Skip to main content

The Federal Reserve Weighs its "Option": Bailout of the Elite

It would be nice if the moneymakers at the Federal Reserve were simply inept.

It was a terrible idea the moment it was hatched nearly one hundred years ago, and I have now had about a gut-full of the freaks at the Federal Reserve. After creating the financial atmosphere where a subprime mortgage meltdown could occur, the Fed now contemplates bailing out the big boys who took it in the shorts--while leaving you in the lurch.

The Mexican Peso Bailout of 1994 wasn't a bailout of the Mexican Peso. It was a bailout of the tycoons who loaned the money to Mexico knowing full well that they would have their spread covered if the deal went south. In a similarly elitist move, the Federal Reserve bailed out Bear Stearns a couple of weeks ago. Why? Because, said Ben Bernanke, we can't afford to let such a big company go under.
Given the exceptional pressures on the global economy and financial system, the damage caused by a default by Bear Stearns could have been severe and extremely difficult to contain," Bernanke told the Senate Banking Committee.
So what's the solution? Put the US taxpayers on the hook.
The investment house was purchased by JP Morgan Chase & Co. with assistance from the Fed in the form of a loan backed by $30 billion of Bear Stearns assets. JP Morgan has agreed to absorb the first $1 billion of losses if the value of the assets declines, but taxpayers are at risk for the remaining $29 billion.
Moral hazard is the art of making bad choices because you are reasonably sure that you will be protected from the consequences of those choices. I'm not sure what you call it when the fix is in in advance--moral turpitude?

Ellen Goodman thinks something is rotten in the American halls of financial power, and I agree.

I grant you that moral hazard is not a myth. But most of the sermons railing against the harm of helping others are directed

The Federal Reserve is setting the stage for a global market meltdown almost infinitely greater than if there were a law against the elite bailing out their friends while pissing on you, the little guy.

at the poorer pews.

We don't seem to worry about the moral hazard of, say, protecting a CEO from his failings. Need I remind you that Robert Nardelli got $210 million in severance after he hammered Home Depot? Or that he now resides at the top of Chrysler?

This leads us right into the den of Bear Stearns. Last weekend, while its chief executive was off playing bridge, one of the most aggressive cowboy firms in the mortgage securities business collapsed. The government brokered a deal with J.P. Morgan Chase to buy the firm and guarantee its loans with your tax dollars.

On the Glenn Beck show yesterday, Peter Schiff explained what is afoot:
It's really easy. It boils down to one word. Inflation. That's what they are contemplating, printing money and buying up mortgages. You know, we talk about, you know, the economic collapse. Our economy has to collapse because it was phony.
Inflation is NOT inflation to the people who first get the extra money that the Fed prints. It is a windfall, and the elite always get that first crack at the new infusion of cash. Not until it gets down to you and me have all the prices gone up--and our buying power gone down. Think about that in conjunction with the fact that the rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.

The Federal Reserve is worse than a waste of time. It is a corrupt cartel that plays fast and loose with your money. In the guise of attempting to correct the economy--which it most assuredly cannot do--it is setting the stage for a global market meltdown almost infinitely greater than if there were a law against the elite bailing out their friends while pissing on you, the little guy.

We can do just fine without you, Federal Reserve--thank you. Step aside and let the economy make its own course corrections, before there is no economy left.

And don't let the door hit you in the butt as you make your exit into the oblivion that you deserve.




Comments

  1. http://aid4families-aid4families.blogspot.com/

    My firm was indicted for offering an alternative to this sham cartel. Recently we requested a bailout of $29 billion from the fed. Apparently under the provision 13-3 allows the fedex reserve to give money to whomever it sees fit. Why not us we figured since our organization is being torned down by the corrupt banking industry coup and our hard-working american clients will be left holding the bag. We've taken the fight to industry and recently appeared on the cbc and plan to go before parliament and the senate to hold these crooks feet to the fire. Hopefully before they jail us. The federal reserve board did go to our website (I will be looking for my $29 billion taxpayer guarantee check any day now.

    ReplyDelete
  2. My family needs aid. Where do I apply to get a cut of your $29B? I don't know any Rockefellers, Morgans, Bushes, Clintons, or Bernankes!!!

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Thank you for commenting. If you have a Google/Blogger account, to be apprised of ongoing comment activity on this article, please click the "Subscribe" link below.

Popular posts from this blog

Red Clothing and Resurrection: Jesus Christ's Second Coming

The scriptures teach that when Christ comes again to the earth, that he will be wearing red apparel. Why red ? They also teach that at Christ's coming, many of the dead will become resurrected. Will this only include members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints? Not by a long shot, no matter what some Mormon might tell you.

School Vouchers: "The Bramble Memo"

$429 million? What? Where? The legislative fiscal analyst for the State of Utah calculated the costs to the public schools over the next 13 years if school vouchers are implemented. It said the costs would be $5.5M in the first year, and $71M in the 13th year. Suddenly, the number I have started seeing thrown around was $429 million, the total costs for vouchers over 13 years. Where did that number come from? Enter the mysterious "Bramble Memo". In the past few days several of us (Jeremy, Utah Taxpayer, Craig, Sara, Urban Koda, Jesse, and me) have (sometimes?) enjoyed a lively discussion about school vouchers in Utah . Jeremy clarified to me the costs of the venture by linking to a copy of the Utah Legislative Fiscal Analyst's Impartial Analysis (LFA) of the costs of Vouchers , found on "The Senate Site". In my previous voucher article, I quoted some of Lavar Webb's article from last Sunday's Deseret News, wherein he stated that those total costs ...

What's Your Reaction to California's Decision on Same-Sex Marriage?

Yesterday a "Republican-dominated" California Supreme Court struck down state laws against same-sex marriages. The LDS Church issued a press release, calling the decision "unfortunate". I agree, but not for reasons you might think. Did the California Court make the right decision? Update 5/17/2008 : California decision does not affect prohibitions against polygamy and marriage of close relatives. Why not? Government should not sanction same-sex marriages for the same reason that it should not sanction heterosexual adultery--such activities tend to be destructive to the family as the fundamental unit of society. Before you get too far into reading into my words, let me echo and agree with something that Madeleine Albright wrote in her recent book, The Mighty & The Almighty (one of the better books that I have read in a long time): I oppose discrimination against gays and lesbians and am convinced that heterosexual adultery is a greater danger to the institu...