Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 10-06-2008, 05:49 AM   #1 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Arizona
Bailout & Elections

Now that all the hurrah is over, I'm just curious on how many were for or against the $700 billion bailout and if you'll let that affect how you will be voting.

I must admit I'm not very knowledgeable about politics, but the bailout has really gotten under my skin. I understand that we're in hard economic times. However, this bailout doesn't seem to be a comprehensive solution and further increases the burden on the taxpayers of America. Why we couldn't just let individual private banks fail is beyond me. I don't understand why there wasn't some sort of commission set up to actually help those individuals who are in foreclosure to assist them. It would have definitely been a much easier pill to swallow had that been the case.

So in my situation, I've taken a look at who voted for the bill and will most likely be voting against them, depending on other circumstances as well.


Here's a link if you're interested.


As for pres, I'm still debating what to do on that.

Last edited by Impetuous1; 10-06-2008 at 06:05 AM..
Impetuous1 is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 06:46 AM   #2 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
I'm very much against this bailout as the ONLY thing it's guaranteeing is the mortgage and credit companies get to keep their jobs and money. All the trickle down effects will not reach those of us who were smart enough to not get in to a home loan we couldn't afford and the only thing it guarantees me is I get to pay for those peoples ill judgement. My congressman voted no, so i'm still voting for him. My two state senators (cornyn and hutchison) both voted yes and its my guess that cornyn is going to lose his job this election and hutchison may as well give up her intended governers run in 2010.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 07:44 AM   #3 (permalink)
Junkie
 
I'm not a big fan of it myself. We have a major problem and we need a solution to this problem. However, i'm not convinced this bailout is the solution. I liked the first bailout much better. With that been said I'd rather have seen a bailout that was focused on the bottom instead of the top. Something along the lines of letting people apply for mortgage relief. Approved people would then get their mortgage subsidized but would have to pay back the subsidy in the future. Obviously the government wouldn't get back everything they dolled out but would at least get back a lot of it. Also most of the people who are facing foreclosure would be able to avoid it and the banks would get relief on their bad debt in a "tickle up" economics system.
Rekna is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 07:51 AM   #4 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
I too am opposed to it. I'm rather surprised the anti-socialism republicans voted to socialize banks in times of loss.

What it tells me is . . .well several things really:

1) it's ok for 50 million people to suffer gross economic destruction, or die, due to lack of healthcare, but it's not OK for wall street companies that made bad investments (and that are under the law, single people) to suffer ill effects as a result of their poor decision making driven by greed.

2) Socialism is bad, unless rich people might have to save a few months before buying that Lamborghini.

3) Private profits are A-OK, even if they come at the expense of the common man living on main street, but any losses must be rendered public, also at the expense of the common man living on main street.
shakran is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 07:58 AM   #5 (permalink)
Eponymous
 
jewels's Avatar
 
Location: Central Central Florida
Who's actually read it? I don't trust the spin out there. Can anyone get through all this quickly? I can read a novel in a few hours, but legalese takes a whole other level of focus.

Read full text of Senate bailout bill - CNNMoney.com
__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain
jewels is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 08:08 AM   #6 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 11:16 AM   #7 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: venice beach, ca
700 BILLION DOLLARS.

if you split that up and evenly gave 1 share to every taxpaying voting american, it would be about 400, 000 $, it would be taxed so the govt would get a large portion of it back right away, and it would completely pay off the mortgage of 99% of the people in danger of foreclosure right now.

instead we're giving it to a few juggernaut companies.

doesn't make a lick of sense to me.
__________________
-my phobia drowned while i was gettin down.
high_jinx is offline  
Old 10-06-2008, 08:49 PM   #8 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Your math is off: 400 000 000 000 / 301 139 947 = 1 328.28608
Rekna is offline  
Old 10-07-2008, 10:32 AM   #9 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
HJ's math is fine. 301139947 is the total population of the US. Kids do not pay taxes and therefore would not receive any money under HJ's plan.
shakran is offline  
Old 10-07-2008, 10:45 AM   #10 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
the whole mess pisses me off

ideologically, I don't believe that pumping money into the upper echelons of business will do much or anything at all for those who are actually struggling to pay their mortgages

economically, I realize that sitting back and watching our fundamental banking structures fail would be academically interesting but not much more

personally, I'm feeling duped in that I wish my wife and I had scraped every dollar we had and put a down payment on a home we weren't sure we could have made the payments on


basically I feel like the only people who are absolutely not receiving any direct benefit are those of us who made wise financial choices
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-07-2008, 11:29 AM   #11 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth View Post
basically I feel like the only people who are absolutely not receiving any direct benefit are those of us who made wise financial choices
+1,000

right there with you smooth. I purposefully avoided the whole low money down get a home you can't afford after the housing market busts period so that I wouldn't be faced with foreclosure and it seems that because of that supposedly wise choice, I get to help pay for those that didn't think things through.
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 10-07-2008, 03:02 PM   #12 (permalink)
immoral minority
 
ASU2003's Avatar
 
Location: Back in Ohio
I think we should have let all the banks fail. But then, the management of the former banks, would just start new banks and we would be in the same boat.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth
basically I feel like the only people who are absolutely not receiving any direct benefit are those of us who made wise financial choices
I really hope this question gets asked tonight at the debates, and I'm pretty sure it will.
ASU2003 is offline  
Old 10-09-2008, 10:07 AM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
To me the "bail out" is Washington at its worst. First everyone is against it, but felt they had to vote for it (sounds like the Iraq war vote and the Patriot act vote) People had been talking seriously about Fannie and Freddie since as early as 2003, there was absolutely no need to rush legislation.

Second, consider the source of the bail out plan. He is an investment banker from Goldman Sachs. Is it a surprise that his solution involves bailing out bad decisions made by investment bankers? Is it a surprise that Congress thinks the solution has to come from government? What would be wrong with letting institutions that made bad decision fail? Nothing. there are some institution who did not make bad decisions (like Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Berkshire Hathaway) or companies who recognized the problem early and took steps to mitigate the damage (Citi Bank) these companies are in a position to take advantage of the failings of the others and end up stronger.

Third, they could not even pass the legislation in a pure form, they needed to load it with "pork".
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-09-2008, 02:17 PM   #14 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
well, the argument, ace, is that the institutions that made bad decisions have a lot of people's money wrapped up in them. If they fail, what happens to the innocents who didn't know what these idiots were doing with their money because the idiots wouldn't tell them?
shakran is offline  
Old 10-10-2008, 01:20 PM   #15 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran View Post
well, the argument, ace, is that the institutions that made bad decisions have a lot of people's money wrapped up in them. If they fail, what happens to the innocents who didn't know what these idiots were doing with their money because the idiots wouldn't tell them?
Innocents???

Greedy perhaps. When I lived in California and the towel guy at my gym started talking about flipping houses, I should have sold everything that day.

People should not invest in things they don't understand. People who invested in companies like AIG and never read the 10K or 10Q reports pretty much paid the price for blindly gambling with their money. Equity investing comes with the understanding that one could loose everything.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-10-2008, 04:46 PM   #16 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
a lot of people, as in 401K plans and Roth IRAs. not innocent as in people who were flipping houses they couldn't afford.
if you can think of a way to punish the people who were abusing the system without punishing the people who were storing portions of their paychecks in sound investments for retirement and leaving the decisions of where the safest places to do so up to their banks and portfolio managers, then I'd be interested to hear about it.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-11-2008, 02:15 PM   #17 (permalink)
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth View Post
a lot of people, as in 401K plans and Roth IRAs. not innocent as in people who were flipping houses they couldn't afford.

I never heard of a 401(k) plan that did not offer fixed investment options or a simple money market choice. The botom line is that the closer a person is to retirement the more conservative they need to be, this advise is every where. If you ignore it you do it at your own risk.

Those who have the benefit of time, will do o.k.. First, there has never been a rolling 10 year period where the market lost money. Second, those making contributions are lowering their cost basis in today's market, its like being able to buy and stock (pardon the pun) up when things are on sale.

For example if you invest $1,000 per month and the prices for a fund are like:

Jan- $100
Feb - $150
Mar-$200
APR -$250
etc.
etc.
Dec - $650

at the end of the year you have 43.6 shares at a cost basis of $275.21 per share.

If the pattern was:

Jan - 100
Feb - 50
Mar - 25
APR - 250
etc.
etc.
Dec - 650

at the end of the year you have 91.94 shares at a cost basis of $130.53.

I know this is simplistic but if you go back historically using the S&P 500 (Spiders, symbol SPY) you can plug in some very realistic historic results. Bottom line is consistent investors with time have an advantage and prefer periodic corrections.


P.S. - Don't make fun of me, I like numbers. I already know I am weird, etc,etc,etc.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 10:12 AM   #18 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: bedford, tx
Banks admit bailout will not work

Quote:
So much for that story. A few days ago, when Hank Paulson called the heads of the nine families to Washington and shoved cash down their throats, he announced that the banks would use this new taxpayer cash to lend. They won't, of course. They'll hoard it like a starving family who has just been given a grocery cart full of food.

And after a few days of silence, even the banks are finally admitting that. So it's back to the drawing board for Paulson & Co.

Next steps? Find a way to force the banks to write their assets down to nuclear winter levels, so 1) private investors don't have to worry about getting sandbagged and therefore invest more in the banks, and 2) the banks know they won't be forced to take more multi-billion dollar losses. Only then will the banks begin to lend again. And at that point, the only challenge will be finding people and companies to lend to, in an economy headed straight into the tank.)

NYT: , John Thain, the chief executive of Merrill Lynch, said on Thursday that banks were unlikely to act swiftly. Executives at other banks privately expressed a similar view.

“We will have the opportunity to redeploy that,” Mr. Thain said of the new capital on a telephone call with analysts. “But at least for the next quarter, it’s just going to be a cushion."...

“I don’t think that the market wants to see that capital being put to work to leverage the business up again,” said Roger Freeman, an analyst at Barclays Capital, which acquired parts of the now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers last month. “My expectation is it’s quarters off, not months off, before you see that capital being put to work.”...

Jamie Dimon, the chairman and chief executive of JPMorgan, said his bank was in a stronger position to use the money than some of its competitors.

“It’s clear that the government would like us to use the capital,” Mr. Dimon said on a conference call with analysts on Wednesday. “If you are a bank that is filling a hole, you obviously can’t do that.”

Who is "a bank that is filling a hole"? Seven of the nine that just got taxpayer money.
Ok, so now that our elected representatives did NOT listen to the american people and gave over 700 billion of OUR money to banks, supposedly to kickstart the credit economy again, and the banks (flush with all that capital) are going to refuse to lend out that money until their economic outlooks appear better, how many people will still remain partisan and vote for their favored party candidate?
__________________
"no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything. You cannot conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him."
dksuddeth is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 01:00 PM   #19 (permalink)
Wehret Den Anfängen!
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
400,000$ is way way way off.

Note that if banks fail, that means they aren't marking down their debts. Someone _has_ to mark down bad debts, or the currency system collapses. As a last resort, it is the US government -- or we all take the hit via inflation.

The theory is it is cheaper to bail out the banks than it would be to deal with all of those bad debts.

Of course, the problem _in the first place_ was the banks getting tied up into a situation of being upside down on equity.
Quote:
First, there has never been a rolling 10 year period where the market lost money.
At 100$ per month, at 3% increase in contributions per year, what would be the value of a rolling contribution to the markets right now. Say, indexed on the Dow, with a mere 0.5% friction cost.

You can also do NASDAQ if you like.

And to clarify, do you mean nominal value, or real (factoring in CPA) value? Because if you mean nominal value, over much of the last 50 years you could be losing 5% value per year and still have more nominal dollars at the end...
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Yakk is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 01:58 PM   #20 (permalink)
Who You Crappin?
 
Derwood's Avatar
 
Location: Everywhere and Nowhere
My math has it more like $5300/taxpayer (based on the # of individual returns filed in 2003)
Derwood is offline  
Old 10-17-2008, 02:21 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
It seems that if things continue like they have for another year, then we will have that rolling 10 year period of losses...unless I misunderstand the claim.

I was under the impression that 2000-01 was hit pretty hard and now we're almost to 2010-11 and I don't see the market as being higher than it was 10 years ago. If it so much as broke even with what it was 2000 then I'd even accept that as marginally better than what it looks like it might actually be come the new year.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 10-18-2008, 05:41 PM   #22 (permalink)
Crazy
 
mixedsubstance's Avatar
 
Location: Where the wild things are.
I think it was a desperate and quick move that wasn't thoroughly thought through. I don't think it's really going to help out much and be a 'trickle down' effect. And even if it was, it would take the economy as a whole to recover, and that's just too long. I, amongst many others, have been laid off, but I have come to the point in my life where I am not going to keeping trying to find another unsatisfying 9-5 desk job just to have money, because there is NEVER such a thing as Job Security anymore. So, back to school I go, and I am finding means to make money (Unemployment or even working at home).
__________________
Well, isn't that just kick-you-in-the-crotch, spit-on-your-neck fantastic?!?

*Without energy, there would be nothing.*
mixedsubstance is offline  
 

Tags
bailout, elections

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:36 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360