Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/26/2008 10:30:01 PM
From: Think4Yourself	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 306849

"Can't someone, anyone, put their agendas/special interests aside and provide some intelligent answers?" No. Sorry. I honestly believe almost no Congressman even truly understands the issues.

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/26/2008 10:39:22 PM
From: alanrs	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

That was my take, two fools spouting their stump speeches. Watched some stupid home video show with my grandson. ARS

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/26/2008 10:47:14 PM
From: CalculatedRisk	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

I was very disappointed that neither candidate addressed the crisis. bummer ...

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/26/2008 10:50:20 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 306849

He blew it. All I needed to hear was "NO BAILOUT MY FRIENDS!" and I was his. But it wasn't to be. Alas, I'll have to switch over and vote for the blue candidate after all.

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/26/2008 10:53:05 PM
From: patron_anejo_por_favor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 306849

>>Can't someone, anyone, put their agendas/special interests aside and provide some intelligent answers?<< They're both 'working for the cause'.......<G/NG> youtube.com It's money that matters, in the U.S.S.A.

To: The Reaper who wrote (151093)	9/27/2008 12:40:56 AM
From: Sr K	Respond to of 306849

This bill is in the equivalent of conference committee, possibly this weekend, otherwise through Monday. It was inappropriate IMO for either to inject issues that they did not already present to their lead negotiator for the bill, and probably just as much for any issue to be disclosed at the debate to the other side for the first time. This applies to any portion they oppose. But Obama did raise the uncertainty of how much it will cost because we don't know what the assets bought will sell for or what income stream there will be before they are sold. I checked out the fdic.gov site while the debate was going on, and they have 2 companies handling debt and RE sales from banks they've taken over. They are well positioned, with Bloomberg Professional software, to help bidders value assets fairly and help bidders prepare to bid. Now that I've seen that, Treasury cannot pay prices to maturity. Others, including 2 OpEds today in the WSJ, by John Paulson and Lucian Bebchuk, have different approaches to putting in place competitive bidding, including a 5% reward to the best of 20 asset managers. If assets are bought for fair value, Treasury will make money on the $350B layout, and then Congress will not unrelease the other $350B. If warrants or senior preferred are part of the mix, it should be fair to start, and if that helps price discovery, then it will work. Banks that don't like the warrants or senior preferred, can fend for themselves, or there can be a provision to buy back the senior preferred if they can find a better deal.