White House Says Story About White House Misleading, Is Misleading

Anyone expecting Obama to come out with his hands up following last night’s story about the made up pre-election jobs numbers, and admit to everything… will be disappointed.

  • STORY ABOUT RIGGED JOBS NUMBERS WAS MISLEADING: WHITE HOUSE

Ok everyone, back to your 29.5 hours a week job, because as everyone knows the White House would never lie to anyone about anything.

More importantly, the Commerce Department, which was referred to investigate the allegations of BLS fraud, thanks White House spokesman Jay Carney for having done its investigative work for it in just a few short hours.

Such government efficiency…


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/hL0j44ZHhg4/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Caption Contest: The Wait For The iBestbuy Begins

… Wait, wait, wait. What do you mean Best Buy isn’t releasing the next retinest, fingerprintscanniest, NSA-trackingest, 6-8 inchiest gizmo and instead these people are simply taking a 10 day break from their highly paid, quality jobs just to wait in line for a $98 TV?

From 19 Action News: Anxious Black Friday shoppers are already camping out at the Best Buy at Chapel Hill in Akron.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/AHUSTH4UGck/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Tim Geithner, January 2013: "Extremely Unlikely Will Take A Job In The World Of Finance"

Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

So over the weekend, the world learned that Tiny Turbo Tax Timmy Geithner had accepted a job with private equity giant firm Warburg Pincus. The news was about as much of a surprise as a lie popping out of Barack Obama’s mouth every time he opens it. Nevertheless, the move is particularly hilarious in light of a profile article of Geithner in New York magazine from January of this year, in which the king of cronyism tried to distance himself from Wall Street. Here’s the money-shot paragraph from the piece:

Another fiction that has plagued Geithner is the idea that he is a creature of Wall Street, specifically that he worked for Goldman Sachs. He isn’t sure where it came from—probably just confusion with his predecessor, Hank Paulson, who was the former CEO—but “once it hardened, it was very hard to overcome.” Indeed, he has not really overcome it at all. I can write, right here, in all caps, TIM GEITHNER HAS NEVER WORKED ON WALL STREET, and still someone will comment on our website that he is a bankster who should just go back to Goldman Sachs.

 

Geithner says it’s “extremely unlikely” he will take a job in the world of finance, but the idea that he is somehow, secretly, working hand in hand with that community persists, and every once in a while someone pulls out records of his phone calls and meetings with CEOs as evidence. Geithner is not really sure what to say about that. “I’m the secretary of the Treasury.” He laughs. “How am I supposed to run a financial rescue if I don’t take phone calls from people?”

At least he is making up for lost time. Those conspiracy theorists making stuff up again…

Full article here.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/09nv9dG8tsI/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Tim Geithner, January 2013: “Extremely Unlikely Will Take A Job In The World Of Finance”

Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

So over the weekend, the world learned that Tiny Turbo Tax Timmy Geithner had accepted a job with private equity giant firm Warburg Pincus. The news was about as much of a surprise as a lie popping out of Barack Obama’s mouth every time he opens it. Nevertheless, the move is particularly hilarious in light of a profile article of Geithner in New York magazine from January of this year, in which the king of cronyism tried to distance himself from Wall Street. Here’s the money-shot paragraph from the piece:

Another fiction that has plagued Geithner is the idea that he is a creature of Wall Street, specifically that he worked for Goldman Sachs. He isn’t sure where it came from—probably just confusion with his predecessor, Hank Paulson, who was the former CEO—but “once it hardened, it was very hard to overcome.” Indeed, he has not really overcome it at all. I can write, right here, in all caps, TIM GEITHNER HAS NEVER WORKED ON WALL STREET, and still someone will comment on our website that he is a bankster who should just go back to Goldman Sachs.

 

Geithner says it’s “extremely unlikely” he will take a job in the world of finance, but the idea that he is somehow, secretly, working hand in hand with that community persists, and every once in a while someone pulls out records of his phone calls and meetings with CEOs as evidence. Geithner is not really sure what to say about that. “I’m the secretary of the Treasury.” He laughs. “How am I supposed to run a financial rescue if I don’t take phone calls from people?”

At least he is making up for lost time. Those conspiracy theorists making stuff up again…

Full article here.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/09nv9dG8tsI/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Forget Bitcoin, Bernanke, & Musk; The Real Bubble Is At The NSA

Depending on the time of day, Bitcoin is up 100% (or 200% or 300%) or down 50% as the crypto-currency swings violently around in what appears a death spasm only to transform into a Tesla-like phoenician rise. But there is another crypto-related bubble that is exploding – and showing no signs of stopping. As Russia Today notes, the so-called “Snowden Effect” has seen Freedom of Information Act requests filed with the National Security Agency increase 888% this fiscal year.

 

Via Russia Today,

“Fueled by the Edward Snowden scandal, more Americans than ever are asking the National Security Agency if their personal life is being spied on,” Yamiche Alcindor wrote for USA Today.

 

Indeed, the thousands of FOIA requests filed by Americans since June far outnumber the mere hundreds that it received annually in previous years.

 

 

Shortly after the first Snowden leak appeared on June 6, however, the agency became flooded with 1,302 requests almost immediately. During the following three months, the paper reported, the NSA received 2,538 requests, the likes of which have inundated the government staffers tasked with responding for the open records requests.

 

Pamela Phillips, the chief of the NSA Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Office, told the paper that “This was the largest spike we’ve ever had.”

 

“We’ve had requests from individuals who want any records we have on their phone calls, their phone numbers, their e-mail addresses, their IP addresses, anything like that,” Phillips said.

 

 

[The NSA appears to be denying many of these requests]

 

“[Y]our request is denied because the fact of the existence or non-existence of responsive records is a currently and properly classified matter,” the agency wrote him.

 

Our adversaries are likely to evaluate all public responses related to these programs,” the NSA said at the time to Collier. “Were we to provide positive or negative responses to requests such as yours, our adversaries’ compilation of the information provided would reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

 

Months later, the NSA is apparently still giving concerned Americans the same runaround.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/M0AgoAsAaqI/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Forget Bitcoin, Bernanke, & Musk; The Real Bubble Is At The NSA

Depending on the time of day, Bitcoin is up 100% (or 200% or 300%) or down 50% as the crypto-currency swings violently around in what appears a death spasm only to transform into a Tesla-like phoenician rise. But there is another crypto-related bubble that is exploding – and showing no signs of stopping. As Russia Today notes, the so-called “Snowden Effect” has seen Freedom of Information Act requests filed with the National Security Agency increase 888% this fiscal year.

 

Via Russia Today,

“Fueled by the Edward Snowden scandal, more Americans than ever are asking the National Security Agency if their personal life is being spied on,” Yamiche Alcindor wrote for USA Today.

 

Indeed, the thousands of FOIA requests filed by Americans since June far outnumber the mere hundreds that it received annually in previous years.

 

 

Shortly after the first Snowden leak appeared on June 6, however, the agency became flooded with 1,302 requests almost immediately. During the following three months, the paper reported, the NSA received 2,538 requests, the likes of which have inundated the government staffers tasked with responding for the open records requests.

 

Pamela Phillips, the chief of the NSA Freedom of Information Act and Privacy Act Office, told the paper that “This was the largest spike we’ve ever had.”

 

“We’ve had requests from individuals who want any records we have on their phone calls, their phone numbers, their e-mail addresses, their IP addresses, anything like that,” Phillips said.

 

 

[The NSA appears to be denying many of these requests]

 

“[Y]our request is denied because the fact of the existence or non-existence of responsive records is a currently and properly classified matter,” the agency wrote him.

 

Our adversaries are likely to evaluate all public responses related to these programs,” the NSA said at the time to Collier. “Were we to provide positive or negative responses to requests such as yours, our adversaries’ compilation of the information provided would reasonably be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.”

 

Months later, the NSA is apparently still giving concerned Americans the same runaround.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/M0AgoAsAaqI/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Guest Post: Increased Minimum Wage, Decreased Economic Prosperity

Submitted by David Howden via the Ludwig von Mises Institute of Canada,

Standard microeconomic theory shows that deviations of a price from its natural level bring forth bad results. In my experience, students most easily grasp the pernicious effects of price controls when phrased in terms of the minimum wage.

Long story short, the minimum wage acts as a price floor which stops people from selling labour services at a price below the mandated level. The final result is an increase in unemployment, partly from existing workers who lose their jobs and partly from new entrants to the labour market looking for a job but unable to get hired.

It’s really not a very difficult theory to comprehend.

 

 

Yet I’m always surprised at how few are able to apply this basic lesson. Take the recent protests in Thunder Bay in support of increasing Ontario’s minimum wage from $10.25 to $14 an hour as a case in point.

Amongst the arguments the protestors put forward, two stood out to me for their weakness in justification.

First, some protestors seemed to think that $14 was inherently “more fair” or “just” than $10.25. Prices are not about justness or fairness, they are about reflecting underlying conditions. A price doesn’t just come out of nowhere. Instead it is the result of the subjective demand someone has for an object, the resource constraints available, the substitute goods that the person could resort to instead, or the potential purchaser’s income level. Changing these general determinants of demand into the specific ones that affect the labour market, we can see that wages are the result of: 1) the productivity of workers, 2) the number of workers available, 3) the price of labour substitutes, like machinery or automated production processes, and 4) the incomes of the employers. (There are lots of other determinants, but this short list will suffice.)

Changing the price of labour does absolutely nothing to alter these determinants. Advocates of alterations to the minimum wage confuse cause with effect. The wage one earns is the effect of all of these aforementioned causes. Changing the wage will not have a positive effect because unless one of these determinants changes there is no reason why the wage should change.

The second prevalent argument at the protests was that higher wages would stimulate the economy. One protestor claimed that the increase in the minimum wage to $14 would stimulate the Thunder Bay economy by $5.1 billion!

Economist Livio Di Matteo did a little digging, and it turns out the “stimulus” in question is the sum of all Thunder Bay residents earning an extra $3.75 an hour. Unfortunately this doesn’t amount to stimulus; it just changes the distribution of income. Minimum wage earners, if they manage to keep their jobs, will end up a little wealthier and businesses will lose some money.

One of the best lessons from economics is that one should pay attention to the unseen effects of a policy. Often times this will be more important than those results which are obvious.

In minimum wage discussions, the unseen effects are two-fold. First are those people who are going to lose their job because of the increase in the minimum wage. If you thought it was hard to survive on $10.25 an hour, wait until you are earning nothing. Second, even those who keep their jobs are not stimulating the economy through their increased wages. To the extent that businesses will have to pay more money to workers there will be less money to invest. This means less growth, and fewer opportunities for people in the future.

Wages, like all prices, are not randomly created. They signal underlying conditions and as such are not inherently just or unjust; they just are. Changing the wage rate without doing anything to alter one of the underlying variables creating it cannot achieve anything positive, and will more than likely make people worse off. If these protestors are successful in achieving an increase in Ontario’s minimum wage, at the very least some of them will gain time to think about this simple lesson after they lose their job.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/MeUp9oNh6hk/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Big Trouble In Massive China: "The Nation Might Face Credit Losses Of As Much As $3 Trillion"

The following chart from Bloomberg showing official Chinese NPL data has its pros and cons.

The pros: it shows that the trend in improving NPLs has dramatically inverted in the past ten quarters and has risen to the highest in at least three years.

The cons: the chart, which again is based on official data, is woefully misrepresenting and underestimating just how profound the bad debt situation is in a country in which each month pseudo-nationalized banks issue loans amounting to the same or more in new liquidity as the Fed and BOJ do combined!

That the Chinese reality “on the ground” is far worse than what is represented was known to Zero Hedge readers over a year ago. For those who may have forgotten, on November 5, 2012 we showed “The Chinese Credit Bubble – Full Frontal” and specifically this chart.

And of course  “The True Chinese Credit Bubble: 240% Of GDP And Soaring” from April:

What is even more concerning is that in order to maintain its breakneck economic “growth” of ~8% per year, China has to continue injecting massive amounts of debt, the so called “credit impulse” or “flow” which according to assorted views, is what is the true driver of an economy, and where GDP growth is merely a reflection of how much credit is entering (or leaving) the system.

 

The chart below shows that total Chinese social financing flow just hit a record for the month of March.

 

Completing the picture is the estimated economic response to a surge
in credit. As the last chart shows, in China the biggest benefit to a surge in flow is felt in the quarter immediately following the credit injection, as one would expect, with the effect tapering off and even going negative in future quarters, thus requiring even more debt creation to offset the adverse impacts of prior such injections.

 

 

What should become obvious is that in order to maintain its unprecedented (if declining) growth rate, China has to inject ever greater amounts of credit into its economy, amounts which will push its total credit pile ever higher into the stratosphere, until one day it pulls a Europe and finds itself in a situation where there are no further encumberable assets (for secured loans), and where ever-deteriorating cash flows are no longer sufficient to satisfy the interest payments on unsecured debt, leading to what the Chinese government has been desperate to avoid: mass corporate defaults.

But while China’s debt – an arcane mixture of public, private, and pseudo-government backstopped credit – is among the biggest in the world, the one outstanding question was how much longer can China keep sweeping the hundreds of billions if not trillions of discharged, bad loans under the carpet and pretend everything is fine.

Today we get some much needed perspective on this topic courtesy of Bloomberg, which has some very disturbing revelations.

Such as this:

An unidentified local bank reported a 33 percent nonperforming-loan ratio for the solar-panel industry, compared with 2 percent at the beginning of the year, with the increase due to Wuxi Suntech, China Business News reported in September.

And this:

China’s lending spree has created a debt burden similar in magnitude to the one that pushed Asian nations into crisis in the late 1990s, according to Fitch Ratings.

As companies take on more debt, the efficiency of credit use has deteriorated. Since 2009, for every yuan of credit issued, China’s GDP grew by an average 0.4 yuan, while the pre-2009 average was 0.8 yuan, according to Mike Werner, a Hong Kong-based analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.

And this:

“The real situation is much worse than the data showed” after talking to chief financial officers at industrial manufacturers, said Wendy Tang, a Shanghai-based analyst at Northeast Securities Co., who estimates the actual nonperforming-loan ratio to be as high as 3 percent. “It will take at least one year or longer for these NPLs to appear on banks’ books, and I haven’t seen the bottom of deterioration in Jiangsu and Zhejiang yet.”

And this:

China’s credit quality started to deteriorate in late 2011 as borrowers took on more debt to serve their obligations amid a slowing economy and weaker income. Interest owed by borrowers rose to an estimated 12.5 percent of China’s economy from 7 percent in 2008, Fitch Ratings estimated in September. By the end of 2017, it may climb to as much as 22 percent and “ultimately overwhelm borrowers.”

 

Meanwhile, China’s total credit will be pushed to almost 250 percent of gross domestic product by then, almost double the 130 percent of 2008, according to Fitch.

And this:

Based on current valuations, investors are pricing in a scenario where nonperforming loans at the largest Chinese banks will make up more than 15 percent of their loan books, according to Werner, who forecasts a 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent bad-loan ratio by the end of 2015. A further decline in GDP growth would lead to more soured loans and weaker earnings, he said.

 

Lenders so far haven’t reported significant deterioration in loan quality. Bank of China said it had 251.3 billion yuan of loans to industries suffering from overcapacity as of the end of June, accounting for 3 percent of the total. Its nonperforming-loan ratio for those businesses stood at 0.93 percent, the same level reported for the entire bank.

All of the above is driven by one main factor – a relentless desire to fund C
hina’s epic scramble into record overcapacity – after all gotta keep that goalseeked GDP above 7% somehow – which in turn has resulted in the producers competing themselves right out of solvency:

Shipbuilding isn’t the only industry affected by overcapacity. Also in Jiangsu, about 130 kilometers (80 miles) southwest of Nantong, Wuxi Suntech Power Co., the main unit of the industry’s once-biggest supplier, went bankrupt with 9 billion yuan of debt to China’s largest banks, according to a Nov. 12 report by Communist Party-owned Legal Daily. Suntech Power Holdings Co. (STPFQ), the parent firm, defaulted on $541 million of offshore bonds to Wall Street investors.

 

Shang Fulin, China’s top banking regulator, this month urged lenders to “seek channels to clean up bad loans by industries with overcapacity to prevent new risks from brewing” and refrain from dragging their feet in dealing with the issue.

 

Government and banks’ support for the solar industry since late 2008 has resulted in at least one factory producing sun-powered products in half of China’s 600 cities, according to the China Renewable Energy Society in Beijing. China Development Bank, the world’s largest policy lender, alone lent more than 50 billion yuan to solar-panel makers as of August 2012, data from the China Banking Association showed.

 

China accounts for seven of every 10 solar panels produced worldwide. If they ran at full speed, the factories could produce 49 gigawatts of solar panels a year, 10 times more than in 2008, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Overcapacity has driven down prices to about 84 cents a watt, compared with $2 at the end of 2010. The slump forced dozens of producers like Wuxi Suntech into bankruptcy.

The downside is well-known: should the people not get paid, riots inevitably ensue. Which is why the government will keep on bailing out and pretending the local loans are viable, until it no longer can.

“The central government is hawkish in its tone, but when it comes to execution by local governments, the enforcement will be much softer,” Bank of Communications’ Lian said. “Many of these firms are major job providers and taxpayers, so the local government will try all means to save them and help them repay bank loans.”

 

When hundreds of unpaid Mingde Heavy workers took to the streets for a second time last November, the local government stepped in by lining up other firms to vouch for Mingde so banks would renew its loans. Mingde Heavy avoided failure by entering into an alliance with a shipping unit of government-controlled Jiangsu Sainty Corp., which also imports and exports apparel.

As for the CNY64 trillion question of how much long the government can pretend all is well, the following may be useful.

The nation might face credit losses of as much as $3 trillion as defaults ensue from the expansion of the past four years, particularly by non-bank lenders such as trusts, exceeding that seen prior to other credit crises, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. estimated in August.

In summary: enjoy the relative calm we currently have thanks to Bernanke’s, Kuroda’s (and soon: Draghi’s) epic liquidity tsunami which is rising all leaking boats. The invoice amounting to trillions in bad and non-performing loans around the entire world, and not just in China, is in the mail.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/_OQl4kq6uYU/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Big Trouble In Massive China: “The Nation Might Face Credit Losses Of As Much As $3 Trillion”

The following chart from Bloomberg showing official Chinese NPL data has its pros and cons.

The pros: it shows that the trend in improving NPLs has dramatically inverted in the past ten quarters and has risen to the highest in at least three years.

The cons: the chart, which again is based on official data, is woefully misrepresenting and underestimating just how profound the bad debt situation is in a country in which each month pseudo-nationalized banks issue loans amounting to the same or more in new liquidity as the Fed and BOJ do combined!

That the Chinese reality “on the ground” is far worse than what is represented was known to Zero Hedge readers over a year ago. For those who may have forgotten, on November 5, 2012 we showed “The Chinese Credit Bubble – Full Frontal” and specifically this chart.

And of course  “The True Chinese Credit Bubble: 240% Of GDP And Soaring” from April:

What is even more concerning is that in order to maintain its breakneck economic “growth” of ~8% per year, China has to continue injecting massive amounts of debt, the so called “credit impulse” or “flow” which according to assorted views, is what is the true driver of an economy, and where GDP growth is merely a reflection of how much credit is entering (or leaving) the system.

 

The chart below shows that total Chinese social financing flow just hit a record for the month of March.

 

Completing the picture is the estimated economic response to a surge
in credit. As the last chart shows, in China the biggest benefit to a surge in flow is felt in the quarter immediately following the credit injection, as one would expect, with the effect tapering off and even going negative in future quarters, thus requiring even more debt creation to offset the adverse impacts of prior such injections.

 

 

What should become obvious is that in order to maintain its unprecedented (if declining) growth rate, China has to inject ever greater amounts of credit into its economy, amounts which will push its total credit pile ever higher into the stratosphere, until one day it pulls a Europe and finds itself in a situation where there are no further encumberable assets (for secured loans), and where ever-deteriorating cash flows are no longer sufficient to satisfy the interest payments on unsecured debt, leading to what the Chinese government has been desperate to avoid: mass corporate defaults.

But while China’s debt – an arcane mixture of public, private, and pseudo-government backstopped credit – is among the biggest in the world, the one outstanding question was how much longer can China keep sweeping the hundreds of billions if not trillions of discharged, bad loans under the carpet and pretend everything is fine.

Today we get some much needed perspective on this topic courtesy of Bloomberg, which has some very disturbing revelations.

Such as this:

An unidentified local bank reported a 33 percent nonperforming-loan ratio for the solar-panel industry, compared with 2 percent at the beginning of the year, with the increase due to Wuxi Suntech, China Business News reported in September.

And this:

China’s lending spree has created a debt burden similar in magnitude to the one that pushed Asian nations into crisis in the late 1990s, according to Fitch Ratings.

As companies take on more debt, the efficiency of credit use has deteriorated. Since 2009, for every yuan of credit issued, China’s GDP grew by an average 0.4 yuan, while the pre-2009 average was 0.8 yuan, according to Mike Werner, a Hong Kong-based analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co.

And this:

“The real situation is much worse than the data showed” after talking to chief financial officers at industrial manufacturers, said Wendy Tang, a Shanghai-based analyst at Northeast Securities Co., who estimates the actual nonperforming-loan ratio to be as high as 3 percent. “It will take at least one year or longer for these NPLs to appear on banks’ books, and I haven’t seen the bottom of deterioration in Jiangsu and Zhejiang yet.”

And this:

China’s credit quality started to deteriorate in late 2011 as borrowers took on more debt to serve their obligations amid a slowing economy and weaker income. Interest owed by borrowers rose to an estimated 12.5 percent of China’s economy from 7 percent in 2008, Fitch Ratings estimated in September. By the end of 2017, it may climb to as much as 22 percent and “ultimately overwhelm borrowers.”

 

Meanwhile, China’s total credit will be pushed to almost 250 percent of gross domestic product by then, almost double the 130 percent of 2008, according to Fitch.

And this:

Based on current valuations, investors are pricing in a scenario where nonperforming loans at the largest Chinese banks will make up more than 15 percent of their loan books, according to Werner, who forecasts a 2.5 percent to 3.5 percent bad-loan ratio by the end of 2015. A further decline in GDP growth would lead to more soured loans and weaker earnings, he said.

 

Lenders so far haven’t reported significant deterioration in loan quality. Bank of China said it had 251.3 billion yuan of loans to industries suffering from overcapacity as of the end of June, accounting for 3 percent of the total. Its nonperforming-loan ratio for those businesses stood at 0.93 percent, the same level reported for the entire bank.

All of the above is driven by one main factor – a relentless desire to fund China’s epic scramble into record overcapacity – after all gotta keep that goalseeked GDP above 7% somehow – which in turn has resulted in the producers competing themselves right out of solvency:

Shipbuilding isn’t the only industry affected by overcapacity. Also in Jiangsu, about 130 kilometers (80 miles) southwest of Nantong, Wuxi Suntech Power Co., the main unit of the industry’s once-biggest supplier, went bankrupt with 9 billion yuan of debt to China’s largest banks, according to a Nov. 12 report by Communist Party-owned Legal Daily. Suntech Power Holdings Co. (STPFQ), the parent firm, defaulted on $541 million of offshore bonds to Wall Street investors.

 

Shang Fulin, China’s top banking regulator, this month urged lenders to “seek channels to clean up bad loans by industries with overcapacity to prevent new risks from brewing” and refrain from dragging their feet in dealing with the issue.

 

Government and banks’ support for the solar industry since late 2008 has resulted in at least one factory producing sun-powered products in half of China’s 600 cities, according to the China Renewable Energy Society in Beijing. China Development Bank, the world’s largest policy lender, alone lent more than 50 billion yuan to solar-panel makers as of August 2012, data from the China Banking Association showed.

 

China accounts for seven of every 10 solar panels produced worldwide. If they ran at full speed, the factories could produce 49 gigawatts of solar panels a year, 10 times more than in 2008, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Overcapacity has driven down prices to about 84 cents a watt, compared with $2 at the end of 2010. The slump forced dozens of producers like Wuxi Suntech into bankruptcy.

The downside is well-known: should the people not get paid, riots inevitably ensue. Which is why the government will keep on bailing out and pretending the local loans are viable, until it no longer can.

“The central government is hawkish in its tone, but when it comes to execution by local governments, the enforcement will be much softer,” Bank of Communications’ Lian said. “Many of these firms are major job providers and taxpayers, so the local government will try all means to save them and help them repay bank loans.”

 

When hundreds of unpaid Mingde Heavy workers took to the streets for a second time last November, the local government stepped in by lining up other firms to vouch for Mingde so banks would renew its loans. Mingde Heavy avoided failure by entering into an alliance with a shipping unit of government-controlled Jiangsu Sainty Corp., which also imports and exports apparel.

As for the CNY64 trillion question of how much long the government can pretend all is well, the following may be useful.

The nation might face credit losses of as much as $3 trillion as defaults ensue from the expansion of the past four years, particularly by non-bank lenders such as trusts, exceeding that seen prior to other credit crises, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. estimated in August.

In summary: enjoy the relative calm we currently have thanks to Bernanke’s, Kuroda’s (and soon: Draghi’s) epic liquidity tsunami which is rising all leaking boats. The invoice amounting to trillions in bad and non-performing loans around the entire world, and not just in China, is in the mail.


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/_OQl4kq6uYU/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Santelli Slams The Jobs Manipulation Scandal: "American Media, You Can Do Better"

Along with Zero Hedge and Jack Welch, CNBC's Rick Santelli was among the most vocal "jobs truther" in the run-up to last year's election – and suffered the same snark from the mainstream media at such conspiracy theories as to suggest the most important number in the world could be (or would be) manipulated. One year on, we now know the truth and as Santelli rages "if we knew then, what we know now," the world could be a very different place, as "all outcomes could have changed." Santelli raged at the time, "things just didn't feel right," and he was right, perhaps, as he concludes in the brief clip below, the American media "must do better."

 

 


    



via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/SOb9yO3ABws/story01.htm Tyler Durden