the investments are preferred stock, not equity, 5% rate for 5yrs then 9%
Welcome to the U.S.S.A.
Collapse
X
-
The only logic I agree with for the bailout was that it was caused by the government. It being needed I do not.Originally posted by Alex SpanosWell the largest banks were affected, which makes it very important to help them out. And considering it was the governments fault they issued subprime mortgages in the first place, one could say the government was responsible.
Of course the problem is Americans being stupid with money. The government consistently helps them be stupid, which sincerely pisses me off. Why would the government try and get everybody into a mortgage? So everyone can own their own house! Wooo hooooo. Now I have a house I can't pay for. Trust me, the government pisses me off as much as it pisses you off. The bailout however, was necessary.
And I never actually read the article you posted, but yeah, that is pretty ridiculous that they would even consider doing something like that. If that shit passes, the basis of our country is just plain gone.
Yes. The consideration makes me sick, and even more so if retards in this country advocate for it.Comment
-
The way people are messing with America, the UK is going to be looking better and better. They have a sensible plan for health care apparently, coming from my friend who just got back from there.
It's no shock that America is not the most free economy.Last edited by rwh11385; 11-01-2008, 02:57 PM.Comment
-
Originally posted by Alex SpanosI just hope that Obama isn't elected. He will fuck up our shit worse than it already is.[...]Obama continues, ".....and nothing happens you might just think to yourself, well let me just try it out. Democrats can't do any worse. They might do better. So you think about that."Comment
-
Bush is the one who came up with all of this bailout idea and all you guys can do is whine about Obama the socialist. Oh my, what's going to happen if we elect a Democrat/socialist/communist?
http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_..._print.html%22
Comment
-
Didn't you see the debates? Buying up the mortgages and partially forgiving the debt for the homeowners was McCain's idea. I'm not sure where you get this stuff.Originally posted by Alex SpanosI can only imagine what Obama would have dreamed up. I am guessing a mandatory government takeover of all troubled banks, and he would probably give all the foreclosed homes back to the people who shouldn't have had them in the first place.Comment
-
Heeter, apparently you don't know much about economics. So let me spell it out for you.
The credit crisis wasn't that people couldn't get loans. It's that interbank lending was frozen. When banks don't lend to each other, they have no money to cover day to day expenses. It's what they use to cover payroll, debts, etc.. Without interbank lending, banks fail. Period. That's what the bailout was about.
It was a lack of laws and rules that got us in to this met. Every single economist worth his/her weight in manure knows that. There were no regulations to stop banks from taking on trillions of risky loans, and so they did. Now we have the result. Not all regulation is bad. How about we get rid of all traffic laws and see how that goes? Think it'll turn out better? Just run the streets with anarchy? Regulation is a necessary part of a modern economy. But too much regulation is bad also. You have this black/white mentality, that all republicans are the savior Jesus Christ himself, and all democrats are Satan. And that all regulation and taxes are bad, and none can possibly be good. But the world isn't a black and white place. It all takes compromise and moderation. Some regulation is needed, as are some taxes.
Seriously, sometimes you sound like a freakin anarchist with all this 'abolish taxes' and 'destroy regulations' crap.Comment
-
wow. you should come into my CWP class. my teacher would love to have you. haha. seriously.Heeter, apparently you don't know much about economics. So let me spell it out for you.
The credit crisis wasn't that people couldn't get loans. It's that interbank lending was frozen. When banks don't lend to each other, they have no money to cover day to day expenses. It's what they use to cover payroll, debts, etc.. Without interbank lending, banks fail. Period. That's what the bailout was about.
It was a lack of laws and rules that got us in to this met. Every single economist worth his/her weight in manure knows that. There were no regulations to stop banks from taking on trillions of risky loans, and so they did. Now we have the result. Not all regulation is bad. How about we get rid of all traffic laws and see how that goes? Think it'll turn out better? Just run the streets with anarchy? Regulation is a necessary part of a modern economy. But too much regulation is bad also. You have this black/white mentality, that all republicans are the savior Jesus Christ himself, and all democrats are Satan. And that all regulation and taxes are bad, and none can possibly be good. But the world isn't a black and white place. It all takes compromise and moderation. Some regulation is needed, as are some taxes.
Seriously, sometimes you sound like a freakin anarchist with all this 'abolish taxes' and 'destroy regulations' crap.M CoupeComment
-
Without a doubt.Originally posted by Alex SpanosI can only imagine what Obama would have dreamed up. I am guessing a mandatory government takeover of all troubled banks, and he would probably give all the foreclosed homes back to the people who shouldn't have had them in the first place.
BTW, if Obama is elected:
Year 1, healthcare for everyone
Year 2, homes for everyone
Year 3, jobs for everyone
year 4, failure for everyoneJoe Funk -- Portland Oregon
That Guy.
03 X5. 3 liter obviously.Comment
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
I don't know. I happen to like our police. And fire department. Roads are cool too, as is the justice system. It's not perfect, but then again nothing in the world is.
Sorry, but you're wrong. The government did not 'force' banks to give out loans. They did it on their own, of their free will. The government did not make them offer subprime mortgages with crazy adjustable rates, the did not force them to engage in predatory lending.Originally posted by Alex SpanosI'm sorry, but you are wrong. The government basically forced banks into giving out subprime mortgages because they wanted more people to 'own' their homes. Read the Community Reinvestment Act. The government wasn't happy with banks not giving mortgages to people who lived in low income areas, so they made legislation to force them to otherwise they would face some penalty.Comment
-
Good memories. Fucking Gorbachev ruined everything. That turd wasn't only on top of his head, it was inside as well.Comment
-
By the way, state banks didn't go under. The thing is, local banks know what's best for locals, it's as simple as that.
We kissed capitalism good-bye, the day federal government started giving incentives to business. Again, local governments can lure businesses with incentives and tax codes, but as soon as federal government gets involved, it all goes to shits.
Local republican government seems to be doing great here in NC. If you think Palin is religiously insane, you have to see out NC governor. For crying out loud, we put Dole in the senate. I love NC, and wouldn't want to move anywhere else. NC is agricultural state with some textile, and we don't need to be democratic. Other states have higher unemployment, have more blue-collar workers, they need democratic government that favor unions. That's why we have red and blue states.
Federal government should not tell the rest of country how handle their business. They can't collectively manage a damn war or impeach a president. Why the hell would they fuck with economy?
Two-party system harms America. We can't decide between between right and left, conservatives and liberals. Something is fundamentally fucked up, when a person can't be conservative and liberal. Simple answer would be elect a constitutionalist, but those people may arm bears.Comment


Comment