Are we bailing out Greece?

posted at 8:30 am on May 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Well, why not?  We have bailed out almost everyone else.  The federal government now owns two carmakers (Chrysler and GM), an insurance agency (AIG), and just about every mortgage in America through Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and FHA.  Frankly, at this point, another few billions for the Greeks seems like chump change, but Mike Pence and Cathy McMorris Rodgers disagree:

US taxpayers will be helping to foot the bill for the Greek bailout, via the Interna tional Monetary Fund. And if the Obama administration doesn’t draw a clear line, Uncle Sam may soon be on the line for even more and larger European “rescues.”

The Greek government, with its high taxes and profligate spending to support large bureaucracies and social programs, is bankrupt. Its bonds have been downgraded to junk status. …

Concerned that the fiscal damage could spread throughout the EU and the world, other European Union members and the IMF have pledged $145 billion to bail out Greece. And since the United States is the largest contributor to the IMF budget, our government will be funneling billions of American tax dollars to Greece.

No one wants to see Greece fail — the economic stability of Europe is important. But US taxpayers have funded bailout after bailout, and our country faces a debt crisis of its own.

Our unemployment rate stands at nearly 10 percent. The public debt now stands at $9.2 trillion. The Congressional Budget Office predicts that America’s debt held by the public will reach 90 percent of gross domestic product within 10 years under President Obama’s budget. Without dramatic spending restraints, America is on a path like the one that led to Greece’s financial catastrophe.

The IMF will absorb most of the costs of the Greek bailout, and our share of it comes to around $7 billion.  That may not seem like a lot, considering the size of the bailouts already extended by both the Bush and Obama administrations.  We issued guarantees worth more than 50 times that amount to bail out Freddie and Fanny, and more than 20 times that for AIG.  The Obama administration spent more than 120 times that amount on a Porkulus bill that didn’t move the economic needle at all.

Those are problems for other reasons having to do with changing the fundamental relationship between our government and a free people that doesn’t apply to assisting the Greeks.  We’ve spent money on foreign aid for decades, so that aspect of it is nothing new.  However, it has something in common with all of the other bailouts in that the money doesn’t exist, at least not in any real sense.  The US government doesn’t have the money to pay its own bills without borrowing it from China or other creditors.

In essence, we will borrow money to give to Greece in order to fix the problems they created … by borrowing too much money.  Only in the public sectors does that kind of idea make any sense at all.  On top of that, the US and the EU want Greece to impose badly-needed austerity measures and downsize its public sector as a condition of receiving the money, when in fact the US and the EU need to adopt those measures themselves before giving the money.

We’re sending fantasy dollars to rescue fantasy euros.  It’s a big Ponzi scheme.  And it seems very likely that we’ll be the suckers left holding the bag at the end of this one.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

A conservative insisting on relinquishing American participation in – and thus control of – the IMF?

ernesto on May 8, 2010 at 3:19 PM

We don’t have control (the europeans out vote us anyway) and the money’s been misspent for some time. The IMF has been nothing more than a way to siphon money from hard working taxpayers into the hands of corrupt dictators of third world countries. The same could be said of foreign aid of any kind, but I’m being redundant.

Better to stop participating and tell them to shove off.

Chaz706 on May 8, 2010 at 5:30 PM

Imagine the UN having veto power over US laws. Obama already gave interpol police powers greater than the FBI inside the USA plus immunity!

Mord on May 8, 2010 at 8:57 AM

The United Nations is proposing a new global currency to take the place of the dollar. While countries such as China and Russia have mentioned this idea several times in the past, one of the authors of the proposal suggested “replacing the dollar with an artificial currency would solve some of the problems related to the potential of countries running large deficits and would help stability.” Unfortunately, Monopoly has already cornered the market on artificial currencies.

From a market letter.

http://www.usfunds.com/investor-resources/investor-alert/

burt on May 8, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Chaz706 on May 8, 2010 at 5:30 PM

But they vote with us…its China we’re supposed to be counterbalancing. The IMF has been a major source of leverage for the US…through it we’ve turned every 3rd world financial crisis into a market opening opportunity. To walk away now would be foolish.

ernesto on May 8, 2010 at 6:35 PM

At one time they may have served some benign purpose, today the opposite is true, w2e are funding our own demise.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 11:36 AMArchimedes on May 8, 2010 at 11:36 AM

No, No, No! The UN, or UNO as it was known at formation, was always interested in our demise. The chief US representative at formation was a Soviet spy. From Wickapedia:

Hiss served as the secretary-general of the United Nations Conference on International Organization (the United Nations Charter Conference) in San Francisco in 1945. He later became the full Director of the Office of Special Political Affairs. Hiss left government service in 1946 and became president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he served until May 5, 1949

burt on May 8, 2010 at 6:38 PM

WWRD?

“We are for aiding our allies by sharing our material blessings with nations which share our fundamental beliefs, but we are against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.”–Ronald Reagan, 1964

Reagan supported the IMF. But not for its own sake. He supported it to empower individuals and to defeat Communism. He told them:

Trust the people — this is the crucial lesson of history. Because only when the human spirit is allowed to worship, invent, create, and produce, only when individuals are given a personal stake in deciding their destiny and benefiting from their own risks, only then do societies become dynamic, prosperous, progressive, and free.

In the turbulent decade of the 1970′s, too many of us, the United States included, forgot the principles that produced the basis for our mutual economic progress. We permitted our governments to overspend, overtax, and overregulate us toward soaring inflation and record interest rates. Now we see more clearly again. We’re working and cooperating to bring our individual economies and the world economy back to more solid foundations of low inflation, personal incentives for saving and investment, higher productivity, and greater opportunities for our people.

Our first task was to get our own financial and economic houses in order.

Now maybe it’s in our interest that Greece not screw up the entire world economy again–but that’s a far cry from the vision Reagan outlined. This $7 billion “loan” of ours is more like insurance or maybe protection money than anything else, and it’s probably charity too, since we’ll be lucky to get it back.

But we shouldn’t invoke Reagan unless we mean it, unless we mean what he meant. He might well have held his nose and supported this out of necessity–maybe. But unlike Current Occupant, he wouldn’t let the opportunity pass to educate people on the bankruptcy of socialism, spiritually, intellectually and otherwise.

I think Reagan would today oppose our $7B IMF “loan” to Greece on these grounds:

1.) It’s all borrowed money in the first place. We’re simply don’t have the resources to toss down any more rat holes, especially with 10-17% unemployment.
2.) Reagan supported the IMF as an antidote to communism. He defeated Soviet Communism–his focus now would be on defeating American Socialism. And therefore Greek Socialism as well–not propping it up.
3.) Europe is no longer divided. Greece is an EU member–essentially a province state of the European Union, just as California or Iowa is a state. Europe needs to finance its own states; we’re already footing their defense bill.

Noel on May 8, 2010 at 8:06 PM

If Russia invaded Turkey from the rear, do you think Greece would help?
Sorry ’bout that

Bevan on May 9, 2010 at 8:18 AM

Bevan on May 9, 2010 at 8:18 AM

The WSJ had a storyline about violence gripping Greece on Thursday.

I’m still waiting for an explanation on how the IMF creats the 17% of the US portion in the loans. Amazing how these government entities just create money and the US taxpayer isn’t on the hook.

IlikedAUH2O on May 10, 2010 at 7:51 AM

Comment pages: 1 2