Taibbi begins: "Obviously Goldman Sachs has become the great symbol of investment banking corruption, and other companies like AIG and Countrywide have become poster children for problems with businesses like insurance and mortgage-lending. But when it comes to commercial banking, Bank of America is as bad as it gets. The markets, of course, have lately come to agree, as B of A has lately been downgraded again to just above junk status. The only reason the bank is not rated even lower than that is that it is Too Big To Fail."
Portrait, Rolling Stone contributing editor and author Matt Taibbi. (photo: Robin Holland)
Pull Your Money Out of BofA
31 October 11
�
�
y good friend Nomi Prins has a great new piece out that I just caught on Zero Hedge, chronicling 10 reasons why depositors should pull out of Bank of America.
Obviously Goldman, Sachs has become the great symbol of investment banking corruption, and other companies like AIG and Countrywide have become poster children for problems with businesses like insurance and mortgage-lending. But when it comes to commercial banking, Bank of America is as bad as it gets.
The markets, of course, have lately come to agree, as B of A has lately been downgraded again to just above junk status. The only reason the bank is not rated even lower than that is that it is Too Big To Fail. The whole world knows that if Bank of America implodes - whether because of the vast number of fraud suits it faces for mortgage securitization practices, or because of the time bomb of toxic assets on its balance sheets - the US government will probably step in to one degree or another and save it.
The government's patronage of the bank was never clearer than in recent weeks, when B of A quietly decided to move trillions of dollars (trillions, not billions) in risky Merrill Lynch derivatives contracts off Merrill's books and onto the books of the parent/retail arm, Bank of America.
This decision was done at the behest of counterparties to those transactions, who wanted those contracts placed under the aegis of Bank of America, whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The move was made, according to reports, so that Bank of America could avoid posting $3.3 billion in collateral to satisfy the company's creditors. In other words, Bank of America just got You the Taxpayer to co-sign as much as $53 trillion worth of dicey derivative contracts.
The FDIC wasn't pleased by the move, but the Fed apparently encouraged it. Bloomberg, citing people with "direct knowledge" of the deals, reported that,
The Fed has signaled that it favors moving the derivatives to give relief to the bank holding company, while the FDIC, which would have to pay off depositors in the event of a bank failure, is objecting, said the people. The bank doesn't believe regulatory approval is needed, said people with knowledge of its position.
So the primary regulator of the banking industry is encouraging a functionally insolvent megabank to respond to a credit downgrade by pushing its most explosively risky holdings onto the laps of the taxpayer. This is lunacy.... Remember that story about the Chinese man who had a world-record 33-pound tumor removed from his face? This would be like treating that patient by removing the tumor and surgically attaching it to the face of a new patient, in this case the US taxpayer.
A series of lawmakers on the Hill, including most notably Sherrod Brown, Carl Levin, and Bernie Sanders, are trying to figure out if there's any way to stop this transaction, but of course there is not. Upstate NY congressman Maurice Hinchey put it best. "What Bank of America is doing is perfectly legal - and that's the problem," he said.
This is exactly why the Glass-Steagall Act needs to be reinstated: without a separation of Investment Banks and Commercial Banks, what we end up getting is taxpayer-guaranteed gambling. Instead of encouraging prudence and savings by insuring deposits in commercial banks, the FDIC is now being turned into a vehicle for socializing speculative losses.
So our government is not only no longer encouraging fiscal conservatism, it is doing exactly the opposite, i.e. encouraging speculation and risk-taking. That this is happening in the fever of the OWS movement, and at a time when top politicians from Barack Obama on down are paying lip service to public complaints against Wall Street, should tell you everything you need to know about whether or not we can expect this government to voluntarily enact real changes, and stop making the taxpayer eat Wall Street's pain.
Anyway, Nomi's list goes a long way toward explaining why Bank of America is the last company on earth whose $53 trillion derivatives portfolio we should be insuring. A sample of her top ten:
7. Bank of America got the most AIG money of the big depositor banks. By virtue of having acquired Merrill Lynch's AIG-related portfolio, B of A got to keep approximately $12 billion worth of federal AIG backing, too. It also received more government subsidies than any other mega-bank except Citigroup ...
In terms of overall federal subsidies (including TARP), Bank of America was second only to Citigroup ($230 billion compared to $415 billion). None of that got in the way of former B of A CEO Ken Lewis' personal take, a $63 million retirement plan, in addition to the $63 million he scored during the three years before his departure.
If you're a Bank of America customer, Nomi is right: find another bank. Try a local credit union. Keeping your money in this TBTF behemoth is very unsafe sex.
Incidentally, this kind of suggestion might prove a real help to OWS. One definite tactic that Occupy Wall Street can adopt, going forward, is educating people about the perfidy of certain financial institutions and convincing people to do what they did back in the days of apartheid, which is disinvest. If everyone were to start pulling their money out of the worst-offending banks, that would have a profound effect on the markets and may function as a great short-cut to political change.
Bank of America is a great place to start. All the TBTF banks suck equally, but as George Orwell would say, some banks are more equal than others. Withdrawals would be a great way for people to answer the Fed's decision to put depositors on the hook for Merrill Lynch's bad bets.
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. |
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
btw, who actually is the architect of this grand betrayal, mr. reich?
before the election it was vote for obama or the country will go to hell; now will it be "accept the grand betrayal or the country will go to hell" can anyone use reason instead of fear-based sophistry any more?
I vote for the cliff. And I certainly don't want people like reich "saving" us from it.
why do you blame robert reich as well, he has been dead on in everything he has said, and his suggestions are backed up with facts, history and a lot of famous economists, like Joe Stiglitz for example.
i don't think you really get it. if you want to understand how objective reich is read "the future of success" by him that talks about how all these factors have acted together to get us to this point, a situation he understands better than most and can articulate very well.
We can and should push back against misinformation in the form of political ads to counter the deception. I just saw a dark, ominous anti-Obama ad, and this was after the election! Once every 4 years is not enough to keep the truth out there.
Wow,you really hit on all the points that make people keep returning the "R"s to office. There are a lot of people that paid very little attention to politics most of their lives. That was until they either lost their job or home, or some of their friends lost their jobs and/or homes back starting in late 2008.
So they decided to pay attention, since politics now made a difference in their life, up close and personal. Unfortunately, since they started paying attention late in the game it was very easy for them to accept that it's all Obama's fault. The TV News makes it all easy to understand and that Fox network is the most popular. So they got duped. And since they never paid hard attention in the past, there is very little for them to reference back to.
Most of the Republicans I know are good people. Many fall into the category I just described, and if it wasn't for the systemic dismantling of our economic infrastructure over the past 30+ years they would continue to not pay much attention. Others, are embarrassed by the insanity in the Republican Party; but that's their party and in many but not all cases they continue to vote for the R's.
At the end of thew day, I have found that they tend to hear things differently and the walls in many cases are too thick to break down overnight. We have to keep plugging away, and be ready to learn their language so we can translate Liberal ideas into something they will understand.
Check it out, if you like it, spread the word. Remind your Congress persons about it.
cpc.grijalva.house.gov/budget-for-all/
BTW, The Commonwealth of Massachusetts passed a state referendum endorsing this plan.
Does money make a difference in governance....Y ou betcha, always has, always will, in any and every country. It's human nature....So I guess is whining.
If no compromise let the tax cuts for everyone expire. Then let Obama have a bill for a tax cut for those only making under $250,000. If the Republicans don't vote for it, then the people will hold them accountable.
But we don't delay this decision after Jan. No way.
The goofs in Washington DC, keep talking about it costing too much money to pay out people intitlements. It seems to me these are earned benefits and the goofs who collect $80,000.00 for kicking the can, think they deserve a continued paycheck, even though We The People have Fired Them are the ones who are depleating the money.
Can't there be a movement of Citizens to cut this as well as congressional members paying taxes on their health insurance which we pay for as well?
Shar
Don't believe what hear on the tv box, their first agenda is to get you go out and but that car or deodorant that they are always telling you about. Stay tuned for more details after this message!
Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC has given it a new name - the 'Fiscal Curb' which describes it much better. As he pointed out, nothing is going to happen immediately if ALL the tax cuts expire - just a bunch of Repuglicans standing there with goo on their faces because they didn't follow orders and scare enough people into supporting another rich-man's tax giveaway.
If you have not seen it yet, check out the Moveon.org and CREDO campaigns to send emails and phone calls to the President, and the members of the House who want to pull this B.S. on us. Let them know that just because the election is over and a horrible fate is averted, we are not going to let up on them. That's the only response that will keep them honest.
And let's all work on getting the s***heads out of office!!
Obama did NOT get re-elected to cave to the Republican agenda. Let the cliff come, as it should, as it was expected to. Think of creative solutions for funding human services affected by the "cliff" - perhaps take what's left over of campaign contributions to the Obama campaign and split it up among affected programs to make up some of the cuts and encourage others, like Bernie Sanders and Pat Leahy and other Dems with big campaign pots to do so also, along with George Soros and Bill Gates, etc. etc. etc. But NO DEAL with the intransigent Republicans. They LOST!!! We can better cope with the cliff than having a spineless president.
Tha Amarican people are the ones who have no backbone, why don't we call, write or go as a crowd to the members who are not doing their job. Thats what needs to be done. Obama is not the father of grown men. Shar
Maybe begin with following Senator Warren's lead... :)
and view it at your chance to 'Refresh' yourselves with the American People.
You might be surprised at to just what kind of strong and much larger following you gather to yourselves/your 'base'...
Steve
Bmiluski, thank you for the Library of Congress citation, however, as Milton Friedman said,"I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you".