The World Thru My Eyes - I speak my mind and man does it like to talk.
So, one short simple article with just one simply (while not really simple) question:

Should we bail out the banks and save their asses in the hopes they learned their lesson or should we simply let them fail by their own mistakes and hope we can survive this possible financial/nuclear explosion and therefor not putting the burden on the American tax payer or is that last part gonna happen anyways?

I hear many conflicting reports and since I am not very educated in the economy, I am confused.

Comments (Page 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Sep 29, 2008

I would rather we not bail them out at all, but I am not sure what damage that could cause

And that is the problem....People like you dont know how this affects you. So they all called their congressmen and said vote no and the congressmen who are up for reelection voted in a way they think will protect their reelection.

So 1 trillion was lost in the markets today....And that's mostly from Main St. because the people who understand this have already isolated themselves from a market downturn. And everyday this keeps going on more and more people will lose their jobs because the credit market is frozen so overnight lending is not happening and businesses that rely on this will close their doors.

on Sep 30, 2008

So 1 trillion was lost in the markets today....And that's mostly from Main St. because the people who understand this have already isolated themselves from a market downturn. And everyday this keeps going on more and more people will lose their jobs because the credit market is frozen so overnight lending is not happening and businesses that rely on this will close their doors.

The day to day fluctuations in the stock market aren't something to get all worked up over.  Yes yesterday was the single largest point loss ever, but guess what today the market is up.  The thing to watch in the stock market is trends over a period of months not days because the market is very fickle.

There needs to be a serious market correction because the market has been over-inflated for far too long.  Yes that correction is going to be painful and people are going to lose their jobs but that doesn't mean it isn't necessary.  Money and credit has been far to easy to come by over the past 10 years or so and as a result people started to live outside their means.  The notion of saving money up to make big purchases was lost and we as a country need to get that back, and that applies to businesses as well as individuals.

on Sep 30, 2008

The thing to watch in the stock market is trends over a period of months not days because the market is very fickle.

I have been. Thats why I have been playing mostly the downside for a few years. The Federal Reserve is contracting the money supply. If you are smart you will research the history of fractional reserve banking, the central banks, and The Federal Reserve. The Fed made credit easy on purpose and they are about to take it all away. We just went through the roaring 20's and they are about to follow through and repeat history. Doing nothing will make things worse very quickly. Passing this bill is not a solution but will give many a chance to change things. It has been changed enough from the original plan, which was basically extortion to something that will hopefully recapitalize the banks long enough to fix some of the problems without the taxpayer footing the whole bill.

 

There needs to be a serious market correction because the market has been over-inflated for far too long

The market is currnetly not overinflated it is broken. The Fed Reserves heavy hand over govt has purposely caused a panic to try to get 700 billion out of the people....one way or another.

 

Who exactly do you think control the Federal Reserve?

on Sep 30, 2008

The Federal Reserve is contracting the money supply. If you are smart you will research the history of fractional reserve banking, the central banks, and The Federal Reserve.

How are they doing that? And who is controlling it?

I am asking for further clarification from you.  I think you have part of the answer, and El-D has much of it.

on Sep 30, 2008

The Federal Reserve is contracting the money supply.

Really?  So by contracting the money supply you mean tossing billions of dollars into the system?  That isn't contracting anything.  Now I can almost guarantee that the Fed will start contracting the money supply in the near future, but they certainly aren't doing that right now.

Doing nothing will make things worse very quickly.

That's kinda the point.  Do nothing now, get the worst of it over as quickly as possible so that we can move on and rebuild the economy rather than extending the pain over several years and delay the inevitable.

The market is currnetly not overinflated it is broken.

The market isn't broken.  It's going through a correction, albeit a very painful one but a correction nonetheless.  The market will pull out of this just fine, it will just take some time.

Who exactly do you think control the Federal Reserve?

The Federal Reserve is controled by a board of governors that care about big business.

on Sep 30, 2008

And who is controlling it?

Warburg, Rothschild, Morgan, Chase, and Rockerfeller would be a few examples of family lines with banking interests.

How are they doing that?

They froze overnight lending. That is why we need this bailout. The Fed Reserve can turn 700 billion into 7 trillion overnight.

 

 

on Sep 30, 2008

The market isn't broken

It is broken. Nobody knows which companies are exposed to mbs's. Nobody knows which companies are cooking their books. Nobody knows whether companies are properly valuing their assets so investors don't know if they are leveraged properly.

on Sep 30, 2008

Regardless, finger-pointing doesn't solve problems - save that for the investigation once things are okay.

I say let them burn.  It may hurt us, but a record of saving the butt of people who failed in business will hurt too.  Fact: If there is a necessary service like this that must be provided, someone else will step up and provide it.

The joy of capitalism - no one and no business is indespensable.

on Sep 30, 2008

I say let them burn.

What you don't understand is that it isnt a matter of letting them burn. The wealthiest will not burn one way or the other. The average american is the one who will burn. The bailout is not a bailout for Wall St. It is a bailout for the whole economy by recapitalizing the banks. Banks are what capitalism is based around.

on Sep 30, 2008

Warburg, Rothschild, Morgan, Chase, and Rockerfeller would be a few examples of family lines with banking interests.

Uh, no.  They may control some banks, but not the Feds.  But at least you did not say Congress or Bush.

They froze overnight lending. That is why we need this bailout. The Fed Reserve can turn 700 billion into 7 trillion overnight.

Questionable on the last part (although they can do a lot of damage).  We dont need the bail out.  And they can only freeze their own over night lending (which would be significant, but not devastating).

All in all, the Feds should be little seen and never heard.  Unfortunately they are both these days (seen and heard).  Some give way to much weight to them, and so the market reacts violently (until the smart money then buys out the suckers).

The Feds are a jewelers tool, not a sledge hammer.  It was never meant to be (but I will agree thatt many - including the Chairman of late - seem to look at it thusly).

on Sep 30, 2008

I say let them burn. It may hurt us, but a record of saving the butt of people who failed in business will hurt too. Fact: If there is a necessary service like this that must be provided, someone else will step up and provide it.

The joy of capitalism - no one and no business is indespensable.

I agree.  INvestment is a risk, and has to be, that is why you can make a killing or lose your shirt.  If we take the down side risk out of it, then no one is going to invest wisely, and that will do a lot more damage than a temporary setback.  That is all this all really is.  Some say a new depression - like mostly the short sellers who want to profit from the panic.  It is none of those.  It is true financial darwinism, and we have to let the stupids fail, or we risk everyone failing from of course "good intentions".

on Sep 30, 2008

The bailout is not a bailout for Wall St. It is a bailout for the whole economy by recapitalizing the banks. Banks are what capitalism is based around.

NO!  Definitely wrong!  The FDIC will make sure the average joe is fine, but Daddy Warbucks gets hurt.  The Bailout is about the fat cats (and through trickle down - that which many do not like - the little guy will suffer in the short term).  The Nailout is all about the fat cats, and not the average joe.  AIG was a different animal, but then it is not a bank or a bailout.

on Sep 30, 2008

They may control some banks, but not the Feds

What do you think the Federal Reserve banks are? The Board of Govenors control monetary policy but that is it.The funds in the reserve banks are the reserve funds that private banks keep at their local Reserve Banks. And if you dont think they have ultimate control of this money then you are a fool.

Like I said you better do some research on the history of not only The Federal Reserve,but also prior central and reserve banks.

The FDIC will make sure the average joe is fine,

Not really. Or do you think everyone should or can move their IRA's, 401K's, Pension Funds etc. to FDIC insured investments?

AIG was a different animal, but then it is not a bank or a bailout.

However you might want to look at what it provides for investment services, which includes an FDIC insured Bank,and mortgage services. It certainly was a bailout.

on Oct 01, 2008

It is broken. Nobody knows which companies are exposed to mbs's. Nobody knows which companies are cooking their books. Nobody knows whether companies are properly valuing their assets so investors don't know if they are leveraged properly.

That's not a broken market, that's broken companies.  And how exactly is a bailout of any size going to fix the problems you identify here?  Whether they are bailed out or not noone will know if they are cooking the books or properly valueing their assets.  And if companies are cooking the books then they deserve to fail not be rescued.

Not really. Or do you think everyone should or can move their IRA's, 401K's, Pension Funds etc. to FDIC insured investments?

You are correct that the FDIC doesn't insure the IRAs, 401K's and pension funds, but the bailout isn't going to address those either.  The market will rebound, it may just take a couple years so yes people depending on retirement funds may need to find other sources of income for a while but they will survive, it's not like the bailout is actually going to help them.

 

 

on Oct 01, 2008

Not really. Or do you think everyone should or can move their IRA's, 401K's, Pension Funds etc. to FDIC insured investments?

DEPOSITS.  Why are people so obtuse!  If yoru IRA or 401K is in a DEPOSIT it is insured (and how many are there?).  If it is in stokcs, that is because they want greater returns, and with that comes RISK.  The government is not there to change yoru frigging diaper.  If you are so damn worried, stuff it under your mattress!

What do you think the Federal Reserve banks are? The Board of Govenors control monetary policy but that is it.The funds in the reserve banks are the reserve funds that private banks keep at their local Reserve Banks. And if you dont think they have ultimate control of this money then you are a fool.

Apparently you dont know.  It is the Banks bank,  As such it can influence banks to some degree, but not run them.  Fore someone calling others fools, perhaps you had best get your head out of the space ship and stop spouting assinine statements.  The "funds" are just the reserves the banks are required to keep by law, not the property of the Fed.  Do you think your lawyer can spend your trust fund?  They have a lot of influence over the money supply, but do not "control" it any more than you control speed limits in your city.  Get real, and get off the insults.

However you might want to look at what it provides for investment services, which includes an FDIC insured Bank,and mortgage services. It certainly was a bailout.

Then every time you sell a house and take back a second, you are bailing out the borrower?  Yea right!  AIG MIGHT cost some money, but what it is - is just an investment.  And a pretty damn good one.  Like the one Warren Buffet did with Goldman Sachs - he bailed them out, right?

And who cares about the Bank?  Seriously are you going to use 7 degrees of separation every time someone craps a turd?

4 Pages1 2 3 4