Ukraine

[riser4]

Woulda been nice if some of the executives had lost all their money AND gone to jail over the 2007/2007 meltdown. That might have actually gone a long ways towards preventing some of the political mess we are in today.

[summit]

Schroeder says "It's fine that I profit by providing the lube for Putin to fuck us with. No regrets! No shame! Just relax and enjoy it."

Sholz's co-leader says "Schroeder get out."

Scholz says nothing.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ne-2022-04-25/

WTF Germany. No enlightened self-interest. Just self-interest.

[rod9301]

Tomayto, tomahto but realistically the problem is regulatory capture rather than conspiracy. There are technical reasons why it made sense to bail out banks, and of course banks were screaming they needed help at regulators, but politically it was a disaster. The gov't learned from its mistake and sent direct aid during the pandemic.

The problem is it's all a black box that's nearly impossible for a normal person to comprehend. The regulatory process has been thoroughly captured by industry and is no longer a truth seeking exercise. So it kinda makes sense for people not to trust vaccines, for example, after the Saklers were able to convince regulators Oxycontin was safe and non-addictive.

When people are injured by regulatory failure causing opioid overdose, losing their house, or a 737 max crashes because a bad design got approved people lose faith in the process. Capitalism's anxieties are real enough so much so that memeing unreal conspiratorial things into existence becomes easy. The problem is thinking elites are evil sorcerers only decipherable through Anon Ops, and not mediocre often incompetent bureaucrats.

Actually, it doesn't make sense to bail banks.

The small deposits are covered.

The only reason for bailouts is to protect large shareholders and bondholders, who really should have known better.

A bank goes under, the next morning it reopens with a new set of shareholders. Old shareholders get wiped out, bondholders mode some.

But if you bail it, there's the moral hazard of investors taking big risks, knowing they will get bailed out

Plus, it's already who gets bailed out. Washington mutual did not, and others did get bailed out (i hope i have the right bank) it's been 14 years.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[rod9301]

Schroeder says "It's fine that I profit by providing the lube for Putin to fuck us with. No regrets! No shame! Just relax and enjoy it."

Sholz's co-leader says "Schroeder get out."

Scholz says nothing.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ne-2022-04-25/

WTF Germany. No enlightened self-interest. Just self-interest.

Of course it's self interest, as it should be.
Sholz is taking care of his people.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[MultiVerse]

Well, if that's their policy then Germany is unfit to have any sort of leadership role in NATO, the EU, or anywhere else for that matter. Because their excuses:

- we can't risk escalation
- we can't confront Russia
- we don't want to become a target

... would apply to any other countries like Poland, Baltic States, Eastern Europe etc. Germany's narrowly self-interested approach essentially says it can't be trusted and is a threat to European security.

[J. Barron DeJong]

https://twitter.com/zeddary/status/1...TDYZjVLsDJjXIw

[J. Barron DeJong]

Actually, it doesn't make sense to bail banks.

The small deposits are covered.

The only reason for bailouts is to protect large shareholders and bondholders, who really should have known better.

A bank goes under, the next morning it reopens with a new set of shareholders. Old shareholders get wiped out, bondholders mode some.

But if you bail it, there's the moral hazard of investors taking big risks, knowing they will get bailed out

Plus, it's already who gets bailed out. Washington mutual did not, and others did get bailed out (i hope i have the right bank) it's been 14 years.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

This is a very poor take

[Cisco Kid]

Schroeder says "It's fine that I profit by providing the lube for Putin to fuck us with. No regrets! No shame! Just relax and enjoy it."

Sholz's co-leader says "Schroeder get out."

Scholz says nothing.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...ne-2022-04-25/

WTF Germany. No enlightened self-interest. Just self-interest.

Perhaps every war has it own Nevill Chamberlin

[J. Barron DeJong]

Tomayto, tomahto but realistically the problem is regulatory capture rather than conspiracy. There are technical reasons why it made sense to bail out banks, and of course banks were screaming they needed help at regulators, but politically it was a disaster. The gov't learned from its mistake and sent direct aid during the pandemic.

The problem is it's all a black box that's nearly impossible for a normal person to comprehend. The regulatory process has been thoroughly captured by industry and is no longer a truth seeking exercise. So it kinda makes sense for people not to trust vaccines, for example, after the Saklers were able to convince regulators Oxycontin was safe and non-addictive.

When people are injured by regulatory failure causing opioid overdose, losing their house, or a 737 max crashes because a bad design got approved people lose faith in the process. Capitalism's anxieties are real enough so much so that memeing unreal conspiratorial things into existence becomes easy. The problem is thinking elites are evil sorcerers only decipherable through Anon Ops, and not mediocre often incompetent bureaucrats.

They underdelivered to Main St. during the Great Recession, learned from their mistake and weren’t going to do that again, made sure they overdelivered pandemic aid, and now Main St. is complaining because of inflation….

[dunfree]

Perhaps every war has it own Nevill Chamberlin

neville was desperate to avoid war, Schroeder is just a cunt cashing checks and the SPD is bought and paid for.

[dunfree]

https://twitter.com/zeddary/status/1...TDYZjVLsDJjXIw

If you think they did that intentionally so people would laugh at the reasoning of “fuck you, we kill them because we can” it’s not so funny

[MultiVerse]

Actually, it doesn't make sense to bail banks.

The small deposits are covered.

The only reason for bailouts is to protect large shareholders and bondholders, who really should have known better.

A bank goes under, the next morning it reopens with a new set of shareholders. Old shareholders get wiped out, bondholders mode some.

But if you bail it, there's the moral hazard of investors taking big risks, knowing they will get bailed out

Plus, it's already who gets bailed out. Washington mutual did not, and others did get bailed out (i hope i have the right bank) it's been 14 years.

Bailout is the wrong terminology but the word is so entrenched that it’s hard not to use it. In 2007 bank balance sheets were loaded with mortgages which they were successfully unwinding as real estate prices calmed down. Then in 2008, the Fed totally rekt the money supply causing massive liquidity problems in bank assets and as a result of its own incompetence the Fed loaned banks capital that was paid back, with interest.

It wasn't technically a bailout per se. The moral hazard you're describing is different. That comes from the deposit insurance described in your post with its implicit government bailout guarantee. It creates a regulatory arbitrage opportunity. If banks were required to carry private deposit insurance and mortgages over 80% required insurance like they do in Canada then the problem you describe becomes a non-issue.

[rod9301]

This is a very poor take

Sorry, not sure what you mean.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[rod9301]

This is a very poor take

What do you mean?

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[TahoeJ]

Actually, it doesn't make sense to bail banks.

It did make sense to bail out the banks, we just did it the wrong way. It should have been partial company acquisition style. As in, oh, you need several billion to stay afloat? Okay, the government can do that for you but we're taking a piece of the company and the resulting revenues in the longer term will go back to tax payers, either directly or via infrastructure development, etc. They had all the leverage in the world and pussied out. If a bank said no, then tough shit, find the money somewhere else or go under then. Of course, they're all buddies more or less so they didn't even play hardball.

[rod9301]

It did make sense to bail out the banks, we just did it the wrong way. It should have been partial company acquisition style. As in, oh, you need several billion to stay afloat? Okay, the government can do that for you but we're taking a piece of the company and the resulting revenues in the longer term will go back to tax payers, either directly or via infrastructure development, etc. They had all the leverage in the world and pussied out. If a bank said no, then tough shit, find the money somewhere else or go under then. Of course, they're all buddies more or less so they didn't even play hardball.

Yeah, that's what they could have done

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[subtle plague]

This is a very poor take

Edit: that is not directed at you per se. It's just an explanation why rod is wrong.
Scholz is under heavy fire here. He has been vague, absent and opinionless on more than one issue, but first and foremost on the war. Habeck is the one trying desperately to find New fossil fuel sources, As a Green nontheless. Scholz....Well...nobody really knows what He does.

Most comments here are that Habeck and Baerböck are doing a good job and wed be better off with a chancellor Habeck. Oh well.

Schröder has been a pompous buffoon for some time. He is not called "Genosse der Bosse" for nothing. He likes tailored suits, money and to be important. He'd love to be an elder statesman like Schmidt was, but he's basically a moron.

[J. Barron DeJong]

Sorry, not sure what you mean.

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

I think that if the banks had been allowed to fail instead of being bailed out, everyone would have been in a world of hurt.

WaMu was allowed to fail because the regulators didn’t want to bail out banks, and that pushed the whole financial system to verge of collapse and the regulators realized they had no choice but to bail the banks out.

Not saying the bailouts couldn’t have been done any better, or that Main St. shouldn’t have gotten more help, but just allowing the banks to fail would have been a worse outcome by an order of magnitude.

(I’m saying this as someone who is quite skeptical of the financial industry in general)

Edit: TahoeJ’s plan would have been better, and there were a fair number of people advocating for something like that at the time.

Edit edit: I think it was the failure of Lehman Brothers that caused the huge panic and forced the regulators to act.

[highangle]

"Russian warship go fuck yourself": https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarV...the_frontline/

[MultiVerse]

It did make sense to bail out the banks, we just did it the wrong way. It should have been partial company acquisition style. As in, oh, you need several billion to stay afloat? Okay, the government can do that for you but we're taking a piece of the company and the resulting revenues in the longer term will go back to tax payers, either directly or via infrastructure development, etc. They had all the leverage in the world and pussied out. If a bank said no, then tough shit, find the money somewhere else or go under then. Of course, they're all buddies more or less so they didn't even play hardball.

That's what they should have done in Europe where no EU government other than the Netherlands recovered more than half of the cost of bailing out their banks, due to much higher subprime asset exposure. U.S. banks largely escaped the Lehman AIG subprime fiasco up until tight money policies caused prime loans to fail too. As a result U.S. banks were given loans, not bailed out, and the capital was paid back with interest.

[basinbeater]

Tomayto, tomahto but realistically the problem is regulatory capture rather than conspiracy. There are technical reasons why it made sense to bail out banks, and of course banks were screaming they needed help at regulators, but politically it was a disaster. The gov't learned from its mistake and sent direct aid during the pandemic.

The problem is it's all a black box that's nearly impossible for a normal person to comprehend. The regulatory process has been thoroughly captured by industry and is no longer a truth seeking exercise. So it kinda makes sense for people not to trust vaccines, for example, after the Saklers were able to convince regulators Oxycontin was safe and non-addictive.

When people are injured by regulatory failure causing opioid overdose, losing their house, or a 737 max crashes because a bad design got approved people lose faith in the process. Capitalism's anxieties are real enough so much so that memeing unreal conspiratorial things into existence becomes easy. The problem is thinking elites are evil sorcerers only decipherable through Anon Ops, and not mediocre often incompetent bureaucrats.

And what cracks me up, is in many cases (not all of course), the party that puts industry execs in to deregulate and send all the money to their cronies rather than regulate in the public interest, is the party that the dupes vote for because they don't trust govt. Grover norquist must be so proud.

Sow distrust and sabotage govt and then declare that government doesn't work. Sell it on Fox 24/7. It's all in the gop playbook.

Sorry for going all poly ass on the Ukraine thread, but war and who we support or sow doubt, is inherently political, and the same bad faith playbook has been demonstrated to be effective in use here.

This war pisses me off. Fuck Putin. Kids should be going to school and saying soccer. Instead they are climbing around on destroyed tanks and learning that their father was killed and their apartment destroyed.

[rod9301]

I think that if the banks had been allowed to fail instead of being bailed out, everyone would have been in a world of hurt.

WaMu was allowed to fail because the regulators didn’t want to bail out banks, and that pushed the whole financial system to verge of collapse and the regulators realized they had no choice but to bail the banks out.

Not saying the bailouts couldn’t have been done any better, or that Main St. shouldn’t have gotten more help, but just allowing the banks to fail would have been a worse outcome by an order of magnitude.

(I’m saying this as someone who is quite skeptical of the financial industry in general)

Edit: TahoeJ’s plan would have been better, and there were a fair number of people advocating for something like that at the time.

Edit edit: I think it was the failure of Lehman Brothers that caused the huge panic and forced the regulators to act.

If you look at Iceland, they let the banks fail, and they came out a lot better

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

[J. Barron DeJong]

If you look at Iceland, they let the banks fail, and they came out a lot better

Sent from my moto g 5G using Tapatalk

Iceland’s financial industry does not play the same role in the global economy that American banks do, though.

[Bunion 2020]

Yeah, cause the US economy and the Icelandic economy are so similar.

Can we amble back to Ukraine please?

[dunfree]

Yeah, cause the US economy and the Icelandic economy are so similar.

Can we amble back to Ukraine please?

Day XX of Putins War:
russian men and material died for no purpose
innocent civilians murdered