Bailout (politics)

> {snip}
>
> ....The Fed, with all the power of the government, will take
> large amount's of my money, and give it to someone else. It's not roads,
> bridges, or even pork barrel construction projects. Just a big transfer
> of money.

See, this is where I get lost in the thinking.....

As I understand it, this new Fed Agency is going to purchase the so
called toxic derivative Bonds on the open market. It will be unknown who
the Fed purchased the Bonds from, US investment banks, King of Saudi
Arabia, or Central Bank of Mainland China. They are just going to buy
the bonds at a discount from whoever is selling.

These bonds will *NOT* be mortgage loans themselves, as that is what
Fanny and Freddie MAC are for. These are bonds derived from Mortgage
loans. Or, derived from other derived bonds, or derived from other
derived bonds which were derived other derived bonds ......

Does any one remember the Junk Bonds of the last century? As I
understand it, and trust me I could be wrong, Sec. Paulson wants the US
taxpayer to buy the junk of the junk bonds (which are somehow backed by
mortgages somewhere way down deep) in the hope the bonds will be paid
something back in 10 or 15 years.

Why do I get the feeling of someone with three cards, a card-table,
shuffles the cards, and a fast talking shout "Find the Queen, place you
money down, and pick the card where your think the Queen is." Could Hank
Paulson at least wear a plaid sport coat as he shuffles the cards?

Stormin Mormon wrote:
> A guy walks into a party, and asks a woman "Would you have sex with
> me for a million dollars?" She says sure. And of course he doesn't
> have a million dollars. But the decision is made, they are going to
> get it on. Now, it's just about deciding how much is the price.

That was Bernard Shaw, and he was insulting her--the sequence goes,
and I paraphrase: "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?", he
asks. "Yes", she replies. "How about for 5 dollars?" "Why Mr. Shaw,
what do you think I am?" "We've already determined that, now we're
haggling over the price."

> I have that sense with the bailout for Freddy and Fannie. My sense
> is
> the bailout is a done deal. The question is only the details. What's
> the end result? The Fed, with all the power of the government, will
> take large ammounts of my money, and give it to someone else. It's
> not roads, bridges, or even pork barrel construction projects. Just
> a
> big transfer of money.

--
--
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

It would seem the analegy is quite apt.

P D Q

"J. Clarke" <[email protected]> wrote in message =
news:[email protected]...
Stormin Mormon wrote:
> A guy walks into a party, and asks a woman "Would you have sex with
> me for a million dollars?" She says sure. And of course he doesn't
> have a million dollars. But the decision is made, they are going to
> get it on. Now, it's just about deciding how much is the price.

That was Bernard Shaw, and he was insulting her--the sequence goes,=20
and I paraphrase: "Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?", he=20
asks. "Yes", she replies. "How about for 5 dollars?" "Why Mr. Shaw,=20
what do you think I am?" "We've already determined that, now we're=20
haggling over the price."

> I have that sense with the bailout for Freddy and Fannie. My sense=20
> is
> the bailout is a done deal. The question is only the details. What's
> the end result? The Fed, with all the power of the government, will
> take large ammounts of my money, and give it to someone else. It's
> not roads, bridges, or even pork barrel construction projects. Just=20
> a
> big transfer of money.

--=20
--=20
--John
to email, dial "usenet" and validate
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)