[Tfug] OT: Bailout Bill

[Joshua Zeidner]

On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Calvin Dodge <caldodge at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 10:36 AM, Paul Scott <waterhorse at ultrasw.com> wrote:
>> Jim Secan wrote:
>>> At 09:56 AM 09/25/2008 -0700, keith smith wrote:>>>
>>>> Are we not in a pickle?  If we fund this bailout we all pay and the ones who
>>>> caused the problem get away with it.  If no bailout what does that do to our
>>>> economy?  Will it crash?  Will the world economy crash?
>>>>
>>>> It seems we are in a pickle.  You and I will more than likely pay $2000 each
>>>> for the bailout, or so that is the figure I am hearing.
>>>>
>>>> Do we have a choice?  Do we want another Great Depression?
>>>>
>>>
>>> We don't really know, and given the propensity for shading the truth (I'm
>>> trying to be polite) by the current administration it's hard to tell.
>>>
>> I understand that part of this was caused during the Clinton
>> administration when the distinction between investment banks and
>> commercial was removed allowing all banks to invent in ridiculously
>> leveraged ways.
>
> It goes back much farther than that - it started when Congressional
> leaders starting screaming "racism" when banks didn't give loans to
> people of color who had poor credit history. It didn't matter that the
> people who they DID give loans to had similar failure rates regardless
> of color.
>
> But the biggest push for this "give loans to people who aren't likely
> to pay them back" plan did, indeed, happen during the Clinton years.
> The people on my side of the fence were warning back then that this
> was a bad idea (example: the National Review article on the subject
> which appeared in 1993 -
> http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n25_v45/ai_14779796/print?tag=artBody;col1)
>
> And when some people (John McCain, John Snow) tried at times during
> the last 8 years to change the rules to prevent this credit disaster,
> the people on the other side of the fence (Barney Frank in particular)
> were saying "no, there's nothing wrong here, and no need to reform the
> system".
>
> So yes, to some extent this problem is due to "greedy Wall Street
> executives", as well as greedy home buyers (trying to get a far more
> expensive home than they could realistically afford). But those greedy
> people couldn't have contributed to this mortgage meltdown if Congress
> hadn't turned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into mortgage welfare
> organizations.

  Calvin, while it is true that culpability here is not at all simple,
but the lowest common denominator is that the lending institution is
responsible for the debt that they issue.  If this debt is repackaged
and you purchase it, caveat emptor.  The great offense here is that
this 'every man for himself' capitalism was exactly what these banks
were calling for before they screwed up royally.  ie. "you lost your
job to India?  sorry free market trumps all!"  so the informed can
only conclude that this bill is nothing less than a vile double
standard that should rouse rage and indignation for all Americans.
-jmz

>
> Calvin
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tucson Free Unix Group - tfug at tfug.org
> Subscription Options:
> http://www.tfug.org/mailman/listinfo/tfug_tfug.org
>



-- 
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World
War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." --Albert Einstein

 - http://www.joshuazeidner.com/