Biggest Bailout Ever: Did the Government Go Too Far?

[AFA]

Biggest Bailout Ever: Did the Government Go Too Far?

So of course the stock market goes up when the US puts itself into greater debt?

So what are the costs? Almost certainly:

Higher taxes
Higher interest rates on government debt
Bigger government deficits

When the alternative is the entire financial system going bankrupt, we guess these costs are acceptable. But we're not convinced that that was the alternative. Also, numerous questions remain. The most pressing is "What price will the government buy the toxic waste for?" (This price will determine how much additional capital the banks have to raise to offset any losses.) Merrill Lynch shareholders are probably also wondering whether they can cancel the Bank of America deal. And Lehman would probably like to un-declare bankruptcy.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Here and I had heard their taking on all the bad loans and mortgages would be unconstitutional.As you say we can't just let the whole thing collapse so what choice do we have.The part that bothers me is we have a one sided socialist system apparently,when they get in trouble we need to pay the price to save them.But in good times they get to keep all their profits pay themselves unreal salaries etc.Its time for more socialism all the way round all the time since we all have such a stake in these institutions.Drop this deregulate nonsense,demand they have more sane salaries across the board and make them accountable to the people.You know you look at corporations in Japan,they seem to operate much differently.I bet the CEO of toyota makes less then the CEO of GM even now and they do well while GM is now talking along with the other big 3 companies they want some sort of govt help since they have loans out at very high rates and are no where near as profitable as a toyota.America better wake up ,these corporate no ethics lets get rich quick types will ruin us if not reeled in and controlled and monitored closely.

 

[BlueBalls]

There are only two scenarios, they bail them out or they dont and risk a major banking meltdown. They made the right choice but this is going to fix the problem.

 

[Facetious]

Wow ! With my typing skills, it's far too comprehensive, complex and multi faceted to go into right at the moment. I have a keen sense of what is going on.

First, there were 30 equally competing corporations and today, only three monopolies remain. Read between the lines on that one !

I also think that the "Fair housing" activists effectively collaborated with the Clinton Admin. (in 1999 IIRC ?), forcing unqualified borrowers into homes that they really had no right to occupy in the first place ! This action, by it's very design is pure unadulterated redistribution of wealth, albeit, after the shit hits the fan. The remedy is S O C I A L I S M ! Force the taxpayers to subsidize the resultant damages.
Mr Biden has recently equated Socialism with "Patriotism", did you catch that ?

I don't have a problem with those who are honestly having a difficult time finding profitable employ, particularly with all of this insourcing, outsourcing and the incursion of illegal immigrant labor undercutting REAL wages. I am less sympathetic to able bodied loosers who attempt to disrupt our way of life, milk the system, mooch off of our safety net welfare system, have the audacity to register for every social freebie available and generally, in all of their delusiveness, think that working Americans owe them.

 

[Friday on my mind]

Wow ! With my typing skills, it's far too comprehensive, complex and multi faceted to go into right at the moment. I have a keen sense of what is going on.

First there were 30 equally competing corporations and now only three monopolies remain. Read between the lines on that one !

I also think that the "Fair housing" activists effectively collaborated with the Clinton Admin. (in 1999 IIRC ?), forcing unqualified borrowers into homes that they really had no right to occupy in the first place ! This action, by it's very design is pure unadulterated redistribution of wealth, albeit, after the shit hits the fan. The remedy is S O C I A L I S M ! Force the taxpayers to subsidize the resultant damages.

I don't have a problem with those who are honestly having a difficult time finding profitable employ, particularly with all of this insourcing, outsourcing, the incursion of illegal immigrant labor, undercutting REAL wages.

I am less sympathetic to able bodied loosers who attempt to disrupt our way of life, milk the system, mooch off of our safety net welfare system, have the audacity to register for every social freeby available and generally, in all of their delusiveness, think that working Americans owe them.

So far the only things I see being bailed out are the corporations.The govt will take over their bad loans,no talk of forgiving the loans.Your house was foreclosed on its gone.I find if laughable to try to reach back 8 years to Clinton to assign any of the blame for this.If this falls on taxpayers I have just heard Bernie Sanders the independant senator from Vermont propose a surcharge on the top income groups to pay for it.Sounds fair to me they were the ones making all the money here and the ones being bailed out,no reason in the world the middle income and down should pay for this is there?

 

[girk1]

Wow ! With my typing skills, it's far too comprehensive, complex and multi faceted to go into right at the moment. I have a keen sense of what is going on.

First, there were 30 equally competing corporations and today, only three monopolies remain. Read between the lines on that one !

I also think that the "Fair housing" activists effectively collaborated with the Clinton Admin. (in 1999 IIRC ?), forcing unqualified borrowers into homes that they really had no right to occupy in the first place ! This action, by it's very design is pure unadulterated redistribution of wealth, albeit, after the shit hits the fan. The remedy is S O C I A L I S M ! Force the taxpayers to subsidize the resultant damages.
Mr Biden has recently equated Socialism with "Patriotism", did you catch that ?

I don't have a problem with those who are honestly having a difficult time finding profitable employ, particularly with all of this insourcing, outsourcing and the incursion of illegal immigrant labor undercutting REAL wages. I am less sympathetic to able bodied loosers who attempt to disrupt our way of life, milk the system, mooch off of our safety net welfare system, have the audacity to register for every social freebie available and generally, in all of their delusiveness, think that working Americans owe them.

I guess OBAMA was on to something when he spoke of those Bitter Americans" huh? You are falling for the Old Republican "OKIE DOKE" by being bitter over the insignificant amount(barely one ,1 percent of the Federal budget) that is spent on Family assistance programs.
(A total of about nine percent if you count Child tax credits/Earned income credit/various other programs)


While these conservative are ranting about the pittance Welfare to the poor they republicans are fighting hard for Corporate Welfare,Tax breaks,assistance in the fight against unions & deregulation (which most wealthy blame for this mess on Wall Street), & the NEO CONs intervention in silly wars which are dragging us into into debt because we cannot afford it.


The poor cannot simply be ignored (as Marie Antoinette & countless other rulers learned). BRAZIL tried to ignore them & is paying now with the most murderous (non war) nation in the world with Over 500,00 murders in the past twenty five years(51,000 in '03 alone),drug & gang wars that makes the US seem like child's play & kidnappings are commomn place. Here in the US it simmered over into the RIOTS of the 1960's until this country faced it head on. You are gonna have to face the poor in the PRESENT with solid social programs/education or you WILL pay for it in the furture with expanded prisons,crimefighting,security,etc...

SEE how you are distracted from the topic of this THREAD? Republicans are expert at getting your attention focus elsewhere while they work on other WAY MORE costly agenda's(IRAQ,Corporate welfare,etc...

Due to the Republican/Conservative fightig the government tooth & nail against Wall Street regulation, I guess we have little choice now?

Does anyone know the ramifications if we allow them to fail? DEpression:dunno:

 

[Legzman]

The question here is did the United States government go to far. I have a question of my own...when does the U.S. government NOT go to far? :dunno:

 

[Friday on my mind]

The question here is did the United States government go to far. I have a question of my own...when does the U.S. government NOT go to far? :dunno:

When they don't regulate such corporations and allow the corporate crooks to get our economy in dire straits they have not gone far enough.

 

[BlueBalls]

The government does not control Wall Street, Wall Street controls the government.

 

[Legzman]

Friday[/URL][/B] on my mind, post: 2514338, member: 44516"]When they don't regulate such corporations and allow the corporate crooks to get our economy in dire straits they have not gone far enough.

:1orglaugh good point :glugglug:

 

[ChefChiTown]

Well, since paying more taxes is now "patriotic", I guess we're all going to be the most patriotic mother fuckers to ever walk this earth. That's good, I guess. :dunno:

The question here is did the United States government go to far. I have a question of my own...when does the U.S. government NOT go to far? :dunno:

You is deep son...deeeeep.

 

[ham hock]

So far the only things I see being bailed out are the corporations.The govt will take over their bad loans,no talk of forgiving the loans.Your house was foreclosed on its gone.I find if laughable to try to reach back 8 years to Clinton to assign any of the blame for this.If this falls on taxpayers I have just heard Bernie Sanders the independant senator from Vermont propose a surcharge on the top income groups to pay for it.Sounds fair to me they were the ones making all the money here and the ones being bailed out,no reason in the world the middle income and down should pay for this is there?

yikes!!.. it was in fact clinton who put pressure on fannie and freddie- gov sponsored entities- to loosen qualifying terms allowing lower income and minorities to buy homes with mortgages that they had little chance of paying for. pretty much affirmative action. this opened the door to millions more loans and guess who benefitted from all this? the greedy bastards in charge at the top, both dems and republicans. both obama and mccain have members of their campaigns involved. it's simple to do a google search and see who benefitted most and they should face criminal charges.

do you have any knowledge of the commercial lending market? if you did, you would know that it never experienced any of these problems. why?...to qualify for a commercial loan you need to show full documentation: financial statements, 3 years of complete tax returns, good credit, and you need to come up with at least 25% down in cash. it was clinton's actions that led to lifting these requirements and on to the liar loans that people took advantage of and fucked our market: zero down, stated income, no asset varification etc, home loans. any dead beat could get a loan as long as he could stand straight long enough to sign.

to suggest "it's fair" that the responsible tax payers who pay their mortgages and are already responsible for 95%+ of our current tax burden pay a surcharge is just plain stupid and/or socialist, marxist. but it sounds like you are among the people who think 9/11 was an inside job and it was the fruition of bin laden's master plant that got our economic situation where it is today, not crap loans, so it's not so shocking i suppose :crash:

mccain saw the danger of the situation and where things were headed. he cosponsored and pushed hard for the fed housing enterprise regulatory reform act of 2005: http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/17/mccains-attempt-to-fix-fannie-mae-freddie-mac-in-2005/
.....and democrats blocked it.

in contrast, after his 2004 election as Illinois Senator Barack Obama clearly stated he was not qualified to run on a national ticket in 2008:

Reporter: Why have you ruled that out - running nationally?

Obama: I am a firm believer is knowing what you’re doing when you apply for a job. And, I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the senate. Now there are some people who are comfortable doing that. I’m not one of those people.

barry-come-lately picks joe biden cause he knows he's unqualified, now he's pointing all blame for the market melt down(along with other wackos like pelosi) at republicans and trying to call mccain out on this issue... it's laughable.

 

[nearlyinvisible]

The question here is did the United States government go to far. I have a question of my own...when does the U.S. government NOT go to far? :dunno:

it is spelled "too"

.......idiot!

 

[D-rock]

it is spelled "too"

.......idiot!

I hate to brake this to you, but coming into a thread and doing nothing but calling out somebody on an Internet messageboard about a minor grammar mistake that pretty much nobody but you cares about is pretty lame. So is thinking it correlates that well with intelligence at all. Then again I’m one of those people that believes the substance of a message is more important than it’s delivery.

 

[BlueBalls]

I hate to brake this to you, but coming into a thread and doing nothing but calling out somebody on an Internet messageboard about a minor grammar mistake that pretty much nobody but you cares about is pretty lame. So is thinking it correlates that well with intelligence at all. Then again I’m one of those people that believes the substance of a message is more important than it’s delivery.

hear hear :hatsoff:

 

[bodie54]

but it sounds like you are among the people who think 9/11 was an inside job and it was the fruition of bin laden's master plan that got our economic situation where it is today

So then what was Bin Laden's master plan?

 

[nearlyinvisible]

I hate to brake this to you, but coming into a thread and doing nothing but calling out somebody on an Internet messageboard about a minor grammar mistake that pretty much nobody but you cares about is pretty lame. So is thinking it correlates that well with intelligence at all. Then again I’m one of those people that believes the substance of a message is more important than it’s delivery.

We all make mistakes. For example, we all make spelling errors. However, making the same error twice (in the same comment) can only indicate the person is stupid, uneducated, or both.

I agree that grammar does not necessarily correlate with intelligence. However, if a person consistently makes a simple error that a third grader could point out, then I have difficulty perceiving the individual as being any more educated than a third grader.

 

[bodie54]

 

[BlueBalls]

We all make mistakes. For example, we all make spelling errors. However, making the same error twice (in the same comment) can only indicate the person is stupid, uneducated, or both.

I agree that grammar does not necessarily correlate with intelligence. However, if a person consistently makes a simple error that a third grader could point out, then I have difficulty perceiving the individual as being any more educated than a third grader.

Sweeping generalization me thinks.

 

[Legzman]

it is spelled "too"

.......idiot!

WOW! holy fuck, my bad man. Excuse my while I go kill myself...

fuckin dick!:thefinger

:rofl:

I love this place sometimes. We attract some of the most worthless losers on the planet!