Bailout!

Help Support CattleToday:

Alberta farmer":20c9wkn7 said:
Jogeephus: Don't know about refusing people who come to the ER. You are a harder man than me if you could turn away some kid with a broken leg because they didn't have insurance.
At least we don't have to worry about that in good old "socialist Canada".

I'm sure it sounds harsh to you as it would also sound harsh to me if I was removed from the problem and didn't understand it. What you don't understand is that our generosity is being abused. What I mean by this is that the illegal aliens and many other non-paying people are using the ER as a doctors office. By law the ER cannot refuse a patient. So what you have are all these folks flooding the EMERGENCY room with major problems like sore throats, hang-overs, minor cuts etc etc. Many of our hospitals are closing down due to this problem. So what would you do in the same situation. Would you rather have a hospital for your family or would you rather them run the hospital out of business and then no one has a hospital?
 
grannysoo":rqb2dhai said:
How about government be required to show that it has the constitutional authority to spend the money on a project. Make this a requirement for each and every spending bill.

Seems that one of our senators has been pushing this for years, and everyone keeps pushing that under the rug. If we could only get back to a constitutional government, many of the nanny-state problems would be solved.

Probably 75% of all government spending now is illegal........

Now that's a novel idea but only problem with this is I think we quit using the Constitution about 15 years ago.
 
Jogeephus":qu8jm5ju said:
grannysoo":qu8jm5ju said:
How about government be required to show that it has the constitutional authority to spend the money on a project. Make this a requirement for each and every spending bill.

Seems that one of our senators has been pushing this for years, and everyone keeps pushing that under the rug. If we could only get back to a constitutional government, many of the nanny-state problems would be solved.

Probably 75% of all government spending now is illegal........

Now that's a novel idea but only problem with this is I think we quit using the Constitution about 15 years ago.

They only reference the constitution now when they can misinterpret the original intent and make it sound like it supports their latest harebrained idea.
 
What a disappointment:

Blowing $700 BN

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury has done nothing to ensure a $700 billion financial bailout fund is used to stabilize the weak mortgage market, which caused the U.S. economic crisis, a congressional watchdog said on Friday.

Elizabeth Warren, who heads a congressionally appointed oversight panel, told ABC news there was no evidence the Treasury had used money from the Troubled Asset Relief Program to support the housing market by avoiding preventable foreclosures.

"There's just no money that's gone in that direction. This one's not even arguable," she said. "The TARP funds themselves have not been used in this way despite congressional statutes requiring them to do so."
 
Uhh, you see, it's like this. It seems we blew and completely squandered the first $700 BN. Can we have another $825 BN?

Another $825 BN

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Democratic leaders in the House of Representatives unveiled an $825 billion tax cut and spending bill on Thursday they hope will help President-elect Barack Obama reverse the steep decline in the U.S. economy.

The bill, which would add to an already massive $1.2 trillion budget deficit forecast for this year, would combine $550 billion in emergency spending initiatives with $275 billion in new temporary tax benefits over the next two years.

The goal of the legislation, according to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, is to create and save up to 4 million jobs in an economy that has suffered through a recession for more than a year.
 
Ok, guys. No one flinched at the $750 BN we wasted or the follow-up $825 BN we asked for. Let's float $2 trillion.

New bank bailout could cost up to $2 trillion: report

Government officials seeking to revamp the financial bailout have discussed spending another $1 trillion to $2 trillion to help restore banks to health, the Wall Street Journal said, citing people familiar with the matter.

The paper said the Barack Obama administration could announce its plans within days but has not yet determined the final shape of its new proposal, and the exact details could change.
 
Perda, I'd like to point out one thing, as stated in the article you provided a link to, just 294 billion of the 700 billion congress approved for the TARP (The Bail Out) program has been used.

Seems the original intent of the program has been scrapped and it has turned into the usuall congressional spending frenzy.

I'll agree with you that the social and business welfare programs coming out now will be a total waste of an opportunity to: fix the roads and bridges, improve mass transit systems, build more prisons and use them, juvenile detention facilities and use them, put more security officers on the streets and let them do the job, hire more judges (not makers of law) to process the malfeasance the security officers uncover. Hundreds of things the government should be doing aren't being done. Build the hospitals, the schools, build the training centers, build food kitchens, build the apartment housing for those that need a place to stay. Stop passing out the cash that gets squandered.
 
Congress has very limited enumerated powers. They do lots of things without proper authority but the sheeple don't mind because they get their "ice cream" and some rich person pays for it. Beyond roads and national defense, if congress wants to spend money on something, they should either amend the constitution to allow these spending sprees or take a national vote. There are mechanisms in place that get flatly ignored.

Congress has released the second half of the $700 BN. They expect to start spending it soon.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... d=99450250
 
$176 BN made no noticable difference.

Wall Street CEOs feel the rage in Washington

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Wall Street bank executives felt the rage of Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. Congress on Wednesday over how they used $176 billion in bailout money without making a noticeable impact on the anemic economy.

Lawmakers seized the opportunity presented by a congressional committee hearing on the troubled bailout program to grill eight bank CEOs and vent rising public anger over the economic crisis.

Questions abound about what the banks have done with the money, given an ongoing credit crisis that has added to the country's deteriorating economy. The hearing came a day after Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner failed to inspire market confidence over the government's financial bailout plans and sent stock markets plunging.

Democratic Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the House of Representatives Financial Services Committee, set the tone for the hearing by telling the CEOs they need to understand Americans' anger and frustration and cooperate with lawmakers willingly, "not grudgingly, not doing the minimum."

"I want to know where the money has gone," said Democratic Rep. Paul Kanjorski of Pennsylvania. He told the executives that if their banks did not use the money, "Please find a way to return that money before you leave town."
 
Economy
An Open Letter to Congress
By RealMoney Guest Contributor
2/11/2009 12:33 PM EST
URL: http://www.thestreet.com/p/rmoney/economy/10463365.html

This column was written by Paul Jaber, portfolio manager for the Perpetual Value Fund.

Dear Congress,

At 1:50 p.m. EST on Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2009, I sat listening to Ben Bernanke's testimony in front of the House Financial Services Committee, and I heard a very intelligent question from Congressman Paul Kanjorski. The basic thrust of it was, "Can you tell us what the basic problem is and what caused it?" I thought to myself, "Finally a refreshing and simple question." Forget about all these different bailout programs. Nothing will work if the leadership of the United States doesn't understand how we got here, the basic cause of this problem. Ben Bernanke, the current President, the former President, certainly John McCain and the overwhelming majority of the members of Congress simply do not understand the problem or what caused the problem. Even in his speech on Monday night, President Obama seemed to blame evil, overleveraged banks for our current situation, hardly an intelligent assessment of the problem. This broad failure to understand, which crosses all party lines, has caused and will continue to cause further damage to average Americans for years ahead.

The answer to what caused this situation is extremely clear: Consumers in the U.S. and the rest of the world spent more money than they earned. To finance this spending, consumers used unprecedented amounts of debt, from mortgages to credit card loans to electronic-store loans, and the use of this debt over the past decade has fueled our spending. We have nurtured a false economy and have created unsupportable levels of demand for various products from new televisions to automobiles. Almost every part of our economy was falsely boosted by consumers addicted to credit. The answer to our problems is not more debt as most think. It's the opposite: We need significantly less debt and credit. I understand no politician will say this because doing so would require an act of patriotism not seen since the summer of 1776, but we are in this situation because the average U.S. citizen (and to be fair most global consumers) has acted irresponsibly.

Both Wall Street and government are certainly to blame by enabling such bad behavior, but the preponderance of the blame rests clearly on the average U.S. consumer. Wall Street acted irresponsibly by fueling the securitization monster. No piece of debt paper was too risky to securitize. Wall Street sold low-credit-quality bonds as if they were backed by gold just because they were sliced up and sold in different tranches. As if cutting up a spoiled pie would magically make each individual piece taste better. This was financial alchemy at its best, and it fooled a lot of greedy investors. Not to stick up for Wall Street, of which I am a part, but at least it was acting like a capitalist, and thus I would argue in a completely rational manner. It was clear to anyone that paid attention to the mortgages that Wall Street was securitizing that the paper was garbage. Wall Street was hiding in plain sight. Anyone could have stood up and told it to stop, yet the world was silent.

Far worse than Wall Street, the government of the United States sat by and actually encouraged greater "housing affordability" and a policy of lower interest rates. Such low rates were needed to keep the debt party going. Affordable housing was championed continuously by the likes of Congressman Barney Frank and Senator Chris Dodd. Chris Dodd directly and implicitly supported the likes Fannie Mae (FNM) , Freddie Mac (FRE) and Countrywide Financial. Now owned by Bank of America (BAC) , Countrywide was one of the leaders in selling consumers toxic mortgage loans in which the value of the mortgage actually grew over the years. After about four years, such mortgages would recast and minimum payments would usually triple. This was not due to higher interest rates, as many in Congress mistakenly suggest. Interest rates have been at decade-low levels for the past four years. The payments of loans pushed by Countrywide would triple because the loan would become fully amortizing, meaning that the payment amount would need to cover the full interest cost and principle cost over the period of the loan.

This brings me to the next problem promoted by the government, a policy of low interest rates until finally today the fed funds rate is essentially zero.

Most uninformed members of Congress have argued that we need interest rates low so that home prices can go up. This is incorrect for a number of reasons, but from the interest rate side, we have had historically low rates. The real problem is that the loans sold by firms such as Countrywide were not real mortgages; they were fake teaser mortgages. These fake mortgages allowed irresponsible people to drive home prices up to irresponsible and unsupportable levels. Essentially, our society allowed the irresponsible to gain control, something that from will not make sense to most rational Americans on a gut level.

Ultimately, there is no interest rate that will make the majority of the loans originated from 2004 to 2007 perform normally. After the four-year recast period expires, the people that took out these mortgages simply do not make enough money to cover the payments. So the time for government to act was years ago. Former Fed Chairman Greenspan should have been scolded in Congress for lower interest rates vs. being cheered as a magic man, though I guess he was a master illusionist. In addition, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, instead of advocating for the Countrywides of the world and constantly pushing for more affordable mortgages, they should have closed down these companies. Sheila Bair, the Chair of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation should have acted years ago and closed down the likes of Countrywide, Washington Mutual, now owned by JPMorgan Chase (JPM) , and Downey Financial, now owned by U.S. Bancorp (USB) . All were leaders in selling these fake mortgages. There were a number of people in government who could have acted, yet no one did.

The most troubling thing about how the government acted is that, except for the current President, all the main players were in place for years as this problem festered. The great majority of them, and certainly Chris Dodd and Barney Frank, were not cognizant enough to see the problem building. Now these same members of Congress want the American people to believe that they are equipped to solve this problem. They still don't understand the problem and their actions will make things much worse.

What the government needs to do now is tell the American public to stop spending and stop living beyond our means. We don't need endless housing, car, TV and furniture debt. That will not happen, of course, because, as I stated before, it would require an immense act of patriotism from our Congress. Instead, the American public is going to be treated to massive money printing. We are being told that inflation is not a problem, but even a child can understand that if you increase the totally money supply by 100%, the money in your pocket will be worth half as much. That means hardworking American families will have their limited savings devalued. That means our earnings for each hour we work will be worth less than it used to be. We will have to work harder and harder to maintain our standard of living, yet the government says that it's here to help. I would encourage the American people to help themselves. Stop using debt to buy things that you don't need, and when Election Day comes around again, remember which members of Congress voted for you to work harder for devalued dollars.

Best Regards,

Paul Jaber Jr., CFA
Portfolio Manager
Perpetual Value Fund
 
1982vette...thanks for publishing that document. I would have emissed it. The author's words are identical to how I believe. The scarey thing is the members pointed out are on the finance committees. :shock:
 
TB..sounds like a catch 22 to me. I am sure the finance committee understands we are spending more than we earn and sooner or later we must pay the price. It is just hard to be a man sometimes and speak what you really feel in front of the world at the risk or getting your head handed to you on a silver platter. Sometimes it is easier to justify postponing certain decisions to buy time so we can put canned food in a hole in our backyard.
 
Unfortunately the truth often hurts. I know folks that have to have everything and have it now, then wonder why they're still living in a rented mobile home when they're 55 years old and up to their ears in debt. A wallet full of credit cards is not a status symbol but should be an embarassment especially if they're ALL being used. Watched a young man buy a sweet roll, coffee and pair of sunglasses just this morning and put it on a credit card.

By the way...how deep do you bury those cans of food??
 
If markets are allowed to "bottom out" naturally, values will recover very quickly. Jobs will come back.
Life will go on.
Is anyone noticing the heavy dose of "gloom and doom" coming from the President.
FDR saved the republic during times far worse than today with defiance (the only thing we have to fear...) and
some action on jobs and those "fireside chats".
BHO got the job with inspirational talks and charisma, but until he turns on the light and gives a little inspiration it is gonna make me turn off the tube and disconnect the net and get to know my neighbors better. C'mon bro, I want you to suceed. But government can't spare us some pain. Extend the unemployment benefits, appoint more bankruptcy judges, and let's shake this out.
 

Latest posts

Top