[patientrenter]

There are only a few key people really driving the bailout bus. They include Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Paulson, and Bernanke. Each of them has made very clear that they will not be satisfied with the bailouts until they make home prices stop falling.

Will the particular programs put in place so far achieve that goal? I don’t know and it’s irrelevant. What matters is whether the govt has the ability, using all its powers now and in the future, to prevent a quick return to historical norms for house prices.

I know which way I’d bet on that.

[patientrenter]

There are only a few key people really driving the bailout bus. They include Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Paulson, and Bernanke. Each of them has made very clear that they will not be satisfied with the bailouts until they make home prices stop falling.

Will the particular programs put in place so far achieve that goal? I don’t know and it’s irrelevant. What matters is whether the govt has the ability, using all its powers now and in the future, to prevent a quick return to historical norms for house prices.

I know which way I’d bet on that.

[patientrenter]

There are only a few key people really driving the bailout bus. They include Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Paulson, and Bernanke. Each of them has made very clear that they will not be satisfied with the bailouts until they make home prices stop falling.

Will the particular programs put in place so far achieve that goal? I don’t know and it’s irrelevant. What matters is whether the govt has the ability, using all its powers now and in the future, to prevent a quick return to historical norms for house prices.

I know which way I’d bet on that.

[patientrenter]

There are only a few key people really driving the bailout bus. They include Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chuck Schumer, Paulson, and Bernanke. Each of them has made very clear that they will not be satisfied with the bailouts until they make home prices stop falling.

Will the particular programs put in place so far achieve that goal? I don’t know and it’s irrelevant. What matters is whether the govt has the ability, using all its powers now and in the future, to prevent a quick return to historical norms for house prices.

I know which way I’d bet on that.

[patientrenter]

hipmatt, I usually stay away from political commentary because too many people already spend too much time in political debate, in my view. But you are an intelligent person, so I will just interject to say that professional Republicans and Democrats appear to be united in their goal of expanding government, to provide short-term benefits for their most vocal or powerful constituencies.

Those constituencies are different, but instead of that difference acting as a harness around their delivery of more govt for the interests they represent, it simply leads to laws that spend most of what the money one side wants as long as the other side gets to spend most of what they want too. Just look at how the political class modified the 700bn spending bill that was rejected at first: they added another 150bn in spending. That was what the professional political class calculated was most likely to turn their fellow pols. And it worked.

[patientrenter]

hipmatt, I usually stay away from political commentary because too many people already spend too much time in political debate, in my view. But you are an intelligent person, so I will just interject to say that professional Republicans and Democrats appear to be united in their goal of expanding government, to provide short-term benefits for their most vocal or powerful constituencies.

Those constituencies are different, but instead of that difference acting as a harness around their delivery of more govt for the interests they represent, it simply leads to laws that spend most of what the money one side wants as long as the other side gets to spend most of what they want too. Just look at how the political class modified the 700bn spending bill that was rejected at first: they added another 150bn in spending. That was what the professional political class calculated was most likely to turn their fellow pols. And it worked.

[patientrenter]

hipmatt, I usually stay away from political commentary because too many people already spend too much time in political debate, in my view. But you are an intelligent person, so I will just interject to say that professional Republicans and Democrats appear to be united in their goal of expanding government, to provide short-term benefits for their most vocal or powerful constituencies.

Those constituencies are different, but instead of that difference acting as a harness around their delivery of more govt for the interests they represent, it simply leads to laws that spend most of what the money one side wants as long as the other side gets to spend most of what they want too. Just look at how the political class modified the 700bn spending bill that was rejected at first: they added another 150bn in spending. That was what the professional political class calculated was most likely to turn their fellow pols. And it worked.

[patientrenter]

hipmatt, I usually stay away from political commentary because too many people already spend too much time in political debate, in my view. But you are an intelligent person, so I will just interject to say that professional Republicans and Democrats appear to be united in their goal of expanding government, to provide short-term benefits for their most vocal or powerful constituencies.

Those constituencies are different, but instead of that difference acting as a harness around their delivery of more govt for the interests they represent, it simply leads to laws that spend most of what the money one side wants as long as the other side gets to spend most of what they want too. Just look at how the political class modified the 700bn spending bill that was rejected at first: they added another 150bn in spending. That was what the professional political class calculated was most likely to turn their fellow pols. And it worked.

[patientrenter]

hipmatt, I usually stay away from political commentary because too many people already spend too much time in political debate, in my view. But you are an intelligent person, so I will just interject to say that professional Republicans and Democrats appear to be united in their goal of expanding government, to provide short-term benefits for their most vocal or powerful constituencies.

Those constituencies are different, but instead of that difference acting as a harness around their delivery of more govt for the interests they represent, it simply leads to laws that spend most of what the money one side wants as long as the other side gets to spend most of what they want too. Just look at how the political class modified the 700bn spending bill that was rejected at first: they added another 150bn in spending. That was what the professional political class calculated was most likely to turn their fellow pols. And it worked.

[patientrenter]

I am nervous. Why? Because I find myself agreeing almost completely with a politician who is considered extreme, weird, and an outcast amongst virtually all our nation’s leaders – politicians, media, intellectuals, business people…

Am I living in the wrong country?

[patientrenter]

I am nervous. Why? Because I find myself agreeing almost completely with a politician who is considered extreme, weird, and an outcast amongst virtually all our nation’s leaders – politicians, media, intellectuals, business people…

Am I living in the wrong country?

[patientrenter]

I am nervous. Why? Because I find myself agreeing almost completely with a politician who is considered extreme, weird, and an outcast amongst virtually all our nation’s leaders – politicians, media, intellectuals, business people…

Am I living in the wrong country?

[patientrenter]

I am nervous. Why? Because I find myself agreeing almost completely with a politician who is considered extreme, weird, and an outcast amongst virtually all our nation’s leaders – politicians, media, intellectuals, business people…

Am I living in the wrong country?

[patientrenter]

I am nervous. Why? Because I find myself agreeing almost completely with a politician who is considered extreme, weird, and an outcast amongst virtually all our nation’s leaders – politicians, media, intellectuals, business people…

Am I living in the wrong country?

[patientrenter]

urbanrealtor,

I think a problem a lot of us have with the proposals that are being presented in “do or die” terms is that they involve too little pain for people who gambled and took and enjoyed the upside as long as it lasted. (See vivid neighbor example above.)

We are very suspicious that this is yet another ruse to allow people who need to change their behavior, and who will only do so when forced, to avoid doing so for a little longer. To make us feel secure that the bailout is really needed, we want to see blood. Not enough to kill anyone, but more than a little scratch. Then we’ll know it’s being done because it’s genuinely needed.

And the blood needs to come from the various parties that benefited the most from the wild and crazy party that was allowed to get way out of hand. Let me offer my personal list:

1. Homeowners that borrowed more than the normal, non-peak, price of their homes.

2. Professional middlemen who loaned to the said homeowners. (mtg brokers, mtg bankers, mtg ins writers..)

3. Investors who handed their money over to finance the said mortgages.

4. Regulators and regulatory bodies that they led who claimed that they couldn’t tell when a bubble was a bubble. (Greenie, Fed, Treasury, FHA…)

5. Politicians who protected and encouraged govt subsidies and guarantees for the buying of homes with a high amount of leverage (The godfathers of FNMA, Freddie, FHA: Dodd, Frank, Schumer, and most dems; and the friends of Wall Street Republicans, like Cheney, and most supply-side Republicans like Kemp etc).

It’s 90% of the population, so it’s hard to see it happening, but it’s the “right thing”.

[Author]

Posts