Follow up

I've read some people say that the Fed hasn't bailed out anybody in this deal. Wrong. They have most certainly done so. Not BSC's shareholders, but rather their bondholders. That, and they've gift wrapped BSC's equity for JPM, handing them essentially $10bn. If the Fed was truly a lender of last resort, there wouldn't an issue. Just business. Unless the details change, that's not what's happening here.

A libertarian in a foxhole

What's going on now on Wall Street is a mess. Firms will fail. It will have a negative effect on the economy. You know what? So what. Capitalism without failure can't work. Whatever problems there are with welfare for the poor, they are much worse for welfare for the rich. Bailing out firms will only make the next crisis even worse, as people rationally conclude that they can take excessively huge risks and have the government bail them out if they fail. If the JP Morgan purchase of Bear Stearns was done without guarantees from the Fed or any other government organization, I'd say good for them, buying illiquid but valuable assets cheaply is smart. If the Fed were a profit-maximizing, truly private, organization, whether they essentially guaranteed JPM against losses for profit or for altruistic reasons wouldn't much concern me. A little, but not much. When the government does what it did, it only delays (and increases) the problems. We are seeing an acceleration in the rate of inflation, and the Fed has to shoulder much of the blame. Perhaps not all of it, but the lion's share, and recent actions are only going to continue that trend. And, yes, inflation is a negative for standards of living. I'm still skeptical of the deep recession story, but avoiding a recession completely seems increasingly unlikely. Most likely, we are already in one now. Perhaps some leaning in the wind, as they say, is called for, but this is ridiculous. Sorry if I've ranted too much, but I want to get this on record now.

Don't try this at home

Or anywhere.

Choosing the Lessest of Three Dictators

I've been thinking about the Presidential race. Assuming my man Ron Paul (warts and all) is out of it, even as a 3rd part candidate, I'm supporting Obama. I've been leaning that way for a while, but re-reading this piece, I was reminded of why I can't stand the thought of Clinton becoming President. That, and that even if she wanted to, I don't think she could get us out of Iraq; it's the opposite of "only Nixon could go to China". McCain scares me. His disrespect for the Bill of Rights alone does it, but also his warmongering/national greatness ways. How he ever had a reputation among Democrats as being against the Iraq invasion is beyond me. Elements of Obama's platform vex me, but on the biggest issues of 2008, he's right or close to right. My biggest worry with him is that there is a serious likelihood of a cult of personality developing around him. I mean more than there is now. That, my friends, is a very dangerous thing, and something we must watch closely. But, among the 3 with a realistic shot at being president, he seems to be the best choice.

(Yes, I know my title uses bad grammar)

What goes around, comes around

The word "ha!" comes to mind. Hopefully they put him away for a bit, but I'd be shocked if that happens. One question, did she Spit(zer), or...