Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, April 03, 2008
Steve Chapman :: Townhall.com Columnist
Undue Haste on the Economy
by Steve Chapman
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


Democracy does not cultivate a taste for deferred gratification: Politicians eyeing the next election want to give people what they want sooner rather than later. And in a time of economic turmoil, the impulse to do something immediately is even stronger. But the haste is misplaced. In the current climate of panic, policymakers need to learn patience, and they need to learn it right now.

A couple of alleged crises are getting all the attention at the moment. The first is the risk of a recession. The second, not unrelated, is the mortgage meltdown and the credit crunch it has helped to bring about. Just about everyone in Washington agrees that swift action is needed on both.

The scenario brings to mind what the late Ohio State football coach Woody Hayes said about throwing the football: Three things can happen, and two of them are bad. Efforts to micromanage the macroeconomy may be useless, or they may be destructive. In either case, they can impede a painful process that is needed to correct mistakes like the housing bubble.

For all the alarms about a repeat of the Great Depression, it's not a sure thing we'll even have a recession, much less a serious one. A recession is technically defined as two consecutive quarters of negative economic growth -- meaning total output actually declines. A recent Wall Street Journal survey of 51 economists, however, found that, on average, they expect not shrinkage but very slow growth in the first and second quarters.

One economist interviewed by the Journal suggested that "there might not be even one negative quarter in this recession" -- which is the equivalent of a damp drought. Herbert Hoover should have had such problems.

But let's suppose we face a real downturn. If the federal government can do anything to goose growth, it's already doing it. The Federal Reserve has slashed interest rates since last summer, and the Treasury is about to start sending tax rebates to 130 million families, who are supposed to rush out and spend it in a flurry of economic stimulus.

It may not work, but we may never know -- since even if it doesn't, the economy will do what it normally does in a recession, which is to ultimately right itself. But the economic stimulus is no longer such an appealing option for Congress and the president, because it has already been done and therefore can't be done now, which is when they want to be doing something.

Fortunately, the mortgage mess is an excuse for additional intervention, which they can justify in the name of helping homeowners as well as the economy. As it happens, though, an effort to rescue people who can't pay their mortgages will probably make a bad thing worse.

In the first place, it will slow down what has to happen to bring back the housing sector -- which is for prices to drop to a level that will clear out the existing oversupply. In the second, it will shift the burden of bad lending and borrowing decisions from the people who benefited from them to the people who didn't.

Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., is pushing a bill to let the Federal Housing Administration guarantee "at risk" mortgages if lenders agree to reduce the total debt. It might be callous of me to say this approach amounts to rescuing "people who were imprudent and bought more house than they should have." But I didn't say it. Barney Frank did.

If the FHA guarantees all these mortgages -- up to $300 billion worth, if Frank has his way -- it will be putting its trust in people who have already shown themselves to be a bad bet. So taxpayers could end up eating a lot of delinquent loans.

The mortgage problem has had the useful effect of forcing financial institutions to exercise greater care in scrutinizing their customers. A lot of the credit crunch is not a bad thing but a good thing, reflecting a tightening of standards that got way too loose. A bailout, by contrast, can only weaken the lesson we should all learn from this episode.

Acting in a hurry without considering the long-term consequences, you may recall, is how we got into this predicament. Fixing major mistakes is not an overnight task. But in time, foreclosures will subside, the housing sector will return to normal and the economy will regain its usual vigor. Here's what Washington should do to help: Let them.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Steve Chapman is a columnist and editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Regulate the regulators
I am worried about the intellectuals such as Fortune's editor Serwer, who said that it is time to adopt a new model: Government getting ahead of the power curve and regulating markets and instruments as they are born instead of reacting when they go bad. No explanation on how, if up to now government has been unable to keep up, it will be able to keep up in an increasingly complex financial world characterized by level upon level of financial derivatives; or how such regulation would affect economic growth.

He also called for regulation and taxes to stop what he considers to be ridiculous levels of wealth. He said that money managers don't need to make $75 million a year; they can "get by" on $35 million. He never addresses the issue of what will happen to everyone else's jobs when you remove that kind of investment capital from the market. Why should he? He's got his.

Yes, this man works for the magazine Fortune. He is a ringleader of the rabble rousers who are pressuring Congress to smash the life and hopes of anyone who has or seeks wealth.

The financial community should stop cowering and apologizing and move to get that man fired, so he can see first-hand the role that "excess" capital plays in human life.

You know what wendy
Nobody needs $75 million a year. There is not one single person who needs a billion dollars. Reagan doubled the number of billionaires in his first two years of office. But where did those guys get their money from. From theft and abuse of power. They stole it from us, who actually work for a living.

How did they steal it? Easy. Reagan nearly doubled social security payroll tax and raised other taxes that primarily affect the middle class and gave it to the rich in the form of decreased maximum income tax rates. Cute.

Why did the rich need the money, more than the wage earners. Don't wage earners also may have hopes of their own?

The reason is that the rich had power. They could afford to bribe politicians into re-writing the laws and they could buy the newspapers (not just to read, to tell the journalists what to write), and they could change the laws regarding fairness in political speech on public airwaves. That's power.

Like prostitutes Reagan and the rest of the politicians took the bribes and changed the laws. Greenspan then told Reagan, when the market collapse happened and Trickle-down was looking like a bust: Go ahead and borrow that money that all those wage-earners paid into the trust fund for future generations, go ahead, no one will notice, because, in the famous words of Bill Casey "We own everyone of any importance in the media."

How dare you cons call yourselves Americans.

Neocon monetarist apologists
on townhall.com


All is fine. Relax....

One bank failure and caboom...the house of cards falls.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080403/bs_nm/usa_economy_regul ators_dc_7

As Mort Zuckerman says, we are in inning 4 of a 9 inning game.

But the Fed to the rescue...and it won't cost you a dime.

Poll: 3 in 4 think USA is in a recession

USATODAY-More than three in four Americans think the country is in a recession, a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll over the weekend shows, reflecting a crisis of confidence that economists say could make the economy worse.
As the Federal Reserve expanded credit to securities dealers and President Bush said his administration had taken “strong and decisive action,” the poll revealed pessimism about the economy’s direction.

Seventy-six percent of those polled said the economy is in recession, compared to 22% who said it’s not. Not since September 1992, two months before President George H.W. Bush lost re-election, have so many Americans said the economy was in such bad shape.

READ MORE

http://controlcongress.com/uncategorized/poll-3-in-4-think- usa-is-in-a-recession


trughes
Sorry bud, but prostitution is prostitution, so whether the Horrible Rich (isn't envy a wonderful character trait) sell their vote in return for political favor, or the Pooooooooor do in return for Political Favor (i.e. welfare etc....) what the difference does it make.

The problem is that the wealthy actually CREATE situations where those who envy them can actually have a job and work for a living. Those who envy the rich are too lame, too lazy, too cowardly and too uninformed to know how to "create wealth" "create jobs" (which they clamour for) or "create opportunity" all three by the way BENEFIT everyone. Eliminate and minimize a persons ability to do those things and guess what...Those who ENVY the rich...no longer have the JOBS they clamour for...Why? Becuase in an attempt to cut down their overhead, minimize their losses, and keep a "margin of profit"...it is the worker and the money they are paid which is ALWAYS the first to take the hit.

So this childish nonesense and what happens to the rabid members of our culture who slavor in envy, fear, and the like...equates to trying to BITE THE HAND THAT FEEDS IT....Translation? Dumb and dumber which is why they ain't rich in the first place.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.