Shamelessly stolen from another newsgroup
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the OPINION section of today's Wall Street Journal


Regulatory Overkill
By ALLAN H. MELTZER
March 27, 2008; Page A14

The claim that deregulation went too far is coming from many sides.
snip most of the article

The financial system cannot survive
if the bankers make the profits and the taxpayers take the losses.

I think the above sentences sum up where we are heading. The same people
who whine about oil company profits will soon notice that the banks are
quite profitable, and the government has relieved them of the risk. At that
time there will be calls for banking to be taken over by the government.
The current call for more regulation is just the first step down that road.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:21:55 -0400, "
wrote:

Shamelessly stolen from another newsgroup
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From the OPINION section of today's Wall Street Journal


Regulatory Overkill
By ALLAN H. MELTZER
March 27, 2008; Page A14

The claim that deregulation went too far is coming from many sides.
snip most of the article

The financial system cannot survive
if the bankers make the profits and the taxpayers take the losses.

I think the above sentences sum up where we are heading. The same people
who whine about oil company profits will soon notice that the banks are
quite profitable, and the government has relieved them of the risk. At that
time there will be calls for banking to be taken over by the government.
The current call for more regulation is just the first step down that road.

Probably better to keep this stuff secret.
Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.
Same with this oil nonsense. Prices haven't hurt me.
Making this stuff public just riles people up.
Oughtta be a law against all this rabble-rousing.

--Vic

On Mar 27, 12:42*pm, Vic Smith
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:21:55 -0400, "





wrote:
Shamelessly stolen from another newsgroup
--------------------------------------------------------------------------*---

From the OPINION section of today's Wall Street Journal

Regulatory Overkill
By ALLAN H. MELTZER
March 27, 2008; Page A14

The claim that deregulation went too far is coming from many sides.
snip most of the article

The financial system cannot survive
if the bankers make the profits and the taxpayers take the losses.

I think the above sentences sum up where we are heading. *The same people
who whine about oil company profits will soon notice that the banks are
quite profitable, and the government has relieved them of the risk. *At that
time there will be calls for banking to be taken over by the government.
The current call for more regulation is just the first step down that road.

Probably better to keep this stuff secret.
Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.
Same with this oil nonsense. *Prices haven't hurt me.
Making this stuff public just riles people up.
Oughtta be a law against all this rabble-rousing.

--Vic *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There are lots of countries you can go to that there are laws against
free speech as well as lots of other "rabble-rousing".

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:50:55 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Mar 27, 12:42?pm, Vic Smith
wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:21:55 -0400, "





wrote:
Shamelessly stolen from another newsgroup
--------------------------------------------------------------------------?---

From the OPINION section of today's Wall Street Journal

Regulatory Overkill
By ALLAN H. MELTZER
March 27, 2008; Page A14

The claim that deregulation went too far is coming from many sides.
snip most of the article

The financial system cannot survive
if the bankers make the profits and the taxpayers take the losses.

I think the above sentences sum up where we are heading. ?The same people
who whine about oil company profits will soon notice that the banks are
quite profitable, and the government has relieved them of the risk. ?At that
time there will be calls for banking to be taken over by the government.
The current call for more regulation is just the first step down that road.

Probably better to keep this stuff secret.
Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.
Same with this oil nonsense. ?Prices haven't hurt me.
Making this stuff public just riles people up.
Oughtta be a law against all this rabble-rousing.

--Vic ?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

There are lots of countries you can go to that there are laws against
free speech as well as lots of other "rabble-rousing".

Okay with me as long as it has Florida.
BTW, that was my attempt at being sardonic.

--Vic

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:42:47 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:47:43 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:42:47 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

Sounds like you want it regulated.

--Vic

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:33:54 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

Sounds like you want it regulated.

Actually not. My real preference would be to let the lenders fail,
except for the one that is paying my pension and holding my retirement
$$$s.

Life is complicated. :-)

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:05:43 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:33:54 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

Sounds like you want it regulated.

Actually not. My real preference would be to let the lenders fail,
except for the one that is paying my pension and holding my retirement
$$$s.

Life is complicated. :-)

Only when you won't accept responsibility for your action or inaction.
That's what I meant when I said it doesn't hurt me.
I really don't care what happens with the bad loan situation, since I
wasn't responsible for it.
Not that it's rocket science. I saw it coming, as did anyone with
their eyes open and not heavily sedated.
If I were responsible I would have regulated loans to prevent it.
But nobody asked me.
Would not have looked good for "record home ownership" statistics
that GWB often crowed about. Just wouldn't be prudent.
And I don't care about the taxes or depreciated dollar.
I just don't. Nobody asked me to be the boss of that, and
I admit I didn't volunteer. I just left it the business community.
with proper gov oversight.
And here we are.
Okay with me.
Why get upset about it?

--Vic (feeling laid back, and a bit high on Stabil)

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:33:54 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

Sounds like you want it regulated.

Actually not. My real preference would be to let the lenders fail,
except for the one that is paying my pension and holding my retirement
$$$s.

Life is complicated. :-)




I just heard on Chris Matthews's "Hardball" show of a plan being kicked
around that would provide government financing for banks to re-negotiate
some of these sub-prime loans with home owners having trouble with their
mortgage. But, here's the kicker. In this plan, not only would the rates
and terms be re-negotiated, but also the prinicple owed .... meaning it
would be lowered as well as the house "value", decreasing taxes. I am not
sure I completely understand this .... or even heard it correctly, but it
sounds rather bizzare.

Those who have managed to keep their conventional 30 year mortgage payments
by working two jobs to make ends meet receive no benefit or consideration.

Sounds like those who are financially responsible, live within their means
and borrow what they can afford finish last.
Those that took chances and advantage of loose lending practices with
mortgages they couldn't afford, win.


Eisboch

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 15:47:43 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 10:42:47 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote:

Whose business it anyway if lenders choose to write bad loans?
Doesn't hurt me.

That's naive. If the government ends up bailing out the lender "to
save the economy" who do you think ends up paying for that? Sooner or
later we all do, either in taxes or with a depreciated dollar.

You know what I think the solution is?

You freeze all those entry level mortgages before they reset. In
return, the GSE's buy the paper from the banks and sits on it.

In return for having a mortgage freeze, borrowers agree to the
following: Not sell the house for a minimum of 10 years. No equity
loans. When the term is finished, 30% of any profit on a sale rolls
over to the GSEs right off the top. That establishes a floor.

Secondarily, the GSEs, can redistribute the risk by picking the
performing loans to keep and wholesaling the non-performing loans into
Junk Bonds.

Win-win.