Welcome to PatsFans.com

We might need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by weswelker#83, Sep 29, 2008.

  1. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,519
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    David: Mark, short answer, the bailout plan, gonna work?

    Mark Hanson: Not large enough to cover the $7T in AT RISK loans made over the past 4 years that need to be re-bucketed.



    Video:
    Video- CNBC.com









     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2008
  2. maverick4

    maverick4 Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    7,662
    Likes Received:
    17
    Ratings:
    +17 / 0 / -0

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    Of course it's not enough.

    The 700 billion is just to give the rest of the rich elite time (in days, maybe weeks) to get the rest of their assets OUT of America before the house finally collapses upon everyone.
     
  3. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +734 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    $7T "at risk" does not equal $7T which will go bust.
     
  4. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,876
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ratings:
    +49 / 16 / -3

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    what percent of $7T at risk are expected to go bust?
     
  5. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +734 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    That, I can't answer. But people shouldn't say we need $7T then say it's because $7T is at risk. It fails simple logic.
     
  6. Stokes

    Stokes In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    Agree with BF, you don't need to buy all $7T of at risk paper, you just need to insure it, which should cost significantly less. Still might be more than $700B though.
     
  7. Wildo7

    Wildo7 Totally Full of It

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,876
    Likes Received:
    36
    Ratings:
    +49 / 16 / -3

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    No but we COULD need 7T$
     
  8. mcgraw_wv

    mcgraw_wv In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,257
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    100 years ago... in 1908, was there even 1 trillion available in currency around the world? The total combined value of the world...

    Think about how easy we throw Trillions around like it's nothing...

    In 2050, we will be watching TV watching them discuss how the elite investors upon their failed investment in moon mining mortgages that they need 14 googlion dollars to protect your house, and main street from feeling the collapse of Moon mortgages.

    If you do not act now, and call your representative, this will never end... Inflation and throwing around invented money only does one thing... devalues your value. Your home, your investments, your property...
     
  9. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +734 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    Or we could need $250B. If you choose to believe at unrealistically worst case, go right ahead. But wes shouldn't be stating "we need" as fact when it isn't fact.
     
  10. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,519
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    He made a nice point that with a 36% DTI people could make their mortgage payments, and save and take vacations and if the house price went down they could wait it out. But at 50% DTI they can't and the way out is to mail in the keys.
     
  11. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,160
    Likes Received:
    179
    Ratings:
    +511 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    The answer to this question is not complicated at all. What we need to get is the current rate of failure of "at risk" loans or credit. If anyone can find that somewhere in cyberspace, we'd be able to accurately project the total.

    Believe me, congress & Wall Stree already know the answer. And when they stand in front of the nation, they SHOULD tell us exactly what this number should be...but guess what? THEY WON'T!

    $700 billion is obviously 10% of $7 trillion. but that doesn't mean squat without the facts.

    Because they don't want the public to REALLY know the extent of the damage to our ecnomy or more importantly, how much our government will subsidizing this mess.

    It should be law that every US citizen knows everything that has been discussed. Specifically, the exact extent of future risk and any other problems they are aware of that the public doesn't know.

    After all, WE are the bosses of this nation, not our politicians.
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2008
  12. weswelker#83

    weswelker#83 In the Starting Line-Up

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2007
    Messages:
    4,519
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Last edited: Sep 29, 2008
  13. Fogbuster

    Fogbuster Pro Bowl Player

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2005
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    10
    Ratings:
    +10 / 0 / -0

    Just take it back from the Chinese. Bill Clinton gave it to them, so we can take it all back. With interest.


    //
     
  14. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,160
    Likes Received:
    179
    Ratings:
    +511 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    A little follow-up on this. With help from Wes, I was able to find some info that tells us we can expect more than 50% failure rate on "at-risk" loans...specifically, mortgage loans. The Alt-A mortgages are just beginning where the sub-primes have almost ended. The failure rate on subprime loans was over 40%.

    The Alt-A loans will have a higher rate of default because they are mainly NOT owner occupied homes. So figure on 50% of the $7 trillion going into default...or around $3.5 trillion.

    That is 5...FIVE...times more than the $7 billion Sec. Paulson has so graciously asked for:rolleyes:
     
  15. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,872
    Likes Received:
    278
    Ratings:
    +734 / 17 / -19

    #24 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    I'm not going to dispute your 50% number despite it seemingly coming out of thin air. The "beauty" of the bail out, though, is the government could re-do those loans with very low interest rates and make them affordable again without taking too much of a loss. I know some don't like that as it isn't fair to those of us who got fixed rate loans. True. But regardless of how fair it is, it could/would be a lot cheaper than if you just look at what the default rate would be if nothing were done.
     
  16. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Hall of Fame Poster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    27,160
    Likes Received:
    179
    Ratings:
    +511 / 6 / -24

    #18 Jersey

    Re: We need 7 trillions dollars ,not 700 billions!!!!!!!!

    I still think the financial/lending companies could fix this on their own. but of course they'll take the gov't loan $$.

    BF, you have to remember, the $7 trillion that we are talking about is "AT RISK" loans. So we intuitively know these have been categorized as "potentially bad loans" In all likelihood, they are "probable" bad loans...thus the term "at risk".

    I didn't pull the numbers out of thin air. If you want to take the time, watch & listen to Mr Mortgage explain it. He tells us that the sub-prime default rate is 40%.

    Either way, I'd bet you what's left in my 401K that the default rate will be WAAaaayyyy over 10%...which is what $700 billion is.

    YouTube - Mr Mortgage - HERE COMES THE ALT-A CRISIS
     
    Last edited: Sep 29, 2008

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>