Bailouts Options

[woody]

Since i don't see a topic for this. What do you all think of the bailouts going on right now?

[woody]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business...aff-937560.html


Fury at $2.5bn bonus for Lehman's New York staff

[impala454]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business...aff-937560.html


Fury at $2.5bn bonus for Lehman's New York staff

just a bunch of brits crybabying because they're not getting a bonus. WAH.

as far as the bailouts, I'm ok with it I guess, but think it's bullshit that the banks are continuing on business as usual in their loan practices.

[chook]

I think the DOT should take that money from the pool.

[woody]

Ron Paul on Bailout

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/23/pau...=rss_topstories

[woody]

must be nice to file for bankruptcy and set aside 2.5B to get paid a "bonus"

@ 10K employees and $2.5bn, that's a 'bonus' of $250,000

[Spectatrix]

I think the bailouts are a bad idea. I think they alleviate some short-term suffering, but are largely just postponing the inevitable collapse of poorly-run institutions. They made their beds, let them lie in 'em. Let the market punish businesses that acted stupidly. It'll hurt us more in the long run if we try to prop them up.

[THECHICKEN]

I think the bailouts are a bad idea. I think they alleviate some short-term suffering, but are largely just postponing the inevitable collapse of poorly-run institutions. They made their beds, let them lie in 'em. Let the market punish businesses that acted stupidly. It'll hurt us more in the long run if we try to prop them up.

Yeah, i agree with this. Let bad companies die... its like the airline industry, others will take thier place. The clients money is still safe and can be picked up by other ... better.. companies.

[Spectatrix]

My view is... either regulate & pick up the tab when companies fail OR deregulate and let companies suffer from their mistakes. Shit like this throws responsibility out the window.

[chook]

Isn't this socialism, but in a messed up fudal way?

[Spectatrix]

It's the worst of both worlds.

And before Impala brings it up, yes, I oppose universal health care too. I admire the sentiment behind it, but it will inevitably be a poorly-done, expensive implementation of bureaucratic bullshit.

[nickluto]

I think they should go under. They have no business loaning money to people with no assets or collateral, no income, and no jobs. Sad that no one saw this coming and even sadder than no one in Washington blew the whistle.

Say what you want about regulation, but oversight/watchdogging is often less bureaucratic and equally as effective.

It's going to be tough for people to get loans for households in the near future after the interest rates bounce back up from their Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac dip, but at least the companies wont be loaning to people who have no business borrowing in the first place.

[Hartmann]

When Clinton was in office he claimed to make housing more affordable. In my opinion, his actions were the beginning of this train wreck, he was giving the signal to Fannie and Freddie to make their loan criteria easier. 2003 rolls around and Bush proposes an oversight of the agencies (http://tinyurl.com/5ptyyh) which is quickly quieted because it will keep people from getting loans.

If I was to tell you to go to Vegas and I would pay for any losses incurred and that you could keep everything you won, what would you do? You'd move to Vegas.

[Spectatrix]

Sad that no one saw this coming and even sadder than no one in Washington blew the whistle.

Sadder is that people *did* see this coming (Ron Paul and possibly others in Congress, certainly several economic watchdogs), but nobody listened.

[Hartmann]

Sadder is that people *did* see this coming (Ron Paul and possibly others in Congress, certainly several economic watchdogs), but nobody listened.

They've been saying this since what, 1999?

[dauss]

Sadder is that people *did* see this coming (Ron Paul and possibly others in Congress, certainly several economic watchdogs), but nobody listened.

Welcome to America. Doing nothing until it becomes a disaster.

Isn't this socialism, but in a messed up fudal way?

Well this definitely isn't capitalism and free market anymore.

[Spectatrix]

They've been saying this since what, 1999?

I don't know for sure, but that sounds about right.

[Spectatrix]

If you oppose the $700 billion bank bailout that Congress is trying to throw together, please please please, for the love of god, CALL your representative and senators! It's an expensive mistake that will only serve to further line the pocketbooks of stupid, greedy CEOs.

http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_info...enators_cfm.cfm
http://www.house.gov/


Edit: Side note -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Sep 24 2008, 08:54 AM

[chook]

Thanks Spex, I just wrote mine.

[Spectatrix]

Coolio. I figured I might as well get off my ass for once and do something more productive than bitch about politics.

[dauss]

I don't know what will work. Throwing money at this crisis won't fix it, maybe delay it. Doing nothing will be even worse. Saying that we should let these institutions fail is not an option, because it will likely cripple the entire US economy.

[impala454]

Yeah I'm pretty much the same. There's not really enough definitive information for me to form any kind of real opinion on it. I.e. say they just let it go and these mortgage companies go completely tits up. What happens to all those mortgages?? Besides the obvious (the US Govt) what other entity or even large combination of entities has the assets to pick up $700,000,000,000 worth of mortgages? Some other government? Now that, to me, would be much scarier than our govt picking it up. I still just don't know though... I guess I can just pull a Lance and go buy a safe and start buying up gold & silver bullion (have actually been looking into that recently anyhow). And lots of .45 & .357 ammo .

[Psykopath]

I love you 8-bit Theater.

[impala454]

That wasn't even remotely funny.

[Spectatrix]

You don't think the orbital position for a stationary solution of the circular restricted three-body problem is funny? Lame.

[impala454]

Yeah, I am a little lame sometimes. I've learned to live with it.

[nickluto]

I don't know what will work. Throwing money at this crisis won't fix it, maybe delay it. Doing nothing will be even worse. Saying that we should let these institutions fail is not an option, because it will likely cripple the entire US economy.

Well, technically speaking, it is entirely possible that in a few years after the economy starts to bounce back, they could end up selling the packaged mortgages for more than they bought them for.

Think of what they're doing in the bailouts as quarantining these terrible packaged sub-prime loans, or attempting to stop the hemorrhaging economy by isolating the bad debt. If everyone feels secure about freezing the loans and the economy recovers from its economic ills, then when everything starts looking up, it's possible for them to start selling the debt back to the investors in the free market and recoup or even make money off of the investments.

They could even make enough money to pay off some of the interest for the national debt, you never know.

Oh, and allowing them to fail is not really an option. Letting one institution go under by itself, and thats okay, but letting AIG, MLynch, Wamu, and Lehmen Brothers all go down at the same time and you are essentially losing about 20% of your financial lending business which, along with housing, is the backbone of the American Economy.

This all started happening, fwiw, when Clinton and the Dem's pandered to the poor voters by urging banks to lower their lending requirements to increase household ownership. As a result, banks started making shittier and shittier loans because they figured the government would have their backs...they were doing their will anyway. And here we are...

[impala454]

I've heard the feds could stand to reap over 2 trillion from this... talk about your friggin trades....

Just hope Obama's not in office when it happens, if he got that much extra cash to play with we might as well start barcoding ourselves and learning the new national anthem, "Hail Mother America".

[Jim]

I think the bailout is a short term fix. And, with the talk of having only one person regulate it all is even worse... No oversight whatsoever.

[nickluto]

I think the bailout is a short term fix. And, with the talk of having only one person regulate it all is even worse... No oversight whatsoever.

Right. It wont work long-term if the problem of predatory lending isn't addressed.

There needs to be reform instituted by the federal government and implemented at the state level that structures lending contracts of all types in a language that fully-discloses the expectation on both parties. Everyone knows it's the fine print that no one reads that ends up screwing them. This needs to be fixed. It might be helpful if the government were to require every bank of a certain size to have on staff a person who is purely on salary and only responsible to the state government who's job it is to explain, in laymens terms, what the terms of every lending contract or credit application entails to discourage predatory lending practices.

Also, consumers need to wise up. The common conception tends to be "well, If they offer me this line of credit, they must think that I will be able to pay it back." No. The credit card companies of old who you used to be able to trust have changed into profit-hungry mega-corps. They want your money. They WANT you to not be able to pay, because they make more money that way. Remember, they are private corporations, too and are driven by the profits to make their stockholders richer. Credit is no longer something that must be earned, like it was with your mothers and fathers. You used to be taught you need "Capital, capacity' and commitment [to repay]" -- the three C's -- to get a line of credit. Now all you need is a social security number.

Predatory lending on college campuses is legendary now. They give you a free shirt, frisbee, or pizza whatever for signing up, all for the price of putting YOUR information into MULTIPLE credit card databases. Lo and behold, a credit card comes in the mail. Kids don't think about the long-term consequences of interest payments when they buy their new PS3, Plasma screen, or Xbox360. They buy stuff, have only a part-time job and tend to get in way over their heads. Most times, their parents try and bail them out, but many many times they cant and are in debt forever.

In addition, credit card companies spend BILLIONS of dollars annually to lobby and get the bankruptcy laws changed so that you need to have a certain amount of debt to file for it. This way they can keep charging you until you die.

In a whole, society needs to return to the roots of responsibility and spending within your means. Banks need to stop pushing customers to get into adjustable rate mortgages with principal payments that are multiple times higher than the customer can afford. Consumers need to wise up and understand exactly how a loan works and what is expected of them to ensure that they can afford future payments, and the federal government needs to stop encouraging banks to make bad loans under the guise that they need to increase home ownership to satisfy their constituency.

And society needs to return to the roots of responsibility not only fiscally. It's ridiculous how much people are allowed to blame on others.

You spill hot coffee on yourself? Sue the vendor for not warning you.

You get pregnant by not using condoms or birth control? Get an abortion.

You aren't happy 100% of the time in your marriage? Just get divorced.

You cant afford your house because you are living outside your means? Just declare bankruptcy.

You want a flat screen TV but cannot afford it? Get a credit card. Everyone else is in debt up their nuts. It's cool.

Don't want to take the time to understand your mortgage contract? Oh well, these people are probably trustworthy, just sign on the X and hope it works out.

There's a quick fix for everything nowadays and many people do not want to make the realization that they acted incorrectly in the past, so they are taking with the path of least resistance and most convenience, regardless of the long-term consequences.

Im not putting any moral qualifiers or judgements on any of the above decisions, I am just positing that as a whole, when taken together, it creates a culture of wreckless irresponsibility.

/rant over.

[cmac]

well put.

[nickluto]

New development. Maybe this is why McCain went to Washington.

But there were fresh signs of trouble in the House Republican Caucus. A group of GOP lawmakers circulated an alternative designed to attract private capital back into the credit markets with less government intrusion.

Under the proposal, the government would provide insurance to companies that agree to buy frozen assets, rather than purchase them directly as envisioned under the administration's plan. The firms would have to pay insurance premiums to the Treasury Department for the coverage.

"The taxpayers haven't done anything wrong," said Rep Eric Cantor, R-Va., adding that rather than require them to bear the cost of the bailout, the alternative "pretty much puts the burden on Wall Street over time."

Rep. John A. Boehner, R-Ohio, the minority leader, was huddling with McCain on the rescue. Earlier, asked whether the GOP presidential nominee could corral restive Republicans to support the plan, Boehner said, "Who knows?"

And Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama, the only House Republican in the bargaining meeting, did not directly say he agreed with the other lawmakers who emerged describing an imminent deal.

"There was progress today," said Bachus, the senior Republican on the Financial Services panel.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1

At least someone is trying to keep taxpayers from fitting the bill if at all possible.

[Hartmann]

New development. Maybe this is why McCain went to Washington.



http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9...;show_article=1

At least someone is trying to keep taxpayers from fitting the bill if at all possible.

I completely agree.

There are very limited options but this one is much better than $700 billion that the taxpayers have to make up for.

The interesting thing is that the bailout amount could be a good investment over a long enough period of time. I think the return is listed at around $2 trillion. But, to me, that isn't important at this time. What's important is fixing the problem without forcing taxpayers to do the leg work.


Your previous post was great.

[Oasis]

So what is Plan B, if the bailout is unsuccessful?

Another great depression?

[Hartmann]

So what is Plan B, if the bailout is unsuccessful?

Another great depression?

A massive recession, then a depression.

Lending would basically come to a screeching halt by all major investment firms, meaning people who deserve loans will not get them.

Either way, I think we are going the way of Europe, smaller homes, multiple generations in homes, etc.

[Dogmeat]

I think we need get off this fucking planet. Period.

[woody]

Well, technically speaking, it is entirely possible that in a few years after the economy starts to bounce back, they could end up selling the packaged mortgages for more than they bought them for.

Think of what they're doing in the bailouts as quarantining these terrible packaged sub-prime loans, or attempting to stop the hemorrhaging economy by isolating the bad debt. If everyone feels secure about freezing the loans and the economy recovers from its economic ills, then when everything starts looking up, it's possible for them to start selling the debt back to the investors in the free market and recoup or even make money off of the investments.

They could even make enough money to pay off some of the interest for the national debt, you never know.

Oh, and allowing them to fail is not really an option. Letting one institution go under by itself, and thats okay, but letting AIG, MLynch, Wamu, and Lehmen Brothers all go down at the same time and you are essentially losing about 20% of your financial lending business which, along with housing, is the backbone of the American Economy.

This all started happening, fwiw, when Clinton and the Dem's pandered to the poor voters by urging banks to lower their lending requirements to increase household ownership. As a result, banks started making shittier and shittier loans because they figured the government would have their backs...they were doing their will anyway. And here we are...

So what is Plan B, if the bailout is unsuccessful?

Another great depression?

blaming bush

[Hartmann]

I think we should blame the people responsible for this directly.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212948811465427.html
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...id=aSKSoiNbnQY0

Punish them by voting them out.

[Seeker]

the bailouts won't work

oct. is going to be monumental, the largest collapse and depression in history

prepare now

[impala454]

Eh life will go on. People will keep buying plasma TVs & iPods. Comparing this to the great depression is stupid. People aren't going to sit around without food to eat or jobless because of these companies. Just yet another case of the media "bad news is good news" beating this subject to death.

[pysex]

Right. It wont work long-term if the problem of predatory lending isn't addressed.

There needs to be reform instituted by the federal government and implemented at the state level that structures lending contracts of all types in a language that fully-discloses the expectation on both parties. Everyone knows it's the fine print that no one reads that ends up screwing them. This needs to be fixed. It might be helpful if the government were to require every bank of a certain size to have on staff a person who is purely on salary and only responsible to the state government who's job it is to explain, in laymens terms, what the terms of every lending contract or credit application entails to discourage predatory lending practices.

Also, consumers need to wise up. The common conception tends to be "well, If they offer me this line of credit, they must think that I will be able to pay it back." No. The credit card companies of old who you used to be able to trust have changed into profit-hungry mega-corps. They want your money. They WANT you to not be able to pay, because they make more money that way. Remember, they are private corporations, too and are driven by the profits to make their stockholders richer. Credit is no longer something that must be earned, like it was with your mothers and fathers. You used to be taught you need "Capital, capacity' and commitment [to repay]" -- the three C's -- to get a line of credit. Now all you need is a social security number.

Predatory lending on college campuses is legendary now. They give you a free shirt, frisbee, or pizza whatever for signing up, all for the price of putting YOUR information into MULTIPLE credit card databases. Lo and behold, a credit card comes in the mail. Kids don't think about the long-term consequences of interest payments when they buy their new PS3, Plasma screen, or Xbox360. They buy stuff, have only a part-time job and tend to get in way over their heads. Most times, their parents try and bail them out, but many many times they cant and are in debt forever.

In addition, credit card companies spend BILLIONS of dollars annually to lobby and get the bankruptcy laws changed so that you need to have a certain amount of debt to file for it. This way they can keep charging you until you die.

In a whole, society needs to return to the roots of responsibility and spending within your means. Banks need to stop pushing customers to get into adjustable rate mortgages with principal payments that are multiple times higher than the customer can afford. Consumers need to wise up and understand exactly how a loan works and what is expected of them to ensure that they can afford future payments, and the federal government needs to stop encouraging banks to make bad loans under the guise that they need to increase home ownership to satisfy their constituency.

And society needs to return to the roots of responsibility not only fiscally. It's ridiculous how much people are allowed to blame on others.

You spill hot coffee on yourself? Sue the vendor for not warning you.

You get pregnant by not using condoms or birth control? Get an abortion.

You aren't happy 100% of the time in your marriage? Just get divorced.

You cant afford your house because you are living outside your means? Just declare bankruptcy.

You want a flat screen TV but cannot afford it? Get a credit card. Everyone else is in debt up their nuts. It's cool.

Don't want to take the time to understand your mortgage contract? Oh well, these people are probably trustworthy, just sign on the X and hope it works out.

There's a quick fix for everything nowadays and many people do not want to make the realization that they acted incorrectly in the past, so they are taking with the path of least resistance and most convenience, regardless of the long-term consequences.

Im not putting any moral qualifiers or judgements on any of the above decisions, I am just positing that as a whole, when taken together, it creates a culture of wreckless irresponsibility.

/rant over.

that's america for you...

the land of irresponsible opportunity!

[Spectatrix]

Great post, nickluto.

I think I learned some valuable lessons from growing up in a house with persistent, mounting credit card debt and daily calls from collection agencies. I didn't get a credit card until I was almost 21 and even then, I used it responsibility. I did carry a balance when I got out of school and was jobless for a couple of months, but I paid it off within 2 or 3 paychecks once I got a real job. Paying off my car loan followed shortly thereafter (paid it off in 2 years when the loan term was for 4).

Nowadays, I'm debt free. No school or car loans, no mortgage (yet). I use an AmEx rewards card (no annual fee), but I've never carried a balance. Better yet, I'll have earned around $200 cash back rewards for the year.

My bf and I may be buying a house sometime next year (assuming it's not completely impossible to get a mortgage), but our goal is to have a mortgage payment that's around 10% of our gross income, largely so that it's still affordable if one of us goes back to school full time.

[blaarg]

I think we need get off this fucking planet. Period.

This is Stephen Hawkings solution.

[blaarg]

Eh life will go on. People will keep buying plasma TVs & iPods. Comparing this to the great depression is stupid. People aren't going to sit around without food to eat or jobless because of these companies. Just yet another case of the media "bad news is good news" beating this subject to death.

Agreed.

[impala454]

Great post, nickluto.

I think I learned some valuable lessons from growing up in a house with persistent, mounting credit card debt and daily calls from collection agencies. I didn't get a credit card until I was almost 21 and even then, I used it responsibility. I did carry a balance when I got out of school and was jobless for a couple of months, but I paid it off within 2 or 3 paychecks once I got a real job. Paying off my car loan followed shortly thereafter (paid it off in 2 years when the loan term was for 4).

Nowadays, I'm debt free. No school or car loans, no mortgage (yet). I use an AmEx rewards card (no annual fee), but I've never carried a balance. Better yet, I'll have earned around $200 cash back rewards for the year.

My bf and I may be buying a house sometime next year (assuming it's not completely impossible to get a mortgage), but our goal is to have a mortgage payment that's around 10% of our gross income, largely so that it's still affordable if one of us goes back to school full time.

Kudos to you for your responsibility, but in this bailout case it doesn't really matter whether the population has debt or not, just whether or not they're actually making payments on that debt.

[Spectatrix]

Oh, granted. My personal example is pretty extreme. Some debt is fine, so long as it's manageable. People getting mortgages that cost half their paycheck, putting a plasma tv on CC when you already have 30k in debt, trading in your car when you're upside down on the original loan... that sort of shit is the problem.

[impala454]

Again though, people racking up that debt isn't the problem. It's racking up the debt and then not making their payments that makes these companies worthless. There are people that rack up $30k in debt and make the payments just fine. Not saying it's a good personal financial decision, but it is what keeps these banks in business.

[Spectatrix]

Bailout got voted down in the house, stocks are plummeting.

I think I have an anarchist streak, given that my first reaction was to think "burn, baby, burn!"

[impala454]

Eh it's just a scare. It seems market reactions are very touchy nowadays. If there's even a hint of problems things plummet, then come back up at a record pace a week or two later. I'm sure we'll be fine. My IRA is business as usual so far today.

In other news, oil dropped back under $100! yay

[Psykopath]

Eh it's just a scare. It seems market reactions are very touchy nowadays. If there's even a hint of problems things plummet, then come back up at a record pace a week or two later. I'm sure we'll be fine. My IRA is business as usual so far today.

In other news, oil dropped back under $100! yay

Yeah, example is one word even remotely uttered from the Fed these days seems to send stocks screeching one way or the other for 3 days then it cools down.


I'm glad the House had the balls to listen to their constituents. DON'T THROW MONEY AT FAILED BUSINESSES!

[impala454]

Looks like we're not the only ones affected either:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/markets/do...sion=2008092915

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The U.S. dollar rose against other major currencies Monday as turmoil in the European economy undercut the euro and the pound.
...
The dollar's strength comes as the crisis on Wall Street appears to be spreading to the European financial system.

In Germany, government regulators and several banks tossed a multibillion euro line of credit to Hypo Real Estate Holding AG in move aimed at preventing the country's second largest commercial property lender from going under.

Meanwhile, the British government announced plans to nationalize troubled mortgage lender Bradford & Bingley, taking over the bank's $91 billion mortgage and loan books, in a bid to help stabalize the country's financial stability.

Over the weekend, the governments of Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg partially nationalized Dutch-Belgian banking giant Fortis NV with a $16.4 billion rescue after investor confidence in the bank evaporated last week.

[Seeker]

It's good the bailout didn't pass.

The Federal Reserve and government intervention is what got us into this mess... more government intervention wouldn't get us out. The proposed bailout and scare tactics was basically a stickup. Imagine Guido robbing your store and then a few days later he offers you "protection" from further robberies if you pay him off; that's exactly what the Federal Reserve did to the American people. 400 economists and historians all agree the bailout not getting passed is a good thing, and if you study the history of Japan, Germany, Russia, and Argentina's financial collapse it looks like we did the right thing by not passing the bill. Examining their history will help us not repeat the same mistakes in the same situation.

[impala454]

It's not about the government intervening to try to get us out of a mess. It's about buying some enormous companies at rock bottom prices. It could potentially be the greatest investment in history. I'm still a little indifferent about it, pass it, don't pass it, either way it will be interesting to see what happens.

[Seeker]

^
|
|
|

lol, NOT government intervention? you amaze me with every post you make

[impala454]

Read the whole sentence geezus Lance. I didn't even say the words "not government intervention". Fucking A.

You said they got us into this mess, and you don't think they can "get us out". It's not about that. There's nothing to "get out of". There's no genius policy that's going to have to be developed. It's a simple matter of either buying out the companies or not.

[impala454]

It's amazing to me how fucking stupid some of the people can be on here, especially you Lance. Enjoy that delusion you live in.

With the exception of a few who know who they are, this board is full of bumbling idiots who are more worried about how they appear to the rest of the members or how much they can piss someone else off rather than actually discussing topics. It used to be about discussion. It used to be fairly civilized, or if not, at least interesting. Now every topic seems to boil down to someone belittling the person who tried to start a reasonable conversation. I've wasted far too much time on this board. I don't plan to keep wasting it. Save for the aforementioned few, I really don't give a shit what most of you think about anything. Especially since you refuse to discuss anything anyways. Especially since there also hasn't been any new people in what, a year? No surprise since if it's a girl the guys swamp her with the "OMGBOOBTITS" remarks. And if it's a guy the alpha dogs always seem to have to belittle the shit outta him and drive him off before he can so much as give his name.

So anyways, this long winded post stemmed from me having the last straw drawn from having some dipshit misread something I post. Enjoy it while you read it, as I'm sure it'll get deleted. Please do me a favor and permanently ban me, so I don't come across this waste of web space ever again. It should make you guys happy, so you can grunt in your cave without further interruption.

Later people. Wish I could say it's been fun. It hasn't.

[Psykopath]

Huh, wow...another "going away wah wah" post.

Didn't figure Impala would snap like that though.

With the exception of a few who know who they are, this board is full of bumbling idiots...

Translation: "With the exception of the few that share all of my same views..."

[fingercuffs]

boob tits

[Spectatrix]

Translation: "With the exception of the few that share all of my same views..."

Nah. I like Impala and have had some good discussions with him. We don't agree most of the time, but at least he keeps things feisty around here.

He brings up some good points, though I think the lack of new members is due to a lack of advertising rather than intimidation by the current member base. Whatever happened to getting some Facebook ads up?

[Seeker]

lmao impala must be on his period this week

[Psykopath]

Nah. I like Impala and have had some good discussions with him. We don't agree most of the time, but at least he keeps things feisty around here.

He brings up some good points, though I think the lack of new members is due to a lack of advertising rather than intimidation by the current member base. Whatever happened to getting some Facebook ads up?

Would like to know this as well.

[The Fanatic]

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

[dauss]

well, it just passed.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/081001/financial_meltdown.html

After one spectacular failure, the $700 billion financial industry bailout found a second life Wednesday, winning lopsided passage in the Senate and gaining ground in the House, where Republicans opposition softened.

Senators loaded the economic rescue bill with tax breaks and other sweeteners before passing it by a wide margin, 74-25, a month before the presidential and congressional elections.

In the House, leaders were working feverishly to convert enough opponents of the bill to push it through by Friday, just days after lawmakers there stunningly rejected an earlier version and sent markets plunging around the globe.

[The Fanatic]

Hopefully the members of the house will do the right thing again and vote against this measure.

[rabble]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaKkuJVy2YA

[Billy]

Hopefully the members of the house will do the right thing again and vote against this measure.

Generally, allowing your financial system to collapse is a bad idea.

[Seeker]

Generally, allowing your financial system to collapse is a bad idea.

japan had a bailout and their economy suffered for decades
russia didn't allow a bailout and now they have one of the strongest world economies

it helps to study history so you don't repeat the same mistakes, obviously no one in the senate has

[The Fanatic]

Generally, allowing your financial system to collapse is a bad idea.

Generally writing henry Paulson a blank check for money Americans don't have is a bad idea.

Throwing money at a broken system does not solve the problem, it only prolongs and delays the inevitable collapse.

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Oct 1 2008, 09:17 PM

[dauss]

japan had a bailout and their economy suffered for decades
russia didn't allow a bailout and now they have one of the strongest world economies

it helps to study history so you don't repeat the same mistakes, obviously no one in the senate has

Japan's economic meltdown took a decade to correct, but they didn't do anything until their financial system and the whole economy was in smoking ruins. This bill would be stepping in before something like this may happen(it still could suffer a total meltdown), but yes, it did take two decades to dig themselves out, but look at them now, Japan has one of the highest per capita savings rates in the world.

[THECHICKEN]

We need to hurry up and kick this next world war off...

[The Fanatic]

Last time it ended the depression...



this time it will end civilization

[THECHICKEN]

Last time it ended the depression...



this time it will end civilization

Civilization but not humanity... we're like cockroaches.

[The Fanatic]

Source: http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2008/09/you_a..._to_choose.html

Has anyone done any reporting on how the collapse of Wall Street has affected the city's cocaine market?

Report

By DaveHuge on 09/29/2008 at 2:49pm

Cocaine prices have decoupled from general commodity markets and the security continues to maintain a strong credit rating from the street, as demand has continued to be strong

Report

By ComfortablySmug on 09/29/2008 at 2:52pm

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Oct 2 2008, 01:11 AM

[FORSAKENR320]

Civilization but not humanity... we're like cockroaches.

I'M LOCKED AND LOADED, LETS DO THIS!

[pysex]

yes ww3 is now inevitable...

[Seeker]

have no fear, the u.s. gov will stage a false flag attack in the suez canal to lure us into ww3
http://www.techsans.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=6299

[Seeker]

http://solari.com/blog/?p=1646

[woody]

Sec. 317. Seven-year cost recovery period for motorsports racing track facility.

page 262

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/01/news/pdf/index.htm

this bill must be passed so that track owners can write off the cost of their facilities for 7 years

[Billy]

Generally writing henry Paulson a blank check for money Americans don't have is a bad idea.

Throwing money at a broken system does not solve the problem, it only prolongs and delays the inevitable collapse.

Other than large financial institutions buying bad mortgage backed securities (which they were misled into thinking were sound assets), how is the system broken? Why do you believe, especially after the crisis that is going on, this mistake will be repeated? I do hope you realize that we will not recover from this very quickly. You can kiss goodbye access to low interest loans, because if the largest part of our financial system goes under, the money will not be available to the little guy. Fewer car loans. Fewer home loans. Fewer small business loans. Fewer student loans. Lost jobs. Lots infrastructure. All of which that took 40+ years to develop. A lot of people are going to be affected by this and in a really bad way.

I don't know. Seems like a bad plan to me.

[The Fanatic]

I mean obviously something needs to be done... i don't know i'm having mixed feelings.


I just don't believe that the tax payers should have to take on this burden

This post has been edited by The Fanatic: Oct 2 2008, 09:32 PM

[nickluto]

Other than large financial institutions buying bad mortgage backed securities (which they were misled into thinking were sound assets), how is the system broken? Why do you believe, especially after the crisis that is going on, this mistake will be repeated? I do hope you realize that we will not recover from this very quickly. You can kiss goodbye access to low interest loans, because if the largest part of our financial system goes under, the money will not be available to the little guy. Fewer car loans. Fewer home loans. Fewer small business loans. Fewer student loans. Lost jobs. Lots infrastructure. All of which that took 40+ years to develop. A lot of people are going to be affected by this and in a really bad way.

I don't know. Seems like a bad plan to me.

Most of what you said was good. Much more informed than the average consumer/know-it-all, without a doubt.

A few quick addendums (not POINTS, since i am not refuting what you said :

-Large financial institutions aren't the only ones who are purchasing bundled "securitized" mortgages and, while the FMae and FMac mortgages definitely contributed to their downfall, they are not solely responsible for why these (Lehman Brothers, WaMu, AIG, et al.) institutions failed. The bundled mortgages used to be seen as "safe" investments. In the last 5 to 10 years, foreign investors have started to dip their dicks in the bucket to try to get in on these, so essentially what we are doing is creating not only a "destabilized" domestic market, but we are seeing effects internationally.

-Second, I personally believe (and take that for what it's worth...literally, you paid NOTHING for my opinion) that reforms need to be formulated at all levels of government. If my sarcasm meter is calibrated correctly (and if it isn't, I sincerely apologize), I think what you hinted at is that if the ship is righted, what makes you think this might happen again? Well, that's an easy answer and the reforms are just as easy. Don't loan money to people who have high default risk. Easy solution...right? But it's essentially the political death penalty if you say this aloud. The government made the mistake in the first place by instituting the CRA which encouraged the banking industry to relax their loaning standards so that they could effectively offer loans to "sub-prime" candidates with a clear conscience (and a government mandate). This made the financial market salivate as they were already beginning to look for different ways to rake in more profits. What it essentially comes down to is your political philosophy, which I will not judge. On one hand, the government was attempting to get loans to low-income peoples so that they could increase housing ownership in that demographic (a noble attempt with, unfortunately, false incentives). The other side would say that they were giving loans to people "unworthy" of borrowing money because of their inability to repay. I think if you read up on my posts you can gather which side I am on, but political slants tend to contribute to the clusterfuck, not help people understand it, so I will attempt to leave that up to the readers discretion.

The prescription is seems to be more forthcoming. If you want to increase housing ownership in the "lower-tier" of society (those less fortunate, I use quotes to underscore obvious political bias that you will hear politicians speak to), you simply need to increase their ability and access to assets, wages, income, and collateral; all of those necessary to secure a healthily risky loan.

How to do that is the $700B question.

-I'll agree that loans will be harder to come by in the future. When Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were taken over by the government a few weeks ago interest rates dipped substantially, but will rebound and increase steadily in the future. Car loans will increase, student loans...are dependent on many factors that will yet to be seen. However, the mortgage loan industry is primarily fueled by the bond market, which has been doing remarkably well.

When the stock market dipped 700 points just a few days ago (and remember, it has rebounded somewhat) the average yield for a 3-month treasury bill almost approached ZERO! What does this mean? It means that all the scardy-pants that wanted to move their assets to less-liquid, ultra-safe investments did so in record fashion such that demand more-than overwhelmed supply. To me and you this means that more people wanted T-bills and bonds than there were supplied. Do you think that these people will be less scared in the future? Fear is what is fueling this whole bailout thing anyway. T-Bills and the bond market will be very good in the near-foreseeable future due to the very fact that people are scared. This means that the mortgage loan market will also be pretty decent. The caveat of this all?

You have be a quality candidate. If you are the average, hardworking American that really wants a house and has paid their dues and can afford one; you should be able to get one. No dice if you are of the "sub-prime" ilk. But that's what we wanted to get away from, isn't it? Eventually, the trend should serve to "iron out" the bad debt.

-However, yes, you are correct. Car loans are very closely related to the credit market. I don't think you need to be very fiscally savvy to figure out that the car sales industry has dipped anywhere from 30-50%. But I heard that next month they are re-opening the Toyota Tundra manufacturing facility in San Antonio. Who really knows?

---*Whether this "bailout" passes or not and whether or not we have a recession, I am always consoled by the fact that there will be a regressive trend back to the days of old where you really have to "earn" credit (or a loan, or a mortgage). I don't care about your political affiliation, but I think this is something that most people today really wish was the outcome. You DO need responsibility. You SHOULD act fiscally like an adult. And you SHOULD work hard to get what you believe is yours.

/rant

[The Fanatic]

As expected the Bailout just passed in the house

[nickluto]

[The Fanatic]

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/vid...bailout/727521/

[chook]

I actually just watched that video and was gonna post it. Pretty much on, except Clinton modifying the prerequisites for a subprime loan, Bush letting some lenders lend out 40x their capital and the greed of loan agents who abused a faulty credit rating system where debt can be disguised.

On the bell curve of wealth, we got fucked.

[James]

Wow. You made Impala quit?

[Hartmann]

I am wondering what the affects will be on businesses that rely on short term loans to do their work. A lot of companies take out short term loans to cover payroll because they have erratic billing structures.

Still, the better way to go about this whole thing was to allow some private citizens to buy up the debt and turn a profit. It does not look like the rest of the world sees the bailout as a great equalizer.

[Hartmann]

I actually just watched that video and was gonna post it. Pretty much on, except Clinton modifying the prerequisites for a subprime loan, Bush letting some lenders lend out 40x their capital and the greed of loan agents who abused a faulty credit rating system where debt can be disguised.

On the bell curve of wealth, we got fucked.

Plus it goes back further than Clinton, it goes into the 1970's when "affordable housing" was first used as a platform issue.

[The Fanatic]

Dow falls below 10,000 today...