• NAXJA is having its 18th annual March Membership Drive!!!
    Everyone who joins or renews during March will be entered into a drawing!
    More Information - Join/Renew
  • Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Some details on the bail out bill

Ecomike

NAXJA# 2091
NAXJA Member
Location
MilkyWay Galaxy
http://publications.fidelity.com/in...agename=IW080929govtrescue&fca_id=20084190p07

These is an interesting read (above) for those interested in the details of the financial markets and the current problems with re-kick starting the system.

"Second, the market pricing mechanism for most of these assets has completely broken down. Because many institutions have been trying to unload the same types of troubled assets at the same time, the selling has over-whelmed the buying, resulting in fire-sale prices or the complete lack of trading at any price. Determining the exact values for these complex securities, in an atmosphere where the price discovery mechanism of the market has broken down, will be a Herculean task."

http://publications.fidelity.com/in...ion/loadArticle?pagename=FEA080915mareupdate2
 
Here's some more detials.

The Senate is going to vote today on a modified bill that the House voted against......perhaps I didn't pay close attention during to Schoolhouse Rock.

Here's amy point.....

  1. Vote - the bill is voted on. If passed, it is then sent to the other chamber unless that chamber already has a similar measure under consideration. If either chamber does not pass the bill then it dies. If the House and Senate pass the same bill then it is sent to the President. If the House and Senate pass different bills they are sent to Conference Committee. Most major legislation goes to a Conference Committee.
So why is the Senate voting on a modification of the bill, if the House has not voted on it and it failed?

Seems like a violation of Constitutional Law........
 
The senate is going to try to pass it, maybe less senators are up for re election or something that makes them immune from constituents pressure, then thats supposed to force the congress to also pass it. Squeeze play and nasty, these peckerheads will stoop to new lows to pass this and on general principals I'm against any legislation being pushed this hard. I'll not vote for anyone who votes for it and neither will anyone in my family.
If these scumbags had pushed with the same zeal for tighter borders, emigration enforcement, job creation and stopping corporations from hemorrhaging jobs overseas overseas we'd be in the black by now.
 
http://publications.fidelity.com/in...agename=IW080929govtrescue&fca_id=20084190p07

These is an interesting read (above) for those interested in the details of the financial markets and the current problems with re-kick starting the system.

"Second, the market pricing mechanism for most of these assets has completely broken down. Because many institutions have been trying to unload the same types of troubled assets at the same time, the selling has over-whelmed the buying, resulting in fire-sale prices or the complete lack of trading at any price. Determining the exact values for these complex securities, in an atmosphere where the price discovery mechanism of the market has broken down, will be a Herculean task."

http://publications.fidelity.com/in...ion/loadArticle?pagename=FEA080915mareupdate2

You beat me too it. I agree with you; very interesting read.
 
Very informative read.
My question is why would anyone vote against it?
Our economy is based on credit, everything from business to supplier transactions to me buying a house.
If lenders run out of capital to leverage against, than the economy goes down the drain. Small businesses, farmers, and my ability to get a student loan are all affected as well.
Where is the alternate solution?
 
Do your research, there are several links to alternate plans.

Why vote against it? It's is %&!*#$ SOCIALISM!!

Time to educate yourself, Commrade.
 
Do your research, there are several links to alternate plans.

Why vote against it? It's is %&!*#$ SOCIALISM!!

Time to educate yourself, Commrade.

I don't agree. Socialism would be bailing out the mom & pop on the corner.
Stepping in and stopping a financial crisis is IMO exactly what government regulation is intended for.
Don't get me wrong, those responsible for bad assets should be held accountable. To let it crash and burn, no matter how entertaining, would be a mistake.

I asked about another solution in an effort to educate myself, you did not help my quest.
 
I don't agree. Socialism would be bailing out the mom & pop on the corner.
Stepping in and stopping a financial crisis is IMO exactly what government regulation is intended for.
Don't get me wrong, those responsible for bad assets should be held accountable. To let it crash and burn, no matter how entertaining, would be a mistake.

I asked about another solution in an effort to educate myself, you did not help my quest.

I'm impressed with your answer! Hell of a Good answer. Just what is your major?

You might consider running for office someday, we could use such clear thinking in Washington, IMHO, it would be a novelty.

By the way, I don't know where some of you people get the idea that salvaging or repairing a financial system, a system that the entire world depends on, would be or is socialism. It is my understanding that socialism is an entirely managed economy, no free enterprise. Something you people don't seem to get is that if Washington leaves the financial system in the shape it is in, like it did in 1929-1932, it eventually leads to US treasuries being dumped on an ill-liquid market, making them worthless, which is the very thing that caused the bank holiday in 1933 when the government closed all the remaining banks ( about 22,000 of them were gone by 1933) and Washington recapitalized them with US treasuries backed by the US Taxpayer.

Not acting now with a bail out, is likely to cause more socialism or socialistic legislation to be passed in the near future as the economy collapses, than the current bail out plan would cause. From what I am hearing, if they do it right the final cost maybe ZERO $$s, and would restore the free market.
 
By the way, I don't know where some of you people get the idea that salvaging or repairing a financial system, a system that the entire world depends on, would be or is socialism. It is my understanding that socialism is an entirely managed economy, no free enterprise. Something you people don't seem to get is that if Washington leaves the financial system in the shape it is in, like it did in 1929-1932, it eventually leads to US treasuries being dumped on an ill-liquid market, making them worthless, which is the very thing that caused the bank holiday in 1933 when the government closed all the remaining banks ( about 22,000 of them were gone by 1933) and Washington recapitalized them with US treasuries backed by the US Taxpayer.

Not acting now with a bail out, is likely to cause more socialism or socialistic legislation to be passed in the near future as the economy collapses, than the current bail out plan would cause. From what I am hearing, if they do it right the final cost maybe ZERO $$s, and would restore the free market.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/...09/29/bailout-marks-karl-marx-s-comeback.aspx
 
It doesn't matter...if Obama's for it than I'm against it. :laugh: :patriot:

The funny (or sad) part is that Obama, McCain, Bush and eventually a majority of Congress (House Representatives and Senators) have and or will support a bail out plan in the very near future. The only question is what the final bill will include.
 
The funny (or sad) part is that Obama, McCain, Bush and eventually a majority of Congress (House Representatives and Senators) have and or will support a bail out plan in the very near future. The only question is what the final bill will include.

What will it have, as much pork as they can stuff in, protection for the boys who screwed it up in the first place. Until I see some golden parachutes replaced with orange jumpsuits I'm against it. Hell, even romans got to see some bad guys eaten by the tigers or pulled apart by horses.... as long as we are doing bread and circus's lets see some blood...
 
I really think the whole thing is being over simplified in the press and from the politicians. Listen to what they aren't saying and think at the same time where is all the money going? I realize they spend the same dollars many times over, but just some things to think about.
The government was printing money to finance the Iraqi war and at the same time borrowing more. The government borrowing was directly competing with other borrows and driving the cost of borrowing money up at home.
The Saudis and others are on a building spree in the Gulf (trillions), the US inflation went up and exchange rates down, the Saudis reacted by raising the price of oil etc. The workers on the Saudi projects were actually refusing to take dollars anymore (first hand knowledge).
The US has pulled the same gambit before, when too much money ends up overseas and the overseas corporations start investing into other countries (besides the US) or holding onto the money and not reinvesting it in the US, the US devalues it's currency (prints more). The overseas debt holders see there US holdings, sink in value fast. It's worked many times in the past.
I'm not an economist, but from my reading the experts are often unsure of what is going on, besides vague indicators (often months old).
Too many entities trying for the same money driving the cost up, the flow interrupted by sinking much of it into physical assets (that aren't selling or producing), the end/beginning of the fiscal year (1 Oct.), the price of energy going up (drastically), the market being manipulated in strange and new ways.
The bailout may just be the tip of a very large iceberg and actually a very small part of the solution for a multitude problems.
 
What will it have, as much pork as they can stuff in, protection for the boys who screwed it up in the first place. Until I see some golden parachutes replaced with orange jumpsuits I'm against it. Hell, even romans got to see some bad guys eaten by the tigers or pulled apart by horses.... as long as we are doing bread and circus's lets see some blood...

I am fond of pork, unless there is steak on the table!:D
 
I really think the whole thing is being over simplified in the press and from the politicians. Listen to what they aren't saying and think at the same time where is all the money going? I realize they spend the same dollars many times over, but just some things to think about.
The government was printing money to finance the Iraqi war and at the same time borrowing more. The government borrowing was directly competing with other borrows and driving the cost of borrowing money up at home.
The Saudis and others are on a building spree in the Gulf (trillions), the US inflation went up and exchange rates down, the Saudis reacted by raising the price of oil etc. The workers on the Saudi projects were actually refusing to take dollars anymore (first hand knowledge).
The US has pulled the same gambit before, when too much money ends up overseas and the overseas corporations start investing into other countries (besides the US) or holding onto the money and not reinvesting it in the US, the US devalues it's currency (prints more). The overseas debt holders see there US holdings, sink in value fast. It's worked many times in the past.
I'm not an economist, but from my reading the experts are often unsure of what is going on, besides vague indicators (often months old).
Too many entities trying for the same money driving the cost up, the flow interrupted by sinking much of it into physical assets (that aren't selling or producing), the end/beginning of the fiscal year (1 Oct.), the price of energy going up (drastically), the market being manipulated in strange and new ways.
The bailout may just be the tip of a very large iceberg and actually a very small part of the solution for a multitude problems.

While your analysis (tip of the iceberg analogy) may be right, It will be the tip of the iceberg if they don't unfreeze the credit markets. I for one am hoping it's a very small, tiny iceberg that melts quickly.
 
While your analysis (tip of the iceberg analogy) may be right, It will be the tip of the iceberg if they don't unfreeze the credit markets. I for one am hoping it's a very small, tiny iceberg that melts quickly.
Whats this frozen credit stuff everyone is talking about, I called my two banks today and asked if I could get a 60 day $25,000 bridge loan to cover production of some workstations and I had a signed Purchase order from such and such a company. They ok'd the loan over the phone and would have transferred it into my checking account over the phone. One of my customers just got a $80,000 loan to cover paving his parking lot, painting the building, remodeling the entire interior and some other new stuff. So far I see no credit crunch. Oh, one of my banks is wachovia too. So far I'm not seeing it, only hearing people panic who did not just do a simple check with their bank. In fact both my banks said I was ok up to $100K.
 
Whats this frozen credit stuff everyone is talking about, I called my two banks today and asked if I could get a 60 day $25,000 bridge loan to cover production of some workstations and I had a signed Purchase order from such and such a company. They ok'd the loan over the phone and would have transferred it into my checking account over the phone. One of my customers just got a $80,000 loan to cover paving his parking lot, painting the building, remodeling the entire interior and some other new stuff. So far I see no credit crunch. Oh, one of my banks is wachovia too. So far I'm not seeing it, only hearing people panic who did not just do a simple check with their bank. In fact both my banks said I was ok up to $100K.

I must admit I got a $10,000 credit card offer, with a 12 month 0.00% interest rate offer from WaMu a few days ago., along with similar offers from Bank of America, Wells Fargo,....etc.
 
Bailout is socialism b/c its a step towards a "nationalized bank"

i'm tired, i'm not saying anything else...stupid east coast time...
 
Bailout is socialism b/c its a step towards a "nationalized bank"

i'm tired, i'm not saying anything else...stupid east coast time...

Some body correct me here, but wasn't Fed (Federal Reserve Bank System) created as THE nationalized bank of the USA, back around 1914?
I think your about 90 years to late to fight the national bank battle.
 
Whats this frozen credit stuff everyone is talking about...

See, that's the part I just don't get.

Sure, a bunch of banks are losing a lot of money, because they made loans they shouldn't have (Actually, because they bought debt they shouldn't have)

But no money-man is so stupid that he can't tell the difference between some yahoo that bought twice as much house as he could afford, and a legitimate business that uses credit as part of its day-to-day operations.

I should hope that the banker would think twice about lending to the yahoo again, but to refuse a loan to the legit business would only shut down the bank's own business.

I can see the banks getting pickier about making loans (and god knows they need to be!) but it would be self-defeating for them to stop all transactions cold.

I think the whole thing is a rotten attempt to over-hype the situation, to avoid the consequences of their bad decisions.

But what do I know...

Robert
 
Back
Top