Daily Kos

Rolling a Hard Six with the Economy

Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:11:00 AM PDT

I usually leave the technical economic stories to more  fiscally knowledgeable editors (and considering the state of my checking account, that would be everyone).  But here's a story on which I feel I can write with equal authority to those who account for every last penny, because in this story no one knows what's going on. Not me.  Not economists.  Not Ben Bernanke.  Not even the investment bankers involved in the story.  Certainly not the government, because -- as part of the worship of free markets -- this is an area that's completely unregulated.  

It's called credit default swaps.  Just defining a credit default swap can be difficult, but here's my best shot.  When you buy one of these things, you're buying a level of protection for an investment.  For example, say someone has some double-yuck rated bonds, and is concerned that these things may soon be worth as much as a Zimbabwean dollar.  With the right credit default swap, you can pay out a small amount over time to ensure that the the bonds still pay out close to face value in case of a default.  So, in a sense, a credit default swap is insurance you buy for a risky investment.  

Originally, these things were used mostly by banks and large bondholders, where they served the purpose of spreading around the threat posed by risky corporate or municipal bonds.  That function is what made Alan Greenspan and meny economists great fans of swaps.

So far credit derivatives have proved a triumph of the financial sector's ingenuity. By dividing the bond market into digestible chunks, they have increased investors' appetite for corporate debt. That may well have lowered the cost of capital—good for the economy, since it should allow companies to invest more over the long run.

But there's a downside to a system that allows more investment on the risky side of town.  Not surprisingly, it promotes more risks.  As the "risky investment" part of most financial institution's portfolios went from molehill to mountain, credit default swaps came along for the ride.  Better still, around the start of this decade, people began to swap the swaps themselves as a new kind of investment.  And to bundle them.  And to sell secondary instruments based on them.  Something like a meta-investment.  Keep in mind that this is a completely unregulated market, so investment banks have been free to get creative in this area.  These are very creative folks.

So, okay.  People started out making pseudo insurance policies for bonds and other investments, then turned those things into another kind of investment.  How big can something this new and this obscure be?  Here's American Public Media's Marketplace to put it in context.

BOB MOON: OK, I'm about to unload some numbers on you here, so I'll speak slowly so you can follow this.

The value of the entire U.S. Treasuries market: $4.5 trillion.

The value of the entire mortgage market: $7 trillion.

The size of the U.S. stock market: $22 trillion.

OK, you ready?

The size of the credit default swap market last year: $45 trillion.

KAI RYSSDAL: That's a lot of money, Bob.

Yes, Bob, more than all the stocks, mortgages, and federal bonds put together seems kind of high.  And here's the scary thing.  Now that we have have so much of our economy's wealth in this odd little instrument that the dollar value would be enough to lay a trail of bills to Saturn and back (Really.  I did the math.), how much are these swaps actually worth?  Answer: nobody knows.  

The original valuations were complex enough.

MOON:  Well, this is where it gets tough, Kai, because a lot of people on Wall Street, even some of the leading economists in the academic world, don't really understand exactly how these things work. A lot of them are whipped up with some computer wizardry, some advanced math -- think of those fancy Greek letters turned on their sides. And there's a lot of guesswork to this, too, about how much they're really worth.

And with all the flux in the rest of the investment world, no one can now tell what's lurking behind all those Deltas and Thetas.  What we have are banks holding paper that they can't value, and system that could come apart like the zipper on a Wal-mart windbreaker.  

The weirdest thing about all this is that credit default swaps in their original form helped to spur the housing bubble by tossing a supposed safety net over bundles of the miserable mortgages banks were handing out, and in their investment form, they don't do anything.  They don't provide money that companies can use to up production or employment.  They don't shore up the banks.  They don't reflect any activity at all.  They just slide back and forth sucking dollars into a froth of pure uncertainty.

[Risk expert] CHRISTOPHER WHALEN: They are the most hideous kind of speculation. To have a federally insured bank like JPMorgan as the largest dealer in this market, to me says we don't know what we're doing anymore, and we don't understand the difference between real work -- real economic activity -- and something that's essentially wasting.

In article after article, credit default swaps are referred to as "gambling."  I take that as an insult.  I'm strictly an amateur gambler, but before I sit down to a blackjack table, I can tell you the odds the house has over me to the tenth of a percent.  A halfway decent poker player knows the odds at almost any given moment.

What the banks are doing isn't gambling.  It's worse.  The Economist was upbeat on credit default swaps and their "benign" affect on the economy only a year ago.  Still, they had their reservations.

But it is in the nature of capitalism to test new ideas to destruction and to use new instruments as the basis of speculative excess. As Mr Roche puts it: "Credit derivatives are like good things to the Catholic Church. If you have too much of them, they're a sin." Nobody will be sure how robust credit derivatives are until they have been tested in a severe economic or financial downturn. And that is not something anyone should wish for.

Bear Sterns was the first pop quiz.  No one is sure when the real exam will start.

  • ::

Tags: Economy, Banking, Credit Default Swaps (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 104 comments

  •  eek. (14+ / 0-)

    The room is so stunned you could hear a pin drop...thats some scary numbers and risk.

    Americans for Effective and Equitable Government www.agilepeople.org

    by try democracy on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:21:43 AM PDT

  •  As they call it in Europa... (7+ / 0-)

    The savage capitalism.

    Hellary and Bull Clinton! DLC: Della Comedia.

    by galliano on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:23:39 AM PDT

    •  Capitalism (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      nathguy

      Without regulation, capitalism is nothing but the law of the jungle.  Only the strongest and most ruthless survive.  That is why it works.

      Probably not well suited to a civilization without substantial regulation.  Which has been very weak for some time now.

  •  This is all part of $500 TRILLION... (15+ / 0-)

    ...Shadow Banking System, which is in the first stages of a total unwinding.  Here is a great article from Bill Gross, head of PIMCO:

    Pyramids Crumbling

    It's going to be a very, very bumpy ride for us little people...

    •  Bill Gross (5+ / 0-)

      is an excellent man.

      "For the love of god learn to think on your own" Me

      by givemhellHarryR on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:27:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Credit Default Swaps = Risk Insurance (5+ / 0-)

      The name Credit Default Swaps hides their true purpose -- to provide insurance against loss in financial derivatives.

      Warren Buffet has called them Weapons of Financial Mass destruction, which is close to the truth. They work as counterparty risk insurance, as long as there isn't any loss; when the system breaks down, then CDS exposure can destroy any company on the wrong side of the bet -- kind of like homeowners insurance after Katrina.

      NakedCapitalism had a good post on the Bear Sterns bailout -- Did the Fed Prevent a Financial Chernobyl?

      http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/...

      In August, the Financial Times FT Alphaville blog published the Kyle Bass Subprime letter -- he said the crisis is the result of the greatest bait and switch of all time. I call it the biggest financial fraud of all time -- Wall Street, with the collusion of the Bond Rating houses, repackaged BBB and BBB- sub prime mortgages into AAA rated securities, and sold them to the rubes. Last Spring, the rubes in European and Asian banks realized they'd been sold shit in a bag, and the financial markets have been in gridlock ever since.

      http://ftalphaville.ft.com/...

      In November, the World Bank issued a report saying this is the worst banking crisis since the 1970's (i.e., since post Vietnam stagflation and the breakdown of Bretton Woods).

      Recently, I've read that this is the worst financial crisis since 1929, and the worst housing crisis since the 1930's.

      On the positive side, there are predictions that the recession could be over by next year -- but I'm not offering any counterparty risk insurance on that bet.

      •  There's been some pretty big fraud in reinsurance (0+ / 0-)

        Reinsurance being wholesale insurance, I guess you could say.  The fraud was swept under the rug by this Bush Justice Dept.  Some Enron style "creative accounting" including offshore banking centers, and perhaps some money laundering involving weapons, too.  (Or so I've heard tell...)

        John McCain voted against health care for kids.

        by Land of Enchantment on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 12:38:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  bear stearns wasn't "bailed out" (0+ / 0-)

        it was rolled up to erase evidence.  BS was a market maker just like Enron, not a buyer or a seller.  JP Morgan and CITIGROUP were the major players on that market.  What would you do if you were buying and selling illegal stuff on ebay and got wind that new sherrif is coming to town?!  that's right: you fold up the operation.

    •  it's part of the 586 trillion (0+ / 0-)

      OTC derivatives market, about which Buffet said they are financial WMDs.

  •  This whole economic crisis was engineered (17+ / 0-)

    in my view.

    At the larger scale it's about shoring up the transfer of wealth that occurred over the last 30 years. It's Bush and DLC brand elitists giving the world a reason why the wealth can't be transferred back to the people it was stolen from.

    At the scale of the construction/real estate industry... it's about transferring property to the wealthy... about giving the top 1% the opportunity to buy up urban and suburban real estate... and then either lease/rent it out.

    It's about destroying any semblance of an "ownership based economy."

    Fewer and fewer Americans making under $100,000 a year will be owning their own homes.

    We'll be beholden to landlords; that's what I think this is about.

    In most of our major cities, nobody but the super-wealthy can own property anymore.

    And that's not a healthy society.

  •   No one is sure when the real exam will start. (9+ / 0-)

    I believe we are at the beginning of it. I just hope our nation can survive this test.

    Let the ga,es begin.

    If you see me behind you..don't assume I'm following you. We just happen to be going the same way and if you slow down, I'll run over your ass.

    by TKH on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:26:00 AM PDT

  •  I am a very good mood today so... (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    ...I won't say anything about the following:

    are like good things to the Catholic Church. If you have too much of them, they're a sin

    Oh my! But you know what I am thinking about...

    Hellary and Bull Clinton! DLC: Della Comedia.

    by galliano on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:26:02 AM PDT

  •  CDS always confuse me. (4+ / 0-)

    No model to gage fair value so a lot of complications arise.  One counterparty says its worth this much the other says this much.  Causing liquidity issues.

    "For the love of god learn to think on your own" Me

    by givemhellHarryR on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:26:46 AM PDT

  •  Nicely done.... (4+ / 0-)

    I like any explanation that grades on a curve: I don't know what credit swaps are, but neither does anyone else.  Or rather, some people know what they are, as in a definition dictionary, but they don't know the risk and benefit of any particular investment, and still buy them.

    "For a man who will turn 72 this month, he's a surprisingly immature politician--erratic, impulsive and subject to peer pressure"-Newsweek.

    by Inland on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:27:51 AM PDT

  •  They need to back off the economic stimulus (6+ / 0-)

    unless they can find a way to do it without going into further debt, like legalizing marijuana, or mandating all passenger cars be electric by 2020. Otherwise this is like giving amphetamine to a sick patient.

    McCain's 3AM ad is really a Flomax commercial.

    by jhecht on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:29:51 AM PDT

  •  Some sick mf'ers are allowing this (4+ / 0-)

    to happen.  The 'gamblers' are creating more risk for all of us when this collapses.

    I feel like we're all living in a wooden ship being eaten by termites -- even a small wave can disintegrate our vessel and drop us into shark-infested waters.  

    Investigate! Impeach! Indict! Incarcerate!

    by Cato come back on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:33:44 AM PDT

  •  Definitions (9+ / 0-)

    the dollar value would be enough to lay a trail of bills to Saturn and back

    Optimist - one who believes the distance quoted is when Saturn is closest to the earth

    Pessimist - one who believes the distance quoted is when Saturn is farthest from the earth

  •  Jefferson County, Ala. didn't know either (8+ / 0-)

    yet they were convinced to engage in swaps with their sewer bonds. That, along with their variable rate bonds, have driven us to bankruptcy. If it can't be explained in a way that a high school graduate can understand, then you just shouldn't do it.

    "Maybe life's meaning is not so much found, as it is made." Opus, by Berke Breathed

    by Lisa in Bama on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:35:54 AM PDT

  •  Bush Approval, Consumer Confidence Hit New Lows (6+ / 0-)

    Three new surveys released Friday document the steep descent of President Bush, and with him, the American economy. While Bush's approval rating reached a new low of 28% in the AP poll, three quarters of economists surveyed by the Wall Street Journal believe that the United States is in a recession that has yet to hit bottom. So it comes as no surprise that American consumer confidence spiraled down to its lowest level in 26 years.

    For the details, see:
    "Bush Approval, Consumer Confidence Hit New Lows."

  •  Not scared yet? We damned well should be. (4+ / 0-)

    But go ahead, buy at the bottom...what could possibly go wrong from here?  Yes, that's a rhetorical question (especially when you've provided such an eloquent response already).

    "Jiminy God!" --Larry Craig, on the shocking notion that anyone might think he was gay

    by rlamoureux on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:36:27 AM PDT

  •  I recommend an excellent Fresh Air interview (7+ / 0-)

    Terry Gross hosted law professor Michael Greenberger on the April 3 show to explain the sub-prime mortgage crisis.  Credit defaults were a major focus of the interview; he likened them to bets.

    Greensberger noted that there were efforts to regulate these things, but a little-known rider that Phil Graham attached to a 1999 omnibus bill put them out of reach.  He offered "consolation" to those of us bewildered by such financial instruments by observing that the investment bankers obviously have little understanding of their implications, either.  He was not optimistic for the near future.

    A streaming download of the interview is available here.  I found Greengerger's explanation easy to follow, illuminating, and scary.

  •  I Heard This on NPR, Too... (16+ / 0-)

    ...what really made an impression on me is the idea that the stock market is based on guys sitting around computers making bets on investments.  

    Not making investments.

    Not starting new businesses.

    Not making new innovations.

    Making bets on investments.

    Well, at least the idea of privatizing Social Security into the stock market is dead.  But imagine.

    If the Kapitologists had had their way, our investments would all be Enronized.  It's bad enough...and who knows how bad?

    Support the Netroots Candidates! A VETO-PROOF majority in 2008!!!

    by InquisitiveRaven on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:39:30 AM PDT

  •  There IS some real stuff (7+ / 0-)

    Like land, oil, arable, fertile land with it's own water supply.... Rebundling ten crap investments together to make one big, good investment has about run it's course, I suspect. I remember reading a few years back that if you took the valuation of every actual thing on ye old Momster Earth - land, water, oil, minerals, buildings etc. - the amount of so-called "money" floating around in financial derivitives was 37 times higher than the value of everything that actually exists in this here "reality" of ours. Cash that check, Bucky - even the brown acid was better than "Republican reality...."

    "The main enemy of the open society in no longer the communist but the capitalist threat."- George Soros

    by David Mason on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:42:03 AM PDT

  •  As an armchair Marxist (6+ / 0-)

    I'm real tempted to start a "Marx 101 for Kossacks" diary series after November.

    I figure I'd be sister souljaed if I tried it before then.

    ---
    Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

    by VelvetElvis on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:43:38 AM PDT

  •  One part of the solution (8+ / 0-)

    We go back to basics. We invest in infrastructure, like FDR did during the 30's. We make it easier for startups and entrepreneurs to take advantage of that infrastructure, and we start throwing those responsible for this mess to the wolves.

    Do Pavlov's dogs chase Schroedinger's cat?

    by corwin on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:45:53 AM PDT

    •  There is no solution, corwin (5+ / 0-)

      I'm sorry, Corwin, but that would work only if we had the supply of cheap oil that we had in 1930. There is a thermodynamic foundation to debt repudiation and peak oil is about to kick in with a will - we get knocked down by this financial stuff, and peak oil knocks us back down each time we try to stand, and there will always be climate change stuff creeping up on us.

       George Monbiot predicts we'll "fight like cats in a sack". I think that is starting ... this funny money will go up in a puff of smoke and it's only a matter of time before one of the European governments calls bullshit on what is happening. I think this comes down before the election - they don't want another neocon fucktard in the office, or worse yet a semi-senile neocon sock puppet named John ...

  •  America's engine: Kapitalism (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, JG in MD, Stranded Wind

    Brooks on PBS the day the Clintons released their income tax:
    Lehrer: Do you think people will resent the news?
    Brooks: People never resent people making money.

    Hey, he must have a point since we have so many millionaires at the White House and in Congress. I am the only one who does NOT have at least one of them among his friends. What's wrong with me?

    Hellary and Bull Clinton! DLC: Della Comedia.

    by galliano on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:48:32 AM PDT

  •  One-tenth of one percent? (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    I thought basic strategy gives the house 1/2 of one percent advantage. Not that it helps me, I lost fifty bucks in Tahoe last week anyway.

  •  Prices are information (6+ / 0-)

    And when they don't give any information, the price is effectively nothing, 'cause the things they're for can't be sold.

    All the criticisms of communism--production suffers because prices don't reflect value--are true about this market now.

    "Oaths bind not an ill man. Were I minded to do you ill, then lightestly would I swear any oath you desire, and lightestly in the next moment be forsworn."

    by jbelac on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:52:28 AM PDT

  •  What Would Happen (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, StrayCat, Stranded Wind

    I know this is absurd, but what if they just declared that the value of the swaps is zero? Nada. Zip. Take it off your books, bye-bye.

    What would it do to the balance sheets?

    I no longer read The New York Times for the news, I read it for the lie. --Chalmers Johnson

    by JG in MD on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:55:05 AM PDT

    •  That wasn't clear (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      greenearth, StrayCat, Stranded Wind

      I meant take it off both sides. No reduction in holdings, a wash, no effect. Forget the question about the balance sheet. Just start over.

      I no longer read The New York Times for the news, I read it for the lie. --Chalmers Johnson

      by JG in MD on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:56:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Problem is - there is no "one side" (5+ / 0-)

        the guy who "bought" the swap did so because he owned some of this crap paper. If both sides of the swap walk away, then the guy holding the crappy paper is, well holding the crappy paper with no one to give it to.

        Bigger problem is that all financial houses run on what is called "mark to market" accounting on their trading desks. If I bought the swap for $1.00 and sold it for $1.05, there is a $.05 gain on my earnings statement and balance sheet. If this swap has been sold 50 times, there may be 75 cents of profits on peoples balance sheets versus the $1.00 initial value. And don't forget, these guys taking the 5 cent profit may be leveraged 20 times - that 5 cent profit equals their entire capitalization.

        I'll walk 100 miles knocking on doors for my Dem candidate - Anna Lord for Colo HD21 - will you?

        by tjlord on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:16:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  You could kiss the balance sheets good bye. (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      greenearth, JG in MD, Stranded Wind

      However, that might be the most sane thing to do, provided that the declaration of swaps=0 is coordinated with the creation of a national industrial and commercial bank. Such a bank would have the limited mission to provide loans to commercial enterprises so that they could continue to produce the goods and services that people need, even though the current banking system has pretty much abdicated that function.

      We cannot win a war crime - Dancewater, July 27, 2008

      by unclejohn on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:06:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  DR Expense, CR Bal Sheet (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      greenearth, JG in MD, Stranded Wind

      My Karma just ran over your Dogma

      by FoundingFatherDAR on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:06:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  $750 trillion disappears instantly (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      0hio, greenearth, JG in MD

      This article doesn't cover it all - the global real estate is worth $75 trillion, global GDP is $50 trillion, and there is $750 trillion in derivatives out there, of which CDS are only a fraction.

       Value that stuff for what it is worth and the Great Depression is a little pipsqueak compared to what we get. The bad news? It will come apart, and come apart very soon ...

  •  they call them bubbles (4+ / 0-)

    for a reason, a shiny irridescent package surrounding thin air, that disappears upon its first contact with reality.  We've been trained to buy bubbles since forever, we never seem to lose our childlike fascination with them, but we do seem to forget the more realistic reaction to their bursting when we were young.  Anyone remember how a baby screams at the loss of the bubble?

    I have never understood economic theory.  In an old joke, I remember the punch line is 'assume a can opener'.   Great for theory.  But in life, you can't assume the can opener.   And in the end, value comes down to tangibles (why certain tangibles have more value than others depends on intangibles, but that should not be conflated with intangibles have economic value).  And its so obvious that  so much of what is traded now and has been for a long time, isn't tangible.

    These are classic pyramids, snake oil sales gimmics, something for nothing isn't real.  But we grab at the bubbles anyhow.  And now a few cynical people own all the real things and have all the economic value.  Shell games work.

  •  When I Took Economics (5+ / 0-)

    I got as far as externalities.

    The professor started listing the things that weren't counted as important, I screamed bloody murder, we agreed to disagree, but it sparked a low seethe that's burned to this day.

    I no longer read The New York Times for the news, I read it for the lie. --Chalmers Johnson

    by JG in MD on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:59:32 AM PDT

  •  Spreading the risk (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, JG in MD, Stranded Wind

    The numbers sound scary but the whole financial system would have to have a complete meltdown, meaning a large portion of home loans would default, a large portion of corporate bonds would default, a large portion of commercial loans would default, etc. etc.  Also the risk is spread over the whole world, Chinese banks, EC banks, Sovereign Wealth Funds, which means the whole world will be in deep sh-it if the above happens.  So as long as the world economy functions at near positive or negative growth, + or - 2 percent or so, the probability of a major percentage of defaults happening on the underlying bonds are remote.  However, the problem is that certain segments of these default swaps, like the current mortgage default situation in the U.S. is hampering the ability of banks to package loans for resale on the secondary markets making loans less available for consumers and it is spreading to the commercial real estate market here in the U.S.  If it can be contained to the U.S. which so far it has with the exception of some mortgages in the U.K., we may get by, with some pain in the U.S. but without bringing down the rest of the planet's lending system.  Time will tell.
     
     
     
     

     
     
     

  •  I read thru the whole post... (4+ / 0-)

    as if I am getting it. I am more confused now. I did not know this economy stuff can be scarry.

    Just tell me when it is time to duck.  I live in a corn country and heck, I will start hanging out with the pooties in the field summer comes. Corn a day will be a blessed season.

    "I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters" Solomon Short

    by RedMask on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:03:41 AM PDT

  •  The big problem of valuation is that (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    they are based on probabilities. The risk (and value) of the investment is frequently calculated as VaR - Value at Risk. Some interesting math is involved but the basic premise is - what is the most the value can change within a certain period (normally seven or thirty days) that this sucker can move

    given the probability curve I assumed

    . The VaR is normally calculated for the 95% or 97.5% risk.

    However, if you have a probability that is not your normal distribution - the "bell curve" all our seventh grade teachers aspired to - but rather a "right tailed" curve - you know the one where the upper end risk sort of just trails off to forever, then the risk after 95% can be double or triple that of the stuff inside the 95%.

    So, just remember, when these financial gurus are telling you what their risks are, they are guesses and only guesses of what they expect to happen.

    Or, to make an analogy, the US financial market and these risks we are facing has all the certainty of a weather forecast. Have a nice day

    I'll walk 100 miles knocking on doors for my Dem candidate - Anna Lord for Colo HD21 - will you?

    by tjlord on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:10:42 AM PDT

  •  http://theautomaticearth.blogspot.com (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    0hio, EdlinUser, dharmafarmer, greenearth

    That one, it is the chronicle of the downfall. Lots of source articles and the editors' comments on what they mean. I don't look anywhere else for financial stuff ... if it's important Stoneleigh and Ilargi find it and cover it.

  •  do you hit your 12 against the dealers 2? (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind, maxxdogg

    if you're not counting cards that is or using a plus minus system. The saddest part is that these investors have every mechanism at their disposal to play the odds and they have, instead, split face cards. I think the house just showed a 6 and got 21.  Too bad it will be my kid who pays for it.

  •  So (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    ...in their investment form, they don't do anything.  They don't provide money that companies can use to up production or employment.  They don't shore up the banks.  They don't reflect any activity at all.  They just slide back and forth sucking dollars into a froth of pure uncertainty.

    Credit default swaps = tulip bulbs?  Once investors realize they don't actually do anything, how long will it take for them to realize that they're worthless, just like the tulip bulbs in Holland 400 years ago?

    -5.13,-5.64; When pygmies cast such long shadows, it must be very late in the day. -Gian-Carlo Rota

    by gizmo59 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:17:26 AM PDT

    •  no, the design was that I could own the (4+ / 0-)

      upside of the fact this guy was paying more interest than the rest of the market and someone else was taking the risk that they would default. In other words, it made me more willing to take a risk the guy would go under - the problem was the people selling the insurance all of a sudden realized more of their insurance had to pay out than they expected. This is really like a $45 trillion insurance default.

      I'll walk 100 miles knocking on doors for my Dem candidate - Anna Lord for Colo HD21 - will you?

      by tjlord on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:20:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Who Holds The CDS (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    So, who wrote CDS? Do they have enough liquidity to cover default? How do we know the people who took the risk can't eat it?

  •  we fear what we do not understand (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    JG in MD, Stranded Wind, ppl can fly

    we fear cds' as our ancients feared lightning and thunder.

    We fear lightning today, but that fear is based on knowledge of what a lightning strike can do, how it works and when the conditions are favorable. Our ancients feared it because they did not understand it.

    There is reason to fear cds'. But the reason is not that the notional on CDS contracts are in the trillions.  Notionals on Interest Rate Swaps are many times that number.

    It has become fashionable, even for smart people who presumably deal with them daily (Christopher whalen) to decry the dangers of default swaps.

    But hell, I have no clue about the engine of the car i drive everyday. Sometimes, neither does my mechanic - he needs to plug it into a computer to figure it out.

    Am I supposed to be scared of my car?

  •  Deviltower? Your post have given me.... (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind

    a headache. Sometimes ignorance may not be a bad thing. (snark).

    I think, therefore I am. I think. Yup. Back to original signature. Thanks a lot, JRE.

    by mcmom on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:30:07 AM PDT

  •  Our Confusing Economy, Explained (5+ / 0-)

    Try this (excellent)..

    Our Confusing Economy, Explained

    Listen Now [39 min 8 sec] add to playlist

    Fresh Air from WHYY, April 3, 2008

    Perplexed by the U.S. economy? You're not alone. Law professor Michael Greenberger joins Fresh Air to explain the sub-prime mortgage crisis, credit defaults, the shaky future of other types of loans and what we can expect from the U.S. financial markets.
    Greenberger is a professor at the University of Maryland School of Law and the director of the University's Center for Health and Homeland Security.
    http://www.npr.org/...

    This time it's personal.

    by apostrophe on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:33:53 AM PDT

  •  Gold (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth, Stranded Wind, RomeyDa

    Always thought the gold bugs were a little wacky, but I must confess that it may turn out to be the only hedge nowadays.  Even cash, especially if it's dollars, isn't safe.

  •  Don't worry, Devilstower: (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    greenearth

    this country is Too Big To Fail!  Of course, as a cost of continuing as a going concern, it may have to sell some assets ... like its citizens ... so I wouldn't make too many nasty comments about Zimbabwe if I were you.  Soon, you may be indentured to Mugabe.

    John McCain's Court will overturn Roe; don't kid yourself.

    by Seneca Doane on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:52:33 AM PDT

  •  Derivatives is what brought down Enron (3+ / 0-)

    I did a diary on this some time back here.

     I think the derivative market is scaring Wall Street more than anything else. Derivatives brought down LTCM in 1998.

    "A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." - Edward Abbey

    by gjohnsit on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 12:03:44 PM PDT

  •  The numbers are not quite as bad as they seem (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    JG in MD, ppl can fly

    You have to take these total numbers for derivatives with a grain of salt. When you see numbers like 500 trillion or whatever it is referring to the "notional" amount of the trade. The actual value at risk may be significantly less than the notional.

    Let me give an example. Let's say you sell a CDS on $10 million notional on Bear Stearns. If Bear goes bankrupt, you do have to pay the $10 million to the buyer of protection, BUT the buyer has to send the seller $10 million worth of "notional" Bear Stearns bonds. Now these Bear Stearns bonds will not likely be worthless since creditors get paid in bankruptcy before equity holders. So odds are that the bonds will be worth something like 60 or 70 cents on the dollar. That effectively means that the buyer of protection sends the seller bonds that are worth 6 or 7 million to get the $10 million cash in "insurance". Net there is only a $3 million effective exchange on the $10 million notional.

    Because of this, if you see something like 100 billion in notional on CDS it probably means something more like 35 billion in actual risk to the sellers. So the numbers are bad, but not quite as bad as they seem on the surface.

    The other thing worth mentioning is that it is not very likely at all that all CDSs will come due at or around the same time. If that happens we are talking about bankruptcy of the entire US economy and we are going to have lots bigger things to worry about than CDS defaults.

    Bottom line, there is probably more risk in these markets than is prudent but don't move to Antarctica in fear quite yet.

    •  Nice explanation, Loudo (0+ / 0-)

      True, what you say.

      There's another couple of angles to it:

      A lot of the banks that write these CDSs hedge themselves by selling the underlying bonds short. That means even if they lose money on the CDSs, they make money when the bonds go down. So they are covered, or partially covered for the loss. This is just "arbitrage" -- finding positions where you can make a small amount of money by taking advantage of inefficient pricing.

      Diversification. They write CDSs on a wide range of bonds. They get to keep the money (like insurance premiums) on the ones that don't default. And, as you pointed out, they get to keep the wreck (think car insurance) when the defaulter goes bankrupt, and it's not worth nothing. So, essentially, just like an insurance company, the winners (good drivers) pay for the losers (suicidal drivers).

      In other words, the proponents of CDSs are not wrong when they say these instruments essentially help to disperse risk.

      The overall risk is the same as it ever was: the companies that issued the bonds go bankrupt.

      This is not to say that they may not cause widespread dislocation of the financial system: when a counterparty (eg bank that wrote the CDS) defaults, someone who thought he had insurance finds out that he doesn't; and he goes bust; and his creditors lose out; and so on.

      But there's always been dislocation when poorly rated companies go bankrupt (usually during recessions).

      Let's not get carried away by the huge apparent amount of "notionals".

  •  What is a credit default swap(CDS)? (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    nathguy
    A credit default is an insurance policy written against debt issued by a country, company, or pool of assets such as mortgages.

    It works pretty much the same way as your car insurance. You pay a fee every month to your counterparty if the country, company, or pool of assets default then your counterparty covers your losses.

    It allows financial institutions to better managed credit default risk exposure of countries, companys, or pools of assets.

    The real problem with CDS is counterparty risk. Counterparty risk is the risk that the counterparty would be unwilling or unable to pay in the event of default.

    You have counterparty risk with your insurance policy as well. What if you get into a car accident and your insurance company is unable or unwilling to pay your claim. To avoid this situation the goverment regulates insurance companies to make sure that they can cover the claims of the insurance that they sell.

    The problem with the CDS market is that their isn't much regulation. When you enter into a CDS with your counterparty, there is no way to know how much exposure your counterparty has to other CDS. This is what happen with Bear Sterns all of a sudden people decided they didn't want Bear Sterns as a counterparty. So they were unable to stay in business.

  •  Greenspan's Body Count (0+ / 0-)

    Greenspan's Body Count hit 11 today.

  •  Clear, lively, forceful writing. (1+ / 0-)

    Recommend