TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Ok so the bailout was rejected, or whatever
Pages (8): « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 »

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 So the republican leadership isn't to blame for so few of them backing it? There were even less republicans willing to vote on the bill speech or not. And its your boy McCain that came sailing in to save the day only to derail what progress had been made at the time and not contribute anything.

maybe i haven't been clear. House Republicans thought it was a crap bill to begin with, and it is really. it can be improved and some Dems know this as well. didn't take much out of Pelosi's mouth to tip what was a crap bill. if it was so great why the hell can't she rally 90 House Dems to go along? because its crap.

as far as McCain is concerned, i would think you wouldn't be shocked to find out that McCain doesn't have a whole lot of pull among the conservative wing of his party. he's managed to pull some but, it's McCain ffs.

at least the man is engaged in the process. where the f**k is the appointed leader of the entire Democrat party?

the roll call >link<

finally, some common sense on this whole bailout business..

quote:

Commentary: Bankruptcy, not bailout, is the right answer CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts (CNN) -- Congress has balked at the Bush administration's proposed $700 billion bailout of Wall Street. Under this plan, the Treasury would have bought the "troubled assets" of financial institutions in an attempt to avoid economic meltdown. This bailout was a terrible idea. Here's why. The current mess would never have occurred in the absence of ill-conceived federal policies. The federal government chartered Fannie Mae in 1938 and Freddie Mac in 1970; these two mortgage lending institutions are at the center of the crisis. The government implicitly promised these institutions that it would make good on their debts, so Fannie and Freddie took on huge amounts of excessive risk. Worse, beginning in 1977 and even more in the 1990s and the early part of this century, Congress pushed mortgage lenders and Fannie/Freddie to expand subprime lending. The industry was happy to oblige, given the implicit promise of federal backing, and subprime lending soared. This subprime lending was more than a minor relaxation of existing credit guidelines. This lending was a wholesale abandonment of reasonable lending practices in which borrowers with poor credit characteristics got mortgages they were ill-equipped to handle. Once housing prices declined and economic conditions worsened, defaults and delinquencies soared, leaving the industry holding large amounts of severely depreciated mortgage assets. The fact that government bears such a huge responsibility for the current mess means any response should eliminate the conditions that created this situation in the first place, not attempt to fix bad government with more government. The obvious alternative to a bailout is letting troubled financial institutions declare bankruptcy. Bankruptcy means that shareholders typically get wiped out and the creditors own the company. Bankruptcy does not mean the company disappears; it is just owned by someone new (as has occurred with several airlines). Bankruptcy punishes those who took excessive risks while preserving those aspects of a businesses that remain profitable. In contrast, a bailout transfers enormous wealth from taxpayers to those who knowingly engaged in risky subprime lending. Thus, the bailout encourages companies to take large, imprudent risks and count on getting bailed out by government. This "moral hazard" generates enormous distortions in an economy's allocation of its financial resources. Thoughtful advocates of the bailout might concede this perspective, but they argue that a bailout is necessary to prevent economic collapse. According to this view, lenders are not making loans, even for worthy projects, because they cannot get capital. This view has a grain of truth; if the bailout does not occur, more bankruptcies are possible and credit conditions may worsen for a time. Talk of Armageddon, however, is ridiculous scare-mongering. If financial institutions cannot make productive loans, a profit opportunity exists for someone else. This might not happen instantly, but it will happen. Further, the current credit freeze is likely due to Wall Street's hope of a bailout; bankers will not sell their lousy assets for 20 cents on the dollar if the government might pay 30, 50, or 80 cents. The costs of the bailout, moreover, are almost certainly being understated. The administration's claim is that many mortgage assets are merely illiquid, not truly worthless, implying taxpayers will recoup much of their $700 billion. If these assets are worth something, however, private parties should want to buy them, and they would do so if the owners would accept fair market value. Far more likely is that current owners have brushed under the rug how little their assets are worth. The bailout has more problems. The final legislation will probably include numerous side conditions and special dealings that reward Washington lobbyists and their clients. Anticipation of the bailout will engender strategic behavior by Wall Street institutions as they shuffle their assets and position their balance sheets to maximize their take. The bailout will open the door to further federal meddling in financial markets. So what should the government do? Eliminate those policies that generated the current mess. This means, at a general level, abandoning the goal of home ownership independent of ability to pay. This means, in particular, getting rid of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, along with policies like the Community Reinvestment Act that pressure banks into subprime lending. The right view of the financial mess is that an enormous fraction of subprime lending should never have occurred in the first place. Someone has to pay for that. That someone should not be, and does not need to be, the U.S. taxpayer. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09...lout/index.html

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I am disappointed that several members of both parties chose to vote no. They are simply chicken shit because they're up for re-election and are afraid that voting for this will get them out of office

I believe that is more accurate

That's a shame. It was a reasonably good plan. At least for Congress.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo maybe i haven't been clear. House Republicans thought it was a crap bill to begin with, and it is really. it can be improved and some Dems know this as well. didn't take much out of Pelosi's mouth to tip what was a crap bill. if it was so great why the hell can't she rally 90 House Dems to go along? because its crap. as far as McCain is concerned, i would think you wouldn't be shocked to find out that McCain doesn't have a whole lot of pull among the conservative wing of his party. he's managed to pull some but, it's McCain ffs. at least the man is engaged in the process. where the f**k is the appointed leader of the entire Democrat party?

I agree with your assessments but I don't believe Pelosi can be singled out as a scape goat for the failure. The entire process from start to finish was a farce. It was never guaranteed to work anyways. So Republicans will get less intervention, less regulation, they will have their recession, since thats what they seem to want.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 which goes to show how petty, and unfit congressional members are to be running a country. personal squabbles over the health of a nation. makes sense to me.

I watched Boehner say it at the press conference while I was taking lunch and this was EXACTLY my thought.

Q, in true partisan hack fashion, applauds this effort that further destroys our country.

IMO, we are very fucked. I'm torn about what to do with my investments, because I know we're going a lot lower very quickly, but when this looked good to go, I averaged on some long-term investments, so I can't cash out now and deduct my losses off the taxes. It's a matter of trying to predict how low we're going vs. how much I'm down now x write-off value, so I'm probably going to suck it up and puke rather than sell for firesale prices. Fortunately, none of them look to be going bankrupt anytime soon.

BTW, Pelosi was out of line. That doesn't make the childish reaction to it any better. The House GOP fucked us all so that they could say that Nancy didn't get her way. Talk about tearing off your nose to spit your face.

Fucking morons

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo f**k you she was right. 40% of her own caucus couldn't get behind her on this. how can she not, as leader, get 40% or her own caucus to vote yes? technically she didn't need a single Republican to pass this. three days it took to negotiate all the other crap she christmas treed this bill with out of it and now we're back to square on. worst Congress ever

Because the Democrats should have narrowly passed this bill that wasn't supported by an uneducated public (and from listening to last week's hearings, an uneducated Congress)? They should have taken the full brunt of the public backlash for a vote that will help them, but not noticeably in 30 days?

You and your ignorant House GOP and the constituents that they represent can really suck my dick. But congrats, you sure showed Nancy and her libtard supporters.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Q, in true partisan hack fashion, applauds this effort that further destroys our country

so you support this bill? interesting

in typical ill-informed and politically naive fashion Groundhog Boy can't come up with a simple explaination as to why the worst Speaker of the House in the history of the Republic can't corral a dozen of her own hand-picked seats to pass this "crap sandwich" of a bill. amazing.

i mean forget that literaly thousands, maybe millions, of concerned citizens across this country leaned on their elected officials Democrat and Republican pleading with them not to pass this bill. no. you gotta take a page from Pelosi to make some petty partisaned comment. bravo. 2 points for originality.

this fight is not over yet. the sky hasn't fallen quite yet. when the next comprimise bill comes along are you going blindly follow Madame Speaker again? or will you bring more of the same after the fact again? i'll be waiting

quote:

Originally posted by noikeee Portuguese TV just said the stock market at S�o Paulo, Brazil, was losing 10% and they had to close it temporarily. Holy shit.

That surprised me as well (link in Portuguese). The weird thing is: As far as I know, our economy is doing fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo so you support this bill? interesting in typical ill-informed and politically naive fashion Groundhog Boy can't come up with a simple explaination as to why the worst Speaker of the House in the history of the Republic can't corral a dozen of her own hand-picked seats to pass this "crap sandwich" of a bill. amazing. i mean forget that literaly thousands, maybe millions, of concerned citizens across this country leaned on their elected officials Democrat and Republican pleading with them not to pass this bill. no. you gotta take a page from Pelosi to make some petty partisaned comment. bravo. 2 points for originality. this fight is not over yet. the sky hasn't fallen quite yet. when the next comprimise bill comes along are you going blindly follow Madame Speaker again? or will you bring more of the same after the fact again? i'll be waiting

It's not hard. The bailout isn't favored by the public. The election is in 30-some days. The Democrats refuse to go down in flames to attempt saving this country's economy, only to be voted out of office.

Party isn't the problem here, lack of information, lack of forsight, and stupidity are.

quote:

Originally posted by Lira That surprised me as well (link in Portuguese). The weird thing is: As far as I know, our economy is doing fine.

From my understanding, Brazil revolves around commodities trading. Global growth is bottom-barrel and China isn't buying from Vale at the prices they're requiring and have boycotted their company. Similarly, the shipping companies that take commodities out of Brazil are getting trounced now.

On a related note, all US steel producers (X, NUE, AKS) were down 10-20%, MTL in Russia was down 18%

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo so you support this bill? interesting in typical ill-informed and politically naive fashion Groundhog Boy can't come up with a simple explaination as to why the worst Speaker of the House in the history of the Republic can't corral a dozen of her own hand-picked seats to pass this "crap sandwich" of a bill. amazing. i mean forget that literaly thousands, maybe millions, of concerned citizens across this country leaned on their elected officials Democrat and Republican pleading with them not to pass this bill. no. you gotta take a page from Pelosi to make some petty partisaned comment. bravo. 2 points for originality. this fight is not over yet. the sky hasn't fallen quite yet. when the next comprimise bill comes along are you going blindly follow Madame Speaker again? or will you bring more of the same after the fact again? i'll be waiting

You can stop waiting now.



c0r version:

Eric Cantor (R) : Waaaaah waaaaah Speaker Pelosi insulted me. My pride is hurt, so I'm gonna throw a tantrum and screw over the economy (again)!

Barney Frank (D) : Eric Cantor disgusts me, but I'll talk dirty to him if it will coax him into doing something for the good of his country for once.

By the way, a journalist today said that, the same way the fall of the Berlin Wall represented the demise of communism, this crisis marks the end of economic liberalism.

Is that so?

quote:

Originally posted by Capitalizt finally, some common sense on this whole bailout business..

In principal i agree with that economist. However, the reality is likely much bleaker. While I can withstand the some pain with de-leveraging, i can't withstand a 500 basis point LIBOR adjustment on my student loans, or real property tax increases because of increased abandoned properties in town. There are collateral consequences that aren't easily measured and are entirely not academic.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov You can stop waiting now. c0r version: Eric Cantor (R) : Waaaaah waaaaah Speaker Pelosi insulted me. My pride is hurt, so I'm gonna throw a tantrum and screw over the economy (again)! Barney Frank (D) : Eric Cantor disgusts me, but I'll talk dirty to him if it will coax him into doing something for the good of his country for once.

Granted, I'm no fan of Pelosi either, and I've made my disagreements with her and the Democratic leaders well known here in the past. But I really found Frank's statements hilarious and right on the money. This really calls for a "WTF" moment to seriously believe what Republicans are crying about here. Are you guys honestly going to try and sell us the fact that you got your feewings all hurt so badly that you decided to help destroy our economy?

Look, I know many progressive Dems didn't vote for the bill. I'm not so sure I would have done it myself, and again there's rightful criticism of Pelosi being a weak-ass leader to not have the ability to whip her party in line very well (God I can't believe I just agreed with Limbaugh today). But to make the claim that the Republican party decided not to go in because of their feelings getting hurt by what Pelosi said (which there's a lovely amount of truth in it, but I digress), man, I just didn't realize how, ummm, sensitive those darn House Republicans were. Perhaps it was even more appropriate to have Barney Frank address you specifically afterall.......

BTW:

quote:

McCain takes credit for bill before it loses Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his top aides took credit for building a winning bailout coalition � hours before the vote failed and stocks tanked. Shortly before the vote, McCain had bragged about his involvement and mocked Sen. Barack Obama for staying on the sidelines. �I've never been afraid of stepping in to solve problems for the American people, and I'm not going to stop now,� McCain told a rally in Columbus, Ohio. �Sen. Obama took a very different approach to the crisis our country faced. At first he didn't want to get involved. Then he was monitoring the situation.� McCain, grinning, flashed a sarcastic thumbs up. �That's not leadership. That's watching from the sidelines,� he added to cheers and applause. Doug Holtz-Eakin, McCain's senior policy adviser, told reporters on a conference call that McCain "dedicated the past week" to addressing the problem but made "a conscious decision not to attract attention to John McCain." "He's made dozens of calls," Holtz-Eakin said. Asked if McCain bears any responsibility for the bill's failure, Holtz-Eakin said McCain "improved it greatly � took the lead in the need for taxpayer protections." Making a similar point earlier on MSNBC, Holtz-Eakin said McCain deliberately "kept a low profile." "John McCain understands that had he looked like he was going to be the key to the success, that Democrats would attack him and kill the deal," Holtz-Eakin said. "That's what you saw today. They were not going to let John McCain do the job that he was trying to do: deliver a bill that would help the American people." "John McCain understood that had he kept a low profile, talked with members of Congress as he did, asked them where they were in their votes, called those members who were reluctant. He was doing his job, and doing it with a low profile [that was] necessary," Holtz-Eakin added. Holtz-Eakin told MSNBC that Obama was "phoning it in" instead of working hard on a rescue. "Where was Barack Obama for today?" Holtz-Eakin said. "He's phoning it in � phoning it in � one more time." McCain initially had been modest about his role. On Sunday, he said on ABC�s �This Week� that congressional negotiators deserve �great credit� for the bipartisan deal. �"It wasn�t because of me,� McCain said. �They did it themselves.� But at almost the same time, McCain senior adviser Steve Schmidt was saying on NBC�s �Meet the Press�: �What Sen. McCain was able to do � was to help get all of the parties to the table. There had been announcements by Senate leaders saying that a deal had been reached earlier in the week. There were no votes for that deal. �Sen. McCain knew time was short and he came back, he listened and he helped put together the framework of getting everybody to the table, which was necessary to produce a package to avoid a financial catastrophe for this country.� On Monday morning, McCain campaign communications director Jill Hazelbaker said on Fox News that the deal would not have happened �without Sen. McCain.� �Sen. McCain interrupted his campaign, suspended his campaign activity to come back to Washington to get Republicans around a table,� Hazelbaker said. �Without Sen. McCain, House Republicans would not have appointed a negotiator, which would not have moved this bill forward. �It�s really Sen. McCain who got all parties around a table to hammer out a deal that hopefully is in the best interests of the American taxpayer.� http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/14088.html

Holy God, John. Is there anything you can get right lately? That guy's got the worst foot-in-mouth syndrome right now.

We are so so so so fucked. This was a massive failure on congress/government on multiple levels. Paulson and Bernanke correctly characterized this crises as it was ... something that is very very big. Bush failed to convince his own fucking party that this is the biggest financial crisis since the great depression. Pelosi is retarded for giving an unnecessarily partisan speech. But by and large, congressional house republicans will probably go down in history as putting partisanship, politics, and their own political ambitions before the sake of our country. As retarded as Pelosi's speech was, that is absolutely no excuse for refusing to pass the bailout package. And at least Pelosi was able to deliver a majority of democrats.

Forget the fact that equity markets dropped $1.2 trillion in value alone today. NONE of the banks are lending. The potential for a severe cash crunch is hitting main street now and companies are at risk for defaulting on their debt. At particular risk to poor liquidity are GM and United Airlines. Nat City is going under. Watching asian markets now, I think tomorrow is going to be brutal.

I moved half of my investments into funds that invested in treasuries half a year ago. I just moved the rest earlier this week.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 While I can withstand the some pain with de-leveraging, i can't withstand a 500 basis point LIBOR adjustment on my student loans, or real property tax increases because of increased abandoned properties in town.

STOP!

JUST STOP!

Stop talking all intellectual. Who cares about LIBOR when your wife's cousin is in LABOR? It's inconsequential and won't affect us anyway.



Sorry, I'm pretty jaded after today. I thought I'd set the bar low to emotionally avoid this...I was wrong. I have a fairly high tolerance for risk given my age.



That said, this stupidity today is seriously endangering the next 30-40 years, AKA, my entire adulthood.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Pelosi is retarded for giving an unnecessarily partisan speech. But by and large, congressional house republicans will probably go down in history as putting partisanship, politics, and their own political ambitions before the sake of our country. As retarded as Pelosi's speech was, that is absolutely no excuse for refusing to pass the bailout package. And at least Pelosi was able to deliver a majority of democrats.

I'm drunk and infuriated - Did the House GOP catch Down's Syndrome from Palin's kid? I'm really struggling to understand how they could be this incredibly dumb.

I pray that the nationwide fallout from this precedes Election Day. But it won't, and these assholes will be re-elected because "they stuck up for voters," A/K/A "Fucked us all by pandering to the stupidity of the masses."

quote:

Originally posted by occrider And at least Pelosi was able to deliver a majority of democrats.

you're happy that she could only deliver 60% of her own caucus to prevent Armageddon? talk about lowering standards.

if this was such a great package why the hell couldn't she deliver a straight party line vote? she doesn't need a single Republican to pass this if it's as serious as she's advertized

what the hell are House Republicans supposed to do with a bill that they despised a week ago anyway, prior to the clean-up of it, when she's not telling any of her own House seats to vote yes on it? who cares really what partisaned crap she said before the vote.

here, listen to a simple observer's take on all this.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo you're happy that she could only deliver 60% of her own caucus to prevent Armageddon? talking about lowering standards. if this was such a great package why the hell couldn't she deliver a straight party line vote? she doesn't need a single Republican to pass this if it's as serious as she's advertised[quote] Stop bitching about the other party and worry about the 65+% of your party that shot it down, after agreeing to it. Congrats on embarrassing Pelosi & the rest of the Dems. You win the award of a credit freeze and market plunge. [quote]what the hell are House Republicans supposed to do with a bill that they despised a week ago anyway, prior to the clean-up of it, when she's not telling any of her own House seats to vote yes on it? who cares really what partisaned crap here, listen to a simple observer's take on all this.

The bill changed so much from Friday to Sunday that it's outstanding. In favor of the Republican ideals. Just stop. Please. I don't have the time to rip your stupidity to shreads on this one.

On the plus side for me, litigation's never been better than now.

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy "they stuck up for voters," A/K/A "Fucked us all by pandering to the stupidity of the masses."

yes because Groundhog Boy is smarter than all of the 208 voters in the House today that voted no.

"BOO DEMOCRACY...DEMOCRACY IS BAD...BOOOOO"

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy I don't have the time to rip your stupidity to shreads on this one.

you never have boy so don't go thinking tonite's your night.

i get the impression you'd be in favor of any bill, huh?

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.