Thursday, October 02, 2008

Stock Painting And Financial Manipulation For Insiders


Andrew Rice, standing up for working families

You've probably seen-- and probably dismissed-- some of that "string 'em up" talk, right? But lynching isn't what I mean when I talk about harsh punishment for the selfish greedballs who are bankrupting the nation. I firmly believe in fair trials first. If you don't live in Seattle it isn't likely you saw this Times story this morning about the relationship between Darcy Burner and the netroots. Inspired by Reichert, the journalist was trying to prove that "liberal bloggers" from outside the district are more of a threat to the residents of WA-08 than Reichert's special interest corporate donors. The writer, Emily Heffter, kept trying to get me to "admit" I'm a liberal, even though I told her I'm not and explained, patiently, why that kind of labeling is a distraction. I told her I had won a scholarship for writing an essay defending the death penalty and that-- at least in theory-- I still believe in it. Does that make me a liberal? A conservative?

Yesterday's NY Times has a wonky business section story by Floyd Norris about stock market manipulations which demonstrates-- clearly for me-- why economic predators, and the politicians who, for fat bribes, enable them, should be tried and punished, not given golden parachutes and bonuses at the public's expense. Keep in mind this was going on in the midst of the Bush Regime's Shock Doctrine approach to the economic and financial mess they have so deftly guided the country into:
The last five minutes of trading on the last day of the quarter were very good to a significant number of stocks on Tuesday, including battered financial shares.

Tuesday’s closing prices were particularly important to money managers who report their performance based on quarterly figures, and suspicions of “painting the tape”-- buying shares at the end of the day to drive up the price-- have been common during the final minutes of a quarter.

This year, with traders no longer allowed to short financial stocks, sharp rises in share prices in the final minute could not be offset by short-sale orders from investors who suspected tape-painting.

Part of the answer as to whether tape-painting occurred may come Wednesday morning when shares with the largest moves reopen for trading. Over all, the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index registered 7 percent of the day’s gain in the final five minutes, while the index of financial stocks in the group produced 11 percent of the day’s gain in the time period.

For many stocks, the final move was striking. Sallie Mae, formally known as SLM, for example, rose 10 percent during those minutes, accounting for more than half the day’s rise. The brokerage firm Charles Schwab and the KeyCorp, a banking company, each leaped 7 percent in the final minutes, moves that accounted for more than one-third of their gains for the day.

Old Republic International, an insurance company; XL Capital, another insurance firm; and Janus Capital, a money management firm, all jumped more than 5 percent in the final minutes, moves that accounted for at least 30 percent of their gains for the day.

So who have they gotten to so far, to sell out their constituents and change their voters in favor of the predators and manipulators? Earlier today we exposed Arizona's most crooked House member (now that Rick Renzi is headed to prison), John Shadegg. But Shadegg, who has accepted legalized bribes from the Finance, Insurance, Real Estate Sector totaling $1,065,296, is by no means the only sleazebag listening to Wall Street's siren song. Tennessee Republican hack Zack Wamp led the way towards betraying working families and was joined by Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick (D-MI) and Emanuel Cleaver (D-MO). They're all abandoning principle and abandoning their constituents for the comforts Wall Street can offer them.

So while the same wacko fake religionist hate-mongers who blamed 9/11 and Katrina on gay people also blame the Wall Street meltdown on gays more rational observers have a slightly different analysis. Oklahoma's radical right Senator James Inhofe has accepted $1,349,302 in so-called "donations" from the culprits in the Wall Street meltdown. It surprised no one that the Republican leadership thought it would be wise for him to vote against Paulson's bailout plan, since a YES vote would have ended his already shaky career on the spot. His Democratic opponent, Andrew Rice, however, isn't letting him off the hook so easily:
"I've said from the very beginning that something needs to be done, but the bill that passed the Senate tonight is not strong enough. It gives too much away to Wall Street without guaranteeing that a crisis like this won't happen again, and it allows executives to get most or all of their multi-million dollar benefits packages without any punitive consequences.

"Rather than being an active participant at the negotiation table and ensuring Oklahomans have a voice in this important decision, Jim Inhofe removed himself from the equation, offered no alternative solutions, and abdicated his responsibilities as a U.S. Senator."

Labels: , , , , , ,


At 9:32 PM, Blogger Rena said...

Inhofe voted "no."


Post a Comment

<< Home