→ 11 answers so far ↓

• 1 jake // Sep 29, 2008 at 10:21 am

  If it’s true that the taxpayer is going to see any profits, then I guess I’m okay with it.

  I’d like to think it would come with a fundamental change in the way this kind of business is conducted in our country, but that’s probably too much to hope for.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “props”

• 2 NateG // Sep 29, 2008 at 11:21 am

  I feel like action is obviously necessary at this point and the bailout package seems to have enough oomph to make a difference in a good way…

  I believe that the money involved should be not just given up, but earned back and with a profit.

  Also i just feel that this is another example of how a total free market system just does not work. On that note, its another example of how it is important to wisely regulate the market systems in this country and to make sure that our middle class does not get screwed over. like without providing protection for ordinary people in this country i believe that the US of A will either be sent to the dark ages or all us will be rushing towards full on socialism…

  Its like in order to protect free-market capitalism you really have to make sure its not to capitalistic.. naw mean?

  also, i am in no way a socialist/

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “unnggghhhh!”

• 3 phil // Sep 29, 2008 at 12:28 pm

  Breaking news: the plan didn’t make it out of the house of representatives after all. Nobody wants to vote for it because it’s a few weeks before the election and 90% of voters hate the idea. If democrats pass it over republican opposition, they can get beat over the head with until election day.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “[applause]“

• 4 lauren b. // Sep 29, 2008 at 4:08 pm

  The whole financial world right now is crazy. More than a few people have been walking through our office looking like they just hit the crack pipe, asking if we are in Russia. Still interesting that one day they refuse to bail out Lehman, and the next they are ready to help out AIG. In related news, the short-ban that is spreading across the entire globe is making my life a living hell, and is making me wonder why I am still in this damn field.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “that’s what she said!”

• 5 Juan // Sep 29, 2008 at 5:30 pm

  To quote the reporter covering the story about Laterian Milton in the ‘A Very Serious Video’ section: “It all ended at Investment Lane and Consumer Drive.”

  I like to imagine that Laterian is really George Bush riding along with his bad-influence, cigarette-smoking friend Hank Paulson. The beat up Dodge Durango is our economy. The cops are Congress. And Laterian’s mom (to whom he refers for help at the end of the report) is really the taxpayers.

  Phil rules.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “black word!”

• 6 phil // Sep 29, 2008 at 5:53 pm

  Juan I think that Laterian Milton is the financial services industry and the government is the grandma, only instead of taking away video games for a week we are buying Laterian grand theft auto IV.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “I approve of this”

• 7 dano // Sep 29, 2008 at 5:58 pm

  It’s a sham. It’s a short term solution. You read any interview with Hank or Ben (or anyone else for that matter) and they have no clue how to fix it. They have no real idea what the problem is, they’re idiots. They’re the same people who, six months ago, told us that everything was fine, and a year ago said there was no housing bubble… meanwhile they didn’t take any action then aside from knicking a couple tenths of a percent off the interest rate… as if that’s going to do anything. Over a year ago they knew there was a MAJOR problem with repackaging of sub-ps into asset back commercial paper but they didn’t do one damn thing to try and get it sorted out then; the writing was on the wall in 50′ neon letters. And that $600 a lot of people got a few months ago that was supposed to pull us back up to #1, that didn’t do anything. Now we’re supposed to believe that this plan is going to work. Horse shit.

  If you read the plan it’s simply retarded because we still don’t have a complete picture of which assests are poisoned and which assets aren’t; we were about to give–more or less–a blank check to the industry that already pissed itself away for a problem that we still don’t know the extent of and say “here, hope this helps, by the way, you may or may not have to let us know how much you spent where and who got what.” Are you kidding me?

  I only have a minor in finance so I’m not some guru but if these assets are non-performing now, and nobody on the block can tell us what’s going to be needed to make them perform, then why the fuck are we buying them? Oh, right, because our *ENTIRE* economy will come crumbling down without out it. Just like the terrorists were going to win without the Patriot Act and every child will be in porn if we don’t allow complete border searches of all electronic devices without reasonable suspicion. AHHHHHHHHHHHHH! We need to take inventory of all assets and their contents and THEN decide what to do. But of course let’s scare everyone into backing some stupid plan by telling them the sky is falling because a certain sector wants to continue on, uninterrupted with the life-style they’ve come accustomed to.

  If we had some $700 billion surplus then it’s possible this might have some impact, but injecting a fake $700 billion by selling bonds to Asia and the Middle East isn’t going to strengthen our economy… it’s just going to shoot up inflation and fuck us in the long run.

  What a super great country we live in… go-d forbid we talk about “socialized” medicine but when it comes time to socialize debt of private industry (while all profits are private) some of these motherfuckers can’t affirm quick enough. It blows my mind.

  As far as the taxpayer seeing profits, don’t hold your breath, you should see the language in this proposal… it boils down to “the taxpayer MIGHT stand a chance to see a cut of the profits, should there EVER be any.”

  There exists prudent banks who did not choose to buy into this, who were cautious and skeptical and who are surviving fine so why reward the reckless idiots if it’s now proven that it was simply bad management (who, by the way, will still get their salaries and executive compensation as long as it was active before the bailout).

  I’m glad it’s so close to election, otherwise this would have passed with flying colors. Both Dems and Reps are fucking the dog on this one and I hope, if it passes, each one that aye’d in gets the fuckin’ boot.

  Ask me what I really think.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “kudos”

• 8 phil // Sep 30, 2008 at 9:56 am

  Dano, this was a well written and thoughtful answer, I appreciate it.

  I think that the government needs to take some action though, especially now because Bush, Paulson and Bernanke all went on tv and worked up everyone saying that we need it and we’ll simply die if we don’t get it.

  What should be done though? I’m at a loss.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “that’s what she said!”

• 9 dano // Sep 30, 2008 at 3:04 pm

  The first thing would be to sort out the assets.

  See, the thing is, that most people don’t get (because nobody really gives a shit about how finance works) is that the problem is as simple as “banks have X amount of bad mortgage loans, people are defaulting so the bank is losing money.” If that were the case we’d have pretty much no problem. The real problem is, like I mentioned before, is the asset backed commercial paper and mortgage backed securities that went out over the last five years. It’s also a huge problem with derivatives; which are financial instruments based on the value of other assets.

  Basically it boils down to this:

  There are the ACTUAL bad mortgage loans and there are other “assets” which are based on those bad loans and still more “assets” based on those bad assets which were created to hedge against a loss… whoops.

  So the first step would be to go through and separate the ACTUAL loans from the derivatives and pull them all apart. The ACTUAL loan assets could be bought or subsidized by the Treasury; the junk left should be shit canned…

  Another fun thing that’s going on is price disparity between establishments. One firm may have a million shares of XYZ (which are just securities issued based on mortgages) and they’ve valued it at .20 since it’s dropped, the next firm may have it valued at .30 and still another firm may have it valued at .80… this bailout didn’t specify that a uniform price had to be reached. It was ready to just write checks to buy these “assets” at whatever the firm had valued their shares at… it was seriously funny to read because ANYONE with half a brain could find the problems with it.

  The solution isn’t going to be quick, everything needs to be sorted out, inventoried, uniformly judged etc etc. But what do we get? We get the President on TV telling us we’re all going to die if it doesn’t pass NOW and Hank and Paul doing the same thing to cover their own asses and their buddys’ asses. Sorting this out is going to be a long arduous process, not some overnight thing.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “word”

• 10 Stefan // Oct 1, 2008 at 4:15 pm

  I disagree with dano to some extent t least. I think its great and necessary for the bail-out plan, especially since it has a signaling function. And with that in mind, in doesnt contradict with what Dano says of this being an arduous process, which is true, but we should get it “approved” now so people can start chillin… also, if you know about the plan, you know you’ll only get a fraction upfront, and then the rest needs to be appoved. This shit needs to go through, quickly.

  current votes: 0 vote if this makes you say “unnggghhhh!”

You must log in to comment. I tried it the other way and had to erase 1,000 ads for viagra and mortgages one by one. Register here, it takes less than ten seconds.