Has the recession effected you yet?
- Thread starter statsman
- Start date
Luckily, I work for a business that does a lot of buying/reselling and given the current market everyone seems to be doing a lot of shopping for used items since they are cheaper. On the other hand a lot of people are also selling items to make their ends meet. I'm not too worried about being laid off.
At this point, for me, it's almost become hilarious. I've never had money, I'm not going to come into money anytime soon and as far as I am concerned the only people who stand to lose anything are the rich, so anymore instead of getting interested in whatever new bs bailout they are proposing I just laugh and say "Let 'em fail". It's not like the government could take anything from me anyway (what are they going to take ? my car? that's barely 4 figures blue book in pristine value - which it isn't)
Something I believe to be little known about this whole banking fiasco is Paulson's role in it. Back in the 90s I believe he was one of the people fighting to get banks a bigger gap in their assets to get loans. I think the old law was $1.00 for every $8.00 they could loan. He wanted it to be something like $12.00 then and I think Bush gave him an even bigger gap. Ironic thing is that law was around to keep this situation from happening. IMO he is the biggest lobbiest on the planet, he successfully got them all the money, then a bailout, and now says we should borrow more money to get out of debt.
Sigh. . . borrow money to get out of debt. Oh well /rant off.
*I did some quick diggin' Net Capital Rule is what Paulson pushed for. In 2004 it was abolished, wikipedia says this:
As Chairman of the SEC, Mr. William H. Donaldson presided over the April 2004 meeting. It was held at the request of the major Wall Street investment houses, including Goldman Sachs, then headed by future Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr.. The firms requested the release from the net capital rule. The complaint that was put forth by the investment banks was of increasingly onerous regulatory requirements -- in this case, not U.S. regulator oversight, but European Union regulation of the foreign operations of US investment groups.
At this point, for me, it's almost become hilarious. I've never had money, I'm not going to come into money anytime soon and as far as I am concerned the only people who stand to lose anything are the rich, so anymore instead of getting interested in whatever new bs bailout they are proposing I just laugh and say "Let 'em fail". It's not like the government could take anything from me anyway (what are they going to take ? my car? that's barely 4 figures blue book in pristine value - which it isn't)
Something I believe to be little known about this whole banking fiasco is Paulson's role in it. Back in the 90s I believe he was one of the people fighting to get banks a bigger gap in their assets to get loans. I think the old law was $1.00 for every $8.00 they could loan. He wanted it to be something like $12.00 then and I think Bush gave him an even bigger gap. Ironic thing is that law was around to keep this situation from happening. IMO he is the biggest lobbiest on the planet, he successfully got them all the money, then a bailout, and now says we should borrow more money to get out of debt.
Sigh. . . borrow money to get out of debt. Oh well /rant off.
*I did some quick diggin' Net Capital Rule is what Paulson pushed for. In 2004 it was abolished, wikipedia says this:
As Chairman of the SEC, Mr. William H. Donaldson presided over the April 2004 meeting. It was held at the request of the major Wall Street investment houses, including Goldman Sachs, then headed by future Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr.. The firms requested the release from the net capital rule. The complaint that was put forth by the investment banks was of increasingly onerous regulatory requirements -- in this case, not U.S. regulator oversight, but European Union regulation of the foreign operations of US investment groups.
Last edited:
In Australia I have not directly seen anything yet but I assume it will come to at least some extent.
Some businesses will be impacted because the Australian dollar has dropped from a high a few months ago of 95c or so and now down to the low 60c.
One does have to wonder how much the outcome is determined by the media. What woudl happen if no one knew what supposed to happen
I would not count on that. When things are bad the gap between rich and poor can become greater and with the rich goin down hill.. well you can guess the rest.
Some businesses will be impacted because the Australian dollar has dropped from a high a few months ago of 95c or so and now down to the low 60c.
One does have to wonder how much the outcome is determined by the media. What woudl happen if no one knew what supposed to happen
I would not count on that. When things are bad the gap between rich and poor can become greater and with the rich goin down hill.. well you can guess the rest.
dan-cat
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2002
- Messages
- 3,433
One does have to wonder how much the outcome is determined by the media. What woudl happen if no one knew what supposed to happen
A great deal in my opinion. Look at what has happened to US gas prices this year. All because of what is being predicted by a few and trumpeted by the media to sell papers.
Indeed, we are seeing now what happens when the poor simply cannot honor their debts. Apart from sending them to the workhouses the lendors simply go without.
statsman
Active member
- Local time
- Today, 00:51
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2004
- Messages
- 2,088
This is generally what happens when the lender should not have leant.
Don't be suprized to see Debtor's Prisons re-established as part of the Bush bail out.
The banks F**ked up here as did the regulation - simple rules that bankers have know for years as to lending ratios -- don lend out (from a bank) more than the assests you have - and ensure that your assets are correctly valued ..
if this part is regulated correctly then there is no need to tons of red tape further down the line .....
if the morgage brokers were regulated as a financial suppleir (here in the UK we have FSA - goverment body to regulate this sort of thing - and they put down the ground rules as to borrowing ratios ) thne half this mess would not be here
however goverment bodies love red tape and they get involved n in regulating the wrong things - and over regulate them , - Keep it simple on regulations and make it valid and to the point - unlike some of the regs we have here in the UK ...
Rant over
if this part is regulated correctly then there is no need to tons of red tape further down the line .....
if the morgage brokers were regulated as a financial suppleir (here in the UK we have FSA - goverment body to regulate this sort of thing - and they put down the ground rules as to borrowing ratios ) thne half this mess would not be here
however goverment bodies love red tape and they get involved n in regulating the wrong things - and over regulate them , - Keep it simple on regulations and make it valid and to the point - unlike some of the regs we have here in the UK ...
Rant over
statsman
Active member
- Local time
- Today, 00:51
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2004
- Messages
- 2,088
Here's somthing you were obviously not aware of.
To a bank, an ASSET is a loan. That's because this is somthing that the bank is making money on.
Money on deposit is a debit since it can be withdrawn.
Banks have very strange accounting and auditing rules and the governments let them get away with it.
Yet another problem to address.
Well the rules that were supposed to be in place after the Enron farce didn't work for the banks in fact they were encouraged to ignore them, now we the "poor" are having to pay the price
Blame the Italians, their traders of old came up with Accounting.
US banks that operated globally fell under the EU rules on capital requirements for their operations elsewhere but for the accounting of assets here, the new rules were under Sarbanes-Oxley and were supposed to use integerity for auditing. The premise being that prior to this, if a company was able to make tic's in certain boxes, then they had to follow the rules based on what tic was placed in what box. Creative accounting allowed for the companies to choose where to placed the tics. The only exceptions to this rule were GSMs like Fanny and Freddie - they had no rules and avoided oversight for rules thanks to some politicians.
After implementation, these hard coded rules were lifted - so now you get into interpretation. The 3rd party accounting firms are supposed to be the extra layer of protection that says 'Nah, we disagree - the tic should go here and you didn't use integrity and own up to the truth.'
-dK
Fifty2One
Legend in my own mind
- Local time
- Yesterday, 21:51
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,412
No no and no. We have always kept our home economy on a tight budget, no credit or debit cards, lots of cash transactions, lots of barter. People will need to start to google previous recessions and credit crisis to see what is missing in their education as far as being less dependent on the financial mistakes of others who face little if any ramifications of their actions.
It is very touching when CEOs of major corporations go begging to the government on behalf of their corporation and all the employees and even stoop to offering to work for $1, knowing very well that they live the big life on perks alone otherwise they could step down - knowing their plan B includes their 45 million dollar separation package.
It is very touching when CEOs of major corporations go begging to the government on behalf of their corporation and all the employees and even stoop to offering to work for $1, knowing very well that they live the big life on perks alone
otherwise they could step down - knowing their plan B includes their 45 million dollar separation package.
Rich
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,898
No, I'm just waiting for the next election to add a few to the list
From the looks of it, not many Washington types will be effected either. Redundant? Yes, we we're promised change but old administration officials being put on the payroll seems like we will get alot of redundancy.
-dK
scott-atkinson
I'm with the Witch.......
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,621
I am having my House repossesed due to the recession, basically back in the summer the cost of Fuel went through the roof and my travelling costs to work increased by 30% in a matter of months, I defaulted on the mortgage and now they are taking my house.
Luckily I will not be homeless as my family have moved out of the house and now live in rented accomodation closer to my work so less travelling costs, but still cannot pay the mortgage as now have to pay rent.
Oh, well Sh*t Happens...
Luckily I will not be homeless as my family have moved out of the house and now live in rented accomodation closer to my work so less travelling costs, but still cannot pay the mortgage as now have to pay rent.
Oh, well Sh*t Happens...
Rich
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,898
I thought St.Gordon had put an end to repossessions
Rabbie
Super Moderator
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2007
- Messages
- 5,906
Looks like Scot was a bit early to get the protectionI thought St.Gordon had put an end to repossessions
scott-atkinson
I'm with the Witch.......
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,621
Yeah of course the Mortgage companies and Banks are gonna do what the Government says... Like passing on the Base Rate cut...
I did qualify for Mortgage Protection according to the National Debt Charity but that hasn't stopped the Mortgage company in filing a case for repossession against me.
Not that I'm bothered now, whatever shortfall is in the house they can go and whistle for it, they can't get blood out of a stone.
Bear in mind that the money you borrowed was not the lender's money, it was a depositors money. The depositor/investor lent it to the bank and the bank lent it to you at a bit higher interest than they paid the investor.
Rich
Registered User.
- Local time
- Today, 05:51
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2008
- Messages
- 2,898
Yeah of course the Mortgage companies and Banks are gonna do what the Government says... Like passing on the Base Rate cut...
I did qualify for Mortgage Protection according to the National Debt Charity but that hasn't stopped the Mortgage company in filing a case for repossession against me.
Not that I'm bothered now, whatever shortfall is in the house they can go and whistle for it, they can't get blood out of a stone.
I can't fault your reasoning or the way you feel, but I've seen this before, unless the bank when it sells your house raises enough to clear the mortgage you will still be in debt to the bank
