It is could possibly be part of a grander scheme to remove the USA/DOLLAR as the "World Reserve Standard", paving the way for a world currency (ie a New World Order
What does Rep McDermott think ?
What does Rep Kaptur Think?
Why should American taxpayers give US Treasury Secretary "Hank" Paulson a blank check to bail out the shareholders of busted banks? Why should the Treasury turn itself into a toxic waste dump for their bad loans? Why not let other banks join the unlamented Brothers Lehman in bankruptcy court, and start a new bank with taxpayers' money? Or have the Treasury pay interest on delinquent mortgages, and make them whole? Even better, why not let the Chinese, or the Saudis or other foreign investors take control of failed American banks? They've got the money, and they gladly would pay a premium for an inside seat at the American table.
READ THE FULL STORY @ ASIA TIMES.COM
ARNOLD KLING FROM THE ECONBLOG EXPLAINS THE REALITY OF THE BAILOUT
ECONOMIST MICHAEL HUDSON describes the bailout as a "Once in a Century Ripoff"
Great Discussion on REDDIT here
5 comments:
I think the "bailout" is a joke. I could care less about the stupid DOW or stupid Wallstreet in General. What has Wall Street ever done for Main Street America? Exactly. NOTHING. They dug their own hole now let them sleep in it!
Jiff
www.privacy.es.tc
We are crowdsourcing a huge list of Henry Paulson's conflicts of interest on this bailout deal at
http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/74otu/lets_track_here_where_paulson_has_his_money_pls/
damn how I wish I still lived in NY, I'd be right out there with all these people. The bailout is going to pass and it is a bunch of bullsh*t but what are we going to do? Essentially markets will fail which would lead to things being worse off than they are now....While I don't agree with it, nor do I believe most politicians do either, it seems it HAS to be done.
If I am getting this right Kling says that loosening the regs about credit requirements would enable banks to start lending again. Maybe I am misunderstanding (this is not my area of expertise at all), but isn't what caused this mess in the first place, that banks were lending money when they shouldn't have?
michael said...
If I am getting this right Kling says that loosening the regs about credit requirements would enable banks to start lending again. Maybe I am misunderstanding (this is not my area of expertise at all), but isn't what caused this mess in the first place, that banks were lending money when they shouldn't have?
They're referring here to loans made to businesses. A big part of what went wrong was the simultaneous loosening of regulation for homeowner loans paired with a tightening of regulation for business loans due to the mark-to-market part of Sarbanes-Oxley legislation passed to prevent any more Enrons from occurring. The SoX legislation forces business to be valued (for the purpose of reporting to stockholders and loan approval) based not on their actual assets, but on a perceived value reflected in stock market confidence. This can cause a company's value to death-spiral at the slightest hint of a tremor in the market, and they won't be able to get a loan via the usual methods to bail themselves out. Part of the "new" bailout bill is supposed to change that. Of course, it also includes an added 396 additional pages of legislation filled with pork.
Post a Comment