Wall street bailout plan defeated in the House.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by jimbuna

One small point here if I may....I'm not a US citizen!!

We have our own financial problems here in the UK to contend with.

I certainly don't see your country as a paragon of financial security either....and that is going back as far as the last world war and before.

As a father I also reserve the right to feel concerned about the financial and economic wellbeing of my offspring in the future.

What is happening throughout the world will undoubtadly have consequences for the future.

I didn't intend to single you out. It was a general consideration I was making. I'm sorry for not being a native english speaking person, and sometimes the things I want to express don't come out clearly.
As to italy being in a catastrophic situation, well as ironic as it may seem italy is well insulated from this particular crysis. And the reason is very simple, our financial institutions didn't invest a lot of money in american securities. So while there may be loses and I'm sure there will be, we won't assist to banks collapsing as is happening in other countries in europe.
As to there being consequences for the future I'm well aware of that. But I think that the americans will suffer the most, and this very harsh lesson will prompt their poltical establishment to rethink what capitalism is about.
The real tragedy is that if america goes under so does the rest of the world.
I don't particularly care what happens to them, but I care what will happen to europe.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

Don't cherry pick. Most ignored it. It is not the lemming to the sea. It is greed and keeping up with the Jones. There are constant ads on TV advertising for help with folks who are in over their heads. Again, everyone knows but chose to ignore. Phone calls from collectors keep coming in with letters to follow looking to collect. These were ignored as well. Then the roof caved in.

Have I really said so much a different thing? Do we really that much disagree here? :hmm: as I said, Lemmings do not run and jump to droiwn in the sea, they just don't knopw when enough is enough (of running up that cliff). And at some time, it turns to being driven by a self-dynamic - and push and ooops and splatter...

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by goldorak

Its the end of the completely free market deregulation capitalism ideology.
Just 15 years after the end of communism and 15 years too late if you ask me.
The 2 greatest 20th century ideologies finally put to rest.
Oh well, all we can hope for is that from this debacle a new economic order arises.
A better and more transparent one.

What? We haven't had anything approaching a "free" market since the 30's, arguably, before that. We have regulated capitalism right now and even had it in the financial sector. A lot of those institutions were bound by federal law to pursue sub-prime lending.

I'm curious about what type of order you would like to see....

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

What? We haven't had anything approaching a "free" market since the 30's, arguably, before that. We have regulated capitalism right now and even had it in the financial sector. A lot of those institutions were bound by federal law to pursue sub-prime lending.

I'm curious about what type of order you would like to see....

What order I would like to see ?
How about one in which financial health is directly linked to industrial production. Where financial assets are linked with real tangibile things.
One where the risk of doing a bad operation is 100% taken by the financial istitution. Private profits ? Ok. Private loses also.
One order where self regulating markets are thrown out the window as experience has demostrated they don't work.
Just for starters, and this doesn't mean a communist or socialist state driven economy.
The faster americans learn this reality the better we're all going to be.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I don't feel like writing a huge paragraph about why this is a good thing, so I'll let one of my favorite spokesmen do it for me.

[GoldenRivet]

Who cares what Bush is thinking... CONGRESS wields the power. in the end, all bush has to do is sign the dotted line and accept public praise or ridicule depending on the public perception.

Congress is the one who should be thinking.

I say... put some of these big lending company CEOs in prison. let them do a little "thinking".

i can trace this whole mess to loaning TONS of money to people who were not qualified for loans.

Remember these slogans from the recent years?

"No money down! No interest for 24 months!!!"

"Zero Interest! zero downpayment! No Social Security Number Required!!!"

"No Social Security Number! Se Habla Espanol!!"

give me a break...

loaning out tons of money to unqualified borrowers gets you into this mess.

NO BAIL OUT PACKAGE.... HOLD BIG BUSINESS CEOS AND LENDERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS!!!!

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by goldorak

What order I would like to see ?
How about one in which financial health is directly linked to industrial production. Where financial assets are linked with real tangibile things.
One where the risk of doing a bad operation is 100% taken by the financial istitution. Private profits ? Ok. Private loses also.
One order where self regulating markets are thrown out the window as experience has demostrated they don't work.
Just for starters, and this doesn't mean a communist or socialist state driven economy.
The faster americans learn this reality the better we're all going to be.

I'm a little confused on the first one, do you mean directly linked to all commercial output, or only industrial output? What about banks?

Next I assume you mean by going back on the gold standard or something. I'd be for that

And you're right to a degree about self-regulating markets. They do need some regulation to prevent fraud and ensure workers' and consumers' safety, but how much? I would argue for as little as possible.

Clarify just a bit more, please.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Who cares what Bush is thinking... CONGRESS wields the power. in the end, all bush has to do is sign the dotted line and accept public praise or ridicule depending on the public perception.

Congress is the one who should be thinking.

I say... put some of these big lending company CEOs in prison. let them do a little "thinking".

i can trace this whole mess to loaning TONS of money to people who were not qualified for loans.

Remember these slogans from the recent years?

"No money down! No interest for 24 months!!!"

"Zero Interest! zero downpayment! No Social Security Number Required!!!"

"No Social Security Number! Se Habla Espanol!!"

give me a break...

loaning out tons of money to unqualified borrowers gets you into this mess.

NO BAIL OUT PACKAGE.... HOLD BIG BUSINESS CEOS AND LENDERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS!!!!

But more than that, hold the State accountable for requiring them to do this by law, and by providing fiscal incentives (i.e. bailouts for failed venture)

Community Reinvestment Act.....
http://www.ffiec.gov/cra/

the FMs were created by the State.....
http://www.creativeinvest.com/fnma/

[August]

Well I know this may come as a disappointment for some here but I am positioned rather well to ride out whatever happens. I have no debt, everything i own i own outright, nearly all of my savings is tied up in property and schools like the one I teach at historically do quite well in hard times when people need the edge that job training provides to compete for work.

[August]

Meanwhile I'm seeing signs that the market actually had the money to bail themselves out instead of relying on the government to wipe their noses for them.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle4844255.ece

and oil falls another $10 bucks a barrel.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

:hmm:

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

I'm a little confused on the first one, do you mean directly linked to all commercial output, or only industrial output? What about banks?

I meant directly linked to commercial output in general. And that comprises also industrial production. But nowadays most financial istitutions push products which in no way are linked to real goods or services. Speculative products whose values are arbitrary. They are totally separated from the real economy and they are one of the reasons of this crisis.

Next I assume you mean by going back on the gold standard or something. I'd be for that

As great as that would be I don't think we will ever go back to gold standard.

And you're right to a degree about self-regulating markets. They do need some regulation to prevent fraud and ensure workers' and consumers' safety, but how much? I would argue for as little as possible.

Clarify just a bit more, please.

Yes the issue is always how much does the government intervene in markets.
Let me start by saying that I'm contrary to government coming to the rescue of institutions that brought their own downfall (and here in italy we have a great example of that, our government has been financing our Alitalia air company for over a decade, a company that was completely broke, losing 2 million € per day).
The point is that government has a responsability towards society to regulate markets, establish a series of checks, controls, and in general a supervising authority that can take action against Corporations/financial istitutions that don't play by the rules. But rules must be made, and regulatory bodies are not to be controlled by those it is supposed to control and supervise.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Who cares what Bush is thinking... CONGRESS wields the power. in the end, all bush has to do is sign the dotted line and accept public praise or ridicule depending on the public perception.

Congress is the one who should be thinking.

I say... put some of these big lending company CEOs in prison. let them do a little "thinking".

i can trace this whole mess to loaning TONS of money to people who were not qualified for loans.

Remember these slogans from the recent years?

"No money down! No interest for 24 months!!!"

"Zero Interest! zero downpayment! No Social Security Number Required!!!"

"No Social Security Number! Se Habla Espanol!!"

give me a break...

loaning out tons of money to unqualified borrowers gets you into this mess.

NO BAIL OUT PACKAGE.... HOLD BIG BUSINESS CEOS AND LENDERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS!!!!

This practice came into play because greed and the inability of the human mind to form mental visual representations of high numbers led to falure of banker's sense of responsibilities. And this human nature exactly is the casue why as a safeguard against such human failures certain rules that make avoidance of such pratcice mandatory, are needed. This is the minimum of regulation, that is needed. nobody talks of 5-years-plans and the bstate governing the economy (although he does with plenty of subsidies, custom taxes, lobbyistic clinch between politics and economics, laws talired for certain businesses' desires - the market is far less unregulated as many propagators of the ultra-liberal market-philosophy are ready to admit. The enthusiasm for globalization also has stopped to shoot fireworks every Friday, it seems, and so more calls for protectionistic measures are to be heared on both sides of the Atlantic.

Egoism is part of human nature, and it becomes the more tempting the less obvious the dmage is, and when the mind behind it is iunable to realise what one hundred thisuand means, then I can tell you as a psychologist that this mind also is unable to imagine what one hundred billion means. and if that difference is not to be seen, and the irelevance of it is taken for granted, then do not be surprised if nobody thinks bad about taking the money with both hands without having a bad consacience, and always wanting more. eno9ugh ex.-bankers have admitted in interviews and newspaper essay that they were acting like being in a drugged state, that it was like an ego trip to handle those numbers - and not being aware of what they mean.

the market does not regulate all things all by itself. If their are no rules of civilisation, it brings out the worst in man: egoism, selfishness, greedl, brutality, and it leads to from healhty competiton to lethal rivalry, and finaly monopoly. Once monopoles are established, the monopolist has the community by its balls. like you need traffic rules to regulkate traffic, and need them the more the more dense traffic has become, you need rules of reuglation for economic business and financial traffic as well - and an auhtority monitoring commitment to these rules, and sanctionising those who violate them, like traffic cops.

that poses a new problem - who should do that? In Germany, we have had banks that came into trouble, and having been run by a board od directors that all were no bankers, but politicians. but only few politicians are finacial experts, most vpoicing their opinions on the issue are not. Non-political experts need to win experience and knowledge, but at the same time they should not be friends with the banking systems, and should have no close ties to it, so that they can keep their independence.

And bam-. there you are again with the same old problem that democracy as well as feudal sytems are suffering from: beiong elected does not mean you are competent, being memkeber of the noble class does not mean you are competent or feel responsible.

I have no solution, but i would say the ones we tried did not work too well - on both sides of the atlantic, but for different reasons.

Maybe our civilisation simply has come too far already. Who says that it always refines and moves on and improves and becomes more developed, is that a natural law, a general trend that cannot be escaped? Certainly not.

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by goldorak

I didn't intend to single you out. It was a general consideration I was making. I'm sorry for not being a native english speaking person, and sometimes the things I want to express don't come out clearly.
As to italy being in a catastrophic situation, well as ironic as it may seem italy is well insulated from this particular crysis. And the reason is very simple, our financial institutions didn't invest a lot of money in american securities. So while there may be loses and I'm sure there will be, we won't assist to banks collapsing as is happening in other countries in europe.
As to there being consequences for the future I'm well aware of that. But I think that the americans will suffer the most, and this very harsh lesson will prompt their poltical establishment to rethink what capitalism is about.
The real tragedy is that if america goes under so does the rest of the world.
I don't particularly care what happens to them, but I care what will happen to europe.

Rgr that mate....no harm no foul

[Stealth Hunter]

We're doomed, aren't we?

[goldorak]

All this financial breakdown remembers me of Tom Clancy's Debt of Honour.
A pity that we can't use the same solution Ryan devised in the story. :rotfl: