Busted: Bankers and The Global Economy

October 12, 2008

International Bankers: Time is Short

the IMF in better times

the IMF in better times

The International Monetary Fund, an international organization that oversees the global financial system based on economic policies of its member countries, proclaimed that time is short for consensus on the international financial crisis. The finance members of industrialized nations failed to agree on absolute and unified measures to end the crisis. The IMF expects a systemic meltdown if stability in financial markets is not achieved. While the international body recommends “exceptional vigilance, coordination and readiness to take bold action,” the body is leaving the pressure and responsibility on the collective bodies of national Finance Ministers. All this from an international body that claimed in August that there would be no recession in the Eurozone.

Solvency concerns are cited as the chief concern. The reality is that solvency is determined by a set of regulations that can easy be changed, as has happened in the United States. Therefore, the definition of solvency to a reasonable extent is in the hands of Finance Ministers and national leaders. Where such a change is seen as beneficial, such a move buys time when developing a consensus is especially important.

While consensus has been difficult, developing effective means to counteract the global financial crisis has been no less elusive. Panicked Finance Ministers are looking for support from the IMF or other global authorities in a effort to deal with the crisis. Britain has developed an interbank lending guarantee that has other nations stressing to compete.

In general, G-7 and G-20 ideas are essentially the same and somewhat short on creativity. Whether injecting capital into financial institutions and insurance companies, effectively nationalizing them, or buying up worthless mortgage assets, groups of Finance Ministers are chiefly examining the importance of uniform national guarantees to protect individual economies and to avoid creating a currency run. Encouraging monetary liquidity through central banking auctions has become a mainstay in prime economies.

Most telling perhaps is a statement made by the Brazilian Finance Minister, Guido Mangega, “The problems we are facing today in the global economy must be solved by several countries, they can’t be addressed by only one country or a single continent.” Finance Minsters from the G-20, not wishing to be left out of the loop, want emerging economies to be included within the ranks of G-7 Finance Ministers or by implication, involved as part of a larger authoritarian body.

Even Arab nations, whose prosperity seemed to make them immune from catastrophe are now encountering monetary issues, property value declines and business funding problems that threaten the Arab economic fabric as in much of the world. The Arab nations are largely isolated within the Islamic banking community except from within the burgeoning oil market, which in recent years has fueled inflation rates as high as 25 per cent.

As a result of the growing crisis, the United States is seen on many fronts, notably among Muslim leaders, as having no credibility whatever. Resentment, which is already high in religious circles, is multiplying because of the perception of financial betrayal and lack of wisdom. The push for Islamic banking within Muslim circles will continue despite any devaluation of the dollar experienced.

The issue created by injecting capital into banks dilutes monetary value and ownership of individual banks. While these types of measure can create the appearance of stability, diluting monetary value creates an ongoing increase in national, as well as global inflation. With increases in credit and cash generated for financial rescues, the end result is always inflationary as the devaluation of currency sets in. The only short-term winners are holding the gold and living off the interest for their services: central bankers. Meanwhile, central banking policies are behind the continued growth in inflation because a flawed economic model that mandates liquidity through monetary production. This is currently central banking’s best hope for economic stability. ~ E. Manning

October 10, 2008

Dollar Rally Due to Global Inflation?

safe haven again?

safe haven again?

The U.S. dollar is once again holding its status as a safe haven because of deteriorating economic outlooks in the global economy and increases in inflation overseas. The recent adjustment in oil prices is due to the leveling effect that inflation is having on economies coupled with recent U.S. government intervention in commodities futures.

The crisis in Iceland, Britain and much of Europe and Asia has electrified the so-called G-7 Finance Ministers to meet to decide on unified actions and strategies to bolster sagging economies.  Iceland refused to stand behind their failed banking system, resulting in large losses to British depositors. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has frozen the assets of Iceland in Britain to insure that losses by British depositors are covered as much as possible. The European Central Bank has also summarized the idea that recent exchange rate imbalances are due to the current financial crisis. Globally, banks are becoming more imperiled as the system locks down due to financial fears and the unknown effect of bad securities globally.

The general consensus is that the goal of the G-7 meeting must be to promote liquidity and growth. Those kind of financial moves dilute monetary systems and boost inflation. Even so, inflation is considered as a back door issue. Today, only stability is king. ~ E. Manning

October 8, 2008

Nationalizing U.S. Banks; Globalizing Banks

global bailout fever

global bailout fever

If there was ever a question about the nationalization of U.S. commercial banking, that question may be at an end. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson signaled the government may invest in banks as the next step in trying to resolve the deepening credit crisis. What does investing in banks mean?

The bailout legislation that Congress passed last week to rescue financial institutions gave Henry Paulson broad authority that he intends to use beyond buying mortgage-related assets on bank balance sheets. Paulsen intends on using the initial $700 billion for a far grander notion. He intends to boost the capital of firms with cash infusions with idea of making the nation’s financial system stronger.

The International Monetary Fund has published that banks worldwide are not raising enough capital to offset losses to the tune of a $150 billion deficit. Henry Paulson and the U.S. Federal Government have arrived on their white horse to save the day.

There has been some discussion within the ranks of international central bankers and the G-7 finance ministers of a global banking bailout using identical policies. Britain has questioned this idea. Still, the turmoil is a global phenomenon that central bankers see advantage in addressing to secure their control. Undoubtedly, this will involve an enhanced system of controls and tools to manage the global economy. The real question remains: Are banks globalizing under a single economic control structure?

In Paulson’s mind, regulators will take measures to limit the systemic risk from any single bank failure. The reality is that the systemic risk has already been introduced due to the same lack of regulation. Allowing the same watchdogs to monitor the system is a questionable move that is apparently unavoidable. ~ E. Manning

Blog at WordPress.com.