OT - Financial mess 101 ($700 billion bailout)

matthewk · Post by **matthewk** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:40 pm

kevinpars wrote:Shouldn't the person in charge be able to pull in some votes from his own party? Isn't he W - The President? Where's the love? Where's the trust? Why not look to our leader?? Why can't we trust him and his plan that may well be fair and balanced and could lead us out of this mess??

Come on, most of you guys voted for him not once but twice. Why not trust the plan he put before the American People?

Stand by your man - show some loyalty and some trust. If he can topple terrorism, then this little economy thing should be a piece of cake.

Sarcastic much?

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:41 pm

fsquid wrote:Pelosi is a fecking moron, let's get that out of the way.

I heard something on the radio about additional earmarks attached? That might explain the failure of the bill. PLus, I saw nothing reforming who we give credit to and the conditions they must meet. I think that also should go into this bailout bill. Not everyone deserves to get a house.

I'd be willing to bet that earmarks (ACORN?! C'mon...) were part of the deal breaker. As to the rest of your sentiment...right on.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:42 pm

kevinpars wrote:Shouldn't the person in charge be able to pull in some votes from his own party? Isn't he W - The President? Where's the love? Where's the trust? Why not look to our leader?? Why can't we trust him and his plan that may well be fair and balanced and could lead us out of this mess??

Come on, most of you guys voted for him not once but twice. Why not trust the plan he put before the American People?

Stand by your man - show some loyalty and some trust. If he can topple terrorism, then this little economy thing should be a piece of cake.

...and you thought we were all mindless robots...

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 7:48 pm

kevinpars wrote:Shouldn't the person in charge be able to pull in some votes from his own party? Isn't he W - The President? Where's the love? Where's the trust? Why not look to our leader?? Why can't we trust him and his plan that may well be fair and balanced and could lead us out of this mess??

Come on, most of you guys voted for him not once but twice. Why not trust the plan he put before the American People?

Stand by your man - show some loyalty and some trust. If he can topple terrorism, then this little economy thing should be a piece of cake.

Constructive post, dipshit. Thanks for contributing.

TED spreads are breaking records now.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/29/markets ... 2008092912

Post by **Jared** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:10 pm

Jared wrote: Like I said in the politics thread, it's hilariously predictable that you blame Republicans for not fixing FM/FM in the face of stiff Democratic opposition (which, you may remember, I agreed with), yet you blame Republicans for torpedoing the bailout bill when they put up much less resistance than the Dems did to more FM/FM oversight.

Wait...where did I blame Republicans for not fixing Freddie/Fannie? The claim was made earlier that McCain co-sponsored a bill to change Freddie/Fannie AND that it was voted down by Democrats; a claim that wasn't true. Obviously, changes to Fannie/Freddie would face Democratic opposition. But that wasn't why that McCain co-sponsored bill didn't get out of committee.

As for the bailout bill (and this also answers Rob), watching Chuck Todd right now, he said that Pelosi said she's get about 130-140 votes from Democrats, and that Boehner said he'd get 90 votes; enough to get passage. There were 140 Democratic votes, and only 65 Republican votes. Which makes it seem like the House Republicans turned on Boehner, or maybe Boehner didn't have the votes. Either way, it's not Pelosi's job to gather up votes from House Republicans. And it doesn't make sense that Boehner would let it go up for a vote w/o "having" the votes ahead of time...as it's major egg on his (and the White House's face) if they switch last minute.

I think blame can go all around for this one. But when you've got Republicans pulling out from the votes, a greater percentage of Republicans voting against the bill than Democrats, then yeah, I think you can say that Republicans torpedoed the bill.

Post by **Jared** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:13 pm

RobVarak wrote:
kevinpars wrote:Shouldn't the person in charge be able to pull in some votes from his own party? Isn't he W - The President? Where's the love? Where's the trust? Why not look to our leader?? Why can't we trust him and his plan that may well be fair and balanced and could lead us out of this mess??

Come on, most of you guys voted for him not once but twice. Why not trust the plan he put before the American People?

Stand by your man - show some loyalty and some trust. If he can topple terrorism, then this little economy thing should be a piece of cake.
Constructive post, dipshit. Thanks for contributing.

Calm it down now. People have been allowed to make sarcastic posts before, and will continue to be allowed to make them within reason.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:59 pm

Full roll call:

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:11 pm

One of the GOP members who voted against it had an extended interview on Hardball.

He referred to alternative solutions presented to the administration but the only thing he specifically mentioned was "mark to market."

I guess they are claiming that if they get rid of mark to market accounting from the FASB, it would free "trillions" into the lending pool.

The guy is Daryl Issa of Southern Calif.

Interesting, these guys found all the hidden value that Paulson, Bernanke and others couldn't find.

We should put them in the cabinet and the Fed!

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:44 pm

Quick thread timeout: "Breakdown" by Guns 'N Roses is one KICK-ASS tune.

Back to regularly scheduled thread discussion and eventual meltdown ...

Take care,
PK

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:34 pm

BTW, they're saying the equity markets lost $1.4 trillion today or twice the bailout sum.

They did make the point that a lot of people who contacted Congress to oppose this plan may not have equity market positions.

Of course, if they have bank accounts ...

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:36 pm

wco81 wrote:One of the GOP members who voted against it had an extended interview on Hardball.

He referred to alternative solutions presented to the administration but the only thing he specifically mentioned was "mark to market."

I guess they are claiming that if they get rid of mark to market accounting from the FASB, it would free "trillions" into the lending pool.

The guy is Daryl Issa of Southern Calif.

Interesting, these guys found all the hidden value that Paulson, Bernanke and others couldn't find.

We should put them in the cabinet and the Fed!

http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson09222008.html

But what threatens to be even worse is the government’s move to let the financial sector make even higher, unprecedented gains by working its way out of negative equity to “make taxpayers whole” by repaying the government’s bailout by bleeding the economy at large. nticipating congressional capitulation in this license to engage in predatory credit, the latest Sunday evening surprise is that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s own firm, Goldman Sachs, is to become bank holding company picking up the financial wreckage now that the government is covering the bad loans and investment gambles Wall Street has made.

What Mr. Paulson did not say in his weekend TV interviews, organized as what he hoped would be a series of victory laps. Neither he nor Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke nor any other Wall Street spokesman has acknowledged that the government has helped promote today’s $46 trillion debt bomb. This enormous overhead consists of the product that banks are selling – interest-bearing debt that is being added to real estate, corporate industry and personal income to price the U.S. economy out of world markets.

dougb · Post by **dougb** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:48 pm

JackDog wrote:
wco81 wrote:One of the GOP members who voted against it had an extended interview on Hardball.

He referred to alternative solutions presented to the administration but the only thing he specifically mentioned was "mark to market."

I guess they are claiming that if they get rid of mark to market accounting from the FASB, it would free "trillions" into the lending pool.

The guy is Daryl Issa of Southern Calif.

Interesting, these guys found all the hidden value that Paulson, Bernanke and others couldn't find.

We should put them in the cabinet and the Fed!
http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson09222008.html

But what threatens to be even worse is the government’s move to let the financial sector make even higher, unprecedented gains by working its way out of negative equity to “make taxpayers whole” by repaying the government’s bailout by bleeding the economy at large. nticipating congressional capitulation in this license to engage in predatory credit, the latest Sunday evening surprise is that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s own firm, Goldman Sachs, is to become bank holding company picking up the financial wreckage now that the government is covering the bad loans and investment gambles Wall Street has made.

What Mr. Paulson did not say in his weekend TV interviews, organized as what he hoped would be a series of victory laps. Neither he nor Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke nor any other Wall Street spokesman has acknowledged that the government has helped promote today’s $46 trillion debt bomb. This enormous overhead consists of the product that banks are selling – interest-bearing debt that is being added to real estate, corporate industry and personal income to price the U.S. economy out of world markets.

Interesting article Jack - I never would have guessed you for a Counterpunch visitor!

I've found some pretty good articles there but I've always thought of it as a pretty far left site. You might also want to have a look at http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/ for some excellent commentary and analysis of this financial fiasco.

Problem is I think things are getting completely out of control. The experts don't really have a good understanding of this monstrosity that's been created (mortgage backed securities, CDO's etc.) and the way that they are all interacting. In the 30's things were terrible but a large part of the problem was created because the Hoover Administration didn't want to take any interventionist action.

Can we get Sarah Palin give up her VP slot and switch to hunting financial executives instead of Moose?

Best wishes,

Doug

FatPitcher · Post by **FatPitcher** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:53 pm

dougb wrote:
JackDog wrote:
wco81 wrote:One of the GOP members who voted against it had an extended interview on Hardball.

He referred to alternative solutions presented to the administration but the only thing he specifically mentioned was "mark to market."

I guess they are claiming that if they get rid of mark to market accounting from the FASB, it would free "trillions" into the lending pool.

The guy is Daryl Issa of Southern Calif.

Interesting, these guys found all the hidden value that Paulson, Bernanke and others couldn't find.

We should put them in the cabinet and the Fed!
http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson09222008.html

But what threatens to be even worse is the government’s move to let the financial sector make even higher, unprecedented gains by working its way out of negative equity to “make taxpayers whole” by repaying the government’s bailout by bleeding the economy at large. nticipating congressional capitulation in this license to engage in predatory credit, the latest Sunday evening surprise is that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s own firm, Goldman Sachs, is to become bank holding company picking up the financial wreckage now that the government is covering the bad loans and investment gambles Wall Street has made.

What Mr. Paulson did not say in his weekend TV interviews, organized as what he hoped would be a series of victory laps. Neither he nor Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke nor any other Wall Street spokesman has acknowledged that the government has helped promote today’s $46 trillion debt bomb. This enormous overhead consists of the product that banks are selling – interest-bearing debt that is being added to real estate, corporate industry and personal income to price the U.S. economy out of world markets.
Interesting article Jack - I never would have guessed you for a Counterpunch visitor! I've found some pretty good articles there but I've always thought of it as a pretty far left site. You might also want to have a look at http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/ for some excellent commentary and analysis of this financial fiasco.

Problem is I think things are getting completely out of control. The experts don't really have a good understanding of this monstrosity that's been created (mortgage backed securities, CDO's etc.) and the way that they are all interacting. In the 30's things were terrible but a large part of the problem was created because the Hoover Administration didn't want to take any interventionist action.

Can we get Sarah Palin give up her VP slot and switch to hunting financial executives instead of Moose?

Best wishes,

Doug

If the best minds on Wall Street and the Fed got us into the current mess, why do we think that another person well-versed in economics would be the answer?

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 10:55 pm

dougb wrote: Interesting article Jack - I never would have guessed you for a Counterpunch visitor! I've found some pretty good articles there but I've always thought of it as a pretty far left site. You might also want to have a look at http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com/ for some excellent commentary and analysis of this financial fiasco.

Problem is I think things are getting completely out of control. The experts don't really have a good understanding of this monstrosity that's been created (mortgage backed securities, CDO's etc.) and the way that they are all interacting. In the 30's things were terrible but a large part of the problem was created because the Hoover Administration didn't want to take any interventionist action.

Can we get Sarah Palin give up her VP slot and switch to hunting financial executives instead of Moose?

Best wishes,

Doug

Hell yeah. I read em all.

Thanks for the link! The AIG cut was downright Mafia. Paulson should be ashamed.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Mon Sep 29, 2008 11:37 pm

RobVarak wrote: Moreover, as speaker, she's got enormous influence over her own party as well as the content and timing of the legislation, plus what looks like a significant coattail bonus in this year's Congressional elections.

Karl Rove reinforces this point in a radio interview with greater detail than I used. He also demonstrates freaky scary knowledge of the membership of the House of Representatives LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdGpxUEN4RU

You can dismiss it because it's Rove if you choose, but remember that you ignore the Evil One at your peril

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 12:48 am

This WSJ editorial is powerful:

Safe in their think-tanks, some of our friends have claimed that talk of a financial crash is merely a political invention. Perhaps we'll now test their theory. A financial panic isn't an academic seminar, and a flight from all risk isn't something any free-marketeer should want. A recession now seems certain, as falling commodity prices are telling us, but the point is to prevent systemic financial collapse. Maybe the Members who voted "no" figure at least they'd still have jobs.

What next? One option is that Democrats will tell Mr. Paulson that they can pass his plan with more liberal votes, but that their price has gone up. This would mean more of the tax, spend and regulate provisions that House GOP leaders stripped out before their rank-and-file headed for the exits. These would only raise the price for taxpayers of the Treasury rescue and, if the equity provisions were too onerous, make the Paulson plan far less workable.

If Mr. Paulson wants to be a statesman, he could offer a Plan B that avoids giving Treasury such a big blank check. Instead, he could propose more public capital for the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., which would do more of the creative financial plumbing it has done over the last week. (See here.) This will have to happen next year anyway, and the FDIC has long experience protecting taxpayers for public capital injections through preferred stock and warrants.

At the same time, the Secretary could salvage his own proposal by promising that while Treasury would start the purchase of toxic securities from banks, he would quickly (within weeks) turn the process over to a new and separate resolution agency. Congress could make this part of the legislation. This would remove Mr. Paulson as the political lightning rod he has become, and also give the rescue process the political insulation it needs. Such an agency could also work closely with the FDIC to protect taxpayers.

Members may not believe Hank Paulson, but they ought to pay attention to markets. The financial system has a huge capital hole due to losses on mortgage securities and other assets, and private capital won't begin to fill it without the life preserver of public capital. Before it leaves town to campaign, Congress needs to act to defend and restabilize the financial system. After the last two weeks, and especially after yesterday, the Members also need to act to redeem their own reputations, to the extent they are still worth redeeming.

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:08 am

A Democratic Congresswoman's rebuke of Pelosi, Frank and their gang of fools:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds

Pure populism, no doubt, as this chick is like Tom Harkin with a bra. But it's good TV!

Take care,
PK

F308GTB · Post by **F308GTB** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:14 am

I don't see how Washington in its heart of hearts thinks this is a real serious problem. Rosh Hashana started last night. We all heard how Congress would likely not start negotiating a/voting on new proposal until Wednesday night or Thursday because of the Jewish holy days. So how many of Jewish faith are in the House and Senate:

From http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/11295/
Senate - 13
House - 30

Granted our pal Barney is one of those 30, but negotiations may be more productive without him involved.

What I do know is that in my business (manned spaceflight), when the s*** hits the fan, everyone is willing and able to be on deck to solve a problem. Doesn't matter what holiday or time of day it is. When astronauts' lives are at stake those on the ground step up. Same can be said for our military, police, etc.

Why 90%+ of the House takes a vacation when they don't have to boggles the mind.

Bunch of lazy f@ck$.

F308GTB · Post by **F308GTB** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 8:33 am

F308GTB wrote:My prediction:

- Asian markets will open lower to reflect the madness of Monday
- European markets will continue to drop Monday and start lower Tuesday before moving up in their afternoon
- US markets will see a big jump as bargains are sought after

A lot of this is a mind game. There will be many bargains to be had after today. Yes, my retirement is taking a beating today, but ultimately my funds should pick up some stocks on the cheap...

Asia - check. Nikkei down about 4%, a few others down, Hong Kong actually up.

Europe - looks like pretty much all the Euro indexes plunged in the opening minutes and have recovered throughout the day with only a couple of them still down

US - CNN has a story on their site "Stocks Set for Rebound" - http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/30/markets ... tm?cnn=yes

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:13 am

F308GTB wrote:I don't see how Washington in its heart of hearts thinks this is a real serious problem. Rosh Hashana started last night. We all heard how Congress would likely not start negotiating a/voting on new proposal until Wednesday night or Thursday because of the Jewish holy days. So how many of Jewish faith are in the House and Senate:

From http://www.jewishexponent.com/article/11295/
Senate - 13
House - 30

Granted our pal Barney is one of those 30, but negotiations may be more productive without him involved.

What I do know is that in my business (manned spaceflight), when the s*** hits the fan, everyone is willing and able to be on deck to solve a problem. Doesn't matter what holiday or time of day it is. When astronauts' lives are at stake those on the ground step up. Same can be said for our military, police, etc.

Why 90%+ of the House takes a vacation when they don't have to boggles the mind.

Bunch of lazy f@ck$.

No doubt. I know a few Jewish Doctors that are working with me at the VA Hospital this week. Congress is a damn joke.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:14 am

Good article...
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122273257698488295.html

Jackdog · Post by **Jackdog** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:19 am

pk500 wrote:A Democratic Congresswoman's rebuke of Pelosi, Frank and their gang of fools:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S27yitK32ds

Pure populism, no doubt, as this chick is like Tom Harkin with a bra. But it's good TV!

Take care,
PK

First Buckeye I've agreed with in years.

RobVarak · Post by **RobVarak** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:49 am

F308,

I think most people agree that the stock market will rebound. The question is whether the Dow will be at 10000 or 8000. And that's a lot of wealth to evaporate without a shrug.

Feanor · Post by **Feanor** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 10:01 am

Whatever happened to Dow 36,000?

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Tue Sep 30, 2008 10:15 am

RobVarak wrote:F308,

I think most people agree that the stock market will rebound. The question is whether the Dow will be at 10000 or 8000. And that's a lot of wealth to evaporate without a shrug.

I think it will be low for awhile, but the market came back from the 7's after 9/11, so it'll be alright after this initial drop, I believe. May get worse for awhile, too, but it's better than this huge government intervention/socialism package they're trying to push.