Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: oakranger on October 03, 2008, 02:31:28 PM
-
Well, the bailout bill pass. Now the real quesion is, WILL IT WORK??
Lets compare this situation with the 1929 market crash. Keep in mind that we really dint know why it happen. One theory is "oversupply". At the time, Herbert Hoover was president. He believe that public confidence was the key to recovery. Or as he say " PROSPERITY IS JUST AROUND THE CORNER". Man was he wrong. So, U.S and most of the world feel into depresion.
Up next to take on the issue was Franklin Roosevelt. How dose he respond to the economic crisis, "WE HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR BUT FEAR ITSELF". Meaning that he was not afraid to try anything. How dose he help the publice with unemployment, he comes up with NRA, AAA, SSI, WPA, PWA, FDIC, TVA, CCC. Altogether, he called it "THE NEW DEAL". This deal was to improvised structure of welfare, job programs and economic planning. Well, depresion happen as way to many organzation took advantage of the new deal. There was a lot that happen from the new deal to dec. 7, 1941 that i am not going to cover. But many people like it, many hate it. The new deal didn't work for most of the people. But thank god we got into war. With mobilization, the economy boomed. This means factories open there door, unemployment vanished, inflation was checked by Gov. prices. The economic crisis, depression was gone.
So, now here we are, 2008. We have been at war for 7-8 years that most likely will never end, gas prices still above $3.oo gal., housing market at its worst, government spending out of control, investor are being carless, loans are give to people who shouldn't qualify, and now California needs $700 billion to bail out. It is hard to say. Nobody know how this bailout will work and who will most likely benefit from it.
That my 2 cents
-
1st.. the war we have no is no 'war' by the definition used for WWII.. not even close.
2nd.. FDR's socialization program became the monkey we have on our backs now.. it didn't work then won't work now.
3rd.. The economy WILL tank. IS tanking. Will CONTINUE to tank.
..and we'll remain in the tank long past the upcoming collapse of the government and it's replacement by a system that will be abhorrent to anybody that's left alive (in this country) today.
-
This deal was to improvised structure of welfare, job programs and economic planning. Well, depresion happen as way to many organzation took advantage of the new deal.
The depression had been going strong for 2 years prior to him taking office... but other than that you're pretty spot on.
I don't know what will happen as a result of the bailout... My guess is that Ron Paul is right and that when the **** really hits the fan, the bailout will only have served as making things worse because the problem was allowed to grow further.
-
1st.. the war we have no is no 'war' by the definition used for WWII.. not even close.
2nd.. FDR's socialization program became the monkey we have on our backs now.. it didn't work then won't work now.
3rd.. The economy WILL tank. IS tanking. Will CONTINUE to tank.
..and we'll remain in the tank long past the upcoming collapse of the government and it's replacement by a system that will be abhorrent to anybody that's left alive (in this country) today.
You missed my point. FDR plane was something he tryed. Nobody didn't know if it work. It took a long time to kick in and well, it really didn't work that well. BUT, it didn't prevent the country to split or at least kept the country head above the water for sometime AND, U.S getting in the war help tremendously.
-
1st.. the war we have no is no 'war' by the definition used for WWII.. not even close.
It's a ****ing war for many families, including mine anyway you slice it.
-
WILL IT WORK??
I think anyone smart enough to know the answer to this question isn't wasting their time here.
-
I think anyone smart enough to know the answer to this question isn't wasting their time here.
Well, i see your point coming from Califorina.
-
Nope... The hogs will be back at the trough soon enough.
-
It's a ****ing war for many families, including mine anyway you slice it.
I back you up on your situation. How is he doing these days?
-
It's a ****ing war for many families, including mine anyway you slice it.
Yup. No disrespect intended. <S!>
We're on a war footing with an infinitesimal commitment to a tiny force compared to the commitment made by this nation for WWII.
-
Well, i see your point coming from Califorina.
Your point?
-
Your point?
Why is Califorina asking for a $7 billion bailout?
-
The problem was, all of those government programs FDR started kept us in the depression, which was worldwide for about 10 years longer than the rest of the world - even Germany. Only WW2 brought us out. Once again, government interference was the problem, not the solution.
-
Why is Califorina asking for a $7 billion bailout?
Because Swarzenegger is worried about obtaining loans due to the problems in the credit market. California typically obtains loans in the fall while it waits for tax revenues in the spring.
If other states follow the same practice, I think it's just a matter of time before they do the same thing.
-
Lets compare this situation with the 1929 market crash. Keep in mind that we really dint know why it happen.
we do know how it happened, there was a trade/tariff war between nations (protectionist), that shut down international trade and companies lost business, it caused world wide depression.
The US stock market at the time allowed margin accounts of only 10% with no proof of liquidability to back up the position. When stocks started to fall the "investors" had to meet margin calls and did not have the money because they were leveraged to the max, they then started to sell off other stocks to meet the margin calls and that led to a chain reaction of all stocks falling.
now margin accounts are at 50% and you must prove you have the liquid assets to back up any margin calls.
-
we do know how it happened, there was a trade/tariff war between nations (protectionist), that shut down international trade and companies lost business, it caused world wide depression.
The US stock market at the time allowed margin accounts of only 10% with no proof of liquidability to back up the position. When stocks started to fall the "investors" had to meet margin calls and did not have the money because they were leveraged to the max, they then started to sell off other stocks to meet the margin calls and that led to a chain reaction of all stocks falling.
now margin accounts are at 50% and you must prove you have the liquid assets to back up any margin calls.
Well, that can be debatable. It is a threory that some people believe.
-
Yup. No disrespect intended. <S!>
We're on a war footing with an infinitesimal commitment to a tiny force compared to the commitment made by this nation for WWII.
None taken, HT. My point is this is a war to those who fight it or have loved ones fighting it. It's not a political bat to hit each other over the head with. It's not a joke as portrayed by sarcastic TV comedians that never put on a uniform. It's not a mistake made by one man. It's a war that the entire leadership of this country voted on and committed our young people to. They die and get maimed, and they're families break up under the separation. Yet the military complains very little. It's all the people back home doing all the complaining. There is a war going on. I don't blame one man, I blame everyone of the so called leaders who voted on it then conveniently washed their hands and turned their back and started pointing fingers instead of trying to win the damn thing. Which is the same thing they'll do with their little bailout today when it goes down the pot. They'll just point fingers and blame each other for it. Sorry for the rant, But we are at war folks, a real war.
-
(http://z.about.com/d/usmilitary/1/0/Z/C/vsm-2.jpg)
<S!>
-
(http://z.about.com/d/usmilitary/1/0/Z/C/vsm-2.jpg)
<S!>
:salute
-
<S> Thomas
Shifty please tell your son howdy from my family and I - we'll never forget and always be in his debt
-
I think it will work super well for a subset of the population. It might or might not work, to some degree, for the rest of us.
Isn't it odd how the ONLY solution were were offered was the Paulson plan? No consideration of any alternative that would arrive at the same goal without bailing out Wall Street. Remarkable how the same folks that got us into this magically know, withing hours, the exact right way to get us out and how no consideration was made after the first bill failed to taking another route.
Amazing.
Charon
-
Well, todays stock market reaction pretty much tells you the real story. The injection does NOTHING. It's monopoly money. The market will continue to drop.
-
Well, todays stock market reaction pretty much tells you the real story. The injection does NOTHING. It's monopoly money. The market will continue to drop.
It may drop, But something will work.
-
It may drop, But something will work.
What do you mean something will work? Your bladder? Something on the market?
-
I think it will work super well for a subset of the population. It might or might not work, to some degree, for the rest of us.
Isn't it odd how the ONLY solution were were offered was the Paulson plan? No consideration of any alternative that would arrive at the same goal without bailing out Wall Street. Remarkable how the same folks that got us into this magically know, withing hours, the exact right way to get us out and how no consideration was made after the first bill failed to taking another route.
Amazing.
Charon
First... Let me say that I DO NOT support the bailout plan. I believe in free market capitalism and that means NO Govt. direct intervention in free markets. If they wanted to work with accounting rules or help structure an exchange to facilitate the sale of supposedly toxic assets or eliminating the capital gains tax to promote the purchase of distressed real estate..... any number of things the Govt. could have done WITHOUT writing giant checks would be ok with me.
There is no question that we are in a serious mess. We can debate the hows and whys of where we find ourselves but the fact remains that 2 weeks ago Paulson and Bernanke were facing the very real fact that the financial system was neck deep in doo-doo and it was rising. BAD BAD things were about to begin happening and once the system stopped teetering and actually began to collapse the fall would be VERY difficult to halt. Time was the critical factor. If action was to be taken and be effective it had to be IMMEDIATE and OVERWHELMING.
So they sought a desperate plan to try a last ditch all out effort to restore confidence, buy time and lubricate the system to begin functioning again. The situation demanded not only extremely rapid action but action on an overwhelming scale that would "shock and awe" the global banking system into having confidence that risks were being mitigated and the operating basis upon which the global economy depends would remain intact. The Paulson/Bernanke plan was effectively a last ditch nuclear strike aimed at stopping the destruction of the worlds credit markets.
They had an impossible sale to close. They could not come right out in public hearings and say "we are on the edge of utter collapse and if this is not passed right freaking now then we are on an express train to a complete financial system collapse and a global depression like this planet has never seen". If they did say that.... they might trigger the very thing their purpose is to avoid. But by not spelling out plainly for the rather dense politicians the dire and immediate nature of the crisis they were doomed to have their sales pitch fail.
So they put together, very quickly, a simple and giant plan. The plan HAD to be VERY quick, very simple and HUGE if it was to accomplish the goal. So thats what they took to the Hill. Then they got shot down. Washington simply does not move that fast. So it dragged on.... the problems sped up and got worse.... the plan got all muddled up and turned into something lacking the shock and awe but bloated with plenty of baloney.
By the time it did pass, over 2 weeks had gone by and the window of possibly opportunity relative to preventing the worst case scenario had closed. Credit markets went from slowing down and getting tight to being locked down.
At this point, I doubt the plan makes any difference. I also doubt the Treasury will end up spending even the initial $250 Billion allowed as it will become obvious that the time frame for doing so having the desired effect will have passed.
I do think most of the flack that Paulson is catching is not warranted. Hank Paulson is not the bad guy. HE does not need this job..... or need money or need power. The guy EARNED his way to being CEO of Goldman and he is a freaking genius. I would MUCH rather have him in charge of funds to be used for any sort of bailout than the criminals and idiots in Congress!
If "I" were going to get to structure a bailout for this mess.... rather than put Treasury in charge of it I would have created an entirely new temporary Govt. agency much like Resolution Trust Co. from the SnL bailout days. Then I would have done whatever was required to convince Paulson and Bill Gross to agree to co-head up this new agency and run it until this mess is cleared and the agency can be disbanded.
IF you want to get real solutions to serious fiscal disasters..... go out and get the absolute BEST talent in the world and put them in charge of fixing it. DO NOT put Washington politicians in charge of the day to day operations or all you will get is PORK chasing more PORK. Bill Gross has not only almost single handedly invented the modern bond market but he has managed the largest bond investment fund on the planet EXTREMELY successfully for decades. HE is the kind of leader we need working for US.... the people.... to get this fixed.
Fang
-
Arnie wants to save Hollywood. They (kommiefornia politicians) need the money because like the U.S. they heavily tax their citizens so the wealthiest have to move away and the income the politicians of the state have 'adjusted' their budgets for doesnt appear and there is a 'shortfall.' With politicians money is a one way street... always more never less.
The bailout wont work and Congress will be making another bailout soon (an adjustment for 'shortfalls in colateral markets').
I have not heard of runs on banks but our local Bass Pro Shop (not so local actually) is out of gun safes and double barrelled shotguns. I know because I bought all the .45 ACP they had. :aok
-
Arnie wants to save Hollywood. They (kommiefornia politicians) need the money because like the U.S. they heavily tax their citizens so the wealthiest have to move away and the income the politicians of the state have 'adjusted' their budgets for doesnt appear and there is a 'shortfall.' With politicians money is a one way street... always more never less.
The bailout wont work and Congress will be making another bailout soon (an adjustment for 'shortfalls in colateral markets').
I have not heard of runs on banks but our local Bass Pro Shop (not so local actually) is out of gun safes and double barrelled shotguns. I know because I bought all the .45 ACP they had. :aok
Per year, I believe the total worldwide film industry gross is something like $50 Billion. The California gross state product is over $1.5 Trillion.
Try again.
-
None taken, HT. My point is this is a war to those who fight it or have loved ones fighting it. It's not a political bat to hit each other over the head with. It's not a joke as portrayed by sarcastic TV comedians that never put on a uniform. It's not a mistake made by one man. It's a war that the entire leadership of this country voted on and committed our young people to. They die and get maimed, and they're families break up under the separation. Yet the military complains very little. It's all the people back home doing all the complaining. There is a war going on. I don't blame one man, I blame everyone of the so called leaders who voted on it then conveniently washed their hands and turned their back and started pointing fingers instead of trying to win the damn thing. Which is the same thing they'll do with their little bailout today when it goes down the pot. They'll just point fingers and blame each other for it. Sorry for the rant, But we are at war folks, a real war.
Frikin great post!!! <S>!!!!! Shifty and family....and give your son our my wifes and my best wishes.
-
:rofl :rofl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xC-jAjf7AA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xC-jAjf7AA)
Mad as Hell
Watch as some one is mad over the bailout
-
:rofl :rofl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xC-jAjf7AA (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9xC-jAjf7AA)
Mad as Hell
Watch as some one is mad over the bailout
Somebody should have told him what will happen when you use crack and drink Red Bull at the same time.
-
I think it will work super well for a subset of the population. It might or might not work, to some degree, for the rest of us.
Isn't it odd how the ONLY solution were were offered was the Paulson plan? No consideration of any alternative that would arrive at the same goal without bailing out Wall Street. Remarkable how the same folks that got us into this magically know, withing hours, the exact right way to get us out and how no consideration was made after the first bill failed to taking another route.
Amazing.
Charon
:lol I was thinking that very thing when this first bill came up...how the frik can the very ones that cause it all of the sudden have the answers.
Which leads me to this question.....
Now I understand that there are more things at work than just this that I am going to ask....but...
Couldn't the government have simply adressed the housing problem with this...?
Make ALL the banks that were in trouble with bad loans , simply refinance EACH loan at a low 30 year fixed rate (instead of arm's) and not charged closing costs. Give the home owners that could afford it that chance and tell them this is all you get.
and MAKE the banks do it.....those that could afford those new deals could stay out of forclosure and those that couldnt were/nt ever going to be able to anyway.
Seems like that would have put ALOT of money BACK in play and even if ther WAS still a need for a bailout it would certainly have been alot less wouldn't it?
-
<S> Thomas
Shifty please tell your son howdy from my family and I - we'll never forget and always be in his debt
Thanks Eagler I appreciate it and will certainly tell him. He and I about to leave for his younger brother's football game.
Hangtime, Oak, sorry for the rant I didn't mean to highjack.
Sometimes things trigger a reaction, I apologize.
Hangtime I recognize that ribbon, my service was after that, but I served under many who earned it like you.
Thank you for your service during war sir. <S>
-
Fang, I understand what you're saying. But I lack the confidence in folks like Paulson to get it right regardless of how smart he is. Maybe he's one of those geniuses that are too smart and self assured for their own good. Maybe no one is too smart to individually, centrally manage a world economy. Did he prevent Goldman Sacks from falling into the trap?
I have admitted before I am an economics moron, essentially, but I was getting into fights with my wife a year ago over her wanting to go to part time hours when our new daughter was born (Sept 15, btw) and I remember using words like... this mess is going to blow up one of these days, soon, and it may not be a recession but a full blown depression..." Where were Paulson and Bernake? Why weren't they fixing the problem when there was time to perhaps actually fix it? And why are they suddenly so smart two weeks ago and not 6 months or 12 or 24 months before that?
My next question, is what's been happening with all of these exotic commodities trading creations that all the institutional money is churning around now? 400 times the speculator volume in energy futures compared to 2003. What's the chance of a blow up there?
Charon
-
Somehow this will go slinking its way right thru to never never land I suspect....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432501,00.html
WASHINGTON — Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.
So did Frank’s partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency’s push to relax lending restrictions.
Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie.
Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical.
"It’s absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane?
"If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least what’s not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because he’s gay. It’s the quintessential double standard."
A top GOP House aide agreed.
"C’mon, he writes housing and banking laws and his boyfriend is a top exec at a firm that stands to gain from those laws?" the aide told FOX News. "No media ever takes note? Imagine what would happen if Frank’s political affiliation was R instead of D? Imagine what the media would say if [GOP former] Chairman [Mike] Oxley’s wife or [GOP presidential nominee John] McCain’s wife was a top exec at Fannie for a decade while they wrote the nation’s housing and banking laws."
Frank’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Frank met Moses in 1987, the same year he became the first openly gay member of Congress.
"I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover."
The two lived together in a Washington home until they broke up in 1998, a few months after Moses ended his seven-year tenure at Fannie Mae, where he was the assistant director of product initiatives. According to National Mortgage News, Moses "helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."
Critics say such programs led to the mortgage meltdown that prompted last month’s government takeover of Fannie Mae and its financial cousin, Freddie Mac. The giant firms are blamed for spreading bad mortgages throughout the private financial sector.
Although Frank now blames Republicans for the failure of Fannie and Freddie, he spent years blocking GOP lawmakers from imposing tougher regulations on the mortgage giants. In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times the rate of single homes, respectively.
Three years later, President Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to impose a new regulation on Fannie, but was thwarted by Frank. Clinton now blames such Democrats for planting the seeds of today’s economic crisis.
"I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Clinton said recently
-
Fangio,
Just wanted to say that I'm glad to see you over here posting. I enjoyed your posts very much at AGW. I think you'll like it here. Most of us get along great, even those on political opposite sides on the fence. There is not one guy that posts here that I wouldn't go have a beer with. :rock
-
Wow. Just....wow. What do our liberal/democrat brethern have to say about this? I'd particularly like to hear from mg1942.
Somehow this will go slinking its way right thru to never never land I suspect....
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,432501,00.html
WASHINGTON — Unqualified home buyers were not the only ones who benefitted from Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank’s efforts to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990s.
So did Frank’s partner, a Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency’s push to relax lending restrictions.
Now that Fannie Mae is at the epicenter of a financial meltdown that threatens the U.S. economy, some are raising new questions about Frank's relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie’s assistant director for product initiatives. Moses worked at the government-sponsored enterprise from 1991 to 1998, while Frank was on the House Banking Committee, which had jurisdiction over Fannie.
Both Frank and Moses assured the Wall Street Journal in 1992 that they took pains to avoid any conflicts of interest. Critics, however, remain skeptical.
"It’s absolutely a conflict," said Dan Gainor, vice president of the Business & Media Institute. "He was voting on Fannie Mae at a time when he was involved with a Fannie Mae executive. How is that not germane?
"If this had been his ex-wife and he was Republican, I would bet every penny I have - or at least what’s not in the stock market - that this would be considered germane," added Gainor, a T. Boone Pickens Fellow. "But everybody wants to avoid it because he’s gay. It’s the quintessential double standard."
A top GOP House aide agreed.
"C’mon, he writes housing and banking laws and his boyfriend is a top exec at a firm that stands to gain from those laws?" the aide told FOX News. "No media ever takes note? Imagine what would happen if Frank’s political affiliation was R instead of D? Imagine what the media would say if [GOP former] Chairman [Mike] Oxley’s wife or [GOP presidential nominee John] McCain’s wife was a top exec at Fannie for a decade while they wrote the nation’s housing and banking laws."
Frank’s office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Frank met Moses in 1987, the same year he became the first openly gay member of Congress.
"I am the only member of the congressional gay spouse caucus," Moses wrote in the Washington Post in 1991. "On Capitol Hill, Barney always introduces me as his lover."
The two lived together in a Washington home until they broke up in 1998, a few months after Moses ended his seven-year tenure at Fannie Mae, where he was the assistant director of product initiatives. According to National Mortgage News, Moses "helped develop many of Fannie Mae’s affordable housing and home improvement lending programs."
Critics say such programs led to the mortgage meltdown that prompted last month’s government takeover of Fannie Mae and its financial cousin, Freddie Mac. The giant firms are blamed for spreading bad mortgages throughout the private financial sector.
Although Frank now blames Republicans for the failure of Fannie and Freddie, he spent years blocking GOP lawmakers from imposing tougher regulations on the mortgage giants. In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times the rate of single homes, respectively.
Three years later, President Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to impose a new regulation on Fannie, but was thwarted by Frank. Clinton now blames such Democrats for planting the seeds of today’s economic crisis.
"I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Clinton said recently
-
Yup. No disrespect intended. <S!>
We're on a war footing with an infinitesimal commitment to a tiny force compared to the commitment made by this nation for WWII.
Yep, he meant economy-wise. WW2 actually generated an insane amount of jobs. Can't say that now.
-
Fangio,
Just wanted to say that I'm glad to see you over here posting. I enjoyed your posts very much at AGW. I think you'll like it here. Most of us get along great, even those on political opposite sides on the fence. There is not one guy that posts here that I wouldn't go have a beer with. :rock
Thanks! Much appreciated....
Folks do seem civil, and I have read lots of intelligent posts AND I am going to get off my lazy butt and get Aces High actually working and give the online fighter pilot thing another run.
Fang
-
Well, the bailout bill pass. Now the real quesion is, WILL IT WORK??
No.
Because like myself, you are dressed from top to underwear in stuff made in Asia or Central America, sitting on a computer chair made in China and reading this post on a screen made somewhere in Asia.
-
Fang, I understand what you're saying. But I lack the confidence in folks like Paulson to get it right regardless of how smart he is. Maybe he's one of those geniuses that are too smart and self assured for their own good. Maybe no one is too smart to individually, centrally manage a world economy. Did he prevent Goldman Sacks from falling into the trap?
Actually, Goldman has weathered this fairly well. That is given the scope of the broader collapse. They certainly played the crazy derivatives game but then so did EVERYONE (probably to include your pension plan....) and at least Goldman did is smarter and better than most (meaning less exposure and better end assets).
I am NOT saying the Paulson is the worlds smartest man nor that I trust him nor that he can fix this. I do not believe in King Hank.
But if I have to choose between Hank Paulson OR guys like Barney Frank, George Bush, Obama, Biden, Hillary.... basically between Paulson or the US Congress.... if that's my choice for who is the smartest and most capable at determining the correct course of action and then following through with hands on management to make the determined path succeed.... then it takes me 1 second to choose Paulson. That is because he HAS demonstrated a 30 year history of extraordinary success while most in Congress have demonstrated nothing more than an ability to suck money from lobbyists and lie with a smile.
I would prefer that we had a true free market capitalist system and that the Govt. would do nothing and allow the markets to correct themselves. But that completely unrealistic and never going to happen.
So if there IS going to be a giant bailout and someone is going to run it.... then unless Bill Gross could be shoved into the chair, Paulson is a good choice. But then again, in 5 months or so he will be gone and God only knows who will be in that chair!
Fang
-
Fang,
I understand what you're saying about acting quickly but......I'm not so sure that the credit wasn't going to seize no matter what the timing was on getting this bill through.
I have advocated the same resolution as you stated, namely setting up something like the old RTC again. Of course that would require more time than Paulson, et al, were willing to give....
-
Fang,
I understand what you're saying about acting quickly but......I'm not so sure that the credit wasn't going to seize no matter what the timing was on getting this bill through.
I have advocated the same resolution as you stated, namely setting up something like the old RTC again. Of course that would require more time than Paulson, et al, were willing to give....
You may be right. IT very well may be that even if the Paulson planned had been passed and signed into law the day it was originally presented it still might not have worked. But it would have had a MUCH better chance than today when it really has little to no chance. IF it had been passed that quickly and then upon working to implement it the situation became apparent that it was not going to have the desired effect then it could have simply been slowed and halted.
An RTC type of entity to deal with the ongoing mess would be the best solution. BUT, rather than have this new RTC buy up all of the wrecked debt paper itself, I would rather see this new organization work to research and define clearly all of the paper in question and then create a new public exchange upon which all of the paper AND all newly issued mortgage backed securities could then be publicly traded.
The best way for investors to be able to safely and transparently invest in mortgages is to have them traded on a public exchange just like stocks or commodities. The model of packaging $100 million in various loans and then securitizing them and selling to investors is just BAD. The investors have no good way of knowing exactly what they are really buying. But if the mortgages were openly traded.... and you could instantly research all the details such as home value, loan to value ratio, borrower credit scores..... all the core details, then investors would always know what they were buying and the free markets would always assign an appropriate value to the financial asset.
I would push someone like Bill Gross into the position of creating and managing this new entity. That would make for a good solution....
Fang
-
Fang,
Agreed on the RTC issue.
On the timing issue....when's the last time someone said sign and sign NOW ever worked out well for anyone? Paulson may have rightly recognized the enormity and gravity of the situation, but his sign NOW OR ELSE just reminded too many folks of those limited time offer deals, IMO.
And he did not adequately sell the deal.....of course trying to put that deal into digestable bites is near impossible.
-
But if I have to choose between Hank Paulson OR guys like Barney Frank, George Bush, Obama, Biden, Hillary.... basically between Paulson or the US Congress.... if that's my choice for who is the smartest and most capable at determining the correct course of action and then following through with hands on management to make the determined path succeed.... then it takes me 1 second to choose Paulson. That is because he HAS demonstrated a 30 year history of extraordinary success while most in Congress have demonstrated nothing more than an ability to suck money from lobbyists and lie with a smile.
No argument there.
Charon
-
Thanks Eagler I appreciate it and will certainly tell him. He and I about to leave for his younger brother's football game.
Hangtime, Oak, sorry for the rant I didn't mean to highjack.
Sometimes things trigger a reaction, I apologize.
Hangtime I recognize that ribbon, my service was after that, but I served under many who earned it like you.
Thank you for your service during war sir. <S>
You have nothing to apologize for.. if there's an apology due, it's from 'we the people', and it should be for NOT stopping what we as a nation were doing in the pursuit of profit and to continue to refuse the burden of sacrifice at home for victory abroad. Another war lost to the game of political football is not tolerable.
I remain resolved to not let happen to today's finest Americans, those that serve with pride; what the shirkers, apologists and the democrats found expedient to do to us 40 years ago.
We remember. You will not be abandoned. I believe I stand with the majority of veterans; honor has no timetable, victory has no palatable substitute.
<S!>
-
:lol I was thinking that very thing when this first bill came up...how the frik can the very ones that cause it all of the sudden have the answers.
Which leads me to this question.....
Now I understand that there are more things at work than just this that I am going to ask....but...
Couldn't the government have simply adressed the housing problem with this...?
Make ALL the banks that were in trouble with bad loans , simply refinance EACH loan at a low 30 year fixed rate (instead of arm's) and not charged closing costs. Give the home owners that could afford it that chance and tell them this is all you get.
and MAKE the banks do it.....those that could afford those new deals could stay out of forclosure and those that couldnt were/nt ever going to be able to anyway.
Seems like that would have put ALOT of money BACK in play and even if ther WAS still a need for a bailout it would certainly have been alot less wouldn't it?
You're making the GIANT and WRONG assumption that the majority of these foreclosed homes were anything but a commodity. The vast majority of people getting burned were trading homes like they were baseball cards.
Through the fallacious house value inflation, people were buying (for example) $200,000 real value homes, for upwards of $500,000. A lot of them did it on a subprime mortgage with the MASSIVE assumption that the price of homes was only going to go up. So these people would hold onto it for a little while, pay relatively low mortgage amounts and then sell it later for a tidy profit.
When the prices crashed, they could no longer sell it without suffering a major loss. A refinance will not solve the problem. The refinance will not erase the past and make it so that these people only owed $200,000 plus interest on the homes. They still owed $300,000 plus interest MORE than what the houses are now selling for. Couple this with the fact that the people couldn't afford to get past the interest only part of the mortgage, putting a real mortgage will especially not make it so that they are suddenly able to afford it.
The only solution that is even partway palatable is to let all those responsible parties crash and burn. That includes the stupid borrowers, the bad lenders, and the crooked politicians.
-
Per year, I believe the total worldwide film industry gross is something like $50 Billion. The California gross state product is over $1.5 Trillion.
Try again.
Its not JUST Hollywood Sandman obviously I was thinking a litte broader then 'I can make a point here by stating the obvious' yet Hollywood is part of Arnies request.
-
Wow. Just....wow. What do our liberal/democrat brethern have to say about this? I'd particularly like to hear from mg1942.
It's true that key Democrats opposed the Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005, which would have established a single, independent regulatory body with jurisdiction over Fannie and Freddie – a move that the Government Accountability Office had recommended in a 2004 report. Current House Banking Committee chairman Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts opposed legislation to reorganize oversight in 2000 (when Clinton was still president), 2003 and 2004, saying of the 2000 legislation that concern about Fannie and Freddie was "overblown." Just last summer, Senate Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd called a Bush proposal for an independent agency to regulate the two entities "ill-advised."
But saying that Democrats killed the 2005 bill "while Mr. Obama was notably silent" oversimplifies things considerably. The bill made it out of committee in the Senate but was never brought up for consideration. At that time, Republicans had a majority in the Senate and controlled the agenda. Democrats never got the chance to vote against it or to mount a filibuster to block it.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/who_caused_the_economic_crisis.html
-
Yep, he meant economy-wise. WW2 actually generated an insane amount of jobs. Can't say that now.
Yeas, todays war just made a few poepel (chaney) to dam rich.
-
Thanks Eagler I appreciate it and will certainly tell him. He and I about to leave for his younger brother's football game.
Hangtime, Oak, sorry for the rant I didn't mean to highjack.
Sometimes things trigger a reaction, I apologize.
Hangtime I recognize that ribbon, my service was after that, but I served under many who earned it like you.
Thank you for your service during war sir. <S>
Shifty, u are ok. I just can relate on what you and family went throu with Thomas critical injury from Iraq. I am glad he is doing well and moving on. :salute
-
Shifty, u are ok. I just can relate on what you and family went throu with Thomas critical injury from Iraq. I am glad he is doing well and moving on. :salute
Oh he's doing great. My wife is spoiling him rotten and I've become his butler. :)
Actually all is good.We're about to have the wheelchair crane and hand controls installed in his truck in the next two weeks and he'll be much more independant.
-
1st.. the war we have no is no 'war' by the definition used for WWII.. not even close.
2nd.. FDR's socialization program became the monkey we have on our backs now.. it didn't work then won't work now.
3rd.. The economy WILL tank. IS tanking. Will CONTINUE to tank.
..and we'll remain in the tank long past the upcoming collapse of the government and it's replacement by a system that will be abhorrent to anybody that's left alive (in this country) today.
Surely you jest.. :eek:
-
First... Let me say that I DO NOT support the bailout plan. I believe in free market capitalism and that means NO Govt. direct intervention in free markets. If they wanted to work with accounting rules or help structure an exchange to facilitate the sale of supposedly toxic assets or eliminating the capital gains tax to promote the purchase of distressed real estate..... any number of things the Govt. could have done WITHOUT writing giant checks would be ok with me.
There is no question that we are in a serious mess. We can debate the hows and whys of where we find ourselves but the fact remains that 2 weeks ago Paulson and Bernanke were facing the very real fact that the financial system was neck deep in doo-doo and it was rising. BAD BAD things were about to begin happening and once the system stopped teetering and actually began to collapse the fall would be VERY difficult to halt. Time was the critical factor. If action was to be taken and be effective it had to be IMMEDIATE and OVERWHELMING.
Snip>
Fang
I was for the bailout, at the time it was introduced to everyone, just because I knew that the emotional reaction form the average taxpayer would cause a clusterf***, it needed to be done fast, and concise. I blame the Republican and Democratic house members who had access to all the advisors, for it or against it, who instead listened to their lobbyists, and to the angry taxpayer who didn't know the severity and end results of what waiting would do. Bloat the bill, handshakes accross the aisle, agree to get enough votes form the Republicans who aren't in a tight race, the ones who are can wait to vote until it passes, then keep their constituents happy by pretending to stand against it. I said last week what would happen and sadly I was right, this bbs was a great barometer of the emotional reaction without thought of the consequences, chest thumping and stomping your feet never solves a problem, americans thumped their chest and shouted, and then meekly asked for a yes vote.