Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

  1. #11
    Conservative Independent
    DarkWizard12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tyler TX
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,562

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    I read quite a bit of that, tedious. I felt like I was at work, email headers and all...

    Anyway, what's your gripe Celticlord? I don't get what's wrong here.

    Did you want them to go public with like 7-8 of the 9 big banks having failed? What kind of craziness would that be? They don't even announce small banks failures until after they transfer ownership (done super-efficiently over 2-3 weekend/holidays typically). Let alone the largest financial institutions in the nation, during the collapse of part of the economy.

    I think maybe you're assuming these are 9 healthy, private firms that are being forced to do something. I don't think that's the case at all (based on very little research).

    I think it was 9 companies some of which (most?) were probably already considered failed or imminent.

    These guys had a choice, fail, or take the money.

    But they couldn't do this with 3/9 banks, or even 7/9 of them. if they did, everyone knows those specific banks are doomed, bank panic, they then are assured to fail. They are smarter than that. They take all 9, treat all 9 identically, some needed it, some did not, and once all or most recover, they can sell/hand back, little worse for the wear. We can't tell who's failed and who's healthy. This isn't like one bank failing where there is an entire healthy industry ready to shoulder the burden. Everyone was reduced to relative poverty, the options playbook is different in that scenario. Business failure = good, natural. Market failure = WTF.

    Isn't this commonly considered best practice, given the history of how the other option, panic, is extraordinarily stupid to incite?

    I don't know what would have happened had they nationalized them either, I would really like to see the pro/con worksheet on that one, we do have examples from other nations and historically what effect that has, maybe it was deemed demonstrably a bad choice.
    No Bank is too big to fail. So yea, I'd rather paulson not have given them the money, and let the economy it's natural growth and contraction. Otherwise, if you bailout everyone, it might work for a while, but it will fail worse in the long term.

    C'mon, we all know all these banks are full of corrupt people, why do you want them to have any money?

  2. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Guerrilla View Post
    To early to call for their resignation?

    And you want hank paulson to resign which position exactly?

    Was Sheila Blair mentioned?

    Ben Bernanke was there as a matter of protocol.

    We already know Tim Geithner was one of the architects.

    The only new news here is maybe that the execs were snuck in a back door. Big deal.

    What are you so upset about--how this was all handled? Or the specific agreements?

    And what is your background in economics?

  3. #13
    Sage
    Mach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    11,520

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by DarkWizard12 View Post
    No Bank is too big to fail.
    How do you know his? It's not "a bank". it's the financial sector, on the backdrop of a recession of historic proportions.

    So yea, I'd rather paulson not have given them the money, and let the economy it's natural growth and contraction. Otherwise, if you bailout everyone, it might work for a while, but it will fail worse in the long term.
    Natural? The entire market is created by, and driven by, government. Suggesting it's some natural being that is utopia, is silly. The markets exist at our whim.

    C'mon, we all know all these banks are full of corrupt people, why do you want them to have any money?
    I know of no human instutution of significant size, where power is concerned, that does not include corruption. Why pick on the banks?

    And part of me really gets close to a berserker-rage when I continue to read and hear more of all the spending going on, and the all the nonsense, it's nauseating. And where is my MF handout to help preserve my employees?

    And at the same time, I know that's an emotional reaction, to a very limited perspective on an issue that is far larger than a bank failing. Banks fail all the time and they get them re-fitted and sold in like 2-3 days. They do this so fast and efficiently it's absurd. Why don't they just do that now? Because it's not "a bank failing".

  4. #14
    Conservative Independent
    DarkWizard12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Tyler TX
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,562

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by Mach View Post
    How do you know his? It's not "a bank". it's the financial sector, on the backdrop of a recession of historic proportions.
    I said, banks. Let them fail as hard as they need to. The strongest will survive, and new ones will take the place of the old/
    Natural? The entire market is created by, and driven by, government. Suggesting it's some natural being that is utopia, is silly. The markets exist at our whim.
    No, the market is driven by supply and demand. That is a fundamental. That is no "Utopia dream", it's fact. If people don't want something, people are not going to buy it, period. The government CAN fit in that, but it doesn't have to, and it shouldn't.
    I know of no human instutution of significant size, where power is concerned, that does not include corruption. Why pick on the banks?
    So you would rather have the government, where, let's face it there is a LOT of corruption, provide EVERYTHING in this economy? Or even just one or very few banks? And you find NO FLAWS in that whatsoever?

    You see, corruption is relative in a free-market economy. Every organization has corruption, some are significantly corrupt, and some aren't. When an organization is found out to be very corrupt, people will leave that organization to fail, and go to another one.
    And part of me really gets close to a berserker-rage when I continue to read and hear more of all the spending going on, and the all the nonsense, it's nauseating. And where is my MF handout to help preserve my employees?

    And at the same time, I know that's an emotional reaction, to a very limited perspective on an issue that is far larger than a bank failing. Banks fail all the time and they get them re-fitted and sold in like 2-3 days. They do this so fast and efficiently it's absurd. Why don't they just do that now? Because it's not "a bank failing".
    I don't even know what this means.
    Last edited by DarkWizard12; 05-15-09 at 07:46 PM.

  5. #15
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by hazlnut View Post
    And you want hank paulson to resign which position exactly?

    Was Sheila Blair mentioned?

    Ben Bernanke was there as a matter of protocol.

    We already know Tim Geithner was one of the architects.

    The only new news here is maybe that the execs were snuck in a back door. Big deal.

    What are you so upset about--how this was all handled? Or the specific agreements?

    And what is your background in economics?
    Why do I need a background in economics?

    Please don't take anymore positions on anything unless you can prove to me that you have some sort of professional training in that specific field.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  6. #16
    Professor
    128shot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Last Seen
    02-18-10 @ 02:56 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,258

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Who here actually thought these bailouts were going to be legit?

    Who here was dumb enough to think throwing money at failing institutions would work?

  7. #17
    Advisor Burning Giraffe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Burgaw, NC
    Last Seen
    07-27-10 @ 08:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    357

    Re: Judicial Watch Forces Release of Bank Bailout Documents

    Quote Originally Posted by 128shot View Post
    Who here actually thought these bailouts were going to be legit?

    Who here was dumb enough to think throwing money at failing institutions would work?
    Most people didn't believe it would work, but they hoped it would. You see, hoping something will happen is now a good enough reason to move forward. That's the new spirit of hope our government was looking for from its dependents.
    There is nothing more dangerous to the liberty of Man than a Government or a Religion seizing upon the strings of an overdeveloped herd instinct amongst the people.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •