Click to read:Geithner Slammed for Defending AIG Bailout

Full story: CBS News

Updated at 4:00 p.m. EST Democrats and Republicans alike pummeled Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner on Wednesday over his role in the $180 billion bailout of insurance giant AIG Inc., venting public anger over Wall Street's return to prosperity while 10 percent of Americans are still jobless.

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 14 of14
hey

Las Vegas, NV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jan 27, 2010
 
About the number that came in between 2001 and 2009?
hey

Las Vegas, NV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jan 27, 2010
 
Hoe do you build a Nation's confidence? Tell them what they want to hear or the truth?
MattJ

Sunnyvale, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The bailouts HAD to be done. Geithner and Paulson were right about that.

So we should not blame them. We should blame the REAL culprits, the deregulators who made it so easy for the reckless and greedy to hold the whole country over a barrel like this.

That includes both parties, but it really is mainly the fault of Republicans, going all the way back to Ronald Reagan if not earlier.
Jeremiah

Orlando, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jan 27, 2010
 
Nearly 20% are jobless when you include those who have exhausted their unemployment benefits or have stopped looking for work. And, the number continues to climb. We are approaching 1930's numbers. When the inflation bubble bursts later this year because of the vast sums of money Bernake has created, we will blow by those numbers in a heart beat. Look for the DOW to collapse when money gets tight just before the bubble bursts. Thanks Tim.
Hands Up

Pelham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Geithner, that wasn't what GHWB meant by "No New Taxes."

¯\(°_o)/¯
Slayer

Leeds, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jan 27, 2010
 
Does anyone remember the extreme scare tactics used in fall 2008 when Hank Paulson was doing news conferences about how the US Treasury HAD to provide hundreds of billions of US taxpayer $'s to the big banks or the entire economy would crash?

No one should have believed him -- but the scare tactics worked -- people were concerned their paychecks would bounce. Geithner did not have to agree to paying 100 cents on the dollar to the big banks for AIG's Credit Derivative Swaps -- the banks should not have received one single penny more than what they paid for the CDS contracts they bought -- the rest was like paying out the highest multiple on a spin at the roulette wheel! Huge hedge funds were the biggest winners! The Hedge Funds managers only allow wealthy people to own shares!

The taxpayers were screwed again by the boys who are brilliant at pulling the wool over the eyes of politicians who are innumerates --(illerate when it comes to numbers!).
Hands Up

Pelham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MattJ wrote:
The bailouts HAD to be done. Geithner and Paulson were right about that.
So we should not blame them. We should blame the REAL culprits, the deregulators who made it so easy for the reckless and greedy to hold the whole country over a barrel like this.
That includes both parties, but it really is mainly the fault of Republicans, going all the way back to Ronald Reagan if not earlier.
Did John McCain vote for Banking Deregulation? No, Joe Biden did and Bill Clinton Signed it. See:

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd...

Did John McCain support Regulation of Fannie Mae? Yes, he did. See:

2005: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd... Click on Show Co-Sponsors.

2007: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd...

Also, so did Bush over 5 years ago!

See the following from: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

By STEPHEN LABATON
Published: September 11, 2003
The Bush administration today recommended the most significant regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings and loan crisis a decade ago.

How did ALL of this get blocked? Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. Chaired by Chris Dodd and had a Democratic Majority and still does to this day. Therefore, none of it made it out to the floor of the Senate and was doomed because the DEmocrats in that committee voted it down. Look it up, they had a 100% party line vote in every case.

Republicans? Check your facts.

¯\(°_o)/¯
Hands Up

Pelham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Oh yeah, don't forget, Jimmy Carter was the one that started the whole "affordable" housing thing too. Can you say sub-prime mortgages thanks to Bubba Clinton's shenanigans in 1999?

¯\(°_o)/¯
Slayer

Leeds, AL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

MattJ wrote:
The bailouts HAD to be done. Geithner and Paulson were right about that.
So we should not blame them. We should blame the REAL culprits, the deregulators who made it so easy for the reckless and greedy to hold the whole country over a barrel like this.
That includes both parties, but it really is mainly the fault of Republicans, going all the way back to Ronald Reagan if not earlier.
By 'deregulators' are you referring to the 1999 Gramm Leach Bliley Act that de-balled the Glass Steagall Act? If so, that pathetic pile of swile was proposed and passed while a Democratic Prez, Clinton was in office bucko! The Banking Services Committee has been chaired by non-other than Barney Frank -- big democrat, with Chris Dodd also a dem on the committe. Just like a DemonicRat -- blame the other guy...

But if you're truly looking to blame the REAL CULPRITS -- don't forget all the stupid Americans who paid too much for a house, got mortgages they couldn't afford in their wildest dreams, all in their greedy dreams of seeing their house go up in value to the stratusphere -- really dumb people! Also: people who cashed out all their home equity to fund dream vacations and dream kitchens.

“Don't be afraid of my Freedom”

Since: Sep 09

or your own

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jan 27, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Slayer wrote:
<quoted text>
By 'deregulators' are you referring to the 1999 Gramm Leach Bliley Act that de-balled the Glass Steagall Act? If so, that pathetic pile of swile was proposed and passed while a Democratic Prez, Clinton was in office bucko! The Banking Services Committee has been chaired by non-other than Barney Frank -- big democrat, with Chris Dodd also a dem on the committe. Just like a DemonicRat -- blame the other guy...
But if you're truly looking to blame the REAL CULPRITS -- don't forget all the stupid Americans who paid too much for a house, got mortgages they couldn't afford in their wildest dreams, all in their greedy dreams of seeing their house go up in value to the stratusphere -- really dumb people! Also: people who cashed out all their home equity to fund dream vacations and dream kitchens.
Nice try: The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. The bills were passed by a Republican majority, basically following party lines by a 54–44 vote in the Senate and by a bi-partisan 343–86 vote in the House of Representatives. After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90–8 (one not voting) and in the House: 362–57 (15 not voting). The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.
Hands Up

Pelham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 28, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Freedom Lover of IL wrote:
<quoted text> Nice try: The bill that ultimately repealed the Act was introduced in the Senate by Phil Gramm (Republican of Texas) and in the House of Representatives by Jim Leach (R-Iowa) in 1999. The bills were passed by a Republican majority, basically following party lines by a 54–44 vote in the Senate and by a bi-partisan 343–86 vote in the House of Representatives. After passing both the Senate and House the bill was moved to a conference committee to work out the differences between the Senate and House versions. The final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90–8 (one not voting) and in the House: 362–57 (15 not voting). The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999.
Precisely! The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act! That allows you to deposit money, take out a loan, make an investment, buy insurance, etc. under the same roof. It is also the reason that we get all of those Privacy Notices from our banks and creditors. Clinton also threatened to veto the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act if there weren't concessions added for underserved communities. He insisted that Banks be forced to give out loans to people that can't afford to pay them back. He specifically said,

"Beginning with the introduction of an Administration-sponsored bill in 1997, my Administration has worked vigorously to produce financial services legislation that would not only spur greater competition, but also protect the rights of consumers and guarantee that expanded financial services firms would meet the needs of America’s underserved communities."

You can see it here:
http://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/papers/1999/...

Banks were prohibited from expanding into new businesses until they met the targets mandated by Clinton’s "revised Community Reinvestment Act" for the percentage of mortgages they were required to write in low-income neighborhoods.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act was a great piece of Legislation when it hit Clinton's desk. His concessions for "America's Underserved Communities" is a HUGE part of the economic mess that we're in today and really created a "False Economy." Many people were going out and buying houses that they couldn't afford so, the economy was booming. After all, people were buying so, it appeared as though the economy was great. But, now that it's time to pay up on those sub-prime mortgages, the economy is going to Hell in a handbasket. Why? Because, those concessions forced the banks to give out loans that they would never recoup. They were essentially "paying for hay for a horse that they couldn't ride."

¯\(°_o)/¯

“Don't be afraid of my Freedom”

Since: Sep 09

or your own

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 28, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The Gramm -Leach act is the reason we are in this mess today. It gave the Capitalist to much power which they used to almost hang themselves.

It's OK though, they were able to slip out of the rope and put it around we the peoples neck.
Hands Up

Pelham, NH

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 28, 2010
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Freedom Lover of IL wrote:
The Gramm -Leach act is the reason we are in this mess today. It gave the Capitalist to much power which they used to almost hang themselves.
It's OK though, they were able to slip out of the rope and put it around we the peoples neck.
The Banks were forced into giving out the sub-prime mortgages. They were prohibited from expanding into new businesses until they met the targets mandated by the Clinton Administration in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. What were they supposed to do? Go out of business or accomodate the Government's mandates?

Let's also not forget some key legislation that was designed to specifically avert the current Economic mess that we're in. There have been Bills introduced that specifically targeted the regulation of Fannie and Freddie.

From 2003:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...

From 2005:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd... Click on Show Co-Sponsors.

From 2007:(This was really a retry at the 2005 Legislation)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd...

Do you see who is sponsoring these? The one from 2003 was a Bush Adminstration initiative, the ones from 2005 and 2007 were both sponsored by Sen. CHuck Hagel (R). If you read them, they were shot down by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs as was the 2003 Bush try. If you look into this committee, the Chairman of the Committee is none other that the top recipient of Fannie and Freddie Lobbyist money, Chris Dodd (D) from Connecticut. This committee also held a Democratic majority and still does today. Look at the recipients of Fannie and Freddie money here:

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/updat...

Now, tell me why you think that the Democratically controlled Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs shot down every attempt at regulating Fannie and Freddie. If you can't make the connection, you aren't paying attention.

¯\(°_o)/¯

“Don't be afraid of my Freedom”

Since: Sep 09

or your own

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jan 28, 2010
 
Hands Up wrote:
<quoted text>
The Banks were forced into giving out the sub-prime mortgages. They were prohibited from expanding into new businesses until they met the targets mandated by the Clinton Administration in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. What were they supposed to do? Go out of business or accomodate the Government's mandates?
Let's also not forget some key legislation that was designed to specifically avert the current Economic mess that we're in. There have been Bills introduced that specifically targeted the regulation of Fannie and Freddie.
From 2003:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html...
From 2005:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd... Click on Show Co-Sponsors.
From 2007:(This was really a retry at the 2005 Legislation)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd...
Do you see who is sponsoring these? The one from 2003 was a Bush Adminstration initiative, the ones from 2005 and 2007 were both sponsored by Sen. CHuck Hagel (R). If you read them, they were shot down by the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs as was the 2003 Bush try. If you look into this committee, the Chairman of the Committee is none other that the top recipient of Fannie and Freddie Lobbyist money, Chris Dodd (D) from Connecticut. This committee also held a Democratic majority and still does today. Look at the recipients of Fannie and Freddie money here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/09/updat...
Now, tell me why you think that the Democratically controlled Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs shot down every attempt at regulating Fannie and Freddie. If you can't make the connection, you aren't paying attention.
¯\(°_o)/¯
It will take me a while to read and digest your links, but I will.

If you are saying that both the Democratic and Republican parties are owned my Wall st, I agree.

I was told, don't know if it's true, that the banks gave out many more loans than they were required to. I still say it wasn't the loans, but it was the packaging, credit default swaps, that led to and exacerbated the crash.

Also, the variable rate mortgages, seems to me the Bankers shot themselves in foot, why did they have to and continue to be so greedy?

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 14 of14
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Other Recent Bank of New York Discussions

Search the Bank of New York Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
Real Estate Foreclosures 9/15/13 (Sep '13) Sep '13 A Justday 2
US DOJ Charges Sinovel With IP Theft From AMSC (Jul '13) Jul '13 Jack Kelly 1
Sinovel Wind Turbines & Edward Snowden (Jul '13) Jul '13 Jack Kelly 4
Sinovel - Stimulus Funds -Snowden (Jul '13) Jul '13 Jack Kelly 1
Sinovel Wind Turbines -Massachusetts 4 (Jul '13) Jul '13 Jack Kelly 1
Vice Presidents in banking, Criminals? Robert T... (Jul '11) Apr '13 LondonEsq 2
Man Accused of Plot to Blow Up Federal Reserve ... (Oct '12) Oct '12 Joan 30
•••
•••
•••
•••