Mark to Market in regards to these CMO's and CDO's is difficult in that no one truly knows the value of the underlying assets as its such a jumbled mix of mortgages, credit cards, auto loans, student loans etc. This stew is impossible to value at this point and until they do, mark to market is placing an undue burden on most companies as no one in the world is willing to create a market. I don't think it should be eliminated as i've always been one for more transparancy and if it wasn't around whose to say we wouldn't have lent even more and more and blown credit up even more. Bank Nationalization: We pretty much already own the banks. We've injected so much capital there and lowered rates which failed in Japan and we don't want to create zombie banks that aren't alive or dead. I think Sweeden's approach or something like it is better in that we seize the banks, clean them up and IPO them back to the public. They still work as banks in the interim as I sure don't want government (Hud-type) policy controlling the banks. Take the assets in an RTC type setup and hold them till maturity and own preferred convertible debt from the IPO'd banks as well as the proceeds from the sale to offset the losses. That wouldn't cost that much more with the proceeds and conv. debt than all this stimulus would and it'll get to the heart of the problem.
Where will these 'new' folx come from? I'd bet big money . . that it would still be the same big money folx Rocket River
So what is your point? Avoid selling it to the "big money" people because you think they are the people to blame for all of this? You really don't understand the causes and problems of what's going on, but if your mind is as erratic as your posts are, then I can understand how hard it is for you to grab these concepts.
If the grocery store down the street goes out of business tomorrow (not entirely analogous, but close enough), the grocery store owners/investors will be wiped out, and its creditors will force the auctioning off of the grocery store's assets. If, during bankruptcy proceedings, one of the former owners (who was wiped out when the store went under) decides to pay up to buy the old cash registers, there's not a problem there. If someone else unaffiliated with the original business buys the cash registers instead, no problem there either. With the FDIC and the two or so banks that go under each week, that's what happens. (See last night's 60 Minutes piece for a good report on an FDIC team taking over a failed bank.) FDIC comes into a failed bank in the dead of night, and chop-shop like, sells off the bank or its parts to other banks, ASAP. The bank stays open for business the whole time, and any depositor with less than $250,000 in the failed bank doesn't have a thing to worry about. There would be a problem finding investors to take over the humongous chunks of the biggest banks (e.g. Citi, BofA) if/once they are "nationalized," but it's the same theory writ large.
Here is the CBS report from last night on the nationalization of a small chain of banks in Illinois: <embed src="http://www.cbs.com/thunder/swf/rcpHolderCbs-prod.swf" width="370" height="361"allowFullScreen="true" FlashVars="link=http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4852631n&releaseURL=http://release.theplatform.com/content.select?pid=95zzuJlvqknFOJb096D3FAayBQcXjeX8&partner=newsembed&autoPlayVid=false&prevImg=http://thumbnails.cbsig.net/CBS_Production_News/1008/126/60_banks_308_480x360.jpg" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer" />
The new folx will be anyone who wants to start a new bank. Like government, some of the folx might be the same, some of them will be different. Who knows. It's better than just giving the old folx bailout money, which is what we are doing now.
voting yes to this type of thing is a dangerous mindset. do you really want the government controlling all aspects of your fiances? well they just about are which would make the founders roll in their graves. I find it amazing that so many of you have been brainwashed to going against every founding principle this country was created under. this slow errosion of our freedoms will have us waking up one morning wondering "what the hell happend" as we wait in the bread line for our soma and rations. but we will have the government to take care of us then right? you do see what they have done with the social insecurity panzi scheme? yes its bankrupt and now you want to give them more control over services and let them further control your money? go do some research on the presidents who sat before the ramshackle early 1900's when the fed was pushed through along with the income tax ammendment. they all are adomentaly against a federal banking system for fear of corruption and thievrey.
Dude, if you read the thread you would realize that by nationalization it doesnt mean the government running the banking industry indefinitely. It wiping out shareholders, getting rid of management (how is that for personal accountability) and then cleaning up the banks and selling them back to the private sector. Is giving failing banks and their management trillions in bailout dollars not an erosion of our freedom?
For a temeraly point in time it should be a consideration to Nationlize our banking system to one lower intrest rates to a moderate amount for old loans to be able to be paid also to basically get the banks out of debt until they return to being successful. I know we all fear the scary word socialismn but our government is desing that we can make the switch to different styles as the timing seeks fit therefore we don't get caught up into being in a failng system of government without allowing ourselves to stubornty consisitally fail. When banks are bank in the black we can swicht back to the free market ideas. It also makes sure our money don't dissapear like durin the great depression.
No and as a matter of fact the Federal Reserve Bank should be disbanded immediately... "It has always been denied by the republican party in this country, that the Constitution had given the power of incorporation to Congress. On the establishment of the Bank of the United States, this was the great ground on which that establishment was combated; and the party prevailing supported it only on the argument of its being an incident to the power given them for raising money." --Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Maese, 1809. ME 12:231
