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.

Trackbacks

1. More bailout funds for Citigroup? | Radio Vice Online
2. On 9/11 Al Qaeda attacked the Heart of our economy, Is Obama’s Big Spending Playing into the hands of the terrorist? « Goodtimepolitics
3. The AMTRAK-ing of CitiGroup « Teh Resistance Blog
4. The Obama Road to Serfdom: Good Morning Socialist States of America! « Jim Blazsik
5. Nationalizing Banks USA: Another day, another multi-billion-dollar bank bailout for Citigroup | Fire Andrea Mitchell!
6. BizzyBlog » AP Report on Uncle Sam’s Citi Deal Avoids ‘Nationalization,’ Plays ‘Name That Party’ with Fat Cat Former Obama Adviser Bob Rubin
7. The News Factor: News, opinion, current events — a rewarding news experience » Blog Archive
8. Various Notes Of The Fisc « 36 Chambers - The Legendary Journeys: Execution to the max!
9. Kick the Anthill » It’s Fun To Stay At The YMCA

Trackback URL

Comments

1. #1
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:05 am, bradley said:

   At $1.90 per share, Citi stock now costs less than their own ATM fee. Same applies to Bank of America.

2. #2
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:07 am, Fuller said:

   ….But! I don’t want my grandkids to be part owners in banks.

3. #3
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:08 am, WarTip said:

   Let’s not forget the now elevated government ownership/control of citigroup to 36% of the company. Can you say “Nationalize the Economy” boys and girls? I thought you could.

4. #4
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:09 am, chapoutier said:

   At $1.90 per share, Citi stock now costs less than their own ATM fee. Same applies to Bank of America.

   Being able to get money out of an ATM is worth something, though.

5. #5
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:09 am, twofoot said:

   At $1.90 per share, Citi stock now costs less than their own ATM fee. Same applies to Bank of America.

   Wow, now there’s a tidbit of information to ponder. It’s to late (been driving all night) and I am to tired to consider what that little fact translates into. Give me a thirty minute nap and a pot of coffee and I’ll be ready to think again.

6. #6
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:10 am, katablog said:

   The deal will convert nearly worthless common stock into preferred shares, put the taxpayers’ stake in the company at nearly 40 percent, and continue the borrow-spend-panic-bailout-repeat cycle.

   You said that backwards Michelle.

   The deal will convert preferred shares to nearly worthless common stock.

7. #7
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:16 am, jjmurphy said:

   This bailout is, of course, nonsense. In business, as in life, failure is as important as success. You cannot have one without the other. If we do not allow poorly run companies to fail, there is simply no incentive for them, or others, to succeed. The failure of a large company allow dozens of smaller more efficient companies or start-ups to come in, learn from the failure of others and do it better.

   Some will experience the pain of failure. Learn from it and move on. The government has thoroughly screwed this up.

8. #8
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:22 am, sonofdy said:

   S(REW it, we are so far down the hole now, the economy is doomed.

9. #9
   On February 27th, 2009 at 9:27 am, Flyoverman said:

   Only government believes in subsidizing a loser. No competent business or military leader ever would.

   But the government that has all this money that is not theirs…… These “rocket scientists” will keep attempting horizontal launches indefinately.

10. #10
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:27 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    The market is headed to 3000 and so is gold.

11. #11
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:37 am, zyzzyg said:

    There are organizations and individuals that have considerable holdings in CitiGroup and we do not want these people to loose their money. These are the wealthy people who provide jobs. Ever get a job from a poor person? Save CitiGroup and the wealthy will be saved.

    As long as the wealthy retain their wealth, benefits will continue to trickle down to the rest of us. And, while we’re at it, we should cut their taxes, too. The less the wealthy pay in taxes, means the more trickle down the rest of will get.

    Sarcasm, off.

    There has to be a better way. I say RTC.

12. #12
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:40 am, maine yankee said:

    Coming to a bank near you;

    “O”banking, deposits according to your ability, withdrawls according to your need.

13. #13
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:43 am, akoypinoy said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:37 am, zyzzyg said: There has to be a better way. I say RTC.

    Amen to that! It worked during the Savings & Loan debacle, but wait, with RTC the Obamaniacs will not be able to nationalize the banks, one bailout at a time.

14. #14
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:45 am, bradley said:

    As of 9:30 this morning, Citi shares were down to $1.70, down from a 52-week high of $27.35.

    Something tells me CitiBank should change its name to ToiletBank. I never invested in toilets, but I DO have a Citi credit card. Hell, my credit is now MUCH better than Citi’s, so I should get an interest-rate reduction. Right? Bet my FICO score is better by far. Bet Citi doesn’t even HAVE a FICO score. Wait. Yes they do. It’s $1.70.

15. #15
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:48 am, iamsaved said:

    Sounds like another Amtrac boondoggle.

    I guess this is what is called negative dividends and capital gains – the investor pays the company for their losses rather than getting a return on their investment.

    Obamanomics 101.

16. #16
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:51 am, irving said:

    My mother worked for Citibank years ago. She always said, “Don’t ever do business with those crooks!”

    Somehow it seems appropriate that the administration wants to be a part of the company.

17. #17
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:54 am, sonofdy said:

    zyzzyg: It will be better of course when we tax them out of business.

    /sarcasm off.

18. #18
    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:59 am, twofoot said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:54 am, sonofdy said:
    zyzzyg: It will be better of course when we tax them out of business.

    /sarcasm off.

    You beat me to it. I don’t understand the myth that it is good to tax wealth. Never have.

19. #19
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:06 am, ArizonaNeanderthal said:

    Well Mr. President Hope and Change keep bad mouthing the economy, keep borrowing and printing money and we can all wonder were the jobs went.
    The answer? Bad mouth the economy, keep borrowing and printing money of course along with a good dose of more helpful regulations, census manipulations and perhaps some firearms regulations to keep the masses sedate. Sympathies to the employees of CitiGroup.

    I’ll keep my guns, you can keep the change.

20. #20
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:07 am, sonofdy said:

    Oh god, the dow is down again. What did obama say know????

    OBAMA STFU!!!!!

21. #21
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:09 am, ajmontana said:

    “And the Beat Goes On”

22. #22
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:10 am, sonofdy said:

    know = now…

23. #23
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:11 am, twofoot said:

    …and perhaps some firearms regulations to keep the masses sedate…

    Saw something just this morning about the administration trying to bring back the “assault weapons”* ban. Reminded me, I was planning on making another bulk ammo purchase today.

    *”Assault weapon” to a leftist is translated as, “It’s scarey looking and makes me wet my pants.”

24. #24
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:13 am, sonofdy said:

    because those bayonet lugs are so deadly in a fire fight

25. #25
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:14 am, thetoysurgeon said:

    I can’t believe the people and leaders of this country have not seen through Obama’s bailout plans. He is here to destroy capitalism. What a marxist is supposed to do. I am counting on the American Democratic party to stand up in time and call this crap sandwich what it is and defile this imposter. The consumers are holding the key to the economy. 2/3rds of the economy is based on our spending. If Obama really wanted a stimulus he would have afforded us some breaks or a bailout. Keep holding on to your wallets. We will make them squeal. We hold the power of the US economy.

26. #27
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:19 am, Kevin K. said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:10 am, katablog said: (#6)

    The deal will convert preferred shares to nearly worthless common stock.

    AND let them vote, unless they made a deal not to. (Which reminds me of a line in the Thornton Wilder play “Our Town” about voting before women were enfranchised: “All the men vote. Women vote indirect.” Which is what I think the government influence will be even if they don’t actually vote.)

27. #28
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:19 am, DBNinKY said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 9:27 am, On-my-soap-box said:

    The market is headed to 3000 and so is gold.

    It’s beginning to look that way. The only reason it has hovered around 7100 this week is because of the wait-and-see attitude many traders have taken towards Obama’s budget and spending bill and the time it takes for them to decipher which derivatives will suffer the most.

    IMHO, I believe we’ll hover at 6800 when Feb’s unemployment come out next week, but I don’t think we’ll go below that until the start of the third quarter, when it becomes clear the “95%” t-cut isn’t working. By the fourth quarter I think we’ll see 6200 or less, as employment continues to rise and an abysmal holiday season takes shape.

    By 2010, it’ll be “Katie bar the door!”

28. #29
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:20 am, walterc said:

    And yet they still haven’t done away with the mark to market rule. That alone would have prevented the need for more bailouts.

    As my wife likes to say “oh sure, throw logic into it.”

29. #30
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:20 am, twofoot said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:13 am, sonofdy said:
    because those bayonet lugs are so deadly in a fire fight

    Gee, I have bayonet lugs on mine. But you know what I have come to realize over the years? I am no 18 year old Marine anymore. So having to actually use a bayonet would be way to much work these days. Which means I just have to make sure they don’t get that close.

30. #31
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:22 am, DBNinKY said:

    Instant verdict: “Shares of Citi tumbled 56 cents, or 22.7 percent to $1.90 in premarket trading.”

    When I was a business major in the eighties, this was inconceivable! How times have changed -

31. #32
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:22 am, conservativesRus said:

    Once upon a time, a long time ago, a bank was allowed to lend money to whomever they wanted. They were allowed to charge whatever interest was appropriate for the risk. Further, they were allowed to recover (foreclose) those things which THEY OWNED and the lendee wasn’t upholding the lendee’s part of the contract. Then congress got involved.
    A bank is now required to lend to whomever, isn’t allowed to (in a meaningful way) charge different rates and can’t recover THEIR non-performing assets (ie – a person can stiff the bank but the bank has zero recourse)
    How in that environment is a bank supposed to survive?
    (NOT defending stupid decisions by CITI or any bank, or the gov’t takeover…just an honest business question)

32. #33
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:24 am, BlameAmericaLast said:

    Saw something just this morning about the administration trying to bring back the “assault weapons”* ban. Reminded me, I was planning on making another bulk ammo purchase today.

    Ain’t gonna happen. Reid and Pelosi (yes, Pelosi) said it’s off the table.
    
    And one can only guess why…remember what happened in 1994? They want to protect their butts and make sure they don’t lose seats in the 2010 elections to maintain power.

33. #34
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:30 am, conservativesRus said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:20 am, walterc said:

    And yet they still haven’t done away with the mark to market rule. That alone would have prevented the need for more bailouts

    Why would congress get rid of a crisis?
    Nothing against lawyers (you too chap) but I don’t take my car to a cobbler for a tune-up and I don’t go to an NBA franchise to get a filling in my tooth, why on earth would we allow Congress (primarily lawyers) to make economic decisions?

34. #37
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:38 am, jjmurphy said:

    And in case you thought the worst was behind us:

    Next Crisis: Commercial Real Estate
    Maurna Desmond, 02.23.09, 08:45 PM EST
    Atlanta Fed president sees U.S. housing troubles spreading to office and retail segments.

    Word of another wave of mortgage-related pain added to investor unease Monday after a top Fed official warned that American real estate troubles will go commercial this year. Nearly all asset classes took a hit for the day, with only the dollar showing appreciable gains.

    Dennis Lockhart, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, said he was concerned that U.S. banks remain “pretty heavily exposed” to commercial real estate. “It is the one domestic factor that keeps me up at night,” he said.

    Oh boy!

35. #38
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:39 am, twofoot said:

    Ain’t gonna happen. Reid and Pelosi (yes, Pelosi)

    I trust those two as far as I can throw them.

36. #39
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:39 am, pdv said:

    February 27th, 2009 at 9:27 am, Flyoverman Said:
    But the government that has all this money that is not theirs…… These “rocket scientists” will keep attempting horizontal launches indefinately

    If only they would actually try a horizontal launch. The rocket would probably go somewhere. What they are doing is vertical launches into the ground and wondering why the hole keeps getting deeper.

37. #40
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:41 am, CleanGuy said:

    AIG stock is down 15% to .44

38. #41
    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:48 am, walterc said:

    I’m really starting to think that the plan all along has been to completely collapse the economy so they can declare marshal law and appoint The One as chairman for life. Does anyone know how much influence Bill Ayres has in this administration? I understand they aren’t stupid enough to give him a cabinet position (DHS maybe?) but I don’t think he is completely out of the loop either.

    I think BO is in way over his head and Emmanual and others are pulling the strings.

    Call me a conspiracy theorist if you must, but that’s the way it is starting to look to me. I just can’t figure out what Nan and Harry’s role is.

39. #42
    On February 27th, 2009 at 11:00 am, jjmurphy said:

    Ya know, if someone sat down and tried to figure out a way to destroy the USA without firing a shot I don’t think they could do a better job than Obama and the democrats are doing right now.

    Everything they are doing is just about guaranteed to destroy freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, the chance of success, or a better future.

40. #44
    On February 27th, 2009 at 11:02 am, WarTip said:

    I think Nancy “The Nanny Queen” Pelosi and Harry “Benefit Reapin’” Reid would be pretty high up on the food chain in their new socialist Utopia if I am not mistaken?

    The day is coming when “conspiracy theorists” may have to say “Somehow, ‘I told you so’ just doesn’t seem like enough.”

    I am not by any means some “Troofer” but I do foresee some very troubling times ahead and people blindly following the government as they lead this country down a long slippery slope with nothing but a cliff at the end. Unfortunately, I am seeing more and more of it every day … even now.

41. #45
    On February 27th, 2009 at 11:31 am, Flyoverman said:

    On February 27th, 2009 at 10:39 am, pdv said:

    If only they would actually try a horizontal launch. The rocket would probably go somewhere. What they are doing is vertical launches into the ground and wondering why the hole keeps getting deeper.

    I tip my cap to a better analogy than my own.
    
    WELL WRITTEN !

42. #46
    On February 27th, 2009 at 12:57 pm, zorro said:

    down…22.7 percent…

    Down 36% now.

43. #47
    On February 27th, 2009 at 1:17 pm, bradley said:

    As of about 1:15 PM, Citi stock is at $1.57 per share.

    Trading PREFERRED for common stock is idiotic. It guarantees a loss for taxpayers, but hey, there’s always MORE where that came from, right Jugears?

44. #48
    On February 27th, 2009 at 1:31 pm, drfredc said:

    The no brainer reply to top down bailouts is bottom up stability — eliminate the tax on bank interest (checking, savings & CDs).

    There’s plenty of folks who would jump at the chance to put $$$ into banks if they weren’t taxed on the interest they earn. It’s taxing good behavior…

    A huge amount of the moral decay in the US that has led to our credit crisis is related to tax policies that discourage savings while promoting easy credit and spending.

45. #49
    On February 27th, 2009 at 3:10 pm, battleaxe said:

    Hopefully these failout bank stocks will fall below $1 and be delisted.

46. #52
    On February 27th, 2009 at 7:50 pm, DBNinKY said:

    Nutz! “…I believe we’ll hover at 6800 when Feb’s unemployment [NUMBERS] come out next week… .”

47. #54
    On February 28th, 2009 at 3:39 pm, RetFireman said:

    So once Citibank closes for good, does that mean I no longer need repay my student loans? Where’s MY stimulus?