I think that’s really the problem - the mass neurosis that both demands a government mommy and causes people to project their anger onto “capitalism” or “Republicans” or “conservatives” or “GWB”. Irish’ writing oozes this (anger, projection, fear of the future, blameshifting, etc), he represents at least half the population, and he represents the reason we have the elected officials we have. Think about it. How does a narcissist like Obama even get appointed to the Democratic ticket? How did a (breathtaking) narcissist like Kerry get appointed last election? The entire East and West coasts are full of people like Irish with the exact same psychology. There is no point in having rational discussion, because at the end of the day, their views represent a psychological aid to get them through life as they’ve defined it in their heads.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I think we need whatever crash may come with doing absolutely nothing and letting the chips fall where they may. If I wind up homeless and starving at least the country would be saved from itself… for now again.
[/quote]
Interesting point Tribulus.
It’s funny that the mentality of unselfishness socialist programs has put us in such great debt that the “unselfish” ones are now asking for this package to save their own livelihoods.
The “greedy” free market capitalists are the ones calling for this to fail as well as all the weak banks and purging this bad debt along with a good chunk of inflationary liquidity to disappear. In the relative short term (6 Months? 10 years?) we will be “hurting”.
Even the most staunch conservative economist knows this will hurt them in their wallets big time but they want the right thing to be done. With prices eventually falling back to a point where commodities and assets can be purchased with a stronger dollar they know that the country would be in a much better position in the long term.
Now let me ask… Who’s the selfish and who’s the unselfish?
THIS DOWNTURN WILL CREATE OPPORTUNITY NOT DESTROY IT!
[quote]AssOnGrass wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
I think we need whatever crash may come with doing absolutely nothing and letting the chips fall where they may. If I wind up homeless and starving at least the country would be saved from itself… for now again.
Interesting point Tribulus.
It’s funny that the mentality of unselfishness socialist programs has put us in such great debt that the “unselfish” ones are now asking for this package to save their own livelihoods.
The “greedy” free market capitalists are the ones calling for this to fail as well as all the weak banks and purging this bad debt along with a good chunk of inflationary liquidity to disappear. In the relative short term (6 Months? 10 years?) we will be “hurting”.
Even the most staunch conservative economist knows this will hurt them in their wallets big time but they want the right thing to be done. With prices eventually falling back to a point where commodities and assets can be purchased with a stronger dollar they know that the country would be in a much better position in the long term.
Now let me ask… Who’s the selfish and who’s the unselfish?
THIS DOWNTURN WILL CREATE OPPORTUNITY NOT DESTROY IT![/quote]
This thing reminds me of one of my customers who would rather pay me over and over to surgically revive their sick and dying computer than pay me once to just reload the damn thing and give it a long term solution.
They don’t want to have to reinstall their programs and go through the pain of getting used to a new operating system install so what would’ve been 100 bucks and a weeks worth of toil is now 500 bucks and a years worth of running it back and forth to me. All this despite the fact that I’ve told them over and over that the reload is inevitably coming one way or the other.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I take full responsibility for not preparing myself for life when I was younger and winding up poor, at least by this country’s standards, but I am sick and $#^*@# tired of paying because these faggotty communist voters keep deciding for me that the United States would be better as some marxist nanny state wonderland.
It’s one thing if I shoot MYSELF in the foot, it’s something else altogether if somebody else does it.
http://bigpicture.typepad.com/comments/2008/10/misunderstandin.html
“It’s telling that, amid all the recent recriminations, even lenders have not fingered CRA. That’s because CRA didn’t bring about the reckless lending at the heart of the crisis. Just as sub-prime lending was exploding, CRA was losing force and relevance. And the worst offenders, the independent mortgage companies, were never subject to CRA – or any federal regulator. Law didn’t make them lend. The profit motive did.”
-Robert Gordon, American Prospect
"Let’s clarify the causes of current circumstances. Ask yourself the following questions about the impact of the Community Reinvestment Act and/or the role of Fannie & Freddie:
�?� Did the 1977 legislation, or any other legislation since, require banks to not verify income or payment history of mortgage applicants?
�?� 50% of subprime loans were made by mortgage service companies not subject comprehensive federal supervision; another 30% were made by banks or thrifts which are not subject to routine supervision or examinations. How was this caused by either CRA or GSEs ?
�?� What about “No Money Down” Mortgages (0% down payments) ? Were they required by the CRA? Fannie? Freddie?
�?� Explain the shift in Loan to value from 80% to 120%: What was it in the Act that changed this traditional lending requirement?
�?� Did any Federal legislation require real estate agents and mortgage writers to use the same corrupt appraisers again and again? How did they manage to always come in at exactly the purchase price, no matter what?
�?� Did the CRA require banks to develop automated underwriting (AU) systems that emphasized speed rather than accuracy in order to process the greatest number of mortgage apps as quickly as possible?
�?� How exactly did legislation force Moody’s, S&Ps and Fitch to rate junk paper as Triple AAA?
�?� What about piggy back loans? Were banks required by Congress to lend the first mortgage and do a HELOC for the down payment – at the same time?
�?� Internal bank memos showed employees how to cheat the system to get poor mortgages prospects approved that shouldn’t have been: Titled How to Get an “Iffy” loan approved at JPM Chase. (Was circulating that memo also a FNM/FRE/CRA requirement?)
�?� The four biggest problem areas for housing (by price decreases) are: Phoenix, Arizona; Las Vegas, Nevada; Miami, Florida, and San Diego, California. Explain exactly how these affluent, non-minority regions were impacted by the Community Reinvesment Act ?
�?� Did the GSEs require banks to not check credit scores? Assets? Income?
�?� What was it about the CRA or GSEs that mandated fund managers load up on an investment product that was hard to value, thinly traded, and poorly understood
�?� What was it in the Act that forced banks to make “interest only” loans? Were “Neg Am loans” also part of the legislative requirements also?
�?� Consider this February 2003 speech by Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozlilo at the American Bankers National Real Estate Conference. He advocated zero down payment mortgages – was that a CRA requirement too, or just a grab for more market share, and bad banking?
The answer to all of the above questions is no, none, and nothing at all."
“If you were to ask me to reveal the prime causative factor for the Housing boom, I would point you to Fed Chairman Greenspan taking rates to 1%, and then leaving them there for a year. The prime factor in the bust was nonfeasance on the Fed’s part in supervising bank lending, allowing banks to give money to people who couldn’t possibly pay it back.”
“The root legislative cause of the credit crisis was excessive deregulation. From exempting derivatives from regulation (2000 Commodities Futures Modernization Act) to failing to adequately oversee ratings agencies that slapped a triple AAA on junk paper, the pendulum swung too far away from reasonable oversight. By taking the refs off of the field and erroneously expecting market participants could self-regulate, the powers that be in DC gave the players on Wall Street enough rope to hang themselves with – which they promptly did.”
But he voted for it.
I love how all the libs on campus here are screaming out against this bail out, and when I tell them the GOP in the House was the one against it, 90% refuse to believe me.
It is both incredibly sad and fucking hilarious.
/b theory:
TEH FEDERAL GUBMENT IZ AN EVIL GLUTTONOUS BEHEMOTH LIEK IT HAS NEVR BEEN IN AMERICAN HISTORY, AN I PLACE MOST OV TEH BLAME 4 DIS SUFFOCATIN CLUTCH OV TENTACLD ANTI-LIBERTY AT TEH EGSAKT MOMENT WOMEN WUZ GIVEN TEH RITE 2 VOTE.
It’s /b/ you putz.
(O_o)/
[quote]bdog527 wrote:
Law didn’t make them lend. The profit motive did."
-Robert Gordon, American Prospect
[/quote]
What a fucking idiot. The American Prospect is bullshit magazine. The only defensible reason to quote from it is for giggles. The fact is, the laws skewed market incentives - risk was muted by the government implicitly (and now explicitly) backing these loans. Any idiot could have predicted what has now come to pass.
I just heard a Dem talking about why he wouldn’t be supporting the bill. He claims much of the bailout money will go to foreign investors. They wanted a provision stating ony assets owned by domestic inversters on Sept. 20 would be eligible. They are also worried about domestic investors buying up bad dept owned by foreign investors and selling to the fed.
700B to domestic investors is bad enough. Hunderds of Billions to foreign investors is crazy. Paulson is going to have sole decression on where this money goes and then he is out in January. Not good.
I haven’t done any research on this but it seems to pass the logic test.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aaSzxcXToC3Q
Oct. 3 (Bloomberg) – California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger told the U.S. Treasury that his and other states may need emergency federal loans if turmoil in the credit markets continues to impede their access to financing.
``This credit crisis has the power to grind the U.S. economy to a halt,‘’ Schwarzenegger wrote in a letter e-mailed to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson last night, Treasury spokeswoman Jennifer Zuccarelli said in Washington today.
``Absent a clear resolution to this financial crisis that restores confidence and liquidity to the credit markets, California and other states may be unable to obtain the necessary level of financing to maintain government operations and may be forced to turn to the federal Treasury for short-term financing,‘’ Schwarzenegger wrote.
[quote]bdog527 wrote:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aaSzxcXToC3Q
Oct. 3 (Bloomberg) – California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger told the U.S. Treasury that his and other states may need emergency federal loans if turmoil in the credit markets continues to impede their access to financing.
``This credit crisis has the power to grind the U.S. economy to a halt,‘’ Schwarzenegger wrote in a letter e-mailed to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson last night, Treasury spokeswoman Jennifer Zuccarelli said in Washington today.
``Absent a clear resolution to this financial crisis that restores confidence and liquidity to the credit markets, California and other states may be unable to obtain the necessary level of financing to maintain government operations and may be forced to turn to the federal Treasury for short-term financing,‘’ Schwarzenegger wrote.[/quote]
Gov’ts needing financing to function is scary. Not having the credit rating to get financing, even now, is even scarier. How about he balance his budget?
WE’RE SAVED!!!
Our most excellent and beneficent overlords have saved us. What would do without them?
Fuck this bail out, all these wall street crooks need to be investigated and indicted. Yay to my tax money bailing out billionaires and crooks.
[quote]snipeout wrote:
Fuck this bail out, all these wall street crooks need to be investigated and indicted. Yay to my tax money bailing out billionaires and crooks.[/quote]
Welp, it’s passed now, hot off the presses.
Why I agree with your sentiment, if these companies go belly up like many likely would, we’d end up footing the bill and be in an even deeper recession.
I don’t want to bail out shit either, but it really may be a case of do it or be damned. That is why I have been on the fence about it. I don’t want to help freeloaders who got loans they couldn’t afford and asshole upper management types who don’t know how to handle money, but I don’t want to get fucked while they are getting fucked. I pay my bills on time, I’d like to keep it that way.
[quote]Christine wrote:
Anyway, I’m sure some form of the bill will be passed by the end of the week.[/quote]
From the second page…
Don’t you guys hate it when the chick is right?
[quote]Christine wrote:
Christine wrote:
Anyway, I’m sure some form of the bill will be passed by the end of the week.
From the second page…
Don’t you guys hate it when the chick is right?
[/quote]
In this case…yes. I’m fucking pissed.
[quote]dhickey wrote:
Christine wrote:
Christine wrote:
Anyway, I’m sure some form of the bill will be passed by the end of the week.
From the second page…
Don’t you guys hate it when the chick is right?
In this case…yes. I’m fucking pissed.[/quote]
It’s passing was never really in doubt.
We are off the slide and now on a free fall to socialism. Once the disastrous consequences of this fall on us out will come the politicians again to scare us into further surrender and so on until we wake up in a fascist state altogether.
We were warned by the founding fathers and clear thinking statesmen every step of the way this is where we would go once the path was started. We should just burn the constitution and be done with it already. This just is not that country any more.
Even if that atrocious anti American enemy Obama loses it’s only delaying the inevitable. This country will not survive in the state of freedom it was founded in.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
dhickey wrote:
Christine wrote:
Christine wrote:
Anyway, I’m sure some form of the bill will be passed by the end of the week.
From the second page…
Don’t you guys hate it when the chick is right?
In this case…yes. I’m fucking pissed.
It’s passing was never really in doubt.
We are off the slide and now on a free fall to socialism. Once the disastrous consequences of this fall on us out will come the politicians again to scare us into further surrender and so on until we wake up in a fascist state altogether.
We were warned by the founding fathers and clear thinking statesmen every step of the way this is where we would go once the path was started. We should just burn the constitution and be done with it already. This just is not that country any more.
Even if that atrocious anti American enemy Obama loses it’s only delaying the inevitable. This country will not survive in the state of freedom it was founded in.
[/quote]
I had decided to vote against Obama after refusing to support McCain, but I don’t know anymore. Probably won’t know till the day of the election, and maybe I won’t care enough to show up.
To me, this morning was a test of the Republican belief in free markets, and the ideal of getting government out of the welfare and financial engineering business.
The government is going to continue to meddle around in the market causing messes. Then, explain to us the mess occured because Government still isn’t active enough, still isn’t spending enough.
What’s scary is that we haven’t seen anything yet. Medicare and SS will be all we can afford in 2040. Who’ll bail that out? How much spending is enough? How much debt? How much wealth and business destroying taxation will be enough?
Instead of a bailout we should’ve gutted taxes, entitlement spending, and brought our military home from around the world (sorry, defend your damn selves). Unfortunately though, I believe you’re right. More government, more spending, more taxing is the only answer these days.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
What’s scary is that we haven’t seen anything yet. Medicare and SS will be all we can afford in 2040. Who’ll bail that out? How much spending is enough? How much debt? How much wealth and business destroying taxation will be enough?
[/quote]
Agreed. We should start another thread with the bailouts thus far and the amount. We’ll soon be adding the auto industry and the airline industry.