Give me a break so the U.S. bails out the greedy M'fkn banks. So how does it work.... ok guys just go print abunch of new money so we can create a false economy.
Notifications
Clear all
Small Talk
24
Posts
15
Users
0
Reactions
6,697
Views
23 replies
fake economy? o_O If they don't save the banks, the consequences are much worse than losing a few billion (although if they can get the market going again by investing, they get back their money in just a few years). Not only would the american economy crumble, but it would re-create something like the 1929 crash (or worse) again... where's the problem? 
I know it just ticks me off because banks run such high profit margins annually why should tax payers pay for it.. I'm not american so...and swiss i do think your right . The situation would be worse if they didnt save the banks.
I'm not going to invest in the american market you?
hell no ♦
i don't have enough money to invest in stocks, but if i did, i'd invest in the UBS (swiss bank) - they're way too important to go down, so if they lose too much value, they'll be bought back or merged.. guaranteed profit 
now, to find me $10k... ^^
Originally posted by swissmoumout
now, to find me $10k... ^^
nlx00
or nlx000 if you're not so patient... good luck
Originally posted by swissmoumout
hell no ♦
i don't have enough money to invest in stocks, but if i did, i'd invest in the UBS (swiss bank) - they're way too important to go down, so if they lose too much value, they'll be bought back or merged.. guaranteed profit
now, to find me $10k... ^^
I lived in Geneva the last year. Used to read "20 minutes". Actually UBS isn't going very well since they where the number one investor in the real-estate crisis in the U.S. Now they have at least a year before they can get back to there feet. Actually I'd even prefer to invest at "Credit Suisse" till things get back to normal.
Originally posted by swissmoumout
now, to find me $10k... ^^
Isn't that why we're here? 
A friend of mine suggested that, instead of giving $700B to the banks, they should give it to the American public instead:
The US has about 300 million people. That works out to $2,300 for every man, woman, and child. (I'm assuming 1B = 1,000M).
Imagine the boost to the economy if you gave that much money to everyone!
Better yet, imagine the nation-wide party that would probably happen! ♦
problem is, when you give money directly to the people, it'll take some time before getting back into the economy (they won't spend it all the day they get it). On top of that, people are buying less these days, because of the bad economy, so it wouldn't work half as well as investing that trillion into the banks. But it has been done in the past, giving people money works very well to get the economy going
Originally posted by swissmoumout
fake economy? o_O If they don't save the banks, the consequences are much worse than losing a few billion
if it got this far, clearly there's a problem with their strategy.
a bigger bankroll alone isn't going to solve that...
"Think of a drunk gambler at a slot machine. He starts with $100 and slowly loses. Every now and then he wins some money, but he keeps putting the coins back into the slot until he has lost everything. That is how this plan will work."
"If Wall Street gets away with this, it will represent an historic swindle of the American public. All sugar for the villains, lasting pain and damage for the victims. Any member of Congress who looks at the plan to give Hank unchecked power to transfer $700 billion from the Treasury to his friends' companies and has any reaction other than 'You've got to be fucking kidding me' does not deserve to hold office."
i would agree with making significant short-term sacrifices in order to avoid a Second Great Depression, but most of what I'm reading suggests to me that this bailout will only make things worse. (not to mention the amount of power this would put in certain unelected people's hands.)
it's one big scam if you ask me. those executives fuck up bigtime, pay themselves 100m$ bonusses in the process and get unlimited reserves from the people's money to "save the economy". while the people whose money they take, can't even pay the mortgage on their houses anymore.
good luck saving that economy...
those executives fuck up bigtime, pay themselves 100m$ bonusses in the process and get unlimited reserves from the people's money to "save the economy". while the people whose money they take, can't even pay the mortgage on their houses anymore.
good luck saving that economy...
Do you know what a budget deficit is? Just wondering.
if that's non-poker speak for a negative BB/100, then i know what it means, yes, but i'm no economist (or even claim to have the most basic understanding of the underlying mechanics of our economy.)
that being said, i do like to keep myself informed on stuff like this and a lot of people who are in a position to know are making some very valid points as to why this is a bad idea.
i may have made some weird associations in my previous post, but my point was the issue being trust, not money. There is lots of money (and credit) but it is being hoarded throughout the system.
Non-financial private debt is $32.4 trillion dollars as of 2Q 2008.
Household debt is $14.0 trillion.
Households lost 400 billion dollars last quarter.
again, i'm no economist, but $700 billion more (in losses via government obligations that taxpayers must cover) seems pretty insignificant against the total bad credit outstanding and therefore insufficient to bail the system out. how it would help restoring the trust in the market is an even bigger mistery to me...
i'm also not saying nothing should be done, but shouldn't we be addressing the root of the problem instead of just throwing a bigger bankroll at it?
if this seems uninformed to you and you can actually tell me why or direct me to some links proving me wrong, i would gladly change my views on this, but just asking me whether i know what a budget deficit is, isn't really helping anyone...
Originally posted by Gerv
HyperMarkets
HyperAggressionWhat's next?
Have you heard that a or some investment firms and banks want to start a poker player fund where they have a 150 player team that playes poker like they invest in the markets. PokerStrategy will have a new market, training bankers how to play poker. Hopefully in 5-10years we do not have to bail out the banks on thier "poker losses". ha ha
On the topic of hyper-inflation, I live in a country that actually went through such a period of hyper-inflation. I myself wasn't yet born, but a common joke about that time that my relatives used to tell me is that if u went for a steak to a restauran and didn't pay for it right away, u had to pay a lot more by the time u finished eating ur steak. Also ppl who had jobs received their pay-checks in milions of the then currency but the money was pretty much worthless the next day. I doubt I'd want to go through that myself ♠
This happened in the former Yugoslavia late 70s, early 80s IIRC.
If they had to rebuild the Titanic today it would cost 400,000,000 $
The top suit would cost 75k to rent.
I'm sure the bank executives can afford this...
Time to get $ inflation linked bonds everybody! If you can keep your poker rolls in Euros 
bumping this up with this update
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13770390
it seems the Americans are scrambling once again.
