|
|
|
| $700 Billion bailout failed |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
 |
Quote: They were even lower in previous years. It didn't help Japan then, and it won't help the US now. After taking such a large hit after trying to manually fix the problem, interest rate changes probably made a smaller difference than normal. I'm not sure you can say it didn't help at all. Or that it won't help. But the rest of the game has to be played right.... Quote: Letting the market crumble won't let you with a better market in the end. It will if its a new market Quote: Without it, those investors will think it twice before doing any kind of business. Not any, just stupid ones. -- |
|
Bob
Free Market Evangelist
September 2000
 |
Quote: consolidation, oligopoly and monopoly. If anyone could open a bank, that wouldn't a problem. Unfortunately, that's not really possible these days. You need special State + Federal government charters to open banks in the US. So there will be oligopolies and monopolies because competition is actively discouraged. Besides, there is already an oligopoly. Banks must be part of the Federal Reserve System, which is itself run by the 12 largest banks in the US (well, before the consolidation anyway). Quote: Without it, those investors will think it twice before doing any kind of business. That's a good thing! People spend more time looking at reviews of cheap trinkets from China than reviews of securities they invest their large savings in. Penny wise, pound foolish and all. -- |
|
ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
 |
Quote:
It will if its a new market I doubt this would create a new market, though. Quote: That's a good thing! People spend more time looking at reviews of cheap trinkets from China than reviews of securities they invest their large savings in. Could be. But as I said, this needs a severe change, and as with any huge change, I doubt it will be adopted. If these gurus missed all their predictions, how can we expect the common Joe to take the right decisions without new education? I say, let this be a lesson. Let the government fix the problem, put harsher rules to prevent the common Joe to be damaged in the future, punish those who inflated the bubble until it burst, and let the market run again. You don't just watch the flood and hope it won't happen again, you take measures against it. (Edited: By the way, this is in the front page of our most important newspaper right now: 10 links to walk you through today’s financial crisis — and make you smarter than 99% of other people) -- |
|
superstar4410
Member #926
January 2001
 |
A lot of good points being put out. I wonder what the economic textbooks will be saying about this in the next Of course it all depends on how it turns out. So tell me someone, what would be the name of the chapter describing these economic times. Don't take yourself too seriously, but do take your responsibilities very seriously. |
|
Goalie Ca
Member #2,579
July 2002
 |
Well i was reading news yesterday and the cbc said that you guys already spent 900 billion or something. This 700 billion is in addition. ------------- |
|
Bob Keane
Member #7,342
June 2006
|
This financial crisis must be serious. I heard even piggie banks are failing. Another bill is on its way to Congress. There's a provision to raise the FDIC limit to $250,000. By reading this sig, I, the reader, agree to render my soul to Bob Keane. I, the reader, understand this is a legally binding contract and freely render my soul. |
|
ReyBrujo
Moderator
January 2001
|
Comedy about the market. Tried to find it in YouTube, but couldn't. -- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
 |
The Senate passed their version with even more money piled into it. I expect it to pass in the House since I believe that many of the Republicans actually wanted to vote yes the first time around. |
|
OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
 |
Quote: "Correcting itself" means banks going bankrupt, merging themselves or being absorbed by bigger ones, which leads to consolidation, oligopoly and monopoly. You couldn't cure yourself from smallpox, you needed a vaccine. Letting the market crumble won't let you with a better market in the end. The so called "invisible hand of market" is nice in theory, but in praxis we see that it's not working. Everyone panics and sells stocks and adds up to the crisis. The government should do something about this, I'm not for saving asses of those who screwed it up, but instead buy of banks that should go bankrupt, rescue them and then sell them. We have Consolidation Agency that does this kind of things here and so far it worked. One possible outcome of this crisis maybe that new economic superpowers will arise - mainly from the east (think of China and India). And I don't know whether it's good or not. [My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online] |
|
HardTranceFan
Member #7,317
June 2006
 |
Quote: You couldn't cure yourself from smallpox, you needed a vaccine. Letting the market crumble won't let you with a better market in the end. A vaccine can be a small, weakened dose of the virus. Letting the market crumble would be just like administering a vaccine - it won't kill, but it can lead to a stronger and healthier system. -- |
|
Bob Keane
Member #7,342
June 2006
|
The new bill is 451 pages long and includes $112 billion in tax cuts. Tax breaks include helping companies make wooden arrows. Funny what they had to do to pass the bill. Maybe we should start recalling congressmen? By reading this sig, I, the reader, agree to render my soul to Bob Keane. I, the reader, understand this is a legally binding contract and freely render my soul. |
|
nonnus29
Member #2,606
August 2002
 |
Quote: The so called "invisible hand of market" is nice in theory, but in praxis we see that it's not working. Actually, I think the case could be made that the 'invisible hand" is working beautifully, just not the way everyone thought. There was an advantage to the mortgage backed securities. They were sponsored by the government, but not backed by the government. They were packaged in such a way that many made a lot of money from them. So from that perspective they worked beautifully. Where it failed was the banks didn't understand the risk and hence they got clobbered. Just like anything, some people educated themselves and understood the risk (Warren Buffett, Goldman Sachs) and didn't hold any of these toxic securities. The other fools, well you see what we have here. Buffett is making some big purchases. If he's buying then he must think the economy's not going to get much worse. To me that's a good sign. |
|
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
The only reason they made all that money for people is because the people selling them purposefully hid the risk Quote: If he's buying then he must think the economy's not going to get much worse. To me that's a good sign. Or its a sign of bad things. Think about it, if he thinks he needs to do the buyout FOR the gov't, then something is wrong -- |
|
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
He doesn't think the $700 billion is enough. He wants private people to put in money on top of that. |
|
lambik
Member #899
January 2001
 |
hmmm newsflash it seems the reworked bill passed just now. |
|
Mark Oates
Member #1,146
March 2001
 |
are we screwed yet? -- |
|
Don Freeman
Member #5,110
October 2004
 |
I have no problem letting these companies crash and burn! They deserve it and some. They are gonna get their money one way or another, and if not...fuck em. These bastards have been screwing others for too long anyway! They knew people couldn't afford these loans, yet they made the loans anyway because: Maybe we should be taking this 700 billion from the CEO's piggy banks! I don't care if you started the business...there is absolutely NO reason why one person needs to make 200 million dollars a year! It's greed and corruption...about the only thing that seems to work in America anymore.:-/ -- |
|
Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007
|
Some people had big money invested in some banks. Not just "some people". But the average joe. People like these had all their life savings on the banks that are going bankrupt. Sure, let the rich bastards crash and burn. But what about the little people? In capitalist America bank robs you. |
|
FrankyR
Member #243
April 2000
 |
Vanneto, most banks in the US are a member of the FDIC (Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation) which protects deposits up to $100 000. |
|
Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007
|
Well our government here protects deposits of up to 22K EUR. I guess 100K USD is quite much, but I bet many people had much more then that deposited. Well, anyway, the banks going bankrupt isn't going to be good, no matter how you look at it. Sure, the rich wall street bastards will get what they deserve. But for every rich bastard that will fall, I'm sure 100 not so rich bastards will take the fall too. But well, not really my problem, just want you to see the bigger picture. In capitalist America bank robs you. |
|
Bob
Free Market Evangelist
September 2000
|
Indeed, the FDIC insures deposits at up to $100,000 per depositor per institution. You can get $1 million insured if you spread it out over 10 banks. I think the little guy is covered (even if by a faulty system). The problem with this bailout is that it will do nothing to solve the problem, and won't even go towards creating jobs. The Federal government could have just built a bunch of electric dams or nuclear reactors for that money and at least would have something to show for it. As it stands now, the precious few capital that is left is being diverted towards propping institutions that should instead fail. When a company makes some bad decisions and wastes its money, you let it go bankrupt. Sure some people will lose their jobs, but they can get those jobs back at other, better companies. If you prop up the failing companies, you prevent the weaker inefficnent companies from being replaced by more efficient, less wasteful, more custommer-oriented ones. This results in a lose-lose situation for all taxpayers: They get higher taxes and they pay higher prices with what's left. -- |
|
Kikaru
Member #7,616
August 2006
 |
You should also consider that if the big lenders go out, other companies will go out with them. |
|
Don Freeman
Member #5,110
October 2004
|
The thing that pisses me off the most about all this...the government always saying this or that is for national security, but never the economy! Well, I guess the national economy is NOT a national security concern!:o This is bullshit! Our economy is a HELL of a lot more important than "helping" all these other countries! It's nice to be able to help when you can, but you can't give until you die!!!:-/ I think we have enough problems here at home to worry about, that we don't have any business anywhere else for at LEAST the next 4 years! Mr President...what is your foreign policy? - Don't need one, we are only dealing with our problems! We have more people in prisons than most countries, yet we yell and scream about human rights! I am sick of all the hypocrisy! Is there no one that can stop all the bullshit in Washington and do what the fuck needs to be done?!?!? I don't CARE who is to blame! I just want some REAL results! We can sit around all day yanking our dicks, but what the hell is that gonna solve?! That's right...not a damn thing! Give us some real RESULTS Washington! DO YOUR JOBS!!!>:( Quote: You should also consider that if the big lenders go out, other companies will go out with them I guess that is why they HAD a plan to deal with this...just never got used! No regulations...just let these companies get so big, that if they fall...so does the rest of the country! We can not expect 1400's politics to survive in a modern age...we need change. I am not saying throw out the Constitution or anything drastic like that, but we need some change!::) -- |
|
Bob
Free Market Evangelist
September 2000
|
If a company is so dependent on credit to carry on its day-to-day operations and meet wages, is it really solvent? Sounds like the company should have gone bankrupt a long time ago, and was only kept afloat via cheap credit. -- |
|
BAF
Member #2,981
December 2002
 |
Weren't they trying to do something about raising FDIC to 250,000 or something like that? |
|
|
|
fresh start and all that. New companies will appear where the old ones left.
