cryptogon.com

President Obama also insisted that he’s convinced the economy will rebound. And while there will of course be some kind of bounce somewhere down the road, no matter how small, what exactly will be the good that comes from it when it happens with the Dow at 1000? I know, that’s probably not what the president thinks. Or hopes for.

I’m thinking that it’s starting to feel like some sort of contortionist act. Looking at the numbers of the day, I see one more instance of a jaw-dropping plunge in home sales, this time in pending sales of existing houses. Whether it’s new or existing real estate, pending or actual sales, all the numbers keep on going down at Olympic speed. Where would that rebound come from, Mr. President? Prices have much more to fall still, sir, or don’t you know that?

Wait, let me put it another way. Who would you recommend buys the stocks? The millions losing their homes? The even bigger numbers losing their jobs? Maybe the tens of millions who’ve seen their pensions lose 40% in one single year should try to make up for these losses with one more brave bet?

And what would you advice they buy? What stocks are cheap, where are the potential gains to be made? Would you want to tell Americans to buy the stock of the biggest losers (in more than one sense), the AIG’s and CIti’s of the world, the companies that you have now transferred trillions of dollars to that belonged to the same Americans in the first place that you now suggest buy the shares?

How about shares in GM and Ford, who today announced sales that are down 53% and 48%, respectively, numbers that ensure unemployment for millions of additional Americans, regardless of future ingestion of government billions? You want the men and women who just lost their jobs, and likely much of their pensions, to go out and buy shares in their former employers? Is that what you want? Am I the only one around here who thinks of terms like ‘cynical’ and ‘perverted’ when I think this over? How dare you sir, how dare you? Have you no shame?

How dare you abuse the trust your voters have put in you to lure them into at best highly insecure investments with what little they have left, while at the same moment your 2nd hand finance salesmen Tim Geithner and Ben Bernanke testify in Congress that the latest $700 billion banking system ‘rescue’ will not be -nearly- enough? We all know you will need trillions more for your policies in the near future. We know that because your minions don’t even try to hide it anymore in public.

What goes through your mind if and when an impoverished old lady who wants so desperately ‘to believe’ that she donated $100 to your campaign even if that meant she’d eat only oatmeal for weeks, follows your advice and buys GM, Citi and AIG shares with her last remaining savings, if Congress refuses yet another, and undoubtedly bigger, round of Wall Street hand-outs? That would wipe out the old lady’s savings, wouldn’t it, Mr. President? And if it’s not Congress, you yourself may well have to take that decision, because the bleeding will not stop..

That’s Jerry Goldsmith’s attitude. The Colorado man lost his engineering job of 29 years — and the six-figure salary that went with it — and is now applying for a casino job dealing craps, blackjack, roulette and poker.

“I was angry. I think everyone gets angry,” says Goldsmith, 60, recalling his New Year’s Day firing. “It’s ‘Why me?’ But after a while I just learned: One door closed, but many more just opened.

“I just need to find the right one to go into.”

Goldsmith was one of 750 people who showed up Wednesday to apply for casino dealer jobs near Denver. Another 550 applied on Thursday.

The applicants were going after 90 spots in dealer school.

Earlier on Wednesday, Goldsmith had interviewed for a job as a cable TV installer. They were his first job interviews since losing his job.

He says that, at first, he spent a lot of time on the Internet looking for work. He also contacted executive headhunters but was unable to find any leads in the engineering field. So he decided to expand his search into other areas.

Goldsmith says he nailed the casino job interview and thinks he would make a great dealer.

The Connecticut Democrat’s effort — which comes in response to urging from FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner — would give the FDIC access to more money to rebuild its fund that insures consumers’ deposits, which have been hard hit by a string of bank failures.

Last week, the FDIC proposed raising fees on banks in order to build up its deposit insurance fund, which had just $19 billion at the end of 2008. That idea provoked protests from banks, which said such a burden would worsen their already shaken condition. The Dodd bill, if it becomes law, would represent an alternative source of funding.

Mr. Dodd’s bill could also give the FDIC more firepower to help address “systemic risks” in the economy, potentially creating another source of bailout funds in addition to the $700 billion already appropriated by Congress.

Mr. Bernanke said in a Feb. 2 letter to Mr. Dodd that such a “mechanism would allow the FDIC to respond expeditiously to emergency situations that may involve substantial risk to the financial system.”

The FDIC would be able to borrow as much as $500 billion until the end of 2010 if the FDIC, Fed, Treasury secretary and White House agree such money is warranted. The bill would allow it to borrow $100 billion absent that approval. Currently, its line of credit with the Treasury is $30 billion.

The FDIC’s deposit-insurance fund has fallen precipitously with 25 bank failures in 2008 and 16 so far in 2009. Some bank failures have a bigger impact on the fund than others, as IndyMac’s failure cost the fund more than $10 billion, while many others cost the fund less than $100 million.

A 1991 law generally caps the amount of money the FDIC can borrow from the Treasury at $30 billion, and the FDIC hasn’t borrowed money from the Treasury in more than a decade.

Ms. Bair said a change in the law would give the FDIC more options to determine the best way to rebuild its depleted fund. In an interview, she stressed that all insured deposits were already backed by the “full faith and credit of the United States government.”

And there are indications that he wasn’t the only one using the dodge before the agency moved to halt the practice.

The hurried purchase of tens of thousands of travel trailers and mobile homes after the twin disasters of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 has been a headache almost from the start for the Federal Emergency Management Agency. That’s because many of the units also triggered headaches — and far worse — for the hurricane victims they were intended to shelter because they contained high levels of the airborne form of the industrial chemical formaldehyde.

That problem is at the center of a massive lawsuit expected to go to trial later this year, as nearly 40,000 plaintiffs seek damages from manufacturers of the units, four companies that installed them and the federal government. It also prompted FEMA to suspend sales of the travel trailers and mobile homes to the public in July 2007.

But now FEMA is finding that even getting rid of decommissioned travel trailers and mobile homes can be complicated.

The federal General Services Administration began auctioning off some of the FEMA units that had been declared as scrap — meaning they “have no value above the basic material content and repairs to maintain the unit are uneconomical” — in October. So far, 348 mobile homes and about 750 travel trailers have been auctioned through the GSA’s Web site, and agency officials estimate that another 4,000 or so currently are destined to be sold as scrap.

‘Not intended for habitation’

“Secret Internet Protocol Router Network”, or SIPRNET, is a sophisticated alternative to the internet, allowing New Zealand frigate control rooms and armoured vehicles access to material seen on generals’ desks in Washington.

Defence Minister Wayne Mapp refused to comment on the link. “We don’t discuss security matters,” he said through a spokesman.

A spokeswoman for the United States embassy in Wellington said it would not comment on security or intelligence matters. “What I can say is that the US considers New Zealand a partner, a team-mate and an extremely close friend.

“Bilateral communication is an obvious part of such a friendship but the specific mechanisms we use for government-to-government communication are not something we discuss publicly.”

New Zealand’s place in the network has been revealed by whistleblower Wikileaks, which published a Rand Corporation study into intelligence operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Wikileaks says the study into counter-insurgency is a notable news and policy source for the wealth of revealing interview quotes it contains.

Rand says that, in Iraq and Afghanistan, coalition forces often did not have access to US intelligence and at times this put British soldiers at “mortal risk”.

As a result the US National Security Agency and Defence Department opened SIPRNET “to a small pool of trusted allies”, including Australia, Canada, Britain and New Zealand.

There are no New Zealand forces in Iraq, but a reconstruction team works in Afghanistan and at times the Special Air Service is deployed there.

New Zealand’s high level of trust contrasts with the official political line that it is a friend but not an ally of the US as a result of its ban on nuclear weapons.

Once a darling of foreign investors because of high interest rates, the country appears almost like Iceland, judging from the current account deficits it has accumulated over three decades.

After weathering the Asian economic crisis and drought in 1997 and 1998, the $95 billion New Zealand economy enjoyed its strongest growth since the 1970s, thanks partly to soaring commodity prices and debt-fueled consumer spending.

Now the economy is shrinking as the once-hot housing market has stalled, skyrocketing fuel and food prices have turned consumers cautious and the credit crunch has hit.

Unlike Iceland’s banks, which were brought down by aggressive and highly leveraged growth, or European banks rescued by their governments, New Zealand’s banking industry shows no signs of stress yet.

The big Australian banks – National Australia Bank, Westpac Banking, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group and Commonwealth Bank of Australia – dominate the market and have so far escaped the global meltdown.

Sue Trinh, a currency analyst at RBC Capital Markets in Sydney, said the likelihood of New Zealand’s becoming a customer of the International Monetary Fund was still low, given banks’ strong capital.

But she warned that the country showed many symptoms that usually lead developing countries to seek IMF help, and that will not ease investor perceptions of an imminent sovereign credit downgrade.

New Zealand “is one of the most heavily indebted developed economies, as measured by the net international investment position as a percentage of GDP,” Trinh said in a note to investors.

At the end of March last year, New Zealand’s national debt, as measured by a negative net international investment position, was 86 percent of GDP, second to Iceland in the group of countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

The country’s banks are rated AA by Standard & Poor’s and have funded a shortfall in savings with commercial paper issues, which have been renewed every few months. They minimized risk by hedging their foreign exchange exposure in the futures market.

Meanwhile, Britain, the United States, Germany, Greece, Austria, Belgium and Ireland bailed out banks with taxpayer cash.

Because of its perilously low household savings, New Zealand has long lived on foreign borrowings to fund spending.

Household borrowing stood at 174.5 billion New Zealand dollars, or $87 billion, at the end of December, which was financed largely by the “big four” Australian banks. About 40 percent of bank borrowing is due for renewal this year.

By the end of September, the annual current account deficit was 8.6 percent of gross domestic product, compared with the peak of 9.3 percent in the first quarter of 2006.

The saving grace had been the strong fiscal position of successive governments, with budget surpluses and falling debt.

That is changing. Market watchers expect large deficits as spending rises and tax revenues fall because of the deepening recession. At the same time, borrowing rises to cover the shortfall, which has brought warnings from rating agencies.

“We are worried that international investors may lose confidence in New Zealand’s ability to meet its obligation. That would present a risk at the sovereign level,” said Kyran Curry, an S&P credit analyst.

S&P has downgraded the outlook on New Zealand’s AA-plus foreign currency rating to negative from stable in January on concerns over its rising fiscal and external deficits.

But the economy’s former strength may be its future savior.

“Even though sizeable fiscal deficits are projected, New Zealand’s starting position is good, compared to other nations,” said Dean Spicer, ANZ’s head of debt capital markets, in a note.

Finance Minister Bill English told Reuters the economy and government finances have deteriorated since the Treasury’s forecasts in December.

The socialist leader also threatened to nationalize Venezuela’s largest food producer, Empresas Polar, amid rising tension between his government and privately owned food producers that authorities accuse of sidestepping price controls aimed at stemming high inflation.

Chavez said Cargill’s plant in Portuguesa state violated local laws by distributing rice without printing the regulated price on its packages. He instructed Agriculture Minister Elias Jaua to “begin the expropriation process.”

“Prepare the decree and we’ll expropriate Cargill,” he said.

Cargill’s rice-processing plant in Portuguesa is one of 13 food-processing plants the Minneapolis, Minnesota-based company operates in Venezuela.

Mark Klein, a Cargill spokesman in Minneapolis, said the company is respectful of the Venezuelan government’s decision and expects an opportunity to clarify the situation.

“Cargill is committed to the production of food in Venezuela that complies with all laws and regulations. The rice mill was designed exclusively to manufacture Parboiled rice, which the company has done at this site for the last 7 years and elsewhere in the country for 13 years,” he wrote in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press.

Earlier in the day, Empresas Polar said it had asked Venezuela’s Supreme Court to block the government from occupying one of its rice-processing plants for a lengthy inspection. The company’s Alimentos Polar subsidiary argued it was “unconstitutional, illegal and arbitrary” for authorities to occupy the rice plant for a 90-day inspection.

The government says the price controls need to be respected to control inflation and keep the prices of basic foods affordable, while businesses say the controls could drive them into bankruptcy.

“These private companies can continue functioning as long as they remain within the scope of the law and the constitution,” Chavez said Wednesday.

Venezuela’s inflation is running at 31 percent, Latin America’s highest, despite price controls imposed in 2003 on items such as rice, chicken, sugar and other products.

The government imposed new rules this week to try to prevent producers from cutting output of price-regulated products or from modifying products to circumvent price controls, such as selling paella-flavored rice that does not fall under the controls.

Companies must ensure that 70 percent to 95 percent of their products are the types that fall under the price controls.

The automaker revealed the concerns Thursday in an annual report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

“The corporation’s recurring losses from operations, stockholders’ deficit, and inability to generate sufficient cash flow to meet its obligations and sustain its operations raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern,” auditors for the accounting firm Deloitte & Touche LLP wrote in the report.

In pre-market trading, GM shares fell 18 percent from Wednesday’s close, to $1.80.

GM has received $13.4 billion in federal loans as it tries to survive the worst auto sales climate in 27 years. It is seeking a total of $30 billion from the government. During the past three years it has piled up $82 billion in losses, including $30.9 billion in 2008.

The company faces a March 31 deadline to have signed agreements of concessions from debtholders and the United Auto Workers union to show the government it can become viable again. On Feb. 17 it submitted the restructuring plan to the Treasury Department that includes laying off 47,000 workers worldwide by the end of the year and closing five more U.S. factories.

GM said in its filing that its future depends on successfully executing the plan.

“If we fail to do so for any reason, we would not be able to continue as a going concern and could potentially be forced to seek relief through a filing under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code,” the Detroit-based automaker said in the annual report.

GM, the report said, is highly dependent on auto sales volume, which dropped rapidly last year. “There is no assurance that the global automobile market will recover or that it will not suffer a significant further downturn,” the company wrote.

But Harlan Platt, a professor at Northeastern University in Boston who teaches about corporate turnarounds, said the auditors’ concerns don’t mean GM is headed for a bankruptcy filing. The auditors, he said, are merely stating what the world has known for months.