If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Congress has reached an agreement regarding the outline of the bailout deal. If you live in the US and pay taxes, grab your ankles   (news.bbc.co.uk) divider line 1002
    More: Followup  
•       •       •

15085 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Sep 2008 at 1:43 PM (5 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1002 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all
 
2008-09-25 04:48:12 PM
libbynomore2: thomps [TotalFark] Quote 2008-09-25 04:37:49 PM
libbynomore2: NOT TRUE!!!!'


Obama did what he instinctively does.....make an empty statement that has no teeth and no resolution.

He had no balls to take a stand and offer a solution. Empty platitudes and shallow comments that do absolutely nothing.

Bottom line, McCain recognized the seriousness of the situation and suspended his campaign on his own to go back to work and represent those in AZ who elected him.

Apparently Obama didn't appreciate his role as Senator from Illinois is to represent those who elected him and had to be told by the President to get his ass back to Washington to do his job. I guess with no experience and instinct, you need to be told by the grown ups what to do.

Even Bill Clinton said that a debate can be rescheduled but this issue needs to be dealt with right away. Even Bill Clinton knows that McCain isn't afraid to debate Obama and pointed out that it was McCain who wanted a series of town hall meetings that Obama chickened out of. Even Bill Clinton admitted that it was HIS party that in the 90's who refused to follow Republicans in trying to reign in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who everyone admits is the catalyst for the problems that we're dealing with right now.

i'd like to respond, but i can't find anything in your post that is grounded in reality. so... you win?


Well let me help you find some reality (new window) early this morning btw. Where have you been today????

Oh, and watch the entire video, Clinton throws Obama AND the Democrats out of a car moving at 80 MPH.

It's priceless.


Yeap.. Clinton did... I figure he wants Obama to fail so Hitlery can run in 2012.
 
2008-09-25 04:48:21 PM
libbynomore2: Well let me help you find some reality (new window) early this morning btw. Where have you been today????

Oh, and watch the entire video, Clinton throws Obama AND the Democrats out of a car moving at 80 MPH.

It's priceless.


i was more referring to your idea that obama has done nothing while mccain has personally saved the day.
 
2008-09-25 04:50:45 PM
mungo: OK, so let's see if I understand this.

George Bush, a right wing republican, has proposed the spectacularly socialist solution of spending the better part of 1 trillion dollars of your money to fix a failure in the banking system caused by the capitalist notion of unregulated banking.

Perhaps if he'd had the balls to be just a little bit less right wing in the first place and pulled these bastards out of the pork trough long enough to slip a leash on them, you all wouldn't be paying for this out of your ass.

There is a lesson here, folks.

A little bit of middle gound socialism (i.e. regularion, interference, call it what you will) prevents an assload of sociallism (700 billion dollars. billion.) being rammed down your throaths without any debate or vote on your part.


Had the US not adopted the socialist practice of encouraging people with bad credit to take out mortgages they couldn't afford by guaranteeing government protection for their debt, we wouldn't have this mess to begin with.

The lesson here appears to be a little socialism now leads to more socialism later, not less.
 
2008-09-25 04:51:01 PM
libbynomore2: thomps [TotalFark] Quote 2008-09-25 04:07:53 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of

again:
1) obama's camp actually initiated the talk with mccain to put together a unified front on the bill


NOT TRUE!!!!'


Obama did what he instinctively does.....make an empty statement that has no teeth and no resolution.

He had no balls to take a stand and offer a solution. Empty platitudes and shallow comments that do absolutely nothing.

Bottom line, McCain recognized the seriousness of the situation and suspended his campaign on his own to go back to work and represent those in AZ who elected him.

Apparently Obama didn't appreciate his role as Senator from Illinois is to represent those who elected him and had to be told by the President to get his ass back to Washington to do his job. I guess with no experience and instinct, you need to be told by the grown ups what to do.

Even Bill Clinton said that a debate can be rescheduled but this issue needs to be dealt with right away. Even Bill Clinton knows that McCain isn't afraid to debate Obama and pointed out that it was McCain who wanted a series of town hall meetings that Obama chickened out of. Even Bill Clinton admitted that it was HIS party that in the 90's who refused to follow Republicans in trying to reign in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who everyone admits is the catalyst for the problems that we're dealing with right now.


Link? I'm curious now.
 
2008-09-25 04:51:40 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of


You're a funny guy, I live in Arizona and I can't think of anything he's done FOR us since his last Presidential attempt in 2000. He has a worse voting attendance record than the dude who had a stroke.
 
2008-09-25 04:51:43 PM
WaltzingMathilda: Atypical Person Reading Fark: 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.

You can't believe that the bill would contain this in the end.


Depends on how fast it goes. And while once, I would have answered your question, "Of course it won't really go through with that in it," the fact that the language is IN it and things are happening so fast...makes me wonder.

We'll have to wait and see. I'd like to think that there's someone up on the hill that will address this - and when brought to the attention of our good Senators and Representatives, they will throw that shiatt language in the trash muy pronto. The language in question is this:

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

I have indeed finally accepted the extreme shortness of the typical human attention span. I just hope my own Senators and representative are paying attention. I keep reminding them, too.

Wonder if anyone in Congress reads Fark? Even a lowly intern?
 
2008-09-25 04:51:51 PM
fighter_of_the_nightman: If I take out a $50k loan to buy a ford focus and I lose my job, should I expect someone to bail me out?

It just dawned on me what your fark handle is ... I no longer care about this discussion. I'm laughing out loud remembering where that came from. Fantastic.
 
2008-09-25 04:53:00 PM
Mouser: mungo: OK, so let's see if I understand this.

George Bush, a right wing republican, has proposed the spectacularly socialist solution of spending the better part of 1 trillion dollars of your money to fix a failure in the banking system caused by the capitalist notion of unregulated banking.

Perhaps if he'd had the balls to be just a little bit less right wing in the first place and pulled these bastards out of the pork trough long enough to slip a leash on them, you all wouldn't be paying for this out of your ass.

There is a lesson here, folks.

A little bit of middle gound socialism (i.e. regularion, interference, call it what you will) prevents an assload of sociallism (700 billion dollars. billion.) being rammed down your throaths without any debate or vote on your part.

Had the US not adopted the socialist practice of encouraging people with bad credit to take out mortgages they couldn't afford by guaranteeing government protection for their debt, we wouldn't have this mess to begin with.

The lesson here appears to be a little socialism now leads to more socialism later, not less.



Why can't you both be wrong? No, wait, you can...


/Yes you can!
 
2008-09-25 04:53:18 PM
At first I really was against this bailout but I am starting to think this isn't a 100% bad thing. The problem as many have said lies in the Mortgage Securities that no one wants. Which makes sense because why would you want to loan money to someone who is never going to pay you back? But with buying these loans the government gets the deeds to the land and structure that is on the land, if the loan defaults. Since the government doesn't have a life expectancy of 74ish years, they can hold on to the assets until they are profitable, and sell them.

//Am I wrong here
 
2008-09-25 04:53:28 PM
thomps [TotalFark] Quote 2008-09-25 04:37:49 PM
libbynomore2: NOT TRUE!!!!'


Obama did what he instinctively does.....make an empty statement that has no teeth and no resolution.

He had no balls to take a stand and offer a solution. Empty platitudes and shallow comments that do absolutely nothing.

Bottom line, McCain recognized the seriousness of the situation and suspended his campaign on his own to go back to work and represent those in AZ who elected him.

Apparently Obama didn't appreciate his role as Senator from Illinois is to represent those who elected him and had to be told by the President to get his ass back to Washington to do his job. I guess with no experience and instinct, you need to be told by the grown ups what to do.

Even Bill Clinton said that a debate can be rescheduled but this issue needs to be dealt with right away. Even Bill Clinton knows that McCain isn't afraid to debate Obama and pointed out that it was McCain who wanted a series of town hall meetings that Obama chickened out of. Even Bill Clinton admitted that it was HIS party that in the 90's who refused to follow Republicans in trying to reign in and regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who everyone admits is the catalyst for the problems that we're dealing with right now.

i'd like to respond, but i can't find anything in your post that is grounded in reality. so... you win?



Well let me help you find some " reality " Apparently Bill Clinton doesn't know as much as you do (new window)

early this morning btw. Where have you been today????

Oh, and watch the entire video, Clinton throws Obama AND the Democrats out of a car moving at 80 MPH.

It's priceless.
 
2008-09-25 04:54:53 PM
clambot: Another pretentious zero wrote:

"Wow, absolutely zero substance except you've asked for citations?"

So, I take it that you can't provide any substance to your assertions.

You asserted them, and I asked you to provide your documentation, and you expect ME to provide your own research FOR you?

That's the rules in your twisted world, isn't it? If I ask an honest question, you don't have to provide any response other than to ask me to do your research FOR you?

I guess you either don't know, or you're just spouting your party provided line, or that whatever citations you CAN provide disprove your arguments.

That's ok. That's to be expected from someone of your ilk who can't hold their own in an honest debate.

I look forward to the day when my "binders" will show up your phantom spoutings for what they are: mere smoke and mirrors geared to hide the crooks and liars who need to swing.

Have a great weekend!


I don't usually do this but... bwahahahaha. You do realize I provided you an easy place to check the numbers right? You're a sad person. I've lost plenty of arguments in my life, usually to someone who had information I didn't have. The way to respond is, "Oh! I didn't know that... that's interesting, I'll have to look into it in more detail." The way you responded is just, as I said, sad.
 
2008-09-25 04:55:26 PM
Your rage is misplaced. You should be raging at yourselves. Where were all of you 15 years ago, when this mess was created? Probably qualifying for mortgages that no one in his right mind would have given you before.
 
2008-09-25 04:56:51 PM
UnkleKrakker Quote 2008-09-25 04:51:40 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of

You're a funny guy, I live in Arizona and I can't think of anything he's done FOR us since his last Presidential attempt in 2000. He has a worse voting attendance record than the dude who had a stroke.



PROVE IT

or STFU
 
2008-09-25 04:57:00 PM
Question: If we were to simply let these companies find their own way through this mess what would the effect be on the value of the dollar?
 
2008-09-25 04:57:24 PM
LosinMySenses: If you live in the US and pay taxes, grab your ankles

There's a word for this, BOHIC


BOHICA dude, BOHICA.

AGAIN is the key word.
 
2008-09-25 04:57:28 PM
Atypical Person Reading Fark: WaltzingMathilda: Atypical Person Reading Fark: 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.

You can't believe that the bill would contain this in the end.

Depends on how fast it goes. And while once, I would have answered your question, "Of course it won't really go through with that in it," the fact that the language is IN it and things are happening so fast...makes me wonder.

We'll have to wait and see. I'd like to think that there's someone up on the hill that will address this - and when brought to the attention of our good Senators and Representatives, they will throw that shiatt language in the trash muy pronto. The language in question is this:

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

I have indeed finally accepted the extreme shortness of the typical human attention span. I just hope my own Senators and representative are paying attention. I keep reminding them, too.

Wonder if anyone in Congress reads Fark? Even a lowly intern?


this is an issue that has been pounded for a couple of days. the language was in the initial proposal, but it's out in the open and no one is into it. that's why even obama and mccain's 5 or seven points or whatever insist on oversight if it's going to pass. i'm almost willing to be my life savings that issue will be addressed.
 
2008-09-25 04:57:32 PM
The Sofa King: Your rage is misplaced. You should be raging at yourselves. Where were all of you 15 years ago, when this mess was created? Probably qualifying for mortgages that no one in his right mind would have given you before.

Or brokering them and walking away with a nice fat commission?
 
2008-09-25 04:57:43 PM
The Sofa King: Your rage is misplaced. You should be raging at yourselves. Where were all of you 15 years ago, when this mess was created? Probably qualifying for mortgages that no one in his right mind would have given you before.

I was in Somalia, checking out the skinny chicks and investment properties.
 
2008-09-25 04:58:00 PM
Degree Absolute: My letter to Messrs. Markey, Kerry and Kennedy:

In my eyes support for the $700 billion mortgage bailout is tantamount to stabbing your constituency in the back. The Bush Administration demands that you and your colleagues reach an agreement by Friday or face serious consequences. This, sir, is malarkey. It is incumbent upon you to take the time to review every contigency and all other bailout proposals. You owe this to the people who voted you into office.

Giving $700 billion to bail out the mortgage industry for over-exposing themselves to bad investments is rewriting the rules in the middle of the game. We live in a meritocracy, do we not? There are rewards for good decisions just as their are repercussions for horrible decisions. That is a fundamental tenet of the America experience and this proposed handout, this welfare for Wall Street, flies directly in its face.

I encourage you and your colleagues to explore every avenue and to leave no stone unturned when it comes to finding alternate solutions to this problem. Those who put you into office did it good faith and you should, in good faith, do everything in your power to protect the American people. You must do your damndest to make sure that a minority in the highest tax bracket do not benefit at the expense of the majority. I know that you will not let this happen on your watch.

Be seeing you,

Degree Absolute


I borrowed this. I made some additional comments (and spelling corrections).
 
2008-09-25 04:58:07 PM
I wish I was an multi(mill/bill)ionaire Investment Banker so I could get a government hand-out too!
 
2008-09-25 04:58:43 PM
libbynomore2: UnkleKrakker Quote 2008-09-25 04:51:40 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of

You're a funny guy, I live in Arizona and I can't think of anything he's done FOR us since his last Presidential attempt in 2000. He has a worse voting attendance record than the dude who had a stroke.


PROVE IT

or STFU


Make me tough guy.

You find one single thing he's done for Arizona.
 
2008-09-25 04:59:50 PM
Degree Absolute: The value of the dollar is going to drop precipitously because of this handout. Our elected officials don't seem to give a shiat though.

You are correct. Let me educate ALL of you on Fark about why this is: PART 1 - there are two kinds of democrats (a) the people of the USA that believe what they are told about the goals of the democratic party, which are actually noble in most cases (as are the republican) and (b) the leaders of the democratic party who use this marketing "pitch" to their voter blocks to create dependencies and programs that actually result in bigger gaps between them (the very wealthy liberals) and the people, which gives them greater leverage. My Libtard friends, who have yet to risk the blue pill: you are being used, your votes are being purchased, and the results from what your Democratic leaders speak for themselves. Part 2 - These "Republicans" are comfortable and cowardly, and since they are also insolated from the havic, they keep their mouths shut, unwilling to risk for the freedoms of all USA citizens.
So what really needs to happen is this: replace the likes of Pelosi (perhaps the biggest clown of all) AND liberal republicans, with those that will actually vote for the people's interests, and then GET MAD AS HELL and hound them constantly, saying, "You're out unless you work for ME, the people!" If you don't like this logic, than at least vote against whoever is in power today, no matter the party.
 
2008-09-25 05:00:07 PM
Degree Absolute: Question: If we were to simply let these companies find their own way through this mess what would the effect be on the value of the dollar?

ZOMG NO BAILOUT CAN'T YOU READ?????

/yeah, i know dude. no one wants to debate what would happen if this doesn't happen
 
2008-09-25 05:00:12 PM
Atypical Person Reading Fark:
Wonder if anyone in Congress reads Fark? Even a lowly intern?


I have this theory that everybody important reads Fark for the lolz, and nobody will ever admit to it (except Ebert), therefore resulting in Fark never being mentioned by anyone except retarded bloggers looking for free content.
 
2008-09-25 05:00:16 PM
libbynomore2: UnkleKrakker Quote 2008-09-25 04:51:40 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of

You're a funny guy, I live in Arizona and I can't think of anything he's done FOR us since his last Presidential attempt in 2000. He has a worse voting attendance record than the dude who had a stroke.


PROVE IT

or STFU


Pot. Kettle. Absence of Light.

Now, here's a question for everyone else. What would happen if, instead of Congress rescuing these financial entities, there was a hostile take-over attempt from, oh, I don't know, some nation with an actual economic surplus? Through its corporations, of course - but still, from some mostly foreign multi-national deal?

It seems possible, given rules of international finance. Would, say, China end up owning foreclosed homes in Nebraska and Bakersfield and...?
 
2008-09-25 05:02:27 PM
Atypical Person Reading Fark: libbynomore2: Would, say, China end up owning foreclosed homes in Nebraska and Bakersfield and...?

They are way to smart to get involved with that type of debt.

Say all you want about the Chinese, but they are savvy investors.
 
2008-09-25 05:02:49 PM
Ow My Balls: Long thread, but here's my take:

The powers-that-be running Wall Street investment firms not only knew about this bailout all along for years, but I also would easily believe they fixed it to happen years ago with our friends the Republicans and Democrats.

I used to think these companies were brazen and dumb for systematically making it possible to loan money to people who likely couldn't pay them back. Now I believe otherwise; they're just crooks.

You have risk and reward sides to an investment equation. If you're powerful enough, you can make the U.S. taxpayer cover that risk for you while you only reap the rewards. Looks like we'll be paying them either way, either as willing customers or in the form of welfare seized from our checks. No choice, and they get to keep living like monarchs.

This is an outrage and a travesty. I believe our descendants will be learning about this day in History lecture halls.

Is there anything an average Joe can actually do?


img81.imageshack.us
img81.imageshack.us
 
2008-09-25 05:03:02 PM
WaltzingMathilda: Atypical Person Reading Fark: WaltzingMathilda: Atypical Person Reading Fark: 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.

You can't believe that the bill would contain this in the end.

Depends on how fast it goes. And while once, I would have answered your question, "Of course it won't really go through with that in it," the fact that the language is IN it and things are happening so fast...makes me wonder.

We'll have to wait and see. I'd like to think that there's someone up on the hill that will address this - and when brought to the attention of our good Senators and Representatives, they will throw that shiatt language in the trash muy pronto. The language in question is this:

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

I have indeed finally accepted the extreme shortness of the typical human attention span. I just hope my own Senators and representative are paying attention. I keep reminding them, too.

Wonder if anyone in Congress reads Fark? Even a lowly intern?

this is an issue that has been pounded for a couple of days. the language was in the initial proposal, but it's out in the open and no one is into it. that's why even obama and mccain's 5 or seven points or whatever insist on oversight if it's going to pass. i'm almost willing to be my life savings that issue will be addressed.


Thank you - I feel reassured (seriously). That's a way better answer than what I'm reading on the web pages of my SEnators and representative - who have yet to give their constituents any sort of reassurance on this issue. Thanks for your faith in the system, I'll try to recover mine.

I think I AM betting my life savings here - since they are in the form of retirement plan, which itself owned by a financial entity - not one on the current list of failed institutions, but who knows?

It'll be just my luck to get to bail out AIG and all the others and then have my own financial institution go under once there's no more money. That would be just peachy.
 
2008-09-25 05:03:09 PM
www.canadiandesignresource.ca

Everyone's welcome, just leave your guns and watered-down beer at the border.

/the taxes are a little high, but you'll find the people very friendly
 
2008-09-25 05:03:56 PM
WaltzingMathilda: Degree Absolute: Question: If we were to simply let these companies find their own way through this mess what would the effect be on the value of the dollar?

ZOMG NO BAILOUT CAN'T YOU READ?????

/yeah, i know dude. no one wants to debate what would happen if this doesn't happen


This. Here's what would happen: a lot of people would lose their jobs, stocks would dive, investment firms would take a major hit and be bought by foreign banks/countries, and similar effects would be felt throughout the economic world. By you know what? We'd get over it.
 
2008-09-25 05:04:09 PM
If the bailout doesn't happen, the dollar would fall in value.

Hopefully, it would fall all the way to what it's actually "worth".
 
2008-09-25 05:04:11 PM
Tad Askew: There are lots of bailout possibilities floating around, and quite a few of them involve either monetary help for foreclosed homeowners, or the govt. taking the mortgages and becoming the landlord.

Of course, I don't know the specifics of the actual plan. Does anyone?

Really, the name-calling is just ridiculous. I assume you're a liberal?


I did no namecalling sir. 'Stupid' is an adjective, not a noun. There are lots of plans for helping people who face foreclosure - many of them have existed for decades. And there may be new ones. That doesn;t change that this 'bailout' has a hell of a lot more to do with the repackaged mortgage securities than it does with people who signed up for more house than they could buy.
 
2008-09-25 05:04:24 PM
The Sofa King: Your rage is misplaced. You should be raging at yourselves. Where were all of you 15 years ago, when this mess was created? Probably qualifying for mortgages that no one in his right mind would have given you before.


Technically 70 years ago, bossman...

"Fannie Mae was founded as a government agency in 1938 as part of Franklin Delano Roosevelt's New Deal to provide liquidity to the mortgage market. For the next 30 years, Fannie Mae held a virtual monopoly on the secondary mortgage market in the United States.

In 1968, to remove the activity of Fannie Mae from the annual balance sheet of the federal budget, it was converted into a private corporation. Fannie Mae ceased to be the guarantor of government-issued mortgages, and that responsibility was transferred to the new Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae)."
[Link] (Pop Tart)

Then we screwed the pooch again 30 years ago...

"From 1938 to 1968, the secondary mortgage market in the United States was monopolized by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae), which was a government agency during that period. In 1968, to help balance the federal budget, part of Fannie Mae was converted to a private corporation. To provide competition in the secondary mortgage market, and to end Fannie Mae's monopoly, Congress chartered Freddie Mac as a private corporation.

The Emergency Home Finance Act of 1970 created Freddie Mac. The goal was to create a secondary market for conventional mortgages, as indicated in the Fannie Mae charter. [3]

The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act ("FIRREA") of 1989 revised and standardized the regulatory mechanisms for both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Prior to that, Freddie Mac was owned by the Federal Home Loan Bank System and its member thrifts and governed by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board which was later reorganized into the Office of Thrift Supervision. FIRREA severed Freddie Mac's ties to the Federal Home Loan Bank System, created an 18-member board of directors to run Freddie Mac, and subjected it to HUD oversight."
[Link] (Mary Poppins)
 
2008-09-25 05:04:30 PM
img81.imageshack.us

You would be label a terrorist and transferred in secret to GITMO. You could spend you life there without charge.

/Don't forget the sunscreen
 
2008-09-25 05:05:20 PM
nmemkha: Atypical Person Reading Fark: libbynomore2: Would, say, China end up owning foreclosed homes in Nebraska and Bakersfield and...?

They are way to smart to get involved with that type of debt.

Say all you want about the Chinese, but they are savvy investors.


You're probably right. However, the lure of American real estate...well, at least in California...it's very real...we've got tracts and tracts of land owned and developed by the Japanese and the Koreans already, and they seem to just keep investing more and more in the market here.

Of course, since the highest bidder (ourselves) has already offered far more than the worth of the assets in this bail-out, it would make no sense for China to bid - I see your point.

/I fail at economics.
 
2008-09-25 05:05:27 PM
Laf, if $700b was enough to make our economy sound and keep me in work and I could live comfortably for the rest of my life without worry of economic catastrophy..

AND.. the people responsible end up in prison - that includes the lenders as well as those who commited fraud when they took out their mortgages as well as the CEOs who knowingly drove the economy into the toilet

THEN, I will happily give my $~~20k share, today, cash-in-hand, to fund this "bailout"

But, not a single one of those things is likely. $700b is not going to fix the economy, and the people who caused this problem are not going to have to face punishment. For shame.
 
2008-09-25 05:05:31 PM
To: Atypical Person Reading Fark [TotalFark]

RE: Would, say, China end up owning foreclosed homes in Nebraska and Bakersfield and...?

NewsFlash, Genius: They already do. That's who the mortgage-backed securities were sold to...international financiers, on the backs of phantom, unregulated paper fostered upon us by the crooks and liars who made a gazillion bucks off the deal, and left us holding the bag.

WAKE UP!
 
2008-09-25 05:05:48 PM
TraeHova: forfarkonly: TraeHova: forfarkonly: libbynomore2: Gwendolyn [TotalFark] Quote 2008-09-25 02:31:17 PM
Can we see the campaign contributions list?

CNN just said Dodd was given $100,000 for the companies in the bail out.

Obama was given well over 100K from the corrupt Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who stole money from tax payers and provided loans to people they KNEW didn't have the money to pay them back.

No wonder Obama was too afraid to go back to DC and do his job, and take a stand on this.

Any FBI investigation of Fannie, Freddie AIG and others should include the names of those politicians who took money, how much money they received and how they voted on their behalf.

RIGHT Obamaniacs?

http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00009638&cycle=2008

This link is for MORONs that still support the hypocrite, Obama. He won't say a word about this massive financial disaster, because the LIBTARDS that screwed US ALL have been backing Obama for YEARS!!!!!! Wake up you farking Libtards!!


Mortgage-backed security - History (Poppers)
"In 1938, a governmental agency named the National Mortgage Association of Washington was formed and soon was renamed Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA or Fannie Mae). It was chartered by the US government as a corporation which buys FHA and VA mortgages on the secondary market, pools them, and sells them as "mortgage-backed securities" to investors on the open market. FNMA was later privatized.

Additionally, in 1970 the Emergency Home Finance Act created a new secondary mortgage market participant, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC or Freddie Mac), which had as its stated objective providing secondary mortgage support for conventional mortgages originated by thrift institutions. The Act also allowed FNMA to buy conventional mortgages in addition to FHA & VA.

Freddie Mac was created to provide competition in the secondary market, where Fannie Mae had continued to have a monopoly."


Obama's fault?! The guy who got elected to Congress and hasn't done shiat since?


/If you are a Republican, I'm ashamed
//Please stop trying to help!
///kthxbye

No, doofus. This is not Obama's fault. You've missed the point entirely. The point is this: Obama has BIG supporters that just happen to be the clowns that created the financial melt-down, and guess what? He's keeping his mouth shut because his buddies sent him money - do you GET IT yet??? You have libtard tendencies.


*sigh* I forgot that history only goes back 4-8 years.

No, doofus. WE created the financial melt-down by inventing Fannie Mae and "mortagage-backed securities" in the first place, just so we could help the poor bastards who couldn't afford a house. Then we screwed the pooch by privatizing it, making it a defacto monopoly, letting them deal in real mortgages and - according to Bush last night - not making it clear enough to investors that there was no tie between the US government and Fannie Mae. Then we created a competitor, complete with the same mistakes, and spun that off too. Then we fueled the fire by being stupid enough to just ride the wave instead of paying attention to what the fark was going on around us. Do you GET IT yet???


/Obama is only the latest political hack to take money from whoever was handing it out
//And while I don't have "libtard tendencies," you obviously have the retard gene... like the folks who set us up for this failure over the last 70 years
///Please tell me you don't vote?!


"We" created this? No. Liberal Socialists created, preserved and covered for this start to finish. Only a true Libtard or liberal media hack could over look this, or hide it from our fellow readers, and then accuse another to divert attention from the problem: socialism. Socialism = FAIL. You are supporting FAIL in your reply. Nice try buddy, but you and FAIL are busted.
 
2008-09-25 05:06:02 PM
War_Kittens: This. Here's what would happen: a lot of people would lose their jobs, stocks would dive, investment firms would take a major hit and be bought by foreign banks/countries, and similar effects would be felt throughout the economic world. By you know what? We'd get over it.

plus, the important thing is we teach those fatcats on wall street a lesson!
 
2008-09-25 05:07:27 PM
MayoBoy: Jamespoon: studebaker hoch: If we have 700 billion dollars, we could give everyone on Earth 20 months of TotalFark!

Imagine that...no more liters!

/hopefully I didn't charlie whiskey the math on that one...

There is a reason why the economic barrier between Fark and TF exists.

Fool.Money.Parted.


You, sir, have just talked your way STRAIGHT OUT of a TF sponsorship!

::puts on monocle::

Hmph.
 
2008-09-25 05:07:59 PM
studebaker hoch: If the bailout doesn't happen, the dollar would fall in value.

Hopefully, it would fall all the way to what it's actually "worth".


So basically no matter what happens, handout or no handout, the dollar is falling?
 
2008-09-25 05:09:23 PM
Another Pretentious Fool wrote,

"I've lost plenty of arguments in my life..."

Chalk up another one.

You either can't or won't back up one assertion that you've made with fact.

You haven't provided one iota of evidence to your assertion that there is "profit" to be made by bailing out your Wall Street icons.

Have a great weekend!
 
2008-09-25 05:09:26 PM
not on the $700b, but AIG's bailout...

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 billon 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.



This even takes care of the AIG employees that lose their job.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your
family?

Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.


If you had insurance from AIG, now you have the money to replace
it with a more stable company.


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!
 
2008-09-25 05:09:30 PM
UnkleKrakker Quote 2008-09-25 04:58:43 PM
libbynomore2: UnkleKrakker Quote 2008-09-25 04:51:40 PM
libbynomore2: I love this. The economy is in crisis. McCain instinctively knows that as a US Senator, his job is to go back to DC and deal with it. Obama, who clearly has no instincts to actually represent the people who elected him, had to be ordered by the President to show up and do his job.

/Obama-Change we should be afraid of

You're a funny guy, I live in Arizona and I can't think of anything he's done FOR us since his last Presidential attempt in 2000. He has a worse voting attendance record than the dude who had a stroke.


PROVE IT

or STFU

Make me tough guy.



LMAO!

What are you, like 12 years old or what?

You made the claim, you provide the evidence...

or not

Sorry, still laughing.........don't you have some arithmetic to do before bedtime?

LOL!
 
2008-09-25 05:13:34 PM
Atypical Person Reading Fark: nmemkha: Atypical Person Reading Fark: libbynomore2: Would, say, China end up owning foreclosed homes in Nebraska and Bakersfield and...?

They are way to smart to get involved with that type of debt.

Say all you want about the Chinese, but they are savvy investors.

You're probably right. However, the lure of American real estate...well, at least in California...it's very real...we've got tracts and tracts of land owned and developed by the Japanese and the Koreans already, and they seem to just keep investing more and more in the market here.

Of course, since the highest bidder (ourselves) has already offered far more than the worth of the assets in this bail-out, it would make no sense for China to bid - I see your point.

/I fail at economics.


The simple reason is they didn't invest in the bubble they already get top dollar financing our current National Debt via Bonds.

They tend to invest for the long term and want use to keep our mad consumer rush the poor house. We buy their goods, they buy our debt. In the long run, who do you think is going to come out ahead?

One thing bad about our Democracy is that we are short-sighted. this mostly due to our short election cycle. As as rule we implement short-term solutions that cause long-term problems.
 
2008-09-25 05:13:38 PM
How about the Feds seize the assets of all executives and board members from these banks to cover the costs. Send some CEOs to jail and this will prevent future such problems. Look at the Enron fiasco. After all the damage they caused, how many high ups (read: not fall-guys) actually went to prison?
 
2008-09-25 05:14:37 PM
thomps: War_Kittens: This. Here's what would happen: a lot of people would lose their jobs, stocks would dive, investment firms would take a major hit and be bought by foreign banks/countries, and similar effects would be felt throughout the economic world. By you know what? We'd get over it.

plus, the important thing is we teach those fatcats on wall street a lesson!


what's that saying again? cut off your nose to spite your face? yeah, that's the ticket.

Atypical Person Reading Fark: Thank you - I feel reassured (seriously). That's a way better answer than what I'm reading on the web pages of my SEnators and representative - who have yet to give their constituents any sort of reassurance on this issue. Thanks for your faith in the system, I'll try to recover mine.

I think I AM betting my life savings here - since they are in the form of retirement plan, which itself owned by a financial entity - not one on the current list of failed institutions, but who knows?

It'll be just my luck to get to bail out AIG and all the others and then have my own financial institution go under once there's no more money. That would be just peachy.


I'm actually closing on my purchase of a house this month ... during all of this. The plus side is that I'm going to lock a low interest rate. The minus is that I'm scared shiatless. But fark it, the world keeps turning. We just have to keep our eyes open.
 
2008-09-25 05:17:06 PM
forfarkonly: "We" created this? No. Liberal Socialists created, preserved and covered for this start to finish. Only a true Libtard or liberal media hack could over look this, or hide it from our fellow readers, and then accuse another to divert attention from the problem: socialism. Socialism = FAIL. You are supporting FAIL in your reply. Nice try buddy, but you and FAIL are busted.


I guess I was being optimistic thinking you were an American first and a Republican second. I know I am, but... hey, what are you gonna do?

Can I get my Republican ticket punched again if I promise not to bring up the fact that "we" held control of Congress for 12 straight years before 2006, of which 6 were with a "friendly" President and "we" could have fixed this mess if we cared to? How about handling it during the 83rd Congress w/ Ike? How about a veto by Nixon in 1970 when "they" privatized a defacto monopoly and spun off another idiot brain-child of the same caliber to "compete"?

...wait! Shiat!


/Guess I'll have to settle for being an American
//Maybe I can round up some like-minded, disenchanted REAL Republicans and we can give both do-nothing parties the boot!
///Any takers?
 
2008-09-25 05:18:08 PM
thomps: War_Kittens: This. Here's what would happen: a lot of people would lose their jobs, stocks would dive, investment firms would take a major hit and be bought by foreign banks/countries, and similar effects would be felt throughout the economic world. By you know what? We'd get over it.

plus, the important thing is we teach those fatcats on wall street a lesson!


No, they'll still be wealthy no matter what we do, but at least we don't throw money into a failed system. People have become dependent on investment banks to secure their retirements, but the banks have no accountability because if they fall, we all hurt. So what's stopping those banks from pulling something like this again? No matter what provisions are put in the bill, it's the country who takes it in the butt for people who can't control their greed.

Bailout is not an answer, it's a temporary fix that will make things worse when this happens again in 20 years.
 
2008-09-25 05:20:27 PM
nmemkha: The simple reason is they didn't invest in the bubble they already get top dollar financing our current National Debt via Bonds.

They tend to invest for the long term and want use to keep our mad consumer rush the poor house. We buy their goods, they buy our debt. In the long run, who do you think is going to come out ahead?

One thing bad about our Democracy is that we are short-sighted. this mostly due to our short election cycle. As as rule we implement short-term solutions that cause long-term problems.


i thought that what caused this huge bubble in the first place is that US interest rates were kept too low to be worth investing in, so all of these foreign funds had to move up the risk chain and finally settled into mortgage backed securities. this huge increase in demand sparked huge pushes in the mortgage markets to generate more mortgages, including riskier ones. you can bet china is sitting on a boat load of MBS's, but they just aren't suffering for over-leveraging and can sit on them through the long term.
 
Displayed 50 of 1002 comments

First | « | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report