Wednesday, 28 January 2009

More Sense In One Issue Than A Month of CNBC
US Editionhome archives Cast of Characters Reader Testimonials
Today's Daily Reckoning:

A Country of Madoffs
London, England
Wednesday, January 28, 2009

---------------------

*** A nation of Madoffs...everyone likes the wages of sin – that is, until the devil comes calling...

*** The party’s over for corporate executives...the only thing these CEOs were good at...

*** Will a “super SEC” do anything to fix these problems?...if you really want to destroy an economy and a currency, Gonoism works...and more!

--- Special Offer ---

Your Last Chance to Grab Gains Already Underway

Since Inauguration Day, the most massive wealth creation in human history has begun...and you can be a part of it.

You could potentially secure three generations of wealth for you and your family...all you have to do is act by noon tomorrow, Thursday, January 29.

Get all the details here.

---------------------

A Nation of Madoffs...

Yesterday, the Dow rose 58 points. Oil held at $41. The euro at $1.31. And gold fell below $900. The yellow metal still looks good. It is at an all-time high in terms of the euro and the pound. But it still has a long way to go.

Gold is the thing you buy when you suspect that monetary authorities are making a mess of things. The fixers are fixing more than ever before. What are the odds that some of the fixes go bad? We don’t know...but our guess is that gold is looking forward to it.

Meanwhile, consumer confidence in the United States is at an all-time low. Fannie and Freddie say they need another $51 billion. Dow Chemical is considering cutting its dividend for the first time since 1912.

Everybody likes the wages of sin...until the devil calls...

This week began with a squabble. John Thain was sacked as head of Merrill Lynch after giving out $4 billion in bonuses – just before announcing $15 billion in losses for the 4th quarter of ’08. The Bank of America, Merrill’s new owner, said it hadn’t approved the bonuses. Thain said it had been ‘informed.’

Then Citigroup announced that it had bought a new corporate jet for $50 million. Seemed a bit rich for a company that had just lost $8.3 billion.

What sort of devilry is this? Where can you can lose billions...take billions in handouts from taxpayers... and still coddle executives with new planes and million-dollar ‘bonuses?’ Penalties would seem to be more appropriate.

By Tuesday, President Obama was already expressing the outrage of the public; he announced that if banks were going to take money from the public, they would have to limit executive compensations and dividend payouts. He pledged to impose “tough and transparent conditions on firms receiving taxpayers assistance.” Bummer. The party’s over.

But it was fun while it lasted. When animal spirits run high, the animals in the financial industry are able to make a buck. Nothing very surprising about that. But the amounts were startling. At Goldman Sachs, for example, the average compensation in 2006 was $521,000 – including secretaries and cleaning staff. Henry Paulson, then CEO of Goldman, later Secretary of the Treasury, earned $38 million.

But it was not just financial industry workers who were getting rich... In the Bubble Epoque, the entire upper crust was glazed with honey. In 1970, top American CEOs made about 39 times as much as the average employee. Thirty years later, the average pay had risen to $37.5 million... nearly 1,000 times higher than the average worker’s paycheck.

Part of the reason for this explosion of avarice can be traced to the government’s own attempts to limit it. In 1993, Congress limited the tax deductibility of executive salaries to $1 million – except where compensation was tied to performance. This left corporate compensation boards to shift more to the use of stock incentives, based on targets and benchmarks, which were hard to argue with. CEO’s pay increase almost 300% between 1990 to 2005, while production worker’s wages rose only 4.3%. And during that same period CEO’s pay rose twice as fast as the S&P...and three times as fast as corporate profits. Soon, every manager wanted a ‘piece of the upside.’ Investors could have the downside all to themselves!

Like Bernie Madoff, the CEOs put it over on everyone – the capitalists as well as the proles. The poor working stiffs had foreign labor breathing down their necks. If they got out of line, their employers would export their jobs to China. The patsy stockholders had no chance either. They knew perfectly well that the schmuck running the business wasn’t worth what he was being paid, but who could argue with “performance?” Besides they had “compensation committees” and consultants to tell them is was “reasonable” or competitive.

Retired CEO of DuPont, Edgar S. Woolard, Jr., did. In 2005, he was chairman of the NYSE’s executive compensation committee. As to the need to pay such high compensation in order to get good talent, he replied with a single word: “bull.” But did not the super-paid super-CEOs create super wealth? It was a “joke,” said he. He blew the whistle. But no one came a running.

Our own experience in business tells us that the larger the corporation gets the less important the CEO becomes. Many become nothing more than mouthpieces, ambassadors and cheerleaders for businesses they barely understand. They do not ‘run’ the business; the business runs them.

And the evidence of the last few years tells us that the only thing these super CEOs were good at was negotiating their own compensation packages.

Public records tell us that Jimmy Cayne, once CEO of Bear Stearns, once a leading Wall Street investment bank, spent about a third of the month of July, 2007, playing in various bridge tournaments. You might expect that a man who was paid nearly $3 million per month for his services would be on-call 24/7. At least, you might expect him to come into the shop when the firm ran into trouble. But July 2007 was the month Bear Stearns went broke.

Dick Fuld made nearly $4 million a month in his last year at Lehman Bros. At $25,000 an hour, you’d expect him to keep his eye on the ball. Remember too, this was the firm that had survived the Civil War and the Great Depression. But Fuld seemed to have no idea of what was going on. In the end, he blamed short sellers – as if he’d spent a career on Wall Street and learned nothing about how it worked.

Short sellers can’t bring down a large, healthy firm. But when they see a Humpty Dumpty like Lehman on the wall, they give him a push.

*** When there is a financial boom, capital assets throw off capital income – capital gains, dividends, interest and rent. When executives cash in their stock options, for example, they get capital income. From 1979 to 1993, the top one percent of households earned about 40% of all income from capital. But in the bubble years, the amount shot up to nearly 60%.

The envy crowd moaned and complained. But why shouldn’t the capitalists get a bigger share of the pie? And then, when the pie suddenly goes bad...why shouldn’t they be the ones to get indigestion?

*** Harry Markopolos sent a 17-page letter to the SEC on November 7, 2005, write Michael Lewis and David Einhorn in the New York Times . He was blowing the whistle on Bernie Madoff. He explained to the regulators why Madoff’s firm couldn’t be on the level. He wasn’t 100% sure what Madoff was up to, he hadn’t been able to look at the books, but he had been in the investment business long enough to smell a skunk. It was mathematically impossible for Madoff to be doing what he said he was doing. Most likely, he wrote, “Madoff Securities is the world’s largest Ponzi Scheme.”

He was right. But who cared?

Not the customers. According to a Bloomberg article, “Madoff enablers winked at suspect front-running.” Many investors in Madoff’s accounts thought something funny was going on. They believed that Madoff was ripping off his retail clients by front-running their purchases and sales in order to deliver steady, above-market returns to his managed accounts. But nobody is easier to scam than a scammer. His managed account clients were perfectly happy to go along with the scam...as long as they thought they were on the receiving end of it.

The SEC didn’t seem to care either. With Markopolos’s letter in their hands – not to mention many phone calls over a several-year period – SEC regulators saw no evil, heard no evil, nor spoke no evil of Bernie Madoff.

And now the folks at Davos are talking about creating a “super SEC” that will regulate the whole world. What can we say? The bigger the fix...the bigger the fool.

*** Tomorrow...an interview with the man of the hour...Gideon Gono! For the record, here at The Daily Reckoning , we don’t believe in Keynesian or Monetarism or practically any other ism we can think of. But we have confidence in Gonoism. If you really want to destroy an economy...and a currency... yes we can!...Gonoism works.

Until then,

Bill Bonner
The Daily Reckoning

--- Special Offer ---

A Tale of Four Deficits: America’s Economic Crisis Hits Home

Four American deficits threaten to steal your wealth. In fact, these shocking deficits could ruin our country. But there are specific steps you can take to not only help repair America, but safeguard your wealth as well.

Based on the acclaimed film of the same name, I.O.U.S.A. is your guide to America’s economic crisis. Every member of Congress recently received a copy...and if they ignore its lessons, they’ll continue to gamble with our country’s future.

Right now, you have an opportunity to get the book and a DVD copy of the film...for free. If President Obama is as smart as we all hope he is, he’ll be reading right along with you.

Click here to get your FREE copies of the I.O.U.S.A. book and film.

Guest Essay:

The Daily Reckoning PRESENTS: Contrary to the common misconception, we have no energy shortage. In fact, we have more energy available than we could ever use. Patrick Cox explains, below...

THE ULTIMATE ALTERNATIVE ENERGY
by Patrick Cox

Contrary to the common misconception, we have no energy shortage. In fact, we have more energy available than we could ever use. If not for the anti-nuclear movement, the funders of terrorism would not be awash with petrodollars and our economy would be significantly stronger. Unfortunately, rock musicians and actors had more influence on energy policies than scientists like Petr Beckmann, whom I was lucky to have as a friend.

Dr. Beckmann was a Czech refugee from Nazism who spent much of his career in America promoting nuclear power. Until he died, Beckmann was treated as some sort of demon by the environmental movement. No longer.

Today, even green leaders are admitting the folly of rejecting this cheap, clean and safe (when compared rationally with other energy sources) technology. If there were justice, Beckmann would have statues erected in his honor.

The green turnaround on nuclear power is particularly relevant now. President-elect Obama has picked several global warming activists to serve as top officials. The most important is Harvard physicist John Holdren. As presidential science adviser, he could have a significant impact on energy policy. His career, in fact, has focused on climate change, next-generation nuclear energy and nuclear disarmament.

From the perspective of an investor, what does this mean? Among other things, it could rapidly accelerate the transition from the current generation of nuclear power plants to the next. I would, incidentally, never invest in a technology simply because it has political support. Ethanol, for example, had lots of it. It was never a good idea, though, and is finally being recognized as such.

Nuclear power as we know it today is obsolete. Current light water reactors use uranium-235. This fuel is not only expensive, but its byproducts create problems. They are difficult politically to handle and can be used to create nuclear weapons.

Those byproducts are, ironically, the reason we initially adopted uranium-235. America needed the materials for nuclear weapons. Power plants using uranium-235 provided them. Regulators, naturally, favored the technology despite the fact that there were superior fuels - especially thorium.

Thorium is not only far more abundant than uranium-235, but thorium reactors do not produce waste materials useful in nuclear weapons. In fact, the wastes are far less hazardous and much cheaper to deal with. Thorium reactors are safer in general to operate, producing little radioactive threat outside their shielding. They cannot, in fact, experience a catastrophic meltdown.

This is a much bigger deal than it appears on the surface. Fuel costs, though much lower for thorium, don’t play much of a role in total nuclear power costs. In his book The Nuclear Energy Option , Bernard Cohen estimates that safety measures to counter meltdowns account for about 75% of current plant costs. As thorium plants can’t melt down, energy costs would be significantly lower.

Additionally, thorium reactors can be almost any size. Prototypes have been made small enough for military aircraft. This makes them economically viable in developing countries without the additional cost of large-scale electrical infrastructure. Thorium reactors would also be easier to sell internationally because they cannot be used to manufacture nuclear weapons.

The shift to thorium would facilitate economic, environmental and nonproliferation causes. So why are we still building plants that burn uranium-235? This is one of the hazards of government involvement in the sciences. Once grants and regulatory attitudes that favor a technology are in place, they are huge barriers to competitors.

A free market would favor thorium over uranium anyway. Coincidentally, Obama’s administration could significantly reduce barriers to thorium energy production. I’m looking hard now at several ways to take advantage of this development.

There is one potential wrench in these works, though. It’s nuclear fusion, and it could change everything. The fuel for fusion is essentially free, so the cost of power generation is a matter of capital costs and maintenance. I’ve been a skeptic about the economics of fusion, but that has begun to change. It appears that early research grants may have derailed and forced out more promising and cheaper fusion technologies than those favored by various governments’ research efforts.

For transformational profits,

Patrick Cox
for The Daily Reckoning

P.S. Obama’s science adviser John Holdren is not only a fan of fusion, but he worked on it at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. I’ll have more information for my Breakthrough Technology Alert readers as the story develops.

If you aren’t a subscriber, now is the time. Get all the details on how you can get in on the most critical market story of the decade here . But hurry – you only have until tomorrow, Thursday, January 29 at NOON to get in on the enormous creation of wealth – already underway.

Editor’s Note: Patrick Cox has lived deep inside the world of transformative technologies for over 25 years. In the 1980s, he worked in computer software development and manufacturing. By the mid-1990s, he worked as a consultant for Netscape - the company that handled 90% of all Internet browsing traffic at the time. InfoWorld and USA Today have featured Patrick’s research many times. He’s also appeared on Crossfire and Nightline . This expertise bought him to Agora Financial, where he now heads Breakthrough Technology Alert , the only place you’ll find the truly transformational technologies that offer exponential gains.

Daily Reckoning Special Reports:

A Golden Answer : Protection Against Untrustworthy Paper Currencies

Investing in Alterative Fuels Great Scott The Future is NOW!

Uranium Market A “Yellow Cake” ETF

Introducing the Single Best Way to Make Sure You'll Never Run Out of Money...

Click to Learn More About Mobs, Messiah’s and Markets.

AGORA Finacial Resources: Daily Reckoning Editors:

Economics & Politics
Crisis & Opportunity
Gold, Oil & Energy Growth,
Tech & Medical

Options Investing

Founder & Editor: Bill Bonner
Executive Publisher:
Addison Wiggin
Managing Editor: Kate Incontrera
Agora Financial

© 2009 Agora Financial LLC. All Rights Reserved.
The content of this site may not be redistributed in any way with out written consent of Agora Financial LLC.

We sent this e-mail to: h.hoffman@btopenworld.com because you or someone using your e-mail address subscribed to this service. You signed up for a free subscription on . If you have not already done so, please click here to confirm your subscription. This will help us ensure you get every Daily reckoning e-letter without interruption. To end your Daily Reckoning e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Daily Reckoning , click here . If you are you having trouble receiving your Daily Reckoning subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox right here .

© 2010 Agora Financial, LLC. All Rights Reserved. Protected by copyright laws of the United States and international treaties. This newsletter may only be used pursuant to the subscription agreement and any reproduction, copying, or redistribution (electronic or otherwise, including on the World Wide Web), in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited without the express written permission of Agora Financial, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. Nothing in this e-mail should be considered personalized investment advice. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized investment advice.We expressly forbid our writers from having a financial interest in any security recommended to our readers. All of our employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation.Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.