$700 Billion Government Bailout

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 01:43 PM
  #16  
FX41's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,273
Likes: 2
From: Bronco Country
Originally Posted by Habibi
What I'm curious about is who actually made the 700 billion?
If you use the logic that for every loser there is a winner, someone is coming out ahead in this, who exactly is it?
CEO's and the like....which is total BS. When United Airlines tanked, the CEO took a multi million dollar bonus as part of the GOv't bailout. All while UAL was saying it could not afford to pay its pensions. Long story short I hope UAL fails and dissolves and that the the people that scrwed so many burn in hell.

Please don't ever buy a United Airlines ticket anywhere.

(UAL and Enron alike. I have personal greviences with these two!)
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 01:54 PM
  #17  
OgRedd's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 1
From: TN
IMO - Don't bail them out. They gambled and lost. Screw 'em. - Og
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 02:10 PM
  #18  
FX41's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,273
Likes: 2
From: Bronco Country
Originally Posted by OgRedd
IMO - Don't bail them out. They gambled and lost. Screw 'em. - Og
Amen Og
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 02:33 PM
  #19  
kobiashi's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 873
Likes: 1
From: Somewhere in the EU
Originally Posted by BROTHERDAVE
maybe i am wrong but his is my understanding.

back in the old days you got a mortgage from a bank and you paid the back back.
Whoa, dude. You're talking about the Ward and June Cleaver era.

Originally Posted by BROTHERDAVE
anyone with a mortgage knows that now days you get a loan and within the first year or 2 the loan is sold to another bank or finacial place.
That almost qualifies as old days too, because these days that loan is "sold" within a month or two, sometimes within weeks and sometimes at closing. You may still be writing your cheque to Bank XYZ, or whatever mortgage company brokered the deal, but they are merely acting as a collecting entity at that point.

Originally Posted by BROTHERDAVE
buying loans is profitable on wall street
Not any more . . .

Originally Posted by BROTHERDAVE
so all of the investors basically encouraged the bank to make more of them.
to me they are bailing out these companies, the one that purchased the loans, not the consumers.
This is true. Mortgages were packaged to investment banks in the form of various instruments including property derivatives. In doing so, the estimated values of those real estate assists were based on indexes that took into account hyper-inflated values that had no basis in reality other than artificially low interest rates which allowed people to buy homes they couldn't otherwise afford, which in turn kept driving the market upward, which caused more people to buy, and more banks to make bad loans. The banks didn't care about the ability to the buyer to repay, they knew the loan would be part of an investment package and resold,(the theory being that risk was spread so wide that "crashes" wouldn't amount to much) so who cares? It's an ugly little cycle with big repercussions (as we are just now STARTING to experience) because those quantitative analysts didn't have enough smarts to figure in such things as a market collapse. For some reason, this wasn't even a possibility.

In essence, we (the tax payers) are not just bailing out the financial firms, there is some benefit to the irresponsible jerks who took those loans (some, not all). The problem is that greed, not just on the part of the investment bank jerks, but on the part of lenders and borrowers created a force a lot like gravity. And, never forget, sooner or later, gravity always works.

I say start prosecuting the CEO of the banks and the investment banks. Take back the options and bonus money and lock them up (executing them would be nice). Given the way the current administration works, you could easily make a case that their actions have caused irreparable harm to the national security. Also, bust those who overextended themselves by knowingly buying houses they couldn't afford and then shirked responsibility, then execute them too. This has multiple benifits. A: So many executions lowers the population and helps improve the percentage of unemployment. B: It allows for a controlled revolution of sorts. You can even televise it. That would lead to C: High ratings in TV, bigger advertising dollars spent, which in turns increases spending, which helps bring the economy back. It's a win-win for us tax payers.

Originally Posted by Habibi
Hey kobi, nice to see you're alive and well
(I'm assuming you are well
Pretty much.

Originally Posted by Habibi
PS---> How's home ownership treating you?
Well, it's not the first place I've owned, but it is the first SFH of this scale I've owned. It's both a blessing and a curse. At the moment, it's kind of a curse.

How be you?
 

Last edited by kobiashi; Sep 22, 2008 at 02:37 PM.
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 02:35 PM
  #20  
Nedward's Avatar
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
From: Newport News, VA
From what I have read the gov't is going to purchase shares of the Banks at a low discounted cost to give the banks more liquidity (cash). Then the gov't wants to sell the shares when the stock rises for a "profit". Who knows how long it will take to reach that point of "profit".

As for who's paying it - you and me for a very very long time. will we see any of that "profit"? probably not in our lifetime.

dont you remember the $600 "gift from the gov't to stirr the economy up. what ever happened to that?

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/22/news...ion=2008092213
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 03:41 PM
  #21  
HappeetxnR.N.'s Avatar
Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
From: Texas
We're screwed.
Craig
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 04:15 PM
  #22  
OgRedd's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 1
From: TN
Originally Posted by HappeetxnR.N.
We're screwed.
That about sums it up. - Og
 
Reply
Old Sep 22, 2008 | 04:22 PM
  #23  
FX41's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,273
Likes: 2
From: Bronco Country
Originally Posted by HappeetxnR.N.
We're screwed.
Thats the best way to say it.....
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 01:42 AM
  #24  
97XL's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 946
Likes: 0
From: London, ON Canada
Originally Posted by HappeetxnR.N.
We're screwed.
Craig
Best answer in this whole thread.

I mean even though I'm Canadian our Gov't does the same crap. If I lost my job do you thnk the gov't would give me money to bail me out...HEEELLLLLL NO!!!.. All these CEOs should be told to sell everything they own and use that to pay the debt and the gov't MAY pay the difference. At least these rich A-holes will have to face some kind of punishment. Like Eddie Murphy said in Trading Places, "The best way to hurt rich people is to make em poor people".
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 02:04 AM
  #25  
Old Dogg™'s Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
Originally Posted by 06yz250f
is our government stupid? were already so much in debt i think don't 700 billion dollars is gonna help us get out of debt. i say screw who cant afford what they bought they should of thought about that when they bought the property and they should not expect people to help them out for their stupid mistakes.
Actually we are bailing out the Banks who made billions with their stupid mistakes.

Everyone wants to blame the borrower who lost their house.

Why no blame to the lender who profited from selling the loan in the first place?

If you loaned me money I never paid back, and you already knew I had problems with my credit who really made the stupid mistake?
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 06:16 AM
  #26  
OgRedd's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 1
From: TN
No bail out, no blank check without oversight, regulation and taxpayer benefits. If this has to be done, conditions have to be applied. They shouldn't get anything - they already get paid for failure. - Og
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 12:41 PM
  #27  
Old Dogg™'s Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 710
Likes: 0
From: Southeastern Virginia
Originally Posted by OgRedd
No bail out, no blank check without oversight, regulation and taxpayer benefits. If this has to be done, conditions have to be applied. They shouldn't get anything - they already get paid for failure. - Og
I think they also should NOT give the Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke one dime of anyones money to manage.

In the Military there is a saying that "You can delegate authority but you can never delegate responsibility." He should quit or be fired since he never saw any of this mess coming.

Let the free market work. If we leave the same people at the wheel we risk the same mistakes again down the road.
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 01:04 PM
  #28  
OgRedd's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,115
Likes: 1
From: TN
Agreed. Let the market play itself out. No one gave me more money to gamble with at the casino when I ran out. Screw 'em and let them taste some reality. - Og
 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 01:55 PM
  #29  
Nedward's Avatar
Member
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
From: Newport News, VA
I think the bailout is necessary to save the economy. A bail out of Main Street not Wall Street. Why save the big guy who Sharted all of the little guy's money away?

What is not necessary are CEOs, VPs, and board members getting million dollar packages for as Old Dogg said who "made billions with their stupid mistakes".

Their company failed why are we rewarding them with more money???

That is the real thing that grinds my gears. We could quite possibly give more millions to those who made millions.

The GOP needs to be able to look at a situation and be able to smack in the face and say "Knock that Sh*t off" However, who is going to tell someone to stop making money. That is exactly what happened in Congress. A few "smart" (I use that word carefully when talking about Gov't officials, especially Congress) men and women in Congress saw the looming future of our Stock/housing market and tried to pass legislation to, not even stop the profits, but to at least take a step back and see where the train was heading. "The administration opposed the bill, and it was defeated on a party-line vote here in the Senate," Senator Christopher Dodd.

Source

 
Reply
Old Sep 23, 2008 | 04:32 PM
  #30  
FX41's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,273
Likes: 2
From: Bronco Country
I would rather we let these companies fail. liquidate their assets to pay off their debt and let the economy correct. Will it suck for a year or so, yeah, but then get better, instead of us bailing them out with the "hope" that they will get paid, they wont, and then the economy sinks bad and is that way for a decade.....its called a free market and we shoud use it!
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:08 AM.