RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Reich writes: "Word on the Street is that J.P. Morgan's exposure is so large that it can't dump these bad bets without affecting the market and losing even more money. And given its mammoth size and interlinked connections with every other financial institution, anything that shakes J.P. Morgan is likely to rock the rest of the Street."

Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)



Resurrecting Glass-Steagall

By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog

11 May 12

.P. Morgan Chase & Co., the nation�s largest bank, whose chief executive, Jamie Dimon, has lead Wall Street�s war against regulation, announced Thursday it had lost $2 billion in trades over the past six weeks and could face an additional $1 billion of losses, due to excessively risky bets.

The bets were �poorly executed� and �poorly monitored,� said Dimon, a result of �many errors, �sloppiness,� and �bad judgment.� But not to worry. �We will admit it, we will fix it and move on.�

Move on? Word on the Street is that J.P. Morgan�s exposure is so large that it can�t dump these bad bets without affecting the market and losing even more money. And given its mammoth size and interlinked connections with every other financial institution, anything that shakes J.P. Morgan is likely to rock the rest of the Street.

Ever since the start of the banking crisis in 2008, Dimon has been arguing that more government regulation of Wall Street is unnecessary. Last year he vehemently and loudly opposed the so-called Volcker rule, itself a watered-down version of the old Glass-Steagall Act that used to separate commercial from investment banking before it was repealed in 1999, saying it would unnecessarily impinge on derivative trading (the lucrative practice of making bets on bets) and hedging (using some bets to offset the risks of other bets).

Dimon argued that the financial system could be trusted; that the near-meltdown of 2008 was a perfect storm that would never happen again.

Since then, J.P. Morgan�s lobbyists and lawyers have done everything in their power to eviscerate the Volcker rule - creating exceptions, exemptions, and loopholes that effectively allow any big bank to go on doing most of the derivative trading it was doing before the near-meltdown.

And now - only a few years after the banking crisis that forced American taxpayers to bail out the Street, caused home values to plunge by more than 30 percent and pushed millions of homeowners underwater, threatened or diminished the savings of millions more, and sent the entire American economy hurtling into the worst downturn since the Great Depression - J.P. Morgan Chase recapitulates the whole debacle with the same kind of errors, sloppiness, bad judgment, excessively risky trades poorly-executed and poorly-monitored, that caused the crisis in the first place.

In light of all this, Jamie Dimon�s promise that J.P. Morgan will �fix it and move on� is not reassuring.

The losses here had been mounting for at least six weeks, according to Morgan. Where was the new transparency that�s supposed to allow regulators to catch these things before they get out of hand?

Several weeks ago there were rumors about a London-based Morgan trader making huge high-stakes bets, causing excessive volatility in derivatives markets. When asked about it then, Dimon called it �a complete tempest in a teapot.� Using the same argument he has used to fend off regulation of derivatives, he told investors that �every bank has a major portfolio� and �in those portfolios you make investments that you think are wise to offset your exposures.�

Let�s hope Morgan�s losses don�t turn into another crisis of confidence and they don�t spread to the rest of the financial sector.

But let�s also stop hoping Wall Street will mend itself. What just happened at J.P. Morgan � along with its leader�s cavalier dismissal followed by lame reassurance � reveals how fragile and opaque the banking system continues to be, why Glass-Steagall must be resurrected, and why the Dallas Fed�s recent recommendation that Wall Street�s giant banks be broken up should be heeded.


Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "Locked in the Cabinet," "Reason," "Supercapitalism," "Aftershock," and his latest e-book, "Beyond Outrage." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
Email This Page

 

Comments  

We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.

General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.

Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.

- The RSN Team

 
+6 # laborequalswealth 2018-12-15 13:53
Gee. Are we all to think that this is anything unusual? Something new? Trump, Putin, the Clintons, the Bushes - all of them work for and with the oligarchs. Not one of them gives a fly's turd about the 99.999% of the rest of us.

If Spier really wants to do something, how about NOT voting for trillions of $$$$ for the American kleptocrat's muscle, aka the US military? Or actually getting a Constitutional Amendment pass invalidating Citizens United? Or taking back Congress' Constitutionall y mandated war powers?

One could go on and on. But I am nauseated by the pretence that only Trump or the Russians or Putin are morally corrupt when Jackie knows perfectly well that ALL OF OUR LEADERS ARE CONTROLLED BY THE KLEPTOCRACY.

And she and the rest of the neolib Demos do absolutely nothing about it. Because they are part of the problem, not the solution.

This absurd Russian bashing, withdrawing from treaties is RISKING NUCLEAR WAR AND OMNICIDE FROM NUCLEAR WINTER.

And all these $174K/year + perks politicos can do is whine about some real estate deals. Jesus F Christ.
 
 
+4 # HarryP 2018-12-15 17:11
 
 
+8 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-12-15 17:57
labor -- I agree with you. Washington is for sale, or more precisely, the elected representatives we send there to do government work are for sale. They have been bought off by every oligarch, corrupt dictator, weapons maker, banker, and criminal you can imagine.

We just hardly pay any attention any more when Obama or Hillary (or Bill) gives a speech to some bankers for a half million or more. I read not long ago that Obama has made about $20 million on speeches since leaving the white house. These are "retroactive bribes." Maybe we should call it the "whore house." The people who live there sure will do a lot for some money.
 
 
+9 # yolo 2018-12-15 21:22
I remember talking once with a Mexican security official about the corruption in his country compared to the US. His response was the only difference between the corruption in his country and the US was in the US the corruption is legalized.
 
 
+29 # Elroys 2018-12-15 16:00
Let's see - why does trump lick Putin's boots?
A. He likes the flavor of leather, especially with the order of corruption and money
B. trump loves putin's money and will do and say anything for a buck
C. trump is so compromised that his only alternatives are to lick putin boots or go to jail and lose everything

D. trump wants to be caught, get fitted for his new pin stripes, live behind bars (iron, not gold) and he's looking for his next "girlfriends" in the new trump tower - the one with barbed wire and large men with AR 15s up in the tower.

Time to pul back the curtains on the wizard of ooze n' slime
 
 
-8 # Chipster 2018-12-15 16:32
A step too far? No connection of Putin to the sale in anything in Spier's article.
 
 
+10 # Salus Populi 2018-12-15 19:26
Imagine that Trump, instead, was in thrall to Israel, maybe through his son-in-law Jared Kushner, who is also close to Saudi Arabia, which feels entitled to torture and murder WaPo reporters as well as to commit genocide right next door to itself -- while the U.S. studies its nails.

Would there be equal outrage? After all, while the evidence of Russian "hacking" of the 2016 election has never been forthcoming, and seems likely not to exist in any reliable form, the evidence of Israeli political influence, and Saudi economic, is not only overwhelming, but right out in the open, even bragged about publicly by a former Israeli Prime Minister.

Oh, wait. Trump *is* kompromatted by Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of which seem to have _de facto_ control over U.S. foreign policy. So why is there no outrage? Maybe because most of the folks who are most vocal about "Russiagate" are essentially on the tab for Israel and the KSA. The neo-cons are notoriously close to Israel, with some of them holding dual citizenship; they are the most droolingly eager for "regime change" in Russia, or, in the alternative, to carry out a nuclear sneak attack on Moscow. And the Clintons, and by extension their "base," are in debt to, if not in cahoots with, Saudi Arabia.

Given Russia's diplomatically close relations to Israel, perhaps the truth is that both Trump and Putin have been bought by Netanyahu, as well as by Mr. Bone Saw.
 
 
-3 # Salburger 2018-12-16 04:35
Ah, the old International Jewish Conspiracy theme right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. But of course no leftist could ever be Antisemitic, could they?
 
 
+4 # yolo 2018-12-16 15:16
Salburger is it possible to criticize Israel without being against the jewish religion or in other words anti-Semitic? If you criticize Saudi Arabia and/or its leader Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud would that make you against all those who are muslims?
 
 
-6 # yolo 2018-12-15 21:51
This opinion piece is classic example of confirmation bias. Rep. Speier gives examples, mainly speculation and innuendo with no evidence linking Putin to Trump, which confirm her beliefs while failing to give opposing evidence to the contrary. Evidence like the fact that Trump imposed new sanctions on Russia, and attacked Syria in spite of Putin's objections to name a few. Not to mention the British are also influencing policy in the US to get us to make Russia our enemy again, see here https://www.moonofalabama.org/2018/11/british-government-behind-secret-anti-russian-disinformation-campaign.html
 
 
-4 # Rodion Raskolnikov 2018-12-17 08:32
yolo -- yes, you would think that after 2 years of investigation by the world's most sophisticated investigative bodies (FBI, CIA, MI6, NSA) there would be some real solid evidence. The NSA and CIA have transcripts of every money transaction ever made on earth, as long as those transactions were electronic.

If these agencies had anything significant, it would have leaked. They leak everything.

But there is huge evidence of the whole scandal having been fabricated by the CIA and MI6. Now that explanation has real legs to stand on. The Trump - Russia conspiracy theory goes back to the CIA and MI6. No one is talking about the illegality of these two agencies meddling in the 2016 election and in the presidency of Trump.

Selling real estate to Russians is not proof of anything other than rich Russians are taking their money out of Russia and making that country poorer. This is something the US government has encouraged for a very long time.
 
 
+2 # Wally2007 2018-12-16 11:58
 
 
-4 # twestheimer 2018-12-17 02:04
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN