Bailout Resurrected

… try, try again, indeed. Yesterday, U.S House of Representatives approved the massive bank bailout boondoggle, which was immediately signed into law by our Panderer-in-Chief, President Shrub.

Let’s stop and think for a second what would have happened if a bill like this had landed on Washington or Jefferson’s desk, shall we? They’d have not only vetoed it, but I suspect it would have ended up as kindling for the White House fireplace.

You don’t save the “free market” by making it less free, people, which is why we’re seriously considering sending all of these Washington sellouts “WWTJD” (What Would Thomas Jefferson Do?) wristbands, since they’re obviously wearing “WWJSD” (What Would Joseph Stalin Do?) wristbands at the moment.

Anyway, this bill’s approval was made possible thanks to “flippers” like South Carolina’s own Gresham Barrett - politicians for whom doing the right thing was merely a prelude to doing the wrong thing.

And, the doomsday financial alarmism notwithstanding, a systematic slaughter of capitalism definitely amounts to doing the wrong thing.

Still, though, not too many people besides us have the right to complain about the bailout.

On this issue, Americans have a collective case of schizophrenia, and if we didn’t hate Congress so much right now, we might actually feel bad for those politicians whose job it is to make sense of their constituents’ bipolarity.

Last weekend, as Congress negotiated the terms of the bailout, Americans were irate at the proposed assault on capitalism. Then after the bill failed on Monday - just like people had hoped - those same Americans blustered about the ominous financial fallout of Congress’s inaction, citing the stock market’s plunge as an apocalyptic harbinger of universal destitute.

Most everyone spent the rest of the week begging the government to “do something,” which Congress finally did today. And now, the people are back to opposing the bailout.

Geez. Congress really was damned when it did, and damned when it didn’t …

What most people don’t understand is that when voters ask the government to “do something,” the result is never going to be good.

Remember what Ronald Reagan once described as the “nine most frightening words in the English language?”

“I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”

Seriously, most of the world’s problems can be traced back to people demanding that government to “do something.” Stay with us here … we do have a point, and it isn’t that we’re misanthropic anarchists.

Our point is that when people say “do something,” what the government hears is “do anything.” And “do everything.”

And the result of that is anarchy of sorts. When the government is free to act without restraint or limitation - when the rule of law doesn’t apply to the rulers of law - governance is diluted to the point of virtual nonexistence.

Fear is the only thing that makes all of this possible - well, fear and a gratuitous government pacifier for the fear.

Take the increased limits on FDIC coverage, for example. Americans have been rightfully freaking out about the safety of their bank accounts, so, in response to the fear, Congress built into the bailout a sizable increase in FDIC limits. Account holders are pleased for the time being, blissfully sucking on the pacifier that is the 150% increase in deposit coverage.

Satisfied that the government “did something,” the gratuity of what government actually did is obscured by the fact that the FDIC is, especially now, largely meaningless. The FDIC is an insurance company - it says so right there in the name - and insurance companies operate within a strict asset-liability context. No insurance company - even one that is government-backed - can increase liabilities by 150% and remain solvent in the event that those liabilities turn into claims.

The coverage may as well have been increased to $5 million, as the FDIC would have as much success paying that out as it would covering the new limits. Again, it’s a meaningless measure that, if ever actually called upon, makes the entire FDIC irrelevant.

That’s just one reason among many that this bailout is a bad idea, as we’ve always known it to be - and make no mistake, we have “like totally” always known it was bad.

No schizophrenia at FITSNews … which is probably good, because given our shared diagnosis as histrionic narcissists (on top of all Sic Willie’s issues), that’s probably all the psychosis one office can handle.

Comments