0
0

Wall Street Banker Bonus Bailout Bill Defeated!


 invite response                
2008 Sep 29, 2:58am   17,648 views  191 comments

by Patrick   ➕follow (55)   💰tip   ignore  

democracy

Wonderful news! The Wall Street Banker Bonus Bailout Bill did not pass the house!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/business/30bailout.html

My faith in American representative democracy is being restored: 99% public opposition to Paulson's theft translates into 53% opposition in Congress. Nearly half of Congressmen sold out to the banks, but not all!

Not too bad, considering how much money Congress takes from lobbyists. All is not lost, yet.

Patrick

« First        Comments 41 - 80 of 191       Last »     Search these comments

41   Peter P   2008 Sep 29, 6:52am  

But I do feel bad for retirees.

Sorry, I do not feel bad for them. They should have seen this coming.

42   surfer-x   2008 Sep 29, 6:55am  

So if you take a giant shit log (BA?) and slice it into very thin slices apparently it does not really smell that bad, but when you go to make a shit sandwich, man it reeks. I guess if you end up with too many shit sandwiches you can always petition the government to buy your shit sandwich stand.

Love the boomer fuck Paulson. He just reeks "trust me".

Suck it long, suck it hard. Get back to work code monkeys.

43   DennisN   2008 Sep 29, 7:09am  

I'm just worried that this will happen: the Dems will put back in the concessions to the GOP they pulled (e.g. $$$ for ACORN) and pass it on a strictly partisan fashion tomorrow.

44   Peter P   2008 Sep 29, 7:13am  

Dennis, the bill *will* be passed sooner or later, in one form or another. There is only *one* Ron Paul. :(

45   santacruzer   2008 Sep 29, 7:23am  

Sorry, I do not feel bad for them. They should have seen this coming.

I don't. Even if they could predict the housing market, they might not have been savvy enough to do something with their money to "protect" it.

46   MST   2008 Sep 29, 7:33am  

I’m just worried that this will happen: the Dems will put back in the concessions to the GOP they pulled (e.g. $$$ for ACORN) and pass it on a strictly partisan fashion tomorrow.

Well, not tomorrow, 'cause they're taking Rosh Hashana off. No. Really. Their self-described *Henry Paulson-end-of-the-world-financial-armageddon-48-hour-doomsday-clock* is ticking well into T+12 days, ohmygodweregonnadie!!!!!

...but they'll be back Thursday.

But yeah, they may very well then pass the ACORN version on a party-line vote. BUT then it has to get past the Senate, (which could miss cloture) which almost certainly means a more moderate bill, then back to conference, and another opportunity for those fine upstanding reps of ours to show some backbone. Or at least their talent for self-preservation.

47   DennisN   2008 Sep 29, 7:36am  

And when it goes to the Senate, there are a couple of Senators (M and O) who then get to show their worth. :)

48   DennisN   2008 Sep 29, 7:39am  

Let's see...the Senate has 49 Dems, 49 GOPs, Lieberman and one other I. Tie goes to Dick Cheney.

49   Peter P   2008 Sep 29, 7:42am  

Why is options liquidity so shitty nowadays? The bid-ask spreads are horrible even for large-cap stocks options.

50   StuckInBA   2008 Sep 29, 8:00am  

Peter P :

When volatility is so high, the market makers often increase the spread. I haven't noticed any major drop in open interest.

51   justme   2008 Sep 29, 8:02am  

I was watching Nightly Business Report on PBS just now, and they were trotting out one `talking head after the other that said congress better had pass the bill or else. No surprise there,

The only voice of reason was John Bogle of Vanguard fame. He basically stated that we need a support deal, but that it should be based on equity purchases and not bad asset purchases. Now there is a guy that I can support. He has always been in favor of the shareholder (that's you, surfer-x :-)) rather than the management.

52   Duke   2008 Sep 29, 8:19am  

If we must have a bailout, ANYTHING is better the the cuurent POS.

Why all the posturing? Why didn't Congress serously consider something else. What is Paulson not telling us?

53   Tesh   2008 Sep 29, 8:20am  

"englishman26 Says:
US stock markets lost $1.1 trillion today. Most of that came out of people’s retirement accounts."

Then it's their own darn fault for not actually saving, and buying into the idea that investing=saving. Investing has risk, and if you lose, you have only yourself to blame for gambling.

Pay attention to your money. Nobody else is going to look out for your best interests; that's your job.

54   justme   2008 Sep 29, 8:23am  

Tesh,

The problem is that if you "save", then somebody else will borrow the money and "invest" it for you. That's why watertight regulation is key.

55   Peter P   2008 Sep 29, 8:26am  

When volatility is so high, the market makers often increase the spread.

I see...

It is also interesting to see how the short-sale ban is affecting the put-call parity.

56   Peter P   2008 Sep 29, 8:28am  

The problem is that if you “save”, then somebody else will borrow the money and “invest” it for you. That’s why watertight regulation is key.

No, even with watertight regulation, air escapes. But airtight regulation suffocates everyone. That is not the answer either.

The solution is to *allow* credit deflation. It is a normal and necessary part of the credit cycle.

57   Richmond   2008 Sep 29, 8:32am  

Kinda' reminds me of Barings - only really, really big.

P.S. John Bogle warned us about the 401k stuff in "The Battle for the Soul of Capitalism"

58   OO   2008 Sep 29, 9:03am  

European central banks cut sales of gold

By Javier Blas in Kyoto , Financial Times, 28 Sep 2008

European central banks have cut their sales of gold to the lowest level in almost a decade, reversing the practice of recent years when hefty sales helped depress prices.

Institutions bound by the Central Bank Gold Agreement – the banks of the eurozone plus Sweden and Switzerland – sold about 343 tonnes of gold in the year that expired on Friday, the lowest amount since the first CBGA was signed in 1999.

This compares with 475.8 tonnes in the year to the end of September 2007. Under the agreement, the banks are allowed to sell up to 500 tonnes of gold each year.

The European trend is part of a global movement of reduced central bank selling and increased investor buying that is helping to underpin high prices at a time of turmoil in financial markets.

GFMS, the precious metals consultancy, estimates global central banks will sell 269 tonnes of bullion in 2008, the lowest since 1995.

Much of the selling by European banks took place between October and December last year.

As central banks sell less, investors are rushing into bullion-backed exchange traded funds to such an extent that some analysts refer to the ETFs as the "people's central bank" because they are now bigger than most countries' official reserves.

Bullion ETF holdings reached a record 1,056.7 tonnes – or more than $30bn – on Friday, up 33 per cent in the past 12 months and double the 2006 level.

The developments provide a bullish backdrop to the annual meeting of the London Bullion Market Association, which begins Monday in Kyoto.

"Less central bank selling sends a strong bullish signal to the market," said Philip Klapwijk, GFMS chairman.

"The investors' bullion-buying will be sustained for the time being if people continue to be concerned about financial system stability."

Gold prices surged last week to $911 a troy ounce, up more than 20 per cent from the level before the collapse of Lehman Brothers but below the high set last March at $1,030.80. Bullion closed at $885 an ounce on Friday.

Kamal Naqvi, head of commodity hedge fund sales at Credit Suisse, said: "We are witnessing strong buying of bullion as financial risks have increased."

Along with investors, some central banks that have sold gold are reviewing their position.

59   justme   2008 Sep 29, 9:05am  

No bailout without equity

is the modern day equivalent of

No taxation without representation.

60   OO   2008 Sep 29, 9:08am  

EBGuy,

are you suggesting that Fed has already started printing since it has less than $300B on its balance sheet? How fast can it print?

I think there will be a deal in the end, when the Wall Street losses begin to be reflected on Main Street in terms of massive layoffs, Americans will do exactly the opposite by faxing and calling their Reps and Senators for a deal. The huge drop in stock market is just a part of the negotiation process.

61   LILLL   2008 Sep 29, 9:29am  

I am still suspicious that they are just doing a kibuke dance and will pass this anyway.

They must think it doesn't have enough baiout for the foreclosure house debtors----

62   LILLL   2008 Sep 29, 9:31am  

Also--Buffet is for it because he invested 5B on the promise it would pass.
I'd be for it too---if I had 5B on the line.

63   Richmond   2008 Sep 29, 9:36am  

Oh yea, they will come up with something. Hopefully it will it will have something in it for the taxpayer other than rhetoric. People want something for their money.

64   OO   2008 Sep 29, 9:50am  

Does anyone think that today's market crash is at least half engineered?

65   HeadSet   2008 Sep 29, 10:08am  

But I do feel bad for retirees.

Just how many average retirees have $10,000 in the stock market? If so, they have an "average" paper loss of about $700. Any assets in bank CDs or even Money Market Mutual Funds are insured. Therefore, I do think the average investor will be hurt. Even so, I think the "average" guy would be better off with the nominal $9300 than with the original $10,000 inflated by bailouts.

This bailout is for the benefit of the big boys. The ones with several hundred thousand in the market, along with the apparatus that profits from them.

66   HeadSet   2008 Sep 29, 10:09am  

Oops, I meant I DON'T think the average investor will be hurt

67   Zephyr   2008 Sep 29, 10:15am  

Millions of investors voted with their feet today. They thought a handout was coming but it did not. The bailout bill is a rip-off for american taxpayers and is a give away to the irresponsible lenders, borrowers, and foolish investors.

Why should we have a bailout that directs the money to them?

68   Zephyr   2008 Sep 29, 10:17am  

We really do need something - but not a money giveaway for the greedy fools who caused this problem.

The government can guarantee the deposits in banks so people and other banks will be willing to put their money in banks. That will solve the liquidity problem without buying bad investments from the fools who own them.

69   HeadSet   2008 Sep 29, 10:30am  

A new scare tactic -Credit Crunch

The idea being that without the bailout, banks will not loan and all business will come to a halt.

Let's see. 95% of banks are solvent. The only way they make money is to grant loans. But since it will be much harder to package and sell off risky loans, banks will insure the borrowers can demostrate the ability to repay and provide adequate collateral. "Credit Crunch" may actually mean "Sane Lending Practices." Whenever you here some newsman, politician, or wall streeter say "Credit Crunch," I bet you could substutute "Sane Lending Practice" into his sentence without changing the meaning.

70   surfer-x   2008 Sep 29, 10:37am  

now that's genius, Senator Fuckstiens website will not take comments.

Beeeeaaautiful.

71   Paul189   2008 Sep 29, 10:41am  

@ englishman26,

While I lost a bit in my stocks, I made a bit in my gold and bonds. Remember the old saying "every portfolio starts with a heart of gold"

Balance my friend, balance.

72   HeadSet   2008 Sep 29, 10:42am  

now that’s genius, Senator Fuckstiens website will not take comments.

Therefore, you must go to her house, crack her open like a shotgun, and deliver your message personaly.

73   kona_three   2008 Sep 29, 10:43am  

Englishman,
Listen to Tesh. You should "save". Yes. Investment is NOT equal to savings. Unless you invest in things like mattresses, fallout shelters, propane tanks, land in the choice (meaning redneck) parts of Idaho or Montana, failing that some lots up in the remote Sierras will do, gold, gun racks, guns, Screw Paulson bumper stickers, gold, seeds (for planting), buggy whips, buggies, mules, gold, large safes to put your gold, gold (can't mention that enough). Yes, cash out your 401K, empty out your IRA, kiss your job goodbye and head for the hills.

74   HeadSet   2008 Sep 29, 10:50am  

While I lost a bit in my stocks, I made a bit in my gold and bonds.

All in paper, I presume.

75   SWJR   2008 Sep 29, 10:59am  

READ MY LIPS!!! No new Bailout!!!

76   surfer-x   2008 Sep 29, 11:00am  

hey i am justcurious, how many of the duly elected bay area reps voted yes?

As in, hell yes, give more money to the gambling fucks.

77   surfer-x   2008 Sep 29, 11:01am  

every portfolio starts with a heart of gold

and every street in the bay area is paved with gold.

78   Brand165   2008 Sep 29, 11:43am  

Musgrave (R) - No
Udall (D) - No
DeGette (D) - Yes
Salazar (D) - No
Lamborn (R) - No
Tancredo (R) - Yes
Perlmutter (D) - Yes

Well, everybody in Colorado knew that Tancredo is a whore. Perlmutter disappoints me. Fortunately, my rep is Marilyn Musgrave. And Udall... more spine than I would have ever thought, especially with the Dems pushing the bill. Good show, all Colorado reps who voted No.

79   Brand165   2008 Sep 29, 11:48am  

btw, no huge surprise for DeGette. Her district is geographically tiny, encompassing Denver, which is a big financial hub. So not exactly a mind-blowing betrayal there. Perlmutter is from the exact same area, excluding Denver.

80   Paul189   2008 Sep 29, 12:36pm  

@HeadSet,

Be careful what you presume.

Cheers!

« First        Comments 41 - 80 of 191       Last »     Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions