Skip to main content

Fed bailouts = capitalism?

We're going to follow up Monday's post on the 2007 liquidity crisis with some reactions to the recent Fed interventions in the markets and the economy.

Should the Federal Reserve and other leading central banks help bailout the investment funds, banks, investors, and homeowners that have been caught in the fallout of the recent credit crunch? That is the question at hand. But first, a summary of Fed actions and stimulations carried out thus far.

IHT.com carries a useful and brief summary of the Fed's bailout actions to date. As the article details, the Fed reacted to the credit squeeze with a series of "liquidity injections", followed by a 50 basis point cut in the discount rate (the rate at which member banks borrow from the Fed), before removing certain regulatory caps on loans to the brokerage affiliates of large banks.

Excerpt from, "What looks like a bailout?":


The cap on loans to an affiliate is a tenet of prudent banking. So waiving it, even temporarily, is a significant escalation of the Fed's rescue efforts. Under normal circumstances, a bank is limited to lending any one affiliate an amount equal to 10 percent of the bank's regulatory capital. Fed documents released last Friday disclosed that the banks would be allowed to lend up to $25 billion apiece, or about 30 percent of their capital.

Compromising the cap to that extent attests to the Fed's belief that a bailout is necessary to avert greater harm to the financial system and the broader economy.

So, as you can see, the Fed is clearly concerned about the effect that the credit market fallout will have on the economy. Which is interesting, because so many of these leading lights now calling for, and enacting, the bailouts were prominent among those who suggested that the subprime/CDO mess was well "contained".

And since so many have been inundated with the hypocritical rescue cries from Jim Cramer and the like, we offer you some opposing viewpoints on the issues of Fed bailouts, and how the credit market bubble got started in the first place.

1. "There's no such thing as a free bailout", by Paul Kasriel.

2. "How regulators fed the credit mess", by Bill Fleckenstein.

3. "The Fed's Subprime Solution", by James Grant.

4. "Deflating the credit bubble", a Financial Sense interview with Doug Noland.

Consider these arguments carefully, as they are the ones which reveal the truth.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dot-Com Bubble in 1 Chart: InfoSpace

With all the recent talk of a new bubble in the making, thanks in part to the Yellen Fed's continued easy money stance, I thought it'd be instructive to revisit our previous stock market bubble - in one quick chart.

So here's what a real stock market bubble looks like. 

Here's what a bubble *really* looks like. InfoSpace in 1999-2001. $QQQ$BCORpic.twitter.com/xjsMk433H7
— David Shvartsman (@FinanceTrends) February 24, 2015
For those of you who are a little too young to recall it, this is a chart of InfoSpace at the height of the Nasdaq dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. This fallen angel soared to fantastic heights only to plummet back down to earth as the bubble, and InfoSpace's shady business plan, turned to rubble.

As detailed in our post, "Round trip stocks: Momentum booms and busts", InfoSpace rocketed from under $100 a share to over $1,300 a share in less than six months. 

In a pattern common to many parabolic shooting stars, the stock soon peaked and began a…

New! Finance Trends now at FinanceTrendsLetter.com

Update for our readers: Finance Trends has a new URL! 

Please bookmark our new web address at Financetrendsletter.com

Readers sticking with RSS updates should point your feed readers to our new Finance Trends feedburner.  



Thank you to all of our loyal readers who have been with us since the early days. Exciting stuff to come in the weeks ahead!

As a quick reminder, you can subscribe to our free email list to receive the Finance Trends Newsletter. You'll receive email updates about once every 4-8 weeks (about 2-3 times per quarter). 

Stay up to date with our real-time insights and updates on Twitter.

Moneyball: How the Red Sox Win Championships

Welcome, readers. To get the first look at brand new posts (like the following piece) and to receive our exclusive email list updates, please subscribe to the Finance Trends Newsletter.

The Boston Red Sox won their fourth World Series titleof the 21st century this week.

Having won their first Series in 86 years back in 2004, the last decade-plus has marked a very strong return to form for one of baseball's oldest big league clubs. So how did they do it?

Quick background: in late 2002, team owner and hedge fund manager,John W. Henry(with his partners)bought the Boston Red Sox and its historic Fenway Park for a reported sum of $695 million.

Henry and Co. quickly set out to find their ideal General Manager (GM) to help turn around their newly acquired, ailing ship.

This brings us to one of my favorite scenes from the 2011 film, Moneyball, in which John W. Henry (played by Arliss Howard) attempts to woo Oakland A's GM Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) over to Boston with an excellent job off…