To be accurate, the headline phrase, penned by screenwriter William Goldman some twenty years ago, referred to the entertainment industry. But it seems a pretty decent description of the current situation back here in the real world. In a recent example, it emerges that Merrill Lynch and its then soon-to-be owner Bank of America made a minor mistake in their assessment of the former’s projected earnings for the last quarter of 2008. This was, you will recall, the period immediately prior to the year-end consummation on the deal, when a cool $3.6 billion in bonuses was being distributed to top-level Merrill executives. Perhaps distracted by the size of their windfalls, these same geniuses were somehow a bit off in their estimate of Merrill’s quarterly loss. By about 100%, as it turned out. Instead of losing $8.3 billion – oops – turned out to be $15.3 billion.
Let’s pause for a moment to consider. The bonuses represented almost half of the originally projected quarterly loss. (For all of 2008, if you were wondering, the loss was $27 billion.) At the risk of cynicism, one might think the estimated loss error was intentional. “Hey, good news! Our bonuses were only a quarter of our losses, not half like we originally thought.”
Not that Merrill didn’t – and doesn’t – have multitudinous company in the ongoing perp walk of humbled former financial masters of the universe. New York City’s offer to provide retraining for those unwillingly separated from the Wall Street lush life risks becoming the kind of mob-scene usually associated with the distribution of free money, an act which, come to think, it vaguely resembles.
Meanwhile, 230 miles away at the southern end of the BosWash corridor, those we would hope are the current generation’s brightest and best are feverishly putting the finishing touches on the next iteration of the final, comprehensive package designed to restore confidence in the financial markets, end the housing crisis, bail out the auto companies (and any other industry with a lobbyist worth his salt), fix healthcare, rebuild the infrastructure, improve education, reduce global warming and, for good measure, put a chicken in every pot.
Maybe not that last one. “A chicken in every pot” was one part of a Herbert Hoover slogan during his successful 1928 Presidential campaign. But the other was “a car in every garage,” which as an idea might be a bit more useful. It’s hard to get a grip on an accurate number, but Treasury officials have recently indicated willingness to pump as much as $2.5 trillion (that’s “trillion” with a “t”) into the financial system. Besides representing a very tall stack of hundred-dollar bills, that amount would cover a $21,000 payment to each and every U.S. household – enough for a pretty decent set of new wheels, the production of which would certainly improve the health of the auto industry. Sounds like a plan.
But then I probably don’t know anything, either.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Guantanamo Redux
OK, here’s the plan. With President Obama’s welcome announcement that those currently detained at Guantanamo will be moved out in the foreseeable future, we’re stuck with the question of what to do with the place.
Leased in perpetuity over a hundred years ago as a base for naval operations in the then-dangerous Caribbean, it has long provided a convenient thorn in Cuba’s side as we await the demise of the First Secretary of the Communist Party. Not to mention the party. More recently, the treatment of Gitmo's involuntary residents has surely been a glowing example to Cubans of our government’s abiding respect for the law and due process. Then again, perhaps not.
But we digress. Having been transformed at who knows what expense – presumably little local labor was involved – into a facility for the extended confinement of those too dangerous to be allowed their freedom, why not put it to use as a long term residence for the financial masters of the universe recently responsible for the devastation of Wall Street, Main Street, and every avenue in between?
Certainly if some poor soul scooped up in the Tribal Areas of Pakistan and for all anyone knows for sure guilty of nothing more than bad luck can languish there for years, a sojourn at Guantanamo should be just the thing for the likes of Richard Fuld, who earned every penny of his $45 million salary presiding over the Lehman Brothers train wreck. Or John Thain, who as CEO of Merrill Lynch just before its fire sale at the end of a quarter when it chalked up a $15.3 billion loss made sure he and some 700 other swells divvied up $3.6 billion in bonuses. (While Mr. Thain might have some difficulty adjusting to the use of standard government facilities after having, if only briefly, use of his famous $1.2 million re-decorated office, surely the balmy temperature and tropical breezes would more than redress the balance.)
While we’re at it, a newly christened Guantanamo Club Fed would be just the place for Bernie Madoff. And how about the wizards of finance who developed and promoted like free pizza a mind-numbing array of financial instruments so arcane and far removed from anything with any tangible characteristics that for the most part they didn’t understand themselves what they were selling? Or the putative regulators and rating agency employees whose lack of attention or comprehension or both allowed the game to continue far beyond the departure of the last solvent player? Or the brokers only too eager to stuff unfortunates into houses with wildly inappropriate mortgages they had no hope of maintaining let alone ever paying off, even under the most pie-in-the-sky circumstances?
Wait a minute. That’s a lot of people. Maybe we should see if Fidel and Raul are open to expanding the lease.
Leased in perpetuity over a hundred years ago as a base for naval operations in the then-dangerous Caribbean, it has long provided a convenient thorn in Cuba’s side as we await the demise of the First Secretary of the Communist Party. Not to mention the party. More recently, the treatment of Gitmo's involuntary residents has surely been a glowing example to Cubans of our government’s abiding respect for the law and due process. Then again, perhaps not.
But we digress. Having been transformed at who knows what expense – presumably little local labor was involved – into a facility for the extended confinement of those too dangerous to be allowed their freedom, why not put it to use as a long term residence for the financial masters of the universe recently responsible for the devastation of Wall Street, Main Street, and every avenue in between?
Certainly if some poor soul scooped up in the Tribal Areas of Pakistan and for all anyone knows for sure guilty of nothing more than bad luck can languish there for years, a sojourn at Guantanamo should be just the thing for the likes of Richard Fuld, who earned every penny of his $45 million salary presiding over the Lehman Brothers train wreck. Or John Thain, who as CEO of Merrill Lynch just before its fire sale at the end of a quarter when it chalked up a $15.3 billion loss made sure he and some 700 other swells divvied up $3.6 billion in bonuses. (While Mr. Thain might have some difficulty adjusting to the use of standard government facilities after having, if only briefly, use of his famous $1.2 million re-decorated office, surely the balmy temperature and tropical breezes would more than redress the balance.)
While we’re at it, a newly christened Guantanamo Club Fed would be just the place for Bernie Madoff. And how about the wizards of finance who developed and promoted like free pizza a mind-numbing array of financial instruments so arcane and far removed from anything with any tangible characteristics that for the most part they didn’t understand themselves what they were selling? Or the putative regulators and rating agency employees whose lack of attention or comprehension or both allowed the game to continue far beyond the departure of the last solvent player? Or the brokers only too eager to stuff unfortunates into houses with wildly inappropriate mortgages they had no hope of maintaining let alone ever paying off, even under the most pie-in-the-sky circumstances?
Wait a minute. That’s a lot of people. Maybe we should see if Fidel and Raul are open to expanding the lease.
Thursday, February 5, 2009
HE’S B-A-A-A-A-CK
Near the end of almost every horror movie, there’s a moment when the good people have finally triumphed over the monster who (or which) has been tormenting them for the past hour and a half or so. General jubilation, uplifting music, and wait for the credit roll. But wait!
The monster’s not completely dead! Rising from its presumed final resting place, the monster goes one more round with the good folk before finally, permanently succumbing.
This tired dramatic cliché came to mind with the recent appearance of Dick Cheney’s first interview since he slithered out of office. Not content to let as much as a month go by before rising from his figurative crypt – no doubt in some undisclosed location – to defend himself and attack anyone so foolish as to disagree with him, the previously aptly named ‘Vice” hoisted his broadsword and heaved once again into battle with his enemies.
Which includes pretty much everyone, but most especially those now occupying the positions of power Cheney & Co. so recently vacated. One suspects that with their inevitable repetition, his efforts at self-justification will become simply tedious. For just now, however, their outlandish audacity can amaze.
For example, “If you release the hard-core Al-Qaeda terrorists that are held at Guantanamo, I think they go back into the business of trying to kill more Americans and mount further mass-casualty attacks. If you turn ’em loose and they go kill more Americans, who’s responsible for that?”
Who indeed? Isn’t it at least a reasonable possibility that what might drive a released Guantanamo resident to mayhem is the experience of having been bundled off to the place, held for years with no recourse to anything even vaguely resembling due process. “Well, you see how it is, Omar. Some tribal leader picked you up, sold you to the CIA for a bounty, which we paid figuring that anyone carrying a pen knife in the hills of Whatchamacallitstan is clearly up to no good and in all likelihood at least middle-level Al-Qaeda. So you were shuffled down some malign underground railroad and ended up a guest of the U.S. Government in Cuba for the past six years. No trial, no contact with your family, no hope the nightmare would end. But hey! No hard feelings, huh?”
Or, following Cheney’s pretzel logic, are we prepared to hold these individuals indefinitely? A more effective jihadi recruitment tool does not readily come to mind.
There’s more. “Those policies we put in place (terrorist surveillance, “enhanced” interrogation, the Patriot Act), in my opinion, were absolutely crucial to getting us through the last seven-plus years without a major-casualty attack on the U.S.” Surely this deserves a gold medal for specious reasoning, served up with a healthy side order of “We know what’s best.” Can it be seriously argued at this late date that the actions of Team Cheney over the past eight years were the best way of achieving our security? And at what cost? This year marks the semiquincentennial anniversary of a germane observation by one Benjamin Franklin: “They who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
As for Cheney, roll credits. The show’s over.
The monster’s not completely dead! Rising from its presumed final resting place, the monster goes one more round with the good folk before finally, permanently succumbing.
This tired dramatic cliché came to mind with the recent appearance of Dick Cheney’s first interview since he slithered out of office. Not content to let as much as a month go by before rising from his figurative crypt – no doubt in some undisclosed location – to defend himself and attack anyone so foolish as to disagree with him, the previously aptly named ‘Vice” hoisted his broadsword and heaved once again into battle with his enemies.
Which includes pretty much everyone, but most especially those now occupying the positions of power Cheney & Co. so recently vacated. One suspects that with their inevitable repetition, his efforts at self-justification will become simply tedious. For just now, however, their outlandish audacity can amaze.
For example, “If you release the hard-core Al-Qaeda terrorists that are held at Guantanamo, I think they go back into the business of trying to kill more Americans and mount further mass-casualty attacks. If you turn ’em loose and they go kill more Americans, who’s responsible for that?”
Who indeed? Isn’t it at least a reasonable possibility that what might drive a released Guantanamo resident to mayhem is the experience of having been bundled off to the place, held for years with no recourse to anything even vaguely resembling due process. “Well, you see how it is, Omar. Some tribal leader picked you up, sold you to the CIA for a bounty, which we paid figuring that anyone carrying a pen knife in the hills of Whatchamacallitstan is clearly up to no good and in all likelihood at least middle-level Al-Qaeda. So you were shuffled down some malign underground railroad and ended up a guest of the U.S. Government in Cuba for the past six years. No trial, no contact with your family, no hope the nightmare would end. But hey! No hard feelings, huh?”
Or, following Cheney’s pretzel logic, are we prepared to hold these individuals indefinitely? A more effective jihadi recruitment tool does not readily come to mind.
There’s more. “Those policies we put in place (terrorist surveillance, “enhanced” interrogation, the Patriot Act), in my opinion, were absolutely crucial to getting us through the last seven-plus years without a major-casualty attack on the U.S.” Surely this deserves a gold medal for specious reasoning, served up with a healthy side order of “We know what’s best.” Can it be seriously argued at this late date that the actions of Team Cheney over the past eight years were the best way of achieving our security? And at what cost? This year marks the semiquincentennial anniversary of a germane observation by one Benjamin Franklin: “They who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
As for Cheney, roll credits. The show’s over.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)