Here is a tip – if you really want to confuse your young child, send them mixed signals. 

Every time I listen to members of the current administration speaking about the states of the economy, I feel like that young, confused child receiving mixed signals from his parents.  Case in point, look what Federal Reserve chairman Bernanke and President Bush were quoted as saying Monday about the current economic situation…

Bernanke

“Well, you hear a lot of loose talk, but let me just … say, as a scholar of the Great Depression — and I’ve written books about the Depression and been very interested in this since I was in graduate school, there’s no comparison,” 

Bush

“I can remember sitting in the Roosevelt Room with Hank Paulson and Ben Bernanke and others, and they said to me that if we don’t act boldly, Mr. President, we could be in a depression greater than the Great Depression,”

President Bush was recalling a conversation between himself, Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson only weeks ago.  During the last two months only negative information has hit the market – housing starts at lows, unemployment rising, credit still unavailable, Citi Group needed Government assistance – so what changed and which is it.  

Is the United States simply in a long, deep recession or is the Nation facing a “depression greater than the Great Depression”

I am not a believe of conspiracy theories, and I have no intent on being cynical, but it almost appears Bernanke and Paulson are giving the “real” information to Bush and trying to keep the public calm by saying “there is nothing to worry about, pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”.  Actually, the ones who are really getting the correct signals are those pulling money out of hedge funds but it even looks like they are starting to have problems getting their money.

Economic information aside, if the administration wants to make public perception of the economic situation any worse, continue to send mixed signals. 

Oh – and for the record – I think Bernanke is right, this has no major comparison to the Great Depression of 1929.  To me it smacks of, and has a direct comparison to, the Long Depression of 1873.

The signs were all around but, apparently, no one was paying attention:

“In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders….

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets — including the New York metropolitan region — will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring….

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980’s.

”From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,” said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ”If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.”

No one, except the New York Times.

There are three major events taking place in the U.S. right now we, as a nation, should be focusing on: The election, the credit crisis and the clean up in Texas after hurricane Ike.  Why, then, does the press focus on….

Clay: I’m gay

Lindsay Lohan: Says she is dating Samantha Ronson

Give us a break! Some say David Blaine’s feat deserves asterisk

These were the major headline on a number of news sites – NOT what is facing America right now.  Seriously, we do we care?  If we are so focused on such crap, we as a nation deserve whatever fate we experience due to our lack of priority.

From very early on I have held the belief that we are not in the middle of a banking collapse, rather we are in the middle of a market correction. It is also important to separate banks that are going under from the likes of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, Lehman and AIG. While all can be tied to the same cause, they fall into three separate categories.

Category 1

The retail banking industry, where you and I have our money, has seen 11 organizations close to date. Closures were directly connected to bad debt and an inability to provide liquidity for all deposits within the bank. It important to note, deposits in such banks are federally insured up to $100,000 per account.

Category 2

The recent bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, a money center bank, falls into the commercial category. They are not a retail bank, nor did they do retail business, which means the government did not need to utilize the Federal bank insurance fund to cover monies. Again, the failure was tied to illiquidity due to bad debt.

Category 3

AIG is neither a retail bank nor a money center bank (brokerage) but an insurance provider to a number of industries, including banking. The liquidity crunch currently facing this organization is due to the insurance underwritten to cover banks debt (both retail and brokerages). No FDIC coverage, no “man on the street” unable to obtain his or her money because of the situation.

Retails banks will continue to fail due to bad debt, and would even fail in good markets due to mismanagement, I think it would be hard to say we have a banking collapse unless people were having difficulty obtaining their money. At that point we would truly be facing a banking collapse, which is why I am concerned to see that the Federal bank insurance fund dwindling and regulators consider options for replenishing it.

From the article:

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., whose insurance fund has slipped below the minimum target level set by Congress, could be forced to tap tax dollars through a Treasury Department loan if Washington Mutual Inc., the nation’s largest thrift, or another struggling rival fails, economists and industry analysts said Tuesday.

Basically, if a large retail bank goes under the FDIC is out of money and needs to find additional funds, most likely in the form of a loan from the treasury. What happens, though, if several large retail banks collapse at the same time?

The FDIC predicts difficulty with one large retail institution; several closings could cause a shortage of funds available to the public. Take it on step further – what if the FDIC cannot obtain the money from the government in order to cover the deposits?

This is what a true banking collapse would be.

Talk about a wild day on Wall St. – Lehman Bro. is on the verge of bankruptcy and Bank of America has agreed to buy Merrill Lynch at $29 / per share, which is a $12 premium over Friday’s close.

Why the buy-out of Merrill and not Lehman?  While Merrill is also facing a number of debt issues, much like Lehman, their assets are considered to be superior to Lehman.  Merrill Lynch has $1.6 trillion in asset management.  Also, this purchase will allow Bank of America the ability to take Merrill’s 49.8% stake in BlackRock which has more than $1 trillion in assets under management.

This means Monday will see the transformation of Wall Street – Lehman will, most likely, go under and Bank of America will purchase the 94 year old institution known as Merrill Lynch.

Not a bad purchase on B o A’s part for $44 Billion.