Video: Treasury’s Kashkari on Rescue Plan
By Barry Ritholtz - October 14th, 2008, 3:00AM
Comments on the details of the rescue plan, with Neel Kashkari, Treasury Dept. assistant secretary
click for video
click for video
>
See Also:
Kashkari Leaps From Obscurity to Lead Role in U.S. Bank Rescue
Robert Schmidt and Rebecca Christie
Bloomberg, Oct. 14 2008
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aR759_pSpbKY&
Treasury to Invest in `Healthy’ Banks, Kashkari Says
Rebecca Christie and Robert Schmidt
Bloomberg, Oct. 13 2008
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aAHSY.n9BG0c&
U.S. Investing $250 Billion in Banks
MARK LANDLER
NYT, October 13, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/business/economy/14treasury.html
October 14th, 2008 at 3:21 am
where do they get these people from?
October 14th, 2008 at 3:38 am
I’d just like to point out that the guy tasked with delivering the cash to the banks is named “CashCarry”. Who wrote this script? It’s terrible.
October 14th, 2008 at 3:50 am
Posted by: Popo | Oct 14, 2008 3:38:05 AM
Bud,
It’s worse than that, it’s Kneel 4 Cash or (hari-)Kari
October 14th, 2008 at 5:20 am
They sucessfully put the event horizon past the election.
Tell me again why we are rescuing “healthy” banks?
Being a nobody simpleton, I would suspect that healthy banks don’t need a bailout.
But that’s probably why I’m a tax supplier and they are a tax consumer.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:10 am
The reason you rescue “healthy” banks is so that no one is frightened away from the “not-so healthy” banks. Finance is confidence in an era where you can move your money back and forth to Iceland with the click of a mouse.
Bravo on the non-interest bearing business checking protections as well, the positioning in the capital structure, comp caps etc.
I applaud this plan and the nuances in it designed with an understanding of how the real world operates. This is an outlier of rational action on the part of the Bush administration.
I hope the ideologues in the White House have learned a lesson.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:17 am
I made a misjudgement the other day. I said the market would not have a major “short squeeze” type bounce. Well it had an amazing bounce on much lower volume than Friday. Not because the shorts covered, but because there is less liquidity because shorts are not playing for some reason. Perhaps hedge funds have no funds to short? The end result will be MUCH higher volatility. Throw VIX and other short term indicators in the trash. Its time to turn to fundamentals…S&P should trade right now at 700 IMO (.7 times sales)…much less if sales crumble. The lack of liquidity could lead to some 1000 point down days as well.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:25 am
I’m sure the terms will be very attractive to attract the most banks. Since they have done such an excellent job, we don’t want to crimp the style of the Masters of the Universe like those commies over in Britain did.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:43 am
This is all just complete rubbish, isn’t it?
“The equity purchase program will be voluntary and designed with attractive terms to encourage participation from healthy institutions.”
But we already know that the program wasn’t voluntary.
We also know that the idea of only rescuing “healthy” banks is stupid. Healthy banks don’t need rescuing by definition, and the failure of Lehman was the thing that precipitated last week’s crisis.
The Bush admin has as much chance of achieving a good outcome here as it had of achieving a good outcome with anything else it’s attempted so far, i.e., pretty much zero.
They don’t know what they’re doing, and they lie constantly.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:58 am
So much for the FED following the “monetary rule.” I’m here reading my old Economics book, trying to gage, “what happens next.” This ending paragraph sticks out:
“In brief, monetarists believe that money has a powerful effect on aggregate demand. Neverthless, they believe that the Federal REserve should NOT attempt to combat business cycles by adjusting monetary policy. The economy is too complex, and our understanding too limited, for such an active policy to help. Instead, the Fed should follow a monetary rule.”
From page 303, “Economics” fourth edition, Paul Wonnacott, Ronald Wonnacott.
It is going to be interesting to see just how too complex, and how limited our understanding actually is. In other words what will be the next tangled mess we get into??? Good luck to all!
October 14th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Do you have to shave your head to work for Paulson?
October 14th, 2008 at 7:26 am
>This is an outlier of rational action on the part of the Bush administration.
The Europeans showed up over the weekend and set them straight.
October 14th, 2008 at 7:48 am
If you want to listen to the whole speech it’s on CSpan:
rtsp://video1.c-span.org/project/economy/econ101308_kashkari.rm
He outlines the seven separate efforts including all the things like buying mortgages and mortgage loans, oversight, etc. Before you criticize too heavily you might want to a) actually get the facts, b)decide if it’s comprehensive enough and c) whether or not you have any better ideas.
What WE need now is solutions not carping critiques.
October 14th, 2008 at 8:30 am
Instead of having to watch an f’ing webcast, how about we see something in writing? Even the Treasury website has no details.
I suppose it’s the Bush Administration STOP. Don’t give out specifics.
All we know so far is amounts and the fact that we don’t get as good an interest rate as any private investors. Don’t want to become socialists here.
I suppose the Europeans are again laughing at what schmucks American taxpayers are.
October 14th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Watched some of it on C-Span yesterday. Neel seems like he is eminently capable of implementing this failed plan with utmost effeciency.
October 14th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
paulson has faith in neel and we’ll all have to as well. yeah, the script sucks and his oratory seems pretty stiff, but judging the man on his name and look is plain ‘ole bigotry and lame.
October 14th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Posted by: lucioloud | Oct 14, 2008 1:02:39 PM
I’m not, nor do think other are, ‘making fun’ of the Man, himself, for his name.
It’s coming from an entirely different vector: one premised upon the idea that we’re being entreated to a Show, replete with Scripts y Choreography, and that his name is apiece.
http://www.yourdictionary.com/apiece
But, worry not, mon friere, feel free to file your reports / the PC Police, then, kindly, Take a Report, for yourself.
October 14th, 2008 at 6:50 pm
i get the drift & there no ain’t pc police comin’ from here as i fully believe in and appreciate a full range of opinions. but say what you want, the set piece is weak and it deserves to be called such.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set-piece
October 14th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Posted by: lucioloud | Oct 14, 2008 6:50:04 PM
Claro!~
In warfare, a set piece battle may involve large formations moving according to a plan and responding to the opposing force also by plan. An example might be the Schlieffen Plan
October 15th, 2008 at 8:26 am
flippin’ CNBS was actually going with ‘Godfather’- Theme music while describing the 9 ‘banks’ getting bailed/free from oversight cash..
what are treasure they are..