PDA

View Full Version : As usual, day late and a dollar short


Grizz
03-13-2008, 09:28 PM
When the Bush administration took office, they had their marching orders - more tax break giveaways for the base ("the haves and the have mores"). They couldn't be bothered with warnings about some bearded Arab who threatened us. We got 9/11 and, golly gee, wasn't that a surprise? Iraq was a serious threat due to their WMD that would be unleashed upon the world through their terrorist buddies. We had to invade and wipe that stuff off the map. Despite the best efforts of professional soldiers who knew what we'd be getting into, they did it their way - on the cheap with faulty plans. Well, here we are years later, almost 4,000 of our best dead and thousands more severely wounded. That went well too, didn't it?

The big money boys were a bit peeved with government oversight, so that was cut back to almost nothing. "The markets will take care of themselves." was the mantra. Anyone who stood up and said that these sub-prime loans could be a problem was swatted down, just like the generals prior to the invasion to Iraq. So, where are we now? Take a look:


Stronger Rules for Mortgages Are Proposed


By EDMUND L. ANDREWS
Published: March 13, 2008

WASHINGTON — The nation’s top economic policymakers, hoping to prevent a repeat of the excesses that led to the mortgage bubble and bust, on Thursday proposed a broad series of reforms aimed at tightening oversight of financial institutions.

The changes include tougher disclosure requirements for banks and Wall Street firms, a nationwide licensing system for mortgage brokers and new rules for credit rating agencies, which have been widely criticized for failing to recognize major problems with mortgage-backed securities and for having potential conflicts of interest.

“This effort is not about finding excuses or scapegoats,” said Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., who outlined the proposals in a speech here on Thursday morning. “But poor judgment and poor market practices led to mistakes by all participants.”

The recommendations were developed by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, a group that includes the Treasury Secretary, the chairman of the Federal Reserve and the government’s top financial regulators.

Mr. Paulson said the government was going to demand greater “transparency” from banks and Wall Street firms, stronger risk management and capital management and a better trading system for complex financial derivatives, such as collateralized debt obligations, that managed to transform risky subprime mortgages into securities with Triple-A ratings.

Echoing measures that Congressional Democrats have been drafting, the presidential group called for tougher state and federal regulation of mortgage lenders and a nationwide set of licensing and registration standards for mortgage brokers.

That reflects a widespread criticism by many experts and policymakers, who have argued that millions of mortgages were originated by independent mortgage brokers who often had no concern about credit quality because they simply passed the mortgages to finance companies that in turn resold them to Wall Street firms and ultimately investors around the world.

Mr. Paulson took particular aim at credit-rating agencies, such as Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch, which gave AAA ratings to billions of dollars in mortgage-backed securities that turned out to be filled with delinquent loans.

Mr. Paulson said the rating agencies would have enforce policies about disclosing their conflicts of interest, an allusion to criticisms that the agencies were typically paid for their ratings by the investment banks who only paid once they had sold their securities to investors.

In addition, Mr. Paulson said the president’s group would push the rating agencies to “clearly differentiate” between the ratings for complicated structured investment products, which investors may not have understood, and the ratings for more conventional corporate bonds and municipal securities.

Issuers of mortgage-backed securities, in turn, would be required to disclose “more granular information” about the quality of the underlying loans and their procedures for verifying the information in those loans.

Mr. Paulson offered few details on how the rules might work and some of his recommendations amounted to little more than demands that investors and financial institutions take greater care in analyzing and managing their risks,

“No silver bullet exists to prevent past excesses from recurring,” Mr. Paulson said, adding that the recommendations were a “good start” and that the administration would release a “regulatory blueprint” in the next few weeks.

Senator Charles E. Schumer, the New York Democrat who is a member of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs and Finance committees, was both positive and critical about the proposals, saying in a statement: “The administration is finally moving towards where Congress was last year. The good news is, they’re beginning to put their toe in the water when it comes to government involvement to help the economy.

The bad news is, they’re going to have to do a lot more than that to address the problem. We need government action not only to solve the current crisis, but also to prevent a future one.”

Link (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/business/13cnd-paulson.html?hp)

penmyst
03-14-2008, 01:17 AM
I'm not really sure how you are tying terrorists, the war against islamo-fascism in Iraq, and your macabre body count of U.S. soldiers into.......the sub-prime mortgage situation?

Err... but the sub-prime mortgage thing? It's another perfect example of why the gubmint shouldn't be allowed to touch ANYTHING. It was the gubmint under Carter that started it, and under Clinton that ramped it up to create today's crisis, that decided they should step in and force lenders to lend to high-risk (read: poor folks and bad credit folks) peeps so that "everybody can have the American dream". Just more of the same old same. "Hi! We're from the gubmint and we're here to hep YOU!"

Grizz
03-14-2008, 10:08 AM
You're quite wrong but I don't have time to adequately respond right now. See ya this afternoon.

preservanation
03-14-2008, 10:47 AM
The notion that Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich is a lie.
This lie has been perpetuated by the left and disseminated by their willing accomplices in the media.

If the Dem Congress allows our tax cuts to expire all of us will get a tax hike, especially the poor who pay no taxes under Bush's cuts.
How will the Dems be able to spin out of that fact?
I don't know, maybe they're betting that people won't notice when their paycheck shrinks.
Probably blame it on Bush somehow, and might even get away with it.
"Seee", they'll say, "those evil republicans are taking your money to kill brown people"
The idiots will believe it and repeat it, and before we know it, it will be "fact"
Marx would be very proud that there are Americans carrying out his tradition.

Elrathin
03-14-2008, 02:31 PM
The notion that Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich is a lie.
This lie has been perpetuated by the left and disseminated by their willing accomplices in the media.

They have helped the rich more than everyone else.

brien
03-14-2008, 07:16 PM
The notion that Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich is a lie.
This lie has been perpetuated by the left and disseminated by their willing accomplices in the media.

They have helped the rich more than everyone else.



Duhhh When you pay more in taxes you benefit more with a tax cut. Oh those evil rich bastards!:unreal:

Grizz
03-14-2008, 09:34 PM
The notion that Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich is a lie.
This lie has been perpetuated by the left and disseminated by their willing accomplices in the media.

The majority of the tax cuts go to those in some serious upper income brackets, not regular folks.

If the Dem Congress allows our tax cuts to expire all of us will get a tax hike, especially the poor who pay no taxes under Bush's cuts.
How will the Dems be able to spin out of that fact?

Since I barely noticed my tax "cut", I doubt my tax "hike" will be all that terrible. And, FYI, the poor pay an awful lot of taxes. Anyone who says otherwise is ignorant of reality.

Probably blame it on Bush somehow, and might even get away with it.
"Seee", they'll say, "those evil republicans are taking your money to kill brown people"

Well, if it's Dem Congress and Dem prez, I don't know how they'll blame that on Bush or Republicans.

4Reaganomics
03-14-2008, 09:48 PM
Bush's tax cuts helped some families that are richer than mine more than it helped my family. I understand this because they pay more in. They should not be punished for producing more than my family, and I am going to work vigorously to get into their position when I am older.

That said, my family sure wasn't complaining come refund time

I don't know about yours

Grizz
03-15-2008, 11:17 AM
Bush's tax cuts helped some families that are richer than mine more than it helped my family. I understand this because they pay more in. They should not be punished for producing more than my family, and I am going to work vigorously to get into their position when I am older.

That said, my family sure wasn't complaining come refund time

I don't know about yours


Let me re-phrase a line for you:

Bush's tax cuts disproportionately helped some families that are richer than mine more than it helped my family.

You work your butt off to earn your salary with a little coming from (maybe) investments or interest income. Maybe you've spent a bundle on college so you could get a good job and you paid a pretty price for that education. You're paying the full tax rate on that salary while someone else whose income come mostly from stock trading pays a far lower rate. Further, through other breaks written into the law, thanks to contributions to members of Congress, the other guy gets even better tax breaks and, percentage-wise, probably takes home more than you do. Sound fair?

bishop
03-15-2008, 02:27 PM
The notion that Bush's tax cuts were only for the rich is a lie.
This lie has been perpetuated by the left and disseminated by their willing accomplices in the media.

If the Dem Congress allows our tax cuts to expire all of us will get a tax hike, especially the poor who pay no taxes under Bush's cuts.
How will the Dems be able to spin out of that fact?
I don't know, maybe they're betting that people won't notice when their paycheck shrinks.
Probably blame it on Bush somehow, and might even get away with it.
"Seee", they'll say, "those evil republicans are taking your money to kill brown people"
The idiots will believe it and repeat it, and before we know it, it will be "fact"
Marx would be very proud that there are Americans carrying out his tradition.


here's something else that the idiots don't seem to understand - we never got any tax cuts. what we got was an extended line of credit, financed by foreign governments (largely china and japan). repaying the debt, including interest, is a burden shared by all.

but alas, if the idiots haven't been able to realize this reality by now, they never will.. let's just pile on some more debt and call them "economic stimulus" packages while we're at it and the idiots will rejoice.