Kill the bailout: The Big Lies
The Biggest Lie of the bailout pimps is this: Give us $700 billion of your money and we promise we’ll give it back someday.
The Second Biggest Lie of the bailout pimps is this: Give us $700 billion of your money and not only do we promise we’ll give it back to you, but you’ll actually make money back off your “investment.” Later. Someday. Really.
HAAAAHHHH! Did you feel a tremor? That was me, laughing my you-know-what off. I think it registered 7.0 on the LMAO Richter Scale.
***
Speaking of “investments,” the wording of this stupid Pew Survey purporting to show that the public supports the Mother of All Bailouts is shamefully misleading:
“Potentially investing billions” to try and “keep financial institutions and markets secure?”
Well, gee, who would object to that?
No mention that it’s at least $700 billion in taxpayer funding taken from you and used to bail out the toxic debt of failing banks by a phenomenally wrong-headed Treasury Secretary demanding unfettered authority to dole it out to whomever he pleases, in the U.S. or abroad.
Worthless polls.
***
Another fiscal conservative stands up: GOP Sen. Jim DeMint.
And GOP Rep. Mike Pence was on the House floor this morning:
U.S. Congressman Mike Pence gave the following speech from the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives today, urging caution when considering the possibility of a federal bailout:
“Our financial markets are in turmoil and the Administration was right to call for decisive action to prevent further harm to our economy.
“But nationalizing every bad mortgage in America is not the answer. This Administration’s request of this Congress amounts to the largest corporate bailout in American history.
“I believe Congress should act, but we should act in a way that protects the integrity of our free market and protects the American taxpayer from more debt and higher taxes.
“The strength of America resides in our faith in God and our faith in freedom, including our economic freedom. To have the freedom to succeed, we must also have the freedom to fail and any solution to the present crisis must preserve that essential economic liberty.
“Next, Congress should consider all available options to put our nation’s economy back on its feet.
“There are no easy answers but there are alternatives that this Congress can consider: indexing capital gains to inflation, passing a real energy bill, even regulating the credit default swap market as the chief of the SEC requested yesterday.
“These and other alternatives to a massive federal bailout must be fully considered and debated before Congress acts.
“We must address this crisis with forethought and creativity, rather than massive federal resources.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Obama’s new campaign candy: More mortgage aid, homeowner “bill of rights”
February 1, 2012 11:39 AM by Michelle Malkin
88 Comments
One cheer for the belated SEC lawuit against Fannie/Freddie execs
December 16, 2011 11:53 AM by Michelle Malkin
45 CommentsBailing out the world
November 30, 2011 09:35 AM by Michelle Malkin
131 CommentsBreaking: Barney Frank will not seek re-election
November 28, 2011 09:54 AM by Michelle Malkin
168 CommentsSnortalicious: Chicago corruptocrat/Fannie fat cat William Daley wears Occupier costume
October 17, 2011 01:56 PM by Michelle Malkin
20 Comments
Here are your 1 percent-ers: Obama’s bundlers
October 17, 2011 03:13 AM by Michelle Malkin
79 CommentsJohn McCain Understands the Frustrations of ‘Occupy Wall Street’
October 12, 2011 09:07 PM by Doug Powers
122 CommentsWho’s Up For Another Fannie Mae Bailout?
May 9, 2011 11:20 AM by Doug Powers
67 Comments
Categories: Subprime crisis
Patterico
» Rick Santorum and the two playbooksRiehl World View
» Romney's Blood Is Blue, Not ConservativePundit & Pundette
» King Barack vs. the NonconformistsJustOneMinute
» Cat Blogging In A Harsh New LightGateway Pundit
» Top Leftist Blog: Obama Must Quash Religious Freedom to Save Earth From Global Warming
LMAO scale? I like that
I never pay much attention to polls. They have usually been heavily manipulated by someone to advance an agenda.
Liberals belive it conservatives don’t
Liberals belive it conservatives don’t
By my take: Liberals – 2, Country – sunk
I’m on the fence about whether some kind of government intervention is warranted. I think relaxing the “mark-to-market” accounting requirements might be enough to do the trick. But on the Paulson bailout, the deal-breaker for me is simply that there’s no reason to trust Hank Paulson with nearly $1 trillion of money that doesn’t belong to him.
An informal and unscientific poll posted on a local news site offers this poll:
“Do you think the government should bailout troubled banks and financial institutions?”
http://www.katu.com
So far, about 80% of the respondents say ‘No’.
MAKE THOSE CALLS!
Call Capitol Hill Switchboard TOLL FREE:
1-877 851-6437
1-800 828-0498
1-800 614-2803
1-866 340-9281
1-866 338-1015
1-866 220-0044
Don’t let Bush and Paulson put the problems caused by sloppy, negligent, and probably criminal politicians on your children and grandchildren!
When I call (early and often), I tell the sweet young woman taking my message, “Pretend I’m yelling at you while I’m talking.” It gets a laugh and also empasizes my message.
There are things that can be done to improve the situation without a complete bailout. I don’t trust anyone with a trillion dollars. and I don’t trust the government to oversee anything. You have to remember this is the “most ethical” Congress ever.
I think the official name of the “LMAO scale” is the “Beau-Tox” scale. But, this is not widely known in non-technical circles.
And this whole bailout has to be an 11 on that scale.
“I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”
If it’s run by the democrats and Obama is in office, the only thing that they’ll consider is how fast they want us to become a socialist nation.
Speaking of unscientific polls. Looks like this isn’t the only one today. The MSM is working hard to make sure Obama is elected.
Just wrote my congressman, who unfortunately supports this joke. I took the time to remind him of 2006 in the process, since I doubt he’ll respond to actual history or reason.
How will this affect ME and MY investments??
That is what I am trying to find out…
Warren Buffett seems to think so.
I thought part of the point of the bailout was that the government wouldn’t be buying these securities at a deep discount, but I am guessing I probably know less than Warren on this one.
That is the big problem here, Chap. I don’t know if I trust them to handle it correctly.
How stupid do they think we are?
Stupid enough to keep electing the criminals resposible for this mess.
Stupid enough to put up with our country being overrun with illegal aliens.
Stupid enough.
I hear a lot of talk about the gov’t buying these securities at a big discount. But if the banks were willing to sell at such a big discount, why are there no buyers already? ANYTHING can be sold at a steep enough discount. What the gov’t will really have to do is pay MORE for these securities than an otherwise willing buyer would.
I think it is going to bollix up everybody’s accounting so much that it’ll take as many years to straighten out as has been taken by the change in stock option accounting. It would have been nice if they hadn’t come up with either idea in the first place.
Yeah, they should have asked the question like this;
“Do you favor giving away $700 billion of the taxpayers dollars to Wall Street scumbags, mortgage deadbeats, and illegal aliens for no good reason, with almost no chance of ever recouping any of it?”
Of course, that’s not what anybody is talking about doing, but the question would certainly get a different response.
Welcome to the stock market. There are HIGHS and there are LOWS. Hopefully you are in your 20′s rather then in your 60′s because its time to hit the LOWS and pay the piper.
Everyone cannot make money and profits FOREVER. And that is what these financial guys are trying to do. Someone has to lose someday in order for someone else to win.
If we didnt have things called bubbles and crashes – then we could have simple and sustained growth for super-extended periods of time. But there is something called greed that ensures that we have to fail hard.
Yeah…that was my impression too, which is why Buffett’s statement above confused me.
U.S. Congressman Mike Pence said:
Well said, Congressman Pence.
It’s sad that our schools teach “Social[ism] Studies”
and don’t teach Free Enterprise.
So, Washington, let me get this straight… you want to correct a lack of oversight with more oversight? Oh, and a $700 B check to boot? What color is the sky in DC?!
These idiots are so far out of touch with the population that they’d politicize anything to gain points for re-election rather than show some damn leadership (DC vacuum). Pelosi and Reid have been incredibly silent on this thing, but Mr. Dodd has been running his mouth to run as fast as he can from any responsibility. CYA, Mr. Dodd. CYA.
Hey Mr. Buffett? If I could also get $700 B for free, I’d do it too. Genius.
TERM LIMITS NOW!!!
Because nobody has enough cash on their balance sheet, and nobody is lending money so that people can buy on credit.
By the way, if you have the freedom to suceed in this country, you have the freedome to fail. The Constitution is not designed to save you from yourself.
They have only given us lies and illegals.
If I recall correctly, the gov’t was able to get back two-thirds of the money it spent to bail out the S&Ls after that crisis some years back. But I’m not sure the S&L crisis is comparable. The mortgage-related securities in the current crisis may be completely worthless or very close to it. Otherwise, the banks should be able to sell them to someone (foreign banks?) at a steep enough discount.
You give them an inch, they want a mile. Expect tax hikes big time.
McCain’s office said he is voting NO!!!!
President Bush to address nation at 9:00PM tonight to explain the 700 billion bailout. As I’ve said elsewhere unless he and others use the phrase “My resignation effective at noon tomorrow…” He has no chance of convincing the American people.
I posted this on another thread, too…
Is my understanding of this somehow off the mark? Because I think Warren Buffett and Hank Paulson are totally full of it.
Yes Indeed!!
enough is enough, we do not need to bail them out of their poorly made decisions and poor oversight. get rid of the capital gains tax and stop the funding of unnecessary welfar programs. cut the wasteful spending and investigate and throw the bums in jail and throw away the keys!
What more proof is needed to show that our government is too big, too out of touch and too partisan to continue?
Democrats have taken congress, set it up how they want it, and now we see the impact. While C. Dodd and B. ‘lisp’ Frank manipulate the system in their favor and Obambi benefits from it the rest of us are taking the fall.
This country is in crisis on many fronts. Socialist liberals are dividing this country by race, religion and sex while many sit back and watch. Now we can all watch it burn to the ground.
Wake up! Stop believing the socialist democrats, Hollywood elite and the far left media spewing lies night and day.
This would mean that they (we) lost one-third, right? Not encouraging. If I can invest $100 today and be guaranteed that that $100 will be $66 at some point in the future, then what’s wrong with a hole in the mattress?
Rasmussen today: Now 44% oppose the taxpayer-backed plan, up seven points from 37% yesterday. Twenty-five percent (25%) support it now, versus 28% in the earlier poll. Thirty-five percent (35%) were undecided
All the potential little buyers wait on the sidelines until they see a big buyer coming in.
Buffet was the big buyer of distressed corporate debt back in 2002. The high yield bond market soared in 2003 after he disclosed his purchases.
Unfortunately, Buffet’s not big enough for this one – the fed is. I honest think buyers will flock to distressed mortgage debt securities at prices HIGHER than the government is willing to purchase. As long as they know that their losses will be limited by the government.
BTW, before anyone attacks me. I’m very much against including car, student, or credit card debt in this bill.
“Guaranteed?”
One data point does not guarantee anything.
96% of mortgage payments are still being made on time. Keep growing the government and raising our taxes (which must go up so that the ChiComs and OPEC continue to finance the debt) and watch the sub-prime mess become the next Great Depression. Read The Forgotten Man. Government caused and exacerbated the first depression and is determined to do it again.
Oops, didn’t mean to provide such a hair to split.
If, based on past experience, I can only expect to get two-thirds of my money back from an investment, is that considered a good investment, or am I a chump?
1 it’s nothing but a blank check, just more money down a black hole.
2 nothing in the bill, addresses the problem that cause the meltdown.
3 last but not least, there is no such thing in Washington is a clean bill ever
I was listening to two elderly gentlemen having a conversation about this plan. One said, “They (the politicians) must think we’re all just a bunch of potted plants.”
Needless to say, they were totally against this.
The government is not here to own the country’s assets, and government mismanages everything they get their hands on… It’s not their money to spend!! Or invest!!
You’re a chump if your expectation is based on one mere data point.
#12 chap said:
Is it imprudent for me to question as to whether a 20 year younger Warren Buffet would have said the same thing about such a risky bailout?
I guess the logical course of research would be to see what a 59 year old Warren Buffet thought about the 1989 RTC bailout of risky Savings and Loan debt that was more than comfortably retired for a profit less than 10 years later.
If Warren was consistent and predicted that 1989 S&L defaulted loans were bargain basement deals at the time, to the point where he even stated that he wanted part of the action, then I’ll put more credence into his current opinions and bold statements.
Unfortunately, I currently believe that even ol’ Warren has passed the eventual threshold from “prudent investing” to “legacy,” wherein he is more willing to contradict his earlier strategies and spin the wheel at his old age than he was ever willing to when he was younger and had more at stake.
Case in point, Buffet’s endorsement of Barack Obama for Chief Executive Officer of the US of A, based on a sudden allegiance to “social conscience” and nothing based on economic competence.
I find his endorsement ironic. Until now, Warren Buffet has shown such strong economic prudence in his dealings, that I can’t imagine he would have ever hired someone with as little economic competence and experience as Barack Obama within his successful corporation, even to simply clear his trades.
I was majorly affected by the S&L failures of 1986, which is why I have little sympathy these days.
A prime example of those days… companies were holding real estate worth lets say $100. They then sold it to another company that bought it for $200. That company then sold it back for $300, which was then resold again for $400, which was then resold for $500.
Since the property was really only worth $100, someone was eventually left holding the bag when everything collapsed.
Question: So who was left holding the bag??
==============
Just FYI – In Dallas it was called the I-30 Condo Scandal.
If you drive down I-30 TODAY and you know where to look, you can STILL see the concrete slabs from the condo buildings that were left to rot.
Research it – learn from history
In the bond market, bonds have various ratings that provide a guide to their level of risk. One reform I would like to see is a similar segregation of loans when bundling them as mortgage backed securities.
One of the really dumb (20-20 hindsight) things was the intermingling of subprime loans with normal mortgages in these pools, as well as slicing, dicing and consolidating the pools. They dragged down otherwise good investments by literally mixing in these toxic loans.
That being said, I need someone to explain why a 4% default rate is such a catastophic event. My description above may be the answer, but I would like to know.
I am beginning to have an opnion that we need to grow he economy to create the 700 billion we may need instead of printing more money. Also, if it is not a mortgage loan for a US bank, it’s not in the plan and on its own!
Is this how Uncle Sam is going to stick it to us (and then some) for getting those stupid stimulus checks?
Answer: The person that paid $500 – NOT the person that provided a “bailout” by purchasing the property for $100 (an 80% discount).
Uh, very … judging that we keep electing these clowns back in office.
Nice graphic, though.
Because people fear that the default rate will increase (double, triple, etc). If the default rate grows only modestly, then many of these securities may already be priced at a discount.
While we are at it, can someone explain to me why the government needs to bailout the stupidity of individual companies (or an aggregation of companies) ?
Unless I am wrong, cant the companies issue more stock in order to help out the companies themselves?
What was that???? Dilution? Liquidity, No one wants to invest? Huh????
So why should I as the taxpayer provide a bailout, if investors themselves do not want to (or can not) invest in those same companies? (blah blah warren buffet blah blah… give me more than that)
(apples and oranges?)
7thson, who is your source on the 96%, how about a link?
They think we are pretty stupid, they don’t realize we are smart and ANGRY. An angry conservative group can be pretty ugly to a liberal.
Why wait? Just send me $34 and you can realize your entire return in just minutes!
Actually I was looking for that the taxpayers were left holding the bag.
Maybe I forgot to mention that the entity that offered to pay the $500 defaulted on the loan and most likely went under. Which caused the entity that initially owned the $100 asset to most likely go under also.
Which meant that the suppliers that built the assets, most likely never got paid in full ,which meant they couldnt pay the construction workers which meant we needed cheap labor from Mexico…. and so on, and so on…
Whew! I am glad I am not the one “snorted” when I heard that they think that the government can turn a profit even though the private sector can’t.
I used to work for a Wall Street firm. I love those guys, don’t get me wrong. They were quite generous to even the lowliest employees during my day, but based on that I believe that if there was a dollar to be made, these guys would be creating funds and buying these things with their personal funds.
Um, Warren Buffet just did that with the PIPE investment in Goldman. Goldman diluted themselves and raised $5B.
Keep in mind, others might follow.
great artcile talking about the severity of the problem, in other words people will be touched in ways you can not model.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/26868860
#48 rabbidsquirrel said:
You raise an excellent rhetorical question. Of course prudent investors won’t put their money into a company with no cash on their books, obscene leveraged debt, and the threat of diluting current equity by issuing even more worthless equity.
So why are we so willing to transfer this failed policy onto the US spreadsheet?
1. Because politics trumps economics.
2. Because there is no accountability in government.
3. Because the majority of American voters have no idea how to quantify, no less realize, the political practice of corruption, theft, malfeasance and dishonesty, all at taxpayers’ expense.
The majority of those in Congress are showing us that they would rather bring down the US Government than relinquish their political power.
Right, which is why I inferred that we cant use Warren Buffet as the evidence to argue that side of the point.
Well you’re talking Warren Buffett. I’m ok with giving him the $700 billion, but I want some BH stock in return.
Can’t we make illegal aliens cough up the $700 billion – you know, Doing The Job Americans Won’t Do?
I have a friend who just today bought a house for around $700,000 (with 50% down and a smaller loan). The original owners paid more than $1 million for it 3-4 years ago. It has been on and off the market several times in the last few years, but there were no takers until now.
Since nobody else wanted to buy this house, I guess I should tell him that he was stupid, and that this house will be worth nothing in another couple of years.
Buffet only did the PIPE because he is convinced that a bill will pass. After the bill passes, others might follow.
In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if the government is never actually needed. The hope of this bill has provided enough confidence to keep the system running for a week.
I’m pretty sure that this is sarcasm. If so, GREAT POST – GREAT ANALOGY.
Excellent points. Which brings me around to the corporate executives. Never mind that ‘most’ Congressmen probably do not understand economics and are reacting to what the lobbyists or corporate benefactors are pushing for.
My guess is that the CEO’s are trying to get the bailouts in order to shore up the corporate financials so that the stock prices stay high (not diluted). And that way their stock options and bonuses are paid out for as long as possible. Golden parachautes are built in from the beginning so that point is probably mute.
(I am way oversimplifying my perspective, because I am not a finance/economics expert…)
The dems are flat out buying America into Socialism.
Banks, insurance companies, schools, houses, apts, ENERGY, OIL, it’s endless.
Remember when everyone laughed when the CA dem said we should nationalize all oil companies?
They’re doing it with this ‘bailout’.
Its not a bailout, its a nationalist/socialist takeover.
I’ll go with that. In that case, problem solved…. or rather averted until another day.
I think that will get you about a share.
#54 corkie said:
But Goldman’s books are sound. Goldman divested its holdings of mortgage backed securities as early as December of 2006 and was able to sell into a still rising market! Goldman’s sound management and growth can afford temporary dilution.
This is what I find so ironic about Buffet’s comments vs. his actions. Warren Buffet divested himself from the US dollar as early as 2002, so what does he care if all private loss is simply transferred onto the US taxpayer? Hell, he has been pushing for increased US taxes while increasing his stake in foreign companies for years now. He continues to put his money into companies with sound management and return on investment (Goldman) while asking the US taxpayer to bail out the losers to the detriment of the US dollar.
Repeat, Buffet and Soros have been betting against the US dollar and investing in Russia and China for years now. I’m surprised that these two haven’t bypassed this bailout proposal altogether and simply ask Congress to shut the door and turn out the lights now.
So his equity is around $350K at the moment. I might be willing to offer him $360K in a couple of years. He could take his 10% profit and walk away happy..
(again oversimplifying, dont slam me on the numbers)
Michelle – thank you for your tireless work on this issue. The bailout is a bad idea. I’m voicing my opposition to my U.S. Rep. (Bart Gordon) and both of my Senators (Alexander, Corker).
No bailout!!!!!!!
Buffett = early Obama supporter.
Everything this man says is suspect.
And oh, by the way, Buffett pays about 18% of his money, his secretary about twice that. Why? Because Buffett refuses to pay himself a salary. He gets his cash by taking dividends from his universe of companies. Dividends are taxed at 1/2 the rate of ordinary income.
This makes sense. Afterall, he has already made certain that his estate will not pay any taxes as well. He gave it to the Gates Foundation.
Buffett would have us increase income taxes to pay for Obama’s programs because that is ‘fair’. He on the other hand has no use for ‘fair’.
I don’t think it’s accurate to say that he ever reduced his dollar exposure to zero.
AND, now has 5 billion new reasons to care about the dollar.
Goldman’s books are sound????
If Goldman’s assets decline in value then their books aren’t sound! This could happen next year, next week, tomorrow.
What is sound? Goldman is as much at risk as your bank. Buffet wouldn’t have made this PIPE investment if he wasn’t convinced that a bill will pass.
thats for sure, you think anybody else could get the deal he just got? no way.
buffet is the patient investor, he’ll hold onto this for years…he thinks its fundamentally sound or he wouldn’t do it, bill or no bill.
One of the “Big Lies” the Democrats and the MSM are pushing is that somehow the Chairman of the SEC is the most to blame. They are projecting, as usual.
The SEC Chairman is part of the solution, not part of the problem:
Why Are The Democrat[ic Socialist]s Attacking SEC Chairman Chris Cox?
The answer may surprise you.
Correction, he “began” divesting himself of the US dollar as early as 2002.
In any event, the man is safely hedged from the risk that is facing the average US taxpayer – he still picks for safe value within the domestic market, (Goldman) yet he is increasing his stake in international holdings, and he is consistently bearish on the US dollar.
So why shouldn’t Buffet ask for ALL corporate debt to be placed onto the Federal spreadsheet in hopes of further decreasing the US dollar, and that US taxpayers be asked to pay more as to slow the US economy even further? He would certainly stand to profit from this with less risk than most US citizens.
And the way that Buffet is currently hedging himself, is it any surprise that Barack Obama is his choice for economic policy leadership?
Buffet has publicly stated his confidence in the passage of a bill. It’s strange for you to boldly declare that he would STILL do this investment even if he wasn’t confident.
I’d be willing to bet that, in the absence of bill, he would NOT have done this deal.
Mike Pence makes me proud to be a Hoosier. You go, Mike.
How can you boldly state this???!?!?
Goldman Sachs – SAFE??? GS was rumored to be facing insolvency last week. And how can you claim that an EQUITY investment in ANY financial company is safe right now? Please, please explain.
#72 corkie said:
You could say the same about Berkshire.
Goldman is the safest bet on Wall Street, some would say that they always have been. (Look at how they played the mortgage-backed debacle in December of 2006 – They completely hedged and divested their leveraged positions months before other houses even considered selling.)
Their management is sound, their strategies are sound, therefore, their assets are the safest bet within the industry. Buffet knows this, as he has always looked for value.
My larger point is that Buffet has found decreasing value in the US Government for years now, look at his currency positions. Therefore, Buffet has less long-term risk in a devalued US debt rating or a devalued dollar than the average American.
Therefore, it wouldn’t surprise me if Buffet’s current position was to pass ALL corporate debt onto the US taxpayer.
It would strengthen his short-term position in Goldman while protecting his long-term bet against the US.
A completely meaningless statement right now.
I’ll leave it at that.
because he’s not a fool. its not the way he invests, based upon what congress does or does not do. He buys things with fundamental value, just like he did with buying AB at 45 or so…you don’t think he’s been looking at the books with a magnifying glass? come on.
The books are dynamic and QUITE affected by macroeconomics. You do agree on that, right? You’re crazy if you don’t think he relied on macroeconomic assumptions – including this bill.
Wait, are you implying that Buffet would be a fool to make any investment that isn’t riskless arbitrage?
buffet’s style isn’t to invest on a wing and a prayer. he understands risk and value better than anyone else in the country. he’s going to make money on that investment no matter what congress does, he holds things for years and years.
buffet bought AB when it was at around 45….no one knew it was a bottom..but buffet did. he’s buying goldman figuring this is a bottom for them. when he invested in AB he didn’t know Inbev would make an offer, that was years away.
I’m sure you know that there’s a big difference between “riskless arbitrage” and “a wing and a prayer.”
Your delusional if you think Buffet doesn’t have any regulatory exposure with this investment.
Buffet knew it was a bottom??? Of Buffet caused the bottom???
BTW, do you mean a bottom in market price or a bottom in value?
So now they are admitting that this is going to cover comercial loans as well. Now the overlap that seemed to be apparent from the earlier bailouts is uncovered!
I’ve really lost all respect for polls. It’s all in how the poll asks the question and the sample data. If you look at all the polls lately, they’re all over the place in regards to the presidential election.
Government cannot save everything or everybody. Businesses fail. People fail.
If such a bailout occurs, there are no standards for businesses anymore. The instant failure is imminent, businesses wil go crying to the government. Same with public education. There are no longer any standards. We must stroke little tyes’ egos or they will go running home to mummy or daddy and the schools will be sued.
Why should Europe’s lack of standards be applied to America? Have we learned nothing of what happens when government interferes in the lives of people?
you’re delusional if you think Buffet hasn’t looked at this from every angle. He runs an insurance company, remember? I’m sure he’s used to regulation, and he’s factored it in.
please.
I’m sure he thought it was at a bottom when he bought it. did his investment mean an upturn for the stock? I don’t remember, and I don’t feel like looking at the charts.
whats the difference?
Factored it in??? What does that mean?
He may have looked at it from every angle, but it doesn’t mean that he’s not exposed (or highly exposed) to regulatory risk.
Again, you’re crazy if you think that Goldman’s stock can’t trade down to $40 – especially if no bill passes. If you’re so convinced that Buffet can’t lose money on this deal (the same as having no risk – which is what you’ve implied), then you should certainly be selling put options at his effective deal price. Would you like me to calculate that for you?
Sorry, I meant ask whether or not Buffet guessed the bottom OR caused the bottom.
In other words, if Buffet hadn’t purchased, would the price have fallen further? Did the fact that Buffet bought give other potential buyers enough confidence to step up?
Often, these situations have less to do with perceived value and more to do with the momentum of the market. Nobody wants to buy low if they can buy lower later on.
Well WE, collective American voter, keep returning an awful lot of these parasites to Congress and million of that collective WE seem intent on voting for the Obamaination.
Pretty damn stupid I hate to say. I have a neighbor, but not for long, down the street claiming he is broke because of the banking mess. The man and wife are 60 years old, have worked for the Department of Correction since college, no kids and have filed for bankruptcy three times in their lives.
During the last boom they borrowed against the equity in their house and are now losing it. As they are both Lieutenants I am guess their family income exceeds $100K. But they have Obama posters everywhere as they are poor folk.
Pretty damn stupid I hate to say.
Three time bankrupt and they think I am stupid. Three times in the last twenty one years I have seen the market overheated and pulled out–the first in 1987 and last this March. It is called keeping your eyes open.
Now we need to worry what Fedzilla will do to the dollar.
Yes, an awful lot of our collective WE is stupid for falling for the same carny tricks time after time. I think I will sell them Carbon Credits and Loan Reduction Debit Cards–as seen on TV! But that is not all! Call in the next 30 minutes and I’ll send you our Get Rich Quick Video, just pay separate shipping and handling.
So when I told my teenage daughter about this she just stared at me …. And then after she figured out that I wasnt a complete loser, she decided to help is out with:
On an LMAO Richter scale of 1 to 10 with being the funniest thing you know.
0 is ‘Lame’
10 is ‘ROTFLMAO’
If a U.S. nuke was detonated by an idiot U.S. government employee and destroyed your business, is it a “bailout” to seek compensation for your loss? Anyone forced by the Feds to loan money to deadbeats or buy securitized loans to deadbeats should not be lumped together with the lazy or stupid who deserve the worthless paper they are holding.