John Cordes a very thoughtful and excellent response. Thank you.
On Jan 24 08:55 AM John Cordes wrote:
> It"s rather amazing to see how many people think that a cataclysm > is a viable option. It's almost as though there is a perverse vengence > or subtext of hoped for melt down in which all those who are underserving > malefactors and the elite will suffer and set the stage for the survivors > to ascend. Too many movies and armagedon dwellers I think. It's > a particularly American characteristic perhaps, wipe the slate clean, > start over, the losers deserve it mentality. I think it's a product > of social darwinism and a culture that has insufficient experience > with humanistic philosophies and spiritualism. Not a plug for religion, > just an observation. > > By the way, nationalization is tantamount to a collapse, just more > costly to the public. As one poster noted, Obama's team is too smart > to do either. Distasteful as it is, we will preserve the big three > banks for the sake of the economy, which could not endure another > psychological blow of this magnitude nor the financial bomb it would > set off. Think of it as you like, either a spider web, a cancer, > a root rhizome that goes everywhere and is tangled up with hundreds > of corporations and businesses. A bankruptcy of such magnitude is > like an emt explosion that frys the infrastructure of everything > it touches. Look at what Lehman's collapse did to dozens of otherwise > innocent corporations and funds. Magnify that by 50 in the case > of CITI or BAC. > > So grow up people, it's not a Mad Max movie, it's your society and > economy as you know it. No fuzzy, grainy black and white newsreels > of hobos and soup lines, but a modern day catastrophy that would > produce havoc and wealth destruction that would last for years and > most likely change world order politics and our own social fabric. > Unless that's what you Mad Maxers think we need.
I agree if you nationalize banks you are putiing us into a deep depression you may never pull out of. The Fed's need to go mark to model. institute the uptick rule, create a bank to hold all the toxic crap and if the Fed's bought common shares you would see the market and economy turn upward quickly.
On Jan 23 02:15 PM TPoise wrote:
> The nationalization of ANY major bank would spread instantly throughout > the financial markets of the world. XLF would be $1/share or less. > > > Nationalization is just a really bad idea. We need to ATTRACT private > capital so the need is reduced for government money. However, not > many people are willing to pile money into a bank right now knowing > that their preferred shares or common will get wiped out just like > TPG did with WaMu in 2008.
If you bought financials on the lows last week. Wachovia below 10 and Citi down below 12 and sold Friday late in the day you made a huge return. Was it smart to do it ? Who knows, but if stocks went much lower the whole game would have been over for everyone!!!!!!!!!!
Is Nationalization Contagious? [View article]
On Jan 24 08:55 AM John Cordes wrote:
> It"s rather amazing to see how many people think that a cataclysm
> is a viable option. It's almost as though there is a perverse vengence
> or subtext of hoped for melt down in which all those who are underserving
> malefactors and the elite will suffer and set the stage for the survivors
> to ascend. Too many movies and armagedon dwellers I think. It's
> a particularly American characteristic perhaps, wipe the slate clean,
> start over, the losers deserve it mentality. I think it's a product
> of social darwinism and a culture that has insufficient experience
> with humanistic philosophies and spiritualism. Not a plug for religion,
> just an observation.
>
> By the way, nationalization is tantamount to a collapse, just more
> costly to the public. As one poster noted, Obama's team is too smart
> to do either. Distasteful as it is, we will preserve the big three
> banks for the sake of the economy, which could not endure another
> psychological blow of this magnitude nor the financial bomb it would
> set off. Think of it as you like, either a spider web, a cancer,
> a root rhizome that goes everywhere and is tangled up with hundreds
> of corporations and businesses. A bankruptcy of such magnitude is
> like an emt explosion that frys the infrastructure of everything
> it touches. Look at what Lehman's collapse did to dozens of otherwise
> innocent corporations and funds. Magnify that by 50 in the case
> of CITI or BAC.
>
> So grow up people, it's not a Mad Max movie, it's your society and
> economy as you know it. No fuzzy, grainy black and white newsreels
> of hobos and soup lines, but a modern day catastrophy that would
> produce havoc and wealth destruction that would last for years and
> most likely change world order politics and our own social fabric.
> Unless that's what you Mad Maxers think we need.
Is Nationalization Contagious? [View article]
On Jan 23 02:15 PM TPoise wrote:
> The nationalization of ANY major bank would spread instantly throughout
> the financial markets of the world. XLF would be $1/share or less.
>
>
> Nationalization is just a really bad idea. We need to ATTRACT private
> capital so the need is reduced for government money. However, not
> many people are willing to pile money into a bank right now knowing
> that their preferred shares or common will get wiped out just like
> TPG did with WaMu in 2008.
Hide in the Fetal Position - Fast Money Recap (10/2/08) [View article]
Hide in the Fetal Position - Fast Money Recap (10/2/08) [View article]
Citigroup: Trading Transparency [View article]