$1 trilllllllllllllllllllllion dollars

[K.C.]

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13602.html

Congressional leaders said after meeting Thursday evening with Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke that as much as $1 trillion could be needed to avoid an imminent meltdown of the U.S. financial system.

Paulson announced plans Friday morning for a "bold approach" that will cost hundreds of billions of dollars. At a news conference at Treasury headquarters, he called for a "temporary asset relief program" to take bad mortgages off the books of the nation's financial institutions. Congressional leaders had left Washington on Friday, but Paulson planned to confer with them over the weekend.



At least $500 Billion...possibly up to a trillion.


What...the...fuck....

[booster11373]

Same administration that said Iraq would cost a minuscule fraction of the real cost

[KnoxHarrington]

Same administration that said Iraq would cost a minuscule fraction of the real cost

But the gas Iraq will start producing will pay for the war!

[oldladyfacepuncher]

I say bring on the meltdown. It's time for some wealth redistribution, bitches.

[SatCam]

I have $11 and a subway scrabble piece in my wallet. will that help?

[Snoogans]

http://z.about.com/d/gocanada/1/0/o/0/-/-/Vancouver_Aerial.jpg

and here is a shot, a bit further west, in (obviously) West Vancouver

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/West_Vancouver_From_Stanley_Park.jpg

[K.C.]

I love this little slice of heaven in the Politico article:

The solution being proposed by the Bush administration is the most expensive bailout in the nation’s history, sharply curtailing the ability of the next president to push for tax cuts or new spending.

Translation: Whoever wins the presidency is fucked.



Make no mistake about it. We really were on the cusp of the Great Depression Part II.

That said, it's a complete and utter fucking bullshit plan.

It rewards and ignores all the greed, the corruption, the shitty lending practices, the stupidity on the part of individuals who put themselves in bad financial situations, and so forth.


And I still don't understand where the money is going to come from here. The U.S. is broke. So presumably, the government is going to borrow this money, to then bailout the banks.

Ok, but if you're broke, you're just compounded your national debt.

So the burden shifts from the investment banks, to the taxpayers.

But here's the thing:

The rich (which make up the majority of investors), and the corporate world bear the brunt of the tax burden. The bailout is going to prevent a complete collapse of the free market and thus save corporate capitalism (which in itself is a paradox...and bailout to SAVE capitalism?)


So the only way this works, is if somewhere down the road, once Wall Street gets its bearings again, the government raises corporate taxes even more so, to help pay off the debt we're running with the bailout.

Otherwise, if that does not happen we're still fucked.


But the moral of this story, is that this bailout will most likely turn into one of the largest tax increases in history at some point down the road, just to pay off what is now a soaring National Debt.

And whoever ends up in the White House next, will likely take the blame for it, where as Bush will herald this as the redeeming of his legacy.

What fucking garbage.

[Contra]

When the window jumpers start, that's when I'll get worried.

[SouthSideJohnny]

As bad as our current situation is, there's a much bigger longer term problem looming over the horizon. The already-committed spending for entitlement programs (medicare and ss) is insane, but neither party will talk about it. What's most frightening is that the future tax revenue stays flat, regardless of whether rates are raised or lowered, but the spending climbs no matter what happens to tax revenue. Neither party will address this because the other party will use it against them in the next election. The politicians are only concerned with the next election cycle, not 15-20 years in the future. A guy named David Walker, former chief comptroller for the USA, is trying to get politicians to address this but nobody will. Here's an article, but you can google his name for more info: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/01/60minutes/main2528226.shtml

There's a great book called 'Bad Money' which explains exactly how we got into the current mess. It's about economics, so it's not a thrilling read but it is frightening when you see how bad things are at the moment and how they're going to get alot worse. http://www.amazon.com/Bad-Money-Reckless-Politics-Capitalism/dp/0670019070/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221936882&sr=8-1

BTW KC, it's a misconception is that the "rich" make up the majority of investors. People often overlook the fact that the biggest investors are the institutions: pension funds, mutual funds, and insurance companies. I'm not disputing that the truly "rich" people have alot invested in the market, but so does almost every working class Joe. If you're a middle class union worker, your pension fund is invested in the market. Your insurance policies are backed by the insurance companies' investment in the market. Every working stiff with a pension, 401k or IRA is invested in the market, but I wouldn't consider them "rich."

On a related issue, it kills me when I hear the knee jerk reaction to tax the big oil companies due to their excessive profits. For starters, any tax would passed right back to the consumer resulting in even higher prices. Also, it's not like there's a handful of rich guys that own Exxon / Mobil. More than 95% of that company is owned by institutions. Even if the government could somehow impose a tax that would not get passed through the consumers, it would ultimately reduce the value of the company. That makes everyone's mutual funds worth less, raises the possibility of pensions not having enough funds for payments, and for insurance companies defaulting. That's what happened to AIG, although its bad investments were in sub-prime mortgages. I hate paying high gas prices also, but trying to tax a specific industry isn't going to bail us out of this mess.

[spankyfrank]

We should actually vote McCain so that the same party stays in power and is forced to take the blame for this mess.

It is my total blowhearted opinoin that Bush is gonna try and pin this on the Democratic party.

I certainly hope voting works, because otherwise we are in for a doosy of a depressionl:wallbash::wallbash:

[NewYorkDragons80]

I'm still waiting to hear why Vancouver beats Montreal or even Ottawa for that matter. The reasons given thus far are incoherent at best

[keithy_19]

I'm still waiting to hear why Vancouver beats Montreal or even Ottawa for that matter. The reasons given thus far are incoherent at best

French girls don't shave.

[cougarjake13]

I'm still waiting to hear why Vancouver beats Montreal or even Ottawa for that matter. The reasons given thus far are incoherent at best




been looking for the connection of you guys bringing up vancouver


where did i miss it ??

[NewYorkDragons80]

French girls don't shave.

Once again, I'm looking for ways Vancouver beats Montreal

[HBox]

This is from an article in the Wall Street journal that isn't available online, but apparently financial lobbyists had a meeting with much of the Republican Congressional Delegation and urged them not to include any new regulation in the bailout plan. I really hope someone walked up to one of these people, spit in their face and walked out but let's face it, they were probably taking notes.

[jafter]

Now that these companies may get bailed out. Will the CEO's and upper management who allowed this whole mess start to begin with be held accountable for destroying the economy. I wonder how many of them will get huge bonuses now that this bad debt is written off. I say make them trade in their pinstripes for jail stripes and their golden parachutes for stainless steel handcuffs. We need to regulate these business practices I just saw a billboard advertising no money down mortgages. Put these companies out of business.

[TheMojoPin]

Once again, I'm looking for ways Vancouver beats Montreal

A little peek into the kinks of NYD?

[debit]

Now that these companies may get bailed out. Will the CEO's and upper management who allowed this whole mess start to begin with be held accountable for destroying the economy. I wonder how many of them will get huge bonuses now that this bad debt is written off. I say make them trade in their pinstripes for jail stripes and their golden parachutes for stainless steel handcuffs. We need to regulate these business practices I just saw a billboard advertising no money down mortgages. Put these companies out of business.


This is populist crap.

Capitalism has it's ups and downs. The two things that drive the stock market are fear and greed.

No one said life was fair. It isn't. Neither is the stock market. Capitalism is like democracy, they are the worst systems, except for everything else. We have laws and if someone breaks those laws then they should go to jail. Throwing people in jail because they made a mistake, even if it costs billions, even if it destroys a company or pension fund investments or an old person's retirement or someone's job is populist crap.

Grow up.

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Throwing people in jail because they made a mistake, even if it costs billions, even if it destroys a company or pension fund investments or an old person's retirement or someone's job is populist crap.


They aren't making "mistakes." It's fraud, deception, and exploitation. Corporations should be held accountable for their actions, if they want to have the same rights as citizens. You can't throw a corporation itself in jail, then you throw they guy in charge in jail. That's the risk they take when they sign on for their insane salaries, and golden parachutes.

[badmonkey]

Clinton reforms Community Reinvestment Act [source: Clinton Presedential Materials Project White House Virtual Library] (http://clinton6.nara.gov/1993/12/1993-12-08-briefing-by-bentsen-and-rubin.text.html)

The 12 current CRA assessment factors would be replaced with three tests -- a lending test, a service test and an investment test. And I have right behind me the 12 current assessment factors which are highly subjective and really don't focus on the target of what we're talking about here which is getting loans and services and investments out to our communities. And the simple three tests we will have under the new reform: a lending test, a service test, an investment test. Are you making loans? Are you providing services? Are you making investments? It's really, in the end, just that simple.

A Strong Community Reinvestment Act [source: Clinton Presidential Library] (http://archives.clintonpresidentialcenter.org/index.php?u=roa-strong-comm-reinvest-act.htm)
In 1993, at the request of President Clinton, the banking regulators reformed the regulation implementing the 1977 Community Reinvestment Act to focus on performance, not paperwork. From 1993 to 1999, banks and thrifts subject to CRA made a staggering $800 billion in home mortgage, small business, and community development loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers and communities. CRA-covered lenders dramatically increased the proportion of their lending to these communities. From 1993-2000, the number of home mortgage loans to African Americans increased by 58%, to Hispanics by 62%, and to low and moderate-income borrowers by 38%. Though this law has been on the books since the 1970s, over 90% of all loans under the Community Reinvestment Act came during the 8 years of the Clinton-Gore Administration.

NY Times - Sept 11, 2003 "New Agency to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae" (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E06E3D6123BF932A2575AC0A9659C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=print)

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

Under the plan, disclosed at a Congressional hearing today, a new agency would be created within the Treasury Department to assume supervision of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored companies that are the two largest players in the mortgage lending industry.

The new agency would have the authority, which now rests with Congress, to set one of the two capital-reserve requirements for the companies. It would exercise authority over any new lines of business. And it would determine whether the two are adequately managing the risks of their ballooning portfolios.

The plan is an acknowledgment by the administration that oversight of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- which together have issued more than $1.5 trillion in outstanding debt -- is broken. A report by outside investigators in July concluded that Freddie Mac manipulated its accounting to mislead investors, and critics have said Fannie Mae does not adequately hedge against rising interest rates.
''There is a general recognition that the supervisory system for housing-related government-sponsored enterprises neither has the tools, nor the stature, to deal effectively with the current size, complexity and importance of these enterprises,'' Treasury Secretary John W. Snow told the House Financial Services Committee in an appearance with Housing Secretary Mel Martinez, who also backed the plan.

Mr. Snow said that Congress should eliminate the power of the president to appoint directors to the companies, a sign that the administration is less concerned about the perks of patronage than it is about the potential political problems associated with any new difficulties arising at the companies.

The administration's proposal, which was endorsed in large part today by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, would not repeal the significant government subsidies granted to the two companies. And it does not alter the implicit guarantee that Washington will bail the companies out if they run into financial difficulty; that perception enables them to issue debt at significantly lower rates than their competitors. Nor would it remove the companies' exemptions from taxes and antifraud provisions of federal securities laws.
Significant details must still be worked out before Congress can approve a bill. Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.

''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.''

Representative Melvin L. Watt, Democrat of North Carolina, agreed.

''I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing,'' Mr. Watt said.

Fannie Mae and the Vast Bipartisan Conspiracy - By Jack Shafer (http://www.slate.com/id/2200160/pagenum/all/)
A list of villains in boldface.

I know it's fun and easy to pretend that all problems start with Bush stealing the election in 2000, but sometimes you should try looking stuff up.

[scottinnj]

We're gonna bail out the foreign banks too. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13690.html)


In a change from the original proposal sent to Capitol Hill, foreign-based banks with big U.S. operations could qualify for the Treasury Department’s mortgage bailout, according to the fine print of an administration statement Saturday night.

The theory, according to a participant in the negotiations, is that if the goal is to solve a liquidity crisis, it makes no sense to exclude banks that do a lot of lending in the United States.

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson confirmed the change on ABC's "This Week," telling George Stephanopoulos that coverage of foreign-based banks is "a distinction without a difference to the American people."

"If a financial institution has business operations in the United States, hires people in the United States, if they are clogged with illiquid assets, they have the same impact on the American people as any other institution," Paulson said.



There's the flip side of the global economy.

[TheMojoPin]

I know it's fun and easy to pretend that all problems start with Bush stealing the election in 2000, but sometimes you should try looking stuff up.

Hah, who are you even talking to?

[NewYorkDragons80]

A little peek into the kinks of NYD?
Actually, my chick is French-Canadian. She's from a francophone family on both sides and lives in Western Quebec (near the Ontario border), but tells everybody she's from Ottawa, is a Sens fan and insists on identifying herself as Canadian because she thinks linguistic independence is bullshit.

[SP1!]

We should actually vote McCain so that the same party stays in power and is forced to take the blame for this mess.

It is my total blowhearted opinoin that Bush is gonna try and pin this on the Democratic party.

I certainly hope voting works, because otherwise we are in for a doosy of a depressionl:wallbash::wallbash:

The economy has been in trouble for a while now, most people forget the first bail out in late 97 early 98 was done by cashing in policies with European insurance agencies effectively changing all their rules. It can all be tracked back to Greenspan, who to the layman looks like a genius but financial analysts were saying he was crazy and his policies doomed to fail over 10 years ago. I'm not gonna blame a party because both had a hand in letting this go but to blame a sitting president for the economy is kinda like blaming a hooker for a venereal disease.

The best thing we can hope for is someone who forges good international ties without selling us completely out, I'm not sure either one is the best candidate for that job. I still don't think they will let us completely snuff out since its in their best interests for us to stay strong economically that is.

[NewYorkDragons80]

We're gonna bail out the foreign banks too. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13690.html)

There's the flip side of the global economy.
Does this mean they'll be indebted to us the way we're currently in debt to China?

[HBox]

Does this mean they'll be indebted to us the way we're currently in debt to China?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Oh that's funny! You're funny!

[NewYorkDragons80]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

Oh that's funny! You're funny!
Not to be too serious, but I'm asking an honest question. I really don't know.

[SP1!]

I know it's fun and easy to pretend that all problems start with Bush stealing the election in 2000, but sometimes you should try looking stuff up.

Its easier for them to have someone they can blame than to find out facts, this economy has been teetering for a looooooooong time, its why the EU has been rushed through.

[HBox]

Not to be too serious, but I'm asking an honest question. I really don't know.

No, the way this is thought to work, and no one really knows at this point, is that we give up to a billion dollars to Hank Paulson and he will go around and purchase all crap debts from banking firms. Anything further than that is a mystery thus far. The questions remain. How much are we going to pay for these loans? Are we going to play a premium price or something closer to what they are thought to be worth? It's thought that Paulson is going to go around and buy these mortgages at a premium, because that's the only way it's going to help out these firms. If so, we are giving a handout of MASSIVE proportions to Wall Street. And not generally, either. Whichever firms have the largest amount of bad debt will get the biggest payouts. Which leads to fears that firms will start shopping for bad debt to get a bigger payout from the Fed.

But so far this is all we really know: Paulson and the White House are asking for a huge blank check. They want it as fast as they can get it with as little strings attached as possible. They are using fear to push this through as fast as they can. How much we eventually know about where this money will go, and what kinds of oversight there will be, is completely dependent on how much of a spine Congress shows this week. this will move fast no matter what.

So be afraid.

How bad us taxpayers make out is dependent on how much the Fed pays for this bad debt and how much payment they can get out of these loans. It IS possible we can make a profit from all this. if there were a President Obama or McCain in charge right now I'd be much more optimistic of that happening.

[mdr55]

Actually, my chick is French-Canadian. She's from a francophone family on both sides and lives in Western Quebec (near the Ontario border), but tells everybody she's from Ottawa, is a Sens fan:thumbup: and insists on identifying herself as Canadian because she thinks linguistic independence is bullshit.

You're one lucky guy.


Go Sens Go!!!!

[bobsnin]

10 10 220 my friends. Terry Bradshaw said I can save money on my long distance. Problem solved.

[jafter]

How much is a trillion?

To give it some perspective.

How many seconds in one day = 86,400.

How many days is 1 million seconds? 11.57 days

How many days is 1 billion seconds? 11574 days = approx 31.69 years

How many days is 1 trillion seconds? 11574000 days = approx 31,688 years

Kinda puts into perspective what a trillion is.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif

[SatCam]

http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif

fucking disgusting

[oldladyfacepuncher]

But so far this is all we really know: Paulson and the White House are asking for a huge blank check. They want it as fast as they can get it with as little strings attached as possible. They are using fear to push this through as fast as they can. How much we eventually know about where this money will go, and what kinds of oversight there will be, is completely dependent on how much of a spine Congress shows this week. this will move fast no matter what.

So be afraid.



I'm telling you guys, "Bring on the meltdown." It's the only way we'll see a change.

They will get our money, our kids money, our grandkids money, our great grandkids money, etc. There will be very little public access to any oversight, if there's any. They will get it without any new substantial regulations. They will get it without judicial review.

As far as making a profit, government is not a business. At least it isn't supposed to be.

[Recyclerz]

No, the way this is thought to work, and no one really knows at this point, is that we give up to a billion dollars to Hank Paulson and he will go around and purchase all crap debts from banking firms. Anything further than that is a mystery thus far. The questions remain. How much are we going to pay for these loans? Are we going to play a premium price or something closer to what they are thought to be worth? It's thought that Paulson is going to go around and buy these mortgages at a premium, because that's the only way it's going to help out these firms. If so, we are giving a handout of MASSIVE proportions to Wall Street. And not generally, either. Whichever firms have the largest amount of bad debt will get the biggest payouts. Which leads to fears that firms will start shopping for bad debt to get a bigger payout from the Fed.

But so far this is all we really know: Paulson and the White House are asking for a huge blank check. They want it as fast as they can get it with as little strings attached as possible. They are using fear to push this through as fast as they can. How much we eventually know about where this money will go, and what kinds of oversight there will be, is completely dependent on how much of a spine Congress shows this week. this will move fast no matter what.

So be afraid.

How bad us taxpayers make out is dependent on how much the Fed pays for this bad debt and how much payment they can get out of these loans. It IS possible we can make a profit from all this. if there were a President Obama or McCain in charge right now I'd be much more optimistic of that happening.

I think HBox has summed up the issues pretty well except on one point: Paulson doesn't have to (and absolutely shouldn't) pay big premiums on the dodgy loans to have the bail out work. The immediate CRISIS is one of liquidity, keeping the money moving, rather than that of profitability, which still is a problem but one the market mechanisms can and should take care of.

This is the best anaology I've been able to come up with. Say you are an art collector and you straight out own 20 Picassos. By any common sense term of the word you are rich - you own several assets that are worth many $ millions each. But you can't buy a car because you have no cash and you can't just tear off a corner of one of the paintings and give it to the dealer. So you have to borrow $ from somebody on the promise to pay it back when you auction off one or more of the paintings at your annual garage sale. So the system works OK until you and everybody else finds out that some of your Picassos are damaged in some way. (Say ESD was at your house and he's telling everybody that he added a little special essence of Dave to a few of your paintings.) Now, all of a sudden nobody wants to lend you money for fear that the collateral you have is impaired and not worth what everybody thought it was. It still has some value but nobody is sure what it is. So the whole system grinds to a halt.

That's what this HUGE bailout and the other ones are designed to prevent, which despite Oldladyfacepuncher's calls for Anarchy in the USA, seems like the least objectionable alternative to me.

[K.C.]

I'm telling you guys, "Bring on the meltdown." It's the only way we'll see a change.


"That's alright, these things have to happen every five years or so....ten years...helps to get rid of the bad blood."


http://www.nakedauthors.com/uploaded_images/Clemenza,-Richard-S-Castellano-738076.jpg

[celery]

How much is a trillion?

To give it some perspective.

How many seconds in one day = 86,400.

How many days is 1 million seconds? 11.57 days

How many days is 1 billion seconds? 11574 days = approx 31.69 years

How many days is 1 trillion seconds? 11574000 days = approx 31,688 years

Kinda puts into perspective what a trillion is.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/history.gif


Clearly, we're eating ourselves into debt.

http://www.unitedhealthfoundation.org/ahr2007/states/images/graph3.jpg

[underdog]

Clearly, we're eating ourselves into debt.

http://www.unitedhealthfoundation.org/ahr2007/states/images/graph3.jpg

I think it has far more to do with the lack of Pirates :

http://www.venganza.org/piratesarecool4.gif

[HBox]

You haven't heard of me, but I'm Chris Dodd. That's Chris Dodd. Chris Dodd is my name! I have a better idea to save Wall Street! BA DOOBA DOBBA SWOBO! BA DOO BADA SWEE SWOW! BADOBO DO WEE! (http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aHeROL9EmlRg&refer=home)

Equity Stake

The legislation requires Treasury to take an equity stake equal to the purchase price of the assets being bought. If the company isn't publicly traded, the government would take senior debt instead, placing it in the front of the line of debt holders for repayment in the event of a bankruptcy.

Dodd's proposal also would create a five-member oversight board to supervise the Treasury secretary's purchase and sale of distressed mortgage debt.

It would consist of the chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. and the Securities and Exchange Commission as well as two members from the financial industry designated by congressional leaders.

The board would be authorized to set up a so-called credit review company consisting of Treasury employees to study the soundness of the purchases. Under the plan, the government would be required to obtain an equity stake equal to the value of the debt that is purchased from the companies, including those whose shares are not publicly traded. The Treasury secretary would also be required to issue weekly public reports on the amount of assets bought and sold by the U.S.

Penalize Executives

Dodd is proposing to penalize executives who take ``inappropriate or excessive'' risks. The executive compensation and severance packages could be reduced if that is ``in the public interest,'' the proposal says. It would also force executives to give back profits they earned that were based on company accounting measures that are later found to be inaccurate.

Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who has supported giving shareholders a bigger say in executive compensation in the past, said today that taxpayers shouldn't foot the bill for ``golden parachutes'' for officers of companies that have crumbled in upheaval on Wall Street.

``The senior executives of any firm that is bailed out by Treasury should not be making more than the highest paid government official,'' McCain said at a campaign event in Scranton, Pennsylvania.

And for those who don;t get the joke:

<embed FlashVars='videoId=81857' src='http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

[badmonkey]

You haven't heard of me, but I'm Chris Dodd. That's Chris Dodd. Chris Dodd is my name! I have a better idea to save Wall Street! BA DOOBA DOBBA SWOBO! BA DOO BADA SWEE SWOW! BADOBO DO WEE! (http://bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aHeROL9EmlRg&refer=home)



And for those who don;t get the joke:

<embed FlashVars='videoId=81857' src='http://www.thedailyshow.com/sitewide/video_player/view/default/swf.jhtml' quality='high' bgcolor='#cccccc' width='332' height='316' name='comedy_central_player' align='middle' allowScriptAccess='always' allownetworking='external' type='application/x-shockwave-flash' pluginspage='http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer'></embed>

That video is pretty funny, but the joke here is somewhere in here maybe:

Chris Dodd is the Democratic Chairman of the Senate banking committee and at $133,900 is the #1 recipient of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac Campaign Contributions, 1989-2008 (http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/07/top-senate-recipients-of-fanni.html).

Meanwhile, the Senate Ethics Committee has begun a preliminary investigation of the mortgages obtained under what was reportedly called the “Friends of Angelo” program — a reference to Countrywide chief executive Angelo Mozilo — by both Dodd and a colleague, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D. (http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2008/06/19/connecticut/doc485936db8abf6602319864.txt)
Sen. Dodd calls Fannie, Freddie 'fundamentally strong' -- July 11 2008 (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/sen-dodd-calls-fannie-freddie/story.aspx?guid={6D500286-5BDC-433B-A2EF-A9B3CE520ADE}&dist=hpts)
"This is not a time to be panicking about this. These are viable, strong institutions," Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., said at a Capitol Hill press conference.

"The economics are fine in these institutions and people need to know that," Dodd said. There's no reason "to talk about failure," he added.

"These two institutions are fundamentally, fundamentally strong," Dodd said. "There's no reason for the kind of reaction we're getting."

Bank of America Drafted Dodd’s Housing Bailout Bill (http://blog.heritage.org/2008/06/20/bank-of-america-drafted-dodd-bailout-bill/)
PDF of the Bank of America document (http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2008/06/20/bofa.pdf)

[scottinnj]

I'm telling you guys, "Bring on the meltdown." It's the only way we'll see a change.

Quoted for Truth. Let it crash and burn, start over.

[Jujubees2]

Holy sheet. The NY Times has the full Paulson proposal and catch section eight:

Sec. 8. Review.

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.

Text of Draft Proposal for Bailout Plan (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21draftcnd.html)

Yep, this is coming from the Bush administration.

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Holy sheet. The NY Times has the full Paulson proposal and catch section eight:

Sec. 8. Review.

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.

Text of Draft Proposal for Bailout Plan (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21draftcnd.html)

Yep, this is coming from the Bush administration.

Ahem. I'm telling you guys ...


They will get our money, our kids money, our grandkids money, our great grandkids money, etc. There will be very little public access to any oversight, if there's any. They will get it without any new substantial regulations. They will get it without judicial review.

[booster11373]

I love the conservative talk show host take on this when someone floated the idea to include homeowners effected by the sub-prime fiasco or consumers with credit card debt out the wazoo.........

Can you guess what their take was on those ideas?

(I don't necessarily agree with those ideas but still.......)

[scottinnj]

Apparantly the paperboy was smarter then we thought (http://www.japantoday.com/category/business/view/nomura-pays-only-2-for-lehman-brothers-european-unit)


http://lonestartimes.com/images/Benzion/April_06/2_Dollars__1_.JPG

[BillySolHarg]

Not to be too serious, but I'm asking an honest question. I really don't know.

YES. Not only are we in debt to China, but China has been rising as a global economic power over the years and is expected to be the economic leader within 2 decades, maybe sooner. How nice, a place that feeds it's people poisoned food and reserves the good food for 'Nation A' - for politicians and the rich of China will be our global leader.

However, I do glow in the fact that I now have better credit than the Gov't. :laugh:

[thejives]

And in case you liked FOX news, check out their crack financial team make fun of a guy who was right in 2006:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

what a bunch of jerks

[underdog]

And in case you liked FOX news, check out their crack financial team make fun of a guy who was right in 2006:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

what a bunch of jerks

Wow.

There's no way this actually happened. This has to be some sort of edit that someone did. There is absolutely no way this much fail could be captured in one video segment.

[thejives]

Wow.

There's no way this actually happened. This has to be some sort of edit that someone did. There is absolutely no way this much fail could be captured in one video segment.

don't underestimate FOX

[scottinnj]

And in case you liked FOX news, check out their crack financial team make fun of a guy who was right in 2006:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/EoB4BS7CGAw&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

what a bunch of jerks

Wow.

There's no way this actually happened. This has to be some sort of edit that someone did. There is absolutely no way this much fail could be captured in one video segment.

don't underestimate FOX

Not just Fox. At the time, all these jerks were singing praises about the housing market, like 20-30 percent jumps in home values were something not just normal, but high time everyone got in on it.

Meanwhile, guys like that lone analyst everyone was laughing at were speaking the truth. It wasn't about the interest rates-it was about the overinflated prices that forced so many people out of the market, the sub-prime mortgages became standard practice to justify paying a million dollars for some old-timers farm and building 100-200 homes on it with prices of 250 to 700 thousand dollars.
It was ridiculous. Homes already built then got artificially jumped in value so the townships could justify increasing property taxes 10-15 percent, and eventually, as was bound to happen, the homeowners got so squeezed between taxes and rising mortgage payments on junk houses that got built for outrageous prices they defaulted, leaving banks and mortgage companies holding homes they couldn't resell for loans that got put on them.


Fuck 'em all. Let the housing industry crash and burn. This bailout won't help anything, except put us further into debt with China. The companies that fucked it all up will be bailed out, and the industry won't change a thing, and we'll be destined to be fucked again.

Fuck 'em in their fucking fuckholes.

[HBox]

Looks like we got a deal....... unless McCain shows up again. House votes tomorrow, Senate Monday. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26884523/)

Main points:

-Limits on executive pay, details not available yet.

-At insistence of House Republicans some money is set aside for a useless government insurance program to encourage companies to hold on to distressed mortgages to protect against default.

-Treasury will buy distressed mortgages. It requires the government to try and negotiate lower payments for these mortgages to keep people in their homes. They would later try to sell these mortgages back into the market.

-The government will receive stock warrants for buying these distressed mortgages.

-Money would come in installments. First one is $350 million. Anything further could be blocked by Congress. President has the ability to veto that. That would likely be President Obama or McCain.

[HBox]

Looks like we are not the only ones having serious financial difficulties. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7640143.stm)

[sr71blackbird]

What I cant wrap my mind about is if we bale out this situation with all this money, how is it that despite that, it seems that thousands of jobs are going to be lost and cities like in this story (http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/105861/Towns-That-Could-Be-Hit-Hardest-by-the-Financial-Crisis) will be impacted?

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Looks like we got a deal....... unless McCain shows up again. House votes tomorrow, Senate Monday. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26884523/)

Main points:

-Limits on executive pay, details not available yet.

-At insistence of House Republicans some money is set aside for a useless government insurance program to encourage companies to hold on to distressed mortgages to protect against default.

-Treasury will buy distressed mortgages. It requires the government to try and negotiate lower payments for these mortgages to keep people in their homes. They would later try to sell these mortgages back into the market.

-The government will receive stock warrants for buying these distressed mortgages.

-Money would come in installments. First one is $350 million. Anything further could be blocked by Congress. President has the ability to veto that. That would likely be President Obama or McCain.

Wow. Who's the pinko commie now?

[Zorro]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fia sco/

'THE PRIVATE SECTOR got us into this mess. The government has to get us out of it."

That's Barney Frank's story, and he's sticking to it. As the Massachusetts Democrat has explained it in recent days, the current financial crisis is the spawn of the free market run amok, with the political class guilty only of failing to rein the capitalists in. The Wall Street meltdown was caused by "bad decisions that were made by people in the private sector," Frank said; the country is in dire straits today "thanks to a conservative philosophy that says the market knows best." And that philosophy goes "back to Ronald Reagan, when at his inauguration he said, 'Government is not the answer to our problems; government is the problem.' "


Insightful Op-ed piece from the Boston Globe. I'm guessing the rush to get this bail out done is because there's enough blame to go around and these guys need to get back to campaigning

[HBox]

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2008/09/28/franks_fingerprints_are_all_over_the_financial_fia sco/



Insightful Op-ed piece from the Boston Globe. I'm guessing the rush to get this bail out done is because there's enough blame to go around and these guys need to get back to campaigning

It's not the fault of the Community Reinvestment Act. It simply isn't. There was no outcry about the CRA until the Republicans caught crap for the deregulation. That they blamed big government and minorities is as obvious a tactic for them as it is wrong.

More here. (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/09/the_thirty_year_itch.php)

And here. (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=did_liberals_cause_the_subprime_c risis)

[HBox]

Here's a better take on the causes of the economic crisis. (http://www.newsweek.com/id/161199)

[HBox]

Everybody find some shelter. It doesn't look like the bailout bill is going to pass. They are already at 221 no votes, over the 218 needed to stop this. Now its at 223. Shit. 224.

[HBox]

The Dow has been down as much as 700 as the House leadsership has frozen the vote and is trying to get people to change their votes. They are at 226 nay. They need to get that number under 218.

[celery]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/S27yitK32ds&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/S27yitK32ds&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[badmonkey]

It's not the fault of the Community Reinvestment Act. It simply isn't. There was no outcry about the CRA until the Republicans caught crap for the deregulation. That they blamed big government and minorities is as obvious a tactic for them as it is wrong.

More here. (http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/archives/2008/09/the_thirty_year_itch.php)

And here. (http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=did_liberals_cause_the_subprime_c risis)

Those articles just basically say "uh, no it's not". ThinkProgress.org authors are not good sources for much of anything other than "Bush sucks!!! his fault!!!" etc. I tried to explain it to you here (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1873445&postcount=20) but you ignored it.

[HBox]

Those articles just basically say "uh, no it's not". ThinkProgress.org authors are not good sources for much of anything other than "Bush sucks!!! his fault!!!" etc. I tried to explain it to you here (http://www.ronfez.net/forums/showpost.php?p=1873445&postcount=20) but you ignored it.

Reading is fundamental.

The evidence strongly suggests the latter. First, consider timing. CRA was enacted in 1977. The sub-prime lending at the heart of the current crisis exploded a full quarter century later. In the mid-1990s, new CRA regulations and a wave of mergers led to a flurry of CRA activity, but, as noted by the New America Foundation's Ellen Seidman (and by Harvard's Joint Center), that activity "largely came to an end by 2001." In late 2004, the Bush administration announced plans to sharply weaken CRA regulations, pulling small and mid-sized banks out from under the law's toughest standards. Yet sub-prime lending continued, and even intensified -- at the very time when activity under CRA had slowed and the law had weakened.

Second, it is hard to blame CRA for the mortgage meltdown when CRA doesn't even apply to most of the loans that are behind it. As the University of Michigan's Michael Barr points out, half of sub-prime loans came from those mortgage companies beyond the reach of CRA. A further 25 to 30 percent came from bank subsidiaries and affiliates, which come under CRA to varying degrees but not as fully as banks themselves. (With affiliates, banks can choose whether to count the loans.) Perhaps one in four sub-prime loans were made by the institutions fully governed by CRA.

Most important, the lenders subject to CRA have engaged in less, not more, of the most dangerous lending. Janet Yellen, president of the San Francisco Federal Reserve, offers the killer statistic: Independent mortgage companies, which are not covered by CRA, made high-priced loans at more than twice the rate of the banks and thrifts. With this in mind, Yellen specifically rejects the "tendency to conflate the current problems in the sub-prime market with CRA-motivated lending.? CRA, Yellen says, "has increased the volume of responsible lending to low- and moderate-income households."

[badmonkey]

Keep reading.

[celery]

The bill was defeated. This is gonna be a fun ride.

[HBox]

Keep reading.

Keep reading what? There's nothing in your post about how the CRA caused this.

[BeerBandit]

What the hell was I just watching that showed a near landslide vote to pass? I swear I just saw this bill pass.

[HBox]

What the hell was I just watching that showed a near landslide vote to pass? I swear I just saw this bill pass.

That was another vote afterwards.

[BeerBandit]

That was another vote afterwards.
It wasn't the re-vote? I thought they were going to press people to change their minds?

[DolaMight]

forgive me for my canadianness in asking, but If the bill is shot down it just means they go backdoorbabes on each other until they make enough concessions to get about 10 people to change thier vote? I'm assuming that's how your house votes...

As in it's close enough to consider it passed given the situation?

[HBox]

It wasn't the re-vote? I thought they were going to press people to change their minds?

They held the vote open for a while to try and change people's minds but only got two people to change their vote. They just announced there won't be another vote today. I'm guessing they want all the no votes to sit for a while and watch the markets crater.

[Recyclerz]

Fuck! I'm going to track down the mother-fuckin' Nay voters and have ESD throw shit at 'em.

Some Republican senator said this morning that they shouldn't be a Congress if they couldn't get this done. He was right. :wallbash:

Fuck!

[scottinnj]

HBox, just wanted to give you props for staying on this. You and I disagree on the scope of it, and who was responsible, but I gotta say thanks for keeping up to speed on the voting in the House.

Kudos budday!

[oldladyfacepuncher]

They held the vote open for a while to try and change people's minds but only got two people to change their vote. They just announced there won't be another vote today. I'm guessing they want all the no votes to sit for a while and watch the markets crater.

:popcorn:























http://www.clipartof.com/images/thumbnail/739.gif

[Furtherman]

Who Run Barterton?!

Who.... Run.... Bartertown?!


Embargo On!

[oldladyfacepuncher]

HBox, just wanted to give you props for staying on this.


Same here. I keep on eye on this thread rather news sites.

[Epschtein]

first, there is no guarantee that this plan will work, plenty of knowledgeable people say it is a bad idea.

second, those fucking retards blaming it on pelosi's speech should be slapped. if this thing is SO important, and they were just about to vote yes, but they let pelosi's speech change their minds, then they need to step down and go mow lawns for a living.

[HBox]

Republicans are blaming Pelosi's speech before the vote for it failing. Democrats and are blaming Republicans for not delivering all the votes they promised.

I don't doubt that Pelosi did something stupid though I haven't heard or read her speech. It would not be at all surprising to me. But it seems to me to be a huge excuse. This isn't popular at all but necessary. If you are serious about your job you need to vote for this. If you were seriously going to vote for this momentous bill and got your vote swayed by hurt feelings you don't deserve your seat. But I don't buy that. Boehner either couldn't get the votes or lied and never had them in the first place.

I hope the Democrats man up and just jam their own bill through for the sake of the economy. It won't happen though. I'm not sure there was ever a political party in the history of the nation to have the fortitude to commit political suicide like that for the sake of the country.

[HBox]

Oh Barney Frank rules. he just said in regards to the 12 Republican votes supposedly lost by Pelosi's speech:

"Somebody please give me those 12 names. I'll go and be uncharacteristically nice to them."

[HBox]

Here's Pelosi's speech. Judge for yourself how scathing it is. (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/rep_pelosis_remarks_on_floor_a.php)

[AKA]

Same here. I keep on eye on this thread rather news sites.

Between this thead and the polling thread, HBox is the the man keeping tabs of (most (http://www.thespookymovie.com)) everything I care about right now.

[underdog]

Boehner either couldn't get the votes or lied and never had them in the first place.

I think people had time to think about it and realized that it was something to do with the economy and Bush was for it. As good as the plan sounded, there had to be something majorly wrong with it for Bush to be for it.

Or he lied and really didn't have the votes.

[AKA]

Oh Barney Frank rules. he just said in regards to the 12 Republican votes supposedly lost by Pelosi's speech:

"Somebody please give me those 12 names. I'll go and be uncharacteristically nice to them."

I was having this conversation last week that Barney Frank is the only one up there who really seems to give a shit and is sweating this thing out.

[Recyclerz]

first, there is no guarantee that this plan will work, plenty of knowledgeable people say it is a bad idea.

second, those fucking retards blaming it on pelosi's speech should be slapped. if this thing is SO important, and they were just about to vote yes, but they let pelosi's speech change their minds, then they need to step down and go mow lawns for a living.

- I don't think anybody loves this plan but it is probably the least bad alternative (See markets, plunge)

- Agree on the second part but WTF is Pelosi doing giving a hyper-partisan speech right before a vote that requires bipartisian support and a willingness to put oneself at risk of pissing off the mobs 5 weeks before an election? She should have her ass kicked out of the Speaker's seat if this is the best she can come up with in a national emergency as should all the Democrats who voted No.

Unless they can get their shit straightened out promptly and pass something that is going to keep the financial system from imploding, we're at risk of a serious recession like none of you youngin's probably remember. The last really bad one was in the early '80's (the first three years of Reagn's term). Trust me it sucked. I was in school at the time and didn't have to really worry about anything but not getting kicked out. But unemployment was over 10% and a lot of people got really fucked over. And that was a sort of medicinal recession to try to wring inflation out of the system, which was kind of predictable as to when it would end.. If we crater the economy over this I have no idea when or if the good times will roll again.

Let me put it like this - the failure to keep the financial system working, even at sub par performance, would be equal to, if not greater than to all the fuckups of W & Friends over the last 7.5 years. And that, my fellow proles, is quite the fuck-up indeed.

:wallbash:

EDIT: OK Pelosi wasn't so hyperpartisan after all. Still, she should have been able to get more Democratic votes to get this passed.

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Roll Call (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml)

The title is wrong, but the results appear accurate.

I never thought I'd see the day when Rehburg and I agree; even if it is for different reasons.

[Zorro]

Not sure how I feel about this.

[K.C.]

EDIT: OK Pelosi wasn't so hyperpartisan after all. Still, she should have been able to get more Democratic votes to get this passed.

60% of house Dems voted YAY

67% of house Reps voted NAY

Is this not Bush's bill?? What's wrong with this picture?

And are you really telling me that 12 House Republicans lying to their leadership about how they'd vote, and/or changing their mind because Nancy Pelosi 'hurt their feelings' is justification for a vote on a matter like this?

[Earlshog]

Dow 10,365.45 -777.68 (-6.98%)
Nasdaq 1,983.73 -199.61 (-9.14%)
S&P 500 1,107.21 -105.80 (-8.72%)

[Melrapuo]

Hey, does the bread line start on the left or the right? I wanna make sure I get a good spot.

[brettmojo]

Not sure how I feel about this.
The more government meddling the worse it's gonna' be.

Where the government should have stepped in was when these loans were going out to people who couldn't possibly pay them back.

[Zorro]

Pelosi's pre-vote ad lib:

"When President Bush took office, he inherited President Clinton's surpluses — four years in a row, budget surpluses, on a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. And with his reckless economic policies within two years, he had turned that around... and now eight years later the foundation of that fiscal irresponsibility, combined with an anything-goes economic policy, has taken us to where we are today. They claim to be free-market advocates when it's really an anything-goes mentality, no regulation, no supervision, no discipline...."

"... Democrats believe in a free market ... but in this case, in its unbridled form as encouraged, supported by the Republicans – some in the Republican Party, not all — it has created not jobs, not capital, it has created chaos."


Not the way to win friends and influence people

[Zorro]

Here's Pelosi's speech. Judge for yourself how scathing it is. (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/rep_pelosis_remarks_on_floor_a.php)

This was the speech Pelosi gave to Reporters, but not the speach she gave on the floor.

[Recyclerz]

60% of house Dems voted YAY

67% of house Reps voted NAY

Is this not Bush's bill?? What's wrong with this picture?

And are you really telling me that 12 House Republicans lying to their leadership about how they'd vote, and/or changing their mind because Nancy Pelosi 'hurt their feelings' is justification for a vote on a matter like this?

40% of the House Democrats voted to jeopardize the economic well-being of everybody in this country. I understand that some of them may be politically vulnerable to the yahoos of the Right who will call them Socialists or Elitists or whatever up to the election but holding political office should mean that you really do "Put Country First" above your personal ambitions and do the right (or, in this case, the least bad) thing.

I know the Limbaugh/Hannity crew would rather reduce the Country to a pile of ashes than have their side "lose." I had hoped that there were enough adults in the House of Reps to supercede those pricks. I guess I was wrong. :glurps:

[HBox]

John McCain was a bit too eager this morning. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html)

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his top aides took credit for building a winning bailout coalition – hours before the vote failed and stocks tanked.

The rush to claim he had engineered a victory now looks like a strategic blunder that will prolong the McCain’s campaign’s difficulty in finding a winning message on the economy.

Shortly before the vote, McCain had bragged about his involvement and mocked Sen. Barack Obama for staying on the sidelines.

[HBox]

In case anyone didn't notice this morning Wachovia fell. (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/companies/wachovia_citigroup/index.htm?postversion=2008092908)

Citigroup will acquire the banking operations of Wachovia for $2.2 billion in an all-stock deal announced Monday, following much speculation over the weekend about the fate of the nation's fourth-largest bank.

To help finance the transaction, Citigroup said it would raise $10 billion through a sale of common stock and announced it would slash its quarterly dividend yet again, cutting it in half to 16 cents a share to preserve capital.

As part of the deal, Citigroup will acquire Wachovia's massive deposit network, giving it more than $600 billion in deposits in the U.S., about a 9.8% market share, and broadening its presence in such key regions as the Southeast and the West.

At the same time, Citi will assume about $53 billion in the Wachovia's debt and take hold of the same loan portfolio that ultimately sank Wachovia in the end.

[JPMNICK]

BTW they got wachovia for about 97 cents a share

and this whole thing might have cost McCain the election

[JerseyRich]

I sold my Pets.com stock this morning!

Man...I hope we can hold this thing together!

[JerseyRich]

John McCain was a bit too eager this morning. (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html)

Good job Brownie.

[brettmojo]

In case anyone didn't notice this morning Wachovia fell. (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/companies/wachovia_citigroup/index.htm?postversion=2008092908)
I always pronounced it "Watch over ya'".

[Jujubees2]

I sold my Pets.com stock this morning!

Man...I hope we can hold this thing together!

I'm thinking about selling my pets tonight!

[brettmojo]

I'm thinking about eating my pets tonight!
Ewww.

[Melrapuo]

In case anyone didn't notice this morning Wachovia fell. (http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/news/companies/wachovia_citigroup/index.htm?postversion=2008092908)

Nothing like absorbing one bank's $50 billion+ debt. Doesn't it sound like paying off one credit card with another?

[scottinnj]

I'm beginning to think this is going to go down as the Iraq vote.

Those who voted "no" today will be the ones who are the smart kids in the class when history looks this event over.

I'm against the bailout, and have been for a little while now. The bailout doesn't do much to help with families stuck in bad mortgages. I really believe we just need to just let the market bail itself out. I'm tired of the past 40 years of bailing out companies and banks.
The country itself is so deep in debt now, borrowing 700 billion more may not be that much compared to the debt, but the interest payments we have now as a country are just staggering, and pretty soon, we'll be owing more in interest then we can tax the country for.

[celery]

I sold my Pets.com stock this morning!

Man...I hope we can hold this thing together!

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zhnEjxsjjuA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zhnEjxsjjuA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[HBox]

And with today's nosedive the Dow is currently lower than it was when George W. Bush entered office.

[DolaMight]

Those who voted "no" today will be the ones who are the smart kids in the class when history looks this event over.


They'll be even bigger than that. The last smart kids in class before the financial meltdown and ensuing nuclear holocaust.

[JerseyRich]

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/zhnEjxsjjuA&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/zhnEjxsjjuA&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

With Advertising like that, I have no idea how they failed!

I miss puppet dog.

[oldladyfacepuncher]

I'm beginning to think this is going to go down as the Iraq vote.

Those who voted "no" today will be the ones who are the smart kids in the class when history looks this event over.

I'm against the bailout, and have been for a little while now. The bailout doesn't do much to help with families stuck in bad mortgages. I really believe we just need to just let the market bail itself out. I'm tired of the past 40 years of bailing out companies and banks.
The country itself is so deep in debt now, borrowing 700 billion more may not be that much compared to the debt, but the interest payments we have now as a country are just staggering, and pretty soon, we'll be owing more in interest then we can tax the country for.


Me too. I'm not a heartless dick who just wants to see a bunch of people go belly up, and I do think this country needs a bailout, but it's not Wall St that needs a break, it us.

Wall St saw this coming and instead of acting responsibly, they knew that the government always bails them out. It's time to cut the cord so they can grow up and become a responsible part of this country, instead of a bunch of jackals. Alas, I'm certain that they'll get their bailout soon enough anyway.

Your reps should vote the way you want them to. They represent you, that's their job. Call them up if you don't like how they vote, or better yet call them up before they vote on legislation you have an opinion on. Then call them up again and thank them when they do the right thing.

[HBox]

Today's vote will most likely be meaningless in the long run. If the economy doesn't tank, and we get off with just a fairly typical recession no one will remember this. It will be a fairly meaningless vote. However, if we go into a severe recession all those people who voted no are in severe trouble. they might be helped now but two years from now when the economy is still in the shitter anyone still around with that no vote hanging around their neck will have severely compromised their political chances.

But the biggest reason it will most likely be meaningless is that there will probably still be something passed. What I've read is that the Democratic leadership has given up on the Republicans and will try and get the votes they need on their side. That likely means bankruptcy reform will be added.

[HBox]

BTW, the first people who should start being scared are people who work for company selling big ticket items, items that most people would need loans to buy. I'm talking mainly about cars and expensive appliances. People will not have access to the credit they need to buy these items so they will not buy them and that's where the layoffs will start. Once that starts it will only spread.

If we get to the point where businesses that rely on lines of credit and revolving monthly loans start having their credit closed, we are in deep deep shit.

[scottinnj]

Well what's bad for Wall Street is good for the consumer (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080929/oil_prices.html):

NEW YORK (AP) -- Oil prices tumbled more than $10 a barrel Monday, dropping back below $100 as a U.S. financial bailout failed to win legislative approval, raising fears of a prolonged economic downturn that could drastically erode global energy demand.

[HBox]

Well what's bad for Wall Street is good for the consumer (http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080929/oil_prices.html):

The reason the price dropped is because of an expectation that demand will drop, meaning the world will not be able to afford to buy as much gas.

Gas will still seem expensive at a price 15% cheaper than it is now if you are making 25% less. Furthermore if the value of the dollar declines further, which is probable, it will make it even more expensive here even if the price of crude continues to drop.

[scottinnj]

The reason the price dropped is because of an expectation that demand will drop, meaning the world will not be able to afford to buy as much gas.

Gas will still seem expensive at a price 15% cheaper than it is now if you are making 25% less. Furthermore if the value of the dollar declines further, which is probable, it will make it even more expensive here even if the price of crude continues to drop.

I don't know man, the world markets are crashing too (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/markets/article4844255.ece), and the dollar is rebounding because of it and the drop in oil prices. Seems like everything is proportional, so prices in general should be falling.
I'm kind of in a unique position though, so my perspective is going to be different then someone else's. I work for a pharmacy, and there are always sick people. My wife is a nurse, and the same thing there. We both have job security, for unfortunate reasons.
But I'm still convinced the markets can solve this on their own, and it won't be as bad as everyone says it can be.

[HBox]

I work for a pharmacy, and there are always sick people. My wife is a nurse, and the same thing there. We both have job security

As long as a lot of people still have health insurance you're alright.

Sorry to be Debbie Downer here. Of course the markets will correct themselves over time. But I think people are way to willing to dive into this recession. And are way too willing to stick to their ideology at all costs. Deregulation and keeping a hands off attitude was a major factor in getting us here. It took a downturn and massively intensified it.

A guy on CNBC had a great point tonight. The prosperity of the last 6-10 years was imaginary, based on cheap credit and over-inflated home prices. It wasn't real. When we emerge from this we will all have a very different idea of what is normal, of what the American Dream is.

[Recyclerz]

The US stock markets bounced back some today but the credit markets are still pretty fucked up. Central banks are flooding the joint with cash but my friends in the biz say the commercial paper markets and bank lending are careening wildly, which is not a good thing. Boring is good in this area. Financial institutions are trying to show as much cash on the books for the end of the quarter reports. We'll see what happens tomorrow.

To translate into real world terms, there are a lot of business that rely on short term borrowing to finance themselves. If they don't have access to this financing they'll pay ridiculuously high rates for longer term borrowing or start bouncing paychecks, etc. Let's hope the shaman figure this out quickly. :glurps:

[HBox]

Bank of America turns down MCDONALDS request for an increase in credit. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aDy9UdLRu6Xw&refer=us)

Sept. 22 (Bloomberg) -- McDonald's Corp., the world's largest restaurant company, told some U.S. franchisees to seek other ways to finance store improvements after Bank of America Corp. declined to increase lending.

Store owners have exhausted financing used to pay for upgrades and equipment to make lattes and espressos, and Bank of America won't provide more money as it works on the planned purchase of Merrill Lynch & Co., McDonald's said in a memo that was obtained by Bloomberg News.

Banks have tightened credit following Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.'s bankruptcy filing, the government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and more than $500 billion in writedowns and losses. Bank of America's reluctance to increase the loan may show that even well-known brands such as McDonald's face difficulties financing expansion.

If MCDONALDS can't get any more credit what hope do small businesses who need credit have? This is going to be really bad.

[AKA]

A guy on CNBC had a great point tonight. The prosperity of the last 6-10 years was imaginary, based on cheap credit and over-inflated home prices. It wasn't real. When we emerge from this we will all have a very different idea of what is normal, of what the American Dream is.

It's interesting how the housing boom almost perfectly coincides with the web bust - from one smoke and mirrors to the next.

[scottinnj]

Deregulation and keeping a hands off attitude was a major factor in getting us here.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not against Congress doing something. I am a free market kind of guy, but when I heard loans were being issued without some sort of proof of employment, I was shocked.

The main problem I have with this bailout package is that the mortgage companies and banks holding bad notes have an incentive to not stop foreclosing. The more houses they have in their possession that are foreclosed, the bigger piece of the bailout pie they get.

If they don't get the bailout, they will be forced to renegotiate the mortgage. They may get less money, but they'll get money, and even though the homeowner may pay more, it won't be so much that they get foreclosed on.

[HBox]

The Senate passes the relief bill 74-25.

[Zorro]

"This is how Washington works," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington research group. "A big pot of pork is their recipe for final passage."


The special provisions include tax breaks for:

* Manufacturers of kids' wooden arrows - $6 million.

* Puerto Rican and Virgin Is- lands rum producers - $192 million.

* Wool research.

* Auto-racing tracks - $128 million.

* Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million.

* Small- to medium-budget film and television productions - $10 million.



Who'd a think you'd have Bernie Sanders and Richard Shelby on the same side?

[Earlshog]

I am sure you will have this forward in your inbox with in the next two days

I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.

Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to
America in a We Deserve It Dividend.
To make the math simple, let's assume there are
200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.
Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man,
woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at
adults 18 and up..
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We
Deserve It Dividend.
Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their
pocket.
A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your
family?
Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college - it'll be there
Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs
Invest in the market - capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care
improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including
the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every
other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those
serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really
do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( 'vote
buy' ) economic incentive that is being proposed
by one of our candidates for President.

If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's
bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!

As for AIG - liquidate it.

Sell off its parts.

Let American General go back to being American General.
Sell off the real estate.

Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean
it up.

Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.

Sure it's a crazy idea that can 'never work.'

But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
How do you spell Economic Boom?

I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the
$85 Billion

We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG
or in Washington DC?

And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion
because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to
Uncle Sam.

Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.

[celery]

The House has passed the economic bailout bill 263 to 171.

[PhishHead]

I am sure you will have this forward in your inbox with in the next two days

I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.

Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to
America in a We Deserve It Dividend.
To make the math simple, let's assume there are
200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.
Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man,
woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at
adults 18 and up..
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We
Deserve It Dividend.
Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their
pocket.
A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your
family?
Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college - it'll be there
Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs
Invest in the market - capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care
improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including
the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every
other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those
serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really
do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( 'vote
buy' ) economic incentive that is being proposed
by one of our candidates for President.

If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's
bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!

As for AIG - liquidate it.

Sell off its parts.

Let American General go back to being American General.
Sell off the real estate.

Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean
it up.

Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.

Sure it's a crazy idea that can 'never work.'

But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
How do you spell Economic Boom?

I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the
$85 Billion

We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG
or in Washington DC?

And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion
because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to
Uncle Sam.

Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.

math is wrong, it would be $425 per person

[Earlshog]

math is wrong, it would be $425 per person


well in that case we arledy did this.... haha

[oldladyfacepuncher]

The House has passed the economic bailout bill 263 to 171.

Great. More debt to pay off. At least this time it's not mine. Oh. Wait....http://www.avatarcorner.com/data/media/93/Suicide.gif

[Earlshog]

Great. More debt to pay off. At least this time it's not mine. Oh. Wait....http://www.avatarcorner.com/data/media/93/Suicide.gif

is that the R Budd Dwyer smiley

[HBox]

Wells Fargo tries to steal Wachovia right from under Citigroup's nose. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27005897/page/2/)

This may be a very good sign. Wells Fargo is buying Wachovia without any government assistance. That in itself is good news. Wells Fargo also did a more in depth investigation of Wachovia and its assets. They may have determined after closer look that Wachovia's mortgage portfolio is worth more than thought. If this works out for Wells Fargo this may trigger a reconsideration of most firms loan assets as undervalued and open up credit markets. Let's hope so.

Of course if this sinks Wells Fargo in the next year................

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Wow this is really working out well so far. I certainly stand corrrrrrected.

[brettmojo]

I think the government should switch from the USPS to FedEx or something, I just got a check in the mail that was addressed to,"Banking type people" for 700 billion dollars...

[oldladyfacepuncher]

I think the government should switch from the USPS to FedEx or something, I just got a check in the mail that was addressed to,"Banking type people" for 700 billion dollars...

$10 says it bounces.

[TooLowBrow]

i just rea that the dow dropped further than is has for four years. since 10/27/04 to be exact. i went to a 'this date in history' site to see what happened those four years ago and " The Boston Red Sox won their first World Series since 1918, beating the St. Louis Cardinals 3-0 in Game 4." was all that was listed. ok, funny, but it didnt answer my question. why did the dow suck four years ago?

[JPMNICK]

i just rea that the dow dropped further than is has for four years. since 10/27/04 to be exact. i went to a 'this date in history' site to see what happened those four years ago and " The Boston Red Sox won their first World Series since 1918, beating the St. Louis Cardinals 3-0 in Game 4." was all that was listed. ok, funny, but it didnt answer my question. why did the dow suck four years ago?

it does not mean it sucked 4 years ago it just is showing that 4 years ago the values of the companies on the DOW are the same as they are now. so adjusting for inflation, you have lost money in those 4 years if you held all those stocks.

it is basically showing that the economy is in a large scale pullback.

[Recyclerz]

Finished less than 400 points down on the Dow.
I guess that makes this a good day? :blink:

[scottinnj]

Finished less than 400 points down on the Dow.
I guess that makes this a good day? :blink:

Gee, I wonder how bad it would have been if those dummies didn't give Wall Street all our money?

Fuckos.

[Recyclerz]

Another 500 point drop on the DJI.

I'm starting to think I would have been better off following the East Side Dave school of financial management in my life rather than the apparently foolish save/invest for the future course that I took. :glurps:

[scottinnj]

$10 says it bounces.

Waited too long. Now it's $1.25

[Jujubees2]

Gee, I wonder how bad it would have been if those dummies didn't give Wall Street all our money?

Fuckos.

And I love how everyone said that this bill had to be passed NOW. Well it passed and thinks are still heading down.

[scottinnj]

Finished less than 400 points down on the Dow.
I guess that makes this a good day? :blink:

Another 500 point drop on the DJI.

I'm starting to think I would have been better off following the East Side Dave school of financial management in my life rather than the apparently foolish save/invest for the future course that I took. :glurps:

About 850 point drop post-bailout. About 800 points pre-bailout.
I thought just the reassurance the package was coming was supposed to be enough to stabilize Wall Street, hence the speed this dummy bill was pushed through Congress and onto the president's desk.
Guess the greedy fucks were wrong again.

[scottinnj]

And I love how everyone said that this bill had to be passed NOW. Well it passed and thinks are still heading down.

QFT. Yep, it was supposed to be passed quickly so Wall Street would settle down due to the reassurance "help was on its way"

It was the credit market that was supposed to benefit from this, so small businesses could operate with normal lines of credit.

The credit market operates in the 60 trillion area of the atmosphere. No way this could have helped that beast. It just overnight pushed our national debt from 10 trillion to 11 trillion. One of these days the foreign banks we owe this money to are going to be used as political capital by not so friendly countries to leverage us during real crises. There is no way this can be paid off-when these loans come due, along with Medicare and Social Security there won't be enough tax money coming in to pay for it all. Guess what? We're either going to have to do away with Medicare & Social Security or conquer the world and forget the loans.

[Sinestro]

QFT. Yep, it was supposed to be passed quickly so Wall Street would settle down due to the reassurance "help was on its way"

It was the credit market that was supposed to benefit from this, so small businesses could operate with normal lines of credit.

The credit market operates in the 60 trillion area of the atmosphere. No way this could have helped that beast. It just overnight pushed our national debt from 10 trillion to 11 trillion. One of these days the foreign banks we owe this money to are going to be used as political capital by not so friendly countries to leverage us during real crises. There is no way this can be paid off-when these loans come due, along with Medicare and Social Security there won't be enough tax money coming in to pay for it all. Guess what? We're either going to have to do away with Medicare & Social Security or conquer the world and forget the loans.

Don't forget to start filling you matresses and pillows with money instead of putting it in the bank.

[scottinnj]

Don't forget to start filling you matresses and pillows with money instead of putting it in the bank.

Have we reached that point yet? My sister banks at Wachovia-she's worried.

[JPMNICK]

Have we reached that point yet? My sister banks at Wachovia-she's worried.

unless she has 100k or more in there, she is fine

and i think it is 250k now with the bailout

now is good time to start getting your cash ready to buy in to the market

buy low sell high is what board room jimmy told me

[JPMNICK]

in this week we dropped past 10k and 9k.

this last month will go down in history.

we have lived through black monday, just over an extended period of time

[JPMNICK]

GM stock is down 30% on rumors they will fold.

The government will have to stand up and bail them out too

[Earlshog]

GM stock is down 30% on rumors they will fold.

The government will have to stand up and bail them out too

GM is toast.....

S and P is down over 40% the last year... this is unprecedented

[HBox]

GM stock is down 30% on rumors they will fold.

The government will have to stand up and bail them out too

We just gave them $25 billion too.

In the mean time Paulson is redirecting the bailout. Instead of using the money to but bad debt he's going to buy stakes in these banks to recapitalize them. It's probably more effective but I don't think anything will help at this point.

[JPMNICK]

We just gave them $25 billion too.

In the mean time Paulson is redirecting the bailout. Instead of using the money to but bad debt he's going to buy stakes in these banks to recapitalize them. It's probably more effective but I don't think anything will help at this point.

credit lending needs to loosen up in order to let the market return to normal.

none of this will end until at least Q3 of 2009.

I am getting ready to buy an Ultra Long ETF that tracks the DOW back up

[KnoxHarrington]

You know, if you needed more proof that Ronnie B is a genius, here you go. He's said that the buyout would go to blow and hookers for the Wall Street guys.

He is, of course, correct. (http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/10/a-grand-time-for-vips?Betterheadline)

As it turns out, a declining market doesn't hurt strip clubs at all. Chelsea's V.I.P. club says business is up, and 80% of their patrons are Wall Street types. Things are going so well that VIP has introduced the most ridiculous thing ever: the $1000 lap dance.

Here's how the New York Times describes the Grand Dance:

In a moment of shrewd business, perhaps, Mr. Zherka and the club decided to introduce a premium product: the $1,000 lap dance package.

The package will buy a 20-minute lap dance, a bottle of Dom Pérignon and a private Champagne room. Not to mention, as Mr. Zherka did, they also “get to keep the girl’s G-strings.”

One trillion dollars to these people, folks.

One fucking trillion dollars.

[K.C.]

GM is toast.....

GM will never be allowed to be toast.

You'd be talking hundreds of thousands of lost jobs...it would be chaos.

Either they'll entice a foreign interest partner, or issue another government bailout. The only way GM could be allowed to fail is if they issued some kind proclamation that instead of spending more to bailout the company, they would re-deploy that money into some public works projects and give those people preference for the jobs.

That would be very New Deal-y.

[scottinnj]

GM will never be allowed to be toast.

You'd be talking hundreds of thousands of lost jobs...it would be chaos.

Either they'll entice a foreign interest partner, or issue another government bailout. The only way GM could be allowed to fail is if they issued some kind proclamation that instead of spending more to bailout the company, they would re-deploy that money into some public works projects and give those people preference for the jobs.

That would be very New Deal-y.

I've been noticing something about Toyota the past couple of years-they have been very, very kind to GM. They have gone as far as pulling ads for their flagship Camry in the US for a period of time, and the Toyota CEO has gone on record saying that GM is essential as competition to Toyota.

[Jujubees2]

I've been noticing something about Toyota the past couple of years-they have been very, very kind to GM. They have gone as far as pulling ads for their flagship Camry in the US for a period of time, and the Toyota CEO has gone on record saying that GM is essential as competition to Toyota.

Of course. Toyota needs a company that makes big, fuel inefficient cars so that it makes Toyota seem like the company that knows what it's doing.

[oldladyfacepuncher]

Fuck 'em all. Let the housing industry crash and burn. This bailout won't help anything, except put us further into debt with China. The companies that fucked it all up will be bailed out, and the industry won't change a thing, and we'll be destined to be fucked again.

Fuck 'em in their fucking fuckholes.

Those who voted "no" today will be the ones who are the smart kids in the class when history looks this event over.


I'm telling you guys, "Bring on the meltdown." It's the only way we'll see a change.


Well at least we know who are the 2 smartest people on ronfez.net now. I hope it was worth the $700 billion.

[cougarjake13]

so who wound up with wachovia ??

[underdog]

Cuomo had objected to "extravagant" payments to executives who ran the company into near-collapse, including a $5 million cash bonus and $15 million "golden parachute" to Sullivan earlier this year, as well as a $34 million bonus for Cassano, whose unit generated the bulk of AIG's losses.

I'm glad we bailed these companies out.

[scottinnj]

so who wound up with wachovia ??

I did. You'll see me in action this summer on the new hit series "Flip this Bank" on the DIY network.

[scottinnj]

So long, suckers. Millionaire hedge fund boss thanks idiot traders and retires at 37 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/oct/18/banking-useconomy)

Punch-worthiness:
The boss of a successful US hedge fund has quit the industry with an extraordinary farewell letter dismissing his rivals as over-privileged "idiots" and thanking "stupid" traders for making him rich.



But yet he is correct:

"I will let others try to amass nine, 10 or 11 figure net worths. Meanwhile, their lives suck," he wrote, citing a life of back-to-back business appointments relieved only by a two-week annual holiday in which financiers are still "glued to their Blackberries".



His final words of advice? "Throw the Blackberry away and enjoy life."

Does this count as a moral conumdrum?

[jonyrotn]

Looks like the the price of cigarettes are going up again..:surrender:

[HBox]

The credit markets are starting to open up again. The bailout may be working. (http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/market-movers/2008/10/20/melting?tid=true)

[Earlshog]

GM is toast.....

S and P is down over 40% the last year... this is unprecedented



GM will never be allowed to be toast.

You'd be talking hundreds of thousands of lost jobs...it would be chaos.

Either they'll entice a foreign interest partner, or issue another government bailout. The only way GM could be allowed to fail is if they issued some kind proclamation that instead of spending more to bailout the company, they would re-deploy that money into some public works projects and give those people preference for the jobs.

That would be very New Deal-y.

GM Bankrupt... still difficult to comprehend... what a sad day!

[TheMojoPin]

Declaring bankruptcy doesn't actually mean they're "toast."

[Earlshog]

Declaring bankruptcy doesn't actually mean they're "toast."

correct they filled 11 not 7.... lets see how it plays....

[K.C.]

It's sad it got to this point.

They told all the workers at the Pontiac/Saturn plant out here, today, that they had 30 days and then the plant was finished.

GM will emerge from bankruptcy, because Obama will mandate it emerge, but this is a huge blow to the middle class, and just something that will further the gap between rich and poor.

The auto industry jobs were the last of this country's manufacturing history where you could not be college educated and make a good living.

Even with GM coming back, it's going to be reduced everything...workforce, salary, benefits, etc.

[TheMojoPin]

It's sad it got to this point.

They told all the workers at the Pontiac/Saturn plant out here, today, that they had 30 days and then the plant was finished.

GM will emerge from bankruptcy, because Obama will mandate it emerge, but this is a huge blow to the middle class, and just something that will further the gap between rich and poor.

The auto industry jobs were the last of this country's manufacturing history where you could not be college educated and make a good living.

Even with GM coming back, it's going to be reduced everything...workforce, salary, benefits, etc.

Yeah, it's scary how much of our manufacturing is gone. That was an inherrent part of being the Consumer's Republic we've been over the last 65 years (though the manufacturing part has been dropping steadily for about 35) and I don't know if we can ever get it back.

[epo]

Yea that whole TARP/Government bailout thing....its in the black already.

Link to Reuters article here. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/usa-treasury-tarp-idUSN3027018020110330)

So the Tea Party can suck my balls.

[WRESTLINGFAN]

Yea that whole TARP/Government bailout thing....its in the black already.

Link to Reuters article here. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/usa-treasury-tarp-idUSN3027018020110330)

So the Tea Party can suck my balls.


How about getting teabagged by a teabagger?


How naive!!! What do you plan to do with your dividend check?


Let me guess GM is in the black too .

[landarch]

This is populist crap.



No one said life was fair. It isn't. Neither is the stock market. Capitalism is like democracy, they are the worst systems, except for everything else. We have laws and if someone breaks those laws then they should go to jail. Throwing people in jail because they made a mistake, even if it costs billions, even if it destroys a company or pension fund investments or an old person's retirement or someone's job is populist crap.

Grow up.

that's the stupidest thing I've ever read.

[TripleSkeet]

that's the stupidest thing I've ever read.

Even stupider then responding to a 2 1/2 year old post?

[disneyspy]

Even stupider then responding to a 2 1/2 year old post?

HE HAS DIAL UP?

[Bob Impact]

Yea that whole TARP/Government bailout thing....its in the black already.

Link to Reuters article here. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/03/30/usa-treasury-tarp-idUSN3027018020110330)

So the Tea Party can suck my balls.

I assume this also goes for the people who complained about TARP money going to proven, responsible companies as well as the messes?

[SonOfSmeagol]

So the Tea Party can suck my balls.

which makes you a teabagger