Just stop paying your mortgage

[Arraya]

PR-No doubt that every American that took part was in some way, shape or form and to some degree is culpable. That I think is indisputable and you won’t get an argument from me. And we will pay collectively for everybody’s sins. My point is that we had mechanisms in place and supposedly responsible people in charge. Not people that feed and encourage peoples greed and fill their head full of fairy tails such as home prices never go down and all that other nonsense. It was a mass delusion put forth by the financial industry and Fed, amplified by the media and allowed to happen by certain politicians, people in the financial industry and orchestrated by the FED , IMO.

What I am specifically looking at is who benefited the most. Hank Paulson made about 700 million while in charge of Goldman Sachs. We sent China 700-800 billion a year during boom times. With that fake wealth the built up their manufacturing base and stockpiled commodities as we hollowed out our economy. In other words turned it into something real when Americans went shopping. Heck, even after tragedy GWB was telling us to send money overseas.

I think maybe we just have been a little naive to call our leaders incompetent, that narrative also makes us feel superior because many of us saw this coming and we get to say “I told you so, look at me I’m smarter than Alan Greenspan”. But just maybe they are extremely competently but they just have different goals than us. Or maybe I’m wrong and Paulson’s trips to China and China being the inadvertent biggest beneficiary of the housing bubble is just coincidence. Either way I think it is something to ponder.

[fun4vnay2]

I wish I have bought a house few years back; be financially irresponsible; risk taker and be rewarded by banks/govt..

I am sure Banks/Govt would definitely go to great lengths to keep existing homeowners stay put

If you become too analytical in everything you do, you get screwed..

[fun4vnay2]

I wish I have bought a house few years back; be financially irresponsible; risk taker and be rewarded by banks/govt..

I am sure Banks/Govt would definitely go to great lengths to keep existing homeowners stay put

If you become too analytical in everything you do, you get screwed..

[fun4vnay2]

I wish I have bought a house few years back; be financially irresponsible; risk taker and be rewarded by banks/govt..

I am sure Banks/Govt would definitely go to great lengths to keep existing homeowners stay put

If you become too analytical in everything you do, you get screwed..

[fun4vnay2]

I wish I have bought a house few years back; be financially irresponsible; risk taker and be rewarded by banks/govt..

I am sure Banks/Govt would definitely go to great lengths to keep existing homeowners stay put

If you become too analytical in everything you do, you get screwed..

[fun4vnay2]

I wish I have bought a house few years back; be financially irresponsible; risk taker and be rewarded by banks/govt..

I am sure Banks/Govt would definitely go to great lengths to keep existing homeowners stay put

If you become too analytical in everything you do, you get screwed..

[patientrenter]

arraya and CA Renter, in response to my pointing my finger at the unwashed masses, you both correctly point out that there are supposed to be leaders who save those unwashed masses from their worst vices.

But the problem is that powerful investment bankers and central bankers and regulators really don’t have a lot of power. Maybe some smart people in power saw that a housing/debt bubble needed to be popped in 2005. And maybe some even tried, gingerly at first. But people in positions like Treasury Secretary and Fed Reserve Chairman and so on are cut to shreds by Congress if they threaten populist voters’ interests championed by politicians (regardless of party).

That’s why I think the real root problem is not poor leadership. It’s greedy voters.

Could I be persuaded otherwise? Maybe. For example, a lot of us respect Paul Volcker. But I honestly don’t know if he would have been allowed to cut off Fannie and Freddie, for example, in 2004 or 2005. I just don’t know if our political system permits us to have strong enough economic leadership to proactively avoid these “free lunch” schemes.

And, yes, arraya, most of these people in leadership positions were ‘playing dumb’. They didn’t know if there was a bubble or not, but they knew there was no percentage in questioning it too hard, and there was more gain (money and promotions etc) in going along.

[patientrenter]

arraya and CA Renter, in response to my pointing my finger at the unwashed masses, you both correctly point out that there are supposed to be leaders who save those unwashed masses from their worst vices.

But the problem is that powerful investment bankers and central bankers and regulators really don’t have a lot of power. Maybe some smart people in power saw that a housing/debt bubble needed to be popped in 2005. And maybe some even tried, gingerly at first. But people in positions like Treasury Secretary and Fed Reserve Chairman and so on are cut to shreds by Congress if they threaten populist voters’ interests championed by politicians (regardless of party).

That’s why I think the real root problem is not poor leadership. It’s greedy voters.

Could I be persuaded otherwise? Maybe. For example, a lot of us respect Paul Volcker. But I honestly don’t know if he would have been allowed to cut off Fannie and Freddie, for example, in 2004 or 2005. I just don’t know if our political system permits us to have strong enough economic leadership to proactively avoid these “free lunch” schemes.

And, yes, arraya, most of these people in leadership positions were ‘playing dumb’. They didn’t know if there was a bubble or not, but they knew there was no percentage in questioning it too hard, and there was more gain (money and promotions etc) in going along.

[patientrenter]

arraya and CA Renter, in response to my pointing my finger at the unwashed masses, you both correctly point out that there are supposed to be leaders who save those unwashed masses from their worst vices.

But the problem is that powerful investment bankers and central bankers and regulators really don’t have a lot of power. Maybe some smart people in power saw that a housing/debt bubble needed to be popped in 2005. And maybe some even tried, gingerly at first. But people in positions like Treasury Secretary and Fed Reserve Chairman and so on are cut to shreds by Congress if they threaten populist voters’ interests championed by politicians (regardless of party).

That’s why I think the real root problem is not poor leadership. It’s greedy voters.

Could I be persuaded otherwise? Maybe. For example, a lot of us respect Paul Volcker. But I honestly don’t know if he would have been allowed to cut off Fannie and Freddie, for example, in 2004 or 2005. I just don’t know if our political system permits us to have strong enough economic leadership to proactively avoid these “free lunch” schemes.

And, yes, arraya, most of these people in leadership positions were ‘playing dumb’. They didn’t know if there was a bubble or not, but they knew there was no percentage in questioning it too hard, and there was more gain (money and promotions etc) in going along.

[patientrenter]

arraya and CA Renter, in response to my pointing my finger at the unwashed masses, you both correctly point out that there are supposed to be leaders who save those unwashed masses from their worst vices.

But the problem is that powerful investment bankers and central bankers and regulators really don’t have a lot of power. Maybe some smart people in power saw that a housing/debt bubble needed to be popped in 2005. And maybe some even tried, gingerly at first. But people in positions like Treasury Secretary and Fed Reserve Chairman and so on are cut to shreds by Congress if they threaten populist voters’ interests championed by politicians (regardless of party).

That’s why I think the real root problem is not poor leadership. It’s greedy voters.

Could I be persuaded otherwise? Maybe. For example, a lot of us respect Paul Volcker. But I honestly don’t know if he would have been allowed to cut off Fannie and Freddie, for example, in 2004 or 2005. I just don’t know if our political system permits us to have strong enough economic leadership to proactively avoid these “free lunch” schemes.

And, yes, arraya, most of these people in leadership positions were ‘playing dumb’. They didn’t know if there was a bubble or not, but they knew there was no percentage in questioning it too hard, and there was more gain (money and promotions etc) in going along.

[patientrenter]

arraya and CA Renter, in response to my pointing my finger at the unwashed masses, you both correctly point out that there are supposed to be leaders who save those unwashed masses from their worst vices.

But the problem is that powerful investment bankers and central bankers and regulators really don’t have a lot of power. Maybe some smart people in power saw that a housing/debt bubble needed to be popped in 2005. And maybe some even tried, gingerly at first. But people in positions like Treasury Secretary and Fed Reserve Chairman and so on are cut to shreds by Congress if they threaten populist voters’ interests championed by politicians (regardless of party).

That’s why I think the real root problem is not poor leadership. It’s greedy voters.

Could I be persuaded otherwise? Maybe. For example, a lot of us respect Paul Volcker. But I honestly don’t know if he would have been allowed to cut off Fannie and Freddie, for example, in 2004 or 2005. I just don’t know if our political system permits us to have strong enough economic leadership to proactively avoid these “free lunch” schemes.

And, yes, arraya, most of these people in leadership positions were ‘playing dumb’. They didn’t know if there was a bubble or not, but they knew there was no percentage in questioning it too hard, and there was more gain (money and promotions etc) in going along.

[Arraya]

Failure is in the design.

http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/

The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.

The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty.

[Arraya]

Failure is in the design.

http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/

The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.

The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty.

[Arraya]

Failure is in the design.

http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/

The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.

The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty.

[Arraya]

Failure is in the design.

http://www.augustreview.com/news_commentary/global_banking/the_twilight_of_irredeemable_debt_2008050890/

The marginal productivity of debt is an unimaginative taskmaster. It insists that new debt be justified by a minimum increase in the GDP. Otherwise capital destruction follows, a most vicious process. At first, there are no signs of trouble. If anything the picture looks rosier than ever. But the seeds of destruction inevitably, if invisibly, have sprouted and will at one point paralyze further growth and production. To deny this is tantamount to denying the most fundamental law of the universe: the Law of Conservation of Energy and Matter.

The captains of the banking system in effect deny and defy that basic law. They are leading a blind crowd of mesmerized people to the brink where momentum may sweep most of them into the abyss to their financial destruction. Yet not one university in the world has issued a warning, and not one court of justice allowed indictments to be heard from individuals and institutions charging that the issuance of irredeemable debt is a crude form of fraud, calling for the punishment of the swindlers issuing it, whether they are in the Treasury or in the central bank. The behavior of universities and courts in this regard could not be more reprehensible. Rather than acting to protect the weak, they act to cover up plundering by the mighty.

[Author]

Posts