700 Billion Wall St Bail Out

.OrgOwner · 09-30-2008, 3:58 AM

Should the tax payers bail out Wall street to the tune of 700 billion? The rescue plan seems to have crashed, like it or not this deal will probably impact on you in one way or another. To be honest I'm not sure what I think of it.

MCR001 · 09-30-2008, 6:40 AM

nope...I agree that they have created this problem by giving away finance to people that cannot afford to repay the loans + all the top brass are making a killing off this.

No body can tell me the managers and top brass has pulled any money out of their pockets to make sure their business dont fall.

The Banks are expecting easy money to cover their mistakes.

Surffrog · 10-01-2008, 3:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCR001

nope...I agree that they have created this problem by giving away finance to people that cannot afford to repay the loans + all the top brass are making a killing off this.

No body can tell me the managers and top brass has pulled any money out of their pockets to make sure their business dont fall.

The Banks are expecting easy money to cover their mistakes.

While that might be true, something does have to be done. There is no choice on that front.

As long as there are no golden parachutes for leaving CEO's, the money is distributed as an extended loan, which must be paid back, and that failing elements of these institutions are sold in order to facilitate some of the pay back, then okay. That is, if the market comes back.

However, I really don't like the whole nationalisation plan. The UK's just done it again (a normal practice for the labour government when they've been in power long enough to screw things up) and it just puts far too much pressure on the government and ends up costing three times as much.

The main point here is for the government to provide a loan pool just long enough for trust to build up again within the banking sector. When that happens the government begins to reduce the loan availability and begins to recall the loans slowly until the balance has been paid back.

MCR001 · 10-01-2008, 10:41 AM

I agree - no easymoney bailout, there has to be controlled plans.
Its one of the few things that seem to run fairly well here in SA. the monetry policy is very tight, you cannot just walk into the bank and get a loan, you have to show them you can even afford new underwear. Although our interest rate is one of the highest.
Yeah the whole thin in the Uk at the moment is much like ours - bit of inhouse unhappyness and backbiting....

steingar · 10-01-2008, 3:14 PM

Upward wealth transfer; that's all it is. A lame duck President trying to do one more good turn for his rich pals. I only hope Congress has the sense to turn it down.

Stick · 10-01-2008, 3:26 PM

For 700 billion dollars we could give each American 7500.00 to put into retirement funds. Instead of helping grow the market, the bail out will only allow it to stay stagnate. They are bailing out companies that made risky loans. Either way banks that have done a decent job stand to narrow the market and make HUGE money either way. Let the stragglers die off naturally, the market will adapt. And even new Companies might bid for market share in attempts to compete.

I oppose the bail out on ALL counts.

red_johnny · 10-01-2008, 3:34 PM

Ok, if we broke this and gave out cash to each tax payer it would only be less than 500 bucks so where did you get 75,000 from? Sure would be nice though

I say sell off everything from the companys involved and let the smaller buisiness pick up stuff where they could benefit.

BTW, sorry, saw this one and could....not.....stay....away

steingar · 10-01-2008, 4:50 PM

Its actually a couple thousand if you use the total population. Goes up if you just include the taxpayers. And it's still a horrid idea.

red_johnny · 10-01-2008, 5:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steingar

Its actually a couple thousand if you use the total population. Goes up if you just include the taxpayers. And it's still a horrid idea.

Got ya, I was thinking it was 70 Billion and not 700 Billion...just a slight differance

.OrgOwner · 10-02-2008, 12:37 AM

Well it's no longer a "free market" if you allow this type of manipulation to proceed. And that 700 billion does not directly help the people who are still going to lose their homes due to foreclosure which is the very thing that set this in motion in the first instance. It's a tough call either way you look at it.

dicknose · 10-02-2008, 3:26 AM

But the people being foreclosed on arent the victims, technically they are part of the problem!

Lending money to people who cant pay it back, do enough of it that you affect the value of the assets backing the loans and even if you foreclose you lose money.

Surffrog · 10-02-2008, 5:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steingar

Upward wealth transfer; that's all it is. A lame duck President trying to do one more good turn for his rich pals. I only hope Congress has the sense to turn it down.

I know you guys don't believe the politicians (neither do we in the UK and Europe), but have no doubt, if the loan freeze isn't lifted we are all f**ked. The UK and Europe as well. You guys will feel it first and when the jobs start disappearing in their thousands you'll all start screaming for a bail - out package. But it will be too late.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stick

For 700 billion dollars we could give each American 7500.00 to put into retirement funds. Instead of helping grow the market, the bail out will only allow it to stay stagnate. They are bailing out companies that made risky loans. Either way banks that have done a decent job stand to narrow the market and make HUGE money either way. Let the stragglers die off naturally, the market will adapt. And even new Companies might bid for market share in attempts to compete.

I oppose the bail out on ALL counts.

When you've lost your job and can't get a new one because everybody else would be losing their, that $7,500 is going to feel like a band aid on an amputated limb. We are all to blame in part. We live in a borrowing culture when we should have all been building up savings reserves. Can any of you honestly say you don't have a debt? We should all stop throwing stones in glass houses. Btw, this will even kill the banks that have been doing the right thing because they can't borrow either!

Quote:

Originally Posted by red_johnny

Ok, if we broke this and gave out cash to each tax payer it would only be less than 500 bucks so where did you get 75,000 from? Sure would be nice though

I say sell off everything from the companys involved and let the smaller buisiness pick up stuff where they could benefit.

BTW, sorry, saw this one and could....not.....stay....away

And I thought you couldn't stand the politics section?

Quote:

Originally Posted by .OrgOwner

Well it's no longer a "free market" if you allow this type of manipulation to proceed. And that 700 billion does not directly help the people who are still going to lose their homes due to foreclosure which is the very thing that set this in motion in the first instance. It's a tough call either way you look at it.

It will be a free market but it will be one that's being propped up by government. And although you don't think the money will be going directly to the people, I would urge you to reconsider. What money do you think will be paying the salaries in the coming months?

red_johnny · 10-02-2008, 9:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Surffrog

And I thought you couldn't stand the politics section?

Yeah, you missed me didnt ya

MCR001 · 10-02-2008, 12:44 PM

I believe that its the wrong thing to help out the banks, the small man is going to suffer - because at the end of the day someone is going to have to payback and its going to be full circle.....the poor ass in the street is going to have his money taken away from him again....to give to the bankers.

steingar · 10-02-2008, 4:03 PM

We no longer manufacture, and we stopped developing new technology because we stopped funding science. The last boom was in housing, so now there is a surplus of that. Add on the imminent retirement of the baby boomers and you have a big economic disaster looming. $700bn dumped into the markets might delay it, but the Piper will get his due...

Surffrog · 10-03-2008, 4:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steingar

We no longer manufacture, and we stopped developing new technology because we stopped funding science. The last boom was in housing, so now there is a surplus of that. Add on the imminent retirement of the baby boomers and you have a big economic disaster looming. $700bn dumped into the markets might delay it, but the Piper will get his due...

Absolutely, but as long as he takes his due slowly and with staged payments it will make it a lot easier for us all to deal with.

Whichever way you look at this, the one thing we are all going to have to learn is that you cannot (with the best will in the world) leave either a capitalist or socialist financial infrastructure to regulate itself or borrow beyond its funding limit. It will slow lending down in the beginning as the institutions take time to get their heads around the quota/ recycling period, but it will level out and provide a great stable environment where everybody knows where they stand - if you can afford it, you can borrow it. If you can't then you can't have it.

.OrgOwner · 10-04-2008, 7:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steingar

We no longer manufacture, and we stopped developing new technology because we stopped funding science. The last boom was in housing, so now there is a surplus of that. Add on the imminent retirement of the baby boomers and you have a big economic disaster looming. $700bn dumped into the markets might delay it, but the Piper will get his due...

Plenty of people are singing that tune now.

ghbzorro · 10-04-2008, 10:07 AM

Isn't it 850 billion now?

Surffrog · 10-06-2008, 3:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghbzorro

Isn't it 850 billion now?

Yep, the pig was looking a bit thin so they added some...

.OrgOwner · 10-09-2008, 1:11 AM

And now the UK is setting up their own bail out for the banks. We are in trouble folks, the system is falling apart around us and those greedy bstrds at the top have let this happen.

Surffrog · 10-09-2008, 2:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .OrgOwner

And now the UK is setting up their own bail out for the banks. We are in trouble folks, the system is falling apart around us and those greedy bstrds at the top have let this happen.

And amazingly the bail out figure is the same as for the US

You know, we (as members of the general public) must accept a measure of the blame as well, though. If you've ever got a mortgage you knew you couldn't afford to pay or have financed a Mercedes (for example) that you knew you salary couldn't hope to meet the payments on, you're responsible too.

It annoys me when I hear some people turning around saying that these companies are at fault and are the ones who put us in this crisis when its clear that it takes two to tango. Without members of the general public borrowing until their blue in the face and taking on mortgages and finance packages they know they can't afford, there wouldn't be a crisis. So, lets all remember that these bail out packages are not just helping these companies out of their problems, but rather are desperate measures to try an halt the damage caused by both parties (of these transactions. I don't mean government).

.OrgOwner · 10-09-2008, 2:44 AM

While I take your point about personal responsibility I can't feel that these companies have and continue to force credit down people's throats. When you introduce competition into the market you also create a situation where these companies have to continue to write business to stay in business. If we don't have laws in place to keep them in order then people will find a way to bury themselves. It's no different to any other set of rules we have in society IMO. Credit is just a nasty drug.

Surffrog · 10-09-2008, 3:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by .OrgOwner

While I take your point about personal responsibility I can't feel that these companies have and continue to force credit down people's throats. When you introduce competition into the market you also create a situation where these companies have to continue to write business to stay in business. If we don't have laws in place to keep them in order then people will find a way to bury themselves. It's no different to any other set of rules we have in society IMO. Credit is just a nasty drug.

Absolutely. Please don't feel that I was implying the companies don't have a massive responsibility for their actions. They most certainly do. However, if we don't consider carefully the new rules necessary to deal with this, we will end up with a nanny state telling us, "Oh, you can't do this or that because you can't be trusted to do what's right. We know what's best for you, we'll do your thinking for you, we'll plan your future for you, we'll..."

MCR001 · 10-09-2008, 3:19 AM

Its seems as though this idea has "Failed".

Surffrog · 10-09-2008, 3:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MCR001

Its seems as though this idea has "Failed".

How did you work that out? We won't know the affects for several months and even then you'll have to compare the results to what is believed might have happened if it hadn't been done.

I think your comment is a little premature, MCR001.