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 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 176

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

  1. #71
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    By requiring (returning to?) the prior SANE lending laws (that did allow "discrimination") by requiring down payments, solid buyer income and credit history, reasonable loan to value ratios, and honest "fair market" valuation appraisals.
    But to get this you would have needed government regullation. Don't forget that the lenders are judged on their performance over a short time period, months. This is because it is a private industry. The problem actually develops over a few years that is longer than the feed back control process that private industry uses.

  2. #72
    Irremovable Intelligence
    Removable Mind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    23,500

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    NONSENSE. Banks did not rewrite ANY banking laws, congress did. Pretending any different is insane. Banks had tremendous political pressure to relax "discriminatory" lending practices and thus made "sub-prime" loans WITH gov't backed blessing, in the form of Freddie/Fannie mortagage insurance, that ALL knew was unsustainable. Name the banking law that you allege that banks, not the congress wrote, voted into law and was then signed by the president. Crickets...
    Apparently you don't know how and who authors bills in Congress. You believe that your district and state representatives sit down in a conference room with their staff and other Congressional members and write bills? Ha!

    Lobbyists and Special Interests organization author bills, which may or not be even read by our Congressional members. Hell, neither side of the isle had a clue as to what was in the Health Care Bill before signing it into law...and admitted to as much. Who wrote the health care bill's 2000 plus pages? Guess who! It was pharmaceutical, insurance, medical provider Lobbyists who were creating a bill for their specific benefit...not ours.

    All Congressional members do is "Sponsor" or Co-Sponsor bills. Yes, as a rule their staffers are at varying degrees involved in bills, but no way to really know for sure. That's why special interests now own our government.

  3. #73
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Removable Mind View Post
    Apparently you don't know how and who authors bills in Congress. You believe that your district and state representatives sit down in a conference room with their staff and other Congressional members and write bills? Ha!

    Lobbyists and Special Interests organization author bills, which may or not be even read by our Congressional members. Hell, neither side of the isle had a clue as to what was in the Health Care Bill before signing it into law...and admitted to as much. Who wrote the health care bill's 2000 plus pages? Guess who! It was pharmaceutical, insurance, medical provider Lobbyists who were creating a bill for their specific benefit...not ours.

    All Congressional members do is "Sponsor" or Co-Sponsor bills. Yes, as a rule their staffers are at varying degrees involved in bills, but no way to really know for sure. That's why special interests now own our government.
    What you say is quite true, yet these members of congress that sponor, co-sponsor and vote for these bills have names, districts/states that elect them and there is ample recourse for their "traitorous" and "corrupt" actions. Start naming them for us.
    “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. #74
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    By requiring (returning to?) the prior SANE lending laws (that did allow "discrimination") by requiring down payments, solid buyer income and credit history, reasonable loan to value ratios, and honest "fair market" valuation appraisals.
    I additionally have to point out that I was a design engineer in the computer industry. I had enough income etc., as you point out, to participate in the housing bubble. Many of my peers did.
    I guess I should add that I'm participating in the housing bubble, sold one near the top, bought three near the bottom. Freedom.
    Last edited by OhIsee.Then; 06-04-12 at 01:29 PM.

  5. #75
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    But to get this you would have needed government regullation. Don't forget that the lenders are judged on their performance over a short time period, months. This is because it is a private industry. The problem actually develops over a few years that is longer than the feed back control process that private industry uses.
    We had just such regulation PRIOR TO the legalization of "sub-prime" mortages. This "private" industry is regulated as much, if not more, than any other, and with good reason. You can not have it both ways here, either the regualtions were changed for the worse (as I assert) or the banks broke the law (as you seem to assert). I wonder who is rght?
    “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

  6. #76
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

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

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    I agree, many other politically popular entities, like those using union labor (auto industry and state/local gov'ts), got included in the spending binges known as TARP and the "stimulus" packages, but the initial justification for this economic madness was mostly the mess caused DIRECTLY BY the "housing bubble" popping and the economic instability created by "sub-prime" mortgages; without that factor much of the rest would never have happened, as it was neither the emphasis of nor the largest part of the bail-out/stimulus craze.
    I can agree with that. My whole thing is, if the government doesn't entangle itself where it shouldn't be in the first place, **** like these bailouts wouldn't become a necessity.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  7. #77
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by OhIsee.Then View Post
    I additionally have to point out that I was a design engineer in the computer industry. I had enough income etc., as you point out, to participate in the housing bubble. Many of my peers did.
    I guess I should add that I'm participating in the housing bubble, sold one near the top, bought three near the bottom. Freedom.
    Then you simply made a bad bet, nobody to blame for it but, yourself. If a deal sounds too good to be true, then it usually is. Many buy bad "investments" but that is simply salesmanship. 15% of the folks will not ever buy anything new, 15% of the folks will buy darn near anything and the rest (70%) is simply salesmanship. ;-)
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-04-12 at 01:35 PM.
    “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

  8. #78
    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?

    I think it is the height of naivety to say special interests don't write laws, Medicare part B comes to mind. Insurance companies keeping their anti-trust exemptions, and a slow drip drip drip of undercutting the banking firewalls.

    FYI by the time the crash hit most of those in Congress responsible for the unspooling had retired to big fat payday jobs as guess what, consultants/lobbyists/fund managers. A bit too late to vote the bums out of office.

    And those who write the laws do get turned out, to become one of the consultant/lobbyist/ fund managers mentioned above. Once more it is naive to think government and big business have a very incestuous relationship. (remember the 'conservative' stink over Obama using lobbyists/consultants in his administration?) While it is possible to find a needle in a haystack as well as a good fed chairman, treasury sec, chief of staff who never worked for a major corporation/financial institution/stock brokerage house/shadow banking firm/ you get the idea....

    I don't think it is a zero sum game that it is all government or all special interest capitalism... nor greedy consumers and poor loan applicants.

    It is very telling some think it is...

  9. #79
    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
    Interesting theory, and one that should be quite easy to "prove". Which members of congress voted for these changes, how much did they get in campaign cash (or other favors) from the banking industry and why do their district/state voters not care about these "corrupt" voting patterns? Perhaps they may include the likes of Barney Frank or other solid blue dudes that have no fear of being denied re-election? That would be "shocking" would it not? That it was the very liberals that cried the loudest about those "greedy bankers" that were the very folks that allowed these "compassionate" and "less discriminatory" lending laws to be "abused" by those mean old greedy bankers. ;-)
    Partisan blame - when it's true - doesn't bother me in the least.

    The Republican Congress wanted to let the banks merge and Clinton signed the bill. That doesn't change the facts of the situation now, does it?!? The banks pushed for that change or Congress wouldn't have given a rats ass. It was a mistake that needs correcting as quickly as possible.

    I don't know what the other crap you posted is about. The Pres pulls the strings at Freddie/Fannie as much as anyone. He also pulls the strings at the SEC.
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 06-04-12 at 02:03 PM.
    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

  10. #80
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,583

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

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    I think it is the height of naivety to say special interests don't write laws, Medicare part B comes to mind. Insurance companies keeping their anti-trust exemptions, and a slow drip drip drip of undercutting the banking firewalls.

    FYI by the time the crash hit most of those in Congress responsible for the unspooling had retired to big fat payday jobs as guess what, consultants/lobbyists/fund managers. A bit too late to vote the bums out of office.

    And those who write the laws do get turned out, to become one of the consultant/lobbyist/ fund managers mentioned above. Once more it is naive to think government and big business have a very incestuous relationship. (remember the 'conservative' stink over Obama using lobbyists/consultants in his administration?) While it is possible to find a needle in a haystack as well as a good fed chairman, treasury sec, chief of staff who never worked for a major corporation/financial institution/stock brokerage house/shadow banking firm/ you get the idea....

    I don't think it is a zero sum game that it is all government or all special interest capitalism... nor greedy consumers and poor loan applicants.

    It is very telling some think it is...
    Quite a clever cop-out, to assert that they (in congress) all do it, when the discussion surrounded WHO, by name, supported the "sub-prime" mortgage lending laws that led DIRECTLY to the housing bubble and need for the bail-outs. Barney Frank led the charge and MOSTLY liberals wanted these housing lending law changes in the name of "fariness" and "helping minorities" get more into the home ownership market. After the mess that it created (the housing bubble) finally collapsed, the cry was that "greedy bankers" caused it, not that well meaning liberal politicians, who simply failed to see (or intentionally ignored) that lending money to those very likely unable to repay it was at the root of the problem. The next, very similar case, is with gov't backed student loans; I predict that bubble will soon burst as well.
    Last edited by ttwtt78640; 06-04-12 at 02:03 PM.
    “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

Page 8 of 18 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... 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
  •