Skip Navigation
 

Bailout: One Down, One To Go

<%=_author %>

By

Morgan Housel

From the Fool blog

Local Police Station Is Useless!

Published in Investing on 3 October 2008

An amended version of the bailout plan has been passed by the US Senate. The plan now goes back to the House of Representatives today.

This article was first published on our US sister site, Fool.com   You can read about the bill's second vote in the House of Representatives in 'Bailout: It's On.'

For better or worse, we're one step closer to making the mother of all mother of all bailouts a reality. The Senate passed a bill last night that could extend up to $700 billion to unclog our financial system, approving the measure by an almost 3-to-1 ratio. The House of Representatives -- which voted down its version of the bill on Monday -- is likely to vote on an updated proposal Friday.

Good news, right? Of course, that depends on whom you ask. Some banks, such as JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), are sitting near 52-week highs, while others, such as National City (NYSE: NCC), are holding on for dear life and realizing that anything less than a bailout could force them down the path of Washington Mutual (NYSE: WM) or Wachovia (NYSE: WB). But despite the constant bickering and split opinions, this bailout is about Main Street, not Wall Street.

Over the past few days, we ran two polls asking Fool readers how they felt about the proposed bill. With more than 18,000 votes cast, the results are pretty darn split. The poll conducted closer to the Dow Jones' 777-point decline sided more toward a bailout, while the poll conducted closer the Dow's nearly 500-point gain sided closer against a bailout. Go figure. At any rate, this week has been completely dominated by split opinions over whether the proposed plan makes any sense, and whether we need a bailout at all.

If you're ideologically opposed to any intervention in the first place, that's one thing. But what seems to have been wholly overlooked are the huge changes made over the last week. Hank Paulson's original three-page plan that gave the former Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) CEO unfettered reign over the situation morphed into a more appropriate 400-plus page proposal that should have put many of the topics headlining the debate circle to rest. The updated bill, among other things, proposes:

  • Caps on executive compensation.
  • Amendments to retrieve any cost to taxpayers from the financial industry after five years.
  • A demand of equity compensation form any company taking part in the plan.
  • A move to push FDIC insurance limits from $100,000 to $250,000 per account.
  • A slew of tax breaks on everything from alternative energy to tuition deduction and teacher expenses.
  • An oversight board.

Why did the changes fail to sway so many people who are opposed to the exact areas the bill tried to dispel? My take is that Washington has done an absolutely terrible job informing people whom this bailout is actually designed to help. The words "Wall Street" and "bailout" have been jumbled together so closely in the same sentence that it's all too easy to overlook that the main premise of the bailout is to unclog the credit markets, not to line the pockets of the infamous Wall Street "fat cats."

No matter how you feel about the bailout, the fact is that credit is completely frozen in place, and it'll have an effect on you and everyone you know until it gets fixed. Auto giants such as Toyota (NYSE: TM) and GM (NYSE: GM) are seeing sales get absolutely decimated amid a freeze-up in auto loans. From small businesses that can't make payroll because lines of credit are being pulled to students who can't get education loans to ... oh, you get the idea ... no use belaboring the Wall Street-vs.-Main Street comparison any more than it has been, but no matter what way it gets turned or who you think is to blame, the problem has become everyone's business now.

Regardless, this debate is sure to remain heated for quite some time. Care to speak up? We'd love to hear from you. Feel free to comment on the bottom of this article.

More: Buffett's No-Brainer Buy

> Index trackers are a cheap and simple way to invest in the stock market for the long-term. 

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

AvensisTom 03 Oct 2008, 9:35am

Well some view this is a blatant and criminal money laundering scam:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20915.htm

"It (The bill) provides hundreds of billions of dollars of bailouts to foreign investors. It provides no real control of Paulson's power. There is a critique board but not really a board that can step in and change what he does. It's a $700 billion program run by a part-time temporary employee and there is no limit on million dollar a month salaries....... It's very clear. The Bank of Shanghai can transfer all of its toxic assets to the Bank of Shanghai of Los Angeles which can then sell them the next day to the Treasury. I had a provision to say if it wasn't owned by an American entity even a subsidiary, but at least an entity in the US, the Treasury can't buy it. It was rejected.

The bill is very clear. Assets now held in China and London can be sold to US entities on Monday and then sold to the Treasury on Tuesday. Paulson has made it clear he will recommend a veto of any bill that contained a clear provision that said if Americans did not own the asset on September 20th that it can't be sold to the Treasury. Hundreds of billions of dollars are going to bail out foreign investors. They know it, they demanded it and the bill has been carefully written to make sure it can happen."

LeVenturian 03 Oct 2008, 12:05pm

Given that “World News” in the USA means news about what is happening on the other coast of the USA and the fact that many US citizens have never been outside the State they were born in, I can understand your average American voter neither caring nor understanding the consequences for world’s economic systems of a no vote on the package, though if the vote is not passed they will very soon learn the hard way when their employers bank overdraft is frozen.

The simple fact is that the current economic crisis facing the world was cooked up in the USA. The rest of the world’s banking system only got sucked in because the USA banks, fraudulently one might argue, repackaged low quality loans and sold them on as top grade investments thereby breaking the trust on which the system depends.

Yes, in the UK we may have some bad debts, but the borrowers are not all going default and our debt problems, even Northern Rock’s, would have worked through the system had the interbank lending markets not frozen in response to the realisation that one could no longer rely on the quality of, or content, of a “top grade investment bond” from a US bank.

So here we are, facing a potential meltdown in the world’s banking system simply because the USA lied to the rest of the world’s bankers and yet what do the political elite of the USA do? They worry more about the fact that there is an election coming up and phone the voters to ask their opinion rather than face up to the USA’s responsibility to fix a problem which can only be fixed at the source of the bad debt, namely in the USA

I’m afraid it doesn’t say much for the intelligence of US political elite.

What was that about Nero fiddling while Rome burned. In the USA it would appear that politician go electioneering while the world economy burns.

Finally, this issue about having to open the offer to overseas institutions is also clear. Low grade debt was presented as high grade investment bonds, in order to reduce the interest payable on the bond. There can be no argument that these organistions knew what they were purchasing as, had they known it contained low grade debt, then they would have either not taken it or demanded a higher rate of interest. They most definitely would not have knowingly taken on low grade debt at the low interest rates associated with high grade debt.

It was therefore deliberate, some would say a fraudulent.

Now that the matter is out in the open any action the US Government any attempt to address this problem without addressing the fact that this debt has been fraudulently sold abroad, will simply mean that overseas organisations will think long and hard before they make any future investment in the US or its institutions which would be a disaster for the US economy.

colin106 04 Oct 2008, 9:41am

Good stuff LeVenturian

bojotools 04 Oct 2008, 11:51am

Darned right that the USA should bear the brunt of sorting out this worldwide mess. Even allowing for reckless 'self-certified' loans and overvalued properties with hidden discounts the vast majority of the mortgages in the UK are backed by property which cannot possibly have fallen in value to the point where assets are all deemed to be worthless. This worldwide fire sale is great for investors who can get into markets now but the average working family have put their faith in the corporate institutions and seen their pensions and shares evaporate in value. When the dust settles some of these corporate heads should be golden parachuting all the way into long prison sentences.

vredfern 05 Oct 2008, 2:01pm

The only people who will benefit from the bailout is the people who caused the mess in the first place - government regulators, who will now have more power than ever to wreck what they don't understand. Some banks did make reckless decisions, and those banks should be allowed to fail, no matter how big they are. But their behaviour was encouraged by the US government, which has spent decades encouraging (and sometime coercing) high risk loans while inhibiting the ability of the market to correct itself or reward long term thinking. The latest restrictions on CEO pay and short selling are both ignorant and unjust, and the bailout as a whole is a disaster - as the markets will reflect soon enough.

LeVenturian 05 Oct 2008, 8:19pm

Vredfern,

I don't disagree with the sentiments of your posting but I think you need to take on board a large dose of reality in terms of what it will be like if the world is unable to restore confidence in the banking sector.

All growing businesses achive their growth by spending money today in the anticipation of a return later. Very few are able to fund this growth out of their own cashflow and therefore borrow, against a sensible and realistic business plan, to fund this investment. Indeed there are probably very few growing and economically propersous business which don't have some form of borrowings.

So, if you work in growing business and we let all these banks go to the wall, then in all probability your employer will not have the cash to pay your salary, so the people who caused the mess will not be the only one's to suffer. You and many other people working for fundamentally sound businesses will be joining them.

Don't misunderstand me, I don't mean for them to get away with what I the criminally fraudulent behaviour of repacking low grade loans, but that can come later.

Right now fixing the world's cash problems is our No1 priority as unless we do thi so some very healthy non-financial companies are going to go to the wall.

Join the conversation

Instructions

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: <b>bold</b>, <i>quoted text</i>. All other tags will be removed from your post.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.