Wednesday, September 24, 2008

The Bail-out

If Congress passes this proposed $700 billion financial bail-out, I will be livid. I am not sure I will be able to speak civilly to anyone for a few days (not that it's their fault; I'll just be in a really bad mood). I don't how many of you know how huge this is. It may be one of the biggest, if not the biggest, pieces of legislation our country has ever seen. It is so dangerous for our government to think it can control economic laws; it can't, just like it can't control the law of gravity. I am not going to go into all I've learned about economics lately (I am happy to share, should you care to ask, but I still have much more to learn), but I promise you, the market has to correct itself. It's going to painful no matter what. The longer we procrastinate it and band-aid it, the worse the correction will be. If we let the market correct now, it won't be pretty, but it won't be nearly so bad as later. Call your representatives today. Let your voice be heard, among the millions of others who oppose this measure. They are supposed to work for us, so tell them your expectations. I'll close with a post I saw on a message board by "John". I really liked what he had to say:

I write to you at this hour with the hopes that this is accompanied by
numerous calls of concern from my fellow constituents to congress.

While the ceasing of credit flow throughout our economic system will
indeed lead to certain recession or worse, I ask that you weigh the
dramatic and dire effects of bloating our national debt to
unprecedented levels while risking explosive rates of inflation that
will certainly put enormous pressure on the dollar. Threatening the
credit rating of the United States Treasury during a time when
international relations are tense will only lead to further debasement
and eventual collapse of the United State currency as it tries to
compete against rising energy costs. Our government has continued to
disregard responsibility and accountability as it socializes risk
based economic loss. Make no mistake about it; the members in congress
that forced lenders to loosen their requirements for the past two
decades are just as responsible as greed stricken Wall Street execs.

Added to which, this legislation seeks to give sweeping authority to
the Treasurer without any kind of accountability; to make acquisitions
at one’s discretion at a tune of what will surely eclipse the
one-trillion dollar figure to assist in liquidating the credit and
housing crunch while bailing out buddies on wall-street. The market
has made its move, and began its self-correction of prices. There is
nothing in existence that can determine the value of assets other than
the free market, and yet government believes it is cunning enough to
contain it and keep value artificially inflated.

Congressional hearings throughout this week have been emphasizing the
assessment of risk between a worst-case scenario of complete loss of
confidence within the market, against the inherent debt that the
American taxpayer will burden. Unfortunately I have not been hearing
much out of Washington regarding possible worst-case scenarios if the
government-acquired assets fail to stop the bleeding in a long-term
situation. While I am unwavering in my opinion that the American
people are resilient enough to endure any economic depression, perhaps
more vital questions to ask would be, ‘Can the American people endure
a complete implosion of public trust in American ideology; Are we the
same people that fought against the tyranny of totalitarianism and
entrusted our freedom not to executive powers but instead the world’s
guiding light of freedom, the Constitution of the United States?’

Risk is the theme of this era, and the only certainty is that we have
to risk something. Do we risk entering the ‘next Great Depression’
now, or do we risk the stability of our entire nation as it continues
to incur debt, debase our currency, nationalize industry, socialize
the losses and consolidate sweeping authoritative powers. If history
has taught us anything, it is that freedom sits precariously on the
most slippery of slopes, greased with the desperation of its people
and pushed by the arrogance of its leaders.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hi Sabrina. I'm Amelia's cousin. I hope you don't mind that I'm commenting. I studied economics at the U. And, I agree. This bail out isn't such a grand idea.

Perhaps you've already seen this interesting article: http://blogs.ft.com/wolfforum/2008/09/why-paulson-is-wrong/. One of my favorite quotes: "“Do we want to live in a system where profits are private, but losses are socialized?”

Spencer said...

I actually am taking an economics class right now. I was quizzing my teacher about this and I keep hearing the same thing, that it is a necessary evil. Maybe I am missing something, I don't see how this is "necessary" I don't think anyone will suffer any direct bodily harm from a recession, granted people will lose jobs, and many will probably lose their retirement but that is just the way it is. I think it relates to one of your posts from a while ago regarding freedom. Freedom inherently comes with responsibility. This bailout thwarts responsibility, in every way. These executives that led the inflation of their asset base are walking away with millions in severance packages. Just the Freddy and Fannie former CEOs are expecting about 14.3 and 9.2 million respectively, in compensation.
I am just wondering where I can sign up for this job? I would be happy to be CEO of a company, over-inflate the balance sheet, drive the stock price up. then when it all gets exposed I could just retire with a big fat severance package, not to mention my fully paid for mansion that I could live in.

Candi Criddle said...

I don't think we should be bailing out property owners who inflated their salaries to qualify for a mortgage they could not afford and I don't think we should bail out businesses that were also over inflated. If the government chooses now to bail out these businesses because it is "necessary" what about later when it might not be as necessary, but the businesses going under have heavily contributed to so-and-so's campaign? This is a slippery slope. We may not have a state sponsored religion, but we are about to get state sponsored businesses. Which is worse?

Ben said...

Must resist ewe bashing ... must resist ewe bashing.

K, if I can avoid cheap shots at economics at the ewe, I'll make a serious point.

When dealing with the near complete collapse of the economy caused by the government, why not let the government fix it.

Put another way, do you want to be able to get a home loan in Tucson at any point in the next 5-10 years?

When I posted several months ago about how our economy couldn't handle the gold standard, this is the kind of thing I was talking about. Massively mis-structured debt can be dealt with by
a) destroying the banking system
b) inflating the structure so it's correct again.

When I get some time I'll post a detailed analysis of why I'm pretty sure this is a good idea on my blog since it's a little long for just a comment here.

Karen said...

Holy crap Sabrina, I'm already in a FOUL mood over this! There was an article on infowars that talked about how this was the financial equivalent of the Patriot Act. So what is it going to take to make people wake up ???

Anonymous said...

Now, now. Don't hold my choice of universities against me. Just read the article. If anything, it's an interesting perspective. And perspective is always good, no?

Ben said...

K, here's my rough take on it. It's long and may well contain errors which I'll be happy to fix if they are pointed out.
http://eeidi.blogspot.com/2008/09/why-government-may-be-solution-to.html

What I find curious as I took the time to write this out, is how you can see this situation as so out of balance that you'd consider the decision very wrong if it happens?

Sabrina said...

If anyone is still following this post and would like to see a more extensive explanation as to why I still believe the bail-out should be avoided, you can check out Ben's blog that he posted above.

Thanks to everyone for the dialogue. We live in interesting times!

Anonymous said...

I cannot disagree that the bailout, in its current form, is nothing short of a travesty against free market capitalism.

Regardless of whether or not this passes, we're in for a train wreck. Strap in, its going to be a bumpy ride.