Incredible Disappearing Brokerages

[we vs us]

As of 8:28pm:

Lehman Bros. declares bankruptcy and announces their intention to liquidate assets.

Bank of American announces a buyout of Merrill Lynch at $29/share, supposedly at the strong urging of federal regulators.

AIG is on a mad dash to raise $40 billion in capital by tomorrow morning or face a ratings downgrade (and certain death).

Add to the Bear Stearns bailout, and the Fannie and Freddie Mac conservatorship, and I'd say you have a financial system that's barely treading water.

I'm really hoping that when the dust settles, Congress grows a pair and puts some strong new regulations in place.  

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

As of 8:28pm:

Lehman Bros. declares bankruptcy and announces their intention to liquidate assets.

Bank of American announces a buyout of Merrill Lynch at $29/share, supposedly at the strong urging of federal regulators.

AIG is on a mad dash to raise $40 billion in capital by tomorrow morning or face a ratings downgrade (and certain death).

Add to the Bear Stearns bailout, and the Fannie and Freddie Mac conservatorship, and I'd say you have a financial system that's barely treading water.

I'm really hoping that when the dust settles, Congress grows a pair and puts some strong new regulations in place.  

Bush and Greenspan are to blame!

Vote for the dumb white guy over the smart black guy. Then America will be flushed....

[MH2010]

Whatever you do, don't put any blame on the congress!!![!]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by MH2010

Whatever you do, don't put any blame on the congress!!![!]

Trust in the Wisdom of Gordon Gecko:

GREED IS GOOD............

[waterboy]

quote:Originally posted by MH2010

Whatever you do, don't put any blame on the congress!!![!]

Ok, a decade of republican dominated, Bush controlled, rubber stamping congress is just as much to blame. Two years of a split congress with an obstructionist President hasn't been too good either.

Feel better?

[iplaw]

How about it's Lehman's fault.  Anyone come to that fairly obvious conclusion?

Why is more government regulation needed?  The market will begin to kill off these parasites if we can keep the government from bailing them out instead.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

How about it's Lehman's fault.  Anyone come to that fairly obvious conclusion?

Why is more government regulation needed?  The market will begin to kill off these parasites if we can keep the government from bailing them out instead.

The rumor is AIG is waiting for a Fed bailout; already Bear and the Macs have been bailed out or are under Fed control.  WaMu is reportedly the next bank under pressure, and would flip us into retail bank territory, where ordinary people's deposit accounts are vulnerable.  

If billions of my tax dollars are going to save these institutions, then hell yeah, I'm going to demand regulation to keep this from happening again. The way we've been playing up till now -- where all profit is private, and all risk is socialized, that's a sucker's game right there.

[iplaw]

I think we should be calling on the government to stop bailing these idiots out instead of wasting time creating more regulations which don't get followed in the first place.  If a CEO wants to play fast and loose with the rules, do you think Congress is going to stop them?  Let the market punish them, it's better at dealing with these people than government regulations.

[TheArtist]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think we should be calling on the government to stop bailing these idiots out instead of wasting time creating more regulations which don't get followed in the first place.  If a CEO wants to play fast and loose with the rules, do you think Congress is going to stop them?  Let the market punish them, it's better at dealing with these people than government regulations.

For once I agree with you. Let those businesses fail, let the fallout happen. Let the mobs hang the bastards from the nearest tree.

The investors, common or large, need to hold businesses accountable. Investment carries risk. Constantly pushing for profits that arent sustainable, pushing a company to do things that are unwise,,, well you get what you deserve. Those who push a company for wise profits, profits that are made on good investments, though they not always give stratospheric results, should be duly rewarded for their risks. Those who push too far and want more than they deserve, want more than their investments should in all fairness be worth, should suffer the consequences.

If it takes a massive shake-up, a big slap in the face and a lot of hurt to get people to realize this. Then so be it.  We will ALL be better for it in the end. We cant persist in a society that wants something for nothing, that doesnt want to EARN. Regulations wont change that attitude. They will just hide it so that the ill effects just pop out some where else in another form.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think we should be calling on the government to stop bailing these idiots out instead of wasting time creating more regulations which don't get followed which don't get enforced in the first place  If a CEO wants to play fast and loose with the rules, do you think Congress is going to stop them?  Let the market punish them, it's better at dealing with these people than government regulations.

Fixed that for you.

The problem with letting the market do its job is that everybody gets punished for this, not just the CEO, not just the Board of Directors, not just the company, and not just the shareholders.  The taxpayers of the United States are the ones who ultimately get punished here.  And really, if I'm one of the ones who's taking the hit, then I'm going to change my financial situation to make sure I don't take the hit again, just like any other player in a free market.  Since I don't get to make the decision to NOT back Lehman up -- the Fed is gonna do that with or without me  -- it means the thing I have left to moderate my exposure is through demanding aggressive regulation. It's the only lever I have, and I intend to use it via my vote.  

[cks511]

Probably too early but has anyone a clue what will happen to the Merrill offices here?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

I think we should be calling on the government to stop bailing these idiots out instead of wasting time creating more regulations which don't get followed which don't get enforced in the first place  If a CEO wants to play fast and loose with the rules, do you think Congress is going to stop them?  Let the market punish them, it's better at dealing with these people than government regulations.

Fixed that for you.

The problem with letting the market do its job is that everybody gets punished for this, not just the CEO, not just the Board of Directors, not just the company, and not just the shareholders.  The taxpayers of the United States are the ones who ultimately get punished here.  And really, if I'm one of the ones who's taking the hit, then I'm going to change my financial situation to make sure I don't take the hit again, just like any other player in a free market.  Since I don't get to make the decision to NOT back Lehman up -- the Fed is gonna do that with or without me  -- it means the thing I have left to moderate my exposure is through demanding aggressive regulation. It's the only lever I have, and I intend to use it via my vote.  

Government bailout removes the element of risk to the corporation and doesn't make the investor whole.  Remove the concept of risk and their greed will just dig a deeper pit because they know in the end the government will print more money to prop them up.

Government dictating that lenders needed to stimulate home sales and the construction trades by more permissive lending practices led to over-inflated home prices and the greatest number of under-qualified mortgagees in our country's history.  That's a perfect example of the unintended consequences of gov't regulation.

[PonderInc]

Republicans want the "free market" to regulate everything...until rich, Republican executives screw up one too many times making greedy, short-sighted decisions.  Then, all of a sudden, they want the government in their business...bailing them out!

The latest one today?  Detroit auto-makers (Ford and Chrysler) "need" billions in low-interest loans from the federal government so they can START making more fuel efficient cars!

For years, they've been making money building enormous SUVs and trucks, all the while lobbying AGAINST increased fuel efficiency standards.  (Their argument has been "the market should decide if people want greater fuel efficiency. Government shouldn't get involved.")

HA!  While competitors like Honda and Toyota have been making fuel efficient cars for years and working on hybrid technology, Detroit's been trying to sell as many SUVs to as many soccer moms as possible.  Their strategic plan for the future involved sticking their heads in the sand and shouting "watermelon, watermelon, watermelon" at the top of their lungs.  

Now the obvious has happened, and people are beginning to feel the pinch of wasteful vehicles.  Big shock: Detroit isn't ready.  They're billions in the hole, and they "need" that government bailout.

The sad thing is that they'll probably get it. I don't understand why we should bail out companies that make ongoing, short-sighted bad decisions.  Isn't that the opposite of capitalism?  Supporting the failures with government subsidies?

I'd rather give those billions in low-interest loans to welfare moms to help them start new businesses.  I bet they would make better choices than Detroit.

[Breadburner]

Ya Toyota has stayed out of the SUV and Truck market....Not.....

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by PonderInc

Republicans want the "free market" to regulate everything...until rich, Republican executives screw up one too many times making greedy, short-sighted decisions.  Then, all of a sudden, they want the government in their business...bailing them out!

The latest one today?  Detroit auto-makers (Ford and Chrysler) "need" billions in low-interest loans from the federal government so they can START making more fuel efficient cars!

For years, they've been making money building enormous SUVs and trucks, all the while lobbying AGAINST increased fuel efficiency standards.  (Their argument has been "the market should decide if people want greater fuel efficiency. Government shouldn't get involved.")

HA!  While competitors like Honda and Toyota have been making fuel efficient cars for years and working on hybrid technology, Detroit's been trying to sell as many SUVs to as many soccer moms as possible.  Their strategic plan for the future involved sticking their heads in the sand and shouting "watermelon, watermelon, watermelon" at the top of their lungs.  

Now the obvious has happened, and people are beginning to feel the pinch of wasteful vehicles.  Big shock: Detroit isn't ready.  They're billions in the hole, and they "need" that government bailout.

The sad thing is that they'll probably get it. I don't understand why we should bail out companies that make ongoing, short-sighted bad decisions.  Isn't that the opposite of capitalism?  Supporting the failures with government subsidies?

I'd rather give those billions in low-interest loans to welfare moms to help them start new businesses.  I bet they would make better choices than Detroit.

Ponder, it's really not a Democrat or GOP issue, it's a culture of government dependence that all our politicians in Washington have fomented since the Great Depression.  Some programs have been wonderful hold-overs from the New Deal, but the end result has become government dependence at every single income level.

Republicans and Democrats know that their own speical interests keep all of them in power in D.C.  If you look at national polling, it's pretty much an equitable power split at near a 50/50 level.

Politicians long ago figured out gifts from the governement were ways to win votes by using tax dollars in ways which could directly benefit the voter or his/her employer.  They could improve their own personal wealth by responding to lobbying efforts by groups, companies, and individuals seeking gov't largesse.

There are many Democrat business leaders out there.  Take a look down Obama and Clinton's donor lists.  I was really pretty surprized when I was looking down the lists for Tulsa donors and the number of people in this conservative 'burg making max donations to Democrat campaigns was much higher than to the GOP.

Warren Buffet is most certainly a Democrat, so is George Kaiser.  Lee Iacocca (former Chrysler chairman) supported my pick for President, Bill Richardson.

As they say, most liberals don't make enough money to be impacted by the type of taxation Dems favor, or they are wealthy enough to afford it.

I'll be honest, my taxation status probably won't change significantly whether Obama wins or McCain wins, though it could affect my employer.  My biggest issue with Obama's tax plan has to do with the subliminal message of class warfare and class envy.