October 10, 2008

The Next Banking Bomb?

CBS News Investigates: Credit Derivatives Comprise $54.6 Trillion Of Risk Among Few Banks Left Standing

  • Photo

     (AP Photo/Richard Drew)

  • Video Running On Empty

    Between increasing gas prices, the credit freeze, and the financial crisis, America's automobile dealers are relying heavily on the bailout bill to save their businesses. Randall Pinkston reports.

  • Video Coping With The Crisis

    A new study shows that 80 percent of Americans cite the economy as a major stressor. Ben Tracy reports on how best to cope with the financial crisis.

(CBS)  CBS News Investigative Unit’s Kim Lengle wrote this story for CBSNews.com.

“This bill will, in my judgment, raise the likelihood of future massive taxpayer bailouts. …if you want to gamble, go to Las Vegas. If you want to trade in derivatives, God bless you.”

That was North Dakota Senator Byron Dorgan’s statement on the floor of the Senate - not this week or last, or even during the last six months as Wall Street collapsed - but back in 1999.

Four years later in a letter to shareholders, billionaire investor Warren Buffett followed with his own warning, calling derivatives “weapons of financial mass destruction” controlled by “madmen.”

While financial experts were concerned with the housing bubble and mortgage-backed securities, Dorgan and Buffett were focused on what many now believe may be the next big shoe to drop - the credit derivatives market, better known as credit default swaps.

What worries financial insiders most is the $54.6 trillion of risky credit derivatives concentrated among the few banks left standing.

Credit default swaps (CDS) are the cornerstone of the credit derivatives market accounting for more than 98 percent of all credit derivatives. They are difficult to understand, ignored by regulators and poorly reported on balance sheets. In simplest terms, CDS are insurance policies on things like bonds, loans and corporate debt. But there are two big differences: the seller of a CDS doesn’t need to have the money to cover losses if the security defaults, and the buyer doesn’t need to own the asset it wants to protect.

It’s as if hundreds of people could buy insurance policies on houses they didn’t own yet still collect the full value if it burns down.

The danger comes when the company defaults and the seller - because he’s not required to - doesn’t have the money to pay out on the default.

Investment firms that traded various derivatives, such as CDS, collected an average of $2 billion in fees each quarter over the past two years. And traders who spoke to CBS News said these transactions were the largest cash cows on Wall Street, even more profitable than mortgages. The newfangled transactions were seen as easy money and many traders had the attitude that when it blows up, it’s someone else’s problem.

Today, the same commercial banking heavyweights thought to be the most safe, JPMorgan, Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America, hold 92 percent of all the disclosed credit derivative contracts, according to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

But that number is merely an estimate because the overwhelming majority of these contracts are unregulated - private, mostly undisclosed and difficult to measure.

“There is no question we are at the edge of the cliff and someone is going to fall off,” said Weil, Gotshal & Manges Senior Partner Harvey Miller who is currently overseeing the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy.

Back in 1999 when the legislation was being debated Senator Dorgan opposed the consolidation of commercial and investment banks. In fact, he sponsored two amendments to prohibit these new mega-banks from …investing in derivatives.

Today, Dorgan apparently feels the same way. He was one of 25 senators who voted no on the recent $700 billion bailout.

“No one knows where [the credit derivatives] are, whose balance sheets they may threaten, or how much additional risk they pose to financial firms. Yet, I was told this plan could not require regulation and transparency of these financial markets because there was opposition in Congress and the White House,” Dorgan said in a statement explaining why he didn’t vote for the bailout.

With banks already suffering losses from the subprime fiasco, many now believe they face chain reaction failures from the credit derivatives market.

“If the market keeps going in the direction it’s been going, you’re going to have lots of defaults which are dangerous things,” said Miller.

Some economic analysts predict even more panic over next few months. As more corporations default and banks find out they can’t make good on their contracts, a new round of losses for funds and financial firms could result and make the recent losses in mortgage-backed securities seem miniscule by comparison.

By Kim Lengle
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Video and Galleries from CBS News Investigates

Add a Comment See all 211 Comments
by yurfulla October 11, 2008 5:34 AM PDT
Socialism is almost here.

Vote Obama and it will finally arrive.

Scary.
Reply to this comment
by freepress6 October 11, 2008 9:05 AM PDT
The GOP which handed us a flawed Presidential election in 2000 when we couldn''t count all the votes, plus non-existent WMB in Iraq doesn''t care about the world economy. The GOP just wants gasoline prices to fall to $2.00 per gallon at the pump by election day in the U.S. so they won''t suffer a wipeout at the poll. Sterling Greenwood, Aspen.
Reply to this comment
by truthspeake2 October 11, 2008 9:07 AM PDT
The Republicans will be responsible for this country going the way of the Roman Empire...

Reply to this comment
by jon_mccain October 11, 2008 9:18 AM PDT
Socialism is almost here.

Vote Obama and it will finally arrive.

Scary.

Posted by Yurfulla at


If socialism eliminates the shadow banking industry and the shadow oil markets than I say bring it on. Right now we privatize profits for the rich and socialize their losses.
Reply to this comment
by grandesign October 11, 2008 9:37 AM PDT
%u201CNo one knows where [the credit derivatives] are, whose balance sheets they may threaten, or how much additional risk they pose to financial firms."

Maybe researchers at CERN, Europe''s atom-smashing laboratory, can locate these CDSs along with dark matter and the God particle. Physics are the same nomatter where you are in the world.
Reply to this comment
by sandycat2 October 11, 2008 9:42 AM PDT
Apparantly, some of you lunkheads didn''t read the article. Senator Dorgon was talking about the bill passed by both parties in Congress and signed by Clinton in 1999 which repealed the depression era Glass-Stegle act which separated banking, insurance and securites. Dorgon called this bill a time bomb that could result in another depression. THIS WAS IN 1999. Bush wasn''t in office then.
Reply to this comment
by gonesouthern October 11, 2008 9:42 AM PDT
Don''t worry my fellow Americans if the banks fail Bush''s Government will just print more money and everything will be just fine once more...
Worry my friend''s worry.
Reply to this comment
by ravens2022 October 11, 2008 9:45 AM PDT
The republican party has become a party of christian fundamentalism and rampant jingoism.
Now THAT is scary.
Reply to this comment
by jon_mccain October 11, 2008 10:00 AM PDT
This "melt-down" is really caused by GLOBALIZATION, the "outsourcing" of American Jobs to Asian markets for cheap labor.

Posted by bellschotsch

I agree, they pushed down wages while offering cheap easy credit and encouraging people to go out and spend. Who cold have guessed it would end up like this?
Reply to this comment
by getreeltex October 11, 2008 10:08 AM PDT



Don''t worry America!


Bush has got his new "Leave No Billionaire Behind" program ready to go.

He''s going to take your tax dollars and give it to the people who caused this mess and eventually it''s going to trickle back down to you.


If, when the trickle finally reaches you, it looks and smells just like urine.........that''s because it is!


Thanks for voting Republican.







Reply to this comment
by skysoldier75 October 11, 2008 10:17 AM PDT

What we ALL need to learn from this mess, both Republicans and Democrats alike, is that deregulation - or a lack of adequate regulation - is extremely dangerous for our entire economy.

The entire financial industry needs to be constantly and intensively monitored by our government, if the best interests of the American taxpayers are to be served.

The real moral of this story is that you simply cannot trust business to "police itself". That will never, ever work -- it just encourages massive abuse, and leaves taxpayers financially responsible for cleaning up the mess when the greedy bail out and take their ill-gotten profits with them, leaving the rest of us holding the bag.

Regulation is obviously a good (and absolutely necessary) thing - not a bad thing.
Reply to this comment
by getaclue777 October 11, 2008 10:31 AM PDT
Regulation is obviously a good (and absolutely necessary) thing - not a bad thing.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by SkySoldier75


Yes, America, we need more and bigger government to fix this problem. And our government isn''t big enough, because its a worldwide problem. Hey, I know, let''s just combine all the countries of the world into one big country, and have one big government over them all. Then we''ll have no more wars, no more financial problems...heck...it''ll be heaven on earth!
At least until your new leader let''s you know that he is just like the rest of ''em. Then you''ll realise you created an even bigger problem. Now you realise you gave control of the world to the antichrist! And the only way out is God! But you hate him and his rules more than you hate your new government! Now whatcha gonna do? Burn for eternity in hell? Or give up your selfish greedy sinful lifestyle and face the Truth?
LOL....a fine mess you''ve gotten us into now, stanley...
Reply to this comment
by sumarongi1 October 11, 2008 10:48 AM PDT
Let''s get very real! Let''s take a hard look at some facts.
The biggest problem is a financial hierarchy which is was morally bankrupt to begin with. They manipulate politicians like puppets on strings and fleece our funds as a game. Unfortunately it''s other people who suffer the harm, not the decision makers.
Then there is our government. Talk about a house of bedlam. These clowns in D.C. could care less about real issues. They stuck their heads in the sand like ostriches and hoped the problems would heal themselves or be solved by someone else. All they care about is when the next break occurs so they can rush out to spend their latest payoffs and the pay raise they voted for themselves, but not for the rest of us.
There is plenty of blame to go around, but think about these facts. The Bush administration has performed more blunders than I have time or space to list. - Oil speculators and companies drove the price of oil through the roof to reap fantastic profits. - Shaky mortgages, remember those morally bankrupt financiers, began to default. - Gas prices suddenly increased drastically thus costing most of the population to spend hundreds of dollars more each month on gas and fuel oil. Add that much burden to an already stretched budget and someone isn''t going to get paid on time, thus more mortgage defaults.
We should consider shooting the bankers, hanging the speculators and throwing politicians and lawyers out of upper story windows.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:00 AM PDT
Wealth concentration is bad for America in three ways:
1. Wealth concentration leads to predatory behavior in society. With excess cash, the purpose of the Richs spending inevitably shifts from utility to vanity. Cars, houses, bank accounts do not simply furnish transportation, shelter, and independence; they purchase the envy of neighbors (fast cars, monster houses, grossly-fat bank accounts). That desire, to be able to look down on your neighbors, then infects the society at large, who copy the successful. But the trade in envy has two problems: 1. No amount of money is enough to service the hole envy wants filled. So saving turns to hoarding (Scrooge fever), taking money out of the general circulation which exacerbates the problem, 2. Envy is relative. It can be as easily obtained by breaking down your neighbor as working to elevate yourself. Symptoms of the resulting predation are lying, workplace harassment, racism/ sexism/ ageism, robbery, bullying, workaholics, malicious gossip, monopolistic behavior, gambling, youth exploitation, and withdrawal from society (gated communities, drugs, pornography). As wealth concentrates, there is a shift in the general population from a ''one-for-all'' mindset to a ''winner-take-all'' mindset. Such a society engages in at least as much destructive behavior as constructive, a slave to the ''envy trade''. The various banking bubbles popping around us are 100% driven by the envy trade.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:01 AM PDT
2. Wealth concentration is bad for capitalism. Capitalism works because labor and capital are both put to work in the free market. Capital works by being risked for a return. One hundred millionaires will each need a 10% return to live comfortably. If the wealth is concentrated so that there are only ten of them, each with 10 million dollars, they need only a 1% return to live comfortably. Common sense: the rich invest their money wisely, the filthy rich do not, for the simple reason that the rich NEED to invest wisely, and the filthy rich do not. Companies that return 10% lead the economy; companies that return 1% follow it.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:02 AM PDT
3. Wealth concentration is bad for democracy. Money influences politics. Representatives of the people end up representing the money instead. This is OK as long as the money is also owned by the people, but this general ownership is lost as wealth concentrates. The media are also influenced by wealth. Whether ''biased'' liberal or conservative, a media-persons primary bias is for dinner. The law establishments, and the lobbyists, are also working for money. As wealth concentrates, the wealthy gain great ability to affect the way laws are written, interpreted, enforced, and sold to the general public. As wealth concentrates, these laws are no longer in the publics'' interest.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:03 AM PDT
How much of America''s total wealth should be owned by her richest 10% of citizens? Pre-1930, ownership was above 70%. A time of low taxes, monopolists, robber barons, pyramid schemes. Their gift to America: the Great Depression. Between 1930 and 1970, ownership was less than 55% due to high taxes. What did these lazy socialists (otherwise known as the Greatest Generation) do with all that ill-gotten tax booty?
Built every major dam in America (still generating 20% of our electricity today).
Built the interstate system (''freeways'' to stimulate trade and commerce).
Built levees and canals (100% responsible for California''s agricultural miracle).
The rural electrification program (so rural farms could also be factories).
SocSec safety-net (now in need of reform).
Defeated fascism and communism worldwide, and rebuilt war-ravaged Europe.
Fought a major war in SE Asia and, the same decade, flew to the moon.
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:04 AM PDT
Since 1980, ownership is above 70% again, due to low taxes and supply-side economics. After 25 years of this, our infrastructure crumbles like the New Orleans levees. The military we paid for has been hijacked by the worlds rich to enforce globalization. Our society shows all the hallmarks of predation: bullying, sloth, lying, crime. Our debt, our debt, our national debt: Reagan tripled the debt and Bush is on track to triple it again! This $10 trillion debt is a gift to the next generation along with our crumbling infrastructure. Supply-side economics: pretending to stimulate your economy by rolling your taxes onto the backs of your children.

America needs to roll back wealth concentration to its value in the 1960s, when the wealthiest 10% of Americans'' owned 60% of the nations total wealth. Progressive taxation will do this. It''s the RIGHT thing for our future, and our society.
Reply to this comment
by legacyabq October 11, 2008 11:07 AM PDT
Jeesus did you guys actually read this article??
This a very very serious!
The system is flawed, but but.. ah.... wait.....

american idol is on... and i just got a cool new mp3 player...
Screw it, uh, what was I saying????
Reply to this comment
by sumarongi1 October 11, 2008 11:10 AM PDT
ubrew12

That''s GREED for you. People in major cities around this country and the world will cruise by the indigent, sick and homeless on their way to purchase an ice cream sundae at a thousand dollars a pop and then retreat to their estates or penthouses and talk about how we should really do something to get those people off the streets. That conversation probably goes something like this. Maybe we can talk our friends in the police department and city government into passing an ordinance that moves them all over a few blocks so they won''t ruin our appetites next time we go down there.
Reply to this comment
by legacyabq October 11, 2008 11:13 AM PDT
It''s too late!

It''s too late Ubrew!
I loved your post, it was right on, but America has been defeated by ignorance and distraction. Right, left, we all lose. Half the people in this country dont know %$#@ about this story, dont know *** aoout econmomics, dont know *** about political philosophy..
We have been dumbed down to the point of no return, the dream is OVER!! OVER!!
America is dying, dying! and those of us who care will have to be tortured by watching it happen!!
Reply to this comment
by legacyabq October 11, 2008 11:23 AM PDT
Our economy is shiiite!
What do we make anymore? What in the world is it BASED on? We must be the only country in the world that can make an economy on interst earnings for credit alone an economic engine, which only works becaus of the massive use of credit to buy everything from consumer goods to paying for the federal government.. That house of cards is falling, and where are all the jobs?? CHINA!
All so people could save a few lousy bucks at traitorous walmart.. Where''s the medium sized businesses? Culture made manufacturing jobs look bad, people are "above" real blue collar work, and now every job there is in a sector that actually MAKES GOODS AND SERVICES is GONE BABY GONE..
Now I expect there to be a glut of MBA''s out there looking for work. Everyone at my school is trying to get an MBA, HA! Ha! Learn all the tricks that got us here..
This is a mathematically impossible situation: there is no way we can handle all this debt, and tax cuts for the rich, and the war, and social security, no country is going to buy our bonds anymore.
Game over!
This will get bad people!
Reply to this comment
by getreeltex October 11, 2008 11:31 AM PDT



In just 8 short years, Republicans have managed to do what no terrorist ever could.

They''ve bankrupted the country and brought the economy to it''s knees.


Stay the course with McSame?


Thanks but no thanks!




Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 11:34 AM PDT
It''s a truism of journalism that when an article that looks scary or provocative is headlined with a question, the answer is probably no. I''ve watched the news reporting of this descent appalled. A market that drops severely at the opening and slowly rises through the day or holds that level gets called "going into a tailspin". I''m a journalist. I think it''s time some of my colleagues stopped doing such irresponsible work, and stopped pushing for the next big scare headline. The reality is bad enough, and freaking people out only makes it worse. Be responsible.
Reply to this comment
by txlakeside October 11, 2008 11:40 AM PDT
Slap the next repub that shouts free markets, less gov is good gov or even mentions the word de-regulation!

The repubs mantra noted above has destroyed our country, the banks and most of the civilized world!
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:43 AM PDT
legacyABQ said: "Right, left, we all lose. Half the people in this country dont know %$#@ about this story, dont know *** aoout econmomics, dont know *** about political philosophy.."

Its hard to know what to do at this point: wealth has been globalized to such a degree that if one country looks like its going to raise taxes, the wealth goes across border. Countries are now in the position states were in a few years ago: of competing against other states for corporate business with tax credits, preferred status, etc: basically giving away the tax base to get the business. Global businesses are more powerful than countries, and Americas massive debt impedes her ability to do much about corporate greed.
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 11:46 AM PDT
The market has dropped by half. We''re at 2003 levels. Doesn''t anyone ever stop to ask whether it was reasonable for stock prices to DOUBLE in five years in the first place?
Reply to this comment
by ubrew12 October 11, 2008 11:46 AM PDT
voxpopulus said: "It''s a truism of journalism that when an article that looks scary or provocative is headlined with a question, the answer is probably no."

I wouldn''t bet on that. Credit default swaps make subprime mortgage derivatives look like gold. Other articles besides this one have pointed out the unsecured, unregulated atmosphere under which they''ve ballooned.
Reply to this comment
by on_alert247 October 11, 2008 11:47 AM PDT
A recipe for disaster:

Government sponsored risky lending: a.k.a Freddie and Fannie Mac + poorly regulated mortgage backed securities and derivatives a congress that couldn''t work together despite repeated attempts over the last 10 years to correct the problem.

Who''s to blame? Congress, both republicans and democrats and ultimately the American people for not electing real leaders.


Reply to this comment
by xyz926 October 11, 2008 11:47 AM PDT
Can someone answer a very simple question for me? Why did Paulson not simply "go direct" and "cut out the middle man"? If his plan was to purchase assets that couldn''t either be sold or borrowed against (dead capital) so that the holders of those assets could lend to businesses and banks, why didn''t he decide to lend the money himself to businesses and banks? Then, taking this one step farther, why not cut out the banks too and lend directly to businesses?

This might eliminate one level of potential (continued) mismanagement.
Reply to this comment
by wheear October 11, 2008 11:49 AM PDT
The bottom line is that President Bush and his failed econmic plans are the reason that McCain/Palin will lose this election. Years back when this started spinning out of control it was clear that we were on the wrong course. Bush could have redirected things when gas began climbing over two dollars a gallon. He was silent. Almost a year ago when mortgages began failing, there were clear signs that something needed to be done and he was silent. 4000 lost lives later, we are still in a war with no end in sight. Thousands have been laid off. Tax breaks were given to companies who sent jobs over seas. Bush was silent and so was the nation. As long as the lower and lower middle class were the only ones suffering and losing, no one cared. Now that it is clear that everyone is in financial pain, now we have a problem. There is no justification for waitng this long to fix the housing mess. It is the crux of a national crisis. Trillions of lost dollars later, the United States is still trying to decide how to fix it. What a mess.
Reply to this comment
by exfed4 October 11, 2008 11:49 AM PDT
You are so right about extremist journalism. There are problems in the financial sector, but many, many, many companies are doing fine, making profits and paying dividends - yes, the fundamentals are fine, but irresponsible reporting has put unwarranted fear into people.
Reply to this comment
by talk2chief October 11, 2008 11:49 AM PDT
Slap the next repub that shouts free markets, less gov is good gov or even mentions the word de-regulation!
The repubs mantra noted above has destroyed our country, the banks and most of the civilized world!
Posted by txlakeside

And it''s funny how many democrats benefited from Freddy Mac and Fanny Mae! Hey, when is congress going to have congressional hearings into that catalyst of economic crises.
Reply to this comment
by whitemale08 October 11, 2008 11:50 AM PDT
IT''S THE DERIVATIVES STUPID!!!!!

THAT''S WHAT THE BAILOUT BILL WAS ABOUT, TO BAILOUT THE WORTHLESS DERIVATIVES TO BLOW OUT THE TAX PAYER ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!!!

THAT WILL ENSURE THE AMERO!!!!
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 11:51 AM PDT
"voxpopulus said: "It''''s a truism of journalism that when an article that looks scary or provocative is headlined with a question, the answer is probably no."

I wouldn''t bet on that."

When journalists have locked down the story, the subeditor does NOT title it with a question. "Did an alien impregnate this Earth woman?" "Is the sky falling?"

It''s likely there''s a risk, but speculative headlines like this, and on the front page, are just sensationalist hysteria-mongering.
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 11:54 AM PDT
Are killer bees invading America?
Reply to this comment
by exfed4 October 11, 2008 11:57 AM PDT
If the press says it''s so, it must be true. They wouldn''t lie. HAR, HAR, HAR..................
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 12:00 PM PDT
More signs of a speculative pieces of journalism:

The "some people say" formula. I''ve used it myself to my shame. "Some economic analysts predict ...." Yeah, and maybe thousands more don''t.

And then there are the "coulds" and "maybes" - "a new round of losses .. could result" .......

What I''ve seen in the past few days in world markets in Asia and Europe is a drop at the beginning of the day, in response to the hysteria on the other side of the world, and then a holding steady or slight recovery through most of the day. The market is trying to find a base, but you wouldn''t guess it from reading most reports. It''s not good copy.
Reply to this comment
by patriot2381 October 11, 2008 12:02 PM PDT
First the politicians will save themselves, the bail out is a good start. We cannot blame Reps or Dems. Is a failing of democracy, which buys votes, as long as we let them.
Reply to this comment
by Renegade.Rivers October 11, 2008 12:03 PM PDT
He''''s going to take your tax dollars and give it to the people who caused this mess and eventually it''''s going to trickle back down to you.


If, when the trickle finally reaches you, it looks and smells just like urine.........that''''s because it is!


Thanks for voting Republican.

Never we forget that a majority of Democrats voted right along with what he wanted.
Reply to this comment
by talk2chief October 11, 2008 12:03 PM PDT
welcome to the republicon theory of trickle down economics,
it''''s for idiots , stupid
Posted by PythonCharly

It''s funny how when Reagan proposed the "Theory of trickle down" economics it was the Democratic controlled congress who wrote the laws to further increase our national debt since then. The house didn''t change control until Bill Clinton. Sorry PythonCharly both parties have blood on their hands.
Reply to this comment
by exfed4 October 11, 2008 12:04 PM PDT
Good points, Vox.
Anyone stop to think that since business was so smart to get us into these derivatives that they won''t come up with some creative way to make a profit out of rearranging them and avoiding Doomsday? No one is going to go to the poor house over these things, the freaking world would cease to exist if these things stood up. Fuggetaboutit!
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus October 11, 2008 12:05 PM PDT
And what IS this "few banks left standing" nonsense? Almost ALL banks are left standing, two or three have had problems. That phrase might have had relevance during the Depression (which we''re not even close to, although you wouldn''t know it), but what kind of irresponsible writing is this in the current situation?
Reply to this comment
by sumarongi1 October 11, 2008 12:07 PM PDT
Hey, this is the country that allowed banks to convince us that proper fiscal management includes amassing large amounts of debt and then paying them large sums of money each month in interest and service fees.
The country where it is now okay for a small business owner to rake more of the profits and invest less in their company because the good ole bank is there to hand out that short term loan to pay your monthly purchases, expenses and payroll. Who needs solvency any more. What business school is teaching this form of economic drivel? All of them. Local companies are locking their doors because the banks insist the credit crunch they caused makes it impossible to continue to loan to companies who trusted them and still have accounts with them. That really helps those ex-employees pay for that mortgage!

The country where Uncle OIL ran up the price of gas in the name of record profits and contributed directly to the present calamity. Take several hundred dollars or more a month out of already tight budgets and of course people have to defer a mortgage payment to pay for gas or fuel oil. I know people in the north who are now strapped for heating costs that are unsustainable.

Rough? Unfortunately you haven''t seen "rough" yet.
When the market crashed in 1929, the worst effects weren''t really peaking until mid 1930 into late 1931.
We''re just watching the waters recede prior to the tidal wave folks.
Reply to this comment
by talk2chief October 11, 2008 12:08 PM PDT
No one is going to go to the poor house over these things, the freaking world would cease to exist if these things stood up. Fuggetaboutit!
Posted by exfed4

It''s called blow back. When a country has nothing to lose it will become desperate, and I am not talking about the U.S. I am talking about maybe Russia. Need only look to history and the German Weimer republic of the 20''s and the rise of Nazi Germany when 5 million marks would not buy you a loaf of bread nor a bottle of milk.
Reply to this comment
by sumarongi1 October 11, 2008 12:15 PM PDT
Didn''t the AIG execs display their concern for the economy by rushing right out with our bailout money and using almost a half-million of it to bolster the income of the St. Regis spa/resort in good old California. After all, they need a break from the *** flowing around Wall Street.
Reply to this comment
by talk2chief October 11, 2008 12:15 PM PDT
Posted by azure11

And with no credit and shrinking capital, business will lay off more people, who will by less goods, which will fuel the fire for continued layoffs.
Reply to this comment
by rockpeterson October 11, 2008 12:16 PM PDT
The people who work in banks don''t know how to handle money. The market may crash as a result of their actions.
Reply to this comment
by exfed4 October 11, 2008 12:17 PM PDT
For every few companies that are having problems, there are tons more NOT having a problem. Those that are in trouble will be the victims of social Darwinism, survival of the fittest. You have to ask if there are banks doing well, why are there those that are not? I suggest irresponsible management and society is well off without them. The unfortunates are the bystanders that catch the shrapnel and my heart goes out to them. I won''t let the few that have fallen take away from the good that the many are experiencing. This stuff will pass.
Reply to this comment
by talk2chief October 11, 2008 12:20 PM PDT
This stuff will pass.
Posted by exfed4

Really, when GM lays off 100,000 workers who is going to shore up their home and auto loans, who is going to go shopping to buy goods to keep the "Other" responsible businesses in business. This is the catalyst to economic failure, and it will continue to fuel continued layoffs. It''s not rocket science, it''s common sense.
Reply to this comment
See all 211 Comments
  • MOST POPULAR
  • Viewed
  • Commented
Latest News
Featured Blogs