PeteyNice Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 So yeah. 500 pts down. And most Asian markets were closed today. http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/15/markets/ma...dex.htm?cnn=yes It is just a bad scene. More regulation is clearly needed. I know we don't discuss heavy finance here much, and I am not trying to turn this political but it is big news especially in and around the city. I thought we needed a thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 part of the problem was the government being involved in the first place. Everyone was able to make whatever loan they wanted because freddoe and fannie would buy it from you. F and f would do this because their mandate was to get everyone into homes regardless of risk if a loan was given. So the government encouraged the market to make whatever crappy loans they wanted because f and f would buy them. That led to huge profits and crappy loans but f and f met their primary govt given goal of mortgages to many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 part of the problem was the government being involved in the first place. Everyone was able to make whatever loan they wanted because freddoe and fannie would buy it from you. F and f would do this because their mandate was to get everyone into homes regardless of risk if a loan was given. So the government encouraged the market to make whatever crappy loans they wanted because f and f would buy them. That led to huge profits and crappy loans but f and f met their primary govt given goal of mortgages to many. Their original loan limits were low but they kept on raising the limit that they could right a loan for. Mr Obama should be careful who he blames for this mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOULAM1 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Why is more regulation needed? Next the airlines, then the auto industry etc.. etc... Kudos to the Feds for not stepping in. You make mistakes, the market corrects itself and that is fact.. not socialist ideals. Yes it may hurt in the short term, but 10 years from now it is the best thing for all of us. I like choices and one investment bank, one airline and one car to choose from is BS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaglejelly Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Kudos to the Feds for not stepping in. In addition, the federal government has asked Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan to lead a $70 billion to $75 billion lending pool for the company, the Wall Street Journal reported. And didn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOULAM1 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 (edited) And didn Edited September 16, 2008 by LOULAM1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevil26 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 And didn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 In Soviet Russia, market corrects you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted September 16, 2008 Author Share Posted September 16, 2008 So, 731, I want to get your opinion on something. Washington Mutual? Absolutely fvcked or going to be OK? I love my local branch and my 3.75% interest but like my money more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 So, 731, I want to get your opinion on something.Washington Mutual? Absolutely fvcked or going to be OK? I love my local branch and my 3.75% interest but like my money more. Well if you have less than 100k in the bank then you're ok. At IndyMac the insured money was covered by the FDIC immediately and non-insured money was covered 50% immediately and the other 50% will come after the bank's assets are liquidated. Also there are lots of ways to get more than 100k of insurance, for example I got my parents up to 600k of insurance. It's all in how you manipulate the titling on the the accounts. By adding beneficiaries and making some accounts joint and some accounts individual and having different beneficiaries you can get a lot of insurance. This was my go to tool when I was at the bank: http://www.fdic.gov/edie/calculator.html You can put in different scenarios and it will tell you how much insurance you have under those conditions. As for whether WAMU will survive, not having any inside info, I think they'll either survive or be bought out/merged. According to their public statements, which they're liable for, they have 50 billion in liquidity they can still tap and Moody's even said that when they cut WAMU to junk they didn't have concern about the banks short term liquidity, which is what causes the FDIC to step in, but cut them to junk to be safe because they didn't know what would happen long term. That's not Moody's saying anything bad, just that they don't know so they're playing it safe now since they got burned being aggressive before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Why is more regulation needed? Next the airlines, then the auto industry etc.. etc... Like any issue, this is not black and white. What do you mean by regulation? If you mean there should be no pricing regulation, then I'm in agreement. If you mean there shouldn't be certain laws and oversight to make sure that unfettered greed doesn't kick the taxpayers in the ass, then I disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Obama should be careful who he blames for this mess. Agreed. This is bipartisan disaster. The Phil Gramms AND Christopher Dodds of this country have blood on their hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted September 16, 2008 Author Share Posted September 16, 2008 What worries me is that the FDIC fund does not have the money to cover Washington Mutual's deposits. I pulled my account there under $100k several months ago but I still enough there that I will be pissed if I lose it. Schwab is up to 3% which, in combination with the dire Washington Mutual News, is what is prompting me to consider my options. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 What worries me is that the FDIC fund does not have the money to cover Washington Mutual's deposits. I pulled my account there under $100k several months ago but I still enough there that I will be pissed if I lose it. Schwab is up to 3% which, in combination with the dire Washington Mutual News, is what is prompting me to consider my options. It doesn't matter, the FDIC will be given the funds to cover any amount of deposits that they are insuring. They've been covering uninsured funds, they certainly aren't going to balk at the insured funds. Even people at Lehmans are being 100% covered. WAMU doesn't appear imminent to collapse with all their liquidity still on hand. I'd be more than comfortable keeping insured money at any FDIC insured bank in the nation, regardless if it was 15k or 500k as long as it was all insured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devilish34 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOULAM1 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevilMinder Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The government is now announcing they will be buying 80% of AIG. Jeez, with the other banks bought and now this, how can the taxpayers afford this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RSC Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, when asked Tuesday whether Democrats bear some of the responsibility regarding the current crisis on Wall Street, had a one-word answer: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LetsGoDevils Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Bush tried to correct this or head this off in 2003, but the Dems shot it down. ''These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis,'' said Representative Barney Frank of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. ''The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.'' http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...agewanted=print Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerrydevil Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 The government is now announcing they will be buying 80% of AIG. Jeez, with the other banks bought and now this, how can the taxpayers afford this? Maybe the other option, an AIG bankruptcy, would leave the American people worse off. I don't know. This whole thing is definitely FUBAR though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
point Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Basically what we are seeing is a run on the investment banks from the back end, not the man in the street depositor. These guys have managed to lose so much money that their peers at the hedge funds and other institutions just don't trust them with the big money anymore. F and F had sold bonds to foreign central banks, which were looking for better returns that they were getting from Treasury securities, so the Treasury said, sure , give your money to F and F, their almost as good as treasuries (wink-wink). The govt had to make good on that implicit promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 Now that we own 80% of AIG, what do we do with it? Do we all get to go to the stockholders meetings? Vote for board reps like they were congresspeople? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squishyx Posted September 17, 2008 Share Posted September 17, 2008 Now that we own 80% of AIG, what do we do with it? Do we all get to go to the stockholders meetings? Vote for board reps like they were congresspeople? you own roughly 1/300,000,000th of that 80%. In the same regard you probably don't goto stockholder meetings, or vote for board reps when you own regular stock in a company do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteyNice Posted September 17, 2008 Author Share Posted September 17, 2008 you own roughly 1/300,000,000th of that 80%. In the same regard you probably don't goto stockholder meetings, or vote for board reps when you own regular stock in a company do you? When I lived in NJ I did as long as the meetings were held in the city (most of them were). This wasn't just a bailout or loan, the federal government has a controlling interest in AIG now. We should have some say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts