The Paulson Plan


So Paulson has come out (pdf) with a plan. It's primarily a reorganization plan, pushing the Thrift regulator into the SEC, creating a federal mortgage regulator, giving the Fed the right to inspect the new firms that now have access to its liquidity. There's some talk about being objectives based. It's almost always a bad sign when the primary "reform" is to create new agencies or merge old ones and Krugman is right to ridicule it as The Dilbert Strategy. What don't I see here?

  • I see no hard and fast statements about leverage in the plan. 30/1 leverage is what made many of these companies so vulnerable. Any plan that does not put hard caps on leverage, get rid of "default insurance" and so on, will change nothing.
  • I see talk of a federal agency for regulating mortgages, but I see no talk about securitization of mortgages. A federal agency pre-empting state ones could actually reduce standards, not increase them.
  • I see no specific talk about forbidding certain types of mortgages such as balloon mortgages and liars mortgages.
  • I see no requirement for banks to keep mortgages on their own books rather than securitizing them.
  • I see no discussion of the ratings agencies, who rated a ton of absolute crap as the highest investment grade and were behind the curve in recognizing when both mortgages and companies were at risk. The current crisis, as a ton of folks have pointed out, is not a liquidity crisis. It is a confidence crisis. How are we going to become confident in the quality of mortgages and various other securities again if no one is checking them to make sure they're worth what issuers say they are?

The SEC should consider streamlining and expediting the SROrule approval process, including a firm time limit for the SEC to publish SRO rule filings and more clearly defining and expanding the type of rules deemed effective upon filing, including trading rules and administrative rules. The SEC should also consider streamlining the approval for any securities products common to the marketplace as the agency did in a 1998 ruling vis-à-vis certain derivatives securities products. An updated, streamlined, and expedited approval process will allow U.S. securities firms to remain competitive with the over-the-counter markets and international institutions and increase product innovation and investor choice.

• The SEC should undertake a general exemptive rulemaking under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”), consistent with investor protection, to permit the trading of those products already actively trading in the U.S. or foreign jurisdictions. Treasury also recommends that the SEC propose to Congress legislation that would expand the Investment Company Act by permitting registration of a new “global” investment company.

The creation of the Department of Homeland Security did nothing to improve security in the US. Nada. Zip. What it did was allow billions of dollars to go to rural red states which are unlikely to be attacked by terrorists, while ignoring real security needs. Organizational reform does not, by itself, do a damn thing -- they are almost always power grabs.

Now power grabs aren't always bad. It depends what you're going to do with the power you grab. Paulson's plan either doesn't tell me what specifically will be done with the increased power, or when it does (as with the SEC or the mortgage regulatory body) it tells me the plan is decrease regulation (the SEC) or to preempt state regulation (mortgages). In no place do I see stern words about leverage, about default insurance, about exotic securities. Instead I read about streamlining and about making business "easier" to do.

The commission that came up with this plan was seated a year ago. What they have proposed is nothing more than what they wanted anyway, such as a federal charter for insurance companies, which as Marcy Wheeler points out, seems to have nothing to do with the current crisis. But there's been talk of a federal charter for insurance for a long time. I used to work in insurance compliance and it's a mess of 50 state laws. Some of them are a joke, but the toughest (currently New York) are far tougher than anything I can see a federal charter creating. But a federal charter would save insurance companies a lot of money to have only one regulator and many of the larger companies have been pushing it hard for years. So yes, this is just something they wanted to do anyway.

Paulson's plan is meaningless and will do nothing to slow this meltdown. More importantly, I doubt it will do much if anything to slow the next meltdown. Fundamental changes are needed, and reorganizations absent a hard mandate, mean nothing. Ultimately, this remains "shock therapy" - wait for a shock, in this case the market collapse, then do what you wanted to do anyway, but couldn't get through in normal times.


Further Reading:

Scholars and Rogues

Paul Krugman


Ian Welsh April 1, 2008 - 5:56am
( categories: Economics: USA | The Markets )

Same problem. Massive chaos, useful for ensuring that nobody is responsible for anything (excluding the occasional, strategic scapegoats).

creativelcro March 31, 2008 - 11:22pm

Are they implying that the current mess was caused by international competition?... Really?...
"...will allow U.S. securities firms to remain competitive with the over-the-counter markets and international institutions and increase product innovation and investor choice."

creativelcro March 31, 2008 - 11:25pm

Paulson and the other circus animals have to put on a show for the public.

I think any serious attempt to address the financial crises would include these elements:

First and foremost, the imposition of a Tobin tax on all financial transactions, not just forex. Financial trading is so massive right now that this small tax of less than one percent will raise nearly $1 trillion (tr not b). But as it will also knock out most of the speculation, that amount raised will rapidly shrink along with financial trading.

Second, we need something like a "bank holiday" but just for derivatives contracts. This prevents the financial system from totally crashing, which was the fear behind the Bare Sterns rescue.

Third, at the same time, the top derivatives dealers, which are the eight largest commercial and investment banks (and which account for over 90 percent of the derivatives) should immediately be put into receivership. If management complains, lock them up, send them to Gitmo, whatever, just get them the hell away from the controls.

Fourth, freeze all adjustable rate mortgages at the present rate, and roll back all the past eight months’ resets. This keeps people in their houses.

Fifth, a re-imposition of usury laws, with a top rate of say, nine percent. That provides an immediate stimulus for people with higg credit card rates, car loan rates, etc.

Sixth, end the reign of hedge funds by imposing the same standards of transparency and regulatory reporting on hedge funds that any other corporation has to comply with.

Seventh, freeze all large capital flows out of the United States that are not tied to the importing of goods and services.

Eighth, vigorously pursue the "claw back" provision of Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (a compensation forfeiture provision, limited to the CEO and CFO) of the top ten or twenty Wall Street firms, as well as Bear Stearns. Derivatives creation and trading is highly concentrated, with the top ten or twenty firms accounting for nearly 100 percent.

Ninth, mobilization of covert special operations against the City of London, which is actually more of a problem than Wall Street. Also, to head off another Business Plot (remember USMC General Smedley Butler?) Get the message across to international elites that WE. ARE. NOT. FUCKING. AROUND.

Tenth, hold a big conference with the heads of pension funds to determine what other measures they require to have them invest in emerging green technologies and infrastructure. No Wall Street people should be allowed anywhere near this conference.

Finally, the amount raised from the Tobin tax is used to fund a crash program of alternative energies, and of retrofitting residences and public buildings in our inner cities. This is aimed at creating a massive employment boom and getting a real economic recovery going. Reversing the sprawl of the suburbs is going to take much, much longer than installing insulation in buildings in our city cores, but that is the eventual goal.

Tony Wikrent April 1, 2008 - 12:06am

is a continuing theme. I think the most important part of the plan is to make feeding and supporting the ponzi builders a little smoother. Might even make it legal. The FED is a private bank which has been successful in creating this mess. The private banking/investment world will not regulate itself so as to benefit the rest of the world.

pihwht April 1, 2008 - 8:12am

I totally agree with this but this what they do best in DC give to friends to Hell with the help.
jo6pac
The race to the bottom continues.

jo6pac April 1, 2008 - 7:44pm

What is happening is what needs to happen, the currency basis of the US needs to shift from non-tradables to tradables.

Unfortunately this is being done by the people who thought Iraq was the solution to our oil supply problems, Medicare Part D was the solution to our drug costs, and the revenue reductions would stimulate the economy and balance the budget. And that is not even a partial list.

While past performance is no indicator of future performance, past behavior is generally considered to be an indicator of future results.

Stirling Newberry April 1, 2008 - 9:28am

needs to shift, aye, but this, which will almost certainly reduce oversight on money creation, rather than increase it, leaves the money supply of the US even more prone to instability and bubbles. Or at least, that's my reading of it.

Ian Welsh April 2, 2008 - 2:26am

"First and foremost, the imposition of a Tobin tax on all financial transactions, not just forex. Financial trading is so massive right now that this small tax of less than one percent will raise nearly $1 trillion (tr not b). But as it will also knock out most of the speculation, that amount raised will rapidly shrink along with financial trading."

Not just a Tobin tax, a Tobin-Pigou tax.

Stirling Newberry April 1, 2008 - 9:30am

It troubles me greatly that a Tobin-Pigou tax is not a recurring theme in the national discourse about these crises. Very few people seem to have heard of Tobin's proposal, and even less of Pigou. Hence I use the phrase, "a Tobin tax on all financial transactions, not just forex."

Of course, there is that alluring element of play: the Bare Sterns Pigou(t) tax.

Tony Wikrent April 1, 2008 - 5:44pm

I'll probably do a piece on Tobin-Pigou in the next few weeks.

Ian Welsh April 2, 2008 - 2:27am

The biggest, most reckless credit experiment in history has started to implode. It's far too late to stop a complete systemic collapse now. Granting new powers to the agency most responsible for the mess simply does not make any sense.
[snip]
Instead, the proposal is to give Fed increased authority to watch over additional henhouses. And if there's one thing worse than the fox watching the henhouse, it's the Fed watching the henhouse. A quick look at history should be enough to convince anyone of that.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com .

Study of the history of money and banking in the US shows that there has been a running battle between Hamiltonians favoring centralization and republicanism (plutocratic elitism) and Jeffersonians favoring democratic populism. The former have fought incessantly for a monetary system under the control of a central bank in the hands of financiers, while the latter have insisted that there is essentially no difference between government bonds, one which taxpayers pay interest, and government bills on which they don't, e. g., Lincoln's "greenbacks" that paid for the Civil War instead of government debt. The difference is that the interest on government debt (bonds) goes to the rentier class and over time, wealth inevitably rises to the top. On the other hand, government bills don't require payment of interest through taxes, so there is no transfer of wealth upward to the rentiers.

This has resulted in an ongoing tussle between elitism and populism, and one could argue, is at the basis of it. For whoever controls the creation and allocation of money controls the game, i.e, the entire socio-politico-economic system of the nation. And the de facto linkage of central banks allows the international financiers to dominate global wealth and to shape global politics.

So the big news is that the Fed is now at top of the flow chart represents a further incursion by the Hamiltonians, as one would expect coming from the former chief of Goldman Sachs.

A big problem is that economics isn't the strong point of most politicians or the public, especially the intricacies of money and and banking. The Fed is poorly understood, with most thinking that it and other central banks like the Bank of England, are governmental institutions. However, that is not the case.

This misunderstanding suits the financiers just fine, in fact they planned it that way, as Woodrow Wilson rued when he later realized that they had pulled the wool over his eyes after the creation of the Fed in 1913 on his watch.

Essentially the Fed is the apex of a private banking system masquerading as a public one. The Federal Reserve System appears to be a quasi-governmental institution because the Board of Governors is appointed the President and must be approved by the Senate, but in fact, the board is always dominated financiers, due to the degree of expertise required and the size contributions involved, and their objective is to preserve and advance interests of the elite, not the people. Moreover, the member banks are private institutions, as are the primary dealers. In practical terms that puts the monetary system in private hands, whose object, being the collection of rent on money and wealth capture, is at odds with progressive social policy.

So this is potentially a lot worse that the shuffling of deck chairs that Krugman sees. This is another example of disaster capitalism at work.

tjfxh April 1, 2008 - 10:13pm

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.