Friday, September 26, 2008

End Compassion Now!!!!

I was driving by DeKoven last night when I noticed signs for Compassion Fest. I mentioned to the passenger of my vehicle that I have always been amused by Compassion Fest as I thought it was the lamest possible name for a festival. And then she came up with an idea that I wish I could claim for myself. Let's protest Compassion Fest. Brilliant!! I am thinking about showing up with a megaphone and a WAR MIGHT BE THE ANSWER sign. Anyone care to join me?

14 comments:

Pete said...

We have a volunteer army -- feel free to enlist!

Denis Navratil said...

Good point Pete. But first I need to assess my combat readiness by taking on our local pacifists.

colt said...

off the subject a bit but can anyone tell the difference between the J-T and The Post in editorial, might be that the Post is father left the the J-T.

Anonymous said...

Make sure you charge $$ for your fest.

Anonymous said...

We are told our national finance system is on the brink of collapse and yet we are blogging on ... Compassion Fest? As this is a blog that often champions free market ideas, are there any freemarket solutions to the crisis, or is an unbridled freemarket at fault?

Denis Navratil said...

anon 8:52, I will have to object to the way you phrased the question as a choice between free market solutions or an admission of free market failure. The first point to ponder is whether free market excesses or government excesses have caused the problem. My guess is the government is more to blame. The government pushed banks into the sub-prime lending business and created Fannie and Freddie, quasi government financial institutions, that became so large that the F and F folks knew that they would be bailed out by Uncle Sam. Additionally, we had very low interest rates and tax incentives to overinvest in housing (mortgage deductions) which, over time, distorted the real value of property, and created the bubble that has now burst. So you can see anon that it is hardly an unbridled free market that has created our current problem.

As for solutions, this is quite a bit over my head, but from what I have read, it seems that some government intrusion may be neccessary. If this takes the form of the gov buying up bad loans and then auctioning them off at some point, I am hopeful that they drive a very hard bargain. There is no reason why they shouldn't and if they pay too much for this bad debt it will only reward excessive risk taking and will not deter future risky investing.

Anonymous said...

Another issue that helped us into this mess is our attempt to harmonize with gloabl accounting "standards". It used to be that when you bought a house let's say - the "value" was captured as an asset that could be transferred from one institution to another but that value stayed the same. As of fall of 2006, the concept of mark to market accounting has been used - this means that the asset "value" is fluid and based upon, among other things, recent sales of remotely similar value assets. Good right? Values go up and more "value" gets securitized for other investments. It's all safe, right? No, very wrong actually - what happens if ONE institution is poorly run and suddenly has to have a fire sale to regain cash (the global harmonization effort also requires particular ratios of assets to debt)? That in effect resets the asset values across the market and, like a spreading disease, infects even well-run institutions. Suddenly many institutions are having fire sales to comply with ratios and welcome to crash city!

Anonymous said...

Denis, glad to hear your take - as I said, you frequently champion the freemarket and I think your comments are interesting and accurate. There is one statement I wish you would clarify, "The government pushed banks into the sub-prime lending business ...". My understanding is that 25% of the sub-prime loans were made to poor folks (who ordinarily wouldn't qualify for a loan)because of a government program. That leaves 75% of sub-primes the government had nothing to do with. I was a fly on the wall at a meeting of local finacial leaders and Congressman Ryan a few months back and their message to him was the springing up of various types of unregulated mortgage brokers was the cause of the sub-prime crisis. At the time I discounted it as the big finacial guys not wanting new competition. Now I'm not sure. Better call DiTech ... not.

Denis Navratil said...

anon 5:38, thanks for you comments and I will take a shot at answering your question but I think I am getting in a bit over my head here. If you are correct that 25% of subprimes were pushed by government and 75% were not, you could still have a huge problem if 10% of the 25% went bad. I suspect that there are a multitude of factors here including the irrational enthusiasm that always accompanies bubbles. I guess my main point was to dispute the lefty narrative that this was simply another failure of the free market.

Anonymous said...

you have got to be kidding me! From the person & party that champions fiscal and personal responsibility, you point the finger of the sub-prime mortgage mess on the shoulders of the government?!

Forget the mortgage companies and brokers who actually sold these loans to folks who couldn't afford them, and forget the banks who couldn't sell these bogus loans to investors... Uncle Sam made 'em do it.

what a joke and a clear avoidance of personal responsibility. Denis, your comments are utterly laughable (LOL!)

Anonymous said...

That's right pal! Perhaps you might check up on the quota (oohhhhhhhhhhhhhh not that) system set up by our government to mandate home loans for people who have been "discriminated" against. Lots of half million dollar homes were bought by people with bad credit - or no credit - then they used home equity loans to buy lots of Cadillac Escalades and flat plasmas. Now everyone was abused and wants to sue again. But for what? They didn't put any money down and everything they bought was from their piggy bank house. Their credit was already bad so no harm there. Because foreclosures move slowly they all get to live in their cribs for up to six months without paying a dime on the mortgage, and if it is winter the utilities won't be able to shut off the heat or electricity. So go on - bitch some more about people being taken advantage of!

Anonymous said...

You can't make this stuff up! From the 9/30 Journal Sentinel:

DISPUTE OVER $155,000 BILL

Oprah's mom countersues high-end clothing store

Oprah Winfrey's mother should not have to pay a high-end fashion store the more than $150,000 it says it is owed because the store extended credit despite knowing her troubles managing debt, according to a new court filing.

colt said...

War is the health of the State!
Obama the Son of God will insure the heath of His state by Class warfare!

The original Anon said...

this is so ridiculous even Mr. Free Racine himself didn't waste his time commenting on.