On Financial Meltdown, Part 3

[seanorange]

(Most, if not all, of the following questions are rhetorical

Comments

[aremisasling]

"We were told, when all of this started, that our economy was under threat of imminent collapse. Why hasn't it happened yet

[seanorange]

So far the banks have been fine (they just can't raise any of their own money), except for that one worth $300 billion. (was that WaMu?) But they were a "thrift", so I'm not sure what that means.

Banks might well be next, but so far so good.

My question is, even if they raise the insured amounts, are they just counting on people feeling more secure and not pulling their money out? That's not really happening right now (not yet, anyway). But if a bank DOES fail and they have to raid the insurance fund, exactly how are they going to cover the 150% greater depoist amounts? Where are they going to get the money now, charge the banks more? They already have a hard enough time raising money. That would just make it worse, not better.

~Sean

[aremisasling]

Actually that has been stated s a major issue. Essentially FDIC has about enough to bail out one major bank like WaMu and not much more

[aremisasling]

that was me, by the way

[aremisasling]

"Why are House Democrats so eager to give away taxpayer money without considering these alternatives -- such as the Republican insurance proposal that eventually made it into the bill, but the Republicans voted down anyway

[seanorange]

The Republicans need to budge on this, and the Dems have to stick to their guns. It is completely ridiculous that they will not stand by the mortgage refinancing provision. Any other solution is incredibly short-term. This thing can't have legs without it. If they don't insist now, they won't have any leverage later.

They MIGHT be able to wait until after the election, but by then it might be too late. How many more people are going to default in the next four months with interest rates rising and driving up ARM rates...?

~Sean