Bookmark and Share

The Fallacy of the Bailout

by Morgan on October 8, 2008

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

I’m glad Hank Paulson is standing firm on his $700 billion bailout that he’s burdened us with. In his speech today he said that the bailout doesn’t protect every bank from failing. Phew, now I feel better that the $700 billion is not just the first round of drinks, but rather the entire bar tab. I mean, granted, it’s a bender – but maybe it’s like a bachelor party – once in a life time type of thing. Excessive, yes. Excusable? Maybe with a forgiving bride who’s too embarrassed to say anything.

Except I’m not stupid or too embarrassed, and I hope you aren’t either.

It has quickly become clear to anyone paying attention (and finally it seems people are waking up) that the $700 billion is just the first round in this debacle. How do I know? Well let’s look at how the fine folks at AIG who needed a tidy $85 billion loan from the Federal Reserve to keep from going bankrupt are doing.


They’re back at the front of the dole line, picking up an extra $40 BILLION to keep operations (like their half-million dollar Ritz-Carlton parties) going strong. And folks, this isn’t an exception – this WILL BE the rule. The US Government has no idea where the tab is going to go. How long did that $85 billion last AIG? Three weeks? This is not the exception, this is the canary in the coal mine. There will be more cash spewing off the presses as more and more institutions come to the dole line.

And it won’t just be banks. None less than the Govenator himself has sent a letter to the Fed asking for help keeping California from running out of cash. We’ll see states, auto dealers, airlines, large real estate companies, sovereign states like Iceland and more all come to the window looking for a little scratch to get by.

Where will we be? We’ll be the stiff with the bill, and even if our drunk friends chip in a bit they’ll always stiff you on the tip. The taxpayers go to the end of the line, go bankrupt, ruin their credit and lose their homes while the government props up irresponsible organizations (no matter their legal formation) with money that doesn’t even exist.

It is the ultimate fallacy of the bailout. $700 billion is a drop in the ocean. They can’t print money fast enough.

From CNNMoney.com on our canary in the coal mine:

The New York Federal Reserve is lending up to $37.8 billion to American International Group to give the troubled insurer access to much-needed cash.

In exchange, AIG is giving the New York Fed investment-grade, fixed-income securities that it had previously lent out to other institutions for a fee. Those institutions are now returning these securities and want their money back.

The new program, announced Wednesday, is on top of the $85 billion the federal government agreed to lend to AIG last month to prevent the global company from collapsing. AIG said last Friday it had drawn down $61 billion.

Last 3 posts by Morgan

Related posts:

  1. Bailout Efforts Shift To Consumer Debt
  2. How to get a piece of the government bailout package
  3. Your stimulus – a drop in the bailout bucket
  4. Stop the Housing Bailout
  5. Past Haunts AIG as Bailout Solution Announced

  • Todd
    Dont forget the drunken behavior in congress, who added an additional 100 billion in pork to the Paulson Plan.

    Throwing the last of our wealth into the tornado, that's whats happening.

    Private companies, cities, states, many wll not be able to meet their budgets or commitments. A bailout is a temporary shot of vodka to ease the pain of the injury but with no power to heal.
  • Fielding Mellish
    It's like the government is trying to empty out the ocean with a bucket.
  • Boomer555
    Let me see? If I were a banking institution and heard that the Feds are giving our free money because banks are not lending money thereby causing a credit freeze - I think that I just may stop lending money and then get in line with my hand out. I must have missed the part where the Feds are getting an equity position in AIG in consideration for the nearly $125B they have given them(or loaned with no realistic outlook of ever receiving full repayment)? Seriously, this is not rocket science. What it is is extortion.
    The only ones who have paid any price for the egregious mismanagement of these financial institutions are the shareholders. Heads of top executives must roll, if for no other reason than it would serve to deter future criminal behavior. At least CNN is attempting to hold some of these folks accountable by identifying them by name and detailing their involvement.

    Come November, I am voting a straight non-incumbent ticket. If you are an incumbent politician - you do not get my vote. Period. Since we voters are not being told the truth as to exactly which politicians were actively involved in the present economic nightmare, I have no choice but to lump you all together. I will take my chances that any swinging dick off the street could not possibly screw things up any worse that you have screwed things up.

    And then there is intelligence-weighted voting. I propose that all of you who voted for Bush-Cheney the last two elections should only get 1/2 vote this time since you have already demonstrated that you do not have a clue and that your conduct has directly led to the near downfall of our country. And if any of you Republicans take issue with what I have to say then . . . bring it on. I have become so disgusted with the events over the last several years that I now find myself complete void of even a trace of civility towards self-proclaimed conservative Republicans. Whatever you may be, a true conservative Republican you are not. The Congressmen you voted into office are financially reckless and have expanded the role of government beyond all comprehension. President Bush has done more harm to our country than any single President in all of history. His policies have resulting in nearly doubling the national debt and our foreign trade deficit is now astronomical.

    In voting for our next President, we must elect the one who is most intelligent, as we have recently witnessed what a lack of intelligence can do to our country. I believe that narrows the field of contenders down to just one choice - and it is NOT the one that prefaces each statement with "my friends" and who sounds like he is trying to sell us a used car.

    And for those of you who find this post offensive and feel that I am trying to get in your face - it is because I am. I have become so disgusted with the incompetence of our government whose only course of action is to throw money at problems, most recently to the tune of nearly a TRILLION DOLLARS dollars, that I simply do not care what you think. The only thing scarier than the present economic situation that the world economy now finds itself in is the thought that Sarah Palin could, someday, become our commander in chief?

    I can just see it now. President Palin comes strolling into a UN meeting that she called to propose an international ban on abortions and she finds that all of the delegates are rolling on the floor laughing their asses off. Oh just friggen' lovely.

    And for those of you who may be so inclined, do not even try to question my patriotism. I did my time in the military, my father retired from the military and every male member of my family has served in our military. So don't even try to go there.
  • Max
    You are the one that needs to get a clue... there is more than enough evidence out there that the evil Dems are the ones respnsible for where we are today.
    Liberalism is the ROOT CAUSE of every problem we face... LOOK... I mean really look... if you dare!!!!
  • Mike
    Liberalism? You mean like the government handing out tons of taxpayer money to people who did nothing to deserve it? Yeah - I think you're right!

    Last time we had a Democrat in the White House we had a surplus. Don't start in with that boneheaded "Liberalism" nonsense.
  • Reality Check
    Let's start with root-level political self interest then--there's nobody who doesn't feed at the trough (including us). That transcends party affiliation. Replace any use of "conservative" or "liberal" with "political" in most indictments and it probably applies to all of them. Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

    As to the "surplus" you think we've had in the recent past--try again. As long as the Social Security and Medicare "trust" funds are funded with IOUs you'll never see one. Our government runs as much off balance sheet as our ponzi-crap companies do.
  • Ralphy
    Well said, Boomer 555. I think you hit the nail right on the head. I feel exactly the same way.
  • I like your voting strategy. I agree with what you're saying about getting out the old, since they keep making bone-head-moves, like bailing out a sinking ship but failing to repair the holes! I'm voting with you!
  • Johnny
    If you think electing the 'intelligent' guy is the way to go then you had better open your history books.

    The problem is these so-called intelligent people who actually think they can 'fix' this problem with a little economic science (or scientific socialism). If Ben Bernacke, Hank Paulson and Alan Greenspan had had the humility and intelligence to realize they cannot successfully manipulate the world economy through interest rates and bailouts we would be experiencing a mild recession rather than facing a once-in-500-years depression and economic meltdown.

    Until the USA returns to commonsense policies (and that includes getting rid of the Fed, getting government out of the economy, and letting deadbeats go bankrupt) you are SCREWED.

    Your only hope is a President who thinks like Ron Paul on economic matters (please note that I didn't say Ron Paul himself). But since your country is quickly acquiring a nanny-state mentality that will never happen.
  • You are so correct. If everybody would NOT vote for the incumbents, that would send a message that WE THE PEOPLE can vote you morons who are selling us out from office. GOP, DEMS, YOU ALL SUCK!
    Sing with me. Its the end of the world and we know it. And I feel fine.
  • John
    Don't bash Republicans. I'm a registered Republican who has already voted for Bob Barr as a protest. Republicans have been getting the worst of this, because RON PAUL, who stands for what we want, was kept from debating by Fox News. JOHN MCCAIN is one of the Keating 5, and has been in the corrupt Senate for far too long to trust.

    Republicans have been cheated by EVIL poltical insiders. They know what we wanted, and they plotted to make certain we could never have that. Instead, we get bashed by everyone. Don't bash me. I'm mad as hell already, and I don't want any blame for this thing, when I'm they guy who has been cheated.
  • Boomer555
    By the way, I feel better having unloaded my frustrations.
  • Boomer555
    Well Max - show me where to look? As to your claim of "evil Dems" and "liberalism", I personally believe in a smaller but more efficient government. I believe that we taxpayers are entitled to know what goes on behind closed doors in Congress. But most importantly, I believe in financial responsibility. Our country should only spend what they take in and invest heavily in domestic manufacturing processes. We cannot compete against the Chinese because the Chinese do not pay their workers a decent wage, unemployment benefits, health care and a pension. Our government's solution is to try to deprive U.S. workers of a decent wage, health care and forcing the workers to assume responsibilty for their own pensions. American workers are being punished in order to reduce costs so that the U.S. manufacturing base can compete against foreign manufacturers (mainly China) I do not think that to be the answer. I think that we should figure out exactly how much of these "social costs" our manufacturers are paying per vehicle, or per piece of equipment, and assess a tariff against incoming products from China. That way, we would be competing on a level playing field. In order for China to avoid having to pay a tariff, they then start to pay their employees a wage comparable to that we pay our workers, institute an unemployment insurance program, contribute towards the Chinese worker's retirement plan and institute effective pollution controls. We will then see how "cheap" their products will become. (Not to mention the additional costs of shipping their goods half-way around the world to the U.S. market).

    I would then employ this same strategy to Mexico and Latin America.

    As things exist now, it has become a race to the bottom. Is this a race we really want to win? Instead of foreign manufacturing processes taking U.S. manufacturing lower to their level, we should be forcing foreign manufacturers to rise up to our level.

    And Max, I am not claiming that the Democrats are innocent because Lord knows they are not. But it has been the Republicans who have effectively controlled economic policy over the last eight years. It is only natural to look to them first?
  • Boomer555
    And thanks for the support Ralphy and Mike
  • ANN
    Morgan you are right in your calculations. Maybe the powers that be read the aricle this week that stated that America is far behind in its maths skills.. However, I don't think that BASIC addition is a problem...

    That 700 billion wasn't even icing on the cake it was more like the finger full taste that your mother would let you have BEFORE the cake was iced....I expect that this weekend will give us more great global news...
  • Malahuna
    To Boomer555: I think maybe you've hit on something: Not electing ANY of the incumbent politicians. If the American voters could possibly get behind this and, in fact, turn every one of them out over the next 2 years, perhaps our future "representatives" would get the message that we're all pretty fed up and pissed off.

    By the way, it seems to me that the public that took the time to phone and email their "representatives" was over 90% AGAINST this bailout, yet they did it any way.

    Time for a Tea Party?
  • The Fed is acting like the ultimate goal is only to increase lending, not spur the economy. If the true goal of providing more credit is to promote investment and spending, wouldn't it be better just to give the $2.2 trillion directly to consumers and business. That way it would be guaranteed to get spent, instead of going only to restore bank balance sheets and pay executive salaries and shareholder dividends.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post: Bernanke hints at a rate cut

Next post: Fannie & Freddie Should Be Fully Privatized