Eh? Sellers are downward pressure.
They just had a good story about this on This American Life. They explained that in a regular short sale, you’re actually borrowing the shares from someone else (for a fee) to sell, and you return them when you buy them back. That makes sense to me.
A naked short sale is when you short a stock without bothering to borrow it first. It’s not quite kosher, but it happens due to slack and non-enforcement in the transfer process. As to who thinks it’s a good idea, pretty much nobody.
I’m sure somebody here knows more about all this than I do.
But you already have! Certainly, the civic mindedness of these companies compeled them to offer financial support to the political party that most embodies the free entreprenuerial spirit that fosters such a climate of bold, innovative creativity! And what political party has worked tirelessly to ensure that the snares of needless regulation are stifled, who has worked harder to keep the vigor of our free market system safe from such petty interference?
And yet, where is the gratitude? Where?
Contrary to your snark, financial services companies spread the joy among politicians of all stripes.
Correct me if I am wrong, but couldn’t the feds have rescued the corporate giants by bailing out the people who are defaulting on their mortgages? These people could have kept their houses, the banks would not be hurting as fewer would be defaulting on their loans, and everybody would be happy, yes? I mean if we are going to bail out those that made bad risks, why not the little guy instead of big private corporations? Is the government hoping that the bailout will trickle down?
No, it’s just that would have cost much, much more money. The government isn’t guarranteeing every nickel and dime. It’s backing the financial services companies so they can meet their obligations. Hopefully, they wil recover and can wipe the bad debt of the books in sunnier economic times. It’s kind of like bank runs. They bak may well be able to cover the loss in the long run. If everyone withdraws in the short, or for another reason it has to pay its debts back NOW, then it can’t raise long-term cash.
Of course, this is over-simplified, since we’re talking about very complex and weird securities rather than simple deposits here, but that’s the gist.
These bailouts will do more than delay the inevitable. It won’t work. This is just printing more magic money that does nothing to help the underlying problems. Over extended credit, inflated housing prices, a keep up with the Jones even when I cannot afford it mentality.
Fucking politicians think to solve anything throw money at it.
America needs to grab its collective cajones and hunker down, the storm will come we can delay it, but it has to happen before we can recover. And it doesn’t have to be a Great Depression just a Depression would do, but if we keep using big brother in ways that not even big brother can afford soon his pockets will be even emptier and when the shit hits he will be broke.
The fed did it with your money. The money gurus are saying there has to be huge tax increases to pay for about 2 trillion bucks in bailouts. So you are rescuing them. That should make you feel better.
There are still; about 5 million homes in foreclosure. They will take the banks down again if they are not addressed. The people have to stay in their homes and make payments or this whole dog and pony show is about nothing.
Frank Raines (CEO of Freddie Mac, 1999-2004, when it was taking on all the shit loans) certainly has Obama’s gratitude, being rewarded as a financial advisor.
Go Obama! Lets run the entire country like Freddie Mac!
Fuck that, if they cannot afford the home find a nice rental. The only way the housing market will recover is when the artificially high prices go away. And if you have a glut of homes on the market the price will get in line with the base price.
You know how many tens of thousands if not millions of people would be better of renting? If it wasn’t for that stupid bullshit “American Dream” pressure we would not be in this shit. Renting is almost looked on like being a pauper or something when in reality if you’re paying a mortgage you can be renting with that same money and end up on the winning end of life.
What about credit card debtors? Should we reach into our pocket and bail them out too? How about auto loans? You draw the line I want to know where exactly it is.
If you have a bad interest rate, sucks but it happens deal with it, if “liar loan” describes you, tough shit. I can see some call for holding the interest rate on the loans steady, but to bailout even more with money we do not have is utter stupidity. Just as stupid as the rest of these stupid bailouts. We have the FDIC that should be the extent of our bailouts when the banks fail the people with the money in it don’t.
If you lose your job, and the bank takes back your home, that is sad. And believe me if it is happening to someone on here, or IRL and I could help I would.
Charity is fine, and helping when we can is also fine, but the government just cannot help everyone we do not have the money.
Gah eventually other nations will have to stop buying out debt. :smack:
Soak the rich, baby. That’s how we get it back.
I hope you’re fucking kidding? Considering Mr.RemoveRegulation Gramm is McCain’s economical adviser.
Trying to assign blame to either party is ludicrous both parties should share the nations scorn.
Personally I think both candidates are ignorant when it comes to the economy, judging by the remarks they have made since this happened anyway. What was that, a problem somewhere? Lets throw money at it, that will fix it!
So Rains visits Obama headquarters and talks to an underling for an hour, never meets with Obama, and suddenly he’s his financial advisor? It’s total bullshit. You need to get your news from somewhere besides Fox or Worldnet Daily, or at least stop printing lies here.
But Robert Rubin is an adviser to him, and he is not the least bit shady. :dubious:
I understand calling him out, the poster above did too, but the matter remains neither party is above the fray.
Go back to France, commie!
-Joe
I guess you would include the Washington Post in that list as well?
Reading an article in USA Today this week, they mentioned that during the Chrysler
bail out, the US did get stock. Once they paid the loan back, the government actually made money on the deal.
And in the case of Chrysler, the government got the tax revenues from the workers who still had their high paying jobs, as well as the stock. Had Chrysler gone tits up, its quite possible that those workers wouldn’t have been working for some time, thus not paying taxes, and that when they did find employment, it would have been at a much lower rate of pay.
No one should be surprised at the government doing bailouts. For one reason, what politician is going to have the cojones to stand up and say that they were responsible for the loss of hundreds of thousands (or even millions) of jobs? Additionally, we need to keep certain companies afloat for reasons of national security. Sure, the taxpayers would save lots of money if we had the Chinese build our weapon systems, but I don’t think that would a very good idea.
Would you care to link to the article or just expect us to believe whatever you have to say?
By the way, Raines himself denies it.