Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Financial rescue 101: What's in the bailout bill (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   
Author Topic: Financial rescue 101: What's in the bailout bill
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Financial rescue 101: What's in the bill
The highlights of the most sweeping government rescue since the Great Depression include taxpayer protections, two oversight boards and curbs on executive pay.


By Jeanne Sahadi, CNNMoney.com senior writer
September 29, 2008: 10:40 AM ET
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- In the span of just 11 days, the Bush administration and lawmakers, seeing ominous warnings in the credit markets, rushed to create legislation to prevent a potential economic meltdown.

The result: A $700 billion bailout package that aims to get financial institutions lending again by letting the U.S. Treasury buy up their troubled assets, most of which are tied to the housing market crash.

After much contentious debate and the addition of several taxpayer protections to the bill, the House is scheduled to vote on the legislation Monday and the Senate will follow, likely on Wednesday.

Here's a quick breakdown of some of the bill's key provisions:

Doling the money out: The $700 billion would be disbursed in stages, with $250 billion made available immediately for the Treasury's use. Authority to use the money would expire on Dec. 31, 2009, unless Congress certifies a one-year extension.

Protecting taxpayers: The ultimate cost to the taxpayer is not expected to be near the amount the Treasury invests in the program. That's because the government would buy assets that have underlying value.

If the Treasury pays fair market value - which investors have had a hard time determining - taxpayers stand a chance to break even or even make a profit if those assets throw off income or appreciate in value by the time the government sells them. If it overpays for the assets, the government could be left with a net loss but would get something back on the open market for the assets when it eventually sells them.

If it ends up with a net loss, however, the bill says the president must propose legislation to recoup money from the financial industry if the rescue plan results in net losses to taxpayers five years after the plan is enacted.

In addition, Treasury would be allowed to take ownership stakes in participating companies.

Stemming foreclosures: The bill calls for the government, as an owner of a large number of mortgage securities, to exert influence on loan servicers to modify more troubled loans.

In cases where the government buys troubled mortgage loans directly from banks, it can adjust them more easily.

Limiting executive pay: Curbs would be placed on the compensation of executives at companies that sell mortgage assets to the Treasury. Among them, companies that participate will not be able to deduct the salary they pay to executives above $500,000.

They also will not be allowed to write new contracts that allow for "golden parachutes" for their top 5 executives if they are fired or the company goes belly up. But the executives' current contracts, which may include golden parachutes, would still stand.

Overseeing the program: The bill would establish two oversight boards.

The Financial Stability Oversight Board would be charged with ensuring the policies implemented protect taxpayers and are in the economic interests of the United States. It will include the Federal Reserve chairman, the Securities and Exchange Commission chairman, the Federal Home Finance Agency director, the Housing and Urban Development secretary and the Treasury secretary.

A congressional oversight panel would be charged with reviewing the state of financial markets, the regulatory system and the Treasury's use of its authority under the rescue plan. Sitting on the panel would be 5 outside experts appointed by House and Senate leaders.

Insuring against losses: Treasury must establish an insurance program - with risk-based premiums paid by the industry - to guarantee companies' troubled assets, including mortgage-backed securities, purchased before March 14, 2008.

The amount the Treasury would spend to cover losses minus company-paid premiums would come out of the $700 billion the Treasury is allowed to use for the rescue plan.

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Propertymanager
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Propertymanager     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's in the bailout plan? NADA! It died a horrible death thanks to the calls of ordinary citizens to our congressmen!!!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
They're already working on another bailout plan PM. You better man the phones!!!

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Propertymanager
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Propertymanager     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Believe me, I WILL be manning the phones. In addition, I wrote a scathing letter to the editor about one of our representatives who voted for the bailout yesterday! Out with the bums!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lockman
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Lockman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's interesting how many ideas for a solution to this mess have come forward since the house had the guts to not pass this bailout.

Seems the FDIC can do alot more and help companies work their way out of their own mess.

Unfortunately our congress is probably going to dump massive amounts of taxpayer dollars into a deep dark hole.

I've heard several reasonable proposals to safeguard the system, but because they don't just give everyone a free ride there dismissed.

PM keep the pressure on.

--------------------
Let's Go METS!!!

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i think we'll see alot of hedges fail...

any hedge that has been selling CDS's will probably try to go out of business before they are hit with a big bill...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Now be honest PM...was this you?

House of Representatives' Web site overwhelmed
Web sites of the House of Representatives are overwhelmed with e-mails
Administrators implement the "digital version of a traffic cop" to handle the overload
"This is unprecedented," says a House spokesman
Overload began Sunday as legislators said bailout agreement was posted online


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The servers hosting the Web sites of the House of Representatives and its members have been overwhelmed with millions of e-mails in the past few days, forcing administrators to implement the "digital version of a traffic cop" to handle the overload -- for the first time ever.

"This is unprecedented," said Jeff Ventura, communications director for the House's chief administrator.

The tidal waves of e-mails and page views began over the weekend after negotiators announced Sunday that a deal had been reached on legislation to enact a $700 billion bailout of the country's financial system.

In making the announcement, legislators said the public could view the agreement at financialservices.house.gov.

"In a short period of time, lots of Web users were rushing to the digital doorway to get a copy of this thing," Ventura told CNN in a phone interview.

As millions of people tried to look at the details of the bailout plan, the House.gov system became overwhelmed and many people saw notices on their computer screens saying "this page does not appear." iReport.com: Do you support a bailout?

Ventura compared the situation to the "old days, when you listened to a radio show and the 10th caller got a toaster. Then everyone calls the same 1-800 number at the same time and all you got was a busy signal."

"This was a massive digital busy signal," he said.

As more people gained access to the page and details of the bailout proposal were published in the news media, constituents then started to e-mail their representatives, Ventura explained.

"We know it's in the millions," he said of the number of e-mails that lawmakers in the House have been receiving. "But we haven't counted yet, because when you're about to get hit by a tidal wave, you don't count the drops of water in the wave."

After the House failed to pass the proposed deal Monday by a vote of 228-205, the e-mail volume surged again, Ventura said.

"Because there were so many e-mails, it was impacting even the presentation of House.gov," he explained.

"This morning, our engineers sounded the alarms ... and we have installed a digital version of a traffic cop. We enacted stopgaps that we planned for last night. We had hoped we didn't have to."

The office of the chief administrative officer of the House of Representatives issued a statement Tuesday saying: "This measure has become temporarily necessary to ensure that congressional Web sites are not completely disabled by the millions of e-mails flowing into the system. Engineers are working diligently to accommodate this enormous traffic flow and we appreciate your patience in this matter."

Now, when House.gov or individual members' sites begin to get overloaded, a message will come up on the computer screen saying, in effect, "try back later," Ventura said.

"This really tells us that the level of constituent engagement on this issue is extremely high," he added.

He said after the failed vote Monday and the initial backlash, the House's Web site administrators thought there would be a drop in Web traffic -- especially with the Rosh Hashanah holiday.

"We monitored the situation all night long, and technicians and engineers saw that we were facing the same demand as yesterday," Ventura said.

He predicted that traffic on those Web sites "would start to subside once there's some guidance on the marketplace and political landscape about what comes next."

Ventura said the House.gov Web site experienced a very high number of hits when the 9/11 commission released its final report on the September 11, 2001, terror attacks against the United States, but nothing like what the site has seen in the past few days.

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
CashCowMoo
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for CashCowMoo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My congressman voted for the bailout. I wrote him a letter letting him know I will be voting for the man running against him this November. His name is Dennis Moore (D) and has a HORRIBLE tax and spend record.

--------------------
It isn't so much that liberals are ignorant. It's just that they know so many things that aren't so.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like my congresswoman quite a bit actually. Unfortunately she voted for the bail-out. I am giving her the opportunity to change her vote in the up coming week or for her and her collegues to prove to me that a new plan is being crafted that will help this mess without creating an all-powerful Paulson hooking taxpayers for the most worthless of homes. I may be forced to vote her out if she cannot.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
from what i'm hearing? the House GOP's are now saying they want to repeal the accounting rule that forced the banks to value their assets at market value...

the biggest single reason we are in this mess is because they were allowed to place arbitrary values on non-trading assets to begin with...
fixing that rule forced them to write-down their net assets to a market based valuation (mark to market)

so the GOP's in the House are suggesting we go BACK to letting them lie on their books?


LOL... yeah that's a fix, we'll all just lie about the values... sheesh.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
these rules were put into effect last Nov to make the acounting more HONEST, and we have GOP's saying go back to the lying... the fact is that they were putting whatever value they wanted to on these assets...




Michigan Rep. Miller demands that certain accounting practices be curtailed
By TODD SPANGLER • FREE PRESS WASHINGTON STAFF • September 30, 2008

WASHINGTON – U.S. Rep. Candice Miller is calling for the elimination or suspension of some current accounting practices as a way to improve the situation on Wall Street.

One of those, she said, is the elimination or suspension of so-called mark-to-market accounting practices in relation to mortgage-backed securities. Mark-to-market accounting rules require assets to be valued at their current market value on a company’s books – and many believe mortgage-backed securities’ values have actually fallen below their inherent worth.

That is pressuring financial institutions which have to keep certain level of assets on hand and are having a hard time finding lenders as those securities continue to lose value. Suspending mark-to-market could allow those institutions to re-value those assets, improving their books and potentially giving other lenders confidence to loan those institutions more money.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, for one, has been advocating changing the mark-to-market rules as a way to improve the market. But some critics argue the mortgage-backed securities are being appropriately valued and lifting mark-to-market would just hide their true worth from investors.


http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080930/BUSINESS07/80930061

this is the same crap the mortgage lenders were doing in the sub and non-prime markets... write down whatever you want... we'll aprove the loans...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
On Monday several Republican Congressmen who had broken ranks with the Bush Administration were focused mainly on the mark-to-market issue rather than on generalised populist disquiet. One reason for the large vote against the package was a persuasive seminar on Capitol Hill just before the voting. It was held by William Isaac, a prominent financial consultant who formerly ran the federal government's deposit-guarantee fund, and who has long argued that suspension of mark-to-market accounting could save many banks from failure and billions of dollars in taxpayer funds.

It seems likely, therefore, that the Bush Administration will swallow its ideological pride and buy Republican support for the Paulson package by inserting two conditions that will be very beneficial to bank shareholders: suspension of mark-to-market and lifting the ceiling on deposit guarantees.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/anatole_kaletsky/article4856 263.ece

unbeleivable...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's sad is how myopic the public is...ya, sure, jam the servers in protest... be outraged...great.

But the real deal is the ENTIRE MARKET needs to be fixed. That's the message our legislators *should* be getting.

The crooks who screwed up my escrow account--then later conceded I was right--ALSO reported me as "slow pay," when THEY caused the problem.

Now, they're entirely out of the picture; they sold my note while I was knocked out, in the hospital. The new note holders have been paid, in full--including about $10k of bogus "penalties & interest." Still, that "slow pay" bullchit on my credit report is keeping me from getting a new mortgage for a new home.

And thinking back, when this all started for me, I was told I couldn't get a loan for as small an amount as I wanted. I *had* to get at least $50 or $60k...otherwise, it wasn't worth their time.

Just think how many folks got leaned on, in even worse ways, with much less resources than I have...

Just think how many hedge-fund MFers need to be outed... how many DTC insiders need to be keel-hauled--I could go on and on...

Yes, we have a serious "short-term" crisis to be addressed.

But if we don't rebuild the entire market structure/regulation process...we ain't done nuthin'

This is a golden opportunity to make the lege aware of the enormity of the problem...

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
But if we don't rebuild the entire market structure/regulation process...we ain't done nuthin

you got that right...

but the media is all worried that their 401K's are going down...

Bush wants everybody to do whatever he says, and the Dems will go along with him as long as they get a "cut of the action"...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That's what I'm saying--these jammed-up servers need to be jammed up with the correct message.

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by T e x:
That's what I'm saying--these jammed-up servers need to be jammed up with the correct message.

how? very few people even know what's broken Tex.

nobody wants to admit that the banks have been creating money out of thin air with fancy bookkeeping...

i just heard another GOP Rep from Texas claim all we need to do is change the mark to market accounting rules.

what is wrong with these people? don't they understand that once the emperors clothes have been shown to be fake? they're never going to convince people they are real again?

accounting tricks are how this mess got started, and they think that by changing the rule back that everything will be fixed?

the worst part is that they voted against the bailout the other day so they could push this thru, and it's even worse....

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
how? very few people even know what's broken Tex.

understood...the point is ==> NOW is the opportunity to spread the word. In athletics, we call it a "coaching moment." You do some of your best coaching following a bitter, embarrassing loss...

a viral campaign aimed at legislators, to plant the "market-is-rigged" seed...

could pay off later

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
i think that Cox figured that out when he saw the shorts take down one bank at a time...

the trading in the CDS's has also forced some of the credit tightening... they act as a shortsale limiting the ability to use assets to borrow more... BTW? the DTC settles them too [Wink] T+5

apparently they were working on both at the same time on each co...

The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating the swaps market in connection with its probe of short selling, and the New York State Insurance Department last week said it would regulate certain types of swaps.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122238927454777389.html?mod=googlenews_wsj


that's why they banned the shorting of the 799 and say they've banned NS'ing...

it's just these few House GOP members that are not "getting it"...
apparently the talk radio conservatives are working it too.. Dave Ramsey and limbugger

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
really?

Dave Ramsey... I like that guy.

I really should call in and ask him about my situation.

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
IWISHIHAD
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for IWISHIHAD     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Lots of people are scared and some ticked off.

They are affraid that they will not have enough money to pay their bills or have a place to live.

If they knock down the credit limits or do not allow any credit to the average person, which could happen, then they better figure some other plan to keep us afloat because we will go down.

Sure this should not have happened(people using credit to get by) but many of them do not make enough money to get by and that is the bottom line.

Did they end up taking a break from this issue for the Jewish Holiday i heard they were but was not sure if they did?

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
raybond
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for raybond     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It seems in America almost everybody hates banks to some degree and would like to se them go down whinning.

--------------------
Wise men learn more from fools than fools from the wise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here's a piece from a former FDIC chair; he's against "mark-to-market" accounting for mortgages AND abusive short tactics--pretty interesting:

quote:
How to Save the Financial System
By WILLIAM M. ISAAC

I am astounded and deeply saddened to witness the senseless destruction in the U.S. financial system, which has been the envy of the world. We have always gone through periods of correction, but today's problems are so much worse than they needed to be.

The Securities and Exchange Commission and bank regulators must act immediately to suspend the Fair Value Accounting rules, clamp down on abuses by short sellers, and withdraw the Basel II capital rules. These three actions will go a long way toward arresting the carnage in our financial system.

During the 1980s, our underlying economic problems were far more serious than the economic problems we're facing this time around. The prime rate exceeded 21%. The savings bank industry was more than $100 billion insolvent (if we had valued it on a market basis), the S&L industry was in even worse shape, the economy plunged into a deep recession, and the agricultural sector was in a depression.

These economic problems led to massive credit problems in the banking and thrift industries. Some 3,000 banks and thrifts ultimately failed, and many others were merged out of existence. Continental Illinois failed, many of the regional banks tanked, hundreds of farm banks went down, and thousands of thrifts failed or were taken over.

It could have been much worse. The country's 10-largest banks were loaded up with Third World debt that was valued in the markets at cents on the dollar. If we had marked those loans to market prices, virtually every one of them would have been insolvent. Indeed, we developed contingency plans to nationalize them.

At the outset of the current crisis in the credit markets, we had no serious economic problems. Inflation was under control, GDP growth was good, unemployment was low, and there were no major credit problems in the banking system.

The dark cloud on the horizon was about $1.2 trillion of subprime mortgage-backed securities, about $200 billion to $300 billion of which was estimated to be held by FDIC-insured banks and thrifts. The rest were spread among investors throughout the world.

The likely losses on these assets were estimated by regulators to be roughly 20%. Losses of this magnitude would have caused pain for institutions that held these assets, but would have been quite manageable.

How did we let this serious but manageable situation get so far out of hand -- to the point where several of our most respected American financial companies are being put out of business, sometimes involving massive government bailouts?

Lots of folks are assigning blame for the underlying problems -- management greed, inept regulation, rating-agency incompetency, unregulated mortgage brokers and too much government emphasis on creating more housing stock. My interest is not in assigning blame for the problems but in trying to identify what is causing a situation, that should have been resolved easily, to develop into a crisis that is spreading like a cancer throughout the financial system.

The biggest culprit is a change in our accounting rules that the Financial Accounting Standards Board and the SEC put into place over the past 15 years: Fair Value Accounting. Fair Value Accounting dictates that financial institutions holding financial instruments available for sale (such as mortgage-backed securities) must mark those assets to market. That sounds reasonable. But what do we do when the already thin market for those assets freezes up and only a handful of transactions occur at extremely depressed prices?

The answer to date from the SEC, FASB, bank regulators and the Treasury has been (more or less) "mark the assets to market even though there is no meaningful market." The accounting profession, scarred by decades of costly litigation, just keeps marking down the assets as fast as it can.

This is contrary to everything we know about bank regulation. When there are temporary impairments of asset values due to economic and marketplace events, regulators must give institutions an opportunity to survive the temporary impairment. Assets should not be marked to unrealistic fire-sale prices. Regulators must evaluate the assets on the basis of their true economic value (a discounted cash-flow analysis).

If we had followed today's approach during the 1980s, we would have nationalized all of the major banks in the country and thousands of additional banks and thrifts would have failed. I have little doubt that the country would have gone from a serious recession into a depression.

If we do not halt the insanity of forcing financial firms to mark assets to a nonexistent market rather than their realistic economic value, the cancer will keep spreading and will plunge the world into very difficult economic times for years to come.

I argued against adopting Fair Value Accounting as it was being considered two decades ago. I believed we would come to regret its implementation when we hit the next big financial crisis, as it would deny regulators the ability to exercise judgment when circumstances called for restraint. That day has clearly arrived.

Equally egregious are the actions by the SEC in recent years lifting the restraints on short sellers of stocks to allow "naked selling" (shorting a stock without actually possessing it) and to eliminate the requirement that short sellers could sell only on an uptick in the market.

On top of this, it is my understanding that short sellers are engaged in abuses such as purchasing credit default swaps on corporate bonds (essentially bets on whether a borrower will default), which lowers the price of the bonds, which in turn causes the price of the company's stock to decline further. Then the ratings agencies pile on and reduce the ratings of a company because its reduced stock price will prevent it from raising new capital. The SEC must act immediately to eliminate these and other potential abuses by short sellers.

The Basel II capital rules adopted by the FDIC, Federal Reserve, Office of Thrift Supervision and the Comptroller of the Currency last year are too new to have caused big problems, but they must be eliminated before they do. Basel II requires the use of very complex mathematical models to set capital levels in banks. The models use historical data to project future losses. If banks have a period of low losses (such as in the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s), the models require relatively little capital and encourage even more heated growth. When we go into a period like today where losses are enormous (on paper, at least), the models require more capital when none is available, forcing banks to cut back lending.

As I write this article, I am seeing proposals by some to create a new Resolution Trust Corp., as we did in the 1990s to clean up the S&L problems. The RTC managed and sold assets from S&Ls that had already failed. It was run by the FDIC, just like the FDIC. We needed to create the RTC in the 1990s only because we could not comingle the assets from failed banks with those of failed thrifts, because we had two separate deposit insurance funds absorbing the respective losses from bank and thrift failures.

I can't imagine why we would want to create another government bureaucracy to handle the assets from bank failures. What we need to do urgently is stop the failures, and an RTC won't do that.

Again, we must take three immediate steps to prevent a further rash of financial failures and taxpayer bailouts. First, the SEC must suspend Fair Value Accounting and require that assets be marked to their true economic value. Second, the SEC needs to immediately clamp down on abusive practices by short sellers. It has taken a first step in reinstituting the prohibition against "naked selling." Finally, the bank regulators need to acknowledge that the Basel II capital rules represent a serious policy mistake and repeal the rules before they do real damage.

We are almost out of time if we hope to eradicate the cancer in our financial system.

Mr. Isaac, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. from 1981-1985, is chairman of the Washington financial services consulting firm The Secura Group, an LECG company.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122178603685354943.html?mod=article-outset-box

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
T e x
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for T e x     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here's more by William Isaac, a piece in the Washington Post--here's an excerpt:

quote:
I have doubts that the $700 billion bailout, if enacted, would work. Would banks really be willing to part with the loans, and would the government be able to sell them in the marketplace on terms that the taxpayers would find acceptable?

To get banks to sell the loans, the government would need to buy them at a price greater than what the private sector would pay today. Many investors are open to purchasing the loans now, but the financial institutions and investors cannot agree on price. Thus private money is sitting on the sidelines until there is clear evidence that we are at the floor in real estate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/26/AR2008092602200. html?nav=hcmodule

--------------------
Nashoba Holba Chepulechi
Adventures in microcapitalism...

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Bigfoot
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for The Bigfoot     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've only read half of it so far but it sounds reasonable. What do you guys think? Will return and finish the read later.

--------------------
No longer eligible for government service due to lack of tax issues.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
he's (Isaac) the one who went to the House and gave a lecture to the GOP's and told them to vote against the bailout, some of the Dems listened too...

if you listen to what he's saying? he is saying that regulations caused this problem, which is just not true..

the mark-to market rules were enacted because the banks were assigning ridiculous values to illiquid assets and then using those numbers to inflate the value of their co's, their bonuses, and their ability to borrow money..

in other words? they were LYING, and creating money out of thin air...

the rules offically went into effect last Novemeber, and the co's had years to prepare, but they didn't, they waited until the last minute... and htey had to write down tens of billions of dolars even tho nothing in their portfolios had changed except the accounting rules...


Dave Ramsey is usually on target, but he ran a cutnpaste email campaign promoting this... you can see it on his website...

his proposals basically just try to turn back the clock to 2006...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
this is the smoking gun that will bring down the crooks, and why the bans on shorting were enacted:

it is my understanding that short sellers are engaged in abuses such as purchasing credit default swaps on corporate bonds (essentially bets on whether a borrower will default), which lowers the price of the bonds, which in turn causes the price of the company's stock to decline further. Then the ratings agencies pile on and reduce the ratings of a company because its reduced stock price will prevent it from raising new capital. The SEC must act immediately to eliminate these and other potential abuses by short sellers.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
there is only one fix to this crisis if you beleive that real estate is the basis for a strong economy.

Housing prices have to come down to a point where people can afford them.

If you have to spend more than 1/3 of your take home pay on your mortgage. then you are going to fail.If you do not fail? you will not have neough money to spend in other sectors of the economy so those sectors suffer.

the median household income in the US is about 46,000...

this means that median monthly take home is under 3000$...

a 1000$ monthly mortgage payment at 6%/yr gets 165,000.00$...

this doesn't include homeowneres insurance, taxes and PMI....

so, either pay has to go up, or housing prices need to drop another 25%... [Eek!]

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LOL:

Suspend Mark-To-Market Now!
Newt Gingrich 09.29.08, 6:05 PM ET

"It is true that the root of this crisis is bad mortgage loans, but probably 70% of the real crisis that we face today is caused by mark-to-market accounting in an illiquid market.


http://www.forbes.com/home/2008/09/29/mark-to-market-oped-cx_ng_0929gingrich.htm l


it illiquid cuz NOBODY WANTS THIS "FUNNY" PAPER...


"Mark-to-Market" Accounting and the Origins of the Financial Crisis: Mark-to-market accounting (also known as "fair value" accounting) means that companies must value the assets on their balance sheets based on the latest market indicators of the price that those assets could be sold for immediately. Under such a rule, declining housing prices don't just reduce the value of defaulting mortgages. They reduce the value of all mortgages and all mortgage-related securities because the housing collateral protecting them is worth less.

duh....

so let's just all agree to LIE to each other and go on like nothing ever happened?

these guys aren't Conservatives, they're ANARCHISTS...


i have i million "magic" beans in my cupboard... and i think i should be allowed to borrow 1 million dollars against them [Wink]

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Happy Valley
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Happy Valley     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10022008/news/nationalnews/piggy_pols_in_hog_heaven_ with_pork_packe_131770.htm

WASHINGTON - Here, little piggies!

Congressional deal-brookers yesterday slopped a mess of pork into the $700 billion financial rescue bill passed by the Senate last night - including a tax break for makers of kids' wooden arrows - in a bid to lure reluctant lawmakers into voting for the package

Stuffed into the 451- page bill are more than $1.7 billion worth of targeted tax breaks to be doled out for a sty full of eyebrow-raising purposes over the next decade.

MORE: Di$aster Plan B Wins Senate OK

EDITORIAL: Porking Up The Rescue Bill

"This is how Washington works," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington research group. "A big pot of pork is their recipe for final passage."


The special provisions include tax breaks for:

* Manufacturers of kids' wooden arrows - $6 million.

* Puerto Rican and Virgin Is- lands rum producers - $192 million.

* Wool research.

* Auto-racing tracks - $128 million.

* Corporations operating in American Samoa - $33 million.

* Small- to medium-budget film and television productions - $10 million.

Another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bald-faced bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.

That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation.

Some of the pork-barrel measures buried in the financial rescue package had been contained in a bill that previously passed the Senate, but died in the House.

The Congressional Budget Office said the package of breaks - including obvious pork and some more defensible tax-relief measures - will add about $112 billion to budget deficits over the next five years because the bill doesn't contain enough offsetting revenue hikes to keep the budget balanced.


The legislative lard annoyed Tom Schatz, president of the watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste.

"There's always something that goes on at the end where the last dozen members are trying to get something for themselves or for a special interest rather than what might be good for the country," Schatz said.


Some of the other measures added to win approval include a $3.8 billion health-care provision that forces insurance companies to provide coverage for mental-health treatment equivalent to the coverage they provide for physical illness.

Other add-ons will increase individual tax credits and help shield more than 20 million Americans from the painful alternative minimum tax, and offer breaks for businesses that invest in alternative fuels.

Also, several federal income-tax breaks due to expire will now be extended through 2009.


daphne.retter*nypost.com

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Browndog
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Browndog         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bald-faced bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.

That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation."

That's great! Tax payers get to pay for the negilence of Exxon.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
osubucks30
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for osubucks30     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
IT DOES NOT MATTER WHAT HAPPENS!!! The American society as a whole has to be restructured!! Inflation is rising more then wages so "REAL INCOME" is falling and has been for years!! How can we grow if this is the case. Are whole way of living is based on people spending more then they make!! This can't be sustained. Its going to catch up with us. The thing that worries me is things will probably get alot worse!!

Alot of people thinking this bill is going to turn the markets around are nuts!!! The market will react with now what??

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
osubucks30
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for osubucks30     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
In the debate wasn't McCain against pork barrel spending?? Is he going to take a stand now???????? SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Browndog:
"Another measure inserted into the bill appears to be a bald-faced bid aimed at winning the support of Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), who voted against the original version when it went down in flames in the House on Monday.

That provision - a $223 million package of tax benefits for fishermen and others whose livelihoods suffered as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill - has been the subject of fervent lobbying by Alaska's congressional delegation."

That's great! Tax payers get to pay for the negilence of Exxon.

after the supreme court sided with Exxon...

it's just a disgrace.

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Happy Valley
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Happy Valley     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by osubucks30:
In the debate wasn't McCain against pork barrel spending?? Is he going to take a stand now???????? SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!!

Yeah, I seem to remember him saying that once or twice during the debate lol...Would have made for a good drinking game...McCain said it again, "Government spending is out of control"...DRINK!!!
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pagan
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Pagan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Happy Valley:
quote:
Originally posted by osubucks30:
In the debate wasn't McCain against pork barrel spending?? Is he going to take a stand now???????? SPENDING IS OUT OF CONTROL!!!!!!

Yeah, I seem to remember him saying that once or twice during the debate lol...Would have made for a good drinking game...McCain said it again, "Government spending is out of control"...DRINK!!!
Would have been even more fun if we decided to make someone drink based on whether McCain would attack in this response or not. We'd all be drunk!! Maybe that's the plan. Who else, other than a drunk, would would vote for 4 more years of this abuse!?!?!?!

--------------------
It is impossible to make anything foolproof because fools are so ingenious.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 3 pages: 1  2  3   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share