Do the rich need Americans?
blogs.wsj.com
Do the rich need Americans?
1–10 of 26 posts
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#2Late last year, the U.S. economy experienced a surprising decoupling. As stocks boomed, the wealthy bounced back.
Isn't this completely predictable? When the government invests hundreds of billions of dollars into the market, by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, and that money's source is loans backed by the people-at-large, then of course this is happening.
The government is transferring money from the taxpayers to those invested in the capital markets. Anybody who believes that the government (not just the GOP but the Democrats as well) is working for the little guy, is a sucker.
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#3Late last year, the U.S. economy experienced a surprising decoupling. As stocks boomed, the wealthy bounced back. Isn't this completely predictable? When the government invests hundreds of billions of dollars into the market, by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, and that money's source is loans backed by the people-at-large, then of course this is happening. The government is transfer…
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries,
Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#4Late last year, the U.S. economy experienced a surprising decoupling. As stocks boomed, the wealthy bounced back. Isn't this completely predictable? When the government invests hundreds of billions of dollars into the market, by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, and that money's source is loans backed by the people-at-large, then of course this is happening. The government is transfer…
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
But I imagine the people buying and selling those failing bonds still took a commission
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
But I imagine the people buying and selling those failing bonds still took a commission
Assuming they were all purchased at retail prices, that was about $8/trade (typical bond face values are about $1000). (In reality, it was probably on the order of pennies.) I.e., not very much.
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#6Late last year, the U.S. economy experienced a surprising decoupling. As stocks boomed, the wealthy bounced back. Isn't this completely predictable? When the government invests hundreds of billions of dollars into the market, by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, and that money's source is loans backed by the people-at-large, then of course this is happening. The government is transfer…
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
They were treated unfairly compared to the union, yes. But it still beats Chapter 11 (probably).
Update: the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is true. If the company really had to be liquidated, the bond holders may have been paid off. But the equity holders would have really taken a bath. So the government did, in fact, keep the equity market rolling.
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#7This article makes good points, but it fails to raise alarms for me. Knowledge has few national boundaries (and largely shouldn't), why should capital?
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
They were treated unfairly compared to the union, yes. But it still beats Chapter 11 (probably). Update: the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that this is true. If the company really had to be liquidated, the bond holders may have been paid off. But the equity holders would have really taken a bath. So the government did, in fact, keep the equity market rolling.
The bondholders disagreed. They'd have rather had a real bankruptcy.
One of the consequences of not honoring the usual rules of debt in bankruptcy is that loans to govt favored industries/companies are now seen as more risky, which makes them more expensive.
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
But I imagine the people buying and selling those failing bonds still took a commission
Assuming they were all purchased at retail prices, that was about $8/trade (typical bond face values are about $1000). (In reality, it was probably on the order of pennies.) I.e., not very much.
How much more money do they have than the typical employee working at one of those auto-companies? :|
Re: Do the rich need Americans?
#10Late last year, the U.S. economy experienced a surprising decoupling. As stocks boomed, the wealthy bounced back. Isn't this completely predictable? When the government invests hundreds of billions of dollars into the market, by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, and that money's source is loans backed by the people-at-large, then of course this is happening. The government is transfer…
by way of dumping money into the financial and automobile industries, Um, the UAW bailout didn't benefit the rich much. Most bondholders/etc took a haircut. The primary beneficiaries were the upper middle class UAW workers/nonworkers (they didn't take a haircut).
[deleted]