Ray weighs in on the Wall Street crisis and the $700 billion bailout that's being considered in Washington D.C.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Talk back!
We want to know what you think. Your written responses to Ray's audioblog posts are encouraged. Click on the "Comments" tab in the lower-right-hand corner of every post for a chance share your opinion.
About Me
- Ray Richardson
- I live in Westbrook with my wonderful wife Dee Dee and our four children. We have been residents of Maine for a little over 22 years, moving here from Florida in 1985.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2008
(175)
-
▼
September
(32)
- And So The Beat Goes On
- Whom do you trust?
- RIP Paul Newman
- Ray Says 'Yes on 1'
- Let Her Loose!
- Ray Says 'No on 2'
- Optimism and Pessimism
- Just How Urgent is This?
- Dispatch from the Cumberland Fair
- Something is Broken
- Beyond Philosophy
- Just How Free is the Free Market?
- Idle Threat
- Don't Panic!
- Buyouts, Bailouts, and Downturns
- The Blind Leading the Blind
- Reckless
- Seeking Energy Solutions
- Where's the Judgment Come From?
- Seven Years Later
- Stop the Flow of Illegals
- Fears and Smears
- Spotlight on Sarah Palin
- Stop the Madness
- Incomes Flatlining
- Time to Get Serious
- Side-by-Side Comparison
- Out of the Park
- Prescription for Savings
- What Really Matters
- 4-Day School Week?
- Astounded by the Ignorance
-
▼
September
(32)
8 comments:
You are certainly right that bad decisions were made with regards to the loans that have gone bad. People that shouldn't have been able to buy a home, but did (were allowed to) anyway and the inevitable failure that occurred has been devastating. Greed was undoubtedly the motivator in the whole thing.
Now, with the bailout, we are all invested in the mess. While I am not sure I like the idea of being invested in other people's mistakes, it is the reality and is unfortunately necessary at this point. It isn't just a matter of a few going out of business because of some bad decisions, it has much deeper consequences now. Consequences that will effect all of us if we don't take care of it. I do however feel that government regulation in this is important.
We've seen what the lack of regulation has gotten us. It has become obvious that we cannot trust the individuals that run these things to police themselves and control their greed.
Perhaps if we had some kind of controls in place to begin with, we would not be here today, but that is purely speculation and obviously we can't "go back" at this point. All we can do is move forward from here with the facts we have.
Whether we like it or not, those facts point directly to government regulation. We can't just write a blank check and turn it loose to the same people that caused all of it, we have got to get some kind of assurances going forward. We need to put a watch dog or two on the hen house while there still is one.
Ray
I cannot believe that you and Ted were so obtuse as to spend 10 minutes talking about how hard it would be to know when you have had enough to drink.
There are charts available.( Your laptop is always in front of you
Google it), telling how much of what type of drink, be it wine, beer , 80 proof or 100 proof alcohol you can drink at your body weight etc. to reach a cerain B A level.
No one is supposed to drink until they are 21, so you would think they would be smart enough by then to figure it out.
A six pack probably would not put a dent in your BA levels
(just kidding)
Had to wait around for washing machine repairman to come this morning so i watched the beginning of the Banking comm. hearings before W came on.
I think the first piece of bipartisan rule making we need is to prohibit speeches at the hearings. Questions only
They are there to ask questions, but both parties always seem to want to hear themselves speak like it is a campaign opportunity.
(Oh year, it is isn't it
Ray here is a quote from one of your favorites in Washington Post today
Guess who"
Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama"
You got it
G Will.
And the quote does not have any big words in it.
On the drinking thing, that was Ted's point. My answer was easy.
Ted wanted to strip down the beer companies standard admonishment, "Please drink responsibly."
My answer is simple, if you do not want to get caught drunk driving, don't drink out in public or just have one. I usually do not have a drink when I am out just to make sure I have no worries.
-------------------------
I don't think any of these guys really know what to do with this financial mess. I am sure they will craft a solution, let politics water it down and then enact something that is inadequate to calm the panic occuring on Wall Street.
Wall Street is a finickie(spelling) place. These guys act like they have a split personality.
Personally, I say let them fall. The government, of course, will not do that because they cannot be sure who will be blamed and therefore lose their power so they will band-aid it and pretend what they are doing is leadership.
Any plan that does not include a re-structuring of mortgages that are in trouble and allows them to become performing just highlights this is about a power save, not a principled attempt to solve the issue.
if the whistle-blowers were truely rewarded...and the "bad guy's and gals" were truely prosecuted...this never would have happened...reading/watching/listening...only a complete moron could defend a lib and not realize who's behind all of this...yes some repub's are in the mix but the dems won this race hands down...the race to socialize the free market...mmmmmmmmmm...subsidized housing/health/food/travel/education....mmmmmmm...guess there is hardly a free market...when people have to work to obtain vs people that are given to obtain...there's that math again and facts to support...read an article stating 10% welfare cuts for 4 years would be over a $1,000,000,000,000 savings....remember the facts..the war is not breaking our back...welfare is....that is the true crisis.....
crs
The FHA program of the 60's and
70's gave a leg up to a lot of families seeking home ownership.
I know many of them 9 "not myself"
whose first home were funded that way and they have become successful tax paying citizens.
Their is nothing socialistic about deregulating business such as banks and investment house so they line their pockets at the expense of our societies economic health.
commrade bruce...again from the trenches...my construction built 5 housing for the elderly...and 3 low income housing projects during commrade carter's era..so i am very qualified when i say this...people with a certain income or no income obtain the same or better housing with people that have worked their whole life...how can you possibly think that is right...there is a right and wrong about all issues...again fact:...water seeks it's own level and thats why those projects become garage dumps...it does not take a genius to realize how much of a tax burden it puts on the tax payer...there's a big difference between regulation and strangulation...as well as help vs support...there is nothing efficient about government...absolutely nothing...if you want to take from yourself to support someone that doesn't want to succeed in life.....please be my guest...but it does not work...you want the support of others to help you support that person...and that's where we are now...broke...again fact...look up what we spend on defense vs social welfare...there's the truth...
Post a Comment