TPS Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 Here's a good article from Bloomberg.com today on the growth of securitized loans. I liken Wall Street to the plant Audrey in "The Little Shop of Horrors:" "Feed me, feed me!" Securitization Note, it mentions almost $3 trillion that the government has spent or guaranteed to help prevent the meltdown. Why is it that the possibility of Obama spending a few more hundred billion makes right-wing heads explode, but the Bush-Paulson $3 trillion doesn't? Hmmm...
Boomer860 Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 Here's a good article from Bloomberg.com today on the growth of securitized loans. I liken Wall Street to the plant Audrey in "The Little Shop of Horrors:" "Feed me, feed me!" Securitization Note, it mentions almost $3 trillion that the government has spent or guaranteed to help prevent the meltdown. Why is it that the possibility of Obama spending a few more hundred billion makes right-wing heads explode, but the Bush-Paulson $3 trillion doesn't? Hmmm... Paulson is a friend of OBama
drnykterstein Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 Paulson is a friend of OBama And Ayers is a friend to Obama, and Ayers is a terrorist. Which explains why Paulson is terrorizing our economy. ... dude, please try to supply more info than your crazy assertions. You have no credibility yourself. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13708.html
bills_fan Posted October 27, 2008 Posted October 27, 2008 Here's a good article from Bloomberg.com today on the growth of securitized loans. I liken Wall Street to the plant Audrey in "The Little Shop of Horrors:" "Feed me, feed me!" Securitization Note, it mentions almost $3 trillion that the government has spent or guaranteed to help prevent the meltdown. Why is it that the possibility of Obama spending a few more hundred billion makes right-wing heads explode, but the Bush-Paulson $3 trillion doesn't? Hmmm... This is a very good read on the history of this. Thanks.
GG Posted October 28, 2008 Posted October 28, 2008 Good chronology, but Stieglitz's & Roubini's comments are superfluous. The end came as a result of a classic mistake of funding long term investments with short term borrowings.
Recommended Posts