Sunday, April 15, 2012

The Fed Is Helping To Bailout Europe

On Tuesday, March 26, 2012, I was invited by Ron Paul and his staff to assist a meeting of the Domestic Monetary Policy and Technology Subcommittee of the House Committee on Financial Services.[...]

The hearing dealt mainly with the Fed's currency swap with the ECB, which amounts to a covert bailout of European banks.[...]

During the financial crisis between 2007 and 2009, the Fed had bailed out European banks mainly through direct loans
to subsidiaries in the United States. In order to conceal the bailouts, the Fed now uses mainly currency swaps. In the swap, the Fed sells dollars to the ECB and buys them back later at the same price, receiving interests. This construction resembles a dollar loan to the ECB at about 0.6 percent (0.5 percent above the federal-funds rate). The ECB can then use these dollars to lend them to troubled European banks. At the hearing the Fed officials did not deny the obvious: the bailout of European banks by the Fed. Rather, they claimed that the bailout was basically a free lunch for US taxpayers, as they would get an almost-risk-free benefit in the form of the interest on the swap.[...]

Let's have a look at these startling arguments. Fir
st, there ain't no such a thing as a free lunch; not even for the Fed, the ultimate money producer.[...] One cost of the swap operation acknowledged by the officials in the hearing is the moral hazard created. Banks and governments worldwide may expect that the Fed will come to save them, too, especially if they are well connected with the US financial system. So why be prudent?

The article then goes on to point out what bailing out bankrupt welfare nations through the IMF and the Federal Reserve is resulting:

The highest cost of the swaps, though, may be something else. Through the swaps, the Fed is helping the ECB to bail out European banks that finance insolvent and irresponsible governments. The Fed is indirectly bailing out countries like Greece, Portugal, and Spain, debasing the dollar. Thanks to the bailouts, the political project of the euro continues. Without the swaps, some European banks might have failed, and with them their sovereigns. Thanks to the swaps, the eurozone stays intact.

The project of the euro leads to an ever-increasing rescue fund, and gradually toward a fiscal union and more centralization. A European financial government and the European super state, which would most likely abolish tax competition in Europe, are on the horizon. The highest cost of the Fed policy, therefore, may be liberty in Europe.[...]

Finally, the Fed claims to be prudent. But how can the Fed know the point at which it is no longer prudent to bail out foreign banks? How can it know when the costs of the bailouts start to exceed the benefits to the US public? How can they know what is best for the United States? Interpersonal-utility comparisons are arbitrary. Thanks to the bailouts, some banks may win, some stock owners may win, but at the cost of liberty in Europe and to the detriment of dollar users. Moreover, bailouts produce moral hazards, crises, and losses for individuals in the future. Yet the Fed claims to know what to do: social engineering at its best — or, as Hayek would put it, a fatal conceit on the part of central (banking) planners.

In sum, the Fed has assumed the task of bailing out the financial industry and governments worldwide by debasing the dollar. Fed officials claim to know that the bailout-swaps are basically a free lunch for US taxpayers and a prudent thing to do. Thank God the world is in such good hands.

The whole article is a worth reading. This last main points of the article state some of the main arguments that I have against the IMF/World Bank, the Federal Reserve, and central banking in general: that is is allowing the continuation of failed socialist economic policies and failed welfare states to the effect of helping to set up a global economic system based on central planing/socialism. Whether this is by design or simply the result of hubris on the part of the central banks does not change what is happening. ("The Creature From Jekyll Island" is worth reading to learn more about central banking in general.)

3 comments:

  1. Nice find. I read an article similar and its a tragedy. A private bank with a Federal name anonymously controlling a nation of 310 million peoples currency (rates/m1/m2/etc) The fact that this operation (Amendment 16 in the Constitution) has been going on for 100 years and of my knowledge has only opened its book to the public just recently, but still won't give a total breakdown of their balance sheet and liabilities.

    The are pushing for a banker takeover by debt slavery. Do you know who the new PMs of Italy and Greece are? *hint* Goldman Sachs...

    "The European Central Bank, another crucial player in the sovereign debt drama, is under ex-Goldman management, and the investment bank's alumni hold sway in the corridors of power in almost every European nation, as they have done in the US throughout the financial crisis. Until Wednesday, the International Monetary Fund's European division was also run by a Goldman man, Antonio Borges, who just resigned for personal reasons."
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/what-price-the-new-democracy-goldman-sachs-conquers-europe-6264091.html

    This a decent read on the recent transitions in Europe and what an investment bank and their ex-employees have been able to obtain.

    I will continue with more when I have some time.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yeah, there is a revolving door between the governments in America and Europe and Goldman Sachs: a lot of people that worked at Goldman Sachs have also worked in the government.
    The Federal Reserve was founded by bankers who wanted to create a government supported and enforced cartel of banks. The bankers avoid competition and can pursue their agenda and the politicans are able to spend more moeny than they have without having to raise taxes immeditately. Instead they can pay for it through the hidden tax of inflation. If the government had to raise taxes everytime it wanted to spend money it didn't have, the people would not support it. Deficit spending and debt is the mechanism central banks use to achieve their goal. Bailouts are a big part of their strategy and are by design. What central banks--to include the IMF/World Bank that are morphing into a world central bank, this was Keynes the intellectual founding father of these organizations goal and hope--are helping to bring about is some socialist-fanstay-new-world order crap. I know that sounds crazy and quite frankly stupid if you haven't read up on this stuff. Maybe somebody can take the time to come up with a more indirect way of saying this. Of course you have to be careful in that if you go to far you can obsfucate or destroy the truth.

    Americans are paying for having to bailout Europe and American institutions with inflation which leads to paying higher food and energy prices.

    America is not that far behind, within a decade or two, Europe in terms of having to face the consequences of their welfare programs going broke. A low birth rate is not the cause of this problem. Although it does contribute to it significantly. As nations become more advanced the birth rate naturally declines. I know the birth rate here in America has fallen due to the bad economy. I know the European race is being replaced by Muslims today. Although I think having kids and a family is very important and a great service to mankind, a lot of people that are having kids today should not be having them. They are having them outside of marriage or having them too young. Then they go on welfare and become a leech to society. They also become deliquents and criminals. So a high birthrate among the wrong demographic can contribute to the collapse of welfare programs.

    I like the premise of the movie "Idiocracy" that the dumb people are deciding to have too many kids and the smart people are deciding to not have kids that leads to a future where dumb people rule the planet. Look around today.

    ReplyDelete
  3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQ-RtxawH9Q&feature=player_embedded

    I found this video yesterday: A 12yr old Canadian girl that knows more about monetary policy than 99% of the people I know.

    Gives a basic breakdown but related to Canada which in terms can be related to any country.

    ReplyDelete