Dead-On

Superfreak said:
Ultimately, it is the best way for the companies in the long run. But in the short run, it was well worth the $14-15 billion to keep it from happening NOW. Just look at the markets reaction today. It is not going to be pretty. To be clear, there are other negative factors hitting the market today as well. But this certainly didn't help.

The fact that Darla had to utter the words....'Now its up to Bush' ... should tell you how fucked up this is.
Click to expand...


15B is an ink spot on our budget. I dont even know why the senate needs to be involved. Bush should just be able to use emergency funds or something.
 
Chapdog said:
15B is an ink spot on our budget. I dont even know why the senate needs to be involved. Bush should just be able to use emergency funds or something.
Click to expand...

He'll use the TARP funds.

I am just pissed that it came to that. Did the idiots not learn anything from the failure to pass the financial package in October???? Watching the market free fall after that and blow through technical barriers all because the idiots in DC couldn't show an ounce of leadership.

Now we get the same thing. This was truly the biggest no brainer in the history of no brainers. This is equivalent to having a hang nail and deciding that chopping off your arm is the way to solve it.

FUBAR
 
Darla said:
Digby says it all.

by digby

From Harry Reid just now:


"Given the unhappy choice between a bridge loan and bankruptcy, Democrats have always believed that we must give the Big Three and the millions of Americans they employ every possible chance to succeed.

"By rejecting every good-faith bipartisan compromise – including those from the White House and Senator Bob Corker – it is now abundantly clear that Republicans have no interest in keeping the Big Three from collapsing.

"Because Republicans failed to act, three million Americans are more likely than ever to lose their jobs and our economy is at risk of suffering even greater damage. Our hearts go out to those families who will now have to deal with this burden as the holidays near.

"Republicans may think that rejecting this legislation sent a message to the auto industry. Instead, they sent a message to every single American that they are more interested in settling scores than solving problems."


I'm not surprised. This is what they do. But if there's anyone left out there who thinks that these guys are on the post-partisan bandwagon, think again. They will do everything in their power to weaken Obama and fuck up this country even worse than they already have.

At this point, the only route they see power is to make things worse and blame it on the Democrats. What else do they have?

Now it's up to Bush to have Paulson release the money from the TARP, something they've been adamantly against up to now. I'm not holding my breath.

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...


Or, the democrats are also fine with bailing out bankers but not workers, but after the legislatvie theater, can now blame republicans to keep people like you loyal to the party, but still in a state of hate. Controlled insanity, like in 1984.


They're all post partisan and are just good cop, bad copping us, and on some issues they switch places.
 
Last edited:
Dungheap said:
You don't strike me as a Stiglitz fan.
Click to expand...

I respect all great economists, I may have more agreement with a Becker or Hayek or Williams but that doesn't mean I don't respect other great economists. Plus there is much more agreement in economics than disagreement and Stiglitz has been right on with alot of what I've heard him say about both bailouts.
 
Superfreak said:
yeah... real fun. This is going to suck.
Click to expand...

CNBC says that the Treasury just said they'll prevent the failure of the automakers until the new congress convenes.

So I guess Paulson is going to hand over the bucks. Whether or not that's without strings, who knows. (strings meaning what does Paulson get in return, not what do the carmakers have to do)
 
So which Democrats voted against the bailout bill? I would probably be more pissed at them if I were a Dem and all. You know, because they do have control of congress. You could have gotten it passed if politicians in general really gave a shit. Instead, to me it just looks like a big fucking blame game where everyone points fingers.
 
Obfuscate said:
I respect all great economists, I may have more agreement with a Becker or Hayek or Williams but that doesn't mean I don't respect other great economists. Plus there is much more agreement in economics than disagreement and Stiglitz has been right on with alot of what I've heard him say about both bailouts.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. I found this piece enlightening:

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/stiglitz200901

Stiglitz should have been offered a job in the Obama administration.
 
DigitalDave said:
So which Democrats voted against the bailout bill? I would probably be more pissed at them if I were a Dem and all. You know, because they do have control of congress. You could have gotten it passed if politicians in general really gave a shit. Instead, to me it just looks like a big fucking blame game where everyone points fingers.
Click to expand...


None. The Senate Republicans used the tactic that no one dare say out loud (THE FILIBUSTER) requiring the Democrats to come up with 60 votes to get to an up or down vote on the bill. There weren't enough Republicans crossing over to get it passed.
 
Darla said:
CNBC says that the Treasury just said they'll prevent the failure of the automakers until the new congress convenes.

So I guess Paulson is going to hand over the bucks. Whether or not that's without strings, who knows. (strings meaning what does Paulson get in return, not what do the carmakers have to do)
Click to expand...

The funny thing... the use of TARP funds vs. the loan package is that the TARP funds actually benefit the automakers more as all the strings attached to the loan package are not going to be attached to the TARP funds (at least that is my understanding).

In my opinion, the ultimate hunting season is getting closer and closer. Sooner or later they are going to push people over the edge and politicians are going to become an endangered species.
 
Darla said:
Digby says it all.

by digby

From Harry Reid just now:


"Given the unhappy choice between a bridge loan and bankruptcy, Democrats have always believed that we must give the Big Three and the millions of Americans they employ every possible chance to succeed.

"By rejecting every good-faith bipartisan compromise – including those from the

"Because Republicans failed to act, three million Americans are more likely than ever to lose their jobs and our economy is at risk of suffering even greater damage. Our hearts go out to those families who will now have to deal with this burden as the holidays near.

"

At this point, the only route they see power is to make things worse and blame it on the Democrats. What else do they have?


http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/
Click to expand...


As a political question may I ask what do you think the Democrats game plan was under Bush? Or either party when they have been out of power in the past? Do you believe they say 'well let's work real well with the party in power and the American people will surely see how bi-partisan we've been and vote us in power now'?

Each party wants to blame everything bad on the other party just as you are doing above. This seems right out of the politics 101 playbook.
 
cawacko said:
As a political question may I ask what do you think the Democrats game plan was under Bush? Or either party when they have been out of power in the past? Do you believe they say 'well let's work real well with the party in power and the American people will surely see how bi-partisan we've been and vote us in power now'?

Each party wants to blame everything bad on the other party just as you are doing above. This seems right out of the politics 101 playbook.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think that's exactly what the democrats did, and since the R agenda was so destructively radical, I believe they did it too often, and too well.
 
Superfreak said:
The funny thing... the use of TARP funds vs. the loan package is that the TARP funds actually benefit the automakers more as all the strings attached to the loan package are not going to be attached to the TARP funds (at least that is my understanding).

In my opinion, the ultimate hunting season is getting closer and closer. Sooner or later they are going to push people over the edge and politicians are going to become an endangered species.
Click to expand...

At least maybe the markets won't dive too low now.
 
cawacko said:
As a political question may I ask what do you think the Democrats game plan was under Bush? Or either party when they have been out of power in the past? Do you believe they say 'well let's work real well with the party in power and the American people will surely see how bi-partisan we've been and vote us in power now'?

Each party wants to blame everything bad on the other party just as you are doing above. This seems right out of the politics 101 playbook.
Click to expand...

This is bullshit, cawacko, and you're particular brand of "they do it too!" is tiresome.

Both parties play politics & obstruction. It stops at the water's edge - as in, when American lives are on the line, and when millions of American jobs are on the line. There are certain times when politicians are supposed to rise above party.

The White House & House of Reps did it; the Senate Republicans just couldn't muster it.
 
Dungheap said:
Fair enough. I found this piece enlightening:

http://www.vanityfair.com/magazine/2009/01/stiglitz200901

Stiglitz should have been offered a job in the Obama administration.
Click to expand...

It's a good read, I agree with him on regulating leverage and Greenspans low interest rates fueled the fire. I disagree that Freddie and Fannie were not a major reason for the crises, they are responsible for 52% of the nations Mortgages with most being in the lower income bracket, they bought anything and everything and that drove up the supply of new houses which is a major reason things are so bad, way too much supply vs demand and it's driving prices down with it. Plus there is a reason they were one of the first institutions that needed the bailout.

Also, it is weird Stiglitz is more in line with Obamas campain and Summers is in the deregulater low tax camp.
 
Obfuscate said:
It's a good read, I agree with him on regulating leverage and Greenspans low interest rates fueled the fire. I disagree that Freddie and Fannie were not a major reason for the crises, they are responsible for 52% of the nations Mortgages with most being in the lower income bracket, they bought anything and everything and that drove up the supply of new houses which is a major reason things are so bad, way too much supply vs demand and it's driving prices down with it. Plus there is a reason they were one of the first institutions that needed the bailout.

Also, it is weird Stiglitz is more in line with Obamas campain and Summers is in the deregulater low tax camp.
Click to expand...


I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on the GSE front. Suffice it to say that their subprime loans were all A- loans. They didn't buy up the crazy shit directly. They did buy mortgage-backed securities though, which were AAA-rated bundles of horseshit.

The reason they were one of the first institutions to need a bailout is that, like the big broker-dealer firms (Bear Stearns, Merril Lynch, Lehman, Goldman and Morgan Stanley) they were permitted to have silly debt to net capital ratios.

I agree on the Stiglitz thing, though Obama was always painted as more lefty that he actually is on the economic front.
 
I don't see how you can make an argument they were not a major reason for the housing crises when they were responsible for over half the Mortgages, leverage was 66/1 and their behavior drove up the supply of houses too high. It there wasn't the major over supply of house the people trying to sell them would much quicker and for more and the prices of houses wouldn't fall as deep or fast which is the major problem because no one knows what these securities are worth until the supply/demand equal out.
 
Superfreak said:
He'll use the TARP funds.

I am just pissed that it came to that. Did the idiots not learn anything from the failure to pass the financial package in October???? Watching the market free fall after that and blow through technical barriers all because the idiots in DC couldn't show an ounce of leadership.

Now we get the same thing. This was truly the biggest no brainer in the history of no brainers. This is equivalent to having a hang nail and deciding that chopping off your arm is the way to solve it.

FUBAR
Click to expand...
I think people are less panicked than we thought they would be. Apparently even people who buy stocks understand that if they didn't get this money it would wind up authorized from the TARP fund.
 
Damocles said:
I think people are less panicked than we thought they would be. Apparently even people who buy stocks understand that if they didn't get this money it would wind up authorized from the TARP fund.
Click to expand...


That must be why the overnight futures and overseas indexes tanked prior to the White House saying it was open to using TARP funds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top