Economists and analysts generally agree that the bank sector is still fertile ground for consolidations, mergers, and acquisitions. (Fertile for mergers and acquisitions, that is, provided Bank A can easily discern what's on Bank B's balance sheet.)

Further, most experienced investors know the benefits of the above – increased efficiency being among the primary advantages – but during the financial crisis the nation also witnessed the downside: the sudden loss of banking service, if that national or multinational bank or lender ceased to operate.

There's perhaps no more accurate indicator of the state of bank lending than the stance of banks in the Northeast U.S., a region replete with high median incomes and a disproportionate share of the nation's wealth.

Three years ago, in July 2006, banks were willing to make the following deals:

• $2.5 million variable-rate loan, with up to 100% financing for 3 investment partners, for a 10-unit speculative condominium complex in Fairfield County, Connecticut.

In the economic analysis field, there are forecast revisions, and then there are 'gappers,' and Wednesday's IMF revision is definitely a gapper.

The International Monetary Fund now expects 2009 global GDP growth to total a scant 0.5% - - down from the 1.7% GDP growth it forecast in November 2008, as the bad debt-led U.S. recession contracts economies from Germany to Russia to emerging markets in Asia.

Further, the IMF also now sees 2009 bank losses from toxic assets totaling as much as $2.2 trillion, up from its previous $1.4 trillion estimate announced in October 2008.

With its benchmark and new, short-term interest rate already in its 0-0.25% target range, investors are expected to concentrate on the U.S. Federal Reserve's statement and any information (or clues) it may provide about both the U.S. economy and the central bank's quantitative easing policy.

Further, Fed officials are also considering a revision of the central bank's forecasts so that they include periods beyond three years, Boomberg News reported Tuesday. The Fed will release its statement Wednesday at 2:15 p.m. ET.

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks he, and probably many other economists, will be looking for any Fed commentary / analysis of its quantitative easing strategy.

Outgoing U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson stated goal was to have banks "deploy not hoard" TARP money as a part of process to loosen constrained credit markets.

In advocating such, the outgoing Bush administration hoped that banks would work with homeowners at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure.

Some banks have worked with struggling homeowners, offering alternate payment plans, loan forbearances, or even lowering the interest rate to help get these mortgages back in the non-delinquent category. Still, the practice has by no means been universal.

Many banks have not participated in mortgage modifications -- even those banks that received TARP funds. For example, a Palm Beach conference sponsored by Sandler, O'Neill & Partners revealed how many banks are using their TARP money, The New York Times reported.

The U.S. Treasury, U.S. Federal Reserve, FDIC's joint decision Friday to inject $20 billion into the Bank of America (NYSE: BAC) and guarantee $118 billion in assets provides another case study. Bank of America's shares fell 80 cents to $7.52 in Friday afternoon trading.

[ Earlier, my BloggingStocks colleague Peter Cohan provided an analysis of the bail-out's cost to taxpayers. ]

Economists and other public policy wonks love the theoretical and they love 'taking the other side' in arguments.

Hey, they can't help it: it's the stuff they were trained to do - - the stuff they love. And, after all, it's frequently a major source of their income.

And my economist and policy wonk colleagues and friends are no different.

Now, on the surface, it looks like yet-another taxpayer bailout of bad decisions by bankers, mortgage lenders, and borrowers. In other words, another "profits - - the bankers win, losses - - the U.S. taxpayer foots the bill." Further, because it occurs on the heels of the Bank of America's buy-out of Merrill Lynch, it looks like, in some sense, U.S. taxpayers are subsidizing a financial institution merger.

Can the U.S. government run $1 trillion budget deficits for two, three years? Indeed it can, Financial Times columnist Martin Wolf argues, and the deficits can even be higher, for a while. After that, there's more work ahead.

The specter of $1 trillion budget deficits may be vociferously opposed by Republicans and other economic conservatives, but Wolf, in so many words, says what other choice does the United States have? What would be the alternative? Simultaneously raising taxes now to lower the deficit? Hardly prudent. Doing nothing? Another dreadful idea. So, it's prime the pump, or sit there at the well and await nothing.

Up ahead: two bigger tasks

What's more, Wolf sees two additional tasks (structural changes) that are just as important to the goal of U.S. economic recovery -- but that may be even harder to implement: removing toxic assets from the banking system and reducing the U.S.'s structural current account deficit (the trade deficit).

The first is the forced write-off of bad assets, fiscal recapitalization of the banks, or debt-for-equity tactic, and it should be done comprehensively and quickly. Slow, gradual bad-debt reduction is not the correct policy, Wolf argues, as it would delay the economic recovery.

If you think change -- and big change -- in Washington won't start until the gentleman from Illinois is inaugurated on January 20, think again.

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass. and chairman of the House Financial Services committee, late Friday announced the new, proposed restrictions for the release of the second $350 billion in TARP funds, and some are stunners.

Under Frank's bill:

• The pay of executives employed by TARP would be capped in a standardized manner, regardless of what type of aid they received under the program. It would also make the pay limit provision retroactive to existing program participants.

"If they don't like it, they can give the money back," Frank said, referring to the retroactive limits on pay, Reuters reported Friday.

• The U.S. Treasury would have to dedicate at least $40 billion to reduce home foreclosures, with a plan developed by March 15.

Think it's hard for the U.S. Congress to agree on a policy?

Try getting a policy passed by the European Union.

Strictly speaking, of course, the European Parliament (both chambers), not the EU, is akin to the Congress, but the 27-nation EU is proving to be almost as unwieldy as the EP.

The EU's decision to increase the guarantee on bank deposits to 50,000 euros or about $68,000 Tuesday represented the first common, or unified approach to the financial crisis, The New York Times reported Tuesday, despite incontrovertible data indicating that the credit crunch is restricting lending, both short- and long-term, and is slowing commerce.

EU stance: 'Every nation for himself'

Economist Richard Felson told BloggingStocks Tuesday the EU's lack of unified action highlights the limitations of Europe's supranational political system. "For those European nations using the euro, these nations are unified by a common central bank. But fiscal policy, in terms of a treasury department, remains at the nation-state level. That makes it much harder to coordinate a bank rescue, for example," Felson said.

That's the main reason the EU hasn't passed a rescue package similar in scope to the U.S. Congress', Felson said. "Europe's economy is just as large as the U.S.'s and it's likely to experience distressed/bad debt aftereffects almost as large as those in America. It requires a unified response, but thus far it's been 'every nation for himself.' It's very disappointing, from a governance standpoint."

A bank stock? In this market? Indeed preferred bank plays exist, with several community banks scoring high on that list. But it's understandable if you may want to avoid the investment banks for awhile.

Still, there are selected investment/commercial banks with superior business models, and among these the Bank of New York Mellon is worth a review.

Bank of New York Mellon (NYSE: BNY) is one of the world's leading asset management and corporate trust services banks, with an astounding $20 trillion in assets under custody and more than $1 trillion of assets under management.

In general, analysts expect BK's merger-adjusted revenue to rise about 8-10% in F2008, and 10-12% in F2009. Analysts also expect BK's merger with Pittsburgh-based Mellon Financial to enhance the company's business mix.

Further, the Bank of New York has also done a good job restricting non-merger expense growth, and it could also benefit as several competitors more-involved in the subprime mortgage sector struggle with credit-related issues. The Reuters F2008/F2009 EPS consensus estimates for BK are $2.99/$3.41.

The perceptive and common sense-rooted Ben Stein, in a business column in The New York Times, has weighed-in on the credit crisis, and for market absolutists, it's an argument they probably don't want to hear.

Stein, like many of us, has pondered how the massively well-paid men and women of Wall Street could create such a catastrophe. How did some of the smartest, talented executives, Stein ruminates, generate such immense losses that "they made banks clam up on lending -- at great risk to the economy?"

Compelling questions

Stein asks: Where were the fail-safe devices? The government watchdogs? The ratings agencies? A speech by Greenlight Capital hedge fund manager David Einhorn at a Grant's Interest Rate Observer event, provided the answers -- the unfortunate truths of the recent housing/credit boom -- which Stein summarized:

The Bank of America, seeking approval of its Countrywide Financial Corp. takeover, announced Monday it will modify at least $40 billion in troubled mortgages during the next two years to keep customers in their homes, Bloomberg News reported Monday.

The action could help as many as 265,000 homeowners, Liam McGee, president of the Bank of America's (NYSE: BAC) global consumer and small-business banking unit, said Monday in Los Angeles at a U.S. Federal Reserve hearing on the pending purchase, Bloomberg News reported.

``No one benefits from a foreclosed home,'' McGee told Bloomberg News. ``It is bad business for banks.''

Bank of America's shares moved 10 cents higher to $38.40 while Countrywide (NYSE: CFC) gained 7 cents to $5.91 on the news in Monday afternoon trading.

RBS (NYSE: RBS), the United Kingdom's second-largest bank, said the move is consistent with earlier stated intentions to cut costs as it merged its two wholesale banking businesses and also is warranted "in light of current conditions in some parts of the global credit markets."

Shares of RBS gained 12 cents to $7.19 on the news in midday Monday trading.

Thinning the ranks

Independent stock analyst C. Leonard Bauer told BloggingStocks Monday investors / traders should not be overly alarmed by RBS's likely upcoming staff adjustment. "I interpret this as more deal-related than credit markets-related," Bauer said. "RBS added considerable positions during the strong years for investment banking, and the bank wasn't understaffed at the start of the boom in 2003, so some job cuts were expected on those grounds. The ABN Amro deal simply meant that there would be more wholesale banking positions to consolidate." Bauer added that he does not have a rating on, nor own, RBS's shares.

Further, Bauer said the likely RBS cuts does not change his outlook on the credit market / bond market recovery.The worst of the mortgage and related asset-backed write-offs are over, he argued, and he expects the size and frequency of investment bank write-off announcements to taper in Q3 and Q4 2008.

Royal Bank of Scotland said it will sell 12 billion pounds or $23.9 billion worth of new shares to boost capital, Bloomberg News reported Tuesday.

RBS (NYSE: RBS) has suffered from capital depletion following loan and related credit mark-downs, and as a result of its $114 billion purchase with Banco Santander (NYSE: SAN) and Fortis of ABN Amro.

Shares of RBS fell 30 cents to $7.19 on the news in Tuesday morning trading. Shares have declined more than 45% since October 2007.

RBS said it expects a large increase in the expected losses it faces on its portfolio of poorly performing loans and assets, including U.S. subprime mortgages and leveraged loans to private equity deals, The Financial Times reported Tuesday. The bank said these additional writedowns would reach about $11.8 billion -- three times the losses the bank has already recorded.

Worst not behind banks?

Confidence in the global economy improved for the the first time in five months in April 2008, a Bloomberg News survey of news / analytics subscribers to Bloomberg on five continents indicated Wednesday.

The Bloomberg Professional Global Confidence Index, which surveys 5,905 Bloomberg subscribers, rose to 14.5 in April 2008 from 13.1 in March 2008. The measure increased to 18.5 from 17.6 in the U.S. and to 11 from 7.5 in Asia. It declined in Western Europe. A reading below 50 indicates negative sentiment.

Economist Peter Dawson, who was not a part of the survey, told BloggingStocks Wednesday the April 2008 uptick is welcome news, but investors/traders should not become prematurely optimistic.

"Overall sentiment remains cautious and downbeat," Dawson said. "We are close to a recession in the U.S., with little signs of life in the housing sector or from the consumer to inspire confidence that recovery is just ahead, so you've got to place the higher April data in the proper context."