News Temp

1. 24 Responses to “FDIC bailout, German elections”

2. By jizzmonger on Mar 10, 2010 | Reply

   What happens to all the money and assets the insurance company has insured if you let it fail?

   The ideal thing to do is to keep them well regulated so they don’t get that way in the first place, don’t ya think?

3. By decepticonsofnwo on Mar 13, 2010 | Reply

   You are a fucking bafoon, herbs814 is pointing out to u the fundamentals of capitalism where gov. does not intrude on the free markets, the to big to fails should not be getting bailed out at the expense of the american people, this is called socialism and it fails, quit insulting people and study up

4. By louiethegreater on Mar 13, 2010 | Reply

   Peter why don’t you just move to one of those countries that has less government.

5. By r8qt7 on Mar 13, 2010 | Reply

   I’m from Germany and even with the election it’s not necessary swinging to lesser government (and I don’t think that this would be the right way anyway).

   We’ll see the path in the future but the CDU (conservative party) won’t kill social security in that degree that the fdp (liberterian party) would want to

6. By Paolo7219 on Mar 14, 2010 | Reply

   Excellent video. Worth watching more than once to get all the information. Mr. Schiff says, “We have only scratched the surface…”. That sounds ominous. Sooner or later, people will find out how corrupt the banks are. The taxpayer has been bailing out failing banks for a long time. In the 70’s, Continental Bank of Illinois was bailed out–because they were reckless, to make a long story short. Continental–at the time–was the 7th largest bank in the country. Thanks for the video, Mr. Schiff.

7. By herbs814 on Mar 16, 2010 | Reply

   things were not fine. FDR made the recession worse by his socialist interventions. It is because of FDIC and Fannie and Freddie and higher taxes and govt spending and regulation and other intrusions that the depression lasted a decade. Then these same intrusions aggravated the recessions in 1958-1960, 1968-1980, 1987, 1991-92, 2001-02, 2007–?? Government has ALWAYS been a problem aggravating the economy. And it is long overdue that government be eliminated from the economy.

8. By jizzmonger on Mar 19, 2010 | Reply

   There isn’t enough here to prove you have no clue in 500 characters so I will simply ask you this question.

   Why were things fine for 60 + years after the depression until the 80’s when Reagan deregulated which led to the Savings and Loan scandal?

   If what you are saying is true, why didn’t the system fail loooonnnnnnnggggg ago?

9. By herbs814 on Mar 21, 2010 | Reply

   Easy credit credit comes from the Fed printing excess currency and loosening reserve requirements, NOT from the free market. Because FDIC insures deposits, it encourages banks to be reckless with their deposits, including lending to unqualified borrowers.

   How much slower do I need to explain this before you understand? You do not have a clue how much government insurance distorts the market. Learn something before you embarrass yourself.

10. By jizzmonger on Mar 24, 2010 | Reply

    Easy credit is provided by Wall Street firms buying more mortgages and bringing in capital from around the world to fund those mortgages.

    FDIC insures deposits, it does not insure mortgages.

    Why do you keep posting when you don’t even have a clue what the FDIC does?

11. By herbs814 on Mar 26, 2010 | Reply

    Housing costs exceeded income because of excessive credit created by the Fed and purchased by Fannie and Freddie and insured against loss by FDIC. Government caused the housing crisis. It’s time for government to get out of the financial markets.

12. By jizzmonger on Mar 26, 2010 | Reply

    Now, please tell us how the FDIC is responsible for this crash or cease responding.

    You are boring me to tears with your intellectually hollow rants.

13. By jizzmonger on Mar 27, 2010 | Reply

    Fannie and Freddie have around in one for another since well, the 30’s. WHy did a crash happen much sooner if it’s their fault?

    Houses exceed income level because of all the stupid shit people put in them nowadays, not because Fannie and Freddie help keep interest rates down.

14. By herbs814 on Mar 30, 2010 | Reply

    it is the intrusion of Fannie and Freddie that caused the housing prices to exceed income (and inevitably crash). it is the moral hazard of the FDIC standing ready to bail out banks that caused the reckless disregard for risk. Government intrusion is the problem. The economy cannot have a sound foundation without limiting the power of intrusive government intervention in the economy.

15. By jizzmonger on Apr 1, 2010 | Reply

    You keep saying the same thing over and over but post no rationale for saying it.

    Your claim is irrelevant without thoughts and ideas to back it up.

    At this point I beleive you are merely parrot who has no idea what he is talking about.

16. By herbs814 on Apr 4, 2010 | Reply

    FDIC, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac have always been evil schemes that steal from the honest and coddle the irresponsible and corrupt. It does not matter how long these evil schemes have existed; they need to be abolished!!

17. By jizzmonger on Apr 6, 2010 | Reply

    No because FDIC insured banks have to follow certain rules, most noteworthy making sure their borrowers are credit worthy.

    This system has been around since before you were born.

    You rants are failed and your comments mean nothing because they are not rooted in fact.

18. By herbs814 on Apr 7, 2010 | Reply

    by insuring deposits, FDIC insulates banks from the risk of making improvident loans. It is because of the socialist insurance scheme of the FDIC that banks are emboldened to provide mortgages to unqualified borrowers. FDIC and Fannie and Freddie have created this mess. They should all be liquidated and abolished, not bailed out to impose more distortions on the market.

19. By jizzmonger on Apr 9, 2010 | Reply

    FDIC insures deposits, it has nothing to do with Mortgages.

    Imagine that. Just like I said, you are parroting back buzzwords and talking points you have heard and have ZERO clue what you are talking about.

20. By herbs814 on Apr 12, 2010 | Reply

    by purchasing ill-conceived mortgages and insuring against the losses from excessive risk (with money extorted from successful and prudent Americans), regulators push banks to take on more risk to chase higher returns.

21. By jizzmonger on Apr 12, 2010 | Reply

    What kind of Moral Hazard do they create and how has that affected the bank’s behavior?

    I.E. point to some examples that back up your point.

22. By herbs814 on Apr 13, 2010 | Reply

    FDIC has been a cause of moral hazard that rewards risk and punishes prudence since its very inception. FDIC has always been wrong; should never have been created; and should be abolished.

23. By jizzmonger on Apr 16, 2010 | Reply

    LOL

    FDIC has been around since 1933, idiots like you are the problem.

24. By herbs814 on Apr 19, 2010 | Reply

    The FDIC and other government regulators are the problem; not the solution.

25. By jizzmonger on Apr 19, 2010 | Reply

    LOL

    I am sure those are your own thoughts and you’re not just parroting them back from some nonsense you have read.

    LOL

26. By herbs814 on Apr 23, 2010 | Reply

    WRONG. The very existence of the FDIC in the first place is the cause of the moral hazard. FDR’s regulations (including FDIC) are the problem. Deregulation and the end of taxpayer bailouts is the solution.

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.