Public Bank Bailouts Boost Markets

Exchanges Rally In Asia, Europe As Governments Ante Up Taxpayer Money To Restore Banks

(CBS/AP)  Many of the world's biggest stock markets rose strongly Monday, boosted by a strong opening on Wall Street thanks to hopes that widespread government efforts to shore up the world's battered financial system will break the logjam in credit markets.

Markets have responded positively to a raft of measures already announced in Europe Monday and to expectations that the U.S. government will join Britain and other countries in buying ownership stakes in troubled banks to get lending markets restarted and help keep the wider economy moving.

The Dow Jones industrials gained more than 900 points in a stunning rebound from days of big losses. The Dow pushed Europe's markets, which were already gaining ground, even higher. Germany's DAX was 375.99 points, or 8.3 percent, higher at 4,920.30, while France's CAC-40 was up 204.08 points, or 6.4 percent, at 3,380.57.

Britain's FTSE 100 was 170.08 points, or 4.3 percent, higher at 4,102.14, despite some hefty falls in the banks that have accepted government help. The strong showing follows sharp falls in stock indexes worldwide last week, and as interbank interest rates remain abnormally high.

"The events in the financial markets last week were cataclysmic and prompted the unprecedented action by governments," said Neil Mackinnon, chief economist at ECU Group.

"The markets have responded positively but there is still a risk of a one day wonder and tomorrow we'll come down to earth with a bump," he added.

The latest coordinated move emerged before European trading began when top central banks - including the U.S. Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank - unveiled new measures to thaw frozen credit markets and bolster funding to banks. They joined the Bank of England and the Swiss National Bank in saying they would provide unlimited U.S. dollar funds to financial institutions. The Bank of Japan said it was considering similar measures.

The banks' action came after leaders of the 15 countries using the euro said Sunday they would guarantee new bank debt until the end of 2009, allow governments to help banks by buying preferred shares, and vowed to rescue important failing banks through emergency recapitalizion.

In England, if a week is a long time in politics, this one's been an eternity for British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who's gone from being the man without a plan to the man whose plan everybody is now following, reports CBS News correspondent Mark Phillips.

"The fact that Europe may well adopt the Gordon Brown plan for semi-nationalization of banks and that Henry Paulson may do the same, certainly stabilized markets this morning," says British journalist David Buik, who has written extensively on world markets.

"We must in an uncertain, unstable world, be the rock of stability," Brown said.

No one has ever accused Gordon Brown of unnecessary charisma, but his dour Scottish, no nonsense manner - and a lot of money - has produced the first break in the cloud of doom that has enveloped London's financial center and others around the world, reports Phillips. Brown's plan isn't just a bailout - it's a buyout.

For an investment of $63 billion, British taxpayers now have interests - in one case a majority interest - in three of the country's largest banks, reports Phillips.

And this new political clout in the banking world comes at a price - for the bankers. One condition of the government putting massive sums into banks was that four of their top executives be fired - without bonuses. In fact, all bonuses and dividends for senior executives have been frozen for now. It's a new world with new rules.

Meanwhile, the German government has since put together a rescue package worth as much as $671 billion to shore up the country's financial system, while France's will provide up to $491 billion to help banks stay afloat through the financial crisis.

In Britain, which doesn't use the euro, the government confirmed Monday that it is injecting a total of $63 billion into three leading banks - Royal Bank of Scotland PLC, Lloyds TSB PLC and HBOS PLC - in return for equity stakes. Taxpayers will own about 60 percent of RBS and 40 percent of the merged Lloyds TSB and HBOS. The merger has been renegotiated Monday too, so the amount of Lloyds TSB shares that HBOS shareholders will receive is lower.

The key is whether the flurry of activity can actually ease conditions in the credit markets. Despite the coordinated interest rate reductions announced last Wednesday, and massive liquidity boosts, the rates at which banks lend to each other continued to rise. That means banks were afraid to lend to each other, and raises the chance that they and other businesses won't get the credit they need to operate.

The London interbank offered rate, or Libor, for three-month dollar loans fell 0.07 percent to 4.75 percent, while the similar rate in euros, or Euribor, dipped only 0.063 to 5.318 percent. The rate remains well above the euro zone's benchmark rate of 3.75 percent set by the ECB, meaning the credit freeze is far over. Usually Euribor is much closer to the ECB rate.

"Even with the guarantees now on offer from the European heads of state and despite some easing over the next few days and weeks we should not expect any sharp falls in the interbank rate yet," said Howard Wheeldon, senior strategist at BGC Partners.

In the U.S., the Bush administration said Monday it is moving quickly to implement its own $700 billion rescue program, including consulting with private law firms on how to buy ownership shares in banks to help thaw frozen lending and get the economy moving again.

CBS News correspondent Thalia Assuras reported that experts say the process of purchasing bank stocks is much faster and more efficient than just buying up the bad debt. And speed is of the essence.

"If you buy preferred shares you can put the money in quickly," says economist Peter Morici. "You leave the process of working out the loans to the banks and, frankly, they understand that much better than the government of anyone the government would hire in New York City to do it."

"We did this during the Great Depression," Morici continues. "We are in that kind of crisis. So in my mind we should first of all recognize that the government is not nationalizing the banks and, second of all, that this is a required step to unlock credit markets."

The actions by Europe and the U.S. are having a positive impact all round the world, with Brazil's Ibovespa stock index up 7.7 percent shortly after opening.

Earlier Asian markets set the tone for the day with Hong Kong's Hang Seng Index, which tumbled more than 7 percent Friday, soared 1,515.29 points, or 10.24 percent, to finish at 16,312.16. Australian and Singapore indices jumped more than 5 percent, while South Korean and Chinese benchmarks added around 3.7 percent.

Elsewhere in Asia, Indonesia's key index, down sharply in early trade, gained 0.9 percent after the lifting of a trading suspension, imposed last Wednesday amid a freefall in share prices. The upswing followed government measures to free up liquidity, including easing regulations for share buybacks and corporate financial reserve limits.

In Japan, where the Nikkei 225 tanked nearly 10 percent Friday to close out its worst week in history, trading was closed for a public holiday.

Oil prices rose, with light, sweet crude for November delivery up $2.87 at $80.57. The contract fell Friday $8.89 to $77.70, the lowest price since Sept. 10, 2007.

The euro was steady above $1.36, having rallied strongly during the day, following the European measures, while the U.S. dollar recovered back above 100 yen.

[toshi43]

The free-market bankers despise ''socialism'' when it benefits someone else, but they don''t hesitate to beg taxpayers to pull their greedy @sses out of a massive fire they started THEMSELVES. The hypocrisy is utterly mind-boggling.

[tannerbird]

This is what i have always wanted to work all my life and end up bailing out a bunch of dam crooks.

[cjs_cnet_xyz]

The U.S. government does not protect the financial interests of its taxpayers. Will this country survive if such theft goes unpunished at the top?

[samthetvcat]

---"The banks'' action came after leaders of the 15 countries using the euro said Sunday they would guarantee new bank debt until the end of 2009"---

Are we going to do that too - it sounds like the crisis is so bad that it''s inevitable even though it''s socialism and oversight would be a nightmare.

But if it''s inevitable, why does Paulson keep dragging his heels on everything? Maybe that''s making things worse, not better you think?

[bunchofchemi]

The last time a reckless deregulation-ideology Republican administration nearly destroyed capitalism, the Democrats held the Presidency for 20 years (1933-1953). This time it could be longer. Even Herbert Hoover was smart enough not to go to war in Iraq.

[usgeneral-2009]

When the doctor is a quack, the cure is often worse than the disease.

Expect a horrific mess from incompetent government intervention.

[lochlan-2009]

80-90% of the country were against this bail out. Yet it was pushed through anyway, with the second bill (the one they passed) being even worse than the first. Still believe in Democracy, Americans? How about free markets? If you''re not ready to grab your torch and pitch fork, your clueless sheeple, step up to the slaughter, right this way.

[jjwalken]

SO HAS ANYONE PLACED A REQUIREMENT ON THE BANKS TO LEND THE TAXPAYERS MONEY OUT TO THE PUBLIC OR CAN THEY SILL HORD IT LIKE THEY HAVE BEEN DOING??? IT SEEMS WEIRD THAT THEY CAN TAKE ALL THE MONEY THEY WANT BUT HAVE NO STIPULATIONS ON LENDING IT OUT... WHY???

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by checkthepast

Opening statement, senate hearings.

"And we will ask about the compensation of Joseph Cassano, who was the executive in charge of the financial products division. Mr. Cassano was well compensated by AIG. He received more than $280 million over the last eight years.

After his division imploded, AIG terminated him without cause in February and did not seek to recover any of Mr. Cassano''s compensation. Instead, AIG allowed him to keep up to $34 million in unvested bonuses and put him on a $1 million a month retainer.

Last month, the taxpayers bought out AIG in an $85 billion bailout. This was a direct result of the mistakes made by Mr. Cassano. Yet even today, he remains on the company payroll, receiving $1 million a month.

The federal bailout occurred on September 16. Less than one week later, AIG held a week-long retreat for company executives at the exclusive St. Regis Resort in Monarch Beach, California. A photograph of the resort is on display.

Rooms at this resort can cost over $1,000 per night. Invoices provided to the Committee show that AIG paid the resort over $440,000, including nearly $200,000 for rooms, over $150,000 for meals, and $23,000 in spa charges."

Minorities caused this, you say?

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by checkthepast

"Today we are holding our second day of hearings on the financial crisis on Wall Street.

Yesterday, we examined the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Our focus today is AIG.

There are obvious differences between Lehman and AIG. Lehman is an investment bank; AIG is an insurance company. Lehman fell because it placed highly leveraged bets in the subprime and real estate markets; AIG''s problems originate in complex derivatives called credit default swaps.

But their stories are fundamentally the same. In each case, the companies and their executives grew rich by taking on excessive risk. In each case, the companies collapsed when these risks turned bad. And in each case, their executives are walking away with millions of dollars while taxpayers are stuck with billions of dollars in costs.

The AIG CEOs are like the Lehman CEO in one other key respect: in each case, they refuse to accept any blame for what happened to their companies..."

They were not forced by any law to take on this risk, as is now public record, the corrupt upper management grew rich from them, that was all the motivation they needed, so your agenda to blame "minorities" for corporate greed is transparent.

[brianbwb-2009]

"Laws that are ''''designed to end discrimination'''' are by nature discriminatory." Posted by checkthepast

Again you evade the point.

No banks were forced to issue loans to unqualified borrowers by any law, or act of congress, they did so of their own predatory volition, and with the aim of making money on the volume of brokerage fees, and they also made money foreclosing on property, and getting new "suckers" trapped into the same house.

They also made money packaging these loans into CDOs and credit default swaps, where an unregulated "free for all" climate turned the CDS market into a huge casino, where these institutions were gambling with money they didn''t even have. They lost, and took advantage of overexposure to eliminate competition (Morgan Stanley-AIG comes immediately to mind)and you blame their corruption on "minorities", very disingenuous, not to forget transparently racist.

As I said before, CDS obligations are now estimated at $56 trillion dollars, more than the yearly global GDP, and you try to place the blame on "minorities".

[checkthepast]

The law was designed to end discrimination against ....

Posted by brianbwb

Laws that are ''designed to end discrimination'' are by nature discriminatory.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by checkthepast

The subprime share of new lending roughly doubled from 2003 to 2004 and increased again in 2005. So far, that''s where most of the "unexpected" defaults have come from, although the default contagion will likely spread to lower interest rate adjustable rate mortgages in the near future.

Compliance Tech, a firm that helps lenders "Manage Diverse Lending Markets," estimates that in 2004-2006, minorities accounted for 44 percent of all subprime loans, with Hispanics slightly outnumbering blacks.

"...The largest defaults in America as measured in dollar losses (number of defaults times size) appear to have come out of California''s exurban fringe: the Inland Empire, Antelope Valley, and the Central Valley. All these areas tend to have mixed white and Hispanic populations..."

Taking "Hispanic", and "Black" borrowers together still does not equal the majority of subprime borrowers, guess who does?

[egresor]

you will find that the problem began in Eisenhower''''s day, when our "secret" military mess in South east Asia allowed war profiteers to begin the robbery of the US economy.

Kennedy died because he was going to stop it.

Johnson used a lie called "the Tonkin Gulf incident" to expand it, by 1972 the US, having lost $13 trillion since 1956, was basically financially and morally bankrupt, and Nixon could no longer afford it. He had to sell off the gold in Ft. Knox to cover the loss, while the automakers chose this time to close factories, which reverberated through steel, mining, and even entertainment.

Carter wouldn''''t extend Nixon''''s wage and price freeze, and so got blamed for the inflation, when OPEC, given the ability from Nixon, devalued the US dollar.

Reagan''''s trickle down economics, union busting, and war corruption (Iran-Iraq) further depleted the treasury, and the middle class, until there was no one to lend to, so banks lent to anyone, and created default swaps to cover their sharking.

The problem is between rich corrupt and the rest of us, your partisan blaming of one political party is the mark of being not too bright.

Posted by brianbwb

excellent timeline!

[brianbwb-2009]

"brian, the lack of trust is a lack of confidence is having loans repaid..." Posted by checkthepas

You intentionally miss an important part, the banks are not lending to each other. To each other.

They don''t trust each other, because they know that all their books are cooked, the credit default swaps are worthless, and their accounting is all BS.

Here is your lie,

"government policy mandates that unsuitable minority borrowers be given loans"

As opposed to the facts,

The law does not require institutions to make high-risk loans that may bring losses to the institution, instead the law emphasizes that an institution''s CRA activities should be undertaken in a safe and sound manner, and I challenge you to show where banks were required to loan to unsuitable borrowers.

"In the February 2008 House hearing, law professor Michael S. Barr, a Treasury Department official under President Clinton, stated that a Federal Reserve survey showed that affected institutions considered CRA loans profitable and not overly risky."

The law was designed to end discrimination against borrowers based on ethnicity (which is probably why you object to it), but no part said that loans should be intentionally made to those who could not repay them.

[brianbwb-2009]

Posted by checkthepast

The banks'' predatory lending (been going on ever since they could make a buck on repossessing the property) scam to the poor actually failed.

They lent money to anyone who they knew could not repay.

They expected that prices would rise and they would foreclose and make some good money, but when the decimated middle class stopped spending, they were caught in the cycle of declining prices.

Both the poor folks and the crooked banks got nailed, but Bush didn''t care as long as it was only the poor who complained, and McSame said a couple weeks ago that there was no problem.

Neither the CRA, Clinton, Democrats, nor the poor folk (even your "minorities")were responsible for wrapping up trashy loans and rating the bundles AAA. that was entirely the fault of Wall St., and the ratings agencies paid off by the firms whose paper they rated.

Checkthepast, check the past.

[checkthepast]

brian, the lack of trust is a lack of confidence is having loans repaid. This cause of that is simply that they aren''t being repaid! 45% of home loans in the US are Fan & Fred, and the large percentage of other mortgages going into default are from brokers trying to get in on the boom with home loans for anyone... regardless. That is the root of the entire problem.
Are you familiar with the 2004 Congressional hearings? Everyone should be.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs

Even though the ''''shocking'''' headline is a bit much (It was no shock to me) the reality is on the table for all to see.

[checkthepast]

I have GOT it now lets forgive all debt strike new money start over and spend,spend,spend.
Posted by tannerbird

Good idea tanner... but please hold off and give me time to get deeply in debt like the rest of the plastic money people before you do it. Right now I don''t owe a penny on anything.

[brianbwb-2009]

"I can''''t blame Ike for the social ''''gimme''''s'''' that have been given out to ''''minorities and low income americans for the past century ..." Posted by checkthepast

Again, you fail to check the past. The "social gimmes" as you put it were the result of the "New Deal" measures that helped to bring the US out of the great depression, and the vast majority of recipients were not, and to date are not, as you couch it, "minorities". Ironically it was the practice of racism that denied many loans to non-"whites," and therefore diminished their role in the crisis.

The credit freeze is due to banks not trusting each other, a result of the fact that they all know that they are all crooks, and have built big houses of cooked books, and falsely valued paper, they made fees lending to the only people left who could borrow, then made more money foreclosing, then made more money packaging subprimes as CDOs, then even more money bundling CDOs into default swap betting, which, at $56 trillion, is larger than the yearly GDP of the entire planet, and you want to blame all of it on "minorities." Maybe you figure that if you think wrongly enough, you will arrive on the backside of correct.

Guess what, you and your party are now the "minority welfare queens", it is the banks, insurance firms, other financial services firms, automakers, airlines, and such who are now coming to the people begging for handouts.

[tannerbird]

I have GOT it now lets forgive all debt strike new money start over and spend,spend,spend.