PDA

View Full Version : Next bubble: $600 trillion?




wildfirepower
04-20-2010, 07:38 AM
As interest rates begin to rise worldwide, losses in derivatives may end up bankrupting a wide range of institutions, including municipalities, state governments, major insurance companies, top investment houses, commercial banks and universities.

Defaults now beginning to occur in a number of European cities prefigure what may end up being the largest financial bubble ever to burst – a bubble that today amounts to more than $600 trillion.

The Bank of International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, now estimates derivatives – the complex bets financial institutions and sophisticated institutional investors make with one another on everything from commodities options to credit swaps – topped $604 trillion worldwide at the end of June 2009.

To comprehend the relative magnitude of derivative contracts globally, the CIA Factbook estimates the 2009 Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, of the world was just under $60 trillion.

Derivative contracts, therefore, have now reach a level 10 times world GDP, meaning even a 10 percent default in derivatives would equal world GDP.

The small 800-year-old town of Saint-Etienne in France has just defaulted on a $1.6 million contract owed to Deutsche Bank. The city entered into a complex currency swap arrangement to reduce the cost of borrowing some $30 million.

To cancel all 10 derivative contracts Saint-Etienne currently holds would cost the town approximately $135 million, more than six times the amount initially borrowed, largely because no bank or institutional investor would want to purchase contracts that are now on the losing side of the bet.

Saint-Etienne is only one of thousands of EU municipalities that bought into derivative contracts as a way to cut the costs of municipal borrowing.

A key problem with derivatives is that in the attempt to reduce costs or prevent losses, institutional investors typically accepted complex risks that carried little-understood liabilities widely disproportionate to the any potential savings the derivatives contract may have initially obtained.

The hedge fund and derivatives markets are so highly complex and technical that even many top economists and investment banking professionals don't fully understand them.

Moreover, both the hedge fund and derivatives markets are almost totally unregulated, either by the U.S. government or by any other government worldwide.

But losses on derivatives are not limited to government entities.

Harvard's billions

Obama administration economic guru Larry Summers may end up being best remembered for having destroyed almost single-handedly the Harvard University endowment fund as a result of misguided instructions he gave the fund's management during his tenure as Harvard University president from 2002 to 2006.

Summers, currently director of the White House National Economic Council, called for an aggressive investment strategy in which Harvard' endowment fund engaged in risky strategies, including derivative strategies that have burdened the nation' largest university endowment with billions of dollars in toxic assets.

As a result, the Harvard endowment, which peaked at $36.9 billion in June 2008, has since lost some 30 percent of its value, dropping to $26 billion, according to Bloomberg News.

In October 2009, Harvard University paid $497.6 million to investment banks to get out from $1.1 billion in interest rate swaps that were intended to hedge variable-rate debt for capital projects, Bloomberg reported.

In what amounted to Harvard's biggest endowment loss in 40 years, the university also agreed to pay $425 million over the next 30 to 40 years to offset an additional $764 million in credit-swap deals gone bad.

Citing failed interest rate swaps that forced Harvard to pay banks $1 billion just to terminate the junk contracts, Bloomberg reported the Harvard endowment's investments have become so toxic that even Summers won't explain what happened during his watch.

The Boston Globe squarely put the blame on Summers' doorstep, noting he came into office with a bold vision to expand the size of its science facilities by more than a third.

Average yearly expenditures for facilities jumped from under $150 million in 1995-2000 at Harvard, to $495 million from 2001-2005, to $644 million in 2009.

"Summers told the faculty not to think small," the Globe wrote. "Its ambitions were limited only by its imagination, he said. "Harvard could always come up with more money from its 'deeply loyal fans.'"

Unfortunately, deeply loyal fans and alumni with deep pockets were not enough to bail the university out from Sumner's ill advised investment advice.

Bloomberg reported that cash-strapped Harvard recently asked Massachusetts for fast-track approval to borrow $2.5 billion.

The damage done to Harvard is not limited to plans to expand the science facility into blue-collar Allston. Now, the university is faced with slashing faculty and staff.

Last year, more than 1,600 of Harvard's staff were offered early retirement, and more than 500 accepted.

"Loyal alumni have contributed generously to staunch the bleeding," the Globe wrote, "but huge deficits remain in spite of all the reductions. Harvard will be a smaller place when the dust settles, with less educational and scholarly reach. It will employ fewer people and will contribute less to local and national prosperity."

What are derivatives?

While the hedge fund market is small in comparison to derivatives, hedge funds in the U.S. are still a $1.5 trillion industry.

Hedge funds and derivatives share a common characteristic in that both were set up initially by professional investment advisers to assist them in managing the risk contained in institutional investment portfolios, including mutual fund assets or pension funds that typically involved hundreds of millions of dollars.

One of the original ideas behind derivatives was the realization that professional money managers, including those in banks, investment companies and hedge funds, needed to make bets to offset the possibility of taking losses.

A popular form of derivative contracts was developed to permit one money manager to "swap" a stream of variable interest payments with another money manager for a stream of fixed interest payments.

The idea was to use derivative bets on interest rates to "hedge" or balance off the risks taken on interest-rate investments owned in the underlying portfolio.

If an institutional investment manager held $100 million in fixed-rate bonds, for example, to hedge the risk, should interest rates rise or fall in a manner different than projections, a purchase of a $100 million variable interest rate derivative could be constructed to cover the risk.

Whichever way interest rates went, one side to the swap might win and the other might lose.

The money manager losing the bet could expect to get paid on the derivative to compensate for some or all of the losses.

In the strong stock and mortgage markets experienced beginning in the historically low 1-percent interest rate environments of 2003 through 2004, the number of hedge funds soared, just as the volume of derivative contracts soared from a mere $300 trillion in 2005 to the more than $600 trillion today.

Bloomberg reported the number of hedge funds tripled in the last decade to a record of 10,233 at the end of June 2008, according to the Chicago-based Hedge Fund Research Inc.

More than one-third of those funds could be "wiped out" in the economic downturn that began in December 2008, Bloomberg said.

The Bank of International Settlements, or BIS, in Basel, Switzerland, makes no estimate of how much of the $604 trillion in outstanding derivative contracts are today vulnerable to collapse.

Losses in derivatives played a major role in the bankruptcies of both AIG and Bear Stearns.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=143057

wildfirepower
04-20-2010, 10:54 AM
As interest rates begin to rise worldwide, losses in derivatives may end up bankrupting a wide range of institutions, including municipalities, state governments, major insurance companies, top investment houses, commercial banks and universities.

Losses in derivatives played a major role in the bankruptcies of both AIG and Bear Stearns.
World assets are worth $400 Trillion to $500 Trillion. Whereas derivatives are worth $600 Trillion. This means the whole world is bankrupt.

wgadget
04-20-2010, 10:56 AM
World assets are worth $400 Trillion to $500 Trillion. Whereas derivatives are worth $600 Trillion. This means the whole world is bankrupt.

Bah...Can't the Federal Reserve just print out a couple more hundred trillion?

youngbuck
04-20-2010, 11:43 AM
I read the title and, just, had to laugh.

SamFisher
04-20-2010, 12:27 PM
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=143057

Next?! This has been going on since the 80s.
LOL! Too late now! Should have thought about it in 1994 during the big deregulation frenzy right after the S&L scandal and the 87 market meltdown:

http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat3/151647.pdf
http://www.bis.org/statistics/otcder/dt1920a.pdf

Welcome to the casino gulag: now all of us are their 3rd world indentured servants!

wildfirepower
04-22-2010, 09:56 AM
Some interesting points from the article above.

To comprehend the relative magnitude of derivative contracts globally, the CIA Factbook estimates the 2009 Gross Domestic Product, or GDP, of the world was just under $60 trillion.

Derivative contracts, therefore, have now reach a level 10 times world GDP, meaning even a 10 percent default in derivatives would equal world GDP.

The hedge fund and derivatives markets are so highly complex and technical that even many top economists and investment banking professionals don't fully understand them.

Moreover, both the hedge fund and derivatives markets are almost totally unregulated, either by the U.S. government or by any other government worldwide.

The Bank of International Settlements, or BIS, in Basel, Switzerland, makes no estimate of how much of the $604 trillion in outstanding derivative contracts are today vulnerable to collapse.

Losses in derivatives played a major role in the bankruptcies of both AIG and Bear Stearns.

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 06:43 PM
The Bank of International Settlements, or BIS, in Basel, Switzerland, makes no estimate of how much of the $604 trillion in outstanding derivative contracts are today vulnerable to collapse.

Losses in derivatives played a major role in the bankruptcies of both AIG and Bear Stearns.

BTW nothing says that the bondholders and the shareholders should be bailed out by the tax payer and if those shareholders are pensions and 401ks I guess

a) we could institute an investment tax to pay for social programs to compensate these people at a bare minimum. that would also cool off speculators.

b) people should think twice in the future before they give up their pensions and savings for speculative gambles which is what a 401k is. taking your life savings and putting it in the back pocket of some investment banker for "safe keeping" is just gamble no matter how it turns out and how smart everybody wants to look at the end.

So all of this doom and gloom is highly contingent on politics and it's not real economics. In other words it's a horror story they tell us so we fork over our money.

Fox McCloud
04-22-2010, 09:34 PM
considering that derivatives are insurance policies, basically, the world isn't bankrupt.

the total liabilities an insurance company has are extremely high if, say, everyone were to lose their homes tomorrow, but this doesn't mean they're bankrupt immediately; it's only if this happens under that condition. IIRC it's similar with credit-default swaps.

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 10:21 PM
considering that derivatives are insurance policies, basically, the world isn't bankrupt.

the total liabilities an insurance company has are extremely high if, say, everyone were to lose their homes tomorrow, but this doesn't mean they're bankrupt immediately; it's only if this happens under that condition. IIRC it's similar with credit-default swaps.

that's only true if the contract is about tangible assets. that's not the case. In fact it's possible that 10% of them are fraudulent hence require no real disaster in order to become a liability since they were never anything but a vehicle specifically designed to hide a liability. Offshore SIVs for instance: just liabilities packaged to look like assets.

Fox McCloud
04-22-2010, 11:01 PM
that's only true if the contract is about tangible assets. that's not the case. In fact it's possible that 10% of them are fraudulent hence require no real disaster in order to become a liability since they were never anything but a vehicle specifically designed to hide a liability. Offshore SIVs for instance: just liabilities packaged to look like assets.

you have to separate like for like here--if something is fraudulent then it's no excuse to argue against derivatives on the whole--it'd be like wanting to shut down the entire company of McDonalds because a few of them fraudulently sold big macs with meat from a supermarket instead of meat from McDonalds regular source.

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 11:08 PM
you have to separate like for like here--if something is fraudulent then it's no excuse to argue against derivatives on the whole--it'd be like wanting to shut down the entire company of McDonalds because a few of them fraudulently sold big macs with meat from a supermarket instead of meat from McDonalds regular source.

I agree, that's why the new bill will put most OTC derivatives on a public exchange and clearing them through a 3rd party so we can see which one is which.

Fox McCloud
04-22-2010, 11:12 PM
I agree, that's why the new bill will put most OTC derivatives on a public exchange and clearing them through a 3rd party so we can see which one is which.

I'm not entirely in favor of this, especially if it's forced---it should be a matter of merely prosecuting those who commit fraud...sadly, the government, more often than not, makes sweeping changes like this when there's a bit of a problem.

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 11:25 PM
I'm not entirely in favor of this, especially if it's forced---it should be a matter of merely prosecuting those who commit fraud...sadly, the government, more often than not, makes sweeping changes like this when there's a bit of a problem.

yeah I hear you, i'd love to see those sobs frogmarched out of 85 Broadway but it will never happen. On the other hand what I would want even more is for this not to happen again, and perhaps what I want even more than that is TO GET MY FRICKN 401K BACK :D

Fox McCloud
04-22-2010, 11:40 PM
yeah I hear you, i'd love to see those sobs frogmarched out of 85 Broadway but it will never happen. On the other hand what I would want even more is for this not to happen again, and perhaps what I want even more than that is TO GET MY FRICKN 401K BACK :D

'course the really easy fix to all of this is to end the fed and use competing currencies (or a gold standard if the government must), which would severely curtail banks ability to make loans on any whimsy they want.

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 11:45 PM
'course the really easy fix to all of this is to end the fed and use competing currencies (or a gold standard if the government must), which would severely curtail banks ability to make loans on any whimsy they want.

not sure how that would work, besides don't you need to change the Constitution for that?!

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8

SamFisher
04-22-2010, 11:48 PM
'course the really easy fix to all of this is to end the fed and use competing currencies (or a gold standard if the government must), which would severely curtail banks ability to make loans on any whimsy they want.

besides, i don't think it worked very well:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States#Free_Banki ng_Era_to_the_Great_Depression

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_central_banking_in_the_United_States#18 37.E2.80.931862:_.22Free_Banking.22_Era

Fox McCloud
04-22-2010, 11:49 PM
not sure how that would work, besides don't you need to change the Constitution for that?!

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei#section8


To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

they don't do this anymore; they gave it up to the Federal Reserve, which, I really don't think they are allowed to do.

there's also this:


make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts;

which implies that the federal government is supposed to use gold or silver.

as for competing currencies? You probably would have to have an amendment for that one.

fj45lvr
04-23-2010, 12:11 AM
what collateral did Deutsche Bank have on these defaulted french city derivatives??


Without any collateral how could this end up doing anything worldwide??

SamFisher
04-23-2010, 01:06 AM
what collateral did Deutsche Bank have on these defaulted french city derivatives??


Without any collateral how could this end up doing anything worldwide??

they don't need collateral: if they win in the courts they have almost taxing power over local communities, they are getting 10-20% of Saint Etienne's tax revenues for the next 50 years. If they don't win against Saint Etienne, they'll win against another town in Germany, Denmark or Jefferson County Alabama, they don't care.

These vampires have to be stopped by the federal government and ultimately by international laws and regulations. People have to go to jail or 1 day you'll wake up and you'll be paying local taxes to buy $5000 paper weights for 12 banks instead of repairing roads and bridges or paying school teachers.

fj45lvr
04-23-2010, 01:44 AM
they don't need collateral: if they win in the courts they have almost taxing power over local communities, they are getting 10-20% of Saint Etienne's tax revenues for the next 50 years. If they don't win against Saint Etienne, they'll win against another town in Germany, Denmark or Jefferson County Alabama, they don't care.
.


if they expect to get paid they DO need collateral. Simply saying that they won't be paid right away but on a "payment plan" is saying that the "bubble" really won't be "shock and awe" when it "unwinds" because the parties will have no luck collecting.....now if they have real collateral then this might be something.