Here we are on the eve of the Presidents ‘State of the Union’ address, which should prove mind numbing as I will explain later, along with a host of other exciting events on Capitol Hill. We will see testimony from a few important figures from 2008 regarding the credit crisis, how they cannot figure out the cause is really beyond me as my 9 year old can recite the causes, but that is your government at work. While I fully expect to hear, during the Congressional hearings, ‘we did everything right and we would do it again ,‘ like they would admit that they screwed up. The President will give the usual speech tonight, the state of the union is strong, but we need to do work, a complete contradiction of reality I can assure you.
We will also hear the President talk about fiscal responsibility, which is a complete joke, as he talks about the massive $250B 10 year spending freeze in government, after he increased spending in those same departments 40% last year. Basically, the President is saying we will save $250B over 10 years, but those spending increases from last year will cost $1.3T, or so. With numbers like those I can assure you the media will not talk about the total hypocrisy of the spending freeze. I am sure we will hear about how well things have ‘improved’ from last year when he inherited this mess, the public is getting tired of that line Mr. President, and keep this in mind, ‘improved’ is a relative term and more politically correct than true for the average American.
A twist will be the indication that Mr. Obama ‘heard’ the public with the MA Brown victory, but he is still not listening. Like him or hate him there is one fact that cannot be ignored, Obama is tone deaf to the public and his arrogance is overwhelming, dare I say more than Bush’s? The point is that he may have ‘heard’ Americans, but he still will not listen to them which will cost him in the upcoming elections. Let’s face the facts, Obama campaigned for 3 Democrats and all 3 Democrats lost and he thinks it is not a repudiation of his policies? Sorry Mr. President, but 3 strikes and you are out. Like most Americans I like Obama on a personal level, but that is not the same thing as endorsing his policies or being blind to the fact that his policies are not working. Hell, Ted Bundy by all accounts was a likeable guy, but few people would want to be roommates with the guy.
No matter what the rhetoric is from tonight’s speech I can assure you that it is going to be meaningless and tone deaf to what is really needed for the country. What is also clear, to me at least, is that fiscal responsibility does not exist and the only things to cut are social programs, labeled ‘entitlement programs.’ It is only a matter of time that Social Security and Medicare benefits are reduced or altered, it needs to be done, but I do have a problem with that. The thing about entitlement programs is that every time you get paid a piece of your money goes into those entitlement programs. In other words, you already paid for these programs through years of work.
The irony is this, we know that these programs were not funded properly and they are broke, even though we put such a large portion of our checks into them every week, but Obama seems to think national or single payer health care is viable. How can any single payer or national health care be viable is Medicare and Social Security are bust and why would any trust the government after 2 large examples of, essentially, failed programs? I am not saying get rid of the 2 programs, the opposite is true, as these programs helped millions of Americans survive, literally, retirement. What I am saying is that these two programs are broke and if these programs, which pays benefits out to those 60 and older, cannot support that segment of the population how in the world can over 300M people get insurance from the government and not have that program blow up? It is not possible, sorry.
Regardless, the President is showing zero sign of fiscal responsibility as his $1.35T budget shows. What I found interesting is that the CBO came out with a damning report on the deficits which got a little air time, but not as much as it should have. However, even the CBO has the projects rosier than what is likely to happen. They actually predict that the deficits will shrink as the Bush tax cuts expire, this is true, for year 1 after the cuts expire. However, we know from history that as taxes go up revenues go down because the ‘wealthy,’ who are the enemy of the state now, decide to earn less because it will eventually be equally as profitable for them to earn less so they can keep more, this is why tax hikes never work long-term. However, that logic is lost on people who care to ignore both history and economics.
The good news is that real tax hikes will not take place until this fall, after the mid-term elections. Now, as far as the whole repayment of TARP tax proposed by Obama, that is a joke because TARP was paid back by most major banks. However, Detroit will likely never payback what they owe, how can they when unions now have board seats? Unions are the ones who killed Detroit to begin with, that is another argument though. The fact is that TARP, a Bush solution, worked, as much as I hate it, and if Obama stuck with only banks receiving it then it would have been profitable. However, now banks have to pay for Detroit which is about par for the administration, blame everyone else but themselves and make others pay for their pet project failures.
I am not sure how the President can claim everything is fine when all the economic data, bad data I mean, is coming home to roost. Unemployment is going to move higher as initial claims increase and the GDP figures, minus government transfers, will show horrible organic growth. We are not out of the woods yet, but everyone is acting like we are.
Ben Bernanke may in fact seem like the unassuming soft spoken professor who is well spoken and polite, and he is, but at the same time he is perhaps suffering from the greatest of the deadliest of sins, pride. I am translating pride into arrogance with Ben because it is essentially the same thing and the sin is identical. There is also no question that Ben suffers from the delusion that he s right and everyone else is wrong, which is how we can tell that he suffers from this disease of arrogance wich will be his ultimate downfall.
I am referring to an article I read this weekend from Reuters, which was reprinted on Bloomberg and various other news sources, where Ben announced that it was not the Federal Reserve’s wall of liquidity during the early 2000’s that caused the housing boom, and subsequent bust, but rather lack of regulation. First of all, he is wrong, because without the liquidity easy credit or the showdown securitization mortgage market simply would not have existed, that is obvious. What is not so obvious is the fact that his regulation argument is also an attack on himself. While Congress did encourage the GSE’s and banks to loosen credit standards, so did the Federal Reserve Bank and the Fed had some significant regulatory authority over these mortgages.
Am I the only one that finds it ironic that Ben, Man of the Year, Savior of the Economy, or whatever else we are calling him now, is the same guy saying that his wall of liquidity is not to blame and more regulation’s was the answer, when part of his job was to regulate the banks? Granted, the Fed’s job in regulating the banks is somewhat small, but are we forgetting Greenspan’s famous speech were he encouraged banks to get more inventive when it came to mortgage origination? This does not sound like getting tough with banks, in fact it sounds like it was a green light to do whatever you want to get homeowners into a house.
Essentially, the Fed gave its blessing to do whatever it took to get people to sign the dotted line on the mortgage application. Not only that, the Fed also provided the liquidity to encourage the lax lending standards. Having just one of those two things is bad, but both combined is disastrous, which we found out. However, our Savior still does not realize that it was the Fed at fault for this mess and I think I know why he is saying this now. He simply wants to be left alone. He figures with his reappointment a done deal, his Man of the Year award, and the magical 25% S&P 500 returns in the market people will get off his back as he built up some credibility, especially the audit the Fed people.
I honestly believe he thinks that his sins of the past can be forgiven because of his recent ‘accomplishments’ which were not really accomplishments. If anything Ben was merely picking up after himself, but with our money. To put everything into perspective on how Ben feels here is how the article ended, and what he thinks caused, I guess, the credit crisis:
“Bernanke pointed to adjustable-rate mortgages and overconfidence that house prices would continue to rise as the main culprits behind the catastrophic housing bubble.”
That is that I guess. He was partially right, but it was not just ARM’s that were the problem, not at all, it was a whole slew of mortgages that were problems. There were jumbo’s that trigger higher rates if the LTV slides below a certain value, there were sub-prime, there was the fact that the asset bubble from the Fed was not just in housing, but in commercial real estate and, well, everywhere. The question is why were people betting so heavily on housing prices to rise? Perhaps because the liquidity spigot was going full force for way too long and then when you went to turn it off the effort was meager at best. Regardless, the biggest problem now is with all types of mortgages, not just ARM’s and sub-prime.
The sheer arrogance of this man is just unbelievable though. The one thing about the deadly sins is that they are deadly and catch up to you, pride is always the one that kills the worst to. At first it was nice to see Ben apologize for the Fed’s role in the Great Depression, but how could we go from a guy who knows that his organization caused the Depression to him denying the Fed caused this problem. What happened over the last 4 years to Ben where he could state the obvious before only to deny it know? It makes no sense other than he suffers from the affliction of arrogance or pride. What I do know is what Ben is doing, long-term, will not work, because Ben has a terrible track record, and the Fed’s powers are on the verge of finally being reduced, which is a great thing as the system failed us greatly and it’s time for it to go.
No matter what Ben and Greenspan are to blame for a large portion of what happened. I am not saying that Congress is innocent, you know me better than that, and I am not saying that those who lied or bought houses they couldn’t afford are innocent either. However, legitimate fraud too place, even to reasonably intelligent people, the Fed let things happen that they should not have and Congress, well, Congress is just incompetent, what do you expect.
Feedback