Tag: bailouts

Categories
free trade & free markets

Banker of the Year

It takes guts and self-confidence to buck a trend, especially to buck a boom. So most contrarians keep a low profile.

Meet Plano, Texas, banker Andy Beal. I read about him in the pages of Forbes magazine, which profiled this master contrarian in early April.

Beal has been buying toxic assets and broken-down banks in big huge gulps. And he’s been doing it without the help of government. Forbes says that he “has purchased $800 million of loans from failed banks, probably more than anyone else.”

How? Well, back in 2004 he stopped making loans. He almost stopped banking. He cut back his hours. He had to lay off a lot of employees.

Why? He didn’t trust the market. He thought the binge of borrowing and lending utterly foolish.

Forbes relates that his behavior puzzled regulators, who were worried that he was over-capitalized! How could he resist the huge profits?

Well, Beal sure showed the regulators. And his competition. Today he’s buying assets for pennies on the dollar.

Beal believes the current crisis was caused, in huge honking part, by government. Now that government is giving failed bankers huge hunks of money, his reaction is twofold:

1. He calls all the bailouts “crazy.”

2. He is taking the opportunity to make a fortune . . . without government help.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
Accountability too much government

Deep, Deep Waters

Are you surprised? I’m not surprised.

Turns out Congresswoman Maxine Waters had “family financial ties” to a bank for which she personally helped solicit bailout money. Without regard to its relative need or value to the economy.

Shocker.

Trillions in stimulus money, bailout money. And we expect politicians will allocate it according to some impersonal calculus that has nothing to do with who their chums are?

Nor can we expect the politicians and bureaucrats to sit back and let the market, or what’s left of it, function unhampered once bailout money has been forked over.

Many banks seemed to think they would simply be allowed to spend the subsidies according to their own judgment about how best to promote the health of their enterprises. But once the bailouts failed to work the instant magic they were supposed to, politicians began attaching strings. So that voters angry about the bailouts could see that there’s “accountability.”

It’s not just about trimming fat executive bonuses. The banks are also supposed to obey orders to cancel employee training, reduce dividends to shareholders, stop hiring employees from overseas, etc. This is about social engineering, not economic efficiency.

So, many banks now say they’ll give the money back. Good idea; great idea. But it would really surprise me if it found its way all the way back to taxpayers.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
insider corruption national politics & policies

A Suicide-Inducing Congress?

Say you are president. You thunder about how your predecessor’s bailouts let corporate execs keep big bonuses at taxpayer expense. That won’t happen on your watch!

And then it does. AIG bigwigs take $165 million.

So you are angry at yourself, for signing that stimulus bill with its specific language permitting TARP recipients to pay bonuses if bonuses were part of contracts made before February of ’09.

Maybe somebody should have read the legislation. So who has that job? Besides you . . . I mean the president himself. Why, Congress, of course!

Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley said he would at least “feel better” were AIG executives to apologize and then either “resign or go commit suicide.”

Connecticut Sen. Christopher Dodd and New York Sen. Chuck Schumer advocate passing a special tax to confiscate all the bonus money ex post facto.

Dodd didn’t mention that he had authored the provision specifically permitting the AIG bonuses. He has now said he’ll return the $280,000 in donations he’s received from AIG executives. Schumer was mum about his $112,000 from those same execs.

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar said, “We’ve got to do whatever it takes to make sure people that basically ripped off the American people weren’t able to profit from it.”

So is she talking about AIG . . . or Congress?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies porkbarrel politics too much government

Homeless Red Ink

I have a prediction.

Even though President Obama insists that all of the trillions in so-called “stimulus” spending will be expertly managed and masterfully allocated — of course, to only the most deserving and stimulating beneficiaries — lots of the hastily cobbled new spending will end up being wasted.

I’m afraid I cheated with this prediction. I already have an example in hand. The town of Union, New York, is slated to receive almost $600,000 from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Why? To combat homelessness.

Problem? There isn’t one — that is, there isn’t a homeless problem in Union. Which is why the town does not have any programs for dealing with the homeless and it has no means of administering the money that’s been flung at it. Nor did the town request the funds. Town supervisor John Bernardo says, “We were surprised. We’ve never been a recipient before.”

A less honest man would have trucked in some homeless guys and warbled, “Thank goodness we’re finally getting these funds.” But what Union lacks, Washington provides: A HUD spokesman says the new grant recipients should employ “creative strategies” in figuring out how to spend the money.

So that more than half-million dollars will find a home somewhere — anywhere but the wallets it came from.

You see why I shake my head and say, “I could have predicted this.” This isn’t change. It’s more — way more — of the same.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
national politics & policies

A Dollar for Your Stimulus

Remember Robocop? The clobbering of the bad guys by the cyberonic cop was a tad too bloodthirsty for my taste. And the satire wasn’t exactly as subtle as Huxley’s or Orwell’s. Still, today’s economic news makes me remember that weird game-show line, horsily bellowed throughout the 1987 flick: “I’d buy that for a dollar!”

Fast forward to 2009 and dire economic times, and the question hangs there. What can you buy for a dollar?

Answer? Subsidy.

Washington state politicians have just sent hundreds of thousands of checks for . . . one dollar each — yes, just a buck — to the state’s poorest residents.

Lots of those residents have no bank account, and thus it will cost the recipients more to cash the check than the amount of the check. So what on earth are the Evergreen state politicians thinking?

Well, there’s method to their madness.

Remember the nearly trillion-dollar so-called stimulus package Congress just passed? Apparently, there’s some rule that says if you’re a food-stamp recipient and you get at least one dollar in energy bill assistance, this qualifies you for even more federal assistance.

So, Washington legislators mail out completely ridiculous, wasteful, dollar-each checks to “prime the pump” of the federal money machine — proving that the bailouts are not only lunatic themselves, but the cause of lunacy in others.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Categories
initiative, referendum, and recall national politics & policies

Santelli’s Stimulus Referendum & Tea Party

CNBC’s Rick Santelli struck one awfully big nerve last week. Reporting from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Santelli said things you don’t hear much on TV, from politicians or from talking heads.

Santelli said that “the government is promoting bad behavior” with all the bailouts.

He railed against Obama’s new mortgage bailout plan, asking workers at the Exchange, “How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage, that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills?” None answered in the affirmative.

Santelli mocked the recently passed stimulus plan for providing people with “a whopping $8 or $10” and then banking on the notion that citizens won’t save the money, but rush out to spend it.

And he ridiculed “the multiplier that all of these Washington economists are selling us.” Using their logic, Santelli sarcastically concluded, “We never have to worry about the economy again. The government should spend a trillion dollars an hour because we’ll get $1.5 trillion back.”

Most working people understand that “you can’t buy your way into prosperity.”

That’s what I liked best about Rick’s rant. He knows the American people are smarter than the politicians.

I like it that he called for a national, online referendum over the bailouts. The government won’t provide it, but I will. Go to CitizensinCharge.org to cast your ballot.

Santelli also called for a Chicago Tea Party. See you there.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.