All right, I didn't mean to evoke your inner libertarians, guys.
I was merely saying that the dramatic -- one might say, hysterical
-- tone of the president's speech seemed a bit much to me.
The threatened "collapse" would not return the U.S. economy to
1929 levels. Financial institutions are currently holding assets
that are not worth what they paid for them, but the assets are not
worth zero. But these institutions don't want to fire-sale
those assets in a market beset by a liquidity crunch, because then
they'd lose a crapload of money and might go bankrupt.
Well, OK, some major financial institutions go belly-up. And
several less-than-major financial institutions follow. And one can
picture a scenario where other businesses heavily dependent on
credit -- especially the auto giants -- follow in this row of
toppling dominoes.
Yet there is a genuine economic floor somewhere underneath all
this artificially pumped-up, credit-fueled superstructure. Even in
the doomsday "collapse" scenario, the ordinary supply-and-demand
mechanism remains in place, and the reset point is not
zero. Real people would lose real money, unemployment
would increase, but these would be relatively short-term phenomena,
and the economy would eventually -- in 6 months, 12 months, 18
months -- absorb the losses and then begin to grow again.
What Paulson and Bush seem to be advocating is risk-free,
pain-free capitalism -- except that taxpayers are ultimately on the
hook for it all. Some Republicans are slinging the term "purist" at
free-market opponents of the Paulson plan, but I'm sorry: A $700
billion lump-sum corporate welfare payment doesn't remotely
resemble the conservative movement I signed up for.
topics:
Business