>New York–The American taxpayer should be intent on making the government keep its promise not to do further bailouts of large financial companies.
The question for the so-called experts is the fallout from the failure of Lehman Brothers, a giant worldwide investment bank. It could cause other repercussions, but I say “If it must be, let it be so.”
This is a market-driven country, not some third-world rogue nation afraid of every oscillation in the market.
If the investment bankers all fail then maybe we can start over and put some reality into the equation. Don’t turn to taxpayer bailouts every time there’s a fluctuation in markets. Of course, this is not a mere fluctuation–it’s a last gasp for survival of a giant.
The Feds and Wall Street are trying to save Lehman, but both are adamant. The government is adamant that it will not pump more money into a company for bailouts. If we bail out Lehman then why not bail out Joe’s Barbershop down the street when a new, bigger, and more luxuriant one is built on the corner? Get my drift?
Jeannine Aversa and Joe Bel Bruno are Associated Press writers who weighed in on this topic Sunday morning, September 14th, 2008. If you believe their report, the field of possible buyers for Lehman Brothers is narrowing.
Their report is that an unnamed investment banking official said Bank of America Corp. and Britain’s Barclays Plc have emerged as front runners for Lehman Brothers after a possible cash injection from its rival Wall Street banks and brokerages.
Top officials from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department and executives from several Wall Street banks met at the New York Fed’s downtown Manhattan headquarters Saturday for the second day in a row trying to hash out a deal to rescue Lehman Brothers.
The financial world was watching. They should be watching. They are the parties of interest. I don’t know about you, but I don’t own stock in Lehman Brothers. Let it fail,” is my mantra.
Those Wall Street firms and others wouldn’t be so adamant that this should not fail if it wasn’t for the fact they are so intimately tied in with this investment bank. By that, I mean they and their “friends” have a lot to lose if Lehman goes down. Again, I say let it fail. What have I and 300 million other Americans got to lose if Lehman becomes a passing byword never to be uttered again.
Money is the chief motivator in their interest in Lehman. Money out of their clients’ pockets. Never before have I felt so strongly and keenly about a financial subject as this. Lehmans is not Freddie and Fannie. It isn’t the FDIC, it isn’t the FED, it isn’t even the corner bank. And for my money, we have too many banks. Let Wachovia and Washington Mutual fail, too. Investments of the little guy like you and I are insured by the FDIC up to $100,000, right? Then tell me why it is bad for a bank to fail? Because it creates a bad omen or sets a bad precedent in the financial markets? I say it will set a good precedent. Banks will be more careful in the future about to whom and how they lend their money.
The Associated Press writers said failure could prompt skittish investors to unload shares of financial companies, a contagion that might affect stock markets at home and abroad when they reopen Monday. They don’t know that for sure. All they’re doing is repeating one of the Bank of America official’s opinions.
But I say, “Good, let’s get a little volatility in the market. If that private source of theirs is right, when I buy low it will be a real low, won’t it”?
The investment banking official who said the following asked not to be named. I wonder why? They said because talks were ongoing, but what is there about the following statement that will hurt or help anyone? All he is really doing is lobbying us taxpayers through the power of the press. They’re real good at that, and the AP is their dupe.
He said: “Investment houses were balking at paying to polish up Lehman’s balance sheet so Bank of America or Barclays could buy a financially clean firm.” That sounds pretty innocuous, doesn’t it?
He said “The investment banks were angling for the government to provide some money, as it did when it helped JPMorgan Chase & Co. buy Bear Stearns in March, because they would get little to nothing in return for their help.” I’m ashamed of the AP. I once wrote for them and never, ever in my life have I seen such a stupid, meaningless bunch of words. The reason he didn’t want his name mentioned is because he’s the one who’s talking to he Feds about throwing in some green–your money and mine. I say identify the SOB. He doesn’t want the fallout of his advice to hurt his company? What a bunch of BS! What a coward!
The story said “The government has drawn a line in the sand over using taxpayer money to help rescue Lehman Brothers, however.” Thank God for that! The story also reported that “The official said the talks were tense and neither side appeared willing to back down.” Good, let it fail.
But I say, hasn’t the AP ever been in a real negotiation? Both sides do a lot of posturing. Both sides look “tense.” That’s all posturing by big-time lawyers and CPAs who huddle in the corner planning strategy. Everyone in the room reads the “tenseness” as nothing more than lawyer lies and sign language. The only ones they want to be tense is we, the taxpayers. We’re supposed to buy their crappy negotiation and throw in some bucks. I say, “NO! Not now, NOT ever again. Let Lehman Brothers fail.”