Reagan-Lovers: Stop the Bull

Oh c'mon WTF. It's not impossible. It worked for you didn't it? Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Rudyard, you of all people should know, you can only get so dumb on certain subjects.

Originally Posted by John Bull

Why JB, I am suprised you were/are for the bank bail-outs

Why JB, I am suprised you were/are for the bank bail-outs Originally Posted by WTF

Well WTF, what would you have done?...in and around 1/1/2009?...given the world as it was then?

You know...you must play the hand that is dealt you...at the time it is your turn to bet. Not play some hand that you had a few deals ago.

So, what would you have done? I can hardly wait.

Nitpick: TARP passed October 3, 2008. Waiting until Jan 2009 would have been a disaster.

Well WTF, what would you have done?...in and around 1/1/2009?...given the world as it was then?
Originally Posted by Rudyard K

I would have shot John Galt and imprisoned the rest of his thieving family. I'm not one to reward bad behavior. Look what that got us from the S & L fiasco...... a freaking Bank Bail-out.

I would have nuked OBL in Afghanistan and never went into Iraq just in case you are wondering. A true conservative approach to financial and terrorist threats to this country instead of this half ass Tea Party excuse making crap I'm hearing.

Oh yea, I would dismantle the welfare system as we know it. Damn this is fun!

Nitpick: TARP passed October 3, 2008. Waiting until Jan 2009 would have been a disaster. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Yeah...I didn't want to look it up. I did say "in and around". I thought that would cover the nit picking.

I would have shot John Galt and imprisoned the rest of his thieving family. I'm not one to reward bad behavior. Look what that got us from the S & L fiasco...... a freaking Bank Bail-out.

I would have nuked OBL in Afghanistan and never went into Iraq just in case you are wondering. A true conservative approach to financial and terrorist threats to this country instead of this half ass Tea Party excuse making crap I'm hearing.

Oh yea, I would dismantle the welfare system as we know it. Damn this is fun!
Originally Posted by WTF

That's what I thought. You're real chance to stretch our minds...allow us to follow the bouncing ball...see that linear wisdom...and no stretch, no bounce, no lines. What's the matter...couldn't find a link to provide you an answer?

That's what I thought. You're real chance to stretch our minds...allow us to follow the bouncing ball...see that linear wisdom...and no stretch, no bounce, no lines. What's the matter...couldn't find a link to provide you an answer? Originally Posted by Rudyard K

There is no stretching a rock.

PJ tells half truths about TARP paying for itself and I provide links exposing that folly. You wisely say nothing. Yet you want me to provide a link on a stupid hypothetical about WTF I would have done to save our banking system? Damn, talk about a stretch. I would not have done shit. I would have let the market do its thing. Bush was scared he'd be the next Hoover and blinked us into moral hazzard or as you Tea Folks like to say, Socialism.

The GOP can scare us into war and bank bail-outs. The pussy Dems can't even scare us into a decent health care plan.

Nitpick: TARP passed October 3, 2008. Waiting until Jan 2009 would have been a disaster. Originally Posted by discreetgent

Who declared that it is not a disastar to taxpayers? All it was was a huge transfer of wealth.

PJ tells half truths about TARP paying for itself and I provide links exposing that folly. You wisely say nothing. Yet you want me to provide a link on a stupid hypothetical about WTF I would have done to save our banking system? Damn, talk about a stretch. I would not have done shit. I would have let the market do its thing. Bush was scared he'd be the next Hoover and blinked us into moral hazzard or as you Tea Folks like to say, Socialism. Originally Posted by WTF

The reason I said nothing is because I was incredulous at your foolishness...and didn't want to expose it...again. But, I'll go ahead.

TARP was a bailout of the banks...and it is being paid back...with interest (i.e.profits to the bail-outer).

Monies being poured into Fannie & Freddie is the Fed bailing itself out. The Fed already had the obligation of backing (with the full faith and credit of the US) Fannie's & Freddie's obligations. That is kind of the essence of a Pseudo-governmental agency.

The Fed making good on its obligation to back Fannie & Freddie most certainly also helps the banks...because they own a lot of the obligations owed by the Fannie & Freddie. But, if those obligations were instead owned by Big Foot...the Fed would still be making good on those obligations. That isn't the Fed bailing out the obligation holder...it is the Fed making good on its obligations.

Now, I can imagine...instead of answering the question...you will run off into a tirade about why these pseudo-governmental agencies got set up in the first palce...and who stood to benefit from them being set up. But that is an arguement for pre-2009 (or pre-Oct 2008, as pointed out by DG). The fact is...in Oct of 2008, they were in place and the obligations of the Fed were there.

You'll never get through RK. This is WTF:

The Fed making good on its obligation to back Fannie & Freddie most certainly also helps the banks...because they own a lot of the obligations owed by the Fannie & Freddie. But, if those obligations were instead owned by Big Foot...the Fed would still be making good on those obligations. That isn't the Fed bailing out the obligation holder...it is the Fed making good on its obligations.

The fact is...in Oct of 2008, they were in place and the obligations of the Fed were there. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Show me the law where they were obligated to bail-out these banks?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae#cite_note-32


No actual guarantees
Fannie Mae receives no direct government funding or backing; Fannie Mae securities carry no government guarantee of being repaid. This is explicitly stated in the law that authorizes GSEs, on the securities themselves, and in many public communications issued by Fannie Mae.
Neither the certificates nor payments of principal and interest on the certificates are guaranteed by the United States government. The certificates do not constitute a debt or obligation of the United States or any of its agencies or instrumentalities other than Fannie Mae.

--------------------------------------------------------------



On the other hand....... Defend this BS, PJ and RK.
The nation's largest banks have an obligation to pay some of the cost for bailing out mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because they sold them bad mortgages, a government regulator said Wednesday. the acting director for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said the banks this summer have refused to take back $11 billion in bad loans sold to the two government-controlled companies, in written testimony submitted for a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday. A third of those requests have been outstanding for at least three months.
DeMarco said the banks have a legal obligation to buy back the loans and called the delays "a significant concern." He said the government may take new steps to force those buybacks if "discussions do not yield reasonable outcomes soon."
In an interview with reporters after the hearing, DeMarco declined to give further details on what the government might do next. He said only that "we're looking for contractual obligations to be fulfilled."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100915/...tgage_giants_4



A Libertarian and a Tea Partier exposed as ''privatize profits and socialized losses'' defenders! WTF is the world coming to? Where is Captain Midnight when ya need him!






http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/06/gses-1-trillion-dumping-ground-for-bad-bank-loans/

And if we keep allowing banks to dump all of their bad loans onto the GSE’s books, I would raise my odds of a trillion dollars in losses from 25% to 100%

Show me the law where they were obligated to bail-out these banks?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fannie_Mae#cite_note-32


No actual guarantees
Fannie Mae receives no direct government funding or backing; Fannie Mae securities carry no government guarantee of being repaid. This is explicitly stated in the law that authorizes GSEs, on the securities themselves, and in many public communications issued by Fannie Mae.
Neither the certificates nor payments of principal and interest on the certificates are guaranteed by the United States government. The certificates do not constitute a debt or obligation of the United States or any of its agencies or instrumentalities other than Fannie Mae.

--------------------------------------------------------------



On the other hand....... Defend this BS, PJ and RK.
The nation's largest banks have an obligation to pay some of the cost for bailing out mortgage buyers Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac because they sold them bad mortgages, a government regulator said Wednesday. the acting director for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, said the banks this summer have refused to take back $11 billion in bad loans sold to the two government-controlled companies, in written testimony submitted for a House subcommittee hearing Wednesday. A third of those requests have been outstanding for at least three months.
DeMarco said the banks have a legal obligation to buy back the loans and called the delays "a significant concern." He said the government may take new steps to force those buybacks if "discussions do not yield reasonable outcomes soon."
In an interview with reporters after the hearing, DeMarco declined to give further details on what the government might do next. He said only that "we're looking for contractual obligations to be fulfilled."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100915/...tgage_giants_4



A Libertarian and a Tea Partier exposed as ''privatize profits and socialized losses'' defenders! WTF is the world coming to? Where is Captain Midnight when ya need him!






http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/06/gses-1-trillion-dumping-ground-for-bad-bank-loans/

And if we keep allowing banks to dump all of their bad loans onto the GSE’s books, I would raise my odds of a trillion dollars in losses from 25% to 100%
Originally Posted by WTF

Geez WTF, do you really live in some kind of a box? No wonder you bounce around so much.

GSE's have no explicit guarantee. But, out here in the real world, there is the law of the written word...and there is the law of equity. The law of equity takes into account past practices, form over substance, source of strength doctrines, exercised apparent control issues, etc. To my knowledge, the Fed "implied guarantee" has not been tested in court. But the lack of an explicit guarantee is woefully short of assurance of no liability. Most of us...you know those of us who live out here in the real world...believe the Fed would lose such a court battle. It would appear the Fed believes that too, because they have not chosen to fight it. And if they did, the other GSE's would immediately be put in play also.

But as humorous as your box living is to blow past the real world above...it is even more humorous that you can immediately change horses and challenge the mortgage servicers refusal to take back mortgages based solely on the testimony of some yokel up in DC.

To educate your small little min...uh, box...Mortgage Loan production and servicing is administered by contract between the mortgage producer and/or servicer, on the one hand and Fannie & Freddie, on the other. Such contract sets out the terms of buybacks for fraudulant loans, poor servicing, etc. Having had quite a bit of experience with such servicing agreements, I can tell you that "contractually" things have to be pretty apparent of fraud for the servicer to be required to take back the loan. But just like above, there is the contract and the "real world". And the one hammer that Fannie & Freddie always had over the servicers was that fact that they could yank your approval to be a Fannie or Freddie servicer on almost a whim. So, if the servicer got too uppity...Fannie could just yank their servicing rights and then they could not service any Fannie loans.

Such a system works well for Fannie and Freddie, as long as they are the biggest gorilla in the room. Fannie & Freddie didn't need any one or two servicers...as much as those one or two servicers needed Fannie & Freddie. But the world is different today. If the banks, or mortgage servicers don't service the loans...in mass...then who is going to? If the banks won't buy the mortages guaranteed by Fannie & Freddie...in mass...then who is going to? Now the banks are getting to be the biggest gorilla in the room. In addition, Fannie & Freddie are not the only GSE's. Who is going to fund those loans.

This is the real world WTF. This is what those folks who were and are trying to figure out how to work our way through this morass are having to deal with. I know you say, "F*ck 'em all...let God sort it out". But then you'll just run back to you little box to play with your weenie. The rest of us have a bit more to deal with.

It would appear the Fed believes that too, because they have not chosen to fight it.

. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

I live in a reality based world. I follow the money. The reason they are not going to take it to court is because donations would dry up to any party that chose to do so. So save your preaching/spinning for someone that believes in the tooth fairy. The reality is that the taxpayers will be stuck footing the bill. Spin that however you want. The taxpayers took a bath in the savings and Loan fiasco and will do so on a grander scale in this matter. That is the reality.

. And if they did, the other GSE's would immediately be put in play also.

. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Good, they will only create a bubbles that private finance can hide behind.

.

This is the real world WTF. This is what those folks who were and are trying to figure out how to work our way through this morass are having to deal with. I know you say, "F*ck 'em all...let God sort it out". But then you'll just run back to you little box to play with your weenie. The rest of us have a bit more to deal with. Originally Posted by Rudyard K

Fuc, If you were sheriff it sounds as if you would get the inmates to sit on juries to sentence their buddies. Great system you got going there RK. Profit, Crash and then ride in to fix the system.

http://www.tradebit.com/filedetail.p...und-effect-wav

http://www.tradebit.com/filedetail.p...und-effect-wav Originally Posted by pjorourke

. .
I sure as hell ain't running around pissing on people's legs and trying to convince them its raining. You two seem to have run out of fire hydrants