George Bush: Plan ratunkowy pomoże wyjść z kryzysu finansowego

2008-10-07 20:28

publikacja
2008-10-07 20:28

George Bush uważa również, że poprawa sytuacji w Ameryce pozytywnie wpłynie na światowe rynki i sytuacje na giełdach.

George Bush zapewnił, że plan ratunkowy został bardzo dokładnie przygotowany. Dodał również, że jest pewien jego sukcesu, jednak podkreślił, że na jego efekty będzie trzeba poczekać. Zdaniem Busha reforma systemu będzie przebiegała w stopniowo i nie da się odczuć jej skutków z dnia na dzień.

Prezydent Stanów Zjednoczonych zapewnił również, że jest w ciągłym kontakcie z przedstawicielami najbardziej uprzemysłowionych państw, które są członkami grupy G8. Dodał również, że przeprowadził serię rozmów z europejskimi przywódcami, aby uzgodnić wspólną strategię obrony przed kryzysem.

Według Georga Busha Stany Zjednoczone powinny skoncentrować się na uniezależnianiu się od konwencjonalnych źródeł energii. Jego zdaniem powinno zwiększyć się nakłady na alternatywne źródła energii, co pozytywnie wpłynęłoby na krajowe finanse i gospodarkę.

Departament Skarbu Stanów Zjednoczonych rozpoczął wdrażanie pierwszego etapu planu ratunkowego dla amerykańskiego systemu bankowego.

Resort przedstawił wytyczne doradcom finansowym umożliwiające skuteczne przeciwdziałanie kryzysowi.

Uchwalony w ubiegły piątek plan ratunkowy przewiduje wykupienie od banków prywatnych nieściągalnych wierzytelności z tytułu udzielonych kredytów hipotecznych. Ma to przywrócić równowagę na rynku międzybankowym, co powinno zachęcić banki do pożyczania pieniędzy i w konsekwencji uratować gospodarkę przed recesją.

Źródło:IAR

~9IronSpitfire2008-10-07 21:38

0 0

We may be looking at decisions made by Paulson and Bernanke that are worse than any made during the Great Depression. Neither of our presidential candidates seems to have a clue what is going on, or at least they won’t comment on it. The only person who speaks up is Ron Paul, who says Paulson and Bernanke should both go We may be looking at decisions made by Paulson and Bernanke that are worse than any made during the Great Depression. Neither of our presidential candidates seems to have a clue what is going on, or at least they won’t comment on it. The only person who speaks up is Ron Paul, who says Paulson and Bernanke should both go to jail. Ron Paul, of course, has been totally dismissed by the media and the American public.

First, let’s go back to where it all started. Here’s an excerpt from a New York Times article on Sept 30th, 1999 by Steven Holmes.

“In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

Well, the whole thing failed, and we are now paying for the consequences of this action. Here is what has happened in the month of September 2008 — a month that could go down in infamy in U.S. economic history. My interpretation of some of these events could be wrong. It is a very complex situation! However, I don’t think my interpretation of the ramifications of the situation is wrong. I think the only reason we haven’t had a much bigger crash in the U.S. stock market is due to the fact that most mutual funds have to be nearly 100% invested.

The U.S. Government takes over 79% of Freddy Mac and Fannie May, costing taxpayers about $200 billion immediately and making the possibility of foreign governments buying U.S. agency debt a thing of the past. China, for example, lost huge amounts in its investment in the two “FMs.” By the way, $200 billion is the cost of the latest debt that the two FMs have coming due. The long term cost will be much, much higher.

Lehman Brothers, a 158-year-old investment bank is allowed to fail, and the ramifications of the derivative positions held by the bank no longer having a backer shakes the world’s financial system.

AIG, a huge insurer that has insured a large portion of the CDOs, is taken over by the government, not because they really failed but because the price speculators were willing to pay for the CDOs had fallen so far that AIG didn’t have the cash to back it up. Now it’s a U.S. taxpayer problem.

Washington Mutual is taken over by J.P. Morgan because its failure would have cost the FDIC 2/3rds of its reserves. It is the largest bank failure in the history of the United States.

When Bank of America took over Merrill Lynch, the Fed suspended a long standing rule that a bank’s deposits could not be used to back investment banking deals. So Bank of America depositors, your money was used to buy Merrill Lynch even though you don’t have any extra assets. Be careful with your money because this is an unprecedented rule change. Some bond holder could claim the money in your account if Bank of America is not careful.

With three of the five huge investment banks in America failing (Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Lehman Brothers), the remaining two investments banks (Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) are allowed to convert to regular bank status and collect deposits.

Short selling in financial institutions has been banned, which basically benefits people who have made huge financial mistakes. However, the government can change the rules of the game any time it wants. Remember that—the government can change the rules!

Hank Paulson proposes a $700 billion bailout of financial institutions. My understanding is that the government could take over much of the junk paper around (at the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury) at full face value (not at its current junk value). Bernanke said in testimony to the Senate Banking Committee, “If the Treasury bids for and then buys assets at a price close to the hold-to-maturity price, there will be substantial benefits.” The plan was to take these over at full face value but to give the taxpayers “an equity stake” (i.e., the lowest stake on the totem pole of who gets paid in a crisis of the companies for which it buys junk at face value).

We’ve had a huge withdrawal of money from money market funds, and some funds have gone below the magic $1 mark, meaning customers have gotten less than they put into the account. The withdrawal has prompted the U.S. government to consider adding FDIC insurance to money market funds. But in the meantime, most short term loans come out of such money market funds and that source of borrowing is now drying up.

GM and Ford will probably fail if the U.S. doesn’t bail them out to the tune of another $50 billion. But both companies have pension plans that could bankrupt them at some time in the future.

The House of Representatives failed to pass the bill with 2/3rds of the Republicans voting against it. Hmm, a Republican administration proposed the bill. The Republican presidential candidate said it was his duty to make sure it was passed. That's not a lot of co-ordination in the Republican party. And the Republicans, of course, are blaming the Democrats who actually did vote in favor of the bill. Interesting logic! And the Dow Jones Industrials immediately went down 777.68 points and then was up 485.21 the next day. So what’s next?

And when I asked that question, I learned that Wachovia’s assets were being bought out by Citigroup in a fire sale that was announced on Monday. In addition, the governments of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg moved to partly nationalize Belgian-Dutch group Fortis NV, and German lender Hypo Real Estate Holding AG secured a credit line from the German government.
Henry Paulson, the Secretary of the Treasury, is the former CEO of Goldman Sachs, which stands to benefit hugely from the bailout. He received a huge severance pay when he left Goldman and is currently worth about $500 million. At the beginning of 2008 he was worth about $800 million so I would think he is paying attention as his net worth drops. The $700 billion bailout originally contained a clause in Section 8 that claimed unlimited powers for Paulson. It said, “Decisions by the Secretary (of Treasury) pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.” However, at least Congress was smart enough to remove that clause from the bill it considered and then failed to pass.

By the way, 25% of all U.S. banks were hurt by the government takeover of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. While the total amount lost was only about $15 billion, 85% of those banks have a very small net worth and that kind of loss is quite serious. Can you remember when a billion dollars seemed like a lot of money? Now hundreds of billions of dollars of shareholder value are being wiped out overnight in major banks and insurance companies.

Also remember that in March 2007, the U.S. Federal Reserve published a study that said the U.S. was bankrupt with $67 trillion in debt, including future off-the-books obligations. I believe that study is still available on the St. Louis Fed web site. However, the off-the-books debt now amounts to well over $100 trillion with all the current happenings. And, in my opinion, that could double before this crisis is over. At $67 trillion the remedies for saving the U.S. from bankruptcy include adding a 30% government tax on consumption and cutting discretionary spending by 50%. Those were not politically acceptable, so everyone in power has avoided the issue. But what are the remedies now?

There are two fundamental problems today and neither is the toxic mortgage debt. The first problem is failing financial institutions. The government failed to recognize the domino effect the failure of Lehman and AIG would have on the rest of the economy. When these two massive giants collapsed, there was no one around to assume their part of the risk in their derivative positions and this affects all, if not most, financial institutions. Remember the derivative problem is massive. J.P. Morgan, for example, has $93 trillion in derivative exposure and no one (I repeat, no one) knows what that really means or what could happen if it unwinds.

Second, we are a borrowing society and financial institutions are afraid to lend money right now. This in turn impacts every business that needs to periodically borrow money to keep its business running. That’s why cash is king.

The bailout program, which is a resort of last measure, fails to recognize these two core issues. And $700 billion is just the tip of the iceberg. When Lehman failed, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae’s failed, and AIG’s failed (just to name a few), it all became a government problem – the lender of last resort. And at that point, the whole system was at risk. Major company problems suddenly were no longer company problems. Instead, it all transformed into a global financial inferno, because there was no one to hold up their end (i.e., Lehman and AIG) of the derivative risk. The result is that we now have massive systemic risk. Remember $700 billion is just the tip of the iceberg because the derivative exposure is so massive. If J.P. Morgan were to fail, the government would basically have a $100 trillion problem.

~salaganart2008-10-07 21:16

0 0

Jak można przekonać się, że tak powiem, z autopsji plan ratunkowy doskonale sprawdza się na Giełdzie Nowojorskiej, a do tego FED, który intensywnie generuje środki płatnicze pt. USD, skutecznie niweluje "chwilowe" niedociągnięcia systemu finansowego. Całość i wymowa palanistyki noszą znamiona reformy, która nie od razu,Jak można przekonać się, że tak powiem, z autopsji plan ratunkowy doskonale sprawdza się na Giełdzie Nowojorskiej, a do tego FED, który intensywnie generuje środki płatnicze pt. USD, skutecznie niweluje "chwilowe" niedociągnięcia systemu finansowego. Całość i wymowa palanistyki noszą znamiona reformy, która nie od razu, lecz w przyszlości objawi swoją błogosławioną siłę. Amen. Dziękujemy Ci, Ojcze Wolnej Ameryki, Pastorze-Prezydencie.

George Bush: Plan ratunkowy pomoże wyjść z kryzysu finansowego

Komentarze (2)

Polecane

Najnowsze

Popularne

Ważne linki

Powiązane: Sektor bankowy

Polecane

Najnowsze

Popularne

Ważne linki