The Geithner Plan FAQ

Q: What is the Geithner Plan?
A: The Geithner Plan is a trillion-dollar operation by which the U.S. acts as the world's largest hedge fund investor, committing its money to funds to buy up risky and distressed but probably fundamentally undervalued assets and, as patient capital, holding them either until maturity or until markets recover so that risk discounts are normal and it can sell them off--in either case at an immense profit.

Q: What if markets never recover, the assets are not fundamentally undervalued, and even when held to maturity the government doesn't make back its money?
A: Then we have worse things to worry about than government losses on TARP-program money--for we are then in a world in which the only things that have value are bottled water, sewing needles, and ammunition.

Q: Where does the trillion dollars come from?
A: $150 billion comes from the TARP in the form of equity, $820 billion from the FDIC in the form of debt, and $30 billion from the hedge fund and pension fund managers who will be hired to make the investments and run the program's operations.

Q: Why is the government making hedge and pension fund managers kick in $30 billion?
A: So that they have skin in the game, and so do not take excessive risks with the taxpayers' money because their own money is on the line as well.

Q: Why then should hedge and pension fund managers agree to run this?
A: Because they stand to make a fortune when markets recover or when the acquired toxic assets are held to maturity: they make the full equity returns on their $30 billion invested--which is leveraged up to $1 trillion with government money.

Q: Why isn't this just a massive giveaway to yet another set of financiers?
A: The private managers put in $30 billion and the government puts in $970 billion. If we were investing in a normal hedge fund, we would have to pay the managers 2% of the capital and 20% of the profits every year. In this case, the private managers' returns can be thought of as (a) a share of the portfolio's total return proportional to their 3% contribution, plus (b) a "management incentive fee" of (i) 0% of the capital value and (ii) between 0% (if the portfolio returns 3% per year) and 9% (if the portfolio returns 10% per year)--much less than hedge-fund managers typically charge. the Treasury is only paying 0% of the capital value and 17% of the profits every year.

Q: Why do we think that the government will get value from its hiring these hedge and pension fund managers to operate this program?
A: They do get 17% of the equity return. 17% of the return on equity on a $1 trillion portfolio that is leveraged 5-1 is incentive.

Q: So the Treasury is doing this to make money?
A: No: making money is a sidelight. The Treasury is doing this to reduce unemployment.

Q: How does having the U.S. government invest $1 trillion in the world's largest hedge fund operations reduce unemployment?
A: At the moment, those businesses that ought to be expanding and hiring cannot profitably expand and hire because the terms on which they can finance expansion are so lousy. The terms on which they can finance expansion are so lazy because existing financial asset prices are so low. Existing financial asset prices are so low because risk and information discounts have soared. Risk and information discounts have collapsed because the supply of assets is high and the tolerance of financial intermediaries for holding assets that are risky or that might have information-revelation problems are low.

Q: So?
A: So if we are going to boost asset prices to levels at which those firms that ought to be expanding can get finance, we are going to have to shrink the supply of risky assets that our private-sector financial intermediaries have to hold. The government buys up $1 trillion of financial assets, and lo and behold the private sector has to hold $1 trillion less of risky and information-impacted assets. Their price goes up. Supply and demand.

Q: And firms that ought to be expanding can then get financing on good terms again, and so they hire, and unemployment drops?
A: No. Our guess is that we would need to take $4 trillion out of the market and off the supply that private financial intermediaries must hold in order to move financial asset prices to where they need to be in order to unfreeze credit markets, and make it profitable for those businesses that should be hiring and expanding to actually hire and expand.

Q: Oh.
A: But all is not lost. This is not all the administration is doing. This plan consumes $150 billion of second-tranche TARP money and leverages it to take $1 trillion in risky assets off the private sector's books. And the Federal Reserve is taking an additional $1 trillion of risky debt off the private sector's books and replacing it with cash through its program of quantitative easing. And there is the fiscal boost program. And there is a potential second-round stimulus in September. And there is still $200 billion more left in the TARP to be used in other ways.
Think of it this way: the Fed's and the Treasury's announcements in the past week are what we think will be half of what we need to do the job. And if it turns out that we are right, more programs and plans will be on the way.

Q: This sounds very different from the headline of the Andrews, Dash, and Bowley article in the New York Times this morning: "Toxic Asset Plan Foresees Big Subsidies for Investors."
A: You are surprised, after the past decade, to see a New York Times story with a misleading headline?

Q: No.
A: The plan I have just described to you is the plan that was described to Andrews, Dash, and Bowley. They write of "coax[ing] investors to form partnerships with the government" and "taxpayers... would pay for the bulk of the purchases..."--that's the $30 billion from the private managers and the $150 billion from the TARP that makes up the equity tranche of the program. They write of "the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation will set up special-purpose investment partnerships and lend about 85 percent of the money..."--that's the debt slice of the program. They write that "the government will provide the overwhelming bulk of the money — possibly more than 95 percent..."--that is true, but they don't say that the government gets 80% of the equity profits and what it is owed the FDIC on the debt tranche. That what Andrews, Dash, and Bowley say sounds different is a big problem: they did not explain the plan very well. Deborah Solomon in the Wall Street Journal does, I think, much better. David Cho in tomorrow morning's Washington Post is in the middle.

The Federal Reserve: The Greatest Scam in History

We first posted this article on 13th August 2007 when it appeared to us that the US Dollar along with the economy was heading into such dangerous waters that gold would be the beneficiary. At the time gold was trading at around $670/oz and it closed yesterday at $960 for a gain of $290 or 43.2%. Yesterday was the first time that we have seen the ‘ C ‘ word used as the Federal Reserve announced that it would be buying back $300 billion in longer-term Treasuries in order to assist the economic recovery. This move to buy these Treasuries is regarded by many as a last resort or a sign of panic as the turmoil in the financial markets reaches a crisis point.

Gold was languishing at the $890/oz level just prior to the announcement and then within the hour it rocketed to the $950/oz level as the news of the Feds action spread. Whether it be an article on Market Watch or a mention on the BBC World Service, news travels fast these days to every corner of the planet and investors react accordingly with startling results. A new government and a New Fed , not really, just more of the same but in increasingly larger doses. Todays action will turn out to be a defining moment for the US Dollar and recorded by historians as the beginning of its demise. Unfortunately the worst is yet to come so steel yourself for a force ten storm.

On 4th October 2008 we updated our original essay with the following excerpts;
If we fast forward to time now and read any newspaper the headlines are dominated with the fire fighting actions being implemented by the Federal Reserve with bankers and politicians in tow. From these bailouts we can only conclude that the dilution of paper money will continue with the pace of dilution accelerating, resulting in massive inflation and propelling the precious metals to higher ground. If you have the time, please read this article and then take a look at what's happening around you and then find the time to question what you are doing and why you are doing it. Being too busy to organise your own affairs is a poor excuse. Just switch the television off for a couple of nights and clear your head, the way forward for you personally will become apparent.

The Federal Reserve: The Greatest Scam In History?

This is the original essay posted on 13th August 2007

The Federal Reserve was created in 1913-1914 in order to bring stability to the economy and yet almost every major crash, including the great depression, can be attributed to the Federal Reserve. We are going to take a look at the history of the Fed and what prominent historical figures have said about the organisation.

Firstly, from 1837-1862 there was a system of national banks in the USA but then in 1913-1914 a consortium of 12 privately held banks got together and formed the Federal Reserve Bank, an entity that is not part of the US government. These banks then purchased notes from the US Mint for printing costs and lent them out through member banks charging interest.

The Federal Reserve came into being after its supporters paid for the Presidential campaign of US President Woodrow Wilson. Wilson signed the bill that transferred the US currency to twelve regional private banks Wilson regretted his decision later saying:
“I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men.”

In 1933 President Roosevelt confiscated citizens gold and handed it to the Federal Reserve. At the very moment when Americans have needed to protect their wealth the most, the best store of wealth ever created, gold, was confiscated from American citizens and given to a un-elected conglomerate of private banks.

When the bill for the Federal Reserve was being considered, some brave politicians spoke out against its creation calling it “the strangest, most dangerous advantage ever placed in the hands of a special privilege class by any Government that ever existed” and Congressman Victor Murdock said, “I do not blind myself to the fact that this measure will not be effectual as a remedy for a great national evil – the concentrated control of credit.”

It even appears that one of the most important and most respected figures in American history disagrees with the Federal Reserve saying, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Jefferson also said, “I sincerely believe the banking institutions having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies” “Paper is poverty… it is only the ghost of money, and not money itself.”

Source: Bob Kirtley