You ain’t seen nothing yet!
by AlexinCT
It looks like the very people whose ideological meddling in the banking and financial industry which brought us this nasty economic contraction, one could say a recession, now plan to do more meddling. In fact, they are simply taking the crisis they created and using it to give them even more control of the industry. Not kidding:
Under the plan, expected to be released Wednesday, the government would have new powers to seize key companies—such as insurance giant American International Group Inc.—whose failure jeopardizes the financial system. Currently, the government’s authority to seize companies is mostly limited to banks.
I certainly will sleep better knowing that the politicians that not only encouraged, but forced the bad behavior through their tinkering, now will be expanding their involvement in the financial market. How lucky can we get having such stalwart protectors of us little people? Remember that these are the same idiots, according to VP Biden’s own admissions, that had no clue what they were doing then, had no clue what they were doing with the patronage bill they pretended would stimulate the economy, and still have no clue now.
On Monday, Obama administration officials sketched the outlines of the plan the president is to unveil Wednesday. They said it would seek to reduce gaps in regulatory oversight, rein in the use of mortgage-backed securities and other complex derivatives, reduce incentives for companies to take excessive risk and give the government new power to quickly intervene during any future crises.
“We had a system that proved too unstable, too fragile. . . . Those are things we have to change,” Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Monday at an economic forum in New York.
Notice what is missing? Their role in creating, then propping up, and finally protecting that unstable and fragile system, which they then imploded because bad economic news favors democrats in election years. I am sure things will now only get better, the smart people are in charge, and see no way for this to become a disaster. All the people in the banking and financial industry really need to do, is give more money to democrat campaigns. Too big to fail! I am sure then the government will help them fleece us all even harder, and when the shit hits the fan, again, angrily blame them, with a wink and a thumbs up of course, and do more of the same. This would be a comedy if it wasn’t such a tragic thing for us all.
Cross posted at Wasting time with Alex
Comments
They said it would seek to reduce gaps in regulatory oversight, rein in the use of mortgage-backed securities and other complex derivatives, reduce incentives for companies to take excessive risk and give the government new power to quickly intervene during any future crises.
Yeah - less regulatory oversight - even more loosening of mortgage back securities and derivatives - and adding incentives for financial institutions to take bigger risks would be a way better plan.
Let’s say first thing we do is round up all these conveniently unnamed
and line them up against a wall and pump a slug into their foreheads.very people whose ideological meddling in the banking and financial industry which brought us this nasty economic contraction
Now what Alex?
What’s the move here to set things right? I already know you don’t think the people who wrote or bundled the loans are responsible ‘cause “Hey, they were able to figure a way to do it because those evil libruls left the door open for them – and heck, what would anybody do but run the whole financial system into the ground if given the chance. Those poor bankers and brokers, tricked into fleecing the country like that”
So if tighter regulation of derivatives and stricter loan requirements are not the answer what is?
What is needed is less government interference, not more. Obama is determined to utterly destroy the nation’s economy in order to install a soviet style one.
Yeah - less regulatory oversight - even more loosening of mortgage back securities and derivatives - and adding incentives for financial institutions to take bigger risks would be a way better plan.
The problem with people like you salinger is that you can’t seem to fathom the fact that in the end the oversight you advocate so hard for will be based on rules and monitoring from the same people that caused the crisis we are in now in the first place. Or maybe you actually do, but your political bias and your ingrained and misdirected anger prevents you from getting past that, even when it is detrimental to you. You actually are stupid enough to believe democrats (for that matter any politicians) when they tell you they care about your interests and will look after you. Call me stupid for not seeing any value in letting the guy that just robbed you rewrite the rules and be put in charge of monitoring that the rules are followed.
Based on historical precedent this new regulation will only serve to usher in the next crisis. The very people that are pushing the hardest to be put in charge of writing the new regulations, are the very same architects and defenders of the changes that led us to our current crisis: Franks, Dodd, Obama. You pick the name and you will find them knee deep in that government mandated disaster that caused the housing bubble burst and the subsequent financial implosion. Do I have to again point out that these politicians are the ones that used their power to force and coerce lending institutions to give out risky loans that they would normally never have done on their own. That these crooked politicians then promised to back them up if things went bad with tax payer dollars. That the politicians, as a way to sweeten the deal, then pushed for the creation of securities and a trading market to for these toxic loans, as if they had serious value no less, in order to make the whole mess palatable. And do I finally have to point out how they brutally attacked, by accusing anyone daring to point out their crooked scam of being motivated by racism, any and all comers that tried to warn us about the impending disaster, dismissing requests for regulation that would actually prevent, or at a minimum mitigate the fallout when that criminal scheme these collectivist politicians put together fell apart?
So salinger, please educate me and the other idiots that fail to grasp this bit of collectivist hocus-pocus you so vehemently defend – I can not stress enough times that this will be created by the same people that brought us the crisis in the first place – is the reason that you are so sure that these idiots tinkering with the system will work this time around?
So if tighter regulation of derivatives and stricter loan requirements are not the answer what is?
If the answer was so obvious and simple, pray tell, why didn’t they do this in the first place salinger? In fact, clarify for me why you feel that those that so vehemently defended the status quo, brutally attacking and savaging anyone daring to ask for changes that would have actually made a difference, then, now suddenly will do the right thing. Especially since the bastards have given no indication whatsoever that they learned their lesson and would address the basic underlying problem – their ideological stupidity – in the first place. Instead their answer to their failure, as it seems to be every time they go down in flames, is to rewrite the rules, with an even larger helping of their ideological stupidity, and assure us the results will be different. That’s what I call insanity.
You insult my intelligence by even pretending that what we will get is stricter regulations of security trading and lending. It isn’t either what these crooks really are planning to do, or what we actually will get from these bastards. They are doing nothing of the sort. All they are really going to do is rig the game in such a way that it drastically increases their ability to meddle and force the free market to behave in ways that are completely contrary to the way things go in the real world. Like all collectivist they always seem to think that the solution to them throwing a wrench into the gears of the machine and breaking it is to then throw in the entire tool box to fix it.
It isn’t either what these crooks really are planning to do, or what we actually will get from these bastards.
I love the mind reading abilities of folks on this site.
Nice rant Alex - perfect avoidance of actually answering the question I posed.
What would you suggest be done?
You looking for a coupe in the white house - tanks rolling up to the capital?
What do you think is the right approach? I hear a lot of “But they made it possible...” Kind of like a judge saying. “Well - you did leave your front door unlocked so you do share in the responsibility of the defendant pulling that U-haul up to your front door and emptying out your place. And maybe you did learn a lesson – I see here that you’re planning to install a new deadbolt – but too late. The defendant is free to go and I am putting an injunction against you installing that new lock.”
I’m talking real world, real current circumstances here Alex.
What do you think the next move should be?
I love the mind reading abilities of folks on this site.
And I am starting to wonder about the intelligence of people that make statements like this one you made salinger. Especially after I clearly point out this is not the first time these same people promised to help us, and then proceeded to rake us over the fire. Mind reading is not even close to necessary, when you have over 6 decades of failed promises, trillions of dollars wasted, and crisis after crisis resulting in the same gang of thieves “fixing things”. But hey, I know. Leftists hate facts.
Nice rant Alex - perfect avoidance of actually answering the question I posed.
Rant? Yeah, sure. I didn’t avoid your question in the least: I pointed out it was absolutely without merit, because it bore no relevance on reality. Don’t let that get in the way of your propaganda.
What would you suggest be done?
Haven’t I made that clear already? Let me type slowly: First off, get the same politicians that caused the problem in the first place completely out of the loop. Then roll back the ideological bull masquerading as a good lending practice. That will kill the market for any kind of security trading related to risky loans, because there will be none to speak off. The answer here isn’t more government meddling by collectivists, that’s why and how we got where we are today anyhow, it is less. Go back to the old rules that didn’t force loans to unqualified buyers for political PC reasons, and presto, no more problems. But that’s not a good answer if you are a believer.
You looking for a coupe in the white house - tanks rolling up to the capital?
No, this stuff is the purveyance and fantasy of tyrannical leftist in love with big governments. You know. The ones that bought into any and all of the Marxist religions: communism, socialism, fascism, Nazism. Me, I prefer that the usual crooks in congress, and their leader in the WH, simply get blocked out by angry American citizens tired of their bull, and do not get to implement the disastrous policy changes they are pretending will yield a fix. Then someone with some sense crafts legislation that reverses this idiotic notion that lending institutions should give money to unqualified people for PC ideological reasons, and I think the problem will be gone.
I’m talking real world, real current circumstances here Alex.
Does not get more real than what I told you above. Once there isn’t a law forcing bad lending, there aught not be any more of the shenaningans tied to that which created our crisis. Of course, this doesn’t fit in well with collectivists and the need to expand the power of government. To help the people of course…
do not get to implement the disastrous policy changes they are pretending will yield a fix.
I haven’t got a chance to read the 80 some page white paper on this - I take it you have and have specific points to make about specific proposals that will not work? See that would be answering my question as if you were in the real world.
I think closing gaps in regulation is a good start. I spent a couple decades doing root cause anlysis and problem prevention in a manufacturing enviroment. I can tell you no matter how well you plan (ppap)things can still go wrong.
Your logic states that once an action renders unpredicted results the people involved can never learn from their mistakes.
I think you just like to say collectivism.
I haven’t got a chance to read the 80 some page white paper on this - I take it you have and have specific points to make about specific proposals that will not work? See that would be answering my question as if you were in the real world.
Learn to Google. There is a preponderance of evidence of failure after failure by these government meddlers trying to “fix” things that’s easy to find and spans decades of blunders. There is a reason they have an 80 page paper, that in the end basically says nothing more than that the Obama Administration and Congress hate the private sector, and that they think they are the only ones that can direct it properly (because the market is unfair and all that jazz).
I think closing gaps in regulation is a good start. I spent a couple decades doing root cause anlysis and problem prevention in a manufacturing enviroment. I can tell you no matter how well you plan (ppap)things can still go wrong.
The easy and fast way to close the “gap” is to stop the ideologically driven push to force lenders to do things that are doomed to failure. As someone used to some analysis of my own, I have always concluded that the best solutions involve simplicity (KISS). Trying to plan for every eventuality is impossible. You plan as best as you can and set up contingencies to deal with the unexpected. However, pretending you can manipulate the system better than the real world and that you can throw more bureaucracy at it to fix it, is not just dangerous, it is an indication of megalomania.
But I understand why you need to ignore what I have said and keep coming back to the point that more government meddling would prevent the problems caused by government meddling in the first place, salinger. To steal a quote from someone else:, liberalism is a mental disorder.
Your logic states that once an action renders unpredicted results the people involved can never learn from their mistakes.
Nice try, but not even close. It has nothing to do with unpredictability. In fact it deals with exactly the opposite. My logic is based on decades of observation and almost a century of proof that one must be insane if one contemplates the ridiculous notion that the people that constantly get it wrong will suddenly get it right. Even if by accident. Conversely, people that learn from their mistakes would not be demanding that they, which were the cause of the problem they now purport to have a solution to in the first place, be allowed to fix it with a heavier dose of “more of the same”. When government meddling in the regulation of lending and securities tied to lending, caused the first problem, you can certainly see why some of us would not think “more government meddling” isn’t likely to solve the problem at all.
I think you just like to say collectivism.
That’s OK. I think you are one of those. Guess we are even.
When government meddling in the regulation of lending and securities tied to lending, caused the first problem, you can certainly see why some of us would not think “more government meddling” isn’t likely to solve the problem at all.
Should read as:
When government meddling in the regulation of lending and securities tied to lending, caused the first problem, you can certainly see why some of us would not think “more government meddling” is likely to solve the problem at all.
Conversely, people that learn from their mistakes would not be demanding that they, which were the cause of the problem they now purport to have a solution to in the first place, be allowed to fix it with a heavier dose of “more of the same”.
So they are asking for more loans to be made to people with dubious ability to repay said loans and for further loosening of derivitives and loan bundling?
I doubt that is what is proposed - but if it is - I’d be against it too.
So they are asking for more loans to be made to people with dubious ability to repay said loans and for further loosening of derivitives and loan bundling?
These democrats are proposing more legislation, around the loans and the security trading practices that caused the problem in the first place, not to get rid of them. If you have proof to the contrary I will be more than glad to see it.
The underlying issue that led to the lending crisis is the ideological concept that using the power of government to promote homeownership amongst the disenfranchised warrants more government meddling. As long as government needs to tamper with the system, to encourage/coerce lenders to make loans they would otherwise avoid like the plague, and backs security trading based on these loans, we are guaranteed to see another implosion like this last one. That’s why I definitely do not want their proposed solution.
This is a mirror of the problem with tobacco. The left purports to hate smoking because it is bad. But they don’t ban it. They just regulate it to death and tax the hell out of people. In the mean time the problem persists. It smacks of idiocy.
I doubt that is what is proposed - but if it is - I’d be against it too.
Then you better be against it. These politicians have never said they would do away with the underlying problem. Just change the laws to allow them even more freedom to meddle with what is going on in the private sector, and then whenever they want to. That’s a recipe for disaster squared to me.
These democrats are proposing more legislation, around the loans and the security trading practices that caused the problem in the first place
Here’s where our main disagreement lies. You seem to me to believe that any program to make low income housing available is wrong. You seem to think ANY government “meddling” in housing is in itself a bad thing. Tell that to your grandfather who bought his first home on the GI bill.
I think the program was rampantly abused and that it was the abuse that caused the lion’s share of trouble.
I’m not saying that in this case you may not have a point – but to completely dismiss regulation – or any attempt to fix things, wringing your hands and declaiming that it can never be fixed is pretty fatalistic.
I’m in the process of reading through the white paper – one stipulation – requiring mortgaging originators to hold a portion of their loans seems to be a good idea – and I would think is the sort of rollback you are asking for.
Here’s where our main disagreement lies. You seem to me to believe that any program to make low income housing available is wrong.
No salinger, I am convinced by the evidence that any program that basically goes against the nature of the things like the free market and/or ignores human behavior is doomed to fail. And often fail miserably. The evidence to back me up is massive. Every time these politicians have sold us “a plan” to deal with some perceived disparity or problem, the law of unforeseen (and often foreseen) consequences kicked in and created an even bigger problem.
Practically every “social engineering” pet project has backfired. And when it involved economics, the damage has always been massive. The “war on poverty” has been raging for over 4 decades now. The cost, even when given by those friendly to it, is in the double digit trillions. And, according to the left, we have the same or more poor now. Children having children out of wedlock? We felt sorry for the babies and decided to subsidize their unwed parents. To help them out, you know. Now we wonder why there is such a preponderance of this behavior. They decided that they wanted to “help” people that were not fit to own homes so they rigged the process. To make it palatable they created a monster that eventually imploded. The list goes on and on.
I am guaranteeing you that as long as they continue to try to force unnatural behavior from the market and people, no matter what regulations are in place, that the end result will be another economic bubble burst and subsequent crisis. Even if government completely and totally takes this stuff over, it is doomed. Just go look at how well the usual 2, 3, 5, or 10 year economic plans of every government that thought it would know how to regulate the market better than the market would has worked. Start with the USSR, North Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, China, and so on. Look at how well the post communist collapse and subsequent economic changes in China have served the Chinese people when China adopted parts of the free market. Then study how well the Europeans are doing with their attempts to control the market too. Not that I expect this to dissuade you. For over a century now supposedly smart people have tried to make this stuff work, and every single time it has failed, in the short or long term. I do not get why anyone still believes that the problem with this ideology is that the “right people” haven’t had a crack at it yet.
You seem to think ANY government “meddling” in housing is in itself a bad thing.
Anyway, thanks for admitting, directly or indirectly, that I am right when I point out that all we are going to get is more of the same bull that led us to this crisis. I expect you to be just as surprised when the next crisis rolls around, and your 401K is again hit hard, and for you to again lay blame everywhere but where it belongs. I am sure you will blame the evil capitalists again instead of the usual marxists that are conditioned to ignore the real world, no matter how often it bitchslaps them silly.
Tell that to your grandfather who bought his first home on the GI bill.
That you compare the GI Bill, where government gave special grants that worked fine in the market system, to a program by the government that had to rig the game against the market, more than proves my point.
Next entry: Will They "Guess Wrong" Again?
Previous entry: Talk about a royal shafting...
Who's Logged In
Total Members: 7041
Total Logged in members: 3
Total guests: 69
Total anonymous users: 0
frankie,
noxiousphysicia,
Seattle Outcast,
Capitalism
Search
Search this site with Google
Search will take you to Google.com, which will display results from Right-Thinking and link you back here. Search using pMachineRecent Comments
Government take-overs, green machines, and excuse making for obvious failures
(1 total, Last @ 01:20)
Seattle Outcast: An "electric car" fails on more than just being overpriced and not usable for anything other than short commuting, but the greens conveniently forget to mention that transforming the world's vehicles to require being charged up regularly means that electricity generation capability and distribution infrastructure must be dramatically increased and…
The $8.7 Billion Hole
(4 total, Last @ 10:43)
Ed Kline: There’s a part of me that thinks we should still keep trying to fix these countries. But there’s a growing part that thinks this would be just throwing good money after bad. The world will make you a libertarian yet Hal.
Calculate the impact of Congress letting the Bush tax cuts expire..
(10 total, Last @ 08:46)
Seattle Outcast: What about the vermin sure to co inhabit the place with muirgeo1? Surly if you could overcome your allergy for the plywood shack you would then have to deal with that too? Would a .45 auto be overkill for shooting vermin? On second thought, I'll just torch the place and…
Calculate the impact of Congress letting the Bush tax cuts expire..
(10 total, Last @ 07:52)
AlexinCT: I know “the wealthy” make for great rhetorical fodder on the campaign trail, but I really would like to see someone runningn for election acknowledge that these evil greedy rich elite are actually also the ones who take the business risks required to real create jobs. Every time I hear…
Calculate the impact of Congress letting the Bush tax cuts expire..
(10 total, Last @ 07:25)
Seattle Outcast: Why not stay at muirgeo’s? He’s got a vacation home :) I'm allergic to cheap plywood shacks...
Last 30 Comments
does this surprise anyone, I figured they would wait till the end of the government fiscal year and declare the stimulus a insufficient then try for more pork sorry stimulus.