The Fed Shutdown Poll and Megathread

[Hansmeister]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

For the same reason we bailout incompetent banks and financial institutions entrusted with the money of those people who work hard/save money, and then piss it away by betting on those aforementioned worthless layabouts who had taken out untenable adjustable-rate mortgages?

Wall Street bankers probably shouldn't be allowed to vote either.

Of course the whole cause of the crisis was that the gov't required banks to make mortgage loans to people who couldn't afford it as part of their idea of a social contract.  The whole subprime market was a symptom of the same disease.

[Razgovory]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

So is this the new Republican talking points?  I have feeling it won't play well in Peoria.

[Tonitrus]

Hmmm, I am pretty sure the only institutions that the government would have enough control over to "force" them to give out a loan might be Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac.

If Bank of America/Washington Mutual, etc., were being forced to finance bad mortgage investments, I am pretty sure they would have complained about it a bit before they went belly-up and down the tubes.

[Razgovory]

Hmmm, I am pretty sure the only institutions that the government would have enough control over to "force" them to give out a loan might be Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac.

If Bank of America/Washington Mutual, etc., were being forced to finance bad mortgage investments, I am pretty sure they would have complained about it a bit before they went belly-up and down the tubes.

Yeah, it's a canard that right has been using for a while now. 

[CountDeMoney]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

So is this the new Republican talking points?  I have feeling it won't play well in Peoria.

Meh, remember it's Hansy: the same guy that was going to quit the Army depending on who the Commander-in-Chief was.  As squirrelly as Siege, without fucking through holes in bedsheets.

[Hansmeister]

Hmmm, I am pretty sure the only institutions that the government would have enough control over to "force" them to give out a loan might be Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac.

If Bank of America/Washington Mutual, etc., were being forced to finance bad mortgage investments, I am pretty sure they would have complained about it a bit before they went belly-up and down the tubes.

Remember Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac were intermediate agnets for the real estate market, which due to their gov't sponsorship could borrow at rates below market for commercial enterprises.  What the gov't did is tell the banks that if they didn't participate in the subprime market they couldn't get access to FM&FM.  That left the banks with little choice (other than exiting the real estate market entirely, of course).  Furthermore, the gov't basically guaranteed the banks that they could sell the mortgages in the aftermarket to FM&FM, which meant that there was no risk for the banks.

Thus, due to gov't intervention the market became dominated by the gov't, with banks guaranteed a profit with no risk to get them to play along.  All part of the social contract to provide everybody with a right to own a home, whether they could afford it or not.

Thus when it all went bad the gov't ended up shouldering the losses, as was designed by the system. 

And now the gov't is repeating the same maneuver, just now with the FHA in charge of the process.  The person who designed the subprime mortgage market for FM&FM was appointed by the Obamateur to oversee the FHA to that end.  Thus, we are guaranteed another collapse and bailout down the line.

All because there is a large segment of the electorate which is incapable to take care of itself because they have been conditioned to have big government do the thinking for them.  Just look at the health care debate which boils down to one party believing people shouldn't be free to make health care decisions by themselves, they need enlightened philosopher-bureaucrats to rule over them and treat the masses like serfs.

You end up with a new feudal society with the masses having their lives directed by an all-powerful bureaucracy, with little choices left for themselves because the bureaucrats deem the unwashed masses unfit to govern themselves.  It's funny how the modern left has embraced aristocracy as a form of government.

[Neil]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

You don't get to opt out of the social contract, no matter who John Galt is.  That is the obligation you owe for everything that society provides you.

[DGuller]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

[Razgovory]

Hmmm, I am pretty sure the only institutions that the government would have enough control over to "force" them to give out a loan might be Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac.

If Bank of America/Washington Mutual, etc., were being forced to finance bad mortgage investments, I am pretty sure they would have complained about it a bit before they went belly-up and down the tubes.

Remember Fanny Mae/Freddie Mac were intermediate agnets for the real estate market, which due to their gov't sponsorship could borrow at rates below market for commercial enterprises.  What the gov't did is tell the banks that if they didn't participate in the subprime market they couldn't get access to FM&FM.  That left the banks with little choice (other than exiting the real estate market entirely, of course).  Furthermore, the gov't basically guaranteed the banks that they could sell the mortgages in the aftermarket to FM&FM, which meant that there was no risk for the banks.

Just out of curiosity, which law was this where the government told the banks all this?

[Razgovory]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

You don't get to opt out of the social contract, no matter who John Galt is.  That is the obligation you owe for everything that society provides you.

Yeah, I think it's obvious that someone here went out and caught a matinee.

[Admiral Yi]

What the gov't did is tell the banks that if they didn't participate in the subprime market they couldn't get access to FM&FM. 

Is this another way of saying they had to meet the CRA minimums to sell to Freddie and Fannie?

Furthermore, the gov't basically guaranteed the banks that they could sell the mortgages in the aftermarket to FM&FM, which meant that there was no risk for the banks.

And yet banks and other financial institutions did in the end choose to hold onto some portion of their subprime portfolio, either as mortgages or as CDOs.  Because they thought they offered a reasonable rate of return.  And banks and other financial institutions were more than happy to expose themselves to the subprime market by selling CDS.

On the other hand people like Tonto seem to keep forgetting that the bank bailouts were loans which the Treasury made an average 15 1/2 percent return on, and which were mandated by the government, often over the objections of the borrowers.

[CountDeMoney]

It's hilarious to see Neil, an actual conservative, absolutely not even come close to the level of comprehension of modern American proto-conservatism.

See what we're dealing with down here, Neil?

[Hansmeister]

What the gov't did is tell the banks that if they didn't participate in the subprime market they couldn't get access to FM&FM. 

Is this another way of saying they had to meet the CRA minimums to sell to Freddie and Fannie?

Furthermore, the gov't basically guaranteed the banks that they could sell the mortgages in the aftermarket to FM&FM, which meant that there was no risk for the banks.

And yet banks and other financial institutions did in the end choose to hold onto some portion of their subprime portfolio, either as mortgages or as CDOs.  Because they thought they offered a reasonable rate of return.  And banks and other financial institutions were more than happy to expose themselves to the subprime market by selling CDS.

On the other hand people like Tonto seem to keep forgetting that the bank bailouts were loans which the Treasury made an average 15 1/2 percent return on, and which were mandated by the government, often over the objections of the borrowers.

You are correct. On all counts. Of course the reason they held on to them because they were perceived as risk-free investments since they could always sell to FM&FM in the end.

I remember back in 2009 reading an article in Businessweek about a small bank in Texas that weathered the crisis well because they refused to participate in the subprime market.  The CEO was remarking how thru they decade he was constantly harrassed and threatened by federal regulators for refusing to participate in the subprime market.  He of course was feeling a littlebit smug about the whole thing because his refusal to cave in to banking regulators left him standing strong after the collapse.

People just don't realize how heavily banking is regulated and how much they are forced to dance to the tune of the gov't.  Alas, in the end it is just much easier to go along to get along, which is what most banks do, particularly since it can be quite profitable to swim with the stream.  At least for a little while.

[alfred russel]

Fuck the social contract, I didn't sign on to having millions of worthless pieces of shit demanding handouts while contributing no effort themselves.  Why should those who work hard, save money for the future, and take responsibility for themselves be required to bail out all the worthless layabouts who blow all their money and then some ob big-screen TVs and XBOX 360's and then want a handout because working would distract from their play time.

Fuck em all.  There is nothing more antisocial than the "social contract", which rewards bad behavior and punishes responsibility.  This is why the poor shouldn't be allowed to vote: they end up voting to rob the public until eventually society collapses under their irresponsibility.

Hans doesn't seem to have noticed who signs his paycheck.

[alfred russel]

What the gov't did is tell the banks that if they didn't participate in the subprime market they couldn't get access to FM&FM.  That left the banks with little choice (other than exiting the real estate market entirely, of course).  Furthermore, the gov't basically guaranteed the banks that they could sell the mortgages in the aftermarket to FM&FM, which meant that there was no risk for the banks.

I don't think this is accurate.