These are tulmultous times. No more investment banks on Wall Street

kgingras

bobman1235 wrote: »

Which may still happen anyway. Listen to any economist, and they'll tell you they have no idea if any of this will even work. We're spending 800 billion on a gamble that NO one knows will work, and it doesn't seem to be fixing the root cause of much either.

Nouriel Roubini is quoted near the end of this article:

By Darryl Robert Schoon (author of How to Survive the Crisis and Prosper in the Process)

There is nothing more dangerous than when those responsible for a nation's troubles are believed to be its savior.

If the truth be known - and someday it will be - central banks are at the very center of today's problems. Indeed, they caused them. Today's disintegration of capital markets based on debt-based paper began in 1913 with the creation of the US Federal Reserve Bank, the central bank of the US.
...Debt-based paper money has led nations and the world down a very dangerous path. Facilitating expansion by encumbering future revenues with compounding debt inevitably indebts individuals, businesses, and governments beyond their ability to repay.
In the beginning, production expands, needs are met and everyone goes home happy. In the end, everyone's home gets repossessed. This is when the amount of debt has grown so large, governments, businesses, and consumers collapse under its collective weight.
That's where we are today. We lived off tomorrow and tomorrow has arrived. What a surprise.
Although in the past, continuing central bank intervention has proved inadequate, the ignorant, unknowing and desperate are yet again hoping that Paulson's latest plan will save them. But the collective solutions of Bernanke, Paulson, et. al. will again prove wanting.
Indeed, Paulson's and Bernanke's continuing attempts to reverse the accelerating credit contraction will only make the final rendering all the more devastating.?
Some are alleging that the US government's accelerating bailout of banks, insurance companies et. al. is socialism. Although it is government intervention in extremis, such intervention in the markets does not constitute socialism.
The bailout of investment banks and corporations by the US government is fascism; the control and intervention of government by corporate interests designed to further corporate and state control. The multi-trillion dollar state support of JP Morgan, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and now perhaps soon GM, Ford, and Chrysler is fascism, not socialism.
The August 2007 credit contraction was like a financial earthquake that unexpectedly shook global markets. It began as a series of crises that have continually escalated demanding greater and greater taxpayer resources.
Now, the house itself is on fire but the cause and the proposed solution are always the same. The cause is always investment bank greed. The proposed solution is always more taxpayer money to bailout out more investment banks. This is not a solution. This is societal blackmail.
When the US handed over the issuance of its money to the Federal Reserve in 1913 it did so in violation of the US Constitution. It illegally gave the right to issue US currency to a private bank and set in motion forces that would lead to today's extraordinary crisis.
Today's extraordinary banking crisis was not unexpected - as private bankers claim and we believe. Today's crisis was inevitable and was in fact prophesized long before it happened. We were warned about this very occurrence two hundred years ago by no less than a founding father of the American republic, Thomas Jefferson.
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
Jefferson's prophecy has now come true and, yet, we act surprised; and, if we are, it is because the corporate controlled media has effectively misled Americans about the cause of their problems.
Double-dipping welfare moms? Illegal immigrants? Muslim terrorists? It's anyone - except, of course, the bankers and the Federal Reserve - or so say again and again America's corrupt corporate media in whose interest it is for Americans to mistakenly blame others for the real cause of its woes.
Otherwise, Americans, left on their own, might wake up.
It is bankers such as Henry Paulson who are responsible for America's disintegrating and imploding economy. Since 1913 America has allowed private bankers to control the issuance of America's money and now, in the very midst of the problems they themselves created, the bankers through Paulson's plan are seeking unsupervised control over America's economy complete with immunity from any future criminal prosecution.
This is because the bankers not only want America to bail them out, they are planning to steal their assets back in the process.
The Bush administration sought unchecked power from Congress to buy $700 billion in bad mortgage investments from financial companies in what would be an unprecedented government intrusion into the markets.
Through his plan, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson aims to avert a credit freeze that would bring the financial system and the world's largest economy to a standstill. The bill would prevent courts from reviewing actions taken under its authority. [bold, Schoon]
"He's asking for a huge amount of power,'' said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University. "He's saying, 'Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.''
The investment banks are even now intending to violate the law in Paulson's proposed government takeover and redistribution of bank assets. It is in the redistribution and sale of bank assets where the crimes will occur - crimes which will be granted pre-existing immunity from judicial prosecution under Paulson's proposal.
This same caveat - immunity from subsequent criminal prosecution - was also written into the authorization of the original Resolution Trust Corporation which disposed of government seized property after the Savings & Loan crisis.
The reason no one remembers the hundreds of billions of dollars of seized property from Savings & Loans listed for sale by the RTC is because it never happened.
The greatest wealth transfer in recent history happened when taxpayer money was used to liquidate S&L properties which were then "sold" to well-connected insiders in transactions immune from criminal prosecution for literally pennies on the dollar.
The soon-to-be owned bank assets under Paulson's plan will not be sold to the highest bidders in an open and fair auction, they will be disposed of again to pools of the wealthy and well-connected at highly discounted insider valuations. The people will pay, the rich will profit.
No, this isn't a monarchy. This is fascism.
THE FOX IS IN THE HENHOUSE
Today, investment banker Henry Paulson, former CEO of investment bank Goldman Sachs is US Secretary of the Treasury. This is no coincidence. Thomas Jefferson would not be surprised.
Paulson's plan to bail out the banks is being presented to American citizens as a fait accompli, as a necessary step to prevent the complete meltdown of our financial system. Paulson's plan is exactly what every venal, opportunistic and self-serving banker would propose as a solution to America's problems in such circumstances.
When this is all over - and someday it will be - it is my hope that we will have learned the lessons that we have now forgotten. That bankers, like vicious dogs, must always be kept on short leashes for the public safety and public good (neutering should also be a requirement); and, that gold and silver, not credit and debt, are the only foundation of sound money.
PREDICTIONS
(1) Paulson's bailout of investment banks giving bankers total control over America's economy will be rushed through Congress and quickly signed into law damaging international perceptions of US creditworthiness which will lead to further uncertainty in the markets. US Treasuries and the US dollar will ultimately bear the long term consequences of Paulson's self-serving short term "solution".
Conclusion: Even greater financial disaster will result from Paulson's taxpayer bailout of his wealthy Wall Street friends.
(2) Written into the investment banking bailout law will be provisions expanding the police powers of the state, e.g. Congressman Ron Paul noted the recent passage of the housing bill contained the requirement that by 2009 "every credit card transaction will be reported to the IRS".
Conclusion: Fascism is the new zeitgeist. This, too, shall pass.

shack

kgingras wrote: »

Nouriel Roubini is quoted near the end of this article:

By Darryl Robert Schoon (author of How to Survive the Crisis and Prosper in the Process)

There is nothing more dangerous than when those responsible for a nation's troubles are believed to be its savior.

If the truth be known - and someday it will be - central banks are at the very center of today's problems. Indeed, they caused them. Today's disintegration of capital markets based on debt-based paper began in 1913 with the creation of the US Federal Reserve Bank, the central bank of the US.
...Debt-based paper money has led nations and the world down a very dangerous path. Facilitating expansion by encumbering future revenues with compounding debt inevitably indebts individuals, businesses, and governments beyond their ability to repay.
In the beginning, production expands, needs are met and everyone goes home happy. In the end, everyone's home gets repossessed. This is when the amount of debt has grown so large, governments, businesses, and consumers collapse under its collective weight.
That's where we are today. We lived off tomorrow and tomorrow has arrived. What a surprise.
Although in the past, continuing central bank intervention has proved inadequate, the ignorant, unknowing and desperate are yet again hoping that Paulson's latest plan will save them. But the collective solutions of Bernanke, Paulson, et. al. will again prove wanting.
Indeed, Paulson's and Bernanke's continuing attempts to reverse the accelerating credit contraction will only make the final rendering all the more devastating.?
Some are alleging that the US government's accelerating bailout of banks, insurance companies et. al. is socialism. Although it is government intervention in extremis, such intervention in the markets does not constitute socialism.
The bailout of investment banks and corporations by the US government is fascism; the control and intervention of government by corporate interests designed to further corporate and state control. The multi-trillion dollar state support of JP Morgan, AIG, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and now perhaps soon GM, Ford, and Chrysler is fascism, not socialism.
The August 2007 credit contraction was like a financial earthquake that unexpectedly shook global markets. It began as a series of crises that have continually escalated demanding greater and greater taxpayer resources.
Now, the house itself is on fire but the cause and the proposed solution are always the same. The cause is always investment bank greed. The proposed solution is always more taxpayer money to bailout out more investment banks. This is not a solution. This is societal blackmail.
When the US handed over the issuance of its money to the Federal Reserve in 1913 it did so in violation of the US Constitution. It illegally gave the right to issue US currency to a private bank and set in motion forces that would lead to today's extraordinary crisis.
Today's extraordinary banking crisis was not unexpected - as private bankers claim and we believe. Today's crisis was inevitable and was in fact prophesized long before it happened. We were warned about this very occurrence two hundred years ago by no less than a founding father of the American republic, Thomas Jefferson.
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.
Jefferson's prophecy has now come true and, yet, we act surprised; and, if we are, it is because the corporate controlled media has effectively misled Americans about the cause of their problems.
Double-dipping welfare moms? Illegal immigrants? Muslim terrorists? It's anyone - except, of course, the bankers and the Federal Reserve - or so say again and again America's corrupt corporate media in whose interest it is for Americans to mistakenly blame others for the real cause of its woes.
Otherwise, Americans, left on their own, might wake up.
It is bankers such as Henry Paulson who are responsible for America's disintegrating and imploding economy. Since 1913 America has allowed private bankers to control the issuance of America's money and now, in the very midst of the problems they themselves created, the bankers through Paulson's plan are seeking unsupervised control over America's economy complete with immunity from any future criminal prosecution.
This is because the bankers not only want America to bail them out, they are planning to steal their assets back in the process.
The Bush administration sought unchecked power from Congress to buy $700 billion in bad mortgage investments from financial companies in what would be an unprecedented government intrusion into the markets.
Through his plan, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson aims to avert a credit freeze that would bring the financial system and the world's largest economy to a standstill. The bill would prevent courts from reviewing actions taken under its authority. [bold, Schoon]
"He's asking for a huge amount of power,'' said Nouriel Roubini, an economist at New York University. "He's saying, 'Trust me, I'm going to do it right if you give me absolute control.' This is not a monarchy.''
The investment banks are even now intending to violate the law in Paulson's proposed government takeover and redistribution of bank assets. It is in the redistribution and sale of bank assets where the crimes will occur - crimes which will be granted pre-existing immunity from judicial prosecution under Paulson's proposal.
This same caveat - immunity from subsequent criminal prosecution - was also written into the authorization of the original Resolution Trust Corporation which disposed of government seized property after the Savings & Loan crisis.
The reason no one remembers the hundreds of billions of dollars of seized property from Savings & Loans listed for sale by the RTC is because it never happened.
The greatest wealth transfer in recent history happened when taxpayer money was used to liquidate S&L properties which were then "sold" to well-connected insiders in transactions immune from criminal prosecution for literally pennies on the dollar.
The soon-to-be owned bank assets under Paulson's plan will not be sold to the highest bidders in an open and fair auction, they will be disposed of again to pools of the wealthy and well-connected at highly discounted insider valuations. The people will pay, the rich will profit.
No, this isn't a monarchy. This is fascism.
THE FOX IS IN THE HENHOUSE
Today, investment banker Henry Paulson, former CEO of investment bank Goldman Sachs is US Secretary of the Treasury. This is no coincidence. Thomas Jefferson would not be surprised.
Paulson's plan to bail out the banks is being presented to American citizens as a fait accompli, as a necessary step to prevent the complete meltdown of our financial system. Paulson's plan is exactly what every venal, opportunistic and self-serving banker would propose as a solution to America's problems in such circumstances.
When this is all over - and someday it will be - it is my hope that we will have learned the lessons that we have now forgotten. That bankers, like vicious dogs, must always be kept on short leashes for the public safety and public good (neutering should also be a requirement); and, that gold and silver, not credit and debt, are the only foundation of sound money.
PREDICTIONS
(1) Paulson's bailout of investment banks giving bankers total control over America's economy will be rushed through Congress and quickly signed into law damaging international perceptions of US creditworthiness which will lead to further uncertainty in the markets. US Treasuries and the US dollar will ultimately bear the long term consequences of Paulson's self-serving short term "solution".
Conclusion: Even greater financial disaster will result from Paulson's taxpayer bailout of his wealthy Wall Street friends.
(2) Written into the investment banking bailout law will be provisions expanding the police powers of the state, e.g. Congressman Ron Paul noted the recent passage of the housing bill contained the requirement that by 2009 "every credit card transaction will be reported to the IRS".
Conclusion: Fascism is the new zeitgeist. This, too, shall pass.

That is so full of **** I can smell it through my screen...:rolleyes:

Jstas

shack wrote: »

That is so full of **** I can smell it through my screen...:rolleyes:

You actually read it?




This thread is gonna go bye bye also because of all the political rhetoric that keeps pooping up.

Facts are facts, numbers don't lie. A ton of stuff has gone in to affecting this. Yes, many of us are either victims or bystanders in all of this but, if we want to continue our current standard of living, the government needs to take action mainly because it is the ONLY entity with the financial power to be able to do something about it.

Does it suck? Yes, yes it does. Should it affect how you cast your vote in November? Yes, yes it should. But instead of spewing political rhetoric, listen to what both sides are saying, do some of your own research and decide for yourself. The writing is on the wall and people are not what they seem to be nor are they what others want you to think they are.

But honestly, there is no amount of politics short of a dictatorship or other fascist or communist system that can affect an economy based on a free market. Even though some crackpots seem to think we live in a fascist regime, we don't. Nobody on Capitol Hill has enough power to act on the economy and change it. Things got out of hand here because many people who had the power to affect things shouldn't have had the abilty. But they did. It's just a shame that many of them were publicly elected officials who betrayed the constituency for the health of their own wallets.

That's politics, that how it always seems to go. It really doesn't have any place in economics just like it doesn't have any place in this discussion.

shack

Anybody that thinks this "really doesn't affect me" take a look at your 401K or IRA or mutual funds after the House decided to "play politics" rather than do the right thing. They are more worried about getting re-elected in 5 weeks than taking the necessary steps to fix the problem before it all goes to hell. The market was down 705 points or almost 7% in a matter of hours. There are too many people that think this is JUST ABOUT THE RICH GUYS. They are sticking their heads in the sand hoping it will all go away...or think it is overblown...or it is a conspiracy....

They just don't get it because it is about ALL OF US and is isn't going away and it isn't overblown.

Ricardo

^^^^+ 1,000

Unbelievable move by the House. Get ready for a roller coaster ride.

Jstas

shack wrote: »

Anybody that thinks this "really doesn't affect me" take a look at your 401K or IRA or mutual funds after the House decided to "play politics" rather than do the right thing. They are more worried about getting re-elected in 5 weeks than taking the necessary steps to fix the problem before it all goes to hell. The market was down 705 points or almost 7% in a matter of hours. There are too many people that think this is JUST ABOUT THE RICH GUYS. They just don't get it.

Even if you don't have investments it still affects you. This affects interest rates on bank accounts, credit cards and so on. If you don't have any of those and keep all your money in a mattress, it affects the value of what you have in that mattress too.

Keep in mind there is still the fuel cost problems that seem to have been forgotten about in addition to the fact that most of the southeast is still without fuel due to storm affects.

Things are only getting worse because it's an election year and nobody is paying attention to anything but getting re-elected.

shack

At its lowest point the market was down 705.06, not far from its previous record for an intraday drop, 721.32, set during the first trading day after Sept. 11, 2001. It could still beat that drop. I guess things aren't really as serious as we thought...:rolleyes:

disneyjoe7

I believe this will effect me either way, and I not convinced that one way or the other is more beneficial.

A.) Bail out cost us $700B, higher taxes over the years

To correct something that the government start some tried to stop before it got to this point. And some will pad the CEO's of fail corporations, which I have a hard time feeling ok with this. Not I blame the corporations which failed I think the Government had a strong hand it also.

B.) Do nothing yes my 401k sucks big time, but maybe I have less taxes over the years.

So like I stated it's a wash to me.

And then there's always another country to move to, if needed. This country is a fine place to live but not the only place to live.

Jstas

Well, we'll see what happens tomorrow.

The bailout was rejected, no more voting will be done today.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/economy/bailout/index.htm?cnn=yes

Jstas

disneyjoe7 wrote: »

I believe this will effect me either way, and I not convinced that one way or the other is more beneficial.

A.) Bail out cost us $700B, higher taxes over the years

To correct something that the government start some tried to stop before it got to this point. And some will pad the CEO's of fail corporations, which I have a hard time feeling ok with this. Not I blame the corporations which failed I think the Government had a strong hand it also.

B.) Do nothing yes my 401k sucks big time, but maybe I have less taxes over the years.

So like I stated it's a wash to me.

And then there's always another country to move to, if needed. This country is a fine place to live but not the only place to live.

Have you read anything in this thread at all?

shack

disneyjoe7 wrote:

A.) Bail out cost us $700B, higher taxes over the years

This is simply not true. That is the amount of funds to be used to purchase the distressed loans and forclosed property. The plan was to work with the homeowners still residing in many of the homes and lower INTEREST payments to allow them to stay in the homes. The principal balance would still be paid back. The foreclosed properties would eventually be sold and the funds recovered in some cases for more than they were purchased for by the govt. The plan was to purchase distressed ASSETS not just give away the money.

DAMN...it pisses me off when our so called leaders have no understanding of something of this magnitude. They say they got calls 10-1 against it by their constituents....WHO DON'T UNDERSTANDING IT EITHER. There are times when they have to do the right thing...even when it is very unpopular.

John30_30

Jstas wrote: »

Well, we'll see what happens tomorrow.

The bailout was rejected, no more voting will be done today.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/economy/bailout/index.htm?cnn=yes

Do you get the impression it failed because Pelosi rubbed it in the faces of the Repubs just before the vote? Or is that just me....

Polk user

shack wrote: »

This is simply not true. That is the amount of funds to be used to purchase the distressed loans and forclosed property. The plan was to work with the homeowners still residing in many of the homes and lower INTEREST payments to allow them to stay in the homes. The principal balance would still be paid back. The foreclosed properties would eventually be sold and the funds recovered in some cases for more than they were purchased for by the govt. The plan was to purchase distressed ASSETS not just give away the money.

DAMN...it pisses me off when our so called leaders have no understanding of something of this magnitude. They say they got calls 10-1 against it by their constituents....WHO DON'T UNDERSTANDING IT EITHER. There are times when they have to do the right thing...even when it is very unpopular.

So some part time avacado picker in California who got bought a $600,000 house with nothing down and no income verification pays the mortgage for a few months and now can't pay it and hes in forclosure is gonna have the gov't redo his morgtgage at 3% and value the house at todays value of $300,000. So now he has a $300,000 mortgage at 3% while I am stuck at 6% for the full 2005 value of my house.

Does that sound fair?

Polk user

John30_30 wrote: »

Do you get the impression it failed because Pelosi rubbed it in the faces of the Repubs just before the vote? Or is that just me....

Heres her speech.... With Barney Frank introducing her. Shouldn't he be in jail?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ey3ZlsmIkz4

shack

Polk user wrote:

So some part time avacado picker in California who got bought a $600,000 house with nothing down and no income verification pays the mortgage for a few months and now can't pay it and hes in forclosure is gonna have the gov't redo his morgtgage at 3% and value the house at todays value of $300,000. So now he has a $300,000 mortgage at 3% while I am stuck at 6% for the full 2005 value of my house.

Does that sound fair?

First of all....THAT loan never happened. And even if it did, he would be foreclosed on because he could not make ANY reasonable payment. The govt would give the lender the market value of the home (it was never stated that the lenders were getting 100% of the ORIGINAL amount of the loan) and the rest would be written off again income (and potentially capital). The govt would then sell the home when the market allowed. The government "gives" stuff to people that they don't give to me ALL THE TIME. Government funded student school grants, subsidised housing, free school lunches, food stamps, WIC, etc...etc...etc... This is no different.

An whoever told you life was fair was telling you a fairy tale. :rolleyes:

bobman1235

Democrats outnumber the Republicans in the house by quite a few (almost 40 I think) so how exactly are they being blamed?

shack

Polk user wrote:

Heres her speech.... With Barney Frank introducing her. Shouldn't he be in jail?

No but you should be ignored...which is easily fixable.


DONE!

DollarDave

John30_30 wrote: »

Do you get the impression it failed because Pelosi rubbed it in the faces of the Repubs just before the vote? Or is that just me....

Absolutely. Calling them "Unpatriotic" and ignoring the fact that about 100 Democrats also voted against it was about as dumb as it gets. But, that pretty well sums up her tenure as Speaker of the House.

I respectfully disagree with those that think that those of us not in favor of this bailout simply don't understand. We have a legitimate concern that manufacturing about a trillion dollars from vapor could cause rampant inflation. The Fed has generally seen inflation as a bad thing and raised interest rates to combat it (or at least failed to lower rates). They were completely wrong on this the last couple of years.

I also question why I should be held to a fair interest rate that I negotiated when I purchased my home because I can make my payments. Why should I, or anyone else, need to subsidize the interest rate of someone that made a poor choice? Answer - I shouldn't, and I won't.

What about all those people that paid over-inflated prices for their homes? Has anyone seen "What's my house worth?" on HGTV? $500/sq foot is common in other parts of the country. $100/sq foot is common here. Why should I, or anyone else, be asked to rescue the lender who gave a loan on this property and asked for 0 down, etc, etc? Answer - I shouldn't, and I won't.

Our bank didn't make these ridiculous loans and others should not have. We are publicly traded and are well capitalized. Earnings have increased every quarter. Not ever quarter this last year, every quarter since we have been a charter. Conservative, prudent, business practices is all it takes.

polkatese

This is a precarious position for the baillout plan: Bush, The House's Democrats, McCain, and Obama on the "Pro" side, House's Republicans on the other.

I wish I could grab a bag of popcorn and watch them while they are goofing off with my 401K's money, and choking off the credit market.

Polk user

shack wrote: »

No but you should be ignored...which is easily fixable.


DONE!

Another liberal that can't handle the truth. So sad. And those loans DID happen.

ohskigod

Polk user wrote: »

Another liberal that can't handle the truth. So sad. And those loans DID happen.

I wouldnt put Shack as a liberal.......I would call him knowlegable in the banking sphere though but hey....thats just my .02


fact kiddie poos, fault lays on both sides of the aisle for this

Dems pushed low income house ownership ral early, and reinforced by 1995ish by Clinton. the govmt put heavy pressure on financial intitutions to push subprime so low income people who had "the right" to home ownership got homes (dont get me started on this). thanks to the boom housing market, subprime became insanely profitable........thus the recent subprime explosion with little to no need for prompting by the government. The private sector took the ball and ran.....hard. some on both sides saw the problem coming, neither spoke loudly enough.

however, the only side that actually tried to enact legislation that could have helped were repubs, and the one side that always shot it down = dems. hence, as pissed as I am at everyone, I know how I am voting.


hell, even the bailout vote failed becuase BOTH SIDES had alot of people vote no.

and someone here said Pelosi's rant might have had something to do with the shootdown, my response = "YA THINK?"

DollarDave

ohskigod wrote: »

I wouldnt put Shack as a liberal.......I would call him knowlegable in the banking sphere though but hey....thats just my .02

I agree. But, he is mistaken on this issue. At least in my humble opinion.

shack

If anything I'm a conservative Republican.

Dave you are looking at the micro and not the macro. My bank didn't make any of the loans in question either. But the trickle down is effecting ALL of my clients. It is the economy that needs this fix...not just the financial institutions. They are merely a conduit to get the funds back into the economy. It is not a "grant" program...it is a lifeline to keep the sinking ships and all that are attached to them (basically all of us) afloat until they can repair the holes.

DollarDave

shack wrote: »

If anything I'm a conservative Republican.

Dave you are looking at the micro and not the macro. My bank didn't make any of the loans in question either. But the trickle down is effecting ALL of my clients. It is the economy that needs this fix...not just the financial institutions. They are merely a conduit to get the funds back into the economy. It is not a "grant" program...it is a lifeline to keep the sinking ships and all that are attached to them (basically all of us) afloat until they can repair the holes.

Understood. Yes, that is my micro-view of it.

How about this? Take these portfolios that have been "marked to market" and devalued off of their operating balance sheets. Let them borrow "fed fund" type of funds to capitalize them separately and appropriately after a risk rating is established. Charge a reasonable interest rate of say, who knows, fed funds rate + 1 or 2%. Put a five year pay-back on it. Over the next several years, institute a work-out program for these loans - as much as I don't like it, just dumping these homes on the market via forclosure or walk-aways will just de-value my house and everyone else's. Through a combination of principle write-offs and interest rate subsidies, we can clean most of these up over the course of a short time. I think you would see many otherwise conservative lenders participate in these work-outs as long as their is some sort of "gaurantee" that their principle will be re-paid. Just my 2 cents and some really random ideas that I haven't completely thought through.. However, mine is probably better than putting someone like Hank Paulson in charge of fixing this.

BigMac

This is pretty easy to understand. Bailing out financial institutions "crap" will only lead to more crap. This 700 billion is no more good than monopoly money.....not even worth the paper it is printed on. Maybe, just maybe, people will wake up and live "within" their means. For those that lived like millionaires on a janitor's salary, I say," killem' all and let God sort em' out". Not literally kill them but you get the idea.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime

Now will somebody please pass the the tarter sauce.

ohskigod

plus, the 700 bil would be the initial outlay, not the final cost (as Shack said a bunch of times I;m sure). the actual cost will be less. how much so will depend on too many factors for me to guess

I am, on so many levels, against this buyout, except for one level.....that being that the economy will collapse hard without it, hurting everyone.

is it right, no, butsometimes the right choice isnt always the perfectly right choice....nes pas?

Jstas

DaveMuell wrote: »

Understood. Yes, that is my micro-view of it.

How about this? Take these portfolios that have been "marked to market" and devalued off of their operating balance sheets. Let them borrow "fed fund" type of funds to capitalize them separately and appropriately after a risk rating is established. Charge a reasonable interest rate of say, who knows, fed funds rate + 1 or 2%. Put a five year pay-back on it. Over the next several years, institute a work-out program for these loans - as much as I don't like it, just dumping these homes on the market via forclosure or walk-aways will just de-value my house and everyone else's. Through a combination of principle write-offs and interest rate subsidies, we can clean most of these up over the course of a short time. I think you would see many otherwise conservative lenders participate in these work-outs as long as their is some sort of "gaurantee" that their principle will be re-paid. Just my 2 cents and some really random ideas that I haven't completely thought through.. However, mine is probably better than putting someone like Hank Paulson in charge of fixing this.

Dude, hate to break it to you but your home is already over-valued. You aren't going to lose value because of a buyout and foreclosures. You are going to lose value because the market will self-adjust, bailout or not. It's not even a question of if it will lose value. It already has. The Question now, increasingly daily becomes when will it stop losing value.

This goes so much farther than little banks that managed their assets well. Of course little banks are not going to be sucked up in the whole mess but still get a hurtin'. Little banks don't have the capital and resources necessary to lend against the risk let alone the ability to absorb the risk should it mature. If you can't play the big risk in the big game, your small risk is not going to matter much at all. The reason small banks get hurt is that they can no longer run the same high interest rates because even though they did play the high-risk game, their capital is still just as devalued as everyone else.

Does it suck? YES! Without a shadow of a doubt. But honestly micro-economics just doesn't apply here anymore. This is macro stuff on a global scale.

Jstas

BigMac wrote: »

This is pretty easy to understand. Bailing out financial institutions "crap" will only lead to more crap. This 700 billion is no more good than monopoly money.....not even worth the paper it is printed on. Maybe, just maybe, people will wake up and live "within" their means. For those that lived like millionaires on a janitor's salary, I say," killem' all and let God sort em' out". Not literally kill them but you get the idea.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime

Now will somebody please pass the the tarter sauce.

That really didn't add anything to the discussion and is honestly not only way off base but way over simplified.

Jstas

By the way, the Dow is down 778 points now.

Polk user

BOTH sides are to blame. In other countries Bush would be run out of town or voted out on a no confidence vote. And yet these fools will be voted back in. Bush is history. Start voting out the rest of these thieves. How come the media is not putting ANY blame on the people who ran these companies into the ground or these fools that ran the over site committees?