It could just be me, but I find the bailouts quite refreshing. Its not every day your suspicions about incipient banana republicanism are proved true, after all.

For example

AIG renegotiation

The Treasury banking stress tests were fixed

White House again refuses calls to nationalize the banks, maintaining what is essentially a pretty fiction

Structural reform of the banking system is essentially nil

And these are just a few stories from the last week.

Now, that's not to say bailouts in theory are a bad idea. With the right structural reforms, proper analysis and adequate punishment for the fools in government, regulation and finance, bailouts could work. There are plenty of good bankers and financial analysts out there who did not jump on the subprime mortgage bandwagon, and have raised concerns about overreliance on credit before now.

But none of those things are happening. Its the "in practice" part of this which is the problem, as per usual. This is like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in the bottom. But then, when the bucket contributed several million in campaign related funds, and those who the money is being taken from contributed, uh, significantly less, you shouldn't really be surprised when the result is systemized looting from the former to the latter.

Or subject them to severe oversight and regulation. That would be even worse. After these last ten years, that would be extremely painful for them.

Iraqis might have actually done it right, if they had been in charge.

KBR was in charge, and they claimed they were NOT required to follow US electrical safety codes. Even the DOD is losing confidence in them.
http://cellar.org/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=538077

The accidental deaths and close calls, which are being investigated by Congress and the Defense Department’s inspector general, raise new questions about the oversight of contractors in the war zone, where unjustified killings by security guards, shoddy reconstruction projects and fraud involving military supplies have spurred previous inquiries.

American electricians who worked for KBR, the Houston-based defense contractor that is responsible for maintaining American bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, said they repeatedly warned company managers and military officials about unsafe electrical work, which was often performed by poorly trained Iraqis and Afghans paid just a few dollars a day.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/wo...ectrocute.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29065911/

I never agreed with the bank bailouts. I DO agree with the stimulus. AIG just makes me see red. I think they should just go down, along with some big banks. In fact, I think too many corporations have gotten too big. They should be broken up.

btw, what about all the info about Northern Trust today? :mad:

A few could do with being shaken down, its true. I would tend to think that any single corporate or banking entity large enough to pose a threat to the economy should a run on them happen (like with Citigroup, for example) is probably too much power in the hands of too few. I'm not entirely sure the benfits outweight the particular costs when it comes to the investment giants, at least those who play it fast and loose with everyone's money.

But apparently such companies are "too big to fail" and we should not worry ourselves about such things. Or so I was told when I asked about the potential risk, a few years back.

I hadn't heard about this until you mentioned it, but Bloomberg, as per usual, has the goods:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...xUwbY&refer=us

Fed chief Bernanke: recession could end in '09

So we are facing a catastrophe or things will be better this year? Which is it?

Idiotic abuse of taxpayers money? That is what politicians are for. When business gets in on the act, what next? The government giving themselves bonuses?

He didn't say things will get better this year.

Apparently he did in the interview.

Well, the "end of the recession" might not be the return to growth, it might be the begining of full-on depression.

Surprisingly, I was a little bit comforted by his interview tonight, something I can't say about listening to Larry Summers this morning. I reeeally, reeeally hope they know they are doing. At least I learned Ben Bernanke did not grow up with a silver spoon in his mouth, and he never worked for Wall Street.

No, he said if a bunch of things happen, and they can do what they set out to accomplish, the recession will end at the end of the year.

But despite his optimism they can meet those targets in spite of Republican obstructionists, what he's actually talking about is ending the plunge into a full fledged depression.

Well then they cut the video REALLY WELL this morning. I wanted to see the whole thing myself after your posts - Thats what it looked like to me.

"....millions of jobs." President Obama

where ya been Merc?

St. Pats Rugby Tourny all week end and we hosted 3 people from the UK in our house. Gave them some big ole American hospitality, cooked a whole salmon on the grill, went to a low country boil, made a few fires in the back yard, hoisted a few cold ones, and soaked in the hot tub. :D

damn. and you didn't call? bastard. I coulda used a nice, big British bloke...

And now more failures of the bailout:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/ed...22schools.html

Aside/ How exactly is it that our elected representatives signed this bailout without even reading it? They are still now finding things that they had no idea were there. Gotta be done before Nancy goes on her trip...

What the fuck did they do? Oh thats right THEY DON'T KNOW EITHER Grrrrr /As you were.

Same as they did with the PATRIOT Act.

Nobody had time to read it, damn near everyone voted for it.

Looks like that is going to be the modus operandi of the democratic congress.

But it was okay for the republican congress to vote for the PATRIOT Act without reading it...because, apparently, the dems were mind controlling them.

Maybe that will be Dodd's newest excuse. :p

Fear tactics. And of course, Congress has to actually pretend like they're doing stuff for OUR benefit, instead of their own political benefit.

So what about the new housing proposal? Wall Street apparently approved, but damn, why does it seem like all the money is going to the people who need it the least?

And people keep calling these mortgages "toxic assets," and while the mortgages might be toxic, the actually properties aren't. The properties are worth something. So I really don't get it.

I think the government should have just divided the money up and given it in equal portions to every adult citizen who makes less than a million dollars a year. It might have been cheaper in the long run, and better for the economy.

Do the math - If the mortgage amount is more than the current home value, thats is a "toxic mortgage." To compound the problem there were ARM (Adjustable Rate Mortgages) bought by people to get into homes that, IMO, they couldn't really afford. Lets leave the "greedy lenders" out of this for a moment.
The homeowners took a gamble that they would be making more or they could refinance later or or or... before the rate on their ARM increased. Many knowingly did this. It has been done for many years, this is not something new. What changed is the home values.

To further compound the problem many homes did not increase in value, in fact, they decreased and on or around the same time the mortgage payment increased. Now you have a devalued home and an increased monthly payment.

An example of the impact:

A good discussion of some projected problems which lay ahead.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/Uploa...mic_crisis.pdf

No one was fooled. It was business as usual before, just as it is now.

I understand all of that. But really, shouldn't they have to eat that? After all, they all went along with the ride. They made the loans to those people. They knew (or should have known) what they were doing. When you take risks, the upside is profit, the downside is the opposite. Still, the houses are worth something, even if the mortgage was a bad one. They are probably worth now what they should've been worth to begin with.

Do the math again.

I don't want to do the math. I understand the math. Do you understand my argument, or question rather?

Honestly, if banks had just renegotiated those mortgages to begin with, this may not have happened. Really.

And... whoever heard of an appraisal person asking the seller what price they would like their house appraised at? There was all kinds of trickses going on.

Yeah, there was some (a lot of) underhanded shenanigans going on, especially in the subprime market.

But more than that, even intelligent people were making some poor choices when overwhelmed with all the legalese and "expert" opinions. Here's an article in NewScientist about how people tend to accept what "experts" say, even when it goes against their common sense.

Therein lies the problem with your argument.

CURL: Stimulus oversight left up to taxpayers

Oh? Oh???? and second....

Wow..A Washington Times editorial writer who doesnt like the process to provide ARRA transparency, including making it relatively easy for anyone to find out more about funded programs.

What A surprise.

Way to see only what you want - you're transparency is showing Dux.

In fact, what I saw about a week or so ago, was the full testimony of Devaney, the head of the ARRA accountability board....and not just the few sentences w/o context in the partisan editorial that you evidently find so meaningful.

But it is what you and Merc do best.....in your "gotcha" game. You two really are interchangeable.

You cut and past a partisan editorial.

You rarely, if ever offer your own opinion with your initial post/link - perhaps just a one-line snide comment.

And you never provide any context at all.

Its a bullshit way to encourage discussion and it just gets tiresome after awhile.

Carry on without me.

Gladly. :yelsick:

Edit: Actually sorry to hear you have that attitude about people who disagree with you. I have learned some stuff from your contribution, not much, but it has been measurable. You might just want to take a break and try again later.

It is not at all about people who disagree with me.

I learn from undertoad and lookout....I even learn from UG.....because they post and discuss their own opinions.

It is a matter of style.

As I said, it has just gotten tiresome for me to respond to one after another after another of the partisan editorials that cherry pick the facts (in this latest case, two sentences out of two hours of testimony) that you and classic throw out repeatedly with a "gotcha" attitude as a basis for discussion....w/o even offering your own opinions.

I can read partisan editorials (on both sides) w/o coming here.

I'm done.

Sure.

Those are direct quotes from him - His first priority is a website - and as an afterthought and by his own admission the second is the other which seems much more important to any relatively intelligent human.

You choose to bring up some other bullshit and avoid the point again. Thats fine, I'm used to your deflections. You learned very well from the politicians you work with/for.

... as an afterthought ? and by his own admission ? WTF are you talking about?

Why not read his FULL opening statement (pdf) for yourself, as part of two hours of his testimony that goes into a bit more detail on the two distinct, but equally important roles of the board than you were led to believe in your partisan editorial - transparency (public website) and oversight (including meetings with federal/state officials w/oversight responsibility for the disbursement and use of the funds).

Right...I guess it is bullshit to suggest that there might have been more to his testimony than the two quotes cherry-picked by a partisan editorial writer.

Fine with me. Your blind fealty to such partisan editorials is laughable if not ignorant.

TW may have it right....You're either just a wacko who believes whatever the wingnuts throw your way OR too fucking lazy to take the time to look beyond those spoon fed talking points before jumping on their bandwagon.

You didn't read the rest of my reply, obviously.

There was no reason to read anymore, even though I did. If you understand what the issue is then there is no issue. :shrug:

So be it. Your choice.

Which is why wacko extremism works. Anybody can cherry pick a sound byte. Rush Limbaugh does it routinely AND teaches extremists how to do it. Reality requires much more work; takes longer to explain.

But then Hitler was an early master. Disparage the bourgeois and intelligencia. Once done, it becomes easy to prove Saddam has WMDs.

They continued doing it to you because that is what wacko extremist do. If even a moderate conservative, then he must be a flaming liberal. That soundbyte cheapshot proved itself.

Easy to post lies and half truths especially when others do not hold them to the required 1500 words of supporting facts, numbers, and reality.

classicman is particular good at subverting discussions with his soundbyte attacks masking as a question. Some call it 'stir the pot'. It really was, for example, outright attacks on Jill because she posted what the overwhelming majority of professionals have always said - with supporting facts and example. She posted what a political agenda fears.

Examples of cheapshots demonstrated by classicman's nefarious soundbyte attacks on Jill in Torture memos.

Notice: soundbyte attacks prove that professionals advocate torture. That is the wacko extremist propaganda; despite reality. Professional interrogators routinely show torture does not work. But to explain truth requires 1500 words in response to each cheapshot attack. What classicman does is also how the Nazis grabbed power in 1930s Germany. And so they have successfully driven you silent? Same extremist agenda was used even in 1930s Germany.

More attacks against a poster - something tw claims incorrectly that he never does and routinely ridicules others about - further examples of what a hypocrite tw is.

ORLY? Your example above is a question repeatedly asked of Redux, not Jill. Care to try again tw or would you prefer to admit that you are wrong again?

No, apparently not. Whats the question?

Look really closely at what is quoted, and what is provided by the editorial's author.

The "Oh, and second" bit is a sarcastic snipe by the editoral author. For all we know, Mr. Devaney said, "First, the board is responsible for establishing and maintaining a Web site. Once that is completed, we will have the tools in place to proceed to step two, which will help minimize fraud, waste, or mismanagement."

I stand 1/2 corrected - I still feel that the website should be a distant second.

The website should be first, if that can result in all of the info being available. Sunshine is the best disinfectant.

The poorest and needy still lose out.

Continues:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...Iwh1wD983T6D00

Holy crap. My great great great grand kids will be paying this off.

White House: Budget deficit to top $1.8 trillion, 4 times 2008's record

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/White-...9183.html?.v=8

Only if you use today's dollars :eyebrow:

Where were you when George Jr was creating these problems? Where were you when the 'Saddam has WMD' myths were being promoted using lies and wild speculation?

Deja Vue Nam. Those Nixon lies in 1968 and 1970 caused massive expenses and the resulting recession in the late 1970s.

Discussed previously were Kennedy tax cuts as proof that tax cuts cure economic problems. Then one who constantly first needs facts noted the Kennedy tax cuts then resulted in economic downturn many years later.

Deja vue. George Jr's welfare to the rich and corporate tax cuts. Time to pay for money games as economics now takes revenge.

Again, who kept posting these warnings more than four years ago?

Let's see. Mission Accomplished would only cost $2billion and be paid for by Iraqi oil. What was reality back then? Which kind of thinker saw a $400billion number? On 22 Mar 2004:
France did something right for once!
Due to further extremist mismanagement ("America does not do nation building"), even that number was too small. Mission Accomplished alone is $1trillion (and still bin Laden runs free).

Or from the Economist of 22 Jun 2002:
Government Debts grow
Economic distress created by George Jr's political agenda was obvious how long ago?

Those were the days you stood up for America - opposed the political agenda. Saw through extremist's myths. Economics is now taking revenge for economics stimulus created by money games. Welcome to the 'Deja Vue' lessons of Nam. So many ignored them to promote a political agenda - and the resulting debts. We knew this problem was looming how long ago?
22 Jun 2002?
22 Mar 2004?

Now we must refight an Afghanistan war all over again - because extremists said, "Americans don't do nation building". More debts directly traceable to presidental mismanagement in the early 2000s.

Economists said it. Obama also confirmed it. We will be paying for economic mismanagement for the next ten years. Amazing how a budget surplus by Clinton could turn into massive economic destruction when an MBA trained mental midget, as front man for wackos extremist, was in charge.

So what are you saying, today's dollars are worth less? :D

This should keep them busy for awhile.

http://cellar.org/2009/stimulus-vs-u...yment-may2.gif

Ain't working yet :( and neither am I :thepain: