I see what you are saying but don't know why you figure the government needs to be taking things from one group to give to another. Something seems wrong with that.
The HOUSE votes NO!!
- Thread starter redlineguy
- Start date
I see what you are saying but don't know why you figure the government needs to be taking things from one group to give to another. Something seems wrong with that.
O
Ollie
ACCOUNT CLOSED
I never thought I would say this, but
Portgrinder is very correct. It started with people buying things they couldn't afford. however, who made it possible for them to get the loans they never should have had to begin with. The very orginizations that are bankrupting wallstreet.
People under 40 have been programmed by TV, the advertisers and the manufacturers that anything is possible with credit. People want the biggest and the best regardless of the cost (just look at sledders, we do it also). They swallowed the whole, you can afford it by doing this.................. It was a scam. The banks and lending instatutions knew they were pushing it hard, but didn't care enough to stop. They wanted the money, the commisions.
The last thing the governement should be doing is letting these idiots off the hook by paying off their bad decisions. Let em hang. If they do a bail out these people should be stripped of every dime they have to help pay off the bills. Throw a few of these idiots in jail for fraud and you will see things change, take away ALL their money and you will see things change. Bail them out with no questions asked and you will see more of the same with zero change.
Got this in an email, and the sender doesn't typically send out crap and checks things over pretty good. Time will tell.....
It's a set-up.
This was the "Bush bill".
Obama will ride back to Washington tonight or tomorrow, and deliver a bill to the Democratic leadership. They will vote, almost lock-step for it, and Bush will have to sign the "Obama bill".
The market tanked when Bush couldn't get it done. The statements will show up 3-4 weeks out from the election and timed to coincide with the next POTUS debate. The markets will rally when the bail-out is passed, and it'll be "Obama's bill" that does it.
Pelosi's speech and post-vote whining is a set-up.
It's a set-up.
This was the "Bush bill".
Obama will ride back to Washington tonight or tomorrow, and deliver a bill to the Democratic leadership. They will vote, almost lock-step for it, and Bush will have to sign the "Obama bill".
The market tanked when Bush couldn't get it done. The statements will show up 3-4 weeks out from the election and timed to coincide with the next POTUS debate. The markets will rally when the bail-out is passed, and it'll be "Obama's bill" that does it.
Pelosi's speech and post-vote whining is a set-up.
The people gettin the mortgages were the druggies, but big banks were the dealers. Here have a little, wasn't that great, o need a vacation, let your home work for you, here have some more. Maybe you want to add on to your home, have some more, we don't really care if you put it toward your home. It's your money do what you want. It wasn't right but it sure got done a lot.
I think what should happen is that any exectuive-level employee of any company that is seeking taxpayer money to bail them out needs to be stripped of any assets they've obtained through compensation from their present employers until all they have left of this compensation is worth $100,000 and no more.
Then, after that, let's see what the final price tag on the "bailout" is going to be.
What sucks is, I hate saying this. But that's how I feel. It should not be the government's responsibility (read: the taxpayers) to bail out companies who sold bad loans and people who took on bad loans.
Generally speaking I'm all for government deregulation, and I *DONT* think the government should have done anything drastically different than it did, but what I do think, is that they need to let the financial institutions and their executives who are responsible for this disaster f*cking figure out how to fix it for themselves.
They're the ones that proprieted these loans that led to the dominoe effect. ..
what was the government's role in this crisis, really? It seems to me it was wall street that got overly greedy ... and I think wall street needs to pay for it, not us.
Let them all fail, and le tnew institutions be built from the ground up with a lesson learned.
Then, after that, let's see what the final price tag on the "bailout" is going to be.
What sucks is, I hate saying this. But that's how I feel. It should not be the government's responsibility (read: the taxpayers) to bail out companies who sold bad loans and people who took on bad loans.
Generally speaking I'm all for government deregulation, and I *DONT* think the government should have done anything drastically different than it did, but what I do think, is that they need to let the financial institutions and their executives who are responsible for this disaster f*cking figure out how to fix it for themselves.
They're the ones that proprieted these loans that led to the dominoe effect. ..
what was the government's role in this crisis, really? It seems to me it was wall street that got overly greedy ... and I think wall street needs to pay for it, not us.
Let them all fail, and le tnew institutions be built from the ground up with a lesson learned.
Ok, lets "dumb it down" from the whole repercussions this bailout would have economically....
If YOUR company went under, would the feds bail you out?
This is PRIVATE enterprise... the people in power made bad decisions, and got hit with the same hardships as the rest of the population... Its not my tax dollar's duty to reimburse them.
If YOUR company went under, would the feds bail you out?
This is PRIVATE enterprise... the people in power made bad decisions, and got hit with the same hardships as the rest of the population... Its not my tax dollar's duty to reimburse them.
S
speeddemon
Well-known member
correct !!! when my 2nd business went under(over extended myself) i filed and guess who still got there money !!! yes the government ! did they help me ? NO !!!!did they offer to buy my screwups/depts ??? NO!!!! i had to eat it and start over ! did i learn from this ?? HECK YES I DID!!!! will they learn from this ???????time will tell!!!!!!!!!!!
mike
S
Snow Fox
Guest
Unbelievable.....it failed and the talk is already that a baillout bill will eventually pass. Did I miss something.??? If the bill failed shouldn't it be done and over with? That is what the majority of the American people want, but it will eventually be forced down our throats.......something is terribly wrong with this picture.
Nope;
People getting the mortgages were the druggies, the realtors were the dealers and the big banks were the growers.
I don't believe that there wasn't some collusion at the top in these businesses.
M
modsledr
Well-known member
I'm not saying I'm for the bailout as it was originally drafted...but if they structure it similar to the AIG loan, then I'm all for it...The AIG deal is for 2 years, at 12% interest, with the gov't (taxpayers) owning 80% of the company when its done. Sure there is risk, but think about the upside.
This isn't about saving companies and wall street...its about getting the financial and banking system back to a point of normalcy, where the bank loan to each other and also to companies and individuals. NO major inovation happens without loans...NO major business grows without loans...NO major purchases happen without loans.
To me the real quesiton is this: do we want "normalcy" back? Or do we want to blow up the entire world banking system and start over? (be careful what you ask for).
If there is a bailout of the banking system, it should be accompanied by significant regulatory change and oversight. There will alway be a need for credit and lending...just need to clamp down on the unmitigated greed.
This whole "sky is falling" reaction gets old.
This isn't about saving companies and wall street...its about getting the financial and banking system back to a point of normalcy, where the bank loan to each other and also to companies and individuals. NO major inovation happens without loans...NO major business grows without loans...NO major purchases happen without loans.
To me the real quesiton is this: do we want "normalcy" back? Or do we want to blow up the entire world banking system and start over? (be careful what you ask for).
If there is a bailout of the banking system, it should be accompanied by significant regulatory change and oversight. There will alway be a need for credit and lending...just need to clamp down on the unmitigated greed.
This whole "sky is falling" reaction gets old.
O
Ollie
ACCOUNT CLOSED
According to the talking heads, one of the reasons it failed is it didn't have enough give aways in it.
A lot of the dems (I think it was 90 dems voted against it) wanted money for credit card debt payoff for low income people, home loan payoffs for low income, etc, etc..
Can you believe it. THey wanted MORE of our money for people that can't live within their means.
Let those companies fail, let the economy drop. The entire world is taking a major hit on this one. The world seems to like to dump on the US for everything, well, let em see how much they depend on the country they love to hate. LEt their economies crash. Ours will recover.
A lot of the dems (I think it was 90 dems voted against it) wanted money for credit card debt payoff for low income people, home loan payoffs for low income, etc, etc..
Can you believe it. THey wanted MORE of our money for people that can't live within their means.
Let those companies fail, let the economy drop. The entire world is taking a major hit on this one. The world seems to like to dump on the US for everything, well, let em see how much they depend on the country they love to hate. LEt their economies crash. Ours will recover.
As I stated earlier, if part of the "deal" meant there was a promise that the real crooks were going to be searched out and proscecuted, I think many of us would be willing to go along with something. But so far I haven't heard any legislation. Maybe because they'd be signing their own jail sentence. Now we have came back around to the start again. Gawd we need term limits so these guys could make descisions based on what's good for the country not their own pockets.
There is always collusion... it is called getting more money! They all wanted it, and all did what they could to get it! Greed my friend, is the best collusion tool ever!
It is more complicated than that, you can't just dumb it down...
We are all borrowing money from these banks. Americans. If your bank system fails, it will cause mass chaos, millions will lose jobs, the economy will come to a halt.
Hard to say "you are on your own" when we have been borrowing money from these same guys.
Want to get really pissed off now? We will be bailing out foreign banks as well.
S
speeddemon
Well-known member
what about this ? instead of taking homes away from people because there arm is up why not let them keep there home keep makig the payments and give them a fixed loan instead of jacking up the intrest rate ? the bank/loan co still get paid not as much but still better than sitting on homes that wont sell and having to go into bankrupsy/ a bailout ? they did this in the last depression i was told and it helped out ! i lucked out i was able to refi my house but it took a year to do and i was paying 18% intrest on my house 1st and my 2nd mortgage . i didnt have a problem paying that( cheap house ) but is still sucked ! now i have a 30yr fixed at 6% its way ezier ! they could help out americans and themselves by doing somthing like that ! just food for thought !!!!!!!!!
mike
mike
There are plans in place to help people who financed a house and have been making all of their payments on time, who are at risk of losing their homes because their ARM is about ot expire. They did this part WAY too late.
