AIG bailout billions to Goldman Sachs

Letter to the SD Union-Tribune (unpublished):

While the AIG witch hunt continues, the real villains go unnoticed. Why hasn't the government allowed AIG to fail? Where have all the bail-out billions gone anyway? Let's see -- to whom did AIG owe money? Goldman Sachs is top of the list, and Goldman's CEO Lloyd Blankfein was present when the Feds made the decision to save AIG. Rescue Czar Hank Paulson also was once top chief at Goldman. Not surprisingly, a large majority of rescue money has passed straight through AIG to Goldman and other connected financial institutions. The fix was in.

No free market?

Letter to the SD Union-Trib (unpublished):

Almost 20 years ago, Japan entered a deflationary slump. Piously wearing the mantle of capitalism, America sent economic experts to advise them to take the hard medicine, let the bad banks fail, allow the free market to work. How ironic now to see the U.S. government spend hundreds of billions to prop up our own failed lending institutions. Apparently we don't practice what we preach.

No bail-out

Letter (unpublished) to San Diego Union-Tribune:

No Bail-out! Why should we trust this "sky-is-falling" administration which previously duped America into a failed War on Terror while allowing little-to-no debate. Now we're to have a War on Falling Prices? Throwing more money at the "problem" is analogous to opening a new bar tab for a chronic drunk. Where does this $700 billion come from anyway? Each additional dollar created by the Fed devalues all existing dollars in circulation. What we really need is a War on Debt as government and citizens learn to live within their means.

Government to prop up housing

Letter (published) to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

I agree with what Housing and Urban Development Secretary Steve Preston said last week: “Taxpayers should not have to absorb preventable, foreseeable losses.” Lenders and borrowers deserve to reap what they've sown. No money down? Liar's loans? Revolving lines of credit? Banks should have known better.

Similarly, I have little sympathy for “naive” buyers who used nonstandard loans to borrow more than they could afford, assuming that rising values would allow them to refinance. Others used their homes as ATMs, pulling out equity to live beyond their means. All are learning property values don't go up forever.

Plenty of people sat on the sidelines waiting for the housing bubble to end. Why should government prop up housing prices? Whatever happened to personal responsibility? Do we live in a socialist or capitalist nation? Let the free market reign.

BRENT McDONALD
San Diego

Union-Tribune link

homeowners bail-out?

Letter (published) to the San Diego Union-Tribune:

Regarding “Help for Homeowners?” (Business, April 12):

So now the Senate is looking at ways to assist homeowners who were “sold mortgages they could not afford.” Ridiculous! Nobody forced these folks to buy anything. In many cases, borrowers with shaky credit lied about income to qualify for more expensive homes, driving prices ever higher. How does that merit a federal buyout?

Adjustable rate mortgages are inherently risky. People must take responsibility for their actions. There has never been a guarantee that home prices would rise forever. A predicted 2 percent to 3 percent decline is peanuts compared with the double-digit increases of the last five years.

I'm one American who balked at absurd home prices and instead worked diligently to build up a nest egg in anticipation of the eventual correction. The government should not be in the business of propping up inflated home prices.

BRENT McDONALD
San Diego

Union-Tribune link

housing affordability?

Letter (published) to the San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper:

During the current mayoral campaign, I've heard much discussion of the city of San Diego's pension deficit but scant mention of the region's ongoing housing affordability problem. Supposedly, San Diego has declared a housing "state of emergency" – shouldn't this issue therefore be debated by those who would take the reins of America's Finest City? 

I am an engineer with a master's degree and steady professional employment. However, I cannot begin to afford mortgage payments on "entry-level" property in this city. As a surfer, I was a Frye supporter until I heard her say the solution to the housing crisis was for people to "get better jobs." Sorry Donna, that doesn't cut it. The only real solution is to increase supply through upzoning and infill.
 

BRENT McDONALD
San Diego

Union-Tribune link

endless war

Letter to San Diego Union-Tribune (published):

President George Bush's slip of the tongue regarding "winning" the war on terror allowed a rare glimmer of truth to shine on the current administration's saber-rattling ways. The war on terror is analogous to the war on drugs: an endless campaign which accomplishes little except to line the pockets of the military-industrial complex.

The Department of Defense has usurped the State Department as the United States' primary foreign policy instrument. Does any Washington politician have the gumption to stand up to the Pentagon?

BRENT McDONALD
San Diego

Coastal Commission politics

"Letter to the Editor" published in the SD Union-Tribune Comments section:

As a former Coastal Commission staff member, I was saddened to read about Patricia McCoy's removal from the Commission after being raked over the coals by the Union-Tribune and other publications.  Her unforgivable sin -- to further scrutinize San Diego's secondary sewage treatment waiver -- was voting in favor of coastal protection.

The commonly held perception of the Commission being strongly environmentally slanted ("out of control") is far from the truth, and McCoy's dismissal is but one example of the undue influence that money, power, and politics play on this group.  According to the Sierra Club, McCoy's pro-coastal voting scores for the last two years were only 35% and 47%, and yet this was too much for Assembly Speaker Herb Wesson and his pro-development cronies.

In the late 1990s, when Democrats gained control of the State Governorship, House and Senate, coastal advocates were optimistic that new members on the Commission would finally balance out the environmentally-hostile appointments of the past.  Unfortunately, these hopes have been bitterly disappointed time and time again.  I applaud Patricia McCoy for a job well done, and I hope that Scott Peters can perform equally as well or better on behalf of protecting our beautiful coastal areas.

BRENT MCDONALD
San Diego

City panders to developers, not residents

Letter to the San Diego Union Tribune (published):

Re: "A plan for Mission Bay" (Editorial, Aug. 15):

I never used to be able to understand why the City of San Diego seemingly encourages large-scale tourism projects with immense hotels that often are sited along our beautiful bays, where they effectively limit enjoyment of these resources by year-round residents.  Then it hit me: the pandering to development and tourist dollar makes perfect sense when viewed within the context of the transient occupancy tax (TOT).

Ever since Proposition 13 locked in property taxes at 1978 rates, San Diego has had to look for alternative methods of financing the government machine.  The TOT is just one of the creative techniques made necessary because of the staggering losses in local property tax revenues. Do the math: while the cost of providing services has risen, the amount of money collected from property taxes has remained relative constant.  Therefore, in order for local government to function, it must find new sources of revenue -- new development and/or new hotels.

But shouldn't the City's first responsibility be to its residents? I would venture that many San Diegans live here for the exceptional quality of life available.  But that won't last when the City panders to developers, approving mega-hotels on the waterfront which block public access and allowing ever-expanding development which degrades the environment and worsens traffic congestion.

Growth for the sake of growth is cancer.  When will it end?  Where is the City's vision of the future?  Does it have one?  Or is it too concerned with the balance sheet to think about what kind of City future residents will live in?

BRENT C. MCDONALD
Pacific Beach