - 500 people even physically attacked Reykjavik’s main Police station and broke out a political prisoner. The collapse of capitalism in Iceland seems to have re-awakened the island’s traditional spirit of independence.
Precisely who caused this crash is the main unanswered question. What is perfectly clear is that it was the governments free market economic policy in the 80’s and 90’s which caused the nosedive. The Independence Party has ruled in every government since Iceland won it’s sovereignty in 1944. Now, for the first time, it has had to hire private bodyguards for it’s members, not least for Davíð Oddson (Mayor of Reykjavik 1982-1991; Prime Minister 1991-2005; Governor of Central Bank 2005-present), its most vigorous exponent of neo-liberal policies.
Unlike other Scandinavian countries, Iceland closely followed a Thatcherite route of privatising all its major industries and banks; slashing or abolishing corporate, inheritance, net wealth, income and company turnover taxes; signing National Accords (suicide pacts) with trade unions. The right-wing thinktank Economic Freedom of the World's annual survey rated Iceland 53rd of the 72 'free-est' (read deregulated) economies in 1975, while it was one of the poorest countries in Western Europe; by 2006 it had risen to be the 12th out of 141 and was amongst the richest on the planet. (Britain went from 23rd to 5th in the same period).
How does being 'economically free' translate into being ridiculously rich? Any fishmonger will tell you that no matter how many tax cuts you get, selling fish, Iceland’s main export, hardly makes you a millionaire. Instead their wealth came from debt. Icelandic bankers stuck their interest rates high so that foreign investors would leave their money with them. They then went on spending sprees across the world, especially in the UK and Denmark. Amongst the UK companies bought by the Icelandic Baugur group were Topshop, Debenhams, Iceland (the supermarket, for novelty value) and the biggest toy shop in Europe - Hamleys (well if you’re a billionaire you can’t just buy your kid an action man). Iceland’s glorious wealth however, was based on borrowed money.
Then the credit crunch bit the world, investors wanted their money back and it became blindingly obvious that the Icelandic bankers couldn’t pay. When all three of its main banks collapsed and were nationalised in the beginning of October (keeping most of the same management, of course), it was revealed that Iceland owed foreign investors $60 billion, 12 times their GDP! But, as these banks were now owned by the nation, it fell on the population as a whole, not the bankers and billionaires who’d taken out these loans, to repay. That’s a debt of about $100,000 per person! And of course, with foreign debts there’s interest and exchange rates to add on. The children of todays Icelanders will still be facing the hangover of the Good Years.
SLUMS GONE TO ICELAND
Out of the $11 billion package to ‘rescue’ its banks, the Icelandic government signed a $2.1 billion “International Monetary Foundation (IMF) conditionality agreement”. In Godfather like tones the IMF once described themselves as “the credit community’s enforcer.” Whereas the logic of investment is usually based on getting money for the risks you take, just like betting on Kazakhstan winning the World Cup would make you rich if they came through but would hit you in the face if they didn’t; the IMF guarantees that it will get its investment back regardless, like someone who bets on Kazakhstan and then points a gun at the bookie to demand their ‘winnings’ when they lose.
The IMF has ruined countless poorer countries with its debt-enforcement, forcing countries to repay loans by raising interest rates; increasing tax whilst reducing public spending; selling off public industries and property; removing restrictions on the movement of money; taking out more loans...and so on. In short it’ll be business as usual for the current Icelandic government, which is probably why their only comments on the conditions for the loan (there are always conditions to IMF loans) were that they wouldn’t have to do anything they wouldn’t have needed to do anyway. Meanwhile they raised interest rates to 18% - step one of the programme. With billions of pounds of British cash nestling in the now decimated Icelandic banks the government has frozen assets using anti-terrorism laws. The Icelandic government was distinctly unimpressed, but has bigger issues to deal with on the home front.
ICE BREAKER
The movement that’s erupted in response to all of this has some unifying demands. 1) Immediate elections - for individuals instead of parties. 2) The entire Icelandic elite be jailed and forced to pay their debts themselves. 3) The entire finance regulatory organisation be replaced, including Davið Oddson, now the most hated man in over a millennium of history. 4) That nobody should lose their home - after Christmas unemployment is predicted to jump to 7% and you can bet that under the gaze of the IMF the already inadequate benefits will be cut.
One shred of good news is that the last 15 years of ecological devastation on the island is grinding to a halt. There’s simply no money to build more mega-dams, geothermal energy plants and aluminum smelters, especially as the aluminum industry itself has gone belly up from the credit crisis.
On a recent demonstration someone climbed on top of the Icelandic parliament and hoisted the symbolic flag of the billionaire Baugur Group, a grinning fat pink piggybank - the logo of their supermarket Bónus. The idea being that Iceland’s recent and hard won parliament was nothing more than an office for the arrogant super-rich and so it should fly its own flag. But while on a university trip to Parliament two weeks later, the same protester was spotted by an MP who got him nicked and locked up for an action against the aluminum industry that he participated in two years ago.
Word spread and 500 people turned up outside the police station, at first demanding his release and then forcing their way in, lobbing stones at the building’s windows and ramming its doors down with poles. Police responded with teargas. Someone paid for his release because a giant group of riot cops were forming behind the station to attack supporters. Once out of nick, the protester gave a speech to the cheering crowd, shouting “Such unity and power that you were upholding in front of this station should not be focused on getting some punk out of a prison cell. I’d rather you used this energy to bring the government to their knees. Launch a complete and general and immediate revolution!”
All this, and yet, the effects of the crisis have yet to even set in…
link
Saturday, December 6, 2008
The Upcoming Hedge Funds Crisis
Up to a fifth of managers in the $1.6 trillion (1.1 trillion pound) hedge fund industry are at risk of going out of business in the next two years, a Man Group strategist said on Wednesday.
Thomas Della Casa, head of the research, analysis & strategy group at Man Investments, told a briefing in Frankfurt one in 10 hedge funds tended to fold after a few years even in favourable market conditions.
"The number will go down from 10,000. In the next two years 2,000 (hedge funds) could perhaps disappear," he said.
Overall, hedge funds are on track for their third ever year of losses, based on industry data going back 18 years, Della Casa noted. Hedge funds last failed to earn money for their investors in 1998 and before that in 1994.
"Assets under management will remain relatively unchanged, we don't expect net inflows," Della Casa said about prospects for 2009. Many investors are likely to go on shunning risky assets, preferring to hoard cash for quite some time, he said.
"Every dollar parked on the sidelines and held as cash usually stays away from markets for about 12 months. We don't expect this liquidity to return any time soon.
"The beginning of 2009 will be hard. We will still see liquidations and fire sales," Della Casa said, referring to hedge funds and their assets, such as corporate bonds.
Yet such conditions could create buying opportunities, he said.
Credit was trading at $0.67-$0.68 to the dollar compared with a "normal" recovery value of $0.70, he said, adding Man Group saw "enormous opportunities here."
Man Group sees the global economic recession lasting at least between four and six quarters. With history as a yardstick, equity markets tend to bottom out half-way through a recession, Della Casa said.
Globally, investors withdrew $40 billion from hedge funds in October, leaving $1.56 trillion in assets under management, Chicago-based tracking firm Hedge Fund Research said on November 20.
October's redemptions exceeded the third quarter's net outflow of $31 billion as retail and institutional investors alike fled to the safety of cash after the collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers Holding Inc (LEHMQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz).
London-based Man Group, the world's largest listed hedge fund group, said recently its assets under management dwindled to $61 billion by early November from $67.6 billion at the end of September, mainly due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar.
Reuters
Thomas Della Casa, head of the research, analysis & strategy group at Man Investments, told a briefing in Frankfurt one in 10 hedge funds tended to fold after a few years even in favourable market conditions.
"The number will go down from 10,000. In the next two years 2,000 (hedge funds) could perhaps disappear," he said.
Overall, hedge funds are on track for their third ever year of losses, based on industry data going back 18 years, Della Casa noted. Hedge funds last failed to earn money for their investors in 1998 and before that in 1994.
"Assets under management will remain relatively unchanged, we don't expect net inflows," Della Casa said about prospects for 2009. Many investors are likely to go on shunning risky assets, preferring to hoard cash for quite some time, he said.
"Every dollar parked on the sidelines and held as cash usually stays away from markets for about 12 months. We don't expect this liquidity to return any time soon.
"The beginning of 2009 will be hard. We will still see liquidations and fire sales," Della Casa said, referring to hedge funds and their assets, such as corporate bonds.
Yet such conditions could create buying opportunities, he said.
Credit was trading at $0.67-$0.68 to the dollar compared with a "normal" recovery value of $0.70, he said, adding Man Group saw "enormous opportunities here."
Man Group sees the global economic recession lasting at least between four and six quarters. With history as a yardstick, equity markets tend to bottom out half-way through a recession, Della Casa said.
Globally, investors withdrew $40 billion from hedge funds in October, leaving $1.56 trillion in assets under management, Chicago-based tracking firm Hedge Fund Research said on November 20.
October's redemptions exceeded the third quarter's net outflow of $31 billion as retail and institutional investors alike fled to the safety of cash after the collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers Holding Inc (LEHMQ.PK: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz).
London-based Man Group, the world's largest listed hedge fund group, said recently its assets under management dwindled to $61 billion by early November from $67.6 billion at the end of September, mainly due to the strengthening of the U.S. dollar.
Reuters
Could Tsys Be the Next Bubble?
By Dan Burrows
We may be through the looking glass here, people. Treasurys, the world's invincible vault of wealth and stability, are acting pretty weird these days. They're behaving like stocks, or at least how stocks used to behave.
Remember, Treasurys are debt instruments, not equities. They're supposed to be kind of boring and not terribly rewarding. But then what do you expect from Uncle Sam's big snuggly security blanket? After all, Treasurys are "riskless," right?
Well, yes and no. They simply can't default, the thinking goes, because the government actually owns the machine that prints money. So you lend the feds some cash, they guarantee your money back, and they throw in a little vigorish for your trouble. (Although those meager yields won't help much later when all this fed paper eventually fuels inflation.)
But we digress. No risk, no reward, whatever. When stocks go down, bonds go up. This time it's different. So much cash has poured into Treasurys that yields are scraping the deck. And bond prices? They're up, up and away. (Remember, when bonds trade, their prices and yields move in opposite directions.)
Which brings us to this: Has the world's panicked flight to safety become a mass exodus to insanity? Could Treasurys (gulp!) be the next bubble?
No doubt it has been a strong and long bull run for Treasurys. The total return generated by the Treasury market was 5.1% in November, making it the best month since 1981. Back then the yield on the 10-year note was 15%, wrote David Rosenberg, Merrill Lynch's North American economist. Ahem, but today the yield on the 10-year note is dabbling with, uh, 2.7%.
"What a great time it has been to have been long the Treasury market as we head into the home stretch of this massive bull market," Rosenberg wrote Nov. 28. "And to think that the asset class most despised and the most underowned in pension fund, household, commercial bank and mutual fund portfolios is the one generating the greatest returns."
It gets weirder. For the first time in 50 years the dividend yield on the S&P 500 index (it's 3.7%) rose above the interest rate on the 10-year note. Historically this ain't how it's supposed to go. Over the long haul stocks generate better returns than bonds, but bonds are less risky and supply a steady stream of fixed income. As one goes up, the other goes down, but to this degree, and in Treasurys, no less?
Here's some data that will make equity investors throw up in their mouths a little bit. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500 index and Nasdaq Composite index have bled out 35%, 40% and 45%, respectively, year-to-date. Now take a look at the total returns generated by various U.S. Treasury indexes.
It's almost too good to be true, as Merrill Lynch's Rosenberg was careful to point out. "Investors should understand that while we maintain a constructive posture, Treasurys have moved into overvalued territory," he wrote.
Not that it has to end anytime to soon. Helicopter Ben is circling his Huey, firing cash down around the perimeter of a hot LZ. Meanwhile, down on the ground, sheer and ongoing financial terror is enveloping the globe.
Almost perversely, that's great news. It means this overvalued condition is likely to persist, Rosenberg says, "as the Fed, households and institutional investors emerge as large-scale buyers, even as foreign central banks pull back."
Ugh. This scenario seems spooky and familiar. Are Treasurys setting up for that classic mania-turn-to-bubble phase we've seen too often and too recently? Tech stocks in 2000. Real estate in 2006. Once the general public crowds itself 10 deep at the craps table, it might be time to take some winnings off the table.
SMARTMONEY.COM
We may be through the looking glass here, people. Treasurys, the world's invincible vault of wealth and stability, are acting pretty weird these days. They're behaving like stocks, or at least how stocks used to behave.
Remember, Treasurys are debt instruments, not equities. They're supposed to be kind of boring and not terribly rewarding. But then what do you expect from Uncle Sam's big snuggly security blanket? After all, Treasurys are "riskless," right?
Well, yes and no. They simply can't default, the thinking goes, because the government actually owns the machine that prints money. So you lend the feds some cash, they guarantee your money back, and they throw in a little vigorish for your trouble. (Although those meager yields won't help much later when all this fed paper eventually fuels inflation.)
But we digress. No risk, no reward, whatever. When stocks go down, bonds go up. This time it's different. So much cash has poured into Treasurys that yields are scraping the deck. And bond prices? They're up, up and away. (Remember, when bonds trade, their prices and yields move in opposite directions.)
Which brings us to this: Has the world's panicked flight to safety become a mass exodus to insanity? Could Treasurys (gulp!) be the next bubble?
No doubt it has been a strong and long bull run for Treasurys. The total return generated by the Treasury market was 5.1% in November, making it the best month since 1981. Back then the yield on the 10-year note was 15%, wrote David Rosenberg, Merrill Lynch's North American economist. Ahem, but today the yield on the 10-year note is dabbling with, uh, 2.7%.
"What a great time it has been to have been long the Treasury market as we head into the home stretch of this massive bull market," Rosenberg wrote Nov. 28. "And to think that the asset class most despised and the most underowned in pension fund, household, commercial bank and mutual fund portfolios is the one generating the greatest returns."
It gets weirder. For the first time in 50 years the dividend yield on the S&P 500 index (it's 3.7%) rose above the interest rate on the 10-year note. Historically this ain't how it's supposed to go. Over the long haul stocks generate better returns than bonds, but bonds are less risky and supply a steady stream of fixed income. As one goes up, the other goes down, but to this degree, and in Treasurys, no less?
Here's some data that will make equity investors throw up in their mouths a little bit. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, S&P 500 index and Nasdaq Composite index have bled out 35%, 40% and 45%, respectively, year-to-date. Now take a look at the total returns generated by various U.S. Treasury indexes.
It's almost too good to be true, as Merrill Lynch's Rosenberg was careful to point out. "Investors should understand that while we maintain a constructive posture, Treasurys have moved into overvalued territory," he wrote.
Not that it has to end anytime to soon. Helicopter Ben is circling his Huey, firing cash down around the perimeter of a hot LZ. Meanwhile, down on the ground, sheer and ongoing financial terror is enveloping the globe.
Almost perversely, that's great news. It means this overvalued condition is likely to persist, Rosenberg says, "as the Fed, households and institutional investors emerge as large-scale buyers, even as foreign central banks pull back."
Ugh. This scenario seems spooky and familiar. Are Treasurys setting up for that classic mania-turn-to-bubble phase we've seen too often and too recently? Tech stocks in 2000. Real estate in 2006. Once the general public crowds itself 10 deep at the craps table, it might be time to take some winnings off the table.
SMARTMONEY.COM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)