Just Survive …
Posted: October 12, 2008 Filed under: U.S. Economy | Tags: bail out plans, Financial Crisis, presidential election, U.S. Economy 2 CommentsI’ve really wanted to talk about the financial crisis more. It’s been hard to write about because things on the ground are changing so quickly. The deal right now is just to survive the entire thing. Times are odd and the odd are getting odder.
The oddest of the the odds is that there are more than just one economic positions being borrowed from Hillary’s plan by BOTH the surviving presidential contenders. Both of these guys are completely clueless on the economy and it’s really showing. They are like little boys in a class room cheating off that one little girl with glasses that has all the answers.
This week, Senator McCain became the liberal by suggesting a plan similar to Hillary’s suggestion of some kind of HOLC like the one that bought up bad mortgages during the depression. Everything he’s been suggesting is so populist that I keep pinching myself to see if I’m actually awake. The Sunday morning talk shows were filled up with democratic talking heads trying to explain that buying folks’ homes at their underwater positions and renegotiating them is going to help banks more than the home owner. This program is basically a re-tooled Roosevelt New Deal idea that is geared specifically to folks living in their homes, not the speculators. If you were all for the banks, the agency would bail out ALL mortgages, not just firsts for home owners. As a progressive, I have to say, for Democrats to be taking a stand against this position JUST because McCain introduced into the debate and Obama just says no, is a little, well, odd, to me.
Another odder than odd policy suggestion is Obama’s idea to let judges work out families’ mortgage problems in bankruptcy court. This is probably a good long term solution, but wouldn’t it be nice to stop these families from showing up in the bankruptcy court? I’m actually wondering if prevention of a problem is something a lawyer can even wrap their brains around. I mean, they make money from exacerbating problems once they’ve gotten huge in a court case, not from problem prevention so is this why he’s stumping for this at a time when short term solutions are required? Even my first year economic students couldn’t figure out why you’d want to let the bankruptcy court work the foreclosures out. Why not try to prevent the foreclosures?
The next thing is the Pelosi hint at yet another stimulus package. Just about any one ought to realize now that the first one really didn’t do much but hold the recession off a few months and make folks think of other things. While it’s a nice thing to get $600 in the mail, the government can’t control what that money gets spent on. It’s one thing if you take the money and buy something American, but most folks either use it to pay down debt which is not the least bit stimulatory or they go buy something that stimulates the Chinese economy. Unless you create a no buying at Walmart rule, this is nothing but another make them feel better while we figure out what to do plan.
Economists have shown empirically with both the Ford and Bush rebates, that rebates are not the way to stimulate the economy because they don’t have the desired results. They usually just exacerbate the debt and make folks feel a little better. They are not game changers. You need underlying changes to the tax codes to do that or you need the government doing spending on something that might have a chance at creating jobs–like building roads. This is another Obama suggestion. The problem with infrastructure spending at this point is that it takes a long time to get through the system. It is needed, but how long will it take to get the program going? Infrastructure improvements are an important part of both short run economic stimulus and long run economic growth, but it’s a little late to start suggesting these things now that we’re in a full blown financial crisis and down turn in the real economy. They’d have to be coming OUT of the hopper right now to do any real good; not going into the hopper some time ‘soon’. Again, this is a preventative type of action once you see things are slowing down. It wouldn’t be soon enough at this point. This again leads me to believe that Obama doesn’t seem to grok the concept of preventative and when it’s useful. I was suggesting this a YEAR ago as a way of preventing a recession and slowing job loss when it does happen. It’s a little futile now. Hillary was suggesting this a year ago too. That and her green jobs initiative were great suggestions for the situation at that time.
Which brings me to another odder than odd. Senator Obama is now wanting some kind of tax credit to home owners for higher energy costs. What I’m waiting to hear is how this is different from just giving every one a tax holiday from gas taxes except you have to wait until the beginning of the year to file for it. Again, every time you talk about a one time deal, even if it is a tax thing, every one knows it’s a one time deal and it doesn’t really change their behavior. Any stimulus that comes from it tends to be very short-lived. Plus, by the time any tax credits would take effect it will be the spring. Not one economist will probably stick their head out to say what kind of things will be needed by then. It doesn’t make sense to try to do that now.
Right now, Henry Paulson is the most important man in Washington. It’s not the President and it’s not these two candidates. The second most important man is Ben Bernanke. Again, odder than odd because neither of these men are elected and both of these men may have very short tenures at the helm. However, I’m just hoping Dubya takes some time off at the ranch. I know I can’t wish that one for every one up for election right now, but I really would like it. It is in the hands of Paulson and Bernanke until January. I’m okay with that because Paulson, btw, is not what the Republicans or the Democrats spin would make him to be.
Paulson has always been odd for both a Wall Street and Washington insider. Paulson is a man that grew up on a farm in Illinois and got into Dartmouth the old fashioned way–good grades. He wasn’t a legacy of any one unlike our current crop of candidates AND the president. His nickname is “the Hammer” because he’s seen as relentless. He is also a devout Christian Scientist who does not drink or smoke and goes back to Illinois on the weekends. He did this even when he was on Wall Street. He lacks ideology and has been criticized by the right of being selling out free-market principles and on the left for bailing out his Wall Street buddies. I always consider being criticized by both sides a good thing in a public servant, but then that’s me.
Now we seen a joint effort from G-7 countries to contain the contagion. Almost all of these plans have to do some with some kind of nationalization of banks. This includes McCain’s suggestion to get the taxpayer ownership which oddly enough was snuck into the bailout package, unknown to many. I’m wondering where THAT came from. Perhaps we’ll find some one taking the credit for that soon, but it seems it might actually be some one like Republican Senator Arlen Specter. Again, odd, odd and odder.
Meanwhile, my strategy and tactics are just to survive with my job and my loans paid down. I’m also trying to put a little money aside in the bank. I’m trying not to look at my 401k plan because it’s telling me that I will die at the podium at this point. I haven’t changed anything about it except all my new contributions are going into bonds. That’s my suggestion to every one right now, don’t panic, we’ve been here before, we just don’t know how long it’s going to last. I actually do have faith in Paulson and Bernanke but not so much in ANYONE running for election right now. Right now, McCain is sounding like the Roosevelt liberal right now and Obama is sounding very moderate so turning to politics for economics signals right now just has me checking my hands to determine which is left and which is right. I still know which way up and down are and that we’re in for more downs than ups for awhile. Other than that, I have NO idea what to say other than it’s an odd time right now and the odd are just getting odder.
Bottom line: Just try to survive.





It wouldn’t be a bad thing for the U.S. economy to stop revolving on credit, at least as much as it does. However, that is something that you want to change over time, and not in a two week jump. Families live on credit, personal debt is at an all-time ludicrous high, and businesses expand, but can’t pay their payroll without a line of credit.
The Federal gov. does it, so it can’t be bad, right?
Unfortunately, worse case scenario USED to be something we relied on when setting up a business.
I have had six, since I left college in ’68, and I could tell you exactly how much had to come in each day for me to make it each month. Still can. Only in the worst of times did I not have a couple of months in the bank to fall back on. Always felt that bankruptcy was failure. It was the thing you never even contemplated, like an insurance fire, or robbing banks.
Must be I was raised wrong, but those WERE basic American values. I am not an economist, I got my degrees in Philosophy and Sociology, minor in English. I didn’t go for an MBA. I just ran businesses, and hired people. At times I sent them back to college, or helped them get out of financial trouble. I was responsible for them, they were my workers.
Now I work for myself, no employees, but my sister and brother-in-law have fifty or so. They treat them well, some have come in on special visas because they can’t get enough soft-ware engineers. That’s okay. I just read that we are bringing in 4000 Philipine citizens to get training to be teachers, because we don’t have enough teachers.
People are unemployed, everyone lives on credit, bankruptcy is something developers do every seven years, whether they need it or not, and we have to get workers from other countries and then train them to do our work.
I know I am missing something here, but, for the life of me, I just can’t put my finger on it.
I think what is missing is a sense of personal responsibility among non-first-generation Americans. I think things started going to pot during the Reagan years–the greed is good era. I think there has been a loss of knowledge and common sense transfer from one generation to the next. Most people want their kids “to do better” but have ¿forgotten? the part of earning what you get.