|
Editor's Note- In this article
Olivier Garret, CEO of
The Casey Report
shows us the massive extent of the bailout compared to every
major Government expenditure from the Revolutionary War and the
Louisiana Purchase to the Iraq War in inflation adjusted terms
and the results are pretty scary.
Based on the
magnitude of the bailout expenditures it appears Hyperinflation
is already baked into the cake. You thought WWII and Iraq were
expensive? You "ain't seen nothin' yet. The current
bailout is larger than all the major government expenditures
since the revolutionary war combined.
And lest
you think that is because the bailout is comparing inflated
dollars against more valuable (and thus smaller numbers) it
isn't. This article uses all inflation adjusted numbers!
In
three months, Paulson and Bernanke spent more than twice the
cost of all of WWII.
Iraq? Vietnam? A drop in the bucket.
The Real Cost of the 2008 Bailout- Hyperinflation
By Olivier
Garret, CEO,
The Casey Report
www.caseyresearch.com
It took the statisticians of the National
Bureau of Economic Research almost a year to confirm what the
rest of us already knew, that the US registered a significant
decline in economic activity, thus officially entering a period
of recession.
While I am pleased
that the members of NBER take their duties seriously, thereby
ensuring that they don’t leap to any hasty conclusions, I only
wish that similar moderation could be displayed by their
colleagues at the Fed and the Treasury.
Unfortunately, the
facts prove otherwise. Three months before the recession was
officially declared, Paulson and Bernanke have embarked on the
largest bailout program ever conceived with the blessing of a
lame-duck president and a complicit Congress - a program which
so far will cost taxpayers $8.5 trillion. This staggering sum
encompasses: loans backed by worthless assets ($2.3T), equity
investments in bankrupt companies with negative net worth
($3.0T), and guarantees on crumbling derivatives and other
hollow collateral ($3.2T).

Back in September
I was stunned that Paulson was able to make his case and win the
support of Congress for a $700 billion bailout package (more
than the total war spending in Iraq to date).
How could
Americans (or more accurately, their representatives) agree to
give such a broad mandate with so few checks and balances? Have
we become completely numb?
While I realize
that many of our compatriots have been running large credit card
balances and interest-only mortgages with little thought as to
how they would repay their debt, one would expect a little more
restraint when dealing with the financial future of the largest
economy in the world.
Operating under
the assumption that our largest financial institutions are “too
big to fail”, in the span of a few weeks we went from pledging
to spend $1 trillion to $3 trillion – a commitment which then
grew to $5 trillion before ballooning to a staggering $8.5
trillion.
At the rate we are
going, we will be dealing with double digits – in trillions-
before the end of the year.
And while all off
that money is not yet spent, make no mistake - these are real
commitments with serious liabilities attached to them.
I have heard the
argument that an equity infusion is not the same as spending
money. While I would agree that in an arms-length transaction
this might actually be the case, our government is definitely
paying a large premium. What is the real value of Citicorp or
AIG? Since they are quasi-bankrupt (and would be totally
bankrupt without massive injections from the Fed), a reasonable
businessperson might pay a token price for their equity and the
assumption of their enormous liabilities. Before doing so
however, a buyer would have to see some significant value in
buying these entities as a continuing business. In most cases,
a buyer would not want to assume the company’s liabilities but
would prefer to buy selective unencumbered assets in a
bankruptcy proceeding. Any money our government pays above what
a reasonable person would pay in an arms-length transaction is
real spending and should more accurately be called a grant.
While defenders of
the too-big-to-fail policies argue that providing guarantees is
not the same as granting money, the reality is that these
guarantees are necessary to prevent the collapse of financial
institutions currently lacking the necessary collateral to meet
their loan covenants. Should their loans be called, we could
actually find out the real value of their assets. The fact is
that in-spite of Paulson’s and Bernanke’s efforts, deleveraging
is already happening. Although at a slower pace, one asset
class after another is being adjusted down towards its intrinsic
value, which is usually not much. Make no mistake; many of
these guarantees will eventually be called in by lenders. In
due time, unless our government is able to inflates its way out
of this bottomless pit, it will have to honor most of these
guarantees.
So how does $8.5
trillion dollars compare with the cost of some of the major
conflicts and programs initiated by the US government since its
inception? To try and grasp the enormity of this figure, let’s
look at some other financial commitments undertaken by our
government in the past:



As illustrated
above, you can see that in today’s dollars, we have already
committed to spending levels that surpass the cumulative
cost of all of the major wars and government initiatives
since the American Revolution.
Recently, the
Congressional Research Service estimated the cost of all of the
major wars our country has fought in 2008 dollars. The chart
above shows that the entire cost of WWII over four to five years
was less than half the current pledges made by Paulson and
Bernanke in the last three months!
In spite of years
of conflict, the Vietnam and the Iraq wars have each cost less
than the bailout package that was approved by Congress in two
weeks. The Civil War that devastated our country had a total
price tag (for both the Union and Confederacy) of $60.4 billion,
while the Revolutionary War was fought for a mere $1.8 billion.
In its fifty or so
years of existence, NASA has only managed to spend $885 billion
– a figure which got us to the moon and beyond.
The New Deal had a
price tag of only $500 billion. The Marshall Plan that enabled
the reconstruction of Europe following WWII for $13 billion,
comes out to approximately $125 billion in 2008 dollars. The
cost of fixing the S&L crisis was $235 billion.
The best deal ever
for a government program was the Louisiana Purchase, a deal with
the French that gave us 23% of the surface of today’s US for
only $15 million ($284 million in today’s dollars). Why
couldn’t Paulson and Bernanke display the financial acumen of a
Thomas Jefferson?
How will our
country repay its debts? The current bailout represents...
Go
To
Next Column
|