The origin and some valid complaints behind the Occupy movement

Eric Bates of The Rolling Stone gives a balanced and adult assessment of the origin and momentum behind the Occupy movement in this clip. The bespectacled co-host Joe is clearly annoyed nay even threatened by the “nebulous” movement as evidenced by his sarcasm, crossed arms and embarrassing demenor which runs away from a weighty discussion to a gushing adoration of Keith Richards. A dead give away for light-weight thinking is to sarcastically reject those highlighting legitimate complaints with high school-banter from the comfy chairs, powdered nose and manicure of a warm studio.  You can view the clip here or below:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Occupy movement cuts a broad swath of complaints from many perspectives– some very enlightened, some clearly not. But to dismiss the entire group as hippies and hapless is to admit one’s own profound ignorance.

Read this intelligent review for more understanding of the issues before us:  Meritocracy vs. Plutocracy.

Posted in Main Page | Leave a comment

More insight on the “sell side” beast

Having spent just over 6 years of my wide-eyed youth in a sell-side, bank owned securities firm, I learned my loathing for the beast first-hand.  That said, far from a wasted experience, I remain greatly enriched by the education:  it taught me everything I know today about what not to do with money. 

Although much has been written about the conflicted, self-serving nature of the risk-selling machine, I am often surprised at how little intelligent people seem to understand about it still.   Lots of good people who are smart and educated in lots of fields, are hopelessly naive when it comes to the ingrained and damaging bias of the financial industry.  Witness that the bulk of investors still rely on the sell-side for their financial advice.  ‘Nuff said.

For those not yet clear, this article offers a wonderful review of the conviction of optimism so endemic to the industry:

“As though we needed another reminder, the early-year plethora of “second half recovery” economic and corporate earnings forecasts highlighted the consistent over-abundance of optimism among sell side analysts. In order to understand this phenomenon it is important first to throw out any assumptions you have about investing and then fully comprehend that the goal of every capital markets participant is not to correctly predict the course of markets – it is to generate commission today. The entire structure of the industry, from the personality types favored by HR to the compensation structure to the seating arrangements are all designed to facilitate this.

Consider the daily routine of, say, a typical institutional equity salesperson. They are generally at their desks reading news feeds and research published overnight by 7:00am. The research meeting starts at 7:30 and the analysts present any changes to the earnings forecasts of their companies and the economists and strategists may outline their predictions. At 8:00 they return to their desks and at this point the truly rich separate themselves from the merely wealthy. Between 8:00 and 9:30 the salesperson calls their best clients (ie the most aggressive traders) – mutual fund, hedge fund and pension fund managers – and attempt to leverage any information they’ve learned since 7:00 to get these clients to make trades. Their careers are dependent on these calls – it is, in other words, their entire job.

You may have been under the assumption that analysts, economist and strategists are compensated to the extent they are correct in their forecasts. This is only true to the extent that accurate predictions generate trade commission…”

Read the whole article here, (thanks Tom) including the truth about Abbey Joseph Cohen and co.

Posted in Main Page | 1 Comment

Nassim Taleb solution: “ban bonuses for bankers”

My grandfather was born December 31, 1899.  He was in his 20’s and 30’s during the credit boom of the 20’s and resulting Depression of the 30’s when he worked as a streetcar driver in Detroit.  I was lucky enough to grow up next-door to my grandparents who were Canadian farmers by the time I came along.  My grandpa died when I was 19.  All my life I remember him hating debt, shaking his head and saying in disgust, “God damn bankers”.  When I was a kid Glass Steagall had stuffed the credit genie back into the bottle and bankers had been tamed back to boring, conservative, salaried types.  Grandpa’s aversion seemed a little curious and harsh to me then. 

My son was born on December 18, 1999 (1oo years after his great-grandfather).  Today as I was driving him to the bus, a story about Italy’s debt crisis came on the radio.  Before I could say a word, my son shook his head in disgust and said “bloody bankers”. 

And that folks is progress: our generational learning curve has come full circle once more.  Now there is hope for the next 100 years.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a professor of risk engineering at New York University Polytechnic Institute, is the author of “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable.” He is a hedge fund investor and a former Wall Street trader.  He offers a simple, workable solution to reckless risk taking in the banking sector:

“Any person who works for a company that, regardless of its current financial health, would require a taxpayer-financed bailout if it failed should not get a bonus, ever. In fact, all pay at systemically important financial institutions — big banks, but also some insurance companies and even huge hedge funds — should be strictly regulated.

Critics like the Occupy Wall Street demonstrators decry the bonus system for its lack of fairness and its contribution to widening inequality. But the greater problem is that it provides an incentive to take risks. The asymmetric nature of the bonus (an incentive for success without a corresponding disincentive for failure) causes hidden risks to accumulate in the financial system and become a catalyst for disaster. This violates the fundamental rules of capitalism; Adam Smith himself was wary of the effect of limiting liability, a bedrock principle of the modern corporation.

… Consider that we trust military and homeland security personnel with our lives, yet we don’t give them lavish bonuses. They get promotions and the honor of a job well done if they succeed, and the severe disincentive of shame if they fail. For bankers, it is the opposite: a bonus if they make short-term profits and a bailout if they go bust. The question of talent is a red herring: Having worked with both groups, I can tell you that military and security people are not only more careful about safety, but also have far greater technical skill, than bankers.”

Read the whole article:  End Bonuses for Bankers

Posted in Main Page | 3 Comments