|
I have been a longtime critic of the Fed, but the latest moves by the Fed
are beyond even my most cynical estimations.
Bear Stearns was one of the most aggressive banks in facilitating the excessive
lending that helped create the mortgage mess. This mortgage mess is impoverishing
millions of Americans and affecting us all through a lower dollar and higher
gasoline prices.
Bear Stearns bet heavily on the mortgage market, made billions in profits
on the way up, and rewarded employees and executives with hundreds of millions
of dollars in bonuses. However, once the bubble burst, Bear Stearns was proven
to have been too aggressive in pushing mortgages. The value of its assets fell
so far that they could not cover the company's liabilities. Bear Stearns was
bankrupt, and no one wanted to buy them.
The bankruptcy of risky and irresponsible companies is an important part of
capitalism. This creative destruction eliminates waste and fraud and ensures
appropriate amounts of risk taking during the next business cycle.
For companies and individuals, insolvency leads to bankruptcy. However, in
the banking sector, the insolvency of a major bank can lead to a domino effect,
with other banks, which are owed money by failing bank, falling into bankruptcy.
As a result, insolvent banks are nationalized, as happened to Northern Rock
in England recently or many S&Ls in the U.S. in the 1980s. The government
prevents a domino effect by guaranteeing payment to counterparties.
Why didn't the U.S. government simply nationalize and wind down Bear Stearns?
If the government is in the bailout business, Hillary Clinton is now asking,
why can't the U.S. government bailout homeowners, too?
Of course, the Fed claims there was no bailout, but the facts are obvious.
Bear Stearns shareholders, holding a company that no one wanted to buy, received
over $2 billion. JPMorgan, the buyer, received all the most valuable assets
of Bear Stearns, which may be worth tens of billions, if not more, in the future.
And we, the people of the United States of America?
According to BusinessWeek, "In essence, the New York Fed [essentially, the
government and therefore the people] will create a special company that will
hold the $30 billion in Bear assets. It will lend the unit $29 billion at 3.25%
interest and JPMorgan itself will lend the unit $1 billion. When the assets
are liquidated, JPMorgan won't get back its $1 billion until after the Fed
has been fully repaid with interest. And if there's any money left over from
the liquidation after all the loans have been repaid, the Fed will get to keep
it." In other words, the risky, nearly worthless $30 billion in assets that
were bogging down Bear Stearns have been handed to you and me. If somehow these
securities end up being worth something we profit. If not, which is what the
market is currently saying, all of the liability (except for $1 billion) will
be borne by us, the people. And worse still, this portfolio of $30 billion
in bonds will not be managed by the government, but will be managed --- at
a high cost --- by one of the original creators of the type of exotic mortgage
products that helped create this mess in the first place.
Why did the government hand all the upside of Bear Stearns over to JPMorgan
without any calm auction process? Why did the government assume nearly all
of the risk? And what do you think the chances are that Ben Bernanke, upon
leaving the Fed, will get an extremely high-paid job at JPMorgan (after all,
that's what happened to a lot of the Fed managers who helped bailout Long-term
Capital) [participate in our poll at fakeben.com].
Please visit fakeben.com and help us
to stop these continued and flagrant abuses of our system.
The Fed must be stopped before it totally destroys the dollar and impoverishes
hardworking Americans through policies that encourage too much debt, not enough
savings, and banking excesses.

|
Fake Ben Bernanke
FakeBen.com
FakeBen is a blog to monitor the Fed and its actions and encourage community
participation. At FakeBen, we believe that the Fed policy of the last two
decades has created a credit bubble as large as that created in the 1920s.
This bubble will lead to either inflation, a recession, or both.
We believe that the Fed's policy of lowering interest rates to encourage
more credit creation is misguided, will eventually lead to 0% interest rates,
and will not solve the long-term problem, which is too much credit relative
to GDP.
Copyright © 2007-2008 Fake Ben
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2010
SafeHaven.com
ADVERTISEMENTS
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|