Do you or did you ever have friends in the FDIC?
"Here in my hand is a list of 205 communists in the blogosphere and the mainstream media."
Well – no actually – but I have a long list of people who – on the record – supported the confiscation of Washington Mutual.
Washington Mutual was given to JP Morgan who did not need to honour all of WaMu’s debts. Debt holders – who would normally have expected to recover most or all of their investment were wiped out.
After this – and until very recently – no ma
The confiscation of Washington Mutual thus forced the entire system onto the government guarantee tit. The cost to taxpayers is thus potentially enormous.
Now at the time the confiscation looked
However if JPM was telling the truth – and Sheila Bair had a decent basis for believing them – then this was not arbitrary confiscation – though it was confiscation without appeal. It would be costly for the system – and it might have been
Alas the facts have a neat way of outing the incompetence of Sheila Bair. JPMorgan is now confessing that almost all of the charges taken when Washington Mutual was confiscated will be reversed through their P&L.
Sheila Bair – a Republican appointee no less – confiscated without compensation and without right of appeal valuable private property. I have argued repeatedly that she should resign – but now my basic thesis is proven her position is totally untenable.
A huge number of people supported her at the time. These are people who supported the confiscation of private property without appeal. Usually such people are called communists. The alternative explanation is that these people are
Actually I know a lot of these people and they are not dopes. [Using McCarthyist logic therefore they must be communists.]
But they are not Communists either. Instead they were dopes on this occasion. Panics – be them financial or political do that. They turn thinking – even iconoclastic people like high profile bloggers – into dopes.
Now Washington Mutual was in fact very easy to add up. It was obviously solvent if you ran the numbers properly – but people find it quite difficult to run the numbers on banks. This applies to senior government officials too. And that explains why financial crises happen. People thought there was no risk in financial assets that were obviously risky during 2005 and 2006 and even into 2007. Thereafter they thought that financial assets that were most likely safe were (near) worthless. Government officials seemingly arbitrarily confiscating assets into the height of the crisis
After the confiscation of WaMu we needed not only to
The irrational fear in markets was not unlike the irrational fear that other manias (eg Joe McCarthy) engendered. That doesn’t make the fear less real or less destructive.
I thought at the time that Sheila Bair’s resignation would heal that wound– and would be the single best thing that the government could do to ease the financial crisis. Her resignation would break the nexus between fear in the market and the fear of seemingly arbitrary confiscation by government officials.
That nexus is broken now through repeated and consistent subsidy at huge potential cost to the taxpayers. The government – through repeated capital in
It would have been cheaper for Sheila Bair
However – the immediate and pressing need for Sheila Bair to resign as a matter of policy has past. The market is no longer outright afraid of arbitrary government confiscation of financial assets though they might have some fear about government intervening in
But whilst the time for Sheila Bair’s resignation as a matter of national priority is past, the time for her resignation for proven incompetence has
John
Read more at John Hempton's Weblog
















I was hoping for some meat in your post. Where's the beef?
Why aren't you calling for criminal charges against JPM?
May 26, 2009 10:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't have the evidence for criminal charges against JPM. There is a risk that that evidence pops up under discovery at the various civil suits - but there is not a chance that the government would ever file those criminal charges.
Moreover the criminal charges would destabilise the financial system which is not likely to be in the public interest.
J
May 26, 2009 10:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
If JPM committed fraud to acquire WaMu, trying that case doesn't "destabilise the financial system", does it?
And I still don't see the beef on Bair. I was hoping the latter part of your post would develop something specific.
May 26, 2009 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
"It was confiscated despite being liquid and adequately capitalised at the time."
The article on JP Morgan and WaMu today @ Calculated Risk would seem to cast doubt on this assertion, Felix Salmon notwithstanding.
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/05/revisiting-jpmorgan-wamu-acquisition.html
May 27, 2009 12:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
9/07 FHFA takes over Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
9/14 Merrill Lynch taken over by BOA
9/15 Lehman bankruptcy
9/16 AIG crashes
9/16 Reserve Primary breaks buck
9/20 Hank Paulson's three-page bailout plan published, all hell breaks loose.
9/25 WaMu seized after 10 day bank run
Now that you've explained it, I can see how if Shelia Bair had just left WaMu alone, everything would have been fine. /snark
May 27, 2009 1:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry John on your lost investments. I suspect that Wa Mu was in no worse trouble than BofA and Citi. It must be frustrating to see that government decided to bail out those insolvent banks and throw your bank under the bus.
The basic fact is that about $10 trillion in outstanding mortgages are backed with about $6 trillion in collatoral. Someone is going to have to take those losses. Just because the taxpayer is absorbing the biggest banks losses does not mean that Wa Mu was solvent.
May 27, 2009 2:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
No - but ex-post JPM has admitted that WaMu was solvent.
The test is ex-post here.
---
And it was a small loss - but a REALLY BAD decision.
It took the crisis from the wholesale banks (Bear, Lehman, AIG FP) to the retail banks (WaMu, Wachovia).
In other words it moved the crisis from Wall Street to Main Street.
Bad move Sheila.
J
May 27, 2009 8:26 AM | Reply | Permalink
The crises started on mainstreet. WaMu had gone into the same schlock mortgage lending business that Golden West, Countrywide, and IndyMac had pioneered.
Golden West was the poison that killed Wachovia.
Countrywide severely sickened Bank of America.
FDIC couldn't find a buyer for IndyMac and took a huge hit.
Of course, this was all compounded by the mark-to-market idiocy. With mark-to-market, WaMu was insolvent.
Having marked down the assets to market, JPMC got them for what they were worth at the time. As they mature and are mostly paid off, JPMC will make a handsome profit. JPMC is just playing the game according to the stupid rules and regulations set up by the government.
May 27, 2009 11:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
Name me one powerful regulator in this mess that hasn't made a bad move that cost billions?
Take as much time as you need.
May 27, 2009 10:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
WAMU has been my bank for years, but I have no intention of leaving any of my accounts with JPM Chase. I am not interested in dealing with a NY bank. I suspect that they will end up losing a lot of the west coast former WAMU customers.
May 27, 2009 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink