By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Next up: $300 Billion dollars bail out (CitiBank)

akuma587 on 24 November 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

Do you just hit the snooze button when Republicans do something you don't agree with?

No one ever said that anyone but Congress passed the bailout, but the Bush Adminstration (specifically Bush and Paulson) were the ones who 1) proposed what the bailout should be and 2) pressed Congress to act immediately to adopt the bailout plan.  Hell, they were acting like it was so urgent that they ended up hurting markets by inciting fear that a bailout was necessary, which of course led to egg-in-the-face syndrome when Congress voted the bailout down the first time, which led to even more urgent pleads to Congress to pass the bailout.

They really made the situation as bad as it was by trying to hastily push through a plan that had not been thought out that well through Congress, which in turn made the markets worse, which in turn made the apparent need for a bailout greater, which made things even worse when the bailout plan turned out to be pretty poorly designed in the first place.

So the president proposed a bad plan, and it was passed.

I got an idea. Why don't we have, oh, I don't know, three equally powerful branches of government that keeps things like this from happening? We could even appoint one in charge of our spending, so the president can't just pass whatever he wants.

Man, if we only had something like that.

P.S. Did you miss Nancy Pelosi fighting for this bill to pass? Did she do it because her hero, Bush, proposed it and strong armed her? Is she that much of a slave to him?

You are completely ignoring that there was a lot of pressure from outside Washington entirely to get some kind of bailout passed, no matter what it was.  The financial sector was plummeting like a rock when all the squabbling over the bailout was occurring and the public was equally jumpy about how quickly the economy was souring.

I agree that the bailout was poorly designed and poorly implemented, but you act like the Republicans have no responsibility whatsoever for the disaster that has been the bailout (which could have actually worked really well if Paulson had not implemented it so poorly.  Most everyone in the financial sector thinks he is incompetent).

And some people assume that the $700 billion is an automatic liability, which is not necessarily true since the government can in theory make a profit on some of that capital once the market recovers (which is actually what happened with the Chrysler bailout that happened years ago).  Its not like we took the $700 billion and just buried it underground so that it was a complete loss, it could actually end up making the taxpayers money.

Paulson especially and the rest of the Bush Adminstration are as much to blame as anyone for the bailout going as badly as it did.  And you act like Congress doing something to help the financial sector was a crime.  If the financial sector crashes, guess what happens?  The entire economy crashes.  Without a financial sector, out economy would disintegrate. 

You also have a knee jerk reaction whenever you see the word government and spending in the same sentence, since you assume that anything the government does (except spending money on the military of course) is completely unjustified and is nothing less than an expression of complete incompetence.  The private sector left to its own ends was what caused the whole financial crisis in the first place.  The private sector does correct itself eventually, but there are certain situations the private sector can't handle on its own.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
TheRealMafoo on 24 November 2008
akuma587 said:

You are completely ignoring that there was a lot of pressure from outside Washington entirely to get some kind of bailout passed, no matter what it was.  The financial sector was plummeting like a rock when all the squabbling over the bailout was occurring and the public was equally jumpy about how quickly the economy was souring.

You also have a knee jerk reaction whenever you see the word government and spending in the same sentence, since you assume that anything the government does (except spending money on the military of course) is completely unjustified and is nothing less than an expression of complete incompetence.  The private sector left to its own ends was what caused the whole financial crisis in the first place.  The private sector does correct itself eventually, but there are certain situations the private sector can't handle on its own.

 

 

To the first part I bulleted:
Being shitty at your job and failing because you can't handle pressure is no excuse to blame someone else for your failings. That's like a kid persuading his parents into letting him drive the car at age 10, and then not blaming the parents for it.

To the second point I bulleted:
Yes. The last 4 months are a great example. I also think they spend way too much money on the military. I just think the military is a place they are supposed to spend money. Not buying banks.

As for the private sector being the cause of this issue. No! It was congress. If you left banks to only give loans to those that are a good risk, banks would have not giving trillions of dollars worth of loans that they knew were bad. If Congress had not incentivized these loans, they never would have been given. Also, if Congress was not a bunch of fuck ups, they would have worked on this issue years ago when they saw it coming. Not wait until the collapse to say we need to rely on them.

My feelings, is everyone in government today is a worthless pile of shit. Yours is only the republicans do wrong, and democrats are here to save the day.

Let's see how you think in 4 years.



steven787 on 24 November 2008

It just drives me crazy because if they had spent money on schools, roads, telecom, alternative energy, and higher education grants (for high demand degrees) while avoiding a useless war and eliminating stupid lending (Down payment loans, come on!) the banks would not need bailing out, foreclosures would be at normal levels, and more people would own homes. /run-on sentence

Thanks, Republicans for turning me into a gaddamnt pinko.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

steven787 on 24 November 2008

On topic: The treasury and the Fed are actually doing most of this bail out under their powers to bypass congress.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Max King of the Wild on 24 November 2008

can they give me just .5% of that?



Around the Network
akuma587 on 24 November 2008
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

You are completely ignoring that there was a lot of pressure from outside Washington entirely to get some kind of bailout passed, no matter what it was.  The financial sector was plummeting like a rock when all the squabbling over the bailout was occurring and the public was equally jumpy about how quickly the economy was souring.

You also have a knee jerk reaction whenever you see the word government and spending in the same sentence, since you assume that anything the government does (except spending money on the military of course) is completely unjustified and is nothing less than an expression of complete incompetence.  The private sector left to its own ends was what caused the whole financial crisis in the first place.  The private sector does correct itself eventually, but there are certain situations the private sector can't handle on its own.

 

 

To the first part I bulleted:
Being shitty at your job and failing because you can't handle pressure is no excuse to blame someone else for your failings. That's like a kid persuading his parents into letting him drive the car at age 10, and then not blaming the parents for it.

To the second point I bulleted:
Yes. The last 4 months are a great example. I also think they spend way too much money on the military. I just think the military is a place they are supposed to spend money. Not buying banks.

As for the private sector being the cause of this issue. No! It was congress. If you left banks to only give loans to those that are a good risk, banks would have not giving trillions of dollars worth of loans that they knew were bad. If Congress had not incentivized these loans, they never would have been given. Also, if Congress was not a bunch of fuck ups, they would have worked on this issue years ago when they saw it coming. Not wait until the collapse to say we need to rely on them.

My feelings, is everyone in government today is a worthless pile of shit. Yours is only the republicans do wrong, and democrats are here to save the day.

Let's see how you think in 4 years.

1) Yup, the bailout situation is just like that, exactly.  There are no flaws whatsoever in translating that analogy to the bailout situation.  And, correct me if I am wrong, but quite a few Republicans were instrumental in the bailout being passed if I remember correctly, and the Presidential candidate that you VOTED for supported the bailout as well.

Its easy to say that everyone in Washington is a worthless pile of shit.  If they are, its because we elected them.  So if they are a worthless pile of shit, then we are a worthless pile of shit for electing them.  Getting jaded about the political process doesn't really accomplish anything, and in the end allows the government to get away with more when people stop paying attention to what they are doing.

I think there are plenty of competent Republicans out there and a fair share of incompetent Democrats, but I certainly don't think the Democrats can do no wrong.  I mean just look at the last two people they ran as Presidential candidates!  Al Gore and John Kerry?  A robot and a person made of wood.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Kasz216 on 24 November 2008
akuma587 said:
The Big Three Bailout is separate. It would only be around $25 billion (although most anyone who knows what is going on know that it would end up being more than that).

I'm torn on the Big Three Bailout. If there was one, it would have to be extreme in its criteria. I mean to the point where the entire board of directors is kicked out and there have to be many tangible steps taken to show that the car companies are going to change.

But I have recently been convinced that Chapter 11 bankruptcy is a better option. This is because Chapter 11 would allow the car manufacturers to negate a lot of the current obligations they have.

Part of the car manufacturers problems is that their cost structure makes them uncompetitive. Toyota, for example, has a fraction of the number of dealerships that GM has, while both have about the same market share. This is because local car dealers have petitioned to their states to get legislation favorable to enforcing restrictive contracts where dealerships only sell certain types of cars. This has ballooned costs across the board.

Another problem is the labor contracts GM and the rest of the Big Three have. These have just gotten completely out of control, with the car companies promising pensions they could never fulfill. I am for equitable treatment of labor, but it just isn't working with GM. They are also paying more than is competitive to their laborers. I may be pretty liberal, but I do know my economics.

So all in all I am against a bailout for the Big Three, as a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing would solve more of their problems and the taxpayers shouldn't be responsible for the car manufacturers' poor choices.

Dude try working one of those jobs and tell me that.

They're outright horrible.  You wake up every day dreading going in, but knowing you can't quit because you aren't going to get a workable wage otherwise.  You dream of fucking quiting a job there.

It's outright horrible.  Those people really don't get overpaid.  They get paid just enough to stop themselves from blowing their brains out or quitting.

The real problem is that.

A) We don't have universal healthcare.  So anyone who gives good healthcare to their workers is at a huge disadvatnage vs countries with universal healthcare or countries where people don't expect healthcare

B) Everyone bought into SUVs, cause that's what America wanted till oil got all fucked up.



segajon on 24 November 2008

Good God, enough is enough. No more bailouts. Bu you know Detroit will be next for gm, chrysler, and ford.



Galaki on 24 November 2008

All the billions flying left and right. Makes winning the lottery sound like chump change or less.



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

akuma587 on 24 November 2008
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:
The Big Three Bailout is separate. It would only be around $25 billion (although most anyone who knows what is going on know that it would end up being more than that).

I'm torn on the Big Three Bailout. If there was one, it would have to be extreme in its criteria. I mean to the point where the entire board of directors is kicked out and there have to be many tangible steps taken to show that the car companies are going to change.

But I have recently been convinced that Chapter 11 bankruptcy is a better option. This is because Chapter 11 would allow the car manufacturers to negate a lot of the current obligations they have.

Part of the car manufacturers problems is that their cost structure makes them uncompetitive. Toyota, for example, has a fraction of the number of dealerships that GM has, while both have about the same market share. This is because local car dealers have petitioned to their states to get legislation favorable to enforcing restrictive contracts where dealerships only sell certain types of cars. This has ballooned costs across the board.

Another problem is the labor contracts GM and the rest of the Big Three have. These have just gotten completely out of control, with the car companies promising pensions they could never fulfill. I am for equitable treatment of labor, but it just isn't working with GM. They are also paying more than is competitive to their laborers. I may be pretty liberal, but I do know my economics.

So all in all I am against a bailout for the Big Three, as a Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing would solve more of their problems and the taxpayers shouldn't be responsible for the car manufacturers' poor choices.

Dude try working one of those jobs and tell me that.

They're outright horrible.  You wake up every day dreading going in, but knowing you can't quit because you aren't going to get a workable wage otherwise.  You dream of fucking quiting a job there.

It's outright horrible.  Those people really don't get overpaid.  They get paid just enough to stop themselves from blowing their brains out or quitting.

The real problem is that.

A) We don't have universal healthcare.  So anyone who gives good healthcare to their workers is at a huge disadvatnage vs countries with universal healthcare or countries where people don't expect healthcare

B) Everyone bought into SUVs, cause that's what America wanted till oil got all fucked up.

Absolutely, but a bailout wouldn't solve either one of these problems, and neither would going into Chapter 11.  GM and the other two need to get their heads out of their ass and have a more diversified business model.

Universal healthcare would really help a lot of employers (if implemented correctly) as it would shift a lot of burden away from them in having to ever offer healthcare to their employers.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson