BIG NEWS: Barney Frank says Treasury has CAVED on equity shares! (We are now officially socialist)

Barney Franks and Chris Dodd wanted the US to be able to take equity shares (stock ownership) in bail-out banks, rather than debt-only.

That makes it somewhat likelier the US will actually make some money of the bail-out works.

Moving in the wires on CNBC: Frank announces Treasury has AGREED to allow equity holding in bail-out fund.

That is a BIG deal

Also says fund may be less than 700 Billion.

After firing and indicting the entire Chimp maladministration.

Hawkeye-X

that 700B doesn't include the $200B for Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac, $85B for AIG...and the list goes on and on.

Market bailout proposal= 700 billion
which does NOT include the below already promised bailouts:

AIG= 85billion

Bear Stearns-JP Morgan Chase merger= 29 billion

Fannie/Freddie = 25 billion

Total= 839 billion

source: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/21/business/21qanda.html?em

**********************************************************************************************

USA GDP= around 13 trillion as of 2006 ( these figures are suspected of being fudged by Gov't)
(what we produce )


USA debt before bailout ( as of today ) $9,727,009,619,894.34

increases an average of $1.80 billion per day since September 28, 2007!


The estimated population of the United States is 304,755,513
so each citizen's share of this debt is $31,664.50. ( rising every day )


source: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np

My head hurts real bad now.

other than the US are having to bare. An example being the UK and the effectively enforced nationalisation of the Northern Rock Bank. There is no estimate for the widely repeated call for other Finance nations to repeat a bail out and those banks operating in Countries that do not can call on Uncle Sam.

This represents protectionism and illegal trading activities, which if it had been carried out in any other sector would have had the wrath of the WTO.

This is giving in to blackmail not rescuing the economy. Banks are refusing to sell loans. It is how they make money. It would be like bailing out McDonalds if they decided to stop making burgers.

This is the same protectionism that allows food mountains to grow, while causing dumping (as donations) and imposing tariffs on African food. For ages we are told Free Trade, for jobs ordinary people work in is essential. So the car worker in America must compete with the car worker in Taiwan, and the most efficient wins. FOr some reason this does not apply to money, the most mobile and flexible of commodities, which is after all just a medium of exchange and has no intrinsic value itself.

There was no money to "protect" miners, there was no money to "protect" factories or steel workers. Other Countries could provide a more efficient service at a lower cost. Miners in Western economies have had to compete with cheap coal from South Africa for may years. Inefficient mines closed. We have now reached that point with the money market. They resold worthless bits of paper based on resales of debt that could never be enforced by the last person in the chain. Now the bits of paper have got back to the last person in the chain and the banks want to create another fool to pass them to. The taxpayer.

These are not real debts. The real economy has not grown significantly. All that has grown is the value of the worthless bits of paper. Recently the Government Statistics Office recalculated growth to be 3.3%, up from 1%. Where that came from is anyones guess and about as believable as house prices were in the States before the property price crash. Something being repeated in the UK>

Do we really need these banks? There are enough alternative currencies and methods of exchange available. $1trillion of US Government debt is already owed to China. This will increase by a further $1.5 trillion. The $1 trillion bail out and the budget deficit. China can not let that debt become worthless.

Allowing property price inflation to sky rocket for short term gain is what has got us to this position. In Europe First time buyers have been waiting for this for ages. Now it is coming the US wants to bail the banks out to stop it happening and wants EU Nations to do the same.

Money is just like any other good. It is there to be bought and sold as a method of exchange. Why is it up to the taxpayer to subsidise companies that do not want to sell their product?

Is protectionism only a good thing when it applies to the jobs Republicans want to do?

We put together shareholder resolutions, kicking the board and management out, and then use our shareholder votes to pass the resolutions.

KEEP UP THE PRESSURE. NO BLANK CHECKS. NO GOLDEN PARACHUTES OR MULTIMILLION DOLLAR PAYDAYS FOR CEOS WHO RIGHTFULLY BELONG IN PRISON.

I am opposed to tying compensation to bail-out participation for a practical reason.

We WANT banks to participate. If executives make more salary for letting their bank go under, rather than participating in a rescue that cuts their salary, it's a disincentive.

Compensation has to be tackled in some other way. IMO.

...of all the executive compensation is a pee-hole in the snow compared to the sums being tossed around. Allowing the issue to queer the deal would be vy. counterproductive.

Something that sticks in your craw, but doesn't add up to shit in real $$$

Hillary isn't running for anything.

And it mentioned limiting compensation and revoking bonuses received under false pretenses. I was just wondering how much of the proposal was getting traction.

To tell you the truth, I feel really lost. I had some bad real-life stuff go down last week and haven't been able to keep up with the news. I'm trying to catch up, but I don't even know where to start. And it doesn't help that my grasp of economic policy is sketchy at best.

Just worded differently. We'll have to see how that goes. Plus he said no compensation---but could switch on that in order to go through with the rest.

Then the stockholders need to fire those executives. That is their right and they should use it. Of course there would probably be criminal liability for any executive found to be deliberately tanking a company for their own profit. But that is the nature of a free market economy. Risk MUST be a two way street.

Personally, I'm against the bailouts as Laissez-faire only works when there is real risk. If we prop up these companies without very stiff penalties, then soon other companies will be following in their footsteps. Greed is good, but only when it it tempered with an honest chance of being burned.

I agree there needs to be some serious penalties and no compensation. We're taking the brunt of this problem.

What would you do? My bet is that most stockholders would press charges and get the bastard of of that position ASAP.

Or the stick it to them point whichever

then yes, that's what we want.

Maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way, but that's my first reaction.

The New Deal was not fascist, for instance.

"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini

but not to help individuals in the working and middle classes, doesn't this make this more of a fascist move?

Barney Frank's motive is to better protect the tax monies at risk.

If the bail-out happens to work and stock prices go up we get some of the profit.

That's much better than the usual deal where we take on only losses and investors get the profits.

The cat is in terrible health. It desperately needs someone who will care for it properly.

It needs a good home. Something the owner is clearly not providing.

An obese cat is not a laughing matter.

My wife was furious when she saw the photos.

not good....and they have just shortened that cats life.

Any Vets in the house? I mean veternarian

I hope that Dodd and Co. push for more

We can do cool daredevil things like on The Amazing Race.

Dems vs. Repukes

Damn, that's the first time we've won anything since when... the minimum wage increase?

small triumph compared to what the fat cats will get but hey

maybe with some control over their fundamentals, things can slowly be put right

And I just can't hide it...I'm about to lose control and I think I like it...like it...

:rofl:

I have been supporting the bailout, but is a definite improvement. Now all that's needed is ensure that executives don't get any financial deals they're not entitled to.

I'd rather be a secured bondholder than a shareholder - at least I know I'll get my money.

Can't wait for Obama to smack them all down much, much more starting in January.

Where is all that money from the bailout going to actually come from? I'm cornfused. Economics makes my eyes rain!

Guess what? They don't know either! That's why the market dumped today ... everyone is wondering WTF and such

hard earned dollars, (I work for my damn money) into the coffers of Wall Street fat cats who ran their businesses into the ground. This 700bn added to Fannie Mae and AIG make it about a trillion dollars. There are what, 300 million Americans? that's what over $3,000 for every man woman and child in America? And the election is how close? Yeah and people think I need to stop whining... LMAO

bulletin that a source indicated, despite rumors, no deal on equities had been reached.

Guess we wait to see what's true.

Ha! I doubt it.