Zaha Hadid, the Georgia O'Keeffe of Architects

Likes Precious Metals, Just not Gold

Big Banks

Big Banks Manipulated Energy Markets In California and the Midwest … Ripping Off Tens of Millions of Dollars in 9 Months

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission says that JP Morgan has massively manipulated energy markets in  California and the Midwest, obtaining tens of millions of dollars in overpayments from grid operators between September 2010 and June 2011.

As shown below, big banks have manipulated virtually every other market as well – both in the financial sector and the real economy – and broken virtually every law on the books.

Commodities Are Manipulated

The big banks and government agencies have been conspiring to manipulate commodities prices for decades.

The big banks are taking over important aspects of the physical economy, including uranium mining, petroleum products, aluminum, ownership and operation of airports, toll roads, ports, and electricity.

And they are using these physical assets to massively manipulate commodities prices … scalping consumers ofmany billions of dollars each year.

Interest Rates Are Manipulated

Interest rates are rigged:

• The big banks have conspired for years to rig interest rates … upon which $800 trillion in assets are pegged

• This was the largest insider trading scandal ever … and the largest financial scam in world history

• Local governments got ripped off bigtime by the Libor manipulation

• Libor is still being manipulated

Derivatives Are Manipulated

The big banks have long manipulated derivatives … a $1,200 Trillion Dollar market.

Indeed, many trillions of dollars of derivatives are being manipulated in the exact same same way that interest rates are fixed: through gamed self-reporting.

Currency Markets Are Rigged

Currency markets are massively rigged.

Gold and Silver Are Manipulated

The Guardian and Telegraph report that gold and silver prices are “fixed” in the same way as interest rates and derivatives – in daily conference calls by the powers-that-be.

Oil Prices Are Manipulated

Oil prices are manipulated as well.

Everything Can Be Manipulated through High-Frequency Trading

Traders with high-tech computers can manipulate stocks, bonds, options, currencies and commodities. And seethis.

Manipulating Numerous Markets In Myriad Ways

The big banks and other giants manipulate numerous markets in myriad ways, for example:

• Engaging in mafia-style big-rigging fraud against local governments. See this, this and this

• Shaving money off of virtually every pension transaction they handled over the course of decades, stealing collectively billions of dollars from pensions worldwide. Details here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here,here, here, here and here

• Charging “storage fees” to store gold bullion … without even buying or storing any gold . And raiding allocated gold accounts

• Committing massive and pervasive fraud both when they initiated mortgage loans and when they foreclosed on them (and see this)

• Pledging the same mortgage multiple times to different buyers. See this, this, this, this and this. This would be like selling your car, and collecting money from 10 different buyers for the same car

• Cheating homeowners by gaming laws meant to protect people from unfair foreclosure

• Pushing investments which they knew were terrible, and then betting against the same investments to make money for themselves. See this, this, this, this and this

• Engaging in unlawful “frontrunning” to manipulate markets. See this, this, this, this, this and this

• Engaging in unlawful “Wash Trades” to manipulate asset prices. See this, this and this

• Otherwise manipulating markets. And see this

• Participating in various Ponzi schemes. See this, this and this

• Charging veterans unlawful mortgage fees

• Cooking their books (and see this)

• Bribing and bullying ratings agencies to inflate ratings on their risky investments

The Big Picture

The big picture is simple:

• The big banks manipulate every market they touch

• Too much interconnectedness leads to financial instability

• The government has given the banks huge subsidies … which they are using for speculation and other thingswhich don’t help the economy. In other words, propping up the big banks by throwing money at them doesn’t help the economy

• Top economists, financial experts and bankers say that the big banks are too large … and their very size is threatening the economy. They say we need to break up the big banks to stabilize the economy

• The big banks own the D.C. politicians … so Congress and the White House won’t do anything unless the people force change

Take Five, again...

Paul Desmond and Dave Brubeck - Take Five

Al Jarreau Takes Five

@JamesGRickards - Currency Wars - enter EU

Print or Die

An "Australian" Perspective on Commodities, Futures Martkets and Gold

A Candid Chat With RBA Boss, Glenn Stevens

By Greg Canavan • November 6th, 2013 • Related Articles • Filed Under

There were no real surprises on the interest rate front yesterday. RBA boss Glenn Stevens put his finger in his mouth, stuck it out the window to see which way the wind was blowing, and decided that conditions were conducive to ‘no change’. The price of overnight credit remained at 2.5%.

The statement that accompanied the decision is an interesting one — once you decipher it — so in today’sDaily Reckoning we’ll provide you with a version of what we think Glen Stevens was really thinking when he penned the media release.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘Recent information is consistent with global growth running a bit below average this year, with reasonable prospects of a pick-up next year.’

TRANSLATION: Despite unprecedented monetary stimulus from our mates around the world, global economic growth is STILL running below average. But surely things will get better next year. Anyway, next year is far enough away to be able to make optimistic statements about it…without getting into too much detail.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘Commodity prices have declined from their peaks, but generally remain at high levels by historical standards. Inflation in most countries is well contained.’

TRANSLATION: ‘Commodity prices’ are code for iron ore prices, but we’re not getting into that today. To be honest, we can see that most other commodity producers are struggling out there. Despite what looks like decent nominal prices, inflation in the sector must be out of control. That is, costs are rising faster than prices, meaning all but the lowest cost producers are struggling to turn a profit. So much for high prices, huh?

It looks like the derivatives market has really screwed with the sector’s prices signals. What a nightmare. I hope I’m back in the Shire by the time that beast blows up.

Although I can’t say I’m sad to see the gold companies struggling. They think they’re producing a precious metal! Ha! They don’t realise the derivatives market has commoditised their ‘precious metal’ too…and that they may as well be digging for tin. Idiots. We’ve managed to pull off reverse alchemy and these clowns don’t even realise what we’ve done to them!

Despite all this, inflation — as we measure and report — remains bang on target.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘In Australia, the economy has been growing a bit below trend over the past year and the unemployment rate has edged higher. This is likely to persist in the near term, as the economy adjusts to lower levels of mining investment.’

TRANSLATION: I’m putting that nicely. There’s a big bloody investment cliff coming up and unless I can replace it with something quick smart then we’re in all-sorts. China is helping out with their endless stimulus iterations, but they have played that card too many times. Something’s gonna give over there soon and I’m just hoping it’s next year at the earliest. By then, hopefully something will have come up.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘Further ahead, private demand outside the mining sector is expected to increase at a faster pace, though considerable uncertainty surrounds this outlook.’

TRANSLATION: I’ve done all I can, really. I’ve lowered interest rates to historic lows. I’ve set off another damnhousing boom, which is good cover for a while but is going to end in tears. What I need is for businesses to startinvesting. Loosen the purse strings. Get some confidence. All I can do now is hope, as I’m uncertain whether it will work out.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘There has been an improvement in indicators of household and business sentiment recently, but it is still too soon to judge how persistent this will be. Public spending is forecast to be quite weak.’

TRANSLATION: There seems to have been an increase in ‘sentiment’ once those clowns got voted out a few months ago. But it’s not translating into anything yet. And big business isn’t making things any easier. All I’m hearing from them in their latest announcements is how the election didn’t change anything in terms of consumer spending. ‘Things are still flat…waiting for a pickup.’

And the government isn’t going to help me out. Right when the Australian economy really needs some additional spending the Lib’s are going all austerity like. But big Joe did raise the debt ceiling to $500 billion…hopefully he’s got something in the pipeline. God knows we’ll need it.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘The easing in monetary policy that has already occurred since late 2011 has supported interest-sensitive spending and asset values. The full effects of these decisions are still coming through, and will be for a while yet.’

TRANSLATION: I’ve managed to unleash another boom in house prices and bank stocks. Are they interest rate sensitive or what?! But I need the rest of the Australian economy to join in. I’ve probably got another six months or so to see how this experiment works.

I thought the wealth effect would’ve started working by now. If it is, it’s taking its time. Having had a good think about it though, I’m now concerned I’ve just facilitated a transfer of wealth and an increase in indebtedness across the Australian economy. So while some people may feel wealthier from the boom, others will feel poorer. Oh man, I’ve got a bad feeling about this…

(As an aside, if you’re loaded with bank stocks AND investment properties, have a good think about it…you ARE Mr or Mrs interest rate sensitive.)

GLEN STEVENS: ‘The pace of borrowing has remained relatively subdued overall to date, though recently there have been signs of increased demand for finance by households.’

TRANSLATION: I’m understating things here a bit. Households are gearing up to buy houses big time…and banks are letting just about anyone in the door. I think APRA is going to have a word with them soon. The banks will get around it though…they always do.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘There is also continuing evidence of a shift in savers' behaviour in response to declining returns on low-risk assets. Housing and equity markets have strengthened further, trends which should in time be supportive of investment.’

TRANSLATION: I’m really going out on a limb here in hoping for an increase in investment. Let me break it down for you…

We’ve successfully lowered the return on cash to such an extent that the punters are getting out of it and getting into riskier assets. This pushes the price of these risk assets up and I’m hoping that these higher prices will encourage greater investment. I’m going to ignore the fact that artificially induced high prices are not normally conducive to attracting additional investment, and just hope that it all works out the way one of our blokes modelled it on an awesomely detailed spreadsheet that takes just about everything into account except human nature, which we find difficult to model.

The funny thing about lowering the cash rate is that we actually put MORE cash into the Australian economy to do so! Then the media helpfully write that ‘people are getting out of cash and into the market’. But they don’t realise that someone else is getting INTO cash at the same time. Actually, more people are in cash now than before, because we created more of it!

Having said that, I wonder who’s holding cash now?

Anyway, look for greater investment down the track. It will take over the mining cliff stuff and we’ll all be sweet. I’m feeling good about this plan now.

GLEN STEVENS: ‘The Australian dollar, while below its level earlier in the year, is still uncomfortably high. A lower level of the exchange rate is likely to be needed to achieve balanced growth in the economy.’

TRANSLATION: Would anyone care to tell me just who is buying the Australian dollar here? I’ve heard all the ‘relative strength’ arguments but our economy is not that strong. We’ve been coasting along on China’s strength for years and our wealth consists of swapping houses with each other at higher prices.

As I mentioned, I’m a tad concerned about China and what that means for us. I hope in a way they do have some problems because that would get the dollar much lower. Right now my ‘jawboning’ attempts aren’t having much success. And the Fed’s $85 billion per month debt monetisation program isn’t helping me.

A lower dollar would be great for me. I’d get the increased investment I’m looking for and balanced economic growth. I’d be a legend.

Wait, what about inflation? Inflation is the wildcard. I just hope that a lower dollar doesn’t come with higher imported inflation. That would really screw my plan up.

Because higher inflation means I might have to raise rates and the game would be over. Now I’m starting to get nervous. When is my stint here over?

Greg Canavan+
for The Daily Reckoning Australia

http://www.dailyreckoning.com.au/a-candid-chat-with-rba-boss-glenn-stevens/2013/11/06/

Bubbles Greenspan v Bubbles are Obvious Bullard

What an absolutely astounding admission former Fed boss Alan Greenspan makes about his new book The Map and The Territory: “Not a single major forecaster of note or institution caught it [the 2008 crash]. The Federal Reserve has got the most elaborate econometric model, which incorporates all the newfangled models of how the world works—and it missed it completely. I was actually flabbergasted. It upended my view of how the world worked.”

That this epitome of Washington brilliance and establishment power really thought the little models could actually forecast the future takes one’s breath away! One could expect that such models would be used as rough guides to action and to keep naive investors calm but that he was surprised the models did not predict specific events is incredible, especially for someone who supposedly had believed in markets. He admits he just now realizes that irrational fears influence how people behave! But we are supposed to trust these guys with $3 trillion sitting in the Fed, telling us they have a way out because the models are scientific, right?

Nobel Laureate F.A. Hayek predicted that people in the future looking back would “discover that the most widely held ideas which dominated the twentieth century” like scientific planning “were all based on superstitions…an overestimation of what science has achieved.” Hayek noted more than a half century ago that there were more intercortical connections in one person’s mind in a few moments than there are atoms in the entire solar system. While the material world still largely remains a mystery to science, human behavior is a real black hole. With billions of people’s minds and untold interactions between them the total human complexity is overwhelming. No super-mind in some Federal Reserve or White House can comprehend this complexity, much less control it. The progressive pretension to understand what they cannot possibly know is the true source of today’s discontent.

http://www.libertylawsite.org/2013/11/04/can-we-finally-retire-scientific-superstition/

Stairway to Heaven

IS ERIC THERE, PLEASE?

BY JOHN KENNEYNOVEMBER 11, 2013

A tentative $13 billion settlement between JPMorgan and the Justice Department was a result of extensive personal outreach from Jamie Dimon, the bank’s chief executive, to the Justice Department.
—NYTimes.com.

Jamie Dimon: Is Eric there, please?

Receptionist: May I ask who’s calling?

Dimon: Jamie Dimon.

Receptionist: Did you say, “Jamie”?

Dimon: Yes.

Receptionist: I’m sorry, isn’t that a girl’s name?

Dimon: It can be a boy’s name, too. Is he there, please?

Receptionist: Please hold.

(A beat as Dimon is placed on hold. Music is heard—the Clash’s rendition of “I Fought the Law.” After a minute or so . . .)

Attorney General Eric Holder: This is Eric.

Dimon: Eric, it’s Jamie Dimon.

Holder: Jamie. Hey. That’s weird. My assistant said there was a girl named Jamie on the phone.

Dimon: There are a lot of guys who are named Jamie, O.K.?

Holder: Jamie Farr, from “m*a*s*h.”

Dimon: Exactly.

Holder: His character dressed like a woman, though, right?

Dimon: So listen. I think we should meet.

Holder: What, like, for dinner?

Dimon: No. For a business meeting.

Holder: Oh.

Dimon: Why? Would you ever want to have dinner?

Holder: It doesn’t have to be dinner. A walk would be nice. Maybe a coffee?

Dimon: Both sound great. Let me tell you the reason I’m calling. A few of the guys over here—the board, for example—we’re a little concerned about some . . . money stuff. Like, that maybe you guys are still thinking of, uh, bringing charges against us.

Holder: Yeah, we’re definitely planning on doing that.

Dimon: Huh. And this is something you feel strongly about?

Holder: Pretty strongly, yeah.

Dimon: I see. And you have, like, evidence and stuff?

Holder: I can’t really talk about that, but yeah . . . like, boatloads.

Dimon: Can I ask you a question?

Holder: Jamie, you know I can’t comment on anything.

Dimon: One question.

Holder: I’m listening.

Dimon: Have you ever seen “The Lion King”?

Holder: O.K., I can’t believe you’re asking me that, because I have and I loved it. And, honestly, I don’t like musical theatre as a rule.

Dimon: Right? Blew me away. When they shake that piece of fabric to make it look like it’s a river?

Holder: Julie Taymor.

Dimon: Julie Taymor.

Holder: Anyway.

Dimon: So you’re definitely suing us?

Holder: Can’t really talk about it.

Dimon: How do you like being a lawyer?

Holder: I like it. But I can’t say I love it. You know?

Dimon: Totally.

Holder: Law school was a fallback. I had no idea what I wanted to do.

Dimon: Same. No sane person becomes a banker.

Holder: Is there a lot of math in your job?

Dimon: So much. And I’m terrible at math.

Holder: I know.

Dimon: Funny. What do you call twenty-five attorneys buried up to their chins in cement?

Holder: Here it comes . . .

Holder: You guys paid back all the money we loaned you, right?Dimon: Not enough cement.

(Both laugh really hard.)

Dimon: Sure did. So listen to this. My kid brings me over to Williamsburg the other day. Have you been there?

Holder: Colonial Williamsburg? Sure. I love it. They churn their own butter.

Dimon: No, no. This is a neighborhood in Brooklyn.

Holder: Oh. No. Never heard of it.

Dimon: Listen to this. Like, every guy has a beard.

Holder: I don’t understand.

Dimon: Almost every man I saw—twenty-two to maybe forty—had a big beard, like they live in the woods or something, and I don’t know why.

Holder: Bizarre. Blankfein grew a beard. What’s up with that?

Dimon: No idea. I saw him recently. Asked him about it. He said it was symbolic, that each whisker on his face—he said he’d had a team of first-year derivatives guys count them—each whisker represented something important in his life. One might be passion, one might be love, one might be a child. He pointed to four that represented helicopters. But the bulk of his face, he said, was money. He said his entire chin was Palm Beach real estate.

Holder: Had he been drinking?

Dimon: That’s the weird thing. I don’t think so.

Holder: Lloyd.

Dimon: I feel like I understand less as I get older.

Holder: Same.

Dimon: Do you ever . . .

Holder: What?

Dimon: Do you ever . . . do you ever look out the window in the late afternoon and just get . . . sad? Like, for no reason?

Holder: Almost every day.

Dimon: I’ll walk around the office some days and just see people crying at their desks for no outward reason.

Holder: Same here.

Dimon: Total change of subject, but would you ever want to go camping?

Holder: That was weird, because you read my mind. I have a two-man tent and, like, fourteen canteens.

(Both laugh for a long time.)

Dimon: Now, in terms of a fine . . .

Holder: Yeah.

Dimon: I was talking with some of the guys here and we were thinking, like, a billion maybe would be good.

Holder: Huh.

Dimon: Were you thinking that would be a good number?

Holder: No-o-o.

Dimon: Oh. What were you thinking, hypothetically?

Holder: Hypothetically? Not less than thirteen.

Dimon: Thirteen. Wow. And that . . . that would be as in billion?

Holder: Yes, definitely billion.

Dimon: Of course. Because thirteen million . . . I mean, my pants are worth more than that . . . ha ha . . . I’m kidding, they’re not, they’re just regular pants. I just think the word “pants” is . . . Anyway. Wow. So thirteen billion.

Holder: Yeah.

(A long beat.)

Dimon: So you feel like we were . . . were bad, the guys and me, at the bank here.

Holder: Pretty much, yeah.

Dimon: Huh. That’s so weird, because we weren’t thinking that at all. We were thinking, you know, we made a lot of money and that that was, like, good.

Holder: Interesting. I guess for me it’s how you made the money?

Dimon: Not sure I understand. Why would that matter?

Holder: Well, over here it’s kind of the . . . what’s the word . . . the essence of the whole thing.

Dimon: Like . . . rules and stuff.

Holder: Exactly.

Dimon: Like that . . . what do you call it . . . Vulcan Law?

Holder: Volcker Rule.

Dimon: Yeah, that one. That’s funny, because we didn’t really take that one very seriously. We actually have a copy of it up on a wall and people kind of point at it and laugh, because, I mean, it’s just funny.

Holder: I think that’s where we differ a bit.

Dimon: Interesting. O.K., then. Well . . . I should probably talk with some of the guys.

Holder: Talk with the guys.

Dimon: Camping soon?

Holder: Can’t wait. Talk soon, Jamie. ♦

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/2013/11/11/131111sh_shouts_kenney?currentPage=all