Bail Out Failed (Franklin, Ira, Jefferson: apartment, rent, insurance)

[dman72]

Originally Posted by Jrprofess

There has been an email circulating based on the percentage of adults aged 18 years and older that figures the number to be 85k. I'll try and find it and post. Good for a laugh, and does make you think at least for a moment...

Even if I got that money right now, all that I'd do is pay down my mortgage with it. So, I'd be paying down debt and many people would just go out and buy a bunch of junk. This isn't about economic stimulus in the simplistic terms, it's about the economy functioning.

[At1WithNature]

Let those pompous BS led companies die off. Just like all the ma and pa shops that have been swallowed up and/or put out of business by Wal*Mart.

It's time for this government to stand for the people, like they are supposed to, instead of these corporate pigs.

[dman72]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

Let those pompous BS led companies die off. Just like all the ma and pa shops that have been swallowed up and/or put out of business by Wal*Mart.

It's time for this government to stand for the people, like they are supposed to, instead of these corporate pigs.

The corporate pigs already walked away with all the money. I know guys who made millions selling these mortgage backed securities and are out of jobs now..but guess how much money they have in their personal bank account now? Your congressman voting against this bill isn't going to hurt them nearly as much as it might hurt you.

[At1WithNature]

Originally Posted by dman72

The corporate pigs already walked away with all the money. I know guys who made millions selling these mortgage backed securities and are out of jobs now..but guess how much money they have in their personal bank account now? Your congressman voting against this bill isn't going to hurt them nearly as much as it might hurt you.

I hope their banks fail.

[dman72]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

I hope their banks fail.

Is your money in a bank? Mine is, so I sure hope that isn't how far the economy has to collapse for every American angry at the system to get their revenge on the greedy.

Keep in mind that half the country voted for George Bush..twice. Both parties have moneyed interest behind them, but as Ralph Nadar once said "George Bush is a corporation posing as a human being". His true "base" have profited wildly from the lack of regulation and oversight in both the energy market and the financial markets.

[OhBeeHave]

Quote:
Originally Posted by At1WithNature
I hope their banks fail.

Is your money in a bank? Mine is, so I sure hope that isn't how far the economy has to collapse for every American angry at the system to get their revenge on the greedy.

I think At1's sentiment doesn't take into account that if the banks fail, so will the rest of us. At1's revenge on the greedy is merely a Pyhrric victory. People have a sepia-toned, almost romanticized Hollywood perspective on the Great Depression. They fail to realize just how many regular Joes were negatively impacted.

[sean sean sean sean]

The only thing I understand about money is that I never have enough of it, so this doesn't really effect me in any way. The whole thing does really confuse me though - not the cause, I understand why it happened pretty well....but I can't figure out why a $700 billion bailout would be any better or worse than just simply letting the banks fail.

dman72, you seem to know a lot about this so maybe you could enlighten me....but in my admittedly very, very simple view both scenarios lead to the same end result. Lets say the banks fail, there's a run and everyone takes their money out. The dollar will become worthless as we'll have to print more - won't the same thing happen in the proposed bailout? The only difference I see is that in one case people will be shoving money under their mattress and in the other case a robot computer somewhere will move a few decimal points and the government will tell us the banks now have money, which is worthless. Isn't money already somewhat worthless because inflation has increased exponentially faster than wages have in the last 50 years? If the banks fail, won't we be dealing with strictly "real" money, albeit less valuable, instead of the "fake" money that got us into this predicament? I'm assuming the value of everything, including labor, would decrease at an extreme rate but the way my brain is looking at this screwed up scenario is that if the entire economy adjusted to dealing strictly with real money instead of running so much on lending and speculation, prices across the board would be more representative of actual worth. The only problem I see is that we're so dependent on foreign products/services that anything outside of our borders would be prohibitively expensive and it'd probably be Mad Max or Planet of the Apes in a few years....

I'm sure I'm looking at it totally the wrong way, could you let me know how it really works?

[dman72]

Originally Posted by sean sean sean sean

The only thing I understand about money is that I never have enough of it, so this doesn't really effect me in any way. The whole thing does really confuse me though - not the cause, I understand why it happened pretty well....but I can't figure out why a $700 billion bailout would be any better or worse than just simply letting the banks fail.

dman72, you seem to know a lot about this so maybe you could enlighten me....but in my admittedly very, very simple view both scenarios lead to the same end result. Lets say the banks fail, there's a run and everyone takes their money out. The dollar will become worthless as we'll have to print more - won't the same thing happen in the proposed bailout? The only difference I see is that in one case people will be shoving money under their mattress and in the other case a robot computer somewhere will move a few decimal points and the government will tell us the banks now have money, which is worthless. Isn't money already somewhat worthless because inflation has increased exponentially faster than wages have in the last 50 years? If the banks fail, won't we be dealing with strictly "real" money, albeit less valuable, instead of the "fake" money that got us into this predicament? I'm assuming the value of everything, including labor, would decrease at an extreme rate but the way my brain is looking at this screwed up scenario is that if the entire economy adjusted to dealing strictly with real money instead of running so much on lending and speculation, prices across the board would be more representative of actual worth. The only problem I see is that we're so dependent on foreign products/services that anything outside of our borders would be prohibitively expensive and it'd probably be Mad Max or Planet of the Apes in a few years....

I'm sure I'm looking at it totally the wrong way, could you let me know how it really works?

I don't think that the bailout is necessarily the treasury simply printing money and handing it over to banks. There is actually a cost to the taxpayer here..but what they are saying is that the bad assets the government will purchase actually do have some value, wheras right now they cannot be sold at all because they are perceived as having $0 value. Most people in this country...barring a complete economic collapse..will continue to pay their mortgages. Even if 10% fail (which is MASSIVE), these bundled mortgage bonds still wouldn't be worth only $0, so the government should be able to recoup that investment.

[At1WithNature]

Originally Posted by OhBeeHave

I think At1's sentiment doesn't take into account that if the banks fail, so will the rest of us. At1's revenge on the greedy is merely a Pyhrric victory. People have a sepia-toned, almost romanticized Hollywood perspective on the Great Depression. They fail to realize just how many regular Joes were negatively impacted.

i said their banks, not mine. and who is to say the stock market isn't orchestrated to begin with and who is to say the one bank that matters, the privately operated Federal Reserve System, isn't controling the supposed downfall of less powerful institutions than itself in the first place in? There is a quality book out there that you should read. It is:

http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyl.../dp/0912986409

[OhBeeHave]

Originally Posted by At1WithNature

i said their banks, not mine. and who is to say the stock market isn't orchestrated to begin with and who is to say the one bank that matters, the privately operated Federal Reserve System, isn't controling the supposed downfall of less powerful institutions than itself in the first place in? There is a quality book out there that you should read. It is:

Amazon.com: The Creature from Jekyll Island: G. Edward Griffin: Books

Thank you for the recommendation.

I am one of the regular Joes, not one of rich guys. One of the banks I do use, WaMu was on the brink of collapse last week. From what I understand, if WaMu hadn't been purchased by Chase the collapse would have drained the FDIC of it's holdings. If that had happened, there would have been runs on the banks by everyone.