Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

“We Were Programmed to Crash”

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 08:14 PM
Original message
“We Were Programmed to Crash”
Here is another name they do not teach you in American history, Albert H. Wiggin. Head of Chase National Bank in the 1920s, he set up dummy companies in the name of family members so that he could short sell his own company’s stock, i.e. bet that his own bank’s stock would go down in value. This made him millions of dollars during the banking crises that rocked the nation between 1929-1232. Try to imagine how easy it would be for the guy in charge of a bank to bet that his own company’s stock would take a dive (in someone else’s name, of course) and then leak some “bad news” so that the stock would take that dive just as he predicted. And it was all legal at the time. That was before FDR was elected and Ferdinand Pecora held his public hearings which exposed the immoral, greedy practices of America’s bankers---or banksters as TIME magazine dubbed them.

When the 1929 crash occurred, Wiggin was put in charge of propping up the bank’s share price. But he used his private firms to take out loans from the bank with which to bet against the stock. During the darkest period of the crash, September through November, he made more than $4 million.


http://articles.latimes.com/2002/feb/22/news/mn-29290

More on Wiggin at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Wiggin

Note that he never paid for his crimes. Instead, the FDR administration attempted to put a stop to the practice of insiders manipulating the price of their own company’s stock, wrecking havoc with the finances of mom and pop investors and costing employees their jobs, all for the sake of a few more million dollars that they did not really need.

For those like me who do not have economic degrees, here is a link to the wiki entry for short selling .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_(finance)

As a result of the Pecora Commission, the SEC was created and rules were passed governing investing in this country. Here is a description of that process from Pecora’s point of view.

In a 1965 interview, Ferdinand Pecora recalled how he, Corcoran, James Landis and Benjamin Cohen had drafted Section 16 as "the anti-Wiggin section," named after Albert H. Wiggin, who headed the Chase Manhattan Bank from 1921 to 1933. Pecora recalled how Wiggin had testified that he short-sold Chase National Bank stock that he didn't own but expected to repurchase at a lower price, and thereby took a profit through six different private investment corporations he had established. One of them had taken a profitable position with Sinclair Oil and Refining Company at a time when Sinclair had a large line of credit with Chase Bank. The securities trading abuses of such people, said Pecora, "were the reason that we drafted
of the Act, as we burnt the midnight oil."(10)
Over the next five decades, the SEC promoted a securities law regime meant to ensure that all parties to stock market transactions had roughly equal access to material information about the company in which they were trading. To that end, the principal goals of the federal acts were to protect individual investors engaged in stock transactions, and to assure broad public confidence in the integrity of the stock market. Yet the common law of fraud and the soon-to-be-created theories of insider trading would conflict as the SEC developed and administered a regime of securities law meant to promote those goals in a sophisticated and growing national market.


http://www.sechistorical.org/museum/galleries/insiderTrading/fullDisclosure_a.php



I finally found a photo of Pecora! That is him on the left. If you want to know why Pecora is now my favorite Depression era reformer, please read my recent journal here:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/McCamy%20Taylor/300

One of the regulations meant to keep insiders from driving down the prices of their own company’s stock so that they could sell short at will to make a quick million whenever they felt like it was called the “uptick rule”. The “uptick rule” is another one of the FDR Era regulations which the Heritage Foundations was talking about when they said that they wanted to roll this country back to the days of Herbert Hoover. They succeeded. The Bush administration got rid of this safeguard last year---with predictable results.


The uptick rule is fairly simple.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/uptickrule.asp

A former rule established by the SEC that requires that every short sale transaction be entered at a price that is higher than the price of the previous trade. This rule was introduced in the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as Rule 10a-1. The uptick rule prevents short sellers from adding to the downward momentum when the price of an asset is already experiencing sharp declines. The SEC eliminated the rule on July 6, 2007.


Why did the SEC do that? Maybe because it allowed for things like this:

“Short sellers have an incentive to spread bad news about companies whose shares they have sold short,” said Jay Baris a partner at the law firm of Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel.
Many blamed short selling and attendant rumors for the Bear Stearns collapse several months ago. After the firm first announced that two of its hedge funds were in trouble, rumors began circulating that the situation was worse than the firm had led on, and clients pulled their money out of the firm. Merrill and Lehman suffered similar fates after word got out that their numbers were starting to decline.
Soon after the Bear Stearns crisis, many executives as well as regulators said there were several rumors circulating throughout the industry and blamed short sellers for starting the rumors to drive Bear Stearns’ price down.
The SEC conducted an investigation into rumors in general and filed one case so far, which it settled in April. The Commission charged Paul Berliner, a former trader with Schottenfeld Group, a hedge fund with sending out a false rumor soon after The Blackstone Group announced its acquisition of Alliance Data Systems. The rumor stated that Blackstone was negotiating a lower price than was announced. Despite that case, the regulator has not filed any other cases in that area.
“It’s not an easy thing to go after,” Baris said. “There is no fool-proof way to deal with it.”


http://www1.cchwallstreet.com/ws-portal/content/news/container.jsp?fn=09-24-08

Recall that Bears Sterns was acquired by Morgan---with lots of financial help from us, the taxpayer. And the two financial firms which Henry Paulson seems determined to protect through the $700 bailout and the recent ban on all short selling of financial stock are Morgan (which we all know has ties to the Bush family that go all the way back to the attempted coup against FDR and their joint work for Hitler) and Paulson’s own Goldman Sachs.

If you have real power you can precipitate a real panic. Last week, John McCain and George W. Bush staged a coordinated attack on the stock market, declaring that we would see collapse, crisis, panic on Monday if Congress did not pass a massively unpopular bailout bill. Those of us who used to watch the market falter every time Independent Pornographer Ken Starr announced that he had more dirt on Clinton and then watch it rally every time Clinton’s rating held strong know that the executive branch has more effect on Wall Street than almost anything else. Yesterday, right on cue, the market dropped 777 points. Today, it regained much of that, proof that yesterday was a phony panic, all sound and fury signifying nothing, since nothing has changed except that savvy investors are snatching up stocks at bargain prices. After the real Stock Market Crash, prices did not rise again for decades. Why would Bush and McCain cause a trillion dollars (on paper) loss of money for American investors? Because their buddies at Goldman Sachs and Morgan are planning to hold their breaths and turn blue until they get their financial bailout.

You thought I was kidding yesterday, when I wrote in my journal that we were programmed to crash? No, I was quite serious. I was already gathering the documentation that I needed to write this journal. A stock market crash can be very profitable---if you plan ahead and bet that the market will crash or if you want to snatch up a rival company or if you want Congress to pass an unpopular law.


“I think as far I can remember we were programmed to crash….”
Douglas Adams The Restaurant at the End of the Universe


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
1. Has anyone in Congress said we should restore the uptick rule? NT
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ellenfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
2. exactly why bushco is trying to start a panic, not doing
as any other leader might do to calm fears. he MUST go or at least be made impotent.

ellen fl
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is why it is infuriating to hear OBAMA and the DEM LEADERSHIP screaming that we need to do
this bailout RIGHT NOW. These are not dumb people. Why would they play along in this absurd scam? Somebody please help me with this.

Thanks for the thread, McAmy.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Combination of politics & Wall Street cash to all parties?
Hmmmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacetalksforall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:29 PM
Response to Original message
4. This was very helpful and I mostly understood it. Thanks for the clarity.
Hope it will be discussed. Yesterday, I was virtually all teared up because I did not have enough information to reach that point where I thought I could smell conspiracy or the fire of an ending of something. All I felt was loss. We are losing something and we don't know what exactly, whether we'll ever find it again, or if the loss would mean more loss. And I felt so sad.

Usually these criminals are working behind the scenes while citizens take care of their s's -serial tv, sports, shopping, and snoozing from too many jobs to do or too many jobs and duties completed. Now they are out in the open, more or less, begging us to let them steal more from us twice. Now we can see their crummy faces and hear their high pitched voices play acting while we learn once again that George is never going to get his A in Performing Arts.

So all I was capable of doing was watching the drama and now you are helping with the nuts and bolts. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
6. No Bail Out without REGULATION
We can't afford to do this every 10 years
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Regulation and Equity.
The government should get shares for the companies they bailout. It is what any other investor would get. If Bill Gates wanted to spend a billion on a bank to help it out, he would get ownership. Any legislator that votes for a bailout that doesn't give equity is either culpable or ignorant. Any legislator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Shallah Kali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. Regulation restored before anything else is done. Period.
I don't trust those guys as far as I could kick 'em so re-regulation should take place before any other action is taken. I totally agree about equity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #11
14. Not only should regulation
be in the language of the bill, Democrats should insist on a public declaration that there will be no Executive Signing Statement. bush has used these over and over to avoid having to comply with any laws passed. He needs this bill. Don't screw up and let him weasel out of whatever minor fixes we put in.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 09:15 AM
Response to Reply #14
15. Yup, yup and YUP!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadrasT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. I really appreciate your thoughful and thorough posts.
We are being played. No doubt in my mind.

Now... what the hell do we DO about it? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 05:42 AM
Response to Reply #8
13. Ask the Dems for an economic stimulus bill to help mortgage holders, to extend unemployment
Edited on Wed Oct-01-08 05:42 AM by McCamy Taylor
benefits, to aid those whose health insurance is not adequate to cover their medical crises and to help those who are strapped to cover college tuition for kids already enrolled who are making good grades.

Pay for this emergency spending package by immediately doing what health insurance companies do---pay drug companies a reduced fee for drugs under Medicare. If Blue Cross Blue Shield gets Mevacor for 25 cents on the dollar, Medicare gets the same discount. Every company that buys in bulk gets a discount. Medicare should be the same. This will save elderly consumers money out of pocket since half the year they pay for their own drugs due to the donut (later, Congress can get around the fixing the donut) and it will immediately slash the Medicare budget, freeing up funds for the projects above.

A strong middle class with security and confidence is what we need going into the holiday season. If Bush vetoes the bill, then this will ensure Obama's win.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jakes Progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 09:54 PM
Response to Original message
9. Lester Thurow
wrote about the Zero-Sum society. Money is not lost in the stock market. A person or investment entity may lose money, but it didn't disappear. It didn't cease to exist. Someone else got it. So if you and your neighbors lose your 401K, the money isn't non-existent. It just exists in someone else's account. Those people manipulate the stocks, the media, the politicians, and eventually - us. As you said :

"A stock market crash can be very profitable---if you plan ahead and bet that the market will crash or if you want to snatch up a rival company or if you want Congress to pass an unpopular law."

Yesterday the market dropped 777 points (should it be 666?) Today, a few people became even more wealthy because of that drop.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. Thank you and on the uptick rule...HR 6517 would require the
Securities and Exchange Commission to reinstate the uptick rule on short sales of securities.

Yesterday morning on CNBC the banner read "Citi Takes Wachovia" the consolidation of wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands is scary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dystopian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Sep-30-08 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
12. KandR
Your posts never cease to amaze me...Thank you for your intense research.
Impressive!

peace~
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 10:04 AM
Response to Original message
16. ...
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberalla Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 10:34 AM
Response to Original message
17. Kick!
Thank you!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 12:51 PM
Response to Original message
18. Kick...CNBC said they are talking about reinstating the uptick
rule.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D-Lee Donating Member (457 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
19. Great post! Please cover the "mark to market" issue ...
As others have said, thank you for your great posts!

I would enjoy your perspective on undoing the "mark to market" rule and whether that revision would be wise ...

The uptick rule was a great protection and thanks for tracking its rationale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 03:04 PM
Response to Original message
20. Thank you ... for keeping us intelligently informed -- !!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
21. Invaluable. Thanks for posting this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Celebration Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 05:15 PM
Response to Original message
22. naked short selling was allowed
Not only did they short Bear Stearns and Lehman, and take them down, they didn't even have to borrow the stock, because the SEC refused to enforce the rule against naked short selling (that is selling shares without even borrowing them). What a racket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bbgrunt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
23. thanks. k n r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Oct-01-08 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Dude what are you smoking? Obama is a moderate Dem. Socialist Workers have said so.
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=14372

Both Clinton and Obama are backed by huge corporate interests and depend on these to finance their campaigns.

On all the major issues concerning the US and world politics, Clinton and Obama agree far more than they differ.


I realize that a lot of left wing Democrats took one look at Obama and decided that he just had to be a leftist, too, because he was half African. This was, of course (pardon my French) bullshit. Obama is a moderate to progressive Democrat and that is what he has always been. Biology is not destiny. Blacks can have any political ideology they choose.

If you signed up for his campaign thinking that you were joining the Revolution, you need to unsign yourself and go down to the Communist Party here:

http://www.cpusa.org/

They will be glad to have you. They are a scrappy little party that can always use a few new members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poseidan Donating Member (630 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. the guy is a republican troll
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 03:10 AM
Response to Original message
26. This looks like a good read for tomorrow.
I'm bookmarking it for later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Irish Girl Donating Member (265 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 03:15 AM
Response to Original message
27. There is no loyalty to our country in this administration
Edited on Thu Oct-02-08 03:16 AM by coincidenceor...
The crooks on the Hill have repeatedly made decisions which are not in the best interests of preserving and sustaining our nation over the long term. Their interests lay outside our boundaries, motivated by what's most profitable, and each decision has systematically chipped away at our infrastructure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
conspirator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 05:07 AM
Response to Original message
29. Programmed? Like in a Ponzi scheme? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Or like how they steal/control elections or MSM ?
Can they create an artificial reality in the stock market? I posted this last night:

Can the puppeteers control daily stock market results like they steal elections?
... to make it look like we are in worse shape than we are?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3522021&mesg_id=3522129

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
30. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
31. Thanks... wish I'd seen this in time to rec it.
I first read about the uptick rule earlier today... on youtube of all places!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ann_american2004 Donating Member (480 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-02-08 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
32. Bookmarking this
Thanks McCamy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-08 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
34. Kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elehhhhna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-08 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
35. The SEC eliminated the rule on July 6, 2007. Day before Bush's birthday.
Gift from the SEC to him & itsself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moodforaday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-08 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
36. kick for visibility
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Karenina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. bttt!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BelgianMadCow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-03-08 01:08 PM
Response to Original message
38. You write it up pretty well without the economics degree! Rec'd for Douglas Adams alone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC