It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

THE intention of the BAILOUT for Dummies

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 23 2008 @ 12:17 PM
link   
you may have heard what Paulson (former Goldman sachs CEO) has to say about the bailout and it's intentions, you may have heard what Obama (top advisor Rubin also former Goldman CE0) has said and you may have heard what McCain (top advisors including phil gramm who steered us into the deregulated casino of wall street) has said.


Now here is some text and the link of an interview of two "insiders" one a banking exec turned journalist (Naomi prins) and the other a fomer Wall street "big wig" a proffessor, historian, and advisor to the Dennis kucinich campaign (Michael hudson) who have experience in wall street and also who seem to grasp the geedy mentality and control wall street trys to hold in washington as well as who are the benefactors of the proposed bailout, and why

by the way it appears they both believe Both party's are in the pocket of wall street

www.democracynow.org...


AMY GOODMAN: Michael Hudson, we’re talking government bailout, which means taxpayers stuck with the bill. Do you think this is the right move?



MICHAEL HUDSON: No, it’s the worst possible move, and it puts the class war back in business with a vengeance. Wall Street has been preparing for this for years, because every financial analyst knows that the debts can’t be paid. And the question that Wall Street has, if you’re going to take a gamble on bad debts that can’t be paid, how are you going to come out a winner? And there’s only one way of coming out a winner, and that’s to make the government bail you out. This has been known for years, because it’s inherent almost in the mathematics of compound interest. Every banker I know knew that the loans they were making were going to go bad. They were trying to sell them to somebody else, ultimately expecting them to end up with some sovereign wealth fund.


hudson answer cont.


And now, you had at the beginning of the show, McCain saying that this is the result of fraud and incompetence. The government has now bailed them out. But by bailing them out—Wall Street was coming to terms with the bad debts. When Bear Stearns went under and when Lehman Brothers went under, this began to wipe away the bad debts. And when the debts exceed the ability to pay, there’s only one thing any economy can do, and that’s wipe them out. Instead, the government is trying to keep the fiction alive. And what Paulson did yesterday, in bailing out AIG, was to try to lock in whoever is the next president not only to further bailouts of Wall Street, ostensibly to protect the public money, but to make it impossible to write down the debts of the four million homeowners that are expected to default this year, impossible to write down the debts of companies that have issued junk bonds, impossible for the country to get rid of this excess of debts that can’t be repaid. And you’re having really a war now of creditors against debtors. And this is what Wall Street has been preparing for. It needed an emergency to do it. It’s really not an emergency at all. This has been building up for many years. Everybody expected it. And breathlessly now, the Secretary of Treasury has done it.


next question


AMY GOODMAN: But, of course, the argument was, if you don’t bail out AIG, it could lead to a global financial meltdown



MICHAEL HUDSON: What you—it’s a meltdown of the gamblers, as Nomi said. These are people who’ve gambled. You had McCain saying they’re gamblers. If these people have gambled, we’re talking about derivative trades, billions of dollars of bets on which way interest rates will go, billions of dollars of bad loans beyond the ability of debtors to pay. Why on earth would you want to bail out these creditors?


last question i will link but please check out the link for the full interview which gives a more unbiased view of the bailout then you will see on the corporate/finance sponsored media


AMY GOODMAN: So, what would happen if you didn’t?



MICHAEL HUDSON: Then you would prepare the ground for writing down the debts of the homeowners that have no way of repaying the exploding mortgages. Those interest rates are going to be jumping up this year. You would be able to bring the debts down to the ability of the economy to pay, and you would save these four million homeowners from defaulting and being kicked out of their houses. Now they’re going to be kicked out of the houses. The houses will be vacant. The cities are going to now say, “Gee, we’re going to have to cut the property taxes to enable the debts to be paid to save the financial system.” So, if they cut the property taxes, they’re going to have to cut back local expenditures, local infrastructure. The economy is being sacrificed to pay the gamblers.


if only the few senators not in the pocket of wall street could have the cajones to say this to those fox's guarding the henhouse.

I'm talking about Paulson (former ceo at goldman sachs) who will be back out in private sector when bush leaves office (i.e he is throwing a pass to himself w/ this legilation and trying to convince people it is 1. too complicated for politico's to understand and 2. that it needs to be rushed through


also the secretary of treausry under Clinton (Rubin) who is also obama's top advisor cheered on the repeall of the glass-steagall act which let this wall street casion out of the bottle.

and (phil gramm) Mccain's right hand man led this charge for deregulation that rubin allowed and supported.

WRITE or call your senators, Email them, EMail fox and CNBC. Don't take this lying down



[edit on 23-9-2008 by cpdaman]

[edit on 23-9-2008 by cpdaman]




 
1

log in

join