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.

 

US agrees to Wall Street bail-out!

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:06 AM
link   
I know this is know for being fact/conspiracy forum, but please don't blast me to hard. It sounds like the might be as good of a time as any to launch the NESARA Plan. if you don't know what i'm talking about just take a look at it, and for those of you that know what i'm talking about please don't slam me to hard it is just a thought. this could solve all of our problems.

everybody friend, and freedom seeker CRAWGATOR




posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:12 AM
link   


Ok, so we bail out the thieves for now. I can deal with this stupid step- Just leave us the hell alone- I dont want to see the MILITARY in the streets, i want my freedom of speech, i want to travel freely, i want food available, i want things to stay the same- even IF it means paying huge taxes the rest of our lives.

I just dont want any talk about police state, i want a new president, i want a NEW ADMINISTRATION, now, i know that they are both corrupt, but we have no choice but to pay the thieves,,, who by the way, the majority of them are having input in fixing this mess. Hows that for sticking the knife in twice?????

They are all millionares, as BUSH did not want to take away their golden parachutes. These folks screwed us.

NOW, if things continue the way they are, and there is no releif, and the thugs got away on top of that, they are going to see a freaking
revolution like they have never seen before.

Screw me once, shame on you.
Screw me twice, shame on me.

They better follow thru and fix this mess NOW.




I do not believe there is any historical precedent for them fixing anything ever or deserving of the trust you put in them now to do something. This is the umpteenth billion time this sort of #e has happened and in a dominator top down society there is no motivation for them to fix anything because there are no personal consequences for their actions. Thats it, thats all there is to it!

Until there are personal consequences for them there will never be any motivation to change. They are perfectly happy with this because the pain has been outsourced to someone else. Standard operating procedure for as long as you let it continue.

But be aware of what you are up against - 911, Pakistan Marriot show the scale of what they are capable of without blinking an eye.

[edit on 2008-9-26 by primamateria]



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:12 AM
link   
Clicking on a map of the foreclosed houses in the us which after the bailout will be owned by the us government I noticed that these are areas containing some of the largest untapped oil reserves in the us. Coincidence? What if after these homes have deteriorated enough and or torn down someone just happens to strike oil or tar sands.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Yarcofin
Please note that while most of the market has rallied on this news, Washington Mutual / WAMU (Symbol WM) has plunged 30%.

I've been calling this since September 18th

If you bank at Washington Mutual, please take my advance warning and take some, a large portion, or all of your money out of the bank. SOMEONE is determined to drive this company into the ground, today is a perfect example of it.

This bnak will be gone by October 15th. Don't say I didn't warn you.


Must give credit where credit is due....

news.yahoo.com...

I am not sure if there is a topic on this yet, didn't look around much. But you were dead on with that call. I didn't think it'd take till October to happen, but I also wasn't foreseeing this before the weekend!



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 02:42 AM
link   
JUST AS A REMINDER TO EVERYONE ELSE, I JUST EMAILED MY CONGRESSMAN, IT TAKES MERE MINUTES... IF YOU WANT THINGS TO CHANGE YOU'D HAD BETTER TAKE THE TIME IN ALL YOUR TYPING TO SEND EMAIL WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE. GOODLUCK US OF A



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 04:01 AM
link   
Sometimes I wonder if this rushed bailout is all about hiding the looted money that ended up in Swiss bank accounts. Sad if true.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 04:09 AM
link   
Remind your representative of this:-

"On June 4, 1963, a virtually unknown Presidential decree, Executive Order 11110, was signed with the authority to basically strip the Federal Reserve Bank of its power to loan money to the United States Federal Government at interest. With the stroke of a pen, President Kennedy declared that the privately ownedFederal Reserve Bank would soon be out of business."

Read the whole article at www.john-f-kennedy.net...

Then watch the video at www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 07:11 AM
link   
this is headline is misleading and is not true. they tried to make it a bi-partisan deal but it tanked. no agreement has been made. a lot of people refused the bill in congress, stating it needs to be restructured. sorry if this isnt all 100% accurate, im typing it as i hear it being said on BBC news



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 10:04 AM
link   
I agree, the headline is misleading and accomplishing the same thing the press is trying to do.

It should be changed. There is no agreement yet, and people should call, fax and email there representatives until they can't pick up the phone anymore.

mtmind



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:18 PM
link   
I think many people have some misconceptions about the bailout because it seems like it's often characterized as a BILL for 700 billion for which we're getting nothing in return. That's not the case.

Most of it is to buy packages of "bad" loans where the collateral has sunk below the original value. The collateral is the home the loan was used to purchase. If the lender gave a loan with no money down, they were assuming the value of the underlying asset (the home) would never go down. If the loan was in default, they would foreclose and, since the house likely would have gone up in value, they'd get all their money back when the house was sold.

But then the housing bubble burst and home prices started to plummet. Suddenly, even if they foreclose they lose money, and they can't sell the loan to another institution because the loan itself lost value because it is tied to the home. Nobody wants to buy an asset sinking in value unless they thinks it's hit a bottom, and nobody thinks they have that yet with housing.

Because banks are typically allowed to loan nine time their deposits/ assets, many banks had tons of these bad loans and they couldn't offer new credit until they had dumped some of them. But nobody wanted to buy and so they were losing money.

That meant there was far less credit available and it was starting to snowball and there didn't seem to any end to it. The whole thing was/is starting to spin out of control. A great depression is still possible if this continues (not certain, mind you, just possible).

The federal government would try to alleviate this situation by buying large numbers of these "bad" loans. But is many cases, the people will still pay them off, and in other cases it will be possible to foreclose on the house and get a significant percentage of the original amount back. It is even possible that we would end up making money out of this in the long run. But we will not lose the 700 billion. That would be impossible. Best case scenario: these loan packages ultimately return 900 billion for a 200 million profit. Worst case scenario: these loan packages ultimately lose 200 billion dollars, but we still walk away with 500 billion.

I'm neither for it nor against it at this point, but I think some people who DO have an opinion have misconceptions about the issue. I blame Paulson and the Bush Administration for exaggerating last week for much of the current hysteria. Legislators were told this was an extreme emergency and that they had to pass the Bush/Paulson proposal within 24 hours or the world's economy would collapse.

More than a week later that hasn't happened.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:30 PM
link   
But of course. I knew they would buckle like a stable of stud horses without their viagra. God help us.

The holdout made for good press and dog and pony show though. Nice job.

[edit on 9/26/2008 by jpm1602]



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
If the economy is the issue, bail out the economy not wall street. Take that $700 Billion, and divide it equally among US citizens over 18. Tax this 'stimulus' package to give the government some working capital, and let the rest take care of the economy from the bottom (our pockets) up.

Well, it's a nice pipe dream...



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 01:43 PM
link   
I totally agree Unit. Now that would be a massive stimulus to the economy. But the piggys in the 'Lord of the Flies' appear to be first in line.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 04:11 PM
link   
... The whole bailout bill is misleading... It says 700 billion at any ONE TIME!! that's fairly clearly spelled out and something the media won't dare touch for some reason... (prolly that whole bought paid for and not on our side thing but then again maybe I'm just paranoid)
And then there's the whole the bill remains in effect for 2 YEARS before potential reevaluation... Ever seen those home and garden flip my house shows? how many 700 billions can you flip in 2 years?
This is in one single piece of legislation the enactment of a command economy...



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 05:47 PM
link   
I had asked this in another thread, but going to try to here too.

Does anyone else think that this whole bail out plan is deeper than what we are being told?
And the uncounted monies will be put forth into the WAR machine?

Does anyone else feel that this bail out will affect our many wars we have going on?

I happen to get this feeling that by making this bail out, it will fund more for the war, and not only fund it better, but keep it going on well past its term?

I feel yet again that this is a ploy to create the wars we are now fighting in Iraq to last longer than what was planned?

I hope Im wrong! If this sounds like something you feel might be possible, please send me a U2 too, or reply to this post with your thoughts and feelings.
If you think its hogwash, then no need to waste your time and mine with telling me how wrong and what not I am..

Many thanks ATS!



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 09:44 PM
link   
Looks like the scary story is going to work. Isn't this just a way for the state to get control of the bank? You know, the scary story, if the state doesn't take over now, you will have a great depression, etc. People give up power and then the state owns the major bank. There are reasons for this division to protect the people.

The state getting control of the banking system is just one more part of the communistic system of governance that is sweeping across many societies, it's just you keep giving up the power without a fight. Scary.


U.S. Supreme Court ruling limits state control over big banks

www.iht.com...?pass=true



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 10:10 PM
link   
If Wall Street is bailed out by the government (translation, we the taxpayers), we are just encouraging more bad behavior. It is the moral equivalent of rewarding a child who throws a temper tantrum, asking for something they want, and having the parent relent and give it to them, because they are sick and tired of listening to the temper tantrum.
Make no mistake about it, Paulson, ex-CEO of Goldman Sachs, has thrown a temper tantrum, and apparently Congress will now give in, and give him and his Wall Street cronies(whom he will go back to, in January) the money they want, so that they can do it again to US.
The Republicans put forth a plan that would NOT have cost the American taxpayer one PENNY, namely forcing the banks to set up their own insurance plan, which they would all have to contribute to, in case a bank failed in the future.
Imagine that- the banks would have to risk their OWN MONEY, and not OURS, with risky behavior.
One thing that I saw many times, in my years as a Professor, was how much better students that had to work to put themselves through college, took that education much more seriously, than those that had college paid for by their parents. That is not to say that there were not serious students who were fortunate enough to have their education paid for, by their parents, but time and again, I saw much more effort by those students that put themselves through college, because of necessity.
I believe the same philosophy would work for Wall Street. We must NOT reward bad behavior, nor encourage its continuance.
By the way, if ANYBODY REALLY BELIEVES that we would eventually MAKE a PROFIT, by buying these highly overpriced equities and bad loans, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Unit541
 


now you know that people aren't going to go out and invest the money that they would get from your theory ... they'd just go and buy some tv's, etc. nothing like the companies that really need the help ... now i'm not stating that i'm for or against this ... i'm just saying i really don't see the logic behind your theory ... people wouldn't go out and reinvest their money after all this is said and done.



posted on Sep, 26 2008 @ 11:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by zysin5
I had asked this in another thread, but going to try to here too.

Does anyone else think that this whole bail out plan is deeper than what we are being told?
And the uncounted monies will be put forth into the WAR machine?

!


Yes it does....

check the thread out in my sig for the complete story and answers to the who, how, why, what etc.....it's all there plain and simple....



posted on Sep, 27 2008 @ 12:32 PM
link   
Part of the problem with educating people on ATS to the Rothschilds, is that the information is scattered across so many threads. I have been warning people about who really controls not only the economy, but industry and government since I became a member, as I'm sure you have, and others.
What would be nice is a separate category, such as Rothschild, where the information could be concentrated, and easily accessed.
By the way, for those that think that the economy NEEDS this bailout, let me tell you something. The Rothschilds and other controlling interests will come up with the funds that they need, if the bailout doesn't materialize. Their philosophy, however, is clear: Why should they put their money up, when they have slaves like our President and MOST of Congress to put up OUR money for them to play with. Furthermore, if we are foolish enough to allow them to use OUR money, then it's back to business as usual, with their crooked deals, and if any of them fail. they can always get their slaves to do their dirty work again.
Think of this- the Dems, the President, and the Press have been demonizing the House Republicans who have tried to hold firm, and refuse to allow the bankers to raid OUR funds. The House Republicans are the only ones that have shown any spine.
We all know that the Democrats have the votes to pass ex-Goldman Sachs CEO Paulson's Plan, without the House Republicans, and Bush has said he would sign it. So WHY don't they just go ahead?
We all know the answer- because they are not SURE that their plan will work, so if it fails, they don't want to be in the blame boat alone. That certainly doesn't sound like a sure-fire plan to me. Does it to you?
It is much like the Agnostics' prayer: "Oh God, if there is a God, save my soul, if I have a soul. If you don't exist, forget I asked."




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join