Mandatory bailout?????

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Mandatory bailout?????

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> Mandatory bailout?????

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 9:55:31 AM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

Two sides of bank bailout emerge

An interesting and disturbing aspect of the bank bailouts seems to be emerging.

quote:

But even as it was agreeing to buy Franklin, Prosperity was being urged by regulators to take bailout money for itself, President Dan Rollins told me.

As I wrote recently, it was among a handful of healthy Texas banks being urged to accept federal aid even though it didn’t need it.

Why are federal regulators using tax dollars to "bail out" healthy banks?

In a related article, "Paulson: Bailout plan moving away from asset buys", the government is purchasing stock instead of the presumptive "toxic" loans.

Bailout was a questionable strategy in the first place, and one that is steadily getting worse.

_____________________________

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 10:02:41 AM

Musicmystery

Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline

It was always a mistake to rush in and leave this in Paulson's unsupervised hands, as Bush presented it (and yes, as Congress approved).

(in reply to celticlord2112)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 10:42:01 AM

UncleNasty

Posts: 1108
Joined: 3/20/2004
Status: offline

Another interesting cite from the article:

"Bankers I’ve spoken with in the past week have said they’re worried that Congress could change the terms of the deals after they’re signed and banks would still be bound by them."

Haven't lenders been doing this to customers for years? The irony is.... Well, it speaks for itself.

Also, I've read other accounts of "healthy" banks having bailout money almsot forced on them.

When individuals are enraged over the bailout, when many individuals would like a bit of a bailout themselves, what exactly is the legitimacy of forcing, or pressuring, banks to accept money they don't want?

Uncle Nasty

(in reply to Musicmystery)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 10:47:26 AM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

Haven't lenders been doing this to customers for years? The irony is.... Well, it speaks for itself.

Strictly speaking, no they have not.

I am not aware of any circumstance where the terms and condition of a loan were unilaterally changed after the loan was finalized and funded. In fact, such unilateral acts would be clear violations of the Uniform Commercial Code.

Now it must be acknowledged that a great many less than honorable lenders have (and often successfully) altered loan terms and conditions at the last minute, and people have signed loan documents without reading them completely and carefully, but once the signatures are in place, the terms themselves are fairly set in stone.

_____________________________

(in reply to UncleNasty)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 12:05:02 PM

pahunkboy

Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline

yes- banks do change the terms. how free is free checking? even if it is- it lasts how long? one year? assuming the bank lasts one year- as the change names so often.

how about univeral default?     and any number of credit card fees.

Why ooh why is congress asking for transparency?   That is not part of the deal. So they should not act surprised.

it is also awfully convenient to the forces that want to destroy the nation state. the banks did this to many in latin america, and now we are next. someone is making alot of money. it will secure that the orders come from the grid, but not any elected official. we are being taken down and we were too dumb to stop it.

this week- the g20 will fail. dont believe "interem solution" and any remedy that is IMF concerned.     the last vestiges of roosevelts mode are gutted and now the brittist empire has full and total control.
this is akin to everyone grabbing a lifeboat for the sinking of the financial titanic.

(in reply to celticlord2112)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 12:07:17 PM

pahunkboy

Posts: 33061
Joined: 2/26/2006
From: Central Pennsylvania
Status: offline

the british colonies are not allowed to seceed. the crises is meant to bring those colonies that have seceeded to go back to control of the brittish..all of which is needed before nukes fry china, russia and india.

(in reply to pahunkboy)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: Mandatory bailout????? - 11/12/2008 12:26:19 PM

celticlord2112

Posts: 5732
Status: offline

quote:

yes- banks do change the terms. how free is free checking? even if it is- it lasts how long? one year? assuming the bank lasts one year- as the change names so often.

Show me one instance where a bank did something their terms and conditions said they could not previously do.

_____________________________

(in reply to pahunkboy)

Profile

Post #: 7