Paulson pulling more tricks to bolster US economy

WASHINGTON – With the economy showing further signs that it is headed into a steep swoon, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson is pulling more tricks out of his bag to try bolster the country's battered financial sector.

The administration and the Federal Reserve rolled out two new programs Tuesday that would provide up to $800 billion in an effort to get more loans flowing in such critical areas as mortgage lending, credit cards, auto loans and small business loans.

Credit markets liked the new efforts, but private economists said the new moves were not likely to be the last changes in the government's vast rescue program, which has already undergone significant alterations since it was passed by Congress on Oct. 3.

Analysts believe more work will need to be done because of their expectations that the economy's vital signs will continue to worsen as the country slips into what many believe could be the worst recession since the early 1980s.

More news on economic performance will be revealed Wednesday with release of data on personal spending, orders to factories for big-ticket durable goods, new home sales and weekly applications for unemployment benefits.

The report on jobless claims is expected to show that applications for benefits fell slightly last week to 537,000, according to a survey of economists by Thomson Reuters. That would be down by 5,000 from the previous week when claims hit 542,000, the highest level for weekly claims since July 1992. Even with the tiny drop, analysts said claims remain at levels indicating severe stress on the labor market.

The unemployment rate has hit a 14-year high of 6.5 percent, putting pressure on personal incomes, with income growth expected to be a modest 0.1 percent for November, according to the Thomson Reuters survey. These Wall Street economists are expecting that consumer spending plunged by 0.9 percent in October, a dismal showing that would follow a period of extended weakness.

The government reported Tuesday that the overall economy, as measured by the gross domestic product, shrank at an annual rate of 0.5 percent in the July-September quarter, reflecting the fact that consumer spending, which accounts for two-thirds of economic activity, fell at the fastest pace in 28 years.

A weak reading for October would indicate that the current quarter could be off to a rocky start. Nariman Behravesh, an economist at IHS Global Insight, said he was expecting GDP to shrink at a 4 percent rate in the current quarter, reflecting the battering consumers are taking from the worst financial crisis since the 1930s. He predicted that the economy would remain in recession through the first half of next year.

"We are in the early stages of one of the worst recessions in the postwar period, even factoring in a massive stimulus program," Behravesh.

The other reports due out Wednesday were also expected to show further October weakness with orders to factories for big-ticket durable goods plunging by 3 percent and sales of new homes falling by 3 percent, according to the Thomson Reuters survey.

To revive the economy, President-elect Barack Obama has said a top priority will be working with Congress to enact a stimulus package with the goal of creating 2.5 million new jobs over the next two years. Analysts believe such an effort will require spending between $500 billion to $700 billion, a figure that would be on top of all the money being spent to stabilize the financial system.

In the latest efforts to stabilize the financial system, the Federal Reserve announced Tuesday that it will buy $200 billion in securities backed by different types of debt including credit card loans, auto loans, student loans and loans to small businesses. That market essentially froze in October. These types of loans as a result have become harder to obtain and have carried higher interest rates

The Fed also announced that it will spend $500 billion to buy mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and another $100 billion to directly purchase mortgages held by Fannie, Freddie and the Federal Home Loan Banks.

This would greatly expand an initial modest effort announced in September with the goal of creating increased demand for mortgage-related assets. The hope is that this will drive down the price of mortgages and make home loans more available.

Analysts predict the Fed program could send mortgage rates down by as much as one-half to a full percentage point in coming months, helping to spur demand in the beleaguered housing market, which is suffering its worst downturn in decades.

The latest federal moves raised U.S. commitments to contain the financial crisis to nearly $7 trillion — though no one thinks the government will actually spend anything like that figure.

美国再投八千亿美元　提振消费支出与房市

美联储和财政部25日上午联合宣布，政府将动用8000亿美元支持消费者支出，降低消费者房货、车贷和学货的利率。这是美国政府在大规模拯救金融市场后，为刺激经济增长采取的最新举措。　
　
　　人民网报道，根据计划，联储将向那些发放信用卡贷款、汽车贷款、学生贷款和小企业货款的金融机构提供2000亿美元的支持，以确保金融机构向有信誉的消费者发放货款的意愿。其中，2000亿美元的200亿来自7000亿美元的金融救助计划，用于消化金融机构参与这一计划可能遭致的损失。财政部表示，2000亿美元只是起点，实际金额将根据需要增加。

　　除支持消费者支出外，联储将购买“两房”及联邦住房贷款银行拥有的1000亿美元的抵押贷款，以增加流向房市的资金，达到降低房货利率的目的。同时，联储还将购买5000亿美元由上述机构发行的抵押贷款担保证券。购买行动将从下周开始。联储在声明中表示，政府此举将降低房屋购买的成本，增加信用流动，其结果将有助于改善房市和金融市场。

　　同一天，美国商务部发布今年第三季度GDP第二次评估，经济收缩0．5个百分点，很大程度上归因于消费支出和房市的低迷。美国美国财政部的数据显示，2007年约有2400亿美元的各种形式的消费者贷款被打包成各种证券出售给投资者．通过打包和再出售这一机制，金融机构有更多现金向消费者发放贷款．但在最近的两个月里，金融机构的这些行为几乎陷于停滞状态，导致贷款利率上升，放贷规模萎缩，对美国经济复苏前景的威胁进一步加大。

巴菲特计划公开投资信息 豪赌股指可能巨亏(图)

投资者担心伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司投资金融衍生品的合约产生巨亏,促使这家主营保险和投资业务的公司股票价格接近腰斩。 

豪赌股指可能巨亏 

路透社24日援引威尔森的话报道,巴菲特打算明年2月底在每年一度的致股东信中进一步披露伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司在金融衍生品领域的投资信息。 

美国证券交易委员会6月要求伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司出具估算所持金融衍生品合约价值的“更详尽”要素,随后于10月完成对这些合约的审查。 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司向包括标准普尔500指数在内共4种股指的股指期货投资者出售保险。保险合约将在2019年至2027年间到期。理论上,如果合约到期时股指点位低于投资者投保时点位,公司将共计赔付大约370.4亿美元。截至9月30日,公司已减记合约价值67.3亿美元。 

美国“股神”沃伦·巴菲特的助手杰基·威尔森说,巴菲特将披露更多信息,解释他执掌的伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司如何计算它在金融衍生品领域的投资损失。 

尽管巴菲特坚称这些金融衍生品合约将为公司赚钱,有别于那些“大规模杀伤性金融武器”,但金融危机引发全球股市大跌的现实令投资者担心,巴菲特对赌股指可能产生巨亏。 

投资者抛售行为致使伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票价格24日收于每股8.75万美元,比去年12月11日每股15.165万美元的历史最高价缩水42%。 

抄底已“四面透风” 

巴菲特“失手”不仅表现在对赌股指方面,他急于抄底美国股市的做法也令投资者质疑,“股神”是否昏了头。 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司9月底拿出760亿美元投资股票,“战利品”包括美国运通公司、可口可乐公司、宝洁公司、富国银行公司等企业的股票。在此后愈演愈烈的金融危机中,这些股票全都未能逃脱下跌命运。 

更令投资者咋舌的是,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司逆市斥资80亿美元,先于9月底以购买股权方式向高盛公司注资50亿美元,继而认购通用电气优先股。这两只股票的价格同样一路走低。 

另外,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司所持垃圾债券面临较高违约风险。截至9月底,这些债券的潜在负债达107.8亿美元。美国穆迪氏投资服务公司预计,全球垃圾债券违约率将从10月份的2.8%上升至明年年底的10.4%。 

与此同时,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司维护AAA级信用评级的成本已相当于信用评级为BBB级或垃圾级的企业。威尔森说,如果信用评级下调,公司将不得不追加相当于不到公司资产1%的抵押担保。 

或是危机下正常起落? 

现年78岁的巴菲特已不是第一次在关键时刻掉链子。上世纪90年代初躲过IT产业泡沫后,巴菲特1999年在资产配置方面给自己打出不及格,因为尽管标准普尔500指数当年大涨,美国市场不少股票红利相当可观,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的账面价值却难以编制预算。 

鉴于伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司经营从地毯到食品的将近80项业务,一些旁观者认为,没有必要对这家公司眼下遭遇的挫折大惊小怪。 

“影响其他企业的事情最终也将影响伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司,”《即使巴菲特也不完美》一书作者瓦汗·亚尼吉安说,“我不是说这家公司经营不善,而是说即使经营得法的公司也会在一场严重危机中受挫。” 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票急挫同样激起一些投资者的抄底热情。对冲基金机构T2合伙人公司执行合伙人惠特尼·蒂尔森说:“我们发疯似地购进伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票。过去两星期内,这只股票成为我公司第一重仓股。” 

行业分析媒体《保险观察家》主编戴维·希夫预计,巴菲特将在金融危机中找到新的机会,因为与其他保险企业四处讨钱的状况相比,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的资产负债表相当好。 

美国政府为何不惜任何代价要救花旗集团？

2万亿美元资产，2亿个客户，35万名员工，花旗“巨无霸”牵一发而动全身，政府不能不救。

　　花旗得到政府所提供的200亿美元注资及3060亿美元的担保后，真的可以安然无恙吗？

　　就在华尔街传出花旗集团因为金融危机而陷入财务困境几天以后，美国政府即推出了及时而周到的救援方案。此次救援的特别之处，不仅在于美国政府的慷慨大方，更在于对花旗现任管理层的宽容与信任。

　　此前，我们曾目睹雷曼兄弟的倒掉，当时美国政府权衡再三，最后仍未施以援手。那么此刻，美国政府缘何不惜代价救花旗？

　　救助花旗美国别无选择

　　在本月17日花旗宣布裁员的消息以后，关于这家金融机构遭受巨额次贷损失的传言四起，其股价在一周内大跌60%。为了及时控制市场恐慌情绪，本月23日，美国政府宣布向花旗银行注资200亿美元，并为该集团持有的房地产贷款和证券资产提供高达3060亿美元的担保。但是与救助AIG的方案有所不同，政府并未立即接管花旗或者要求撤换现任CEO潘伟迪，而是选择保留当前的管理层，以保持花旗经营策略的持续性。

　　美国政府选择救助花旗的新方案有可能基于以下几点考虑：首先，花旗集团作为美国第二大商业银行，其在美国金融体系和民众生活中发挥着不可或缺的公共金融服务提供者的作用，其服务具有基础公共产品特征，花旗的破产或者重大战略变动，不仅会影响市场信心，还会影响相当一部分美国企业和居民的正常生活，这无疑是为本已疲弱的美国经济雪上加霜。其次，同贝尔斯登、雷曼兄弟等投资银行相比，花旗所受损失尚未达到破产地步，其管理层所奉行的稳健经营策略在当前市况下仍有可取之处，通过政府注资和担保改善花旗的资产负债表，有可能使其逐步走出财务困境。再次，作为一家拥有上亿客户和几十万员工的跨国银行集团，花旗的日常运营与管理极其复杂，美国政府缺乏足够的人力和手段接管它，与其政府费力接管，还不如让它自求生路。最后，次贷危机程度的逐步加重，使市场信心极其脆弱，投资者已经承受不起另一家大型银行倒闭的打击，政府的救助措施必须确保花旗稳定地持续经营。

　　花旗真的可以安然无恙吗

　　尽管美国政府不惜代价救花旗，但是，花旗真的可以安然无恙吗？

　　目前花旗有约2万亿美元的表内资产和1.2万亿的表外资产，政府所提供的3060亿担保不太可能覆盖花旗在此次危机中的全部损失。鉴于花旗的市场地位和资产规模，寻求合适的并购方将是相当困难的。因此如果危机继续发展，它完全可能再次寻求政府救助。

　　此外，花旗陷入次贷泥潭令人遐想：难道其它美国大银行乃至欧洲大型金融机构就可以独善其身吗？它们是不是也需要政府救助？但是，美国国会批准的救市计划首批3500亿美元已经用完，按照目前的速度，剩下的3500亿也坚持不了多久。在那以后怎么办？现在看，救市的药方没有错，只是所需要的资金量有可能远远超过最初的计划乃至超出美国政府的承受能力，而且金融市场将不得不经历一个痛苦的自愈过程。在此过程中，实体经济会受到流动性紧缩的打击，衰退几成定局。若要改变这一局面，美国需要更多的外部援助。

权威机构终于确认：去年12月美国就已步入衰退

华盛顿十二月一日电 (记者 邱江波)美国权威的国家经济研究局今天正式宣布，美国经济事实上从二00七年十二月已经陷入衰退。

　　美国国家经济研究局今天宣布，经过该机构的权威经济学专家组长期仔细的统计和分析，美国经济实际上已经于去年十二月陷入了衰退。经济学界通常根据GDP、商品和服务总量连续两个季度下降，就断定进入经济衰退。但国家经济研究局则使用了更多精确的指标来衡量，这些指标包括了就业数据。专家组说，他们的周期测定委员会在上周五通过电话会讨论并确定了本次经济衰退的开始时间。国家经济研究局说，美国的GDP事实上已于今年七月到九月这个季度转为负增长，更多的经济学家则认为，当前正在走过的第四季度，经济指标的降幅将更甚于前个季度。

　　不过，白宫发言人托尼·弗拉脱今天在评论这个消息的时候，尽力避免明确使用“衰退”这个词语，而使用布什总统在第二个任期常常使用的词语：“第二次经济低迷期”。弗拉脱为此辩护说，重要的是我们能为这个现实做些什么。据他理解，将金融和信用市场回归到原来的正常轨道并继续促进住房市场进步，这是我们继续关注的地方。　　

　　尽管布什政府在今年以来与国会共同颁行了两个刺激经济的计划，还有一个七千亿美元的救市方案，以阻止美国金融危机蔓延，刺激陷入衰退的经济，但专家依然认为，这次美国经济衰退将持续到二00九年。

　　由权威经济学家组成的美国国家经济研究局，尽管在名义上是一个私立和非营利机构，但历来都是决定美国商业周期和界定是否经济危机的权威学术机构。

Bush administration ignored warnings about mortgage crisis

By MATT APUZZO
Associated Press Writer

Published: Monday, December 1, 2008 at 8:08 a.m.
Last Modified: Monday, December 1, 2008 at 8:11 a.m.

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration backed off proposed crackdowns on no-money-down, interest-only mortgages years before the economy collapsed, buckling to pressure from some of the same banks that have now failed. It ignored remarkably prescient warnings that foretold the financial meltdown, according to an Associated Press review of regulatory documents.

"Expect fallout, expect foreclosures, expect horror stories," California mortgage lender Paris Welch wrote to U.S. regulators in January 2006, about one year before the housing implosion cost her a job.

Bowing to aggressive lobbying — along with assurances from banks that the troubled mortgages were OK — regulators delayed action for nearly one year. By the time new rules were released late in 2006, the toughest of the proposed provisions were gone and the meltdown was under way.

"These mortgages have been considered more safe and sound for portfolio lenders than many fixed rate mortgages," David Schneider, home loan president of Washington Mutual, told federal regulators in early 2006. Two years later, WaMu became the largest bank failure in U.S. history.

The administration's blind eye to the impending crisis is emblematic of its governing philosophy, which trusted market forces and discounted the value of government intervention in the economy. Its belief ironically has ushered in the most massive government intervention since the 1930s.

Many of the banks that fought to undermine the proposals by some regulators are now either out of business or accepting billions in federal aid to recover from a mortgage crisis they insisted would never come. Many executives remain in high-paying jobs, even after their assurances were proved false.

In 2005, faced with ominous signs the housing market was in jeopardy, bank regulators proposed new guidelines for banks writing risky loans. Today, in the midst of the worst housing recession in a generation, the proposal reads like a list of what-ifs:

—Regulators told bankers exotic mortgages were often inappropriate for buyers with bad credit.

—Banks would have been required to increase efforts to verify that buyers actually had jobs and could afford houses.

—Regulators proposed a cap on risky mortgages so a string of defaults wouldn't be crippling.

—Banks that bundled and sold mortgages were told to be sure investors knew exactly what they were buying.

—Regulators urged banks to help buyers make responsible decisions and clearly advise them that interest rates might skyrocket and huge payments might be due sooner than expected.

Those proposals all were stripped from the final rules. None required congressional approval or the president's signature.

"In hindsight, it was spot on," said Jeffrey Brown, a former top official at the Office of Comptroller of the Currency, one of the first agencies to raise concerns about risky lending.

Federal regulators were especially concerned about mortgages known as "option ARMs," which allow borrowers to make payments so low that mortgage debt actually increases every month. But banking executives accused the government of overreacting.

Bankers said such loans might be risky when approved with no money down or without ensuring buyers have jobs but such risk could be managed without government intervention.

"An open market will mean that different institutions will develop different methodologies for achieving this goal," Joseph Polizzotto, counsel to now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers, told U.S. regulators in a March 2006.

Countrywide Financial Corp., at the time the nation's largest mortgage lender, agreed. The proposal "appears excessive and will inhibit future innovation in the marketplace," said Mary Jane Seebach, managing director of public affairs.

One of the most contested rules said that before banks purchase mortgages from brokers, they should verify the process to ensure buyers could afford their homes. Some bankers now blame much of the housing crisis on brokers who wrote fraudulent, predatory loans. But in 2006, banks said they shouldn't have to double-check the brokers.

"It is not our role to be the regulator for the third-party lenders," wrote Ruthann Melbourne, chief risk officer of IndyMac Bank.

California-based IndyMac also criticized regulators for not recognizing the track record of interest-only loans and option ARMs, which accounted for 70 percent of IndyMac's 2005 mortgage portfolio. This summer, the government seized IndyMac and will pay an estimated $9 billion to ensure customers don't lose their deposits.

Last week, Downey Savings joined the growing list of failed banks. The problem: About 52 percent of its mortgage portfolio was tied up in risky option ARMs, which in 2006 Downey insisted were safe — maybe even safer than traditional 30-year mortgages.

"To conclude that 'nontraditional' equates to higher risk does not appropriately balance risk and compensating factors of these products," said Lillian Gavin, the bank's chief credit officer.

At least some regulators didn't buy it. The comptroller of the currency, John C. Dugan, was among the first to sound the alarm in mid-2005. Speaking to a consumer advocacy group, Dugan painted a troublesome picture of option-ARM lending. Many buyers, particularly those with bad credit, would soon be unable to afford their payments, he said. And if housing prices declined, homeowners wouldn't even be able to sell their way out of the mess.

It sounded simple, but "people kind of looked at us regulators as old-fashioned," said Brown, the agency's former deputy comptroller.

Diane Casey-Landry, of the American Bankers Association, said the industry feared a two-tiered system in which banks had to follow rules that mortgage brokers did not. She said opposition was based on the banks' best information.

"You're looking at a decline in real estate values that was never contemplated," she said.

Some saw problems coming. Community groups and even some in the mortgage business, like Welch, warned regulators not to ease their rules.

"We expect to see a huge increase in defaults, delinquencies and foreclosures as a result of the over selling of these products," Kevin Stein, associate director of the California Reinvestment Coalition, wrote to regulators in 2006. The group advocates on housing and banking issues for low-income and minority residents.

The government's banking agencies spent nearly a year debating the rules, which required unanimous agreement among the OCC, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Federal Reserve, and the Office of Thrift Supervision — agencies that sometimes don't agree.

The Fed, for instance, was reluctant under Alan Greenspan to heavily regulate lending. Similarly, the Office of Thrift Supervision, an arm of the Treasury Department that regulated many in the subprime mortgage market, worried that restricting certain mortgages would hurt banks and consumers.

Grovetta Gardineer, OTS managing director for corporate and international activities, said the 2005 proposal "attempted to send an alarm bell that these products are bad." After hearing from banks, she said, regulators were persuaded that the loans themselves were not problematic as long as banks managed the risk. She disputes the notion that the rules were weakened.

In the past year, with Congress scrambling to stanch the bleeding in the financial industry, regulators have tightened rules on risky mortgages.

Congress is considering further tightening, including some of the same proposals abandoned years ago.

• Analyst: Lending industry may cut $2 trillion in credit card lines

(Reuters) – The U.S. credit card industry may pull back well over $2 trillion of lines over the next 18 months due to risk aversion and regulatory changes, leading to sharp declines in consumer spending, prominent banking analyst Meredith Whitney said.

The credit card is the second key source of consumer liquidity, the first being jobs, the Oppenheimer & Co analyst noted.

"In other words, we expect available consumer liquidity in the form or credit-card lines to decline by 45 percent."

Bank of America Corp, Citigroup Inc and JPMorgan Chase & Co represent over half of the estimated U.S. card outstandings as of September 30, and each company has discussed reducing card exposure or slowing growth, Whitney said.

A consolidated U.S. lending market that is pulling back on credit is also posing a risk to the overall consumer liquidity, Whitney said.

Mortgages and credit cards are now dominated by five players who are all pulling back liquidity, making reductions in consumer liquidity seem unavoidable, she said.

"...We are now beginning to see evidence of broad-based declines in overall consumer liquidity."

"In a country that offers hundreds of cereal and soda pop choices, the banking industry has become one that offers very few choices," Whitney wrote in a note dated November 30.

She also said credit lines to consumers through home equity and credit cards had been cut back from the second-quarter levels.

"Pulling credit when job losses are increasing by over 50 percent year-over-year in most key states is a dangerous and unprecedented combination, in our view," the analyst said.

(Reporting by Neha Singh in Bangalore; Editing by Vinu Pilakkott)

Panel says U.S. has been in a recession since Dec. 2007

WASHINGTON – The U.S. economy has been in a recession since December 2007, the National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday.

The NBER — a private, nonprofit research organization — said its group of academic economists who determine business cycles met and decided that the U.S. recession began last December.

By one benchmark, a recession occurs whenever the gross domestic product, the total output of goods and services, declines for two consecutive quarters. The GDP turned negative in the July-September quarter of this year, and many economists believe it is falling in the current quarter at an even sharper rate.

But the NBER's dating committee uses broader and more precise measures, including employment data. In a news release, the group said its cycle dating committee held a telephone conference call on Friday and made the determination on when the recession began.

The White House commented on the news that a second downturn has officially begun on President George W. Bush's watch without ever actually using the word "recession," a term the president and his aides have repeatedly avoided. Instead, spokesman Tony Fratto remarked upon the fact that NBER "determines the start and end dates of business cycles."

"What's important is what is being done about it," Fratto said. "The most important things we can do for the economy right now are to return the financial and credit markets to normal, and to continue to make progress in housing, and that's where we'll continue to focus."

Many economists believe the current downturn will last well into 2009, and will be the most severe slump since the 1981-82 recession. The country is being battered by the most severe financial crisis since the 1930s as banks struggle to deal with billions of dollars in loan losses.

The Bush administration won approval from Congress on Oct. 3 for a $700 billion rescue package for the financial system. Bush said in an interview with ABC's "World News" to be aired Monday that he would support additional intervention if necessary to end the recession.

"I'm sorry it's happening, of course," Bush said, referring to a global financial crisis that has eliminated millions of jobs and damaged retirement accounts.

Both Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson were scheduled to give speeches Monday providing an update on how the government's rescue efforts are working to deal with the economic distress.

Two new reports on the economy provided a grim snapshot of how steep the slump is becoming. The Commerce Department reported Monday that construction spending fell by a larger-than-expected 1.2 percent in October, while the Institute for Supply Management said its gauge of manufacturing activity dropped to a 26-year low in November.

The GDP contracted by 0.2 percent at an annual rate in the fourth quarter of 2007, but that that drop was followed growth in the first two quarters of this year, partially boosted by the distribution of millions of economic stimulus payments.

However, employment, one of the measurements tracked by the NBER, has been falling since January.

The NBER decision means that the economic expansion lasted from November 2001 until December 2007. Economic expansions peak and recessions begin in the same month, according to the NBER's dating methods. Founded in 1920, the NBER has more than 1,000 university professors and researchers who act as bureau associates, studying how the economy works.

The decision on the recession means that during the eight years that Bush has been in office, the country has seen two recessions. The first downturn lasted from March 2001 until November of that year.

给房产界的警告。今天国会听证，FDIC chair, Sheila Bair， 预测 -realtiger- 

在未来两年之内，将有4－5 million homes enter into foreclosures.

如果推行她的mortgage modification plans, which are opposed by some bankers, 会减少1.5 million 个foreclosures. 也就是说，在乐观的情况下，还会有 2.5-3.5 million homes enter into foreclosures.

just for your information.

// fred = many big banks. Citi = 5-10% fred. So, citi can not die.
// how big banks looting the money from working and middle class: inflation in normal years + tax payers money bailout in financial crisis.

美国银行 下一个崩塌的巨擘 -Tiger666- 

中国证券报 2008-11-30 04:14:33

　　本周，美国政府向处于困境的银行业巨头——花旗集团伸出援手。无论对于美国，还是对于国际金融体系来讲，花旗都是一个超级巨无霸，大到不能让它破产。然而继贝尔斯登、美国国际集团（AIG）……花旗之后，又会轮到哪家金融巨头倒霉并需要美国政府“买单”，华尔街对此猜测不已。


　　有业内人士日前称，美国银行（Bank of America）可能成为“金融危机准星瞄准的下一个靶子。”作为以资产计算排名目前全美第三大的银行，美国银行股价11月累计下跌了36％（以26日收盘价格计算）。更令投资者沮丧的是，“股神”巴菲特尽管近来已开始陆续增持部分美国金融股，但美国银行恰恰是巴菲特大幅减持的对象。

　　公开信息显示，巴菲特的伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司今年第三季度出售了410万股美国银行的股份。而美国银行上月发布的第三季度财报也令投资者失望，该行当季度盈利为11．8亿美元，而去年同期则为37亿美元。美国银行还宣布，将削减一半股息至每股32美分。

　　美国媒体披露，美国银行首席执行官肯尼斯·刘易斯本周发布了致该行所有雇员的公开信。信中表示，美国银行仍是全球最优秀、稳定的银行之一，并不需要救助资金，更没有寻求救助资金的注入，他说：“我们接受政府资金的注入，只是稳定整个金融系统的计划的一部分。”

　　今年6月，美国银行以总价40亿美元收购了全美最大的商业抵押贷款机构全美金融公司（CFC）；9月，美国银行又计划以440亿美元收购华尔街第三大投资银行——美林集团。这两笔买卖在当时看来堪称“十分划算”，但分析人士认为，一旦这两家被收购对象手中的抵押贷款、证券资产的损失进一步扩大，则可能将美国银行拖向深渊。仅以CFC为例，在将其资产收入囊中后，美国银行的住宅抵押贷款规模已经超过了2500亿美元，诸如此类的危险资产很有可能在未来成为破坏美国银行的“地雷”。

　　独立研究机构CreditSight日前发布的研究报告表明，如果商业地产、住宅市场的表现超出市场最坏的预期，美国银行的核心资本率可能走低至7.15％。尽管监管部门对此的最低要求是6％，不过一旦该指标达到或接近7％，都足以令投资者感到惊慌失措。CreditSight构建的模型分析还显示，在美国政府本周大举注资花旗集团之前，花旗的核心资本率按上述极端情况计算可能走低至8.64％。

　　相对于花旗而言，分析人士认为美国银行还算拥有自己的优势，即其管理层尚能得到投资者的认可，这也从某种程度上冲淡了市场对核心资本率之类问题的担忧。不过，如果一些危险资产的损失持续扩大，或者未来投资者的敏感性变得更高，或许美国银行会步花旗集团的后尘，沦落到需要美国政府援手的地步。

征求建议：我不是富翁，能否早退休 -快乐大叔-

公司已开始大量裁人，轮到自己是早晚的事儿，其实没什么了不起的，我正盼着早退休可以有时间钓鱼，摄影等。
家里人说我们不是富翁，哪有那么多钱维持生活?当然可以，我早就算好了,大家可以帮看看我算得对吗？
我们有一个townhose 现市价是28万多，位于大学区附近，已全部付完贷款，我手头上还有一些现金，足可以付的起不太贵的房子的
首付，没工作后，我就出租townhouse,租金大概2000-2300，非常好租，再买一套房子自住，每月还贷控制在1000，我们这个小城市
生活费不高，当地的饭馆也早已吃遍了，美国，加拿大，欧洲也去过，每年可以回国一趟，北京还有一套房子出租，
租金够我在国内的吃喝，旅游。如果夫妻俩都没工作，孩子上学有奖学金不用我们的钱，我是不是可以提早退休了。虽然钱不多，但是属于自己的时间多了。

How low can banks go?

It's anything but festive on Wall Street these days.

Canceled holiday parties, lower bonuses and job cuts combined with expectations of a miserable fourth quarter, numbers-wise, weighed on financial stocks Monday. In one stark example, Goldman Sachs shares fell 17%, and analysts almost uniformly predict it will have a fourth-quarter loss after sailing through the 16-month-old credit crisis relatively unscathed.

Other bank shares tumbled Monday as well. Morgan Stanley declined 22%, JPMorgan Chase 18%, Citigroup 22%, Merrill Lynch 23% and Bank of America 21%.

The pessimism extends to the outlook for financial markets in general, especially after a report Monday by the National Bureauof Economic Research confirmed what everyone suspected all along: The U.S. is in a recession and has been so since last December. A recession, combined with rising unemployment, could translate into lower spending, lower corporate profits and less deal activity all around.

One potentially alarming trend is banks pulling back consumer credit lines, says Oppenheimer analyst Meredith Whitney. She estimates that $2 trillion worth of credit lines will be canceled in the coming months.

Since many households use credit cards to manage monthly cash flow for necessities like groceries and gas, "pulling credit at a time when job losses are increasing by over 50% year-on-year in most key states is a dangerous and unprecedented combination," Whitney wrote in a research note.

Risk aversion is one big reason banks are pulling back, however. Despite well more than $100 billion in write-downs so far, there are tens of billions more yet to be taken. Write-downs related to deteriorating asset values could take a huge chunk out of the $250 billion the U.S. Treasury has pledged as direct equity investments into banks to help them start lending again.

A volatile fourth-quarter trading environment may also wreak havoc on bank earnings. Credit Suisse analyst Susan Roth Katzke said Monday that Goldman could have a fourth-quarter loss of $4 a share (or $1.5 billion) largely because of an estimated $4 billion loss in its trading activities. That is quite a difference from the record $3.2 billion profits ($7 a share) it reached in the fourth quarter last year. So far this year, Goldman has reported profits of $4.3 billion.

Morgan Stanley, the other big independent investment bank left standing in the credit market rubble, is also seen struggling with trading and corporate finance. Katzke sees a $385 million loss for the bank in the fourth quarter, or 35 cents a share.

Both Goldman and Morgan could climb out of the credit crisis with the aid of a large bank acquisition, which would bring them highly coveted deposits to fund their lending, rather than relying on the short-term debt markets. Both companies converted to a commercial bank license this fall with the intention of building deposits. Morgan Stanley is seen as more likely in the short term to strike a large bank acquisition.

The pickings are getting slimmer, though. Wells Fargo is taking over Wachovia, JPMorgan Chase took on Bear Stearns and Washington Mutual, and Bank of America is absorbing Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch. Citigroup is also seen looking for a deal even after the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department tossed it a $20 billion lifeline last week.

That leaves Morgan Stanley to pick among the larger regional banks. Any deal would have to be a blockbuster to have real effect. Consultants at Booz & Co. see a banking industry where just four banks control 40% of U.S. deposits.

"A combination of constrained credit availability, anemic demand and intense deposit competition will put significant earnings pressure on the banks that remain," write the consultants, Mike McKeon and Seamus McMahon.

Copyrighted, Forbes.com. All rights reserved.

巴菲特计划公开投资信息 豪赌股指可能巨亏(图)

投资者担心伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司投资金融衍生品的合约产生巨亏,促使这家主营保险和投资业务的公司股票价格接近腰斩。 

豪赌股指可能巨亏 

路透社24日援引威尔森的话报道,巴菲特打算明年2月底在每年一度的致股东信中进一步披露伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司在金融衍生品领域的投资信息。 

美国证券交易委员会6月要求伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司出具估算所持金融衍生品合约价值的“更详尽”要素,随后于10月完成对这些合约的审查。 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司向包括标准普尔500指数在内共4种股指的股指期货投资者出售保险。保险合约将在2019年至2027年间到期。理论上,如果合约到期时股指点位低于投资者投保时点位,公司将共计赔付大约370.4亿美元。截至9月30日,公司已减记合约价值67.3亿美元。 

美国“股神”沃伦·巴菲特的助手杰基·威尔森说,巴菲特将披露更多信息,解释他执掌的伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司如何计算它在金融衍生品领域的投资损失。 

尽管巴菲特坚称这些金融衍生品合约将为公司赚钱,有别于那些“大规模杀伤性金融武器”,但金融危机引发全球股市大跌的现实令投资者担心,巴菲特对赌股指可能产生巨亏。 

投资者抛售行为致使伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票价格24日收于每股8.75万美元,比去年12月11日每股15.165万美元的历史最高价缩水42%。 

抄底已“四面透风” 

巴菲特“失手”不仅表现在对赌股指方面,他急于抄底美国股市的做法也令投资者质疑,“股神”是否昏了头。 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司9月底拿出760亿美元投资股票,“战利品”包括美国运通公司、可口可乐公司、宝洁公司、富国银行公司等企业的股票。在此后愈演愈烈的金融危机中,这些股票全都未能逃脱下跌命运。 

更令投资者咋舌的是,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司逆市斥资80亿美元,先于9月底以购买股权方式向高盛公司注资50亿美元,继而认购通用电气优先股。这两只股票的价格同样一路走低。 

另外,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司所持垃圾债券面临较高违约风险。截至9月底,这些债券的潜在负债达107.8亿美元。美国穆迪氏投资服务公司预计,全球垃圾债券违约率将从10月份的2.8%上升至明年年底的10.4%。 

与此同时,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司维护AAA级信用评级的成本已相当于信用评级为BBB级或垃圾级的企业。威尔森说,如果信用评级下调,公司将不得不追加相当于不到公司资产1%的抵押担保。 

或是危机下正常起落? 

现年78岁的巴菲特已不是第一次在关键时刻掉链子。上世纪90年代初躲过IT产业泡沫后,巴菲特1999年在资产配置方面给自己打出不及格,因为尽管标准普尔500指数当年大涨,美国市场不少股票红利相当可观,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的账面价值却难以编制预算。 

鉴于伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司经营从地毯到食品的将近80项业务,一些旁观者认为,没有必要对这家公司眼下遭遇的挫折大惊小怪。 

“影响其他企业的事情最终也将影响伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司,”《即使巴菲特也不完美》一书作者瓦汗·亚尼吉安说,“我不是说这家公司经营不善,而是说即使经营得法的公司也会在一场严重危机中受挫。” 

伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票急挫同样激起一些投资者的抄底热情。对冲基金机构T2合伙人公司执行合伙人惠特尼·蒂尔森说:“我们发疯似地购进伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司股票。过去两星期内,这只股票成为我公司第一重仓股。” 

行业分析媒体《保险观察家》主编戴维·希夫预计,巴菲特将在金融危机中找到新的机会,因为与其他保险企业四处讨钱的状况相比,伯克希尔·哈撒韦公司的资产负债表相当好。 

征求建议：我不是富翁，能否早退休 -快乐大叔-

公司已开始大量裁人，轮到自己是早晚的事儿，其实没什么了不起的，我正盼着早退休可以有时间钓鱼，摄影等。
家里人说我们不是富翁，哪有那么多钱维持生活?当然可以，我早就算好了,大家可以帮看看我算得对吗？
我们有一个townhose 现市价是28万多，位于大学区附近，已全部付完贷款，我手头上还有一些现金，足可以付的起不太贵的房子的
首付，没工作后，我就出租townhouse,租金大概2000-2300，非常好租，再买一套房子自住，每月还贷控制在1000，我们这个小城市
生活费不高，当地的饭馆也早已吃遍了，美国，加拿大，欧洲也去过，每年可以回国一趟，北京还有一套房子出租，
租金够我在国内的吃喝，旅游。如果夫妻俩都没工作，孩子上学有奖学金不用我们的钱，我是不是可以提早退休了。虽然钱不多，但是属于自己的时间多了。

巴菲特计划公开投资信息 豪赌股指可能巨亏(图)

征求建议：我不是富翁，能否早退休 -快乐大叔-