Paulson panic prevention for a U.S. too big to fail

Tagged:

For all but Obama Hoovercrats

By Mike DeVine, Legal Editor

As I get up off my knees from thanking Nature’s God for our first and latest Treasury Secretaries, I see the current state of economic affairs in dimes not spared, gardens not grown and three non-filing stations near my Carolina home.

I ran out of gas today when none of the three closest stations to my home were selling any. But I didn’t run out of food despite the fact I don’t grow it and no brother asked me if I could spare a dime.

1929 it ain’t, and, despite our problems, it won’t be, unless We the People commit historical mass suicide and turn the Indispensable Nation’s affairs over to Nancy, Harry and Barack’s 21st Century version of Herbert Hoover.

The United States has the worst economic system in history, except for all the others by far, thanks to the wisdom the Founders, and especially, current Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s most distant predecessor. Alexander Hamilton put meat (economic institutions) on the bones of private property based Liberty that produced an economic miracle that made Americans the most prosperous citizens in history since the early 1800s with enough dough left over to fund a defense against evil megalomaniacs for going on 200+ years.

Our prosperity suffered and endured panics in the post-agrarian industrial age culminating in the Great Depression, but, with government’s help following a Dust Bowl on the plains and a market crash that dusted up garden-property challenged denizens of big city tenements, Liberty was again unleashed to defeat fear itself, with Nazis and Japanese fascists thrown in for good measure.

Since then, the greatest threat to our prosperity has been oil embargoes of the foreign OPEC and domestic Democratic Party varieties. The latest wears the faces of The Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi who would permanently lock away the bulk of our domestic reserves within 50 miles offshore so that fish can choke on it as it seeps towards Myrtle Beach and The Speaker from the TelePrompTer Barack Obama who welcomes high gasoline prices so long as we endure the rising of them like lobsters in a lukewarm pot.

Given that Obama and Pelosi have not learned the lesson of the Quaker State’s first oil well and our delivery from riding Donkeys, it should not surprise us they from the party of that stubborn like a mule donkey, have also failed to learn the lessons of Hoover, for they want to repeat his post-1929 crash trade tariffs and tax hikes.

The Hoovercrats blame the current financial crisis on a lack of regulation, despite the fact that it was Clinton Era regulations that directed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to guarantee mortgage loans to credit risky borrowers in the name of fighting supposed “institutional white racism.” So the loans flowed, egged on by an overabundance of non-salaried realtors and loan officers whose universe of potential customers were mostly credit challenged. The Hoovercrats now label the fruits of their regulations, “predatory lending” and were successful in enacting a major bailout of ARM mortgagees a few months ago.

For their part, McCain-Palin are out there blaming the Housing/Credit Crunch driven financial market crisis on “corruption on Wall Street.” This is too simplistic an explanation and too shallow a justification for “more regulation”.

While I would denounce Michael Douglas’s “greed is good” declaration in the movie Wall Street, greed is, and always has been since Eve bit the apple. And our system has been and is the best at channeling same for good and mitigating the bad as has ever existed.

The fact is that no amount of regulation can prevent speculative bubbles in a free society. And the alternative to a free society is the biggest bubble of all: tyranny and its attendant deprivation that makes one long for our relatively puny bubbles.

This is a basic lesson from that early Babylonian garden: without free choice, there can be no real prosperity. The Founders understood that for wealth to be created, people would have to risk failure, with the prize for success being to get to keep the fruits of one’s labor.

After man left gardens and started hiring them out to Winn Dixies, it became necessary for government to grow, so the argument of big vs. small government is moot. The issue is how big and whether governed by basic principles or moral hazard.

Clearly, Fannie and Freddie guaranteed too large a percentage of mortgage loans and their failure, combined with other factors including a weak dollar and high energy prices, has caused a crisis that we remain in the midst of.

But I am confident that President Bush’s genius at Treasury, Henry Paulson, who lately has eschewed Sunday rest, based on Christ’s adage that the Sabbath was made for man, and not vice versa, to do the yeoman’s work of adjusting the Hamilton edifice for a changing world.

But one thing has not changed, as evidenced by the recent spectacular rise in the dollar: The United States is THE indispensable nation. The world can’t thrive without selling their wares here and investing their money here.

The rise in the dollar started soon after Putin over-reached in Georgia. A dying mafia nation flush with lottery oil money counted on western euro weenies to counsel their eastern neighbors on surrender. But Bush put the US military on land and sea in Russia’s path to Tbilisi while the former slave states flew their Presidents to the Caucasus to give Putin the middle finger.

Russia’s stock market crashed. But they have Ossetia and the North Pole.

The world is voting with their money on America, while the Hoovercrats want to take money from Americans while denying them their own oil on the hope for a wind driven alchemy even Merlin the Magician couldn't conjure.

President Bush twice tried to get Congress to limit Fannie and Freddie.

Pelosi refused.

John McCain tried to do the same. John McCain wants to drill offshore. Obama does not. McCain wants you and the businesses you work for and shop at to keep more of the fruits of their labor. Obama wants to raise taxes.

One day, the USA will fall. Greece and Rome fell. Eventually we will fall, and eventually I will die. But I’m not throwing my body in front of a semi to hasten the day.

For the world, we are too big to fail, but for Obama, despite the role of non-accountability in the current crisis, wants to sell the idea that the government should ensure no one can fall. The last great such experiment ended with a wall falling near where his campaign began its descent in Berlin. For Pelosi and Obama, the government is still too small to satisfy their gargantuan egos. But they are blind to America’s greatness, greatness too big to indulge their historical ignorance.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
DocJ's picture

But I am confident that President Bush’s genius at Treasury, Henry Paulson, who lately has eschewed Sunday rest, ... to do the yeoman’s work of adjusting the Hamilton edifice for a changing world.

So, taking-over large chunks of the mortgage business, nationalizing an insurance company, and clearly hinting that Uncle Sam is going to be tossing large piles of Other People's Money at what used to be private businesses is "adjusting the Hamilton edifice for a changing world"?

We've seen what that world changes into, GC - Cuba.

I'm sorry, man - if a Democrat was doing this we'd be screaming "Socialism" to the high stinking Heavens. And we'd be right.

It doesn't make me feel any better than we're getting there under a nominally Republican president.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

gamecock's picture

that we haven't slipped into a bad recession in the past year or so given the shocks to the economy and I give much credit to the work of Bush and Paulson.

I agree that Fannie and Freddie, AS I SAID IN THE COLUMN, were too big and led to to the crisis, and that the eventualy re-structure must be guided by our smaller govt principles and not THE bubble that brought down the wall (Berlin - read Cuba if it helps) nor Hoover like policies either.

But if your point is that we can one day have SMALL government in fact like the 19th C. in a post-agrarian modern economy, then you are dreaming.

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

gamecock's picture

And we still don't know what you would have done, but I suspect doing nothing and yelling small government would have plunged the world into a crisis much worse and much sooner.

The changing edifice is the actions Paulson (and Bernanke) took weeks ago with respect to regulating the changed landscape of mortgage lenders and some of mergers.

The actions you cite, that i referred to are the panic preventions. Stability is important in a crisis and Paulson's Sunday moves have been to try and get us past the crisis without a deep recession. So far so good.

Yes, eventually, we need to reintroduce a MUCH larger possibility of risk so as to prevent reckless behavior.

But we will always have bubbles and we will always need govt as an umpire and to prevent crises that would cause great suffering across the economy from growing into deeprecessions and Great Depressions

One of the main reasons we don't have them or haven't since the 30s is the learned lessons from Hoover and FDR re taxes and money supply and some of the shock absorbers built in which Reagan called the safety net for the truly needy.

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

gamecock's picture

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

DocJ's picture

10-years from now, when we have nationalized airlines, car companies, heavy equipment manufacturers, banks, brokerage houses and are all carrying newly-minted national health service cards - in other words, when we are virtually indistinguishable from the socialist people's republics of Old Europe...

I should be happy with the knowledge that it was George "Harvard Biz School Graduate" Bush and his team of economic savants, with their unparalleled government spending and borrowing and continued bail-outs of Democrat Primary Voting riverboat gamblers who, at the end of the day, were playing with house (that would be, our) money who put us on this path.

Thanks - I feel better already.

But you want to know my answer - here it is...

Let. Them. Fail.

All of them.

Freddy. Fannie. AIG. Chrysler (Carter should have let them fail - but I suppose I shouldn't expect better from a Harvard Biz School Graduate, either). Merril. Washington Mutual. Ford. United. American Airlines. All of them.

Let. Them. Fail.

Yeah, it will suck. Big time. But so will having Barney Frank tell us what sort of checking account we can have. The difference being that, if we let these losers fail, after the suck there's at least the chance we could recover and actually turn into something better. Whereas under the "nationalize the world" scenerio we're left with nothing more than continuing varieties of suck (c.f.: Old Europe).

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

gamecock's picture

do favor reversing the ones that have made to avert the present crises. I also regularly cite Slouching Towards Gomorrah, lobsters in lukewarm water and I regularly challenge smarter fiscal cons than me to come up with an actual plan, with a transition from a to be as part of the plan, to reduce the size of government.

But that requires a consensus in congress, which will require a conservative filibuster proof majority.

The President can and must take actions to avert crises.

Let "them" fail, yes, depending on who and when. Each instance of so-called bailing (Bear Stearns was no bail, for instance) is different in kind and importance.

A good parallel is what was done in the S&L crisis with that 6-year clearing house.

But DocJ, if I thought that your do nothing approach wouldn't precipitate a crisis, the damage of which I think would outweigh the benefits of the eventual lesson re moral hazard that we must return to, then I would be for it.

I just think the circumstances of debt, energy costs, and slow growth and more made it vital that paulson do much of what he is doing.

I could be wrong. This is quite complicated even for this summa cum laude, phi beta kappa, curve breaker econ major's mind. (I mention that not to substitute for a substantive argument but rather to suggest that while I know what I am talking about and can put it on graphs, this science is dismal and we see thru a glass darkly. Biting that apple was devastating and its been all damage control East of Eden.)

Which is why I rarely write on econ. I do stand by my general principles in the article, but as to specifics, I haven't the best of clues I suspect.

Its easy to sit back and throw darts and blow holes, throwing up one's hands and declaring oneself above it all, but scoffers don't impress me as very helpful.

So, I try.

God bless DocJ, and we don't disagree on what we wish could be, and in time should and can be, to a great extent.

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

DocJ's picture

Look, I'm a self-proclaimed dope when it comes to these things too. A simple glance at my checkbook and 401k would quickly confirm that.

But frankly I expect from a nominally Republican president an approach to economics and policy that differs from the Democrats - and honestly, I don't see anything that Bush/Paulson has done over the last 2-years that is in any tangible way different from what we could have expected from a President (shudder) Gore or (double-shudder) Kerry.

Honest, I just don't see it.

So, from where is the push-back going to come when there are calls from Congress to nationalize the mortgage industry (Barney Frank's "Let's buy all the bad morrgages" "plan") for example? Who's going to push-back when the auto industry, or the airline industry, or the (fill-in-the-blank) industry come calling?

Anyone?

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

gamecock's picture

or management, given the current system and unchanging human nature, we should expect that a Rubin and a Paulson might do similar things.

Bush and McCain tried to fix maes and macs before this.

As for what is done in the future, I am on your team. I suspect Palin is our best shot to make the sale. We need for the conservative experts to show us what the financial system out to look like in terms of govt regs and show us how we get there and then make the case to the American people thru McCain-palin and congressional leaders and in races for congress.

In the meantime, we are lucky we have paulson and in the future we as conservatives must also understand that no system can prevent all bubbles that govt should never address.

One could argue that for Fannie and Freddie to have existed for so long without a crisis is a pretty good run, but I also understand what Clinton and Rubin did in 1998 and what the GOP congress didn't do in 2002-2006.

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

DocJ's picture

Especially with regard to Freddie and Fannie - which were both stupid ideas in the first place and should have been killed in the cradle. And I further give McCain very high marks for trying to do something about it before it was on anyone's radar screen.

It's also entirely possible that there were no better answers. What I think is undenyable though is that these bailouts 1) will make future bailouts harder to resist in the future, 2) help guarantee that there will be a need for such bailouts in the future, and 3) invite - heck, beg for - the very sorts of regulations that should make us all cringe (SOX, the sequil) - bringing us, I hate to say it, many steps closer to Old Europe.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

gamecock's picture

Because (and I am going to pose this question to him and Skanderbeg) it appears that the main problem may have been the bundling of mortgages as a new financial instrument and not so much the mae and mac per se.

Why? Because since less than 3-5% of the mortgages failed, I would trade that for the HUGE increase in stable homeownership, which is STILl at an alltime high overall and minority.

still thinking

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

DocJ's picture

But that's a huge part of it. Now, why the bundling of sub-prime mortgages became viable as an investment vehicle is, ahem, beyond my paygrade.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

pilgrim's picture

wing of the Republican Party. I do not share your gloomy crystal ball projection of the future. I also do not share your simple answer to the economic problems we are faced with. I believe the United States has had several times in the last 232 years to face crises even more dire than our current one.

There is enough blame to go around to political leaders across the spectrum of both parties. I think getting out of these messes will require a lot of feathers being ruffled by a lot of folks with a high opinion of themselves. It will be messy, but I still believe America's best days are in the future.

DocJ's picture

Tell you what, Pil - you tell me who is going to push-back, now that BushCo have put bail-outs on a massive scale not only on the table but in the centerpiece and everyone is going along happily with the plan, once every single hurting industry in the country comes to Capitol Hill with a tin freaking cup in their hands and I'll back down.

Name names, Pil.

You tell me who is going to stop our run to embrace Old Europe. Specifically. Who is going to stand-up against the media, and congress, and people who've lost 1/3 of their house value and 1/4 of their 401k over the last 3-4 years now that bailing out the big boys is the Governmentally Approved Solution to the "crisis".

Take your time.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

pilgrim's picture

First of all, DocJ, I apologize if you read my previous post as a personal attack against you. In your post you repeated the phrase "let them all fail", and it brought to me memories of Marie Antoinette's 'let them eat cake" line. So it was just play on a line you used and not a personal attack against you.

Secondly, I've only got two names in mind for shaking up things in Washington. Their names are John McCain and Sarah Palin. I hope Art Chance can get to this team after they win the WH, and persuade them to fire every governmment bureaucrat they have the authority to fire.

I certainly cannot predict the future.

John Wayne: "You're a persistent cuss, pilgrim."

DocJ's picture

I was perhaps being touchy as it's already been a rough morning. We're cool.

Here's the thing though - the people who are/were running these "companies" (AIG, Fannie/Freddie, Lehman, etc.) are big boys and girls. They knew the risks and were very, very well compensated for their jobs. I'm totally cool with that - believe me when I say that there isn't a class-warfare molecule in my psyche.

But now that they've run their businesses into the ground (which, of course, sucks for them, their shareholders, investors and employees) they show-up in DC with threadbare clothes and ask the government to take food off my table and out of my kids' mouths to bail them out while they and their progeny for 5-6 generations get to live like Lords off the spoils of their failure.

Sorry kids, this is my stop and where I get off. And, speaking as the former Vice Chairman of the Connecticut Libertarian Party - you know, the "All Capitalism, All The Time" people - if the "Capitalists" (note the quotes) have lost me, well, I can't believe I'm alone.

I don't have much hope for McCain - I really don't think he understands the Dreaded Private Sector any better than your average career pol, which is to say, not very good. I have high hopes for Palin, as well. And let's state the obvious - they will be far, far better than Big Brother Barack and Slow Joe. But we're starting from a deeper hole than we need to be as a result of these bailouts, and we're back on defense - and we all know you just don't often win when you're constantly playing defense.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

pilgrim's picture
Excellent diary, gamecock with a smackdown of positions advocated by candidate Barack Obama that mirror the actions that President Herbert Hoover took.
Here is what a candidate running for President had to say:

My opponent is for spending and taxing too much, increasing national debt, raising tariffs and blocking trade, as well as placing millions on the dole of the government. My opponent is for "reckless and extravagant" spending, of thinking "that we ought to center control of everything in Washington as rapidly as possible.


So which right-wing nutjob do you suppose made these comments?
Democratic Party candidate Franklin Delano Roosevelt
speciallist's picture

"40 million American households that read TMR are generally happier
than those people in households that don't read TMR."

speciallist's picture

..when they start Bitxxing about the economy and who's to blame..

This info will help to Calm their fears...If they will listen to me!

"40 million American households that read TMR are generally happier
than those people in households that don't read TMR."

speciallist's picture

"40 million American households that read TMR are generally happier
than those people in households that don't read TMR."

gamecock's picture

it's not chicken cordon bleu as the main course.

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

Steve Foley's picture

...and btw great piece as always GC!

The simple fact is we are in this Mortgage Crisis for ONE reason and ONE reason alone - The law of unintended consequences!

In the 90's the Clinton administration and it's Republican Congress saw the act of loaning people with bad credit at a higher interest rate (which liberals successfully argued were minorities) was a racists act! So the FIX became the government wrapping their arms around companies like Countrywide, urging and in a lot of cases guaranteeing, more loan for less money! This worked great until the Market, which the government needs to stay a healthy distance from, corrected itself!

anyone who tries to make this about anything else than what I just put forth is not only lying but pushing an agenda!

Kill the Cheerleader... Kill the World

DocJ's picture

That's a huge help - and thanks for that.

Here's the thing though, the people who ran these companies - and made a whole lot of money for themselves in the process (AHEMfranklynrainesAHEM) went along with all this. Happily so. And now we're stuck holding the bag.

So my frame of mind is telling me that if I'm going to have to guarantee these deals then darn it I want these bastards regulated - and I want it out there naked and in the open for everyone to see.

I hate to sound like Huckabee, but I am absolutely livid with the number of people who got ludicrously rich running these places into a taxpayer bailout.

Now again, my default position is "get the government out of the (fill in the blank) business" - but it's looking more and more like that ship has sailed.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

Steve Foley's picture

...for those who want to stay involved -- transparency of what these corporate crapweasels do as far as selling off their stock and such is now right there for everyone to see... online!

It was government regulation that got us here, we don't need more. But if that's what you want lets have better regulation instead of more!

Kill the Cheerleader... Kill the World

DocJ's picture

But it's what we're gonna get. Hard.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

streetwise's picture

And so is talk of imminent nationalization.

I think we need to distinguish between Lehman and AIG.

The feds allowed Lehman to go BANKRUPT. Its stock, has plummeted from a high of around $70 to eight cents. Executives and directors holding stock options have been wiped out, are worse than those of Bear Stearns. Its viable businesses will be sold, and thousands of employees terminated.

All AIG got was a very expensive credit line, enough hopefully to prevent a run on the company whose links to the broader economy through its insurance business are too important to disrupt for a short term liquidity crisis. AIG is PROFITABLE, just cash poor right now.

Its management will be replaced, and its shareholders punished.

Neither case is a bailout, but a very, very stiff dose of nasty castor oil.

streetwise's picture

was a general response to some of the concerns expressed in other comments about your blog.

You have been on a roll lately!

DocJ's picture

Since I'm sure your comment was directed principally at me, would you care to enlighten me as to how this news - which the Disassociated Press is crediting for the huge run-up on Wall Street today - is not, well, the nationalization of large piles of what was once private debt?

Quote:
Wall Street rallied in a stunning late-session turnaround Thursday, shooting higher and hurtling the Dow Jones industrials up 400 points following a report that the federal government may create an entity that will take over banks' bad debt. ...

Investors hoped a huge federal intervention could help financial institutions jettison bad mortgage debt and stop the drain on capital that has already taken down companies including Bear Stearns Cos. and Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.

So, doesn't that mean that you, me and everyone else who pays taxes is being set-up to buy that debt?

And is it, well, conservative governance to set-up the federal government as the lender of last resort?

Those are not rhetorical questions, by the way. I really don't have any freaking idea what's going on here (and it's driving me nuts) but I sure as heck know what it sounds like.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

streetwise's picture

did a very good job of unwinding the absolute mess of the S&L debacle that originated in the late 70's, and did NOT lead to large-scale nationalization of the economy.

I actually bought a plane from the FDIC once, acting in a similar role. Believe me, they were not pushovers, and got a decent deal at fair market value, as did we.

They take over assets, stabilize value because of the credit strength of the federal government, and THEN sell them at a decent price.

DocJ's picture

This isn't "Federal Government as Loan Shark".

It's "Federal Government as Repo Man".

Is that closer?

That said...

"...did NOT lead to large-scale nationalization of the economy."

To which I add only - Yet.

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

streetwise's picture

I say a "stitch in time saves nine"

You say "beware the slippery slope"

Obama says "Let's slide!"

We all have to pick our poison, I guess. :>)

Re the Repo Man analogy. I like it! And it's a good thing, as long as they sell eventually.

gamecock's picture

eve bit the apple

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson

DocJ's picture

And it's demoralizing that here we are, what, 20-years from the S&L nightmare and we're going through it (or something like it) all over again. It's like we didn't learn anything.

Sad.

Ah, but for the days when a 4-pack of Drink was only $3.19!

---------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock.

streetwise's picture

gamecock's picture

"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson