No politician has convinced me yet that the world will fall apart if we don't pony up the money to bail out this gov't screw-up.

This goes to a couple of core libertarian values: Limited government and personal responsibility.

Every elected politician in Washington, vested with the responsibility of preventing tax-payers from trillion dollar bailouts, should resign. These banks used the gov't to avoid responsibility. This unholy alliance is evidence of the libertarian principle that gov't should not give anyone preferences.

Bankers and gov't created this mess. Our economy is big enough to absorb this problem. We currently do not have $700 billion worth of bad mortgages. They want this money just in case. That's ridiculous! Those in gov't allowed this to happen, why should we trust them to fix it? They will form a bail-out that helps their pals in Washington and Wall Street.

Bush and the other politicians on both sides created this mess- and now want to quickly brush the whole thing under the carpet using our money as the broom.

This situation is also an excellent example of why the two-party system should be forced to open up to more political parties. The dems and repubs created this mess and do not deserve a monopoly of political power.

9/24/2008 9:22:30 PM

signed.

I am so fucking irate right now I can't even stand myself.

OMFG

Lessons learned: LYING IS OK IF EVERYONE ELSE IS DOING IT.


Next time I'm tempted to take advantage of government money I'm gonna rape the ever loving shit out of it

9/24/2008 9:24:20 PM

how is it bush's fault?

The Dems voted for the deregulation that led to all of this shit

9/24/2008 9:32:28 PM

oh whoops....I didn't mean to sign the part about it being Bush's fault specifically. It's everyone in congresses fault. Bush is the less to blame seeing as how he wasn't the one who signed the major deregulation bill. That was Clinton.

9/24/2008 9:34:36 PM

Quote :

" The Dems voted for the deregulation that led to all of this shit"

Which deregulation?

9/24/2008 9:35:54 PM

this problem start in 2002 under current president term.

9/24/2008 9:39:07 PM

^^Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act

^wrong

9/24/2008 9:41:05 PM

wall street. investemtn banker bets 30/1 on borrow monetary. i right. you need do research. GLBA had no to do with if.

this start in 2002.

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 9:44 PM. Reason : .]

9/24/2008 9:42:52 PM

gramm?

wasnt there some guy in the mccain campaign with that last name? same person by chance?

9/24/2008 9:44:55 PM

^^It had a lot more to do with it than the current administration.

Learn how to speak fucking English you dip shit

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 9:49 PM. Reason : ]

9/24/2008 9:48:51 PM

I still haven't heard exactly why people believe the repeal of Glass-Steagall was the root of the credit crisis.

If anything, the repeal of Glass-Steagall helped the credit crisis. Without it, Bear Stearns would not have been acquired by JPM. Morgan Stanley and Merrill Lynch (pending agreements) would not have been able to be absorbed by Wachovia and BofA. It is the diversified financial companies, those retail banks with I-banking arms like BofA, JPM ect, that are weathering the storm.

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 10:03 PM. Reason : .]

9/24/2008 9:55:24 PM

why mad man? you want excuse for republican. republican in office for 8 years . so if they fault. republican have more rule than democrants in gov for 12 years. you wrong man.

deruegulation if republican philosophy. Mccain want less gov. Bush have less regulaiton. you confused. is everybody fault more republican.

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 9:58 PM. Reason : .]

9/24/2008 9:56:20 PM

Quote :

"Bush and the other politicians on both sides created this mess"

I think he was pretty clear that he was including everyone.

Quote :

"wasnt there some guy in the mccain campaign with that last name? same person by chance?"

yes.

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 9:59 PM. Reason : oh and, signed]

9/24/2008 9:59:20 PM

We had republicans in charge of the White House and Congress since '94. They did nothing to prevent this from happening.

Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae had Clinton cronies at the helm, and stole millions by cooking the books.

And Bush sat back for 8 years and did nothing to bring this to the forefront.

Liberals bullied the gov't into encouraging banks to give loans to people who had no business getting them. And the Republicans, in charge of the gov't, sat weak-kneed and spineless to stop them.

9/24/2008 10:03:28 PM

NCLB

NO CEO LEFT BEHIND!!!

Quote :

"Liberals bullied the gov't into encouraging banks to give loans to people who had no business getting them. "

Arguably you could blame the conservatives who ran both congress and the white house for the 6 out of the last 8 years. Through lack of regulation and oversight companies through greed encouraged people into taking loans bigger than they needed, in order to maximize profit. Than it bit the companies in the ass. Also, b.c the new investing rules combined with lack of SEC oversight caused a powder keg when the housing mortgage busted.

Truth be told I look for politicians to vote for this Nov. who have a plan to fix the problem, not to point fingers. The debate of who caused it Liberals v Conservatives can go on as long as the Israeli conflict with Palestein, with neither side winning.

[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 10:10 PM. Reason : l]

9/24/2008 10:05:07 PM

own house is American dream. people need to have home.

9/24/2008 10:05:26 PM

Yes. It's congresses fault. And ultimately OUR fault for voting for jackasses to fill those spots. That's me taking my personal responsibility.

9/24/2008 10:05:48 PM

To be honest, this isn't surprising at all that this happened.

The people who are in office, need money to get into office. People in NYC (and across the country) that are in the banking and hedge fund industries are the ones that support their candidacies.

Why bite the hand that feeds you?




(not advocating for it, just saying why it's not surprising)

9/24/2008 10:06:30 PM

Quote :

"And Bush sat back for 8 years and did nothing to bring this to the forefront. "

Well, he tried, and I do believe the Republicans shot the measure down?

9/24/2008 10:07:30 PM

Quote :

"Liberals bullied the gov't into encouraging banks to give loans to people who had no business getting them."

Rofl, you mean, the liberals told CRA institutions that tax breaks would be taken away and fines imposed if they didn't try to help out EVERYONE in the community, you know, something that should be done with everyones (the taxpayers) money?

9/24/2008 10:09:03 PM

Elizabeth Dole's Office: 202.224.6342 / http://dole.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=ContactInformation.ContactForm

Richard Burr: (202) 224-3154 / http://burr.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home

Oh, and this is a good line too, from the bill itself:

Quote :

""Decisions by the Secretary (of the treasury) pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.""

9/24/2008 10:09:08 PM

Would anybody like to speculate what will happen without a bailout?

9/24/2008 10:14:28 PM

eonomy fix itself. institution fail all time. would take a down. get up soon in time.

9/24/2008 10:15:58 PM

^^ Paulson and Bernanke's used the D word in a meeting with the joint houses of congress. The thing is, this bill is so nebulous and unstructured, and gives such sweeping and undefined powers to the SoT with no oversight, that it is anybody's guess what'll happen with the bailout. So far, none of the government's moves to shore up the industry have worked, there is no guarantee here other than we'll be starting whatever comes next $700B in the hole.

9/24/2008 10:18:53 PM

^^ Well, now that the market expects it, I imagine every week that passes without any word of a plan will be worth 500 points or so on Wall Street. Without any sort of a plan to relieve the banks of their toxic paper, the financial system as we know it would finally seize up completely. Banks would stop lending to each other, the dollar would crumble to shambles, gold and oil would skyrocket (for a brief period until the reality of a global slowdown set in) and you'd see runs on banks as bad news and fear set in.

Make no mistake, something has to be done to get the credit markets working again. But trusting 700 billion to a plan cooked up by 1 guy (and a small group of advisors) with no oversight, no input by the brightest financial minds in the country, and this fake urgency to get it done (which is to save the GOP from a crushing defeat in a few weeks) is a horrible way to go about it.

9/24/2008 10:21:13 PM

^ good my friend. you correct. but where it does end? if you help some other want help. let some fall nationalize others smaller.

America dollar deflation alot if 700 if pass. future intrest rate could make worse. national credit average below for rest of world.


[Edited on September 24, 2008 at 10:25 PM. Reason : .]

9/24/2008 10:24:05 PM

Buying up these securities may rid the banks of bad debt in the short term, but in the long term the Federal Government owns large quantities of bad debt with no means of valuing it. The banks themselves don't know how to value what they own. Even with that off their books, that doesn't restore faith in the financial system.

9/24/2008 10:25:25 PM

You guys just don't understand how this all works. This is a great opportunity for the government. They aren't simply giving the money away they are buying 700b worth of securities that are rock bottom shit value right now and nobody will buy them. In ten years when things are back to normal the value will be back to normal and the government will profit big time assuming they take the responsibility of fixing the way these companies attack people and help americans redo their mortgages/avoid foreclosure.

9/24/2008 10:25:59 PM

God, I hope some people go to jail over this shit

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=ah839IWTLP9s&

In this whole fiasco, any one "check" on the system would have probably prevented the problem. These guys at Moody's and S&P were at the root of the issue. Thinking about it now, it's a bit unfathomable that so much of these obscure investments that are taking down the economy...were rated by FOR PROFIT companies.

If anything going forward, rating agencies are what should be nationalized or heavily scrutinized by the SEC as the "monkey wrench" thrown into any hair brained scheme these suits on Wall Street cook up to get rich beyond imagination off of.

9/24/2008 10:28:17 PM

Quote :

"You guys just don't understand how this all works. This is a great opportunity for the government. They aren't simply giving the money away they are buying 700b worth of securities that are rock bottom shit value right now and nobody will buy them. In ten years when things are back to normal the value will be back to normal and the government will profit big time assuming they take the responsibility of fixing the way these companies attack people and help americans redo their mortgages/avoid foreclosure."

Hmm, so no one on Wall Street wants to pay the asking price of this toxic debt, but the government will give them their asking price, and expect to turn a profit on it?! Rofl!

9/24/2008 10:30:42 PM

Why do you think these securities are at rock bottom? Because there is no value behind them. They're based on inflated housing prices and a debt culture that could not be sustained. If they were good long term debt options the banks could sell them off.

So you're advocating putting the American Taxpayer $700B further in debt to buy questionable securities in a scatter-shot attempt to shore up a flawed industry that may not even succeed.

And that still doesn't address the amount of power being given to Paulson.

9/24/2008 10:31:56 PM

Anyone know if there's anything in the bailout that says shit about the CEOs of the companies and their severance packages?

9/24/2008 10:32:53 PM

Quote :

"Elizabeth Dole's Office: 202.224.6342"

No point in contacting Dole. She cares nothing of NC beyond the minimum to not look completely like a uncaring bitch.

After all she knows that beyond any other qualification simply having the "-R" on the ballet will win her the election in NC

9/24/2008 10:34:30 PM

Quote :

"they are buying 700b worth of securities that are rock bottom shit value "

This leads me to focus in on another favorite target - the Fed.

The central bank of our country created a huge credit bubble by keeping interest rates so low during the early part of the decade. This dropped the risk for the entire financial services industry to take on highly questionable loans.

With a bubble, you have a big difference between the price of something and its actual value. With the credit bubble, the Fed is forcing taxpayers to assume the cost of this difference.

We are buying these assets at their over-valued bubble prices. We may hold them for awhile and try to resell them, but we will never get back the difference that the credit bubble created.

Paulson and Bernanke helped get us into this mess...they are the last people we should be listening to for a solution.

9/24/2008 10:44:19 PM

Quote :

"No point in contacting Dole."

I'm not voting for her in November, but Hagan is within striking distance and Liddy needs votes. You bet your ass she'll care if enough people call the office. I called this morning.

9/24/2008 10:45:46 PM

Quote :

""Decisions by the Secretary (of the treasury) pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.""

This right here is the scariest part of the whole situation...

9/24/2008 11:07:30 PM

http://nowallstreetbailout.com/

Also, to echo JCASHFAN above: write your damned Congresscritters. Don't just sit around bitching uselessly on an internet message board.

(Yes, they likely won't listen, but they need to know that some people actually are paying attention and don't like this bailout...)

9/24/2008 11:21:58 PM

Quote :

"Why do you think these securities are at rock bottom? Because there is no value behind them. They're based on inflated housing prices and a debt culture that could not be sustained. If they were good long term debt options the banks could sell them off. So you're advocating putting the American Taxpayer $700B further in debt to buy questionable securities in a scatter-shot attempt to shore up a flawed industry that may not even succeed. "

They aren't good long term investments NOW but after the government buys them they will do some more things like give aid to defaulting mortgages and help people get into new loans everything it takes to undo the reason these securities are dead. They are going to change the culture. At that point tese will be good long term options and the government will be able to sale them back.

This 700b isn't "putting us further into debt" because we're already in debt and would really be screwed if the domino affect is allowed to continue. We already win by doing this bailout and we win again by trying to fix it and if it somehow works out and we make the money back then we REALLY WIN. Its a win-win-WINNNNN situation.

Quote :

"you have a big difference between the price of something and its actual value."

Eventually credit will open back up, values will increase and evertyhing will be right back on the beat...

9/24/2008 11:55:43 PM

Quote :

"God, I hope some people go to jail over this shit"

9/25/2008 12:00:07 AM

Quote :

"evertyhing will be right back on the beat"

And we pay for it by either
- Raising taxes which run the risk of ruining the economy.
- Print up more fiat dollars which runs the risk of hyper-inflation.
- Seize the assets of these financial companies contributing to the conversion of the country to a fascist state.

Instead of getting back on the beat, I fear these politicians will be beating us on our backs.

9/25/2008 12:48:46 AM

There is bipartisan hate for this bailout. Bush, mccain, and obama are out of step with the people.

9/25/2008 12:53:52 AM

Quote :

"Mr. Chairman, I believe that our economy faces a bleak future, particularly if the latest $700 billion bailout plan ends up passing. We risk committing the same errors that prolonged the misery of the Great Depression, namely keeping prices from falling. Instead of allowing overvalued financial assets to take a hit and trade on the market at a more realistic value, the government seeks to purchase overvalued or worthless assets and hold them in the unrealistic hope that at some point in the next few decades, someone might be willing to purchase them. One of the perverse effects of this bailout proposal is that the worst-performing firms, and those who interjected themselves most deeply into mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps, and special investment vehicles will be those who benefit the most from this bailout. As with the bailout of airlines in the aftermath of 9/11, those businesses who were the least efficient, least productive, and least concerned with serving consumers are those who will be rewarded for their mismanagement with a government handout, rather than the failure of their company that is proper to the market. This creates a dangerous moral hazard, as the precedent of bailing out reckless lending will lead to even more reckless lending and irresponsible behavior on the part of financial firms in the future. This bailout is a slipshod proposal, slapped together haphazardly and forced on an unwilling Congress with the threat that not passing it will lead to the collapse of the financial system. Some of the proposed alternatives are no better, for instance those which propose a government equity share in bailed-out companies. That we have come to a point where outright purchases of private sector companies is not only proposed but accepted by many who claim to be defenders of free markets bodes ill for the future of American society. As with many other government proposals, the opportunity cost of this bailout goes unmentioned. $700 billion tied up in illiquid assets is $700 billion that is not put to productive use. That amount of money in the private sector could be used to research new technologies, start small business that create thousands of jobs, or upgrade vital infrastructure. Instead, that money will be siphoned off into unproductive assets which may burden the government for years to come. The great French economist Frederic Bastiat is famous for explaining the difference between what is seen and what is unseen. In this case the bailout’s proponents see the alleged benefits, while they fail to see the jobs, businesses, and technologies not created due to this utter waste of money. The housing bubble has burst, unemployment is on the rise, and the dollar weakens every day. Unfortunately our leaders have failed to learn from the mistakes of previous generations and continue to lead us down the road toward economic ruin. - Ron Paul -"

we need more politicians like this

9/25/2008 5:23:57 AM

Playing devil’s advocate…

Quote :

"These guys at Moody's and S&P were at the root of the issue"

The credit ratings for CDO/MBS are ultimately a function of housing prices and default rates. Even the vast majority of professional economists were off the mark predicting the future level of housing prices, so it is difficult to say whether underpaid bureaucrats could have known any better what the future held for the housing market and the credit environment. With that said, they should still be heavily scrutinized for not provisioning for a low-probability crisis event.

Quote :

"if they were good long term debt options the banks could sell them off."

From people I’ve spoken to, the cash yield on CDO/MBS securities are much higher than implied in their prices. The reason for this is that no one wants to buy them, thus creating a very illiquid market. The premise behind Paulson’s plan is that by buying some of these assets, a semblance of a market will come back, which will give firms a better idea of a going market price.

Quote :

"The central bank of our country created a huge credit bubble by keeping interest rates so low"

In fairness to Greenspan, there was a huge threat of a Japese-style deflation after the ’01 recession. Conducting open market operations is far more an art than science.



It should also be pointed out that the $700bn will require a treasury auction to raise the money, but is by no means the full amount of what the US expects to ultimately pay. Given the 700bn is going to be used to buy assets, our losses are only a function our buying price, selling price and borrowing rate. In the best-case-scenario where we buy these securities on the cheap (given they are currently pricing in a very illiquid market), the US could ultimately turn a profit in the endeavor.

I agree, though. The fact that the Federal government is taking such an active role in the markets is very disturbing.

[Edited on September 25, 2008 at 7:04 AM. Reason : .]

9/25/2008 6:52:35 AM

^ That is actually pretty well put. My two biggest bones of contention are the ideas that this will turn into a profit or that it'll even work. While possible, the current economic situation is part of a paradigm shift away, at least for a while, from cheap energy and likely a permanent shift away from cheap resources coupled with falling real wages as we begin to compete globally. The idea that the kind of disposable income that existed (thanks to the double internet / housing bubble) during the last 10 years will return is pretty unlikely. This is not to say we're going to enter a new dark age, just that our future purchases are going to wind up being more energy and resource efficient.


Look, it isn't to say that something shouldn't be done, but this current plan seems haphazard at best. Again, this is some scary shit to read in legislation:

Quote :

"Decisions by the Secretary (of the treasury) pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."

This will not end with the government just giving up that kind of power. They never do.

Quote :

"Also, to echo JCASHFAN above: write your damned Congresscritters. Don't just sit around bitching uselessly on an internet message board."

Thanks. Richard Burr isn't up for reelection, but Liddy Dole and, for me, David Price are. Hell, Barack Obama and John McCain aren't our Senators but they want our votes in November. I'm not voting for either of them but I'll be calling their office this afternoon.

Barack Obama: (202) 224-2854 / http://obama.senate.gov/contact/
John McCain: (202) 224-2235 / http://mccain.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

Oh, and Congresscritters . . . lawls.

9/25/2008 7:23:27 AM

Is there any way this bailout does not actually happen?

9/25/2008 9:27:07 AM

Quote :

"The credit ratings for CDO/MBS are ultimately a function of housing prices and default rates. Even the vast majority of professional economists were off the mark predicting the future level of housing prices, "

It is also a function of credit rating and income. You know, the ability to pay back a loan, something that has been in place since time immemorial.

This is all anyone really needs to know:

Quote :

"Driven by competition for fees and market share, the New York-based companies stamped out top ratings on debt pools that included $3.2 trillion of loans to homebuyers with bad credit and undocumented incomes between 2002 and 2007. "

These guys were the fraudulent gangsters. The iBanks and anyone else looking to invest in the CDO/MBSs paid good money to Moodys and S&P for them to accurately assess the risk. I can imagine they were so inundated with "work", that they just took huge shortcuts so they could get to the next profit monster.

And you want to talk about housing prices and default rates, they threw out the experience of their analysts for some lame model.

It was just one greed driven fail after another

Quote :

"The rating companies earned as much as three times more for grading complex structured finance products, such as CDOs, as they did from corporate bonds. Through 2007, they had record revenue, profits and share prices. Moody's operating margins exceeded 50 percent for the past six years, three to four times those of Exxon Mobil Corp., the world's biggest oil company. "

9/25/2008 9:29:34 AM

^^^^^ Ron Paul Rulez!

9/25/2008 9:36:54 AM

signed, to the topic not above post

[Edited on September 25, 2008 at 9:37 AM. Reason : .]

9/25/2008 9:36:56 AM

An email I got from Ron Paul, I think the beginning is hilarious

Quote :

"Wednesday, September 24, 2008 Dear Friends, Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike. The events of the past week are no exception. The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish.It is downright sinister.  It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder.  Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China!  "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters." That describes the current bailout package to a T.  And we're being told it's unavoidable. The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it.  But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook.  The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess! • The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time.  That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us. • Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals. • Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency."  Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process. There goes your country. Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? ;Don't make me laugh. Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. ;Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. ;A sad display, really. Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. ;Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. ;With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. ;Call them! ;Let them hear from you! ;Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity. The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom?  Do we care about responsibility and accountability? ;Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? ;Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? ;Do we care? When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media? Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be. In liberty, Ron Paul "

oh and signed, Ill be calling someone during my lunch break

9/25/2008 9:48:08 AM

It's hard to blame democrats too much. Expanding gov't is their thing.

But the republicans really tork me off. They sat there and ridiculed, ignored and marginalized Ron Paul- a man who has been trying to show the Fed for the farce that it is.

We should be running Bernanke and Paulson out on a rail. We should be hauling Jamie Gorelick and Raines up on charges for some major prison time. We should be pressuring both Obama and McCain to purge from their campaign staffs anyone who made a penny profit off this crisis.

This Bail-out is a big shake-down.

9/25/2008 10:34:05 AM