The ABCs of the Asian Bailout

Crises:
Winners & Losers
January 28, 1998

Dear Colleague:

Bailouts are supported by some and opposed by others. If one follows t he money trail, it
becomes easy to understand who supports and who opposes more bailout money. There are
clear winners and losers in this charade of maintaining “financial stability.”

Who wins?
If we were to put purple dye on the money that we are sending to these countries in the
bailouts today, the Wall St reet fat cats will be walking around w ith P urple Pockets t omorrow.
The money also funds lavish bailout bureaucracy salaries and corrupt foreign government
officials--these groups argue for the gravy train to continue.

Bailout money insulates investors and bankers from their bad investment decisions and
insulates corrupt rulers (who often plunder the economy for personal or familial gain, rape the
environment, crush movements of laborers trying to express their right of voluntary
association, and violate other human rights) from the people who seek a more responsive
government.

Who loses ?
The people of the bailed-out countries who work hard and save but have their earnings
washed away by inflationary money expansion. With t hese fiat currency devaluat ions, the
working people (who don’t have money in Swiss bank accounts or in other “hard” currencies
or gold as their rulers do) have lost up to 80% or t heir savings and earnings ( in U.S. dollar
terms). Fuel and basic foodstuffs are now unaffordable for many of the working poor.

The US taxpayer has money deducted from their paychecks which is given to the IM F.
Supporters claim that it is a neutral “exchange of assets,” but, in reality, it is far from neutral
for the taxpayer. The taxpayer whose money is taken cannot go the IM F t o pay for child care,
education, food for children, mortgage, c redit cards, s tudent , or car loans.

Solid M ajority of Americans Oppose More Bailout Money

For these easy to understand reasons, asolid majority of Americans oppose the
Administration’s request to bail out the Asian economies. According to a Reuters poll
released on January 22, 1998, a majority of respondents “disagreed with the White House’s
controversial request seeking Congressional approval of some $19 billion of extra money” for
the IM F.

Lis ten to the taxpaye rs NOT the purple -pocke ted.

 Oppose ne w funding for the IMF!
Sincerely,

Ron Paul