Vaughan Spa

Paulson Bank Rescue Proposal Is `Crazy' O'Neill Says

Mcluhan

New member
Let the ad hominem arguments begin..

Paulson Bank Rescue Proposal Is `Crazy,' O'Neill Says (Update1)


By Brendan Murray

Oct. 1 (Bloomberg) -- Former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill said the $700 billion bank-rescue proposal under negotiation in Washington is ``crazy,'' with potentially ``awful'' consequences for the world's largest economy.

``Doesn't this seem like lunacy to you?'' said O'Neill, who was President George W. Bush's first Treasury chief, from 2001 to 2002, in a telephone interview today. ``The consequences of it are unbelievably bad in terms of public intrusion into the private sector.''

O'Neill's objections mirror those of Republicans in the House of Representatives who rejected the plan in a Sept. 29 vote. The former Treasury chief said he's lobbying for an alternative solution that would offer guarantees for troubled assets, stopping short of purchasing the debt.

``Is anybody thinking there?'' asked O'Neill, who also served as deputy budget director in the Ford administration. ``It's too late, it's not going to make any difference and it's aggravating as hell when there's a better idea and you can't even get it in play,'' he said, recognizing little success so far in pitching his own proposal.

O'Neill, 72, was fired after an almost two-year tenure marked by strains with White House officials and comments that roiled markets.

`Just Like Cash'

His plan to deal with the crisis would start with a ``discounted cash-flow analysis'' of distressed instruments that are clogging the financial system. The government would guarantee the assets, paring back the support as principal and interest payments were made, he said.

``That should take care of the liquidity problem because if they have a government guarantee at a specified level they should trade just like cash,'' O'Neill said.

He likened his solution to the Treasury's decision Sept. 19 to guarantee domestic money-market funds for a year to try to stop a run on what traditionally have been among the safest of investments.

To replenish capital in banks, the government should make 20-year loans to institutions and charge 2 percentage points above the government's borrowing rate, he said. Regulators could count the loans as part of the banks' capital base, he added. Paying the premium would give banks an incentive to retire the government loans faster, he said.

O'Neill said he has tried to shop his ideas to congressional leaders including Joint Economic Committee Chairman Charles Schumer; Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd; and Senator Richard Shelby, the ranking Republican on the Banking Committee.

Senate Vote

``None of them are returning phone calls,'' O'Neill said. ``I honestly don't think they really understand it and they're so much in a bubble that it's impossible to penetrate it.''

Meanwhile, the Senate is set to vote tonight on a modified version of the $700 billion rescue plan the House rejected two days ago. The House may vote again Oct. 3.

``If they pass this thing, it's awful what the consequences are going to be in terms of an ongoing federal relationship that doesn't need to exist with the institutions,'' O'Neill said. ``Are we going to insist on having a federal representative on boards of directors to protect our investment?''

The main component of the legislation now under consideration is giving the Treasury secretary authority to purchase distressed mortgage-related assets with an amount of money equivalent to about half of Canada's annual gross domestic product.

``We have no capacity in the federal government and it's not possible to create a capacity to manage a $700 billion property portfolio,'' said O'Neill, who was chairman of Alcoa Inc., the largest U.S. aluminum producer, from 1987 to 2000. ``It's crazy. It's like we've lost our moorings.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Brendan Murray at
 

WoodPeckr

Protuberant Member
May 29, 2002
46,949
5,768
113
North America
thewoodpecker.net
Well this wouldn't be the first terrible idea to come out of Team 'w'....;)
 

Mcluhan

New member
Senator Russ Feingold

Letter by Senator Russ Feingold, October 1, 2008


"I will oppose the Wall Street bailout plan because though well intentioned, and certainly much improved over the administration’s original proposal, it remains deeply flawed. It fails to offset the cost of the plan, leaving taxpayers to bear the burden of serious lapses of judgment by private financial institutions, their regulators, and the enablers in Washington who paved the way for this catastrophe by removing the safeguards that had protected consumers and the economy since the great depression. The bailout legislation also fails to reform the flawed regulatory structure that permitted this crisis to arise in the first place. And it doesn’t do enough to address the root cause of the credit market collapse, namely the housing crisis. Taxpayers deserve a plan that puts their concerns ahead of those who got us into this mess."
 

y2kmark

Class of 69...
May 19, 2002
18,981
5,407
113
Lewiston, NY
Bingo!!!

Mcluhan said:
Letter by Senator Russ Feingold, October 1, 2008 ... The bailout legislation also fails to reform the flawed regulatory structure that permitted this crisis to arise in the first place. And it doesn’t do enough to address the root cause of the credit market collapse, namely the housing crisis. Taxpayers deserve a plan that puts their concerns ahead of those who got us into this mess.[/I]"
O'Neil has some good ideas (rare for a Bush appointee, but as an "ex" he is now outside the usual political vetting system and is therefore free to make some sense for a change) but failed to get at what is worst about the administration's "solution" - Russ is much more to the point!:cool:
 

Mcluhan

New member
y2kmark said:
O'Neil has some good ideas (rare for a Bush appointee, but as an "ex" he is now outside the usual political vetting system and is therefore free to make some sense for a change) but failed to get at what is worst about the administration's "solution" - Russ is much more to the point!:cool:
Yeah, i thought the same, O'Neil the insider outcast speaks the truth. Feingold didn't mince the words... cock, aim, fire.

I have read about 70 and saved about 30 such letters like these over the past 2 days, from business writers, economists, professors, ex-bankers, house reps etc. These two hit the mark. This bankster bill to save the American economic system is a heist.. it took me 7 days to understand why, but i finally see it for what it is. The greatest untold story.
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
Secretary O'Neill may well be right that there is a better way of resolving the problem. The difficulty is that time is not on our side. I'm sure O'Neill would agree with Paulson and Bernanke that the consequences of failing to do something would inevitably be: a stock-market crash, sky-high unemployment, the inability of Americans to get loans, banks failing so rapidly that they would quickly drain both the federal deposit insurance fund and people's life savings.
 

Rockslinger

Banned
Apr 24, 2005
32,769
0
0
Aardvark154 said:
Secretary O'Neill may well be right that there is a better way of resolving the problem. The difficulty is that time is not on our side.
Agreed. We don't have time for endless debate on the perfect solution. Any solution involves the U.S. government in some way. This solution does not prelude other solutions such as the U.S. government guaranteeing all bank deposits (like Ireland did).
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
Insidious Von said:
I don't know as much about finance as some of you do but there's something I don't understand. If this bailout is so critical to our economy why is it laden with so much pork?
Some of it probably was pork. Other parts of it such as saving 20 million taxpayers from having to file under the Alternative Minimum Tax I doubt fits.
 

jwmorrice

Gentleman by Profession
Jun 30, 2003
7,133
2
0
In the laboratory.
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts