Outsider observation on Wall St and financials in general...

[Doe Dumper]

Have you guys noticed how the supposed most diehard capitalists (investors, brokers, bankers..etc)in the world turn into the most whining socialists at the first sign of things not going their way? You can bet if things were good as usual they'd cuss the govt for any involvement that might slow down the revenue stream but yet when they f*** things up they go scraming to uncle Sam like a raped panther wanting help?


Just seems ironic to me...

[wahoohunter]

righttt, it was the "socialists" who did it[&:]

[Doe Dumper]

Get your head out of your *** and quit being blinded by political bs... I didnt blame anything on socialists...I merely pointed out that outlooks and philosophy changes quickly in time of adversity on Wall ST and the investment community in general.

[bergall]

ooh....that's gonna leave a mark !


The alternatives to a bailout are really quite cataclysmic. The bailout is not for the Wall Street skunk-bags
who sold us down Crap-Creek. The bailout is to protect people's retirement accounts. It's to get lending institutions to extend credit (at reasonable cost). It's about "Blue Collar Joe's" kid getting a student loan to get to college. It's about getting a mortgage on a home, or refinancing one you already have. It's about so much more than just bailing out a bunch'a rich skunks. Yes, the bailout reeks to high heaven. Do we need one ? I believe we do...

[Alsatian]

ORIGINAL: bergall

The alternatives to a bailout are really quite cataclysmic. The bailout is not for the Wall Street skunk-bags
who sold us down Crap-Creek. The bailout is to protect people's retirement accounts. It's to get lending institutions to extend credit (at reasonable cost). It's about "Blue Collar Joe's" kid getting a student loan to get to college. It's about getting a mortgage on a home, or refinancing one you already have. It's about so much more than just bailing out a bunch'a rich skunks. Yes, the bailout reeks to high heaven. Do we need one ? I believe we do...

bergall: I don't want to flame you, but I want to offer a counter view to yours. I don't know if I'm right or not.

So far I have heard this fix that we are in as being akin to being on the edge of a cliff. If we don't take the action the financial wizzards tell us is necessary, the sky will fall. Things are characterized in VERY VERY dire terms. Well, for example, I hear that credit markets are frozen. I suspect that is FALSE. I suspect you can still go out and get a car loan to buy new car. If you have good credit and the right parameters, I bet you can still get a mortgage on a house. If you are a small business owner, I'm guessing if your business is solvent and shows a record of positive cash flows, I bet you can get short term loans to keep meeting payrolls. Something smells wrong. I hear dissenting opinions about this from various sources that I find respectable voices. I read today that a Harvard economist says the right answer is to let these sick firms go bankrupt. It is a fallacy, he says, that this is going to be our deaths. In a bankruptcy, assets are sold off at real market values -- be this real-estate properties or what have you -- and the guys who took the risks are left with their pockets emptied or their business sold off to someone else who may be more astute.

I think it is possible that the cure is worse than the disease. Particularly when the cure isn't guaranteed to dispatch the disease! I'm referring to bailing out these financial losers. I'm particularly concerned that this stampede for government to do something will involve bailing out a bunch of home owners who ought to take the fall for their own financial dim wittedness rather than ask me and my neighbors to cough up my money to rescue them. Screw that.

I'm thinking that there may not be a bail out on this. The stock market was up to day, in the absence of any bailout and in the absence of any hope of progress. The interests of Democrats and Republicans are pretty starkly opposed on this. Democrats would be happier if support for home owners were added to the bill; this change would kill much of the Republican support for the bill. These guys know that they are elected by their constituents to serve their interests and that these constituents are watching this pretty closely.

If there is more to this than meets the eye -- more than what the media has portrayed it to be, welfare for the rich --then the media has their share of blame in this. I have not heard an understandable explanation of what is proposed, but I have gotten some sense that it is not quite writting a blank check and the money may be recoverable. If this IS more than just writing out a $700 B check with the ledger entry "Mad Money," someone has done a grave disservice not to educate and explain this to the public.

[wahoohunter]

ORIGINAL: Doe Dumper

Get your head out of your *** and quit being blinded by political bs... I didnt blame anything on socialists...I merely pointed out that outlooks and philosophy changes quickly in time of adversity on Wall ST and the investment community in general.

"whining socialists"

I think you made it pretty clear where you were going champ; and calm down a bit, i'm not sure its necessary to respond by saying "get your head out of your ***," but if you feel that an ignorant vernacular is the best way to get your point across, more power to you.

[F3d]

I believe most of them like a mixed economy and not pure capitalism. Plus, the government is the one that got everyone in this mess in the first place. The main factor of the crisis lies mainly with Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the asinine government policies.

[Doe Dumper]

ORIGINAL: wahoohunter

"whining socialists"

I think you made it pretty clear where you were going champ; and calm down a bit, i'm not sure its necessary to respond by saying "get your head out of your ***," but if you feel that an ignorant vernacular is the best way to get your point across, more power to you.

All that education and nary a clue about comprehending what you read eh? Why dont you tell me where I was going? Since you seem to know what Im thinking?

I dont pull any punches...what I typed was what I meant. There wereno underlying nefarious motives aimed at trying to stir up the feeble minded. All I wanted was honest input like bergall, Al, and f3d have offered. However I guess its easier to just do a flaming drive-by and try to stir things up when you cant come up with anything useful to the conversation.

[thndrchiken]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This all started back in 1978 when Jimmy Carter came up with the Community Reinvestment Act to help low income citizens become home owner's. Then during the Clinton Administration the law was rewritten to force the banks to issue these subprime mortgages and allow the companies to float their leverage to record levels and creative accounting cooking the books to make things look legit while the big wigs got fat. While it is fact that the current administration did nothing to curtail this current crisis before it became one, the people who believe that Obama and a 700 billion dollar bail out is the answer think about this. Obama's top three financial advisors are the three that ran Fannie Mae into the ground and are in large part directly responsible for the current crisis.

[ipscshooter]

You know, everyone keeps calling it a $700 Billion "bailout", but, if I understand correctly, the government could actually make a profit on the deal. They're buying up $700 Billion of sub-prime loans. Most of these loans are still paying. If the owners eventually default, the government forecloses, just like a bank. They can then resell the property immediately, or hold the real estate until prices move back up.

I am a little curious how the original deal set aside a multi-billion dollar payment to support the ACORN voter fraud proponents...