Must read

Germany won additional adherents to sound money. It constructed around it a bloc of stable countries that would never devalue and would be reliable markets for German goods. And Europe brought closer to realization the age-old goal of political union on a previously fragmented continent. The grand accomplishment was summed up in the slogan coined by Kohl's ever-jaunty Finance Minister Theo Waigel: "We are bringing the d-mark into Europe."

What the German political establishment didn't realize is that monetary union is a two-way street. Germany exported its own currency, and it imported other people's. The d-mark was sent out on what appeared a successful conquest, but — while it was away — the drachma slipped in by a back door.

There has been a lot of talk of contagion. But the real infection has been borne by Germany. It displays the progressive debilitation of stronger nations coming under viral attack from the debts of uncompetitive smaller countries, whose trade deficits are automatically financed by German credits, which then have to be written down when the debtors can't or won't pay.

None of this really should have been a surprise. The Bundesbank has been warning for decades that, in monetary union, states form a "community of solidarity", linked symbiotically together "for better or for worse". No one really could have believed that monetary union would prevent Germany, placed at the center of Europe, from importing unpleasant phenomena from abroad. As Oswald Spengler, the gloomy historian-philosopher of the Weimar Republic, put it: "Germany is no island. No other country is in the same degree woven actively or passively into the world's destiny. Everything that happens afar involves the heart of Germany."

Last week's meeting between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, which brought more promises of "economic government" (called, unhelpfully, "economic direction" in German), predictably failed to calm the markets. Since there is no firm buyer of last resort to repel bond-market contagion, the viral assailants are now closing in on Berlin. Many of Merkel's natural supporters are uneasily aware that, were Germany and other creditor countries to submit to demands that they formally pool government borrowing with the other euro (EURUSD - News) states, that could mark the gradual end of Germany's own economic sanctity.

Wolfgang Reitzle, the well-regarded boss of industrial gas giant Linde, says he supports the euro "but not at any price." Kurt Lauk, the head of the economic council of Merkel's Christian Democrats, a former finance director of motor group Daimler and energy company Veba (the former Eon) even talks of a "currency reform" if euro support arrangements fail to work.

Students of history should recognize that one of France's goals in pushing for monetary union after the Berlin Wall fell was to weaken supposedly dominant Germany — an objective with which Kohl readily complied. If "economic government" together with common euro bonds becomes a reality, then Mitterrand, from beyond the grave, will have achieved his goal. The Germans know that — and that is why it is unlikely to happen.

Provided, that is, Germany makes the fateful choice.

David Marsh is co-chairman of Official Monetary and Financial Institutions Forum.

from

finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/...JjZQ--?mod=bb-budgeting

Separate data from the Labor Department showed initial claims for state unemployment benefits increased 9,000, to 408,000. Another report from the department showed the Consumer Price Index increased 0.5 percent in July, the largest gain since March, after falling 0.2 percent in June.
So don’t expect most businesses to increase sales. And don’t expect profits to go up. Businesses have already done a very good job of squeezing costs in order to survive the downturn. That helps keep up profit margins. But it’s murder on the economy. One business’s costs are another business’s revenues. While profits rise, revenues fall. Not good for the long term.
The biggest single expense for most businesses is the payroll. People are expensive. So, if you’re a good businessman, you try to get rid of as many people as possible – and not hire more of them. Even when you think business is improving, you try to service the new sales with the same staff. A little more over-time…streamlining administration…making the enterprise more efficient.
In that regard, computers and modern communications technology have been helpful. They make it easy to fire people! But they don’t seem to lead to the kind of GDP boosts that you need to create jobs and increase standards of living.
That’s why the 10 million or so jobs that disappeared in this downturn won’t come back. And it’s why the real unemployment rate in the US hasn’t been this high since the Great Depression.
If that weren’t enough, there are other reasons to expect stock prices to go down. The main reason is because that’s what stock prices do. They go up. Then, they go down. Sure, they have a lot of reasons. But people usually only find the ‘reasons’ after the fact. Like commentators and analysts this morning…struggling to find the ‘reasons’ for yesterday’s 419-point drop.
The only thing we really know is that markets go up and down. And yesterday, Mr. Market wanted to go down.
Here at The Daily Reckoning we’ve been expecting lower stock prices for a long time. Wall Street has never completed its ‘rendezvous with disaster’ that began in January 2000. As we see it, stocks began a bear market almost 12 years ago, after an 18-year bull market. But the bear market was never allowed to fully express itself. Instead, the feds came in – like rap stars into a late-night party. They turned up the music. They poured drinks for everyone. They brought drugs and hookers. And pretty soon, the party was going louder and wilder than ever.
But now the party’s over. The feds are still opening bottles. But nobody’s drinking.
The bear market is back. By our reckoning, the Dow should fall below 5,000 before it is over. Most likely, it will not be a short, quick collapse. Instead, it will be a long battle…stretched over many years…with the feds fighting over every inch.
Anyhow, that’s our story. That’s been our story for many years. Seeing no reason to change it, we’ll stick with it.
But what about gold? There…well, we admit to a certain feeling of ‘I told you so.’ But it was one thing to tell Dear Readers to buy gold when it was selling for $300. It’s another thing to suggest it at $1,800. Gold was a steal at $300. At $1,800, it’s probably close to fair value.
That doesn’t mean it won’t go higher. In fact, we think it will go much higher. But it’s a rare bull market that makes it so easy for investors. But gold is harder to figure out.
If the economy is really in a Great Correction…
…and if it will be in a funk for years…a Japan-like slump…
…and if investors are fleeing stocks and buying dollars and dollar-based bonds…
…then, why is gold going up?
Are investors really looking ahead to the feds’ reaction to a double-dip recession? Are they thinking that Bernanke et al will panic…and print more money? Are they worried about higher rates of inflation?
Or maybe investors figure – with interest rates so low – they might as well hold their money in gold. Who knows what could happen? Who knows what the feds will do? Who knows anything?
At least gold is something you know won’t go away.
Possibly. But we don’t think investors are that smart. Or that forward-looking.
Zombie, zombie in the night…
Ah, modern technology comes to the aid of looters. Right in our home state, too. Here’s the report:
(CNN) – A “flash mob” believed to have been organized on the Internet robbed a Maryland convenience store in less than a minute, police said Tuesday, and now authorities are using the same tool to identify participants in the crime.
Surveillance video shows a couple of teens walking into the Germantown 7-Eleven store Saturday at 1:47 a.m. Then, in a matter of seconds, dozens more young people entered and grabbed items from store shelves and coolers. Police said the teens left the store together, without paying for anything.
“At least 28 different individuals” have been confirmed on the video, Capt. Paul Starks told CNN Tuesday.
Although investigators have said they ‘“can’t confirm how this (robbery) was organized,” Starks does believe the Internet was involved.
Regards,
Bill Bonner,
for The Daily Reckoning


Read more: Stocks and Gold Point to a Hellish Outcome dailyreckoning.com/...oint-to-a-hellish-outcome/#ixzz1Vv1cnlCh

M1 NSA 2,040.5  2,033.0  ...           ...           ...
M2 NSA 9,498.8  9,478.2  ...           ...           ...
*From May 16, 2011; Feb. 14, 2011 and Aug. 16, 2010, respectively.
Note: Special caution should be taken in interpreting week-to-week changes in money supply data, which are highly volatile and subject to revision.
Source: Federal Reserve

Thursday, August 25, 2011

online.wsj.com/mdc/public/page/...sdata.html?mod=topnav_2_3028

Return on Equity (ROE): 3.87
P/E ttm: N/A
Dividend Yield: 0.52%
Mean Price Target Among 25 Analysts:  $12.98
YTD Percent Change: -43%
Subindustry: Diversified Financial Services



JPMorgan Chase [JPM  36.21     0.49  (+1.37%)   ]
Price to Book Value: 0.83
Price to Tangible Book Value: 1.14
Return on Equity (ROE): 9.9
P/E ttm: 7.62
Dividend Yield: 2.8%
Mean Price Target Among 29 Analysts: $53.95
YTD Percent Change: -16%
Subindustry: Diversified Financial Services



State Street [STT  34.04     0.45  (+1.34%)   ]
Price to Book Value: 0.95
Price to Tangible Book Value: 1.53
Return on Equity (ROE): 11.5
P/E ttm: 10.57
Dividend Yield: 2.14%
Mean Price Target Among 21 Analysts: $54.03
YTD Percent Change: -28%
Subindustry: Asset Management & Custody Banks



Fifth Third Bancorp [FITB  10.05     0.315  (+3.24%)   ]
Price to Book Value: 0.75
Price to Tangible Book Value: 0.92
Return on Equity (ROE): 3.36
P/E ttm: 9.91
Dividend Yield: 2.47%
Mean Price Target Among 30 Analysts: $15.51
YTD Percent Change: -34%
Subindustry: Regional Banks




Capital One Financial [COF  44.23     0.85  (+1.96%)   ]
Price to Book Value: 0.74
Price to Tangible Book Value: 1.38
Return on Equity (ROE): 11
P/E ttm: 5.7
Dividend Yield: 0.46%
Mean Price Target Among 18 Analysts: $60.17
YTD Percent Change: +2%
Subindustry: Consumer Finance



Source CNBC Analytics, Capital IQ and Thomson Reuters

source   www.cnbc.com/id/44274002

---------------

Über 70 in diesem Jahr haben schon aufgegeben, und die oben genannte Financiers sind diese, die auch eintauchen?

Die Finanzkrise kehrte zurück als staatliche Schuldenkrise. Ihr zerstörerisches Potenzial wirkt um so heftiger, als die Politik keinerlei Konsequenzen aus der Finanzkrise 2007/08 gezogen hatte: Die Finanzmarktregeln wurden nicht verschärft, eine Finanztransaktionssteuer nicht eingeführt. Es erfolgte kein Verbot hochspekulativer Fonds und von Leerverkäufen, keine Ächtung der „finanziellen Massenvernichtungs waffen“ (Buffett), wie Credit Default Swaps (CDS) oder strukturierter Anleihen. Entscheidend aber: Keine der mächtigen Banken wurde zerschlagen oder gar in Gemeineigentum bei demokratischer Kontrolle überführt.
Wurden schon keine neuen Dämme gebaut, so erfolgten erst recht keine Maßnahmen zur Abschöpfung der zerstörerischen Geldflut, etwa durch eine wirksame Besteuerung der Reichen und Geldmillionäre. Denn
das entscheidende Problem ist nicht der Damm, das Problem ist die Flut. Solange die Geldmassen nicht abgeschöpft werden, finden sie immer eine Lücke, wo sie ein- und durchbrechen können.
Der Dammbruch passiert gegenwärtig bei den staatlichen Finanzen, in den Strudel geraten die Öffentlichen Etats. Da sich profitable Investitionsmöglichkeiten in der Realwirtschaft wegen gekappter Massenkaufkraft und verschuldeter öffentlicher und privater Haushalte minimieren und sich in der Finanzsphäre infolge
überquellender Geldmassen ein Anlagenotstand auftut, ist für die Finanzinvestoren die wachsende Verschuldung der Staaten ein begehrtes und expandierendes Anlage- und Spekulationsfeld. Zur Rettung ihrer Banken
haben sich die USA und die EU-Staaten in erheblichem Maße zusätzlich verschuldet. Die Finanzmittel dazu liehen sie sich von eben diesen Banken und Finanzinstituten, über die Ausgabe von Staatsanleihen, die von
diesen gezeichnet wurden und ihnen nun erhebliche Zinseinkünfte bescheren. Wie eine Analyse der Landesbank Baden-Württemberg (LBBW) am Beispiel des Euro-Raumes aufzeigt, ist der Staat die am schnellsten wachsende Schuldnergruppe in den Bankbilanzen. Die Banken haben zwischen 2009 und 2010 gut die Hälfte
der steigenden Staatsverschuldung und Fiskalprogramme finanziert. Was sich für die Banken krass rentierte.
„Das opportunistische Halten von langlaufenden Staatsanleihen dürfte bei gegebener Refinanzierung durch die EZB (bei geringen Liquiditätsabschlägen und 0% Risikogewichtung dieser Aktiva) äußerst lukrativ sein“, schreibt die LBBW. Sie schätzt, dass die Banken durch die Nutzung der EZB-Refinanzierung „Windfall“- Zinsgewinne von 34 Milliarden Euro von Ende 2008 bis Herbst 2010 erwirtschaftet haben. Und sie zieht
folgendes Fazit: „Das vorgestellte Zahlenwerk dürfte deutlich machen, dass es für Banken äußerst opportun ist, in Staatsanleihen investiert zu bleiben. In einem von hoher Unsicherheit geprägten ökonomischen Bild, wie insbesondere in der Eurozonen-Peripherie vorzufinden, werden Banken ihre nationalen Staatsanleihen aus Mangel an Alternativen kaufen. Die systemische Verknüpfung zwischen Banken und Zentralstaat wird dadurch weiter verstärkt“.
Noch aus einem anderen Grund ist das früher eher langweilige Geschäft mit Staatsanleihen zu einem renditeträchtigen und hochspekulativen Geschäft geworden. Mit den gestiegenen Geldfluten, verbunden mit der Hebelwirkung unermesslicher Kredite (Leverage) auf der einen und dem wachsenden Schuldendruck auf der anderen Seite, ist es heute möglich, Zinsen und Renditen hochzutreiben und selbst gegen Leitwährungen oder auf den Bankrott ganzer Staaten zu spekulieren und diese finanziell aus den Angeln zu hebeln.
Eine zentrale Rolle beim Hochtreiben der Zinsen und Renditen von Staatsanleihen spielen dabei die drei großen privaten Ratingagenturen Moody´s, Standard & Poors und Fitch, die die Risikoeinstufung ganzer Staaten vornehmen. Ihr downgrading (Herabstufung) der Bonität von Staaten treibt die Zinsen und Renditen in die Höhe.
Sind die Staaten dann gezwungen, zu diesem höheren Zinssatz Kredite aufzunehmen, dann ist das ein weiterer Grund zur Herabstufung, weil die Zahlungsschwierigkeiten ja zunehmen. Es ist eine Art Doppelpass-Spiel von Rating-Agenturen und Spekulanten, das die Staaten immer mehr in die Zinsfalle treibt.
Erste Opfer waren die kleinen, nicht mehr wettbewerbsfähigen Länder an der „Peripherie“ der Eurozone, die sich mit der Rettung ihrer Banken und  konjunktur programmen überhoben hatten. Ins Fadenkreuz der
globalen Spekulation geraten zunehmend auch mittelgroße und große Euroländer, wie Spanien und die G7-Länder Italien und Frankreich oder gar die ökonomische Weltmacht USA, wie der Verlust des Triple A zeigt. Aus der Kombination von Rating-Einstufungen und Spekulationsangriffen von Fonds, allen voran der Hedge-Fonds, resultiert dann auch der große Zins-Spread für Staatsanleihen von Ländern der gleichen
Währungszone, wie z.B. der einzelnen Euroländer: Für Staatsanleihen mit zehnjähriger Laufzeit mussten z.B. bereits im März 2011 in einzelnen Ländern der Euro-Union folgende unterschiedlich Zinssätze berappt werden: Griechenland 12,44 %, Irland 9,67 %, Portugal 7%, Spanien 5,25%, Italien 4,88 %, Frankreich 3,61 % und Deutschland 3,21 %. Gerät ein Staat infolge der Spekulationswellen in die Nähe des Bankrotts, dann steigen die Banken zum großen Teil aus dem Geschäft mit den Staatsanleihen aus, um nicht selbst in die Finanzklemme zu geraten. Ihre prekären Staatsanleihen verkaufen sie größtenteils an die EZB. Diese kaufte bislang in mehreren Aktionen Staatsanleihen der Peripherieländer und Italiens auf, um ein neues bankenbeben, ein Austrocknen des Interbankenmarktes oder gar einen Dominoeffekt an Bankenpleiten zu verhindern. Die Banken steigen aus, die Hedge-Fonds jetzt erst richtig ein und treiben, zum großen Teil mit massiven Leerverkäufen, die Staaten noch weiter in die Schuldenklemme oder gar den finanziellen Ruin.
Die Troika aus EU-Kommission, EZB und IWF wiederum versucht immer größere Rettungsschirme aufzuspannen, um zu verhindern, dass die Euro-Länder wie Dominosteine kippen, die Eurozone gesprengt wird. Denn nach Spanien gelten inzwischen auch Italien und sogar Frankreich als die nächsten Wackelkandidaten.
Fragt sich aber, wie lange diese „Rettungspolitik“ noch durchgehalten werden kann. Während Spanien gerade noch unter den Rettungsschirm – EFSF: 780 Milliarden Euro - passt, ist er für Italien definitiv zu klein. Italien ist mit seiner hohen Staatsverschuldung der drittgrößte Anleihemarkt der Welt. Es braucht in den kommenden drei Jahren 500 Milliarden Euro frisches Geld.
Ein Entkommen aus der Schuldenfalle ist kaum denkbar. Die Politik sitzt hier in der Zwickmühle. Der ultraneoliberale Mainstream setzt auf Haushaltskonsolidierung durch Sparprogramme. „Deutsches Spardiktat für die Euro-Zone“, titelte die FTD (17.8.11). Nach dem Muster der „deutschen Schuldenbremse“ sollen Obergrenzen der Neuverschuldung bis 2012 in alle Staatsverfassungen der Euro-Staaten reingeschrieben wird. Zu den Spar- und Anpassungsprogrammen zählen nach der Doktrin des Washington Konsens von 1990 rigorose Haushaltsdisziplin und -einsparungen, Beschneidung des Öffentlichen Dienstes und öffentlicher Daseinsvorsorge, Kappung von Sozialleistungen und Renten, Lohnkürzungen und Erhöhung der Massensteuern.
Zudem werden die Schuldnerländer zur Privatisierung öffentlichen Eigentums in neuen Dimensionen gezwungen. „Alles muss raus!“. Selbst Kulturgüter sind nicht mehr tabu.
Mit dem knallharten Kurs der Strukturanpassung sparen sich die Staaten jedoch noch mehr in die Krise, mit der Folge von Steuerausfällen und noch geringeren Staatseinnahmen zum Bedienen oder gar Abtragen der Schulden.
Es mehren sich die Stimmen, die einer Weginflationierung der Staatsschulden das Wort reden. Dazu gehört das letzte Aufgebot der Keynesianer, aber auch der neoliberale Chefökonom der Deutschen Bank, Thomas Mayer, (siehe Artikel Ackermanns Chefökonom..; www.isw-muenchen.de), vor allem aber Ökonomen aus Großbritannien und den USA, wie der Harvard- und frühere IWF-Chefökonom Ökonom Kenneth Rogoff.
„Um den Schuldenabbau zu unterstützen, bräuchte es über mehrere Jahre hinweg eine Inflation von vier bis sechs Prozent“, sagte er der französischen Tageszeitung „Liberation“. Es solle ja nicht gleich „eine Hyperinflation herbeigeführt werden“, aber nur in Kombination von „moderater Inflation“ und wirtschaftlichem Wachstum könnten die Schulden abgetragen werden.

2. Profiteure von Schulden und Krise

Der Metropolen-Kapitalismus ist pleite. Soviel Schulden waren noch nie. Als sich Ende Mai 2011 im französischen Deauville die Staats- und Regierungschefs der „führenden Industrieländer“ zu ihrem jährlichen
G7-Gipfel trafen, tagten sie auf einem Schuldenberg von gut 35 Billionen (35.000 Milliarden) Dollar Staatsschulden. Die USA haben inzwischen Staatsschulden von knapp 100% eines BIP, die Euro-Zone von 86 % und Japan von 220 %.
In den USA sind die Staatsschulden auf 14.650 Milliarden gestiegen, das bedeutet eine Schuldenlast pro US-Bürger – ob Kind ob Greis – von 47.000 Dollar; auf der Schuldenuhr in New York wird der Anteil pro Familie angezeigt: Anfang Juli 2011 121.853 Dollar. Allein seinem größten Gläubiger, China schuldet jeder US-Amerikaner 4000 Dollar, insgesamt knapp 1.200 Milliarden Dollar – die von China gezeichneten Anleihen der quasi-staatlichen Immobilienfinanzierer Freddie Mac und Fannie Mae noch gar nicht mitgerechnet.
Es ist nicht nur die staatliche Schuldenlast, die auf die Bürger in den kapitalistischen Zentren drückt. Hinzu kommen noch die Schulden der Privathaushalte in ähnlichen Dimensionen und die Schulden der Unternehmen. Auch letztere werden in irgendeiner Form – z.B. über Preise oder niedrigere Löhne für die Belegschaften – auf die Allgemeinheit abgewälzt. Nach Angaben der EZB betrugen diese Schulden der Unternehmen (ohne Finanzsektor) in den USA Ende 2010 75% des US-BIPs, was etwa 11.000 Milliarden Dollar Schulden bedeutet. Eine besondere Bürde für die Bürger sind die schwindelerregenden Schuldenberge,
die auf den Privathaushalten lasten. Im ersten Quartal 2011war das ein Schuldenturm von 13.970 Milliarden Dollar – pro US-Bürger nochmals 46.000 Dollar. Insgesamt hängt damit der US-Gesellschaft eine Schuldenlast von 39.000 Milliarden (39 Billionen) am Hals. Legt man ein durchschnittliches Zinsniveau von nur fünf Prozent zugrunde, dann muss die US-Gesellschaft jährlich knapp zwei Billionen (1.950 Milliarden) Dollar an Zinsen berappen, 13% des gesamten BIP. Diese Zinsen fließen quasi als Tribut der gesamten
Gesellschaft an die Geldaristokratie dieser Gesellschaft. Deutlich wird daran aber auch, dass die Schulden über das normale Wirtschaftswachstum nicht mehr abgetragen werden können.
Daniel Stelter, Managing Director bei der Boston Consulting Group mach folgende Rechnung auf: „Bei einem gesamtwirtschaftlichen Zinsniveau von durchschnittlich fünf Prozent verdoppeln sich die Schulden alle 15 Jahre – in Wahrheit steigt die Schuldenlast jedoch deutlich schneller, weil zusätzliche Schulden aufgenommen werden und der Effekt der Alterung der Gesellschaft voll durchschlägt. Es ist Zeit einzusehen,
dass wir des wachsenden Schuldenbergs nicht mehr Herr werden“ (FTD, 10.8.11).
Die Entwicklung der Weltverschuldung in den vergangenen Jahrzehnten bestätigt diese Aussage. So betrug nach Angaben der Bank für Internationalen Zahlungsausgleich (BIZ) 2010 das auf der Welt im Umlauf befindliche Volumen an Schuldtiteln insgesamt 95 Billionen (95.000 Milliarden) Dollar. 1990 war es weniger noch als ein Fünftel: 18 Billionen; 2000 35 Billionen und 2005 59 Billionen Dollar.
Doch die Weltwirtschaft besteht nicht nur aus Schuldtürmen, sondern aus ebenso gigantischen Schatzkammern.
Die sich auftürmenden Geldschätze sind größtenteils das Pendant eben dieser Schulden, sie resultieren daraus, dass der Staat und ein Teil seiner Bürger sich verschulden musste. Ein Geldvermögen von 121,8 Billionen Dollar wird nach den Erhebungen von Boston Consulting Group weldweit gemanagt (assets under management: bei den Erhebungen der Boston Consulting Group sind das Geldvermögen von 100.000 Dollar und mehr). Anders als die Schulden, sind die Geldschätze in den Händen weniger Millionäre und Milliardäre hoch konzentriert. 12,5 Millionen Millionäre weltweit - das sind 0,9% aller Haushalte mit nennenswertem Geldvermögen – besitzen 39% (48 Billionen) des gesamten globalen Geldreichtums. Die Geldvermögen der Reichen der Welt liegen heute um 11 Billionen (11.000 Milliarden) Dollar höher als vor der Finanzkrise. Reiche kennen keine Krise, sie verdienen an ihr.
In Nordamerika stieg das verwaltete Geldvermögen im Nach-Krisenjahr 2010 um 10,4 % auf 38,2 Billionen (38.200 Milliarden) Dollar. Die 5,2 Millionen Millionärshaushalte (nur Geldvermögen) krallen sich hier mehr als die Hälfte. Die Zahl dieser Haushalte stieg um über acht Prozent in 2010.
Allein die Investmentfonds verwalten in den USA Geldvermögen im Wert von 27.600 Milliarden (27,6 Billionen) Dollar. Die Spaltung der US-Gesellschaft in Arm und Reich ist angesichts dieser Konstellation abgrundtief.

Schuldenkrise!? Welche Krise? Für die Geldvermögenden bietet die Staatsverschuldung Anlagefelder in neuen Dimensionen und – wie oben ausgeführt – im Wechselspiel von Banken, Rating-Agenturen und Hedge-Fonds auch hohe Renditen. Mit der Spekulation auf den Bankrott können Hedge-Fonds mit Leerverkäufen und Kreditausfallversicherungen (credit default swaps – cds) im Spekulationsgeschäft alle
4 Register ziehen. Notfalls werden sie über die EZB oder staatliche Rettungsschirme herausgepaukt.
Selbst an einer Umschuldung verdienen sie noch, wie der „kleine Schuldenschnitt“ für Griechenland zeigt. Der „freiwillige“ Gläubigerbeitrag entpuppt sich als eine Farce“, schreibt Harald Hau, Finanzmarktspezialist an der Wirtschaftshochschule Fontainebleau. „Das griechische Hilfspaket ist vielmehr ein riesiges Geschenk für
die Kapitaleigner der Banken und anderer Inhaber griechischer Staatsschulden (SZ, 8.8.11). Frankreichs Präsident Nicolas Sarkozy deutete die Brüsseler Einigung als Einstieg in eine Europäische Wirtschaftsregierung.
Harald Hau: „Doch ist gerade der politische Aspekt der Einigung besonders beschämend: Die womöglich insgesamt bis zu 200 Milliarden an Steuergeldern für die Griechenlandrettung kommen hauptsächlich den fünf Prozent reichsten Familien zugute. In den USA wie auch anderswo kontrollieren die fünf Prozent wohlhabendsten Familien etwa 70 Prozent des Finanzkapitals. So bedeutet die Sozialisierung der griechischen Schulden gleichzeitig eine gewaltige Umverteilung zugunsten der Reichen dieser Welt“.

Die „systemische Verknüpfung zwischen Banken und Staat“ zeigt ihre Wirksamkeit. Der Souverän der Politik sind heute Banken, Fonds und das „Urteil der Finanzmärkte“. Die Parlamente haben sich entmündigen, sich ihr originäres und zentrales Recht, das Budgetrecht, weitgehend nehmen lassen. Über die Wirtschafts- und Finanzpolitik in Europa bestimmt heute die Troika aus EU-Kommission, EZB und IWF.
In Verbindung mit dem eigentlichen Macht-Trio aus Systembanken, Rating-Agenturen und Hedge-Fonds.
An dieser Macht will keine Regierung kapitalistischer Staaten kratzen.

source

finance.yahoo.com/video/...wN2aWRlb3MEc2xrA2ZyZW5rZWxzYXlzZQ--

Europe's politicians nevertheless thought they could have it both ways: a single currency among divergent economies, each with fiscal autonomy, allowing them all to borrow and spend to their hearts' content. No surprise then that the euro has turned into a bankruptcy machine. Once the markets had finished with Greece, Ireland and Portugal, they were bound to move on to Spain, Italy and—soon—France. The proximate causes for each of these crises may be different (excessive sovereign debt, over-leveraged banking sectors, property-market bubbles) but the root is exactly the same: the euro.

Adopting the euro has allowed these economies to mask their underlying lack of competitiveness and borrow on the strength of other countries' creditworthiness. It's not a problem of liquidity, as the euro's apologists would have you believe, but of solvency.

The currency's troubles, however, go even deeper than bad economics. Politically, there is no hope that a fiscal union would save the euro. Let's be clear what that would mean: a single treasury, tax regime, welfare system and public-borrowing function. This option would fail for the exact reasons that European leaders avoided it from the outset: It would be massively undemocratic, relegating national politicians and voters to the role of helpless bystanders. Why would the Greeks willingly become a German vassal state? Why would German taxpayers willingly subsidize a bloated, inefficient, Greek public sector?

Given the arrogance that many European leaders have shown to date though, I fully anticipate a rapid move towards fiscal union. It won't come about through cozy formal chats, such as last month's Merkel-Sarkozy meeting, but as a response to a severe market crisis. The next one could come as soon as this month, when Italy is due to raise or refinance more than €68 billion of its public debt.

Back-door fiscal union is already underway. Now that the European Central Bank has started buying Italian and Spanish government bonds, expect the ECB to issue its own bonds to fund this. All of this, as German President Christian Wulff said last month, without the mandate or legitimacy of treaty changes or popular support.

As for Britain, there is little it could do to protect itself from the economic fallout of a collapsed euro. We must be grateful, however, that europhiles in all three major U.K. political parties did not get their way. Britain could well have been in the same situation as Italy and Spain, were it not for its ability to depreciate sterling and set its own interest rates. And at least the U.K. now has a government that recognizes the need to tackle its own national debt.

Whenever the inevitable overhaul of euro-zone arrangements begins, Britain must then renegotiate its EU membership. In 1975, the British people voted to join a Common Market for goods and services. Perhaps now that can finally be achieved.

Each day the euro remains on life-support in its current form, the consequences of its eventual death become graver. If European leaders would only accept that their grand economic experiment has failed, the impact would be more predictable and more manageable. There would still be bank failures and heavy losses but, by acting decisively now, there is still an opportunity to avert catastrophe.

Mr. Javid is a Conservative member of the British parliament and a former Deutsche Bank executive.

online.wsj.com/article/...l?mod=WSJEUROPE_hpp_sections_opinion

The Swiss move to cap its currency caused some global reverberations. The Japanese yen weakened Tuesday as investors wondered whether the Japanese government—which intervened early last month to rein in the yen—might follow Switzerland's example. But the yen starting climbing again midday Wednesday after the central bank concluded a regularly scheduled policy meeting without taking action, signaling that policy makers aren't in a rush to make Swiss-like moves.

Economists worry about the specter of a so-called currency war, in which a growing band of countries seek to lower the values of their currencies to protect their economies.

Guido Mantega, the finance minister of Brazil, itself struggling with a strong currency, said the Swiss effort might have some short-term effect but may not have much impact over the longer term. "It's an extreme situation where they are desperate," he said.

Investor anxieties have increased in recent weeks as the euro faces an intensifying debt crisis that threatens to spread to big economies like Spain and Italy and raises the risk of a break-up of the currency.

The dollar doesn't look attractive either. The U.S. economy appears to be slowing, interest rates are at rock bottom and the government's debt no longer commands a unanimous triple-A credit rating.

The SNB said Tuesday it would "no longer tolerate" the euro falling below 1.20 francs. It said it will enforce the limit with "the utmost determination and is prepared to buy foreign currency in unlimited quantities."

The euro surged 10% to 1.22 francs, though weakened to 1.2066 in late New York trading. Before the announcement, the euro had sunk to about 1.10 francs, after hitting a record low
of 1.001 francs in early August. The dollar also gained 9.7% to trade at 0.8618 francs, its highest level since May.

In a sign of investors' aversion to risk, U.S. Treasury bond prices soared, pushing down the 10-year note's yield to a record low below 2%.

The Swiss move pushed funds into the few other currencies still considered safe. Norway's krone Tuesday hit its highest level against the euro since February 2003, and the Swedish currency also strengthened.
"There is a lack of safe havens, and people are turning their eyes to Norway with its rock-solid finances and good growth," said Kari Due-Andresen at Handelsbanken in Norway.

The European Central Bank made it clear that the Swiss were acting alone, without coordination from Frankfurt. In a statement, the ECB said it was "informed" by the Swiss and "takes note" of the decision, "which has been taken by the Swiss National Bank under its responsibility."

The franc posted a 27% gain against the euro between November 2010 and August, prompting the SNB to slash interest rates to close to zero. The franc fell against the euro—but only temporarily.

The strains in the euro-zone financial system that have driven funds into Switzerland show no signs of letting up. Funding for European banks grew more expensive and less accessible Tuesday amid worries about banks' health and unresolved debt problems in the euro zone.

In one sign of funding stress, the deposits that banks parked overnight at the ECB reached a high for the year, increasing to €166.8 billion ($235 billion), up from €151.1 billion on Monday.

The jump shows banks are increasingly risk-averse, choosing to leave their deposits at the central bank overnight rather than lend them. While the amounts have been climbing for the past several weeks, it is still far from its high amid the financial crisis in 2008, when the amount being left overnight at the ECB came close to €300 billion.

U.S. Federal Reserve officials have become concerned in recent days about renewed strains in European financial markets and the risk that this could spill over into the U.S.

Markets for short-term dollar loans have become more stressed, with some European borrowers being forced to pay more for short-term dollar credit and borrow over shorter periods. U.S. officials take some comfort from an emergency credit line between the Fed and the ECB to provide dollars to European banks, which could prevent a sharp disruption.

The Swiss government expects the economy to grow 1.5% in 2012, slower than 2.1% this year and 2.7% last year.

For the past month, the Swiss government and business leaders have been appealing for bolder action by the SNB to weaken the currency, particularly amid signs of growth elsewhere in Europe and in the U.S. could hit the skids. The SNB on Tuesday said the franc "poses an acute threat to the Swiss economy."

Having drawn a line in the sand, the SNB could now face an endurance test in defending its ceiling, as investors increasingly worry whether key euro-zone members such as Italy will execute credible plans to get their enormous debt under control.

"This could be a bloody battle for the SNB over the next few months," says Jane Foley, currency strategist for Rabobank. "It's a battle of the SNB against the search by investors for safe havens."

Others point to the strong language in the SNB's Tuesday statement as a sign of the bank's determination, which could bolster its credibility in the market. The language is far starker than the bank's communiqués to the market during its 2009-2010 interventions.

"The SNB is now completely committed," says Alessandro Bee, currency strategist with Bank Sarasin. "There is no going back. They will do everything to defend this. They have to resist the pressure. Otherwise, they can just close the SNB."

Mr. Bee expects the euro to stay close to the 1.20-franc level in the coming months, and then appreciate to around 1.30 francs next year if the euro-zone debt problems ease.

—Sara Schaefer Muñoz,
Jon Hilsenrath and Brian Blackstone contributed
to this article.
Write to Deborah Ball at deborah.ball@wsj.com

Printed in The Wall Street Journal, page A1
Source
online.wsj.com/article/...tml?mod=WSJEurope_hpp_LEFTTopStories

2011
Summary of Commentary on
Current Economic Conditions
by Federal Reserve District

Commonly known as the Beige Book, this report is published eight times per year. Each Federal Reserve Bank gathers anecdotal information on current economic conditions in its District through reports from Bank and Branch directors and interviews with key business contacts, economists, market experts, and other sources. The Beige Book summarizes this information by District and sector. An overall summary of the twelve district reports is prepared by a designated Federal Reserve Bank on a rotating basis.

see  there
www.federalreserve.gov/fomc/beigebook/2011/

However, there are a myriad of other countries that are likely to find their currencies rising as investor interest in most major currencies continues to fall. They too will find their exports under pressure, especially if major engines of the global growth such as China continue to manage a slowing of their economies.

There is certainly little sign of an early global recovery with data this week showing Japanese machinery orders plummeting again, the latest Beige Book from the Fed suggesting U.S. growth is nearly at a standstill and that instead of stabilizing as hoped, the rate of unemployment in Australia has jumped higher.

With Switzerland already having taken matters in its own hands, without any apparent consultation with its trading partners, expect other countries to do likewise.

Even Canada, one of the least likely countries to take maverick action, this week signaled that monetary tightening will be put on hold to protect the country’s growth.

Brazil, which has long warned of currency wars and has been busy over the last year trying to use capital controls to curb the real’s rally, could be among the first, along with Chile and Colombia, to start threatening rate cuts.

And on the other side of the world, Marc Ostwald of Monument Securities, identifies the Philippines, South Korea and Indonesia as prime candidates to start adjusting policy in what could become an all-out currency war to protect exports.

see there

blogs.wsj.com/source/2011/09/08/...g-the-dogs-of-currency-war/

Even a bigger and better European Financial Stability Facility–the euro-zone bailout fund Europe is putting such stock by–sees trouble in Greece, with EFSF CEO Klaus Regling saying the currency bloc’s rescue plan for Greece just isn’t working.

What about that plan to tap Greece’s private-sector creditors? It won’t work, according to OECD chief economist Pier Carlo Padoan. Other mechanisms could be considered, he said, though he accepted these could be even less attractive for investors. (Translation: deep haircuts.)

The sharper tone radiating on Athens has rattled Greek officials into action, looking at more cuts to a public sector that previously had been the Sacred Cow for the ruling Socialist party. The cuts naturally will choke off more consumer spending and trigger social protests.

And, right on cue, medical staff went out on strike Thursday in a new phase of public protests that in early summer escalated to mass rallies and violent clashes with riot police. Teachers, tax office workers and other civil servants are set to join them in the days ahead as the frantic government mulls cutting another 100,000 public-sector jobs.

Greece’s streets are heating up, but cut it must.

Next week, the EU, ECB and IMF inspectors will return to Athens and they’ll want to see results and proof that there won’t be further slippage in austerity implementation.

With Athens looking down the gun barrel, the rest of Europe is watching with uncomprehending fascination. Financial markets are spinning any number of scenarios on how big the bang will be for the euro-zone and its banking system if Greece slips into default unaided by other euro members.

The Maastricht founders hadn’t prepared anyone for this, leaving out the possibility that its experimental machinery would need an emergency escape hatch.

source

blogs.wsj.com/source/2011/09/08/all-told-a-bad-week-for-greece/

G-7 finance ministers meet in Marseilles. The agenda includes discussions on supporting weak global economic growth and could center around suggestions to rein in the euro-zone debt crisis.
It is also the deadline for non-binding commitments from private-sector creditors to participate in Greece’s proposed bond-exchange program, although a formal bond exchange isn’t due to take place until some time in October, assuming EFSF changes are ratified by euro-zone members.
Saturday, Sept. 10

Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou delivers his annual economic policy speech.
Monday, Sept. 12

Italy sets a date for a final vote on the country’s austerity package. The vote is crucial to restoring investor confidence in the country, which has so far escaped serious attacks from speculative investors.
France auctions bons du Tresor a taux fixe et a interet precompte, or BTFs, Treasury bills with initial maturities of one year or less.
Tuesday, Sept. 13

Finnish Prime Minister Jyki Kataninen will meet German Chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss Finland’s demand for collateral in the second Greek bailout.
Italy auctions Buoni del Tesoro Poliennali, or BTPs, multi-year Treasury bonds with maturities, ranging between five  and nine years.
Wednesday, Sept. 14

Greece expected to resume talks with European Commission, IMF and ECB officials on fiscal, economic reforms
Thursday, Sept. 15

Spanish government auctions bonds.
Friday-Saturday, Sept. 16-17

Informal meeting of the EU Economic & Financial Affairs council.
Saturday, Sept. 17

Three months since Moody’s Investors Service put its Aa2 sovereign rating on Italy on review for possible downgrade. Reviews are typically completed after two to three months.
Sunday, Sept. 18

German state elections in Berlin. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union has suffered losses in recent elections, undermining her political support base and the bailout process.
Tuesday, Sept. 20

Greece auctions three-month Treasury bills to replace a previous issue maturing Sept. 23.
Greece’s Papandreou expected to meet IMF chief Christine Lagarde in Washington.
Wednesday, Sept. 21

The Austrian parliament reconvenes, although no date has been set for an EFSF vote. The country has been a vocal opponent of lending money to Greece unless it meets previously agreed conditions.
Friday, Sept. 23

Merkel’s government due to put proposals to change the EFSF bailout mechanism to a vote in the Bundestag. Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said Thursday that Merkel will receive the full support of her own party in the vote, but internal dissent is growing.
This is also the last day of parliament in Spain ahead of general elections on Nov. 20.
Tuesday, Sept. 27

Italian treasury auctions CTZs, or zero-coupon bonds with maturities of 24 months.
Papandreou expected to meet Merkel in Berlin.
Wednesday, Sept. 28

Italian treasury auctions BTPs.
Thursday-Friday, Sept. 29-30

The upper house of German parliament is expected to vote on changes to the EFSF.
– Mark Brown and William Kemble-Diaz in London and Alkman Granitsas in Athens contributed to this article.

blogs.wsj.com/source/2011/09/09/...p-for-the-euro-zone-crisis/

Germany Tries to Save Prestigious Title of Doctor

By CHRISTOPHER F. SCHUETZE
Published: September 11, 2011

www.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/world/europe/...e12.html?ref=europe

The plagiarism scandals that rocked the political world in Germany this year have led to a period of soul-searching among academics and researchers around the country. They have also prompted calls for stricter controls at German universities.

At issue is the prestigious title of doctor, which is widely used in Germany, even outside academics circles. Many politicians campaign with the title prominently displayed as part of their name. After several cases in which doctoral theses were described as using unattributed material from earlier works — the most prominent of which pushed Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg to resign as defense minister — German universities have questioned the way doctoral candidates are tested.

Some academics insist that the system is generally sound, pointing out that in the half-dozen high-profile cases where plagiarism was found, the doctoral degree was ultimately retracted.

Still, some politicians are calling for stricter guidelines and even for a nationwide system to screen submitted theses.

Ulla Burchardt, a member of Parliament from the opposition Social Democratic Party and chairwoman of the parliamentary committee for education, research and technological assessment, has called for nationwide screening of doctoral theses.

According to Ms. Burchardt, the high-level politicians found to have plagiarized form just the tip of the iceberg. She argues that random testing of theses across universities and disciplines would give a clearer understanding of the scope of the problem and the faulty mechanisms leading to the phenomenon.

“I think in general we need to have a more thorough debate,” she said in a telephone interview, “and it should be open to the public.”

Universities in Germany are self-governing and generally autonomous from the state. Within the university structure, faculties regulate guidelines for doctoral students, leading to a profusion of rules and regulations, even within the same institution. Even if a form of Ms. Burchardt’s suggestion were ultimately adopted, nationwide sampling would most likely take place independently of any university examination of doctoral work.

While the idea of general screening is not popular among many academic leaders, other suggestions made by Ms. Burchardt find wide acceptance and are being discussed in many of the country’s faculties, and some are already in place.

Wolfgang Löwer, an ombudsman for the German Research Foundation, is one of the many German academics calling for a course on rules and procedures of academic scholarship.

University administrators say the course, which would be mandatory for incoming students, could become an important element in the effort to prevent fraud.

According to Andreas Archut, spokesman for the University of Bonn, which in July retracted the doctoral title of Jorgo Chatzimarkakis, a member of the European Parliament, the university will publish extensive and explicit guidelines so that doctoral students know exactly what is expected.

Before a committee at the University of Bonn found problems with his work and recommended the retraction of his academic title, Mr. Chatzimarkakis publicly stated that he had simply used a different system of citation, one he learned while briefly studying at Oxford.

“The faculty,” Mr. Archut said, “does not want to leave wiggle room.”

Heidelberg University, which in June formally retracted the doctorate of Silvana Koch-Mehrin, a member of the European Parliament, announced in August that it would begin demanding that doctoral students sign a legally binding affidavit, attesting original authorship. Signing a false statement on such an affidavit can prompt legal action in the local courts, which can lead to a fine and even to a prison sentence of up to three years under the German penal code.

Professor Thomas Pfeiffer, speaking for the university, said the threat of possible legal action, in addition to the embarrassment of a retracted doctorate, would act as a further deterrent.

Faculties at the University of Bonn, Heidelberg University and the University of Bayreuth have all retracted doctorates after internal commissions determined that students-turned-politicians had plagiarized. They are demanding that all doctoral theses be submitted as an electronic copy, to help spot-checking with plagiarism-detection software, a step considered just as important as a deterrent for would-be plagiarists as it is a detection mechanism.

“Just as the immune system learns from past infections,” Mr. Archut said, “we must do the same with the incidents of plagiarism.”

Academics say, however, that they still have faith in large parts of the doctoral-testing system, through which universities acted decisively in retracting doctoral titles once instances of plagiarism were discovered.

Mr. Löwer, the ombudsman, said he thought that the recent high-profile cases would lead those who would submit academically dishonest work to think twice and those checking to be extra vigilant.

Mr. Pfeiffer, who is also the vice rector of international relations at Heidelberg University, pointed to the benefits of binding contracts and electronic submissions, but also warned of a general culture of suspicion.

“When one puts too much energy in preventing fraud,” he said, “one ends up putting too little into the actual work.”

A version of this article appeared in print on September 12, 2011, in The International Herald Tribune with the headline: Germany Tries to Save Prestigious Title of Doctor.

Connect with The New York Times on Facebook.

-----------------------------------

Tragicomedie ? Für mich ja.

More than anything else, political and business leaders want to avoid the phenomenon of contagion, in which fears in one country spread to others, causing severe stress throughout the financial system, as happened in the fall of 2008. To be sure, Europe could still draw away from the precipice. That is especially true if policy makers come up with a plan to keep Greece afloat while also preventing anxiety from infecting other countries like Spain and Italy, whose huge debts and weak economies have fed worries that their borrowing has become unsustainable.

On Sunday, French government officials braced for possible ratings downgrades by Moody’s Investors Service of France’s three largest banks, BNP Paribas, Société Générale and Crédit Agricole, whose shares were among the biggest losers last week. The biggest banks in Europe, especially in France, hold billions of euros’ worth of Greek bonds, and investors fear even a partial default by Greece would sharply diminish the value of those assets, eroding already weak capital positions.

American financial institutions, typically heavy lenders to their French counterparts, have begun to pull back on these loans, but United States banks’ exposure to France remains substantial.

Still, if the French banks are indeed downgraded, it would underscore how European officials have been unable to contain the effect of the financial crisis in Greece, despite two bailout packages totaling more than 200 billion euros ($272 billion).

Frustration elsewhere in Europe has been mounting over whether Greece is sticking with the austerity goals it agreed to follow in order to qualify for the aid, and German voters in particular are wary of more handouts.

Despite repeated pledges by Chancellor Angela Merkel to keep Europe together, the cacophony of dissent within Germany has been rising. That is creating fresh doubt — justified or not — about the nation’s commitment to the euro.

“The German electorate is not in the mind-set to undertake actions it sees as subsidizing less worthy nations,” said Carl B. Weinberg, chief economist of High Frequency Economics in Valhalla, N.Y. “As a result, the government is moving in a very isolationist way to try to establish a fortress Germany that’s economically secure despite the risks in its European Union partners.”

On Friday, a stalwart German member of the European Central Bank, Jürgen Stark, abruptly resigned — news that would have barely merited more than a few lines in the financial pages just a few years ago. Today, it is considered a sign of frustration within Germany about the extraordinary measures being pursued to maintain stability in the euro zone, adding to the volatility in global financial markets.

“Mr. Stark’s departure could be seen by financial markets as another indication of growing disenchantment in Germany towards the euro,” Julian Callow, chief European economist at Barclays, wrote in a note to clients.

Last week, Mrs. Merkel’s finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, warned that Greece’s European Union partners would withhold new financial aid that is needed to help Athens pay its bills through Christmas unless the Greek government fulfilled the conditions of its first bailout.

All this has generated severe discomfort in Washington, which has watched the fallout from the European debt crisis with growing alarm.

Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner has been in regular contact with his European counterparts, repeatedly advising them to speak with a single voice to help reduce confusion in financial markets. After a series of discussions on Friday at a meeting of the Group of 8 finance ministers in Marseille, he declared that “European officials fully understand the gravity of the situation there.”

Athens is expecting to receive the next allotment of 8 billion euros of aid from the 110 billion euro rescue package that Greece was awarded last year. That aid is to be supplemented by a second bailout of 109 billion euros that European leaders agreed to in July. But the second package is threatened by demands from a handful of euro zone countries, including Finland and the Netherlands, that Greece provide collateral to secure further loans.

Mr. Venizelos said the government would do everything needed to close the budget shortfall. “If we can prove wrong those who are betting on Greece to fail, we will see the crisis recede,” he said.

Among the measures Mr. Venizelos announced on Sunday was a temporary property tax, ranging from 50 cents to 10 euros a square meter, depending on the value of the property, which would be collected for two years. The levy will be added to electricity bills to thwart tax evasion.

Mr. Venizelos also warned that the government would make further cuts to public spending. In a largely symbolic move, the government said it would withhold a month’s pay from all elected officials.

“This is a battle for the country’s survival,” Prime Minister George A. Papandreou told a news conference in the northern port city of Salonika on Sunday. “These measures are the supplies we need to fight.”

Niki Kitsantonis and Ben Protess contributed reporting.

A version of this news analysis appeared in print on September 12, 2011, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Investors Brace As Europe Crisis Flares Up Again.

Source
www.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/business/global/...tml?ref=business

“European governments, including Berlin, that currently oppose recognition of a Palestinian state should instead work to pursue the European line of consistently supporting a two-state settlement, recognizing the Palestinian state and supporting its full membership in the United Nations,” said Muriel Asseburg, Middle East specialist at the German Institute for International and Security Affairs in Berlin.

Ever since its Venice Declaration of 1980, the Union has supported a two-state settlement. Especially in the wake of the Arab Spring, more and more Europeans see the recognition of the Palestinian state as a reflection of the their own commitment to the values of self-determination and freedom.

In practical terms, the Union is the biggest political and financial supporter of the Palestinians, providing up to €1 billion, or $1.36 billion, a year, thus giving it considerable leverage. And over the past two years, the institutions in the West Bank have been greatly strengthened as a result of a more rigorous approach by the Union, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

Indeed, the international donor group in support of the Palestinians concluded last April that the Palestinian Authority’s delivery of public services and implementation of changes compared favorably with those of many middle-income countries. Missing, said donors, was a political settlement to complement the state building efforts.

Some analysts also say it is in Europe’s interests not to bow to U.S. or Israeli pressure over the U.N. issue.

“It is time that the Europeans recognized their interests in the Middle East,” said Rashid Khalidi, a professor of Modern Arab Studies at Columbia University in New York. “They include energy and immigration. The Middle East is too important to be left to the United States.”

Yet despite what is at stake, neither those European countries that support nor those that oppose the Palestinian resolution have a Plan B for the “day after” the resolution.

Angela Merkel, the German chancellor who is a staunch defender of Israel, said last week that she was concerned about the “day after,” asking what might happen on the ground if the Palestinians unilaterally went to the U.N. General Assembly.

“The big question is the day after,” said Yaacov Bar-Siman-Tov, an international relations specialist at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “The settlements will still be there. The Israeli Army will still be there.”

The situation might quickly deteriorate if the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, stops, as he has threatened, the transfer of customs revenues owed to the Palestinians. The Obama administration, too, might cut aid to the Palestinians and even downgrade its ties.

There is a danger, too, that riots among the Palestinians could ignite the anger of Israel’s other Arab neighbors.

All of this, analysts say, would make it imperative for the Europeans to think hard about how they could help the situation on the “day after.”

Such a Plan B would require at least three elements: It would have to give hope to the Palestinians that renewing the negotiations with Israel could lead to a speedy settlement. It would also need to spell out how Israeli security might be safeguarded, and it would have to point to a way to get the United States back on board.

Daniel Levy and Nick Witney, Middle East specialists at the European Council on Foreign Relations, a research organization in London, say they believe the Europeans could develop a strategy.

“The Europeans could help draft a U.N. resolution that could include in the text Israel’s concerns about its security and an acknowledgment of its right to exist,” they said.

Even then, the Netanyahu government could accuse the Europeans of being anti-Israeli. But analysts believe a united European response would be welcomed by large sections of the Israeli public and the security establishment.

But the truth is that the Europeans have no Plan B. “It’s because we have not seen the text of the resolution,” said an E.U. diplomat. But when they do, chances are it will be too late.

A version of this article appeared in print on September 13, 2011, in The International Herald Tribune with the headline: E.U. Divided by 'Palestine' Bid at U.N..

Source
www.nytimes.com/2011/09/13/world/europe/...r13.html?ref=europe

JULY 25, 2011
European Sovereign Credit Ratings
A look at the long-term, foreign currency credit ratings assigned to European sovereign borrowers by the three major ratings agencies. The table is sortable by country or agency, and ratings are color-coded from the highest triple-A rating (dark green) to subinvestment grade (orange.) Use the map to see ratings for a specific country.

see there online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/...LRD_20110610.html

Bank stress tests in July found that European banks are largely well-capitalized but failed to ease market concerns about the industry's health.

Michel Barnier, the EU's commissioner for financial regulation, said that while the 2011 tests were an improvement over last year's, "we must also acknowledge that the tests did not restore the credibility in banks strength in the way we would have hoped."

The tests should be strengthened, he said. "In particular, I think we need to reconsider how we treat sovereign exposure and liquidity, and further improve coordination between supervisors," Mr. Barnier said.

The July tests didn't take full account of what would happen to bank capital if a euro-zone government goes through a major default. That has become a more pressing concern as Greece's budget reforms haven't worked as expected; meanwhile, yields on Italian and Spanish debt spiked in August to their highest levels since the introduction of the euro.

After Saturday's meeting Spanish Finance Minister Elena Salgado told reporters that ministers recognized the need to make the tests "more uniform and … more rigorous."

Among the options, governments are considering whether the consequences of a sovereign default should be modeled more explicitly, said the official who has direct knowledge of the discussions. That could be achieved either by modeling bigger losses on sovereign debt held in the banks' trading books or by including debt that is in the banking book—or "held to maturity" —in the tests.

The issue has gained urgency as fears have spiked in recent weeks that Greece could default and be expelled from the euro zone after failing to meet budget targets as part of an initial bailout plan agreed last year.

German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said Greece itself knows that currently it isn't fulfilling the austerity targets.

He said Greek efforts to bring down the deficit through a new property tax deserve respect, but raised doubts whether the tax really can kick in this year.

"The Greeks have decided to collect the tax already this year. We will see in coming weeks, whether that in fact happens," he said.

Mr. Schaeuble was cautious about a U.S. proposal to leverage the euro zone's current rescue fund, the European Financial Stability Facility, in order to give it more fire power to also help larger economies such as Italy if needed.

"If you talk of leveraging, it depends what you mean by it," Mr. Schaeuble said. "We don't believe that you can resolve real economic problems trough monetary policy," he said.

On Friday, euro-zone finance ministers and U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, who joined the talks for the first time, debated over the need to expand the region's rescue fund as well as introduce stimulus measures.

In a stark message delivered on the sidelines of a meeting of euro-zone finance ministers, the U.S. official pledged his country will do all it can to help Europe overcome its challenges but urged his European peers to overcome damaging divisions and remove "catastrophic risk" from markets.

"What's very damaging is not just seeing the divisiveness in the debate over strategy in Europe but the ongoing conflict between countries and the central bank," he said.

Friday's meeting was the first top level euro-zone meeting since a July 21 accord by heads of government to expand the 17-member bloc's bailout fund and extend a second round of lending to Greece.

Implementation of the deal has been held up by sparring national interests, not least the collateral problem.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the head of the Eurogroup of euro-zone finance ministers, said governments are committed to the deal and to responding to the market turmoil. But he said the euro zone can't pass another economic stimulus package despite the sharp slowdown in growth that is expected to persist in the months ahead.

Meanwhile, negotiations over a plan to introduce a financial transactions tax are proving difficult, meeting resistance from the U.K. and Sweden after the U.S. signalled it won't back the plan.

The European Commission is set on proposing a tax on trading shares and bonds, foreign exchange and derivatives in the coming weeks, for all 27 EU member countries, after France and Germany, the region's two largest economies, backed the idea. The EU also plans to press the case at a summit of the Group of 20 leading economies in November.

But Polish Finance Minister Jacek Rostowski, who chaired the meeting Saturday, said EU leaders are "very much divided on this" and the tax isn't expected to be a crucial element in strategies to stabilize the economic crisis.

Mr. Geithner told his European peers on Friday that the U.S. wouldn't back a financial transactions tax.

The U.K. has long said it would only agree to such a tax if it was global.

The U.K. is Europe's biggest financial center and says it would only support such a tax if it is implemented around the world for fear that it could lose businesses key to its economy.

"I must confess it's not so evident we'll meet agreement in Europe about that," Belgian Finance Minister Didier Reynders said. "If it's not possible, we will maybe discuss on the euro zone."

—Laurence Norman, Riva Froymovich and Marynia Kruk contributed to this article.
Write to Riva Froymovich at riva.froymovich@dowjones.com

online.wsj.com/article/...950972.html?mod=WSJ_World_MIDDLENews

Pressure has been turned up on Athens after talks with visiting international inspectors were abruptly suspended earlier this month with the discovery that the country would overshoot the limit set on its budget deficit for this year. Inspectors demanded that Athens cover the gap before they approve the release of the next EUR8 billion installment of its bailout program organized last year.

Greece has enough money to last until mid-October, according to Greek government officials.

In May 2010, Greece narrowly avoided default with the help of an EUR110 billion bailout from its fellow euro-zone members and the IMF in exchange for measures to cut its deficit and other economic reforms. Since then, European leaders have pledged EUR109 billion in fresh financing.

Despite the recently announced property tax, aimed at collecting some EUR2 billion, Greece's creditors, particularly some of its EU peers, are pushing for more sustainable measures that include immediate cuts in the number of public-sector employees and faster steps on its privatization plan, according to a source.

Meanwhile, Greece's public servants are preparing for a showdown with the government. They announced Friday a 24-hour strike on Oct. 6 to protest planned cuts in special benefits and entitlements to supplement the basic salaries of the country's 750,000 civil servants.

Earlier Saturday, Venizelos warned of "catastrophic" consequences for Greece if economic governance doesn't improve, adding that meeting budgetary targets and securing the viability of public debt isn't enough to get the country through the crisis.

—Bernd Radowitz in Wroclaw, Poland, and Costas Paris in London contributed to this article

online.wsj.com/article/...3111903927204576576722226147548.html

It has imposed a floor on the euro, not a peg on the franc. Note that it didn't set a lower limit for the franc, nor a line in the sand for the franc's value against any other currencies.

Crucially, the SNB did this not because it feared being isolated from the euro, not because it thought the franc would be steadier if it somehow tied it to the common currency, and not because, in Ms. Merkel's words, it "doesn't fit into the global structure." It's not even a vote for world peace; The famously non-bellicose nation doesn't appear to be answering the chancellor's rallying call that countries that share a currency never wage war on each other. By that logic, given the sparkling success of the euro, maybe all countries everywhere should band together into one global currency. Wouldn't that be fun?

Instead, Switzerland was trying to stop the vicious decline in the euro from destroying its economy.

Since the Greek crisis erupted in 2009, the euro has plunged by some 33% against the franc. That's not because of some kind of economic miracle in Switzerland. It's because investors are desperate to flee euros and hide somewhere safer.

The euro is the problem for Switzerland, not the solution. It's a small country, which makes it easy for its inhabitants to pop over the border to do their shopping on the cheap with their super-strong francs, and that's what they were starting to do, to the detriment of local retailers. Its exporters, despite being buoyed up by demand from Asia, feared a nasty rout as they reeled from this euro-shaped stink bomb.

Norway faces similar problems, particularly now the Swiss have slammed the door on inflows. It could cut interest rates if the krone climbs too far, it warned. The euro has also collapsed to a 10-year low against the yen, raising suspicions the Japanese authorities may intervene to stop the rot.

As a politician involved in discussing currency policy matters in forums such as the G-7, Ms. Merkel must surely know that if one currency falls, another has to rise. It simply isn't possible for a currency to fall or rise in isolation. She must, or should, be aware of the hideous mess the euro crisis is spreading around the world.

But Ms. Merkel is not alone in badly misreading this situation. In August, her finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, said roughly the same thing. In an interview with a German radio station during the height of speculation that the SNB might enforce a peg, he said the possibility of such a move proves that the euro is a stable currency. Ah, right.

Joining the chorus, European Commission Vice-President Viviane Reding said last week that the euro bloc was implementing strong anti-crisis measures, adding that the franc's new peg to the euro (sic) was evidence of the single currency's strength. Ms. Reding's comments were written in close coordination with Olli Rehn, commissioner for economic and monetary affairs. Worrying stuff.

Being very generous to the politicians here, you could just about squint and see this euro floor as a peg, but only if you take it as an admission by the Eurocrats that the currency bloc's debt mess is inexorably worsening and destined never to ease. That way, the franc would never fall, so 1.20 to the euro would indeed be a quasi-peg.

Given that Switzerland paid a yield under 1.6% for debt due in 2049 Wednesday, while Italy has to fork out 5.6% for five-year paper, and given that the Greek debt crisis seems to worsen by the day, that may be a safe assumption. But it is a very weird one for the Eurocrats to utter in public.

Within all this fatuity lies one important kernel of truth that is probably being undersold to German taxpayers. That is that while it is monumentally expensive to keep on bailing out Greece, and that it may not be able to prevent a banking crisis, it is arguably cheaper for Germany to chuck money at its errant euro cousins than it is for it to go it alone.

If the euro were to break up—not too outlandish a concept these days—Germany would suddenly find itself with the strongest currency on the planet. After all, one reason why investors want to buy francs is that they are similar to dear old German marks.

Free Germany from the shackles of euro membership, and it would be lumped with a currency strong enough to whack its crucial exports hard. By some estimates, it would end up with a currency trading at the euro equivalent of $1.80 against the dollar, from $1.36 now. Doubtless it would be tempted to fix a limit on how far the mark could climb. Or is that a peg?

Write to Katie Martin at katie.martin@dowjones.com

online.wsj.com/article/...6570440204702956.html?mod=WSJ_Agenda

Neben Brasilien haben unter anderem die USA bereits einen nationalen Handlungsplan zur Umsetzung der Vorgaben für einen offeneren Regierungsstil vorgelegt. Demnach will US-Präsident Barack Obama, der bereits kurz nach seinem Amtsantritt eine Richtlinie für "Open Government" veröffentlichte, eine Online-Petitionsplattform einrichten, den Schutz von Whistleblowern verbessern und einer Initiative zur Veröffentlichung der Einnahmen von natürlichen Ressourcen wie der Öl- oder Gasförderung sowie dem Bergbau beitreten. Die Bemühungen des Weißen Hauses für mehr Offenheit haben aber auch bereits Rückschläge erlitten. So wurde das Budget für das Open-Data-Portal Data.gov   deutlich gekürzt. Zudem gibt sich die Obama-Regierung in Überwachungsfragen genauso zugeknöpft wie die vorangegangene Bush-Administration.

Zu den Gründungsmitgliedern der Partnerschaft gehören neben den beiden Initiatoren Indonesien, Mexiko, Norwegen, die Philippinen, Südafrika und Großbritannien. Deutschland fehlt auf der Liste der Nationen, die sich der Allianz anschließen wollen. Die Entscheidung über einen möglichen Beitritt und eine Teilnahme am ersten OGP-Gipfel im März in Brasilien könne erst nach Vorliegen der Partnerschaftserklärung und nationaler Implementierungspläne fallen, hieß es im Bundesinnenministerium. Experten aus der Zivilgesellschaft drängen auf eine rasche Entscheidung, um dem Thema Open Government hierzulande neuen Schwung zu verleihen.

Bitange Ndemo, Staatssekretär im Kommunikationsministerium Kenias verwies auf den Aufbau eines nationalen Open-Data-Portals. Dieses werde von den Bürgern sehr gut angenommen. Künftig sei geplant, Verwaltungsdienste auch über mobile Plattformen anzubieten. Die kenianische Regierung habe zudem ein Recht auf Informationsfreiheit in der Verfassung festgeschrieben. Mo Ibrahim, der eine eigene Stiftung zur Förderung der Transparenz in Afrika gegründet hat und einen jährlichen Anti-Korruptions-Index veröffentlicht, monierte, dass US-Konzerne wie Google oder Microsoft bislang kein Interesse hätten, Breitband-Netze und -Dienste in Afrika aufzubauen.

Der Gründer der World Wide Web Foundation, Tim Berners-Lee, unterstrich, dass offene Daten an sich wertvoll seien und eine noch zu hebende Goldmine darstellten. Auch das Regieren selbst funktioniere besser, da Ministerien bislang häufig "blind" seien gegenüber den Tätigkeiten anderer Ressorts. Die OGP könne dank der Vernetzung von Initiativen und dank der Maschinenlesbarkeit von Datenformaten nun dafür sorgen, "dass wir alle eine bessere Sicht auf die ganze Welt bekommen". Wichtig sei es, mit der Veröffentlichung von Informationen in staatlicher Hand zunächst anzufangen. Standards zur weitergehenden Erschließung und Verknüpfung der Daten könnten nachträglich entwickelt werden. (Stefan Krempl) / (jk)

Source
www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/...ne-Deutschland-1346876.html

Frau Merkel - warum Deutscland ist noch nicht dabei ?

Muss die Piraten Partei Sie und Co. aus der Regierung verjagen ?

www.openthegovernment.org/

Jamie Dimon           www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/jamie-dimon

Jamie Dimon is the Chief Executive Officer of JPMorgan Chase since December 31st 2005. He also became chairman of the board on December 31st 2006.

Dimon had been Chief Executive Officer of Bank One Corporation, the sixth-largest U.S. bank at the time, since March 2000. After its merge with JPMorgan Chase in July 2004, he became President and Chief Operating Officer.

Before joining Bank One, he held different senior executive positions at Citibank. He is a graduate of Tufts University and of Harvard Business School.


Read more: www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/jamie-dimon#ixzz1Z8943YYm

Many successful improvements that have been made since the financial crisis
And now there are going to be even higher capital requirements, and we know there are 300 rules coming.
Has anyone bothered to study the cumulative effect of the regulations authorities are about to impose?
Dimon predicts they will be the reason that it will take so long our banks, our credit, our businesses, and most importantly, our job creation, to start going again
Basically: regulations kill growth. Imposing them during a crisis might curtail a recovery.
Dimon confronted Carney during a small meeting at this weekend's IMF conference in D.C., in front of around 30 bank officers.
Now the fight is ON. Two days later, Carney hinted publicly that Dimon's speech had no effect on his opinion.
From the FT:
"Carney delivered a speech to global bankers at the Institute of International Finance, warning them “it is hard to see how backsliding [on implementing new capital rules] would help” the global economy.
Carney said:
“If some institutions feel pressure today, it is because they have done too little for too long, rather than because they are being asked to do too much, too soon."
“Authorities are increasingly hearing concerns about the pitch of the playing field for Basel III implementation. Everyone is claiming to be a boy scout while accusing others of juvenile delinquency.”
“However, neither merit badges nor detentions will be self-selected but, rather, determined by impartial peer review and mutual oversight.”


Read more: www.businessinsider.com/...l-requirements-2011-9#ixzz1Z8AjThjd

----------------

was für eine  Affen-Theater

Blankfein earned a total of $54.4 million in 2006 as one of the highest paid executives on Wall Street. His bonus reflected the performance of Goldman Sachs, which reported record net earnings of $9.5 billion. The compensation included a cash bonus of $27.3 million, with the rest paid in stock and options. While CEO of Goldman Sachs Group in 2007, Blankfein earned a total compensation of $53,965,418, which included a base salary of $600,000, a cash bonus of $26,985,474, stocks granted of $15,542,756 and options granted of $10,453,031.
Blankfein was named as one of "The Most Outrageous CEOs of 2009" by Forbes magazine. Taking a different position, Financial Times, which named Blankfein as its "2009 Person of the Year," stated: "His bank has stuck to its strengths, unashamedly taken advantage of the low interest rates and diminished competition resulting from the crisis to make big trading profits." Critics of Goldman Sachs and Wall Street have taken issue with those practices.
On January 13, 2010, Blankfein testified before the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, that he considered Goldman Sachs's role as primarily a market maker, not a creator of the product (i.e., subprime mortgage-related securities). Goldman Sachs was sued on April 16, 2010 by the SEC for the fraudulent selling of a collateralized debt obligation tied to subprime mortgages, a product which Goldman Sachs had created.
With Blankfein at the helm Goldman has also been criticized "by lawmakers and pundits for issues from its pay practices to its role in helping Greece mask the size of its debts." Blankfein testified before Congress in April 2010 at a hearing of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. He said that Goldman Sachs had no moral or legal obligation to inform its clients it was betting against the products which they were buying from Goldman Sachs because it was not acting in a fiduciary role.
Politics
Blankfein is a contributor to mostly Democratic party candidates and donated $4,600 to Democratic Party candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2007. Goldman employees and their relatives contributed almost a million dollars to Barack Obama's presidential campaign, the second most from any one employer, and Blankfein has visited the White House at least four times. Former Goldman executives who hold senior positions in the Obama administration include Gary Gensler, the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission; Mark Patterson, a former Goldman lobbyist who is chief of staff to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner; and Robert Hormats, the undersecretary of state for economic, energy and agricultural affairs.
On April 7, 2009, Blankfein recommended guidelines to overhaul executive compensation. According to The New York Times, he said that lessons from the global financial crisis included the need to "apply basic standards to how we compensate people in our industry."
In November, 2009, he declared in an interview, as a banker: "I'm doing God's work." Several days later he indicated that he regretted that remark and said he had intended it as a joke. He also apologized on behalf of Goldman Sachs to the public for unspecified "things that were clearly wrong and have reason to regret" and which contributed to the financial and economic crisis. The firm announced a 10,000 Small Businesses initiative, committing $500 million to aid American small businesses.
This page has been adapted from the Wikipedia entry of January 19, 2011.


Read more: www.businessinsider.com/blackboard/...-blankfein#ixzz1Z8Cmgpsz

----------------------
Der da ist der Stripenzieher

---------------------------------------

SEPTEMBER 9, 2011, 10:32 AM CET

blogs.wsj.com/emergingeurope/2011/09/09/...-italy-poland-says/


Euro Won’t Survive Debt Crisis In Italy, Poland Says

KRYNICA, Poland—

The euro won’t survive if the sovereign debt crisis engulfs Italy, Polish Finance Minister Jan Vincent-Rostowski said at an economic forum in southern Poland, and urged European leaders to institutionalize economic management of the European Union. Poland holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union in this half of the year.

Here’s what Mr. Rostowski had to say on a discussion panel:

Of course there is a sovereign debt problem in particular euro-zone countries, but if we take … the consolidated debt of all the euro-zone countries and relate that to the GDP of the euro zone, we’ll find it’s quite a bit less than in the U.S. and very much less than in Japan, and yet it’s the euro zone that has a sovereign debt crisis. It’s because there are weak links in the chain. We created a system that is like a chain of links. When the crisis comes, it hits at the weakest point.

What has happened over the past two and a half years since the crisis started was that we’ve been constantly behind the curve in reacting to the crisis. If we’d created EUR450 billion of real disbursable money instead of EUR250 billion, we’d never have got to the situation we’re in today. Fundamentally, it’s a political problem. …

We’re constantly behind the curve, and if you don’t like the word solidarity, then on the security front in terms of protecting the European system. The reason we have this problem we’re all democracies, we all have electorates. That puts the burden of explaining the stark choices on politicians. …

We’ve been saying as the EU presidency this crisis requires more solidarity from the stronger countries, the surplus countries, and of course it requires more responsibility from the weaker countries.

If the stronger countries are not willing to exhibit that solidarity, then they have to realize the sovereign debt crisis that started in a small and non-essential country like Greece could spread to Italy and Spain, and there is no way—there is no way—the euro zone can survive a crisis in Italy. …

The ECB is only providing temporary support to give us some time, correctly, but institutions need to be built. We need to face the fact this is a major political crisis for Europe affecting severely the growing countries mostly in the north and deficit countries most in the south.

Do the surplus countries of the north really want to create their own currency and find it appreciating like the Swiss franc? You can ask the Swiss what the consequences would be.

Structural reform is essential. We were the first in 2010 to say Greece needs not only austerity, but a structural reform. That was based on our experience 20 years ago that the only way you can get out of those problems is through structural reform. Reform is not just for emerging markets, it’s also for Europe, even above all for Europe.