Financial Market Coup d'etat

[gonegolfin]

I sent the following note to a couple of professionals that I respect, just to get another take on a question ...

XXXX,

I believe we are probably on the same page in that there are numerous things in this bailout plan that we both find distasteful (I am opposed to any sort of bailout, but my distaste goes far beyond that). But as soon as I saw the plan description for the first time on Bloomberg, I became a bit pale. Specifically the part of the plan that specifies that actions by the Treasury under its authority are unreviewable by the judicial branch (in fact, any court or government agency). This is dictatorial power, the likes of which you would find in a totalitarian state. In this context, I would like to get your opinion on something ...

The proposal states that the Treasury has the authority to purchase a range of assets, including mortgage loans, mortgage backed securities, and commercial mortgage related assets. But it also states that "other assets", in consultation with the Fed Chairman, can be purchased as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets. Might this new absolute power by the Treasury, in conjunction with the authority to purchase anything it sees fit, open the door for a potential precious metals confiscation by the government (the second in our nation's history)? I did not think we would see it in this day and age, especially considering the sophistication of communications today and the loud protests that would ensue. But this type of language makes me wonder.

Is the price of freedom all of a sudden too high?

Thanks,
Brian

 

[Paulie]

I sent the following note to a couple of professionals that I respect, just to get another take on a question ...

XXXX,

I believe we are probably on the same page in that there are numerous things in this bailout plan that we both find distasteful (I am opposed to any sort of bailout, but my distaste goes far beyond that). But as soon as I saw the plan description for the first time on Bloomberg, I became a bit pale. Specifically the part of the plan that specifies that actions by the Treasury under its authority are unreviewable by the judicial branch (in fact, any court or government agency). This is dictatorial power, the likes of which you would find in a totalitarian state. In this context, I would like to get your opinion on something ...

The proposal states that the Treasury has the authority to purchase a range of assets, including mortgage loans, mortgage backed securities, and commercial mortgage related assets. But it also states that "other assets", in consultation with the Fed Chairman, can be purchased as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets. Might this new absolute power by the Treasury, in conjunction with the authority to purchase anything it sees fit, open the door for a potential precious metals confiscation by the government (the second in our nation's history)? I did not think we would see it in this day and age, especially considering the sophistication of communications today and the loud protests that would ensue. But this type of language makes me wonder.

Is the price of freedom all of a sudden too high?

Thanks,
Brian

Just going on gut instinct here, but I think you and I both know they'll take our metals if they want to.

I like how no one comments on these kinds of threads. Too scary for most people to digest.

How is it even constitutionally legal to exclude judicial review?

 

[sealybobo]

I sent the following note to a couple of professionals that I respect, just to get another take on a question ...

XXXX,

I believe we are probably on the same page in that there are numerous things in this bailout plan that we both find distasteful (I am opposed to any sort of bailout, but my distaste goes far beyond that). But as soon as I saw the plan description for the first time on Bloomberg, I became a bit pale. Specifically the part of the plan that specifies that actions by the Treasury under its authority are unreviewable by the judicial branch (in fact, any court or government agency). This is dictatorial power, the likes of which you would find in a totalitarian state. In this context, I would like to get your opinion on something ...

The proposal states that the Treasury has the authority to purchase a range of assets, including mortgage loans, mortgage backed securities, and commercial mortgage related assets. But it also states that "other assets", in consultation with the Fed Chairman, can be purchased as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets. Might this new absolute power by the Treasury, in conjunction with the authority to purchase anything it sees fit, open the door for a potential precious metals confiscation by the government (the second in our nation's history)? I did not think we would see it in this day and age, especially considering the sophistication of communications today and the loud protests that would ensue. But this type of language makes me wonder.

Is the price of freedom all of a sudden too high?

Thanks,
Brian

Yes, we are bailing out the top 1 percent and foreign banks. I don't even believe we are in a crisis. This is consolidation of power.

The top 1 percent own 33 percent of the wealth.

Let the market renegotiate the value of the homes, not bail out the rich.

and the gop will tell conservatives that this is dem. socialism.

ps. see how much power bhank paulson is getting. his actions will be secet and non reviewable by any court in our land.

Americans better wake up.

Let homeowners renegotiate. It will free up money and fix the problem. Only the rich bankers don't like this because then they don't get bailed out.

This is like when they lied us into iraq. Disaster capitalism.

 

[Hum Dinger]

This bailout is a REALLY bad plan all around. What can we do to stop it?

 

[Paulie]

This bailout is a REALLY bad plan all around. What can we do to stop it?

Get off your ass and lobby your neighborhood to get off THEIR asses, and all of you lobby your representatives.

It really is the only way. Our apathy and laziness is what the government depends on to gain their control.

 

[sealybobo]

They want to put all the power in one mans hands and his decisions are not reviewable by any courts. Henry Paulson could tell the supreme court and congress to fuck off. Read the details of the proposal.

This is the gop practicing desaster capitalism. Look it up if you don't know what that is. They created the mess, now they'll pretend to save us but really this is what they wanted all along.

Plase conservatives. Together we can stop them. Forget what they did. Lets deal with what they want to do next.

Don't cry about bailing out homeowners. You are homeowners. You aren't rich but if you defend them,they will bail themselves out and it won't fix what's wrong.

 

[Paulie]

I'm having a real hard time understanding how the administration could possibly push through a piece of legislation and just simply say "no judicial review".

This isn't even America anymore. This is insane.

And some of you STILL don't care.

 

[gonegolfin]

This bailout is a REALLY bad plan all around. What can we do to stop it?

Write your representative and senator (very important since a filibuster can stop this). I can send you the letter I wrote if you are interested (feel free to use it as is or modify). Simple send me your email address in a private mail. This is an open invitation for anyone.

Brian

 

[Hum Dinger]

I'm just emailed my two senators, Congresswoman and the Obama compaign. Not that I believe anyone will read it....I'll look at your letter...maybe we could print out copies and leave them in all of our neighbors mailboxes asking that they copy them and distribute it to everyone they know...a chain letter approach?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

I'm working on several letters. I've been emailing and receiving emails from friends in other states to take it to their own neighborhoods, streets. I'd probably say there are about 40 million people who are about to snap from anger. We need to get that number up to about 100 million to demand what WE want to get this country back.

 

[WillowTree]

I'm way ahead of you guys. I mailed my senators a week ago and told them to give their paychecks back. Them and every other congresscritter, President and Washington hack around. They damn sure haven't earned a penny we have paid them. I was just a little nicer than that but you get the gist.

 

[Navy1960]

Okay everyone I created a site that you can direct people too that will at least give the the numbers to call and get things going and maybe sign a guestbook and once it gets full I will send it to congress.

Don't Support the Bailout Call Congress |

 

[Toro]

This plan is a horrific affront to democracy. I heard Newt Gingrich on NPR this afternoon saying Congress should vote against it.

naked capitalism: Why You Should Hate the Treasury Bailout Proposal
Vote No Bailout!

 

[Paulie]

Wow I'm surprised, you guys. My hat is off to everyone who is doing something about this.

Stay on these bastards' asses. It's the only way!

 

[gonegolfin]

Wow I'm surprised, you guys. My hat is off to everyone who is doing something about this.

Stay on these bastards' asses. It's the only way!

If you get a chance, watch Fox Business American's Scorecard tonight (they rerun it later). They explicitly discussed the language in Section 8 and how it is an affront to freedom.

Senator Shelby was also interviewed and is against the Treasury proposal.

Brian

 

[Paulie]

If you get a chance, watch Fox Business American's Scorecard tonight (they rerun it later). They explicitly discussed the language in Section 8 and how it is an affront to freedom.

Senator Shelby was also interviewed and is against the Treasury proposal.

Brian

I can't say it doesn't leave a lingering feeling of eeriness in the back of my mind, that MSM is reporting about that particular part.

I suppose they pretty much have to. The only question is how much will they continue to harp on it, or will they just mention it in a passing glance for a day or two before they go back to giving it good press.

Perception is reality with the media, of course.

I don't get Fox Business, do you have any other sources of MSM coverage on section 8?

 

[NOBama]

If you want to email your senators here's another starting point:

Oops! Sorry, I'm new to this board so I can't post the link.

httpCOLON//wwwDOTsenateDOTgov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

 

[Valerie]

I sent the following note to a couple of professionals that I respect, just to get another take on a question ...

XXXX,

I believe we are probably on the same page in that there are numerous things in this bailout plan that we both find distasteful (I am opposed to any sort of bailout, but my distaste goes far beyond that). But as soon as I saw the plan description for the first time on Bloomberg, I became a bit pale. Specifically the part of the plan that specifies that actions by the Treasury under its authority are unreviewable by the judicial branch (in fact, any court or government agency). This is dictatorial power, the likes of which you would find in a totalitarian state. In this context, I would like to get your opinion on something ...

The proposal states that the Treasury has the authority to purchase a range of assets, including mortgage loans, mortgage backed securities, and commercial mortgage related assets. But it also states that "other assets", in consultation with the Fed Chairman, can be purchased as deemed necessary to effectively stabilize financial markets. Might this new absolute power by the Treasury, in conjunction with the authority to purchase anything it sees fit, open the door for a potential precious metals confiscation by the government (the second in our nation's history)? I did not think we would see it in this day and age, especially considering the sophistication of communications today and the loud protests that would ensue. But this type of language makes me wonder.

Is the price of freedom all of a sudden too high?

Thanks,
Brian

Your posts make a lot of sense.

The more I read and the more I learn about what's going on, the more convinced I am that we need to stop this bailout. I heard a proposal for a much lesser amount of money being provided as a temporary stop gap measure, rather than just frantically writing this blank check out of fear, and it makes much more sense. It feels like they are trying to scare us into agreeing to a very bad deal. Giving the treasury absolute power is too dangerous and it's not worth it.

 

[Valerie]

Not Buying It

Why Secretary Paulson's plan to bail out the financial industry needs a better explanation.

We are embarking on the most radical transformation of the American economy since the New Deal, committing hundreds of billions in taxpayer money to save banks and other financial institutions from the consequences of their own bad investments. This, we are told, is the cost of averting a crisis. But I sure wish someone would explain to me exactly what crisis we're trying to avert.

What's clear is that a bunch of financial institutions have made mistakes and lost money. What's unclear is why anyone (other than the owners and managers) should care. People make mistakes and lose money all the time. Restaurants fail, grocery stores fail, gas stations fail. People pick the wrong stocks, they buy the wrong cars, and they marry the wrong spouses without turning to the Treasury for bailouts.

So what's special about banks? According to what I keep reading, it's that without banks, nobody can borrow, and the economy grinds to a halt.

Well, let's think about that.......(cont...)
Not Buying It - The Current

 

[Valerie]

[Ilya Somin, September 24, 2008 at 1:26am] Trackbacks
Economists Protest the Bailout Plan: Numerous prominent economists on both the right and the left have signed this petition against the bailout plan proposed by the Administration (list of signatories available at the link above): {below}

As economists, we want to express to Congress our great concern for the plan proposed by Treasury Secretary Paulson to deal with the financial crisis. We are well aware of the difficulty of the current financial situation and we agree with the need for bold action to ensure that the financial system continues to function. We see three fatal pitfalls in the currently proposed plan:

1) Its fairness. The plan is a subsidy to investors at taxpayers’ expense. Investors who took risks to earn profits must also bear the losses. Not every business failure carries systemic risk. The government can ensure a well-functioning financial industry, able to make new loans to creditworthy borrowers, without bailing out particular investors and institutions whose choices proved unwise.

2) Its ambiguity. Neither the mission of the new agency nor its oversight are clear. If taxpayers are to buy illiquid and opaque assets from troubled sellers, the terms, occasions, and methods of such purchases must be crystal clear ahead of time and carefully monitored afterwards.

3) Its long-term effects. If the plan is enacted, its effects will be with us for a generation. For all their recent troubles, Americas dynamic and innovative private capital markets have brought the nation unparalleled prosperity. Fundamentally weakening those markets in order to calm short-run disruptions is desperately short-sighted.

For these reasons we ask Congress not to rush, to hold appropriate hearings, and to carefully consider the right course of action, and to wisely determine the future of the financial industry and the U.S. economy for years to come.

The Volokh Conspiracy - -