Bailout (politics)

Page 2 of 3  

Milliners and our Country Legislators
I have been in this country many years over half century I have seen lot, some I understood, some I did not and some I never will understand. We have been preached that justice is equal for all! I am Sorry but that is one lie I can not condone. Our Government does one thing and saying other. Yes old Indian American Indian was absolutely right when they stated that white man speaks with two tongs. "Our Government is doing just that". They are telling us how much they want to help small individual business. Have any one "EVER" heard of that State or on Federal level has bail out small business from bankruptcy, instead they have actually put the people into bankruptcy "you paid the tax" or everything your own and the house In which you are living in is taking and you are out on street. However our Legislature bends over to help Milliners
Why? Well you be the Judge.
State of NJ has bail out ENCAP and now ZANADU in Billions. With the money that they collect from small individual business and if is illegally or unfair, that is OK since we don't donate Thousands of dollars to politicians for they extra curricular activities. Yes that is understandable we are not Golden Goose laying golden eggs, I am truly sorry about that. And now USA Federal Gov. supposedly is bailing out Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and now Lehman Brothers. Please don't get me wrong I am all for bail them out but? First everything that they own must be used as collateral. This people Top Management, Owners, CEOs they must be brought down on ground level with blue-collar worker. No Limos, no Yachts, no Royal Royce, no gifts to sibling in thousands or millions no houses and apartments world wide. You get one reasonable house to live in that is all "That is Justice" Now you get bail out, but that will not happen because our corrupted legislators covering them self,
You see they are part of the system.
That is my Opinion Thank you
Tony

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on 10/4/2008 11:31 AM Old and Grunpy said the following:

Most of the women's clothing sold in the US is made in China. :-)
(Snip)
--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm a milliner as well as a clothier, and all of my products are made in the USA. The OP obviously meant "millionaires", which could never be confused with "milliners", since we make very little.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on 10/4/2008 12:22 PM h said the following:

Missed the smiley, did you?
--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for correction Young man Tony
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

clowns who have voted in lock-step with Bush and voted down the plan presented by Bush's incompetent messenger. The "leaders" should have seen this mess coming a long time ago and the only answer was to cut taxes. Cut taxes = buy votes. The entire house is up for election in a month, and they will sell their souls to get another 2 years, so the Reps tried to make this a Dem plan. That isn't politics? Florida has a great deal to do with the mortgage mess, but Florida delegation almost unanimously voted "no".
As for Obama not returning to Washington, that is ludicrous, as are many of McBush's positions. The freaking President is supposed to be the leader, not the candidates. If McBush was leading, he could pick up the phone, twist arms, and get a deal made. Or, better yet, come up with a deal more palatable and be able to communicate it to the public. Mebbe Sarah can do it for him.....just raise her hemline an inch or something. With several years of serious foreign policy "problems", energy crisis and crumbling economy, lots of folks are still voting on the basis of whether someone was a POW, has a vagina or dark skin. How many times has McBush voted against raising the minimum wage? And we blame people for being poor?
The "drill now" mentality reflects the same lack of leadership. We've been talking about the price of gas and the lack of saving by Americans for forty years! What if we conserved, which reduces the outlay in dollars AND we save our supply for the day when the rest of the world reaches our level of consumption?
The lame, pseudo-religious garbage in all of the elections since '80 could have been framed in real moral terms that apply to everyone, like "save for a rainy day" - don't refi to cover your freaking credit card excess, save some money in the bank. Oh, the bank would have cash and not have to borrow? I can't buy $1,000 in cheap, imported s--- to put under the tree every Christmas? I'm old enough to remember the AIDS epidemic getting started - it didn't really matter that a bunch of gays had a horrible disease. It didn't matter when hemophiliac kids started dying by the hundreds - we just had to make sure they didn't buy the home next to ours.
No healthcare plan? I've got mine, I've got a job (now) so you and your kids can die? I know Joe and Harry phonied up a sore back, got a permanent disability and used the money to open a construction business? What goes around eventually comes around.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

people know that the time to excoriate and blame is AFTER the votes are safely counted, not before. Doubt it really made any difference in the vote itself, but it might cause hard feeling for round 2. Interesting that almost the same %age of GOP-types voted FOR the package as Dem types voting AGAINST it. Bipartisan outlook on both sides of the question.

Yep. Trended down, got oversold in the new environment and then started going back up. Futures in the US are looking up. Just like no tree ever grows to the sky, no stock market falls to zero.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Kurt Ullman wrote:

Right. The rule is "Don't gloat before the vote."
And her speech probably made a difference.
I suspect the back-channel conversations went thusly:
1. Many congress-critters had constituent action running 400-1 against the bail-out. In order to vote FOR the proposal, they had to have political cover. 2. Some Republicans, seeking this cover, go to their leader and say: "I'll vote "AYE" if I can be assured the vote won't be used against me by my Democratic opponent." 3. Bonier (the GOP leader) goes to Pelosi and says: "I can give you an additional 12-20 votes if I have your word you'll tamp down any criticism of the vote by your Democratic candidates." Pelosi probably agrees. Bonier goes back to the members and says "I have the word of the Speaker." 4. Then the speech. The speech leads several GOP members to significantly distrust the "word" of the Speaker not to politicize the vote and decide to vote they way their constituents want.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
It's time for the panic-monger chicken littles of the world to apologize
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
clipped

still want Hillary to apoligize for voting for the war, as if she was the only one voting. The greatest strength of most of the elected members is their hypocracy and deceitfulness in ramming through their favorite project.
What is strikingly odd, lately, is the disappearance of the Clintons.........Bill has been so neutral that I'm stunned. I am betting five cents that one of them are in line to be treasury sec, regardless of whom is elected pres.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 27 Sep 2008 05:20:13 -0700 (PDT), snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

If he and his spin-docs thought it'd serve their purpose, yes. Whether true or not.

It has already spun out of control.

I don't even think that is the central issue.
The US now produces near nothing save WMD's and services. Wall Street used to have numerous trusted financial institutions. NYC was the "Money Center" of the world. As production in countries like China and India has ramped up, foreign investment has become an increasingly important component of the US economy.
Wall Street, as the foreign investors knew it, is gone. Never to return. They have acted so irresponsibly that full trust will never be restored, regardless of what the gov't does/doesn't-do.

1.) We don't even have definitive evidence of recession (yet), let alone depression.
2.) Comparisons to the Great Depression are not the least bit appropriate. Economic conditions then and now are very, -very- drastically different.

So do they. But only when it is convenient and profitable for them.

You assume a.) doomsday and b.) gov't spending, essentially the nationalization of the investment banks mutant loan bundles, will save us. It's just not rational.
You believe precisely what they want you to believe.

Very close to the mark, that last.
If practical, I'd support unbundling the loans, separating speculative loans from those on primary residences. Let the former default, provide some re-financing for foreclosures on the latter. And that's all. Maybe $50B.
I think that what most people don't understand is that the US gov't has become quintessentially hostile to all US citizens save the "financial elite". The (gummint) gloves are off ... and the brass knuckles are on.
Puddin'
"Take Yo' Hand Out My Pocket (I Ain't Got Nothing What Belongs To You)!" - Rice Miller, who probably never even _heard_ of GW Bush, John McCain.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, it hasn't. So far, everything is under control. Out of control would be runs on banks both sound and unsound, dumping of US securities by foreign investors, credit becoming unavailable to any borrowers whether credit worthy or not, the Dow going down a few thousand points in short order, etc. The problem would then extend to the economy at large, with a resulting drop in GDP, unemployment going higher to 10%, people taking big hits on their 401Ks, more layoffs resulting in more foreclosures, etc. So far, this problem has been largely confined to certain financial institutions and some of the home building industry.

Of course it is one of the central issues which could occur if nothing is done.

Complete nonsense. Boeing, Intel, Microsoft and a whole list of other great world leading companies make that such a silly statement that it's laughable. But when you drag WMD nonsense into a financial discussion, it does show where you're coming from.

And NYC still is the money center of the world.

There is zero evidence that foreigners have the jaundiced view that you do of the USA. They haven't left and they still own huge amounts of US securities and assets. And that's because they know the US economy and assets are basicly sound and good investments. If Wall Street is finished, why do you think Warren Buffet, who is known the world over as the greatest investor of our time, just put $5Bil into Goldman Sachs? Maybe he knows a little more than you.

Recessions are declared by a non-partisan board that reviews data months after the data is first released, revised, etc. In other words, they are looking in the rear view mirror and don't declare a recession until it's been under way for 6 months to a year. If we wait for that to happen, it will very likely be too late and/or even more of a bailout will be necessary.

Really, pray tell those very very drastic differences? The problems then were caused by far too much leaveraging of assets and greed turning into fear. Very similar to what is occuring today. Who do you think knows more about the risks to the banking system and economy? You or Bernanke?

These institutions that are going to be assisted, have already taken huge hits. It hasn't been profitable to them, nor will it make it profitable. Bear Stearns is wiped out, the investors lost everything. Same thing at Lehman. Both of those companies are gone and tens of thousands of employees have lost their jobs. Under the current plan, the govt is going to be buying these sub-prime loans deeply discounted. The institutions are NOT being made whole.
But you would rather have the economy go down on principle. I notice none of the liberal Dems in Washington, who are always anti-business, are claiming the risk to the economy isn't real. Obama agrees in principle with the bailout too.

Only not rational to you. As to whether it's a potential doomsday, I'm not willing to take that gamble.

My, I wish I could be enlightened like you, so I could go around claiming the US economy is based on producting WMDs.

If you pay attention, most of these problem loans ARE on primary residences.
Let the former default, provide

Refinancing for foreclosures? That's totally stupid. By refinancing, the govt would be paying off the existing mortgage in full, letting the current lender completely off the hook. The lending insitution would be made whole. Under the proposed plan, the lender takes a big hit, the govt buys the mortgage from them deeply discounted, perhaps for 30 cents on the dollar.

Spoken like a true crackpot. How is it that people can come here from all over the world with nothing, become citizens, buy homes, send their kids to college, prosper and live the American dream, while guys like you just bitch and have nothing positive to say about the country?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Puddin' Man wrote:

Very well said!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

True, but buying those loans at a time when the actual value of those assets cannot be easily determined seems like throwing money away, and without solving the problem, to me. Then consider that wolf Paulson would be guarding the chicken coop...
Would you buy one of those loans with your own money? For how much?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chris wrote:

Sure. Maybe $10-15. Better return than a lottery ticket.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes I would. How much I would pay obviously depends on the details of the actual loan.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:
| > It's not exactly giving the money away, which unfortunately is the | > impression most people have because the media has not done anything to | > explain it. Even Bush didn't do a good job of explaining it. What | > they are going to do is conduct a reverse auction for loans that are | > delinquent, but have not defaulted on. | | True, but buying those loans at a time when the actual value of those | assets cannot be easily determined seems like throwing money away, and | without solving the problem, to me. Then consider that wolf Paulson | would be guarding the chicken coop... | | Would you buy one of those loans with your own money? For how much?
If it were the loan on my own house and I could sell (or possibly refinance) the house for less than what I would have to pay for the loan I might. In order for the bail out to actually help the banks is the price going to have to be higher than that? I find it a little confusing because people talk about "pennies on the dollar" but it isn't clear that I can buy real estate for pennies on the dollar compared to a year or so ago (unless we are talking about maybe fifty pennies). Or is the problem that real estate isn't moving at all because the prices haven't come down?
                Dan Lanciani                 ddl@danlan.*com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
| | snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: | | | > It's not exactly giving the money away, which unfortunately is the | | > impression most people have because the media has not done anything to | | > explain it. Even Bush didn't do a good job of explaining it. What | | > they are going to do is conduct a reverse auction for loans that are | | > delinquent, but have not defaulted on. | | | | True, but buying those loans at a time when the actual value of those | | assets cannot be easily determined seems like throwing money away, and | | without solving the problem, to me. Then consider that wolf Paulson | | would be guarding the chicken coop... | | | | Would you buy one of those loans with your own money? For how much? | | If it were the loan on my own house and I could sell (or possibly | refinance) the house for less than what I would have to pay for the
Oops, make that "more than what I would have to pay..."                 Dan Lanciani                 ddl@danlan.*com
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
YES!!!!! Less regulation, and more freedom. Do nothing and risk depression sounds better than federal control.
--
Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Stormin Mormon wrote:

It's more like a loan, although not exactly that either. Remember, the government made a profit on the Mexico, Chrysler, and New York City bailouts. By most accounting standards, the government made a profit on the S&L rescue, too.
The government will buy troubled mortgages at a significantly reduced value - some say as low as 10% of the face value. The feds then own the mortgage or, in the event of default, the property itself.
The people who are for sure getting screwed are the investors in Freddie Mae and Freddie Mac. Probably also getting screwed are the illegal aliens who work in the building trades. There are ample foreclosed houses to handle the housing market for quite some time, so new construction will fall fall way off.
Reconditioning of these foreclosed homes will boom, so there will be an increased need for skilled tradesmen...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.