Anyone watching/listening to the news?

I'm still having a hard time figuring this all out.

If mortgages were chickens this is how the problem occurred: There are `millions’ of chickens. Some of these chickens are in very good shape and will produce like clockwork (ARM loans to folks who make the bucks and move every two years), many more are a bit long in the beak, weak in the legs and can’t lay on demand anymore, but have pretty plumage and can still forage for their selves (might make the reset payments). And, then, there are a whole passel of chickens that are already dead but too dumb to lie down (still standing, yes? Waiting to be knocked over on reset).

Now, the chicken market is going great guns and all chickens regardless of condition look really fine to the chicken choking business eagles who, flush with cash, want to grab up these chooks and take the `meat’ back to their nest of shareholders before their competiors do.
So, the chickens are divided into tranches (French for slice) The eagles will pay top dollar for a flock of the high producing chooks (don’t make as much interest, but egg production is guaranteed). The next group of less productive chooks cost less but, if they come through with the eggs there is more profit to be made! And so on through the run until they pay least, for the truly speculative pile of half breathing chooks, hoping to clean up if they keep gasping long enough.

But! there are rating agencies that determine whether you’re buying a really GOOD (trucks instead of tranche, now) `truck ‘ of chickens (lots of mortgages packaged together) or not (AAA chickens !! top roost!). However, the folks loading the trucks were hiding BAD CHICKENS in with the good and the chicken raters didn’t exam them too closely. But, just as any hauler would do, the financial companies/banks/etc. bought insurance on their particular loads of chickens (just in case). However, the insurance providers weren’t required to be capitalized (unlike State Farm – may refuse your claim but have the money to pay if they wanted to).

So, the highway is full of trucks full of chickens and everyone is sure they’ll get to where they’re going and make lots of money on the way. But, ah heck, price of gas goes up (literally) economy starts to slow and chickens start coming home to roost, if they aren’t expiring suddenly. But, now, no one wants these chickens ( exactly what’s in the trucks good/bad/ugly?). The insurance is kaput because there was never any money to pay claims.

Millions of chickens in thousands of trucks make everyone run around like `suits' with their heads cut off! `Why should I loan you any money if we can’t go through the truck and find out what kind of collateral you’re actually hauling???' Nearly all the big boys have these `repackaged’ bunches of chickens on trucks and none of them trust anyone else’s chook valuations and so the chickens pass into the realm of the toxic and the highways are clogged with them, nothing (credit) is moving! So, the Fed comes along to take possession of the trucks at the lowest possible (we hope) price, bring in their inspectors and figure out what they are worth thereby clearing the roads. Once this is done the new buyers (who will probably be required to move the newly grouped chooks at low rates) will sell the chickens (if we don’t tank there will be a market). (sorry for stretching the analogy)...
I really expect we’ll make money off of everything the government’s grabbed up. This is a near-beer problem (if action is taken, it is).
I want to be clear that I'm no apologist for idiocy and greed (on my good days I love Tom Paine, on my bad days - today - I'd be emulating Joseph Stalin given the chance)

Below an excerpt from a speech given on the 9/25 by the CEO of the Dallas Fed:

“Even before tackling the task of cementing capital adequacy, we need to bear in mind that the TARP places one more straw on the back of the frightfully encumbered camel that is the federal government ledger. Other off-balance-sheet liabilities were already in place before Washington took on additional burdens from the reorganization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and whatever we realize—which may, after all is said and done, be a positive return—from the liquidation of collateralized loans made through the Fed to Bear Stearns and AIG, and now the Treasury’s discharging of “x” dollars of mortgage-related securities for which there is presently no palpable market. (I say “x” because under the proposal made, the taxpayers’ outlay is not $700 billion; it is the difference between $700 billion and the return earned on that $700 billion investment.)
Foremost among the existing liabilities are some $13 trillion in unfunded Social Security benefits and Medicare obligations already promised to the people but as yet unfunded, an obligation that the Dallas Fed staff estimates at a present value of over $80 trillion.[8] The former comptroller general of the United States, David Walker, estimates the Medicare deficit to be less, only $34 trillion, so let’s work with his less-excitable numbers. With everything including Social Security and Medicare properly accounted for, Mr. Walker estimates that “as of September 30, 2007, the federal government was in a $53 trillion fiscal hole, equal to $455,000 per household and $175,000 per person.”

700 Billion is a puny amount, eh?

Counting out loud to a billion? ~32yr. Counting out loud to a trillion? ~32,000yr.

We send ~700 billion out of country EVERY YEAR to purchase energy (one form or another)... (we really could staunch that flow - best thing we could do for our economy and posterity IMHO).
 
Quote:
That is exactly how I feel too.

My husband and I prefer to invest in ourselves. We are young and energetic now, so it makes sense for us. I suppose if we were older we would have a harder time deciding on a prudent investment. However, I feel that money is best kept in the community and invested in young energetic people trying to better the community.
 
Well they threw us to the wolves. Hang on it will be one bumpy ride.

Start now stocking up. Buy canning jars. Every time you have a spare $ buy fresh produce and start canning. In 3 to 5 years you will need this food. If not sooner.

Pay off everything you can so you have no debt. Start learning how to barter. Get to know your neighbors now so you know who you can depend on later.

Down size go to the smallest house you can and tighten it like Fort Knox as far as weatherizing goes. Have family, get a place that you can move your whole family in if you need to, so that when the sh*t hits you can move all your kids and their family in and save money. Get off the Grid as fast as you can. Learn to shoot and start storing amo.

Get your money out of the bank and change it for what is going to survive the paper money won't.

Get going learning how to store and process your own food. Can most of it as the electric may not be available to you. I figure 3 to 5 years to prepare but h*ll I have been wrong before.

Our founding fathers would not be turning in their grave. They would be coming back and changing the government to work for the people again. There should be no country owning any part of America. Nobody but Americans should own any business or land. Government sold us down the river. When we take back our rights that is when we will survive again. With this government in place we are doomed.

This is my opinion not asking anyone to share it but thanking all for letting me share.
 
I have WHAT in my yard? :

They owed us over a hundred grand. We did nothing wrong and had a legal contract! But, bankruptcy law left us with nothing! Each of these business that go under owe other people money. The number two cause of bankruptcy for families in this country is medical expenses. Next in line is financial loss due to SOME ONE ELSE"S bankruptcy.

When this company went under it almost took us with it. It DID take three other small businesses down. When these big guys go down they'll take out alot of innocent people.

This is exactly why, personally, I think the gov't does unfortunately need to step in and do SOMETHING (big) now, although I totally agree the original bailout plan was not the best way of doing it (haven't read the current version yet).

It is all well and fine to define it all as someone else's fault and say that those who got themselves into the mess can just darn well take their lumps.

Unfortunately, the way things are all interrelated in our economy, YOU are going to be taking their lumps right there WITH 'em. Possibly moreso than them, in fact, because it tends to be the less honest more gamblin'-inclined loophole-findin' types (who chiefly caused the problem in the first place) who manage to weasel their ways out of trouble without paying.

"He did it, punish him" and "it's not my fault, don't punish me" sound good in theory but they aren't the way this situation works. To me, opposing ANY large-scale gov't intervention in this situation is like a buncha people on a ship in a storm in the middle of the ocean, discovering that some of them have allowed pieces of the hull that they were responsible for maintaining get all rotten and holey, and just crossing your arms on your chest and stubbornly saying "well, *I'm* not going to do anything about it, it's THEIR fault, let them go down with the ship." Point being of course, you are on the same ship.

JMHO and I realize a very unpopular one around here,

Pat​
 
Personally I think we're listening to a bunch of scare tactics and fear mongering. Listen to the people saying how much the so called 'bad loans' are worth - $156 billion, I've heard. Why are we now up over $800 billion? I'd rather let the chips fall where they may and then deal with the real issues, and not hand out money willy-nilly. I'm with Jeffrey Mirons on all of this and will continue to think that way.
 
Did anyone else see this or hear about it? I heard it on the news the other night and about hit the roof!


The $700 billion price tag for the failed U.S. government bailout of Wall Street and the financial system was conjured up. Where’s the evidence? Forbes’ Brian Wingfield and Josh Zumbrun wrote on September 23:

In fact, some of the most basic details, including the $700 billion figure Treasury would use to buy up bad debt, are fuzzy.

“It’s not based on any particular data point,” a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. “We just wanted to choose a really large number.”

And you wonder why Americans are suspicious of government…

I repeat... "IT'S NOT BASED ON ANY PARTICULAR DATA POINT. WE JUST WANTED TO CHOOSE A REALLY LARGE NUMBER"..
barnie.gif
 
ya think the failed plan was bad,, you oughta see this new one,,, has even MORE tax breaks for the wealthy,,hahaha ,,,theres an easy way to fix this,,, vote EVERY incumbent out of office,, it'll take the new guys a couple years to get "paid off" by the biggies.
 
Here are selected quotes from an interesting article .

Weiss and Larson co-authored a paper that they submitted Friday to the Senate Banking Committee and to the House Financial Services Committee. The paper explains in depth their analysis of what Weiss called during a conference call "a debt crisis so severe, there's risk of a Great Depression."

The Weiss-Larson report greatly expands what has been released publicly regarding the debt crisis.

For example, Weiss found the number of banks in need of assistance is 1,637 -- nearly 20 percent of the 8,451 such institutions nationwide. Those banks and thrifts have assets totaling $3.2 trillion -- 41 times the $78 billion in assets held by the 117 financial institutions recognized as needing assistance by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp.

and

Weiss and Larson offer three recommendations to ease the crisis:

• Congress should limit and reduce funds allocated to any bailout to avoid a sharp interest-rate rise or a collapse of the dollar and focus on shoring up government safety nets.

• If Congress creates a new agency to acquire bad private-sector debt, the agency should pay the market value for that debt. Such a move would mean buying the debt at a sharp discount so that it can be quickly converted to cash.

• Congress must admit to the American people that there are significant risks in the financial system that government can't fix, including the possibility of surging defaults on debt not covered by a bailout or a chain reaction of corporate failures.​
 

New posts New threads Active threads

Back
Top Bottom