|
September 25, 2008
the case for bailout?
If we were going to face the conditions which might trigger another Depression, we couldn't pick a better man to possibly prevent it than Ben Bernanke: Bernanke is particularly interested in the economic and political causes of the Great Depression, on which he has written extensively. On Milton Friedman's ninetieth birthday, November 8, 2002, he stated: "Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve System. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You're right, we did it. We're very sorry. But thanks to you, we won't do it again."I think it's fair to say that (at least in academic terms) Bernanke's Depression-prevention expertise is roughly analogous to General Petraeus's Vietnam-prevention expertise. On a less serious note, can anyone Paul Krugman says is Satan be all bad? I'm inclined to take another look, and I want to be fair. (It's the least I can do; especially because being fair is supposed to be one of my rules.) Like Professor Bainbridge I can change my mind. Who knows? there might be virtue in waffling right now. Bernanke thinks that the government might not only be saving the economy by this bailout, but getting a good deal: Bernanke said there is plenty of blame to go around for the current crisis, as he named Wall Street firms and banks that underestimated risk of the securities they were creating, rating agencies and regulators.Here's the part I like: And he stressed repeatedly that while the Treasury Department plans to spend up to $700 billion buying the securities, it can expect to recoup most if not all of that money by selling them at a higher price later on, once markets have stabilized. He argued that doing nothing would cause the economy to slow so much that there would be a bigger hit to tax collections than the program will eventually cost taxpayers.I might be naive, but Bernanke strikes me as a decent and knowledgeable man, who is not out for himself. Maybe all the political hotheads (including myself) should try counting to ten, and at least listen to him. He might just be worthy of our trust. If he is worthy of our trust, and he turns out to have been right, it would be a tragedy to ignore him simply because there's an election and everybody wants to win. (I think it speaks highly of McCain that he suspended his campaign, btw.) Earlier today, I did not hesitate to embrace the third rail. If I can do that, I see no reason why I can't occasionally waffle too. And if the economic collapse of the United States isn't worth waffling over, then what is? MORE: Please forgive the sloppiness of my thoughts and the spontaneous way I may have presented them here. It's late at night, and I probably shouldn't be writing a blog post. But I think this is damned serious. AND MORE: For more on why this might not even be the bailout it's said to be, read The Paulson Plan Will Make Money For Taxpayers." It's fascinating, and here are former hedge fund manager Andy Kessler's conclusions: .... it is possible, all in, for this portfolio to generate between $1 trillion and $2.2 trillion -- the greatest trade ever. Every hedge-fund manager will be jealous. Mr. Buffett is buying a small piece of the trade via his Goldman Sachs investment.(Via Glenn Reynolds.) posted by Eric on 09.25.08 at 01:05 AM
Comments
It may have been late and you may have been tired, but you captured several critical elements of Bernanke's testimony that other conservative bloggers continue to miss and mis-state. The fact that the underlying loans are still sound, and that therefore these securities should have considerable long-term value, is completely lost on them. They act as if these securities are composed exclusively of non-performing loans, which is completely false. Second, you noticed the mechanism for valuation, the reverse auction. Almost all other bloggers have missed this, and criticize the plan as if Bernanke and Paulson are going to be able to dictate the price by fiat to benefit their buddies on Wall Street. Anyone who has ever had experience with reverse auctions knows that they are a very effective mechanism for setting the lowest acceptable sale price for an item. So all in all, good job. I would cite this post in threads on other blogs, except that in the miasmic tidal wave of ill-informed, gut-level (and inaccurate) commentary out there, it would just get lost. Oh, heck. I may just do it anyway. HTL · September 25, 2008 12:27 PM Forgot to add: "Sancho, my armor!" HTL · September 25, 2008 12:29 PM Thanks, glad you liked it! Eric Scheie · September 26, 2008 12:01 AM Post a comment
You may use basic HTML for formatting.
|
|
September 2008
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
September 2008
August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 AB 1634 MBAPBSAAGOP Skepticism See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Whose fault will it be if he loses?
And if you put lipstick on a pit bull, then what? Obama Plans To Debate Himself Bill Clinton Fires Up The Base A Dog Man The great Obama versus Obama debate? Why not? Keeping Up The Burn Rate Obama To Get Help From Johnson Brief the case for bailout? Top Obama Fundraiser Meets Ahmadinejad
Links
Site Credits
|
|
Even if you trust Mr. Paulson, I don't trust him to finish the job by January 20.