http://windycitywriters.com/blog/2008/11/19/interview-author-stephen-edds.html

By Walt McElligott 

 (*Editor’s Note: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors of The Losing Game, T.E. Scott and Stephen Edds, and do not necessarily represent those of the article’s author, Walt McEligott, or of the Chicago Writers Association.)

Co-authors Stephen Edds and T.E. Scott don’t hold back their cards when it comes to their feelings about Wall Street. Their new book, The Losing Game: Why You Can’t Beat Wall Street (Hidden Truth Publishing), is a stinging indictment of the American financial industry.

In the book, the authors pose questions such as, “Would you gamble your retirement on a game that’s rigged?” Then they provide their own answers. “You are now. For decades, the American people have been held captive in their financial lives by the limited knowledge of and an inherent trust in Wall Street, only to see that trust violated time and time again by greed and corruption.” 

Or they ask leading questions such as, “Why are you trusting your 401(k) and pension to a corrupt and unregulated market? Would you take your retirement money to Las Vegas to gamble?” 

Edds, a freelance writer from Indianapolis, shares the story behind the book in this interview for the Chicago Writers Association. As in the book, he pulls no punches when it comes to Wall Street, which he charges is “fleecing” Americans out of their hard-earned money.

———————————————————————————————–

CWA: The Losing Game describes “Wall Street as the largest gambling casino in the United States, where the games are fixed and the house ALWAYS wins.” What experience do you or your co-author have that qualifies you to write a book like this?

Edds: I have a BA degree from Hanover College and also worked for 15 years in the field of corporate marketing communications. Like many people, I had a very limited knowledge of Wall Street until I met T.E. Scott. Through months of research and conversation, I realized T.E. had seen through the illusion and deception of Wall Street and I joined his mission to help spread the word.

As for T.E. Scott’s qualifications, he is a retired entrepreneur and business owner who not only worked as a union laborer for United Airline for 32 years, but then built his small business into a multi-million dollar company before he retired.

Together, we apply well-reasoned arguments, unwavering logic, and common-sense insights to expose the stock market and commodity markets for what they are: brilliantly marketed con games designed to separate working families from their money without accountability or prosecution.

CWA: Am I correct that you are describing a type of psychological warfare happening on Wall Street?

Edds: Exactly. In the book, we talk about how over the years, Wall Street has implemented a form of psychological war, using propaganda, marketing and the complexity of the market itself, to keep us in the dark about their true intent.

In The Losing Game: Why You Can’t Beat Wall Street we are able to show the bottom-line basics of how Wall Street is fleecing millions of Americans every day with Congress and the media as willing accomplices. Scott presents a revolutionary perspective that uncovers the deceptive conditioning of the American worker to place their trust and money in Wall Street without question.

For example, how many times have you read about how “now is the best time to invest with the market down”? It’s marketing and sales, pure and simple, disguised as news.

CWA: Simple people, like me, have been led to believe that the only way to solve our “financial crisis” is to dump a trillion of our hard earned dollars into Wall Street. Does The Losing Game help us understand what is really happening?

Edds: The Losing Game exposes Wall Street’s motivations and speaks to the involvement of the media, academic world and Congress to lay out clearly why we’re in this mess to begin with. It didn’t start in 2008, 1987, or 1929, and it’s not going to change anytime soon!

This is the book you MUST read before even thinking about investing in Wall Street! Average people believe they’re making a safe investment, when in fact, they are gambling in a casino where all the games are rigged!

CWA: Is your book for the everyday blue- and white- collar worker?

Edds: Yes, we wrote the book especially for those people who don’t like reading investment books. We use simple terminology to walk the reader through the process of what REALLY happens when you pay into your 401 (k) or retirement plan. It’s amazing that millions of people who would never buy a lottery ticket or step into a casino hand their money to Wall Street, which is just as much of a gamble as a slot machine. We believe it will help anyone break through the myths and demand accountability from Wall Street. Readers need our book to help them understand that they are trusting their 401(k) accounts and pensions to a corrupt and unregulated stock market.

CWA: What is the difference, if any, between “gambling your hard earned paycheck” at one of Harrah’s casinos and the stock market?

Edds: You’ll have better odds at Harrah’s and the games are honest. Gambling boats and casinos are promoted as pure entertainment, with no reason to promote themselves as something other than what they are. The markets, however, are promoted as performing an important business function with a vital economic value.

In a casino, you are playing games marketed as a fun activity. No value attaches to the games themselves. The gambler knows he is gambling, and the name of the game is insignificant. A poker game is a poker game. Roulette, craps, blackjack are just games. They have no vital economic importance to society.

Las Vegas never denies that the casinos are primarily gambling facilities. You know upfront that even with the best restaurants, star-studded shows, and luxurious amenities, available to enhance the gambling environment and to bring your money into the specific casino, you are still gambling. You may enjoy these activities, but try as you might, you can’t hide the fact that you are at a casino to gamble.

To camouflage the market’s reality (that it’s a huge gambling casino) Wall Street managers needed to convince the public that people were actually investing to enhance their savings and promote the economy of the United States. This is a formidable task. Wall Street had to circumvent all of the entertainment and amenities that casinos offer and change your mindset to get you to believe that the stock and commodity markets are a business function vital to everyone’s well being.

CWA: In other words, I freely gave my money over to a huge gambling casino when I invested in my companies 401(k)?

Edds: You did so because you (and thousands like you) trusted that you’re investing your money. You’ve been convinced that the “games” are actually a legitimate financial venture. To get you to believe you’re investing, the exchanges had to attach something of value to the names of the games. They took symbols that we believed were vital to our economy and used them as titles on their games (stock names, commodities, etc.), which allowed them to seduce the public into thinking they were investing in something of substance. In reality, they’d merely changed the title of the games, but it’s still the same gambling games that you find in Las Vegas.

CWA: I note that your book makes several provocative claims, one of which is that the stock and commodity markets are “minus-sum” propositions for investors. Please explain.

Edds: “Minus-sum” is one of the primary factors that make Wall Street a “losing game” for investors. The Losing Game describes this concept in great detail, but briefly, minus-sum refers to all of the “hidden costs” that make it impossible to get ahead in the stock market. These costs include brokers’ fees and commissions as well as the taxes the IRS collects whether you win or lose.

CWA: What is the most important thing to keep in mind in playing the Wall Street “game”?

Edds: Two things. One, the main element of all the games is that players or investors are trying to predict an unpredictable, and the odds are stacked in favor of the house. Two, the odds are that you are going to lose money in the market.

CWA: What is the difference between gambling at a casino and gambling in the stock market?

Edds: A major difference between gambling at a casino and gambling in the markets is that the markets present advantages to an elite few that the average investor doesn’t have. In a casino, you may be treated as a high roller, with VIP treatment and access to parts of the casino that average people will never see. But at the end of the day, the games you choose to play for a high buy-in are the same games average people are playing on the main floor.

On Wall Street, an elite few have access to inside information, a seat on the exchange, the ability to act on information instantly as opposed to when it hits the public, and access to information that the public doesn’t receive. Some of this is legal, some not. All of these advantages result in an increase in the odds in favor of a select few, to the detriment of average investors.

CWA: Please explain the similarity you draw between Las Vegas and the New York Stock Exchange.

Edds: At a casino, there is a strong natural tendency for an investor to ignore losses and focus on winnings. Casinos encourage this tendency by making sure that every quarter won in a slot machine causes lights to flash and makes its own little jingle in the metal tray. Seeing all the lights and hearing all the clinking, it’s not hard to get the impression that everyone’s winning.

If you watch the floor of the NYSE, with all of the yelling and running around and the flashing lights and the stock ticker, one cannot help but be caught up in the excitement, thinking that fortunes are being made on the floor. But losses are mostly silent.

CWA: The great illustrations for your book were drawn by John Marr. Is he available for hire as an artist to other writers?

Edds: Certainly. The funny thing is that John is a friend of T.E. Scott and initially a skeptic of the concepts Scott was developing for the book. Not only did Scott change John’s mind, but he contributed some fantastic and funny illustrations. If any Chicago Writers Association members are in need of John’s talents, I’d suggest that they e-mail me at: <Stephen (at) stephenedds.com> for his contact information.

CWA: What are your current writing plans?

Edds: Right now, I’m completely focused on promoting The Losing Game. Publishing the book is only step one – our primary objective is to create a grassroots movement that gets people to stop investing in the stock market – and start investing in themselves. As a nation, we’re drowning in debt, the bailouts will NOT work. If we can’t make changes at the grassroots level, we’ll be forced to enact Federal legislation that takes control of the currently unregulated financial markets. If everyone just stops giving their money to Wall Street and invest in themselves and their communities, this won’t be necessary.

My writing is focused on the losinggame.com blog

CWA: Many thanks Stephen, for taking time out of your busy schedule to share your thoughts with the Chicago Writers Association. Best wishes to you and Mr. Scott on the success of The Losing Game.

Our friend, Gary Weiss is once again on top of the situation when it comes to pointing out not only the compulsive deception that drives Wall Street, but the complicity of Congress and the media to promote the agenda of Wall Street without any investigation.

Here’s the point: I’m convinced Wall Street WANTS you to be mad at AIG and the bonuses, because not only is it so beside the point, it allows them to pass stuff like mark-to-market that resumes their “business-as-usual” money grab with no one paying attention. So, they take a PR hit and a few brokers lose their jobs?

Minor collateral damage.

The key to populist anger is to focus it in the right direction, and with the right information. If you let the ones you are angry with direct your anger, you lose, we lose and nothing changes.

Thank you Gary! Keep up the good fight, and let you friends in NYC know a couple of guys in “fly-over country” are helping get the word out.

Read Gary’s article below:

gary-weiss.com  

The Market Celebrates Pro-Bank-Fraud Measure

Posted: 02 Apr 2009 10:44 AM PDT

The stock market is up spectacularly this afternoon. That’s the good news. The bad news is that it is gaining for a terrible reason: relaxation of mark-to-market accounting rules that are supposed to keep bank financial statements honest.

Reuters reported:

U.S. stocks jumped 4 percent on Thursday after world leaders agreed to pump an additional trillion dollars into the economy to fight the financial crisis and on rule changes aimed at giving banks flexibility when dealing with toxic assets.

Already, the mark-to-market pushers are gloating. Something called the Center for Investors and Entrepreneurs at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, whatever the hell that is, just emailed a gloating press release saying as follows:

The events leading to the Dow’s climbing over 8000 today can be properly called the Mark-to-Market Relief Rally. More than any expected action of the bureaucrats and politicians at the G20, the decision expected today of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to relax strict application of mark-to-market accounting mandates, urged by members of Congress of both parties, it what’s giving investors something to cheer for.

That’s right. Let’s hear it for cooking the books. Hip hip hooray!

Isn’t it just wonderful that congressmen from both sides of the aisle are still capable of doing something stupid?

© 2009 Gary Weiss. All rights reserved.

We’ll be all over the blogosphere in April promoting “The Losing Game.” If you see one of your favorite blogs listed, make sure you visit them on our day. If you know or have a blog that wants to participate, please let us know and we’ll get you scheduled.

Apr 1 http://thebookconnectionccm.blogspot.com/

Apr 2 http://thewildinvestor.com/why-you-cant-beat-wall-street/

Apr 3 http://www.scribevibe.blogspot.com/

Apr 6 http://currenteventsinbooks.blogspot.com/

Apr 7 http://www.divinecaroline.com/

Apr 8 http://www.thebookstacks.com/

Apr 9 http://www.bizzia.com/yieldingwealth/

Apr 10 http://www.americanchronicle.com/

Apr 13 http://www.pageonelit.com/interviews/TheLosingGame.html

Apr 14 http://the1stpage.blogspot.com/

Apr 15 http://blogcritics.org/books/

Apr 16 http://bookexcerpts.wordpress.com/

Apr 17 http://rebecca2007.wordpress.com/

Apr 20 http://bookchase.blogspot.com/2009/02/losing-game-why-you-cant-beat-wall.html

Apr 21 http://windycitywriters.com/blog/2008/11/19/interview-author-stephen-edds.html

Apr 22 http://www.books-and-authors.net/Interviews/TheLosingGame.html

Apr 23 http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-11887/TS-189980.mp3

Apr 24 http://www.thewriterslife.blogspot.com/

Apr 27 http://www.popsyndicate.com/books

Apr 28 http://booktoursandmore.blogspot.com/2009/03/losing-game-virtual-book-tour-09.html

Apr 29 http://thebookrack.wordpress.com/

Apr 30 http://www.freebookexcerpts.com/2008/11/05/the-losing-game-why-you-cant-beat-wall-street-by-te-scott/

We’re non-partisian here at The Losing Game, but since the Republicians are generally viewed as the most pro-Wall Street, I thought this would be both interesting, and infuriating:

Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee to Keep Madoff Donation Money  

From the Hill:

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) has apparently decided to keep $100K in contributions from Bernie Madoff, who faces up to 150 years in prison for swindling billions from the likes of Steven Spielberg, Elie Wiesel, Kevin Bacon and Kyra Sedgwick in a massive Ponzi scheme.

In campaigns, one side often calls on the other to return money for one reason or another. Sometimes it’s valid, sometimes not. Regardless, it’s Campaign 101. But when the contributor in question is the single biggest financial criminal in history, there can be no question that those illicit funds should not remain in campaign coffers.

Sens. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) gave thousands in Madoff donations to charity. Reps. John Dingell (D-Mich.) and Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) are doing the same.

Given the economic uncertainty our nation faces and that Madoff not only fleeced the rich and famous but major corporations such as HSBC — in other words, Madoff swindled all of us — the DSCC’s decision is shockingly tone-deaf.

However, what’s almost equally surprising is the virtual silence from the media. During the Enron scandal, returning campaign money was a daily drumbeat, as were the news stories discussing Enron’s purported ties to President Bush. Now, when the Democratic Senate campaign vehicle makes the conscious decision to keep $100K in Madoff money, stolen just as if it came from a bank holdup, there’s little to no outrage. Why?

Here’s a suggestion for members of the media — ask Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), who himself was robbed by Madoff, what he thinks of the DSCC keeping stolen money in order to help fund his colleagues’ Senate campaigns this election cycle.

One of the topics we cover in “The Losing Game”  is the confusion surrounding derivatives, which Warren Buffett calls “financial weapons of mass destruction.” According to DK Matai, Chairman of the ACTA Open, worldwide outstanding derivatives amount to 1.114 QUADRILLION DOLLARS!! What that means, in simple terms, is that there are pieces of paper people are holding that have a published value of $1,114 TRILLION. Where is that money going to come from, and what will happen to these investors who are caught holding worthless pieces of paper?

Derivatives were created as a new revenue source for Wall Street, with very little understanding or oversight implemented. As long as the exchanges made their money, what happens when the bubble bursts is none of their concern.

That day is coming as well.

Silicone Valley Watcher.com says the derivative bubble equals 190,000 per person on the planet.

“According to various distinguished sources including the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland — the central bankers’ bank — the amount of outstanding derivatives worldwide as of December 2007 crossed USD 1.144 Quadrillion, ie, USD 1,144 Trillion. The main categories of the USD 1.144 Quadrillion derivatives market were the following:
1. Listed credit derivatives stood at USD 548 trillion;
2. The Over-The-Counter (OTC) derivatives stood in notional or face value at USD 596 trillion and included:
a. Interest Rate Derivatives at about USD 393+ trillion;
b. Credit Default Swaps at about USD 58+ trillion;
c. Foreign Exchange Derivatives at about USD 56+ trillion;
d. Commodity Derivatives at about USD 9 trillion;
e. Equity Linked Derivatives at about USD 8.5 trillion; and
f. Unallocated Derivatives at about USD 71+ trillion.

Quadrillion? That is a number only super computing engineers and astronomers used to use, not economists and bankers! For example, the North star is “just” a couple of quadrillion miles away, ie, a few thousand trillion miles. The new “Roadrunner” supercomputer built by IBM for the US Department of Energy’s Los Alamos National Laboratory has achieved a peak performance of 1.026 Peta Flop per second — becoming the first supercomputer ever to reach this milestone. One Quadrillion Floating Point Operations (Flops) per second is 1 Peta Flop/s, ie, 1,000 Trillion Flops per second. It is estimated that all the data found on all the websites and stored on computers across the world totals more than One Exa byte of memory, ie, 1,000 Quadrillion bytes of data.”

 

Here is a list of all the bailout/stimulus measures since last September:

• AIG Bailout:

On Sept. 16, the Fed loaned AIG $85 billion.

The Fed extended another $38 billion in credit on Oct. 9.

On Nov. 9 the loans were restructured, interest rates were reduced, and the Treasury chipped in $40 billion to purchase preferred stock in AIG.

March rescue of AIG: $75 billion

• Federal Takeover of Freddie and Fannie:

Originally the government allowed $100 billion per GSE, so Freddie and Fannie were given $200 billion (paid by Treasury). In addition to the government takeover, which CBO estimates will increase the federal government’s net liabilities by $238 billion, several government agencies have taken steps to increase liquidity within Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Among these steps:

1. Federal Reserve purchases of $23 billion in GSE debt (out of a potential $100 billion) and $53 billion in GSE-held mortgage backed securities (out of a potential $500 billion).

2. Federal Reserve purchases of $24 billion in GSE debt.

3. Treasury Department purchases of $14 billion in GSE stock (out of a potential $200 billion).

4. Treasury Department purchases of $71 billion in mortgage backed securities

5. Federal Reserve extension of primary credit rate for loans to the GSEs

The original $100 billion amount was recently increased to $200 billion per GSE.

• TARP: $700 billion ($350 billion for dispersal in 2008, the rest in 2009)

• Stimulus Package: $580 Billion appropriated (this is $789 billion minus the tax provisions in the bill)

• Placeholder for more financial rescue in FY2009 under Obama’s FY2010: $250 billion

• Foreclosure:  $75 Billion

• Omnibus bill: $31 billion, or 8 percent, more than the total funding in the fiscal 2008 versions of the nine bills in the package.

All of this was passed with NO accountability, NO transparancy, and NO reporting about where the money was spent.

This is YOUR money going into a drain, and despite the assurances from both parties that this will provide relief for average Americans, there is hundreds of billions unaccounted for already.

We received this e-mail and today, received permission to reprint it.

“I write a monthly financial/stock column for an online newspaper in Lake County Ohio. Also, I’m a retired accountant (74) and have 40 years experience in the stock market. I manage my wife’s and my own IRA accounts at a discount broker. My loses the past year is about 18% and I know the markets and their machinations well. I’ve lost the past four years profits I’ve made.

Now to my point. In my online columns, I’ve tried to tell readers that akin to horse racing tracks, the markets have taken up the same revenue producing policies that race tracks did years ago. What I’m saying is; years ago the only types of betting at racetracks were one daily double (1st two races) or a win, place or show type of bet; (1st place, 2nd place or 3rd place), that was it. The race track would take their cut off the top (about 16%) and distribute the balance to the winning betters.

In order to stimulate more betting at the racetracks, they came up with exotic betting; exactas, trifects, pick 3, or pick 4, or pick 6, parlays, rolling doubles, etc. Same as what happens in the stock and commodities markets to keep monies in “motion”; more oportunities to bet, and bet and bet.

I’m almost finished with your book (The Losing Game) which I started Saturday, and I must say the details you’ve both described are so accurate that it makes a person like myself think why this kind of book hadn’t been written before. I can’t believe the book hasn’t been somehow bashed verbally by the Wall Street media cronies (CNBC, et al). But you can bet that I’ll tell all my readers to buy your book.

If this book doesn’t stop millions of people throwing their money into Wall Street I don’t know what will (except for the market’s 55% losses) which might. My congratulations to both of you for explaining ALL the details of why in today’s game of investing (gag), we out here cannot win no matter how much we think we know. Yes, it’s no longer an “investing” game, It’s a crap shoot. At least craps, which can be beat if you bet right.

My thanks again,

Emil Marino

Painesville, Ohio

www.thelakecountysentinel.com/business.html

SEC alleges Robert Allen Stanford orchestrated a scheme centered on an $8 billion CD program.

By Julianne Pepitone, CNNMoney.com contributing writer

Last Updated: February 17, 2009: 2:37 PM ET

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The Securities and Exchange Commission said Tuesday that it has charged financier R. Allen Stanford and three of his companies with orchestrating an $8 billion investment fraud.

The SEC’s complaint alleges that the fraud centered on a CD program in which Stanford International Bank promised “improbable and unsubstantiated high interest rates.”

SIB, based in Antigua, allegedly acted through a network of Stanford Group Company financial advisers to sell approximately $8 billion of “certificates of deposit” to investors.

The bank boasted a unique investment strategy that it said allowed it to receive double-digit returns on its investments for the past 15 years, the SEC said.

“We are alleging a fraud of shocking magnitude that has spread its tentacles throughout the world,” Rose Romero, director of the SEC’s Fort Worth regional office, said in the statement.

The SEC also charged SIB chief financial officer James Davis and Laura Pendergest-Holt, chief investment officer of Stanford Financial Group. The third company named in the complaint is investment adviser Stanford Capital Management.

According to the release, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Connor issued a temporary restraining order, and froze the defendants’ assets.

Early Tuesday, CNBC reported federal marshals were seen entering the offices of Stanford Financial Group in Houston. Reuters reported an eyewitness saw a sign taped to the window stating the company is now “under the management of a receiver.”

SEC alleges false financial claims

According to the SEC’s complaint, filed in federal court in Dallas, the defendants told CD purchasers that their deposits were safe, falsely claiming that the bank re-invests client funds primarily in the portfolio; monitors the portfolio through a team of more than 20 analysts; and is subject to yearly audits by Antiguan regulators.

Amid the news of Bernard Madoff’s massive Ponzi scheme, SIB falsely claimed the bank has no “direct or indirect” exposure to the Madoff scheme, the statement said.

Stanford’s inner circle

According to the SEC’s complaint, a close circle of Stanford’s family and friends operates SIB.

Its investment committee, responsible for managing the bank’s multi-billion dollar portfolio of assets, includes Stanford; Stanford’s father, who lives in Mexia, Tex.; another Mexia resident with business experience in cattle ranching and car sales; Pendergest-Holt, who had no financial or securities experience prior to joining SFG; and Davis, Stanford’s college roommate.

SIB’s Web site claims its network has $51 billion in deposits and assets under management or advisement, with more than 70,000 clients in 140 countries.

$20 million cricket match

In September, Forbes named Stanford No. 205 in its 400 Richest Americans article. He’s used some of his billions to spark interest in cricket.

In 2006, he founded the Stanford 20/20 Tournament, a single-elimination knockout cricket competition held in Antigua featuring 20 teams from several Caribbean territories competing for $1 million.

Stanford topped that in 2008 with the “Stanford Super Series,” in which four teams competed for $20 million – the largest team prize for a single sporting match, according to the series Web site.

An additional scheme

The SEC’s complaint alleged an additional scheme relating to $1.2 billion in sales. SGC advisers are accused of using materially false historical performance data to create a mutual fund program called Stanford Allocation Strategy, the release said.

According to the complaint, the false data helped grow the program from less than $10 million in 2004 to more than $1 billion, generating SGC – and ultimately, Stanford – about $25 million in 2007 and 2008.

That fraudulent performance helped recruit registered investment advisers, who were then given heavy incentives to move their clients’ assets to SIB’s CD program, the release said.

Stanford Financial Group could not immediately be reached for comment. 

First Published: February 17, 2009: 1:49 PM ET

Looks like Calvin and Hobbs figured out the stimulus 15 years ago: http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2009/02/classic-calvin.html