Would this work?

Discussion in 'Economics' started by magnum29464, Oct 2, 2008.

  1. Instead of this "bailout" why wouldn't the government just say ok we'll take these loans off your balance sheets but the money we pay will be considered a loan to be paid back at whatever low ball interest they decide? its still a bailout but atleast the return is more solidified..

    to me thats a simple way to keep these banks functioning which is what they all are supposed to be looking for. if you can't function after that type of loan you dont deserve to continue business.
  2. Can I get some thoughts, because I'm really thinking this is a good idea. Is there some holes in my thinking?
  3. there is a serious problem with your idea, fed can and has already given out loans, so why the hell would they need a bailout, are you retarded, would you go out bribing a bank so they give you a credit card, or would you rather get cash with no obligation to return, if you are over 20 and you are asking the above question i think you are stupid, because if at that age you have not understood how governments function then you are a sore loser like all the other sheep, i hate people like you because all the suffering in this world are the result of the stupidity of people like you, your inability to think of the intentions of the person who speaks rather than their useless speech and for your naivety in accepting everything that is thrown at you. No matter how far back in history you go, it is stupid people like you that are the root of the problems, the sick leaders could only exist because morons like you existed, idiots who buy into everything no matter how stupid it is
  4. Wow, was that a troll?

    The government takes the house (an asset) and overpays for it (giving a bigger asset). So the banks now have more assets, and in the form of cash, which they need to show solvency. For this priviledge, the banks take on the liability of paying back the loan. If it all was "fair", then theoretically, the bank didn't gain or lose anything, but their cash flow is improved, and with more cash on hand, they can loan more. I think it would work. Thing is, I thought that was kind of what the bailout plan was to begin with.

    What I thought would be a better plan is if the government provided super cheap money...like at 0%, or even -1%, but it could only be borrowed for individual citizens to buy repossessed houses. Basically, the bank could borrow the money for 30 years at 0%, then lend out that money for a super cheap 3% fixed. And Joe Citizen could then take the house off the banks hands and pay only 3% interest.

    Also, at the same time, banks could borrow money at a higher rate (still cheap) at like 1% interest, and offer 4% mortgages or mortgage refinances.

    The net result is that buying real estate would start up again and the properties owned by the banks would be bought up.

    The trick would be to balance the rates so that a bubble didn't occur. I guess you'd also have to eliminate the 100% refinances and maybe change the banks liquidity requirements temporarily.

    I think the only reason the government is doing your idea (a top down approach) instead of my idea (a bottom up approach), is because they care more about the corporations than the people. I think their actions (i.e., their approach) are/is proof of it.

  5. here is the reason,
    on a different thread:

  6. gucci


    OMG, he was just asking... It means he wants to know. He can evolve. And the idea per se isn't stupid. By the way all the suffering in the world is rather the result of hate than the product of naiveté. Welcome on ignore.
  7. oh don't put me on ignore, please o' please, i need you to listen to me, please, noooooooooooo
  8. you go with this moron:

    "The Scary Guy is quite possibly The Most Powerful Agent For Change on the Planet Today!

    His sole mission is ‘The Total Elimination of Hate, Violence and Prejudice Worldwide.’"

  9. you missed the whole point genius...

    the purpose of the bailout is to get the bad debt off there balance sheets. instead of the government taking in all that bad debt as a purchase to clear the banks of the problem only to hope to sell it back to the market, why not just take it off of there books as a loan? ofcourse the companies would perfer a deal with no obligations but who cares what they want.

    as far as people like me being the problem, I believe its passive aggressives internet shit talker who are the problem. Grow some balls and express your anger in real life so you won't have to use the net to express the real asshole that you are. internet rants are for those that wanna be tough but understood noone would take them seriously. in short be a man and not "internet aggressive". when you can talk to someone in real life the way you just posted you will have grown as person, but it will never happen.
  10. no you missed the point, you wish to think; "ofcourse the companies would perfer a deal with no obligations but who cares what they want", but the reality is who cares what you and your type want

    It's impossible to grow balls, but I do have virtual balls, wanna see them?
    #10     Oct 12, 2008