Online Journal
Front Page 
 
 Donate
 
 Submissions
 
 Announcements
 
 NewsLinks
 
 Special Reports
 
 News Media
 
 Elections & Voting
 
 Health
 
 Religion
 
 Social Security
 
 Analysis
 
 Commentary
 
 Editors' Blog
 
 Reclaiming America
 
 The Splendid Failure of Occupation
 
 The Lighter Side
 
 Reviews
 
 The Mailbag
 
 Online Journal Stores
 Official Merchandise
 Amazon.com
 
 Links
 
 Join Mailing List
Search

Commentary Last Updated: Nov 26th, 2008 - 01:47:23


Can they do that?
By Tim Buchholz
Online Journal Contributing Writer


Nov 26, 2008, 00:20

Email this article
 Printer friendly page

Well, it started with $700 billion. Actually, it started before that with the Fed helping Chase take over Bear Stearns, and then saving AIG, and then . . . well, you were there.

But let’s get back to $700 billion. Under what some say were threats of martial law, our government approved $700 billion taxpayer dollars (or future taxpayer dollars) to buy up bad mortgage assets off these struggling banks’ books, and we were going to get the money back when the housing slump ended and the mortgages were resold. Then, Treasury Secretary Paulson decided that the money would be better served given as direct infusions to the banks, buying up stock (which could be bought back later) and thus giving the banks the capital needed to start lending again.

Didn’t Congress approve that money for buying bad assets? I’m not saying I like that idea any better, but isn’t that what our representatives voted for? Of course, the banks aren’t really using the money the way they were supposed to, and some are even using it to buy other banks, but we can’t put too many restrictions on the money, or the bailout won’t work, says Paulson.

So far, Paulson has spent half of it, as well as $2 trillion in loans that he will not say who they went to, because too many restrictions will make the bailout fail. The next $350 billion has to be asked for and approved, and some say Paulson wants to save it for the next administration to take a swat at the problem.

Then I read yesterday from AP economics writer Martin Crutsinger that Paulson is going to be using an additional $600 billion to, again, buy mortgage assets, good ones this time according to NPR, not the subprime ones. I thought they had changed their minds on that one, and if they spent $350 billion of what had been approved for this action, and can’t use the other $350 billion without approval, where did they find another $600 billion without a vote on Capitol Hill and campaigns being called off?

Crutsinger says, “The Fed said it will purchase up to $100 billion in direct obligations from mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as the Federal Home Loan Banks. It also will purchase another $500 billion in mortgage-backed securities, pools of mortgages that are bundled together and sold to investors.”

He goes on to say that the Fed is also releasing a program for the next phase of this crisis, the credit card, student loans and auto loans. Only $200 billion will be needed for this crisis, for now. As Bush said about the re-bailout of AIG, it may not be the last.

So, that’s $800 billion the Fed and Treasury is going to hand out without Congress’ approval, when it took two weeks and more pork than my wife’s lasagna to get $700 billion? (Tax breaks for wooden arrows and NASCAR, to name a few.) What’s happening here? Where is this money supposed to come from?

Richard C. Gross in The Washington Times says, “The $200 billion plus $600 billion to boost mortgage lending will come from money created by the Federal Reserve.”

So, they can just create $800 billion out of thin air? We’re saved then, right? But wait, doesn’t somebody eventually have to pay this money back?

I’m holding on for dear life here, trying my best to believe in my elected officials, but they are not making it easy. So today, the Federal Reserve created an additional $800 billion and added it to our National Debt, which, according to the US National Debt Clock, is, get ready, $10,658,127,246,511.06. Remember when Bush first came into office and it was around $3 trillion? Just eight years ago?

And for those of you thinking it’s going to get better under Obama, just take a look at his appointments so far, including the head of the Fed in New York City, Timothy Geithner, as his secretary of the treasury. This is one of the guys who just “created” $800 billion, remember?

Obama has already said it’s going to get worse before it gets better. I’m just beginning to wonder if it ever will really become better for us, “Main Street,” as they like to call us. Just ask yourself who profits when we increase our debt (we are paying interest on it, folks), and you’ll start to feel as sick to your stomach as I do.

There is a great breakdown of the events in this crisis,

Gov’t announces another $800 billion in bailout plans; total commitments approach $7 trillion.

Tim Buchholz is a freelance writer living in Ohio.

Copyright © 1998-2007 Online Journal
Email Online Journal Editor

Top of Page

Commentary
Latest Headlines
Some U.S. holiday terror?
The Great Depression meets the Great Recession
American jihad in Pakistan
Who’s afraid of Hiroshima? Obama’s nuclear hypocrisy
Let’s get fiscal: More stimulus, more government jobs programs, more debt relief
Globalization unchecked: How alien media are suffocating real culture
America’s leadership deficit
The US needs to be censured for its immoral behavior
The Hague’s the place for trials
For Obama it’s one (term) if by war, two if by peace
In a chilly London November, war and remembrance
Dying to prosecute Hasan
What is Israel’s role in the destabilization of Pakistan?
Aung San Suu Kyi, Omar Khadr and Barack Obama: A dreadful tale of what America has become
Fifteen very bad things Republicans would do if they got their selfish way
China’s yuan, not the dollar, is too cheap
The US government and the assassination of Tupac Shakur
The reactor relapse takes 3 hits to the head
Major Nidal Malik Hasan, jihadist or patsy?
The humble tuna