The Audacity of Dopes
William K. Black
Associate Professor, University of Missouri; Senior regulator during 
S&L debacle
Posted February 10, 2009 | 12:30 PM (EST)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/the-audacity-of-dopes_b_165637.html

We are being played for chumps. The Bush and Obama plans could only 
have been designed by failed
bankers -- for their principal beneficiaries are failed bankers. We 
already know enough to confirm that
the Bush administration made us the "fool" in the market by massively 
overpaying for assets. The Obama administration is about to compound 
that scandal with a "guarantee" program. The bankers that caused
the crisis designed both programs. The senior officers at big bank 
aren't very good lenders, but they are e
xpert in maximizing their compensation.

Worse, Mr. Geithner, the senior public official who, with former 
Treasury Secretary Paulson, designed the
failed Bush plan is the architect of the disastrous Obama plan. 
Indeed, as the New York Times has just
revealed, it should be called the Geithner plan. He overcame intense 
opposition within the Obama administration and designed a plan that 
is even worse than the failed Bush program. Geithner's gifts to the 
bankers that caused the crisis include: a unnecessary taxpayer 
bailout of "risk capital," a massive coverup
of their banks' insolvency, gutting the proposed limits on executive 
compensation, and devising a
"guarantee" mechanism designed to hide the expenses of the 
unprincipled bailouts from the American
public. Remember, executive compensation is not "merely" a fairness 
issue. Executive compensation and
the compensation systems used for appraisers, accountants, and rating 
agencies were designed, and served,
to create the perverse incentives and ethical rot that caused the 
ongoing financial crises by producing a "Gresham's dynamic" in which 
fraudulent and abusive lending and accounting practices drove good
practices out of the marketplace.

Here's the amazing part -- the bankers are so arrogant that they 
bragged to a sympathetic CNBC commentator they are playing us:

"What a delicious irony this is--last week, just as President Obama 
was publicly bashing the stupidity of the banks ... his economic team 
[was] privately begging for input from Wall Street. The 
administration was conducting around-the-clock discussions and 
interviews with senior Wall Street executives, including many from 
the same firms he was theoretically appalled with, about how to fix 
the lingering financial crisis. "

There are proven ways to resolve the crisis that are far cheaper and 
more effective because they don't subsidize bankers and "risk 
capital." We know how to resolve failed banks. The Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation (FDIC) can place even the largest banks in 
"pass through" receiverships on Friday at the close of business and 
reopen them as "New Federal" bank Monday morning with minimal 
disruption to customers and creditors and retain "going concern" 
value. This is how the Reagan administration resolved failed S&Ls 
during the debacle.

The FDIC appoints a senior manager to ensure that "New Federal" is 
run prudently. There is plenty of unemployed banking talent 
available. Hundreds of good bankers lost their jobs during the 
financial bubble because they refused to make bad loans. Research has 
shown that its sister agency, FSLIC, appointed receivership managers 
that greatly reduced losses during the S&L debacle. Leaving the 
managers in charge of failed banks that they led into insolvency is 
suicidal. The new senior leader is picked based on expertise in 
prudent lending and integrity. If we want failed banks to return 
promptly to making prudent loans and help lead an economic recovery 
an S&L style "New Federal" is the best possible device. The existing 
managers have terrible incentives -- to cover up existing losses and 
to make bad or even fraudulent loans that produce the greatest 
(fictional) accounting income and to "live large" through bonuses and 
perks. (The Obama compensation limits are political cover. The 
bankers have designed the "guarantee" plan to ensure that the 
compensation limits will be illusory.)

The FDIC managers have the correct incentives to finally produce an 
honest evaluation of which assets are toxic and how much they are 
worth. This transparency is essential if we are to end this crisis. 
Under the Bush and Obama plans we retain the existing managers that 
have overwhelming incentives to cover up the losses. The bankers have 
designed the guarantee plan to encourage banks to continue to cover 
up their toxic assets and not recognize their losses. These cover-ups 
make a financial crisis last longer and increase the taxpayers' costs.

The FDIC managers preserve the going concern value by making prudent 
loans and get the "New Federal" in shape to be acquired. By providing 
reliable information about the toxic assets the managers reduce 
acquisition risks, which expands the number of bidders and reduces 
the financial assistance required to aid the acquisition.
"New Federal" receiverships dramatically reduce cash needs. Most 
costs are deferred until the New Federals are sold.

Pass through receiverships save the taxpayers money and prevent 
perverse managerial incentives because they do not subsidize "risk 
capital" when banks are insolvent. Common and preferred stock and 
subordinated debt in banks are "risk capital." Their holders are 
supposed to receive nothing if a bank becomes insolvent, but the Bush 
and Obama plans reward them. There is no need to do this. Subsidizing 
risk capital and maintaining the failed managers at insolvent banks 
creates the worst possible incentives. It will cause future crises. 
It will delay the recovery from the ongoing crises. It robs the U.S. 
taxpayers and primarily benefits the wealthy -- many of them non-U.S. 
citizens. The contract they made was that they would get nothing if 
the bank failed. It has failed, and they are often complicit in those 
failures. The bankers have convinced the Bush and Obama 
administrations that the taxpayers should be looted to bail out risk 
capital. We should stop listening to the folks that caused the crisis 
and have interests hostile to our interests. Let's stop them from 
using us as chumps.

William K. Black, Associate Professor of Economics and Law, 
University of Missouri - Kansas City. He held senior regulatory 
positions during the S&L debacle and is the author of "The Best Way 
to Rob a Bank is to Own One" (2005)
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to Mark Crispin Miller's 
"News From Underground" newsgroup.

To unsubscribe, send a blank email to 
[email protected] OR go to 
http://groups.google.com/group/newsfromunderground and click on the 
"Unsubscribe or change membership" link in the yellow bar at the top of the 
page, then click the "Unsubscribe" button on the next page. 

For more News From Underground, visit http://markcrispinmiller.com
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to