Bank Bailout, Dumping Market, Next?

[Pinepig]

Bankers have asked for years and years not to be under any regulation emanating from the governement. Now they want $700 billions from the same governement. One solution would be to sell out to the Chinese and Arabs, and sell $700 billions worth of America. That also means that foreign countries will come to control the US economy and governement at some time.



So true. That's what I meant. Thanks. Bankers just looked the other way when analysing a buyer's info with bad credit...

Who do you think owns that 700bil that they are trying to save, it's the Chinese and the Arabs, let them eat cake.:)

[Vedubin01]

They are backing it with your tax money!

[rwh11385]

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree to anything of the sort. Just that if they are going to develop 700b more debt, there are better ways of doing so.

Temporary debt, for a shitty investment. Funny how companies were able to BS the attractiveness but now no one wants to touch them. But nothing is getting consumed and they can be resold later. Hopefully if they do "fix" things by throwing money at shit, the economy will come back, people will be happy and maybe a few of those subprimers will pay their mortgages and the assets will be worth something. Or not.

I think everyone should just grow up and come to terms with their stupid decisions. Okay, you bought junk assets. Deal with it...

[Massive Lee]

BTW Before blaiming the Dems for not supporting the plan, we should know that 2/3 of the Republicans, mostly the most conservative ones, voted against the plan, judging that the private sector should remain private, with no intervention from the state. Claiming that it would be some type of socialism if the US government was to do a financial intervention.

[Vedubin01]

BTW Before blaiming the Dems for not supporting the plan, we should know that 2/3 of the Republicans, mostly the most conservative ones, voted against the plan, judging that the private sector should remain private, with no intervention from the state. Claiming that it would be some type of socialism if the US government was to do a financial intervention.

Thats the way it should be, thats how our founding fathers wrote it. People dont like it, Canada is a nice place! :)

[Jon325i]

I think everyone should just grow up and come to terms with their stupid decisions. Okay, you bought junk assets. Deal with it...

That's the problem with the many who are crying - they don't want to accept the responsibility for the wrong financial decisions that they made. Until people can live by the rule "you've made your bed, now sleep in it", shit like we're seeing today will cease to end. It is really frustrating because I know a lot of people who didn't take the risky options.....they always paid their bills and lived within their means and now we will wind up having to pay for mistakes of others. Makes you want to liquidate everything, pack up and move to some tax-haven like the Cayman Islands or Switzerland.

Jon

[Money$hit]

I just have to laugh at the whole situation.




I kinda hope Barack wins the election and this all blows up in his face. When my military reenlistment comes up in 2011 and hes president, Ill definately say fuck no. You could offer me a dumptruck full of money and Id still walk away.

[Aptyp]

all companies that are being bailed out or want to be bailed out should disclose their spending and make it public. If US government is going to invest into this bail out by going further in debt, American people at least deserve to know how those companies managed to screw up. CEOs' salaries and bonuses should be disclosed as well. BoDs should surrender their bonuses to back up their companies stability. What happened to FBI probe into CEOs salaries and tax evasions, it was a hot topic on senate floor last month and I watched 3 committee hearings about it, what happened? There should be no bailout until that is sorted out. Some people must go to jail and some should be publicly tried for what they have done.



How can you tell your senator/representative is a crook or a dumbass?

This is how: last week they voted on the bill, most republican voted for, and democrats voted against. Last weeks bill had no oversight of any sort and was straight 700 billion buy in.

Today, that same bill with slight oversight and rationing in bailout was rejected but democrats split decisions, and 3rd of republican voted against it.

Conclusion: Democrats who voted against before, changed their minds for minimal oversight and rationing, but drop persecution of people if they somehow lose that money. Republican who voted against this time, are against any oversight, even minimal and want one lump sum.

Check them by names, make sure you don't vote for a tool this November.

[jflip2002]

Now, again, Im far from an economist. But my feelings are, why the fuck SHOULD we bail them out? So when there are Americans struggling (or even not), and these guys are prospering, making butt loads of money, where are they? They are not donating any money to spread the wealth. So why should we all pick up the slack when they are down in luck? I'm pretty sure that while they were driving their companies into the shitter, these executives were making more than most of us would ever dream of. So these companies can lose money, and they can make money out of the ass.... Sounds fair to me. I like the idea of Aptyp. Lets see where their money goes. I feel it should be that way with any publicly owned corporation.

Fuck them, you ride the highs, so you better be wise enough and prepared enough to ride the lows. Just my view, someone who is even keeled, I dont ride highs, and my lows dont get very low, either.

[Farbin Kaiber]

I think everyone should just grow up and come to terms with their stupid decisions. Okay, you bought junk assets. Deal with it...

I have come to accept this as is all government money (taking/giving) like the stimulus checks, now 3g's in extra taxes to make up the difference out of each of our pockets is a bit lame. Nothing I or any of us can do to change it, just hold on for the ride, but I never bought any high risk credit related purchaces.

No financed home, never financed a car, etc., but I'll have to toss into the pot for the bailout. Why can't the guys fighting to get this thru change it so anyone who financed thru a ARM, or defaulted on a home loan in the past 72 months be charged an increased tax rate to come up with the money. Instead of me paying in, why not take it from the guy that refied three times, to triple the real market value then defaulted, only to buy another house in his wifes name get hit with a 6-10k bill for the next three tax cycles?

I just think they should at least try to get it from the guys that fueled the fire, instead of the guys that couldn't even become a buyer.

[Aptyp]

because people who defaulted, don't have the dough

[Aptyp]

and problem with companies is this: those who rode the highs, won't be there for the rest of us. Part of this bailout is to allow secretary of treasury to invest that money any way he seems fit, which includes investing overseas. Another part of that bill says that he can not be persecuted if his investments fail. Would you give this guy 300 billion dollars to start with? FUCK NO. let's see how he can flip 1 billion first, then we'll talk about it.

We need a bailout, just not that amount and not under those conditions. Congressmen are now being flaky because their contributors are in the trenches waiting to see what happens. I was very disappointed with a few representatives today. Madam speaker (whoever oversaw the hearing), did oral yay/nay, and decided in favor of yays, until most of the HoR started yelling at her for an electronic vote. It was hilarious, she got really pissy, and called results 225-228, which was BS, since vote was 205-228.

We'll see what happens next, I suspect another deadlock next time, with even more democrats and republican turning away. Most republicans who nayed today have elections coming up in their states for their jobs. Democrats are still insisting on better terms, and other half is just obliging with whatever white house asks for. Pulosi joined ranks of Reid, being a fucking pushover.

Happy Jewish New Year.

[Pinepig]

all companies that are being bailed out or want to be bailed out should disclose their spending and make it public. If US government is going to invest into this bail out by going further in debt, American people at least deserve to know how those companies managed to screw up. CEOs' salaries and bonuses should be disclosed as well. BoDs should surrender their bonuses to back up their companies stability. What happened to FBI probe into CEOs salaries and tax evasions, it was a hot topic on senate floor last month and I watched 3 committee hearings about it, what happened? There should be no bailout until that is sorted out. Some people must go to jail and some should be publicly tried for what they have done.



How can you tell your senator/representative is a crook or a dumbass?

This is how: last week they voted on the bill, most republican voted for, and democrats voted against. Last weeks bill had no oversight of any sort and was straight 700 billion buy in.

Today, that same bill with slight oversight and rationing in bailout was rejected but democrats split decisions, and 3rd of republican voted against it.

Conclusion: Democrats who voted against before, changed their minds for minimal oversight and rationing, but drop persecution of people if they somehow lose that money. Republican who voted against this time, are against any oversight, even minimal and want one lump sum.

Check them by names, make sure you don't vote for a tool this November.

While I'm sure that you think that is what happened but not quite.

The dems wanted to put 20% of that 700 billion into a program called ACORN ( look it up I'm not doing your homework for you ) so they torpedoed the bill till they could get it in, they tried but there was no way the repubs were going to let that piece of shit rider fly. In the mean time people started lighting up the switchboards calling there congress critters and demanding that they not vote for the bail out, numbers I have read were 300-1 against it. The only folks that will vote for any bail out no matter what it contains are the ones that work in districts that if they killed the new baby jesus on live TV they would still get voted back in.

It's never about what the country needs, it's about keeping thier worthless asses in power. It has been this way for at least 150 years, to think any different is pure fantasy.

[Ray Smoodiver]

I think it's insane that in the states you can default on a house mortgage, and simply walk away, handing the keys to the bank with little (no) repercussions. Who the hell thought that sounded like a good idea?

[Money$hit]

Now, again, Im far from an economist. But my feelings are, why the fuck SHOULD we bail them out? .

I am an economist, and we shouldn't bail them out. I think Adam Smith, America's most famous economist would agree with me too. The free and open market cannot find a bottom with all these government capital infusions, plans, legislation, etc. The government should let it all fall down. We cannot accurately value these banks, assets, mortgages with all this artificial market supporting action

CEO's will be fired, banks will fail. American's want it, I want it. I dont want it for the sake of seeing people lose their jobs, but we all deserve to see where the market bottoms. American's may be dismayed to see their 401k's, retirements and pensions go out the window, but guess what? Whoopdee-fucking-do, when you signed your ING packet, you signed away the rights of any of that money being insured.

If financial institutions can't make any money on investments, you sure as hell won't either. You can't have your cake and eat it too.