The way to fix the bailout
Dave details the plan that could really help to clean up a lot of the mess made by the government bailout.
A quick summary: Companies that had billions in subprime loans were feeling the effects of their stupid decision to make those loans in the first place, and practically gave them away for pennies on the dollar. But since no one wants these loans, and they've had to mark them down to market value, it has frozen the market. If we temporarily change the rule that forces companies to do that, that will free the market up.
This is one of Dave's biggest and most significant rants ever. It's an absolutely huge deal, and it involves everyone getting in touch with their congressperson before we spend hundreds of billions of dollars that we don't need to!
Read the transcript and find the link to write to your Congressman by clicking here!
mandate that financial products are valued
acurately. Are you suggesting companies lie
about the value of assets? Who would this be
fooling anyway?
2. Extending insurance for mortgage-backed
securities less costly and seems good plan.
But why do you believe this will be enough to
stabilize the markets?
3. Some acknowledgement please that
deregulation and false valuations caused this
massive crisis in the first place.
Help us Dave, Help us all!!!!!
http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/
If I'm understanding him right, he is not saying companies should lie. He is saying the daily reporting of the bonds is causing an untrue evaluation of the assets. By not reporting them daily for awhile, it will allow the companies to catch their breath and stabilize, which will help stabilize the market. The law was a knee-jerk reaction in the first place and is not necessary as like he said, you cannot legislate ethics. People will misbehave no matter how many laws you have on the books.
list of congnresspeople
I have contacted my senators and congressman and told them do something or lose your job.
I have had it! Enough!
We all have to take responsibility for our actions.
Mr. Dodd.....SIT YOUR BUTT DOWN AND SHUT UP! YOU BENEFITED FROM THIS SO I AM NOT INTERESTED IN YOUR OPINION NOW!
THANKS DAVE FOR THE RANT!
Dear Sirs,
I am writing this in concern of the financial woes our nation faces. You are our voice and I feel you need to look @ this as a crisis with monumental consequences. I am a registered voter who never votes a straight ticket and urge you to push for legislation to change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance, but extend no loans. If you push to extend loans - if you push to borrow the money on the national debt in order for us to all go into the mortgage business of a trillion dollars - I will be an advocate, and actively campaign against your re-election to another term. - Thanks, Josh
Honorable Congressman:
You are our voice. I am a registered voter in your district and never vote a straight party-line ticket. I research the candidates and their records. I vote for the person who best serves the people. We work within our community to educate voters and encourage them to do the same. We make monetary contributions accordingly.
With regard to the monumental economic crisis we are facing and the government credit and housing bailout I would like to implore you to push for legislation to change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance, but extend no loans. Pushing to extend loans and borrowing (more) money on the national debt then saddling the American taxpayers is NOT acceptable.
I assure you I will be following this situation closely and advising as many people as possible within our voting district. I will personally be an advocate, and actively campaign against your re-election to another term should you choose to ignore what is best for the people of this country rather than what is best for Wall Street.
Again, please push for legislation to change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance, but extend no loans.
Kind Regards,
Gregory K. Soderberg, Austin, MN.
The other solution to the financial crises that will immediately and directly help the people and the banking industry is to stop lending all new money into circulation. Start ‘spending’ it into circulation as payment for labor and materials provided in the building and maintenance of public roads and bridges, a benefit to all society and critical for commerce.
This simple, principle change in how we increase the money supply will provide the money we desperately need without an increase in indebtedness and with no inflation as productivity gains will increase as the money supply increases, greater employment, high-paying jobs and a list of benefits too long to note here.
'Monetizing' public roads and bridges as a debt-free wealth brings new money into circulation in lieu of more taxes and more borrowing. One cannot pay debt with more borrowed money and get rid of debt. Money produced, as wealth to all parties, is the only way the interest debt can be paid out of our economy.
Because the interest debt is compounding so fast, ‘producing’ our way out of this debt must be accompanied by forms of debt repudiation that do not harm citizens.
Consider all primary home residence mortgages paid. This will lower the total indebtedness, allow people to live in their homes and have money to help meet their other living costs. This will create a real economic stimulus.
When mortgages are cancelled, the bank loses the mortgage asset and the loan liability simultaneously suffering no real loss of asset because the only thing the bank actually loaned was an electronic number of no real substance. Those numbers will remain in the economy available for consumption of other economic production including payment of other loans.
Loaning all new money into circulation and the resulting unpayable, compounding debt it creates got us to where we are now. More borrowing will only make our financial predicament more severe.
Please forward this solution to everyone you can think of. Otherwise, the growing, unpayable debt is going to make us a people infinitely more sorry than we are already
Our country and economy is in a huge dilemma due to the Wall Street collapse and the sub-prime mess. As our elected representative, we are counting on YOU to solve this problem NOW. How you handle this will affect November's elections.
Legislation is on the table in Washington right now, and YOU HAVE NOT ONLY THE OPPORTUNITY, BUT THE OBLIGATION TO PROTECT OUR INTERESTS IN THIS MATTER. Putting us deeper in debt is not the solution. Bailing out every tom, dick and harry person or company who screws up is not the answer. IT IS TIME FOR EVERYONE TO BE PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE AND RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS. Protecting the leaders of these companies who took great risks and made stupid choices is no longer an option.
I am writing to tell you to change the mark-to-market accounting law at least temporarily and as it applies to the sub-prime loans, and to extend FHA insurance to cover these loans but NOT TO EXTEND ANY MORE LOANS. This should cost us about $40 billion rather than $700 billion. If you extend loans - if you borrow the money on the national debt in order for us to ALL go into the mortgage business a trillion dollars - we're going to fire you ALL and send you home.
I will vote against you IF you don't vote to change the mark-to-market law and I'll contribute my money to make sure you never serve in office again.
The people are watching and have ways of finding out even as we can no longer trust the media to provide honest journalism.
I trust you will serve New Mexico, who elected you, and the American people well.
Sincerely,
Sharon Kirby
Sarbanes Oxley has nothing to do with this mess. Accounting pronouncements are issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) to provide guidance to accountants to properly account for a companies books fairly. Dave if you think for one minute that restating values at a historical cost will do anything to jump start the economy your living a pipe dream. However, it may be worth the good old college try, but doubtful.
Then what is your solution to this big mess we are in?
I found the link and have e-mailed my Congressmen, the Senate Banking Committee, and John McCain. Thank you for all that you do.
I appreciate you!
for providing the easy means to do so. Also thanks
for your breakdown of the situation.
If a man steals my mama's purse as
she exits a building, I expect the
government to penalize him. Call that
"legislating ethics," call it dancing, call
it whatever you want. It is regulation
of private action that causes harm, and yes,
we need it. There is good regulation and bad
regulation, and we should figure out
the difference between the two and get it
right. I am inconvenienced too on the way to
work when I see a state trooper pointing one of
those speed devices at me. But I slow the heck
down. Collision avoided. Instead, we have a
700 billion dollar clean-up on I-85. Blanket
calls for deregulation of financial markets
are common sense lacking. As for Dave's mark
to market suggestion, if Dave is correct, the
market valuation of mortgage-backed securities
does not reflect true value. Could be. We
should then focus on the real value, not hide
it. We have had enough hiding, thank you.
Re-writing bad mortgages so that people can
actually afford them is another suggestion
which could stabilize the value of these
securities by forcing people to pay. Could
stabilize markets. Dave?
market for many of the CDO's, housing bonds and
pools- They're worth zero! Mark to market is right!
May the favor of GOD be with you!!!
Regarding your remarks from 9/28 6:43pm above, I really want your ideas to work, but I need some clarification.
Doesn't the U.S. Treasury have to borrow money from the Fed (a private corporation) to "spend" it into our economy since our Treasury doesn't really control our money supply since the Fed took over that role? Thus we still take on more debt, right? I would certainly rather "spend" it into roads and bridges than bombs and tanks and funding the Home Land Security police state infrastructure like we are now.
My heart lightened at the thought of a "year of jubilee" where the mortgage on my primary residence is considered paid in full. That could sure free up a lot of discretionary income for me and alot of others. A definite economic stimulus, but I dont think the bankers would like that much. There goes their revenue from all those interest payments, right? Lots of banks would fail then? How could that all work?
Hope you are still out there to respond to this. Anyone else have a comment?
Scott
Did you see Dave Ramsey's show on Fox News? He had an economist that has a proposed plan to solve the short term "crisis" instead of paying $700 Billion for with only 5 days of planning in a panic mode.
http://www.daveramsey.com/tdrs/index.cfm/2008/9/23...
Do NOT vote to pass this law! There are options. Calmer heads prevail - look outside of the industry and Washington for answers!
I'm traditionally a Republican who respects both Barry Obama and John McCain but I will vote against and campaign against anyone that votes for this package. You are suppose to represent the people. I'm one of the people. Hear our voices now!
Here is my letter to the congress. I hope it, along with the other well crafted letters above, helps you to create and send your own.
Scott
Honorable (Senator/Representative) ____________:
I do not want the government to take on an additional $700 billion in debt to bailout the sub-prime mortgage market! We have to get more creative than just taking out another loan! No bailouts, period! Those that created the problem need assistance in sorting out their problems, not a government bailout in which taxpayers pick up the tab for poor management decisions!
Foreclosures are not the primary cause of this problem at this time, it is the “mark the market” accounting law that is causing these sub-prime loans to be unmarketable. This “mark the market” accounting law makes each company restate daily what their assets are worth if sold on the market today. This is an attempt to legislate ethics for companies by keeping them from having bloated balance sheets; a good idea in theory considering the Enron scandal.
Given a choice between temporarily changing an accounting law or an ENORMOUS bailout and increased tax burden, I chose changing a law. I want you to temporarily change this “mark the market” accounting rule for the sub-prime loans AND extend government backed mortgage insurance to cover potential defaults so that we can get this market moving again.
In the end the government might have to spend $40 billion or maybe more to cover loans that do go into default, which is MUCH better than having to “buy out” all these loans for $700 billion!
This particular solution may only answer 60% of the problem, but taking out MORE LOANS is NOT ACCEPTABLE. Please consider all non-loan options when crafting a complete solution, including the phasing out of the Federal Reserve in favor of a constitutionally sound money supply controlled once again by the U.S. Treasury.
Thank you for your solemn pledge to support our U.S. Constitution and for holding the welfare of the American people above that of the special interests behind the bailout effort. Thank you for your service to our Republic during these challenging times.
Sincerely,
(Your name here)
P.S. I repeat, NO BAILOUT! Give these companies the relief they need to sort it out for themselves! Temporarily change the “mark the market” accounting law regarding the sub-prime loans and extend government backed mortgage insurance to get this market moving again. EXTEND NO LOANS! GIVE NO BAILOUT!
The more promising suggestion is for the federal government just to guarantee some mortgages -- say subprime created from January 2004 to January 2008. Essentially the proposal I heard from Dave is to provide essentially FHA insurance to mortgage holders in exchange for a fee. This insurance would clear up the value of the mortgage-backed securities by itself, and mark-to-market accounting is not nearly so important.
While a really awful idea under normal circumstances, this proposal would go a long way to resolving the financial turmoil. It also avoids problems associated with Treasury Secretary Paulson's proposal that the Treasury buy securities that are difficult to value under most circumstances. It also does not reward Wall Street types directly and, to the extent it helps anyone directly, it probably helps out the borrowers to some extent.
So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billon that equals $425,000.00. Our population is about 301,000,000 ± counting every man, woman
and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a
"We Deserve It Dividend".
Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college - it'll be there
Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car - create jobs
Invest in the market - capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves
Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks
who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company
that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out
a puny $1000.00 ( "vote buy" ) economic incentive that is being proposed
by one of our candidates for President.
If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
As for AIG - liquidate it.
Sell off its parts.
Let American General go back to being American General.
Sell off the real estate.
Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
Sure it's a crazy idea that can "never work."
But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
How do you spell Economic Boom?
I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion
"We Deserve It Dividend" more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in
Washington DC.
And remember, this plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because
$25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
http://tnbadger.blogspot.com/2008/09/open-letter-t...
Feel free to use, but I think that personalization sends a stronger message.
I think Dave has great personal financial advice but I don't think he's seeing the root cause in this case.
1 - suspension of the capital gains tax for two years which could unleash private capital to help cope with the crisis.
2 - make the CEOs and other officials of the bailout companies who profited from making/buying bad loans, pony up money from their pockets to clean up their own messes!! (I think I like this idea best of all!)
Dear Mr. Corker,
I am urgently writing to you regarding the crisis with the stock market and housing.
I would like you to know that I do not support another bailout of any private company. It is my understanding that our economy is resilient and must go through ups and downs. I believe that the president and his people are pushing this through at a time when our country is already so far in debt that it will take hundreds of years to pay it back. I do not want my children and grandchildren and great grandchildren to be paying for the greed on wall street.
I am a registered voter who never votes a straight ticket and urge you to push for legislation to change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance, but extend no loans. If you push to extend loans - if you push to borrow the money on the national debt in order for us to all go into the mortgage business of a trillion dollars - I will be an advocate, and actively campaign against your re-election to another term.
In highest regard,
Michael Sparks
overseeing this. I hope it helps! My husband and I are SO angry
over this WASTE of our hard-earned tax dollars. This is OUR country.
WE are the government. WE are the people. WE need to take back our
government and get some of these losers who don't take their
responsibilities seriously, out of there. WE hired them. WE can
fire them!!
Sincerely,
Susan Aragon
http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/
CHANGING THE MARK-TO-MARKET WONT WORK
================================================
23 Sep 2008 12:03 pm
Even the easy answers aren't easy
I am in favor of some form of government bailout, and I am also in favor of some major changes in the way that we regulate the banks. But even simple, seemingly obvious changes are trickier than they look.
Mark-to-market accounting, for example, was mandated by Sarbanes-Oxley. The idea was that we wanted to keep companies from playing games with the securities they owned by forcing them to update the balance sheet at the end of the day with the new values.
Seems obvious and good. But mark-to-market was a major factor in the bank collapses. When markets for various securities froze up, the book value of those securities was basically zero, even though many of those securities would eventually pay off. That collapsed the value of balance sheets. This not only panicked investors, but also threatened their credit rating. For a bank, a credit downgrade is death. They borrow a lot of money short term to smooth their cash flows. Also, a lot of regulated entities have strict rules about the credit rating of the institutions they're allowed to lend to. The result is a drying up of capital all out of proportion to the underlying financial condition of the institution.
Or take capital requirements. I'm in favor of higher ones. But a high capital requirement, perversely, hurts companies in a downturn. This sounds bizarre. But say you have a broker-dealer that is only allowed to leverage itself 5 to 1--a very, very safe capital ratio. (12-to-1 is, IIRC, about standard).
Now say that the bank suffers a major setback, like a bunch of totally illiquid mortgage backed security whose nominal value has dropped to near zero. Having a lot of capital protects the creditors in bankruptcy, who now get 20 cents on the dollar instead of six. But the firm still goes into bankruptcy, because they can't dip into their other capital to make good the debts. Indeed, the higher their capital requirements, the more they have to deleverage in a crisis, because they need to unwind more positions to shore up the bad ones they can't sell. That deleveraging dries up capital in other markets, decreases the value of whatever securities they're dumping, and thus threatens other institutions.
This is not a brief for doing nothing. Only a caution that even things that sound simple and obvious are neither.
people.
There are 535 of them to one Secretary. Its time
they stood up for we the people.
NO BAIL OUT! OR....
VOTE THEM OUT!
Everyone knows about 200 people..spread the word!
Can't wait to hear what GW has tonight. He's just become a used car salesman to me in this whole mess.
and the transcript above these comments. Thanks for all you do Dave.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hale-stewart/memo-to...
at this time. We have written to our rep
here in No. Texas. I haven't seen my husband
this "red faced" in a very long time. God bless
you and your ministry.
Mark to market not a villain
Posted by Michael S. Rozeff at 04:18 PM
The housing disaster's most important proximate cause is bad loans. One cause of that is the house price falling below the loan value. Loans were made on expectations of a continuing bubble of house prices rising, but instead they fell.
Mark to market worries many, but it should not. Mark to market accounting requires writedowns of assets that have lost value. The stock market mostly knows and/or estimates such losses even if the banks do not mark to market. Postponing mark to market won't change the market value losses or the bad loans. Eventually a mark to market has to be written off either to book value or to a loss reserve account. Banks want to postpone this so that they do not show up as insolvent, which would mean they would need to restore capital or go under, as the realized losses might trigger some debt covenants. Postponement is a means for the existing management to stay around for a longer time. Ex post postponement (changing the rules after the fact) is a way for the managers to put one over on the debt-holders and prevent them from gaining a degree of control over the insolvent bank. Postponing mark to market of the assets gone bad will not resolve the banking system's insolvency.
sent email, now, if our Senator Obama will take come "home" to take care of other business......
I have emailed my congressman and senators. My husband and I own and run two businesses. If we make a bad
business decision, then we have to absorb our loss and make better decisions in the future to grow our
business and produce more income. We are following your plan and getting our personal and business finances
in better shape. I wish other people and businesses would do the same and quit relying on all of us taxpayers
to bail them out when greed and bad decision making are key factors in creating a financial mess/crisis.
Thank you for inspiring us to be responsible and live better!!
Suzanne in Knoxville, TN
and the bonds now become marketable, who would
buy these bonds...where are they marketable?
Wouldn't the buyers know this is some kind of
temporary fix of what's already junk anyway?
OR is it that the buyers are buying a steal of
a deal? Not clear to me.
for putting this together. Message sent below:
I am very disturbed that government is about to bail out big business with my dollars for mistakes that government should have known were being made.
Change the mark-to-market accounting law temporarily until this blows over and extend insurance but do not extend any loans.
If loans are extended and if money is borrowed on the national debt so that I am placed in the mortgage business to the tune of a trillion dollars, I will do everything in my power including working for your opponent in the next election to send you back into the civilian work force.
Respectfully,
Tim Way
Actually, these bonds do have value. I have spent the past 10 years doing mortgage inspections on the underlying real estate in these bonds. Most of them are very nice properties, probably ones that you either shop at or work in. They are generally real estate that is in demand, only the bonds have fallen out of favor.
If I had the money, I would be delighted to purchase one of these bonds. As the government is having to "borrow" the money from us to purchase these, maybe, they should postpone the purchase until they are in a financial shape to make the buy...I am holding my breath...
the profits from this will pay most of the loan b
back. Sure.......just like the federal
government has done such a wonderful job of
paying back the money loaned out of the social
security fund. Who does he think he's kidding?
I have no respect nor do I believe one thing
coming out of a politicians mouth anymore.
Screw them....no way am I paying for this.
contacts as well. Time for the Fed to start
following your advise now and GET ON THE PLAN
so this 30+ year mess of unbridled spending,
no energy policy, and other assorted behaviors
that have led us to this point ENDS NOW..
Keep up the fight...
Here is my solution: Instead of spending 700B on a bailout, return that money to people that PAY taxes, filea tax return by April 15th every year for the past 5 years. Require the check to be made out to the tax payres mortgage company to pay off/pay down their mortgage. This would still pump 700B into the fianancial market while helping our american families. Makes sense to me, but sadly will never happen.
On our side, we should strive for debt and borrowing elimination, and learn to pay cash for what we want.
I don't think a taxpayer bailout is fair to those of us who have made timely payments, have good credit, have done the best for our families and have worked too long and hard to see our hard earned retirement be delayed while we pay higher tax bills to bailout the rich execs that have not shown accountability.
Suspending the market-to-market rule will do nothing to help the market for these assets, it just changes the way they appear on a balance sheet. What Ramsey is suggesting is all smoke and mirrors, from a market perspective. If the assets are on the balance sheet, that's what matters.
Below is what I sent to my Congressman:
I don't know you and you don't know me, but I do know that you are suppose to have the best interest of those that you represent at the forefront of your political agenda.
I am writing in regards to the Economic Crisis that we are facing.
I would like you to not vote for the Bail Out, but to Encourage Congress to look at the mark-to-market accounting law and to Extend Insurance but Extend NO loans. We can not afford to go into further DEBT as a nation!
We are suppose to be a SUPER POWER! What has happened to America? The Blind cannot continue to lead the Blind.
Please rethink your decision. At least talk to your Constituents about taking more time to look at another alternative.
Thank you and when I say God Bless America, I am really praying that He will hear us (Read II Chronicles 7:14 in your Bible tonight).
He's not obligated, but if we do our part, He just might have Mercy on us.
God Bless you.
Isn't it ironic that our government is going to solve this problem by taking out a loan that we'll never have the ability to pay off?
Can you foreclose a country?
Love to hear other ideas for chants
Send this to your reps, or yell it
on the phone to them if you get the
run around by some dip Aid, and
ad Obama and MCcain to your list
ok , here it is
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
You know what it is !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
You know what to do !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
We Want you to Suspend
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
Socialized Banking makes us Broke !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
If you really want my Vote !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
Do you want to get fired !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
Thats what we want !
" MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET"," MARK TO MARKET",
Suspend it Now !
Instead of bailing out and spending 700 billion dollars to help people who made bad decisions, let them fix their own mess with the taxpayers helping by using the FHA insurance (I don't like this either but it's a lot better than 700 billion outright). This is relatively easy to do:
Change the accounting rules on "mark to markup law" temporarily on the sub prime loans only for a certain time period and extend the FHA insurance but extend no loans.
If the loans are extended and you vote for it I will do everything in my power to send you home and make sure you are never voted into office again my money and my voice will be put to this use. I don't care if you are a Democrat or a Republican you are my elected representative so act like it and represent me.
Feel free to contact my if you have the courage, I would be happy to talk with you.
Change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance but extend no loans. Why can't the government insure these loans instead of the tax payers buying them? DO NOT borrow the money on the national debt in order for us to all go into the mortgage business a trillion dollars! I do not wan to buy theses mortgages through tax, I would rather have the FHA extend the insure across the sub prime loans! DO NOT BORROW $700 BILLION DOLLARS and put it on the tax payers!!
Sir, I am not for extending any form of loan to bail out Wall Street.
What I do support is the following;
1. A Temporary change to mark-to-market acounting law to free up the frozen marketplace.
2. Extend FHA insurance so that buyers will be confident to buy the bonds. I don't like guaranteeing them but it's cheaper than BUYING them!
We will SPEND roughly $40 Billion without adding $700 Billion to the debt.
I am a Proud American. I have no public voice other than my elected representative's. I VOTE. I will watch to make sure my voice is heard.
Please, do not put our Country in further debt!
Respectfully, Lisa R. Ortiz
This makes total sense to me!
I have contacted those who need to be through your info on this site!
Keep up the good work!
Sutton from Ohio) several times this morning
using the address and form on her website, only
to be told that it is undeliverable. Any one
else having this problem? Do they just not
want any more emails from us?
Dear Senator
I am writing you to express my vote AGAINST the proposed financial bailout and for the following changes to address the situation:
1. Temporarily change the mark-to-market accounting law so the affected offenders are not forced to mark these bad loans down to market value. Give them a reasonable time to allow the markets to work this out (perhaps 1 year).
2. Extend FHA insurance program across these loans. Estimates are this will cost less than $50B and thus save *us* tax payers 90+%.
I don't want any more of my tax dollars being wasted on fraudulent or incompetent companies because you the government (including but not limited to the current administration, Congress, SEC, Treasury and many others) failed to properly regulate and oversee.
3. Fire Christopher Cox immediately. Give him 2 weeks pay.
4. Aggressively puruse criminal charges against all officers of the affected companies. What they've done is criminal. In exchange for no jail, allow them to "donate" all of their compensation above $40k/year to a fund that will help pay for extending the FHA insurance.
I urge you to take leadership in this matter. Do not let politics sway your decision and genuinely listen to your constituency because we are watching.
Respectfully,
Secondly, you really think the "media" is not talking about this plan because it's so great? Revaluing securities will do nothing to free up the credit markets? "Look at me I'm holding this piece of crap security for more than mark-to-market. Anyone want to buy it now?"
Thirdly, if the economy is doing so great, why do we even need a plan? I hear Dave come on the show each day and say that everything is great and it's a great time to buy a house. "This is the best weekend to buy a house in a long time." But, now Dave has the plan for a problem that doesn't exist? Dave is starting to sound like a politician now.
Lastly, why is everyone all of a sudden mad at Congress for spending money they don't have? Congress has always spent money they don't have! It is the presidents job to control spending by the spend happy Congress. George Bush has done nothing to veto spending bills.
This is a mess and rational minds need to prevail. That means Congress needs to get out of the way!!!!
Newt Gingrich has proposed some excellent ideas that are on point. He is suggesting a 3 year rolling mark to market on these instruments and is totally in agreement that, that is what is causing the problem. He also pointed out that had we had these same rules during the S&L crisis with the truly unsound economy in the 80's this would look like a walk in the park compared to the fundamentals back then. As a CPA I was very skeptical of the change in accounting and how that could make such a difference. But when your ability to lend and borrow are on based on financial statement ratios, it does make absolute sense.
Keep up the good work, I have emailed my Congressman.
generally useless. They don't respond to
voters unless you have a big name like Cindy
Sheehan. These DNC crooks only respond to
huge lobbies of their own kind. Remember that
in this upcoming election, any vote for a
Democrat representative is a vote for Pelosi.
This bail out is rediculious.
Dear Mr. Lampson,
This is the first letter that I have ever written to a State Representative. I hope that is some indication to you of how important this matter is to me.
I am writing to express my wishes that our government NOT bail out lenders that have made poor financial decisions and made bad loans with full knowledge of what they were investing in. As a small business owner (and an adult) I am forced to live with the consequences of my actions for better or worse, as should be the case.
I believe that this proposal is only a temporary solution and that by forcing our nation into so much more debt we will, in the long run, be hamstringing ourselves economically for generations to come. The idea that somehow this might be a profitable venture for the government and that we will recoup the expense is laughable.
Please, do not saddle us taxpayers with this burden. I urge you to take the time to consider more options – options that DO NOT include increasing our national debt. I will vote against and actively campaign against any elected official that votes for this.
Sincerely,
XXXXXX XXXXXX
Likewise, Dave, please acknowledge that deregulation and false valuations caused this massive crisis in the first place.
Lastly, someone please explain to me how Reagan left office with an unprecedented budget deficit, Clinton left office with ZERO deficit, and W. will leave office with a deficit that will dwarf Reagan's ..... and somehow DEMOCRATS are the spenders with no clue about fiscal sanity and responsibility.
but rather to suspend the mark-to-market rules
until this crunch is over. By requiring assets
to be re-valued so frequently, it opens
companies up to the volatility of a insecure
market. By suspending the rule for a fixed
period of time - to be revisited at that point -
we could allow some of these companies some wiggle
room.
By extending insurance over the sub-primes, we
do a world of good.
All I know is this: if anybody is going to get
bailed out, it should be the honest taxpayer whose
house (here in SoCal) depreciated from 750K to
250K in two years, leaving me (oh, I mean "them")
with a 440K mortgage on a 250K house. (By the way,
for those in other areas, that's a small tract
home.)
civics 101 - Congress spends the money.
The President is not without blame. He can veto the spending, but Congress (presently the Democrats) spends the money.
85 billion /200 million
85,000,000,000 / 200,000,000
is only $425 per person.
not 425,000 per person.
On the positive side:
I see in the news that some House GOP members
are kicking around an alternative idea including
giving insurance to these loans instead of
buying them. Hopefully it is not too late!
I have also heard Dave give the absolute WORST investment advice I have ever heard, ever, to many callers. Yes, I do think Dave Ramsey's common sense approach to not living on credit cards and paying off your debt is very smart and everyone should really do it, I mean there's no sense in carrying debt and spending more than you have, that's pretty much all he knows. He is a one trick pony when it comes to financial advice, and mark-to-market is not the answer to the country's current financial crisis, but nice effort.
civics 102 - I guess Congress declared war with Afghanistan and Iraq as well? That's only $582 Billion.
Didn’t you mean “…change the accounting rule and let them work their own crap out”?
would provide insurance to companies that agree \
to buy frozen assets, rather than purchase them
directly as envisioned under the
administration's plan. The firms would have to
pay insurance premiums to the Treasury
Department for the coverage."
This ought to be eye-opening for those who think voting for McCain will lead to better financial management. Apparently it's the Republicans who haven't met a credit card they don't like.
civics 103
9/11: only happened here ONCE . . . does someone have to explain it to you guys AGAIN?
With all do respect, what are you talking about?
I'm talking the President spending money we don't have. "civics 101 - Congress spends the money. The President is not without blame. He can (BUT DOESN'T) veto the spending, but Congress (Republic controlled in 2004) spends the money."
This is the same rush to action that Bush used to get us into the Iraq War which has and is costing us billions. Now it's a rush to bail out any friend of Bush's that wants to clear out some questionable debt. The answer is absolutely no.
listen to you about the mark to market
change. I personally don't want to own
that much real estate as a taxpayer. How
can we as taxpayers get them to listen. I
just feel that my congressman is not listening
to us. This is eating me up when I think about
it and I just can't stand it anymore
With all due respect -
I'm going to drop this since the arguments are moot but I will point out AGAIN that CONGRESS spends the money, not the President.
Congress puts up every spending bill, including military spending. Yes, the President should have vetoed over-the-top spending. Yes the Republicans did betray their core constituency by going crazy with the checkbook. But the reason why we elect individuals to Congress is to represent us and provide a "check and balance" against the other two branches. While the President has the ability to veto legislation, his primary mandate is to protect the country against outside aggressors. I think this President, with all his faults (and I include this mess as part of that) has done a very good job of spending the $582 billion figure you quoted. Like I said, 9/11 happened here only ONCE. For that I give him full credit and I say money well spent. The war spending is not what caused this mess. Congress has this sitting in their laps. This is a result of a series of bad legislation, over-regulation and lending institutions forced to lower lending standards so that Juan and Juanita Doe who do not even have a valid id can own their first home even though they can't afford it . . . and that, by the way, was the DEMs who were responsible for that. You want to blame the President for this whole thing because he didn't use his veto power. I simply point out that Congress has more of a responsibility here than the President. Funny thing is they were begging for control of the Congress and now that they have it they aren't doind a frickin' thing with it. Why didn't they fix this thing in spite of the President? They have passed plenty of resolutions to recognize insignificant people or events that no one gives a flip about, but they can't pass Social Security reform or new Healthcare legislation LIKE THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO BEFORE THEY TOOK CONTROL !! This is the least productive Congress with the lowest approval rating in our lifetimes and they are controlled by the DEMs. Don't get me wrong. I'm glad they can only wreck our country in little chunks at a time, but if they are so blameless why can't they step up to the plate and fix the mess they helped to create?
I am writing to implore you to NOT back the $700B bail-out plan. I know that times are very serious, but I think there has to be a solution that utilizes the irreplaceable power of the free market. The best idea I know of is to change the "mark-to-market" accounting law that was put into place in knee-jerk reaction to Enron and the like. If that part of the reforms we temporarily suspended, and we extended the FHA insurance to cover this slimy sub-prime mess, companies could breathe enough to work through their own mess and the markets could loosen up. The cost for this would be around $40B, a BIG DIFFERENCE. I will be very clear. Anyone who saddles me and my children with another $700B-$2T in debt must be voted out of a job.
Here is how I see it...
1. Greed and lending based on assumption are the vices that got us here in the first place.
2. Loaning money to people that cannot handle the debt load is crazy. Both times I have been in the housing market and wanted to purchase a home lenders take a look at my credit score and say I am good for >40% of my income per month for a house payment. WAKE UP AMERICA. Purchase what you can afford with risk considered. To wave the mark to market is just what I thought Dave is against. To fix the problem this way seems hypocritical. Let the market reap what it sows. It happened in the early 80's in the Ag sector and we didn't learn our lesson.
IF we apply this same logic to any other asset how would that work? So with the logic presented I should get a loan on the value of my 2001 for $18000 car I bought. I can then use the asset value from 2001 as present value to further finance other purchases today right?... Then with those purchases I can fund more purchases with the original purchase value of those even if I paid too much and then the government will ensure I don't loose money in the game right? Sounds like we are right back where we started@!
This is Hypocritical and I am embarrassed that Dave would suggest waving the mark to market rules. If you cant cover your risk position .. .you are in at the wrong level. Is this not why the original PMI was setup? Why did lenders go above the 20% down rule? GREED and Congress's greed for more votes from people who should not be owning a house anyway!> Because as DAVE SAYS ... Home buyers did not have it to spend it@!
websited tells me that my zip + 4 is not
acceptable! I checked my zip + 4 on the USPS
website, and I have the right one! Seems that
these losers don't want their constituents
contacting them!
haunt us still today. I have contacted Nick Lampson. Ill be watching.
Just count every third person, and you have an idiot...
Those are the people we elected to office!! :(
http://www.stopthehousingbailout.com/
“Congress has no right to give the White House and its Secretary of the Treasury the power to transfer the people’s money to the richest bankers in the country. Vote No to the Bailout legislation. The Bailout legislation is being rammed through Congress in a matter of days.
“This is an illegal power grab by the White House and their richest friends on Wall Street. The Legislation allows the Treasury Department to appoint the same bankers who created the crisis to administer and dictate the use of trillions of our tax dollars. It is also one of the biggest transfers of wealth from working families to the ultra-rich in the history of the United States.
“Congress should help families stay in their homes. Wealthy executives should be forced to disgorge their obscene profits, fees and bonuses that made them ultra-rich while they ran the economy into the ground.”
If you approve this bailout I will FIRE YOUR BUTT!!! I will use all of my resources to make sure you never get re-elected.
I got the text of the letter here
http://www.votenobailout.org/
Writing and calling your congressperson is a great thing to do but not fast enough. We've got to unsuppress this information on the internet immediately.
If you enter [bailout] on Google news and then again [Bailout "mark to market"] as of 10:39 PM PST 9/25/08 you will find 113,709 articles about the bailout, but only 742 that additionally mention mark-to-market. The 742 articles are outnumbered at a ratio of 153 to 1. It is a tragic reflection of public awareness.
We can change this in just 24 hours. Nearly every one of those articles allow for reader comments. Go onto each of those sites that you can find and ask about a "mark-to-market" solution. The writers typically read these and will be educated immediately to look further, ask questions of lawmakers and broadcast the topic. In time mark-to-market accounting law change will enter the dialog and the tide can turn.
The 742 articles online offer some hope, but its time to take it all the way until the bailout gets exposed for exactly what it is.
Go to Google News - Bailout here:
http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=b...
Make sure that every single article has a response from one of us along the following lines. Say it your way, in your own words so it is authentic and original. Make sure it is in your own words so it is not disregarded as a form letter.
--
Let's pay 40 not 700 billion with Mark-To-Market Accounting Law Change
Why isn't anyone pushing for legislation to change the mark-to-market accounting law and to extend insurance, but extend no loans? Pushing to extend loans and borrowing (more) money on the national debt then saddling the American taxpayers is NOT acceptable.
--
Please do not go to sleep tonight without visiting 5-10 bailout news articles and making your voice heard. We can all sleep when the ratio improves and we are hearing about the mark-to-market alternative with every mention of the bailout.
understand what has happened to the banks and
what needs to be done- not the $700 billion
bailout. I contacted my representatives and
the committee. I also emailed friends and
relatives your website address.
Thanks, Dave for summing all of this up so concisely for us. Hopefully, the outcome will be what we (conservatives) want.
There are a lot more moving parts to our economy than a family budget.
Despite the blame shifting, there are only two real culprits in this drama; money-greedy banks making high risk loans and house-greedy consumers taking high risk loans. We’ve not responsible for the business practices of the banks (or their rescue when those practices are ill-advised), but we are responsible for our actions as consumers and as a society.
If you’re a twenty-something with a high-school diploma and a ten dollar an hour job, maybe you really don’t have to have the 2,600 hundred square footer with granite counter tops and spa tub right now.
If you can’t control the credit cards, cut them up, don’t sell your home equity to cover your lack of discipline.
Not a big fan of gambling, but I do know this; when you lose, you pay – not someone else. Both the banks and the home owners rolled the dice on a gamble that didn’t pay out. Rest assured that if it had, these same folks wouldn’t be rushing to pass the winnings on to the taxpayers. Having lost however, they are looking for someone else to cover the tab.
One thing is guaranteed, whenever we mess up and then manage to dodge the bullet of our own consequences, we always, always, always repeat the mistake.
-Tim
Medford, Oregon
I you think these mortgage-backed securities are worth more than 22 cents on the dollar, then why don't you buy some? They are valued at that amount because that is what they are worth.
This "crisis" is a text-book example of a bubble bursting. No amount of "rule-changing" or "financial bailout" will stop a bursting bubble. The question is who is going to give the pound of flesh: Banks or Taxpayers?
mark-to-market rules won't change much of anything. Read this article: http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0925ng.html
As the article points out, these are level 3 assets we are talking about, and banks can book them however
they pretty much want, because its an absolute guess as to what they are really worth. The companies
aren't getting hammered because they've booked their assets too low, if anything the problem is investors
believe they still have them booked to high!
Commentary by Jonathan Weil
(Bloomberg) -- If only we didn't know how badly off the banks are, then maybe we could save the financial system as we used to know it.
That is the growing mantra from financial executives and their water carriers in Washington. The major problem isn't that banks made poor decisions and lost credibility with investors, in their view. The problem is that mark-to-market accounting is dragging down financial institutions and the U.S. economy, as House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank said last week.
They couldn't be more wrong. And there's so much misinformation floating around the markets on this subject that it's time, once again, to debunk the myths.
Myth No. 1: The rules known as Financial Accounting Standard No. 157 are to blame.
The latest iteration on this tired saw comes from Christopher Whalen, a managing director at Institutional Risk Analytics, who gave an interview on the subject Friday. Among his recommendations:
``Rescind FAS 157 so if you have a real quoted price for an asset, fine, use it. Otherwise you allow companies to use historic cost. You had a transaction, you know what you paid for it, it's a fact. All this other stuff is speculation. We are literally creating the impression of losses.''
The Awful Truth
The truth: FAS 157 doesn't expand the use of fair-value accounting. Rather, it requires companies to divulge more information about the reliability of their reported fair values.
Most companies won't even adopt FAS 157 until this quarter. All the standard does is require companies to disclose how much of their assets and liabilities are valued using quoted market prices, how much are measured using valuation models, and how much come from models using inputs that aren't observable in the market. That's it.
Myth No. 2: Mark-to-market accounting is new.
Companies have been ``marking to model'' for decades, and few people complained when banks and others were recording large gains as a result. The difference now, thanks to FAS 157, is that outsiders can see the extent to which companies' fair-value results are based on estimates, at least at companies that adopted the rules early.
Financial statements always have been piles of estimates heaped upon a bunch of guesswork. Look through the footnotes to any company's financial statements, and you'll see that estimates are used for everything from loan-loss reserves, to income-tax and stock-option costs, even revenue.
Solves Nothing
Moving everything to historical-cost accounting wouldn't solve anything. For assets that aren't marked-to-market each quarter, such as goodwill and inventory, they still must be written down to fair value whenever their values have declined sharply and show no sign of bouncing back. The accountants call this an ``other-than-temporary impairment.''
So even if we had historical-cost accounting today for all the mortgage-related holdings that have plummeted in value and for which there is no liquid market, companies still would have to estimate the assets' fair values and write them down accordingly. That's because the values probably won't come back anytime soon, if ever.
Myth No. 3: Companies aren't allowed to explain their mark- to-market values.
This is a fairly new one. Last week, the Securities and Exchange Commission said it is drafting a letter to let companies tell investors when they think the market values of their plunging assets don't reflect the holdings' actual worth. Companies also would be allowed to disclose ranges showing what their models say the assets might fetch in the marketplace.
Guess what? Companies are allowed to do these things already in the discussion-and-analysis sections of their SEC reports each quarter. They also can make such disclosures in their financial-statement footnotes. What they can't do is print ranges on their balance sheets or income statements, any more than taxpayers can put down ranges on their Internal Revenue Service returns.
Myth No. 4: Eliminating mark-to-market accounting will prevent margin calls.
If you're a banker for, say, Thornburg Mortgage Inc. or Carlyle Capital Corp., do you think for a minute that you would hesitate to call in one of these companies' loans just because they started using historical cost to account for hard-to-value financial instruments? No way. The moment lenders decide the collateral isn't worth enough to support the loans, they'll demand more collateral or pull the plug, no matter what the financial statements say.
Myth No. 5: The public would be better off without mark-to- market accounting.
Investors are fully capable of understanding that unrealized losses on hard-to-value assets are estimates. They're also smart enough to know that values change over time. And in the case of things such as credit-default swaps that eventually might reach some settlement date, the fair-value changes include vital forward-looking information about what the future economic costs of these derivatives may be.
What most investors can't tolerate is being kept in the dark, when companies in their portfolios are sliding toward insolvency and whistling along the way that all is well.
We've got a meltdown, folks. Deal with it.
(Jonathan Weil is a Bloomberg News columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)
To contact the writer of this column: Jonathan Weil in Boulder, Colorado, at jweil6@bloomberg.net
THANK YOU DAVE FOR ALL YOU DO!!!!!
It is the real culprit.
You told us to do the research and not just take your word for it. Over the past week I have done detailed in depth research of this crisis. I have looked into the causes of this crisis, the potential macroeconomic and microeconomic effects and how those effects can effect our economy. I have also done a historical analysis into other financial crises.
The Paulson plan may be a travesty but IT IS OUR BEST HOPE TO AVOID FINANCIAL CALAMITY. I have written all on my representatives and implored them to SUPPORT the Paulson plan.
We are on the edge of a serious catastrophe and we can not afford delay or half measures.
Our GDP could shrink dramatacly from this crisis. If this happens our tax revenue will see a similar decline. At that point our current debt becomes unservicable and things get worse from there.
Clearly we wouldn't be in this mess if more people would have followed sound financial principles. If we could turn back time a year then the republican house bill would be appropriate.
The vast majority of economisists that have researched historical examples of this type of financial crisis believe that this can not be fixed by changing the mark-to market rules or insuring more homes.
We need to act boldly and act decisively!
This can solve the current Wall Street and home owner, all American’s problems without spending 1 US tax payer’s dollar and in doing so; it would make us the strongest country on earth again.
On this day all us criticizes & us based business are forgiven of all their past debt.
Basically you in the above action, just created the strongest country in world, if you are a business and own money overseas well so sorry.
However tomorrow morning the overseas debt you have will be the only debt you wake up with and it is the only debt you have left. Basically, if you’ve invested and / or borrowed money, outside of the USA that’s just too bad shame on you.
Going forward its just business as usual and new riches will be made but for today we have a debt free country. The next step is to place in effect a 10% straight tax across the board and the elected government better live to it because there is 50 year lock down on the new 10% straight tax.
If you like this idea better than the current one on the senate floor which is fixing to kill this country then please forward it to everyone you know and ask them to do the same. Don’t forget to forward it to your senators also.
Thanks
I am a concerned taxpayer who has paid his bills and works hard for his money. I do not believe that this buyout is the right thing to do. I feel that we have other options that are far better than bailing these companies out by buying bad loans that they made. I have learned about a new accounting rule that is part of a law to try to instill ethics in companies after the Enron scandal. I do not feel this law was successful and it has helped to cause the problem we are now faced with. A part of this law is a rule called mark-to-market where a company is required to mark down its assets according to the market value at the time. Because these companies are forced to do this, they cannot sell these loans for the value that they loaned. This has frozen their assets since they cannot sell them. While I realize that this was a stupid thing for them to do, I am suggesting that we reverse this law temporarily to allow these companies to market these loans at close to the original value. I further suggest that we should extend the guaranteed loan program to guarantee these loans but NOT to buy them. This would allow these companies to sell these loans and they would be much more attractive to potential buyers. This would allow the market to begin moving again and cost the taxpayers less money than trying to buy these loans outright. These loans are not defaulted loans and are still worth a considerable amount. By only guaranteeing the loans we will only have to pay for the loans that default. This lowers the burden on the taxpayer considerably. We should not buy these loans but rather allow the companies to market them for what they are truly worth. This way the market solves its own problems and all we have to foot is the guarantee portion of this solution. I know that I am not the only one with this idea as it is spreading rapidly through the internet. With the voice of Dave Ramsey a reknowned financial advisor, the word is getting out and we are on to the game that you are trying to play with us. We will keep spreading the word, I am telling everyone to contact their representatives and vote against anyone who votes for this bailout. Mind you, I am a stout republican however I will not vote for any republican who votes for this plan. Let's put on our thinking caps and come up with a plan that doesn't call for a total buyout. We the people are tired of not being listened to and if you continue to do what we say not to do, I feel it is time to have a new Boston tea party. Instead of throwing tea out, we will be throwing you out! I am planning to organize as many people as possible to come to Washington and protest this bill. You better listen because soon the sound of our shouting will deafen your ears. Sincerely, Daniel B. Smith
who posted their comments.
I wrote my reps: DECIDE IN HASTE, REPENT IN LEISURE
Even if David's idea is not a good one, at least tell them to think about it before they spend this money. This is MY money and I don't want it spent on these people who lost their money.
Big thing is tell them all, DON'T DO IT UNTIL YOU HAVE RESEARCHED ALL POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS
Please, please, please, pass this along to everyone you know.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/09/memory...
Government needs to let the free market work.
If the government wants to stimulate the economy to improve cash flow, it needs to lower capital gains tax to 15 % and lower corporate tax rates, and any other reasonable action like cutting spending. I am going to stop paying taxes if the crooks in DC dont stop spending my money responsible. TWO WORDS TERM LIMITS. VOTE THE CROOKS OUT OF OFFICE.
The Birk Economic Recovery Plan (a little old as i know its more now)
I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG. Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a We Deserve It Dividend. To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000bona fideU.S. Citizens 18+. Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up.. So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend. Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes. That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam. But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
Pay off your mortgage – housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans – wh at a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college – it'll be there
Save in a bank – create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car – create jobs
Invest in the market – capital drives growth
Pay for your parent's medical insurance – health care improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean – or else
Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces. If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out
a puny $1000.00 ( "vote buy" ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President. If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
As for AIG – liquidate it. Sell off its parts. Let American General go back to being American General. Sell off the real estate. Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned
instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
P.S. Even if the number is 250 million adults, the share is $340,000 gross each!!! ($238,000 net after that estimated 30% federal tax rate)
Your state and local governments will want "their share" too, but think of all the pre-financed public works projects that could get done. More jobs! Repave streets and upgrade utilities--that needs labor, and equipment and materials. This is much better than "trickle-down" economics--it would be "tidal wave" economics!
people are already removing all their money from the banks and investments
"Hey everyone, it's ok now we just moved some decimals over on our balance sheet. We're a strong company now, you can trade with us."
Of course that will instil the confidence everyone needs to get the credit markets unlocked, and leave their money in the questionable banks.
Sorry, at this point the only thing that will fix this is Uncle Sam and our hard earned money.
Change the rules so it doesn't happen next time, but way too late now.
We need a NO VOTE on the $700 billion bailout. Let the banks fail. Let them go bankrupt. Yes, our nation will face some months of very tight credit, of our credit lines being halved, of other market consequences. But the system needs to re-start.
Because there is legitimate demand for banks, this sector will come back after they've flushed out the bad investments that are pulling them down.
But there is no reason for taxpayers to bail-out these banks due to their very poor risk management. Yes, people were stupid to be conned into adjustable-rate mortgages -- but the banks still offered the deal. And got burned.
Call your Congressmen,
-Josh
I'd have googled the info for my representatives in congress
myself, but obviously those email addys wont take files
and it's not here in print.
No bailout! There is more than one way to deal with this and a bailout covers up the regulatory mistakes made by the very representatives drafting this bailout.
and if not doing the bailout will collapse our credit economy, why not use that 700 Billion to give low interest loans directly to the people that deserve and qualify for it.
CHEEETAH!!!
Look at the bailout plan.
It has 2 parts on mark-to-market. Is this fluff only?
1) restating that the SEC Chairman has ability to suspend it?
2) a 90 day review to tell Congress how it is working?
You telling me the SEC chairman is in control of this. Looks like a way for our Congress to save face if we ask. Help us understand.
That article left me thinking that mark to market was a bad thing. Enron was using it to project profits and claim them now. Can someone explain this? Thanks.
Thanks for being a clear leader for Godly finances.
Think of what that would for the financial health of our citizens!!
and wasn't it their disdain for rules and ethics that got us here in the first place. 2) the ones that
complain the loudest about Sarbanes Oxley are Wall St Execs who consider it unfair that they have to
guarantee that their financial statements are true and sign off on them. 3) It's dishonest, If this is
good for Wall Street why shouldn't I be able to pretend the investment home that I took out a 500,000
dollar loan for really isn't worth 300,000 dollars and I really am not in debt. To coin a recent phrase,
pretending that bad paper really has value is like putting lipstick on a pig. You are expecting the
Wall Street folks who sold this crap in the first place to all of a sudden believe it has value because
of an accounting slight-of-hand. I have no faith that will happen and it will be greedily manipulated
to get more ill gotten gains.
I disagree with you that we can't legislate ethics. What we haven't been doing is enforcing it. I learned
in your classes that anyone can make out a budget (rules to live by). It's only when I face the
consequences of not actually practicing my budget that it becomes clear that I am failing.
But, the simplest of all economic rules states that doing so would devalue the U.S. Dollar so much it would destroy all it is inteded to fix. Not that paying off all these loans would be any different.
instead of giving this money to the banks, lets help the people. lets find a way to distribute that 700bil to the people that really need it. maybe age groups 25-50 or something like that, who are the hard working lower middle class with incomes lower than 100k a year. get it narrowed down to about 2mil people who would each get about 350k out of the deal. this would greatly help the economy because if they paid off their houses the money would end up in the banks to cover what they have screwed up so far. then most of them would end up borrowing again which would again give the banks interest. it would create jobs when they buy cars and other things they could otherwise not afford. it would help those that have lost their jobs and are having a hard time getting another one in the current market.
i am sure there are many flaws as i am not trying to be a financial genius here, but its an idea that would greatly help the people who most politicians say they are here to help rather than to give the government more power like the current plan seems to do.
I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.
>
>
>
> Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in
>
> a We Deserve It Dividend.
>
>
>
> To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000
>
> bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.
>
>
>
> Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman
>
> and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up..
>
>
>
> So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billon that equals $425,000.00.
>
>
>
> My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a
>
> We Deserve It Dividend.
>
>
>
> Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
>
> So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
>
>
>
> Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
>
> That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
>
>
>
> But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
>
> A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
>
>
>
> What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
>
> Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
>
> Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
>
> Put away money for college - it'll be there
>
> Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
>
> Buy a new car - create jobs
>
> Invest in the market - capital drives growth
>
> Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves
>
> Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else
>
>
>
> Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks
>
> who lost their jobs at Lehmann Brothers and every other company
>
> that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
>
>
>
> If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out
>
> a puny $1000.00 ( 'vote buy' ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.
>
>
>
> If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
>
>
>
> As for AIG - liquidate it.
>
> Sell off its parts.
>
> Let American General go back to being American General.
>
> Sell off the real estate.
>
> Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
>
>
>
> Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
>
>
>
> Sure it's a crazy idea that can 'never work.'
>
>
>
> But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
>
>
>
> How do you spell Economic Boom?
>
>
>
> I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion
>
> We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC .
>
>
>
> And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned
>
> instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
>
>
>
> Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
> Kindest personal regards,
> Birk
> T. J. Birkenmeier, A Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic
> PS: Feel free to pass this along to your pals as it's either good for a laugh
> or a tear or a very sobering thought on how to best use $85 Billion!!
>
>
>
>
in another direction...e-mails will be sent to my state reps, etc...
"The one word that keeps running through my mind with this whole mess is....
CHEEETAH!!!"
# Posted by burn-a-debt | 9/28/08 12:46 PM
spout lies and half-truths about subjects they don't understand. Econ 101 Dave, no credit equals no economy. Regardless of the details of the plan, the point
is, we need a plan. Any plan. Keep telling people that this is bad. That way they'll keep calling and watching your show. Why? Because they'll never be debt
free without a job or a retirement account. Both of which will be gone by the end of this week. Great marketing plan, dummy!
FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 674
My rep Tom Cole (R-OK) voted yea
Tom, do I need to get Donald to call
Ya, or do you want to hear if from me.
YOUR FIRED !
I just called, to say
YOUR FIIIIIIIIIIRRED
and i did too !
Tom, now that its defeated, you get
a chance to repent !
NOW BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD !
These 165million dollar paycheck must stop.I was a middlre class citizen .Now I'm over my head and about to lose my home,and this do nothing congress is laughing all the way to the bank. If your not me yet, you will be soon. Let really make a change..This will be the first time in my life and I am 50 years old . Get out and vote and let's change this mess.
on with all of this. You have explained it better in one article than
all the news during 10 days!
Why have you done the American taxpayers a grave disservice by denying them an investment in these under-valued bonds?
Why are you arguing that removing mark-to-market will solve things? It may need to be a tad more lenient, but removing it, in the long-run, will only allow "fantasy" balance sheets to remain....a very dangerous practice.
The loss in your readers'/listeners' 401(k)s and pension plans will take years to recover. I hope you are pleased with yourselves.
The Birk Economic Recovery Plan
> >
> > Hi Pals,
> >
> > I'm against the $85,000,000,000 bailout of AIG.
> >
> > Instead, I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a We Deserve It Dividend.
> >
> > To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.
> >
> > Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up..
> >
> > So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.
> >
> > My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a We Deserve It Dividend.
> >
> > Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
> >
> > So let's assume a tax rate of 30%.
> >
> > Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
> >
> > That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.
> >
> > But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
> >
> > A husband and wife has $595,000.00.
> >
> > What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?
> >
> > Pay off your mortgage - housing crisis solved.
> >
> > Repay college loans - what a great boost to new grads
> >
> > Put away money for college - it'll be there
> >
> > Save in a bank - create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
> >
> > Buy a new car - create jobs
> >
> > Invest in the market - capital drives growth
> >
> > Pay for your parent's medical insurance - health care improves
> >
> > Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - or else
> >
> >
> > Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+ including the folks who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
> >
> > If we're going to re-distribute wealth let's really do it...instead of trickling out a puny $1000.00 ( "vote buy" ) economic incentive that is being proposed
> > by one of our candidates for President.
> >
> >
> > If we're going to do an $85 billion bailout, let's bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
> >
> > As for AIG - liquidate it.
> >
> > Sell off its parts.
> >
> > Let American General go back to being American General.
> >
> > Sell off the real estate.
> >
> > Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
> >
> > Here's my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn't.
> >
> > Sure it's a crazy idea that can "never work."
> >
> > But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
> >
> > How do you spell Economic Boom?
> >
> > I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion
> >
> > We Deserve It Dividend more than I do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC ..
> >
> > And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
> >
> > Ahhh...I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
> >
> > Kindest personal regards,
> >
> > Birk
> >
> > T. J. Birkenmeier, A Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic
> >
> > PS: Feel free to pass this along to your pals as it's either good for a laugh or a tear or a very sobering thought on how to best use $85 Billion!!
for leading the charge to
defeat H.R.3997!
BTW Dave Iam watching Newt Gingrich
suggest YOUR PLAN to a temporary change that one rule and don't force them to mark down to market value
for years. Now, all of a sudden they give loans to people that can't be backed and they expect the rest
of us to bail them out! If we just back up a little bit and take a look at their accounting, i'm sure
that they have more than enough capital, liquid or otherwise, to hold them over until the market stabilizes.
As a small business owner should i expect the government to bail me out if i go for the fast buck even
though it may be a poor business decision. Maybe i will leverage everything; the government will help me
out, right. At least that is the thinking. I pay my taxes, that is the only government involvement i
want in my business. Anything else is beyond what the government is there to provide. Let's look back at
the constitution and all the things that built this country and realize that it is as much the administration's
job to bail out private business as it is to keep steroids out of professional sports. It's nothing more
than posturing and photo oppurtunities before the election.... Smoke and mirrors.
Ackerman
Allen
Andrews
Arcuri
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Bean
Berman
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blunt
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boyd (FL)
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Calvert
Camp (MI)
Campbell (CA)
Cannon
Cantor
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Castle
Clarke
Clyburn
Cohen
Cole (OK)
Cooper
Costa
Cramer
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cubin
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis, Tom
DeGette
DeLauro
Dicks
Dingell
Donnelly
Doyle
Dreier
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emanuel
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Everett
Farr
Fattah
Ferguson
Fossella
Foster
Frank (MA)
Gilchrest
Gonzalez
Gordon
Granger
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hare
Harman
Hastings (FL)
Herger
Higgins
Hinojosa
Hobson
Holt
Honda
Hooley
Hoyer
Inglis (SC)
Israel
Johnson, E. B.
Kanjorski
Kennedy
Kildee
Kind
King (NY)
Kirk
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
LaHood
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (KY)
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mahoney (FL)
Maloney (NY)
Markey
Marshall
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum (MN)
McCrery
McDermott
McGovern
McHugh
McKeon
McNerney
McNulty
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy, Patrick
Murtha
Nadler
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Pallone
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson (PA)
Pickering
Pomeroy
Porter
Price (NC)
Pryce (OH)
Putnam
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Regula
Reyes
Reynolds
Richardson
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Ross
Ruppersberger
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sarbanes
Saxton
Schakowsky
Schwartz
Sessions
Sestak
Shays
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Tancredo
Tanner
Tauscher
Towns
Tsongas
Upton
Van Hollen
Velázquez
Walden (OR)
Walsh (NY)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Weldon (FL)
Wexler
Wilson (NM)
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wolf
---- NOES 228 ---
Abercrombie
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Baca
Bachmann
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett (MD)
Barton (TX)
Becerra
Berkley
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Boustany
Boyda (KS)
Braley (IA)
Broun (GA)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Buyer
Capito
Carney
Carson
Carter
Castor
Cazayoux
Chabot
Chandler
Childers
Clay
Cleaver
Coble
Conaway
Conyers
Costello
Courtney
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Davis (KY)
Davis, David
Davis, Lincoln
Deal (GA)
DeFazio
Delahunt
Dent
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Doggett
Doolittle
Drake
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
English (PA)
Fallin
Feeney
Filner
Flake
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gillibrand
Gingrey
Gohmert
Goode
Goodlatte
Graves
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Hall (TX)
Hastings (WA)
Hayes
Heller
Hensarling
Herseth Sandlin
Hill
Hinchey
Hirono
Hodes
Hoekstra
Holden
Hulshof
Hunter
Inslee
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Jefferson
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, Sam
Jones (NC)
Jordan
Kagen
Kaptur
Keller
Kilpatrick
King (IA)
Kingston
Knollenberg
Kucinich
Kuhl (NY)
Lamborn
Lampson
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Lucas
Lynch
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul (TX)
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McMorris Rodgers
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Mitchell
Moran (KS)
Murphy, Tim
Musgrave
Myrick
Napolitano
Neugebauer
Nunes
Ortiz
Pascrell
Pastor
Paul
Payne
Pearce
Pence
Peterson (MN)
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe
Price (GA)
Ramstad
Rehberg
Reichert
Renzi
Rodriguez
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Rothman
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Rush
Salazar
Sali
Sánchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Scalise
Schiff
Schmidt
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Solis
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Taylor
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Turner
Udall (CO)
Udall (NM)
Visclosky
Walberg
Walz (MN)
Wamp
Watson
Welch (VT)
Westmoreland
Whitfield (KY)
Wittman (VA)
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
---- NOT VOTING 1 ---
Weller
bill have woken up and seen the damage that vote has done, take a look at this - http://www.cnbc.com/id/26954215.
It's time to write to your representatives again and urge a positive action that will correct the situation. The hand of government is required to serve as the lender of last resort.
Depending on 'market forces' to self-correct is like believing in the tooth fairy. Only regulation will solve this now.
Any other view is based on a 9th grade civics class view of the economy.
do bussiness legal. While the goverment & elite fly-high & take ther vacations this weekend with tax payers trillions! face it the
goverment know has there hand in just about evertying know! My soulution produce the note just like the gongress women from detroit
had said until the banks are willing to modify and work with people whoe have had a history with their banks! You would get people to
start paying their mortgages rather than relocate families and uproot children find new schools, doctors ect....!
Very simple the banks already have been paid interest and the notes have been sold over and over again, the servicing companies are not
gona do anything they did not receive any rules with there billions, trillions of our taxpayers dollors!
Let working american families keep there homes, so they are not paying $3000. and they pay $2000. modified! Bob Marquez my father allways
said to have somthing curculating is better than nothing! With 100,000. job losses in just Ca. very scarry and were bearly tapping into comercial and credit meltdown!