Americans say no to bailouts, even if economy is harmed

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by Cutten, Sep 23, 2008.

  1. The 700 billion dollar proposal by Paulson is not going solely to Wall Street investment banks.
     
    #61     Sep 24, 2008
  2. Are you folks really this dumb or are you foreign agents trying to talk down America.

    Your parents must be proud that they raised idiots.
     
    #62     Sep 24, 2008
  3. poyayan

    poyayan

    There are 0 investment banks in wallstreet now. You have to agree that MAJORITY of the 700B will go to banks right? A couple smaller AIG here and there might ask for this too.

    Bottomline, you don't ask the same group of people to solve this very problem that they created.

    Inject credit thru other means. Bypass these guys.

    Much like when the internet bubble burst. Let the tech sink and inject credit else where.
     
    #63     Sep 24, 2008
  4. The solution would be to create a 700B real estate management company to mop up all residential distressed real estate and rent it out to the people who are about to jump ship.

    Sit on this real estate until wages catch up, a decade perhaps and then sell at cost. Screw interest.

    It's not a good solution but it would stop the hemorrhage.
     
    #64     Sep 24, 2008
  5. Mecro

    Mecro

    No, YOU need to get a clue. Maybe learn a little about money & banking.

    Depression is here regardless. This bailout will do nothing but exacerbate the inflation.

    Better plan, how about the people who are actually willing to bailout these parasites do so via donations. Let's see just how much you will contribute. Even more interesting, how much are the execs & principal employees of these firms willing to contribute.

    Don't know about you, but I'm sure they wouldn't give a penny.
     
    #65     Sep 24, 2008
  6. Mecro

    Mecro

    Goldman Sachs (of which Paulson holds A LOT of stock) and Morgan Stanley are sure to be key sellers of this subprime crap to the RTC.
     
    #66     Sep 24, 2008
  7. why are taxpayers obligated to subsidize housing prices at levels where people who work cant afford them?

    all of a sudden, we lost faith in 'free markets'
     
    #67     Sep 24, 2008
  8. poyayan

    poyayan

    The thing we are arguing right now is who is going to do the mop up and how to split the lost.

    Government doesn't care about mortgage or housing price. It cares about the decrease of housing asset which will lock up banks. That, in turn, shrink credit available for normal business.

    If Government can get the credit market function, it could care less about mortgage problem just like the tech bubble.
     
    #68     Sep 24, 2008
  9. this is such a blatent conflict of interest that paulson should be relieved of his post

    any judge would be asked to recuse himself for a matter far less signifigant

    plain and simple, paulson is attempting to sell his assets (that are held in GS) to the taxpayer, far far above market rates

    criminal
     
    #69     Sep 24, 2008
  10. because if not, ALL taxpayer's real estate will keep sinking in value without a catalyst to help create a bottom quickly.
     
    #70     Sep 24, 2008