Thursday, January 7, 2010, 11:41AM ET - U.S. Markets close in 4 hours and 19 minutes.

How to Build a Better Bailout

Posted Sep 25, 2008 01:40pm EDT by Aaron Task

Update: Congressional Republicans and Democrats are reported to have agreed "in principle" on Paulson's bailout plan, saying they would present it to President Bush in hopes of a vote within days.

The $700 billion bailout plan making its way through Congress has come under intense scrutiny, from Main Street to Wall Street and even a few folks in Washington, D.C.

But if the Paulson plan isn't right, what is?

I put that question before Joshua Rosner, managing director of Graham Fisher & Co., an analyst Fortune dubbed a "prophet of the credit crisis" for his prescient warnings.

"We do need to do something. It's a crisis," Rosner concedes. "But we need to be considered and talk about what would work."

His recommendations include:

  • The government acting as lender of last resort, rather than the buyer as currently proposed.
The government should play the role of market maker - putting buyers and sellers together -- rather than "the government as speculator," as per the plan for Treasury to buy $700 billion of bad debt and hope for a positive return down the road.
  • Force banks to open up Level 3 and disclose what they're actually holding and how they're valuing them.
  • "The Swedish Solution": Faced with a similar crisis in the 1990s, Sweden forced banks to write down bad loans, then the government injected liquidity into the system and profited from the upside after taking equity stakes in the banks.

In other words, the government could do what it did with AIG -- an $85 billion loan with onerous terms -- on a much bigger scale.

"That is the road we should be thinking about," Rosner says. "Part of reason Japan ended up in such morass is they did not force write-downs. Instead, small banks with bad loans were bought by bigger banks with bad loans." (Sound familiar?)

Rather than solving the crisis, moving bad debt from the banks' balance sheet to the government's -- as is currently proposed -- is just another form of off-balance sheet financing, which Rosner notes "was a big cause of the problems" to begin with.

85 Comments

SatishS
SatishS - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:44PM EDT

What congress is doing is appropriate.. There is no hurry to write a blank check for $700B. Let's start with $150-200B and see where it takes.. who knows $700B may not be required!! Funny comparision yesterday, $700B Bailout is more than S.Korea's budget, it is more than Pentagon's budget and hold on to your seats, it is more than the Education Budget for schools!!!! No wonder we have Stupid kids coming out of High Schools and Colleges!!!! If they had spent more money in Education 10-15 years ago, we would not have been in this $700B mess!!!

Sao
Sao - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:46PM EDT

Fine bailout is a go, now allow all the people whom have had forclosed and filed bankruptcy to get a MORTGAGE loan so they can get back into the housing market...THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION. THIS WILL STABILIZE ALL MARKET situation, short and long term. Because houses are cheap and affordable now...god damn it, why don't those senagators think of this!

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:47PM EDT

who wants to help the guy who lost his job, or the couple who lost their home?

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:49PM EDT

Here is the simplest way of looking at the problem. Imagine we are a bunch of kids playing the board game Monopoly. It is a long and tedious game that can last for hours if played to conclusion. The played to conclusion outcome always being that all players but one eventually go broke and one player has acquired all the monopoly dollars to be had. Now UNLESS that winning player is willing to put the money back in the "bank" to be redistributed in the standard starting allotment to other players again. (i.e, instead the winning player just takes that monopoly money and hides it in his bedroom or takes it to his 2nd grade class and dupes the other kids into believing they should sell their cookies to him for his "monopoly money" , the silly things that selfish bratty inconsiderate CHILDREN do), nobody else gets to play the game again until until more monopoly money is ordered from Barker Bros. the maker of the game. Okay so now, a new package of "monopoly money" arrives in the mail and the game can be restarted. But now what happens this time is that instead of this new money being equally distributed to all the players to "restart" the game, the same selfish, bratty, inconsiderate child that has already won the last game just takes the newly received monopoly dollars and goes and hides it in his bedroom again. Guess what, the game can never restart can it!! It would be nothing but complete idiots of parents that would authorize that to happen. Unless of course their amoral child is bringing some of the cookies he swindles off of his classmates home and giving those to his parents. Are you getting the picture yet??? So what would normally happen in that scenario? Well none of the other kids are ever going to play the game anymore with the "monopoly bully kid". "Forget it, you don't play fair" they all say. "aw c'mon the monopoly bully kid says" I won't do that again, pleeeeeeease let's jsut play the game again" I'll give you a few crumbs from the big sack of cookies I have gotten from the kids in my class if you do". Finally the other kids in their wimpy childish wills relent because the reward of a few cookie crumbs sounds better to them then no cookie at all. So they begin a new Monopoly game again. Same scenario happens again. Except now the other kids refuse to ever, ever, ever, ever play the game with the "Monopoly bully kid" again. Well by now the bully is so addicted to swindling the other kids at school with his monopoly dollars (who themselves are pretty damn stupid to believe that those dollars have any real value at all) that he now has a desperate pathological "need" (psychopathic actually) to swindle his classmates of their cookies, so he sneaks into Mom and Dad's room and gets their gun, and points it at his siblings and says "Play monopoly with me or you will die." (seems I heard something similar on televison last night.) So the other kids reluctantly agree. And so it goes. The kids play the game reluctantly under such threat. Put during a kool-aid break they talk amongst themselves and realize if they just get together they can overcome the "monopoly bully kid". So they return to the game and as soon as the monopoly bully makes one more kid go broke and then arrogantly chortles "ha, ha, you're a loser, give me all your properties and money". Well that is the last straw and the other kids fling up the monopoly board, pounce on the monopoly thief, beat him up till he is bloody and then take him out back to the pool and hold him under water until he drowns. Kids can be so mean at times, can't they. . . . . . . . . .

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:51PM EDT

We don't need a better bailout plan We need people who won't put us in a position to need ANY bailout plan. Having said that let's HOPE this helps GOD BLESS US ALL !!!

Sao
Sao - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:51PM EDT

Let downers go down, too rich now. Let new beginners begin from $0.00

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:54PM EDT

The bailout must include repeal of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1996 (the PSLRA). Since the PSLRA we have had 2 booms and busts due to fraudulent oversold securities - the dot.com/enron bust and the mortgage securities bust. If lawyers, accountants and investment banks had been subject to the same liability as they were prior to the PSLRA, neither bust would have happened. We need these scammers and schemers again subject to civil liability for writing, auditing and underwriting these securities. From the passage in 1934 of the Securities Exchange Act until the PSLRA, we had no similar massive securities bubbles and busts based on untransparent securities. We have to get the 1933 and 1934 Acts back in business, and the only way is through enforcement by private plaintiffs under 10b-5 against aiders and abettors.

C
C - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:56PM EDT

IS IT TRUE HANK PAULSON MADE 700 MILLION WHILE AT GOLDMAN SACHS AND IT WAS MAKING ALL THE DERIVATIVES AND MORTAGAGES DOES IT MEAN HE KNEW?

C
C - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:57PM EDT

IS IT TRUE HANK PAULSON MADE 700 MILLION WHILE AT GOLDMAN SACHS AND IT WAS MAKING ALL THE DERIVATIVES AND MORTAGAGES DOES IT MEAN HE KNEW?

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:57PM EDT

IS IT TRUE HANK PAULSON MADE 700 MILLION WHILE AT GOLDMAN SACHS AND IT WAS MAKING ALL THE DERIVATIVES AND MORTAGAGES DOES IT MEAN HE KNEW?HE COULD GET LOTS OF PROFIT

Steve
Steve - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:00PM EDT

thanks to Bush and his cronies, now we are all speculators.

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:01PM EDT

IS IT TRUE HANK PAULSON MADE 700 MILLION WHILE AT GOLDMAN SACHS AND IT WAS MAKING ALL THE DERIVATIVES AND MORTAGAGES DOES IT MEAN HE KNEW?HE COULD GET LOTS OF PROFIT

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:01PM EDT

Derivatives will be our down fall. Lending is a much better idea. What they plan to do is disastrous to the future. Sweden has also a better plan. Where will we get the money to pay interest to the countries that buy our debt? It is an outrageous transfer of wealth. Speculators win. Savers lose.

FANFOREVER
FANFOREVER - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:03PM EDT

Chargers Rule (not), your wrong that no one has 500,000. The same scum that have caused this have it and they know not to put it in the banks. Tell me that most Americans haven't read (in the last week) about the FDIC and whether your checking and savings are safe. Tell me NOBODY checked to make sure their aggregate balances didn't exceed the 100,000 number. The money is out there ! Bailouts for all should end...Ford, GM, AIG, etc...who got the bucks from all of these...CEO's. The common person got the shaft and\or lost their job in cuts. Find another way to fix it.

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:04PM EDT

Even more astute solution . . . . . .

Paul Zag
Paul Zag - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:09PM EDT

raising4daughters - Thursday September 25, 2008 02:31PM EDT Times like these make me wonder if we'd be better off if Flight 93 had reached its target. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:09PM EDT

It's bad. It's severe. Be afraid. BE VERY AFRAID. Thanks George for the closing contributions to your legacy. From George's speech: "There are other good ideas, and members of Congress should consider them. As they do, they must ensure that efforts to regulate Wall Street do not end up hampering our economy's ability to grow." Excuse me, but isn't this another way of saying there's an ongoing encouragement of minimal oversight and regulation, which is how we got to this point in the first place? It could have been so simple. 1. Put all your cards on the table. That means no more hidden derivatives, period. If you've got em, show em. No more over the counter crap. (which are the REAL cause of the huge financial losses.) That means 401k disclosure. That means no off the table crap. 2. If you want to buy a home, you have to prove that you are capable of the minimal amount of financial discipline. Show us a real, legit (not borrowed) down payment, 20% minimum. If you can't, come back later when you can put that crap down that you keep buying and save up the 20%. If you still can't, guess what, it won't cost you $500,000 to buy a house that should cost $200,000 anyway.

ThomasC
ThomasC - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:13PM EDT

This is a saving grace for Bush and his political party - He will sit back and watch the next guy take the fall - This holds true with everything he does - Nothing ever comes to a happy conclusion - Afganistan, the war, the economony, the energy crisis - What has he accomplished - Absolutely nothing! - Oh - I shouldn't say that ....He accomplished a lot- Put us in a war that we shouldn't be in -Doubled the price of gas and heating oil -saw food prices climb so high that more Americans can't feed their family- put more Americans out of work - and sat back and watched the ecomony go down in flames - and is bringing us closer to a socialist society- Thank god he's out of office soon - Don't know how much more this country can take - I just feel sorry for the next guy -

Yahoo! Finance User
Yahoo! Finance User - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:19PM EDT

This doesn't seem all that workable. His first idea is to find buyers for the investment firms, with the Treasury underwriting the existing the existing potentially worthless bonds/loans. Assuming we would want such a buyer to actually make a substantial payment for the US investment industry, who has that kind of cash? China, the Saudi's, ... I'm not sure that I like that idea. His second idea seems to conflict with the first. The US Government essentially nationalized AIG. That isn't bringing in an outside investor, it's a takeover by the government.

Busha
Busha - Thursday September 25, 2008 03:21PM EDT

What if instead of using the 700 Billion to bail out banks, what about distributing this money to the taxpayers? Considering the US has about 300million people, this would equate to approximately US$2300 to every man, woman and child....this would then in turn be injected back into the economy and used by people to avoid foreclosures....as well as helping the banking industry for people who simply choose to dump their money into a savings account or continue to pay their mortgage....

Yahoo! reserves the right to refuse, or remove any comment that does not comply with the Yahoo! Terms of Service. The submission of spam, hateful, or obscene messages may result in the termination of your Yahoo! ID.
About Tech Ticker - Send FeedbackDisclaimer. Copyright © 2007 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Copyright/IP Policy - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Help
Quotes delayed, except where indicated otherwise. Delay times are 15 mins for NASDAQ, NYSE and Amex. See also delay times for other exchanges.

Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes for NASDAQ, NYSE and Amex. See also delay times for other exchanges. Real-Time continuous streaming quotes are available through our premium service. You may turn streaming quotes on or off. Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Financials data provided by Edgar Online. Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data, daily updates, fund summary, fund performance, dividend data and Morningstar Index data provided by Morningstar, Inc. Analyst estimates data provided by Thomson Financial Network. All data provided by Thomson Financial Network is based solely upon research information provided by third party analysts. Yahoo! has not reviewed, and in no way endorses the validity of such data. Yahoo! and ThomsonFN shall not be liable for any actions taken in reliance thereon. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.