Can Obama Make Sense of All This Debt? 9 comments
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
Early Tuesday morning, the federal government announced a new, massive $800B program to buy up bad debt and pump money into the sagging credit markets. According to a NYTimes article entitled: “U.S. Unveils New Programs to Ease Credit,” the program would be structured as follows:
The Federal Reserve said that it would buy up to $600 billion in mortgage-backed assets from the government-sponsored mortgage finance giants Fannie Mae (FNM) and Freddie Mac (FRE). The agency would also buy up to $100 billion in debt directly from the companies and up to $500 billion in mortgage-backed securities.
In addition, the Fed and the Treasury unveiled a different $200B package to help commercial lending (car loans, student loans, etc).
The NYTimes article describes the move as:
The action by the Federal Reserve on buying mortgage-backed securities brings the full force of monetary policy to bear on the credit markets. Having already reduced the benchmark federal funds rate to just 1 percent, the central bank is now effectively using what economists call “quantitative easing” to reduce the costs of money.
Instead of trying to reduce overnight lending rates in the hope of influencing longer-term interest rates for things like mortgages, the Fed is directly subsidizing lower mortgage rates. It is doing so by printing unprecedented amounts of money, which would eventually create inflationary pressures if it were to continue unabated.
It begs the question though: how much spending is going to occur as a result of the crisis? With additional programs, government spending is piling up quickly: $700B banking bailout plan, $50-$150B on the Citi (C) bailout, the new $800B credit program, $200B commercial lending program, the looming question of government-backed aid package to the American auto industry, and talks of additional stimulus packages being put into place.
The NYTimes article stated that:
Democratic leaders in Congress are gearing up to move quickly on an economic recovery package that aides said could cost more than $500 billion. The goal is to have a legislative package approved by the House and the Senate and ready for Mr. Obama to sign, perhaps on his first day in office, in January.
Clearly, with such unprecedented spending, it begs the question what is the net result when it is all said and done, and is the federal government overcompensating?
Obama has already issued some ‘belt-tightening’ language such as:
The economy’s likely to get worse before it gets better, full recovery will not happen immediately. And to make the investments we need, we’ll have to scour our federal budget, line by line, and make meaningful cuts and sacrifices.
However, even with his proposed reduced military spending, they are still going to be grossly over budget with the proposed programs being implemented. U.S. Markets remained turbulent Wednesday and are currently relatively even. Emerginvest will be extremely interested to see how the proposed plans are both structured and carried out in the upcoming months as the Obama administration transitions into the White House.
Related Articles
|
























This article has 9 comments:
If the banking system is due to collapse, a soft landing approach may be the right move and money well(?) spent. I hope this is followed by massive deleveraging, then we might be okay for a while and recover nicely.
If the banking system fails utterly, anyway, well...then we've already over spent trying to prevent the inevitable "correction." But, maybe we can keep a few more folks in their homes.
Dont forget to flush the present and the next administration into the toilet. Problem is there is not a politician anymore in charge with a hint of a backbone to sell what is right to the fellow Americans. There is nothing in the resume of the the new boss elect that lets me expect that he has any better idea to deal with the crisis than the old boss.
Emerginvest may be interested in examining whether Asian and Middle Eastern SWFs will be making more investments closer to home as long as the dollar is strong and U.S. interest rates are low.
But, I think I understand what the Fed is doing. They will not let the financial system fail regardless of cost. This will help us stave off a depression.
Where do you think the Fed got $2tn shadow money? From the very people who do not want to see the banking system collapse. The real power brokers.
Anthony, yep. The federal debt has taken a back seat for now. But, unless I miss my guess, we'll come out okay after about 2 years of deep recession.
New monetary regulations will limit the money supply, and this spells good news for dollar assets long term. Well, in my dream world it does.
In a normal world your point is very well taken. But we are not in a normal world. Paulson's actions are not at all about asset rescue or freeing credit markets. That is all smoke and mirrors. It is about propositioning liquidity in the system to try to cover a Credit Default Swaps financial nuclear weapons cascading detonation that will take down the financial system of the entire world. Otherwise, why not print more money and buy every foreclosed home in the U.S.? It would be a lot cheaper.
The dire truth of this situation is not being clearly discussed in the MSM.
www.youtube.com/watch?...
www.youtube.com/watch?...
tinyurl.com/5sob6h
tinyurl.com/6ycfaf
Then, again already planned and coordinated with the world's central banks, shrink the money supply like there is no tomorrow to get inflation back under control, along with (possibly) some quantitative tightening?
Now, will this work to avoid a "technical" depression? I guess in theory it might, and it just might in the real world, too. But, that's the risk creditors have to understand and take. I suspect they do and will.
If Bernanke can sell this and pull it off, he will probably be more popular than Greenspan. And, the real bankers, the "shadow bankers," are behind him 110% to save the current banking system. Maybe Obama is too. So, he might just pull off the miracle of our lifetime.
Dirac, thanks for the URLs. Lemme check them out before I respond.
www.youtube.com/watch?...
BTW, do you take your moniker from the great mathematician Paul Dirac?