What is Digg?218 Comments
- SonsOfTheCloth, on 09/22/2008, -2/+49I would be thrilled if the final bailout bill somehow penalized companies that are on the brink of collapse, but still giving out 6-7 figure severance packages to their CEO's. I also liked how Treasury Secretary Paulson worries that if the program penalizes CEOs, then the companies are not going to participate. I'd like to be at the shareholder meeting where a CEO tries to explain why it was important to turn down federal funds...
- inactive, on 09/22/2008, -6/+48I called all my congresscritters to tell them we would not accept the bailout of greedy plutocrats, no matter how much said plutocrats dump in the congresscritters kitty. Bailout the victims of the predatory lenders, maybe. The Wall Street pigs need to be handed subpoenas, not checks. People need to be doing hard time for this.
Call your congresscritters and give them the ***** they deserve. - saranac7, on 09/22/2008, -7/+35Just like the gun to the head "Approve the Iraq War" tactic...not this time, W.
- psy333che, on 09/22/2008, -3/+26It is very imporant that people call and email their leaders so that this does not get pushed through quickly
- georgemason01, on 09/23/2008, -2/+25This reminds me of when the Democrats voted with the Republicans for the Iraq War Resolution in 2001 - "Yeah, we're voting for it, but we'll keep a close eye on what the White House does with the authority/money we gave them. We promise!"
- paintgrl, on 09/22/2008, -3/+20Please write every rep in congress and the senate for your state and tell them this will not fly, say no to Treasury Secretary Paulson .
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/ ...
An e-mail only takes a second please write one saying you are against this Paulson plan and a blank check no over site bail out. - maceelk, on 09/23/2008, -2/+19I say stop debating HOW and start debating IF!
The fed has no right to exists in the first place, our founders warned us about this.
Thomas Jefferson in 1802 in a letter to then Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin:
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." - mfc5200, on 09/23/2008, -7/+23Limit executive pay? I would say go even farther. Once this mess is over, the companies that were irresponsible and got us into this mess should be liquidated until the $700 billion is payed back. The US government should have a lien on their assets. It has to be crystal clear that this crap won't be tolerated in the future. This will also set up a situation for the companies that have been responsible and don't require bailouts to flourish in the future as a result of less competition. It's called natural selection, its a good thing.
Bailing out homeowners? That's *****. They took loans they couldn't afford. STOP TRYING TO BUY VOTES DEMOCRATS!
We the taxpayers better see a return on this money! Again, I want the US treasury to have first lien on all the profits until all that money is paid back with a standard 3-5% interest rate. And if they don't return to profitability and have to be liquidated, the US better have first claim to all the assets. Claims that are above not only the stockholders, but also the preferred stock owners and bondholders. - huntress58, on 09/22/2008, -6/+21Okay so if it is going to cost the average taxpayer $2000 - $7000, then I say give each taxpayer a credit voucher for that amount. They can use it toward cc debt, pay off car loans, college loans, or apply to their mortgage to prevent foreclosure.
What do you say? - Dustin00, on 09/23/2008, -1/+16"They may not want the funds if there are CEO pay restrictions"
If they can find $700,000,000,000 laying around somewhere else, they're welcome to it. - ousthouse, on 09/23/2008, -3/+17Republicans want to give irresponsible rich people money. Democrats want to give irresponsible poor people money.
Politicians need to shut up about the rich and poor. Responsible vs. irresponsible is a more important subject matter. - crombenevolant, on 09/23/2008, -4/+18I don't get why everyone is suddenly so sympathetic to the people "who might lose their homes" because of this. These are the people who bought homes they could not afford with nothing down, bad credit, and interest only loans. Why should they get a break on their mortgages? What makes them so special?
I busted my ass and saved to come up with a down payment and bought an older fixer upper, no one is lining up to give me a break for being able to pay my mortgage. Why should these guys get rewarded for being irresponsible? Home ownership is not a right, it is a privilege that has to be earned. If we reward every idiot who got in over their head, what is next? Somebody who bought a plasma on a credit card and can't make the payments? How about someone who racked up their credit card in the champagne room at the strip club? And what do these people learn from their mistake: It pays to buy something you can't afford, because the government will bail your ass out. - crombenevolant, on 09/23/2008, -4/+18Sure, here it is in a nutshell:
Guy has bad credit and can't get a home loan.
Mortgage company sees this and realizes they can give him a loan at very high interest because of the risk, and then sell the loan (because they don't want to keep it).
Bundler buys the loan and sells it en mass as a mortgage security, promising high returns and low risk.
Giant investment companies buy up mortgage securities like mad because of the high return.
Turns out guy had bad credit for a reason and defaults on mortgage (*100,000).
Giant investment firms/banks/bundlers cry foul as their risky behavior has consequence.
US government gets out checkbook to make it all better.
Democrats cry foul, get out their checkbook for original guy with bad credit.
You and I, left at the bar with the tab..... - 3drage, on 09/23/2008, -4/+17Screw homeowners, how about a little help for the responsible people out there who can't buy a home because greedy people priced them out of one?
Stop rewarding people for poor decisions! Help those who make responsible choices. - TsuruchiBrian, on 09/23/2008, -1/+13Let's just bail out EVERYBODY!
Can't we just have the Federal Reserve print $700 billion for every single person. That way no one will have to be poor and everyone will have enough money to do whatever they want. If anyone says it's a bad idea, we can tell them that we have to do it to save the economy from collapsing. - KittySpark1es, on 09/23/2008, -3/+15If you go here:
http://congressorg.capwiz.com/congressorg/issues/a ...
You can write one letter and it will be sent to Bush, your senators, and your district congressman. Kill 4 birds with one stone. - UTKEngineer, on 09/23/2008, -1/+12I have to agree with phybere. People on each side are in the wrong.
Instead of nationalizing these banks, why don't we just break them up and auction them off to local banks who are in a position to deal with the real estate and capitalize on the rock bottom prices? - OMnicient, on 09/23/2008, -2/+13Oversight??? This is a time to put aside partisan politics!
Remember Neil Bush and Silverado? He's with Scientology now.
I've got to ask, when everything goes bad, isn't it time to actually "write off" a fair amount of losses?
Maybe the rich should stand up and be "patriots" for all they have gained, raped, robbed, and pillaged. They should take a BIG hit.
In the soviet union, the penalty for speculation was death. Maybe they weren't so wrong after all, considering the New Socialist "bail out" republicans. - TsuruchiBrian, on 09/23/2008, -1/+11I got an even better idea. How about we limit Congress' pay every year they spend more money than they are supposed to.
Or better yet we could just vote all these crooks out of office. - CourtesyFlush, on 09/23/2008, -2/+12http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20080918/bs_ibd_ibd/20 ...
Here's the lead of a New York Times story on Sept. 11, 2003: "The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago."
Bush tried to act. Who stopped him? Congress, especially Democrats with their deep financial and patronage ties to the two government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie and Freddie.
"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Rep. Barney Frank, then ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
It's pretty clear who was on the right side of that debate.
As for presidential contender John McCain, just two years after Bush's plan, McCain also called for badly needed reforms to prevent a crisis like the one we're now in.
"If Congress does not act," McCain said in 2005, "American taxpayers will continue to be exposed to the enormous risk that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pose to the housing market, the overall financial system and the economy as a whole." - j0hnk377y, on 09/23/2008, -3/+13Too bad they shot down the reform in 2003 Bush proposed because it would disenfranchise lower income people from getting a mortgage on a home they couldn't really afford.
- LoveWidescreen, on 09/23/2008, -3/+12So, am I going to get a bailout for NEVER missing a mortgage payment in the past several years?! Why the hell do the irresponsible people who signed a dotted line knowing full well that they shouldn't have get a bailout while I get jack ***** for being responsible?
- Benno, on 09/23/2008, -3/+12I feel like a sucker for renting and saving for a down payment now. My savings are becoming less valuable by the day while at the same time people whom make less money than I do get to keep their homes I can't even afford.
winners: reckless people.
losers: responsible people.
- mzx639, on 09/23/2008, -2/+10The people that bought homes they couldn't afford DO NOT deserve any help from the government, aka MY tax dollars!!
- omnis, on 09/23/2008, -0/+8Great, so the people who created the mess are going to be our champions and fix the mess? Splendid. I can't wait until they get to control our national healthcare...
- alcaron, on 09/23/2008, -1/+9So, screw the homeowners who bought houses they couldn't afford, why bail them out if it was their mistake.
Instead, lets bail out the lenders who shouldn't have made those loans, and KNEW they shouldn't have made those loans, in the first place, I mean if you are just going to bail them out when they make PISS POOR financial decisions, why bother.
BOTH sides are to blame, but the companies moreso because there was a LOT of predatory lending practices going on. My 18 year old sister was approached by a bank (she didn't approach them) after getting a CHECKING ACCOUNT and they told her "now is a great time to buy a house" she said she couldn't afford it, out came the charts and graphs and, I kid you not, FORTY different loan plans, and sure enough in one of these fairy tale loan plans, she could afford it.
These banks KNEW this was a short term gain long term loss, like but like every other bubble in the history of economics, they thought they would be the ones to get out before it went south.
So, explain to me again why they should get all the money and the people they preyed on to MAKE these faulty short-term gains should be left out in the cold?
If my money is going to someone, much as I don't want to buy a $2-5,000 chunk of ANYONES home, I'd damned sure rather it going to the people instead of to greedy corporate ***** who will just pay their execs a *****-ton of money for being INCREDIBLY bad at what they do. - mogebier, on 09/23/2008, -2/+10It's about time Pelosi and her ilk pulled their heads out of their asses and did something.
They have been in power for 2 years, as you Liberals keep spouting all over Digg, and they did NOTHING to stop this. NOT A DAMN THING.
They control congress.
Congress controls the country's purse strings.
They are partly responsible for this whole freaking mess. - FredFredrickson, on 09/23/2008, -2/+9I'm a Democrat, and I don't think any of them should be bailed out. That said, if we have to pass a bail out package, it better pull in the reigns on the treasury and put restrictions on government debt relief. I'm all for extending the arm of the government to help people who deserve it, but nobody in any of these situations deserves a dime. They all knew what they were doing, and they all deserve what they got.
- artofficial, on 09/23/2008, -1/+8This seems like the tangent of a few old men chatting about how they are going to fix things all while eating caviar and discussing how they dont like the smell of a new Benz. Regardless of party affiliation. This entire goverment "bailout," is ***** and against everything we are supposed to stand on as a country.
- yyymilitia, on 09/23/2008, -6/+13...No, they're adding unnecessary add-ons to an already unconstitutional program.
- phybere, on 09/23/2008, -7/+14Oh please. What's next, people who max out their credit cards are "victims" because the lender offered too much credit? No one's responsible for a persons spending other than themselves.
- EasySt, on 09/23/2008, -3/+10Quote from Barney Frank, in opposition to greater oversight of Fanny and Freddy, September 11, 2003:
"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis," said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. "The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."
See, this whole mess is simply a welfare program gone wrong! Now we're starting another bad welfare program, this time for banks, AND we're gonna give blank checks and oversight powers to the same people that created this mess?
Welcome to the USSA.
Citation:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?pagewan ...
Related:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive ... - h4ppydotcom, on 09/23/2008, -1/+8What an excellent quote. That Jefferson geezer was quite a smart cookie.
- RabidAngel, on 09/23/2008, -2/+8Here's what will really happen: the bailout will pass, with a bunch of "feel good but do nothing" terms added by Democrats. Salary caps for executives might be put in but they won't address bonuses, making them useless. Americans will bitch and moan, while a bunch of us - myself included - post a few rants on the internet.
Meanwhile, we all got robbed in broad daylight by what has become the most corrupt and fascist government that this country has ever seen. And they will get away with it, profiting from disasters that they themselves engineer, as they always do. - TSK05, on 09/23/2008, -11/+17Mean while, Obama endorses Bush's package while McCain calls for oversight and introduces a bill as such! Let me guess, you think Obama is the champion behind ending bailouts and McCain is their greatest supporter - right? Wrong - it's the exact opposite.
“The Federal Reserve should get back to its core business of responsibly managing our money supply and inflation. It needs to get out of the business of bailouts,” McCain said in Green Bay, Wis. - Yahoo: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080919/pl_nm/usa_poli ...
"Barack Obama endorses Bush's rescue package and calls for bipartisanship. John McCain outlines his proposal to create a new federal regulator." - LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-campaig ...
McCain is calling for oversight or an end to bailouts, Obama is endorsing Bush's plan! - psy333che, on 09/22/2008, -3/+9I agree with you a 100%
- mogebier, on 09/23/2008, -0/+6Well.... If I told the truth then I would just get dugg down by the brainwashed masses.
- SQLserver, on 09/23/2008, -2/+8Wait.
I'm confused.
Can someone explain this to me? - inactive, on 09/23/2008, -0/+6The only problem is: no matter how much we hate the "deadbeat bailout" if foreclosures continue we will never have a property value recovery. If we do it will take decades as opposed to a few years. I don't want to lose any more house value regardless of who can't pay for theirs. Home equity is most family's greatest source of measurable wealth.
- badqat, on 09/23/2008, -1/+790% of the crap that the federal government does isn't justified via the constitution. We need more than just getting rid of the fed...
- badqat, on 09/23/2008, -1/+7Partially? Try completely...
- Enzo33, on 09/23/2008, -1/+7The Democratic controlled Congress makes headlines only with topics they feel are fitting for headlines. It's ***** disgusting at this point - get over yourselves and your ***** egos and do the right ***** thing. *****. As Chris Rock would say: "I'm tired of this *****." The Democrat Party is the party of wait and see.
Well, don't wait too much longer Dembo's or you will see another Republican in the White House - GOD willing. - twitrock, on 09/23/2008, -1/+7Thanks. My letter has been sent.
- Grym11, on 09/23/2008, -0/+5Latentk, the lender-borrower relationship is a professional relationship not unlike attorney-client or doctor-patient relationships. The great disparity of knowledge and experience puts any sort of responsibility almost entirely upon the professional (i.e. the LENDER) when things go wrong. To solely (or even equally) blame borrowers for this would be like blaming patients for unknowingly swallowing the wrong drug or criminal defendants for unknowingly not following proper court procedures.
Furthermore, what troubles me about the arguments of those who want to solely blame borrowers is that they totally ignore who benefits and PROFITS from this mess. It's not the borrowers. They're defaulting on loans because of usurious interest rates, ruining their credit, losing their homes, and going bankrupt. Other borrowers, who have yet to default are watching as their major asset (their home) rapidly depreciates in value both from inflation and from the bursting of the housing market. Meanwhile, the executives at Lehman Brothers gave themselves a bonus of 2.5 BILLION dollars AFTER they ran the company into the ground. More importantly you need to ask yourself who CAUSED this mess... It wasn't the sub-prime mortgage borrowers who LOBBIED for more and more deregulation (i.e. financial lawlessness). It wasn't the borrowers who thought it would be prudent for banks to leverage themselves 30:1, more than double the traditional maximum. It wasn't borrowers who used their Ivy League business and economic degrees to assure us that all of this was sustainable and stable.
So, forgive me if your howls against ignorant borrowers doesn't phase me. I think it's pretty clear who the real villains are here. - liquisoft, on 09/23/2008, -2/+7If CEO's who ***** over their failing companies and still get millions of dollars severance pay are worth helping, and companies who do horrible jobs of managing their money are worth helping, then I should be worth helping. I'm a responsible homeowner and pay all my bills, and somehow I'm overlooked for bailout?
- Orsigno, on 09/23/2008, -4/+9They're both worthless regardless of what they've said. Especially Obama, because he's got all the idiots rallying for his *****.
- EndGamePlayer, on 09/23/2008, -1/+6I say that $700,000,000,000 is $699,999,999,999.99 too much.
There is no way to legally pay down the National Debt - only interest gets paid - at the % amount they say (it's not negotiable) .. .that's where your hard earned taxes go - to the interest on the debt - NEVER THE Principle on the DEBT.
Once there is a debt on the books - it is NEVER REMOVED and INTEREST HAS TO BE PAID ON IT FOREVER. - a2fan, on 09/23/2008, -7/+12"Congressional Democrats began to set their own terms on Sunday for a plan to rescue the nation 's financial institutions..."
And well they should considering they are partially to blame for creating the conditions that led up to this fiasco.
Vote'em all out. - BoneStamp, on 09/23/2008, -1/+6@mfc5200
Do you realize how close to financial collapse we were last week! There wouldn't be any other companies to hire the good employees. The money market froze!!! This everyman for himself attitude is great until every man's livelihood is in jeopardy. The government is taking a lot of heat over this crisis, but they don't mind since there would be a state of panic if people understood the full magnitude of what's going on. - akhomestead, on 09/23/2008, -0/+5That was probably for the common man. The Russian elites didn't want the masses to control anything, kinda like our gov. now.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 219 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is