By huffer_g on
9/28/2008 5:42 PM
I feel sorry for Jonathan Hoenig of Capitalist Pig Asset Management who is a Fox News contributor.
He is about the only one on the financial shows, who understands the philosophy and principle behind having a free market. At least he is the only one I’ve seen articulate the ultimate morality of the free market.
I am continually amazed at the ignorance of free market principles by supposed financial experts. There are a few others on the Fox broadcasts who get it, Neil Cavuto and Gary B. Smith seem to but perhaps do not put the philosophy of the free market in moral terms.
I am not just talking about the whole dog and pony show of the financial sector 700 billion dollar bail out which is likely to have long term and dire consequences for the U.S. economy. Many of the so called financial experts have jumped on board the bail out plan but I am not surprised.
What I have been surprised and disappointed about are the people who seem to be successful in the business of buying and selling stocks, tracking...
Read More »
|
By Jerrad Bodenschatz on
9/28/2008 8:42 PM
Sitting on the sidelines during this election is not an option for those who value the founding principles of this country. Allowing Barack Obama to have even one term in office will be a disaster for this country's core principles. If you give failed socialist programs a chance to get enacted it could be near impossible to reverse the course of freeloading on the producers of this country. We have already seen many of the new businesses that are being started being based in England as opposed to the regulation obsessed United States. London has replaced New York City as the financial center of the world markets. So, lets answer the question, how much damage is it possible for a one term president to do to our country?
As a sample of what we might expect take a look at history. Some of the worst Presidents we have had who created the most problems for a free enterprise society were less than two term Presidents. Jimmy Carter was the worst, most inept of the group, his shortcomings are monumental as it was he...
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/28/2008 7:33 AM
Posted by Deborah Durkee
Bailout deal reached.
From David Rogers and Patrick O’Connor at Politico, a verbal deal has been reached. “The plan would likely give Paulson a relatively free hand accessing the first $350 billion of the $700 billion he sought. It was not clear when the remaining $350 billion would become available, but Treasury apparently agreed that a future Congress could block its release though a joint resolution signed by the president.
”The agreement would also include much greater oversight than the Bush administration had initially proposed; an opportunity for the government to take an equity share in the companies it helps, either through warrants or options to buy stock; and a provision limiting the compensation paid to executives of those companies.
”To help win the support of House Republicans, the agreement also would likely...
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/27/2008 6:16 PM
Ashley Durkee's blog post direct from the McCain-Obama debate and festivities on the campus of Ole Miss.
What many are calling a boring debate was made far more
interesting simply by proximity. Had I been watching at
home, I probably would have been multi-tasking: checking
e-mail, working on the PowerPoint presentation for my
dissertation proposal, talking on the phone, or flipping
through a magazine. Had I been watching at home, I probably
would have been less than riveted. Luckily, I go to Ole
Miss, so I didn’t have to watch the debate from home. I got
to watch it on a jumbo screen on campus in the Grove (a
large lawn in front of the Student Union where we tailgate
before football games) with thousands of others, only yards
from where the debate was actually taking place.
There was...
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/27/2008 8:16 AM
Posted by Deborah Durkee
Who won the debate?
Jim Geraghty at National Review Online’s Campaign Spot says it’s all in who you’re for. “From where I sit, McCain had a surprisingly strong night. It's obvious I thought the postpone-the-debate-oh-nevermind-we're-back-on hokey-pokey was potentially a major, major misstep. Tonight, that seems like much less relevant news. If you were wavering on McCain, nothing you saw tonight should give you doubts and probably reassured you a great deal.
“In that sense, tonight was a major win for McCain — it'll change the storyline from "uh, what was he thinking?" http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWExYTI3MjJkMWVlZmE3N2ZhODNiYzQ3YTk5NzkxYWI=
Kathryn Jean Lopez at National Review Online thinks Obama came off better than expected, but McCain is strength. “Obama's an impressive guy to have come this far. But do you look at them both tonight and think, ‘yeah, I want that guy to pick up the 3 A.M. phone call’? Not unless Joe Biden is sleeping next to him.” http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YTFmNmQzNzMwZDBlMDkyY2M2OTJjYWIzNTdlN2M0M2E=
...
Read More »
|
By Ted on
9/26/2008 8:43 AM
http://
As we have watched the current financial crisis be debated on TV it has given us a glimse into the working of our legislative process. As the current crisis has unfolded it has shown our leaders in action and my question to you is, do you like what you’ve seen. Are they acting like the leaders that you want representing you? Are they asking the questions that you want ask? Are they keeping you informed of what is going on and how they stand on the issue? Are they listening to you if you have tried to contact them? If you haven’t given them any input do you have a reason for being disappointed for their actions?
The constitution established principles of service for those people who represent us, stating that the power they have comes from the people, it does not say they have power over the people. That same constitution has set up our government...
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/26/2008 8:00 AM
Outline of tentative “rescue” before Obama/McCain meeting.
“The tentative accord reached earlier in the day (Thursday) would give the Bush administration just a fraction of the $700 billion it had requested up front, according to an outline obtained by FOX News, with half the money subject to a congressional veto.
“Under the plan, the Treasury secretary would get $250 billion immediately and could have an additional $100 billion if he certified it was needed. The last $350 billion could be blocked by a vote of Congress under the arrangement, designed to give lawmakers a stronger hand in controlling the unprecedented rescue.
“The agreement would also set up standards to prevent excessive executive compensation. It would require most profits to be used to reduce the national debt, and establish an oversight board and require regular status reports to Congress....
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/26/2008 7:27 AM
Posted by Deborah Durkee
NC bank BB&T CEO John Allison doesn’t like the bailout.
Allison basically believes the debate in Washington has not included the well-run institutions (such as BB&T). He has sent out a letter to all members of Congress making his case.While all financial intermediaries are being impacted by liquidity issues, this is primarily a bailout of poorly run financial institutions. It is extremely important that the bailout not damage well run companies.Corrections are not all bad. The market correction process eliminates irrational competitors. There were a number of poorly managed institutions and poorly made financial decisions during the real estate boom. It is important that any rules post “rescue” punish the poorly run institutions and not punish the well run companies.
Hat Tip: http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=M2Y3Y2E3YmI4MmJjNWRkNDI2YjkwNDM0OTI2MGI0YWQ=
...
Read More »
|
By Ted on
9/25/2008 6:48 AM
After listening to the hearings yesterday and today, listening to the news media and reading some of the excellent articles on the subject and finally the Presidents speech, here is what I have heard and where I come down on the issue.
Points of information about the situation;
*The request to bail out the financial community and avoid an imminent recession is what the $700 billion is to be used for. This money will be used to buy nonperforming securities from various financial institutions in a reverse auction process and held for future sale back into the market as conditions improve..
*The $700 billion (5% of all outstanding debt) seems to be far more than should be needed to acquire the remaining mortgage assets particularly after the prior bail out of Fannie and Freddie.
*This $700 billion, the $200 billion to Fannie and Freddie, plus the $85 billion use to buy an 80% interest in AIG and you have $1 trillion of taxpayer dollars on the line.
...
Read More »
|
By a Politically Empowered Blogger on
9/24/2008 8:47 AM
Posted by Deborah Durkee
Food for thought for conservatives on the bailout plan.
What’s a principled conservative to think about Hank Paulson’s $700 billion bailout? Donald Luskin, chief investment officer of Trend Macrolytics, gives his well-thought-out take at National Review Online.
“Is the $700 billion authority necessary? Will it work? Is it morally justifiable?”
Luskin says that the amount is too much, that after the bailout of Fannie and Freddie, the amount is more like $521 billion and that’s if the Treasury paid full value, which it won’t. So why $700 billion when about half that would do?
“And if the Treasury’s authority were scaled down to something more in proportion to the size of the asset market it claims to address — say $350 billion — must that authority be granted all those dollars at...
Read More »
|
|
|
|
|