(no subject)

[gracheeha]

Что удивительно, что в сложившийся ситуации Конгресс и медия совершенно не интересуются мнением незаинтересованных финансовых экспертов, каких-нибудь маститых академиков, нобелевских лауреатов.  От всех этих слушаний остаётся впечатление, что Конгресс ведёт переговоры с террористами, которые обещают убить заложника, если мы немедленно не предоставим им деньги.  Террористы, впрочем, говорят о спасении тяжелобольного, но где же консилиум врачей?!

Comments

[vlad-ab.livejournal.com]

Ну почему же не интересуются. Вот извольте.

US ECON - U.S.: Economist Sees No Need For Government Bailout
Of Wall Street

(AUDIO AVAILABLE under NC092462/63/64/65/66/67)

(Intro) Despite skepticism from many members, the U.S. Congress
seems poised to approve the White House's proposal for a $700
billion bailout of the country's financial institutions. But at
least one American economist, Allan Meltzer, dismisses warnings
that the program is essential to restore confidence in the U.S.
free-market system. In an interview with RFE/RL correspondent
Andrew F. Tully, Meltzer says there's plenty of private money
-- and confidence -- to rescue Wall Street without risking a
penny of the taxpayers' money.

WASHINGTON, September 24, 2008 (RFE/RL) --

RFE/RL: There's a general sense in Washington that Congress
will pass at least some form of a bailout plan for Wall Street,
despite the concern felt by many on Capitol Hill. The reason
cited is that, like it or not, a bailout is simply necessary to
restore confidence in the country's financial markets. Do you
agree?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :58 -- NC092462)
Allan Meltzer: No, I don't. I don't see any evidence [that the
move is necessary]. The economy has been moving along. These
people (eds: government officials) have been predicting
disaster since January. Their forecasts have just been wrong.
They may be right this time, but let's put it to the test. What
I see so far happening is nothing like what they're describing.

Let's take some examples. Lehman [Brothers, the stock brokerage
that recently was allowed to fail]: well, in about a week it
had sold its U.S. operations to Barclay's [Bank of London], it
sold its foreign operations to a Japanese bank. So there seems
to be money around to bail these things out, if the government
gets out of the way. What happened with Goldman Sachs, [another
broker whose stock has fallen]? It just got $5 billion from a
domestic source, Mr. [Warren] Buffett [the leading U.S.
investor]. Buffett must think that there's value there. I mean,
he's not what's known as a stupid investor.

And there are lots of other examples. I mean, AIG [American
International Group, which the U.S. government recently bailed
out] -- there were three [private] offers for AIG. They [AIG's
board] didn't take them. The reason they didn't take them was
probably because they thought they'd get a better deal from the
[U.S.] Treasury (eds: Finance Ministry).

продолжение

[vlad-ab.livejournal.com]

RFE/RL: So you're saying a bailout by the Treasury simply isn't
necessary because there's plenty of private money available to
rescue faltering financial institutions? And that there's more
confidence in the system than the U.S. administration believes
there is?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :30 -- NC092463)
Meltzer: There's enough people with private confidence and who
know a bargain when they see one to say, "Gee, this is a good
time to buy up these distressed assets." There seems to be
capital around the world that believes that the U.S. is not
falling apart and that these assets are cheap and it's a good
time to buy. So I just don't see the evidence that this [a
complete collapse of the financial markets] is going to happen.
And if it does happen, well, [there will be] time enough to do
things [consider rescue plans], and there are things that they
can do without coming up with $700 billion.

RFE/RL: What are the alternatives?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :27 -- NC092464)
Meltzer: One would be to apply a law that we have on the books
since 1991, which says before the capital is all gone [from a
company], the government can take it over and reorganize it. It
doesn't need to put in $700 billion, it can do them one at a
time if it has to. We have the FDIC (eds: Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation) to help with smaller banks -- it can't
handle the huge ones, but the huge ones don't seem to be in
need of a bailout at this point.

RFE/RL: What about the slowdown in lending because of the bad
home loans, or mortgages, that caused the current economic
shock in the first place?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :26 -- NC092465)
Meltzer: Banks are lending "C and I" loans -- commercial and
industrial loans -- at banks are going up, there isn't a sign
yet of a credit crunch that they keep talking about -- except
in New York. That's where the heart of this crisis is. And how
does bailing out the New York banks and insurance companies and
so on -- how does that help solve the problem of housing? I
don't see it. I don't see the connection.

RFE/RL: Professor Meltzer, you said a little earlier that big
American companies usually get their way -- get a government
bailout -- because they convince the government that the U.S.
economy can't survive without them. Are there examples where
Washington didn't come to their aid?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :52 -- NC092466)
Meltzer: For 40 years, I've heard the government tell us that
if we don't do this [bail out foundering corporations], the
world is going to come to an end. Well, there've been only
three examples that I know of where that didn't happen.

Let me tell you just one of them. The Penn Central Railroad
failed -- went into bankruptcy -- in 1970. Many thought this is
really a disaster, and they started to yell, "Disaster!
Disaster! We really need help!" President [Richard] Nixon was
about to agree on a bailout when -- lo and behold -- Penn
Central hired as its bankruptcy lawyer the Rose Law Firm, from
which Nixon came. That made it toxic [as a conflict of
interest], as far as Nixon was concerned. He didn't do the
bailout. And what happened? Very little. There are other
examples of this, but not many because they (eds: foundering
companies) usually get their way. This time, maybe not.

окончание

[vlad-ab.livejournal.com]

RFE/RL: Are you saying it's time that the U.S. government
shouldn't rescue Wall Street, letting it earn its lumps for
betting other people's money on risky investments?

(INSERT AUDIO -- Meltzer in English -- length :50 -- NC092467)
Meltzer: I don't want to punish people for making mistakes. In
life, we all make mistakes, so it's (eds: my suggestion is) not
punitive. I'm opposed to this [government bailout plan] because
I don't think it's necessary. I believe we could get a market
solution if the government would stop pushing money at the
problem. And if we need to do it, there are other ways to do
it. I mentioned one.

Another one would be to make loans. Why not lend them the money
and make them pay it back with interest? If they need it and
they're in crisis, that's a solution. This (eds: the bailout
plan) is the government protecting the private interest at the
expense of the public interest, and I don't like that. And I
believe that we won't have a [financial] system for very long
if we allow the bankers to make the profits and the public
takes the losses. I'm not against them making the profits, but
they have to take the downside along with the upside.

RFE/RL: Thank you, Professor Meltzer.

hm/

Re: окончание

[cheeha.livejournal.com]

Спасибо! Прочитала с большим интересом.

Но, боюсь, что члены Конгресса и американская публика не часто слушают радио Свобода. Ближе к дому я слыхала кое-что на NPR. А, казалось бы, всякие эксперты должны бы говорить по всем каналам новостей, однако, слово предоставляется экономическим советникам МакКейна и Обамы, сенаторам и конгрессменам, обозревателям и комментаторам и т.п. И так час за часом, жвачка 24/7. Я обычно ящик не смотрю, но сейчас временами включаю. А уж пригласить экспертов на слушания вроде сам Бог велел. Ведь идёт процесс о 700 миллиардах!