OT – Inside Obama’s “Tax Cut” Can you say Redistribution!

[TheBreeze]

[quote=gandalf]

I’m not supporting “No Banker Left Behind”. I feel incredibly conflicted and am morally disgusted with the bailout. Just saying it’s not an easy issue, and hard to paint in partisan terms — Dems did this, Reps did that, etc. These are not ordinary times.

If it matters, I’m absolutely for Bailout version 2.0 over version 1.0, the “European Version”. US Govt should receive equity in troubled banks with the opportunity to liquidate holdings once the markets regain footing. This is slightly less disgusting than relieving banks of bad loans. Both solutions are pretty much awful though.[/quote]

Each bailout is pretty horrible and each is designed to reflate the bubble. It’s likely that each bailout will fail. If the bailouts “succeed”, it willl likely lead to hyperinflation in the long run.

To me, it seems all that’s needed is some full-reserve banks to deal with short-term business transactions. I believe CA Renter made this suggestion the other day. There’s no reason the taxpayer should be on the hook to fund the profits generated from businesses “sophisticated cash-management techniques”.

[gandalf]

Yeah, I agree. For $2T dollars, seems like US Govt could have established a national business/retail “bank of last resort”, no interest but guaranteed transactions, letters of credit, etc. Sophisticated cash management isn’t the problem, it’s what the banks and IBs did with the cash while they were supposed to be ‘holding’ it. They lost it.

[gandalf]

Yeah, I agree. For $2T dollars, seems like US Govt could have established a national business/retail “bank of last resort”, no interest but guaranteed transactions, letters of credit, etc. Sophisticated cash management isn’t the problem, it’s what the banks and IBs did with the cash while they were supposed to be ‘holding’ it. They lost it.

[gandalf]

Yeah, I agree. For $2T dollars, seems like US Govt could have established a national business/retail “bank of last resort”, no interest but guaranteed transactions, letters of credit, etc. Sophisticated cash management isn’t the problem, it’s what the banks and IBs did with the cash while they were supposed to be ‘holding’ it. They lost it.

[gandalf]

Yeah, I agree. For $2T dollars, seems like US Govt could have established a national business/retail “bank of last resort”, no interest but guaranteed transactions, letters of credit, etc. Sophisticated cash management isn’t the problem, it’s what the banks and IBs did with the cash while they were supposed to be ‘holding’ it. They lost it.

[gandalf]

Yeah, I agree. For $2T dollars, seems like US Govt could have established a national business/retail “bank of last resort”, no interest but guaranteed transactions, letters of credit, etc. Sophisticated cash management isn’t the problem, it’s what the banks and IBs did with the cash while they were supposed to be ‘holding’ it. They lost it.

[an]

gandalf, I totally agree with you that it’s not black and white and that there are a lot of innocent bystander getting hit. But instead of bailing out these big banks, why not just funnel the $ into the credit unions and local banks to make sure innocent bystanders are still getting their credit and let these big bank fail if they screwed up? I’m no economist, so I don’t know what would be the best solution for this, but I just feel like the government are constantly trying to stop a bubble from crashing, which then cause an even bigger bubble. If Greenspan would have let the .com crash, we probably wouldn’t have the RE/credit bubble we have today.

[quote=TheBreeze]
Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.
[/quote]
BTW, I’m not voting for Ron Paul, since like you said, he’s not on the ballot. But I will be voting for Bob Barr.

[an]

gandalf, I totally agree with you that it’s not black and white and that there are a lot of innocent bystander getting hit. But instead of bailing out these big banks, why not just funnel the $ into the credit unions and local banks to make sure innocent bystanders are still getting their credit and let these big bank fail if they screwed up? I’m no economist, so I don’t know what would be the best solution for this, but I just feel like the government are constantly trying to stop a bubble from crashing, which then cause an even bigger bubble. If Greenspan would have let the .com crash, we probably wouldn’t have the RE/credit bubble we have today.

[quote=TheBreeze]
Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.
[/quote]
BTW, I’m not voting for Ron Paul, since like you said, he’s not on the ballot. But I will be voting for Bob Barr.

[an]

gandalf, I totally agree with you that it’s not black and white and that there are a lot of innocent bystander getting hit. But instead of bailing out these big banks, why not just funnel the $ into the credit unions and local banks to make sure innocent bystanders are still getting their credit and let these big bank fail if they screwed up? I’m no economist, so I don’t know what would be the best solution for this, but I just feel like the government are constantly trying to stop a bubble from crashing, which then cause an even bigger bubble. If Greenspan would have let the .com crash, we probably wouldn’t have the RE/credit bubble we have today.

[quote=TheBreeze]
Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.
[/quote]
BTW, I’m not voting for Ron Paul, since like you said, he’s not on the ballot. But I will be voting for Bob Barr.

[an]

gandalf, I totally agree with you that it’s not black and white and that there are a lot of innocent bystander getting hit. But instead of bailing out these big banks, why not just funnel the $ into the credit unions and local banks to make sure innocent bystanders are still getting their credit and let these big bank fail if they screwed up? I’m no economist, so I don’t know what would be the best solution for this, but I just feel like the government are constantly trying to stop a bubble from crashing, which then cause an even bigger bubble. If Greenspan would have let the .com crash, we probably wouldn’t have the RE/credit bubble we have today.

[quote=TheBreeze]
Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.
[/quote]
BTW, I’m not voting for Ron Paul, since like you said, he’s not on the ballot. But I will be voting for Bob Barr.

[an]

gandalf, I totally agree with you that it’s not black and white and that there are a lot of innocent bystander getting hit. But instead of bailing out these big banks, why not just funnel the $ into the credit unions and local banks to make sure innocent bystanders are still getting their credit and let these big bank fail if they screwed up? I’m no economist, so I don’t know what would be the best solution for this, but I just feel like the government are constantly trying to stop a bubble from crashing, which then cause an even bigger bubble. If Greenspan would have let the .com crash, we probably wouldn’t have the RE/credit bubble we have today.

[quote=TheBreeze]
Good point. Ron Paul does seem to have the most economically sensible policies. It’s too bad he’s not on the ballot in California. I may yet vote for Bob Barr as Ron Paul’s proxy. I will be voting against Democratic Representative Susan A. Davis because she voted for the bailout.
[/quote]
BTW, I’m not voting for Ron Paul, since like you said, he’s not on the ballot. But I will be voting for Bob Barr.

[Author]

Posts