Sept. 28, 2008
Paulson Warns Of "Fragile" Economy
Treasury Secretary Talks To Scott Pelley About The Controversial $700 Billion Bailout
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Paulson On The Bailout
Scott Pelley gets rare access to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson as he deals with the nation's unfolding economic crisis.
-
Photo
Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson (CBS)
-
Timeline
Financial Meltdown
Track major events that lead to one of the most tumultuous times in Wall Street's history.
Related Videos
60 MINUTES
-
Watch past 60 Minutes economy segments:
- September 2007: Greenspan
- September 2007: Greenspan, Part 2
- January 2008: House Of Cards
Who is Henry Paulson? 60 Minutes shadowed him these past two weeks as he worked to convince the Congress that it should give him perhaps more power than any Treasury secretary has ever had.
"What if the plan doesn't work, what if 700 billion doesn't do it?" correspondent Scott Pelley asked Sec. Paulson.
"Scott, it's gotta do it and we're going to make this work, and we're going to do what it takes to work," Paulson replied.
"Shouldn't the price of failure be failure on Wall Street?" Pelley asked.
"And failure and the market discipline that goes with it is the right thing, but unfortunately we have a system that is way out of whack, where our institutions are too big to fail. We don't have the regulatory authorities and structure in place to protect the American people," the secretary said.
"You can't be proud of Wall Street," Pelley remarked.
"I'm not proud of a lot of things. You know, as I go around the world right now, representing the United States of America, it's a humbling experience," Paulson replied.
Paulson's office in the Treasury building overlooks the White House next door, but the view that has seized his attention is behind his desk: four market monitors that have signaled one emergency after another.
"What was the most difficult moment, what was the moment that put a knot in your stomach?" Pelley asked.
"Scott, I've had a lot of knots in my stomach, but I would say last Wednesday night, when the capital markets froze, when there started to be a run on money markets, banks stopped lending to each other. And, I know people in America won't understand what that means, but if money doesn't flow freely between financial institutions, then it impacts everyone in the country," Paulson explained.
"The economy had a heart attack in that moment," Pelley remarked.
"I would say this: whether it had a heart attack or not, the arteries were clogged," Paulson said.
That was Wednesday, Sept. 17, and Paulson told 60 Minutes that was the night he realized the collapse of Wall Street needed a sweeping intervention.
How much jeopardy is the economy in?
"It's a fragile situation, a very fragile situation. There were times, a couple days, last week, and a day this week, when U.S. Treasury bills were trading for well under one percent," Paulson told Pelley.
"People were buying Treasury bills knowing that they would get almost no return. But it was a safe place to stuff their money," Pelley said.
"It is, in some ways, the equivalent of sticking money in your mattress," Paulson said.
Produced by Henry Schuster and David Gelber
© MMVIII, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left
Scroll Right


- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 178 CommentsThe problem started with the free trade agreements, that were mostly signed into law by Clinton. They were warned about what it would do to our economy, but it was ignored. People out of work, or making less than they were before do not pay debts. Add that to the fact that big companies are only cash cows for executives, and a crash is inevitable. Well it has begun, and spending 700 billion in tax payer money, will only deepen the problem worse. This depression we are headed into, will make the 29 crash look like kids playing hopscotch.
Throwing 700 billion at wall street, instead of on jobs for the tax payers, will be like fighting a flood with a fire hose.
Congress needs to back away from this mess, and get to work on fixing the bleeding of jobs from this country.
I am here to tell you that this bailout will only speed up the crash.
Has ANYONE on this discussion board been unable to borrow ANY money recently due to lack of available lenders????
How do we KNOW this bailout is really as necessary as they say?
"one Wall Street analyst to another wrote, quote, ''Let''s hope we are all wealthy and retired by the time this house of cards falters.'' They were writing these e-mails nearly two years ago. "
These two analysts obviously knew what they were doing, which was defrauding their customers and ultimately the American public. While I know it would be just a symbolic gesture, the Feds obviously know who they are and these two should be thrown in jail for the rest of their lives, and fined their entire ill-gotten fortunes.
THANKS TO THE REPUBLICON CONGRESS OF 1995 - 2006! John McCain should be proud of his voting record that supported the deregulation of Corporate America, which is the number one cause of all that ails the US economy, and the only reason US taxpayers are called upon to bailout Wall Street. John McCain supporters: as dumb as they get!
Posted by sun247 at 08:07 PM : Sep 28, 2008
They were repealed by the Clinton-era Gramm-Leach-Bliley banking deregulation act of 1999 that was SIGNED BY BILL CLINTON. He could have vetoed it, and if his veto was overridden he could say the measure passed over his objections.
THIS ROBBERY OF THE PEOPLE BY DELIBERATE FAILURE TO PROTECT was a TRULY BIPARTISAN EFFORT. It gained the OVERWHELMING SUPPORT of both parties in the House.
CUT OUT THE PARTISAN NONSENSE!
Everybody knows BOTH parties were mixed up in this.
You''re the one who thinks the people are stupid if you think they don''t know.
CUT OUT THE PARTISAN NONSENSE!
Everybody knows BOTH parties were mixed up in this.
You''re the one who thinks the people are stupid if you think they don''t know.
Here is your proof.
Case. Completely. Closed.
---"Asked if this was not unforeseeable, Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel Prize winning economist told Pelley, "Oh, not only was it foreseeable, it was foreseen. Stiglitz says the "sucker" is the American taxpayer."---
Sigh, that''s life I suppose. What are you going to do?
What are Paulson''s predictions as to the effect of his bailout plan? What does Congress expect to be the effect of it? They were very vocal about what they thought would happen in it''s absense, what do they foresee occurring with it''s passing?
Posted by perform421 at 09:10 PM : Sep 28, 2008
Just today, the Wall Street Journal quoted a 2003 New York Times interview with Democrat Barney Frank, who said at the time that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac should not be more closely regulated because it could hurt their ability to provide "affordable housing."
Americans spend $250-$300 billion a year just complying with our current complicated tax code. We could recoup the cost of the bailout in 3-4 years if we had the Fair Tax. This in additon to the Fair Tax helping the poor and bringing jobs back to the US.
If ever there was a time for the Fair Tax, that time is now. It is ineveitable that we will have to pass it, otherwise, America will implode financially.
WE as Americans need to DEMAND term limits on senator and representative seats. We need to get a bill going NOW. It''s a win-win for the people- if the senators and representatives vote against it, we simply vote them out of office come next term.
Posted by fkovacs1 at 09:37 PM : Sep 28, 2008
I seriously doubt the members of Congress will vote for term limits on themselves. As for voters voting them out - history shows this is VERY unlikely.
An executive order or some such is needed to get it done IN SPITE OF Congress.
Some big shot General, I think his name was Powell, went infront of the UN and told them Iraq was in a fragile situation with WMDs?
So we went to war and gave all those no-bid contracts to Halliburton?
Hey This Paulson guy looks just like Gen Liar Powell.
So who''s getting the no-bid contracts this time?
And why''s that Pelosi Bush Hoe caving in again to her master Bush?
Congress doesn''t get that Americans do not support BANKER BAILOUT.
None of these Wall Street bankers deserve this free pass. If your factory is being closed they just say "hard luck there pal, find a new job!" Privatise profits, socialize risk they are all traitors.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcZSh1diQRQ
Posted by VicenteFox2 at 10:08 PM : Sep 28, 2008
But wait - they say if we don''t do this bailout, the factories and small businesses might close.
But you''re right - when was the last time they gave a RAT''S A$$ if some small business failed.
THIS SOUNDS VERY, VERY FISHY....
Could it be their REAL concern is BAILING THEMSELVES OUT because THEY ARE PERSONALLY INVESTED IN SUBPRIME LOANS???
Could this be a CONFLICT OF INTEREST???????????????
Has ANYONE in this discussion been unable to borrow ANY money due to lack of available lenders?????
HOW DO WE KNOW THIS "CRISIS" ACTUALLY EXISTS, before we throw hundreds of billions of dollars at a crisis that might NOT EVEN REALLY EXIST?????
This sounds VERY, VERY much like the WMD "crisis..."
Sounds SUSPICIOUSLY like this bailout plan, and the events leading up to it.
We don''t HAVE to be evil. The king is just tricking us into THINKING we do.
Posted by txgrouch2006 at 10:20 PM : Sep 28, 2008
Paulson was of course CEO of Goldman Sachs.
Conflict of interest.
That''s when the former CEO (******** C) of Halliburton was the prime proponent for the Iraq war, a war that benefited Halliburton the most.
Let''s see what Goldman Sachs and all the other criminal enterprises get out of this deal.
Will you want the taxpayers to buy out the next round of wreckless investments?
I am guessing the answer would be yes. Especially if this goes through.
"A" had a strong economy, with happy and productive workers spread across many industries and service sectors producing goods and services valued the world over for their advanced technology, quality, and uniqueness.
Nation "U", not so much.
As a result, nation "U" shattered their economy in attempting to fund the arms race. Much turmoil ensued, and nation "U" - streamlined and reborn as nation "R" said: "What the hell. Maybe they are telling the truth; we will try playing it their way."
Nation "A", having declared victory, decided they could dispense with their factories and their services and their workers...and even better, get "something for nothing" by using those displaced workers in a fit of imperialism.
Soon enough, nation "A" found their economy in "a fragile situation"...as nation "R" watched, bemused, and pondered the hypocrisy - the outright lies - of "A"...
Don''t believe me? Look at what happened at the RNC! If you don''t tow the line you get beaten tear gassed and arrested.
We need to stop ******** and start the revolution. We''ll never get our government back from the corporations who have stolen it unless action is taken.
John McCain: PRIVITIZING PROFITS, SOCIALIZING LOSSES!
Airhead Palin: John McCain is a maverick!
REBEL! QUESTION AUTHORITY! SAY NO!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 178 Comments