Romneyville and the confederation of financiocrats.

    Before the process of deconstructing Willard Romney began in earnest a month ago it was difficult to objectify that special world of Finance which exists as a form of supra-capitalism I choose to call Financiocracy---a Confederation of institutions and individuals who in a multi-national context make money with money. 

    The Confederation exists in an ethos which is literally not anchored to our traditional form of locale-specific capitalism. One of the most vivid examples of such un-connectedness is when, in the invention of Mortgage Backed Securities, sold and traded world wide, home mortgages in the U.S.were severed from the established grounding of actual paperwork and signatures, and the physical recording of mortgages in the municipalities where the asset resides, a centuries-old practice, was violated. 

    Romneyville crystalizes one aspect of this brave new world of finance so discreetly and clearly that it is likely to remain as Exhibit A of a practice known as Private Equity for a generation to come. Romneyville rests on several important privileges extracted from the government and populace of the U.S (see below).

     A significant enabler of this brave new world of Finance is a companion narrative of "capitalism" and "free market economy" which touts the Financiocrats as essential Job Creators in our overall economy---a message aimed at the middle and the working class who are suffering low wage growth and unemployment.

    In objectifying Romneyville, the types of privileges underlying much of the success of the Financiocrats have been laid bare. The privileges consist of tax breaks such as "carried interest" which allows earned income for managing investments to be taxed as if it were the same as a capital gain on the underlying asset---thus producing a 15% rate for "work". In taking over companies in the manner which Bain Capital did, small amounts of "equity capital" were boosted with large low interest and tax deductable loans. In addition, offshore "blocker accounts" were most likely used to skirt taxes such as the UBIT tax. 

    While the above description of privileges is truncated and over simplified, the important point is that those practices and privileges are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the rarified and multinational menu available to the elites in the system within which Private Equity operates. For example, by setting up Bain investment vehicles in tax havens like the Cayman Islands, foreign investors can invest in Bain deals, thereby minimizing or eliminating their taxes.

    The essential revelations about Romneyville do not go to its legality---as most likely the letter of the law was followed---but whether this system of supra capitalism is fair. And, just as important, in its concept was it a default option and a sin of omission. Were there, and are there, better and more effective incentives to govern, manage and grow our economy?

    The Confederation of international players making money with money exists as a privileged oligarchy which is extracting profit from the world economy without a clear understanding of the value that is being created in terms of goods and services being produced nor a clear understanding of the positive impact, if any, upon employment. In a world where two or three hundred million workers are unemployed, the burden of proof of the economic and social benefits of supra-capitalism rests with the Financiocracy itself.  

    As the first, foremost, indelible, and walking definition of a Financiocrat in American history, may Romney's name, and his infamous campaign, reside in the annals of rogue Capitalism and moneyed politics---and not in a registry of the occupants of 1600 Pennsylvania, Ave., Washington D.C. 

     

    Note: Physiocrat was a term coined in 18th Century France and related to the economist Quesnay's posit of Physiocracy---the rule of nature---as the foundation of a single science of politics and economics grounded in private property. The exclusive method of productivity was agriculture. Anyone considering himself to be a Physiocrat would most likely have been landed gentry--for example, Crevecoeur, who penned "Letters from an American Farmer".

     

       
     

      

    Comments

    It will be an interesting year as the average person becomes more aware of how the wealth moved to the top and who enabled the whole process. This past week has been a wake call for some in Florida. No one was really focused on politics around here because of the holidays until the GOP dog and pony show came to town and took over the airwaves.

    Thanks, Trk. Newt is doing a lot of the work that the O team would have to have done eventually but. how much better that it be done within their party. 


    Lately I have been thinking it is all to the good that the whole "financiocrat" thing has been raised so early in the presidential campaign process. Gives people many months to slowly notch up the understanding of the whole topic, absorb the amount of information necessary to make a better judgment about it. Even with TV, they can't just repeat the same basic agitprop points over and over for that long period of time, it has to be upped to another conversation level eventually. People won't just settle for a repeat of Course 101 version by the time the general election debate comes along. So for that reason, maybe it's good we have a "financiocrat" running for president? Otherwise, this very important topic about our economy would get much more simplistic attention, with basic populist demagoguery without real teeth an easy ploy.


    Here I am coming back a few minutes later to say: all that could change. I just turned on Hardball and what I saw was clips of Newt saying today he's staying in the race to protect the party from a Massachusetts liberal taking it over...Massachusetts liberal..Massachusetts liberal....

    and now they've got Sarah saying "annoy a liberal, vote for Newt"

    If the tea partying (et. al.) wing moves away from the populist economic attacks on Mitt, and keeps steady on labeling him a liberal, they will enable the idea that "Wall Street" is all a liberal Obama/Mitt plot. Where the learning about finance will not continue, bur rather that Mitt's just another Obama, both Goldman Sachs tools, bailing out their liberal rich friends. And if you've read sites like FDL, you know that there are plenty of lefties willing to add to such a chorus, and repeat it ad nauseum for a long time without upping understanding of the situation.


    Thanks, Artsy. There could be a populist backlash against Obama himself as a financiocrat---I think that's what you meant. But I'm not so worried at this time about anything the tea party might do to attack Obama. Also I think the distinctions between Obama and Romney are growing by the day. Assuming Romney wins the nomination they will go to the standard playbook and pick a social conservative for V.P---and I'm not much on an expert but I don't think they are going to spend much time attacking Obama where Romney is weak. The appointment of Corrdray, settling up the foreclosure practices suit and structuring the Task Force are a direct assault on Romney, particularly statements like letting the foreclosure mess "hit bottom".

    The Task Force will looking at the origination of the MBS's more so than foreclosure practices and will be attacking some of those in Romney's funding constituency. Meanwhile Obama will be taking the populist stance against the banks. Romney walked right into this.The longer this primary goes on the more so.  I remember back a while when we were comparing personalities but I think Romney's further definition by his own hapless statements as well as the attacks by Gingrich changed much of that.   


    True...Here in my neck of the woods, I used to find it hard to have a political conversation with like minded freinds without getting lectured to by a loud ditto head. We are able to talk openly about the election at hen parties now without the fear of causing a commotion. I don't think it is from the water in the punch.

    I just love the term Physiocrat.

    I mean it sings to me!


    Thought this might add to our chest of Physiocrat data:

    Mitt's money man

    The Globe profiles Brad Malt, the man who oversees Mitt Romney's wealth and investments, and peels back the onion a bit on the thought behind having the Swiss bank account that the candidate closed last year, along with some of his sell-offs in advance of his campaign:

    In 2007, as Romney prepared his first run for president, Malt sold stock in dozens of potentially controversial companies, including casino operators, tobacco growers, and firms with ties to Iran. Last year, after Romney pushed for tougher trade sanctions against China, Malt dumped a number of Chinese holdings. He recently shed a money market mutual fund that had invested in government-backed mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are blamed for exacerbating the housing bust.

    In early 2010, as Romney advanced toward a second presidential campaign, Malt decided to close the $3 million UBS account he set up in Switzerland seven years earlier, realizing it could become a political issue. In 2009, the US government sued UBS to obtain the names of thousands of Americans who secretly held billions of dollars in Swiss accounts.

    Malt said he opened the Swiss account not to hide assets, but to diversify Romney’s investments into foreign currencies. If the value of the dollar declined, for example, a rise in the Swiss franc might offset it. The account, Malt stressed, was listed on Romney’s 2010 tax return and Romney paid taxes on the interest, just as he pays taxes on all the earnings from other foreign investments.

    “It’s actually kind of crazy,’’ Malt said of the controversy. “This is a fully legitimate, fully reported account that pays every penny of taxes.’’

    Terrific Post! Appreciate.

     


    Thanks, Aunt Sam. In other words, Romney labels Obama as a European style leader while he himself invests in a rising European currency. Seems then that Europe might have something to offer. 

    Newt missed this one---"Romney bets against the U.S. economy. With a Swiss bank account he profits from a decline in the value of the American Dollar."

    Malt's defense unwittingly creates an argument against Romney---for the simple reason that this ilk has never really concerned themselves with specifics on how the natural world of the financiocrats might adversely affect those on the lower rungs. 


    Another for our file, courtesy of Andrew Sullivan:

    Romney's New Loophole For The Rich

    The former Bain executive has pledged to eliminate capital gains taxes for households with income under $200,000. Roberton Williams explains how this would work in reality:

    Nearly 80 percent of households already pay no tax on gains and dividends—either because they have no investment income or because they’re in the 15-percent tax bracket or below. This cut—about $40 billion in 2015—can only help the remaining 20 percent. Not surprisingly, the bulk of benefits go to high-income households. And, because the threshold would apply only to non-gains and non-dividend income, households in the top 1 percent would get nearly a tenth of the tax savings.

    Ah, the gift that keeps on giving!!!


    Thanks again. This particular tax cut would appeal to a lot of Independents. But overall, I don't think, given the total election, that it's going to offset the downside of the total Romneyville package. 


    A new CBS poll shows support for a change in the tax rates for Capital Gains and Dividends. By 52% to 36%, respondents think both should be taxed at the same rate as "work".  Independents are 54 to 32. 

    The comparisons to prior surveys, if any, are not given.  My impression is that OWS and Romneyville have had a significant impact on these results---but I have no proof of that. 


    Count me in the "nay" column. I think the tax rate for capital gains and dividends should be taxed at a higher rate than "work". wink

    I mean, seriously, why should income from gains and interest on what is primarily inherited wealth be subject to lower taxes? (Yeah, I know, preaching to the choir…)


    I was just wondering who the 2% was, should have known.

    I think it's interesting that people are actually making the distinction, although the questions lead them on quite well. I heard Jim Cramer, CNBC shouter, say that it's clear from many people who tweet him and send him emails is that they have no idea there are even separate rates. 

     


    Robert Harris, author of the Fear Index has just proffered the statistic that the average time a share of stock is held by its owner in the U.S. is 22 seconds.

    Harris: "The twenty year trajectory which has brought us to our present financial crisis can be summed up as follows: quants begat derivatives; derivatives begat the crisis of 2008; the crisis begat the debt crisis;" and so on to Recession and prolonged attempts at recovery.

    The quote I like most. "The gulf of understanding is now not so much between the humanities and the sciences (having briefly worked in an institution of higher learning I would never have expected this) but between the bewildered humanity and a global financial system that seems both utterly mysterious and highly unstable."

    I might add the recent comment that the customer accounts at Global Investors cannot be located and appears to have "vaporized". 


    So a long term tax deferred Swiss/Cayman leveraged account means you held the stock for over a minute? Jobs are only created when the money that makes money stays in secret accounts in Switzerland, or is passed on tax free as trust accounts.

    If it wasn't legal, a Republican would just say it was patriotism that made him do it.


    Latest Comments