Wall Street Prepares for Potential Lehman Bankruptcy (possibly by midnight)

Erm, you tell me, so I judge it all on what people like you say, thanks.
I have not seen any of this yet, I work, I can afford the food I eat, I am not paying anything more in fuel bills etc.
I'm waiting to be told life for me will get worse.
I'll apologise for being vague.

 

And the Republicans wanna privatize social security. The way things are going, social security may be the only retirement funds we've got...

 

"I am not affected my this... so everything is ok!"

Meh... Say that to the millions of Americans that are.

 

I like hippiehillbilly's style

 

well it looks like the fed is going to bail AIG out..
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/09/nationalization-of-aig-treasury-to-get.html

welcome to socialism in america.

aint this wonderful folks? when everything finally hits bottom "We The People" are going to be responsible for trillions and trillions of debt.
while these wall street tycoons tap out and go sit pretty in there mansions with there 100's of millions in the bank..

these are just bandaids folks, there putting a bandaid on a rotten festering sore and hoping it hides the infection long enough for all the guilty parties to get there ducks in a row and cash out..

85 billion will not save a company thats over 400 billion in the whole..

 

The magical deity from the land of personal and family security called insurance is losing its power.

Oh no this can’t be true..



We must pray and keep the faith.

 

Socialism in america amounts to giving the most government aid to the folks who need it least.

On the bright side, these bailouts are a drop in the bucket compared to the cost of our fiasco in Iraq.

 

i dont think you have a comprehension of how much debt the fed now holds in its hands if you think the war in iraq is even measurable to the debt the fed has taken on in the last year..

there is no comparison..

 

But isn't the war in Iraq is partly responsible for our debt? Sure, funding for the war may technically come from different coffers, but ultimately it's the tax base that's supporting it, so it's we the tax payers who are paying for it with our futures and our childrens' futures, right?

The bush legacy lives on...

 

cost of iraq war,550 billion and growing.
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

cost of the bailouts to taxpayers is estimated to exceed 2.5 trillion(not including the inflationary costs caused by the bailout)..

http://www.contrarianprofits.com/articles/fed-bailouts-could-cost-taxpayer-25-trillion/5180
http://mises.org/story/3062

there is no comparison between the 2 IMO. before this is over with,the bailouts quite possibly will dwarf the war by a margin of 10 to 1.this is just the beginning,there WILL be more bailouts to add to that number..

this country could have bore the weight of the war,the bailouts are going to crush us...
there is no comparison...

 

When you look at the cumulative cost of the bailouts, this is true, I was just trying to provide another perspective is all (though the numbers I found were on the order of 1 to 2 trillion for the long term cost of the war, and 800 billion in the past year for bailouts, but I get your point).

They tell us the AIG bailout is merely a loan, that the government will step in, make some changes, and sell off some of the assets to repay that loan, like that's supposed to give us more confidence, yet the fed forks over 85 billion for a company worth 7 billion, kinda makes you wonder where that money's supposed to come from...and where it's going...

 

its nationalization of corporate debt plain and simple. we are going to get screwed..
heres a couple good reads on it.

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/09/nationalization-of-aig-treasury-to-get.html
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/09/aig-bailout-fed-loophole-133.html

 

The problem is that people are mixing up the terminology. Number one, this to me is not a bailout. A bailout is the public sector absorbing private sector losses. The shareholders of AIG have seen their shares decline in value since the Fed intervention. They have taken more losses, not less.

Secondly, the Fed is not "forking over" $85bn for a $7bn company. For one, AIG is a $30bn company, in the sense of its market capitalisation. Secondly, the Fed is not paying $85bn for the company, they are loaning it $85 billion, and in return they get about 80% of the company plus they have that $85 billion loan - a senior claim on the company's assets at a punishing interest rate.

 

I'm skeptical, but I hope you're right.

 

Uh, hello. Welcome to the Politics Forum. *waves*