Hundreds Of Banks Will Fail, (May Cost Taxpayers $2 Trillion)

[Psychoblues]

Just where will this financial travesty end? This makes Enron look like elementary school!!!!!!!!

Source: Reuters

NEW YORK, Aug 3 (Reuters) - The United States is in the second inning of a recession that will last for at least 18 months and help kill off hundreds of banks, influential economist and New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini told Barron's in Sunday's edition.

Taxpayers will pay a big price for helping bail out the rest of the financial services industry as well, Roubini said -- at least $1 trillion and more likely $2 trillion.

The banks will become insolvent because of mounting losses as a result of the housing bust and because they have only written down their subprime loans so far, he said. Still in front of them are their consumer-credit losses, for which they lack the reserves, Barron's reported..........


Now, Roubini told Barron's, the government is overregulating, bailing out troubled participants and intervening in every market.

"The regulators should investigate themselves for bailing out Fannie Mae (FNM.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Freddie Mac (FRE.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), the creditors of Bear Stearns and the financial system with new lending facilities. They have swapped U.S. Treasury bonds for toxic securities," he told Barron's. "It is privatizing the gains and profits, and socializing the losses as usual. This is socialism for Wall Street and the rich."...........

More: http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSN0344130720080803?sp=true

This is not encouraging news at all! I hope the investigations put more in jail than the Enron ones did!!!!!!! It ain't nothing but thieves and crooks caused all this nightmare!!!!!!!

[mundame]

Just where will this financial travesty end? This makes Enron look like elementary school!!!!!!!!

Source: Reuters

NEW YORK, Aug 3 (Reuters) - The United States is in the second inning of a recession that will last for at least 18 months and help kill off hundreds of banks, influential economist and New York University Professor Nouriel Roubini told Barron's in Sunday's edition.

Taxpayers will pay a big price for helping bail out the rest of the financial services industry as well, Roubini said -- at least $1 trillion and more likely $2 trillion.

The banks will become insolvent because of mounting losses as a result of the housing bust and because they have only written down their subprime loans so far, he said. Still in front of them are their consumer-credit losses, for which they lack the reserves, Barron's reported..........
************************************************** ***

This is not encouraging news at all! I hope the investigations put more in jail than the Enron ones did!!!!!!! It ain't nothing but thieves and crooks caused all this nightmare!!!!!!!


It's not news at all, Psychoblues: it's only a prediction, by one rather bearish outlier economist. You said this makes Enron "look like elementary school," but Enron actually happened: it went from peak stock value to total bust inside 8 months. This recession hasn't even started yet, as far as anyone can tell, and the business channels obsess on that question every weeknight. Bank failures are up, but only a few have gone down at this point.

You are talking as if prediction is the same thing as something having happened, but the latter is real and the former is just speculation.

[Psychoblues]

Fair enough, mundame, but you speak as if recent failures of major financial institutions are not precursors of things to come. I admire your optimism!!!!!!!

The damage already done in the financial markets do indicate a propensity for them to further rape the goodwill of the peoples and demand redress from the very one's they are raping. It's a comprehensive subject and point that you obviously missed in your reading but one that deserves immediate attention of the heretofore unraped, can you dig it?

Do you own a house or a mortgage? Depending on which side of that fence you stand on is the gist of the question.

[avatar4321]

This is presuming that the government will bail out the banks. Why should we expect the government to do so?

And we cant be in the second inning of a recession because we arent in a recession yet.

[Psychoblues]

Everybody has dreams, a'21.



This is presuming that the government will bail out the banks. Why should we expect the government to do so?

And we cant be in the second inning of a recession because we arent in a recession yet.

We'll see how your's works out.

[mundame]

On what do you base your optimism?


I'm not optimistic; I'm only interested in reality. That means the past, and under good conditions, the present.

You are taking one negative predictor's speculations about the future as for-sure fact, but I can't see the point in that. No one knows what is going to happen in the future ----- there is poor data from that era.

[Psychoblues]

Not at all, mundame. I simply shared an article of information that you may not be aware.



I'm not optimistic; I'm only interested in reality. That means the past, and under good conditions, the present.

You are taking one negative predictor's speculations about the future as for-sure fact, but I can't see the point in that. No one knows what is going to happen in the future ----- there is poor data from that era.

Obviously you disagree. Care to share?

[mundame]

Not at all, mundame. I simply shared an article of information that you may not be aware.

My point is that this isn't an "article of information." It's dire speculation about the future, a bourne from whence no traveller returns.





Obviously you disagree. Care to share?

Sure. The word "will" is always a lie. That article is full of will's. Therefore it is a lie from start to finish, not because it can't happen (it might, or something else might happen), but because this guy claims to Know All, but actually, he knows nothing about the future, just like the rest of us.

Why not wait and see what happens? That works better.

[theHawk]

This is presuming that the government will bail out the banks. Why should we expect the government to do so?

Because its quite possible we'll have a Democratically controlled Congress and White House. Dems would favor such bail outs in order to expand government power into private industry, all under the guise of helping the people from big banks. They would love nothing more than to have a nation not only dependant on big government, but also indebted to them as well.

[CockySOB]

This is presuming that the government will bail out the banks. Why should we expect the government to do so?

And we cant be in the second inning of a recession because we arent in a recession yet.

Think S&L crisis a while back. The savings and loans were making the same sub-prime home loans that the current mortgage and loan providers have been making, and with the same results - the Federal government bails them out. Far better to learn from the mistakes of the past and let the banks which engage in sub-prime lending fail. Call it economic Darwinism if you'd like. The best way to get rid of risky and predatory lending practices is to remove the Federal safety net which we continue to provide them.

And you're right, we are not in a recession and we haven't been in one for a good while. Real estate speculators are feeling the crunch, but it is a crunch of their own making, just like tech companies felt the crunch of the dot-com-bust. The tech industry rebounded quite well without Federal intervention, and is stronger today because the high-risk speculation has been strongly curtailed in the tech markets. Now if the Feds would leave real estate alone, we might see the weak weeded out and the strong survive in the real estate markets.

[CockySOB]

Because its quite possible we'll have a Democratically controlled Congress and White House. Dems would favor such bail outs in order to expand government power into private industry, all under the guise of helping the people from big banks. They would love nothing more than to have a nation not only dependant on big government, but also indebted to them as well.

That's from Appendix A, section II of the Democrat Party Playbook, the unabridged edition - you know, the copy the Democrat elites use to keep their slaves on the plantation....

[avatar4321]

Everybody has dreams, a'21.




We'll see how your's works out.

Your fantasy world aside, you haven't addressed a single point I brought up. We aren't in a recession yet. The numbers prove that. And it's not the government's responsibility to bail out failed businesses.

I do have a dream, however, that one day the government will get out of our lives.

[mundame]

I do have a dream, however, that one day the government will get out of our lives.


That IS a dream!

Reminds me of the Burmese traditional list of the Five Evils:

Fire
Famine
Disease
Flood
-------and Government.

[Trigg]

Think S&L crisis a while back. The savings and loans were making the same sub-prime home loans that the current mortgage and loan providers have been making, and with the same results - the Federal government bails them out. Far better to learn from the mistakes of the past and let the banks which engage in sub-prime lending fail. Call it economic Darwinism if you'd like. The best way to get rid of risky and predatory lending practices is to remove the Federal safety net which we continue to provide them.

And you're right, we are not in a recession and we haven't been in one for a good while. Real estate speculators are feeling the crunch, but it is a crunch of their own making, just like tech companies felt the crunch of the dot-com-bust. The tech industry rebounded quite well without Federal intervention, and is stronger today because the high-risk speculation has been strongly curtailed in the tech markets. Now if the Feds would leave real estate alone, we might see the weak weeded out and the strong survive in the real estate markets.

We're already seeing some positive steps being taken because of the "crisis". Mortagages and loans are harder to get and people are having to prove their incomes once again.

[Psychoblues]

Dig that, Trigg!!!!!1




We're already seeing some positive steps being taken because of the "crisis". Mortagages and loans are harder to get and people are having to prove their incomes once again.

Can I make a little joke?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!? Triggin' is diggin'!!!!!!!!!!!!!