The Bailout Plan is just anything but sound. It’s driving insanity to a maximum.
So here are some „fast shots“. One must conclude that this disaster has been benefitted comparable few in the last years. Well agreed people not able to have housing, suddenly get one.
They lost them because houses cost dearly, as everyone owning one just can subscribe. It’s as obviously that loans were granted just on the premist that the house would pay itself in a few years, riskless. This promise definitivls was criminal. So usually you try to get those criminals. This is higly unlikly to happen. Maybe the investigations will show up something, but I do not think it really will harm but a few.
So we know have people with debts around they could not bear. They were not driven to take them but they did, I’m sorry but if you do errors you have to pay for it… Those having sold that we not interested in their faits, but they obviously have lied, and sort of pressed on. So if you say to someone jump of the house and this one can not judge what’ll happen? Who is than responsible?
It’s a bit oversimplified of course, but it’s obviously that those having took the loans, had not idea what’ll happen. the promise was they will get rich quick. It’s snow-balling system and partly self-fullfilling as long as enough get into that avalanche.
Both sides were guilty, in Germany we have some guards against that they are call „sittenwidrige“ Verträge. They are void from the beginning. I don’t know if the US have something comparable, if not that law must get into their laws also.
So in fact I’d argue this could turn to work to safe the credit loanes here. I’d suggest any lawyer in the US to check for such things.
With that we’d have at least a handle to let them feel their reponsibility.
Now let’s go on further up the ladder. Someone must have back up this worthless loans, and they gained from that probaly with high payments. They driven their agents to sign and bring in such contracts. So that can be seen as asking someone to do criminal things. This is chargeable.
I think this could be the leverage we can follow up the ladder. So the middle agents were backed up a level higher but the level below was „criminal“ so, I guess one can make them all chargeable. Now they’ve taken out the money on their own, of course they spend them in all kinds of things, but surely there must be something of value behind it. I’d argue it’s not unfair to take them away most of what they’ve taken out.
The backed up a snow-ball system and I guess this can be charged for in Germany as in the US.
This should IMHO be a handle to get back the taken out money, to quite some extend.
I don’t know if that really works, but it’s one idea.
My next suggestion to the system would be that banks which business it is to lend money, must back up their given credits which much more „own“ money. This will lower the leverage effect and surely will calm down any speculative bubble, based on too „easy“ money. I also would consider not real cap in payments but a cap above which you will get held repsonsible, if such a bubble bursts. I surely would ask anyone beeing owner, to allow throwing out that much money just from the management. Guess what’ll happen if the money has not got into the hands of just a handfuls „managers“ but shareholders?
The responsibility of the central banks are as clear, and those are driven by the politicians. So fact is there was too much money on the market and this comes in the end from the Fed. AFAIKT is the Fed under „polictical“ control. We can not have something over the laws, so the laws must be changed that, to give the fed the highest degree of autonomy. It must be forbidden that the current leading party, can demand „support“ for whatever they deem appropriate. They should just be bound to
keep Inflation rates low.
This has turned out to be work best, we’ve proven it correct for 50 years of West Germany, and it’s the all-above rule for the EZB.
So in fact I would go for laws, fasten the rights of shareholders. I also would not allow managers payments in form of options. Because in this case they have much less risk to bear. If business is running well, you get extremly much from it, but your risk is at an absolute minimum.
So the leverage just works for the managers and can’t work against them. Just imaging the leverage of options is 1:10 and much larger. So you’ve to spend 1 EUR but get back 10 EUR and the most you can loose is this EUR. So no I would disallow any payment in form of options. The problem is that managment can decide what should be the base of this options plan and you can make it that low that it just needs cautious working to get into the profitable sight.
In the end I think one thing is the most promising. Giving more rights to the owners and much less to managment. It has run the other way round for the last decades and better be driven back
The other desparate change is that the central bank must get the only guideline on „keeping the money value stable“. Just think what an inflation rate of let’s say 10 % means. It means within 7 years a trillion is worth 500 billions, so it’s an easy way for long term debtor as unfortunatly the democracis seem to be. With both approaches one can do much more to rebuild accountability….
So here’s my alternative plan. Do whatever you can to make everyone accountable, for his/her doing. Do not allow anyone just profiting….
So the Bailout Plan goes complete against it, and so do not accept it.