I say "no way" to the bail out!

[Oscar54]

If the USA members of this site have not contacted their Congressmen or Sentors regarding the current crisis please do so now, it is critical that they hear from everyone.

I personally have contacted mine and told them "NO BAILOUT" for these bums who collectively paid themselves Billions of $'s and now have their hands out to us.

One way or the other the government is going to end up with these financial institutions and so it might as well get them for free after they go belly up.

If we are going to spend $700 billion lets spend it on us in the form of roads & bridges, schools, water & sewer plants, electric grid and other projects that will create jobs here.

 

[Doorag]

I'm with you (don't forget I'm American) and I'm also very worried about all the M/A activity at the moment. I think a lot of this stuff is happening behind the media led hysteria and the banks are laughing. They have probably been trying to get this done for years, but never could because the fed wouldn't allow it on competitive grounds. Now that there's a crisis, they seem to be able to do whatever they want. It scares me a bit. I think in 10 years we will find that a lot of it was a bit of scaremongering and some people became sickeningly wealthy out of all this. I will also predict they will all be close friends of Bush.

 

[FZ1inNH]

Will they bail me out if I start to flounder? NOPE! I say No as well. Let the chips fall....

 

[FzPilot]

"shhh" here's an idea: why don't we... start by NOT spending 720 million per day in Iraq? ...when you call your congressman, mention that..

 

[oldfast007]

As long I get a dividend check every month when they rebound, sure....

 

[necrotimus]

Question... assume your mortgage company goes under and can't sell the mortgage to someone else what happens to your home when you dont own all of it?

I don't know and I'm not sure that anyone has an answer... I'm not worried about a few companies going under I am worried about the entire economy going under.

 

[Sqrly]

No way! No how! Im gonna stop with that. I really get cranked up when I think our government is actually considering doing it!

 

[wrightme43]

From the year 2000.
The Trillion-Dollar Bank Shakedown That Bodes Ill for Cities by Howard Husock, City Journal Winter 2000
Discussing what is going to be happining OH SAY NOWISH!! LOL

Greenspan's Warning
The clear gravity of the situation pushed the legislation forward. Some might say the current mess couldn't be foreseen, yet in 2005 Alan Greenspan told Congress how urgent it was for it to act in the clearest possible terms: If Fannie and Freddie ``continue to grow, continue to have the low capital that they have, continue to engage in the dynamic hedging of their portfolios, which they need to do for interest rate risk aversion, they potentially create ever-growing potential systemic risk down the road,'' he said. ``We are placing the total financial system of the future at a substantial risk.''
What happened next was extraordinary. For the first time in history, a serious Fannie and Freddie reform bill was passed by the Senate Banking Committee. The bill gave a regulator power to crack down, and would have required the companies to eliminate their investments in risky assets.
Different World
If that bill had become law, then the world today would be different. In 2005, 2006 and 2007, a blizzard of terrible mortgage paper fluttered out of the Fannie and Freddie clouds, burying many of our oldest and most venerable institutions. Without their checkbooks keeping the market liquid and buying up excess supply, the market would likely have not existed.
But the bill didn't become law, for a simple reason: Democrats opposed it on a party-line vote in the committee, signaling that this would be a partisan issue. Republicans, tied in knots by the tight Democratic opposition, couldn't even get the Senate to vote on the matter.
That such a reckless political stand could have been taken by the Democrats was obscene even then. Wallison wrote at the time: ``It is a classic case of socializing the risk while privatizing the profit. The Democrats and the few Republicans who oppose portfolio limitations could not possibly do so if their constituents understood what they were doing.''

Bloomberg.com: News

IBDeditorials.com: Editorials, Political Cartoons, and Polls from Investor's Business Daily -- 'Crony' Capitalism Is Root Cause Of Fannie And Freddie Troubles

starting in 2001 the Bush Administrations warnings that this is coming.

Just the Facts: The Administration's Unheeded Warnings About the Systemic Risk Posed by the GSEs

I reccomend the guilotine. There I said it.
If you really really want to be mad at someone, look at who runs Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and Ginny Mae.
Look where there money goes.
Look where the people that sent the money places work now.

(Chris Dodd and Barack Obama and Barney Frank) Just in case you dont want to go look for yourself. Also examine where their wives and family members work.

I am not going to do it all for you. I promise if you do a little bit of research you will want to punch the next person that says Bush did it right in the teeth.

Liberilism is a mental disease.

 

[Oscar54]

Question... assume your mortgage company goes under and can't sell the mortgage to someone else what happens to your home when you dont own all of it?

I don't know and I'm not sure that anyone has an answer... I'm not worried about a few companies going under I am worried about the entire economy going under.

I know what you mean, but keep in mind these are only 4 or 5 companies, it is a big world out there! Let's not let them scare us into doing what they want.

Remember, these are the same people who told us everything was fine a few weeks ago! We believed them then, now their story is 180 degrees different?
So they either lied to us or didn't know what they were talking about then, why should we believe anything they say now?

I say:Flip:

Lewis

 

[BranNwebster]

It's just going to cost every family around 10k USD for this. I ready to do my part in keeping the CEO's of America comfortable and not have to give up their Malibu, Aspen home or their new Gulf Stream.

 

[Jman]

Not no.....but HELL NO!!!

 

[Oscar54]

Please Stop it Wrightme43!

The privatization of Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac was the doing of the Free Market Conservatives not the Liberals. And once they were privatized they began to act like typical preditory corporations.

Dodd and Frank pushed to eliminate "Red Lining" in lower income neighborhoods and to keep in tact regulations important to the "Community Reinvestment Act". Nothing they did held a gun to these guys heads at Goldman Sacks, Bear Sterns, Leighman Brothers or any of these other failing banks to make bad loans to unqualified barrowers and speculators. Or to create these BS sausage mortgage securities that apparently are so complex no-one has any idea how to value them so no-one wants to buy them, which dried up the market and made them affectively worthless. Thus precipitating these companies bankruptcies.

This situation is a direct result of the Gramm, Leach, Bliley (All Republicans) Act that repealed the Glass-Steagall act in 1999 that kept banking, security trading and insurance activities from being performed by one company. Glass-Steagall was put in place back in the 1930's after the last bunch of Conservative Free Marketers crashed the financial system.

I know that the talking heads on the Right always want to blame the poor and uneducated for out foxing the Ivy League Wall Streeters at the own game when their ponzy schemes colapse and try to hand us the bill, but the facts are that the "Free Marketers" have pretty much gotten everything they have wanted for the last 28 years and here we are!

 

[urbanj]

there was a story on our local news about canadians going down to vegas and buying houses. apparently its the foreclosure capital and one realtor they interviewed said 1/3 of his clients were canadians. and you could get a nice house for 60,000.

here in vancouver the houses are averaging over 600,000. a one bedroom condo where i live is anywhere from 200,000 to 350,000. booo

 

[oldtimer]

there was a story on our local news about canadians going down to vegas and buying houses. apparently its the foreclosure capital and one realtor they interviewed said 1/3 of his clients were canadians. and you could get a nice house for 60,000.

here in vancouver the houses are averaging over 600,000. a one bedroom condo where i live is anywhere from 200,000 to 350,000. booo

From what I understand, your canadian housing market is going boom very soon too.

I'm against the bailout- particularly CEOs/CFOs/etc who made off with a lot of salary for the past few years.

Unfortunately, all this falls back on dip**** Alan Greenspan. A big FU :Flip: Alan for your ****ty job in keeping the economy in check.

 

[necrotimus]

argh!!! i understand the gut reaction to say no bailout should occur... but what happens when 700 billion dollars effectively disappears from the economy and all those people lose their homes and since they have borrowed against their homes they lose their cars... and what happens when all those people become unemployeed.... it could be enough to spiral out of control

sure sure f the companies f the people who have been lining their pockets.... maybe even f the peopel who should have known better about buying a house they couldnt afford... BUT WHAT IF IT DOESNT STOP THERE...

There will be so many depressed homes on the market the only people who's houses will be worth what they paid will be the people who bought their homes in 1970.

Are you eager to try and finance a car when your home costs 200k and its worth 100k?

 

[inkrediboy]

Not no.....but HELL NO!!!

I'm with brother thread killa' on this.

All of this is a direct result of greed, stupidy, and then more greed. Those idiots that sold homes for 3 to 4 times what they are worth because some even bigger idiot would buy it is why we are here today... Now more greed follows with sick politicians with over inflated salaries sitting around talking about solutions with our paychecks not theirs. As if taking nearly half of my g-dam pacheck isn't considered slavery already and way in excess of what would be required if these pricks actually regulated the madness while in progress. America is the land of excess - want now pay later - and those that dug the whole this deep for the entire country (you freakin idiots), need to be thrown in that whole, and buried alive.

I did not contribute to this madness - nor do I want to contribute with my hard earned money to help losers who knew they could't afford these insane crazy mortgages.

All you realtors, brokers, lenders, and finanacial instituations who rode this out like a Paris Hilton ridem cowboy video - need to be hung from a cactus in front of Jstein95's pad and burned at the stake. In other words burn in hell!!!

Screw these crashing instituations, they are reaping what they deserve, and those who lost their homes, are those who could not afford to buy it in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!!! They are not my responsibility, and not yours either.

I'm stepping out - this topic makes me want to puke!!!!!!!!!!!! Damit!!

P.S.
I dont' know or have much faith in politics or idiots with big fat taxpayer paychecks - but emailing the terminator in california might end up with someone actually getting heard. You can submit in inquiry to Arnold through here:

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger - Interact

RA

 

[abner]

The real problem is that gov't has no business getting involved in private sector businesses. When they do it creates a false economy.

Somebody mentioned that the Canadian housing market is on the verge of calapsing... this is not the case, but it is slowing. The reason for this is because of the world economy and the fact that the gov't has implimented incentives over the last 20 years that made it possible to buy a house with no money down. It used to be that you needed 25% down. This has allowed those that couldn't afford a house, to do so. Now that they have run out of incentives, short of subsidizing a purchase, the market is in for a correction.

The only time the gov't should play god with the economy is when it is in a recession. They should only be investing in infrastructure to create jobs there by giving the economy a shot in the arm. Not bailing out private business.

BTW... why the bleeding heart for the people that shouldn't have been able to get a mortgage in the first place?

 

[tom5796]

If we are going to spend $700 billion lets spend it on us in the form of roads & bridges, schools, water & sewer plants, electric grid and other projects that will create jobs here.

How about we give it back to taxpayers and let them decide for themselves how to invest it?

 

[tom5796]

The real problem is that gov't has no business getting involved in private sector businesses. When they do it creates a false economy.

This is what Oscar doesn't realize (though I think we would violently agree to no bailout). We have not had a free market in our lifetimes. 2 government sponsored "private" entities (both set up by Democrats) do not a market make. Also, this is not just about saving the highly paid execs of the financial companies. It is about creating one of the largest social welfare programs ever conceived, AND giving the government even more control. You did read that the proposal calls for the first 20% of profits to go to the Housing Trust Fund, aka ACORN, right?


Btw, I have lost a TON in the stock market this year. Can I get a bailout?

 

[tom5796]

Potentially of interest...

Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Dear Friends,

Whenever a Great Bipartisan Consensus is announced, and a compliant media assures everyone that the wondrous actions of our wise leaders are being taken for our own good, you can know with absolute certainty that disaster is about to strike.

The events of the past week are no exception.

The bailout package that is about to be rammed down Congress' throat is not just economically foolish. It is downright sinister. It makes a mockery of our Constitution, which our leaders should never again bother pretending is still in effect. It promises the American people a never-ending nightmare of ever-greater debt liabilities they will have to shoulder. Two weeks ago, financial analyst Jim Rogers said the bailout of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made America more communist than China! "This is welfare for the rich," he said. "This is socialism for the rich. It's bailing out the financiers, the banks, the Wall Streeters."

That describes the current bailout package to a T. And we're being told it's unavoidable.

The claim that the market caused all this is so staggeringly foolish that only politicians and the media could pretend to believe it. But that has become the conventional wisdom, with the desired result that those responsible for the credit bubble and its predictable consequences - predictable, that is, to those who understand sound, Austrian economics - are being let off the hook. The Federal Reserve System is actually positioning itself as the savior, rather than the culprit, in this mess!

• The Treasury Secretary is authorized to purchase up to $700 billion in mortgage-related assets at any one time. That means $700 billion is only the very beginning of what will hit us.

• Financial institutions are "designated as financial agents of the Government." This is the New Deal to end all New Deals.

• Then there's this: "Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency." Translation: the Secretary can buy up whatever junk debt he wants to, burden the American people with it, and be subject to no one in the process.

There goes your country.

Even some so-called free-market economists are calling all this "sadly necessary." Sad, yes. Necessary? Don't make me laugh.

Our one-party system is complicit in yet another crime against the American people. The two major party candidates for president themselves initially indicated their strong support for bailouts of this kind - another example of the big choice we're supposedly presented with this November: yes or yes. Now, with a backlash brewing, they're not quite sure what their views are. A sad display, really.

Although the present bailout package is almost certainly not the end of the political atrocities we'll witness in connection with the crisis, time is short. Congress may vote as soon as tomorrow. With a Rasmussen poll finding support for the bailout at an anemic seven percent, some members of Congress are afraid to vote for it. Call them! Let them hear from you! Tell them you will never vote for anyone who supports this atrocity.

The issue boils down to this: do we care about freedom? Do we care about responsibility and accountability? Do we care that our government and media have been bought and paid for? Do we care that average Americans are about to be looted in order to subsidize the fattest of cats on Wall Street and in government? Do we care?

When the chips are down, will we stand up and fight, even if it means standing up against every stripe of fashionable opinion in politics and the media?

Times like these have a way of telling us what kind of a people we are, and what kind of country we shall be.

In liberty,

Ron Paul