thought some of you might be interested in this.
how they voted on the bailout...
- Thread starter queenlives
- Start date
one of the guys name is slaughter
So, I'm confused.
Pelosi made a big speech laying the all blame on the Republicans for this mess.
Does anyone really believe this nonsense?
The Dems have the majority. They have had the majority for some time. They could have passed this bill days ago. They didn't need the Republicans at all.
It's not about the bill, it's about bashing Bush and doing whatever it takes to elect Obama.
Why didn't she mention Bush's (and McCain's) attempts to reform Fannie and Freddie? If she didn't want to be totally honest she could have at least admitted that both Dems and Reps didn't sign onto this bill and more work needed to be done.
No, she would rather inflame the situation and risk passage of the bill that she thinks is SO important for the country, simply to bash Bush and to take the opportunity to help Obama.
It's just disgusting.
Pelosi made a big speech laying the all blame on the Republicans for this mess.
Does anyone really believe this nonsense?
The Dems have the majority. They have had the majority for some time. They could have passed this bill days ago. They didn't need the Republicans at all.
It's not about the bill, it's about bashing Bush and doing whatever it takes to elect Obama.
Why didn't she mention Bush's (and McCain's) attempts to reform Fannie and Freddie? If she didn't want to be totally honest she could have at least admitted that both Dems and Reps didn't sign onto this bill and more work needed to be done.
No, she would rather inflame the situation and risk passage of the bill that she thinks is SO important for the country, simply to bash Bush and to take the opportunity to help Obama.
It's just disgusting.
If they didn't bring up re-doing the vote or however you want to describe it, you would have seen 4 figures down on the DOW, with room to spare. A bunch of guys on the floor got blown out when they didn't pass the bill. I wasn't foolish enough to have that much confidence in our congress. Pelosy and some 'hardcore' conservatives held the bill back, neither can escape blame for this one (or take credit, however you look at it). I hope they use this time to make the bill more effective (lots of weaknesses and flaws but for such a short term project it's not bad) and not waste time bickering while the retirment funds of individuals -around the world- sink into oblivion. But as I often say.. hope is not a strategy.. and past performance is often* indicative of future results, when it comes to our congress.
I'd love to see some or all of those people who voted nay be interviewed on primetime TV. I'd particularly like to see what the Dems who voted against would say.
- Joined
- 21 January 2005
- Messages
- 1,384
2004 Video: Democrats Refuse Freddie and Fannie Reform: http://sooshisoo.wordpress.com/2008/09/29/2004-video-democrats-refuse-freddie-and-fannie-reform/
The Republicans are blamed for the failure of Freddie and Fannie but yet, in 2004 they (McCain and others) attempted to address the problem.
I strongly believe that the Dems don't want this issue to be resolved until after the elections so they can continue to lie and confuse the voters about what really is going on.
well, a large population of some "poll" taken showed very very VERY little support for giving away 700 billion dollars, people will all be effected differently, but one way or another something needs to happen "pra-active"
I've very happy the bailout was shot down. I had emailed my congressman and senators to show opposition.
The bailout is full out communism/socialism. Have any of you taken the time to read the 110 page bill?
I would personally rather see DOW at 6500 and have my free markets and properly valued assets, than to have a hyperinflated currency from the Fed printing out money we don't have. If we follow the course we are taking the dollar will collapse eventually.
I think there will be a point when the dollar is low enough that importing goods will no longer be cheaper, and thats when I'll hop back into the markets fully.
Here are some of the scarier sections of the bailout bill from another website that I frequent.
Once again all that above is not my writing, just some key points I wanted to point out in the bill. Any opinions?
The bailout is full out communism/socialism. Have any of you taken the time to read the 110 page bill?
I would personally rather see DOW at 6500 and have my free markets and properly valued assets, than to have a hyperinflated currency from the Fed printing out money we don't have. If we follow the course we are taking the dollar will collapse eventually.
I think there will be a point when the dollar is low enough that importing goods will no longer be cheaper, and thats when I'll hop back into the markets fully.
Here are some of the scarier sections of the bailout bill from another website that I frequent.
Once again all that above is not my writing, just some key points I wanted to point out in the bill. Any opinions?
Last edited:
It's hard to blame some of these representatives, the public is so clueless as to what is going on and has "bailout bailout bailout" shoved down their throats they don't know up from down. Some of these guys are getting calls at a ratio of 100:1 against the bill, what are the supposed to do?
But I wonder if the phone will be ringing when homes are down another 30% and your 401k looks like a kindergartner went wild with a red marker, with a quiet voice proclaiming "we changed our minds".
It's going to be a blood bath if they don't get something figured out very quickly. And all of this is while the short ban is still on. Who are they going to blame now? No selling allowed!
In response to the above, those are definitely "selected" to give you a certain impression. However, there is no doubt/argument over the degree of power the secretary will hold in that bill's format. I don't care to get in to detail as I've already done it twice today elsewhere, but the bill is definitely imperfect and could use a lot of revision. However, it was more or less designed over about a week's time. HCM out of austin I believe has a great article on the bailout and potential revisions. You can access it through john mauldin's site, go here http://www.investorsinsight.com/ or keep yahoo'ing his name until you find it. If you read john's opinion of the bailout and HCM's, you will probably know more than most in congress do about it.
But I wonder if the phone will be ringing when homes are down another 30% and your 401k looks like a kindergartner went wild with a red marker, with a quiet voice proclaiming "we changed our minds".
It's going to be a blood bath if they don't get something figured out very quickly. And all of this is while the short ban is still on. Who are they going to blame now? No selling allowed!
In response to the above, those are definitely "selected" to give you a certain impression. However, there is no doubt/argument over the degree of power the secretary will hold in that bill's format. I don't care to get in to detail as I've already done it twice today elsewhere, but the bill is definitely imperfect and could use a lot of revision. However, it was more or less designed over about a week's time. HCM out of austin I believe has a great article on the bailout and potential revisions. You can access it through john mauldin's site, go here http://www.investorsinsight.com/ or keep yahoo'ing his name until you find it. If you read john's opinion of the bailout and HCM's, you will probably know more than most in congress do about it.
Last edited:
Yep, that's what I was thinking for a long time now but I'm not taking a side on it.
Socialist programs are what caused this. Easy money and the transition of fannie and freddie in to welfare mortgage firms distorted the natural balance of supply and demand in housing. We screamed beyond any reasonable historical average housing figures for 5 solid years. Greed or whatever you want to call it, only occurred because of this opportunity. Can't the thieves for your entire life if you leave your ferrari outside with the key in it every weekend and it keeps getting stolen.
I don't see the risk vs reward of letting the markets "sort this out" being very appealing. This wasn't created by the free markets and nobody knows what their solution will be. My guess is a significant portion of the dow will eventually declare bankruptcy and unemployment will reach well beyond 10%.
I don't think many people "want" to do this or are happy about it. But as a securities trader I've seen the violence first hand on the front lines. This isn't necessarily about getting rid of "waste", what we are doing is slitting the throats of any firm that depends on short term paper to run its business, I'm not sure that is what those who oppose the bailout think they are doing.
Do a revised version of the bailout and put back in real measures that work towards a solution to the underlying problem.
I understand that is would be a rough ride without the cash injection, but I don't mind. I'd rather live through another great depression than have a socialist society. Government is WAY to big already IMO.
If you look back through the history books there was a crash in 1921 that was similar in size to the crash that cause the great depression. The reason you never hear about it is because it cleaned itself up within the year. The great depression on the other hand involved a significant amount of intervention. Todays markets are much different however (fiat currency allows for hyperinflation instead of deflation).
Government should NEVER be meddling with markets and price fixing. The reason we are in this mess is because of artificially low interest rates set by the Fed. The Fed needs to be abolished and the market needs to set the interest rates.
In response to above, I think that we are on the same page, but just differ on the solution. I'm ok with a crash and burn scenario, and you are ok with a bit more intervention.
I want no intervention period, but that's just a wish sadly.
Last edited:
Again, I agree with you. However, you and I may be in a position to make it through this. I have friends and family that could potentially have their lives financially ruined. There is no way I can justify that when I think there is a more efficient solution. Far from perfect and against what I've learned and preached for a long time, but a medium of some sort needs to be reached.
Agreed :smile:
If they meet in the middle somehow, allowing for a significant market correction without complete collapse I'll be content.
I think the markets win in the long run however, so anything that prevents the correction is just a bandaid. It's like getting my hand chopped off quickly or just letting the government slowly saw it off. I'll take the quick correction
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 April 2002
- Messages
- 2,273
I refuse to get into politics but this will get passed. It has to. As much as I hate this. As much as this makes us no better then other 3rd world countries that have done similar socialistic tactics and have blocked free markets. The sad reality is the US is the only one with enough money to unclog our credit mess where debt is literally how money is created in our country.
They think they already have the votes in the senate and the senate may go first (not uncommon). If they have 60 votes in the Senate they can get it through and not worry about a filibuster, then the markets will get a bump and the house will fall in line with some more back room negotiations.
It was a very bad move and honestly a rookie mistake by both parties to bring such a critical piece of legislation to the floor without the votes. They thought they could get the votes on the floor. There was tremendous arm twisting on both sides. Republicans were told they could kiss any future leadership positions goodbye without a yes vote. Yet recent poles show over 60% of constituents are against the bailout so the response was "what leadership positions? I am going to lose my seat!"
So what really happened that you don't hear?
When the republican arm twisting wasn't working and the no votes started coming in (where they thought they had yes votes) the democrats knew where things were going. The remaining dems from that point forward didn't want to support the bill that they knew couldn't pass. So the "no" votes started coming in on both sides. The idea the leadership negotiated and wanted was everyone on both sides would "jump" together. Any "yes" this close to election in a contested contest puts that seat at risk and people think of their own hides first and often others second - regardless of your job career.
This is not dead. The leaders of both parties are working on a vote swap to get this passed in the house. A certain number of republicans and democrats will both be "forced" to vote yes so neither party gets an advantage in November. In reality this is a difficult thing to orchestrate but it will happen I am confident. It has to.
Like it or not our financial system today is built on credit. Easy and low cost access to credit is key. This deal isn't perfect, may not be enough, but you see how much confidence the market has in it getting done to help. It will get done.
They think they already have the votes in the senate and the senate may go first (not uncommon). If they have 60 votes in the Senate they can get it through and not worry about a filibuster, then the markets will get a bump and the house will fall in line with some more back room negotiations.
It was a very bad move and honestly a rookie mistake by both parties to bring such a critical piece of legislation to the floor without the votes. They thought they could get the votes on the floor. There was tremendous arm twisting on both sides. Republicans were told they could kiss any future leadership positions goodbye without a yes vote. Yet recent poles show over 60% of constituents are against the bailout so the response was "what leadership positions? I am going to lose my seat!"
So what really happened that you don't hear?
When the republican arm twisting wasn't working and the no votes started coming in (where they thought they had yes votes) the democrats knew where things were going. The remaining dems from that point forward didn't want to support the bill that they knew couldn't pass. So the "no" votes started coming in on both sides. The idea the leadership negotiated and wanted was everyone on both sides would "jump" together. Any "yes" this close to election in a contested contest puts that seat at risk and people think of their own hides first and often others second - regardless of your job career.
This is not dead. The leaders of both parties are working on a vote swap to get this passed in the house. A certain number of republicans and democrats will both be "forced" to vote yes so neither party gets an advantage in November. In reality this is a difficult thing to orchestrate but it will happen I am confident. It has to.
Like it or not our financial system today is built on credit. Easy and low cost access to credit is key. This deal isn't perfect, may not be enough, but you see how much confidence the market has in it getting done to help. It will get done.
30% off massively overvalued is still overvalued. The prices still need to correct more, especially in some parts of the country.
If the market is really free, the blood needs to flow, institutions need to fail, and those that survive are the better ones. Isn't that the whole point of a free market? Every once in a while a big forest fire clears out the old growth & deadwood, it's the way of the world. New growth comes & maybe a little old growth survives. You ran your business into the ground; that's your problem, not mine. People forget there are both good & bad consequences to decisions. It is not government's role to be a magical safety net that suddenly appears when the bad consequences arrive, especially since nobody was giving Uncle Sam $700B in profits when things were good.
The hypocrisy of the Republicans, especially in railing against socialized medicine, is repugnant since they seem to have zero problem with a socialized banking system. But wait, this will benefit rich white guys like themselves so that makes it ok. They & their big donors will make out, so "the country" needs this.
It is ridiculous to think that a problem of this magnitude that has been brewing for this long, will be solved by a small group of politicians whose only real skill is career prolongation & preservation. In 1 week no less. This country has a long history of closing the barn door after the horse has run off & the knee jerk response will only serve to give the illusion of an effective response to mollify the masses until after the election. Precious few of these a-holes have ever held a real job & are long & far removed from the real world. I'm pretty sure you could count the # of people in the House & Senate who don't have law degrees & did have real jobs prior to election on two hands.
If the market is really free, the blood needs to flow, institutions need to fail, and those that survive are the better ones. Isn't that the whole point of a free market? Every once in a while a big forest fire clears out the old growth & deadwood, it's the way of the world. New growth comes & maybe a little old growth survives. You ran your business into the ground; that's your problem, not mine. People forget there are both good & bad consequences to decisions. It is not government's role to be a magical safety net that suddenly appears when the bad consequences arrive, especially since nobody was giving Uncle Sam $700B in profits when things were good.
The hypocrisy of the Republicans, especially in railing against socialized medicine, is repugnant since they seem to have zero problem with a socialized banking system. But wait, this will benefit rich white guys like themselves so that makes it ok. They & their big donors will make out, so "the country" needs this.
It is ridiculous to think that a problem of this magnitude that has been brewing for this long, will be solved by a small group of politicians whose only real skill is career prolongation & preservation. In 1 week no less. This country has a long history of closing the barn door after the horse has run off & the knee jerk response will only serve to give the illusion of an effective response to mollify the masses until after the election. Precious few of these a-holes have ever held a real job & are long & far removed from the real world. I'm pretty sure you could count the # of people in the House & Senate who don't have law degrees & did have real jobs prior to election on two hands.
Last edited:
- Joined
- 14 April 2002
- Messages
- 2,273
When your toddler is a couple steps up on carpeted stairs - you let them fall to learn a lesson.
When your toddler is a couple stories up and about to fall you do everything you can to stop it as the lesson is too painful.
Bottom line is whether you think it is socialism (I do), a good idea (not sure), a bad idea (more likely), etc, doesn't really matter.
The market expects it and has confidence this will help with the problem.
That is what 700B buys you. Confidence that when banks lend money they will have a reasonable expectation of getting paid back. Confidence that the stocks of banks will recover once the bad debt is cleared off the books. Etc.
Then we can spend the next 50 years writing text books on how we should have seen this, come up with a 21st century "levy" system, or have a group hug with Ron Paul. No matter.
People that say they prefer a depression have never led their family to a tent city. Listened to their children cry themselves to sleep from hunger night after night. Sold family heirlooms for pennies on the dollar. Lined up for a construction job praying someone would die so they might get a 1 in 100 chance for that job. Begged for scraps of food. Lived with no hope.
I find it laughable that people who have never lived in such devastating times are so willing to accept the consequences of inaction. It took massive gov't spending and a world war to get us out of the last mess. Sounds like a lot more gov't, lives destroyed, and overall money lost then $700B with a chance to get the money back + preferred stock positions that will be paid back first.
I don't know if this will help but God help us if we don't try or the market starts to believe it won't work.
When your toddler is a couple stories up and about to fall you do everything you can to stop it as the lesson is too painful.
Bottom line is whether you think it is socialism (I do), a good idea (not sure), a bad idea (more likely), etc, doesn't really matter.
The market expects it and has confidence this will help with the problem.
That is what 700B buys you. Confidence that when banks lend money they will have a reasonable expectation of getting paid back. Confidence that the stocks of banks will recover once the bad debt is cleared off the books. Etc.
Then we can spend the next 50 years writing text books on how we should have seen this, come up with a 21st century "levy" system, or have a group hug with Ron Paul. No matter.
People that say they prefer a depression have never led their family to a tent city. Listened to their children cry themselves to sleep from hunger night after night. Sold family heirlooms for pennies on the dollar. Lined up for a construction job praying someone would die so they might get a 1 in 100 chance for that job. Begged for scraps of food. Lived with no hope.
I find it laughable that people who have never lived in such devastating times are so willing to accept the consequences of inaction. It took massive gov't spending and a world war to get us out of the last mess. Sounds like a lot more gov't, lives destroyed, and overall money lost then $700B with a chance to get the money back + preferred stock positions that will be paid back first.
I don't know if this will help but God help us if we don't try or the market starts to believe it won't work.
- Joined
- 6 September 2008
- Messages
- 66
Wall St wants to privatize the profits and socialize the losses. Screw them
visit www.d2z.org to see where the dollar stands today in terms of value, imagine what would have happened if this was passed
Just an FYI from a neutral (besides I wish the best of my family and friends) party.. the blood will run down main street just as well. Getting 'revenge' against wall street (who is that exactly anyways these days? The CEO's who are already paid millions or the CEO's who's reputations are shattered or Lehman or Washington Mutual or Wachovia or Mlynch?) for potentially a "lost decade" like Japan has suffered through might not be a good trade. This might not be clear to many yet, but in due time it will be painfully clear.
Last edited:
It isn't nearly* that simple. We are entering a deflationary environment, not inflationary. Guess which is more dangerous. Inflation is vital and welcomed, as long as it is controlled. The link you provided failed to mention a little fact, the credit expansion of the last 100 years is directly responsible for the fact we ride in BMW's and live in 3000sqft homes instead of ride on donkeys and live in cottages in the woods. I'm not saying there is no argument in favor of the gold standard, but the whole "when I was a kid a nickel bought you 3 apples" your grand father tells you is not overly relevant. IMO anyways.
Also, confidence in the economy that represents that dollar [ability of the economy to provide tax money to back up the tbonds for example] is just as important as the amount of "printing" that goes on. My guess is the dollar is going to take a serious hit either way. Overall, banks control the money supply, the fed just attempts to control the banks. Do you think banks are "printing" (this is when they take your 10,000$ deposit and make a loan for $100,000 to Joe to buy his house) money moreso then before? I seriously, seriously, seriously doubt it. In fact I know it.
I'm a stock market nerd, but I found 'd2z' to be an interesting name for this particular set of theories. The ticker DZZ, or D2z's so to speak, is the ultra short for gold of all things.
Last edited:
This is one of the best posts I have read in a long time on this subject.
To touch on your last point. I do think the package will help but only for a short period of time. I think there are way more problems to come that have not even surfaced yet and the 600B is only going to keep the dog at bay for a short period of time. The market has been knocked back so hard at this point and by the time the package is passed it's going to be too late for most investors to get out without taking massive losses. After the 600 billion dries up and the over leveraged HELOCs hit the foreclosure market, that's when the fed will be out of dry powder and the real fun will start.
I was hoping for the bill to get passed today and for the market to take off then run for the door. But you know what theysay hope in one hand nothing in the other hand and you got nothing.
This is bigger than any individual lesson. When your toddler takes a 2 story header that is evolution ending your poor parenting skills from being passed on. The species continues on. Free markets don't care about individual entities either, only the system.
that bailout plan would have helped for only a short time.
bush just fucked the whole country over from the beginning. my $0.02
bush just fucked the whole country over from the beginning. my $0.02
Similar threads
