Sums up this communist bailout plan perfectly.
It seems to me and let’s be clear I am no economist finding running a wallet a real achievement, that the American Public can suffer the loss two ways;
1 - They fund the bailout and pay for it until such time as the government is able to sell the properties at a profit ( Obama’s claim not mine) the dollar is inflated reducing everyone’s buying power, housing prices continue to fall, consumer goods become more and more expensive , millions lose their jobs, etc. etc. etc.
2 - These financial institutions are allowed to fail and the world is plunged into an immediate recession / depression where millions are out of work, homes are lost, property values collapse etc. etc. etc.
It seems that there are two choices. Either the government stays out of the bail out business ( and this is my natural ‘conservative’ choice) and the world economy suffers a very hard landing. Or the government bails out the institutions ( and this runs contrary to everything I believe about getting big government out of the way of all of us) and the world economy suffers a somewhat softer landing.
Much and all as this offends my idea of what is the role of government I must say that I will hold my nose and support the softer landing and then hope that all conservatives will fight to get big government back to it’s proper place in the scheme of things.
Well, at least I still have hope left!:mrgreen:
I’d like to know how this “crisis” spontaneously formulated about a week ago and why the “Wall Street Welfare Bill” needs to be enacted in the snap of a finger. I smell a rat …
First I agree with your two premises, but not your conclusion. Why, because in the end it will fail, furthermore it will be costlier, and finally because when it is all over the government will have their foot on the neck of its citizens. I don’t care what anyone says… Prices can’t be maintained, if it were that easy they could just pass a law that says houses can only be sold for more than they were purchased for. The crisis will end when the prices of homes stops falling until then all that is being proposed by this administration is a bailout of those who caused the condition we now find ourselves in.
Just look at who is telling you that this is needed.
He is an ex CEO of a wall street firm for 6 years. He will be joining the private sector again after 1-2009. I will give a 1000 to 1 odds that he is the CEO or high level executive of another wall street firm before the end of 2009.
Talk about a conflict of interest!!!
I just don’t understand how borrowing more money is going to fix this problem. My personal feelings are that we have been living on borrowed time for way to long. Both the government and most citizens are in debt up to their $ss and have been living on borrowed money for sometime. How many people mortgaged their house to the max in the last 5 years and now owe much more than what it is worth? I know that my kids mother did. We bought the house in 1995 for $50000 now it has a 108000 mortgage and is going to go back to having a value of 50000. I’ll bet that the majority of homeowners are in the same position.
I doubt that there are many that have their home paid for and have no debt. As hard as a depression is going to be we need it to get people back on the right track and living within their means. It is going to happen with or without the bailout. The only question is do we take care of the rich people that got us in this position or not. I say that we let them suffer like the rest of america is going too.
I have been thinking an awful lot about what is taking place and what I as an individual can do about it. I have come to the conclusion that there isnt much that I can do as an individual but I think we can do something if all of us get together and worked on common solutions. You always hear about the 1% that rules this country, but you never hear anything about the other 99%. That is because the 1% keeps us fighting with each other so that we never accomplish anything. Just think of what we could do if even half of that 99% joined together and fought for what america needs instead of what the 1% wants.
It is time to take back America and we can only do it as a group not as individuals.
First, if you look at it from a factual standpoint, and not one from a completely insane emotional stand point, the government was the first domino to fall in starting this mess with “the poor to own homes who can’t afford it” act. I’ll reaseach in a minute to find the name of the act and post it in a few mins. So we give loans to people that have minimum wage jobs, or are on the government tit so to speak and we also have just plain stupid people buying $ 500,000.00 homes or more that could not afford it, with low or no down payment financing, and/or interest only loans. So there is the first BIG mistake made by our lending institutions, lead by our government that has to “feel good” before using comon sense! So, our financial institutions sold all of these “what in the hell were you thinking” loans to other financial institutions like Freddie May and Fannie Mac. They are covered under the “government blanket” for acting like a complete moron with no business sense back-up plan. The reason we are now feeling it is because we have been playing a shell game with our own money in order to make some people in the government to feel good about their LAW that they passed to help the poor own houses that they couldn’t afford to begin with. I guess the old saying “the pathway to hell was PAVED and four laned with good intensions”. What REALLY pisses me off about the whole ordeal is that we (people who pay taxes = we) are going to pay for it in the long run AND we are giving the BILLIONS of dollars for the bail out TO THE PEOPLE WHO STARTED ALL OF THIS MESS!!! Does it bother anyone that the “deal” was done by our congress during the week-end when no one is looking and they can weasel out of responsibility? Speaking of “responsibility”, does it make anyone else mad that these failing institutions are paying the CEO’s Millions of dollars that they do not have, and expecting the gov’t to “bail them out” of all the financial burden? Which as you know, we (people who pay taxes = we) will be paying the bill later?
The ONLY chance the American public had was a provision that was lobbied for, and lost, during negotiations.
That sole provision would have empowered bankruptcy judges to re-write mortage terms as a part of a bankruptcy procedure. In essence, the bank had little to say, and the judge would actually be directly able to instantly help a family facing foreclosure.
Of course, this was not advantageous to the banks, so it was instantly jettisoned…
I hope the EVERY AMERICAN sees and understands what this means. It DOES NOT MATTER what your beliefs are as to fairness or anything else. What it PROVES is that this country and this congress are the PUPPETS of special interests.
Finally, and no one gets this, is the following:
The purpose of the bailout, as it has been sold, is that currently no credit is available. Without credit, houses cannot be purchased, companies cannot expand, payrolls cant be met, cars cant be bought, college cant be paid for… whatever.
So riddle me this Batman… AFTER we buy all this debt, will credit become INSTANTLY available again? I seriously doubt it.
If anything, the criteria to borrow will remain ridiculous. Facts prove that even with reduced home proces, few can afford the houses, and fewer can qualify for credit.
Credit is a business. Any excuse to ding someones credit and its done. Presto. No one has yet been able to explain how looking up someone’s credit score lowers it, automatically. So, you cant shop for financing, because every time a credit report is requested, the score drops.
On other fronts, we continue to do nothing.
No one is talking about reigning in the credit card companies. No oe is specking of controlling and reducing credit card interest rates and terms. No one is speaking or eliminating universal default. No one is speaking of reigning in the credit reportng agencies.
Once again, Congress is missing the big picture.
Reward the banks. Reward the investment firms. Reward the rich. Do it at the expense of the taxpayer, and provide nothing in return.
Well, plan on the government foreclosing on homes, and throwing folks into the street. Then plan on making those homes “affordable” and giving them to the special interest do-gooders. Plan on Section 8, group homes, community centers, and God-knows-what coming to a neighborhood near you.
Kiss Tom and Ellen and their 3 kids goodbye andf welcome to the New World Order; right next door.
Instead of helping our neighbors, the Government and special interests are helping themselves.
No matter what, we are headed for a global depression. The sole survivirs will be big business (foreign of course), oil, utilities, and foreign banks.
Our government will create new jobs, with public works projects. Unfortunately, these jobs will jot generate enough income for folks to remain in their homes.
The middle class will soon cease to exist.
I hope I am wrong, but I fear that I am not.
Fish stinks from the head down. They all need to go.
For many people when they consider their net wealth or when they look in their wallet and see cash & credit cards really see no difference between the two. For many years Americans have had the insane luxury of treating credit as real money. Very soon the false connection between the two will be broken and it will shatter that illusion forever.
Good point Joe. But that illusion was created and perpetuated by the banks.
Remember when the banks lobbied Congress to modify personal bankruptcy rules to help them with credit card debt problems?
Congress said “sure”.
The law was passed.
The very next day, millions of unsolicited credit card offers went out.
Predatory lending terms in most.
Another scam. Some who took cash advances are paying a whopping 50% interest.
Thinks that’s a little excessive.
Makes looking like going to your local loan-shark a smart move.
At least they cant break your arm with a judge watching…
The Bailout talks… What’s really happening.
This hidden camera expose just posted.
We must protect our phoney baloney jobs.
I have a feeling that in the very near future credit cards being held by people with a credit score below “X” (600-700) will be turned off, maybe as soon as next week.
To me the truly scary thing is because of all of the previous meddling by the government there is no asset class that will hold up in the coming recession, there is no real hiding place for people to put their money into that is not without grave risk. This collapse will be complete and without precedents.
I didn’t get a “Harumph” out of you. Watch your a$$…
Boo, friggin’ hoo!
**A Lehman trader copes with the sudden onset of income shrinkage. **
By Gabriel Sherman, Published Sep 21, 2008
The ’97 Barbaresco was not supposed to be opened for this. Stashed under a desk on the third floor of Lehman Brothers’ Seventh Avenue headquarters, the bottle awaited an appropriate victory. Like food, wine pairs well with vast sums of money.
But on Friday, September 12, as Lehman’s stock flatlined at $3.65 per share, the Trader knew it was time to uncork the Santo Stefano. He was in his late thirties, at the prime of his earning potential, a standout in one of Lehman’s profitable trading divisions. When the stock price had fallen below $20 a share in July, the Trader knew things were bad but took solace in the prospect of one more bonus cycle. Things are bad; things will be bad for a while. We’ll hunker down and survive, he had thought then.
But the fact that the Trader’s desk met its targets in August meant nothing at Lehman, where cascading losses from a few epic bets on commercial real estate triggered a firmwide meltdown. As one recently laid-off Lehman staffer said, in characteristic Wall Street vernacular, “These assholes on another floor completely dropped our pants.”
Read the whole tawdry article here: http://nymag.com/news/businessfinance/50523/
You can sum up much of 20th century history by saying that in the 1930s Americans decided that markets didn’t work and government did, and that in the 1970s Americans decided that government didn’t work and markets did.
The protracted and painful experiences of those decades changed basic public attitudes on the balance between government and markets, between regulation and enterprise, between government aid programs and self-reliance. The breadlines and depression of the 1930s moved Americans in one direction; the gas lines and stagflation of the 1970s moved them in the other.
Which raises the question of whether the financial ructions of 2007-08 (09?) will move them back again. One reason to believe this is possible is the passage of time. Americans in the 1980s and 1990s were ready to accept deregulation and tax cuts and welfare reform because so few of them had personal memories of the 1930s.
In 1992, Bill Clinton ran as a different kind of Democrat because so many voters then had personal memories of the 1970s. Today, fewer do. Half the voters did not reach adulthood until the 1980s. They never sat behind the steering wheel in a gas line or paid monthly bills as inflation was skyrocketing. It’s plausible that they may be more open to big government programs than their elders.
Barack Obama and other Democrats have used the financial crisis to spin a narrative. The problem, they say, is deregulation and greed. This is not strictly speaking accurate. Obama and the Democrats opposed tighter regulation of the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and John McCain supported it. Unregulated firms like hedge funds have done well, while heavily regulated banks have had troubles.
But the narrative will be advanced by the Obama-loving media … and by the passage of a giant financial bailout – er, rescue package. The likelihood, as this is written, is that Obama will be elected president and the Democrats will expand their congressional majorities. Possibly even to the 60 votes they need to effectively control the Senate.
In that case, Democrats might be able to move toward nationalized health care finance. Their card-check bill will promote unionization and do to much of the private sector what union contracts have done to the Detroit Three automakers. Higher taxes and overregulation could reduce economic vitality and creativity. Comparable worth laws could have bureaucrats setting private sector salaries. America could move some distance to becoming another France.
Those seeking that outcome would do well to study some history. Some New Deal-Great Society programs have mostly worked well over the long term: bank deposit insurance, securities market regulation. Some worked well for many years but are on the road to something like financial collapse: Social Security, Medicare. But some had adverse economic effects and proved unpopular: high taxes on high earners, industrial unionization.
The economy in the 1930s suffered from what Amity Shlaes in “The Forgotten Man” calls a “capital strike,” with unemployment stuck over 10 percent. Take a look at the polls in the 1940 election. If voters had decided on domestic issues, the Democrats probably would have lost. Franklin Roosevelt won because Adolf Hitler, with his then-ally Joseph Stalin, had conquered most of Europe and was threatening Britain and the United States. Roosevelt’s experience and his steady hand on foreign policy won him his third term.
The war that followed produced huge economic growth and sharp increases in income equality – the biggest such movement in American history. But the war policies – government taking up nearly half of gross domestic product, the mobilization of the equivalent of 37 million in the military – are not replicable under any circumstances foreseeable today.
Postwar America continued to grow, with help from the John Kennedy tax cuts, declining unionization and (I would argue) the civil rights acts. But eventually, in the 1970s, regulation designed to freeze a static economy in place and macroeconomic policies complacent about the danger of inflation (the big problem in the 1930s was deflation) produced the gas lines and stagflation voters rebelled against. Policies inspired by the inflection point of the 1930s led to a different inflection point in the 1970s.
Are we looking at another inflection point today? Maybe so. Reviewing the long course of history, I think it’s obvious that market capitalism, together with the rule of law, hard currency and regulations that ensure transparency and accountability, has produced bounteous growth and the resources to address problems that require government action, like defending the nation and protecting the environment. But voters tend to consider only the history they know. They might do well to look back a little further.
Hope this helps;
Sorry but no, paragraphs are our friends, embrace them.
Among the key bull**** segments of the bill:
EXECUTIVE PAY. Restrictions would be imposed on the compensation received by executives whose companies sell some of their bad assets through the government’s purchase program. There would be tax restrictions on executive pay over $500,000 and limits on so-called “golden parachutes” for executives who leave the companies getting government bailouts.
OVERSIGHT. The Treasury will be required to provide details of its purchases of bad assets within two days of the transaction. Oversight boards would be created including one with members selected by Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and Senate and one that will include top government officials.
TAXPAYER PROTECTION. Taxpayers would be given ownership stakes in companies whose bad assets are purchased and after five years if the government is facing a loss in the program then the president will be required to submit a plan on how to recoup a portion of the losses from the companies that participated in the program.
We’re so far past screwed that the light from screwed isn’t going to get here for a million years.
It’s not so bad :roll: they dropped it to 700 billion. :shock:
$700 Billion: ‘Nobody Believes That’s Going to Be the Final Cost’](http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Economy/story?id=5904056&page=1)