View Poll Results: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

Voters
42. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    9 21.43%
  • No

    33 78.57%
  • Dunno

    0 0%
  • I don't care

    0 0%
Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 176

Thread: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

  1. #121
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    But the stated INTENT was to help "disadvantaged" (minority?) folks get into the housing market by making "sub-prime" loans that LOOKED affordable (based on rosy assumptions and good intentions) but turned out to not work at all once the actual time to pay any priciple rolled around. Many things came together to make it all collapse at once, but gov't sowed the seeds. Sure the bankers outsmarted the politicians in the end, but was that the fault of smart bankers or dumb politicians?
    That wasn't the intent, that was the excuse. Big difference.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  2. #122
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    But the stated INTENT was to help "disadvantaged" (minority?) folks get into the housing market by making "sub-prime" loans that LOOKED affordable (based on rosy assumtions and good intentions) but turned out to not work at all once the actual time to pay any priciple rolled around. Many things came together to make it all collapse at once, but gov't sowed the seeds. Sure the bankers outsmarted the politicians in the end, but was that the fault of smart bankers or dumb politicians?
    Absolutely, and that wasn't the end to the mistake, what really set us up for the fall was how the resulting bad debt was dealt with. They bundled it, sold it off as an asset and used it to generate an industry trading in debt instruments. When that crashed the housing market went with it.

    The banks and investment houses that had taken advantage of the government's foolish implementation of the plan to get more folks into houses were now left holding a huge debt bag. They never hold that bag for long and immediately began passing it down to the consumer/the tax payer. Congress encouraged and helped them in this with the bailouts because those same banks and investment houses had already shifted a good deal of those bad investments and derivatives into the retirement investment accounts of many an average American.

    My take is that we should have crafted legislation that made it impossible for them to pass that debt along. Most of the majors would not have gone out of business, but would have defaulted. The bankruptcy courts are and were less forgiving these days, and would have re-structured their debt rather than forgiving it. This would have caused some economic downturn, but the burden wouldn't have become the albatross around the neck of the average tax payer.
    Last edited by clownboy; 06-04-12 at 05:16 PM.

  3. #123
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    That wasn't the intent, that was the excuse. Big difference.
    I can't argue with that; a fish will bite a rubber worm as readily as a real one. ;-)
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  4. #124
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,601

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Absolutely, and that wasn't the end to the mistake, what really set us up for the fall was how the resulting bad debt was dealt with. They bundled it, sold it off as an asset and used it to generate an industry trading in debt instruments. When that crashed the housing market went with it.

    The banks and investment houses that had taken advantage of the government's foolish implementation of the plan to get more folks into houses were now left holding a huge debt bag. They never hold that bag for long and immediately began passing it down to the consumer/the tax payer. Congress encouraged and helped them in this with the bailouts because those same banks and investment houses had already shifted a good deal of those bad investments and derivatives into the retirement investment accounts of many an average American.

    My take is that we should have crafted legislation that made it impossible for them to pass that debt along. Most of the majors would not have gone out of business, but would have defaulted. The bankruptcy courts are and were less forgiving these days, and would have re-structured their debt rather than forgiving it. This would have caused some economic downturn, but the burden wouldn't have become the albatross around the neck of the average tax payer.
    That could largely have been avoided by simply never allowing the AMTPA scam to be born in 1982. Once anyone is permitted MUCH more flexability to leverage OPM then all sorts of bad things become possible, indeed likely.
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #125
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    That could largely have been avoided by simply never allowing the AMTPA scam to be born in 1982. Once anyone is permitted MUCH more flexability to leverage OPM then all sorts of bad things become possible, indeed likely.
    But if investment banks are pruned down so they don't effect the local economies as much - if they are unhitched from the corner bank - then it doesn't matter if they fail. Eventually, if enough of them fail or screw their clients over, people will simply quit investing there.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  6. #126
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    If you mean stick to the constitutionally limitted powers granted to the federal gov't, then you are at least 50 years too late. It is now time to try to get that toothpaste back into the tube. ;-)
    Well it certainly can't stay smeared all over my mirror, now can it?
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  7. #127
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,620

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Not a cop-out at all, you simply refuse to see how we got in the financial mess and choose right wing partisan talking points over a bipartisan overview. Since Reagan, blessed be his psuedo-conservativeliness, the cry to deregulate, cut red tape, let business run business has been the battle cry of the free market mirage chasers. (or the casino capitalist snakeoil salesmen if you are not in love with unfettered capitalism)

    Business lobbyists have been working hand in glove to write new laws as well as undo much of the regulations in oh so many areas besides banking.

    It is funny you shrug off much that helped drive us over the bridge as 'that never should have been allowed' while ignoring just how it got made into law/regulation/dropped from regulation. Congress, to include Frank didn't act simply because they wanted to, major donors and high priced lobbyists worked long and hard to make sure the congressman who has major financial corporations in his district understood the situation.

    Freddie and Fannie are conservative stalking horses, into the mix too late for anything but the sh*tstorm that came.

    You can see this the way you like, give corporations and special interests the fig leaf of 'congress writes the laws' but we all know many on the congressman's staff, the heads of many posts in government, have long work histories in the very corporations to be overwatched. Hell's Bells man- at times the lobbyists themselves who write the key portions of a bill.

  8. #128
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    We just signed the papers today on a 7 year old house that sold originally for 175, then 6 months later 265, then a 2nd was taken out (my guess is the second was for another 50 or so, then today it closed at 92. My guess is that an 'investor' bought it originally and made 90 gross. The two banks, actually mortgage companies, took a bath today. The builder got his profit. BTW, the house is constructed better than any I've seen, I've been in the attic for example during inspection. So, what bank came out ahead on this house? The builder did OK. The investor did great. The second buyer completed a short sale with us, and he got to spend the money from his 2nd. His credit will be OK in about 2 years. The mortgage banks, not Freddie or Fannie, and their investors took a bath for about $200,000. So the mortgage banks did well influencing congress? As I posted, successful influence, high bonuses for a couple years; then they need a rescues. All I can say is: Thanks!
    Last edited by OhIsee.Then; 06-05-12 at 03:49 AM. Reason: Lots of edits.

  9. #129
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    Quote Originally Posted by Canell View Post
    If things start to go nasty again and new bailouts are on the way, should the "too big to fail" be nationalised instead?
    There is no need for that if we once again erect a firewall between investment banks and commercial banks, we had for the half-century that the Glass-Steagall Act was in effect.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  10. #130
    Professor

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    MI and AZ
    Last Seen
    03-15-15 @ 01:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1,581

    Re: Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?

    So I'm posting on a poll that I haven't voted on. "Should the "too big to fail" be nationalised?" Doesn't give me a choice. They need regulation and it has to be suported by people that think functional regulation is a good thing. That is why I pointed out what Reagan did with the S&Ls. He stopped the regulation. A much smaller problem resulted, but functionally it was the same.
    Last edited by OhIsee.Then; 06-05-12 at 04:05 AM. Reason: better wording

Page 13 of 18 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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