Advertise On EU-Digest

Annual Advertising Rates
Showing posts with label Kleptocracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Kleptocracy. Show all posts

5/10/16

Hedge Funds: Top 10 hedge fund honchos netted $10 bn in 2015

Ten top US hedge fund honchos collectively made over $10 billion personally in 2015 after racking up huge profits in extremely volatile markets that left rivals in the red, according to a report Tuesday.

Tied for the top spot with $1.7 billion in income for just one year were Citadel's Kenneth Griffin and Renaissance Technologies' James Simons, according to the annual hedge fund "rich list" published by Alpha Magazine.

Three other hedge fund gurus also banked more than $1 billion apiece: Bridgewater Associates' Raymond Dalio and Appaloosa Management's David Tepper, each with $1.4 billion, and Millennium Management's Israel Englander, with $1.15 billion.

The article pointed out some prominent no-shows on this year's list, including John Paulson of Paulson & Co., Leon Cooperman of Omega Advisors and Daniel Loeb of Third Point. Funds of all three finished 2015 in the red, Alpha said.

Others missing from the top 10 were Nelson Peltz and Bill Ackman.

The median take for the list of top 25 hedge fund earners was $275 million, the lowest level in five years.
About half of all hedge funds lost money in 2015, Alpha said.

The S&P 500 finished 2015 with a loss, snapping a three-year winning streak.

 Read more: Flash - Top 10 hedge fund honchos netted $10 bn in 2015 - France 24

kleptocracy Rules: The Panama Papers & Capitalism -Today:Neo-liberalism’s World of Corruption

TTIP: legalizing Kleptocracy
Of course corruption has always existed in capitalism. But neoliberalism, the ‘free market’ system that started in the 1980s, promoted it on a vast scale for two reasons:

1. Neo-liberal deregulation and privatisation promoted the dominance of financial capital and the expense of industry and the state. Financialisation and low capital gains taxes have turned big companies and utilities into cash cows, virtual banks with huge wealth, looking to maximise the interest on their money and minimise their tax. Finance capital is, after all, basically about swindling. In the middle ages they called it usury.

2. The shift to the right crashed ‘socialist’ command economies and undermined nationalist governments in the third world, replacing both with corrupt and usually highly authoritarian neoliberal regimes. Getting hold of the state apparatus has become a royal road to mega-wealth for dozens of dictators and their cronies through simple theft.

The core of it is the banking system. European and American banks receive (read: launder) billions of dollars every year from international mafias, and in particular from drug dealers. Sometimes by accident some of this comes to light. In 2006 Mexican soldiers intercepted a drug shipment in Ciudad del Carmen and found a cache of documents showing the Sinaloa drugs cartel had made payments of $378 billion to the American bank Wachovia, a subsidiary of the financial giant Welles Fargo.

Roberto Saviano, the author of the best-selling Gamorrah which exposed the workings of the Neapolitan crime organisation Camorra, claims that London is the centre of money laundering for Latin American drug money. Even the British National Crime Agency says:

“We assess that hundreds of billions of US dollars of criminal money almost certainly continue to be laundered through UK banks, including their subsidiaries, each year.”

Saviano says that Mexico is the ‘heart’ of the drugs trade and London its ‘head’. Antonio Maria Costa, head of the UN Crime and Drugs Agency, says drug dealers invested $352 billion in Western banks in 2008, and this was key in keeping some major banks from collapse.

So corruption – receiving money from crime and drug cartels – is deeply ingrained in the culture of US and European banks. And this is not going to stop, given the vast profits involved.

The klepocratic state is an old story. It’s reckoned that no Mexican president leaves offices with less than $100m. Key Western allies from the 60s and 70s, like Mobutu, president of Zaire (DRC) from 1965-97 and Suharto, president of Indonesia from 1967-98, both established murderous regimes and systematically looted their respective peoples of billions of dollars.

Direct corruption by the state is one thing, influence is something else. In western democracies influence is stacked in favour of the rich and powerful. In the United States and increasingly in Britain it is professional lobbyists who fight their corner. The Atlantic magazine in the US points out:

“Corporations now spend about $2.6 billion a year on reported lobbying expenditures—more than the $2 billion we spend to fund the House ($1.18 billion) and Senate ($860 million). It’s a gap that has been widening since corporate lobbying began to regularly exceed the combined House-Senate budget in the early 2000s.

“Today, the biggest companies have upwards of 100 lobbyists representing them, allowing them to be everywhere, all the time. For every dollar spent on lobbying by labour unions and public-interest groups together, large corporations and their associations now spend $34. Of the 100 organizations that spend the most on lobbying, 95 consistently represent business.”

The above account doesn’t include the direct payments and other gifts given to members of Congress by big companies, not least the health insurance and healthcare companies who have fought so long and so successfully against a universal US healthcare system.

Britain is going in the same direction. As in the United States, business and politics are often revolving doors with former minister joining the boards of companies they dealt with when in power. Seumas Milne says:
“…lobbying doesn’t begin to cover the extent of corporate influence. More than ever the Tory party is in thrall to the City, with over half its income from bankers and hedge fund and private equity financiers. Peers who have made six-figure donations have been rewarded with government jobs.

“But the real corruption that has eaten into the heart of British public life is the tightening corporate grip on government and public institutions – not just by lobbyists, but by the politicians, civil servants, bankers and corporate advisers who increasingly swap jobs, favors and insider information, and inevitably come to see their interests as mutual and interchangeable. The doors are no longer just revolving but spinning, and the people charged with protecting the public interest are bought and sold with barely a fig leaf of regulation.”

Corruption everywhere has the effect of transferring huge amounts of wealth from the poor to the rich. If poor individuals are not directly robbed, then their economic situation, their public services, their health service, their transport, their education – all these are robbed when taxes are avoided and government revenues robbed.

You can’t analyse corruption today by looking for illegal activity alone. Many of the practices that happen in rich and poor countries are legal or in a grey area where it’s difficult to tell criminal from the lawful.

For example, property dealing in Britain is profoundly corrupt. House prices in London (and thus in the whole country indirectly) are pressured by the huge amount of hot money from corrupt Russian oligarchs and assorted gangsters of various nationalities invested in the expensive end of the market. But nothing here is illegal, as far as the house purchases in Britain are concerned. It’s just that they are bought with corrupt money and force up the living costs of millions of ordinary British people.

Look at the purchase of rare earth minerals from the Congo, essential for computers and mobile phones. Much of this mineral wealth is controlled by war lord armies, guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity. The companies who buy the mineral products they control – the moral equivalent of blood diamonds – have no contact with them at all. Dealers act as a buffer and through their transactions – perfectly legal – wealth based on rape and murder is miraculously washed clean.

Finance capital is by definition corrupt. The investment banks typically do not disclose their fees to investors in advance (they call their charges ‘consideration’) by deduct self-decided amounts as they go along. Free charging professionals like lawyers, and in many countries doctors and dentists, make up their own huge fees. Isn’t this corrupt? But there’s nothing illegal about it.

The tax dodges by major companies like Amazon, Facebook and Starbucks, are perfectly legal. They pay all the tax they are required by law – or by agreement –in countries like Ireland and Luxemburg where they are registered. Whether these practices are illegal in the UK for example is a very grey area. But corruption it certainly is.

All these examples have the same effect: robbing the poor to further enrich the wealthy.

 Read more: CADTM - The Panama Papers & Capitalism Today: Neo-liberalism’s World of Corruption

1/27/16

USA: Trump and Palin: Is America Becoming an Oil Kleptocracy? - by Alexei Bayer

Oil-producing nations are a mess. Go down their full list – from A for Algeria, Argentina and Azerbaijan via I for Iraq and S for Saudi Arabia all the way down to V for Venezuela – and you’ll see economic and political basket cases.

Many of these oil-producing countries don’t need, or like, democracy. They are ruled by narcissistic authoritarians who distribute goodies, talk of national greatness and stuff their own pockets.

Muammar Gaddafi, Vladimir Putin and Hugo Chavez come to mind. Eccentric, quirky, self-indulgent and totally devoid of self-doubt, they like to hear themselves talk and are very entertaining. They’re performers, not policy wonks.

They are, in short, wizards of Oz, selling snake oil to their grateful populace. Eventually, they turn nasty, making mischief in the rest of the world and oppressing and robbing their own people.

Now, what does that have to do with the United States, an industrial giant and the world’s leader in technological innovation? Well, in recent years the United States did become the world’s largest producer of oil. Last year, it even started to export some of the stuff.

Of course, the United States has a huge diversified economy and its oil industry accounts only for a small portion of its GDP. It is still a major importer of oil.

Besides, oil is currently quite cheap. At least for now, you can’t live high on the hog by exporting it. All those oil kleptocracies that were rich and self-important are suddenly starting to pawn their family silver (if they have any).

And yet, the U.S. economy and U.S. society as a whole are sending forth dangerous signals. The United States has long been on a road to de-industrialization, sending manufacturing jobs to China, Mexico and other places.

The number of U.S. manufacturing jobs is down 15% from 2006 and it didn’t grow at all during 2015, which was otherwise a bumper year for jobs. Since 1985, the number of manufacturing jobs has dropped by 35%.

 Read more: Trump and Palin: Is America Becoming an Oil Kleptocracy? - The Globalist

4/3/14

Democracy: "The Kleptocracy gets green light" - US Supreme Court Strikes Down Overall Political Donation Cap - by Adam Liptak

The US  Supreme Court on Wednesday continued its abolition of limits on election spending, striking down a decades-old cap on the total amount any individual can contribute to federal candidates in a two-year election cycle.

The ruling, issued near the start of a campaign season, will very likely increase the role money plays in American politics.

The 5-to-4 decision, with the court’s more conservative members in the majority, echoed Citizens United, the 2010 decision that struck down limits on independent campaign spending by corporations and unions. 

Wednesday’s decision seemed to alter campaign finance law in subtle but important ways, notably by limiting how the government can justify laws said to restrict the exercise of First Amendment rights in the form of campaign contributions.

The court’s 88-page decision reflected sharply different visions of the meaning of the First Amendment and the role of government in regulating elections, with the majority deeply skeptical of government efforts to control participation in politics, and the minority saying that such oversight was needed to ensure a functioning democracy.

In a dissent from the bench, Justice Stephen G. Breyer called the majority opinion a disturbing development that raised the overall contribution ceiling to “the number infinity.” “If the court in Citizens United opened a door,” he said, “today’s decision may well open a floodgate.”

Such oral dissents are rare, and they signal deep disagreements. But Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Breyer noted from the bench that the other side’s arguments were well presented.

Note EU-Digest: Philly.com writes the following about the about theUS Supreme Court ruling  under the heading "The Supremes put the exclamation point on "kleptocracy!"  - "Consider this: It's been reported that the billionaire Koch Brothers spent close to $400 million on their conservative network for the 2012 election - and that was long before the McCutcheon ruling came down. That's because previous court rulings -- most famously the Citizens United case in 2010 -- have long meant that any laws attempting to stop billionaires (both conservative and liberal billionaires, for what it's worth) from buying elections were already a lost cause. The Roberts court has held that -- even in a time with record levels of income inequality -- money is just a form of free speech. It's just that a handful of very privileged people are able to speak through a megaphone as big as the Ritz". Yes indeed, the Kleptocracy has been given the green light
and that was long before the McCutcheon ruling came down. That's because previous court rulings -- most famously the Citizens United case in 2010 -- have long meant that any laws attempting to stop billionaires (both conservative and liberal billionaires, for what it's worth) from buying elections were already a lost cause. The Roberts court has held that -- even in a time with record levels of income inequality -- money is just a form of free speech. It's just that a handful of very privileged people are able to speak through a megaphone as big as the Ritz.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Our-new-plutocratic-overlords-tack-on-another-run.html#Cwuc5GKSV7gWyiGo.99

Consider this: It's been reported that the billionaire Koch Brothers spent close to $400 million on their conservative network for the 2012 election -- and that was long before the McCutcheon ruling came down. That's because previous court rulings -- most famously the Citizens United case in 2010 -- have long meant that any laws attempting to stop billionaires (both conservative and liberal billionaires, for what it's worth) from buying elections were already a lost cause. The Roberts court has held that -- even in a time with record levels of income inequality -- money is just a form of free speech. It's just that a handful of very privileged people are able to speak through a megaphone as big as the Ritz.
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Our-new-plutocratic-overlords-tack-on-another-run.html#Cwuc5GKSV7gWyiGo.99
Read more: Supreme Court Strikes Down Overall Political Donation Cap - NYTimes.com