Author Topic: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)  (Read 563 times)

opsec

  • Ultraviolet team
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4978
  • Expect the worst, don't just prepare for it.
    • View Profile
I was lead to this speech from Gary North's website. Mr. North says this is the most frightening speech he has ever heard. He says the implications surpass his worst expectations for this country's future. I would be very interested in an analysis of this speech by Atash, and Mike. http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2008/fs080528.cfm
"The difference between a pessimist and an optimist is that the pessimist usually has more information"

"Where law ends tyranny begins. Where law begins, tyranny becomes legal"

"Truth is hate to those that hate truth".

Atash Hagmahani

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8929
  • Learning from my mistakes since 1964
    • View Profile
    • Mutually Assured Survival
Re: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)
« Reply #1 on: August 12, 2008, 12:20:00 PM »
Opsec, here are some words from an old poem:

Orientis partibus
  In eastern lands,
  adventavit asinus
  the ass arrived,
  pulcher et fortissimus
  pretty and so strong

That speech has a lot of blah blah blah before he finally comes to the point, which I think can be summed up like this:

1. Government spending has (and tends to) rise faster than tax receipts.
2. This debases the currency and furthermore, since the currency is pure fiat, it tends to produce a self-reinforcing loop where the expectation of future inflation causes the currency to lose value ever faster.
3. There are huge UNFUNDED liabilities on the books associated with promises that were made to the baby boomer generation regarding social security, medicare, etc.
4. Those unfunded liabilities can not be handled by the system.

Don't jump to the wrong conclusion. The wrong conclusion would be that the government actually WOULD fund those unfunded liabilities and break the system.

The correct conclusion is that anybody my age or younger is pretty much completely on his own to take care of his retirement.

Not said by the speech, is the fact that MOST of the programs that the policy think-tanks came up with for people to SELF-FUND retirement have BACKFIRED.

401(k) plans are almost a total washout, because so badly designed were they, that they created a massive incentive to use them as dumping grounds for assets that the investment banks don't know what else to do with because the BIG BOYS, the hedge funds, won't buy them, realizing that they are overpriced garbage.

IRAs were a better deal, because the owner has far more control over them, which is largely why the government immediately restricted who is allowed to have one.

So far the best program for the owner, by far, is the Roth IRA.

Now, going back to the problem of too many aging boomers, and not enough (productive) workers: what Fisher dare not say, but I will, is that there is a demographic ticking time bomb, that was intentionally created through think-tank created "movements" such as Feminism and Welfarism, before all the consequences were realized (not that they care too much...). Basically, in one or at the most two more generations, the USA is a third-world country comparable to Guatemala. Bear in mind that immigration is accelerating even as higher-paying jobs continue fleeing the continent.

Is that a problem? Well, not for Mr. Fisher and I sincerely doubt he really cares. His problem is making sure that expectations are set correctly so that when TSHTF, the approved outcomes result instead of system meltdown.

99% of the population doesn't see it coming, because they have been conditioned to tune it out. As Dr. Timothy Leary would say "Turn on, tune in, drop out". They commute to office buildings in cars by freeway, seeing nothing of what is going on on the streets; they go home to their exurban communities insulated by nothing but empty space from problems, go home, and turn on the television to wipe their brains.

They have no idea that the local schools are full of Xtacy, and will stubbornly insist that "we don't have those problems here" (for those who don't know: Xtacy is primarily a suburban phenomenon among white middle-class kids).

They have ZERO idea who runs the schools or what their kids are "learning" (in the sense of attitude-conditioning). They have zero idea who Lynda Belt is, or what her so-called "Drama Outreach Program" is about, and furthermore, they don't care. They will aggressively defend the system that is destroying them, because the television and other media have conditioned them to do so.
We're running out of petroleum. Are you ready?

Learn about food self-sufficiency and food security at New World Seeds & Tubers.

darwinslair

  • Ultraviolet team
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1355
    • View Profile
    • Darwin's Lair Graphic Design & Production
Re: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)
« Reply #2 on: August 12, 2008, 08:14:56 PM »
While the numbers are not in my mind, this was taught in my high school economics class.  We were told that the system could not survive and to know that the system of medicare and social security could NOT be there for us when we were of the age that people were enjoying the benefits of it at that time.

That was 1987.  This is not new.  I have assumed it was coming for a long time.  The timeframe given by the teacher was 2012-2017 for the system to be changed or abandoned.

How much squawking there is going to be about the taxes that have been collected for a percieved benefit that will never pay......oh well.  People can squawk all they want.  Those with the biggest guns make the rules, and trust me, none of us own guns like that.

Tom Kleffman
If you can catch it and kill it, or grow it, dont buy it.

opsec

  • Ultraviolet team
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4978
  • Expect the worst, don't just prepare for it.
    • View Profile
Re: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)
« Reply #3 on: August 12, 2008, 10:07:11 PM »
I've always known that I wouldn't see any of the social security benefits that I've paid into. I just consider fica to be a head tax.

The only real retirement income is going to be a self-sufficient farm.
"The difference between a pessimist and an optimist is that the pessimist usually has more information"

"Where law ends tyranny begins. Where law begins, tyranny becomes legal"

"Truth is hate to those that hate truth".

Atash Hagmahani

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8929
  • Learning from my mistakes since 1964
    • View Profile
    • Mutually Assured Survival
Re: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)
« Reply #4 on: August 12, 2008, 11:37:37 PM »
I just read this today:

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_33/b4096000769608.htm?chan=search

Quote
Now Wall Street Wants Your Pension, Too
 JPMorganChase, Citi, Cerberus, and Morgan Stanley are among the firms lobbying Washington to let them take over and run corporate pension funds

Some of the folks that brought us the subprime meltdown and the global credit crisis have a bold new idea that could solve a slew of problems for U.S. companies—but also might cause a whole set of troubles for employees.
 A broad coalition of Wall Street firms, from banks and insurers to hedge funds and private equity firms, are pushing lawmakers to let them buy and manage so-called frozen corporate pension plans, which no longer accept new members but must continue to cover current ones. Of the $2.3 trillion in U.S. corporate pension fund assets, some $500 billion sits in frozen plans, including those of big companies such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard, Verizon, and Alcoa.
 At first blush the idea would seem to be a tough sell in Washington. Not only are Wall Street firms scrambling to boost profits and raise capital to stay afloat—they're also fighting allegations that they knowingly dumped toxic securities on unwitting investors during and after the mortgage boom.
 Yet firms are getting a receptive ear from the Treasury Dept. After the IRS ruled that the concept needed legislative approval, Treasury on Aug. 6 offered a blueprint for lawmakers to allow "financially strong entities in well-regulated sectors" to acquire pension plans. Now the debate moves to Congress, which would have to change existing law.
 For companies, offloading pension plans could be a boon. Many have struggled in recent years to make good on their generous pension promises, swinging from surpluses to deficits depending on the whims of the stock market. For example, Ford Motor, which reported an $8.7 billion loss in the latest quarter, has a pension plan that's underfunded by $9 billion, according to Credit Suisse analyst David Zion. Problems like that are a big reason why Charles Millard, director of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., the federal insurer of last resort of corporate pension plans, is behind the Wall Street plan. He says it would "create greater security for retirees and the pension system," though he warns that "these deals should only be permitted when the acquiring entity has a higher credit-rating than the seller."
 Dumping plans seems especially opportune for companies now. Since 2007, companies have been required to list pension-fund figures on their balance sheets, but that doesn't affect earnings. But new accounting standards that are supposed to take effect over the next two years will require them for the first time to include fluctuations in the value of pension assets or liabilities as part of their quarterly earnings totals, a change that could devastate profit results for some. "We have identified several clients who would be willing to be first to sell a plan," says Scott Macey, a senior vice-president with Aon Consulting, one of the firms lobbying hard for the new rules, alongside Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, Prudential Financial, Cerberus Capital Management, and others.
 Wall Street, of course, has a different motivation—fees. As companies increasingly decide they can no longer offer the lavish benefits they once did and stop using pension plans as a recruiting tool, consulting firm McKinsey & Co. predicts that the assets in frozen plans will more than triple, to $1.7 trillion, by 2012. By taking over frozen plans, Wall Street firms could charge fees based on the total assets, perhaps in line with the standard 1% to 2% levied by many money managers.
"A TERRIBLE IDEA"
 But the gambit to turn pensions into moneymakers raises plenty of questions. Critics, including some on Capitol Hill, worry that financial firms won't always have workers' best interests at heart, putting some 44 million current and future retirees at risk. "We think this is just a terrible idea," says Karen Friedman, policy director for the advocacy group Pension Rights Center. "In the wake of the subprime crisis, it would be crazy to allow financial institutions to manage these plans."
We're running out of petroleum. Are you ready?

Learn about food self-sufficiency and food security at New World Seeds & Tubers.

Mike

  • Ultraviolet team
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1975
    • View Profile
Re: Speech by Richard W. Fisher (head cheese at Dallas Fed. Reserve Bank)
« Reply #5 on: August 13, 2008, 11:18:11 AM »
Quote
Mr. North says this is the most frightening speech he has ever heard. He says the implications surpass his worst expectations for this country's future. I would be very interested in an analysis of this speech by Atash, and Mike.
http://www.dallasfed.org/news/speeches/fisher/2008/fs080528.cfm

Richard W. Fisher, pres. & CEO of the Dallas FRB gave a speech May 8, '08 addressing unfunded entitlement programs.  The present value of the liabilities discounted over the infinite horizon are:
$13.6 Trillion - Social Security

$34.4 Trillion - Medicare Part A
$34    Trillion - Medicare Part B
$17.2 Trillion - Medicare Part D

Quote
(If) every U.S. citizen who is alive today decided to fully address this unfunded liability through lump-sum payments from our own pocketbooks, so that all of us and all future generations could be secure in the knowledge that we and they would receive promised benefits in perpetuity. How much would we have to pay if we split the tab? Again, the math is painful. With a total population of 304 million, from infants to the elderly, the per-person payment to the federal treasury would come to $330,000.

Alternatively, a permanent 68% increase in corporate & individual tax rates could fund the SS/medicare unfunded liability.

Quote
(Or) all we would have to do to fully fund our nation’s entitlement programs would be to cut discretionary spending by 97 percent. But hold on. That discretionary spending includes defense and national security, education, the environment and many other areas, not just those controversial earmarks that make the evening news. All of them would have to be cut—almost eliminated, really—to tackle this problem through discretionary spending.

Comment:
At this point this is just an obligation from our government to its people, us.  It is kind of like a New Year's Resolution.  And now we are realizing that it can't be kept.

What scares Mr. North must be the prospect that our government will borrow to fund these unfundable entitlements.  Ultimately, creditors will realize that the US is so indebted that that it will default through monetization or abrogation of its debts.  In other words, Mr. North fears that we will borrow ourselves into bankruptcy.  That is a legitimate fear.

The question is, "Will the US abrogate its obligation to retirees?  Or will it bankrupt itself and then abrogate its obligation to retirees?"  For all of our sake, the New Year's Resolution should be broken sooner rather than later.  It is better to default on promises to ourselves than a financial debt to lenders.

The speech was made back in May.  Since then we have had HR 3221, The Banker Bail-Out, which is here and now.  It sets a new standard for government privatizing profits and socializing losses.   I'll bet this HR 3221 is the scariest bill Mr. North has ever seen congress pass!

 

anything