You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A Letter Against the Bailout Plan
- Thread starter OldTrader
- Start date
Quote from IluvVol:
and the CEO of North Carolina's ;-) THIRD largest bank really understands all the implications, lol. Enough said.
Oh wait, as he seems to run his ship straight, we dont hear him financing and lending to small companies as he did before. Hmm, surprise surprise. He should be coming out now with his seemingly strong balance sheet and grab market share by applying sound risk management techniques that he claims to understand so well. Where is he? BB&T go for it ;-)
Let me help you out with your ignorance here:
First, they are #14 in the US. Maybe higher now since some banks have gone out of business.
They're in more than one state. So while they're #2 or #3 in North Carolina, they have something like 1500 branches in a variety of states.
Latest numbers I have show $137 Billion in Assets.
They have about 31,000 employees.
Now since you seem to be dubious about the ability of the CEO to understand the implications of what is taking place, perhaps you could also discuss whether or not any of the major banks or brokers understood the implications of the types of business they conducted. Give me a read on Merrill, Lehman, Bear, WaMu, Wachovia, IndyMac etc etc ett
Your attitude is the type of attitude that got alot of these guys into trouble. That kind of know-it-all attitude that is all too prevalent in East Coast institutions. Maybe you should see if this CEO with BB&T would be willing to educate you.
OldTrader
well you know, tons of people suddenly come out to "educate us". Let this guy put his money where is mouth is. Warran Buffet is a man I admire and respect. I dont have respect for some country side CEO whose company nobody in international finance has hardly ever heard of and who has run a country side banking operation (seemingly he did not take ANY RISKS whatsoever). I respect him for that because thats what a thrift bank should do, running checking and savings accounts. However now coming out of the bush to trumpet how he wants to save the world sounds ludicrious to me. This guy has never run an international operation, has never dealt with risky assets, therefore, would not know a thing how to value those and how to handle the current mess. Let him do his job what he can do best but I dont need to listen to a guy who suddenly claims expertise in a field he has certainly never been in. Thats my take. You also dont listen to a self-proclaimed expert in something such person has never done before and let such guys advise on matters they are certainly not qualified to advise on. Again: I respect him for sticking to his core business ALL RESPECT. But keep it that way please!!!
Quote from OldTrader:
Let me help you out with your ignorance here:
First, they are #14 in the US. Maybe higher now since some banks have gone out of business.
They're in more than one state. So while they're #2 or #3 in North Carolina, they have something like 1500 branches in a variety of states.
Latest numbers I have show $137 Billion in Assets.
They have about 31,000 employees.
Now since you seem to be dubious about the ability of the CEO to understand the implications of what is taking place, perhaps you could also discuss whether or not any of the major banks or brokers understood the implications of the types of business they conducted. Give me a read on Merrill, Lehman, Bear, WaMu, Wachovia, IndyMac etc etc ett
Your attitude is the type of attitude that got alot of these guys into trouble. That kind of know-it-all attitude that is all too prevalent in East Coast institutions. Maybe you should see if this CEO with BB&T would be willing to educate you.
OldTrader
hmm should we be surprised to stumble over such posts, especially at ET? How funny that this is so respresentative of the average Joe. I can also hold a piece of paper in my hand and say how I think everything is BS, LOL. Very constructive.
thats absolute nonesense. It costs about $2000 per person. Now think of an average household how much they have got in savings invested in money markets and stocks. Now, lets make it ultra-conservative: Lets say the bail-out package would prevent the market from going down 1-2% less than without any package. This would be a HUGE savings (let alone less stressed money markets and lending facilities). Any retard who can add 1 and 1 together figures that the benefits of this package will be at least as stated above. Would you argue against that? Well, then you conclude that hald of the American congress men must be close to being retarded from which I guess the rest of the world can draw conclusions about the average American. I personally do not believe that those who voted yes have not done the math.
That the average American can take care of their own finances is a complete overstatement. A wild guess is that about 10% do know how to handle their finances (and even they get and already got badly burned in their 401Ks and other savings and investments), 30-40% cant keep money in their pockets as it would burn holes into the same, and the rest has no freaking clue how and where to invest it and let other do it for them (who I claim do not know a whole lot more -> the whole long-only mutual fund industry). So, you are addressing 10% of the whole population.
I just think the broad reaction to the whole package is this: People lost already such a chunk that they say "what the f...., another 10-20% who cares, i hold my investments for the long term", they rather grind their axe cause they cant take it that some guys who made mistakes get away with millions. Thats how things, in theory, in the U.S. seem to HAVE to work. The good prevails over evil. Its cant be that those guys get away with it. So, people rather march on the streets and declare their independence and now especially those who were always anti-government/anti-any-intervention see their chance to proclaim victory.
HOWEVER, this is anything else than handling savings and investments in a sound manner. The trading 101 basics are to keep emotions outside. This exactly is what many guys in this thread and most in public just cant handle. So, call it what you want but this is ALL BUT knowledge how to take care of finances.
That the average American can take care of their own finances is a complete overstatement. A wild guess is that about 10% do know how to handle their finances (and even they get and already got badly burned in their 401Ks and other savings and investments), 30-40% cant keep money in their pockets as it would burn holes into the same, and the rest has no freaking clue how and where to invest it and let other do it for them (who I claim do not know a whole lot more -> the whole long-only mutual fund industry). So, you are addressing 10% of the whole population.
I just think the broad reaction to the whole package is this: People lost already such a chunk that they say "what the f...., another 10-20% who cares, i hold my investments for the long term", they rather grind their axe cause they cant take it that some guys who made mistakes get away with millions. Thats how things, in theory, in the U.S. seem to HAVE to work. The good prevails over evil. Its cant be that those guys get away with it. So, people rather march on the streets and declare their independence and now especially those who were always anti-government/anti-any-intervention see their chance to proclaim victory.
HOWEVER, this is anything else than handling savings and investments in a sound manner. The trading 101 basics are to keep emotions outside. This exactly is what many guys in this thread and most in public just cant handle. So, call it what you want but this is ALL BUT knowledge how to take care of finances.
Quote from sprstpd:
It is personal. This whole bailout is an insult to people who can actually do simple math and know how to take care of their finances.
Quote from IluvVol:
they rather grind their axe cause they cant take it that some guys who made mistakes get away with millions.
HOWEVER, this is anything else than handling savings and investments in a sound manner. The trading 101 basics are to keep emotions outside. This exactly is what many guys in this thread and most in public just cant handle. So, call it what you want but this is ALL BUT knowledge how to take care of finances. [/B]
You obviously won't be swayed from the herd on wall street's community statement and you won't awaken to the fact that no one knows how to deal with risky highly leveraged assets, especially investment banks.
First the reason BB&T sounds good is that we don't want our banks to dabble in this "nucler" stuff when they lie about their companies balance sheets, prospects, and even if they will be in business next week. Every one of the banks said they knew what they were doing until they were seized and taken over.
Risky means just that, most american's believe in the definition. If banks take the chance for more rewards than are normal they have to be ready to die. Goldman Sachs needs to die. That the asshole formerly know as Warren Buffet now bought in and is talking it up just lend credence to the fix being in. If they would allow the banks that took on these RISKS to go under I would be in favor of holding these assets. As it is they will and should fail and we don't have to pay for the right to pick of the pieces and allow them to get away and destroy us another day.
Wall streets knowledge of finances needs to be redefined. Most of main street understands the consequences of risky behavior.
JIM
a true monkey of the streets has spoken. Thank you for the representation of your kind. And thank you for proving my point, that many average Americans have NO FREAKING CLUE about this crisis, but stung by media and some bi-partisan war they rather bite the dust than shelling out a few bucks to save a big chunk of their savings and investments.
Quote from Allen3:
You obviously won't be swayed from the herd on wall street's community statement and you won't awaken to the fact that no one knows how to deal with risky highly leveraged assets, especially investment banks.
First the reason BB&T sounds good is that we don't want our banks to dabble in this "nucler" stuff when they lie about their companies balance sheets, prospects, and even if they will be in business next week. Every one of the banks said they knew what they were doing until they were seized and taken over.
Risky means just that, most american's believe in the definition. If banks take the chance for more rewards than are normal they have to be ready to die. Goldman Sachs needs to die. That the asshole formerly know as Warren Buffet now bought in and is talking it up just lend credence to the fix being in. If they would allow the banks that took on these RISKS to go under I would be in favor of holding these assets. As it is they will and should fail and we don't have to pay for the right to pick of the pieces and allow them to get away and destroy us another day.
Wall streets knowledge of finances needs to be redefined. Most of main street understands the consequences of risky behavior.
JIM