Americans say no to bailouts, even if economy is harmed

landis hasnt answered my question

is he an American citizen?

 

Thank You.
And yes, for those that are interested I am indeed an American citizen.

 

Your "chicken and egg" logic is downright bizarre.
Try doing some homework on Paulson's plan to become better informed.

There won't be any CONSUMERS if American businesses are unable to generate economic growth and jobs. They need loans to do this, and in order to make loans they need to have healthy collateral on their books. At present, they do not. I am unsure of why you are not able to comprehend this.

This is Basic Econ. 101A

This has nothing to do with people with poor credit.
Why you are fixated on this is beyond me . . .
Do you even know what Tier-3 level securities are?

 

the main problem with paulson's proposal (aside from no accountability control or recourse) is this

Wall street has preached the religion of globalism for 16 years

does ANYONE believe, that if wall street thinks the USA is at risk for a depression, that they're going to invest that 700 billion dollar WELFARE check in the USA?

that they're not going to invest it somewhere ELSE in the world?

that, out of the goodness out of their blessed little hearts, that they're going to suspend their religion of globalism in favor of national altruism, without a single legal requirement to do so?

people, they tried to stuff a guest worker bill through, on the VERY SAME DAY they passed the hat for a bailout!!

if we're really this close to a depression, then i'd rather not trade our last cow for their magic beans - i'd rather save it to feed the poor

House Judiciary Com. to Vote Today on Foreign-Worker Bills
Updated Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 10:00 AM

Public Notice for Markup Given in Dead of Night Yesterday

The House Judiciary Committee will take up two foreign-worker bills today: H.R. 5882, which would add an additional 550,000 permanent green cards; and H.R. 5924, which would add 20,000 additional foreign nurses per year for three years (plus their families). Please contact your U.S. Representative through the Capitol Switchboard (202-224-3121) and ask him/her to do everything possible to stop the passage of these bills. The Committee waited until late last night to give notice for the markup, presumably in an effort to avoid public scrutiny.

H.R. 5882 – "Recapturing Unused Employer-Sponsored Visas"
This legislation is similar to the measure that Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) is using to hijack debate on E-Verify reauthorization in the Senate. The bill’s sponsor, Immigration Subcommittee Chairman Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif), claims it would “recapture unused employer-sponsored visas” from as far back as 1991 and then add them to the current numerical cap of 140,000 employer-sponsored visas that are available each year. Current law, however, clearly states that any employer-sponsored visas not used in one year are allocated to the family-preference categories in the following year. That means that there are no “unused” visas from past years to “recapture

 

Very well written, thanks for pointing me to that. I guess the next question is, are we looking at the auto insurance scenario (which we can sustain) or the storm insurance scenario (which we can't)?

I'm probably not educated enough on the subject to say for sure (is anybody?), which is why the heavy handed warnings without the mathematical explanation bother me. If we're only talking about a couple I-banks going down, I think it's possible we may be looking at the auto insurance scenario, which would surely drive us into a recession but probably not make everyone homeless. However, if a large number of commercial banks are going to go belly up, I can connect the dots and see the FDIC won't be able to sustain it, so a bailout is necessary to keep the system alive.

With a system built on cheap money moving at such a high velocity I guess it's easy to see how one day the only currency left will be food, water, and guns. Bar the door indeed.

 

yes - it is very well written Pabst.

My problem is that this proposal seems to be pathetic. Our taxpayers are going to pick up the worst of the worst paper with almost no future value but there will still be trillions more of worthless paper.

By the way i really like your point that wall street would never have done this unless they were public.

Those execs were criminal.
..

 

Excellent points.
And I think that this just isn't about I-Banks but the entire commercial banking system. One doesn't have to look any further than Wamu or Wachovia to appreciate that.

Can't wait for all of the absurd credit rating agencies who have tons of publicly traded companies all lined-up in the "que" for further downgrades should Paulson's plan not get implemented.

Why someone has not talked about how irresponsible and out-to-lunch these rating agencies have been through all of this is absolutely beyond me.

Someone should temporarily suspend their ability to rate corporate debt, not suspend short-selling.

But these morons don't get it.

 

Duh it's an election year. The people have the leverage now and the political leaders know it.

There is an out cry against this, it make me proud to be an American.

 

Not in an election year. Otherwise you are correct.

 

Blaming the rating agencies is like blaming the analysts for the tech decline. It is what it is regardless if someone tells you about it.

That's why we believe the tape, eh? The market has superior information to public information. Yet the market had no idea either. This stuff developed quickly. As an analogy: I heard about a CBOE trader who'd had several 5 mil years. Presently after Friday opex? Debit 30 million! What do you think his "rating" was earlier in the week? Pretty darn good. Shit happens, shit changes. Many of these mortgages from "quality" credit worthy borrowers look fine until one day when their check is missing from your mailbox....