Geithner's Plan

In my uninformed opinion, it seems unlikely that ALL of the mortgages are going to default, and some of those securities will someday be worth at least something.
 
I think it has more to do with the welfare package.
People have had time to look at it.
CNNMONEY had a comparison of house to Senate and it's mostly welfare.
NOT JOBS, NOT TAX CREDITS.

Top it sounds as if you are conflating Geithner's bank bailout with the stimulus. Two different things.
 
So what is going to happen in the long run then? What do you think the inevitable is? Those banks close?

No. The government will pay a lot of money to inject capital in banks that are walking dead and after the first injection of capital will have to spend more to nationalize the bigger banks that can be saved, clean up their balance sheets and then resell them down the line, something it should just do in the first place.

I think that's where they are headed with the stress test proposal.
 
Whether they default or not is not the relevant question. The relevant question is what are they worth. Can you answer that one for me? You keep dodging it every time I ask it, instead focusing on the pointless default issue.

There is no one set value for all of the assets moron. They are all pricing dependent upon the underlying assets. The range right now, again depending on the underlying assets is 25-60 cents on the dollar.

I notice that you once again ducked answering the question. You continue to pretend that defaults and expected defaults have nothing to do with the pricing. It just lends to the assertation that you are using some bullshit fear mongering talking points and really dont have a fucking clue how these assets are valued. Because they are valued based on cash flow and anticipated defaults.

Your complete lack of comprehension puts you on par with Asshat. Congratulations. You are the Dixie on this issue. Continuing to argue a point on which you clearly lack any sort of basic understanding, all the while pretending that by saying the same thing over and over again you have somehow made a point.

Now... answer the fucking question....

Do you think the majority of these loans are going to default?
 
In my uninformed opinion, it seems unlikely that ALL of the mortgages are going to default, and some of those securities will someday be worth at least something.

Of course there is value. Because for one they wont all default and for another, even those that do default have underlying assets that have value.
 
There is no one set value for all of the assets moron. They are all pricing dependent upon the underlying assets. The range right now, again depending on the underlying assets is 25-60 cents on the dollar.

I notice that you once again ducked answering the question. You continue to pretend that defaults and expected defaults have nothing to do with the pricing. It just lends to the assertation that you are using some bullshit fear mongering talking points and really dont have a fucking clue how these assets are valued. Because they are valued based on cash flow and anticipated defaults.

Your complete lack of comprehension puts you on par with Asshat. Congratulations. You are the Dixie on this issue. Continuing to argue a point on which you clearly lack any sort of basic understanding, all the while pretending that by saying the same thing over and over again you have somehow made a point.

Now... answer the fucking question....

Do you think the majority of these loans are going to default?


You seem to want to take issue with whether the assets are "worthless." I freely admit that they are not worthless in the true meaning of the term. They are just worth a shitload less than was paid for them and the idea that they are worth a whole lot more than people are willing to pay for them is, well, silly.
 
Stimulus Plan: Comparing House And Senate Versions
Topics:Interest Rates * Inflation * Ben Bernanke * Employment * Consumers * Federal Reserve * Federal Budget (U.S.) * Economy (Global) * Economy (U.S.)By: AP * 10 Feb 2009 * 03:19 PM ET Text Size Here's a comparison of the $838 billion economic recovery plan passed by the Senate with an $820 billion version passed by the House.

Additional debt costs would add almost $350 billion over 10 years. Many provisions expire in two years.

Spending Aid To Poor And Unemployed

—Senate: $40 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through Dec. 31, and increase them by $25 a week; $16.5 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 12 percent through fiscal 2011 and issue a one-time bonus payment; $3 billion in temporary welfare payments.
CNBC.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


—House: Comparable extension of unemployment insurance; $20 billion to increase food stamp benefits by 14 percent; $2.5 billion in temporary welfare payments; $1 billion for home heating subsidies and $1 billion for community action agencies.

Direct Cash Payments

—Senate: $17 billion to give one-time $300 payments to Social Security recipients, poor people on Supplemental Security Income, and veterans receiving disability and pensions.

—House: $4 billion to provide a one-time additional Supplemental Security Income payment to poor elderly and disabled people of $450 for individuals and $630 for married couples.

Infrastructure

—Senate: $46 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $11.5 billion for mass transit and rail projects; $4.6 billion for the Army Corps of Engineers; $5 billion for public housing improvements; $6.4 billion for clean and drinking water projects.

—House: $47 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repair and $12 billion for mass transit, including $7.5 billion to buy transit equipment such as buses; $31 billion to build and repair federal buildings and other public infrastructure; $12.4 billion in rail and mass transit projects.

Health Care

—Senate: $20 billion to subsidize health care insurance for the unemployed under the COBRA program; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $22 billion to modernize health information technology systems; $10 billion for health research and construction of National Institutes of Health facilities.

—House: $40 billion for more generous COBRA subsidies and to provide health care through Medicaid; $87 billion to help states with Medicaid; $20 billion to modernize health information technology systems; $4 billion for preventative care; $1.5 billion for community health centers; $420 million to combat avian flu; $335 million for programs that combat AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases and tuberculosis.

State Block Grants

--Senate: No provision.

--House: $25 billion in aid to states to use as they please to defray budget cuts.

Education

—Senate: $39 billion in state fiscal relief to prevent cuts in state aid to school districts; $25 billion to school districts to fund special education and the No Child Left Behind K-12 law; $14 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $400 to $5,250; $1.1 billion for Head Start.

—House: $54 billion for education-related state relief; $20 billion for school modernization; $26 billion to school districts to fund special education and the No Child Left Behind K-12 law; $16 billion to boost the maximum Pell Grant by $500 to $5,350; $2 billion for Head Start.

Energy

—Senate: About $40 billion for energy programs, focused chiefly on efficiency and renewable energy, including $2.9 billion to weatherize modest-income homes; $4.6 billion for fossil fuel research and development; $6.4 billion to clean up nuclear weapons production sites; $11 billion toward a so-called "smart electricity grid" to reduce waste; $8.5 billion to subsidize loans for renewable energy projects; and $2 billion for advanced battery systems.

—House: $28.4 billion for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs, including $6.2 billion to weatherize homes; $11 billion to fund a so-called "smart electricity grid" to reduce waste.

Homeland Security

—Senate: $4.7 billion for homeland security programs, including $1 billion for airport screening equipment and $800 million for port security.

—House: $1.1 billion, including $500 million for airport screening equipment.

Law Enforcement

—Senate: $3.5 billion in grants to state and local law enforcement to hire officers and purchase equipment.

—House -- $4 billion for state law enforcement grants.

Taxes New Tax Credit

’House: About $145 billion for $500 per-worker, $1,000 per-couple tax credits in 2009 and 2010. For the last half of 2009, workers could expect to see about $20 a week less withheld from their paychecks starting around June.

Millions of Americans who don't make enough money to pay federal income taxes could file returns next year and receive checks. Individuals making more than $75,000 and couples making more than $150,000 would receive reduced amounts.

—Senate: The credit would phase out at incomes of $70,000 for individuals and couples making more than $140,000 and phase out more quickly, reducing the cost to $140 billion.

Expanded Child Credit

—House: $18.3 billion to give greater access to the $1,000 per-child tax credit for the working poor in 2009 and 2010. Under current law, workers must make at least $12,550 to receive any portion of the credit.

The change eliminates the floor, meaning more workers who pay no federal income taxes could receive checks.

—Senate: Sets a new income threshold of $8,100 to receive any portion of the credit, reducing the cost to $7.5 billion.

Alternative Minimum Tax

—House:-- No provision

—Senate: About $70 billion to spare about 24 million taxpayers from being hit with the alternative minimum tax in 2009. The change would save a family of four an average of $2,300.

The tax was designed to make sure wealthy taxpayers can't use credits and deductions to avoid paying any taxes. But it was never indexed to inflation, so families making as little as $45,000 could get significant increases without the change. Congress addresses it each year, usually in the fall.

Expanded Earned Income Tax Credit

—House: $4.7 billion to increase the earned-income tax credit —which provides money to the working poor—for families with at least three children.

—Senate: Same.

Expanded College Credit

—House: $13.7 billion to provide a $2,500 expanded tax credit for college tuition and related expenses for 2009 and 2010. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $160,000.

—Senate: Reduces the amount that can be refunded to low-income families that pay no income taxes, lowering the cost to $13 billion.

Homebuyer Credit

—House: $2.6 billion to repeal a requirement that a $7,500 first-time home buyer tax credit be paid back over time for homes purchased from Jan. 1 to July 1, unless the home is sold within three years. The credit is phased out for couples making more than $150,000.

—Senate: Doubles the credit to $15,000 for homes purchased for a year after the bill takes effect, increasing the cost to $35.5 billion.

Home Energy Credit

—House: $4.3 billion to provide an expanded credit to homeowners who make their homes more energy-efficient in 2009 and 2010. Homeowners could recoup 30 percent of the cost up to $1,500 of numerous projects, such as installing energy-efficient windows, doors, furnaces and air conditioners.

—Senate: Same.

Unemployment

—House: No similar provision.

—Senate: $4.7 billion to exclude from taxation the first $2,400 a person receives in unemployment compensation benefits in 2009.

Bonus Depreciation

—House: $5 billion to extend a provision allowing businesses buying equipment such as computers to speed up its depreciation through 2009.

—Senate: Similar.

Money Losing Companies

—House: $15 billion to allow companies to use current losses to offset profits made in the previous five years, instead of two, making them eligible for tax refunds.

—Senate: Allows companies to use more of their losses to offset previous profits, increasing the cost to $19.5 billion.

Government Contractors

—House: Repeal a law that takes effect in 2011, requiring government agencies to withhold 3 percent of payments to contractors to help ensure they pay their tax bills. Repealing the law would cost $11 billion over 10 years, in part because the government could not earn interest by holding the money throughout the year.

—Senate: Delays the law from taking affect until 2012, reducing the cost to $291 million.

Energy Production

—House: $13 billion to extend tax credits for renewable energy production.

—Senate: Same.

Bonds

—House: $36 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, teacher training, economic development and infrastructure improvements.


RELATED LINKS

Current DateTime: 12:20:25 10 Feb 2009
LinksList Documentid: 29124740
Stimulus Compromise Not Easy
Ranking Stimulus Bill Spending

—Senate: $22.8 billion to subsidize locally issued bonds for school construction, industrial development and infrastructure improvements.

Repeal Bank Credit

—House: Repeal a Treasury provision that allowed firms that buy money-losing banks to use more of the losses as tax credits to offset the profits of the merged banks for tax purposes. The change would increase taxes on the merged banks by $7 billion over 10 years.

—Senate: Same.

Auto Sales

—House: No similar provision.

—Senate: $11 billion to make interest payments on most auto loans and sales tax on cars deductible.
 
So where is Dungheap coming from? I'm trying to understand his argument.


My argument is that, because these assets are worth a whole lot less than the owners of these assets claim they are worth on their balance sheets, there are lots of institutions holding a lot of these assets that are insolvent in reality. Their assets aren't worth what they claim they are.
 
So where is Dungheap coming from? I'm trying to understand his argument.

I'll let him explain his own position. Because I dont beleive he knows where he is coming from. His argument is the same as Asshats.... say they are worthless over and over again until people agree.
 
Can you name even one renowned economist who favors protectionism?

Economists are paid to tell lies, and buttress the military industrial complex ideologically. Right now, the mic is actively destroying the american economy so they can extend the power and control of the state with less opposition, due to americans being poor. They have hastened this fall with assinine notions of globalization zealotry.
 
So Dung are you saying that we should go ahead and nationalize the banks that are holding lots of these securities since we might have to give them cash to meet their obligations anyway?
 
So Dung are you saying that we should go ahead and nationalize the banks that are holding lots of these securities since we might have to give them cash to meet their obligations anyway?

What are we doing instead? Socializing loss and privatizing any profit, how is that beneficial?
 
I'll let him explain his own position. Because I dont beleive he knows where he is coming from. His argument is the same as Asshats.... say they are worthless over and over again until people agree.


Not really. I'd just prefer that the government get right to the point than pussyfoot around with these gimmicks that no one is buying. The end game is going to be the same. Some institutions will make it without government intervention, some institutions will make it with government intervention and some just won't make it. At the rate we are going we will waste money by subsidizing all three.
 
I'll let him explain his own position. Because I dont beleive he knows where he is coming from. His argument is the same as Asshats.... say they are worthless over and over again until people agree.

Their value is so low that nobody wants to sell them on an open market, and instead, the banks are screaming that the government prop up their value at taxpayer expense.

You can claim it's a good deal for the taxpayer over and over, no thinking person will ever agree.
 
What are we doing instead? Socializing loss and privatizing any profit, how is that beneficial?

I'm not expressing an opinion. I'm not informed enough about this issue to speak with any authority on it. I'm simply trying to understand the various views and positions.
 
Not really. I'd just prefer that the government get right to the point than pussyfoot around with these gimmicks that no one is buying. The end game is going to be the same. Some institutions will make it without government intervention, some institutions will make it with government intervention and some just won't make it. At the rate we are going we will waste money by subsidizing all three.

So ideally what would you like to see happen?
 
Back
Top