is the best way to manage your money. Go there now »

Sign up or log in to mint.com

A Brief History of Government Bailouts

Share This


Free-wheeling capitalism has always been the heart of the US Economy but the recent $700 billion bailout, a level of government intervention not seen since the Great Depression, is hardly unprecedented. Historically, the Feds have not only taken stakes in banks, steel mills, and coal mines but have even seized control of everything from railways to savings and loans.

(source)

To get some perspective on our current financial crisis, it’s helpful to look back at some earlier bailouts since the Depression leading up to the drastic moves of late.

Railroad Bailout

(source)

Entire industries once considered the backbone of our economy can sometimes disappear as a result of changing technology. During World War I, the government nationalized railroads saying they represented vital supply lines. In the 1970s, the railroads were nearly threatened out of existence by the recent popularity of air travel. The government-owned National Railroad Passenger Corp., better known as Amtrak was created in 1971 and is still reliant on taxpayer money today. Conrail was created in 1976 as a merger of Penn Central (which declared bankruptcy in 1970) and a half-dozen other bankrupt railroads. Conrail fared better than Amtrak, even managing to turn a profit by the mid-1980s and eventually going public.

Lockheed

(source)

The Emergency Loan Guarantee Act, passed in August, 1971 was explicitly directed at shoring up American business enterprises. Its first beneficiary was the aerospace firm Lockheed, a major government contractor, which received a mind-blowing $1.4 billion. As in earlier times, Lockheed’s status as a defense contractor played a major role in the bailout.

United States National Savings Bank/Franklin National Bank

(source)

The first major bank to fail in the US since the FDIC was established was United States National Savings Bank, worth $1.5 billion. Shortly thereafter, on October 8, 1974, the Franklin National Bank in New York also failed. At the time, it was the largest bank failure in US history, and Michele Sindona, the mafia-connected member with a controlling interest in the bank, eventually went to prison and died of cyanide poisoning. The Feds assumed the debts in those cases, and proceeded with a bailout that was simply unthinkable at the time, the equivalent of $7.7 billion by current standards.

Chrysler

(source)

As in today’s mortgage crisis, Chrysler’s downfall was the result of major hubris on the part of its executives but was also blamed on the increasing popularity of cheap Japanese automobiles coming into the US market. Chrysler lost $1.1 billion in 1979, a loss which many feared would ripple through the entire US automotive industry. The Feds stepped in almost immediately, passing the Chrysler Loan Guarantee Act in 1980 which provided $1.5 billion in loans to Chrysler, one of the largest payouts ever made to a single corporation.

Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust

(source)

1980 starts a decade of intense bank failures; the FDIC reports that 1,600 were either closed or received financial assistance from 1980 to 1994. Many of the same questions got asked as get asked today. How much oversight is necessary? And how deftly can we actually assess risk? Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust was once the seventh-largest bank in the US but fell on bad times due, in part, to bad loans for oil producers and investors in the Oklahoma and Texas oil boom of the late 1970s and early 1980s. As the bank was heading for failure, large depositors withdrew over $10 billion of deposits in early May, 1984. The bank was seized by the US government that year, which remained in control until 10 years later when it was acquired by what is now Bank of America, a beneficiary of the current bailout. A few nay-sayers called this one, “Continental’s lending style might be overly aggressive,” one man hauntingly points out in an FDIC report. Not unlike the failures that were a result of the recent mortgage crisis, the bank’s downfall could be directly traced to risk taking and a lack of due diligence on the part of bank officers.

Less Developed Country Debt Crisis

(source)

The LDS Debt crisis was the result of international banks and monetary funds expanding too fast in an attempt to keep pace with the emerging global village in the late 1970s and early 1980s. As development became a driving goal and traditional banking borders were removed, less advantaged countries took advantage of this bank roll. By 1978, Latin America owed international banks a boggling $159 billion. By 1982, $327 billion was outstanding. Experts did protest about the risk and volatility. Imploring warning letters were sent. But it wasn’t until the recession in the 1980s that international banks looked hard at their holdings. By 1982, 40 nations could not foot the bill. The Feds kept the American banking market out of it in the end, and a global recession was narrowly avoided.

What we’ve learned

Is history doomed to repeat itself. Is the US economy doomed to suffer an endless cycle of ups and downs that will forever require the hand of government intervention? Are government bailouts, as some have recently said, akin to socialism?

There are no easy answers to these questions but after the lessons of the 1980s, the Feds have acquired some common wisdom about when banks fail (if not always why). Whenever there’s a period of rapid growth there’s a tendency for both lenders and investors to get too cocky and take on far more risk than they should. Today, there are number of industries on the verge of collapse, including the airline and automotive industries. Should the government step in?

The good news here is that, in almost every case, these course corrections have proved temporary and most finance experts believe they have been both necessary and beneficial in times of financial crisis, war or other national emergencies.

Want more perspectives? Check these interactive sites for more info:

http://www.propublica.org/special/government-bailouts/ gives an excellent visual representation of this historic bailout against others, including a section on if those examples worked out not.

http://www.thetakeaway.org/archives/2008/09/17/5 gives a jazzy audio podcast of the history of bailouts that sparked most of the ideas in this article.

http://images.businessweek.com/ss/07/12/1217_bailouts/index_01.htm is Businessweek’s top-notch interactive slideshow of historic bailouts, domestically and abroad.

Sources:
The 3 above, plus:
The FDIC, http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/235_258.pdf
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/191_210.pdf
The State Department
Gotham Center for New York City History
New York magazine
Time magazine

6 Comments so far

leave a comment
  1. Robert

    You talk about how AMTRAK requires subsidies (because of its lack of popularity relative to air travel and highways), but you fail to mention how the government subsidizes air travel and highways as well.

  2. Uncle B

    If thats what is called socialism (it is not – read Marx) then the U.S. needs more of it, the so called Capitalists have been given every advantage and failed miserably! We need fast cheap commuter trains, We need massive government investment in our schools! The Chinese have more people with IQ’s of 100+ in school than we have total student population! To compete we gotta get off of our proverbial’s, stop resting on our laurels and boogie! We are going to be surpassed , that is certain, but how well we survive this Asian explosion will be determined by how seriously we take it! Our government MUST get behind us and support us if we are to survive – We are no longer the superior beings we once supposed, that idea belongs back in the movies, where it came from. The Chinese are now well ahead of us in medicine, Space technologies, Food technologies, automotive sciences (the new GM eco, battery car will come from China) and educational techniques! They have our asses whipped in computer science, and while we fed our kids candy coated Windows pablum, their kids were writing their own programs using the Linux core! – For Free! We may end up sending our smarter kids to China to learn new technologies! For Real! If our government can formulate a plan and use its money to lessen the blow and to keep us alive through this, more power to them! Socialist? no Survivalist! Yes!

  3. I commuted to Oklahoma during the early 80’s as part of the many loan workout teams assigned to try and maximize the loan recoveries for my bank too. This was right after the Penn Square bank failure. The Penn Sqaure failure eventually lead to the failure of The Continental Bank. The Continental Bank was the largest bank to fail at that time due primarily to bad loan participations with Penn Square Bank. However, there were many more bank failures through the rest of the 80’s and into the early 90’s especially in the Southwest.
    These ongoing failures during the 80’s and 90’s were the beginning of the US bank consolidation that continues today.
    The $ 250M billion in funds to be used to purchase prefered stock in troubled banks is being used selectively by the Treasury to insure only the more healthy banks remain in the system. Those banks selected to survive will eventually help obsorb the weaker banks now in the system.
    Evidence JP Morgan’s Chairman stating they will use their
    $ 25B in new Treasury fundings to make addtional acquisitions.

  4. neoliberal

    1.) Why do the big three need a bailout if they produce tangible goods? obviously they are financially failed not economically failed. Therefore, need to file chapter 11 not recieve a bailout. Why do they also think it’s the taxpayers duty to bailout private companies monoplized by unions with democrat ties and affected by big government regulations? What about the employees from other companies who are failing but aren’t being saved by big government bailouts? (eg. Detroit free press, Tribune Co, NYT, Circuit City. etc…)

    2.) I see no good reason to trust the same rationale that was behind bailing out the big banks. That $700 Billion TRAP was designed only to assist banks, however now insurance companies and even credit card giants like American Express are trying to get in on that action. Thus, This auto bailout is nothing more than, informal fallacy argumentation, ethier we complie or we caused everyone to be affected. How did that first bailout work again? Oh that’s right it was pork filled and paulson changed his mind on how that 700 billion should be spent. Not to mention, the economy has gotten worse. The stock market has tanked, and the deficit has soared to historic proportions. We’re now on the hook for over $7 trillion and some people are still begging for more? Who created this situation? Was it the fault of the tax-payers? Or was it the fault of bad management, the UAW with democrat ties, and the big Government regulations? All Evidence points to the latter. Furthermore, this isn’t the first time in history one of these car companies has asked the government for a bailout. In the late 1970’s Chrysler asked the government for a bailout telling the government their sob story and in the end they got their bailout. Flash forward to 2008 here they are again with another sob story asking the government for another bailout. ie. The government trough has reopened and the bad management, the lobbying special interest, and the UAW all feel they’re entitled to feed from it once again. The point of my example is this, they’ll just keep coming back asking for more and more tax-payer money. Those who learn nothing from history are doomed to repeat it. The big three are like bank robbers with alot of hostages so they aren’t afraid to black-mail tax-payers with the canard of 3.3 million jobs will be lost. The only way to cure the big three once and for all is to let them file chapter 11 and restructer from the bottom up. Moreover, Those auto part manufactureers can also do bussiness with the international auto-mobile makers that produce right here in america. Obviously they’ll pick up the slack for the big three if they end up failing. Honestly, do chief executives who fly on private jets really need a bailout? Seems to me, if one can create enough urgency then one can implament their agenda. And their agenda is obviously; Lemon Socialism!

    Other industries have survived bankruptcy just fine:

    eg. Most of the major airlines have spent time in bankruptcy, including United, Continental, Delta, Northwest, and US Airways. Their predicament looked particularly dire after 9/11. But the major carriers made it through. And to the extent that they suffered, low-fare competitors such as Southwest and JetBlue picked up the slack, often offering superior service in addition to cheaper prices.

    Others have not:

    eg. TWA/Delorean too big/historic to fail? (obviously not america is still here)

    While another auto-mobile industry (leyland) which was in a very similar position to the big three’s situation now was indeed saved by a government bailout only to still fail in/by 2005: eg.http://edition.cnn.com/2008/BUSINESS/11/20/auto.industry.uk/index.html

    (Note: For now I’m not even asking the big three to fail i’m only asking they file chapter 11.)
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122939117718809261.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
    http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9787
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=F0FB4204-8E58-4E63-A348-AD9151BB6834 (Chapter 11 allows operations to continue while helping shed fatally unsupportable obligations. It does not mean liquidation.)

    3.) They don’t all pay similar real wages: “The average private sector worker earns $25.36 an hour in 2006 $17.91 an hour in cash wages and $7.45 an hour in benefits such as pensions, paid time off, and health insurance. Autoworkers at Japanese plants located in the United States earn substantially more than this: between $42 and $48 an hour in wages and benefits, which amounts to over $80,000 a year in total compensation hardly cheap labor. However, The typical UAW worker at the Big Three earns between $71 and $76 an hour in 2006. This amount is triple the earnings of the typical worker in the private sector and $25 to $30 an hour more than American workers at Japanese auto plants. The average unionized worker at the Big Three earns over $130,000 a year in wages and benefits.” Where the other problem lies: “Health care costs the Big Three so much because the UAW negotiated gold-plated health benefits that include medical, hospital, surgical, and prescription drug coverage. These benefits also cover durable medical equipment (e.g., hearing aids), dental benefits, and even lasik eye surgery. For all this, GM workers and retirees must pay monthly premiums of $10 for an individual and $21 for families.These gold-plated health care benefits put the Big Three, and especially GM, at a competitive disadvantage.” http://www.heritage.org/Research/Economy/wm2135.cfm

    Are they in the auto-mobile business or in the health insurance business? Last time I checked the auto-mobile industries made cars for X amount of profit. Hence the running joke that the big three are really health-providers who just happen to make cars.

    From the NYT; Mitt came up with this plan:

    “IF General Motors, Ford and Chrysler get the bailout that their chief executives asked for yesterday, you can kiss the American automotive industry goodbye. It won’t go overnight, but its demise will be virtually guaranteed.

    Without that bailout, Detroit will need to drastically restructure itself. With it, the automakers will stay the course – the suicidal course of declining market shares, insurmountable labor and retiree burdens, technology atrophy, product inferiority and never-ending job losses. Detroit needs a turnaround, not a check.

    First, their huge disadvantage in costs relative to foreign brands must be eliminated. That means new labor agreements to align pay and benefits to match those of workers at competitors like BMW, Honda, Nissan and Toyota. Furthermore, retiree benefits must be reduced so that the total burden per auto for domestic makers is not higher than that of foreign producers.

    That extra burden is estimated to be more than $2,000 per car. Think what that means: Ford, for example, needs to cut $2,000 worth of features and quality out of its Taurus to compete with Toyota’s Avalon. Of course the Avalon feels like a better product — it has $2,000 more put into it. Considering this disadvantage, Detroit has done a remarkable job of designing and engineering its cars. But if this cost penalty persists, any bailout will only delay the inevitable.

    Second, management as is must go. New faces should be recruited from unrelated industries — from companies widely respected for excellence in marketing, innovation, creativity and labor relations.

    Investments must be made for the future. No more focus on quarterly earnings or the kind of short-term stock appreciation that means quick riches for executives with options. Manage with an eye on cash flow, balance sheets and long-term appreciation. Invest in truly competitive products and innovative technologies — especially fuel-saving designs — that may not arrive for years. Starving research and development is like eating the seed corn.”

    4.) The logical fallacy here is assuming europe only wants american cars produced by the big three, but the reality of the situation is the free market doesn’t care “by whom in america” as long as an american company makes; small fuel efficient cars. Thus, it does not follow that they have to come specifically from the big three. Therefore, the international auto-mobile companies in America would then gain their exporting business replacing the big three. However, If the big three file chapter 11 the former won’t happen and as they restructer they can remain doing business in the european market. As for our trade deficit the only way of recovering our footing there is by declaring that the U. S. policy is to gradually reduce our trade deficit down to near zero. The goal of all countries should be equal trade. By gradually increasing the tariff on all goods imported into the United States from the following five countries Japan, Germany, China, Canada, and Mexico; Whom are responsible for 60% of our tade deficit. This will be the correct path to equal trade. Now that is a tariff with a responsible goal, a goal which is to create an international trading system based on equal trade between all nations.

    ps. your site is aligned too far to the left center it out so I can read what you have to say. It’s such a pain in the arse.

  5. Carmen

    While government bail-out is one thing, what really gets my goad is all the bonuses that continue to be doled out the high-ranking administrators. And the “reason” given is always “the companies need to keep their best on board”. Well, I ask, if these people are so great, why are all these companies they’re running SINKING!? I do know this – I don’t get any bonuses, job well done or not. Rather, if I did something to cause my company (a non-profit hospital) to lose $, I’m pretty sure I’d not only NOT get a bonus, but also lose my job. So, maybe withholding the bonuses and thereby “losing” the blood-sucking louts wouldn’t be a bad idea after all… Just saying.

  6. appreciate the info guys, thanks

Leave a Comment

How Mint Can Help

See Where You Spend

Mint.com auto-categorizes all of your transactions so you’ll always know where your money goes. Find out more »