Better Ways to Sell the Bailout

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Why is is that so many have just started a Job ,be it part time. feel that now there is a right to say ,I am a tax payer. The UAW tax payers have had jobs for up to and including 45 years are not considered tax payers by them. There is a perception that people in the Auto industry were to blame for the Government not making sure the industry kept some of the 19 billion taken from the GM pension fund in the late 60's to cover pensions in GM . Then the Pension fund was depleated last year again by GM with the Governments blessing.Thank the government over site for its work on the baseball fiasco and not paying attention to business.

Plano of FL 11:46AM May 28, 2009

The fact is the taxpayer will be paying for the bailout. And I feel like that the taxpayer should get a % of each bank and company that got some of the money from the bailout. What do you think ?

Ric B of AL 1:06PM October 29, 2008

private institutions and greed started it all

Ric B of AL 12:58PM October 29, 2008

Not to sound like McCain... but i'm no financial expert. So i wonder: if the the CEO's and Execs of these failed banking companies walk away w/ millions, maybe billions -- and if this bailout is so financially beneficial - y couldnt they pool their monies together, buy the debt, and make a profit after the dust settles? Really - why involve the taxpayers? ..

T. Hampton of PA 9:48PM October 03, 2008

I think not. It surely isn't rational to gloss over a failure by a government mandate to allow unqualified person(s) to get loans. It surely isn't rational that corporations that then repackage (read that hide!) these high risk loans into "securities" for sale are then actually covered by government (read that taxpayers'!) money. And all of this AFTER the government has already subsidized Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and AIG at well over a cost of $300 Billion.
Let's get real, if the boys and girls in charge of these corporations didn't realize that with potential reward there is always risk, they should look for a new job anyway. It's not without purpose that we have bankruptcy laws, let them be used.
And the final nail in the coffin of this bailout issue for me is that this all smacks of fraudulent practices, which should be investigated and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. The US doesn't deal with terrorists, so why the devil do we insist on rewarding white collar criminals?

Dan Lane of MO 5:20PM October 01, 2008

I typically dont post on blogs but the response from the Dartmouth Dean baffles me. I am in the mortgage industry (and no I did not originate this stuff) and I dont know how on earth he thinks America could possibly make money by buying these "troubled assets". The sliding scale that congress proposed starts at 70 cents on the dollar for the cleanest of the portfolios on down to 30 cents. Right now Hedge funds are coming in at 30-40 cents on the cherry picked loans. The problem is the values in Temecula, CA and Kissimmee Florida, WILL NEVER reach the proposterous values that appraisers were being forced to come up with all the way through 2007. This is compounded by the fact that the lionshare of these mortgagors couldnt afford them on the first day they moved in, let alone after the neg am, arm changes and escrow increases. Most servicers of this paper are seeing default rates on these loans in the high teens to mid twenties. The end of that road is foreclosure/REO or short sales which are even more heavily discounted. So you are back at the begining and have to sell the property. Where is the margin for profit in 70,60 or even 50 cents on the dollar with the depreciation we have seen. Oh, and I forgot, you are now trusting a government organization to effectively service and administer these assets and do it quickly. Let businessmen make these decissions not politicians or deans of ivy league politico factories.

RF of TX 4:05PM October 01, 2008

I dont see why congress doesnt put this money into modification companies. My sister used a company named www.proloanmods.com who charged her $2000 and got her rate cut in half and fixed. instead of borrowers having to pay these modification companies there processing fee government should pay it for homeowners and then that will curb all the foreclosures

bobbie mcguffin of MI 4:05PM October 01, 2008

I am having a real hard time with this bailout thing. I am unhappy with all this help me stuff. Why is this the taxpayers problem? The Congress and Senate are the ones that let this happen. I understood that if we didn't pass this bailout by Monday that the world was going to come to a end. Guess what I'm still here. I think the scare tactics are alitte much. Yes some people will loose their homes, and still some will loose their jobs, and the financial institutions wont have money to lend at a whim, and new cars will be hard to come by, BUT, jobs will come, loans will come, and there's a car lot on every corner. We are still here and we will make it no matter what. We just don't need the "bailout, handout, or saleout".
It is time to reform our "give me government" It'a not enough that we pay them well and supply them with benfits that none of us will ever get...now they have to make us pay even more for their screw ups. Its not Wall Street that we are bailing out it's all the financial institutions that our government turned a bind eye to.
The media keeps saying that more taxpayers want this thing now. I'm not sure where they are getting their info, because I haven't changed my mind and neither has anyone I know. Maybe they think that if they keep saying it we will all believe it. NOT!

Rebecca S. of 3:08PM October 01, 2008

The definition of Corruption is: "impairment of integrity, virtue or moral principle; depravity, decay, and/or an inducement to wrong by improper or unlawful means, a departure from the original or from what is pure or correct, and/or an agency or influence that corrupts”.
We hire lawyers , of all people, to go to Washington who accept money from lobbyist, who are paid money by large companies to convince OUR representatives to vote in a way that benefits their client. Hello, hello, is this thing on; is anyone there?

Aubrey Clark of GA 2:25PM October 01, 2008

You can call it an ice cream cone for all we care. It's still no solution. We do not dislike it because of it's name. How stupid do you think we are? Politicians and the media need to stop insulting our intelligence and start understanding the real issues we have with the plan.
A *REAL* plan would:
*Make the people who are responsible for the problem pay for fixing it. DO NOT make people who have been fiscally responsible pay for the mistakes of those who haven't been. THIS IS THE PREMISE THAT WE REJECT. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY NOT ACCEPTABLE. WE WILL NEVER, EVER SUPPORT THIS.
*Put restrictions in place to prevent the bad practices from continuing. This includes transparency, responsibility, accountability, and moderation. Treat the cause, not just the symptoms.
*And finally, DO NOT make people who have been fiscally responsible pay for the mistakes of those who haven't been. Make the people who are responsible for the problem pay for fixing it. This means having THEM and ONLY THEM take the hit from the toxic loans that THEY lent. This means making them buy back the securities derived from these loans at the price that they sold them at. If managers have to sue their employees to get the money they need for this - so be it. The burden must be placed on those responsible. If it makes them go bankrupt - so be it. That's the natural consequences of their decisions. Other companies shouldn't go bankrupt for decisions that they did not make - nor should taxpayers.
Oh and did I mention: Make the people who are responsible for the problem pay for fixing it.
Now you can call *this* economic plan "satan incarnate" for all I care. It's what we REALLY need.
And in the interim, be sure that you DO NOT make people who have been fiscally responsible pay for the mistakes of those who haven't been.

Kevin of WI 2:02PM October 01, 2008