Large Scale Central

Did the Bush administration deliberately tank the economy?

General Discussion
#1

Did the Bush administration deliberately tank the economy?
The Federal Reserve recently announced the Federal Reserve was going to spend $800 billion in an effort to free credit markets.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/25/news/economy/paulson_consumer/

They are spending these funds without any approval from Congress. $800 billion.
Now, my question is, why did Bush and Paulsen create the panic with their announcement that Congress needed to approve a $700 billion “rescue” package if the Federal Reserve can spend $800 billion without Congressional approval?
What was the point in creating the market panic?
The administration obviously knew the panic their announcement would create. After all, there are a dozen financial “experts”, such as Warren Buffett, who can cause large downturns in the markets, just by making negative statements.
So, why go public and accelerate the financial crisis worldwide?
I say one of two possibilities. They either wanted the markets to tank, or the Federal Reserve spending $800 billion without Congressional approval is not legal.
If the Fed spending such a large amount on its own was a viable and legal option, why wasn’t this the course of action originally?
And why is there no public outrage over the Fed spending $800 billion without Congressional approval?
I’ve waited since the announcement was made for the public outcry. It hasn’t happened.
Ralph

#2

Ralph,

Answer to first question: too dumb!

Answer to “no outcry”: too dumb!

#3

Mr. Berg; Please go back in history to the mid 1990’s, check out the actions by the Congressal Black Caucus and their dealings with FANEMA etc… There you will find the beginning of our current problems! Will it get solved soon? No, because the people who get it started want to use it to stay in power, it is all about power, and guess who gets to pay for that? You and me - infact all of us! So hang on to what you got because you will need it soon!

Paul

#4
E. Paul Austin said:
Mr. Berg; Please go back in history to the mid 1990's, check out the actions by the Congressal Black Caucus and their dealings with FANEMA etc.. There you will find the beginning of our current problems! Will it get solved soon? No, because the people who get it started want to use it to stay in power, it is all about power, and guess who gets to pay for that? You and me - infact all of us! So hang on to what you got because you will need it soon!

Paul


I not going to argue the point of where it started.
The point is, why did the Bush administration create the public panic when the Federal Reserve can quietly spend $800 billion without Congressional approval?
We have to follow the money. Whenever someone loses money…somebody else is making money.
I went through the numbers awhile back in another post about the “bailout”. Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae hold $5 trillion in mortgages. When Congress approved the $700 billion, it brought the total spent on the “problem” to $1.8 trillion. Add $800 billion more, and we are up to $2.6 trillion. $500 billion would have bought out the entire 10% of the mortgages the administration said were bad.
You want to believe the fairy tale the administration is spinning about this being a “bad mortgage” problem, go right ahead. I know better. Mortgages are the scapegoat.
Yes, it is all about power and money. And yes, you and I and the rest of the “average” citizens will be the big loser.
Ralph

#5
Hans-Joerg Mueller said:
Ralph,

Answer to first question: too dumb!

Answer to “no outcry”: too dumb!


Too dumb? No, HJ, no faction that was able to work itself into the highest position of power in the world, is that stupid.
As for the public, too dumb isn’t the answer either. Apathy, maybe.
Or, the public has accepted the fact that something has to be done and are just hoping like hell what the Treasury and Federal Reserve are doing, works.

What they have managed to do is consolidate the financial power into a smaller group by taking out one of the biggest banks. It would have been two, except that Wells Fargo stepped in and mucked up their plan to help Citigroup suck up Wachovia’s assets. Instead, we have forked over billions more to Citigroup and are going to guarantee over $300 billion in “bad” paper.
We are “crying” about greedy Unions and Automakers wanting $25 billion in loans that might save blue collar jobs, and saying nothing about the Citigroup deal or the $800 billion more the Federal Reserve is using to bailout financial “players”. This $800 billion will not be loans. They will be buying “bad” assets.
Ralph

#6

Ralph,

The general impression from North of the Border:

Just trying to muddle through til Jan 19th! And that is dumb!

The media and the voters letting them get away with it?! That is dumb!

Every member of Congress should have a picket line in front of his/her residence, constituency office etc.!

#7

Ralph,

First of all, the Federal Reserve is not a Gummint Institution, it is a privately held bank.

Second, this report came from CNN, no friend to the Bush Administration. That should, but probably doesn’t, give you pause for concern about it’s accuracy. Have you vetted it? Is there a similar article from a conservative source?

Third, did you follow the money? Where did it go?

Fourth, what are you going to do when you don’t have Bush to hate any more?

#8

Steve, they’ll keep on hating Bush until long after he is dead and buried! They are still doing that to Hover and Reagen! They will never blame one of their own!

Paul

#9

Congress bailed out the financial firms first because most of those old geezer Congressmen have a lot of financial stock in their portfolio.
They won’t bail out automakers, cause none of those old geezers own any automobile stock in their portfolios.
Wait til the drug companies come for a handout.
They’ll get it in a heartbeat, because most of those old geezers hold drug company stock in their portfolios.
That’s how it works.

#10
Steve Featherkile said:
Ralph,

First of all, the Federal Reserve is not a Gummint Institution, it is a privately held bank.

Second, this report came from CNN, no friend to the Bush Administration. That should, but probably doesn’t, give you pause for concern about it’s accuracy. Have you vetted it? Is there a similar article from a conservative source?

Third, did you follow the money? Where did it go?

Fourth, what are you going to do when you don’t have Bush to hate any more?


The Federal Reserve is indeed a “private bank”. Who appoints the head of the Federal Reserve? Our President.
The story was on all the major news services. The Federal Reserve is buying $800 billion in troubled assets.
I’m not hating anyone. I’m just wondering, why cause a worldwide panic and market collapse, when there were other avenues available?
Ralph

BTW Steve. on the top of our money, it says “Federal Reserve Note”. It is signed by the Treasurer of the United States as well as the Secretary of the Treasury.
Who do you think is on the hook for all dept issued by the Federal Reserve?

#11

The federal reserve is a unique institution, not imagined by the Constitution. It’s a hybrid public/private entity. It’s fairly outrageous from several standpoints and as henry Ford said, if the American public understood the Fed there’d be rioting in the streets. The Fed is a group of bankers who sit and decide how much money should be in circulation, which largely determines prices and interest rates. They look at a range of statistics and decide if you and I are paying what they think is too much or too little for a car loan or a dozen eggs

The Fed can create money by buying treasury bonds and by lowering lending rates to member banks. When it buys bonds it puts money into circulation. When it sells bonds it takes money out. The 700 billion bailout was outside of normal fed operations and it was directed by the Treasury secretary, who asked Congress to authorize 700 billion in spending. That’s different than the Fed trying to put 800 billion dollars into circulation. They are two different entities. The fed cooperated with Treasury, but it has its own operations. if you look at the link you’ll see that it’s a combined effort by the fed and the treasury

The idea that the Congressional black caucus caused this crisis is laughable

I’d also say Bush did not cause the economy to tank–not intentionally anyway.

Here’s an interesting fact: we are lending money to save citibank, so that Citibank can then lend it back to us at higher interest via credit cards. I’ve been thinking for a while now, why not just cut out the middleman? why not lend directly to citizens? It’s absurd that we lend money to private companies so they can lend it back to us at a higher rate.

#12

Mike,

You’re on to something there. :wink: :slight_smile: BTW if all of us diligently pay off the balance owing on the cards when the payments are due, then we don’t have a problem!
Anyone who finances his/her “whatever” via the credit cards needs to do some really hard contemplating!

As I mentioned quite some time ago, the other shoe will drop when the credit card bubble goes “pufff - fizzzzzzzzzzzzz”. :frowning: :? :frowning:

#13

Look at his history, Bush never met a company (country) that he could not run into bankruptcy

#14

Think about this. If the stock market was “topped” out, the only way to make serious money is to have a major downward correction and start running the prices up again.
A possible indicator the stock market had topped, was the shift into the oil commodities which ran oil prices up to record levels.
Ralph

#15

It is also possible to make big money by betting on a downturn.
That is what insider trading is all about.
Being in the know!!!