With the US congress defeating the bill as presented, do you feel that this is a good/wise thing? Should financial institutions be allowed to fail (as you or I would should we not be able to pay our debts)? Is it a forgone conclusion that a bailout will be passed?
I gather that there have been protests about this, but do the majority of Americans care?
it’s lose/lose…
We pay 700 billion it’s corporate welfare at it’s worst… we don’t bail out and the rich just richer on all of their forclosures [:(]
only a bush could srew us this bad and for all the mike moore haters, (hate him all you want but) that dude called this back in his fahrenheit 9/11 movie. “George W Bush has bankrupted every business he has been involved with, Will the US be any different?” (or something along those lines…
Late,
grmpysmrf
I think its pathetic that this bailout requires $700bn of American taxpayers money: these financial institutions are the guys who fuck around the everyman to build their empires and then when they fuck up (largely due to poor regulation) they look to the everyman!?
Nonsense. I dont know what the repercussions will be with a yay or a nay but on principle I would reject it. Also to see G Bush’s presidency to end in pure ridicule.
Anyway I aint American but I hope that the American people dont have to take the brunt of this corporate fuck up.
Nader/Gonzalez 2008!
This “global credit crunch” is really riding my nerves. In Ireland, our precious little government are rushing in a finance bill to gurantee depositis on all 6 major Irish banks. Its similar to the U.S. & UK, banks fucking up and regulation non-existent. No scrutiny applied to any of the banks (some are notorious for fucking up and being extortionate bastards), the minister for finance just writes them a ‘blank cheque’ with our, the taxpayers, money. So basically they get rewarded for being incompetent assholes. The gov rush this in because they are paraniod the people will rush to withdraw their money (which isnt there for them) if they hear all this talk of problems with banks. The anarchists will have a field day with all this nonsense.
I had hoped to get a loan in the €€,€€€ region for further study soon enough but I dont know if that is viable now as there will be sickening interest rates for a while.
[reply]it’s lose/lose…
We pay 700 billion it’s corporate welfare at it’s worst… we don’t bail out and the rich just richer on all of their forclosures [:(]
only a bush could srew us this bad and for all the mike moore haters, (hate him all you want but) that dude called this back in his fahrenheit 9/11 movie. “George W Bush has bankrupted every business he has been involved with, Will the US be any different?” (or something along those lines…
Late,
grmpysmrf
Some of you need to do a little research on the facts, rather than reach for the liberal excuse of it’s all Bush’s fault. Bill Clinton in 1999 signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted 1999-11-12.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley is directly responsible for the mess we are in today. I know liberals love to blame all the troubles in the world Bush but news flash for you, this mess is Clinton’s doing. I’m no fan of Bush and he has been an unmitigated disaster, he certainly didn’t help the situation but this was ENTIRELY instigated under the Clinton regime. The Bushies absolutely could have done something but chose not to along with Allan Greenspan’s ruinous tenure at the Federal Reserve.
For your edification Gramm-Leach-Bliley repealed a large part of the Glass-Steagall Act which decimated many of the regulations in the finance and banking industry here in the United States.[/reply]
No shit.
Everyone I hear talking about this talks about the greed of the corporate institutions caused this (and of course Bush, who also caused 9/11, el nino, and my dog’s untimely death last year) but no one wants to talk about all of the idiots who bought houses they shouldn’t have and couldn’t make the payments, expected the gov. to bail them out. Fuck them. Not everyone deserves to own a house. Rent a fucking place until you can afford to buy one. If individuals would practice some self responsibility, we wouldn’t have countless idiots losing their houses.
George Bush will go down as the worst prez ever, but it sometimes makes people look dumb/uninformed, when no matter what is going wrong you pin it on bush. He’s just one legislative branch of the American gov. What about the Democratic Congress for the last two years? I know W. has vetoed some of their shit, but I feel like they’ve been doing a pretty shitty job themselves.
Some of you need to do a little research on the facts, rather than reach for the liberal excuse of it’s all Bush’s fault. Bill Clinton in 1999 signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted 1999-11-12.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley is directly responsible for the mess we are in today. I know liberals love to blame all the troubles in the world Bush but news flash for you, this mess is Clinton’s doing.
This mess isn’t Clinton’s doing as much as you would love to blame him, I’m sure. GLB was signed into law by WJC, this much is true however…
GLB had over 2/3rd’s support in the House and in the Senate…making it veto proof. WJC had to sign it. He had no choice in the matter. True, the bill had some Democratic support …but not nearly the support that it had among the Republicans who were running the show in Congress back in 1999.
If anyone is to blame, it’s the Republican controlled 106th Congress.
[reply][reply]it’s lose/lose…
We pay 700 billion it’s corporate welfare at it’s worst… we don’t bail out and the rich just richer on all of their forclosures [:(]
only a bush could srew us this bad and for all the mike moore haters, (hate him all you want but) that dude called this back in his fahrenheit 9/11 movie. “George W Bush has bankrupted every business he has been involved with, Will the US be any different?” (or something along those lines…
Late,
grmpysmrf
Some of you need to do a little research on the facts, rather than reach for the liberal excuse of it’s all Bush’s fault. Bill Clinton in 1999 signed the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act, Pub.L. 106-102, 113 Stat. 1338, enacted 1999-11-12.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley is directly responsible for the mess we are in today. I know liberals love to blame all the troubles in the world Bush but news flash for you, this mess is Clinton’s doing. I’m no fan of Bush and he has been an unmitigated disaster, he certainly didn’t help the situation but this was ENTIRELY instigated under the Clinton regime. The Bushies absolutely could have done something but chose not to along with Allan Greenspan’s ruinous tenure at the Federal Reserve.
For your edification Gramm-Leach-Bliley repealed a large part of the Glass-Steagall Act which decimated many of the regulations in the finance and banking industry here in the United States.[/reply]
No shit.
Everyone I hear talking about this talks about the greed of the corporate institutions caused this (and of course Bush, who also caused 9/11, el nino, and my dog’s untimely death last year) but no one wants to talk about all of the idiots who bought houses they shouldn’t have and couldn’t make the payments, expected the gov. to bail them out. Fuck them. Not everyone deserves to own a house. Rent a fucking place until you can afford to buy one. If individuals would practice some self responsibility, we wouldn’t have countless idiots losing their houses.[/reply]
You don’t buy things you can’t afford, Literally, because they can’t get loans! but corporate greed under deregulated banks gave them loans they can’t afford. WHose fault is that? unwealthy people wanting something they can’t afford is normal because everyone wants things they can’t afford. What’s criminal is these banks taking advantage of peoples desire for a better life… Corporations knew they were going to bankrupt people effectively taking ALL of their money and ultimately getting the property they sold them BACK! Greedy bastards!
George Bush will go down as the worst prez ever, but it sometimes makes people look dumb/uninformed, when no matter what is going wrong you pin it on bush. He’s just one legislative branch of the American gov. What about the Democratic Congress for the last two years? I know W. has vetoed some of their shit, but I feel like they’ve been doing a pretty shitty job themselves.
Not pinning “anything and everything” on Bush although he bears a crap load of the brunt of our magnifyed social problems considering the shape of the country when he took office compared to now…he has completely ignored social problems wasted our tax money and destroyed public education.
where as you think people blame him for too much I think you don’t blame him enough…I’m always amused by those trying to play both sides!
This mess isn’t Clinton’s doing as much as you would love to blame him, I’m sure. GLB was signed into law by WJC, this much is true however…
GLB had over 2/3rd’s support in the House and in the Senate…making it veto proof. WJC had to sign it. He had no choice in the matter. True, the bill had some Democratic support …but not nearly the support that it had among the Republicans who were running the show in Congress back in 1999.
If anyone is to blame, it’s the Republican controlled 106th Congress.
thank you for that senor! people gerenally forget this
Late,
grmpysmrf
thank you for that senor! people gerenally forget this
Late,
grmpysmrf
Your entirely welcome. But it’s only the people who worship at the foot of Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh tend to forget these kinds of things.
I’m not going to blame Bush on this one - not everything should fall under the President’s umbrella - there are cabinets, economic departments, etc, etc. It’s too easy to blame just one man for all this.
Sure the government should have set up stricter lending rules but it’s not like Bush came in and removed limitations - they were always like that. Actually, currently, it’s Bush and the majority of the Democrats who support the bailout while other Republicans are stopping it. It will get passed just with other clauses I think.
I blame the banks to a degree, obviously, but I also blame the American people for buying adjustable mortgage rates (wtf were they thinking?). No-one seems to be pointing fingers at this crowd.
Anyhow, it’s happened - no use crying over spilled milk, however, I won’t support the bailout if these banks become nationalized (which is the argument of many Republicans). America is, after all, not socialist in this way. The banks will have to repay the shares bought into their company from the government - this is good, granted, the banks can do so. Now with only a handful of big banks left, it should be okay.
You don’t buy things you can’t afford, Literally, because they can’t get loans! but corporate greed under deregulated banks gave them loans they can’t afford. WHose fault is that? unwealthy people wanting something they can’t afford is normal because everyone wants things they can’t afford. What’s criminal is these banks taking advantage of peoples desire for a better life… Corporations knew they were going to bankrupt people effectively taking ALL of their money and ultimately getting the property they sold them BACK! Greedy bastards!
I agree they’re greedy corporations and they capitalized on the public’s greed and stupidity. Letting people off the hook for getting loans for something they shouldn’t responsibly own is a cop out. Of course people want things they can’t afford. I want a BMW, but I’m not gonna go out and get a loan I can’t make payments on just to get it. That makes no sense grump.
Not pinning “anything and everything” on Bush although he bears a crap load of the brunt of our magnifyed social problems considering the shape of the country when he took office compared to now…he has completely ignored social problems wasted our tax money and destroyed public education.
where as you think people blame him for too much I think you don’t blame him enough…I’m always amused by those trying to play both sides!
I just said earlier worst prez ever and I’m not blaming him enough? C’mon man you sound like Al. I’m just rational enough to know that he’s not the only crooked politician, and being corrupt is not a quality that is exclusive to the Republican party.
This mess isn’t Clinton’s doing as much as you would love to blame him, I’m sure. GLB was signed into law by WJC, this much is true however…
GLB had over 2/3rd’s support in the House and in the Senate…making it veto proof. WJC had to sign it. He had no choice in the matter. True, the bill had some Democratic support …but not nearly the support that it had among the Republicans who were running the show in Congress back in 1999.
If anyone is to blame, it’s the Republican controlled 106th Congress.
The Reps held 55 seats in Congress in '99. The Dems held 45. That’s barely a majority, yet congress supported it by 2/3rds? Wow, pin the tail on the Republican again. I might be wrong, but I remember Bill supporting that legislature anyway, he wouldn’t have vetoed it if he could have.
[reply]You don’t buy things you can’t afford, Literally, because they can’t get loans! but corporate greed under deregulated banks gave them loans they can’t afford. WHose fault is that? unwealthy people wanting something they can’t afford is normal because everyone wants things they can’t afford. What’s criminal is these banks taking advantage of peoples desire for a better life… Corporations knew they were going to bankrupt people effectively taking ALL of their money and ultimately getting the property they sold them BACK! Greedy bastards!
I agree they’re greedy corporations and they capitalized on the public’s greed and stupidity. Letting people off the hook for getting loans for something they shouldn’t responsibly own is a cop out. Of course people want things they can’t afford. I want a BMW, but I’m not gonna go out and get a loan I can’t make payments on just to get it. That makes no sense grump.
I hear what your saying, BUT I just don’t see it all that way. C’mon now, you want a BMW you know you can’t afford one so that’s it (Your responsible) but others want a BMW and know they can’t afford one BUT have been told by a reputable institution that they CAN afford one!! so Who’s at fault there? (if you can’t afford something a bank won’t lend you money) you know full well you can’t afford it BUT you’ve been told you can by a bank. Everyone knows that banks won’t lend money to people who can’t pay it back “Well if a bank is gonna loan me money, Perhaps I can afford this!?” I think Banks took advantage big time! I was serious when I said it’s a lose/lose situation you’re right people were dumb but people have always been dumb and to say that it’s the corporations job to take care of them would be a serious mistatement BUT corporations certainly have a duty NOT take take advantage to the degree that they have. I think that is the root of the problem right there.
Not pinning “anything and everything” on Bush although he bears a crap load of the brunt of our magnifyed social problems considering the shape of the country when he took office compared to now…he has completely ignored social problems wasted our tax money and destroyed public education.
where as you think people blame him for too much I think you don’t blame him enough…I’m always amused by those trying to play both sides!
I just said earlier worst prez ever and I’m not blaming him enough? C’mon man you sound like Al. I’m just rational enough to know that he’s not the only crooked politician, and being corrupt is not a quality that is exclusive to the Republican party.
All I really heard was “not all his fault.” yeah sure he has cabinet members and what not to guide him but when you stack your cabinets with friends of yours that you know to be corrupt of course your gonna get corrupt information. THose corrupt people would not be there if it was not for the main corrupt guy putting them there, so it still goes back to bush! Al maybe obnoxious with his bush ranting but that doesn’t mean he is wrong
Late,
grmpysmrf
The Reps held 55 seats in Congress in '99. The Dems held 45. That’s barely a majority, yet congress supported it by 2/3rds? Wow, pin the tail on the Republican again. I might be wrong, but I remember Bill supporting that legislature anyway, he wouldn’t have vetoed it if he could have.
Gramm (R-TX), Leach (R-IA), Bliley (R-VA). These were the masterminds behind the bill. They presented it to Congress and pushed it through. Granted, back in 1999, everyone thought that the housing market and flow of money the was created by Bill Clinton’s economy would never end. But the bottom line is, this was a Republican bill, a Republican Congress and was hailed as the greatest thing since Reagan’s election by people like the Heritage Foundation and the WSJ. The banking community had been pushing for the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act since the 80’s…and the 106th Congress rolled over for them.
Interesting to note that Phil Gramm is now McCain’s chief financial advisor…but that Leach is a co-founder of ‘Republicans for Obama’.
Interesting to note that Phil Gramm is now McCain’s chief financial advisor…but that Leach is a co-founder of ‘Republicans for Obama’.
Phil gramm, the economic advisor that said the economy was fine and that we are a “Nation of Whiners”? REpublicas for obama? did he co-found the “republicans for Kerry” too? Talk about playing both sides of the fence!
Late,
grmpysmrf
I hear what your saying, BUT I just don’t see it all that way. C’mon now, you want a BMW you know you can’t afford one so that’s it (Your responsible) but others want a BMW and know they can’t afford one BUT have been told by a reputable institution that they CAN afford one!! so Who’s at fault there? (if you can’t afford something a bank won’t lend you money) you know full well you can’t afford it BUT you’ve been told you can by a bank. Everyone knows that banks won’t lend money to people who can’t pay it back “Well if a bank is gonna loan me money, Perhaps I can afford this!?” I think Banks took advantage big time! I was serious when I said it’s a lose/lose situation you’re right people were dumb but people have always been dumb and to say that it’s the corporations job to take care of them would be a serious mistatement BUT corporations certainly have a duty NOT take take advantage to the degree that they have. I think that is the root of the problem right there.
Wrong.
Banks weren’t telling people they could afford houses that couldn’t. They simply offered higher interest rates to people with higher risk potential. That is not uncommon or unethical. It covers their asses when idiots that buy a 225k house on a 45k salary default on their payments. Banking in general is a business sector that can easily be labeled as “greedy”. But without it shit wouldn’t run right.
To say that these bank’s greed was what caused this would be to assume than the lending institutions themselves foresaw the bubble burst. At the time, people were taking these sub-prime loans b/c they were flipping houses and making a ton of money. Other people saw this and wanted in themselves. They made bad investments, the banks made bad investments and now we’re all fucked.
Banks don’t just show up at your door and say “Hey man you can afford that huge house down the street. You don’t have to live in this middle income house anymore”. People go to banks when they’ve already found the house they want and they need funding. Now when Joe Schoe decides he wants to keep up the the Jones’ and get a house out of his price range, and goes to the bank to get a loan, the bank knows full well that he could default and they would end up with a nice property. That is where they are greedy, but that is called business. That is how it works. Should they have counselors in the banks telling people that they should be more responsible and get a smaller house?
So I take it you are against gambling being legal as well?
you ar right in the fact that banks didn’t come to people’s houses and say, “you can afford a Better house!” but your are wrong in the fact that people showed up to banks and applied for and got loans they could not afford! Banks knew they could not afford those loans and chose to give them the loans anyway. WIth regulations in effect they would have NEVER been approved for those loans!
Damn straight lenders saw the bubble bursting! (I saw the market brsting and I don’t even run in bussiness circles!) they counted on the bubble bursting! you know how much property they stood to gain?!
Counselors at banks telling people to get smaller houses? LOL no but perhaps they need counselors when they tell people “You cannot afford this house, No matter what size it is!”
and No I’m not against gambling but I do beleive the Casino has a duty to refuse service to anyone they know has a problem (which is exactly what banks did not do, to extend on that metaphor!)
Late,
grmpysmrf
there were plenty of reasons why bad mortgages were approved. possibly because the local bankers themselves had quotas to meet in order to get a raise or promotion. this mess goes from the top on down.
i know a retired professor ameritus of economics who said he thinks some of the CEOS ought to go to prison.you have to wonder why they’re being investigated by the FBI?
the way some of these guys went into companies which they knew were failing, signed up for golden parachutes in the event they had to leave the companies, and walked away with bonuses sometimes in the double digit millions is galling. do you honestly think they didn’t know to what degree the financial markets would tank? i think getting a golden parachute from a failing company, which you know is failing should be treated like insider trading. YOU CAN’T DO IT without running afoul of the SEC.
your are wrong in the fact that people showed up to banks and applied for and got loans they could not afford! Banks knew they could not afford those loans and chose to give them the loans anyway. WIth regulations in effect they would have NEVER been approved for those loans!
There are regulations in effect. It’s the regulations that played a huge role in all this. In fact, back in the day, banks had certain areas they designated as absolute no loan zones. Poor, usually minority areas where lending money to potential home buyers was not just a risky investment, but an almost a guaranteed foreclosure. All the economically uninformed whiners labeled it as “redlining” and President Clinton and his 55 Rep., 45 Dem. Congress decided that banks should no longer act like banks and lend money only to home buyers who could afford to handle monthly payments. Now anyone, even people with horrible credit would be entitled by law to obtain mortgages even when it was obvious they couldn’t afford to handle them.
[reply]your are wrong in the fact that people showed up to banks and applied for and got loans they could not afford! Banks knew they could not afford those loans and chose to give them the loans anyway. WIth regulations in effect they would have NEVER been approved for those loans!
There are regulations in effect. It’s the regulations that played a huge role in all this. In fact, back in the day, banks had certain areas they designated as absolute no loan zones. Poor, usually minority areas where lending money to potential home buyers was not just a risky investment, but an almost a guaranteed foreclosure. All the economically uninformed whiners labeled it as “redlining” and President Clinton and his 55 Rep., 45 Dem. Congress decided that banks should no longer act like banks and lend money only to home buyers who could afford to handle monthly payments. Now anyone, even people with horrible credit would be entitled by law to obtain mortgages even when it was obvious they couldn’t afford to handle them.[/reply]
so you’e telling us that the government MADE those banks make bad investmenents? Hell I wish I had known that, when I got turned down to buy a car 6 years ago. I wouldn’ve busted out that law!
The fact is, the banks knew that they were taking advantage of the system and did this on purpose as a greedy money grab only it bit them in the ass BIG TIME because I don’t think any of them expected this rough of a time getting a hand out from the government.
Late,
grmpysmrf
[reply][reply]your are wrong in the fact that people showed up to banks and applied for and got loans they could not afford! Banks knew they could not afford those loans and chose to give them the loans anyway. WIth regulations in effect they would have NEVER been approved for those loans!
There are regulations in effect. It’s the regulations that played a huge role in all this. In fact, back in the day, banks had certain areas they designated as absolute no loan zones. Poor, usually minority areas where lending money to potential home buyers was not just a risky investment, but an almost a guaranteed foreclosure. All the economically uninformed whiners labeled it as “redlining” and President Clinton and his 55 Rep., 45 Dem. Congress decided that banks should no longer act like banks and lend money only to home buyers who could afford to handle monthly payments. Now anyone, even people with horrible credit would be entitled by law to obtain mortgages even when it was obvious they couldn’t afford to handle them.[/reply]
so you’e telling us that the government MADE those banks make bad investmenents? Hell I wish I had known that, when I got turned down to buy a car 6 years ago. I wouldn’ve busted out that law!
The fact is, the banks knew that they were taking advantage of the system and did this on purpose as a greedy money grab only it bit them in the ass BIG TIME because I don’t think any of them expected this rough of a time getting a hand out from the government.
Late,
grmpysmrf[/reply]
Dude, that was HOUSING regulation. What would that have to do with you buying a car?
My dad owns his own business… It’s been hard times there for the past couple of years and now it’s basically hand to mouth, month to month, maybe they’ll stay open maybe they won’t… but where is THEIR bailout? and it’s not mismanagement on his part… it’s a shit auto economy