I mentioned earlier that I felt like I was stuck in an Ayn Rand novel.  A favorite sci fi author reminded me of some more details about why that is. I think some writer’s scoffed that Rand would name a government bureaucrat, who blackmailed and stole from corporate heads, “Wesley Mouch.”

Can you imagine the reaction if she had named one of her villains Neel Kashkari?

Of course, the situation has grown far far worse since I made my dystopian literary comparison.  I guess there is no real conspiracy because, you know, conspirators hide what they are doing.  This is all going on in the daylight with the aid and abetment of the media, both main political parties, and their candidates.

Where do you think this lawlessness will end?  Right now, I’m praying my kids grow up and grow old without being citizens of a country where there is open knowledge of an assassination of someone for not cooperating with the executive branch.  I can hear the NPR discussion now.  “Well, I think it is probable that he ordered it done and it might stand up in court.  But everyone knew that something had to be done with this economy the way it is.  The real question should be why the CEO refused to do what was necessary.”

Reading this report, I can only hope it is accurate.  If the United States was to go into 2009 with a strong economy, that would mean we could be certain to engage in more international warfare on foreign soil.  (Who gets elected would have made no difference.  The McBama presidency will mean more war unless something restrains the person holding that office.

So if God is forcing us to bring our armies home and to get back into production rather than consumption and international nation-“building,” then let us be thankful.  Military virtues are real virtues, but they shouldn’t be put to the service of impossible schemes that promise safety and peace in the far future and only deliver chaos and uncertainty in the real world.  These schemes are typically generated by people who would never serve a minute in the military and have no concept of military virtues.  Being poor is a great way to force people to deal with reality.

I’m too tired to find links or videos or anything, so you’ll have to do all the relevant googling yourself.  A couple of fixed points: First, I don’t approve of illegal activity involving deception in order to vote more than once in an election.  Second, I would prefer that Obama not be our next president.

Outside of those two considerations, however, I can’t really get too worked up over all the voter fraud that is taking place.  Voter fraud only matters if voters matter.  And they don’t.  We just had Congress and the Senate decide to make a big geek our economic dictator with $700 billion and virtually zero accountability (along with $150 billion in pork).  This was done over the objections of an overwhelming majority of voters begging them not to.  Wall Street had already bought all of those lawmakers.  When Congress temporarily acted like responsible people, Wall Street used Wall Street’s media to whip Wall Street’s recalcitrant politicians back into line so that they voted for the law.

So why should I get outraged that lower class radical socialists have found their own way to beat the system?  (of course, they probably are working for Wall Street too and just don’t know it; but whatever)  The rich people buy votes and the poor fabricate them.  I don’t see much point in being outraged.

CEO Michael Hyatt’s blog post about “the wealth Wall Street can’t touch” is a great reminder of what really matters.

His title, however, reminded me of an editorial I ran across today. I wonder if we could take it further. Maybe Wall Street simply does not have the earth-shattering impact it wants us to think it has. Casey B. Mulligan, a professor of economics at the University of Chicago, says exactly this: “The non-financial sectors of our economy will not suffer much from even a prolonged banking crisis, because the general economic importance of banks has been highly exaggerated.” This certainly jives with what we are all experiencing, doesn’t it? We’ve seen the economy slowing for months and maybe years but no one has seen a sudden cataclysm that matches the stock market nose dive. In fact, today I heard a radio commercial for cadillacs assuring listeners that they had plenty of cash to loan. (I’m not sure I think that is a great thing, but there you go.)

This claim also reminds me of the fact that the Great Depression did not begin immediately with the stock market crash of 1929, but occurred later (after the government took steps to fix the economy. And the 1987 crash, Mulligan writes, didn’t cause a Depression despite being of similar proportions.

(I just saw this post by Robert Higgs telling of receiving another offer of credit and also finding it hard to find evidence that “no one is loaning.”)

I’m no independent expert on these matters, but this scenario does work with the hypothesis that the government lies.  The first lie was that the economy is great when it was in fact in a recession with the financial sector especially ready to self-destruct.  Then the second lie was that unless $700 billion was put at Paulson’s disposal we would have martial law on Monday.

Still I wonder if Mulligan’s scenario is too rosy.  If America has been borrowing money to buy iPods, then that has to  cost something.

Whatever it would cost, we can be pretty sure that the government is going to try to make sure that those most responsible don’t pay it.  Better Main Street go to Hell rather than Wall Street lose its place in Mammon Heaven.

October 9, 2008

U.S. May Take Ownership Stake in Banks

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS and MARK LANDLER

WASHINGTON — Having tried without success to unlock frozen credit markets, the Treasury Department is considering taking ownership stakes in many United States banks to try to restore confidence in the financial system, according to government officials.

Treasury officials say the just-passed $700 billion bailout bill gives them the authority to inject cash directly into banks that request it. Such a move would quickly strengthen banks’ balance sheets and, officials hope, persuade them to resume lending. In return, the law gives the Treasury the right to take ownership positions in banks, including healthy ones.

The Treasury plan, still preliminary, resembles one announced on Wednesday in Britain. Under that plan, the British government would offer banks like the Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays and HSBC Holdings up to $87 billion to shore up their capital in exchange for preference shares. It also would provide a guarantee of about $430 billion to help banks refinance debt.

The American recapitalization plan, officials say, has emerged as one of the most favored new options being discussed in Washington and on Wall Street. The appeal is that it would directly address the worries that banks have about lending to one another and to other customers.

This is a dream, right?  I’ll wake up and none of this will have happened.

Is anyone else as angry as I am that the media is devoting so much time to the election?  As if that is the story right now?

Well, I said yesterday that I felt like the world was trapped in an Ayn Rand novel.  Today we learn that the person who will distribute the money is Neel Kashkari.  You can’t make this up.

And then this is Bush today:

Bush emphasized that the program must be effectively designed and not rushed into action.

“It’s going to take awhile to restore confidence in the financial system,” he said. “But one thing people can be certain of is that the bill I signed is a big step toward solving this problem.”

Bush signed the bill into law after Congress approved it last week.

We don’t want anything rushed into action?  We just got a Shock & Awe Bailout shoved through Congress and now we don’t need to rush?  If we’re supposed to be so careful and cautious now, why not in the crafting of the bill?

In fact, according to this clip from Cspan, Congress was told there would be martial law without the plan.

[kml_flashembed movie=”http://www.youtube.com/v/gnbNm6hoBXc” width=”425″ height=”350″ wmode=”transparent” /]

In the meantime, now that the deed is done, those who betrayed voters are not willing to say that they voted as they did because they were scared out of their minds.  And that is probably true since they waited until they got a load of pork handed to them.  But they insist that the Bill was now “imporved” and that this was the result of years of “deregulation.”  Right, that’s why Europe’s banks are tanking–because they were so infatuated with Reagonomics.

Back in July, Robert Novak pointed out the Goldman-Sachs cronyism that Paulson seems to be able to get away with.  But has there been any sign of interest in the mainstream media since them now that the stakes have gotten far higher?  The wonderfully-named Kashkari is from Goldman Sachs.  Why hasn’t anyone in the press shown an interest in hard-hitting, follow-the-money journalism.  Surely there is one reporter out there who isn’t so busy campaigning for Obama that he could try to investigate the story of the century?

It is not like it would be hard.  Bloomberg reported, “Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley may be among the biggest beneficiaries of the $700 billion U.S. plan to buy assets from financial companies while many banks see limited aid, according to Bank of America Corp.”  That was the lead sentence in a story with the same headline.  It mentions in passing, ” Paulson is a former chairman and chief executive officer of Goldman.”  So is his appointment, Kashkari.  But will anything be said about the propriety of this?  What the frack is wrong with people?

In the meantime I reproduce below the stupid letter you get from turncoat Congressmen who voted for this pork-stuffed monstrosity.

October 6, 2008 

Dear MR Horne: 

Thank you for sharing your concern about the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. As you know, this legislation was considered by Congress this week in order to stabilize the U.S. financial and credit markets. I appreciate hearing from you and welcome the opportunity to respond.

Like you, I am deeply troubled by the current economic situation in our country. Years of de-regulation of the financial markets, coupled with lax oversight by this Administration of these institutions, has had devastating effects on the lives of millions of Americans. While I do not support paying billions of taxpayer dollars to bailout an industry that made poor decisions, the risk of taking no action at all is too great to our economy, and to the financial stability of all Americans. For this reason I voted for the financial rescue package.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 will unlock the credit market that is essential to both individuals and businesses. Without a properly functioning credit market, small businesses risk not making payroll and individuals will have increasing difficulty obtaining car loans, home loans, student loans, as well as other forms of credit upon which we all rely. This legislation will require the government to develop a plan to reduce foreclosures as it buys troubled financial assets, allows the government to purchase other types of mortgages to unfreeze the credit market, and allows the government to purchase certain troubled assets from pension plans to ensure individual retirement security.

The economic rescue package considered by the House is a vast improvement over the original proposal put forward by the Bush Administration. It will insulate the American people and Main Street from the crisis on Wall Street and protect taxpayers as we stabilize the markets. Without decisive action, experts believe the situation will only worsen, credit markets will freeze and Main Street will suffer. Working Americans will not be able to take out basic home and car loans, small businesses will not be able to make their payrolls, and credit card interest rates will soar.

Following the House vote, on Monday, the stock market plunged sharply, costing the American economy $1.2 trillion. Americans across the country instantly saw their 401ks, pension plans, and college accounts lose value, making the need to take decisive action even more clear. This legislation is not just a bailout of Wall Street; it is more importantly a buy-in so that we can turn our economy around and help hard working Americans.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 considered by Congress includes great taxpayer protections by ensuring taxpayers are repaid in full with Wall Street making up the difference. Also, the bill gives taxpayers a share of the profits of participating companies and puts taxpayers first in line to recover assets if a company fails. A major concern I raised was the lack of oversight contained in the original plan proposed by the Administration. That is why I was happy to see the bill considered by the House includes strong independent oversight and transparency. Also, the legislation would help homeowners change the terms of their mortgages to forestall the two million projected foreclosures that could further cripple our economy by reducing the principle of the interest rate or lengthen of time to pay back the mortgage. Finally, the bill restricts the compensation of executives. The CEOs whose irresponsibility caused this crisis should not receive taxpayer subsidized golden parachutes.

I believe it was critical for Congress must act to prevent serious economic pain for more Americans. I am hopeful Congress can work in a bipartisan manner to pass a plan that will ensure the American people and Main Street are insulated from the crisis on Wall Street.

Again, I appreciate hearing from you. If I may be of further assistance to you on this or any other matter please do not hesitate to contact me.

Maybe when I have energy I will fisk this piece of garbage.  If you feel inclined you can do so in the comments.  I’ve run out of energy.