http://www.angryrenter.com/
Backlash grows against the housing bailout
Many Americans want no part of a government-funded bailout for troubled mortgage borrowers.
By Les Christie, CNNMoney.com staff writer
Last Updated: April 23, 2008: 3:34 PM EDT
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Why should American taxpayers have to pay to bailout reckless lenders and borrowers?
The website Angryrenter.com, launched just last week, has a vitiation demanding that Congress not pass any bailout programs that reward risky borrowing and lending. To wit: "Let the free market sort it out!"
The petition is gathering 40 to 50 signatures per hour, according to spokesman Adam Brandon, who adds that the site is already getting 15,000 visitors a day.
"There's a huge segment of the country saying, 'We don't want our money used for a bailout,'" said Brandon.
AngryRenter.com is backed by FreedomWorks, the conservative, free-market Washington-based lobbying group run by former House majority leader Dick Armey.
"A third of the American public rents," Brandon pointed out. "They're saying 'I've been saving for a mortgage for years. I could have jumped in on a subprime loan too. Now I'm going to have to pay for a government bailout."
'We wanted to buy too'
Many CNNMoney.com readers agree, expressing outrage at the idea of seeing their taxes used to keep people in homes they never should have purchased.
"We are both working professionals who would have liked to buy," said Matthew Haas, a community development organizer who moved to Los Angeles with his wife in 2003. They opted not to pay bubble prices, and are still renting despite ample income.
"Now we have hit [the alternative minimum tax] and are finding out our tax dollars are going to bail out others." "Where is value, morally, as a country?" he said. "Is it taking taxpayer money and applying it to people who should never have bought, people who were flippers?"
Many people would prefer the government do nothing at all to prop up the housing market -- especially those hoping to buy in a more affordable market.
Patrick Killelea has been blogging about the housing bubble at Patrick.net for four years from San Francisco, where it takes a not-so-small fortune to buy.
"Bailouts reward bad behavior. I've been diligently saving, denying myself lots of things so I can afford to buy, yet the government is saying we have to keep all these people in their homes," said the Web site programmer and author. "Well, wait a minute! Why can't I spend more than I can afford and have the government bail me out."
Fat profits
Nationalbubble.com is another newly minted site devoted to the bailout backlash. "I just got really angry," said blogger Morgan Ward Doran, an L.A.-based attorney who isn't professional involved with the housing industry. "Everyone I hear from is against the bailouts."
Doran argues that lenders, brokers and home builders all made huge profits by overbuilding houses pushing through poorly underwriten loans, and now they want taxpayers to cushion their fall.
Indeed, there is a provision in the Senate bailout bill that would give extensive tax breaks to home builders, which has some people especially incensed.
The Laborers International Union of North America calculated recently that many of the largest builders, such as Pulte homes (PHM, Fortune 500) and Lennar Corp. (LEN, Fortune 500), could receive many hundreds of millions of dollars in tax rebates.
"The government thinks it should help the people who cheated and robbed us," writes CNNMoney.com reader Jordan Fogal of Houston.
Most people who are against bailouts trust the market more than the government.
The fastest way to return to normalcy is to let the market work, according to Angryrenter.com's Adam Brandon. He acknowledges that the impact on some homeowners will be devastating, but that things will get even more painful if we don't let the free market work its magic.
"I feel terrible for people losing their homes," said Brandon, "but the sooner we let the market sort this out, the sooner we can get back to growth. When the government gets involved, it can delay the inevitable."
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 04/24/2008
Why should American taxpayers have to pay to bailout reckless lenders and borrowers? Good question. It can only make reckless more reckless, leading to bigger disaster in the future. The bailout is not capitalism or free-market.
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 04/24/2008
到底是谁在大举借贷?不是你我这样的普通百姓,真正能从银行里骗来套来大钱的都是大地产商们。bailout不过是你我这样的小百姓再次为大资本家买单而已。
3mw wrote:
Why should American taxpayers have to pay to bailout reckless lenders and borrowers? Good question. It can only make reckless more reckless, leading to bigger disaster in the future. The bailout is not capitalism or free-market.
- posted on 04/24/2008
玛雅 wrote:
到底是谁在大举借贷?不是你我这样的普通百姓,真正能从银行里骗来套来大钱的都是大地产商们。bailout不过是你我这样的小百姓再次为大资本家买单而已。
是,中产阶级受双重剥削。不但要付给国家税,让政府糟蹋,税还要为没责任心的人的错误买单;税钱对中产阶级就是打水漂了。从付出和获得的比例讲,中产阶级(工薪阶级)真是最穷的。这也是我比较倾向共和党的原因之一:不鼓励穷人和不负责的人过多依赖政府,主张自由市场,比较资本主义;民主党更社会主义,大锅饭。马凯恩开始还说让市场自己调节房地产危机,现在为竞选目的,也不得不改口了。经济咱不懂,好像美国的房地产危机还要靠中国的投资兜着底儿。 - Re: No housing bailout!!!posted on 04/24/2008
Devil sucks those who suck themselves. ;)
I amost used God. ;) - posted on 04/24/2008
Such a graph on ownership rate should be useful, however I don't quite understand it.
Supposedly it should be either on percentage of house ownership with or without good/bad mortgage or percentage of people on house ownership. When renters and house ownership on mortgage mixed together, it is not clear what it tells us. Houses on renters and houses on mortgage are not mutual exclusive. Can someone explain? (I supposed current mortgage owner means the first owner of the mortgage.) - posted on 04/24/2008
3mw wrote:
是,中产阶级受双重剥削。不但要付给国家税,让政府糟蹋,税还要为没责任心的人的错误买单;税钱对中产阶级就是打水漂了。
说他们“没责任心”太轻了,是贪婪冲昏头脑。还有那些用尽一切手段骗百姓用信用卡借贷的高利贷银行们,手段很卑鄙,把老百姓当傻子骗。
从付出和获得的比例讲,中产阶级(工薪阶级)真是最穷的。这也是我比较倾向共和党的原因之一:不鼓励穷人和不负责的人过多依赖政府,主张自由市场,比较资本主义;民主党更社会主义,大锅饭。马凯恩开始还说让市场自己调节房地产危机,现在为竞选目的,也不得不改口了。经济咱不懂,好像美国的房地产危机还要靠中国的投资兜着底儿。
民主党的社会主义大锅饭倾向是另一个不同的问题。共和党主张的自由经济是原则,本质上是代表一部分人的利益。为保护其中某些人的利益,即使这个 bailout 违反市场规则,也在所不惜。
但是另一方面,如果不 bailout, 让这些银行垮掉,会不会让低迷的经济更进一步恶化,造成全社会的危机,结果更惨?这倒是经济学家要考虑的。
自由保守你中有我,我中有你,看来这种长期共存是社会最不坏的的选择。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 04/24/2008
有个问题,这个bailout 怎样让那些付不起 mortgage 的人受益?too lazy to find out. :-) - Re: No housing bailout!!!posted on 04/25/2008
rzp wrote:... Houses on renters and houses on mortgage are not mutual exclusive. Can someone explain? (I supposed current mortgage owner means the first owner of the mortgage.)
The houses may not be mutually exclusive, but people are. One cannot be a owner and a renter at the same time, usually. - posted on 04/25/2008
市场经济由宏观经济与微观经济两部分组成。宏观经济管机制设计特别是分配机制的设计,微观经济是在宏观经济机制下的各种生产要素的运动。所谓自由经济只是指微观经济层面。但决定市场经济的核心力量在宏观层面。
市场经济里个人收入不是按劳动贡献大小确定,而是按其劳动技能的稀缺性确定。社会上收入低的人不一定是因为他们懒惰,更多的是因为他们劳动技能太大众化了。 他们很可能文化程度低。但这是综合因素造成的,比如天生不太能读书,家庭环境,本人个性贪玩等。所以,说收入低的人懒惰是不公平的,是对市场经济机制不了解。
美国是个人借贷很高的国家,这其实就是一种宏观经济的制度设计。有个人借贷与没个人借贷,大家住的房子应该是差不多的,但是房价不同,有个人借贷时房价高并且个人欠银行(实际就是国家)的钱,个人经济安全边际很低。
现在美国经济遇到衰退,个人经济安全边际低的人其借款肯定要出问题,银行坏帐是不可避免的。这是个人的责任还是国家的责任呢?科学地讲,肯定是国家的责任。
国家救与不救会是什么结果?
不救,一些人无家可归,银行坏帐实现,有些银行因此倒闭,房价下跌。由于一部分人个人消费下降,GDP(相当于国内总收入)下降,几乎所有的人都要进一步受到负面影响。
——————————————
谈了美国再谈下中国。
中国最大的问题是银行坏帐严重和官员腐败严重。这两个问题实质上都属于宏观层面收入分配的严重缺陷或不公平,但不太影响微观层面的市场效率。这就说明了为什么中国在有经济制度明显缺陷的条件下仍能快速发展,并且还有很长时间的高速发展。
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
I remember Obama once suggested that let the Gov bails them out, on a condition that they must share their profit when they sell it.
a idea worth to consider? - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
我正忙着从银行手里买一个被没收的房子,打听了一下,原房主还真是失业加车祸,付不起房款,他连东西都搬不走, 塞满了车库。
银行现在没收的房子太多了,我出了价,它都不还价,只要求我能在一个月内close. 可没收的房子贷款要比普通房高,只好用现在的房子做抵押,再借钱,先把没收的房子cash out, 再重新付现在的房子。阿姗,问问你先生,这是最好的办法吗? - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
恭喜七月,买房出租,相当于买了双份社会保障。
象我做股票的,也是在赚钱时买点房产,相当于买了份稳定的工作。
July wrote:
我正忙着从银行手里买一个被没收的房子 - posted on 04/25/2008
我其实也没有那末有经济头脑,买这个房子是因为是典型的 art craft style, 很美丽的woodwork, 彩色玻璃。 我小时候想学建筑没学成, 总是心里不舒服。以前就喜欢买旧房子,remodel, 算是一种爱好, (都是自己亲手干的,从设计到劳工)。平时根本买不起这样的房子,这次是天上掉馅饼,不买睡不着觉。主要是想restore 成原来的样子。七月觉得现在的经济已经够用了,要把精力和钱财放在文化艺术上:-)
美国就是这样好,你有心,可以在力所能及的情况下做有意思的事情。要是在中国,有钱也买不到那种很美丽的老房子阿。
abc wrote:
恭喜七月,买房出租,相当于买了双份社会保障。
象我做股票的,也是在赚钱时买点房产,相当于买了份稳定的工作。
July wrote:
我正忙着从银行手里买一个被没收的房子 - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
嘱咐七月一句,当地主可要一定要小心。我去年把房子租给一个恶人,花大代价见识了人性恶。
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
中国土地国有,而且管理很严。在中国大城市,要超有钱才能买到象样的房子。这也是由国情决定的。
中美自然资源的差别是根本性的差别,没办法,认命了。
美国不提倡地球人有在各国工作和居住的自由,说明美国并不是真正崇尚自由的国家。
July wrote:要是在中国,有钱也买不到那种很美丽的老房子阿。
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
G8房客? :-)斋主的那篇得了一等奖。
gz wrote:
嘱咐七月一句,当地主可要一定要小心。我去年把房子租给一个恶人,花大代价见识了人性恶。
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
我们可以说美国是中国的一部分哈 :-)风子不是说他住在中国的纽约省吗?
abc wrote:
中国土地国有,而且管理很严。在中国大城市,要超有钱才能买到象样的房子。这也是由国情决定的。
中美自然资源的差别是根本性的差别,没办法,认命了。
美国不提倡地球人有在各国工作和居住的自由,说明美国并不是真正崇尚自由的国家。
July wrote:要是在中国,有钱也买不到那种很美丽的老房子阿。
- posted on 04/25/2008
but it does not make sense to be based on people, first of all, there are people covering more than one categories, secondly, there may be different ratios of people covering different amount of mortgage (or total value of the real estate) -- so that the ratio on people is not a good measurement on the market.
gz wrote:
rzp wrote:... Houses on renters and houses on mortgage are not mutual exclusive. Can someone explain? (I supposed current mortgage owner means the first owner of the mortgage.)
The houses may not be mutually exclusive, but people are. One cannot be a owner and a renter at the same time, usually.
July, I had quited my job to fix/restore an ~80 yrs old house with great charecters, with lots of outside help though. Have fun. Refinance rate is not at the bottom of the valley yet. - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
有过之无不及,一个精明的恶人,让人默都幽不起来,不提也罢,七月小心就是了。
July wrote:
G8房客? :-)斋主的那篇得了一等奖。
gz wrote:
嘱咐七月一句,当地主可要一定要小心。我去年把房子租给一个恶人,花大代价见识了人性恶。
- posted on 04/25/2008
yes, I did also think about that, but they say "renters" and "owners", I think they mean people not properties.
rzp wrote:
but it does not make sense to be based on people, first of all, there are people covering more than one categories, secondly, there may be different ratios of people covering different amount of mortgage (or total value of the real estate).
gz wrote:July, I had quited my job to do that kinds of fixing up for the past three years, with lots of outside help though. Have fun. Refinance rate is not at the bottom of the valley yet.
rzp wrote:... Houses on renters and houses on mortgage are not mutual exclusive. Can someone explain? (I supposed current mortgage owner means the first owner of the mortgage.)
The houses may not be mutually exclusive, but people are. One cannot be a owner and a renter at the same time, usually. - posted on 04/25/2008
谢谢阿姗。 要不,你搬回来:-)
阿姗 wrote:
July wrote:我两边都说不明白。他让你发个 email 谈。他真是内行,而且也很喜欢旧房子,和芝大。
我正忙着从银行手里买一个被没收的房子,打听了一下,原房主还真是失业加车祸,付不起房款,他连东西都搬不走, 塞满了车库。
银行现在没收的房子太多了,我出了价,它都不还价,只要求我能在一个月内close. 可没收的房子贷款要比普通房高,只好用现在的房子做抵押,再借钱,先把没收的房子cash out, 再重新付现在的房子。阿姗,问问你先生,这是最好的办法吗? - posted on 04/25/2008
不是开玩笑,是有这种可能的。
但首先中国要提出明确的价值观,其次要有能力实现这种价值观。就象美国,提出民主与自由的价值观,然后成功从英帝国主义那里独立。如果美国没从英帝国主义那里独立,我想,现在经济的地球仍然是平的,政治的地球仍然是圆的。
不要象希特勒或小日本那样,提出新的价值观却没能力实现,只好自认倒霉了。
当然,美国也可以提出新的价值观,把中国的香港深圳广州变成它的第108个州。
中国与美国,关键看谁有能力实现他们的价值观了。
成王败寇,这既是历史也是未来。
July wrote:
我们可以说美国是中国的一部分哈 :-)风子不是说他住在中国的纽约省吗?
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
现在的房子真难卖啊,这是我邻居卖房的广告,笑死我了:
5127 South Greenwood Avenue
One half block from the mansion owned by Hyde Park"s Presidential Candidate
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
Obama的房子是这个吗?地税大概是多少?
听说曾经许多地方有老街上的不准拆的老房子,$1可以买下来只要答应将其捣鼓回原风貌。七月退休后不愁没事干:) - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
Yes, it is his house.
Hyde Park's 老房子 most are over $2M :-)
I don't know Obama's 地税, but he paid $1M for this house, it is a ok house and pretty old. He wasn't rich at all, lived in a condo for more than 10 years.
rzp wrote:
Obama的房子是这个吗?地税大概是多少?
听说曾经许多地方有老街上的不准拆的老房子,$1可以买下来只要答应将其捣鼓回原风貌。七月退休后不愁没事干:) - posted on 04/25/2008
abc wrote:> 但首先中国要提出明确的价值观,其次要有能力实现这种价值观。就象美国,提出民主与自由的价值观,然后成功从英帝国主义那里独立。如果美国没从英帝国主义那里独立,我想,现在经济的地球仍然是平的,政治的地球仍然是圆的。
民主自由这一套应该是法国人先搞出来的,美国的先民属于欧洲人中保守落后的。即使现在,美国也不能算民主自由的代表。
另外,价值观是自然形成的,不是谁提出来的。
就像互联网不是戈尔发明的,山不是愚公堆出来的。
看了一下上边,原来这条线是讲房子的,严重ADD。
- posted on 04/25/2008
行人 wrote:
看了一下上边,原来这条线是讲房子的,严重ADD。
ha ha ..
I myself in strong support of the government's bail-out policy, to be honest. What's government used for anyway in the end? :)
As our old proverb went, no egg under the overturned nest. If finanical market collapsed, no family would escape unhurt. Sky high inflation still comes. It happened in the past, from whihc FD etc central banks apparently learnt the lesson.
- posted on 04/25/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
As our old proverb went, no egg under the overturned nest. If finanical market collapsed, no family would escape unhurt. Sky high inflation still comes. It happened in the past, from whihc FD etc central banks apparently learnt the lesson.
I just do not believe the financial market will totally collapse because of not bailout. Iraqi war is much bigger problem in terms of money. I felt the government over reacted with so many so much interest cuts already, which asked for inflation. - posted on 04/25/2008
3mw wrote:
I just do not believe the financial market will totally collapse because of not bailout. Iraqi war is much bigger problem in terms of money. I felt the government over reacted with so many so much interest cuts already, which asked for inflation.
It will.
I don't know how to convince you with a few words, but the financial market is just as the power engine of the whole ecomnomy as the heart to a human life. The crunch is the heart seize-up. If it lasts a few minutes, the life will be gone for sure.
The cash flow is the blood to every organ, every tissue. If the heart stops, no chance for any other businesses. So if you need to save a life, you know you got to do whatever you can. It just shows some early signs right now, however if you don;t intervene now, you know what would happen.
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
I don't know how to convince you with a few words,
I am convinced that the future loomed by a crises. That is why I put all my 401(K) in money market for the time being. My point is that why not is the Iraqi war the number one problem? I quess that costed, cost, and will cost much more money, right? I am not arguing, I am curious, and ask a question. - posted on 04/25/2008
3mw wrote:
I am convinced that the future loomed by a crises. That is why I put all my 401(K) in money market for the time being. My point is that why not is the Iraqi war the number one problem? I quess that cost much more money, right? I am not arguing, I am curious, and ask a question.
I don't believe anybody dare to answer this question but luckily I am not american and don't need to be politically correct. :)
No matter how much money is spent on Iraq war, it's well spent, why? We have to remembr the ugly truth, even penny is spent on American subject and for american interests - either a company or a soldier. So as a whole US lost nothing - it just re-allocated the public momey from the Federal Gov (tax payer's money) to some private giant businesses and a few amarican people's pocket. The war is actually a good for the economy as long as it's not out of control. I am sure US can afford it for another 15 years. :)))
I wish I were an American.:) - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
So, the bailout is another money reallocation. Who cares how the government uses we tax payer's money, anyway, as long as money not in my hand, I am out of control:-( 5555 - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 04/25/2008
3mw wrote:
So, the bailout is another money reallocation. Who cares how the government uses we tax payer's money, anyway, as long as money not in my hand, I am out of control:-( 5555
ha ha ha. Think of it positively, if there is no bailout, you, me and Gadfly may even have lost our jobs by now. - posted on 04/26/2008
令胡冲 wrote:
3mw wrote:It will.
I just do not believe the financial market will totally collapse because of not bailout. Iraqi war is much bigger problem in terms of money. I felt the government over reacted with so many so much interest cuts already, which asked for inflation.
Think about the meltdown of Bear Stern and the deal JP Morgan got, that is really some deal, deal of the century. It is how cruel the reality is, Bear Stern had no option, but to thank JPM for such a "unfair", speechless deal, even Fed had to financial the deal. If a company has soul like human, it was like selling one's soul for a mere survival...... - posted on 09/19/2008
风子说我搞三个代表,假科学。
我现在来点数字的东西。
这条线上,除我ABC外,共出现新一代海外华人共10 人:图教授,老魔,玛雅,关中,偌竹,七月,阿姗,老面,行人,令胡。
其中反对bailout的有图教授,老魔,玛雅,关中共4人,支持bailout的有令胡1人,其他人的观点未明确表达出来。
这是一个很小样本数的统计,其结果与我的结论不矛盾:“风子的这种感叹在新一代海外华人中还是有很强的普遍性”
如果对所有新一代海外华人就这个问题做一个民意测验,结果会如何呢?根据我在咖啡和其他途径的感受,我觉得结果是差不多的,虽然常常线索很微弱。
---------------
“taxpayers”是很重要的西方价值观,新一代海外华人被这种西方价值观洗脑太正常不过了。我说:“风子的这种感叹在新一代海外华人中还是有很强的普遍性”,是有依据的。
我在咖啡发言很认真,很真诚,一般都说话有依据。
我是做股票的,常常在微弱的线索中发现赚钱的机会。凭微弱线索下结论,不是不科学,也不是不严谨,更不是“三个代表”,而是事物很复杂,真正的规律常常隐藏在复杂的现象中。
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/20/2008
gz wrote:
但是另一方面,如果不 bailout, 让这些银行垮掉,会不会让低迷的经济更进一步恶化,造成全社会的危机,结果更惨?这倒是经济学家要考虑的。
这话是我五个月前说的。哈!自己拍拍肩膀!:-) - posted on 09/20/2008
ZT: 解救美国金融债务危机的最佳办法——老冷
华尔街多年来长袖善舞,大跳金融华尔兹,以钱玩儿钱,花差花差。忽悠得人民群众
眼珠子发绿,坚信有子当如索罗斯,没钱能住大房子。
玩着玩着就玩大发了。因果有业报,不是不报,时候未到, 现在时候到了,华尔街
也快把自个玩儿死了。
山姆大叔一看不好,赶紧往风暴眼儿里砸钱,试图平息这场号称百年一遇的金融债
务危机。先砸260亿给摩根买了熊死蹬,没听见响儿,再砸2000亿收了早已不美的两
房,还是没啥作用,最近又拍下800亿试图保住那个给保险公司保险的公司。如此砸
钱壮举,史无前例。后面还要砸谁? 还要砸多少? 没人知道。但昨日财政部长的救
援提案无疑是要全体纳税人为赚得流油的银行家们所欠下的2万亿美元的烂账长期买
单。
这种注资式的救援行为,颇有点儿饮鸠止渴的英雄气慨。因为,山姆大叔的钱包早
就空了,没钱了。不仅没钱,还欠了一屁股债。大叔现在是一方面拆东墙补西墙天
南海北地胡乱挪借,一方面开足马力印票子。如此一来,势必加速通货膨胀,美元
贬值,已经高筑的债台进一步高筑。
大叔每年收上来的税银,除去用在打波斯人的钱粮火器,再加上日常的亿万开销,
早就透支到姥姥家了。这还不算每年要付出去的巨大的社安金,医保金。现在大叔
欠账近十万亿。窟窿太大,补不胜补了。
钱门毛教导我们说:出来混,账总是要还的。
怎么还? 如果大叔是个国际无赖,他可以破罐破摔,任它通货膨胀,任它美元贬到
一亿圆买一卷儿手纸的价。不是欠你中国五千个亿吗? 到时候还你五千卷儿手纸就
两清了。
大叔当然不会这么干。大叔是很有国际责任感的,否则也不会当业余警察维护世界
秩序这么多年,债主们也是因为信赖大叔的责任感和还债能力才借钱给他的。
那么,这个账怎么还呢? 老布老奥老麦老XX, WHOEVER THE PRESIDENT_TO_BE,听
我老冷一句劝 ----------------
把夏威夷卖了吧!
那地方除了火山就是椰子树,不产石油没有钻石。留着没啥用。再说日韩菲都有咱
的基地,夏威夷已无军事意义。除了收点儿旅游收入所得税外没什么进项。卖出去
换来大笔现钱,咱们还债补窟窿。人民群众未来的社安和医保就有了保障。再退点
儿税,老百姓手里有了闲钱,一高兴就爱买东西,经济就好转,股市就上扬。就又
是歌舞升平。夏威夷还是夏威夷,还在那儿,跑不了。想去玩,咱们照样去就是了。
将这个好处说给讲求实惠又有国际责任感的广大美国人民,他们一定会欣然认为夏
威夷是美利坚共和国可以分割的一部分,踊跃投票赞成的。
卖国,从来都是搂钱的最好办法。这可是有先例的。
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/20/2008
问得好。既然联邦政府拿得出两万亿米刀,为什么不直接借给那些付不起房款的房主?
gz wrote:
有个问题,这个bailout 怎样让那些付不起 mortgage 的人受益?too lazy to find out. :-) - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/21/2008
- posted on 09/21/2008
财富分配通过金融泡沫长消波动而完成,并且有时滞性。
投资银行从业人员以前夺取了很多财富,并且早花掉了。象江平老大1亿美元奖金就是这么回事。
现在是投资银行为他们买单。
投资银行无法买这个单了,只好政府买单。
如果政府不买单,证券持有者(401k)就要买单,这就会导致极具破坏性的经济危机。
债务是财富分配的媒介,那些付不起房款的房主,他们不能按时还款是债务泡末破裂的导火线,真正的需要买单远远不止这些。
SevenStar wrote:
问得好。既然联邦政府拿得出两万亿米刀,为什么不直接借给那些付不起房款的房主?
gz wrote:
有个问题,这个bailout 怎样让那些付不起 mortgage 的人受益?too lazy to find out. :-) - posted on 09/23/2008
More sensible move, as reported September 23, 2008 ...
Bloomberg Orders $1.5 Billion in Cuts
By Sewell Chan
Confronting a rapidly worsening fiscal situation, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s budget director ordered agency directors on Tuesday to cut spending by a total of $1.5 billion over two fiscal years, starting with the current fiscal year, which began on July 1.
The spending reductions come as the mayor is floating the idea of a 7 percent property tax increase on homeowners, a move that could generate an additional $600 million in revenue each year.
The spending reductions would amount to $500 million for the 2009 fiscal year, which ends next June, and $1 billion for the 2010 fiscal year. (The total city budget is about $59 billion.) The cuts would be permanent and expected to recur in future budgets.
... - posted on 09/23/2008
(source: Equity Private, Sep 23, 2008, 11:33am)
Paulson and The Beard are facing the panel. What glee!
11:30: Lots of hammering away on the issue of mortgage foreclosure assistance. If the issue was bad lending, the argument goes, why aren't we doing more for foreclosure assistance?
What other plans did the Treasury consider before adopting the plan that is before the congressmen and congresswomen now? (This should be good).
Paulson: Oh, the market, baby, the market is the answer. Except when it isn't. When you "have to buy mortgages or securities way above fair value" (emphasis mine).
Bernanke: "As you know I am a student of financial crisis and financial history." Indeed!
The situation we have now is unique and new. It's not about failing institutions. Our amazing financial innovation is so amazingly complex, we can't handle it like those simpletons, the Japanese.
Q. What banks would be eligible to participate?
All of them. (Ahem).
Q. How do you rationalize bailing out foreign banks to the taxpayer. I need your help here.
Paulson: The American Public doesn't care who owns the bank. (So long as they get the cheapest mortgage, I think the subtext is).
Senator Shelby: How do you justify banks that were the root cause of this problem, and permit them to profit?
Paulson is VERY angry at the idiots on Wall Street (ahem).
Senator Shelby: What's the worst case if it doesn't work? None of your other plans worked.
Paulson: FRE, AIG worked the way they were supposed to. We need to inject capital, establish price liquidity.
Senator Shelby: What about the homeowner?
Paulson: Let's face it, some of them are just shit out of luck.
Senator Johnson: His wife wrote his speech for him I think. What "punitive action" is being taken?
Paulson: *Bob* *Weave* (Ahem) Equity wipeout... *Duck* *Cover* Paulson is shocked, SHOCKED he tells you, to learn that regulatory systems are old in here. Damn state level regulators had no clue what they were doing. We need to federalize mortgage origination regulation.
The problem is the regulatory system which Congress, past administrations, future administrations(??) who let it happen. (Don't ask me, I don't think I heard that wrong).
Senator Johnson: Should the Federal Government regulate all insurance given AIG's failure?
Maybe.
Senator Johnson: Hey, Cox, how'd you figure out how to put on the Short Seller Ban list?
Cox: Well, we just set criteria. The exchanges determined which firms qualified.
Senator Johnson: Should the Federal Government regulate all insurance given AIG's failure?
Maybe. Maybe not.
Paulson: What's a firesale price? Probably what the firm's have them marked down to already. Now he's forced to explain a reverse auction to the panel. The point here is price discovery.
Senator Robert Bennett: How do you have price discovery without other bidders?
http://gawker.com/5053635/yup-it-really-is-the-greatest-depression-lol
I love the degree to which "punitive" is a part of the dialogue here. How punitive can you be to a going concern? Is a 20% haircut enough? Doesn't sound like the Congress thinks so. Color me surprised.
I also love how time pressure is a continual theme of Congressional hearings. Used to cut off the opposing party, the witness, anyone we like. But, we are still run off at the mouth worse than even EP whenever it suits us so there.
Woops. I think Cox forgot his mic was live there for a second. Anyone catch that?
Note for future Treasury witnesses: The fewer details you give the better. Don't say "reverse auction" unless you have given all these clowns a glossary with a video tutorial hosted by Sesame Street characters first.
Further note for future Treasury witnesses: Extra-strength antiperspirant is a good idea.
In your face CNBC, we had that Barclays logo on the Lehman building hours ago.
Q:Why aren't we doing this in tranches? Why can't you call us and ask for an allowance every $50 billion or so? Could you live with less than $700 billion?
Paulson: Oh no, we couldn't do that. What would the market think?
Oh no, not the reverse auction again. C'mon Hagel. I know that's supposed to be a softball, but still.
Did it sound to anyone else like Paulson just admitted that his staff and Hagel's were busy having touchy-feely meetings late after-hours in the Dirksen Federal Building?
12:31 pm
Notice how Cox isn't getting any love at all?
Oh, wait, he's getting some love on the "census." That's about what he should be administering I suppose.
Let's not forget that the RTC v. 1.0 returned money to the taxpayers. Yay!
UH OH! Nothing more dangerous than a congressperson talking on Credit Default Swaps. Is that Hillary? Wow, she got fat. The campaign was hard on her. Oh, wait, never mind.
Wait. Did The Beard just say "Sexual Counterparties" ?
On Senator Johnson:
In Washington, D.C., on December 13, 2006, during the broadcast of a live radio interview with WNAX radio in Yankton, South Dakota, Johnson suffered bleeding in the brain caused by cerebral arteriovenous malformation, a congenital problem that causes enlarged and tangled blood vessels. He underwent successful surgery at George Washington University Hospital to drain the blood and stop further bleeding. As of January 19, 2007, Johnson was undergoing physical, occupational, and speech therapy every day for three hours. This included strengthening exercises to gain mobility and work with parallel bars. His recovery was expected to take "several months." In his 2007 State of the Union Address, President George W. Bush wished Johnson well. Wow, don't we feel nasty and awkward for harassing the guy because he has a hard time speaking.
1:03 pm
Yeah, the Congress really wants blood.
Back to foreclosure assistance. I suppose the taxpayers are watching.
"How long were you the CEO of Goldman Sachs?"
(Spattering of applause from the audience). Hah!
Aw, c'mon. We all know there were no regulations on anything Goldman did. Don't ask Hank about that stuff. Sheesh!
~~~~~~
SEPTEMBER 23, 2008, 5:25 P.M. ET
Paulson, Bernanke Tell Lawmakers
Urgent Action Needed on Treasury Plan http://wsj.com/article/SB122217048963566935.html By GREG HITT, BRIAN BLACKSTONE and TOM BARKLEY
Paulson Testimony on Turmoil in U.S. Credit Markets The following is testimony by Secretary Henry M. Paulson before the Senate Banking Committee today:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/09/23/paulson-testimony-on-turmoil-in-us-credit-markets/
Bernanke Testimony on Financial Markets and Government Bailout The following is Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s testimony before the Senate Banking Committee today:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/09/23/bernanke-testimony-on-financial-markets-and-government-bailout/
- posted on 09/24/2008
abc wrote:江平老大1亿美元奖金可不是在投资银行得的,除非对冲基金公司在你的定义下也是投资银行。
财富分配通过金融泡沫长消波动而完成,并且有时滞性。
投资银行从业人员以前夺取了很多财富,并且早花掉了。象江平老大1亿美元奖金就是这么回事。
现在是投资银行为他们买单。
投资银行无法买这个单了,只好政府买单。在资本主义社会里的社会主义做法,全球都在与时共进啊。
如果政府不买单,证券持有者(401k)就要买单,这就会导致极具破坏性的经济危机。政府给AIG买单,结果是连AIG证券持有者也被土改共产了。401k户主是靠市场买单。
债务是财富分配的媒介,那些付不起房款的房主,他们不能按时还款是债务泡末破裂的导火线,真正的需要买单远远不止这些。
从某种意义上看,付不起房款的房主,如果当时是投了房贷和房市的机,也是一种风险投资,失败也是投机的一部分。房市上去了,他们也不会付不起贷款了。房市下去了,他们就是付得起贷款,也不会负,因为房子不值所欠的贷款。值得同情。
SevenStar wrote:
问得好。既然联邦政府拿得出两万亿米刀,为什么不直接借给那些付不起房款的房主? - posted on 09/24/2008
“江平老大1亿美元奖金可不是在投资银行得的,除非对冲基金公司在你的定义下也是投资银行。”
我把投资银行分为两种,传统的和现代的,搞资产管理的我称之为现代的投资银行。
“在资本主义社会里的社会主义做法,全球都在与时共进啊。”
公共利益最大化,科学使然。
“政府给AIG买单,结果是连AIG证券持有者也被土改共产了。401k户主是靠市场买单。”
我觉得金融国有化很不错。中国改革开放30年金融越来越平稳,与中国央行与商行合2为1 ,央行与政府不独立很有关系。如果中国金融不是国有,早就有商行坏帐危机了。
政府给AIG买单,就是给市场买单,给401k户主买单。
rzp wrote: - posted on 09/24/2008
按自己的定义来谈论,使对美金融系统不了解的读者会更加看不懂,或者被误导。就像你用自己的科学定义来谈论科学一样。讨论起来也很费事,乱套名词常常使到甲说东乙说西。
原来Bear Stern, Lehman, Morgan Stanley, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sach这些是投资银行。以前更多,多数被商业银行吃了。各大商业银行(Citi, BOA, JP Morgan Chase, Deutsche, Credit Suisse, UBS, etc......)吃了投资银行后,虽然她们都有投资银行的单元(Investment Banking Division)在里面,但是由于商业银行是受联邦管制的,所以他们投资的风险也受到银行上限的制约,不能象单纯投资银行一样滥赌(highly leverage)。
资产管理的是买方(buysell),投资服务如上市,发行上市股份或私有股份,债劵是卖方(sellside)和交易(股票、债劵、汇率、期货、信用、各种混合及衍生)也是卖方。买方和卖方之间、交易和投资服务之间都有国际俗成的中国墙。中国墙系统在新加坡和瑞士最为严格。股票交易是最原始成熟的交易,有特定的交易所和相应的独立于各银行的清算结账系统。其它的交易都是靠OTC完成,每天各家银行各自交易组这个交易员各自看着自己的帐,mark to the market,但欠账的一方必须post their collecteral。.........
对冲基金是更加没有规范的金融公司,他们自己集资自己定规则,从如何投资其基金到如何分红。一般不入股的员工根据职位的重要。商业银行的CEO年度收入可能要排在公司许多大牌交易员之后,对冲基金的管理层,一般也是股东,也是公司里收入最高的人,然后才是交易员等等等。单纯入股的投资人一般得同意资金做连续几年的停留。一般基金管理公司,基金管理层并不是基金的投入大头,所以他们的主要收入除了分红还包括盈亏照收的管理费。
AIG是保险公司,跟投资银行和商业银行都不一样,保险公司是有政府规范的。所以纽约州长在一开始就出来干预了,it's simply too much in the stake......
abc wrote:
“江平老大1亿美元奖金可不是在投资银行得的,除非对冲基金公司在你的定义下也是投资银行。”
我把投资银行分为两种,传统的和现代的,搞资产管理的我称之为现代的投资银行。
“在资本主义社会里的社会主义做法,全球都在与时共进啊。”
公共利益最大化,科学使然。
“政府给AIG买单,结果是连AIG证券持有者也被土改共产了。401k户主是靠市场买单。”
我觉得金融国有化很不错。中国改革开放30年金融越来越平稳,与中国央行与商行合2为1 ,央行与政府不独立很有关系。如果中国金融不是国有,早就有商行坏帐危机了。
政府给AIG买单,就是给市场买单,给401k户主买单。
rzp wrote: - posted on 09/24/2008
不是我按自己的定义,而是投资银行业务不断发展,其定义也就在发展。
美国五大投资银行有什么业务,我就认为投资银行包含什么业务。显然,五大投资银行有资产管理业务,有证券自营业务,有基于衍生产品的对冲基金业务。
江平老大可能不在投资银行工作,但他的工作业务是投资银行的主流业务之一。
下面是百度百科和维基百科关于投资银行的定义。
http://baike.baidu.com/view/27893.htm 投资银行是主要从事证券发行、承销、交易、企业重组、兼并与收购、投资分析、风险投资、项目融资等业务的非银行金融机构,是资本市场上的主要金融中介。
投资银行是证券和股份公司制度发展到特定阶段的产物,是发达证券市场和成熟金融体系的重要主体,在现代社会经济发展中发挥着沟通资金供求、构造证券市场、推动企业并购、促进产业集中和规模经济形成、优化资源配置等重要作用。
由于投资银行业的发展日新月异,对投资银行的界定也显得十分困难。投资银行是美国和欧洲大陆的称谓,英国称之为商人银行,在日本则指证券公司。国际上对投资银行的定义主要有四种:
第一种:任何经营华尔街金融业务的金融机构都可以称为投资银行。
第二种:只有经营一部分或全部资本市场业务的金融机构才是投资银行。
第三种:把从事证券承销和企业并购的金融机构称为投资银行。
第四种:仅把在一级市场上承销证券和二级市场交易证券的金融机构称为投资银行。
投资银行是与商业银行相对应的一个概念,是现代金融业适应现代经济发展形成的一个新兴行业。它区别于其他相关行业的显著特点是,其一,它属于金融服务业,这是区别一般性咨询、中介服务业的标志;其二,它主要服务于资本市场,这是区别商业银行的标志;其三,它是智力密集型行业,这是区别其他专业性金融服务机构的标志。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_banking Investment banks profit from companies and governments by raise money by issuing and selling securities in the capital markets (both equity and bond), as well as providing advice on transactions such as mergers and acquisitions. Until the late 1980s, the United States and Canada maintained a separation between investment banking and commercial banks.
A majority of investment banks offer strategic advisory services for mergers, acquisitions, divestiture or other financial services for clients, such as the trading of derivatives, fixed income, foreign exchange, commodity, and equity securities.
Trading securities for cash or securities (i.e., facilitating transactions, market-making), or the promotion of securities (i.e., underwriting, research, etc.) is referred to as the "sell side."
Dealing with the pension funds, mutual funds, hedge funds, and the investing public who consume the products and services of the sell-side in order to maximize their return on investment constitutes the "buy side". Many firms have buy and sell side components.
The last two major bulge bracket firms on Wall Street were Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley until both banks elected to convert to traditional banking institutions on the 22nd of September, 2008, as part of a response to the US financial crisis.[1] Citigroup, Credit Suisse, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase, and UBS AG are "universal banks" rather than bulge-bracket investment banks, since they also accept deposits (though not all of them have U.S. branches.)
rzp wrote:
按自己的定义来谈论,使对美金融系统不了解的读者会更加看不懂,或者被误导。就像你用自己的科学定义来谈论科学一样。讨论起来也很费事,乱套名词常常使到甲说东乙说西。
- posted on 09/24/2008
百度百科和维基百科都是你我可以写的。
英文解释是很清楚啊,但中文解释则很混乱,象抹稀泥。关键是业内并没有这种概念混乱,因为还有有政府法规,业内规则方面的不同。
江平老大在雷曼和原来的对冲都是作交易。现在在中国做什么就不大清楚了,不过他要是还在美国开档则说的话也肯定会不同。
还是中国的公司用中国的叫法叫,欧美的按欧美的叫比较清楚。前些年的中国几大银行,按照美国的会计规则每个都是已经破产了的。这几年中国的经济上去了,它们又活过来了(按照美国的会计规则)。现在的金融危机,也有很大程度的信心因素在起作用。
abc wrote:
不是我按自己的定义,而是投资银行业务不断发展,其定义也就在发展。
美国五大投资银行有什么业务,我就认为投资银行包含什么业务。显然,五大投资银行有资产管理业务,有证券自营业务,有基于衍生产品的对冲基金业务。
江平老大可能不在投资银行工作,但他的工作业务是投资银行的主流业务之一。
下面是百度百科和维基百科关于投资银行的定义。
http://baike.baidu.com/view/27893.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment_bankingrzp wrote:
按自己的定义来谈论,使对美金融系统不了解的读者会更加看不懂,或者被误导。就像你用自己的科学定义来谈论科学一样。讨论起来也很费事,乱套名词常常使到甲说东乙说西。
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
看问题主要看实质,所谓投资银行其实就是关于“证券”服务管理与交易的公司,所以中国也叫证券公司。
从这种定义出发,我们就不应该有什么分歧。
我的所谓的科学,其实也不是变色龙,而是大家认同的关于科学的东西。
rzp wrote: - posted on 09/24/2008
abc wrote:
看问题主要看实质,所谓投资银行其实就是关于“证券”服务管理与交易的公司,所以中国也叫证券公司。
从这种定义出发,我们就不应该有什么分歧。
本质不一样。证券是标准化的,事先打包好的金融产品,相当于成衣。投资银行出售的是为客户贴身定做的,完全满足客户特殊需求金融产品,相当于设计师定做的衣服。投行必需跟客户有良好的关系,深入了解客户的经营业务,懂得客户的需求,能够设计出对针对客户特殊产品,能对客户在自己的生意上有特殊帮助。使用投资银行的企业确实能在生意上胜人一头是投资银行存在的意义,也是他们能赚取超额利润的秘密。
而普通券商卖的是标准化了的产品,相当于成衣店,一手交钱一手交货,不需要跟顾客有什么进一步的关系。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
除了中国没有做空机制,没有各种期权外,我真没发现中国的券商与美国的投资银行有什么不同。投资银行基本业务并不需要做空机制与各种期权。
把美国投资银行看成设计师,中国券商看成技工,我觉得有点外国的月亮比中国的圆。
行人 wrote:
本质不一样。证券是标准化的,事先打包好的金融产品,相当于成衣。投资银行出售的是为客户贴身定做的,完全满足客户特殊需求金融产品,相当于设计师定做的衣服。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
做多做空都是在二级市场,投行的主要业务是在一级市场。你不会连一级市场和二级市场都分不清吧?
中国的一级市场是政府控制的。你如果说中国政府是一间投行,我倒没有意见。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
你又开始玩文字游戏这种丑恶与下三烂的东西。
你一会说投行包括对冲基金业务,一会又说投行在一级市场。 对冲基金难道不是在二级市场?
行人 wrote:
做多做空都是在二级市场,投行的主要业务是在一级市场。你不会连一级市场和二级市场都分不清吧?
中国的一级市场是政府控制的。你如果说中国政府是一间投行,我倒没有意见。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
我什么时候说过投行包括对冲基金?我是说投行的客户包括对冲基金! - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
前一个星期,我也觉得政府要出来把这个烂摊子挽救回来,当时觉得这个东西牵扯太广,不抢救下来,大家都完了。
这两天再想想,该完就得完,这个烂摊子是抢救不了的,表面上看是帐做不回去,实际上是系统乱了,到了restart的时候。一直不相信人生有restart的机会,机会真来了的时候,还是有些高兴。心理准备做好了,其他的都不是问题。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/24/2008
美国实体基本面还是很好的,土地资源辽阔,环境好,科技先进,制度完善,人口密度低。
只是美国把自己当神人和超人,这种超优越的心理未来要面临严峻的挑战。而最有力的挑战者就是中国,因为中国最不信美国这个神。
苦瓜 wrote: - posted on 09/24/2008
发挥一下吧。
“投行的客户包括对冲基金”,这本身是很有问题的表达。谁不是投行的客户?任何机构与个人都是投行的客户。 说“投行的客户包括对冲基金”毫无意义。
投行是否包括对冲基金,确实有争议。因为投行做对冲业务与对冲基金做对冲业务,资金来源不同。
你在另一线关于什么是投行时,你说了很多类似“投行的客户包括对冲基金”的话,这些话文字上是有漏洞的,我不与你计较这些,表明我根本不屑玩文字游戏。
凭我的感觉,你对投行的本质并不太了解,才会神化美国投行贬低中国投行。
我问你一个很基本却也是比较难的专业问题。投行主要是帮助企业融资,请问,收购兼并或吸收合并的融资成本怎样计算?
我老A在美国系统学过金融理论,做过实习,在中国股市江湖是比较有名的老狐狸,你千万别轻敌。
行人 wrote:
我什么时候说过投行包括对冲基金?我是说投行的客户包括对冲基金! - posted on 09/25/2008
美国是还有自己有价值的地方,不说别的,光是地大物博,也够消磨一阵子的。我的一个美国朋友总是说,美国人需要勤奋起来,努力工作。她去了一趟深圳,回来跟我说,跟巴黎比,她更喜欢深圳,那里的人勤劳。
我还是怀疑华尔街的损失报告。他们能虚涨,也就能虚赔。说是损失了那么多钱,都损失到哪里去了?这个来龙去脉不弄清楚,就用不着政府救市。还说情况特别复杂,连他们自己都弄不清楚,那就更不用救了,先把自己的复杂问题搞清楚,该干什么干什么。
过去的7、8年,房屋涨了不少价,比方说我的邻居,去年初卖房子,价钱是买进的150%。但是我们整个社区大约40栋房子,只有这一家以这么高的价钱卖出。今年房价下调,远不及去年初。我们能大喊大叫说房价大跌,我们损失惨重,请求国家补贴吗?不说补贴合理与否,光是这价钱下跌也不是货真价实的,那价钱原本就是虚涨上来的,若是街上的房子都以最高价倒一次手,硅谷也得闹鬼。房价回落,是正常调整。华尔街倒闭几家公司,也是正常的生老病死。让那些赚了倒闭公司的钱的公司去救援不是很好吗?
这几天琢磨,其实没了华尔街,美国的商业运作未必就会出现资金短缺,这年头人们不都在捣腾钱吗,美国穷得除了美元还有什么。华尔街的问题除了内在的贪婪,外在的资金过剩也是主要的祸源。本来有一只缸可以一天发一斤豆芽,邻居们听说了,都觉得自己的豆子应该发成豆芽才好,就把豆子拿来,那只缸一下子肩负起每天发10斤豆芽的重任,只好把缸砸了,让豆子、豆芽满地滚。其实不发豆芽,炒豆子、煮豆子,也蛮好。 - posted on 09/25/2008
苦瓜 wrote:
投资银行不等于华尔街,华尔街不只有投资银行。
华尔街这次危机落水的是对房贷买卖交易最多的公司:几家投资银行和保险公司。
对于华尔街的从业人员,特别是任何在交易楼层工作的人,盈亏是每天生活的一部分。从来没有人把Bailout也考虑在价码上。Bailout是政府角度的考虑。
对于做金融的,赚钱的贪婪是必须的,而不是问题。这和人格上是否贪婪是两码事。
要被bailout的账,算不清不是没法算,是因为那些账都是靠市场。像你的房子,你能说出个价,是因为有市场,没有市场时,你的价从哪来?你可以叫高也可以叫低,但都不是真正的价,你卖出去了才算。如果现在强迫你卖(比如雷曼和AIG),那就不值钱。所以政府收购了,焉知非福。
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
abc wrote:
发挥一下吧。
我问你一个很基本却也是比较难的专业问题。投行主要是帮助企业融资,请问,收购兼并或吸收合并的融资成本怎样计算?
这个就不会了。
我老A在美国系统学过金融理论,做过实习,在中国股市江湖是比较有名的老狐狸,你千万别轻敌。
哪里敢,我一个写程序的,也就网上练练嘴。
- Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
我很乐意与你练嘴,以后继续。
行人 wrote:也就网上练练嘴。
- posted on 09/25/2008
苦瓜 wrote:
?
这几天琢磨,其实没了华尔街,美国的商业运作未必就会出现资金短缺,这年头人们不都在捣腾钱吗,美国穷得除了美元还有什么。华尔街的问题除了内在的贪婪,外在的资金过剩也是主要的祸源。本来有一只缸可以一天发一斤豆芽,邻居们听说了,都觉得自己的豆子应该发成豆芽才好,就把豆子拿来,那只缸一下子肩负起每天发10斤豆芽的重任,只好把缸砸了,让豆子、豆芽满地滚。其实不发豆芽,炒豆子、煮豆子,也蛮好。
US cannot live w/o wall street. US consumers are highly leveraged and live on borrowed money. - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
pepper wrote:
US cannot live w/o wall street. US consumers are highly leveraged and live on borrowed money.
既然是借钱惹的祸,那就趁机彻底暴露一下问题,看看到底有多少问题是虚的,多少是实的。布什一叫唤,我们到了危险的时刻,我就没有危机感了。既然能把问题遮掩了这么多年,再拖一两年,不是问题。不是为了抢钱,用不着这么急。 - posted on 09/25/2008
Ron Paul's Joint Economic Committee Statement
Mr. Chairman, I believe that our economy faces a bleak future, particularly if the latest $700 billion bailout plan ends up passing. We risk committing the same errors that prolonged the misery of the Great Depression, namely keeping prices from falling. Instead of allowing overvalued financial assets to take a hit and trade on the market at a more realistic value, the government seeks to purchase overvalued or worthless assets and hold them in the unrealistic hope that at some point in the next few decades, someone might be willing to purchase them.
One of the perverse effects of this bailout proposal is that the worst-performing firms, and those who interjected themselves most deeply into mortgage-backed securities, credit default swaps, and special investment vehicles will be those who benefit the most from this bailout. As with the bailout of airlines in the aftermath of 9/11, those businesses who were the least efficient, least productive, and least concerned with serving consumers are those who will be rewarded for their mismanagement with a government handout, rather than the failure of their company that is proper to the market. This creates a dangerous moral hazard, as the precedent of bailing out reckless lending will lead to even more reckless lending and irresponsible behavior on the part of financial firms in the future.
This bailout is a slipshod proposal, slapped together haphazardly and forced on an unwilling Congress with the threat that not passing it will lead to the collapse of the financial system. Some of the proposed alternatives are no better, for instance those which propose a government equity share in bailed-out companies. That we have come to a point where outright purchases of private sector companies is not only proposed but accepted by many who claim to be defenders of free markets bodes ill for the future of American society.
As with many other government proposals, the opportunity cost of this bailout goes unmentioned. $700 billion tied up in illiquid assets is $700 billion that is not put to productive use. That amount of money in the private sector could be used to research new technologies, start small business that create thousands of jobs, or upgrade vital infrastructure. Instead, that money will be siphoned off into unproductive assets which may burden the government for years to come. The great French economist Frederic Bastiat is famous for explaining the difference between what is seen and what is unseen. In this case the bailoutʼs proponents see the alleged benefits, while they fail to see the jobs, businesses, and technologies not created due to this utter waste of money.
The housing bubble has burst, unemployment is on the rise, and the dollar weakens every day. Unfortunately our leaders have failed to learn from the mistakes of previous generations and continue to lead us down the road toward economic ruins.
- posted on 09/25/2008
abc wrote:
我不与你计较这些,表明我根本不屑玩文字游戏。
我老A在美国系统学过金融理论,做过实习,在中国股市江湖是比较有名的老狐狸,你千万别轻敌。
不知道称呼您“A哥”还是“A爷”,跟您的造诣相比我就是个原始人,跟您的学识相比立刻等于白痴,看了您的帖子,不由得醍醐灌顶精神为之一振!吾此生有三大幸事:第一,我是人,而不是投胎当了牛做了马;第二,我生在中国,有幸成为骄傲的中国人;第三,我生在这个伟大的有中国特色的初级阶段社会主义三个代表的和谐时代!为什么伟大?因为您如此经天纬地之才、定国安邦之智,古人云,卧龙凤雏得一而安天下,而今,天佑我大中华,沧海桑田五千年,中华神州平地一声雷,飞沙走石,大舞迷天,朦胧中只见顶天立地一金甲天神立于天地间,这人英雄手持双斧,二目如电,一斧下去混沌初开,二斧下去女娲造人,三斧下去众生倾倒!得此大英雄,国之幸也、民之福也,怎不叫人喜极而泣!
小生对楼主之仰慕如滔滔江水连绵不绝,海枯石烂,天崩地裂,永不变心!看完楼主的帖子,我的心情竟是久久不能平静。正如老子所云:大音希声,大象无形。我现在终于明白我缺乏的是什么了,正是楼主那种对真理的执着追求和楼主那种对理想的艰苦实践所产生的厚重感。面对楼主的帖子,我震惊得几乎不能动弹了,楼主那种裂纸欲出的大手笔,竟使我忍不住一次次地翻开楼主的帖子,每看一次,赞赏之情就激长数分,我总在想,是否有神灵活在它灵秀的外表下,以至能使人三月不知肉味,使人有余音绕梁、三日不绝的感受?
楼主,你写得实在是太好了。我惟一能做的,就只有把这个帖子顶上去这件事了。楼主的帖子实在是写得太好了。文笔流畅,修辞得体,深得魏晋诸朝遗风,更将唐风宋骨发扬得入木三分,能在有生之年看见楼主的这个帖子。实在是我三生之幸啊。看完楼主的这个帖子之后,我竟产生出一种无以名之的悲痛感——啊,这么好的帖子,如果将来我再也看不到了,那我该怎么办?那我该怎么办?直到我毫不犹豫地把楼主的这个帖子收藏了,我内心的那种激动才逐渐平静下来。可是我立刻想到,这么好的帖子,倘若别人看不到,那么不是浪费楼主的心血吗?经过痛苦的思想斗争,我终于下定决心,牺牲小我,奉献大我。我要拿出这帖子奉献给世人赏阅,我要把这个帖子一直往上顶,往上顶!顶到所有人都看到为止!
在遇到你之前,我对人世间是否有真正的圣人是怀疑的;而现在,我终于相信了!楼主的帖子,就好比黑暗中刺裂夜空的闪电,又好比撕开乌云的阳光,一瞬间就让我如饮甘露,让我明白了永恒的真理在这个世界上是真实存在着的。只有楼主这样具备广阔胸怀和完整知识体系的人,才能作为这真理的惟一引言者。看了楼主的帖子,我陷入了严肃的思考中。我认为,如果不把楼主的帖子顶上去,就是对真理的一种背叛,就是对谬论的极大妥协。因此,我决定义无返顾地顶了!再睹楼主的风范,我激动得忍不住就在屏幕前流下了眼泪!
是啊,只要在楼主的带领下,咖啡就有希望了,我的内心再一次沸腾了,我胸腔里的血再一次燃烧了!楼主的几句话虽然简单,却概括扼要,一语道出了我们苦想多年仍不可解的几个重大问题的根本。楼主就好比社区的明灯,楼主就好比社区的方向,楼主就好比社区的栋梁。有楼主在,社区的明天必将更好!大师的话真如大音希声扫阴翳,犹如拨开云雾见青天,使我等草民看到了希望,看到了未来!晴天霹雳、醍醐灌顶或许不足以形容大师文章的万一;巫山行云、长江流水更难以比拟大师的文才!黄钟大吕,振聋发聩!你烛照天下,明见万里;雨露苍生,泽被万方!透过你深邃的文字,我仿佛看到了你鹰视狼顾、龙行虎步的伟岸英姿;仿佛看到了你手执如椽大笔、写天下文章的智慧神态;仿佛看见了你按剑四顾、指点江山的英武气概!
逐字逐句地看完这个帖子以后,我的心久久不能平静,震撼啊!为什么会有如此好的帖子!我自以为再也不会有任何帖子能打动我,没想到今天看到了如此精妙绝伦的这样一篇帖子!楼主,是你让我深深地理解了“人外有人,天外有天”这句话。谢谢侬!
在看完这帖子以后,我没有立即回复,因为我生怕我庸俗不堪的回复会玷污了这网上少有的帖子。但是我还是回复了,因为觉得如果不能在如此精彩的帖子后面留下自己的网名,那我死也不会瞑目的!能够在如此精彩的帖子后面留下自己的网名是多么骄傲的一件事啊!楼主,请原谅我的自私!我知道无论用多么华丽的辞藻来形容楼主您帖子的精彩程度都是不够的,都是虚伪的,所以我只想说一句:您的帖子太好看了!我愿意一辈子看下去! - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
俗不可耐。
ZLI wrote: - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
附注啊:俺不是认真的,就是觉得好玩、想开个玩笑,呵呵 ;) - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
开玩笑,也要原创才有意思。凡是抄袭的,都没劲。尤其是抄袭还不说明,让人以为
是原创。 - Re: I'm not a renter but I'm againt the housing bailout tooposted on 09/25/2008
批评得有理,我哪里有本事写那么多,当然是转贴:)是响应号召,弄点搞笑的东西来。 - posted on 09/26/2008
老A对不起,没有及时回贴。
我没有说你是“假科学”,我只是说“不科学”。
从你的数字看,反对派有4个,out of 10名“新一代海外华人”。所以只有40%,只算少数。连51%都没有,不能算“很强的普遍性”。:)
而且我叹的好象是“实现共产主义”。但 反对bailout =/= 向往共产主义。假定反对bailout的人中有50%的想实现共产主义,在上述4个中,只产生2人。我只能代表20%。
不过我已经忘了我们为什么争了。:))
abc wrote:
风子说我搞三个代表,假科学。
我现在来点数字的东西。
这条线上,除我ABC外,共出现新一代海外华人共10 人:图教授,老魔,玛雅,关中,偌竹,七月,阿姗,老面,行人,令胡。
其中反对bailout的有图教授,老魔,玛雅,关中共4人,支持bailout的有令胡1人,其他人的观点未明确表达出来。
这是一个很小样本数的统计,其结果与我的结论不矛盾:“风子的这种感叹在新一代海外华人中还是有很强的普遍性”
如果对所有新一代海外华人就这个问题做一个民意测验,结果会如何呢?根据我在咖啡和其他途径的感受,我觉得结果是差不多的,虽然常常线索很微弱。
---------------
“taxpayers”是很重要的西方价值观,新一代海外华人被这种西方价值观洗脑太正常不过了。我说:“风子的这种感叹在新一代海外华人中还是有很强的普遍性”,是有依据的。
我在咖啡发言很认真,很真诚,一般都说话有依据。
我是做股票的,常常在微弱的线索中发现赚钱的机会。凭微弱线索下结论,不是不科学,也不是不严谨,更不是“三个代表”,而是事物很复杂,真正的规律常常隐藏在复杂的现象中。
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/26/2008
反对bailout,起码不是700 billion bailout。
这个方法是可行的。
Meanwhile a group of House GOP lawmakers circulated an alternative that would put much less focus on a government takeover of failing institutions' sour assets. This proposal would have the government provide insurance to companies that agree to hold frozen assets, rather than have the U.S. purchase the assets.
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/26/2008
有免费电话,大家可以投票反对。 - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/26/2008
纳税人当然不该给大金融公司买单,但如果股市崩溃,将损害所有人的利益,比如退休金都要大幅缩水了。 - posted on 09/26/2008
玛雅 wrote:
反对bailout,起码不是700 billion bailout。
这个方法是可行的。
Meanwhile a group of House GOP lawmakers circulated an alternative that would put much less focus on a government takeover of failing institutions' sour assets. This proposal would have the government provide insurance to companies that agree to hold frozen assets, rather than have the U.S. purchase the assets.
Probably it will not work. Who wants to hold these toxic waste assets?
Paulson's plan is lousy, and the GOP's plan is even worse. - Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/27/2008
- Re: Sign the Petition to Congress: No housing bailout!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!posted on 09/28/2008
Please paste HTML code and press Enter.
- touche
- #1 3mw
- #2 玛雅
- #3 3mw
- #4 touche
- #5 rzp
- #6 gz
- #7 gz
- #8 gz
- #9 abc
- #10 LM
- #11 July
- #12 abc
- #13 July
- #14 gz
- #15 abc
- #16 July
- #17 July
- #18 rzp
- #19 gz
- #20 gz
- #21 July
- #22 abc
- #23 July
- #24 rzp
- #25 July
- #26 行人
- #27 令胡冲
- #28 3mw
- #29 令胡冲
- #30 3mw
- #31 令胡冲
- #32 3mw
- #33 令胡冲
- #34 rzp
- #35 abc
- #36 gz
- #37 gz
- #38 SevenStar
- #39 SevenStar
- #40 abc
- #41 wince
- #42 rzp
- #43 rzp
- #44 abc
- #45 rzp
- #46 abc
- #47 rzp
- #48 abc
- #49 行人
- #50 abc
- #51 行人
- #52 abc
- #53 行人
- #54 苦瓜
- #55 abc
- #56 abc
- #57 苦瓜
- #58 rzp
- #59 行人
- #60 abc
- #61 pepper
- #62 苦瓜
- #63 kugua
- #64 J
- #65 abc
- #66 J
- #67 3mw
- #68 Joey
- #69 风子
- #70 玛雅
- #71 玛雅
- #72 gz
- #73 pepper
- #74 SevenStar
- #75 SevenStar
(c) 2010 Maya Chilam Foundation