$700 Billion - To Bail or Not to Bail...That is the question - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 09-29-2008, 07:09 PM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
Utoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Lovetown
Posts: 8,343
Local Time: 09:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post

See, I view arguments like that as a huge problem. Barr says that the big companies should be allowed to go bankrupt. Banks should be allowed to go under. Sounds good--I mean, hey, they made the mistake, right? Why should we pay for it?

The problem is that none of us lives in a bubble (though thinkers like Barr might in their heads). There are repercussions to such failures. Big ones. Ones that touch more than just the fat CEOs of companies and banks.

One word defines arguments like this: ignorance.
__________________

__________________
Utoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 07:09 PM   #92
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by financeguy View Post
Can you explain why?
The language wasn't strong enough in some areas. I don't think the oversight was truly meaningful, for example.

If the first bill was a 1/10, this one was maybe 6/10. I wouldn't have been upset if it passed, but it's possible to get a better one.

However, now we are in total meltdown mode.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 09:55 PM   #93
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
Yes that was obviously edited together by someone who was completely fair and unbiased...
If it were factually untrue, I'm certain that it would have been throughly pointed out by somebody here already.


What's sad tho, is the ppl involved in the cause of this debacle could never stand the thought of being held accountable.

And besides that, we are 4 years too late.
<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 10:01 PM   #94
Blue Crack Supplier
 
kellyahern's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 8 years and I still can't think of anything witty to put here
Posts: 34,698
Local Time: 09:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Utoo View Post
See, I view arguments like that as a huge problem. Barr says that the big companies should be allowed to go bankrupt. Banks should be allowed to go under. Sounds good--I mean, hey, they made the mistake, right? Why should we pay for it?

The problem is that none of us lives in a bubble (though thinkers like Barr might in their heads). There are repercussions to such failures. Big ones. Ones that touch more than just the fat CEOs of companies and banks.

One word defines arguments like this: ignorance.
Thank you.

That is what amazes me when I keep hearing how the constituents are so opposed to the bailout and how they are telling their politicians to vote no. When they say, "I don't want the money going to the fat cats on Wall Street."

So, none of these people have 401k plans? Need car loans? Need student loans?
__________________
kellyahern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 10:25 PM   #95
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 02:42 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
If it were factually untrue, I'm certain that it would have been throughly pointed out by somebody here already.


What's sad tho, is the ppl involved in the cause of this debacle could never stand the thought of being held accountable.

And besides that, we are 4 years too late.
<>
It's not as if those decisions weren't made. But the clip is conveniently leaving out the other side of events that lead to the debacle.
Let's just be honest, Democrats and Republicans have both screwed up by falling for those free market fundamentalists that have championed the cause of deregulation.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 11:27 PM   #96
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vincent Vega View Post
It's not as if those decisions weren't made. But the clip is conveniently leaving out the other side of events that lead to the debacle.
Let's just be honest, Democrats and Republicans have both screwed up by falling for those free market fundamentalists that have championed the cause of deregulation.
free market was not the problem.

no, fannie and freddie cooking the books-that was the problem.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-29-2008, 11:34 PM   #97
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 07:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
If it were factually untrue, I'm certain that it would have been throughly pointed out by somebody here already.


What's sad tho, is the ppl involved in the cause of this debacle could never stand the thought of being held accountable.

And besides that, we are 4 years too late.
<>

This has been a long day of weak conservative arguments. There is a difference between facts and the whole story, this is not the whole story. Plus the written commentary between edits made it obvious the picture they wanted to paint. Here's so and so lying, etc...

Republicans had control of the White House and Congress and didn't do a damn thing. So quit looking back to the 90's to try and find fault.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 12:08 AM   #98
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:42 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by BonoVoxSupastar View Post
This has been a long day of weak conservative arguments. There is a difference between facts and the whole story, this is not the whole story. Plus the written commentary between edits made it obvious the picture they wanted to paint. Here's so and so lying, etc...

Republicans had control of the White House and Congress and didn't do a damn thing. So quit looking back to the 90's to try and find fault.
It wasn't the 90s.

In 2005 there was :

Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005

Sponsered by Hagel, McCain, Hutchinson and Schnunu-all Republicans.

Most of the Republicans voted for it except a few hold outs, and there was zero support from the Left.

Trouble is you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass it, so it was DOA, because there not being 60 GOP Senators to have passed it-at the time.

In the end the Republicans tried to hold Fannie and Freddie accountable in 2005-to avoid the mess were in today.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 12:26 AM   #99
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 07:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
It wasn't the 90s.

In 2005 there was :

Federal Housing Enterprise Regulatory Reform Act of 2005

Sponsered by Hagel, McCain, Hutchinson and Schnunu-all Republicans.

Most of the Republicans voted for it except a few hold outs, and there was zero support from the Left.

Trouble is you need 60 votes in the Senate to pass it, so it was DOA, because there not being 60 GOP Senators to have passed it-at the time.

In the end the Republicans tried to hold Fannie and Freddie accountable in 2005-to avoid the mess were in today.

<>
Still not the full story. The bill first went to the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs in 2005 which was majority Republican and it never reached the floor. It was then reintroduced in 2007 without McCain's backing(not sure what changed his mind), once again not making it to the floor...

This was a bi-partisan fuck up, lets not pretend it isn't... Pointing fingers will get us nowhere.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 01:00 AM   #100
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:42 PM
You would be on more solid ground if 4 Democrats had offered a bill to clean up Fannie and Freedie, and the Republicans derailed it.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 01:15 AM   #101
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 02:42 AM
If it was only that easy that it was just the practices of Fannie and Freddy that led to the trouble. Instead of allowing a market that creates financial models which are built upon selling debt, hiding it and thus spreading what is then to become the blockade in the interbank lending market.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 01:29 AM   #102
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 06:42 PM
It was that easy, Freddie and Fannie sold the loans to world banks after packaging them up as "profitable loans".

They misrepresented their worth, (by fabricating numbers) and when the loans were found to be unprofitable, it pissed off the banks in Europe who they were sold to thus creating a liquidity crisis.

The Republicans tried to get Fannie and Freddie to stop writing crap loans and stop over inflating their value.(2005).

They couldn't find enough people with integrity to support the bills they offered. (60 votes needed in Senate).

Now the world banks are on to us because of these past dubious pratices, we can't sell them and the USA is going under.

Plus egos are in the way to try and stop the bleeding.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 07:35 AM   #103
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 07:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
You would be on more solid ground if 4 Democrats had offered a bill to clean up Fannie and Freedie, and the Republicans derailed it.

<>
If you want to live in a one dimentional world, so be it. This is a multi-faceted issue and the trail leads to both parties. Quit trying to pretend it was ever a priority for the Republicans or that it's only these two lenders at fault.
__________________
BVS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 10:50 AM   #104
Refugee
 
BostonAnne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Massachusetts, USA
Posts: 2,052
Local Time: 09:42 PM
General News - Fingerpointing continues on bailout failure

Quote:
Rep. Tom Price, R-Ga., who voted against the bailout, said he thinks "it's important to get this vote right, not necessarily to get it quick."

"We are principled in the fact that we believe we ought to stick to American principles, we ought to protect the taxpayer, we need to make sure that private money, private equity can get involved and have Wall Street bail out Wall Street, not on the backs of the taxpayers," Price said on NBC's "Today" show.

"And we need to make certain that there's an exit strategy," he said, "so that there's not a huge, massive bureaucracy that grows up around this. I'm positive and hopeful that we'll be able to get to this by the end of the week."
Makes sense to me..
__________________
BostonAnne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-30-2008, 11:23 AM   #105
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
ntalwar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 4,900
Local Time: 08:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamond View Post
The Republicans tried to get Fannie and Freddie to stop writing crap loans and stop over inflating their value.(2005).
How about the "voluntary regulation" attitude of the Republican SEC?




Quote:
The Securities and Exchange Commission can blame itself for the current crisis. That is the allegation being made by a former SEC official, Lee Pickard, who says a rule change in 2004 led to the failure of Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and Merrill Lynch.

The SEC allowed five firms — the three that have collapsed plus Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley — to more than double the leverage they were allowed to keep on their balance sheets and remove discounts that had been applied to the assets they had been required to keep to protect them from defaults.

Making matters worse, according to Mr. Pickard, who helped write the original rule in 1975 as director of the SEC's trading and markets division, is a move by the SEC this month to further erode the restraints on surviving broker-dealers by withdrawing requirements that they maintain a certain level of rating from the ratings agencies.

The so-called net capital rule was created in 1975 to allow the SEC to oversee broker-dealers, or companies that trade securities for customers as well as their own accounts. It requires that firms value all of their tradable assets at market prices, and then it applies a haircut, or a discount, to account for the assets' market risk. So equities, for example, have a haircut of 15%, while a 30-year Treasury bill, because it is less risky, has a 6% haircut.
Ex-SEC Official Blames Agency for Blow-Up of Broker-Dealers - September 18, 2008 - The New York Sun
__________________

__________________
ntalwar is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com