income tax rates and the bailout

Take it up with these guys.

Oh, I have no doubt that some of the mortgages given out were ridiculous and salesmen got people to buy things they shouldn't have. But if you were able to say no, shouldn't other people?
The firms being bailed out right now aren't the ones that were doing these things - Lehman's sub-prime origination unit only came into being a few years ago. Lehman/Merrill/Bear didn't really give out the loans themselves - they just ended up holding a lot of them.
They failed too, which is why they're getting hurt right now.

they are simply applying the propsed tax rates to people in the various income segregations.
they, however, did not take into account deductions, exemptions, etc, when computing this data, and I find it quite appalling that they missed such large pieces of data.
I choose to deal in fact: 44% of America did not pay federal income taxes last year. No matter what Obama says, taxes can't be cut for the lower/middle classes if this is happening.

Obama wants to increase the EITC.

Fair enough-- but the behavior seemed awfully contrary to what I had learned to expect from bankers. I can see how less cynical folk might have taken it for permission to say "Whee!"

If your Doctor says smoking crack won't hurt you...

Well, those people weren't bankers, really - they were loan officers masquerading as bankers. Their attitude was "it doesn't matter what this loan looks like so long as I can sell it". Which is fine if you retain a piece of the action on it, but sets horrible disincentives if you don't. Which is, of course, what happened.

The one really good thing about this crisis is that it will teach banks to be a lot more careful with the assets they hold on their balance sheets. When everyone thought sub-prime trash was perfectly liquid and good as gold, there was no reason to care how it was originated. Now, however, since banks are the ones left holding so much of the bag, they'll be a lot more careful about the mortgage pools they're buying, which means that those awful loans won't be made nearly as much.

I know I'm just a country bumpkin from North Cackalacky, but has it really come to this? Banks need some external event to tell them to be careful about the assets they are holding? Sweet Lord, talk about the soft bigotry of low expectations.

This is why I think my rant that opened this thread makes alot of sense. I'm not saying it was RIGHT, but it makes sense. Because look at the alternative. "These banks have learned to pay attention to their business."

No, it doesn't. All models ALL banks used proved inadequate due to things like homeowners walking away from primary residences for the first time ever. (Its never happened before.) Raters models failed, assets that have been liquid for 25 years suddenly turned more illiquid than dry dirt. It isn't exactly a predictable situation. Banks will now be vastly more diversified and use structured debt easily. Were there some bankers who ********ed up? Yeah. Big time. And they're fired.
Are you suggesting you're smarter than all the iBankers dave? Really?





Oh, and ******** Apple and their ************ products. Ruined this damn post twice.

Given the new bankruptcy law, it was not exactly a shock that people would mail the keys to the bank. I don't buy your "nobody could see this coming" take. I know I read stupid left wing pinko blogs alot, but they were railing about the bankruptcy bill and its treatment of the different kinds of debt.

See panel #3.

again, that isn't cutting taxes. it is a federal give away of cash to those who work for low wages. their tax rate will still be ZERO.

Huh? In most states you can leave your keys and walk away (not all). Thats favorable to the borrower. This has nothing to do with the bankruptcy bill. Even if people weren't walking away we'd have loans in default.