Will rescue plan work?
CNN
Transcript
Where do I start? I guess I start with, is this, in any shape or form, the silver bullet the financial market has been looking for? Is this the end to the problems? The markets seem to think so. It is not, unfortunately. It is a bullet that is needed in the fight, but there are a number of fronts that have to be fought. This is one. This is the credit crisis. They are trying to actually, what they're doing by announcing the formation of a plan that they hope to have hammered out in a very, very politically charged environment with a very short time to do it, with massive implications. They've set the bar very high. What they tried to achieve by announcing that is short-term market stability, and they actually got that. They wanted to stop the bloodletting. The panic is over for now, but what happens, and now what investors are likely to get caught up in, is really elation that is undue, and a rally that's really not going to be sustainable. Just looking at the details as we know it, the Fed could end up, or the government could end up, taking over tens, perhaps hundreds of billions of dollars worth of this toxic holdings, these instruments which are rapidly unwinding. That doesn't seem to be a particularly good solution for the U.S. taxpayer, obviously. Exactly. It's shifting the burden from the shareholders of these institutions to the taxpayer. And there's no actual guarantee that this would work. And again, if you're rallying, if you're going out and thinking it's time to buy the financials, think about the mechanics of how this is going to work. If the government's going to buy this toxic waste, they're going to buy it at very cheap prices. And write-downs are going to have to be realized. They're going to be brought to the forefront. For the financial institutions to get rid of these products and sell them to the government means realizing the losses that everyone's wondering about. And then the cost, again, the long-term implications and the cost of the tax cuts, the cost of the tax cuts, the cost of the taxpayer, and the potential loss of confidence in the U.S. government are quite astounding. You know, if the financial situation, sorry, the real systemic risk in the world is if there's a loss of confidence in the U.S. government's ability to fund itself. If the rest of the world doesn't want to keep paying, and with the rapidity with which the Fed is spending money, you know, that's not an impossibility in the future. Kirby, it's Adrian in London. As I understand it, what's being proposed here is something akin to the Resolution Trust Corps. Which came to the rescue back in the 1980s during the savings and loan debacle. I mean, it sends the wrong message, doesn't it, to the banks who've been accused of irresponsibility with these complex financial products that have got them into so much trouble. That, hey, you know, it's fine. We can take these dangerous risks. We'll always get bailed out. Exactly. I mean, which country is this? You know, is this the greatest bastion of free market capitalism in the world, or is this Venezuela, where we're nationalizing companies left and right? You know, at this point, we don't know. All I can say is this. It's been mishandled from the beginning, in my view. Paulson and Bernanke have been irresponsible all along in their calls for complacency in the market, their inaction in the very beginning, and every step along the way that got them to the point where they have to take this drastic and massive action in a very short period of time. It doesn't happen. It does send the wrong message. It tells, basically, the financial markets, you know, I think it's going to take a number of years before they're ever in a situation where they're going to be able to create a bubble, you know, that the Fed would have to rescue again because of regulation coming in. But it does send the wrong message. You know, we need to work through this pain. This stopgap, this measure, maybe it's necessary, maybe it's not. But the thing is, it's not going to take away the pain, and that's what investors have to realize. This is still going to be a painful and very long process. What we see now is, is the possibility of an end, of one portion of the credit crisis with the government coming in, but we don't see an end to the whole situation, to the housing downturn, to the decimation of the U.S. consumer that's going to drive global economic growth and global equity markets down substantially in the next year to two years. Now, Kip, I just want to pick you up on that because this was something the Fed had to do, though. I mean, you may not agree with how things have been managed, but this last week, what we've seen with AIG, $85 billion, what we've seen now with, with, this, this plan to take toxic debt, they didn't have a choice, did they? I, you know, that, that's a very difficult question. I would say, I was, as I was telling you earlier, I was in the U.S., I was watching this all day long taking place, and I was amazed. I've never seen anything like the targeted attacks that, that were happening. However, you know, maybe they were justified. Maybe these companies really do deserve to have their stocks hit. The problem was, yes, it was happening in a panic mentality. Systemic risk was perceived. Therefore, the Fed had tried everything. The Fed and the Treasury, had done so many things this week that were unprecedented. The amount of money, the, the, the, the global coordinated intervention into the money markets, pumping liquidity into the markets, did nothing. So, yes, in one sense, they had to do this. But what have they done? They've really announced that they intend to do something. And again, to get this done in a week, they've got a lot on their plate. And, and so just, what I want to say to investors is, be careful in this rally. I have a word that I've coined. It's a fallacy. That's a rally based on fallacy. And we just might be in that situation again. But, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but, but