Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Geithner's Market Rally Spells Taxpayer Ripoff -- Nothing for Us to Cheer About

By John Nichols, TheNation.com. Posted March 24, 2009.


Geithner's bank rescue may have perked up Wall Street but it's nothing new. They've already tried it in Britain and it's failed.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

In Special Coverage

Belief:
What if People Actually Treated Religion as Just a Metaphor (Like Trekkies and Secular Jews)?
Greta Christina

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
What Happened to That Prosperity Tax-Cutters Promised Us?
Sam Pizzigati

DrugReporter:
The War on Weed: Marijuana Is Basically Harmless -- The Monumentally Stupid Drug War Is Not
Jim Hightower

Environment:
20 Weird, Crazy Ideas for Helping the Earth

Food:
10 Tips for a Sustainable Thanksgiving
Sarah Newman

Health and Wellness:
Is the House's Health Bill Really Worse than Nothing?
Joshua Holland

Immigration:
Hate Group, FAIR, Is Looking for "Ethnically Ambiguous" Actors to Amplify Its Racism
Adam Luna

Media and Technology:
The Memory Scrub About Why Ft. Hood Happened Is Almost Complete ... If It Weren't for Archives
Mark Ames

Movie Mix:
The Yes Men: Pranksters Out to Fix the World
Mark Engler

Politics:
Just When You Thought It Was Safe: 3 Potential Obstacles to Health-Care Reform
Adele M. Stan

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Can't We Look Away From Sarah Palin?
Vanessa Richmond

Rights and Liberties:
Obama Quietly Backs Renewing Patriot Act Surveillance Provisions
Willam Fisher

Sex and Relationships:
Hot Mormon Muffins and Models for Jesus: What's With All the Sexy Christians?
Liz Langley

Take Action:
G-20 Meetings: Nothing Much Happened in the Suites, and There Was Too Much Punch in the Streets
Laura Flanders

Water:
Poseidon's Financial Shell Game: Why Is a Private Desalination Plant Asking for Public Money?
Peter Gleick

World:
Obama Will Announce 34,000-Troop Escalation in Afghanistan 'Within Days'

More stories by John Nichols

Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Yes, it is true: If you offer a trillion dollars to Wall Street, it will perk up.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has supposedly gone from zero to hero because his scheme to have taxpayers back up another bailout of bad bankers -- by buying all those toxic assets -- caused the stock markets to spike on Monday.

"Markets Like Geithner's Plan," chirped the Atlantic Online, in a pretty typical headline at the close of the day.

From Wall Street's perspective: What's not to like? Hundreds of billions more in federal funds will be used to prop up what even Fox Business News describes as a: "Bad Bank Buying Binge."

The news would be laughable if it was not precisely accurate.

ABC News celebrated the run-up by declaring: "Dow Soars as Investors Back Bad Asset Plan."

Bad is good.

Toxic is healthy.

Geithner is a genius.

Or is he?

While the US financial media may be going on one more Jim Cramer bender, a more sober take comes from across the pond.

Dan Roberts, the former US business editor for the Financial Times who now oversees the well-regarded business sections of Britain's Guardian and Observer newspapers, notes that Geithner's approach is not new.

Britain did pretty much the same thing months ago.

It didn't work.

Indeed, months after a Geithner-style fix, Britain's headlines today read: "Deflation returns to UK after nearly fifty years (The Guardian), "UK unemployment jumps at fastest pace on record" (The Telegraph) and "(Bank of England policymaker) Blanchflower warns of 'horrible' things to come" (The Independent).

Here is the assessment of Geithner's scheme from the Guardian's Roberts:

 

Events in Britain often take their direction from America, but the prevailing Atlantic westerlies seem to have reversed - at least as far as the banking crisis is concerned. It is hardly anything to be proud of, but we were the first to opt for selective nationalisation; the first to have a big row over bonuses (battles at AIG have eerie parallels with Sir Fred Goodwin's pension), and now seem to be several weeks ahead of the US in tackling the legacy of bad loans. The toxic asset plan unveiled by the US treasury yesterday aims to achieve roughly the same as the British government's insurance of bad loans did for the Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds.

So how do the two schemes compare? They still like to think they do things bigger and better over there. Treasury secretary Timothy Geithner has temporarily distracted critics from his Paul Myners-style grilling over bonuses by bragging about how the toxic asset plan will cover up to $1tn of bad debt. He is also clinging to American-style optimism about free markets: the actual commitment of government funds is far lower than $1tn but Geithner hopes private investors will make up the difference.

Otherwise, both schemes work on the same general principle: that banks will start behaving normally again and drag the rest of the economy with them if only they can be protected from their past mistakes.

But these responses underestimate the scale of this crisis. It is telling that yesterday's plans cover not just "toxic credit securities" but also many ordinary bank loans made to parts of the US economy that were meant to be still functioning relatively normally. Similarly, the assets put forward by Lloyds in the UK insurance scheme include every buy-to-let mortgage issued by HBOS, not just the ones already in default. Judge the banks on their actions rather than their words, and you would conclude this crisis has some way to go.

Yet both governments assume banks are suffering from a crisis of confidence that can be cured simply by removing the uncertainty of "toxic" debt. What neither seems willing to acknowledge is the likelihood that much of their lending has gone for good; that this is not a liquidity crisis, but a solvency crisis.

The headline on the Guardian's assessment is chilling for anyone who has been watching the evolution of the global economic crisis? "US follows UK -- on the wrong road."

From the front page of this morning's conservative Daily Mail newspaper comes a measure of where Geithner's misguided economic might lead:

"Millions face 'worst of both worlds' as cost of living rises but rate for fixing pay and pensions falls to zero."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: banks, tim geithner

John Nichols is The Nation's Washington correspondent.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I'm confused.
Posted by: GuitarBill on Mar 24, 2009 1:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author writes, "...Indeed, months after a Geithner-style fix, Britain's headlines today read: 'Deflation returns to UK after nearly fifty years (The Guardian)'."

Yet, the last paragraph reads, "Millions face 'worst of both worlds' as cost of living rises but rate for fixing pay and pensions falls to zero."

Perhaps I'm confused, however, if deflation returned to the UK (and I believe that's true), how will "the cost of living rise"?

Perhaps I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that a deflationary economic environment is characterized by falling prices, not rising prices.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: I'm confused. Posted by: John Sawyer
Geithner is a paid-off Wall Street stooge!
Posted by: Jay Randal on Mar 24, 2009 2:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It does not look good for Pres. Obama to allow Timothy Geithner to call the shots on anything. The guy is a paid-off Wall Street stooge and only does what the banksters tell him to do.

If Obama was really a new FDR, then he would never have taken Geithner as Treasury Secretary.
Unfortunately Obama acts more like another Hoover.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Geithner is not a "banker". Posted by: GuitarBill
» RE: Geithner is not a "banker". Posted by: GuitarBill
Too bad the public will fall for more cha-chings on Wall $treet at this rate.
Posted by: JenniferBedingfield on Mar 24, 2009 3:05 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Tim Geithner as I see it is really a symptom of society's weakness to fall for the "greed is good" mantra. Unfortunately, the taxpayers for far too long don't care if they're ripped off by Wall $treet. At most, they'll focus on the false accusations that they're being ripped off by things like abortion clinics or art centers. Tell them that they're being ripped off by Wall $treet and Big Military and they blow out and say shit like "Well, it's good for the economy and it's good for you !" I'm afraid Main Street is at a war with itself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Doublespeak? Welcome to Oceania!
Posted by: kaelieh on Mar 24, 2009 4:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's time to storm Wall St and overthrow it. I want a new government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The injustices of the Bail-Outs need to be balanced against the Risk of Total Financial Collapse
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Mar 24, 2009 4:59 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sure, the investment banks have totally screwed up by playing the most outrageous casino games with other people's money - largely for the benefit of the employees of the investment banks.

They should be investigated, and where any illegal activity is proved - they should be charged. There is an extremely good argument that a lot of these people should end up with long jail sentences rather than continuing to receive obscene bonuses.

The problem, though is that since last September, the entire banking system has been at risk of total collapse - and probably still is.

What happens - if you go to the cash machine - and find none of them are working? If total financial collapse occurs the same will happen with employers. They will be unable to pay wages. Even local states/councils will be unable to pay police.

No one will get paid. Will anyone do any work - when they are not getting paid?

Our food supply system, and energy supply system is highly efficient - but they are based on a supply chain - all parts of which must work - if everyone is going to eat, drink water or have their toilets flushed.

If banks go bust - everything could stop working - because no one is getting paid. We could in theory carry on working to provide essential services - but would we without money?

How would order be maintained? If food was free would we continue to take just what we need - or would we hoard and fight? The chances are that all hell would break loose and all but the strongest would die a horrible death.

So I think its extremely important to keep banks running even if it means printing vast amounts of paper money that ultimately risks hyper-inflation.

We have never actually been in this position before. It's potentially far worse than the 1929 depression because then the supply chain of basic services such as food and energy was much simpler.

So whilst it may seem horrific to keep these corrupt greedy w/bankers/politicians slurping at the trough of excess - it is not yet safe to drag the pigs off to jail.

Whilst we certainly need reform, we really do not want a bloody revolution. We haven't got our farms to run back to. We are no longer close to our food.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This Just In
Posted by: Revolutionary (Direct) Democracy on Mar 24, 2009 5:36 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"President Barack Obama looked to steer the nation's economic attention to the bigger picture Tuesday night..."

Don't look away from the details and don't blink.


FREE AMERICA

REVOLUTIONARY (DIRECT) DEMOCRACY

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Geithner Plan is a sham ...
Posted by: mmckinl on Mar 24, 2009 6:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Yet both governments assume banks are suffering from a crisis of confidence that can be cured simply by removing the uncertainty of "toxic" debt."

Well that's true!

But $1 trillion is a drop in the bucket ... Wall Street Banks alone have over $120 trillion in derivatives ... $1trillion is less than 1% of the total derivatives just for Wall Street!

Yes there are counterparties, but how many will be around to collect from?

They'll create markets! ... Wrong! These derivatives are one offs ... each contract is different financially and legally.

Why should tax payers take responsibility for resolving these derivatives? They shouldn't. The banks and insurance companies that are insolvent need to be broken in two. The share and bond holders take the off and on balance sheet assets commensurate with their dollar value and the government takes the enterprise and depositors and goes forward. The stake holders sell the derivatives for what they'll fetch and the government sells the enterprise, or breaks it up, to be resold.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dear President
Posted by: SlyGuy on Mar 24, 2009 9:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's over. You fucked up. Picked all the has beens you could, suck ups to to Wall Street. Hope upon hope to flush Wall Street with enough cash to buoy the market until the real economy springs back. Yes we voted for you. We voted against a real threat of more wars and no-nothing economic policy. You cast your lot with the ones who brought us to and cast us over the brink. Don't think we don't get it. You are only buying time. If you think it will work, you are paving the way for an even fiercer form of facism in the future. You keep flushing taxpayer dollars after these frauds and cheats, bullshit derivatives and default swaps, and you know you are, hiding behind the likes of preppy-boys like Geithner, there will be backlash, and perhaps blood. Get ready. Howl. Don't say we didn't warn you. Time for revolt.

You better show you have some guts soon, not just another bought and sold pol. There isn't much time. Progressives and others with a moral backbone are waiting, but not much longer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dear President Posted by: disc golf
chicken or the egg
Posted by: cbishopp on Mar 25, 2009 7:09 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's see...the news media claims there is no conspiracy but Goldman Sachs is the fourth largest contributor (approx. 30 Million) to both political parties since 1989. Almost every heavy hitter in the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department who has any control over this situation is a former Goldman Sachs employee. If AIG defaults that will be huge losses for all the companies that bought credit default swaps from AIG, but most importantly Goldman Sachs was paid by AIG about 6 billion dollars of our tax money. On the other hand, Goldman Sachs states that it stands to lose very little if AIG fails.
In a nutshell - Goldman had bought billions in AIG CDS in the 2004 to 2006 timeframe. Whether this was predicated by their expectation that subprime would blow up, or their very early understanding just how bad things at AIG were, one will never know, especially not the SEC.
So Goldman effectively shorted AIG to the tune of 4.7 billion.
Luckily all these banks and financial firms control commerce so whether they fuck up or not all they have to do is stop loaning money and everything screeches to a halt and we all freak out and all I hear from MSNBC or CNN or Obama, himself is that we have to do everything we can to get credit flowing again.
Credit, by the way, that carries interest payments on the money we just gave them. American taxpayers gave money to banks so that they might loan it BACK to us with interest.
What backward hillbilly thought this was a good idea?
The problem is not complex financial derivatives or credit default swaps or a general financial crisis, it's the monetary system as a whole. It's the Ponzi scheme known as the US economy that is insolvent.
The worlds wealthiest bastards learned long ago that lending money to people at usurious rates of return was a great way to get rich but if you can loan a government money based on the collateral of the future tax payments of it's citizens, well then you have struck gold.
Through this fake crisis they have done exactly that. In fact they went one better, they loaned money to the government and then begged us for a bailout to save companies that were making money all along.
To be blunt, they fuck you on the way in and they fuck you on the way out. Welcome to the party.
Geitner says let's buy all this crap off the banks and bury it in the yard and the result will be a transfer of wealth that has never before been experienced by this nation.

KILL THE DEBT THAT IS OUR MONETARY SYSTEM. Change the way you understand money. It is meant as a means for exchange not enslavement. It is not wealth in and of itself, Federal Reserve Notes are merely debt receipts.

Now watch as these same architects of disaster call for a world currency that they claim will help stabilize the very system they have purposefully flipped over.
You think the world is small now. There will be not a centimeter of this earth left that will not be owned. There will be nowhere to live where tax and fear will not follow you.
Not long ago this world was shared by all it's people, now we are renters.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement