The financial crisis is not over. If things were back to normal, banks would be lending to each other and to businesses and individuals. But measures of bank lending risk suggest fear is 12 times as high as it would be in normal times. The reason? Banks know more than you do about what's wrong. And they're not talking about it because they don't want you to withdraw your deposits and sell your stock. What they know is that on October 21st, some of the biggest players on Wall Street could be required to come up with $400 billion that some may not be able to pay.

Last month, the White House decided that we could afford to let Lehman Brothers file for bankruptcy. That proved to be an enormous mistake. It triggered a run on money market funds because one of the oldest such funds, Reserve Primary, broke the buck since it held Lehman Brothers paper. The U.S. responded with a $50 billion guarantee of money market funds. But the biggest consequence of that mistake is in the $54.6 trillion market for Credit Default Swaps (CDSs).

A CDS is like selling insurance on your car to hundreds of people who don't own it -- yet if your car goes up in flames each of those people collects the full value of your car. More specifically, CDSs are insurance against a bond or loan default. Why are CDSs so dangerous? Three reasons: a CDS seller does not need to put any capital aside to cover losses if the security defaults, the buyer doesn't need to own the asset it wants to protect, and there is no central place where information about all these CDS deals is collected and updated.

This morning markets in Asia fell about 4% -- a relatively muted response to the 7% drop in the Dow Monday. Should we trust our increasingly fragile global financial system to the 73-year old gambler who claimed a victory in yesterday's failed vote on the bailout bill? One poll suggests that the answer is no.

A September 29th Gallup poll found that Americans have the least trust in the Administration's ability to handle this financial crisis and the most in Senator Barack Obama (D-IL), 47. Here is the percentage of Americans who approved of how various people were handling the economic crisis:

• Barack Obama (46%)
• Democratic congressional leaders (39%)
• John McCain (37%)
• Republican congressional leaders (31%)
• Hank Paulson and George Bush (28% each)

Senator McCain, a former POW, gambled on taking money from corporate interests, on appointing Sarah Palin as vice president, and on choosing Phil "Americans are Whiners" Gramm as his chief economic advisor -- the same guy whose bill to deregulate the Credit Default Swap (CDS) market helped get us into this financial catastrophe.

Our national decision is less than six weeks away.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter.

Some investors/readers -- and certainly casual observers of the stock market in towns small and large -- have been perplexed by the turn of events that has led to the current state of affairs in these United States: namely how and why does the U.S. government need to pass a $700 billion bailout/intervention bill to end a financial crisis in the U.S., possibly globally?

While numerous economic, regulatory, and behavioral factors created the conditions that formed the basis for the crisis, economist Richard Felson told BloggingStocks that the imminent failure of insurance giant American International Group (NYSE: AIG), in his view, "was the flashpoint at which both [U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry] Paulson and [U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben] Bernanke realized that a case-by-case, reactive policy would not be adequate to check the building financial storm."

No AIG, massive exposure

Felson pointed out that at least a portion of hedge fund trades -- and the trades of other financial institutions -- are predicated on the assumption that mortgage-backed securities are good/have value, or, if not, that the insurance behind these securities is in force as a result of policies written by AIG. When it became clear that AIG did not have the assets/resources to pay claims, it was necessary for the U.S. government to take over AIG via a $85 billion loan from the U.S. Federal Reserve for warrants for a 79.9% stake in the company.

The State of New York has proposed to start regulating credit default swaps owned by investors trying to protect bonds they own, Bloomberg News reported.

The plan won't apply to credit default swaps purchased by speculators, i.e. swap owners who are trying to profit from an increase/decrease in a borrower's creditworthiness, New York Governor David Paterson told Bloomberg News. Paterson also urged the federal government to follow New York's lead and regulate the rest of the credit default swap market.

Credit default swaps are contracts designed to protect against or speculate on default. CDSs pay the buyer face value if a company fails to adhere to its debt. Hedgers typically use them to guard against bond losses. However, speculators use them as an active investing/trading tool in an attempt to profit from a company's / issuer's credit worthiness.

Economist David H. Wang told BloggingStocks there's an upside and a downside to increased regulation of the $62 trillion CDS market.

"On the one hand, we do need a central regulator in the United States to verify that those selling credit default swaps can in fact pay the swap holder if there is a default claim," Wang said. "The system for swaps was jeopardized when AIG could not pay all claims, and could have resulted in contagion, which prompted the federal government's loan."

Just call it an endorsement of a collective security policy where 'you go first.'

That was how one economist characterized the G-7 group of finance ministers' stance toward the U.S. Treasury Department's proposed $700 billion intervention to stabilize the financial system.

In a conference call statement, the G-7 - - Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Japan, Italy, Canada, along with the U.S. - - said, "We strongly welcome the extraordinary actions taken by the United States to enhance the stability of financial markets and address credit concerns, especially through its plan to implement a program to remove illiquid assets that are destabilizing financial institutions," The Wall Street Journal reported Monday(subscription required.)

However, none of the other six G-7 members will adopt a program similar to the U.S.'s, German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck told reporters in Berlin after the call, Bloomberg News reported Monday.

Economist Peter Dawson told BloggingStocks Monday the G-7's stance is half-hearted, in his interpretation. "In its general statement, the G-7 is on-board with the [U.S] Treasury's program but [German Finance Minister Peer] Steinbrueck's comments are disappointing. Steinbrueck, or another G-7 representative should have followed up with 'and we stand ready to assist the United States and other nations with fiscal measures to support the above goals, if needed, etc.,' " Dawson said. "Right now, the G-7's tone is 'go forth U.S., but we're not getting in the pool right now, the water's too cold.' Given the G-7's complicity in causing the problem and their systemic interest, a more-engaged statement should have been issued regarding fiscal policy options."

Cites AIG's 'interconnectedness'

For example, Dawson said the G-7's corporate involvement in American International Group's (NYSE: AIG) is evidence item 'A' for stronger G-7 involvement. "G-7 companies, banks, and institutional investors benefited from AIG's credit default swaps and related products, and would be hurt by a systemic failure. Since they are parties to the problem, they should also bear some of the costs of the reforms and bailout," Dawson said. "But right now their stance is 'Go ahead U.S. We back your spending your money, but not ours.' That's an inadequate response from our G-7 associates."

Bloomberg News reports that in the latest effort to prop up global stock markets, the Fed coordinated with central banks around the world to pump $180 billion into the financial system. This move reversed stock markets' 8% slide, leading to a small recovery. Specifically, the Fed got together with the European Central Bank, the Bank of Japan, The Bank of England, the Bank of Canada and the Swiss National Bank to make $180 billion more available to the markets.

Once again, the 100 Year Crash is exposing to the public parts of the financial system of which it had not been previously aware. The most recent new area is Credit Default Swaps (CDSs), which Phil "Americans are Whiners" Gramm, chief economic advisor to John McCain, helped expand. Today's lesson is what the New York Times calls "temporary reciprocal currency arrangements." These are also called "swap lines" and they allow banks "to borrow more dollars in markets at a lower rates," according to the Times.

It is these swap lines that are providing the source of the new dollars. I have never seen this kind of central bank action -- and it makes me wonder: Will central banks need to inject $180 billion a day to halt these knife-dagger plunges? Will they need to inject more every day to have the same effect? Won't all this extra currency cause the value of the dollar to plunge and drive inflation out of control?

A friend and colleague of yours truly, economist David H. Wang, frequently speaks with family and friends from his native China. One of the observations he's been hearing recently goes like this: "Strange, new form of pure capitalism you have in the United States that bails-out every company."

Well, as Wang pointed out, it's not every company, and in point of actual fact, the United States is a mixed capitalist system -- private sector-based, but with a social welfare safety net.

Still, the reality is that had the U.S. Federal Reserve not offered an $85 billion loan to American International Group (NYSE: AIG), given AIG's counterparty, pension, investment fund and related relationships, "the global financial system would have frozen-up," or "experienced a level of stress we haven't seen since the stock market crash of 1929," Wang said.

The Fed's action was the 'Greenspan Doctrine squared:' AIG was not only 'too big to fail,' it was 'too interconnected to fail.' So one can see why Fed Chair Ben Bernanke and U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson put in motion another 'loan of epic size' for a private company.

As the United States' financial crisis continues, a chorus (or cacophony) of voices will rise about appropriate reforms.
Moreover, given the upcoming U.S. Presidential and Congress election on November 4, the American people will have considerable say regarding what shape that reform should take.

Here are three things that yours truly believes should be on their list. These are three realities that must be corrected if the nation expects its capital markets to function normally again. And admittedly, right now, 'normal' may seem like a far-off goal. But it is achievable.

• Trust: The nation must improve and increase federal regulations to restore investor trust. The nation must pass regulations that require financial institutions to be truthful -- with balance sheets, assets, and loan risk. The new financial order must be transparent and accurate. And there must be costly federal penalties and punishment for financial institutions that fail to do so. Without the above, capital markets cannot function.

As of midday Monday, the Dow had rebounded off early-session lows, but if investors / readers are thinking about entering this market now, caution is advised, for several reasons.

First, those familiar with technical analysis know that the Dow's rebound to a loss of 180 points to a level of about 11,233, up from a loss of more than 300 points, could be just short-covering.

Second, major unknowns exist regarding the financial system. And I mean major.

The fate of American Interational Group (NYSE: AIG) remains an enormous question mark. The largest insurer of assets, AIG may face a downgrade that would trigger a collateral call from debt investors who bought credit default swaps, a form of insurance for bonds. Further, if hedge and other institutional investors sense those swaps are not in force, they may seek swaps elsewhere and/or sell assets to reduce market risk / raise capital. That could spark a new round of stock selling. AIG's shares fell $5.33 to $6.81 in late Monday morning trading.

The dollar Monday recovered from lows registered earlier in the session, but traders said uncertainty permeated the currency market, given the unprecedented developments in the global financial system.

"We're in unchartered waters, and no one is certain about the impact on the dollar or the financial system," currency trader Andrew Resnick told BloggingStocks earlier Monday. "The logical, rational view is that the dollar will fall based on the expectation of increased government spending and borrowing to deal with the widening financial crisis. But a major dollar fall may not occur if the markets judge the worst is over. That's why a lot of traders are flat now." Resnick added that he was flat, or had no open currency trading positions.

The dollar initially fell early Monday morning about 1.5-2% against the euro, British pound, yen and Swiss franc, but recovered somewhat after the European Central Bank and the Bank of England joined the U.S. Federal Reserve in taking action to calm the financial markets jolted by Lehman Brothers (NYSE: LEH) bankruptcy filing, Bloomberg News reported Monday.

ECB, BOE, Fed all add liquidity to system

The ECB awarded banks a one-day, money market auction of $30 billion that was three times oversubscribed, while the BOE loaned banks $9 billion for three days. Earlier, the Fed expanded the collateral it will accept for loans to securities firms.

Lurking in the background of this weekend's collapse of two of Wall Street's biggest names, is a $62 trillion segment of the $450 trillion market for derivatives that grew huge thanks to John McCain's chief economic advisor, Phil "Americans are Whiners" Gramm. That's because in December 2000, Gramm, while a U.S. Senator, snuck in a 262-page amendment to a government re-authorization bill that created what is now the $62 trillion market for credit default swaps (CDSs).

I realize it is painful to read about yet another Wall Street acronym, but this is important because it will help you understand why the global financial markets are collapsing. And it will give you information to consider when you vote in November. CDSs are like insurance policies for bondholders. In exchange for a premium, the bondholders get insurance in case the bondholder can't pay. As I posted, in the case of the $1.4 trillion worth of Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM) and Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE) bonds, the government's nationalization last Sunday triggered the CDSs on those bonds. The people who received the CDS premiums are now obligated to deliver those bonds to the ones who paid the premiums.

Gramm's 262-page amendment, dubbed "The Commodity Futures Modernization Act," according to Texas Observer, freed financial institutions from oversight of their CDS transactions. "Prior to its passage, they say, banks underwrote mortgages and were responsible for the risks involved. Now, through the use of [CDSs]-which in theory insure the banks against bad debts-those risks are passed along to insurance companies and other investors," wrote Texas Observer.

Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (NYSE: LEH) is likely to file for bankruptcy today. The reason is that the Treasury and White House are smarting from criticism of their $29 billion bailout of Bear Stearns and the $200 billion to $800 billion Fannie and Freddie nationalization. Neither of these moves has stopped the serial sell off in the shares of investment banks and other firms saddled with crumbling real estate assets. So now the powers that be have decided that they'll tighten up their moral standards and refuse to bailout Lehman.

As I posted, the basic problem is that Wall Street thinks the Treasury will cave in and put money into the Lehman bailout. But despite reports of a proposal to hive off the good part of Lehman from the bad part -- financed by other Wall Street banks -- such a resolution does not appear likely. That's because Wall Street does not want to risk its slim capital shoring up Lehman's bad part -- $85 billion worth of commercial real estate and mortgage-backed securities (MBS). These banks rightly fear that they would lose their investments and sink the entire industry in the bargain. In addition, these bad bank financiers don't want to provide the backstop to enable the winner of the bidding on the good bank to surpass them by picking up Lehman's assets cheaply.

Assuming that plan does not work and that the government refuses to step in to finance the bad bank, this leaves two basic options: Lehman files for bankruptcy or other banks liquidate Lehman in an orderly fashion. Bankruptcy might be a relatively orderly process. According to FOXbusiness, "if Lehman entered into bankruptcy protection, the brokerage units would enter Chapter 7 liquidation and a court-appointed trustee would liquidate the firm's assets and give customers back their money. Generally, securities a customer holds at a brokerage firm are legally the investor's property, and aren't exposed to the claims of the firm's creditors." A bankruptcy would likely wipe out Lehman common shareholders.

Bloomberg News reports that Moody's (NYSE: MCO) may downgrade municipal bond insurer MBIA (NYSE: MBI) after it reported deepening losses from the mortgage-market slump. MBIA's insurance financial strength rating may fall to the Aa range, although a drop to the A category is possible. MBIA's stock is down 91% since the end of May 2007.

That's when I first suggested that investors consider selling MBIA shares short. William Ackman had already shorted MBIA because he thought it lacked the capital needed to support its obligations. Back then, MBIA traded at $66.59 a share -- today it's down to $5.88. His bet proved prescient.

Meanwhile, investors are wagering that MBIA won't make it. Credit-default swaps tied to MBIA's insurance unit rose to a record as investors hedged against the risk the company's guarantees will sour. Sellers of five-year contracts demanded 23% upfront and 5% a year. That's up from 18.5% initially and 5% a year yesterday.

Only $5.88 more to go.

Peter Cohan is President of Peter S. Cohan & Associates. He also teaches management at Babson College and edits The Cohan Letter. He has no financial interest in MBIA securities.

Deutsche Bank and other investment banks are apparently working on plans to develop a clearing house for the credit derivatives markets, in an effort to allay rising regulatory concern and investor skittishness about counterparty risk, The Financial Times reported Friday.

Deutsche Bank (NYSE: DB) and other banks are apparently trying to develop a plan that would allow only institutions with strong capital bases and credible trading histories to clear trades in the credit default swap markets with a central counterparty, The FT reported.

The derivatives market has experienced explosive growth in the past decade, with the instruments' value totaling $350-$450 trillion, depending on the methodology used. At the same time, the credit default swaps market has grown to $45-50 trillion.

Global clearing house

Economist David H. Wang told BloggingStocks Friday that, ideally, a global derivatives clearing house should take the form of a public, international organization administered by member nation states. Failing that, he'd like to see a private international organization administered by the major investment banks.