punked Posted March 3, 2009 Report Posted March 3, 2009 Just love this guy - instead of telling me or informing me and bringing me up to speed he talks down - Jezzz hope you feel better. I was just asking because you posted a 20 line response to my comment on Zombie banks with out knowing what they are. They are banks which only exist because all their loans are backed by the government, their assets don't cover their loans in fact nothing does but it is ok because their loans are backed by the government. These banks are already have their loans nationalized, why shouldn't the rest of them go with it. At least this way the government gets the rewards as well as the downfall. These banks SHOULD be nationalized. Quote
msj Posted March 4, 2009 Report Posted March 4, 2009 I was just asking because you posted a 20 line response to my comment on Zombie banks with out knowing what they are. They are banks which only exist because all their loans are backed by the government, their assets don't cover their loans in fact nothing does but it is ok because their loans are backed by the government. These banks are already have their loans nationalized, why shouldn't the rest of them go with it. At least this way the government gets the rewards as well as the downfall. These banks SHOULD be nationalized. Now, now punked. We are going to have to wait for people to come to their senses before that type of thing happens. They'll ignore the billions in shareholder value that the banks have already destroyed, and they will ignore the trillions that taxpayers are already guaranteeing, just don't cancel out that final $10 billion or so in shareholder value that Citi Bank may have. No, that would be the death of capitalism. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
msj Posted March 4, 2009 Report Posted March 4, 2009 No, it is successful Ford that is giving money to a failed GM and Chrysler.Obama wants to take from those who succeed and give it to those who fail. Given that Ford loses money anyway I will guess you mean that Ford loses out on an opportunity to recovery some sunk costs. The real loser is still taxpayers who pay taxes - that means Honda, Toyota and part manufacturers who have actually made money and are likely to make money in future years. Ford? They may make some dough someday. Individual Americans? They will be paying for this failure for decades to come. Quote If a believer demands that I, as a non-believer, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect but for my submission. And that is incompatible with a secular democracy. Flemming Rose (Dutch journalist) My biggest takeaway from economics is that the past wasn't as good as you remember, the present isn't as bad as you think, and the future will be better than you anticipate. Morgan Housel http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/14/things-im-pretty-sure-about.aspx
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.