If we wait to pass the bailout for one more month - DEMS can decide where the money goes

[grahamhgreen]

No bailout please dear God...

[Hydra]

1. DUR!

This is what no one is getting. If we wait til Obama is in office(And if we can get the Banks and Wall St. to quit whining and crashing the system, January isn't far away) we might get a REAL fix, and not a signing statement!

[lapfog_1]

3. Almost 4 months until President Obama (and the new congress)

take office.

You all really want to do nothing about this for four months?

do you think that if there was ANY WAY they could paper this over until after Nov 4, they would have done it? I'm pretty sure that they would have.

[Hydra]

5. This wasn't a crisis last week until Bush decided he needed to use the national ATM again

And considering Bush's track record with "fixing" things, I'm very much in favor of waiting 4 months rather than handing out a blank check to people who aren't going to help...especially since this "crisis" seems to be only affecting the major banks who want us to buy up their losses. Very socialist, if you ask me.

[lapfog_1]

6. So, what was the motivation for using the ATM last week

actually almost 2 weeks ago now?

Why now and not Nov 5?

He just felt like it?

[clear eye]

59. No, Cheney and Paulson timed it so the House would be under the gun

to finish up soon so they could go home and campaign. (It's nonsense to say that Bush makes any decisions anymore.) This was a widely acknowledged crisis a couple of months ago, so the situation could have been presented to Congress then. They knew they could pretty much get the whole thing if there wasn't time to deliberate and take testimony from economists.

Here's an article by a wonderful NYU economist decrying the avoidance of economists' input, and describing how a few, relatively easy changes would make an enormous improvement: http://www.rgemonitor.com/roubini-monitor/253762/rge_conference_call_on_the_economic_and_financial_outlookand_why_the_treasury_tarp_bailout_is_flawed

[anigbrowl]

38. It was if you were paying attention

Bush was asleep at the switch and din't heed warnings until it was too late.

[clear eye]

9. Who's they? Bush appointed Paulson?

I don't think so.

[lapfog_1]

2. How do you figure that?

Repukes are all of a sudden, after getting their asses kicked, going to vote the way Dems want? and override a lame duck veto?

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Wouldn't that be loverly?

[dailykoff]

7. That would be too smart.

As Americans, it's our duty to be fleeced like sheep.

[EFerrari]

8. Yep. And one branch of my family will lose their business

and another will lose their home because they can't refinance. Not because they have bad credit but because they can't refinance for love or money.

A lot of people can get hurt in just one more month of this stick up.

[dailykoff]

10. How the heck would the bailout change either of those situations?

If your home owner relatives for example haven't been able to renegotiate their mortgage thus far, their lender will just be further incentivized not to bother.

[pnwmom]

12. That's not true. A number of lenders have just put loans on hold until

the government does something to restore confidence about inter-bank lending.

[dailykoff]

14. If the lenders were still refinancing, there wouldn't be a crisis.

Duh.

[pnwmom]

22. Then I don't understand your previous post, saying that resolving the crisis

won't make any difference to that family. Depending on the circumstances, it very likely could.

[dailykoff]

25. I thought they were applying. If the loan has actually closed,

they'll get their money, and soon, bailout or no. That's what closing means. If they're still in the application process, I don't envy them, because lenders stopped refinancing adjustable mortgages about two years ago.

[EFerrari]

28. In their case, the ap is finished, loan approved and was about to be funded.

It's on "hold" now. That's all she wrote.

I don't think that people really understand that loans are not being made or what that means.

[dailykoff]

30. If the loan has closed, the bank has made a legally enforceable commitment to fund it.

My brother is a mortgage broker and we've been through this, ouch.

[EFerrari]

31. The loan was not "closed", only approved.

They have us right where they want us, I'm afraid. :(

[dailykoff]

35. Okay. Sounds like they're being gamed, but hey, that's what mortgage brokers do.

Even nice ones.

[EFerrari]

40. Half of my family are mortgage brokers and the other half are

in commercial real estate. It's not the broker's fault. He's being jacked around, too!

[dailykoff]

41. So which half is loaning to the other half?

Just kidding.

[pnwmom]

53. Loan approval is one stage of the process -- the next stage is closing.

It's quite possible that the loan was approved, and then outside circumstances caused the lender to put the closing "on hold." And I bet their legal documents gave them that option.

[EFerrari]

15. Because these gangsters are going to hold up credit

until they empty the cookie jar. It's not the bailout per se, it's the mafia behind it. Oh, and my relatives had a loan lined up, there was nothing left to negotiate. It was put on "hold" until further notice.

[dailykoff]

16. They're in business to make money. If the loans are not profitable,

a bailout won't change that. If they are, a bailout won't change that either. :shrug:

[EFerrari]

17. Let me put it a different way: there will be no lending until

the vampires get their drink. It's like a strike or something. It's not about math and only somewhat about confidence as far as I can tell. :shrug:

[dailykoff]

18. Fine, let them strike, eventually they'll have to resume business

with our without a bailout.

[EFerrari]

19. That's right. And the casualties will not be any of them

but mostly the people like the family members I described to you.

[dailykoff]

20. It's not in their business interest to kill off business

so, although I appreciate that your family is being played in the most despicable way imaginable, I think that their financial future does not, in fact, hinge on the passage of this ridiculous and completely useless give-away.

[EFerrari]

21. That's right. It doesn't. They 're only doing this because they can.

It's not necessary, it's a stick up.

[Mojorabbit]

23. There was a wonderful explanation

on Rachael's show. They cannot make loans under the existing rules until they sell some of the mortgages they have due to some accounting rule re the assets they carry on their books. I can't remember the particulars as I should be asleep now and cannot think. Even people with the best credit ratings are being turned down. I have seen countless interviews in the local and national news of small businesses not being able to get loans or credit who have excellent credit histories.

[dailykoff]

26. If the state of Mass got turned down for a loan, it's a hoax.

Pure and simple.

[Mojorabbit]

36. Why do you day that? nt

[dailykoff]

39. They've got a tax base and a credit history for one thing.

They're not Ma and Pa Joad.

[Mojorabbit]

44. I can't see where it makes any difference to a bank

Credit ratings do not seem to be making a difference right now. Loans are not being made.

[dailykoff]

45. It's theater. They'll make their loans if they want to stay in business. (n/t)

[Hannah Bell]

49. why am I getting offers to refinance in the mail, then?

i don't believe the blanket statement is true.

[grahamhgreen]

60. I just got a 5 figure offer

[clear eye]

27. This bailout doesn't save anyone's home.

Nor will crashing the economy by causing hyperinflation save anyone's business--at least not for more than a couple of months. Please read the bill here: http://www.c-span.org/pdf/marketsbill_draft.pdf

Truly I get the gut fear gripping most of us regarding the economy. I'm old enough to be among the first to find myself unemployed in a shrinking economy w/ only a small IRA, Social Security, and a few years worth of a state pension to live on. I have no children and if the dollar collapses, I'm done for.

But I've read the bailout bill and quite a few progressive economists' commentaries (as opposed to those of Wall St. economists partly responsible for creating this mess). What becomes abundantly clear is that this bill gives a corrupt Wall St. insider and Bush administration appointee, Paulson, sole discretion on how to bail out the financial institutions with no requirement to get equity in them in return. The $750B is all our remaining borrowing power and according to the bill, can be used as quickly as Paulson wants, which is sure to be before he is out of office in January. The international financial community think we've gone nuts and are dumping our dollars, already causing devaluation. Even its proponents admit it doesn't address the underlying causes of the recession. What they don't mention is that there will be no money left to address them in January.

The choice is not between passing the bill and saving the economy or letting it all fall apart, but between passing this bill which might put off the economic collapse a couple of months but leave us in more dire straits very soon, or pass a more responsible bill which has real oversight, doles out the money in smaller increments in exchange for equity stakes to provide for repayment of the Treasury when things improve, does address foreclosures, and leaves the international financial community with some faith left in our Treasury bonds.

If this bill passes and your relatives lose their business in Dec., Jan. or Feb. when it all hits the fan so they can't even find a job, they surely won't be better off than if there is a couple of weeks delay to get a better bill that leaves our economy in tact. Banks don't do well or have much money to lend in really hard times.

[EFerrari]

34. The bailout won't directly save anyone's home or business.

The point is, there will be no lending until it happens. It's pretty simple.

[lonestarnot]

29. and who is to say they won't just hoard the dough after they get it?

[EFerrari]

37. It's just a stick up. "We won't do business until you fork over the dough."

Once they get their billions, credit will be miraculously freed again.

[lonestarnot]

43. It's such bullshit!

[EFerrari]

46. Yes it is bullshit as far as I can tell. And, they really can hurt a bunch of people.

[pnwmom]

11. How many banks can fail in one month? Ask the folks

who went through the Great Depression.

[girl gone mad]

24. The bank failures aren't really causing problems so far.

The FDIC is running smoothly and they've been handled through mergers and acquisitions.

[pnwmom]

52. The WaMu failure, the biggest bank in the country, was a huge wake-up call.

Even with the FDIC guarantee, the bank ended up failing because of a major run during the last couple weeks. And the FDIC doesn't have nearly enough assets to cover all the banks that potentially could fail, because of the loss of investor confidence.

[TexasObserver]

13. I would like to see Democrats begin hearings after the election.

And Obama can have legislation ready to pass January 21, 2009.

[clear eye]

32. With what will this new legislation be financed? n/t

[TexasObserver]

51. I don't play that. If you want to launch a red herring, you'll have find someone else

to play your silly game

[clear eye]

57. ?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

33. Sorry, the fix is in -- it will pass the House Friday...

[EFerrari]

42. Yep. BushCo is setting fire to the drapes and stealing the silverware

on their way out.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

50. I wish it were only that bad -- this is economic 9-11.

The manipulators will restore the Dow to "life support" status for the time being, but this will only make the coming meltdown that much worse.

Kucinich called it what it is, a massive transfer of wealth: "This whole government's become nothing more than a big machine that transfers the wealth upwards..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS6k369DbA4

[EFerrari]

54. Is it that big, really? It just seems like bow tying to me.

Bush subverted all the regulatory agencies. They captured DoJ early on so they could never be subject to the law. They put in the Patriot Act which put them in control of the flow of information. By declaring "war", they created a presidency that Congress couldn't touch politically. They've been moving money up for eight years. This is just their prom, excessive but not unexpected. :shrug:

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

55. Yes -- $700,000,000,000 taken from the taxpayers...

and given to Wall Street bankers is a colossal transfer of wealth for which we will be rewarded with a pocket full of rain.

[JDPriestly]

47. This is important. I do not trust the Republicans.

[dchill]

48. Hence the awesome urgency...

to do something RIGHT NOW!!! Before it's too late.

[barbtries]

56. make yourself heard

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=4050128

[lostnfound]

58. Agreed. People underestimate the ability of Bush to create disasters and profit from them.

All the signs are there that this is one last bank robbery on their way out. It's been done before in multiple countries -- influenced or cheered on by some of the same people.