Seeking Alpha
Wednesday, December 30 2009  |  05:09 EDT  | 
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)

Market Currents

Thursday, June 4, 2009
4:44 PM TweetThis
Back to Today's Market Currents »

This news story has 33 comments:

  •  
    I know I, for one, am shocked, SHOCKED I say, at the mere thought that a company that ran itself into the ground, got bought by another company that ran itself into the ground, and then got bailed out by politicians who are attempting to run this country into the ground, would possibly be screwing over the little people that don't control billions of dollars in bailout funds.

    *disgusting
    Jun 04 04:58 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    She should stop paying the mortgage. Let the pride go people, you're being boiled alive.
    Jun 04 05:03 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Wells Fargo has done the same thing to me, offering a refinance with a hefty fee instead of allowing me to participate in Obama's "Home Affordable Refinance Program", even though the mortgage is owned by Freddie Mac and Wells Fargo has a nice web page describing the program.

    I would like to see the numbers of people that have actually been able to use this much touted program and which banks are actually allowing their customers to participate.
    Jun 04 05:07 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Aside from Bonnie & Clyde and a few other small-time bank robbers, when has it been any different?

    I mean AFTER Republicans deregulated banking.
    Jun 04 05:11 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    The money that folks spend needs to come from some type of income now or later!

    People need to live within their means!
    Jun 04 05:11 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Like most govt programs, this one is just more BS. It's a shame the govt didn't let these failed banks go bankrupt so that the more competently managed banks could have arisen to take their place.
    Jun 04 05:13 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Actually, the act that had kept the investment aspect of banking separate from the rest was called Glass-Steagall which was put into place during the 1930s Depression .

    Note that "the final bill resolving the differences was passed in the Senate 90-8 (1 not voting) and in the House: 362-57 (15 not voting). ' The legislation was signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 12, 1999."

    Both parties have plenty to be ashamed of in this situation.


    On Jun 04 05:11 PM Just Say Whoa! wrote:

    > Aside from Bonnie & Clyde and a few other small-time bank robbers,
    > when has it been any different?
    >
    > I mean AFTER Republicans deregulated banking.
    Jun 04 05:18 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Here is an interesting piece of info for any who had BROKERED loans...my real estate attorney tells me that 99.9% of them are illegal and actionable in court. He has yet to find even ONE that complies with federal law as to how the backend broker rebate was disclosed as to how it affected the interest rate AND the monthly payment. Seek legal advice! What the derivatives do not destroy, court action will! Your lender giving you the runaround? Do not sit still for it!!
    Jun 04 05:20 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    OK. Let me get this straight: she recklessly borrowed some 130K against her 77K house and lived beyond her (very modest) means, used her house equity as an ATM (HELOC), and did not bother to save. She has children who can support her and social security check with which she can rent a place within her means.

    Am I missing something here?
    Jun 04 05:43 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Herd mentality, Doc. The banks bombarded everyone with adds to do it. You could not walk into your bank without the teller asking if you got your HELOC yet from them. The lender said it was OK, Greenspan and Bernacke said it was OK. President Bush said it was OK. Barney Frank and Congress thought it was an absolutely GREAT idea. What was the poor lady to think? LOL!!!


    On Jun 04 05:43 PM DrBenway wrote:

    > OK. Let me get this straight: she recklessly borrowed some 130K against
    > her 77K house and lived beyond her (very modest) means, used her
    > house equity as an ATM (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), and
    > did not bother to save. She has children who can support her and
    > social security check with which she can rent a place within her
    > means.
    >
    > Am I missing something here?
    Jun 04 05:52 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I hear you. I was just prepared to read a story about a single mom with 5 children being thrown on the street. While this lady's situation is indeed unpleasant, I do not see any moral imperative to bail her out. I also do not have any issue with Bank of America trying to sell her a service so it can make some money to pay taxpayers loan back.

    I find the writer's logic rather perverse: the bank should use taxpayers money to modify her loan so it can go back to the goverment with hat in hand when it runs out of money again.

    She apparently has children and they should help her out to pay her (very modest) mortgage, just like I would for my mother.

    On Jun 04 05:52 PM Market Sniper wrote:

    > Herd mentality, Doc. The banks bombarded everyone with adds to do
    > it. You could not walk into your bank without the teller asking if
    > you got your HELOC yet from them. The lender said it was OK, Greenspan
    > and Bernacke said it was OK. President Bush said it was OK. Barney
    > Frank and Congress thought it was an absolutely GREAT idea. What
    > was the poor lady to think? LOL!!!
    Jun 04 06:11 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Karl Denninger's view....

    market-ticker.org/arch...
    Jun 04 06:36 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Oh, you expect something to back up the President's words. Come on now! This is the best speaking President we have ever had, why do you need action. Can't we all just get along?

    On Jun 04 05:07 PM Dan Seeks Alpha wrote:
    > I would like to see the numbers of people that have actually been
    > able to use this much touted program and which banks are actually
    > allowing their customers to participate.
    Jun 04 06:44 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Agreed. Even seen the bumper sticker "Honk If I Am Paying Your Mortgage". The taxpayer should not be bailing out ANYBODY. By the way Doc..is your handle from The Firesign Theater? Just curious.


    On Jun 04 06:11 PM DrBenway wrote:

    > I hear you. I was just prepared to read a story about a single mom
    > with 5 children being thrown on the street. While this lady's situation
    > is indeed unpleasant, I do not see any moral imperative to bail her
    > out. I also do not have any issue with Bank of America trying to
    > sell her a service so it can make some money to pay taxpayers loan
    > back.
    >
    > I find the writer's logic rather perverse: the bank should use taxpayers
    > money to modify her loan so it can go back to the goverment with
    > hat in hand when it runs out of money again.
    >
    > She apparently has children and they should help her out to pay her
    > (very modest) mortgage, just like I would for my mother.
    >
    > On Jun 04 05:52 PM Market Sniper wrote:
    Jun 04 06:51 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    This article rekindled my memory about an SA comment some time ago. Those words still kept reverberating in my head, quoted below:

    " ...(To Obama)...The bankers are not your friends, nor are they your partners, and they should never be part of your team..."

    How true!
    Jun 04 06:52 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Who took an unknown "community organizer" out of Chitown southside and elevated him to where he is? Give you just one guess.


    On Jun 04 06:52 PM Teutonic Knight wrote:

    > This article rekindled my memory about an SA comment some time ago.
    > Those words still kept reverberating in my head, quoted below:<br/>
    >
    > " ...(To Obama)...The bankers are not your friends, nor are they
    > your partners, and they should never be part of your team..."
    >
    > How true!
    Jun 04 07:02 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Thanks, Screwloose! Karl hits the nail on the head, as always ...


    On Jun 04 06:36 PM Screwloose wrote:

    > Karl Denninger's view....
    >
    > market-ticker.org/arch...
    Jun 04 07:25 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    I agree she should stop paying the mortgage. It will take a few months for the bank to get to her foreclosure so she should be able to save enough for 1st and last for a rental. I am sure in Mesa she can find an apartment or small house for under $500 per month.

    I also agree that it is her fault she is where she is today. She never ever should have touched the equity in her home. She made a mistake and now is paying for it. Both she and the bank made a bad business decision. Walk away from it and start anew.
    Jun 04 08:35 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    What else is new?

    Real news would be banks not screwing people over.
    Jun 04 08:58 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Umm...I agree with her about the bailout; and generally with the comments here. But grossing $26K per year and griping about all the money "we've been giving these banks" is laughable. She doesn't pay income tax and her social security will pay out a dozen times more than she's ever put in. Welcome to the UnitedStatesSocialistR... This isn't going to end well when a large number of producing people drop out. Kind of like East Germany.
    Jun 04 09:10 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Yes, financial imprudence has been all the rage and should NOT be rewarded regardless of individual circumstance. But that is the way it works nowdays. I find it highly amusing that some still believe that we actually vote for the people set in place that suposedly call the shots. When we have a presidential election where BOTH party's candidates are pre-selected, you have to wonder. I detest Statists of all stripes, regardless of what wing of the Demopublican Party they belong. I have little doubt that had John McCain been elected, much today would be different.


    On Jun 04 09:10 PM This Game is so Rigged wrote:

    > Umm...I agree with her about the bailout; and generally with the
    > comments here. But grossing $26K per year and griping about all the
    > money "we've been giving these banks" is laughable. She doesn't pay
    > income tax and her social security will pay out a dozen times more
    > than she's ever put in. Welcome to the UnitedStatesSocialistR...
    > This isn't going to end well when a large number of producing people
    > drop out. Kind of like East Germany.
    Jun 04 09:23 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Concur. Two parties - both the same. The Republicans pretend it's about fiscal responsibility, but really are only interested in usurping individual rights. The Democrats pretend it's about the right to choose, but really are only interested in being first among equals in a perfect socialist society where everyone is above average. Every Pres. is pre-approved via CFR, regardless of party affiliation. They are the true party.


    On Jun 04 09:23 PM Market Sniper wrote:

    > Yes, financial imprudence has been all the rage and should NOT be
    > rewarded regardless of individual circumstance. But that is the way
    > it works nowdays. I find it highly amusing that some still believe
    > that we actually vote for the people set in place that suposedly
    > call the shots. When we have a presidential election where BOTH party's
    > candidates are pre-selected, you have to wonder. I detest Statists
    > of all stripes, regardless of what wing of the Demopublican Party
    > they belong. I have little doubt that had John McCain been elected,
    > much today would be different.
    Jun 04 09:29 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Good point.

    On Jun 04 09:10 PM This Game is so Rigged wrote:

    > Umm...I agree with her about the bailout; and generally with the
    > comments here. But grossing $26K per year and griping about all
    > the money "we've been giving these banks" is laughable. She doesn't
    > pay income tax and her social security will pay out a dozen times
    > more than she's ever put in. Welcome to the UnitedStatesSocialistR...
    > This isn't going to end well when a large number of producing people
    > drop out. Kind of like East Germany.
    Jun 04 10:51 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Yes, if we could only extend the past eight years perpetually into the future. How great things would be. All hail the great president Bush, our savior.

    On Jun 04 07:02 PM Market Sniper wrote:

    > Who took an unknown "community organizer" out of Chitown southside
    > and elevated him to where he is? Give you just one guess.
    Jun 04 10:56 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    nobody is screwing anybody! WTF, is this America? Why should I feel bad for this old hag, she fucked up..plain and simple! She started 20 years ago with a $79,000 and she owes over $140,000 now and I need to bail her out? Fuck this shit..what happened to my fucking country?? She used her condo as a fucking piggy bank, refi"d over three times and now she is crying for help?? fuck you..
    Jun 04 11:04 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    No you are not missing any thing and thank you, thank you and thank you! Finally, someone gets it!

    We are dragging this "once" great country back to the Third World. Is this really it for the good ol' USA?


    On Jun 04 05:43 PM DrBenway wrote:

    > OK. Let me get this straight: she recklessly borrowed some 130K against
    > her 77K house and lived beyond her (very modest) means, used her
    > house equity as an ATM (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), and
    > did not bother to save. She has children who can support her and
    > social security check with which she can rent a place within her
    > means.
    >
    > Am I missing something here?
    Jun 04 11:13 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Ha...


    On Jun 04 07:02 PM Market Sniper wrote:

    > Who took an unknown "community organizer" out of Chitown southside
    > and elevated him to where he is? Give you just one guess.
    Jun 04 11:17 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    426034

    I concur with your sentiments . When one makes BAD financial decisions , the taxpayers should NOT be on the hook to bail them out . Why can't she live with 1 of her children? When I collapsed on a ICU floor in 2004 of a massive MI + was resusitated , I would have been in DEEP Sh*T had I not practiced " fiscal responsibility ". Note lifelong illness caused this + NO taxpayer is having to bail me out . I have have NO sympathy for this heffer !
    Jun 04 11:27 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    so i suppose you think the banksters should be bailed out but no help for the people who were sucked in by these very banksters.


    On Jun 04 11:27 PM Lin wrote:

    > 426034
    >
    > I concur with your sentiments . When one makes BAD financial decisions
    > , the taxpayers should NOT be on the hook to bail them out . Why
    > can't she live with 1 of her children? When I collapsed on a ICU
    > floor in 2004 of a massive MI + was resusitated , I would have been
    > in DEEP Sh*T had I not practiced " fiscal responsibility ". Note
    > lifelong illness caused this + NO taxpayer is having to bail me out
    > . I have have NO sympathy for this heffer !
    Jun 04 11:42 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Why should either one be bailed out? We should not reward unethical behaviour nor stupidity.


    On Jun 04 11:42 PM johnqpublic wrote:

    > so i suppose you think the banksters should be bailed out but no
    > help for the people who were sucked in by these very banksters.
    >
    Jun 04 11:50 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Sorry to hear about your health problems and I hope your doing ok?

    The funny thing is that this article was published by the "idiot" writer and meant to make me feel bad for her! Is this for real? For God sake, the old hag bought a brand new car using a line of credit on the house and now she is crying!

    Don't take me wrong, I am not heartless and I am all for helping people..people that deserve to be helped but this is way too much. It is not going to end well for the rest of us.

    On Jun 04 11:27 PM Lin wrote:

    > 426034
    >
    > I concur with your sentiments . When one makes BAD financial decisions
    > , the taxpayers should NOT be on the hook to bail them out . Why
    > can't she live with 1 of her children? When I collapsed on a ICU
    > floor in 2004 of a massive MI + was resusitated , I would have been
    > in DEEP Sh*T had I not practiced " fiscal responsibility ". Note
    > lifelong illness caused this + NO taxpayer is having to bail me out
    > . I have have NO sympathy for this heffer !
    Jun 04 11:52 PM | Link | Reply
  •  
    Absolutely, positively not, banksters should not be bailed out under any circumstances and I don't think his comment suggested that in anyway. People on the other hand are a different story, we are a civilized society and we should help anyone in need. The one mentioned in the article and many like her do not deserve any help or bailing out.

    Homeless veterans living on the street few blocks from my house, absolutely, deserve all the help we can afford. If you are a hardworking, productive member of society and you fall on hard time and need some food to survive then by all means, we should help you. On the other hand, if you are lazy, unproductive and already drawing social security but USE your house as an ATM, to buy a brand new car of all things, then you don't deserve any help or bailing out.

    Good luck to all of us.


    On Jun 04 11:42 PM johnqpublic wrote:

    > so i suppose you think the banksters should be bailed out but no
    > help for the people who were sucked in by these very banksters.
    >
    Jun 05 12:07 AM | Link | Reply
  •  
    She's 63 with 140k left on her mortgage. It doesn't take a financial wizard to see that she has no concept of financial responsibility. At her age, if she set up her finances such that she couldn't afford to even get sick.

    I have helped out my parents a fair amount with finance and, you'd better believe that, if they got themselves into this situation, I would figure out a way to free up a bedroom and mail her keys to the bank.


    On Jun 04 05:43 PM DrBenway wrote:

    > OK. Let me get this straight: she recklessly borrowed some 130K against
    > her 77K house and lived beyond her (very modest) means, used her
    > house equity as an ATM (seekingalpha.com/symbo...), and
    > did not bother to save. She has children who can support her and
    > social security check with which she can rent a place within her
    > means.
    >
    > Am I missing something here?
    Jun 05 12:38 AM | Link | Reply
Follow Market Currents on
Latest Articles
All latest articles »
Latest StockTalks
More StockTalks »

From our sponsors: