Wow, it got voted down. That was unexpected.
Dow dropped off the radar for a moment there.
Should the US toss the life preserver (to the tune of $700B)?
- Thread starter benjy
- Start date
Dow dropped off the radar for a moment there.
WOW, just wow. I guess the public will get what they want. Hold on for the ride, it's going to be ugly for a few years. I'm mad about bailing out Wall Street too, but to let the economy crash like this is going to be a tough pill to swallow.
I'm glad I'm not in over my head on anything and think my job is very secure, at least for now. For those whose careers depend on the publics expendable cash, I'm sorry and good luck.
I'm glad I'm not in over my head on anything and think my job is very secure, at least for now. For those whose careers depend on the publics expendable cash, I'm sorry and good luck.
Wow, it got voted down. That was unexpected.
I guess time will tell... The effect has already been disastrous... hopefully it's just short term
RockMonkey
Suddenly Enthusiastic
They'll go back through the bill, make some concessions, change some meaningless verbiage, and vote on it again. I bet it will pass the second try. It sounds like Nancy Pelosi really pissed off the house republicans just before the vote.
RockMonkey
Suddenly Enthusiastic
Dow dropped off the radar for a moment there.
The Dow has now dropped below the low point it hit immediately after the bill failed. Currently down 711 points, only about 30 minutes remaining today...
RockMonkey
Suddenly Enthusiastic
Dow closed down 777 points. Wow.
Last edited:
Newt explains it very well.....
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94900671&ft=1&f=1001
I find it very ironic that a chat board such as this, which is very conservative would be in favor of this stuff.
An excerpt:
"Well, if I'm wrong, then we're going to have a significant problem. And if I'm right, we're going to have a bigger problem. So I think part of the question is, why can't this be done out in an open debate, have an openly marked-up bill, have the American people know what's being asked of them?
I was just reading an analysis by a very sophisticated person who said that there's been at least one leak from a congressional staff briefing by Secretary Paulson, in which he clearly indicated he intended to buy assets at above their market value. And that — why should the taxpayer do that? I mean, why are we not saying, 'We'll provide enough capital to avoid collapse, but we're not going to provide enough capital to guarantee the profits of Wall Street people' — who, after all, last year, at Goldman Sachs alone had three people each earning $73 million a year. Now, why should we bail them out?"
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=94900671&ft=1&f=1001
I find it very ironic that a chat board such as this, which is very conservative would be in favor of this stuff.
An excerpt:
"Well, if I'm wrong, then we're going to have a significant problem. And if I'm right, we're going to have a bigger problem. So I think part of the question is, why can't this be done out in an open debate, have an openly marked-up bill, have the American people know what's being asked of them?
I was just reading an analysis by a very sophisticated person who said that there's been at least one leak from a congressional staff briefing by Secretary Paulson, in which he clearly indicated he intended to buy assets at above their market value. And that — why should the taxpayer do that? I mean, why are we not saying, 'We'll provide enough capital to avoid collapse, but we're not going to provide enough capital to guarantee the profits of Wall Street people' — who, after all, last year, at Goldman Sachs alone had three people each earning $73 million a year. Now, why should we bail them out?"
Bucking Bronco
................
- Location
- Layton
I can tell you that 2 weeks ago I was booked about 3 days out and had several jobs booked into the following week. On Monday the 15 my phones stopped ringing, Last week I only worked on Monday and Tuesday so I had a 5 day weekend. Luckily this week I do have a few jobs but generally this time of year I am booked a week to 10 days out.
I am worried but thankfully like bart I am not over extended and have a few months of reserve
On a side note I have had a lot of time to work on the buggy.
I am worried but thankfully like bart I am not over extended and have a few months of reserve
On a side note I have had a lot of time to work on the buggy.
Last edited:
All four people that posted support of the plan represent the board's 6k+ members? Maybe it's just me, but even if I had no idea what was going on in the economy, I would trust economic geniuses (Paulson, Bernanke) over radio voices (Gingrich, Ramsey) any day... I'll have to give that article a read when I have a free minuteThey'll go back through the bill, make some concessions, change some meaningless verbiage, and vote on it again. I bet it will pass the second try. It sounds like Nancy Pelosi really pissed off the house republicans just before the vote.
Yep It will pass. 700 billion in addition to the 1 trillion plus that evaporated today. I could deal with my share of the 700 but what today cost me over stupid political BS really pisses me off.
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Politicians, always looking after their own asses before anything else. I saw Nancy's little speach at the beginning and I am sure that didn't help either to win votes
JackKeslerCustoms
Active Member
- Location
- Herriman
Politicians, always looking after their own asses before anything else. I saw Nancy's little speach at the beginning and I am sure that didn't help either to win votes
So the question is will the version that passes be better or worse than the one that failed? You would hope that with an extra day or two to think about it, it would get better but then factor in the political aspects and it has the potential to be a disaster. The theories of how this will work are all over the board, and there are enough variables that any one of these plans could work given the right circumstances. Also, every one of them has the potential to fail miserably. If you belive in the free market, then you should let it correct itself. If it really is that good of an investment, then the govt should buy. (Warren Buffett didn't get rich not knowing anything.) Then how about Citi? They will take the losses up to $42 Billion then the FDIC will step in. Is there a possibility of the govt buying the $42B? Depending on how this bill is written it could be.
He also didn't get rich by following our personal interests, he got rich by following his personal interests which are usually a lot different. Call me crazy, but I don't think that just because Warren Buffet says the Government should do this that it's the right thing to do.
But then again, nobody really knows what to do or support... me included. My first instinct is the keep the Gov't out of it, just like they should stay out of most things. If you look back far enough in the Fannie Mae records you'll see a history of socialist democratic decisions that started this snowball on the mountain. That makes me think that we need less socialistic intervention.
All bubbles eventually burst.
waynehartwig
www.jeeperman.com
- Location
- Mead, WA
I have to admit only watched part of it and not all of it...
Obama voted for this and even helped sue banks etc that did not make home loans available to low income families.
McCain, Bush and even Clinton have said this was an issue in 01, 03 and again in 05 I believe.
I just posted this...
http://www.rockymountainextreme.com/showthread.php?p=544124#post544124
Do I think we need to buy their bad debts? Yes, we are literally on the brink of a second great depression. All of the signs are there - people are loosing their homes, jobs, taxes are rising, cost of living (groceries, oil, etc) are higher, etc.
As a fellow business man, I do agree that they should fail (if I was to fail, nobody would give me a bailout) and I do believe other business' will absorb most of it for pennies on the dollar. Buffet has done so and so has great banks like Citibank, Chase and BofA. But I still think there needs to be some federal assistance where the local sector can't absorb it.
Is it something that has to happen right now!? No.. I think we should sit pat and wait a few more weeks and let the larger, more financial secure SMART business men soak up the bad debts and then if there is still a need to help, then step up and help.
waynehartwig
www.jeeperman.com
- Location
- Mead, WA
I completely agree. But I'm thinking more in terms of a domino effect. If this happens now, what will the economy be like next year? 2 years? 5 years? What about our home values? Retirement accounts? This is the part that concerns me. I could honestly care less if a bad business goes under - let 'em! It's the after math I'm concerned about.
waynehartwig
www.jeeperman.com
- Location
- Mead, WA
Exactly. Warren knows if the govt doesn't help, the market will continue going down and he'll loose money. Keep in mind though, if he looses money so do we. It's one of those things that you are for because of selfish reasons; however, those selfish reasons will help the general public as well.
Brett
Meat-Hippy
- Location
- Salt Lake City Utah
Exactly, when the smaller guys in the US, aka the normal consumer, suddenly start finding they can't get loans, their credit card limit's just were halved, they can't even buy a new car with great credit, that's when the shouting will happen. "Why didn't you bail out the finacial markets, gov?" This will happen if they don't do something to shore up Wall Street. I'd prefer not to see that happen and would rather dump $700 billion into the market to get the economy stabilized before the floor REALLY falls out.
I don't know how many of you follow the finacial markets or read the news stories, but if aren't, DO IT. You need to understand how this problem can effect you if nothing is done to stop it now.
waynehartwig
www.jeeperman.com
- Location
- Mead, WA
They'll go back through the bill, make some concessions, change some meaningless verbiage, and vote on it again. I bet it will pass the second try. It sounds like Nancy Pelosi really pissed off the house republicans just before the vote.
Anything Pelosi (and Oboma) is for just scares the **** out of me!
Its a damned if we do, damned if we don't kind of situation.
I fully understand all the reasons why we should do this, I really do. But what kind of message will it send? What future behavoirs will this re-inforce? Thats its OK to gamble all your money away because Jonh Q Taxpayer will foot the bill?
Glad to see Obama exposed for the fraud he is. He and a bunch of other bleeding hearts played thier role too in this mess by insiting everyone should be able to own a home. Hell I'd vote for Hillary for prez long before I vote for him.
I fully understand all the reasons why we should do this, I really do. But what kind of message will it send? What future behavoirs will this re-inforce? Thats its OK to gamble all your money away because Jonh Q Taxpayer will foot the bill?
Glad to see Obama exposed for the fraud he is. He and a bunch of other bleeding hearts played thier role too in this mess by insiting everyone should be able to own a home. Hell I'd vote for Hillary for prez long before I vote for him.