Comments on: Calls to Congressmen Running in Favor of Bailout Bill http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:18:28 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Economic Computer Games http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18652 Economic Computer Games Wed, 01 Oct 2008 09:01:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18652 Wait somebody explain, how can the senate originate a spending bill? Isn't that one of the powers reserved for the house? How can the senate take up the bailout plan? Isn't it essentially a spending bill? Wait somebody explain, how can the senate originate a spending bill? Isn’t that one of the powers reserved for the house? How can the senate take up the bailout plan? Isn’t it essentially a spending bill?

]]> By: Richard Kline http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18646 Richard Kline Wed, 01 Oct 2008 08:42:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18646 I, too, am more than deeply skeptical of pronouncements _now_ that "calls to Congress have swung the other way." We are deep in the territory of Any Lie Will Serve. Congress knows that this bill is viciously unpopular, and many of the House members who voted Nay have said on record that they did so for fear of their constituents' wrath. Congress is into 'managing the message' since the bullrush hit the wall, and trying, desperately I may say, to find a supposed price in silver that will buy the votes of twelve Nay-sayers in the House. I don't have much hope in the Senate (never did), but I've been surprised a tad so far. Let us pray for more fireworks on Wednesday. Notice for how the vote was scheduled for after the markets and the evening news wrap up? I never had less respect for the institution of the US Congress than today---and I never had any at all, which tells you how I feel about this. If the outcome from these votes may cost less dearly in lives than the enabling vote for the attack upon Iraq, it sill demonstrates an even lower standard of governance in that body. Only the Earl of Hell and his Bailiff are laughing from the heart on this one. : ( I, too, am more than deeply skeptical of pronouncements _now_ that “calls to Congress have swung the other way.” We are deep in the territory of Any Lie Will Serve. Congress knows that this bill is viciously unpopular, and many of the House members who voted Nay have said on record that they did so for fear of their constituents’ wrath. Congress is into ‘managing the message’ since the bullrush hit the wall, and trying, desperately I may say, to find a supposed price in silver that will buy the votes of twelve Nay-sayers in the House. I don’t have much hope in the Senate (never did), but I’ve been surprised a tad so far. Let us pray for more fireworks on Wednesday. Notice for how the vote was scheduled for after the markets and the evening news wrap up? I never had less respect for the institution of the US Congress than today—and I never had any at all, which tells you how I feel about this. If the outcome from these votes may cost less dearly in lives than the enabling vote for the attack upon Iraq, it sill demonstrates an even lower standard of governance in that body. Only the Earl of Hell and his Bailiff are laughing from the heart on this one. : (

]]> By: John Law http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18631 John Law Wed, 01 Oct 2008 07:02:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18631 America for socialism? USA is not a democracy state anymore. The Congress is control by the Wall Street Bankers.<br/>You can have a re-vote anytime?<br/><br/>THIS IS CRITICAL: Please fax AND phone your congressman. Do not bother with any members of the House except for Nancy Pelosi. <br/><br/>Call them with this simple message "If you vote for this bill, you will lose my vote". <br/><br/>Click Here For Congresional Phone And Fax Numbers <br/><br/>Senate Fax List <br/><br/>Please fax everyone on this list. <br/><br/>Sen. Richard Shelby (R) 202-224-3416 or 202-224-5137 (try both not sure which is correct) <br/>Sen. Harry Reid (D) 202-224-7327 <br/>Sen. Jim DeMint (R) 202-228-5143 <br/>Sen. John Ensign (R) 202-228-2193 <br/>Sen. Jim Bunning (R) 202-228-1373 <br/>Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) 202-224-6020 <br/>Sen John McCain (R) 202-228-2862 <br/><br/>Sen. Barack Obama 202-228-4260 <br/>Sen. John D. Rockefeller 202-224-7665 <br/>Sen. Dianne Feinstein 202-228-3954 <br/>Sen. Ron Wyden 202-228-2717 <br/>Sen. Evan Bayh 202-228-1377 <br/>Sen. Barbara Mikulski 202-224-8858 <br/>Sen. Bill Nelson 202-228-2183 <br/>Sen. John Kerry 202-224-8525 <br/>Sen. Daniel Inouye 202-224-6747 <br/>Sen. Hillary Clinton 202-228-0282 <br/><br/>Those inclined should also fax their own senators as well. America for socialism? USA is not a democracy state anymore. The Congress is control by the Wall Street Bankers.
You can have a re-vote anytime?

THIS IS CRITICAL: Please fax AND phone your congressman. Do not bother with any members of the House except for Nancy Pelosi.

Call them with this simple message “If you vote for this bill, you will lose my vote”.

Click Here For Congresional Phone And Fax Numbers

Senate Fax List

Please fax everyone on this list.

Sen. Richard Shelby (R) 202-224-3416 or 202-224-5137 (try both not sure which is correct)
Sen. Harry Reid (D) 202-224-7327
Sen. Jim DeMint (R) 202-228-5143
Sen. John Ensign (R) 202-228-2193
Sen. Jim Bunning (R) 202-228-1373
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R) 202-224-6020
Sen John McCain (R) 202-228-2862

Sen. Barack Obama 202-228-4260
Sen. John D. Rockefeller 202-224-7665
Sen. Dianne Feinstein 202-228-3954
Sen. Ron Wyden 202-228-2717
Sen. Evan Bayh 202-228-1377
Sen. Barbara Mikulski 202-224-8858
Sen. Bill Nelson 202-228-2183
Sen. John Kerry 202-224-8525
Sen. Daniel Inouye 202-224-6747
Sen. Hillary Clinton 202-228-0282

Those inclined should also fax their own senators as well.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18618 Anonymous Wed, 01 Oct 2008 05:20:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18618 I think they're flat lying about the calls. This is manipulation. I think they’re flat lying about the calls. This is manipulation.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18614 Anonymous Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:28:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18614 "Perhaps a positive aspect of the revised bill will be increased FDIC limits; I've heard revised to $250,000."<br/><br/>Does the FDIC have enough money to back the $100k they're backing now?<br/><br/>On a side note, I know Ireland doesn't have the money to back their system, and unlike us, they don't control their currency. Hopefully it won't come to it, but if things get worse, that'll be ugly (or we'll see the return of the Irish pound). “Perhaps a positive aspect of the revised bill will be increased FDIC limits; I’ve heard revised to $250,000.”

Does the FDIC have enough money to back the $100k they’re backing now?

On a side note, I know Ireland doesn’t have the money to back their system, and unlike us, they don’t control their currency. Hopefully it won’t come to it, but if things get worse, that’ll be ugly (or we’ll see the return of the Irish pound).

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18607 Anonymous Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:50:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18607 Yves, fantastic blog. New to posting here, have lost a bunch of sleep keeping up on the reading.<br/><br/>Just a scary post. After reading this, I started to rewrite all of my senators/reps. When I went to the House Rep Site, my computer immediately went blank, then mysteriously restarted about 1 minute later. All windows and websites open.<br/><br/>Keep up the good work. This "rescue bill" must fail. Yves, fantastic blog. New to posting here, have lost a bunch of sleep keeping up on the reading.

Just a scary post. After reading this, I started to rewrite all of my senators/reps. When I went to the House Rep Site, my computer immediately went blank, then mysteriously restarted about 1 minute later. All windows and websites open.

Keep up the good work. This “rescue bill” must fail.

]]> By: ty http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18606 ty Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:34:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18606 A friend of mine pointed me to a post on kudlow's site that claims the revised bailout they are working on is loaded with a lot more socialist items. "bankruptcy judges setting mortgage terms and rates, the ACORN slush-fund spending, the union proxy for corporate boards, stricter limits on executive compensation, and much larger equity ownership of selling banks through warrants will all find itself back in the new bill"<br/><br/>She also mentioned the transaction tax was being added, but I think this might have also been in the first version that failed. This second revision is starting to sound even scarier. I just finished reading Hayek's Road to Serfdom and that was an eye opener. A friend of mine pointed me to a post on kudlow’s site that claims the revised bailout they are working on is loaded with a lot more socialist items. “bankruptcy judges setting mortgage terms and rates, the ACORN slush-fund spending, the union proxy for corporate boards, stricter limits on executive compensation, and much larger equity ownership of selling banks through warrants will all find itself back in the new bill”

She also mentioned the transaction tax was being added, but I think this might have also been in the first version that failed. This second revision is starting to sound even scarier. I just finished reading Hayek’s Road to Serfdom and that was an eye opener.

]]> By: Jojo http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18604 Jojo Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:30:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18604 Mark Hulbert wrote an article about the short selling ban a few days ago:<br/><br/>===========================<br/>September 28, 2008<br/><b>Maybe Short-Selling Isn’t So Bad, After All</b><br/>By MARK HULBERT<br/><br/>FEDERAL regulators have banned short sales of more than 800 stocks, mostly of financial companies, in an effort to stabilize prices in a shaky market. But the move may have an unintended consequence: reducing the stock market’s efficiency and prolonging the current crisis.<br/><br/>That’s the consensus of several finance professors who have devoted considerable energy to the study of short-selling — a mode of trading in which a profit is made from a price decline. Short-sellers, like investors who go “long” on a stock, make money by buying low and selling high. The difference is that short-sellers reverse the usual chronological order, selling first and buying back later, at what they hope will be a lower price. They accomplish this time switch by selling borrowed shares and agreeing to return them later.<br/><br/>Were short-sellers ganging up on various stocks in the recent tumult, causing prices to plummet? Adam Reed, a finance professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who has extensively studied short-sellers’ behavior and its effects on the markets, said it was “hypothetically possible” that they were. He added, though, that the question still needs study because real-time information about these possible “bear raids” isn’t available. But he would be surprised if short-sellers were a major cause of the market’s turmoil over the last year.<br/><br/>“In recent years,” he said, “when academic researchers have looked for bear raids — even in those areas in which investors suspected that they existed — they haven’t found them.”<br/><br/><a HREF="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/28/business/28stra.html" REL="nofollow">Full article</a><br/><br/>====================== Mark Hulbert wrote an article about the short selling ban a few days ago:

===========================
September 28, 2008
Maybe Short-Selling Isn’t So Bad, After All
By MARK HULBERT

FEDERAL regulators have banned short sales of more than 800 stocks, mostly of financial companies, in an effort to stabilize prices in a shaky market. But the move may have an unintended consequence: reducing the stock market’s efficiency and prolonging the current crisis.

That’s the consensus of several finance professors who have devoted considerable energy to the study of short-selling — a mode of trading in which a profit is made from a price decline. Short-sellers, like investors who go “long” on a stock, make money by buying low and selling high. The difference is that short-sellers reverse the usual chronological order, selling first and buying back later, at what they hope will be a lower price. They accomplish this time switch by selling borrowed shares and agreeing to return them later.

Were short-sellers ganging up on various stocks in the recent tumult, causing prices to plummet? Adam Reed, a finance professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who has extensively studied short-sellers’ behavior and its effects on the markets, said it was “hypothetically possible” that they were. He added, though, that the question still needs study because real-time information about these possible “bear raids” isn’t available. But he would be surprised if short-sellers were a major cause of the market’s turmoil over the last year.

“In recent years,” he said, “when academic researchers have looked for bear raids — even in those areas in which investors suspected that they existed — they haven’t found them.”

Full article

======================

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18603 Anonymous Wed, 01 Oct 2008 03:28:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18603 If it were not so serious it would be high comedy. First the calls were 100 against bailout. Then the market drops and the number suddenly reverses.<br/>I am reminded of Danny Kaye in the "Court Jester" <br/>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS75NtlH3gI<br/>enjoy<br/>plschwartz If it were not so serious it would be high comedy. First the calls were 100 against bailout. Then the market drops and the number suddenly reverses.
I am reminded of Danny Kaye in the “Court Jester”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS75NtlH3gI
enjoy
plschwartz

]]> By: eh http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor.html#comment-18596 eh Wed, 01 Oct 2008 02:19:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/09/calls-to-congressmen-running-in-favor-of-bailout-bill/#comment-18596 Yeah, sure, as if stocks cannot be sold to lessen exposure. No one I know has changed his mind, and we all have money in the market. BTW, were the same people who sold yesterday buying today? It's all pretty funny, as long as you don't let yourself become too cynical. <br/><br/>I expect the ban on short selling to be extended -- they still need a bogey-man. Although admittedly the chances of this lessen when/if they pass a bill. Yeah, sure, as if stocks cannot be sold to lessen exposure. No one I know has changed his mind, and we all have money in the market. BTW, were the same people who sold yesterday buying today? It’s all pretty funny, as long as you don’t let yourself become too cynical.

I expect the ban on short selling to be extended — they still need a bogey-man. Although admittedly the chances of this lessen when/if they pass a bill.

]]>