Newsflash


Why I’m Still Buying

by Ben Stein

 
 
Ben Stein, How Not to Ruin Your Life
 
 
Posted on Friday, October 17, 2008, 12:00AM
This is my most serious column yet. So let's get to it.

I get a fair amount of mail about the economy. Lately, much of it asks the same questions:

* What the heck happened to our economy so suddenly and powerfully that it caused the immense uproar and fear and stock market crashes we have had lately?

* Why didn't I, Ben Stein, famous so-called braino, get what was happening and why did I remain optimistic so long?

* What is the future going to bring?

First of all, obviously, I don't know what the future will bring. If I knew the future, I would be the richest man on the planet very soon and I assure you I am very far from that.

But I now see what has happened and I can explain that, and it might give a tiny bit of insight into what will happen in the future.

Start around 1995. Groups involved with civil rights issues and activities for poor people began to complain that poor people and especially non-white poor people got mortgages much less often than white well to do people. Many economists, including me, explained that it was not at all surprising that poorer, less credit worthy people were often turned down for credit. That's how credit is supposed to work: you lend to people who will pay you back.

But the advocates for poor and black people had immense political clout. Under President Bill Clinton, they passed legislation that called on banks to be required to lend to non credit worthy borrowers. The laws, including the Community Reinvestment Act, the CRA, required two large government sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to buy those lower quality mortgages from the banks, guarantee them, and sell them to the public. These were bundled into immense pools of subprime mortgages as they were called, and sold all over the world.

Soon, the private sector got into the act in a vast way. They also went to banks and bought their subprime loans, packaged them, and sold them as Collateralized Mortgage Obligations all over the world.

Supposedly, the subprime collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) were sliced up in such a way that buyers could have a very high likelihood that they would be repaid even if many of the mortgages in the portfolio defaulted. This assumption was based on a misunderstanding of poor quality credit that had been popularized during the era of the junk bond investment powerhouse, Drexel Burnham Lambert.

As it happened, these low quality mortgage bonds were recognized as highly likely to have real problems very soon after they started to be issued by private banks in the billions. The people who recognized the high likelihood of defaults were able to profit from that likelihood:

First, they could sell the mortgage securities short, a straightforward wager that has long been available.

Second, they could buy credit default swaps (CDS) from financial entities. These were essentially a side bet that anyone could make about a certain mortgage bond (or any other kind of security). It paid off fantastically if the bond went into default or was close to default. The people who sold these CDS were banks and insurers, especially Merrill Lynch and A.I.G., that believed the mortgage bonds would not default and therefore charged very little to the other side, the counterparty, to make the bet.

Things went along well for everyone on the long side for several years as the housing market boomed. Even if borrowers could not repay their mortgages, they could refinance the mortgages for more money than was owed on the original mortgage, pay off the first mortgage and live happily in their new home. The mortgage in question in the bond would - again-- be paid off and the bond would continue happily in its owners hands.

Then, the housing market started to stabilize and soon fall, as housing prices do. They move in cycles, although around a rising mean, as we economists say.

Now, when the subprime mortgage holder could not pay off his mortgage, he could not refinance. Instead, he had to default. When a lot of these mortgages defaulted, the bonds into which they had been lumped declined in value.

So far, I, your humble servant, followed the deal just fine. It was extremely similar to the collapse of the Drexel Burnham Lambert junk bond empire. This had caused barely a ripple in the national economy when it fell apart in the early 1990's. I assumed that the same would happen with junk mortgages. There would be some failed banks and insurers, but the Federal Reserve, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Treasury could make all of those losses good. The total amount of subprime mortgage bonds was large but not compared with bank capital or the regenerative powers of the Fed.

So, I assumed, and wrote, things would be fine.

Where I missed the boat was not realizing how large were the CDS based on the junk mortgage bonds. They were not only large, but absolutely staggeringly large. Where the junk mortgage bonds were in the hundreds of billions, the CDS were in the tens of TRILLIONS. If the sellers of the CDS had to pay off in large part, the liability greatly exceeded the total bank capital in the United States and maybe in the world. That is, the derivatives based upon the junk mortgage bonds could be - and were - not in any way limited to the size of the mortgage bonds themselves, and this I did not know until a few months ago.

It is this liability that swamped the banks, investment banks, and insurers. It is the CDS liability that broke AIG and Lehman.

When I realized the extent of this problem, I wrongly thought the federal government would step in and in some way rescue everyone who had sold CDS. They did, except they ‘forgot' to rescue Lehman. Lehman was so large that when it failed, it was like a torpedo striking an ocean liner below the water line. A gaping hole was left in the whole world finance system.

Bankers panicked. If Lehman could fail, then anyone could fail. In that case, the banks that were still solvent figured they had better hoard their assets and stop making loans. This led to the ongoing credit freeze. This led to a rapidly gathering economic downturn and a drastic fall in prices of all kinds of securities, real estate and commodities. It also led to a severe credit squeeze on hedge funds, which saw credit dry up and their asset prices fall suddenly, and were forced to sell stocks and other assets on a dramatic scale, leading to still greater falls in securities prices, and the worldwide panic that it still unfolding.

In turn, this led to huge infusions of liquidity into the banks of the world, the semi-nationalization of the banks of the United States and of many other nations to shore them up, thaw credit, and bolster world markets and economies. These were drastic steps for drastic times, all generated by derivatives. Warren Buffett had warned us against them, and he was dead right, as always.

Now, these acts should help. But it might not do the job all by itself. Major lender solvency issues remain. If housing prices keep falling, more mortgage bonds will default and the liability attached to the credit default swaps based upon them will still be in the trillions or even tens of trillions.
I might well be too alarmist here, but I think the only rational possibility is for the federal government or the New York State government (because most of the CDS were entered into in New York) to simply annul the credit default swaps as void as being against public policy. After all, there was no insurable interest in most cases, which tends to void insurance contracts, which is what a CDS is.

Once that happens, the banks can breathe freely again, take risks, and the economy can revive. Or, perhaps the housing market will stabilize, mortgage based bonds will rally, and the CDS will be out of the money and will not be a threat to the lenders. But something has got to happen to defuse these deadly derivatives.

In any event, we now know a lot we did not know before. Credit default swaps are way too dangerous. Derivatives generally are dangerous. There is much that Ben Stein does not know. I hope this explains some of how we got to this precarious place, I apologize for not seeing it sooner. But I am still optimistic that the government will save us from the CDS, and we will go on to renewed prosperity. In other words, I am still buying.


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! JoomlaVote! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
 

Content Calendar

<< September ’10 >>
Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa Su
  
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
   

YouTubes OnBlass

Advertisement Images

gtsilogotm.jpg
powered_by.png, 1 kB

Home
FTC Cracks Down on Scammers Trying to Take Advantage of the Economic Downturn PDF Print E-mail
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest 
Wednesday, 01 July 2009

New Public Education Video Helps Consumers Steer Clear of Business Opportunity Fraud

The Federal Trade Commission today announced a law enforcement crackdown on scammers trying to take advantage of the economic downturn to bilk vulnerable consumers through a variety of schemes, such as promising non-existent jobs; promoting overhyped get-rich-quick plans, bogus government grants, and phony debt-reduction services; or putting unauthorized charges on consumers’ credit or debit cards.

Dubbed “Operation Short Change,” the law enforcement sweep announced today includes 15 FTC cases, 44 law enforcement actions by the Department of Justice, and actions by at least 13 states and the District of Columbia. During a joint press conference today at the FTC, David Vladeck, Director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, was joined by Assistant U.S. Attorney General Tony West; Roy Cooper, Attorney General of North Carolina; and a Washington, D.C. job seeker who was conned by a company that made false promises of maintenance and janitorial work.

“Rising unemployment, shrinking credit, record-setting foreclosures, and disappearing retirement accounts are causing consumers tremendous anxiety about making ends meet,” Vladeck said. “But to con artists, today’s challenging economy presents just another opportunity to play on consumers’ worry and bilk them out of money.”

“Thousands of people have been swindled out of millions of dollars by scammers who are exploiting the economic downturn,” Vladeck added. “Their scams may promise job placement, access to free government grant money, or the chance to work at home. In fact, the scams have one thing in common--they raise people’s hopes and then drive them deeper into a hole.”

To help consumers understand how easy it is to be conned--and how to avoid fraud--the FTC produced a new consumer education video featuring a former scammer who hawked phony business opportunities and ultimately served prison time for deceiving investors. To view the video, go to ftc.gov or YouTube.com/ftcvideos. In the video, the former scammer gives an insider account of how these operations use high-pressure tactics and celebrity endorsers to trick cash-strapped consumers, and how consumers can protect themselves by demanding written disclosures on earnings and other sales data.

Operation Short Change: FTC’s Law Enforcement Actions

The FTC today announced that it has brought eight new cases against companies that have conned consumers who are struggling to make a living and pay their bills during these difficult economic times. The Commission brought seven additional cases challenging similar conduct earlier this year.

In each new case, the FTC alleged that the defendants’ practices were deceptive or unfair. In some of the cases, the FTC also charged the defendants with making illegal electronic funds transfers or violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule.

In the law enforcement actions announced today, the Commission charged:

John Beck/Mentoring of America, two principals, and three purported “inventors” marketed three get-rich-quick schemes, duping hundreds of thousands of consumers into paying approximately $300 million. The defendants marketed “John Beck’s Free & Clear Real Estate System,” “John Alexander’s Real Estate Riches in 14 Days,” and “Jeff Paul’s Shortcuts to Internet Millions.” The defendants allegedly made false and unsubstantiated claims about potential earnings for users of these systems. They used frequently aired infomercials to sell the systems for $39.95 and then contacted the purchasers via telemarketing to offer “personal coaching services,” which cost several thousand dollars and purportedly would enhance their ability to earn money quickly and easily using the systems. In addition, all purchasers were signed up for continuity programs that cost an additional $39.95 per month, but which were not adequately disclosed to consumers. Some consumers also continued receiving unwanted sales calls after they told the defendants’ telemarketers to stop calling. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Wagner Ramos Borges, through a host of front companies, including “Job Safety USA,” allegedly systematically targeted people seeking maintenance and cleaning work. Luring job seekers with print and online classified advertisements in newspapers throughout the country, Borges allegedly tricked them into paying $98 for a worthless and needless credential called a "certificate registration number" supposedly so that the consumers could get maintenance or cleaning jobs–jobs that Borges did not provide. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland Greenbelt Division.

Grants For You Now and its affiliates and principals operated Web sites such as
grantsforyounow.com, grantoneday.org, and easygrantaccess.com that deceived consumers by promising them free government grant money to use for personal expenses or to pay off debt. According to the FTC complaint, after obtaining consumers’ credit or debit account information to process a $1.99 fee for grant information, the defendants failed to adequately disclose that consumers would be enrolled in a membership program that cost as much as $94.89 a month. Some consumers also were charged a one-time fee of $19.12 for a third-party “Google Profit” program. All the defendants’ Web sites falsely offered a “100% No Hassle Money Back Guarantee.” This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Cash Grant Institute and its principals allegedly waged an automated robocall campaign promoting bogus claims that consumers were qualified for grant money from the government, private foundations, and wealthy individuals that they could use to overcome their financial problems. They made similar misleading claims about "free grant money" on their Web sites, cashgrantsearch.com and requestagrant.com. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.

Mutual Consolidated Savings, its affiliates, and principals used telemarketing robocalls and the Internet to push a phony “Rapid Debt Reduction” program to consumers in the United States and Canada, according to the FTC complaint. The defendants allegedly convinced consumers to pay them $690 to $899 for the program by misrepresenting that the program would reduce credit card interest rates, save thousands of dollars and enable consumers to pay off their debt three to five times faster than they could under their current payment schedule. The defendants also failed to make good on promises that they would refund the fees paid if consumers’ credit card interest rates were not reduced. Finally, they did not disclose to Canadian customers that the quoted price was in U.S. dollars. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington at Tacoma. In investigating Mutual Consolidated Savings, the FTC received assistance from the Canadian Competition Bureau. Both the Competition Bureau and the FTC are members of the Vancouver Strategic Alliance, a law enforcement task force located in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. In carrying out the terms of the court order in Mutual Consolidated Savings, the FTC received assistance from the Tacoma, WA Police Department.

Google Money Tree, its principals, and related entities allegedly misrepresented that they were affiliated with Google and lured consumers into divulging their financial account information by advertising a low-cost kit that they said would enable consumers to earn $100,000 in six months. They then failed to adequately disclose that the fee for the kit would trigger monthly charges of $72.21, the complaint states. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada.

Penbrook Productions, run by Michael Allen Brooks, promoted a work-at-home scheme
online that used spokesperson “Angela Penbrook,” and charged $197 for the opportunity to become a “certified” rebate processor, earning as much as $225 per hour. According to the FTC complaint, after purchasing, consumers discovered that the work-at-home “opportunity” had nothing to do with processing rebates, but merely instructed the consumers about becoming an affiliate marketer. Despite Penbrook’s “100% Ironclad, 3-month ‘Make Money Or It’s Free,’ Triple Satisfaction Guarantee,” consumers then found that they could not get a refund. The
defendants thus misrepresented that consumers would be hired as rebate processors, made false earnings claims, and misrepresented the refund guarantee. This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Southern Division.

Classic Closeouts, illegally made unauthorized charges and debits to the consumers’ accounts months or years after they bought low-cost clothing or household goods from classiccloseouts.com, the FTC charged. The charges usually ranged from $59.99 to $79.99, and Classic Closeouts charged some consumers’ accounts multiple times. Consumers’ efforts to contact the defendants to contest the charges were unsuccessful. Many consumers also disputed the charges with their financial institutions. After the financial institutions reversed the unauthorized charges, the defendants contested these disputes, falsely claiming that consumers had chosen to join the Classic Closeouts “frequent shopper club.” This case was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The Commission vote to issue each complaint was 4-0. The Commission has obtained
temporary restraining orders barring further illegal conduct and freezing the assets in these cases: FTC v. Wagner Ramos Borges d/b/a Job Safety USA, FTC v. In Deep Services, Inc. d/b/a Grants For You Now, FTC v. Cash Grant Institute, FTC v. Mutual Consolidated Savings, FTC v. Google Money Tree, and FTC v. Classic Closeouts, LLC. The agency is asking the courts for permanent injunctions that would provide for possible consumer redress in each of the cases announced today.

The FTC would like to acknowledge the assistance of the San Bernardino County Sheriff's Department and the Better Business Bureau of Southland, Inc., Colton, California, in connection with FTC v. In Deep Services, Inc.; and the Utah Department of Commerce’s Division of Consumer Protection and the Draper Police Department in connection with FTC v. Google Money Tree.

In addition, the FTC initiated, settled or otherwise resolved seven law enforcement actions earlier this year in similar types of cases:

The enforcement actions announced today named the following defendants:
Mentoring of America – Gary Hewitt; Douglas Gravink; John Beck; John Alexander; Jeff Paul; Family Products, LLC; John Beck Amazing Profits, LLC; John Alexander, LLC; and Jeff Paul, LLC, doing business as Shortcuts to Millions, LLC. Wagner Ramos Borges – d/b/a, Job Safety USA, Sparkle Industrial, Sparkle Maintenance, Star Maintenance, Aim Janitorial &
Flooring, and United Maintenance. Grants for You Now – Ryan Champion and Joseph C.
Fleming IV. Cash Grant Institute – Paul Navestad aka Paul Richard; Global Ad Agency, Domain Leasing Company, and/or Global Advertising Agency; and Chintana Maspakorn aka Christina Maspakorn. Mutual Consolidated Savings – Paul Morris Thompson and Miranda Cavender. Google Money Tree – Infusion Media, Inc.; West Coast Internet Media, Inc.; 2 Two Warnings, LLC; Two Par Investments, LLC; Platinum Teleservices, Inc.; Jonathan Eborn; Stephanie Burnside; Michael McLain Miler; and Tony Norton. Penbrook Productions – Make You Famous Consulting; Process from Home; and Michael Allen Brooks. Classic Closeouts – classiccloseouts.com; ThirdFree.com; and Daniel Greenberg.

NOTE: The Commission authorizes the filing of complaints when it has “reason to believe” that the law has been or is being violated, and it appears to the Commission that a proceeding is in the public interest. A complaint is not a finding or ruling that the defendants have actually violated the law.

Copies of the documents related to these cases are available from the FTC’s Web site at http://www.ftc.gov and also from the FTC’s Consumer Response Center, Room 130, 600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20580. The Federal Trade Commission works for consumers to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business practices and to provide information to help spot, stop, and avoid them. To file a complaint in English or Spanish, visit the FTC’s online Complaint Assistant or call 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357). The FTC enters complaints into Consumer Sentinel, a secure, online database available to more than 1,500 civil and criminal law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and abroad. The FTC’s Web site provides free information on a variety of consumer topics.

MEDIA CONTACT:

Betsy Lordan
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-3707

Peter Kaplan
Office of Public Affairs
202-326-2334

STAFF CONTACT:

Daniel Salsburg
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3402

Karen S. Hobbs
Bureau of Consumer Protection
202-326-3587



Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Reddit! Del.icio.us! JoomlaVote! Google! Live! Facebook! StumbleUpon! Yahoo! Free social bookmarking plugins and extensions for Joomla! websites!
 
< Prev   Next >

OnBlass Weather

Philadelphia, PA
Mostly Sunny Today: Mostly Sunny
91°F | 70°F
Slight Chance Thunderstorms, Probability Of Precipitation: 30% Tomorrow: Slight Chance Thunderstorms
90°F | 62°F
Current Conditions:
The most current observation is more than 18631 hours old, please try again later.
Dallas, Tx
Flash Flood Watch - Dallas (Texas)
Short Term Forecast - Dallas (Texas)
Rain Showers, Probability Of Precipitation: 60% Today: Rain Showers
86°F | 74°F
Rain Showers, Probability Of Precipitation: 80% Tomorrow: Rain Showers
85°F | 75°F
Current Conditions:
The most current observation is more than 18631 hours old, please try again later.
Martinsburg, WV
Increasing Clouds Today: Increasing Clouds
90°F | 64°F
Mostly Sunny Tomorrow: Mostly Sunny
84°F | 55°F
Current Conditions:
The most current observation is more than 18631 hours old, please try again later.
Los Angeles, CA
Patchy Fog Today: Patchy Fog
75°F | 62°F
Patchy Fog Tomorrow: Patchy Fog
71°F | 59°F
Current Conditions:
The most current observation is more than 19424 hours old, please try again later.
OnBlass Weather
© 2010 Onblass.com News1 - Your Consolidated News Source
Global Technology Solutions Inc! Proving Solutions to your technical challenges.