[TheBreeze]

I always hit my numbers. And I prefer to regulate my mood the old-fashioned way: with booze and cigarettes.

[TheBreeze]

I always hit my numbers. And I prefer to regulate my mood the old-fashioned way: with booze and cigarettes.

[TheBreeze]

I always hit my numbers. And I prefer to regulate my mood the old-fashioned way: with booze and cigarettes.

[TheBreeze]

I always hit my numbers. And I prefer to regulate my mood the old-fashioned way: with booze and cigarettes.

[TheBreeze]

I always hit my numbers. And I prefer to regulate my mood the old-fashioned way: with booze and cigarettes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=davelj]

(I’m sorry, but in what post did I suggest that the govt. should buy MBSs/CDOS, etc.? I recall saying that certain of these securities might turn out to be good investments from current prices, but I have no recollection whatsoever of suggesting that the govt. should buy these securities. Please point me to the post where I stated otherwise.)[/quote]

Now, that $2 trillion in mortgage-related losses that we, the good taxpayers of the US, are going to eat will largely consist of principal reductions given to homeowners in order to lower their mortgage payments. Yes, it’s unfair. I know. But it’s going to happen, so stop whining about it. Just accept it. Life ain’t fair. Move on. Also, if it’s any consolation, it will help us avoid a depression which would be even more painful than the ultimate bill associated with bailing out these irresponsible fucksticks. The wrinkle in the principal reduction plans will be that the execution is complicated and it’s going to take longer than the our Great Leaders think. But, it will get done in some sloppy form or fashion.

The vast majority of the TARP money (ex the money that goes to the auto companies) and the various acronym-challenged “facilities” will be money good. That is, we’ll get back most of that money (forget about the interest), but we’ll probably take a hit. With a few exceptions, the collateral for this stuff is pretty good (albeit not perfect). The really big losses to the govt (us) will be through Fannie and Freddie in the residential sector.

http://piggington.com/some_math_on_how_we039re_going_to_get_out_of_this_mess

Here you are advocating that the government buy mortgage-related stuff in order to avoid a depression.

By the way, are you still confident that the “vast majority of TARP money” will be “money good” now that Bank of America and every other large bank is saying that they need another bailout?

[TheBreeze]

[quote=davelj]

(I’m sorry, but in what post did I suggest that the govt. should buy MBSs/CDOS, etc.? I recall saying that certain of these securities might turn out to be good investments from current prices, but I have no recollection whatsoever of suggesting that the govt. should buy these securities. Please point me to the post where I stated otherwise.)[/quote]

Now, that $2 trillion in mortgage-related losses that we, the good taxpayers of the US, are going to eat will largely consist of principal reductions given to homeowners in order to lower their mortgage payments. Yes, it’s unfair. I know. But it’s going to happen, so stop whining about it. Just accept it. Life ain’t fair. Move on. Also, if it’s any consolation, it will help us avoid a depression which would be even more painful than the ultimate bill associated with bailing out these irresponsible fucksticks. The wrinkle in the principal reduction plans will be that the execution is complicated and it’s going to take longer than the our Great Leaders think. But, it will get done in some sloppy form or fashion.

The vast majority of the TARP money (ex the money that goes to the auto companies) and the various acronym-challenged “facilities” will be money good. That is, we’ll get back most of that money (forget about the interest), but we’ll probably take a hit. With a few exceptions, the collateral for this stuff is pretty good (albeit not perfect). The really big losses to the govt (us) will be through Fannie and Freddie in the residential sector.

http://piggington.com/some_math_on_how_we039re_going_to_get_out_of_this_mess

Here you are advocating that the government buy mortgage-related stuff in order to avoid a depression.

By the way, are you still confident that the “vast majority of TARP money” will be “money good” now that Bank of America and every other large bank is saying that they need another bailout?

[TheBreeze]

[quote=davelj]

(I’m sorry, but in what post did I suggest that the govt. should buy MBSs/CDOS, etc.? I recall saying that certain of these securities might turn out to be good investments from current prices, but I have no recollection whatsoever of suggesting that the govt. should buy these securities. Please point me to the post where I stated otherwise.)[/quote]

Now, that $2 trillion in mortgage-related losses that we, the good taxpayers of the US, are going to eat will largely consist of principal reductions given to homeowners in order to lower their mortgage payments. Yes, it’s unfair. I know. But it’s going to happen, so stop whining about it. Just accept it. Life ain’t fair. Move on. Also, if it’s any consolation, it will help us avoid a depression which would be even more painful than the ultimate bill associated with bailing out these irresponsible fucksticks. The wrinkle in the principal reduction plans will be that the execution is complicated and it’s going to take longer than the our Great Leaders think. But, it will get done in some sloppy form or fashion.

The vast majority of the TARP money (ex the money that goes to the auto companies) and the various acronym-challenged “facilities” will be money good. That is, we’ll get back most of that money (forget about the interest), but we’ll probably take a hit. With a few exceptions, the collateral for this stuff is pretty good (albeit not perfect). The really big losses to the govt (us) will be through Fannie and Freddie in the residential sector.

http://piggington.com/some_math_on_how_we039re_going_to_get_out_of_this_mess

Here you are advocating that the government buy mortgage-related stuff in order to avoid a depression.

By the way, are you still confident that the “vast majority of TARP money” will be “money good” now that Bank of America and every other large bank is saying that they need another bailout?

[TheBreeze]

[quote=davelj]

(I’m sorry, but in what post did I suggest that the govt. should buy MBSs/CDOS, etc.? I recall saying that certain of these securities might turn out to be good investments from current prices, but I have no recollection whatsoever of suggesting that the govt. should buy these securities. Please point me to the post where I stated otherwise.)[/quote]

Now, that $2 trillion in mortgage-related losses that we, the good taxpayers of the US, are going to eat will largely consist of principal reductions given to homeowners in order to lower their mortgage payments. Yes, it’s unfair. I know. But it’s going to happen, so stop whining about it. Just accept it. Life ain’t fair. Move on. Also, if it’s any consolation, it will help us avoid a depression which would be even more painful than the ultimate bill associated with bailing out these irresponsible fucksticks. The wrinkle in the principal reduction plans will be that the execution is complicated and it’s going to take longer than the our Great Leaders think. But, it will get done in some sloppy form or fashion.

The vast majority of the TARP money (ex the money that goes to the auto companies) and the various acronym-challenged “facilities” will be money good. That is, we’ll get back most of that money (forget about the interest), but we’ll probably take a hit. With a few exceptions, the collateral for this stuff is pretty good (albeit not perfect). The really big losses to the govt (us) will be through Fannie and Freddie in the residential sector.

http://piggington.com/some_math_on_how_we039re_going_to_get_out_of_this_mess

Here you are advocating that the government buy mortgage-related stuff in order to avoid a depression.

By the way, are you still confident that the “vast majority of TARP money” will be “money good” now that Bank of America and every other large bank is saying that they need another bailout?

[TheBreeze]

[quote=davelj]

(I’m sorry, but in what post did I suggest that the govt. should buy MBSs/CDOS, etc.? I recall saying that certain of these securities might turn out to be good investments from current prices, but I have no recollection whatsoever of suggesting that the govt. should buy these securities. Please point me to the post where I stated otherwise.)[/quote]

Now, that $2 trillion in mortgage-related losses that we, the good taxpayers of the US, are going to eat will largely consist of principal reductions given to homeowners in order to lower their mortgage payments. Yes, it’s unfair. I know. But it’s going to happen, so stop whining about it. Just accept it. Life ain’t fair. Move on. Also, if it’s any consolation, it will help us avoid a depression which would be even more painful than the ultimate bill associated with bailing out these irresponsible fucksticks. The wrinkle in the principal reduction plans will be that the execution is complicated and it’s going to take longer than the our Great Leaders think. But, it will get done in some sloppy form or fashion.

The vast majority of the TARP money (ex the money that goes to the auto companies) and the various acronym-challenged “facilities” will be money good. That is, we’ll get back most of that money (forget about the interest), but we’ll probably take a hit. With a few exceptions, the collateral for this stuff is pretty good (albeit not perfect). The really big losses to the govt (us) will be through Fannie and Freddie in the residential sector.

http://piggington.com/some_math_on_how_we039re_going_to_get_out_of_this_mess

Here you are advocating that the government buy mortgage-related stuff in order to avoid a depression.

By the way, are you still confident that the “vast majority of TARP money” will be “money good” now that Bank of America and every other large bank is saying that they need another bailout?

[TheBreeze]

The Geithner pick is disappointing. Obama wanted Volcker as his first choice, but Volcker declined.

Luckily, Volcker is the head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/beyond-obama—-watch-inner/story.aspx?guid={52C04A66-B335-4EEC-8A66-6985E8FDB3E4}&dist=google

Hopefully Volcker will hold more sway in Obama’s administration than Geithner.

[TheBreeze]

The Geithner pick is disappointing. Obama wanted Volcker as his first choice, but Volcker declined.

Luckily, Volcker is the head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/beyond-obama—-watch-inner/story.aspx?guid={52C04A66-B335-4EEC-8A66-6985E8FDB3E4}&dist=google

Hopefully Volcker will hold more sway in Obama’s administration than Geithner.

[TheBreeze]

The Geithner pick is disappointing. Obama wanted Volcker as his first choice, but Volcker declined.

Luckily, Volcker is the head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/beyond-obama—-watch-inner/story.aspx?guid={52C04A66-B335-4EEC-8A66-6985E8FDB3E4}&dist=google

Hopefully Volcker will hold more sway in Obama’s administration than Geithner.

[TheBreeze]

The Geithner pick is disappointing. Obama wanted Volcker as his first choice, but Volcker declined.

Luckily, Volcker is the head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/beyond-obama—-watch-inner/story.aspx?guid={52C04A66-B335-4EEC-8A66-6985E8FDB3E4}&dist=google

Hopefully Volcker will hold more sway in Obama’s administration than Geithner.

[TheBreeze]

The Geithner pick is disappointing. Obama wanted Volcker as his first choice, but Volcker declined.

Luckily, Volcker is the head of Obama’s Economic Recovery Advisory Board:

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/beyond-obama—-watch-inner/story.aspx?guid={52C04A66-B335-4EEC-8A66-6985E8FDB3E4}&dist=google

Hopefully Volcker will hold more sway in Obama’s administration than Geithner.

[Author]

Posts