An Honest Man on Wall Street

I Want You to Start Thinking
When I announce to people I am in support of free markets, they may mistakenly conclude that I'm also in favor of the type of fraud that has allowed the current credit crisis to emerge. I vehemently oppose it, and so does the man in my story. I hope this inspires you to think more about speaking up and speaking out against violations you see in the world, and not to have fear even if it is something within your own organization or industry.

An Honest Man on Wall Street
Over the past few months, the question I have asked of professors and classmates most frequently in my finance and econ classes has been, "Did no one see the fraud going on in the financial world? And if so, why didn't anyone say anything?"

Today I got my answer.

Meet David Einhorn, a young hedge fund manager with a conscience. In 2002, he spoke at a prominent investment conference where he discussed a company called Allied Capital and what he believed were their fraudulent business practices. In fact, he was so certain that this company was operating illegally that it wouldn't last and he publicly recommended shorting it's stock. (Shorting: selling without owning so that a drop in price creates a profit.) The results were dismal, for the company, and for Einhorn who was placed under investigation and accused of fraud himself.

Over the last 6 years, Einhorn endured SEC investigation for market manipulation, threat of investigation from Eliot Spitzer, violation of his personal property by Allied, his wife was "mysteriously" fired from her job at financial publication Barron's, and he has felt the ire of many professionals on Wall Street. Going against financial giants would make some people shrink, but like his biblical namesake, David kept going, and recently released a book about his experiences. Fooling Some of the People All of The Time is a book and website where he reveals details about his struggles, his innocence, and Allied's fraud.

This touchy-feely story doesn't end though. David isn't really interested in simply capitalizing on his now-turned-around fortunes, and keeping quiet. This year, he hit another firm between the eyes: Lehmann Brothers. He revealed his concerns about the CDOs (Collateralized Debt Obligations: a type of financial instrument) that were not valued properly, falsely boosting Lehmann's balance sheets. He again recommended shorting the stock. The company tried to privately clear up any confusion David may have had, but by the end of the conversation, David only confirmed his suspicions, the company was in deep trouble. He went public with the nature of the call, which prompted further decline of Lehmann's stock, and we all know how this story ends.

The best part about David's methodology is that while he's been making a lot of enemies, he's also particularly adept at making money. He is a shining example that basic business values and always going for the most ethical solutions can help you turn a profit in the long term. His firm, Greenlight Capital, is known for its rigorous review of any company it decides to invest in, or bet against. New York Magazine put it succinctly, "If you had given him $1,000 in 1996, he’d have turned it into $14,600 by now." That's a 25% annualized return over the last 12 years (figures as of mid-summer, that number may have, uh, shifted by now!) He also happens to be an incredible poker player, winning 18th place in the 2006 World Series, and donating over $659,000 to the Michael J. Fox Foundation.

I think David is an incredible example of how by free market principles, free speech, protecting private property, and taking a stand as an individual guided by a personal moral code can lead to justice being served, and to well-deserved personal gain. I also can't imagine anyone saying that Einhorn, who is undoubtedly wealthy, hasn't earned it. I hope understanding that most people obtain their wealth through honest means, and can do wonderful things in their positions of influence will inspire readers to think twice about what is grossly mis-labeled as class warfare, or that the rich should suffer and sacrifice for the "sin" of their wealth.

And those questions again:

Have you ever witnessed fraud, and what did you do?

Do you think moral people are destined to "lose" in life? Lose opportunity, lose money, get taken advantage of, etc.





Why the Nation Needs to Keep Its Eye on Michigan

Michigan: Our Mistakes Coming to a State Near You
The ongoing debacle with the Big 3 is front and center in national news. It highlights the massive failure, not only of the domestic auto industry, but of the State of Michigan to properly diversify their economic plans. You might think that Congress' plan to reject the bailout (for now) means you can avert your eyes from Michigan and move on, but Michigan's woes could prove to haunt the entire nation for the next four years.

Why the mysterious premonitions? Oh, I don't know. Maybe it's because at one point recently, Michigan's Governor Granholm was rumored to be a candidate for energy secretary in Obama's new cabinet. Or maybe it's because Granholm was Joe Biden's personal debate coach. Or maybe it's because Obama is incredibly impressed by what Granholm has done for our state in the last few years. From his website:

"Obama and Biden will create an Advanced Manufacturing Fund to identify and invest in the most compelling advanced manufacturing strategies. The Fund will have peer-review selection and award process based on the Michigan 21st Century Jobs Fund, a state-level initiative that has awarded over $125 million to Michigan businesses with the most innovative proposals to create new products and new jobs in the state. "

I'm not sure if any of you have been to Michigan lately, but it pretty much blows. (Don't get me wrong, there are some kick-ass things about Metro Detroit and Michigan, which have to do with the people and our natural resources, but our economic policies don't make the list!)

Detroit was awarded America's Most Miserable City earlier this year, for-sale signs line the streets, and my fair neighborhood has record-breaking levels of foreclosed homes for auction. Empty buildings stand where thriving businesses once operated. Home invasions and arson cases are rising dramatically: a break-in occurred near my mother's home, one elderly woman was badly beaten (warning: graphic photo in link), and another elderly woman was shot and set on fire by a junkie.

But all that's just to set the mood. Let's now discuss how well Granholm's plans have panned out, so we can get a taste of what Obama has in store!

Michigan: Blowing Away Business
Anyone who lives in Michigan knows Granholm is famous for saying, "In 5 years, you're going to be blown away" in her 2006 State of the State address. She meant to impress, but today it reads like a threat. We have been blown away - by her failures.

Governor Granholm has proven she is determined to make our state an inhospitable business environment, with the exception of playing political favorites. Her 2008 proposal slashed taxes for the auto-industry (good), while shifting that tax burden, plus extra, onto non-manufacturing businesses (huh?). The net result? Driving business out of Michigan, and making sure more don't come in, unless they receive a hefty government subsidy. Her logic is baffling. Why would the benefits of tax cuts apply to automotive, but not to other businesses? Couldn't be because the unions provide a huge voting block for her personal gain, could it?

Let's pretend her plan was a good one. Even then it was doomed to backfire because encouraging advanced manufacturing and keeping the UAW happy are two distinctly different, and opposing activities. The UAW has bit Michigan automotive in the ass in more ways than I care to enumerate here, but keeping the Big 3 uncompetitive in manufacturing is one of their foibles. State-of-the-art plants cannot be built by domestic auto because of stifling union controls that ban supplier integration.

For example, Ford would have loved to bring Michigan one of the most advanced and efficient manufacturing facilities in the world, but it was not allowed to do so. So, it had no other choice but to send its capital to Brazil, where the workforce is well-treated, well-paid, and gaining valuable industry experience. (Hat tip: Rosy Villa)

Michigan: We Don't Accept Donations, But We Will Accept Your Taxes!
In 2003, Granholm turned away a $200 million private donation from local philanthropist Robert Thompson. Even larger than the $125 million Michigan 21st Century Jobs Fund, it could have made a great impact on our economy. So much for the greedy rich man in the top hat and monacle, eh?

Thompson offered the funds for the creation of 15 new charter schools in Detroit. However, because of political backlash from the school board, the Teachers Union, and their stifling contracts, it was denied by the Governor. She missed the opportunity to revolutionize the Detroit school system and serve as a model for the nation with no-strings-attached money! Insanity.

But don't worry, Granholm left Detroit's students in what she thought were the most capable hands. It's comforting to know the latest road to success from the Detroit Public School Board (who have run up massive deficits and are on the verge of their second state takeover in 7 years) is to ask the federal government for a $500 million bailout.

Michigan: Where the Losers Win and It's Caught on Film
It just gets better. In 2005, Granholm accepted a $9 million bid for state land from Toyota, when local real estate developers DPG York, LLC had bid $25 million. In offering state land for less than fair market value, she violated Public Act 671. To suit the lowest bidder and ensure political favoritism, Granholm pursued new legislation, Public Act 326, legalizing her decision after the fact.

Her latest fiscal debacle is offering cash incentives to woo the movie industry (which is not known for its advanced manufacturing techniques, profitability, or stability) to Michigan. Her effective 42% subsidy provides movie-makers with ample cash rebates funded by taxpayer dollars resulting in scant net gain to Michigan's GDP. The only benefit I've reaped from her poor decision-making is knowing Clint Eastwood got a portion of my tax money to shoot a scene in the park down the street from my home. I only hope I can score some free movie tickets for my donation.

Rumblings that Granholm will join the new President's administration should deeply worry the nation.


Hop On Board!

Photo by extranoise
With companies falling apart at the seams, their boards of directors are too. Board members are jumping ship at many companies for being too busy with other boards or leading their own companies - but what does that mean for everyone else? Opening up opportunity to other industries and expanding board membership beyond the usual suspects.

This is a good sign - the less incestuous the corporate world, the better.

The Audacity

In today's Wall Street Journal, UAW President Ron Gettlefinger suggests some interesting advice to the Big Three CEOs, "...consider resigning if that would help win backing for a bailout."

I'm curious and baffled why Mr. Gettlefinger hasn't applied this same advice to his union.

The Man Who Should Have Been Our President Speaks

Ron Paul speaks to the veracity of Austrian Economics to have predicted this current crisis and the woeful inadequacy of the proposed solutions.

Bernanke's answers were pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.

With Friends Like These

I'm fairly certain that when one publicly announced they voted for McCain, they risked losing some friends. I think this happened to me, but I can't be sure. After the election one of my Facebook friends mysteriously disappeared, though I don't know who it was, just saw my friend count tick down (oh, I've unfriended a few loonies I never should have friended in the first place, but really, I'm not anywhere near the certifiably crazy side of the coin.) While no one has abandoned me in any obvious way, I've had a sneaking suspicion I've majorly disappointed at least a few people who thought I was pretty cool - solely on the basis of my vote.

How fascinating to have my suspicions gain a bit of scientific validity, when I read about this brave grade-schooler, Catherine Vogt. Catherine, age 14, conducted a simple experiment in which she attended school wearing a t-shirt that read "McCain Girl" one day and "Obama Girl" the next, and recorded the reactions. The results were far from neutral.

In addition to being urged to go "crucifix" herself, Catherine was chided and near-terrorized by her classmates on "McCain Girl" day. She kept a record of the comments, taunts, and accusations, to the chagrin of some teachers who found themselves swept up in the frenzy of intolerance. On Day 2, she wore the "Obama Girl" shirt and was praised for coming to her senses.

This experiment could be tossed aside as a silly game made up by a kid. I'd be inclined to agree, yet the simplicity of the single-variable project meant her evidence-gathering didn't require substantial processing and interpretation. I'm guessing comparing 5 death threats for "McCain Girl" to zero for "Obama Girl" doesn't require an advanced degree.

I was astounded by the automatic and unfounded cruelty she found herself facing. But, I know how she felt. During the election, I was subjected to the same kind of schoolyard bully treatment from grown men and women. It was part of the reason I didn't put a McCain sign in my yard or on my car, I was fearful of what might happen to my relationship with my neighbors or with the riff-raff that seem to be populating the streets lately. I kept quiet for the most part. But when I did speak my mind, there was no mistaking what people thought of me.

In Which I Discover I Was Printed in the Wall Street Journal

So, I got an email from a friend this morning saying, "Hey, how you doing, and I liked your letter to the editor in the Wall Street Journal a few months ago."

Yowza! I hadn't thought they'd printed anything I've written - but apparently I didn't check diligently enough. It took them a few weeks to do so.

So, here it is, a few months late!

Wall Street Journal - Letters to the Editor
Trade Helps Poor, Beats Intervention
16 September 2008

The noble attempts described in your article "Nobel Laureates Say Globalization's Winners Should Aid Poor" (Aug. 25) to match isolated, short-term historical events to procure an entirely new functioning of economic principles only indicates more tired attempts at politicization of economic theory. Globalization, when accompanied by free trade and deregulation, is the champion of economic prosperity, not central planning.

Furthermore, there is little historical evidence that government intervention has ever been successful at bridging gaps in economic disparity. To attempt to assign objective relevance to recent globalization and technology events, is irrational and academically irresponsible.

M. T.
Royal Oak, Mich.

Public Discourse: A Blogger's Perspective

Kristina Summers of Everyday Public Relations and Brazen Careerist invited me to do a guest post. Head on over to her site to catch my views on Public Discourse at it relates to blogging and weigh in with your own thoughts!