The fall out of wreckless investments, both local and global, are being absorbed by US tax payers.
Wall Street has turned the US government into it's own garbage disposal system; enjoy the "benefits" of capitalism.
The fall out of wreckless investments, both local and global, are being absorbed by US tax payers.
Wall Street has turned the US government into it's own garbage disposal system; enjoy the "benefits" of capitalism.
Since when can Wall Street legislate that tax payers are required to bailout europe? Don't get me wrong as I'm no fan of wall street either, but the governments have enabled them through loose credit policies that eventually have to be tightened. If the government didn't charter a lender of last resort for them, then supply of credit would be much tighter and the business cycle would be minimized for those who weren't risk takers.
Anyway, there is a huge problem with bailouts because they're nothing other than bailouts of creditors who are also debtors. As for creditors who aren't debtors, sure some of their savings would've been wasted, but they have no right to be bailed out at tax payer expense and they'd benefit from the deflation that would happen. Letting the creditors who are in debt go bankrupt has worked every time in history when government actually let that happen.
who exactly do you back? You quickly point fingers, but I think your cause is as corrupt as wall street
Then we should go down as well, we never should have been so entrenched with them to get to this point. Failure is the best course of action and we should allow it. It won't be that bad, the people who will be hit the hardest are those at the top with power. They'll be the ones whose blood people are demanding.
Too big to fail? No. Too big to bailout.
Keep inflating these bubbles and you'll cause economic ruin.
You idiot the reason why we would have to bail them out is because US banks and Wall Street were selling them toxic debt.
Nope. We've already done that with TARP. A lot of that money went to foreign banks holding US derivatives/CDS's. (IMO, that was unnecessary. They bought it, they should've known what they were doing. You want the reward, you take the risk. Fsck 'em.)
Anyhoo, Europe's current problem is bad foreign (country) bonds, like Greece and Italy et al, not anything from us. And we're worried that their problems may cause us problems with (lessening) demand etc that would negatively impact our economy.
Fern
From what I read our problem is far less one of "entrenchment" and more of a problem that one of our big trading partners (imports US goods) will go into a slump and buy less of our products, leading us into a slump also.
There may be some "entrenchment" with some funds/banks holding Italian bonds etc., but I'm not hearing that's a big problem. (Unless, of course, you invested in Corzine's company - MF Capital. IIRC, recently heard the amount of 'missing' investor money had risen to $1.2 Billion)
Fern
There was some talking head on CNBC a day or two ago who said exports to Europe were 10% (it was 10% or 20%), but that most of that is re-exported elsewhere out of Europe."one of our big trading partners (imports US goods) will go into a slump and buy less of our products, leading us into a slump also."
"Some analysts concur with the view that the situation may not be that dire. For example, Jonathan Anderson, an economist with UBS in Hong Kong, notes that Asian economies are “essentially self-sufficient in terms of finance for local investment, consumption and working capital”.
The flows from European banks are primarily connected with trade finance, he says. That means that, even if the European banks pull back, as seems to be happening, either global banks, such as HSBC, or local banks can pick up the slack, in part because such finance does not require banks to set aside much precious capital against such lending.
Still, Mr Anderson concedes all this is dependent on banks maintaining lines to each other, since it is in their interest to maintain a stable interbank market. In fact, banks are all wrestling with the dilemma that it can be prudent to cut lines to counterparties whose funding base is fragile, yet if everyone cuts those lines, everyone is worse off."
http://www.cnbc.com/id/45409040
So none of Europe's problems are due to any of the bad credit default swaps and derivatives that were sold to them by the U.S and the T.A.R.P. was in your opinion sufficient enough to bail everyone out??
Do you realize the only people who knew the true risk of the garbage they where selling was Goldman sachs,Big Bank CEO's and a few other Wall Street insiders? In fact Goldman Sachs was secretly hedging against this crap they were selling to their own customers.
I also have read in many credible sites that it will take YEARS for all the toxic debt in the WORLD'S financial system to clear out and it will take at least 10 more years to come out of this recession.
Wow never read this angle before.
There was some talking head on CNBC a day or two ago who said exports to Europe were 10% (it was 10% or 20%), but that most of that is re-exported elsewhere out of Europe.
That person said the exports originated primarily from three states, New York, New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania (don't know how that jives with what I heard that technology companies had large markets in Europe?)
I think greater concern might be if there is a global recession (RBC strategist who was projecting very low GDP next year (I think he said 1.5 - 2%) because a lot of emerging markets get their financing from Europe.
China seems to have gotten control of it's inflation problem (inflation is stabilized and not going up now), but still concerns about soft landing or hard landing for their economy.
I'm not. government-created bubbles have to pop.Can you please explain to me why you are proposing stronger government policies with the bolded statement above?
LOLwut??
-snip-
If American tax payers end up on the rope for the European bailout, how the fuck does Obama win an election then? I don't see it happening.
It seems though that we want to perpetuate this cycle and that's wrong.
So when you said that 'government's loose credit policies have to be tightened' you weren't proposing that 'government's loose credit policies have to be tightened'?I'm not. government-created bubbles have to pop.Can you please explain to me why you are proposing stronger government policies with the bolded statement above?... the governments have enabled them through loose credit policies that eventually have to be tightened.
...