Now Wall Street may shun $700bn bail-out

The Observer via The Guardian ^ | Oct 5 2008 | James Doran

[Daffynition]

This is where I think these *bad mortgages* can be re-written the right way .... one-by-one, and the holders suffer the consequences for their stupidity, if necessary... without a government bailout.

Or what is the PC term now, *rescue*? PFFFFT!

[pepsi_junkie]

If you;ve ever worked somewhere where Chairman and CEO are the same, you will recognize how atrocious it is. CEO is allowed to run the company into the ground without any sort of accountability. An independent board might just fire a rotten CEO but one controlled by the CEO never will. How else do you explain chumps like Jeff Immelt keeping his job at GE? Stock is down almost 70% since he took over, he’s still in charge and nobody can get rid of him.

[Daffynition]

This is where I think these *bad mortgages* can be re-written the right way .... one-by-one, and the holders suffer the consequences for their stupidity, if necessary... without a government bailout.

Or what is the PC term now, *rescue*? PFFFFT!

[Iron Munro]

Uppity taxpayers, demanding accountability!!!

Paulson and Bush just wanted $700 billion in used, unmarked bills, to hand out to Paulson's cronies with no strings attached and no accountability.

If the minimum control and oversight in the bill that passed is enough to keep some multi-billion dollar companies from taking taxpayer handouts then they aren't hurting as badly as we were told.

[Dick Vomer]

[Daffynition]

[Yardstick]

Thanks for that.

[Man50D]

If a company is bellying up to the federal funds window, obviously their executives have largely failed. Try again.

If executives are trying to do so then it means the onus is on the socialists in Congress who created this mess by attacking our free market system and those who support them. The last thing the people should be doing is electing any candidate who supports this socialist scam Try again.

[Daffynition]

Excellent cartoon!

[Salgak]

No, but they are the only two options that end at the White House. . .

[savedbygrace]

We all have to sacrifice for the good of the nation.

So, if they’re not going to take the money, I will.

You’ll thank me later.

[dirtboy]

The free-market system played a large role in creating this mess with CDOs and CDSs. Ratings agencies lied about the quality of bonds. I’m sorry, but the free markets failed here. And the greed of executives was a critical aspect. They would play games to maximize their pay and the consequences to the world financial systems be damned. To blame government for all of what we are seeing is to live in as much denial as the Dems who only blame the private sector and deny their role in Fannie and Freddie.

[mrmargaritaville]

What McCain should have done was come out against the “second” bill-which the Senate approved. That version of the bailout was loaded with pork and earmarks. He could have then used his vote against it, and obama’s vote for it as another example of wasteful washington spending-at a time when this country can not afford it.

[dirtboy]

Personally, I wish he would have. Politically, I can see where he simply could not have. He was screwed by too many pubbie Senators. The final vote was 74 for. It would have accomplished nothing but to allow McCain to get shredded.

[Melchior]

I see that Citibank has just sued to stop the transfer to Wells Fargo. The Arabs who control Citibank must be bent out of shape.

[Man50D]

The free-market system played a large role in creating this mess with CDOs and CDSs. Ratings agencies lied about the quality of bonds. I’m sorry, but the free markets failed here.

The free market system didn't fail. You're missing a very fundamental concept of the free market system and socialism. All economies undergo periods of expansion and contraction for a variety of reasons. In this case it appears to be about greed. As I said in a previous post. The free market ultimately weeds out those who make bad decisions. What's left are those who are aware excess in the long run will destroy a business. They remain in business. On the contrary, the free market system is working just as it is supposed to with no help from the socialists in Congress.

It is this socialist bail out that will destroy the economy by allowing those who made bad business decisions to stay in business and further world financial systems. The problem is socialists don't care about the stability of economies. They care about controlling them at the expense of everyone else.

To blame government for all of what we are seeing is to live in as much denial as the Dems who only blame the private sector and deny their role in Fannie and Freddie.

You didn't read my post very thoroughly. I said Congress and those who support them. The government is not just Congress. The people are the government and many of them are to blame for allowing socialists to slowly destroy the country. People should be blaming them for perpetuating this mess instead of voting them into office.

[informavoracious]

He’s not a Maverick, he’s a flaming Pinto.

[ContraryMary]

This would not be a bad thing.

[dirtboy]

In this case it appears to be about greed. As I said in a previous post. The free market ultimately weeds out those who make bad decisions.

In this case the free market created an interlocking system of derivatives capable of completely obliterating the global economy as we know it. Warren Buffet himself called them finacial weapons of mass destruction. The rest of the world is not interested in your end game of financial destruction as proof the free market works. You approach destroys the village to save it. No idea or concept works by itself, and free markets are no exception.

[ccmay]

Good. I’ve got friends (and an investment) in a community bank that has NEVER made a sub-prime loan, even at the height of the craziness a few years ago. They are still taking deposits and making loans. People are abandoning the over-leveraged Wall Street houses of cards and putting their money in safe, prudent local banks.