http://www.breitbart.com/…

The US Senate Saturday approved 25 billion dollars in loan guarantees for the financially strapped US auto industry, intended to spark a wave of automotive innovation.

The loan guarantees were included in a continuing resolution that included funding for the US government and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

President George W. Bush has indicated that he intends to sign the bill.

“We’re very pleased Congress has chosen to act at this critical time,” said Greg Martin, director of communications for General Motors Corp’s Washington office.

GM had been subject of much speculation that it could be forced into bankruptcy.

The bill, which was approved by the House of Representatives on Wednesday, are the first loan guarantees for US carmakers since Congress approved a similar 675 million dollar measure for Chrysler Corp. in 1980.

Chrysler Chairman Robert Nardelli, however, said this week the loan guarantees should not be considered a rescue package for struggling carmakers. “This is not a bailout,” he said.

Under provisions of the new legislation, not only US carmakers are eligible for the guarantees but also suppliers and foreign automakers with plants in the United States that are more than 20 years old — Nissan and Honda’s US operations qualify.

Not a bailout?

Bailout in economics and finance is a term used to describe a situation where a bankrupt or nearly bankrupt entity, such as a corporation or a bank, is given a fresh injection of liquidity, in order to meet its short term obligations. Often bailouts are by governments, or by consortia of investors who demand control over the entity as the price for injecting funds.

Obviously Mr. Robert Nardelli and I have different definitions of ‘bailout.’

How about we let them burn just like the banks? The unions want to complain about it? Let’em! They have brought this on themselves by using the guns of government to minipulate and regulate the auto industry out of competitiveness. Though luck.

http://www.nytimes.com/…

Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, the last big independent investment banks on Wall Street, will transform themselves into bank holding companies subject to far greater regulation, the Federal Reserve said Sunday night, a move that fundamentally reshapes an era of high finance that defined the modern Gilded Age.

The firms requested the change themselves, even as Congress and the Bush administration rushed to pass a $700 billion rescue of financial firms. It was a blunt acknowledgment that their model of finance and investing had become too risky and that they needed the cushion of bank deposits that had kept big commercial banks like Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase relatively safe amid the recent turmoil.

It also is a turning point for the high-rolling culture of Wall Street, with its seven-figure bonuses and lavish perks for even midlevel executives. It effectively returns Wall Street to the way it was structured before Congress passed a law during the Great Depression separating investment banking from commercial banking, known as the Glass-Steagall Act.

By becoming bank holding companies, the firms are agreeing to significantly tighter regulations and much closer supervision by bank examiners from several government agencies rather than only the Securities and Exchange Commission. Now, the firms will look more like commercial banks, with more disclosure, higher capital reserves and less risk-taking.

I’m fine with this outcome in that the Glass-Steagall Act has been effectively nullified as far as I can tell. However, it makes me wonder if this was all part of some plan. Yes these firms will become more regulated in some ways but in what way does it harm them vs harming smaller firms. Morgan Stanley has had its Utah based industrial bank and word is they have been looking at the benefits of becoming a bank holding company for a while now.

So now they are a net less risky. They claim revenue will be down as a result as will bonuses and perhaps pay. We shall see. How long till the government forgets what led us here and creates the environment for a bubble again? If we make it out of this one… likely not long.

http://www.bloomberg.com/…

Morgan Stanley and Goldman have defended their business model, saying they have adequate capital and don’t need the deposit funding that banks have. Mack, 63, lambasted short sellers for pushing his firm’s shares lower.

In a memo to employees yesterday, Mack said the management committee is “taking every step possible to stop this irresponsible action in the market” and urged employees to contact clients to reassure them that the firm is performing strongly and has plenty of capital.

“There is no rational basis for the movements in our stock or credit-default spreads,” Mack wrote in the memo. “We’re in the midst of a market controlled by fear and rumors, and short sellers are driving our stock down.”

Things are bad and people don’t want to lose their investments. That is rational behavior. As for the short sellers… also rational. They expect prices to drop and wish to take advantage of that. It bugs me when individuals use the word rational in this way. Which is really “I don’t understand what’s going on or wish to excuse or diminish the action by claiming no one understands.” By definition those actions are rational.

The rumors surely are abundant. Who’s merging with who? Who’s got Morgan Stanley? Is it Wachovia? Citic Group? HSBC? Wells Fargo? JPMorgan Chase? Seems like people are just throwing out names. “What banks still exist? Yeah that one will buy them!” I’m guessing the reason Goldman isn’t getting this kind of attention is because they are a larger firm.

According to their press release MS has $170+ billion liquid. Some, months ago, was criticizing MS for having that much on hand as it would hurt their earnings just sitting around. They had a good quarter considering the environment. Goldman did relatively worse but still is in an decent position overall. It seems to me there is some game going on. As if there are forces trying to make these firms merge with a bank. Both firms’ credit default swaps are at 10ish levels below what Moody has rated them for which would put them at junk levels and their stocks plummeted on what looks to me to be nothing but positive news.

Unless GS and MS are lying about their liquid assets and the market knows something I don’t… I can’t help but feel like something bigger is going on. Perhaps it’s is just fear and shorters, people selling off to invest into safer things (gold stocks were up 7-12% yesterday) and those furthering the issue by taking advantage of it. With language like this I’m concerned the industry will become even that much more regulated and the world will be thrust further into financial crisis.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

Sept. 9 (Bloomberg) — Senator Jim Bunning said Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, by rescuing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, is acting like China’s finance minister and both Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke should step down.“I sincerely believe that Henry Paulson and Ben Bernanke should resign,” said Bunning, a Republican from Kentucky on the Senate Banking Committee. “They have taken the free market out of the free market.”

Paulson and the federal regulator for Fannie and Freddie placed the two largest U.S. mortgage-finance companies in a government-operated conservatorship on Sept. 7, ousting their chief executives and eliminating their dividends. Treasury also may purchase up to $200 billion of stock in the firms to keep them solvent.

“We no longer have a free market in the United States, we have a government controlled free market,” Bunning said in an interview. Paulson, a former chief executive officer of Goldman Sachs Group Inc., “is acting like the minister of finance in China.”

Bunning, 76, criticized Paulson’s successful effort in July to obtain congressional authority to pump unlimited amounts of money into Fannie and Freddie to keep them afloat.

“When I picked up my newspaper yesterday, I thought I woke up in France. But no, it turned out it was socialism here in the United States,” he told Paulson at a July 15 Senate Banking Committee hearing.

Back in July, Bunning called for the Fed’s “monetary policy responsibility” to be “taken away”.

Bunning is a little late to the party and a little off but it sounds a lot better than a lot of those criminals in DC are saying.

Good news on the AP wire from DC (emphasis added):

WASHINGTON, May 19 (Reuters) - Leaders of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee said on Monday they had reached a deal on legislation to create a multibillion dollar mortgage rescue fund and a new regulator for housing finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The plan would enable the Federal Housing Administration to guarantee billions of dollars in refinanced mortgages for homeowners whose properties have fallen in value since they took out their loan.

“The bill addresses the root of our current economic problems — the foreclosure crisis — by creating a voluntary initiative at no estimated cost to taxpayers which will help Americans keep their homes,” Democratic Sen. Christopher Dodd, the committee’s chairman, said in a statement…

“This is a victory for the taxpayers. As far as the housing component is concerned, we’re not funding this… with taxpayers’ money,” Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the panel’s top Republican, said on CNBC.

A quick google news search brings up another source with even more info on the planned bill.

Read More…

http://www.lewrockwell.com/…

As was announced on this site yesterday, our good friend Murray Sabrin, professor of finance at Ramapo College in New Jersey, is running for the U.S. Senate in New Jersey as a Ron Paul Republican. Ron has endorsed his campaign, and will hopefully appear with Murray soon in New Jersey. Murray is devoted to all the same principles of peace, freedom, private property,constitutional government, and a sensible foreign policy that Ron has been so successful in promoting in his campaign. In addition, Murray is a top-notch economist who will make mincemeat out of any and all debating opponents in Jersey.

Good for Mr. Sabrin. xyz and myself met him at the Fort Lee Ron Paul rally a while back. I believe we had met prior to that but I can’t remember where. I think we’re going to be seeing more and more Ron Paul Republicans running for office in the coming years. Mr. Sabrin has run before and has been friends with Dr. Paul for some time but now that Ron has become a bit of a political star it’s obviously a bigger deal.