Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Half of American GDP to financial sector

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:38 am    Post subject: Half of American GDP to financial sector Reply with quote

Quote:
Fed Pledges Top $7.4 Trillion to Ease Frozen Credit

By Mark Pittman and Bob Ivry
Enlarge Image/Details

Nov. 24 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. government is prepared to lend more than $7.4 trillion on behalf of American taxpayers, or half the value of everything produced in the nation last year, to rescue the financial system since the credit markets seized up 15 months ago.


The unprecedented pledge of funds includes $2.8 trillion already tapped by financial institutions in the biggest response to an economic emergency since the New Deal of the 1930s, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The commitment dwarfs the only plan approved by lawmakers, the Treasury Department�s $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program. Federal Reserve lending last week was 1,900 times the weekly average for the three years before the crisis.

When Congress approved the TARP on Oct. 3, Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson acknowledged the need for transparency and oversight. Now, as regulators commit far more money while refusing to disclose loan recipients or reveal the collateral they are taking in return, some Congress members are calling for the Fed to be reined in.

�Whether it�s lending or spending, it�s tax dollars that are going out the window and we end up holding collateral we don�t know anything about,� said Congressman Scott Garrett, a New Jersey Republican who serves on the House Financial Services Committee. �The time has come that we consider what sort of limitations we should be placing on the Fed so that authority returns to elected officials as opposed to appointed ones.�

http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=arEE1iClqDrk&refer=home

And we're just getting started. Credit cards, auto loans and others - all of which have been securitized - are set to explode in the new year. This is lunacy.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Join Me



Joined: 14 Jan 2008

PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Maybe it is time for those of us who are Americans to change our lifestyles. What other country in the world would let you buy a home with a few thousand down and anything else you want with 100% financing and no cash up front. We got ourselves into this mess...now it is time to pay up.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 7:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

An adjustment will happen. It is not possible to prevent. But the government is trying to keep the party going and sustain the late 90's model when it has clearly failed.

Citi has 300k employees. That is too many, obviously. Going forward the financial sector will be much smaller (80% smaller +/-). Most people in the FIRE economy will need to retrain and find productive employment. The government ought to focus on that and not keeping insolvent firms from failing. Every cent thrown at these banks (and Bank of America is, if not next, then certainly in line) is wasted.

* $2.4 trillion in commercial paper purchases by the Fed.
* $2 trillion in other loans and pledges from the Fed.
* $1.4 trillion in rescue committments, including higher deposits insurance. Bloomberg explains: "The FDIC, chaired by Sheila Bair, is contributing 20 percent of total rescue commitments. The FDIC's $1.4 trillion in guarantees will amount to a bank subsidy of as much as $54 billion over three years, or $18 billion a year, because borrowers will pay a lower interest rate than they would on the open market, according to Raghu Sundurum and Viral Acharya of New York University and the London Business School."
* $892 billion for the Treasury's TARP and other Hank Paulson rescues.
* $300 billion from FHA to guarantee mortgages through the Hope for Homeowners program, designed to keep distressed borrowers from foreclosure.
* $444 billion bailout bucks for Sheila Bair's mortgage program. Bloomberg: "Not included in the calculation of pledged funds is an FDIC proposal to prevent foreclosures by guaranteeing modifications on $444 billion in mortgages at an expected cost of $24.4 billion to be paid from the TARP, according to FDIC spokesman David Barr. The Treasury Department hasn't approved the program."

http://clusterstock.alleyinsider.com/2008/11/our-7-4-trillion-bailout
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
caniff



Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map

PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is really spiraling out of (even apparently the Fed's) control.

I have for some time been aware, in a general sense, that the US was in line for an eventual major economic shakeup (taxpayer shakedown?) Still, I never would have expected things to unravel as quickly as this.

We are also faced with a situation where Bush and Co. has zero clout (and offers nothing but stop-gap measures such as throwing more money at the problems) and Obama's people are not yet vested with the power to step in to take the reins (remains to be seen how effective they will be once there).

As McCain might say, 'My friends, these are difficult times.'
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Mon Nov 24, 2008 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
All US Financials Will be Nationalized in a Year: Manager

It's not preferable, but all major U.S. financial companies will eventually be under government control because the alternative is so much worse, Hugh Hendry, chief investment officer at hedge fund Eclectica Asset Management, said Friday.

"All financials will be owned by the U.S. government in a year," Hendry said. "I bet you."

Nationalizations take dramatic losses from the private sector and places them on the larger balance sheet of the public sector, he said.

"It's not good," but society is vulnerable and society is going to have to intervene, Hendry said.

Shareholders Should Get Nothing

Because the taxpayers are forced to foot the bill for bailout out the banks, shareholders shouldn't be compensated, Hendry added.

"Actually the shareholders of Citigroup have looked the other way for more than a decade" while management took excessive risk, he said.

Shareholders should take nothing away if it is nationalized, because the taxpayer will be "paying this for a long, long time," he added.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/27835645

That would be a pretty large change in American political economy. Even a few months ago such a claim would have been easily tossed aside as nonsense. But now..
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

OK, mises. It's time to be honest. Just how much of this grim economic news do you believe? I mean 'really believe'? Yes, I know you read right-wing economists. And yes, I remember that you said '80 %' of economics is ideology.

I know you have said you think it's best to let the banks etc go bankrupt as that is the quick way to rip the band aid off. But something tells me (mostly Paul Krugman) that you are just 'hoping for the worst' so as to justify your ideological view.

Something tells me that 75 years from now your grand kids and my great-grand kids will be arguing that Obama should have/shouldn't have done whatever...much like Kuros says that FDR screwed up the New Deal while ignoring what could have happened if he hadn't done the New Deal.

I think what I'm saying is this: The views that were obsolete in 1932 are even more obsolete 75 years on in 2008 but they sound good to the people who live in an ideological paradise of a world that never existed outside of a text book.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 6:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
OK, mises. It's time to be honest. Just how much of this grim economic news do you believe? I mean 'really believe'? Yes, I know you read right-wing economists. And yes, I remember that you said '80 %' of economics is ideology.

Frankly, I don't know. I have lost almost all faith in economics of late, it is true. But I certainly don't read 'right wing' economists exclusively or even mostly anymore. Though it is true I mostly agree with the Austrian School in their analysis of banking/finance etc. But in regards to the post above your post, I think it is possible that the government will feel itself forced to nationalize most of the financial system.

Quote:
Something tells me that 75 years from now your grand kids and my great-grand kids will be arguing that Obama should have/shouldn't have done whatever...much like Kuros says that FDR screwed up the New Deal while ignoring what could have happened if he hadn't done the New Deal.


Yeah, that is about the only thing we can say for sure.

Quote:
I think what I'm saying is this: The views that were obsolete in 1932 are even more obsolete 75 years on in 2008 but they sound good to the people who live in an ideological paradise of a world that never existed outside of a text book.


Probably right as well.


This crises is getting worse by the day. The banking system and her offspring (finance, insurance and real estate) is too large (20% GDP) and will cause crises after crises as it shrinks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 7:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Frankly, I don't know. I have lost almost all faith in economics of late, it is true.


You were not supposed to say that.

You were supposed to say something.....about how if I ended up living in a cardboard box under a bridge in the winter in Iowa at -20 degrees F it would be for the betterment of humanity. (Many many years ago I told my high school students that 'your' generation of Americans would have wheelchair races to the extermination centers with me and their grandparents so they could save 50 cents. It's looking more and more like I was a prophet.) [I'm 59.]

I have absolutely no basis for saying this (and I'm probably just expressing a wishful hope) but I don't think things are quite as bad as you have been posting. Something tells me that things will work out better than you are predicting...probably about 1 month and 2 days after I freeze to death under my bridge.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 10:38 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:

I have absolutely no basis for saying this (and I'm probably just expressing a wishful hope) but I don't think things are quite as bad as you have been posting. Something tells me that things will work out better than you are predicting


I'm not predicting anything more than a very severe recession. I think the 'prediction' part is dead and we are now in a severe recession.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kuros



Joined: 27 Apr 2004

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:06 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-Ta Boy wrote:
I think what I'm saying is this: The views that were obsolete in 1932 are even more obsolete 75 years on in 2008 but they sound good to the people who live in an ideological paradise of a world that never existed outside of a text book.


First, let me fulfill my role and start this post out with a little FDR-bashing. But here I'll have Megan McCardle emphasize how misguided and disingenuous the Leftist Authoritarians are.

Quote:
"Roosevelt saved capitalism from a violent communist revolution with the New Deal, and that therefore free market types should bow down in gratitude to Dear Leader." This argument is, as far as I can tell, advanced entirely by people who also believe that its programs are a moral imperative.

There are two problems. The first is that a program that must give people money so that they will not kill/imprison/etc the donors may be practical, but it is also immoral. This means, it seems to me, that you can either claim that the New Deal is a sort of broad spectrum Dangeld, or that it is a moral necessity, but not both.

The second is that this is not necessarily a good argument for New Deal programs. If the concerns are merely practical, then perhaps the New Deal was the more cost effective way to buy peace; but perhaps not. This could just as well be an argument for rich people buying bigger and better guns than poor people. Even rich people are, presumably, entitled to shoot back.

I think most of the people who make this argument are, in fact, being sophistic; they aren't particularly interested in saving American capitalism, but they think that the people to whom they speak might be persuaded by this remarkably stupid and amoral argument. I have, obviously, a mixed opinion of the New Deal. But I find this particular "logic" an unbelievably offensive slur against my country.


And lest Ya-Ta think I am heartless and without compassion, let me underline it was not FDR's Leftism that is such an affront. No, people, even Presidents, make mistakes. His egregious authoritarianism is what was unforgivable.

Nevertheless, back to the topic at hand.

This is not the Great Depression. Only 19% of the banks have failed, in the Great Depression, ALL of them failed. Barack Obama is not FDR (or even Herbert Hoover for that matter, the man who STARTED the New Deal). Comparisons between the present economic climate and that of the 1930s should be made with caution and support.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Tue Nov 25, 2008 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree. But the problem is we are a backwards looking bunch. Whenever something bad happens to us now, we immediately look in the past for a similar event and then try to apply the lessons from that to the current predicament.

There are any number of reasons as to why this crises is different from the depression. I don't see much that we can learn from that experience that will help us move past this.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mises



Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 5:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
OK, mises. It's time to be honest. Just how much of this grim economic news do you believe? I mean 'really believe'? Yes, I know you read right-wing economists. And yes, I remember that you said '80 %' of economics is ideology.


You might not want to watch this:

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2008/11/the-real-maverick-present-economy-worse-than-depression/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sojourner1



Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Location: Where meggi swim and 2 wheeled tractors go sput put chug alugg pug pug

PostPosted: Fri Nov 28, 2008 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope the government creates millions of new jobs by training people to go out on site to manage these banks and corporations with the goal of returning them to profitability and then keeping it that way through accountability. While this spells America becoming a socialist state, it will be better for the majority of Americans, but bad for that 1% upper crust population, because the majority will be gainfully employed in their respective fields and have what they need in order to live their lives without the anxieties our current failed capitalist system forces upon most of us.

A socialist system that is effectively managed and productively producing profit is more sustainable and offers a way for most to survive while the country can pay down debt, personally and as a nation. Just because a company or bank is held by the government doesn't mean it can't operate at a profit. We don't need a privatized laizze faire capitalist system. We need to restructure and realign the government to manage the economy, financial sector, large corporations, investing, and all employment to ensure it's done fairly and in a way that is sustainable.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RJjr



Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Turning on a Lamp

PostPosted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Savor today's economy and every luxury because it will get a lot worse.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International