Hank Paulson Is A National Hero

鲍尔森(Hank Paulson)是国家英雄。去年10月份我就说过这话，并且始终这样认为。现在，有切实的证据证明我说的没错。问题资产救助计划(TARP)奏效了。华尔街危机结束了。至少市场是这么认为的。市场波动指数VIX目前约为30，不到去年秋季平均水平的一半。摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)股价较去年10月的低点涨了4倍多。今年9月15日是雷曼兄弟(Lehman Brothers)的一周年祭日。在那之前，最初参与问题资产救助计划的8家银行中将有5家总计偿还美国纳税人500亿美元，另外还有利息。别会错我的意。经济依然状况 惨，不过至少在运转。不久前，我们还在担心获得问题资产救助资金的银行会垮台。如今，我们担心的则是，能否从那些银行把我们的担保悉数拿回。我在《华尔街日报》的同事艾文斯(Peter Eavis)周三发表了一篇精彩的文章，抱怨说纳税人在获得问题资产救助资金最多的16家银行中的投资回报只有少得可怜的5.6%。然而，鲍尔森推出问题资产救助计划的意图不仅仅是为了替纳税人赚钱，而是为了稳定信贷市场，以尽可能低的代价拯救银行。问题资产救助计划恰恰做到了这一点。有谁能质疑信贷市场的神奇复苏？2009年初以来，表现最好的资产类别就是问题债券，已经涨了近40%。银行体系的情况又怎样呢？投资者们现在纷纷往银行体系里扔钱。5月份，接受了问题资产救助资金的银行新筹得850亿美元资金。年初以来，光是美国银行(Bank of America)一家就筹得330亿美元。所有这些并不是说仅凭问题资产救助计划就让形势发生了如此的好转。诚然，美联储(Fed)的货币政策也很宽大仁慈。也不是说鲍尔森在去年秋季动荡之时就明确知道自己在干什么。他并不知道。问题资产救助计划最初的设想是收购并剥离银行资产负债表内的毒资产。到目前为止，那些毒资产还在银行的资产负债表上。不过从问题资产救助计划起，危机开始走向终结。而这个计划是鲍尔森的杰作。不顾来自所在党派的强烈反对，鲍尔森帮助财政部获得了7,000亿美元的“空白支票”。他让所有的大银行都参与了问题资产救助计划，无论是摩根大通这样状况良好的美国银行这种境地不佳的，还是花旗这样的“丑陋银行”。他还以可偿还的优先股和担保构建财政部的投资，这样纳税人和银行就都可以有个行得通的退出战略。当然，奥巴马当选总统后，华盛顿和华尔街的人个个激动不已。当时普遍的看法是，鲍尔森和他的问题资产救助计划都失败了。当时即将上任的新财长适时承诺各种各样的新玩艺儿，比如公私合作投资计划(PPIP)。但盖特纳最终到底做了些什么呢？基本上是鲍尔森以前做的事。是换汤不换药的问题资产救助计划。不错，财政部用严格的“压力测试”装扮了一下问题资产救助计划，不过本质上盖特纳的主要政策就是问题资产救助计划。这样做并没有什么错。奏效就是奏效，无可辩驳。只是要把功劳归给应得的人。这个功劳应该属于鲍尔森，他才是国家英雄。Evan Newmark（编者按：本文作者Evan Newmark曾在华尔街工作了20余年，目前已远离各大投行自己在进行股票投资。本栏目文章选自他在Deal Journl上的博客Mean Street。栏目内容都与华尔街有关。）相关阅读问题资产救助计划的投资回报如何？ 2009-06-03鲍尔森：我其实没有怪中国 2009-02-06 本文涉及股票或公司document.write (truthmeter('2009年06月05日10:55', 'JPM'));摩根大通公司英文名称：JPMorgan Chase & Co.总部地点：美国上市地点：纽约证交所股票代码：JPMdocument.write (truthmeter('2009年06月05日10:55', 'MS'));摩根士丹利英文名称：Morgan Stanley总部地点：美国上市地点：纽约证交所股票代码：MSdocument.write (truthmeter('2009年06月05日10:55', 'LEH'));Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (delisted)总部地点：美国上市地点：纽约证交所document.write (truthmeter('2009年06月05日10:55', 'BAC'));美国银行英文名称：Bank of America Co.总部地点：美国上市地点：纽约证交所股票代码：BACdocument.write (truthmeter('2009年06月05日10:55', 'LEHMQ'));Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.总部地点：美国上市地点：美国场外交易粉单市场(Pink Sheet)股票代码：LEHMQ


Hank Paulson is a national hero.I said it last October and I'm sticking by it. And now, there's actual evidence to back me up. The TARP bailout worked. The Wall Street crisis is over.At least, the market thinks so. At around 30, the VIX, the market's volatility barometer, is trading at less than half the average level of last autumn. A share of Morgan Stanley (MS) is trading more than 400% higher than its October low.And by this coming Sept. 15, the first anniversary of the fall of Lehman Brothers, five of the original eight TARP banks will have repaid the American taxpayer $50 billion plus interest.Don't get me wrong. The economy is still in crummy shape. But, at least it's functioning. Not too long ago, we fretted over TARP banks collapsing. Now, we worry about getting full value for our warrants in the same banks.In an excellent piece published Wednesday, my WSJ colleague Peter Eavis grumbles about the measly 5.6% returns earned by taxpayers off their investment in the top 16 TARP banks.But Paulson's intent for TARP wasn't just to make money for the taxpayer. It was to stabilize the credit markets and save the banks at the lowest possible cost.And that's exactly what TARP has done. Who can doubt the amazing recovery of the credit markets? The best performing asset class so far in 2009 has been distressed debt, up by nearly 40%.And the banking system? Investors are now throwing money at it. In May, $85 billion of fresh capital was raised by TARP banks. Bank of America (BAC) alone has raised $33 billion in capital since the start of the year.All of this is not to suggest that TARP alone made all these good things happen. Certainly, Ben Bernanke's Fed has been pretty forgiving with its monetary policy.Nor is it to suggest that Hank Paulson knew exactly what he was doing in the frenzied days of last fall. He didn't. The TARP as originally conceived was to buy up toxic assets off the bank balance sheets. To this day, those assets are still sitting there.But TARP was the beginning of the end of the crisis. And it was Paulson's baby.He got the Treasury its $700 billion blank-check, in spite of furious opposition from his own party. He got all the big banks - the good (JPMorgan), the bad (Bank of America) and the ugly (Citi) - to go along with TARP.And by structuring the Treasury's investments with repayable preferred equity and warrants, he gave both the taxpayer and the banks a workable exit strategy.Of course, everybody in Washington and on Wall Street, got all excited when Obama came to town. The collective wisdom was that both Paulson and his TARP were failures. And the incoming Treasury secretary duly promised all sorts of new-fangled programs like the PPIP.But what did Geithner end up doing?Basically, what Paulson had done before. The TARP. Yes, the Treasury dressed the TARP up with the rigor of the 'stress tests,' but at its core Geithner's primary policy is the TARP.Nothing wrong with that. If something works, it works. Just give credit where it's due. And that would be with Hank Paulson, national hero.Evan Newmark