What is Digg?24 Comments
- Seditio, on 07/20/2009, -0/+22Bondholder bailout not gov't bailout, this is how it should be.
- rbalik, on 07/20/2009, -1/+20This isn't a government bailout. These are private bondholders.
- alexology, on 07/20/2009, -0/+15rage fail.
- 11oops, on 07/20/2009, -0/+12Your rage is misdirected in this instance.
- numb401, on 07/20/2009, -0/+11Thank you for actually reading the article.
- fedak, on 07/20/2009, -0/+6A 10.5% loan is hardly a rescue vs. a chance for the lender to get in the front of the line at liquidation time.
- Ebacherville, on 07/20/2009, -1/+7At least its not tax dollars..
look its a "to big to fail" actually finding what the need on there own.. Hmm Imagine that , the government says no and they figure it out by them self.. it seems if there is motivation to not fail you actually might not fail due to actually working to try to not fail.. IMAGE THAT?
In other news the ones the tax payers bailed out are making hand over fist. - 11oops, on 07/20/2009, -0/+5I'd like to buy a vowel Pat....
Seriously guy, you need to invest in a new keyboard there because you're missing a lot of random letters in that post. - Konrad9, on 07/20/2009, -1/+6Don't care. Don't care. Don't care. If I was a shareholder I would say "Good christ that was a ***** investment" and pull it all.
- 4AntiStupid, on 07/20/2009, -0/+5I wouldn't mind making a 10.5% loan to them with some of my cash. That's better than I can get with equities right now.
- zeth006, on 07/20/2009, -0/+4Except that Goldman Sachs has paid off all its bailout debt and has turned a profit. Other companies that received bailout money are soon to follow suit.
- dmm219, on 07/20/2009, -1/+4that assumes they will be good for the loan. (they won't)
- deema1, on 07/20/2009, -0/+3And notice how the bailout didn't come from the government. They spent $24 trillion on bailouts for top Wall Street firms but they refused to save the one company that specializes in loans to small and mid-size businesses.
I thought the bailouts were awful, and disagreed with them completely, but if they were willing to go down that road under the guise of saving the system then they should have been willing to extend a hand to the company that makes loans to the types of businesses that provide over 90% of the jobs to our economy. The fact that they were willing to save Wall Street but cut funding to Main street says a lot about the motivations of our leaders. - inactive, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2FTA: A rescue would help CIT address a looming $1 billion bond payment due next month
yikes! Can I have $2.50? - DaviDTC, on 07/20/2009, -0/+2http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&a ...
Stock chart for CIT for the last couple of days. - BionicPimp, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1yeah, 3/5ths of your competition has gone out of business, and you can borrow money at 0% and lend it at 6%...not hard to make money that way...but it's not actually creating any real value. It's just moving money around from one group (taxpayers) to another (bank shareholders)
- Elranzer, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1As my former credit card bank, I wish Citigroup the worst of luck.
Canceling my credit card with them (after getting it to $0 balance) was harder than trying to cancel an AOL account. - zeth006, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1It's too soon to say FOR SURE that the bailouts failed. Dunno about you, but it takes most people part of a lifetime to pay off their college loans. I don't expect to see any of the major banks pay off all their loans within this year.
- zeth006, on 07/20/2009, -0/+1@Bionic
Yes, but that's a different story to read. I'm pretty confident the banks will survive. The cups of Faux News' fear/hate-mongering on this subject is that the money will be wasted and the companies will fail.
My only question is...if you let some multi-billion dollar financial pillars fall...what "competitors" would pick up the lending slack? Problem is, you can't turn a tiny bank into a major lender over night. =/ - TinternAbbot, on 07/21/2009, -0/+1What makes you say that?
- inactive, on 07/20/2009, -1/+1Goldman Sachs seems to be a special case, and have some sort of Illuminati-like connection network. Maybe our country will actually make money on the bailout though, and that would boggle my mind. Of course its 2009 dollars, so...
- Barackalypse, on 07/20/2009, -2/+1Those bondholders better be praying the Government doesn't cough up any funds subsequent to this, lest they get screwed like the bondholders of GM and Chrysler did when the Fed's intervened and wiped out the secured debt holders to the benefit of the unsecured debt holders (the Unions).
- syntaxgs, on 07/20/2009, -6/+2onestley I think this a good idea becosue the company are very large and need too be able too keep the lend up especialy in these economic time when the ppl need the money fast
you can,t let company die then the people will lose there lend - Konrad9, on 07/20/2009, -18/+4NO. Enough. We have given billions of dollars to these ***** companies that got us in this mess in the first place.
Cut every single employee to a maximum of $250K/year INCLUDING BONUSES and they will NEVER need government assistance.
Edit: And yes I know those second round bailouts required cutting salaries of the higher-ups but as soon as they paid off their loans they immediately started given hundreds of millions of dollars back to those CEO's and kept cutting positions at the bottom.
/rage
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is