If the 700 billion dollar bailout fails , what’s next ?

I’ve read the thread … when I posted this , I fully believed that the bill would PASS … I simply posted this to question if it would be effective or not …. I was in utter shock when I heard it failed … this is a momentous day … this bill NEEDED to pass … it would have bought us valuable time .


To those of you talking about the next great depression and saying that our society “needs†this .. It will teach the greedy people a lesson … you have no idea what your talking about , and to those who think our system will simply reset after enough pain and time have passed , your completely , utterly wrong …

The only people who will not be affected by this are the people who have almost nothing now ….

If you have a second house , and this next depression should come about , kiss it good bye ….

If any one of you thinks for a second that I and others will stand idly by while millions upon millions of Americans are kicked out of their houses onto the streets homeless while there are vacant houses to shelter them , then your dead wrong ..

You can kiss your property rights goodbye …..
You are over reacting.

You had no rights when you came into this world, what gives you any now?

Putting your faith in wall street is a very bad investment with returns no one wants to reap.

We will never see another great depression, except in your fear engulfed minds and souls.

Unless this leads to Armageddon, what's to worry about and if it does, so what?

Oh I forgot, most have NO HOPE---shame isn't it.
 
Obama and Pelosi blew the bailout

Apparently neither one of them lifted a finger to pressure their toadiest toadies, which means either they’re not taking this seriously or they’re too stupid and/or gutless to lean on their colleagues effectively. You’d think Obama at least could flip 12 Democrats by promising to swing by their districts. After all, if the polls hold, this is going to be his mess to clean up come January.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdGpxUEN4RU...k244421698.html
 
How about a bill banning adjustable rate mortgages and converting all existing ones into government backed fixed-rate mortgages?

How about the government regulating home values so there's no risk in buying one?

How about a law requiring a person to take a 12 hour course on personal finance before obtaining credit of any kind? If you can't comply, you're cash only.

How about a law banning check-cashing and the 200% payday loans?

How about a government that budgets for surpluses and PAYS DOWN the debt we've been paying interest on for 50 years in some cases? Maybe then we won't have to go to China to get money to bail out the nation's banks.

We're eliminating personal responsibility, little by little, here in case you didn't notice. Everything is the government's responsibility...we should just follow their program...scary stuff.

At what point does a bank admit they loaned a bunch of, in many cases, crackheads without jobs money to buy houses and then the values went down because of the glut of housing?
 
Now that the first bailout plan has been defeated in the house and assuming that any potential second vote will not occur (or succeed), I think (and hope) that the powers that be will consider what I suggested earlier: A debt-for-equity swap.

The procedural upside is that this likely would not need approval from congress, as it likely within the fed's current power scheme. Beyond, the procedural upside, many benefits can come from this. First, the duration of this process will likely be shorter than no plan and the bankruptcy process, thereby hopefully shortening any economic pain on a grand scale. Second, while this plan still must confront the difficulty in valuing the toxic assets, it is better than letting the government try to value assets -- who would likely overvalue the assets, thereby enriching the owners/managers of the banks and costing the taxpayers. If, on the other hand, our government correctly pays the actual value of the assets, what good has it done... it has only exchanged one type of capital for another. This approach, after determining the worst-case scenario as the starting value, would create a new second-market value that will be determined by private parties. Third, a debt-for-equity swap in certain situations would benefit both debtholders and equity holders. Forth, it does not socialize losses.

There are more upsides, but those are what I consider the most prevalent; I also recognize that there are several downsides (e.g., valuation), and would like to hear your opinions/objections on the matter. I sincerely hope that the powers that be consider this option... even if it is eventually dismissed for the relief of a better plan. And, notably, this would be the first-step of a long-term solution (not the fix-all). I believe that this may be a decent approach (perhaps one that could be conbined with others), but what do I know; I am, as one poster amusingly suggests, simply a bartending gynecologist. :rolleyes:

Apparently the senate does not want to consider this approach (or at least not within the view of the public). The Senate will vote on the bailout bill on Wednesday... putting additional pressure on the house if it passes the senate. I suppose it is just coincidence that those democrats who voted for the bill in the House received 78% more contributions from finance, insurance and real estate industries than those democrats that voted against the bill (similar with repubs). And we know what the executives of the corporations in question feel about any other option other than the bailout.
 
Or For those of you like myself who feel the economy is finished completely , I’d like to hear your views on what we should do to keep our nation running in the event of total economic collapse , I have my own personal views which I will share after I’ve finished refining them .
Got a generator behind the trailor huh?
 
… but if you have a second house that’s empty .. We’re to take it and give it to homeless people … same with hotels , cabins , any place we can shelter people …

If you want to see the Paris hiltions of the world get theirs , then your day is coming …. In the new future a person who contributes nothing to society won’t be allowed to live in the biggest mansions …. We’re going to give those to the doctors and scientists of our society ….

Freedom will die for his country, just not the constitution.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #71
Freedom will die for his country, just not the constitution.

Make sure you understand the distinction of what I’m saying ….

In the event of mass homelessness I am prepared to take those actions necessary to shelter the population ….

If someone was dying because they were freezing to death and all I had were copies of the construction , flags and greenbacks … I’d burn everything to keep that person warm ….

The country IS the people .
 
Make sure you understand the distinction of what I’m saying ….

In the event of mass homelessness I am prepared to take those actions necessary to shelter the population ….

If someone was dying because they were freezing to death and all I had were copies of the construction , flags and greenbacks … I’d burn everything to keep that person warm ….

The country IS the people .

There won't be mass homelessness because most people, thank goodness, aren't stupid enough to buy a house they can't afford.
 
Gosh....I started reading this bill that the democrats in a GOP controlled Congress prevented from being enacted. So the GOP had no other option than to table it. In reading...towards the end (but not the very end) I saw many references where Fannie and Freddie would be "exempt" from compliance of several sections of the The Securities Exchange Act of 1934. One of these that they proposed to exempt them from was put in place "in the public interest or for the protection of investors". I think there is more to this than what a youtube video can show.
 
Gosh....I started reading this bill that the democrats in a GOP controlled Congress prevented from being enacted. So the GOP had no other option than to table it. In reading...towards the end (but not the very end) I saw many references where Fannie and Freddie would be "exempt" from compliance of several sections of the The Securities Exchange Act of 1934. One of these that they proposed to exempt them from was put in place "in the public interest or for the protection of investors". I think there is more to this than what a youtube video can show.

Dem's in a GOP congress prevented?

Dude, 135 Gop voted it down to 95 dem's.....get with it.

Exactly what planet are you on and what you smoking? :down:
 
Gosh....I started reading this bill that the democrats in a GOP controlled Congress prevented from being enacted. So the GOP had no other option than to table it. In reading...towards the end (but not the very end) I saw many references where Fannie and Freddie would be "exempt" from compliance of several sections of the The Securities Exchange Act of 1934. One of these that they proposed to exempt them from was put in place "in the public interest or for the protection of investors". I think there is more to this than what a youtube video can show.



Danger...More cronYism ahead...proceed with CAUTION!
http://www.newsweek.com/id/161218
 

Latest posts

Back
Top