non-partisan feelings on bailout

#1
MontereyVol

MontereyVol

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2007
Messages
6,315
Likes
19
#1
As I watch some of my investments tank and others do ok, I can say I am somehwhat breaking even right now. I want to know what everyone here thinks of the bailout and I don't give a damn about Obama or McCain.

My thoughts on this are we need to have an attitude shift in this country away from self entitlement and get back to how we lived as an average family, fiscally in the 50's. To do this I believe we should not pass this bailout package in any form and let the free market work itself out.

We should enact oversight back to what it was.
 
#2
#2
MontereyVol said:
As I watch some of my investments tank and others do ok, I can say I am somehwhat breaking even right now. I want to know what everyone here thinks of the bailout and I don't give a damn about Obama or McCain.

My thoughts on this are we need to have an attitude shift in this country away from self entitlement and get back to how we lived as an average family, fiscally in the 50's. To do this I believe we should not pass this bailout package in any form and let the free market work itself out.

We should enact oversight back to what it was.
Click to expand...

I agree 1,000,000%!
 
#3
#3
I think the bailout should go forward and that oversight will be enacted due to the bailout.

I honestly think it would cost us much more long-term to sit idly by and let the market overcome the problem.
 
#4
#4
2688055633_b3dfef67cd.jpg
 
#5
#5
In a free market there are winners and losers. I would not vote for the bailout. I'm a Milton Friedman fan and I think it would take a little while but the market would rebound and be even stronger. By bailing out the idiots that got us there we will only encourage more bad behavior in the future. I say VOTE NO!
 
#6
#6
BigPapaVol said:
I think the bailout should go forward and that oversight will be enacted due to the bailout.

I honestly think it would cost us much more long-term to sit idly by and let the market overcome the problem.
Click to expand...

But wouldn't people like Buffet dumping money into the Banks get people to start investing? I am starting to wonder how much of this is being exacerbated by the MSM.

If there is a bailout why not give the average joe, who has been saving money, an oppurtunity to place what he wants into this bailout. For a 11.86% return I would.
 
#7
#7
VolBeef88 said:
In a free market there are winners and losers. I would not vote for the bailout. I'm a Milton Friedman fan and I think it would take a little while but the market would rebound and be even stronger. By bailing out the idiots that got us there we will only encourage more bad behavior in the future. I say VOT NO!
Click to expand...

I agree with this, it seems like we are only going to prolong the inevitable and then destroy our kids chances.
 
#8
#8
There are private groups saying that they will buy the loans at the same thing the Government is going to pay for them.
I say let the market solve it's self. It will be hard, but it is needed to send a message for future financial activities. jmho
 
#11
#11
VolBeef88 said:
In a free market there are winners and losers. I would not vote for the bailout. I'm a Milton Friedman fan and I think it would take a little while but the market would rebound and be even stronger. By bailing out the idiots that got us there we will only encourage more bad behavior in the future. I say VOTE NO!
Click to expand...
but we're bailing out Fannie and Freddie in the end and it's not prolonging the inevitable. There will significant structural change in our mortgage world. The gov't has a very large hand in the problem. It's not that just these companies were doing stupid things. They were playing by Fannie's and Freddie's rules in trying to bring home ownership to everyone. That little ideal has been proven a failure so now the world can go back to underwriting real estate and valuing real estate as it should.

Finally, the losses are going to be drastically less than those being bandied about today.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#12
#12
BigPapaVol said:
I think the bailout should go forward and that oversight will be enacted due to the bailout.

I honestly think it would cost us much more long-term to sit idly by and let the market overcome the problem.
Click to expand...

This is the conclusion I've come to. The bailout is necessary. Bernake and Paulson appear to see the bigger picture.

The dereg, rereg, exec comp. etc. is all needed and can come but I tend to agree with the Fed and Treasury on this one - stop the bleeding first then debate about how to prevent it from recurring.
 
#13
#13
I find it hard to favor something that makes the government look like it "bailed" someone out when all is said and done. The image of government to the rescue is just difficult to stomach.
 
#14
#14
T-TownVol said:
I say let the market solve it's self. It will be hard, but it is needed to send a message for future financial activities. jmho
Click to expand...

MystifyingVol said:
No bailout in any form or fashion. Let the free market work.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I understand the sentiment but the free market isn't exactly what got us her. Lending legislation, quasi-governmental institutions with non-market based mandates among other root causes are definitely not free-market mechanisms.

To call this a free-market vs. government intervention debate misses the point that the system was not a free-market system to begin with.

NOTE: I'm not advocating a totally free market system - financial markets definitely require regulation.
 
Last edited:
#15
#15
MontereyVol said:
But wouldn't people like Buffet dumping money into the Banks get people to start investing? I am starting to wonder how much of this is being exacerbated by the MSM.
Click to expand...

I believe WB invested because he believed the bailout would occur. Without the plan, I don't think he would be in. At least that's what Bernake said about the WB investment.
 
Last edited:
#16
#16
volinbham said:
I understand the sentiment but the free market isn't exactly what got us her. Lending legislation, quasi-governmental institutions with non-market based mandates among other root causes are definitely not free-market mechanisms.

To call this a free-market vs. government intervention debate misses the point that the system was not a free-market system to begin with.

NOTE: I'm not advocating a totally free market system her - financial markets definitely require regulation.
Click to expand...


Who is "her"...are you blaming Sarah?
 
#19
#19
T-TownVol said:
No, he would have waited a little longer and got in even cheaper.
Click to expand...

I'm quoting Bernake on this one - I'm trying to find the comments from Buffet to back this up. The point is, WB buying in isn't evidence things would be fine with out the bail-out. On the contrary, WB buying is evidence of the impact the bail out could have.
 
#20
#20
volinbham said:
I'm quoting Bernake on this one - I'm trying to find the comments from Buffet to back this up. The point is, WB buying in isn't evidence things would be fine with out the bail-out. On the contrary, WB buying is evidence of the impact the bail out could have.
Click to expand...

I know that WB said that. I have a family member that is on one of his boards. He does NOTHING, business wise, that does not make Berkshire profit.
He would have bought in at some point any way.
 
#21
#21
If you can show me how this bailout is a constitutional function of the government, I might consider it. Good luck!!
 
#22
#22
BigPapaVol said:
but we're bailing out Fannie and Freddie in the end and it's not prolonging the inevitable. There will significant structural change in our mortgage world. The gov't has a very large hand in the problem. It's not that just these companies were doing stupid things. They were playing by Fannie's and Freddie's rules in trying to bring home ownership to everyone. That little ideal has been proven a failure so now the world can go back to underwriting real estate and valuing real estate as it should.

Finally, the losses are going to be drastically less than those being bandied about today.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...
Dont get me started on Fannie and Freddie :furious3:.

The market needs or better yet has to correct itself. The worse thing we could do is bail out and set ourselves up for even more bad behavior in the future. One thing we should all know is that once the Gov gets involved they never leave. We will see this again in our lifetime if we follow through (which we will) I know Fannie and Freddie put pressure on lenders to lend even when it was a bad deal to "add" to their protfolio to show Congress they are doing well. But instead of a bail out we should be investigating and putting people in jail. Hell Congress is always wanting to hold hearings and investigate. Here is finally something they should investigate and they wont. I guess steroids in MLB is more important.
 
#23
#23
VolBeef88 said:
Dont get me started on Fannie and Freddie :furious3:.

The market needs or better yet has to correct itself. The worse thing we could do is bail out and set ourselves up for even more bad behavior in the future. One thing we should all know is that once the Gov gets involved they never leave. We will see this again in our lifetime if we follow through (which we will) I know Fannie and Freddie put pressure on lenders to lend even when it was a bad deal to "add" to their protfolio to show Congress they are doing well. But instead of a bail out we should be investigating and putting people in jail. Hell Congress is always wanting to hold hearings and investigate. Here is finally something they should investigate and they wont. I guess steroids in MLB is more important.
Click to expand...

I think they know the answer on this one.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#24
#24
volinbham said:
I'm quoting Bernake on this one - I'm trying to find the comments from Buffet to back this up. The point is, WB buying in isn't evidence things would be fine with out the bail-out. On the contrary, WB buying is evidence of the impact the bail out could have.
Click to expand...

I think you're right, I believe WB has come out and said that he took the deal because he believed a bailout was coming. However, he took the deal like any of us would have since he was given such a sweetheart option.
 
#25
#25
This is a good quote

A few financial experts have even suggested that the decision by the Treasury and the Fed to force Lehman Bros. (LEHMQ, news, msgs) into bankruptcy created the collapse of AIG. They argue that the failure of Lehman critically undermined confidence in the derivatives market and led to a massive margin call on the insurance giant.

I don't know whether those critics are correct, but it does raise the best argument against the haste that Paulson and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke advocate. These markets are incredibly complex, and the dangers of doing something that doesn't work or that has an effect opposite from the one intended are very real.
Click to expand...

This is the best example of why I want congress to take their time on this. Wait a couple of months and in the meantime fix the source of the problems. Rushing into something this large really worries me and I believe you are watching the US government becoming French.

Let's not rush to blow $700 billion - MSN Money
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top