How We Can Fix a Crisis We Did Not Create

90 Recommendations

Dear Fools,

Yesterday, we asked for your help in passing a bill that we, after much deliberation, believe would protect the taxpayer. The volume and outrage of many of your responses was impressive, to say the least. We need to provide more context.

First, understand that we are as frustrated as you are about this situation. There was incompetence, negligence, and outright fraud, and we're angry about the liberties some have taken in abusing our capital markets. However, we need to confront a brutal reality: The condition of the credit markets jeopardizes our economy.

Our position on this is governed by three overriding principles:

  1. That letting massive portions of our financial sector fail would have enormous negative effects across our economy.
  2. That although we'd prefer a free-market solution, the U.S. government is the only entity with resources sufficient to make a significant impact.
  3. That government intervention must protect the interests of the American taxpayer.

As stock-market investors, we may not focus that much on the credit markets, so it is critical to remember how much the credit markets mean to our way of life. Credit accounts for the overwhelming majority of the money supply in our economy.

If the reliability of our credit markets is undermined, there are innumerable consequences. For the economy, the credit crisis means lower investment, lower spending, recession, business failures, and a massively devalued stock market. For the average taxpayer, this means watching 401(k)s plummet and putting on hold plans to retire, buy a house, or go to college, and for many it will mean layoffs, foreclosure, and bankruptcy. This type of crisis is not only unacceptable but also unnecessary.

While we greatly prefer free-market solutions, this is a time for government intervention, because only our Treasury has the resources to help our financial system get back on its feet. If the crisis persists, we could be in for a consumer depression, which would hurt us all far more than it would cost us to prevent it today. We do not say this with any pleasure: The choice is between taxpayers taking on the responsibility for this crisis in an orderly fashion or a non-orderly one. Either way, we're on the hook to clean up the mess.

Taxpayer rewards
Now, as we begrudgingly support intervention today, we demand that taxpayers' interests be the dominating priority. There are far too many details and too many other people working directly on this for us to be prescriptive here. What we are demanding are certain standards of minimum acceptability during any financial repair.

The plan must be effective at restoring confidence in our capital markets. The banks should pay a fair price for the capital. And we believe the deals should include some form of equity (such as warrants) from the banks requiring relief. Similar steps have been taken with Fannie Mae (NYSE: FNM), Freddie Mac (NYSE: FRE), and AIG (NYSE: AIG). Taxpayers deserve upside for investing capital to fix a crisis they did not create.

Please note, we are not advocating long-term government ownership of this equity. At some point down the road, the government should be required to liquidate its equity position in the recovered banks, but this is a detail to be worked out later. As stated earlier, at this point we are mainly concerned with ensuring a minimum level of taxpayer protection.

Just as Warren Buffett cut an excellent deal with Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) this week, the government needs to strike an excellent deal on behalf of taxpayers. We should participate in the value creation brought about by the "second lives" we are providing. And these profits the government makes should be returned to the taxpayers.

If you are in agreement with these principles, please send an email similar to this one (from Fool community member jeffbas) to your elected officials. Find their email addresses at www.house.gov and www.senate.gov.

Fools, these are extraordinary times. This is not business as usual. Our country and system are the greatest the world has known; indeed, the rest of the world needs us to make this right. We will get through this. We need to demand that our leaders get us through this in ways that serve the best interests of their investors -- taxpayers in America.

Fool on.

Scott Schedler, President, The Motley Fool

P.S. Our discussion board on this issue remains lively with opinions, so please come and share yours with us.

Motley Fool President Scott Schedler owns no shares of any company mentioned in this article. The Fool has a disclosure policy.

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:35 PM, spongeworthyusa wrote: Report this Comment

    OK, guys, again I ask you what are these ominous "negative effects" upon which you base your entire support for this bailout?

    How are these effects better or worse than the massive hyperinflation we can expect from injection of $700,000,000,000.00 of money created literally out of thin air?

    What about the moral hazard of this bailout?

    Why should Wall Street mend its ways when most likely next time the temptation for easy money comes along they won't be able to resist again?

    Could you please stop your fearmongering when you can't even describe what it is we should fear?

    I understand that credit availability is going to contract, resulting in a lot of bankruptcies of individuals and corporations that depend on debt for their existence. I say, bring it on. The problem is we already have way, way,way too much credit that is probably ultimately going to be bad debt. Why stick the people who had no hand in creating the credit or using the credit with the bill for the others' irresponsibility?

    You said "the government needs to strike an excellent deal on behalf of taxpayers." But as currently constituted, the plan is for the secTreas to pay MORE for the bad loans than their worth. Don't you know that? How can you call that making an excellent deal for the taxpayer, even if we get equity?

    Here's what I think: you guys i.e. the motley fool, have far more to gain from a bailout than you do from a market crash. It's that simple. Same with Cramer on TheStreet and all the other Wall Street cheerleader who were wild free-marketers when the times were good. You see the possibility of a market crash as the equivalent of the death of the goose that laid the golden eggs.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:36 PM, spongeworthyusa wrote: Report this Comment

    I meant $7,000,000,000,000,000.00 .

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:37 PM, kjston00 wrote: Report this Comment

    If these businesses are too big to fail then why did the Government let them, and continue to let them be so big?

    Can anyone channel Teddy Roosevelt?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:37 PM, FreeNachos wrote: Report this Comment

    One huge message I've always got from the Motley Fool is to avoid using credit and live within your means. Sure, a credit crisis would have far-reaching implications but maybe that is exactly the point, that the culture of spending money we don't actually have is inherently flawed and will ultimately fail like it should.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:46 PM, richardnogginn wrote: Report this Comment

    I've heard horror stories about the Great Depression from Grandparents, Great Uncles, etc. As children they used to pull a red wagon behind them and pick through the garbage of the well-to-do. Anything like a half-eaten potato went into the wagon. They would take steak bones and pound them so they suck out the marrow. Individual families had to move in with each other so there wasn't much room for privacy. Aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, pooled their money together so they could rented a house. When my grandfather lost his job at the tablet factory, he lost the home he was buying.

    I'm writing this to inform folks of the consequences of our government not acting. If you are single you will be homeless and hungry. You'll be a hobo.

    If you have a family you will have to watch your children or grandchildren starve. You will do your best to build them a tar paper and cardboard shack to live in, until you can one again afford a home.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 4:53 PM, richardnogginn wrote: Report this Comment

    I've heard horror stories about the Great Depression from Grandparents, Great Uncles, etc. As children they used to pull a red wagon behind them and pick through the garbage of the well-to-do. Anything like a half-eaten potato went into the wagon. They would take steak bones and pound them so they suck out the marrow. Individual families had to move in with each other so there wasn't much room for privacy. Aunts, uncles, cousins, grandparents, pooled their money together so they could rented a house. When my grandfather lost his job at the tablet factory, he lost the home he was buying.

    I'm writing this to inform folks of the consequences of our government not acting. If you are single you will be homeless and hungry. You'll be a hobo.

    If you have a family you will have to watch your children or grandchildren starve. You will do your best to build them a tar paper and cardboard shack to live in, until you can one again afford a home.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:03 PM, ferg6 wrote: Report this Comment

    Sorry, I still don't buy it. True, the Treasury has the money but that puts the people in the congressional bubble in charge. Obviously, they aren't qualified to organize lunch.

    So, when is this time down the road when they relinquish ownership and where does ownership pass then.

    We are in a depression or has everyone missed it.

    Please - a more cogent argument.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:06 PM, skat5 wrote: Report this Comment

    This bail out is betting the farm. The credibility of currency is on the line.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:06 PM, zirconx wrote: Report this Comment

    richardnogginn, I call BS on that. I have a ton of equity in my home, I have savings, and I have pretty much zero debit other than the house. I don't think I'll be living on the street.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:07 PM, DenimAdept wrote: Report this Comment

    We need, somehow, to reduce the reliance of companies and individuals on credit.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:08 PM, rv36116 wrote: Report this Comment

    richardnogginn,

    You need to address the issue of how it came to be that you still do not have the same fate as your grandparents/great uncles, etc...

    How long did they have to do that? And WHY did they have to do that? Do you really believe that more than 75% of the American public were "Homeless hobos" as you suggested some of us would become if this stimulus package passed...

    Think about this, when 9/11 happened, and the tech bubble burst, what happened to the markets?

    They went WAY down, didn't they? What happened next? Why some airline bailouts happened of course, and guess what?

    The market popped back up a year or two later and guess what happened to those industries that got loans? They're still doing crappy.

    Moral of the story, we MUST learn to live within our means and if that means putting off retirement because of this (for a year or two), then that's what must be done. If you know anything about economics, this is the process that will occur if the $700B bill is allowed to pass:

    1 - inflation

    2 - everyday goods and food go up in price

    3 - those who were scraping by and paying their mortgage are hamstrung by the rise in everyday goods and food

    4 - they default on their mortgage

    5 - the same crappy businesses that just got bailed out are going to need more bailout

    6 - the government bails them out again

    7 - return to step 1 and begin again.

    Please think about this and don't go off of a gut reaction on what horror stories there are coming from the great depression.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:10 PM, crbblair wrote: Report this Comment

    With all due respect and I really mean those words. The answer is NO! The sky was supposed to fall already and it hasn't. We don't need to bail these guys out; they need to pay the same way I did with my Fannie Mae preferreds. I took extra risk for more reward and lost. The "give me your dollars" crowd will tell you this bailout is necessary and it is too complicated to understand why... bull! This is simple. There will be pain and a there will be a lot of losers but then these "smart, smart people" will be out of the financial gene pool for good! The doomsayers are playing on our fear and they have you duped too. Don't ever think this can be structured so the "taxpayers" will get their money back. It will never happen. It will just go for more things the government shouldn't be doing with our money and we'll never see a penny.

    Wake up fools! NIX THIS DEAL!

    Best regards,

    Chris

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:13 PM, rv36116 wrote: Report this Comment

    Oh, and by the way, I just joined here recently, and already, the writer of this article has me wondering where the logic is in the impractical article that was written here.

    Logic and free trade economics - they're not that hard to apply to this situation.

    We NEED the economy to flush itself out, and last time I checked, supply and demand will equal lower appartment or home rental prices for those that loose their home because they can not pay their home mortgage.

    Get with the program and quit spouting illogical political mantra's here.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:23 PM, tumachar wrote: Report this Comment

    Govt might just as well

    1. Nationalize banks

    2. Nationalize Insurance

    3. Nationalize Fannie/Fridie

    30 years after govt wrote a check for RTC corp, we come back again to same situation. And if govt intrevenes we will again be at same place (this time maybe sooner than 30 yrs). As we know its a solution that worked.

    This is nonsense. Just because the govt prints paper that says "Legal tender for all depts public or private", does not mean they are responsibe for all depts, public or private.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:28 PM, ExitGrindAt50 wrote: Report this Comment

    If you dig yourself a hole, you better be prepared to live in it for a while. I'm tired of paying for other people's irresponsibility. I recognize that not passing this bailout will result in complete market chaos. But maybe this is exactly what the markets need. Let's purge the market of all the idiots who made reckless decisions and are now begging for the responsible to save them. Bring on a depression - I'm ready for it.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:31 PM, neirbotm wrote: Report this Comment

    Unfortunately the credit situation is the result of the desire of every part of the financial sector to reap the rewards of the speculative housing boom. We seem to have lost our understanding of the term "speculation". The subprime loans were made to further the speculative bubble's existence. This was not real money, it was imaginary money. The incomes required to pay the subprime loans did not exist. The inevitability of our current situation was completely ignored by every expert who should have been raising flags of caution. I like most other Americans stand to take a painful hit should this house of cards be allowed to fall. However, if it is not allowed to fall, we are only prolonging the inevitable.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:39 PM, jsl4980 wrote: Report this Comment

    You have got to be kidding me... The runaway inflation created by artificially low interest rates and out of control deficit spending will destroy the value of the dollar.

    Bailing out banks will cause incredible moral hazard. Why not take risks when the government will just bail you out?

    No bailout will be big enough when there is no backing for the money they print. 6 months from now they will need another one and another, then more funding for the wars...

  • On September 26, 2008, at 5:45 PM, interperk wrote: Report this Comment

    I also vote with the no deal crowd. This feels like the invade Iraq argument of a mushroom cloud happening unless we invade.

    This is a situation where very rich people are going to loose a lot of money because they played it too risky. They have friends in high government places. They would rather be rescued than loose the money.

    And doesn't it smack of complete hypocrisy that these same guys wanted no government involvement, and in some ways were anti-government, until they thought they might loose some of that rich lifestyle.

    Locking up the credit market and having these businesses fail might just be the ticket to a stronger America going forward. We will survive.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:01 PM, richardnogginn wrote: Report this Comment

    I don't need to argue, because it doesn't affect me very much either way it goes. My home is paid for, the car and tractor are paid for, I raise my own food, and I use wood for heat in the winter. I'll miss not being able to use the computer or TV if electricity goes out, but that happens every so often anyway.

    I just wanted folks to know what will happen if this does turn out to be the great depression part II.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:07 PM, DemonDoug wrote: Report this Comment

    Just remember: The people who are selling this bailout are also the people who sold us the Iraq War.

    I wasn't buying then, and I'm not buying now.

    "Our position on this is governed by three overriding principles:

    1. That letting massive portions of our financial sector fail would have enormous negative effects across our economy.

    2. That although we'd prefer a free-market solution, the U.S. government is the only entity with resources sufficient to make a significant impact.

    3. That government intervention must protect the interests of the American taxpayer."

    And on top of your buying the bailout, you have three principles that have no basis in reality. I will shoot them down one at a time:

    1. There are many banks that did not participate in overleveraging, and there is enough capital and money out there for well-run banks and financial institutions to profit from companies who are bankrupt, and when I say bankrupt i mean financially, morally, and legally. There is no evidence that a financial meltdown would take down the entire system, and I dare you to prove me otherwise.

    2. The assumption is that the US government can make a positive impact on the credit markets. This is false. Real Estate and toxic mortgages will continue to falter, although there will be a temporary floor, and the cost of this floor will be even higher inflation than we have now.

    3. The government intervened in 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001. Those interventions protected wall street bigwigs, and average taxpayers have gotten the shaft, especially since 2001.

    I urge the motley fool staff to reconsider this highly flawed line of thinking, and for all Foolish readers to rise up against this terrible, awful, horrendously flawed proposal.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:09 PM, ragerman wrote: Report this Comment

    My wife and I having been fiscally responsible most of our lives, we have a paid off modest house, vehicles, and some savings. I will feel betrayed by our representatives and government officials if they "bail out" the folks who acted in an irresponsible, greedy, and reckless manner, meanwhile foisting the trash heap of their making onto me, my children and grandchildren to pay for. I had hoped to retire and have a comfortable, if modest, retirement however if this "package" is approved I can see that inflation, shortages, etc. will ruin that prospect. There is going to be pain no matter what happens, like an operation to get rid of cancer, once the healing is over we could be back in some sembalance of good health. I say let the markets sort this out, that is what all the "free market" pundits have been saying for years, now is the time for them to put their plan to work, instead of cannabalistic capitalism when we are on the upswing and socialize the debts when we are in a decline.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:10 PM, ferfer wrote: Report this Comment

    Investment brokers/traders and any one in the finance industry has a vested interest in a bailout. It's how they make a living. All of a sudden their livilihoods are at risk. Ordinary folksa re being asked to bail them out. But it isn't a one way street. I tend to think that the economy will go into a recession regardless of the $700 billion or $250 billion or something in between. The question si, who will get that $700 billion. Where's it going to go? Does it filter or trickle boack into main street? Or does it head overseas to pay off China, Dubai, Japan and Europe who hold our debt? Does that money then float back over in terms of cheap U.S. commodities like wheat, corn, ag machinery, etc? Inevitably the U.S. dollar will break through current levels with other major currencies. I think either way, American taxpayers as always will get stuck with the bill. Whether it be an unnecessary war in Iraq or avarice on Wall Street, the bill will land at the feet of the taxpayer.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:14 PM, robdulaney wrote: Report this Comment

    I appreciate your note.

    I agree! We need to hold our nose and support this plan!!!

    Over the past week I have done research into the underlying fundamentals of this crisis and it IS as bad as they say. Inaction, gimmicks, or half measure are not an option.

    This type of crises has happened in many other countries throughout history. The fed has studied these crises and various possible responses. The proposal has the most sound economic support. It must be done quickly. The cost of inaction would be far worse for taxpayers and the future of our nation.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:32 PM, nestegg4324 wrote: Report this Comment

    Is this coming from the same people that said the recession would work itself out just a few articles ago?WTF is wrong with you guys... Stick to your guns the market will work itself out it always does. For once our governement needs to do something it hasn't done in quite a while "NOTHING". They made there beds now let them lie in it. When Americans are in debt and cant afford to pay there own bills I dont see the Federal government jumping to there AID. But yet when a bunch of banks and investments companies live above there means they get free money, must be nice! Most of us have to file for bankruptcy! Lose our house etc. These guys get huge salaries, tell them to put some of that up start another companies and raise there own capital the old fashion American way "hard work". If I couldnt afford to pay for my house they wouldnt cut me a break you think banks would give any of us an slack yet alone let us miss a payment? I mean come on its obvious. We should be allowed to have cheaper houses and apartments which is exactly what will happen. They'll have so much excess inventory Americans wont even need a loan to buy a house they could just buy it cash the way it should be. But banks have done such a great job into convincing us all that we need to borrow money from the when the truth is we dont ! at all we can do it all on our own! How our grand parents did it thru the great depression when a house was a couple thousand if that. The market will not just die over night as much money as we have invested. The governement should take a couple of billion and use it to give new business owners small business loans instead of leading it to dying companies concentrate on creating new thriving companies who reak of success, instead of leading a leg to a dying horse and getting stuck with the funeral costs on top of that.

    Leave it alone thats my opinion concentrate on taking the neccessary precautions to ensure the future of our economy!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:36 PM, UH2L wrote: Report this Comment

    It's ironic that due to the lack of regulation of the banking/financial industry, we now need to institute mega-regulation and resort to government control of certain important financial entities. It's just proof that the free market doesn't work without oversight! If it did work, we wouldn't be in this mess. Corporate greed went amok and societal greed didn't help matters any. This is another downside of the government allowing companies to merge until they are each too important and large to allow to fail. Competition and diversity must be protected, but it seems like the Republicans like to support their big business buddies as they build their empires. Oh, and what ever happened to the Republican idea of privatizing Social Security??? They were wrong on that one too.

    As for the bill not passing, people can complain that we shouldn't have to do it for moral reasons. But we can't go back in time and the question is what should we do at this point in time to avert a financial catastrophe. Not providing government support might cause much more harm than just delaying the inevitable. Can any of you prove otherwise? I can't prove either way, but I'm not sure I want to risk it.

    If people stop getting paychecks because their employers can't borrow money, we'll have near anarchy on our hands.

    My motto is this, "Corporations have much more capacity to do harm than individuals do." This is why I don't vote for Republicans who value corporate freedom over personal freedom.

    UH2L

    http://www.thingsivenoticed.com

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:43 PM, richardnogginn wrote: Report this Comment

    If this happened in China, they would take the Finance Minister out and shoot him on live TV. That way the next few Ministers make sure they don't screw up.

    We might not want to shoot these managers, but we sure could send a message to Congress that we want these guys tried for Sedition or treason or something. Isn't treason where a person puts his country and countrymen at risk for his own gain?

    I also think that the guys making the original request just might know a few things that the rest of the country is ignorant to.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:45 PM, jack21222 wrote: Report this Comment

    After days of research, I still haven't been able to form an informed, cohesive opinion on this bailout. While it would be nice if the government can work out as sweet of a deal as Buffett did, I don't trust congress enough to pull that off. I certainly oppose a blank check. However, people say there will be another depression if nothing is done.

    I simply lack the knowledge and insight to make an informed opinion. It is frustrating.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:52 PM, yankeedollar wrote: Report this Comment

    I'm with the Fools who have posted above. The proposed bailout offers every American an appalling disincentive to act in a fiscally responsible and honest fashion. Every responsible banker, shareholder, and consumer is now facing the question: Why go through the considerable effort of handling money and credit with prudence when the most likely foreseeable outcome of labors is that you will be involuntarily saddled with the enormous financial burdens abandoned the irresponsible and the dishonest?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:52 PM, tennischica wrote: Report this Comment

    I say let 'em fail. If you work for a company that can't meet payroll and has to borrow, you should have looked for a new job a long time ago. As a small business owner, I have always looked out for my employees and one of the ways I do that is never to get into over my head debt. I have never grown too fast, never bought equipment that I couldn't pay cash for and still I've still managed to grow my business 10-20% a year for the past 10 years! Borrowing money to live on is bad news folks; If you don't have enough cash to cover even basic business expenses, then your business is in trouble. And if you wanted a house that you couldn't afford, then you should lose it and go back to renting. And listen up Dems and Repubs, all the senators and congressmen who are on the take with special interests ought to be recalled. We ought to clean house entirely. That Raines and Johnson and now Fishman from WaMu skate away with millions...after their companies failed. Utter nonsense. This is theft and these idiots in office are in bed with these guys. Chris Dodd need to go!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 6:57 PM, genomega1 wrote: Report this Comment

    The short-term credit market has completely collapsed.

    The Federal Reserve has lost control of the money supply. No matter how much liquidity the Fed pumps into the system, banks are still unwilling to lend to one another. Many financial institutions are shutting down existing lines of credit to otherwise healthy businesses. Main St will also be affected as banks make it more expensive to get mortgages and car loans. Banks will not offer home equity lines of credit, and they will begin to demand payment on the lines they have outstanding. Families that borrowed off their home thinking they could pay it back over a span of years will be forced to come up with the cash immediately.

    There are many problems with this attitude; number one, many people will not get their paychecks. It is a common practice to take out short term, low rate loans to meet payroll expenses. Vendors will not be paid for the same reason.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:06 PM, MooBaby17 wrote: Report this Comment

    I am standing with those who believe that this bailout proposal and "supporting arguments" being propagated by various writers for the Motley Fool, and now its president, are flawed. The first point is IF the reliability of our markets is undermined? IF? What does anyone at the Fool think is happening right now within our own borders and on a global scale?? Our markets are already undermined without further action by the Treasury or anyone else! Most of us in this room were taught that there will be repercussions for our actions and decisions; that's a fact of life. So how could so many on Wall Street and in positions of power in this country have missed such a critical life lesson? They didn't... they ignored it!!! I sense a swelling of outrage of such proportions in this country as I have never known before in my 54 years of life. How dare these irresponsible power brokers behave as if they have some right to take what we have spent our lives to earn honestly! No, no, no and again NO! They can all feel what it is like to lose their jobs, give up their corner office suites, their McMansions, personal drivers and tee times and have a huge portion of humble pie catered for lunch for once in their selfish, fraudulant lives. The esteem for these type of people was long ago lost because of they way they treat others and conduct their lives, and now few have faith in anyone or our long-established institutions anymore. They have been living the high-life off the backs of the masses for far too long, never truly caring about the shareholder (their employer!) or the taxpayer, and now they expect us to just provide them with a soft landing based on their heinous actions and disregard for anything but their own fat paycheck? They expect us to believe that their "bailout fix" is for our good??? Puhleeze! They wouldn't recognize an altruistic response to anyone if it stood up and sang the Star Spangled Banner! I DON'T THINK SO!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:12 PM, MarcoPalo wrote: Report this Comment

    There are just too many brilliant economists who say that the administration's cure is worse than the disease and we should make the market clean it up with some insurance backing from the govt. There is no problem of liquidity, on a problem of confidence. And the result of rapid or hyper-inflation seems to be something that most assume will happen. Plus, we're giving GM something like a $70 billion loan. we can't keep this up. We still have our needless wars and environmental problems to pay for.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:14 PM, rkfoster wrote: Report this Comment

    The main point here seems to go unmentioned wherever I read or listen/watch the news. That point is simple, why have "sub-prime" mortgages not been paid? Why are homeowners defaulting on their mortgages? The fact is that the average so-called "middle-class" is no longer making the kind of income that supports home ownership. This is no longer due to people speculating on property values, these are real people losing their real homes! The average citizen of the US is the one that needs a "bailout", although they would much prefer a job or a better paying job. Businesses in the US that have no social conscience to put the lives of their workers ahead of the bottom line are the ones that precipitated these bad assets.

    I'm afraid this bailout of financial businesses will be necessary or there will just be more companies laying off people and creating the same vicious circle. Commerce will need to continue so that even more of those average homeowner citizens don't end up not being able to pay their mortgages. The average citizen is not a Motley Fool when it comes to protecting their wealth.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:18 PM, JesseCornel wrote: Report this Comment

    It is obvious to most that when you arteries are clogged, the blood doesn't flow. When you have blocked arteries it is an emergency, and to avoid a heart attack it is critical to get the blood flowing, which implies the use of a stent or open heart surgery. A complete blockage will result in a heart attack or worse. Time is critical, and the required correction is an emergency.

    Analogous to your vascular system, the financial markets are the arteries of the economy. Analogous to your arteries, when the financial markets are frozen, the monetary supply does not flow. This creates an emergency situation where it is imperative that we restore the monetary flow.

    In today's environment it is critical that we on an emergency basis thaw the financial markets thereby enabling the required monetary flow. There is not a lot of time to react. Waiting too long will create a severe recession or a depression.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:28 PM, NoBailout wrote: Report this Comment

    The bailout is NOT good for the taxpayer. Surely there are better ways to fix this problem. How many problems has Wall Street created in the last 100 years? I vote for extreme regulation of financial markets so these boneheaded financiers don't completely screw up our country! Also, abolish the Fed. That is all.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:29 PM, AmbroseSnit wrote: Report this Comment

    Since we are so worried about this "crisis" I may just have the solution. how about we take 100 billion and divide that into the 200 million adults and let let pay off their mortages. Then gov't could get its 25% from it. All the banks would get their asset books covered and cleared. We then could use the remaining "thin air" money to buy a car which would save our auto industry. I know inflation but at least this would actually benefit all of us instead of the select few. You work out the details and get back to me. Such oversimplifing I know. If they are going to do it why not put it in our hands so we can only blame ourselves for letting this get to this stage in the first place. Zimbabwe hear we come.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:33 PM, timali1711 wrote: Report this Comment

    A lot of us are angered by the need for this "bailout" even though it is needed. It would be a much easier sell if in addition to the bailout, there was 1) An announcement of legislation that WILL be passed this year to keep this from happening again. Not the meaningless type of legislation that came out of the collapse of Enron and such, but stuff that really works. 2) A few arrest warrants issued for upper management and board members of these companies that did all this. The FBI has been looking at these companies for months. They may not have a tight case for conviction yet, but you can bet they have probable cause on many people. That's enough for an arrest warrant. 3) Congress should pass the consumer credit card protection (H.R. 5244) legislation that is currently pending. This bill will help out all of us by ensuring that things like double cycle billing are prohibited, credit card companies have to apply payments to higher interest rates before lower (promotional) interest rates, among other great consumer protections. This would really go a long way to restoring consumer confidence that our elected officials really do care (right). That's my rant. Only the bail out will happen and in 15-20 years, we'll do it all over again.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:33 PM, feliz1000 wrote: Report this Comment

    If that is the Motley Fool stand, I am doing business with the wrong organization. Seems like your article is based on self-interest. Of course there may be fallout but that's the price we pay for speculating.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:35 PM, Indefatigable69 wrote: Report this Comment

    I am stunned not only by the proposal but also the position of 'the fools'. Please have more faith and confidence in our way of life, our country, our people, and our economy. Not since FDR has such potential damage been proposed and seriously considered by the congress and the chief executive.

    By the way, this is not about "bad" mortgages (running about 6% - very managable): this is entirely about gross over leveraging by investment banks, hedge funds, and others. Those are the entities who will be saved by this bailout.

    It may be too late, but I will continue to contact my representative and senators and I hope you will contact yours as well.

    Lastly, I hope the fools reconsider. Take it from some of us who've been around awhile, it's not as bad as it seems.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:36 PM, UniqueMiner wrote: Report this Comment

    You guys are nuts. I am not supporting the republican bailout. I will pull out my investments first thing Monday morning and watch your rich fat asses slide down the greased slope to hell. I could care less what dire straits you prophesy. Who are you? Where the hell is Dave? He doesn't support propping up this mess does he? What happened to all the talk about staying calm? You led me to believe you had some insight. What a letdown. This letter to us is your only measure to capitalize on this market? What about buying companies at bargain prices? Didn't the Oracle of Omaha just pick up a multi-million dollar company for pennies? Why aren't you guys talking about capitalizing on all these fears like he is? This economy will go down because Bush drove it in the ground, but that happened months ago, right? Aren't you guys ahead of the curve? These days I wait for Obama about as much as I wait for Jesus. I will make a prediction you people should have seen long ago. Obama, the current leader of any Democratic Party decision right now, will instruct everyone to vote against any bailout because the economy being in the ditch ensures his election. I am sorry for disrespecting you guys who have helped me so much, but please. Go back to community college and take a political science class to learn more about who controls the markets in this country. We do. The American people. This year we are voting for a change. Predictions: You can still get 40% out of the coming six months. Sell anything you have invested in Asia. Buy stocks like NXG and NILE until election is over. Then buy EBAY, GOOG, ATVI, INTC, and HPQ like it was the old days and ride this thing out. What's next after that? Genetics. See a trend?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:48 PM, skyelobar wrote: Report this Comment

    Let them Burn! Let them all burn!!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 7:57 PM, lstanley9175 wrote: Report this Comment

    I'm also a vote NO person. I understand the enormity of the problem and the implications. Yes, it will be bad, very bad. Shame on Wall Street and everyone else bound up in creating this mess. At the risk of sounding like Sour Grapes Sally, I used to be a small business co-owner that went belly up back in the 80s. Guess what? No one bailed us out. We went flat broke and lost everything. That was an incredibly hard lesson for all concerned but it taught me the value of living within my means and the importance of living with a realistic budget. Credit is a beautiful thing when it's not abused. And if you (or banks, corporations, etc.) choose to abuse it, then suffer the consequences. We will all share in the pain one way or another anyway. If I had any trust or confidence in those trying to come up with a bailout package now, I would reconsider my opinions. But I don't. After what's happened, why should I?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:00 PM, RevCBH wrote: Report this Comment

    Hear hear! I'm extremely heartened to see the tremendous opposition to this plan both online and among the population in general. This is certainly not the correct action and the people know it.

    The mess we're in is a RESULT of government policy ever since the creation of the Federal Reserve. The ONLY way to prevent these sorts of bubbles are to live within our means as a nation (specifically in the way we run government) and to restore a sound monetary system based on gold and silver.

    Save the economy, respect the constitution, restore the republic!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:01 PM, pmbarrett wrote: Report this Comment

    I never thought I'd see the day that MF would take a position that supports out right Socialism. There is no good reason to support this "payback" to this group of Robber Barons.

    The fact of the matter is that years ago (1977) our incompetent legislative rubes made a deal with the devil to increase home ownership in our country. The rubes said they would provide the money (Fanny/Freddie) if the banks would look the other way when reviewing credit requirements. Well the irresponsible got their homes according to plan, and all the rubes patted each other on the back for a job well done. But a funny thing happened, the irresponsible did the irresponsible thing and bite off more than they could chew. They didn't pay, so now the responsible members of our society have to once again pay for the irresponsible. And, the rubes, being the mental midgets that they are, don't understand why the responsible folks are flat pi$$ed off.

    This bailout is not just a Wall Street bailout, it is a bailout of the incompetent rubes we call politicians. Our elected officials! We put them into office and now it is time to removed everyone that goes along with this scheme. Also, every person that participated in this mess should be drug out and prosecuted to the furthest extent of the law. From bank CEO's to lying politicians to irresponsible home owners. No one should escape the wrath of the responsible. When the public sees our laws enforced, then maybe we can consider bailing out those that actually need it. As now proposed, we are simply covering for our moronic elected officials.

    It's time to serve notice to our elected officials that they better stop writing checks with their mouth that their a$$ can't cover!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:06 PM, paddingtongreen wrote: Report this Comment

    Sorry guys, the sewer is blocked, the crap is backing up into YOUR bathroom and you are refusing to cleanup on principle, you're not the one who caused the blockage!

    How bad does the smell have to get.

    There is a run on the banks, they have no money to lend, employers can't borrow so they can't make payroll till they get the recipts of business, you can't pay your CC bill, and on, and on. Banks lay-off, your employer lays off and you have a depression.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:07 PM, TradingForWealth wrote: Report this Comment

    Contrary to what the politicians might think, some of us have prepared and will survive when the system crashes and burns. Some of us have seen this coming for years and warned deaf ears of the problems now clearly visable.

    This bailout, or rescue if you prefer, is just a postponement of the inevitable. I keep hearing people state; Uncle Sam is the only entity with the funds to do it. My mama tought me; as long as you owe someone something you own nothing. This country is broke. Our financial system operates with smoke and mirrors and now the wind is blowing the smoke aside and tipping over the mirrors.

    If we as a country are ever going to recover we're gonna have to feel some pain and learn the lessons our forefathers did. Yup there might be food lines and more homeless people but maybe my kids will appreciate the roof over their heads and the food on the table instead of whining about how the neighbor has xbox 360 and we don't! Good luck everyone

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:11 PM, Richard233 wrote: Report this Comment

    I'm not sure what action is really needed.

    I know that what is going on is causing ripples in the economy, I also know that if enough banks fail the FDIC does not have the money to cover it, at least in the short term. So, if these organizations really need to exist, then nationalize them (the stock becomes worthless) fire the top management and boards who let this crap happen (no parachutes or the like), let the stock holders sue the board to recover their money from the bonuses and the like, clean up the balance sheets, pay off the loans based on ACTUAL value, not the inflated fake values of the last 8 years. Set up a system to sell of the assets at a reasonable pace on an open market. Pay back the tax payer plus a reasonable return (double treasury rates) and give the remaining amounts (if any) to the stock holders. Oh, and make any lobbying for these types of firms forbidden. If caught, we throw you in a dark hole never to come out again.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:23 PM, NoMoreBailouts wrote: Report this Comment

    No bailout.

    194 top economists in the US signed an open letter to Congress stating this bailout would do more harm than good.

    You can read about it at bloomberg news, just type in "bailout".

    We have two people, Hank Paulson and Ben Bernake that are trying to sell us this plan using fear. All of us are relying on the advise of just two people. These are the same two people who have been questioned at regular intervals over the past two years about the state of the economy. Bernake said the sub-prime fiasco would be contained and not spread throughout the rest of the economy. Both have also said the economy was fine as recenlty as a month ago. Now, all of a sudden, there's a mad rush that we need to commit to 700 billion dollars in a matter of days or else we're going off a cliff.

    Not convienced at all. In fact I have major doubts. Given the gravity of the situation, at a minum we should get a second opinion.

    I have a bank account at WaMu. This morning, (Friday) I went to the bank at 9:15 am and the doors were open and the new JPMorganChase/WaMu was ready for business. I asked if they were making loans. "Absolutly" was the response.

    Gee, credit is tighter than it was three years ago. So what? Is documenting your income and demonstrating that you can pay a loan back unreasonable?

    Some of us remember the tough credit era of the early 80's when first mortgages were 17% and car loans were 22%. We endured and made it through. We were getting rid of the inflation caused by the weak Fed policies similar to the Bernake Fed.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:31 PM, CallmeKevin wrote: Report this Comment

    "It's ironic that due to the lack of regulation of the banking/financial industry, we now need to institute mega-regulation and resort to government control of certain important financial entities. It's just proof that the free market doesn't work without oversight!"

    Lack of regulation? What planet are you living on? The institutions struggling the most are among the most regulated in the industry.

    Free market? That's funny. If there were a free market, almost no one would have made loans to people who couldn't afford them. If there were a free market, Fannie and Freddie wouldn't even exist. Regulations put these anti-free market institutions in existence in the first place.

    Lack of regulation indeed, lol.

    And now we have the same people who gave us this problem coming up with the fix. :o You have to be kidding me. Next they'll be telling us if we don't fix this, planes will start dropping out of the sky, and CO2 will kill us all.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:39 PM, ONEBIZTIGER wrote: Report this Comment

    Sorry Foolish Brothers and Associates!

    This bailout wreaks. It's time for the chips to fall where they may. Survival of the fittest, and all that jazz.

    Why should we bail out commission-hungry bankers and investors who were thinking of their own bottom line?

    When is enough -- enough?????

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:43 PM, rse0506 wrote: Report this Comment

    I don't understand enough details of the so-called "bailout" (does anybody?) to prognosticate on the consequences of doing or not doing it. But I want to offer some "fundamentally oriented" thoughts:

    There are two major things that need to happen, indeed have been happening, in our economy and our financial system:

    1. Deleveraging, ie. paying down debt and getting our overall "equity ratios" higher.

    2. "asset rationalization", which just means that overvalued asset classes (esp real estate) must devalue (or revalue) until they are in balance with other kinds of assets.

    The issue at hand is not WHETHER that will happen, but HOW and WHEN it will happen. There is no sense trying to prop up overinflated assets, that will just make it worse. BUT! "Just letting the markets take care of it" is very likely to lead to asset values dramatically undershooting their true values and then returning to some sort of normalcy later. It's the difference between an orderly movement toward debt unwinding and asset rationalization, and a disorderly one where things yo-yo around, with speculative panics on the downside to complement the speculation we've already had on the upside, and then more speculative "melt-ups" from the lows.

    The problem with the latter scenario is that those deep lows of dramatic undervaluation could be INCREDIBLY DESTRUCTIVE. At these lows, it will be not just the greedy and irresponsible who are wiped out. People who have tried to prudently use and manage debt will also be wiped out. Every financial institution consists of a balance sheet of considerable liabilities and assets, BY DESIGN (that's what it means to be a financial institution). Their assets are somebody else's liabilities. As others have pointed out, not all, in fact not even most, of those assets (which reflect others' liabilities) were taken on, entered into, whatever, in an irresponsible manner. Rather, they came about as part of the ordinary functioning of the financial system. That's what it MEANS to have a financial system: one person's liabilities are someone else's (financial) assets.

    To simply allow it to all melt down will result in the wipeout of many, many responsible lenders and borrowers. They will have to sell at the bottom (that low-point of the yo-yo bottom), when in fact the assets they are forced to dispose of have a higher intrinsic worth. Productivity could take a phenomenal hit. And ultimately it is ONLY productivity that will get us through this and allow us to recover. Productivity is what ultimately supports the value of all economic assets.

    Those who have cash or hard assets, seeing this coming, will naturally hold off on buying until they are convinced that they will not also suffer more losses when they buy. This will exaggerate the yo-yo low, wiping out more innocent people. Whereas if they perceive that the rationalization and debt unwind is happening in an orderly fashion, they will reenter the market sooner.

    ONLY the re-emergence of buyers will stop the declines (in any asset class), but the point at which they step back in is highly dependent on whether they perceive an orderly rationalization or a freefall ending in a horrible crash.

    Characteristics of an orderly rationalization would be things like most people staying in their homes and continuing to work in their jobs. No huge loss of productivity. No big drop in the value of the NON-overinflated assets - in fact the value of those assets could even rise (relative to the overinflated ones, they will rise anyway).

    Could it happen this way? Those who support the intervention think it may be possible.

    It is not a proper role for the govt to try to peg or set the eventual values of various assets. That's the market's job. However, I believe that it is a proper and good function of government to do what it can to dampen the wild, and destructive, swings that are likely happen in the do-nothing, just "let 'er squeal" approach to the necessary debt unwinding and asset rationalization.

    With ALL that said, I don't know enough about the floated proposal to be able to judge how well it will work. I DO think the criteria that Motley Fool senior staff have laid out are very important, however. Therefore I support their three principles.

    Scott

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:43 PM, aamire wrote: Report this Comment

    Out of the frying pan

    into the fire?

    If there's no bailout, credit dries up and we fail to function. If there is one, we print more money, create inflation, promote indulgent financial institutions, cripple economy even more in some time,... bust!

    Heads we lose, tail we lose?

    Not really. My choice between the devil and the deep blue sea is to support the capital markets for now and buy time to analyze the course much more deeply. I am confident we could exhaustively analyze the consequences and options and come up with a better decision if we buy time now with the bailout package.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:46 PM, rbsd wrote: Report this Comment

    What's to stop the creative geniuses who drove the economy into the ground from simply taking the $700B and digging a deeper economic hole? Why reward bad behavior? Revive the concept of debtors prison and put those creative geniuses into it along with the administration officials who stayed asleep at the switch while the crisis developed. Let them out after the economy recovers -- plus an additional 24.9% days of late fees, interest, and penalties.

    Those bastards wouldn't even think of giving an ordinary citizen a break if the citizen were in trouble. Rather, they would heap on penalties. Let them rot in hell.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 8:49 PM, jescarigle wrote: Report this Comment

    More foreclosured homes, means less Property Taxes collected by local governments, thus.... the taxes of the non-foreclosured properties, have to be doubled in order to cover the Local Government (City and Towns) approved Budget needs, thus.... the mortgage payment of those remaining owners, will considerable be increased (not by mortgage and Banking/Lending interest rate but by Real Estate Property Taxes) in order to cover for the non-being-paid by the foreclosured homeowners, and these, might join the trend of people unable to pay their mortgages, and thus.... even more foreclosure properties.

    Further more, local Homeowners Associations, will fall into the same situation [of above mentioned Townships], since foreclosured homeowners will not longer pay the Association Dues, and these must be passed over to the burden of the remaining homeowners properties, in order to cover their budgeted expenses, thus.... these will have their home expenses, increased and might be unable to cope with an thus, join the legion of foreclosed homes.

    And also to mention, that foreclosed properties, stop their electricity and water services, as well as maintenance of landscaping, and thus creating houses who built mold {due the closed not properly vented property}, damaged swimming pools, house overheated since there is no electricity to run a minimum air conditioning, or frozen since the is no electricity to run a minimum of heating, plus the grass and weeds growth without control, because there is no maintenance., and thus..... keep diminishing the market value of the area properties.

    If banking and lenders, do not stop their immensurable usury and freeze and change the terms of their mortgages and credit cards as outlined below, this situation will grow without control; thus, is not just to lend the lenders a $700 bn gift, but the affected consumers have to be the principal beneficiares of this handout.

    From: Jesus y Carmen Iglesias

    Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 17:12

    To: Jesus y/o Carmen Iglesias

    Subject: Fw: more of..... Too much on the line to rush Wall Street fix

    The usury of the Financial Institutions, not the people, are to be blamed for the way our economy is right now.

    Unbelievable!, have just received in today's mail, an offer from WA-MU (Washington Mutual) for a credit card up to a line of $30K, at....

    introductory rate 9.99%

    23.99% thereafter as well as cash advances

    default: prime rate PLUS 25.99% (actually 30.99%!!!!!!!!!!!)

    purchases prime rate plus 18.99%

    They must be out of their mind to offer these terms to a human being.

    $700,000,000,000,000.00 to save the banking and financial institutions, for going bankrupt and with it, the 401Ks, the retirement accounts, and the massive unemployment of these institutions employees, but it does not solve the problem of creditors still been unable to pay mortgages, loose their properties in foreclosure, and pay their credits at the highest interest and variable ("creative financing, it was called!) rates, thus in ahead time, we would have to -again- rescue these financial institutions with another $800 billions to save then from the -still- unable to collect from consumers and writing-off uncollectable accounts.

    As a condition for this humongous injection to the private sector, the interest rate on credit cards must be frozen and variables rates eliminated, and these changed to a maximum of 8% thus.... the institutions will still receiving a profit (not as much as before, but more than what the Fed's prime rate charges these), and people will be able to pay their credit cards.

    As all Real Estate properties had losen their values, up to a point where Equity Lines of Credits had been canceled, and therefore, properties owe a Mortgage Amount higher than the actual property market value, thus.... therefore, all mortgages must be reduced by 40% and all variable terms been converted to a 30 years straight interest rate, not higher than 7% (not as much as before, but more than what the Fed's prime rate charges these), and people will be able to pay their mortgages

    With these terms, the "thinking" CEO's will be unable to get millions dollars of severance, retirement, or performance bonuses plus high salary, stock options, expenses etc...., while their employees (the ones who really do the work) get minimum salary and stockholders, minimum (if any) dividends on stocks.

    Those charged-off adjustments or reduced amounts, of "uncollectable funds", must not been passed over to borrower-consumer with a followed up 1099-Misc tax form sent to borrower so that these must report them as gift income and therefore, taxable to the consumer-borrower, but, lender-financial institutions must right-ff these amounts on their Corporative of LLC's taxes, and these lesser incomes to the IRS, shall be part of the said Billionaire Bail Out.

    Hope these suggestions would be helpful to solve the crisis, from the point of view of a voter citizen.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 9:07 PM, tangotommy wrote: Report this Comment

    To get yourself out of a mess by printing more money seems to run counter to the fundamentals espoused by us fools. When money becomes nothing but numbers, we're in grave trouble. But, since money is already nothing but numbers, I guess we're already in a deep pool of cess. EXcess.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 9:10 PM, noneedforaname wrote: Report this Comment

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197

    I think more and more of us are becoming aware of the ploys of the hedgemony. It's an outrage how devious these families behave. They control most of the world's wealth (money, land, and resources), but will not stop until they have it all. This failure of the FIRE sector -- financial, insurance, real estate -- is part of the plan. Fortunately they have undermined the resilience, fortitude, and compassion of WE THE PEOPLE. This is the greatest time to be alive. Our decisions now will reverberate through time. Let us UNITE and minimalize the wealth of the deciduous hedgemony. They will pass away and a stronger and closer nation will emerge. One for the people and by the people. We will need a revolution based on love to get there. DO NOT PANIC; we can do it together.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 9:44 PM, gardnersf wrote: Report this Comment

    I have difficulties trusting anything coming from Secretary Paulson. He is a product of the very environment that got us into this mess. I do not support the bailout, at least on the scale that we are seeing it. I suspect that Secretary Paulson understands the financial markets very well, but lacks an understanding of driving a successful business that produces something. I suspect that an economic recovery can happen a lot quicker with modern technology than it did previously. If banks fail, then other institutions can spring up to fill the voids. Businesses must be allowed to fail and be rebuilt.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:15 PM, 922622cb wrote: Report this Comment

    Some people who made bad financial decisions will be hurt. That's our capitalistic system. It works.

    Some 401-K valuations may go down. They were unrealistic. If the government bails out the bad guys, what will go up is the national debt. The government will have to borrow money, and the government does not know how to make money in mortages, so I believe most of it will go down the drain. We will be passing the problem off to the next generation!

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:21 PM, 1bigredviper wrote: Report this Comment

    google this new york times article. this crisis was predicted September 30, 1999

    Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

    By STEVEN A. HOLMES

    In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers,

    the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks

    and other lenders.

    The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New

    York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose

    credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope

    to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

    Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure

    from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and

    felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

    In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help

    them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings

    and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance

    companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points

    higher than conventional loans.

    ''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down

    payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer.

    ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has

    required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called

    subprime market.''

    Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent

    of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the

    conventional loan market.

    In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more

    risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized

    corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to

    that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

    ''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around

    us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the

    government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift

    industry.''

    Page 1 of 2 Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times

    9/26/2008 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF......

    Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate

    one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a

    rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on

    time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

    Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to

    consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By

    expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to

    people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

    Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can

    qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority

    and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

    Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The

    number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998,

    according to Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies. During that same period the number

    of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of

    Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

    In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per

    cent.

    Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in

    part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

    In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent

    of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income

    borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

    The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial

    discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to

    determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

    Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company Home Privacy Policy Search Corrections XML Help Con

    Page 2 of 2 Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending - New York Times

    9/26/2008 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DB153EF......

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:26 PM, pkassoc1 wrote: Report this Comment

    A lot of unsophisticated ordinary workers with families have held long term jobs and supported their children and have invested in retirement plans of various sorts to reduce the load upon their families when they get old. These retirement plans are managed by people that are judged by the company managers as to the perfomance of these funds. If the fund manager says he cant get as high a return on the investments that the next guy can because the next guy has riskier placements, then the manager will be replaced by somebody else that will succumb to the risk. So, like any working person, he will succumb to the demands of his job. The real problem occured as our leaders in washington accepted lobby cash to turn a blind eye to the secondary markets that were invented to game the system. This was fraud of the highest order with the government, financial entities, mortgage brokers and liar applicants etc. all involved. Many people from all walks of life partook in this scam and profited greatly from it.. However, we must not let envy cloud our reason. Many, many more people led ordinary lives and did not profit during this period from this bubble. It is not reasonable to plunge the entire world into a depression by allowing the system to collapse in an uncontrolled fashion. The consequence would be a very long and painful period with a this period inflicting much less pain to the finacially elite than to the rest of the population. There will be much clumsy management of the recovery and some efforts that will be counterproductive, but i feel that a more economical recovery will occur if we follow a proactive course.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:28 PM, wonderousdragon wrote: Report this Comment

    I believe that those in office have been arranging this new way of stealing the taxpayers money. They will probably siphon the funds from the social security fund.

    They really wanted everyone to have invested their social security funds into the stock market first, but I guess this will do.

    Everyone should know by now that anything the Bush administration does is overly suspect.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:33 PM, Bullstothewall wrote: Report this Comment

    NO SOCIALIST CORPORATE WELFARE 'BAIL OUT!'

    Don't be a fool, tell your congress person and senators to vote against this un-American bill or YOU and your kids will end up paying for it.

    Email your congress persons and tell them you don't want to pay to to bail out a bunch of Wall Street millionaires.

    http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:36 PM, 1bigredviper wrote: Report this Comment

    This is not a product of the Bush administration. This is a product of the Clinton administration. Offering loans to people who didn't qualify in an attempt to give low-income families a chance to own a home and now they cannot or will not pay because the value of the home is less than the mortgage. Corporate greed in an attempt to keep the earnings high has lead to this situation. It is not the responsibility of the US government, whether they can print the money or not (because we cannot afford it) to inject the cash into the society. Private equity exists for this reason. Businesses will merge, collapse or succeed. It is ridiculous to think that the finance industry will collapse as a whole. 94% of homeowners are paying their mortgage. Only 6% of the debt is bad debt (up from an average of 3% several years ago). If we wanted Nationalism we would live in Europe.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:37 PM, a1aman wrote: Report this Comment

    I agree with most, no blank check. I'll take my chances with time running out. Strike a deal where We the taxpayer can recover the investment down the road. Look at the CEO of Washington Mutual, over 40 million insalary last year to run the bank into the ground. Even if he never again runs a company the 40 million should allow him to suffer in luxury. With this bailout how many more like him?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:38 PM, flatrater1 wrote: Report this Comment

    as far as the bail out goes ; what should be done is first have the holders of the equities discount them 25% then a additional 50% .. keep fanni & freddi which started life as gov enities , use the income to reduce the federal debt ..

    also use fanni & freddi to lower instrest rates to 4.5% fixed for the next 3 to 5 years. ; after which they can be alowed to float at market rates....

    no severance pay or golden paraschutes for the ceo's which caused this mess ; in fact they should be made to work for free for the next 5 years to clean up their mess & pay back to the share holders the overage that they have been over paid for their incomptance.....

    what really needs to be done is get rid of all of the dirrivetives which are the under lying cause of this mess ; the so called

    securities /paper liens....

    reinstate the rules & regulations & over site of the markets that were in place before bush 1 started getting rid of then & bush 2 finished the job....

    or we could keep it kiss ; keep it simple

    keep it stipid.....

    the lenders / equities holders/ banks ; what ever you want to call then . could just write 25% of all exisiting loans (

    writwe them down ) take a loss on their taxes which they are going to do any how.... lower the loan rates to 4.5% on their own ... and clean up their own mess

    .....

    at the rate they are going with foreclosures ; reselling them at a loss on

    average of 30 to 50 % plus the cost of

    foreclosure another 10 to15 % ;you would think it would just be cheaper & easier to redo the loans ...

    but as most bakers have their head up their rear most of the time I don't

    expect them to think about this it would be too simple / stupid.....

    and I mean all the loans issued to every body in the last 4 years or so....

  • On September 26, 2008, at 10:58 PM, commonsense1won wrote: Report this Comment

    The ceo's who took 500 million golden parachutes from investors need to be federally investigated, indicted by a grand jury, sent to prison and disgouged off all thier ill gotten gain.

    THE GREEDY FILTHY RICH ARE AS DANGEROUS AS THE DESTITUTE, BOTH WILL DO ANYTHING TO GET MONEY.

    Tax the grotesque uber rich into middle class and give the homeless destitute a sro.

    people who are too rich and greedy are dangerous as they will do anything for money, can never get enough money and they are never satisfied. The destitute are dangerous as the filthy rich as they.they have nothing to lose and will do anything for money. destitute and filthy rich are both bad news dangerous and the field should be leveled. tax the filthy rich and give a sro to the destitute.

  • On September 26, 2008, at 11:02 PM, dove29 wrote: Report this Comment

    I am deeply skeptical about this bailout. It feels like somebody is trying to shake us down.

    Up until last week they were telling us everything was going to be all right. Now they are just about telling us that civilization itself is circling the drain.

    Why is it that the big guys can get bailed out after letting greed take over and making loans that were unlikely to be paid back? Will anything be left to help public transit systems struggling with high fuel costs, railroads that have been given too little funding, airlines that are on the verge of going under, young people trying to finance a college education, school systems trying to educate our children, people trying to rebuild after the recent hurricanes - ANYTHING besides the bailout and the war? And why are we on the verge of giving them all this without better oversight?

  • On September 26, 2008, at 11:08 PM, bradylarry wrote: Report this Comment

    I really hope this is the last pro-bailout fearmongering article I see from the Fool. From a service that I subscribed to due to their support of free market capitalism, fundamental value investing, and "don't panic" philosphy, this has