AIG

Previously, I wrote about the Fortune 500 companies whose stocks performed well last year. If you want to see returns on your stock investments, look into dollar stores, food wholesalers and other types of discount retail. However, this article is about which companies lost the most money last year.

Fortune 500 compiled a list of companies that lost the most money in 2008. Here are the top five.

1. American International Group

AIG has been all over the news, and for good reason. Besides taking multiple government bailouts and then handing out bonuses to company executives, AIG lost more money than any other Fortune 500 company. The gargantuan insurance company lost nearly $100 billion in 2008. Fortune Magazine says:

The New York-based insurance company that spawned an out-of-control London derivatives dealership is now a $170 billion (and counting) headache for the American taxpayer.

Most of AIG’s losses were due to contracts created to pay off holders of mortgage-backed securities if the personal loans that backed them defaulted. Lesson learned? I hope. This company is going to need some serious credit repair.

2. Fannie Mae

This partially government-owned entity bought or guaranteed approximately 20 million personal loan mortgages with money it borrowed at very low rates. According to Fortune:

As the delinquency rate on the single-family home loans it guarantees more than doubled last year, the company was taken over by Treasury, which is now using it to absorb an endless stream of housing market losses. Last year Fannie lost a staggering $30 billion on its mortgage guarantees alone.

Long story short, Fannie Mae lost $58.7 billion in 2008. Not surprisingly, its brother company is next on the list.

3. Freddie Mac

Though Freddie Mac is considerably smaller than Fannie Mae, it came close to losing the same amount of money, with more than $50 billion. Freddie jumped on the bad-loan-backed security band wagon and suffered $16 billion in realized and unrealized losses.

Freddie borrowed $14 billion from the government, and it has asked for another $31 billion.

4. General Motors

It should come as no surprise that GM is fourth on this list of big-time money losers in 2008. Rumors have been flying that this automaker will soon file bankruptcy. GM lost about $31 billion in 2008. It has gotten government bailouts as well, to the tune of $13.4 billion.

GM is struggling to fight an 11 percent drop in sales. It has released several new fuel-efficient and hybrid cars to try to increase profits.

5. Citigroup

Rounding out the top five Fortune 500 companies that  lost the most money in 2008 is Citigroup, parent company to Citibank. The huge financial conglomerate lost $27.7 billion. Citigroup lost money in every quarter in 2008. Subprime mortgages cost the group $14 billion.

The government now holds a 36 percent stake in the company, and Citigroup surprised everyone when it turned things around in the first quarter of 2009. It pulled in a profit for the first time in more than a year, mostly because of its investment banking division.

Tough year for consumer finance. People use online cash advance loans and credit cards to dig in where their paychecks don’t go, but habitual use can create trouble. It has also been a rough year for American high finance. Small and large banks have collapsed under the weight of their own irresponsible lending (special thanks to ACORN and Self-Help, Inc. for that recession bomb). The largest financial institutions have begged at the doorstep of Obama’s big top government, and they have made off with billions of dollars. Whatever confidence investors and the general public had in this system is severely damaged. One would hope that it is not permanent.

Then there are big time lenders like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They have disgraced themselves (again, with ACORN and Self-Help, Inc.’s assistance) before the eyes of the taxpaying public, and the day-to-day efforts to rebuild credibility must weigh on their consciences like a great millstone.

But money and public opinion are never worth more than a life. Sadly, acting CFO David Kellermann of Freddie Mac may have taken his own life over it.

A horrific story

Tom Jackman, Debbi Wilgoren and Zachary Goldfarb of the Washington Post report that David Kellermann was found dead in his Fairfax County home after apparently committing suicide, Fairfax police said.

Kellermann, 41, was a longtime Freddie Mac executive who joined the firm as an analyst in 1992. He became acting CFO in September of 2008. Police were called to his home shortly before 5 a.m. according to the authorities. The call was made by someone inside the home whose identity has not been revealed. The body was was found in the basement. It was unclear to the Post whether a suicide note or other sign of motivation had been left behind.

A company in trouble

It may very well have been stress that led to the David Kellermann suicide. Freddie Mac had made “risky mortgage-related investments” that resulted in losses in the billions. After the American housing market crashed, Freddie Mac was “transformed into a quasi-government agency, carrying out big parts of the Obama administration’s housing recovery plan,” as the Post puts it.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were severely criticized by Congress for paying $210 million in retention bonuses (spread between 7,600 over an 18-month span). Further inflaming matters, federal regulator James Lockhart defended the ill-timed bonuses, saying “those currently working at the companies are an important part of the solution and not the problems of the past.”

The public didn’t agree

As acting CFO, Kellerman was responsible for Freddie Mac’s financial controls, financial reporting, tax, capital oversight and compliance with federal oversight requirements. He also oversaw the company’s budgeting and financial planning.

According to the Post, Freddie Mac’s government-appointed CEO, David Moffett, quit following disagreements with federal regulators. John Koskinen has been serving as a temporary replacement. No permanent successors to Moffett – or Kellerman – have been named.

Related Videos:

Freddie Mac, a company that has already received billions of dollars of government funding, is asking for another $30.8 billion from the U.S. Treasury.

Right now taxpayers own 79 percent of the company, after the government moved the company into conservatorship in September.

Troubled times

Freddie Mac says it needs the $30.8 billion in cash advance loans because of deep losses it sustained fourth quarter of its fiscal year. The company says it lost $23.9 billion in three months. Over the year in 2008, the company lost $50.1 billion.

Only a week ago, Freddie’s CEO David Moffett, who was appointed in September, announced he would step down from his post. John A. Koskinen was named interim chief executive and Robert R. Glauber interim nonexecutive chairman on Wednesday — the same day the company asked for the additional aid.

Pre-emptive strike

Freddie Mac seems to be preparing for backlash. It already issued a statement regarding the new request for aid:

“Freddie Mac is working hard to serve our expanded mission in this historic crisis, by doing all we can to help stabilize the financial markets and hasten the recovery in housing. We absorbed heavy financial losses last year, driven primarily by mark-to-market items and credit-related expenses. But we also provided vital liquidity to the strapped housing market — injecting more than $460 billion in mortgage funding in 2008.”

Loan refinance program

Freddie Mac plays a big role in Obama’s recently revealed foreclosure prevention plan. People who have mortgages held by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae can apply for new loan terms to get lower interest rates or longer terms. This is a special privilege for Fannie and Freddie customers because only homeowners who are delinquent on their loans can apply for the other portion of the government’s loan modification program.

There’s no word yet on whether or how the new government aid will affect the loan refinance program.

I am certainly not the only one concerned over ACORN and its role in razing America’s economy to the ground. Michael Gaynor writes that Anita MonCrief, who has testified in court against the community organization group, is eager to expose the group’s connection to Herbert Sandler. She’s writing a four-part series entitled “ACORN and the Sandlers.” Like everyone else who cares about eliminating government corruption, I’d love to see what she comes up with.

Why didn’t ACORN go after “one of the worst predatory lenders in the country?” What is its relationship with the Center For Responsible Lending (take a look; new information is always good, however)? What should we know about ACORN’s housing projects like Desert Rose in Arizona and the Glenn Subdivision in Texas? I look forward to Ms. MonCrief’s analysis.

President Obama’s connection

There are many people who are up in arms over Barack Obama ascending to the presidency when it is considered that he may have been closely involved with ACORN. You did know that ACORN has been accused of voter fraud by MonCrief and others, right?

ACORN is known to have had allies among Congressional Democrats. Senator Obama of Illinois was allegedly one of those. Where were they when ACORN was extorting banks into making bad loans and preventing the Treasury Department from overseeing what was going on with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac? President George W. Bush, Senator John McCain and other Congressional Republicans were crying for that oversight to occur. Instead, the giant lenders melted down and the volcano that is the American economy blew its top.

Getting their cut

MonCrief continues to probe at ACORN:

Their latest endeavor illustrates that ACORN may not have its fingers around Obama’s throat quite as tightly as they would like. So, why not do a little street theater, it’s always worked before. They will cower him into submission the way they have everyone else with few exceptions. Secondly, like most of its campaigns, there can be no bailout for the homeowners without the “ACORN off the top cut.” America’s taxpayers are now part of one of the biggest schemes in the country, our money is being used to position ACORN for the 2010 and 2012 elections. As evidence has shown, Washington needs less ACORN cronies, not more.

Gaynor wonders what hold ACORN may have on President Obama. The president claims he represented them in a lawsuit involving a motor voter law where the Clinton Administration Justice Department sided with ACORN. Yet Gaynor cries foul against what he considers “liberal media” distortion of the facts. He accuses the New York Times of unfairly targeting conservative Republicans like John McCain (well, relatively conservative, in a liberal kind of way). Most importantly, Gaynor insists that the newspaper failed to report accurately about ACORN due to its liberal Democratic bias.

America should know the truth about ACORN and Obama, or at least more than a token comment by country’s Orator-in-Chief. Perhaps MonCrief has access to untold information. Or perhaps it will just be another version of that great subjective notion of truth that exists in the Information Age.

And that’s only from Part I of MonCrief’s series!

In Part II, she digs deeper for gold:

While Obama is touting a $65 a month increase for America’s workers, ACORN is priming the pump for federal “black gold.” ACORN appears to be challenging Obama for their piece of the pie, either through the stimulus or the foreclosure package. Either way it is now up to the Administration to stand up to a bunch of thugs who are currently under criminal investigation in almost 15 states.

Gaynor asks an obvious question. If President Obama is truly “in the pocket” with easy loans from ACORN, will he actually stand up to them and make current criminal prosecution count? In that scenario, it would appear that the answer would be a resounding “no.” In light of the near trillion-dollar stimulus spending bill – which Gaynor likes to point out was called “pork-free” by the current administration – what is truly being done? Is ACORN being put in its place or rewarded? More on this as information becomes available…

Related Videos:

During the recent presidential election, an organization called the Association of Community Organizers for Reform Now (ACORN) grabbed more than its share of the headlines. Specifically, there have been allegations that ACORN has been involved in large-scale voter fraud (and here’s a road map).  But let’s focus on some of their even more prominent activities, and how they have had close ties with Self-Help Credit Union and the Center For Responsible Lending (CRL). It could easily be said that ACORN and the CRL have sided against the American taxpayer since day one.

For those of you who don’t know, ACORN is a consumer group that began after the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) became official in 1977. Their stated goal since the beginning has been to combat redlining. However, what they have achieved over the years is to effectively convince lenders to relax their standards so that they can serve people with poor credit and little or no assets. According to the Wall Street Journal, ACORN and the CRA “laid the foundation for the house of cards built out of subprime loans.”

Lend… or else

According to the organization Rotten Acorn, the CRA “required banks to increase lending in low-income neighborhoods.” However, the terms of this requirement and how it would be enforced were vague. By the time of the  savings and loan bailouts of the 1980s, lenders had to compile records of their borrowers by income, race and gender. It was at this time that Self-Help, Inc. (the predecessor and current affiliate of the Center For Responsible Lending) began to compile stats to support ACORN’s charges of racism and discrimination on the part of lenders.

It was an effective political intimidation tool they had at their disposal, and ACORN and Self-Help used it well. By the early 1990s when the CRA was revised, ACORN could even pressure banks into lending to subprime borrowers. If lenders didn’t comply, ACORN had the authority to use the CRA to block applications for new bank branches, mergers and acquisitions. ACORN could shut down a banks’ expansion if they didn’t agree to cheap loans for high-risk clients who couldn’t likely pay back the mortgage loans they were taking.

“One of the earliest subprime lenders in the nation”

Martin Eakes, founder of Self-Help and president of the Center For Responsible Lending, put it best. “By offering mortgages to borrowers with battered or bad credit, Self-Help was, in fact, one of the earliest subprime lenders in the nation.”  So clearly, ACORN and the Center For Responsible Lending have had a close association over the years. Now they are going after their own government bailout dollars – much like the lenders Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which ACORN and the Center For Responsible lending helped bankrupt with their subprime lending pressure. And it’s all happening at the taxpayers’ expense!

If this weren’t enough to cast a shadow of doubt on the motivations of the Center For Responsible Lending, consider their support for an organization (ACORN) with such a checkered history. Furthermore, consider that ACORN has also been closely allied with Herbert Sandler, one of the granddaddies of the subprime debacle and a huge money man and board member for the Center For Responsible Lending. How can we believe that Martin Eakes and the Center For Responsible Lending have anything other than their own political agendas in mind? Clearly, their treatment of credit that created the subprime crisis and contributed largely to America’s current economic depression is irresponsible, to say the least.

David Moffett served as vice president of U.S. Bancorp from 1993 to 2007.

Only six months after being appointed CEO of Freddie Mac, David Moffett says he will step down from his position.

Moffett was placed in the chief executive position in September, after the government took over the flailing mortgage finance company. Moffett says he will resign before March 13, and the company’s regulator  will name a successor before then.

Not a good sign

There are few details available about why Moffett has chosen to leave his post. News reports say only that he wants to return to the financial services industry. The company has said it will appoint a new head before Moffett leaves, but some analysts still say his departure is a bad sign.

“Whatever the reason Mr. Moffett has determined to leave, the abrupt departure with no replacement in hand is a negative indicator for the company,” said Jim Vogel, a strategist at FTN Financial Capital Markets in Memphis, Tennessee.

Sad to see him go

Based on comments from others within the company, it’s pretty clear that Moffett’s resignation is his decision. His performance at his post, to which he was appointed by Freddie Mac’s regulator, has been exceptional.

“We are very sorry to see David go. He made valuable contributions to Freddie Mac as the company transitioned into conservatorship,” said Freddie Chairman John Koskinen.

A bit of history

Freddie Mac backs personal loans held by homeowners, much like Fannie Mae, which also was placed under conservatorship by the government last year.

Both companies have been infused with government money to keep them from collapsing. Freddie Mac has used nearly $14 billion in government funds, and the company says it will likely need more aid soon.

A big job

James Lockhart

President Barack Obama’s housing foreclosure prevention plan relies heavily on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Whoever takes over Moffett’s post will be responsible for the fates of many mortgage holders who are struggling to keep their homes.

Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency James Lockhart says he is working with Freddie Mac to ensure a smooth transition in leadership.

Two companies are working on making these signs less common.

Homeowners considering getting instant payday loans to cover their mortgage so they don’t get evicted might be able to hold off.

Moratorium on foreclosures

Payday loans are great for keeping your credit in good standing if you use them to make mortgage payments on time. However, if you are facing foreclosure, it’s probably too late to be worrying about your credit.

If your mortgage is held by either JPMorgan or Citigroup, you don’t have to worry about foreclosure, either. At least not for a month. So instead of getting instant payday loans, start saving now to make sure you have the money to keep your house next month.

Banks wait for word from Obama

JPMorgan Chief Executive Jamie Dimon says the company will not foreclose any owner-occupied homes before March 6. Citigroup won’t foreclose mortgage loans on homes that are the borrower’s primary residence.

Citigroup’s moratorium will last through March 12 or until the White House has finalized the loan modification program, whichever comes first.

Making an example

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are government-controlled, have already stopped evicting homeowners from foreclosed homes. The companies will continue to hold off through the end of this month.

Government intervention

Barack Obama’s administration is currently considering working on the loan modification deal. The program would use taxpayer money to lower monthly payments for homeowners facing foreclosure. However, that group of people is still growing.

More than 274,000 U.S. households received at least one foreclosure-related notice last month, according to RealtyTrac Inc.

Not everyone will be able to receive help, and it will be tough to decide who qualifies.

Stay off the street

For homeowners who are facing foreclosure, instant payday loans can keep you from becoming homeless, and there are usually no credit checks.

Related articles

• U.S. home foreclosure notices hit 274,000 in January (cbc.ca)
• Fannie and Freddie suspend foreclosures (money.cnn.com)
• Foreclosures Fall From December To January (huffingtonpost.com)
• White House may move to buy mortgages (msnbc.msn.com)
• Streamlined Loan Modification Now Available (azmortgageguru.com)
• Mortgage Modification Program (kristalsellsdenver.com)

It must be big

Ready to bust some banks, Barack?

Financial strategist and author David Smick’s recent Washington Post editorial  “Memo to the Banks: Lend or Else” suggests that the President-elect must make bold moves in order to help recapture consumer (and institutional) confidence in the U.S. economy. One of the best ways he sees to accomplish this is via a showdown with the country’s afflicted banking system. Something like this would be much more important (and much less destructive) than cracking down on faxless payday loans that actually aid consumers.

At one time, banks were considered “too big to fail.” Clearly that is no longer the case, though, as massive bailouts from the Bush administration have shown.  Did you know, however, that current post-bailout cash reserves for America’s banks sit at over $800 billion? What are they doing with the money? They’re sitting on it! Smick blasts American banks, for they have shifted from reckless abandon to static safety. The result of this is that they are tightening their belts so much that credit has been unable to flow as it needs to.

The economy suffers

Banks have been doing something with the money. Unfortunately, it’s nothing good. The cockeyed leadership of these financial dumps have taken it upon themselves to send their executives on spa vacations and double their investment in Chinese banks. Common sense or a drive to tackle issues at home head on are nowhere to be seen.

The mortgage crisis is tightly wound up in this, too. Smick points out that giving loans to people who could scarcely repay them was one thing, but the banks made things even worse by burying their errors in off-the-books ventures. We may never know exactly how big a hole the banks dug for themselves, or whether they needed as much money as they received from an all-too-eager government in the first place!

Obama had better bring a shovel

If banks won’t lend, Smick suggests that Obama ride a hard line with these deeply diseased behemoths. He should insist that their Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds be used to buy Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt. Since it is now federally guaranteed, bank executives have no excuse. They cannot sit on their freshly manicured hands, they cannot pass Go and they cannot go on any more “team-building” retreats. It’s time to act like big boys and girls now, or else.

Some bankers are saying they’re confused by the government’s efforts, that some are telling them to demand more capital and lend less money, while others say they’re receiving the opposite message. Poppycock. You know that increased lending will improve liquidity and get this economy on the right track again. You want to make excuses, Mr. and Mrs. Bank.

Wow. Now.

America is in a financial crisis. This is not a test, but the real thing. As Smick sees it, Obama’s only move is to take banks to the carpet and make them heel. Busting banks for their misdeeds is what is needed, not punching payday loans in the mouth. Whether or not this will be possible remains to be seen, but what America wants to see is bold moves. They will appreciate the effort and (hopefully) savor the results.

Low mortgage rates and payday loans help those who dream of owning a home and those who need a temporary shield against small-scale financial surprises and can help repair credit. Since mortgage rates have received welcome decreases from the Federal Reserve – making them low enough that more can afford to make payments and worry less about defaulting – home purchases are up.

The Mortgage Bankers’ index has increased by nearly 50 percent

New Home Construction

Home sales have increased appreciably (Conventional Purchase Index up 17.7 percent) , as have refinances (62.6 percent leap in the  Refinance Index). The Mortgage Bankers Association (http://www.mbaa.org/default.htm) reported its overall Market Composite Index, which measures application volume, shot up 48 percent for the week ending December 19. The only index to fall was the Government Purchase Index, which monitors FHA loans. Yet that index went down by a mere 3.4 percent.

With mortgage rates at nearly zero percent, people are jumping at the dream of home ownership, a dream that poor credit may have barred them from previously. Being able to actually make mortgage payments is a great way to help repair credit. In addition to the rate cuts, the Fed also announced it would buy more mortgage-backed securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Such improvements to America’s economic condition inevitably lead to increased consumer spending and a heightened willingness to exercise consumer credit options like payday loans.

Lower mortgage rates give the economy room to grow

It’s true – increased consumer spending and utilization of credit (in well-considered amounts) are keys to stimulating America’s economy. According to Freddie Mac, current rates have reached at least a 37-year low. Thirty-year fixed mortgages fell last week to 5.19% from 5.47% the week before.

The rising number of mortgage applications are definitely good news for the housing and home building markets. Puts a different face on things after the number of existing homes sold during November 2008 plummeted 8.6 percent as prices plunged by record amounts. New home sales were also lower.

Want to calculate what a mortgage would cost you under the new low mortgage rates?

Here’s an easy-to-use calculator to satisfy your curiosity. Nobody knows how long this mortgage rate decrease will last, and we know that the U.S.  As we’ve learned in the last year, the American economy is very unpredictable, so the chance to lock in a fixed-rate mortgage at a record-low rate may be too attractive to pass up.

Low mortgage rates and payday loans are great ways to help repair credit.

Related articles

• Mortgage rates fall to 37-year low
• Treasurys rally on Fed programs
• Loan Modifications Reamortize, Don’t Affect Fixed Rates

Advocacy Group pressures Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

This announcement came after the government-controlled mortgage finance company came under pressure from a legal-aid group that threatened to file suit over recent evictions in Connecticut.

In late November, both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac pledged that they would suspend tenant evictions temporarily during the year-end holidays. However, New Haven Legal Assistance said that despite the pledge, Fannie Mae had proceeded with more than a dozen new eviction cases in Connecticut. The advocacy group said the evictions would violate legislation passed earlier this year – to rescue the two mortgage finance giants – that required them “to permit bona fide tenants who are current on their rent to remain in their homes under the terms of their lease”. This would keep people from turning desperately toward payday loans.

Fannie Mae now plans to act as a type of landlord, or property management Company. They intend to sign new leases with renters living in foreclosed properties owned by the Company. Freddie Mac has not announced a similar pledge or policy reversal however a spokesperson said they are “currently evaluating additional actions.”

Thousands affected by foreclosure.

With regards to landlord foreclosures, last year a New York University conducted a study and concluded that at least 15,000 New York renter households had been affected by foreclosure. It is safe to say that the number of foreclosures has increased since that study was conducted. So have the number of people taking out payday loans. In response to these landlord foreclosures, a group of Harvard University students have been going door to door in the Boston area and notifying tenants of their rights in an eviction. Many tenants are unaware of their rights and accept “cash for keys” offers from lenders to vacate. This amount is typically between $500 to $1000 US dollars.

Cash for keys.

Chauntay Barnes knows all to well about “cash for keys.” In November of 2007, she moved into a single-family home with her two kids on a quiet street in Hamden, Connecticut. She told the Wall Street Journal that she never missed a payment and was recently shocked to find an eviction notice in her mailbox. Her landlord had defaulted on his mortgage payments, and the property was now owned by Fannie Mae. She tells the Journal that one day, “A guy came by from Fannie Mae offering me cash for keys,” she said, referring to his offer of $1,000 for her to leave the property. I would have taken it but it just wasn’t enough,” she said.

Attorney’s advise homeowners to stay put.

Scared, confused and low on extra cash, she may have thought of turning to payday loans but instead turned to her local legal aid office, New Haven Legal Assistance, where attorney Amy Marx told her to stay put and go through the court system, which would give her the maximum time under law to look for a new place. “We have seen the devastating impacts of Fannie Mae offering cash for keys to tenants and evicting most of the rest,” attorney Amy Marx of New Haven Legal Assistance, said. “We eagerly await the implementation of the new policies.” The Wall Street Journal reports that Fannie Mae could not be reached for comment.

House Oversight Committee Blasts them for Irresponsibility in Investment

At a hearing in Washington D.C. on Tuesday, December 9th, House Oversight Committee Chairman, Henry Waxman, let them have a piece of his mind after testimony from some of the former executives of the company was given at the capitol, along with other committee members who had their two cents worth.  The companies backed their company cash by basically buying up debt, almost like a loan shark, in order to have a steady flow of cash coming in from the borrowers of the subprime mortgages’ payments.  When the payments decreased, or stopped coming in altogether, the amount of operating cash that the company had on hand to use in lending to consumers for other loans, such as other mortgages and loans to businesses, decreased dramatically.  As the market for housing contracted over the summer, the income of the company continued to decline until both were about to declare bankruptcy.
Waxman called the decision to lend money for mortgages with money from other mortgages that were less reliable irresponsible.  This was after both companies’ own risk managers had advised them not to undertake such a venture, since the security of doing so was not viable.  See, the way it worked was that a lot of people had a particular type of mortgage, called an Alt-A mortgage.  Alt-A mortgages are lent to borrowers with more debt, lower credit scores, or people who wanted more money in financing than a property was worth.  These loans are far riskier than other mortgage loans, because they are made outside of the normal guidelines for what are considered viable mortgages.  What the executives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac did was basically buy all of these mortgages from other companies, and then raised the interest rates in order to squeeze more cash out of people that shouldn’t have probably had a mortgage in the first place in order to make a few quick bucks, so they could keep lending.  Then, when these people defaulted, the money stopped rolling in, and things began to go circle down the drain.  Then, the federal government had to step in to bailout these companies to keep them from failing and inject capital so they could get back to work.  So we see then, that responsible financing is a skill that should be taught to not only us the consumers, but also to Wall Street CEOs apparently.   Most quick payday loans customers know responsible financing.   Perhaps Yale and Harvard should be rescinding their MBAs?

Responsibility is Key in your finances

Let this be a lesson to all of us.  You cannot put your finances in a risky situation in order to turn a quick buck.  You have to plan adequately, budget, save, and find ways to spend less, responsibly.  Also, remember that a responsible option in the wake of a sudden change in fortune is needed as well, and trying to get a wacky venture that no one really understands is not the way to go if you need some bailout funds, but quick payday loans from a reputable vendor is far and away a better option.

Some state regulators, recognizing early signs of trouble in housing markets, sought help from Congress when the Bush administration adopted rules barring states from enforcing tough laws targeting predatory lending – the practices that were enabling unqualified applicants to obtain subprime mortgages. With Wall Street serving a key role in buying, bundling and reselling subprime mortgages, …

Quoted With Edits From: Wall Street firms at center of bailout are big political donors (Lexington Herald-Leader)

Did You Know?

Did you know? Many of the top Wall Street financiers and firms who are largely responsible for prompting the $700 billion dollar federal bailout just happen to be the elections biggest contributors.

$64 million dollars have been donated by eight of the most troubled firms. Does this sound oddly suspicious?

I am not very politically savvy however, many of the problems with the mortgage crisis and other economical factors that we are facing today were foretold from as far back as 2001. This was when many of these sub prime mortgage loans and false securities that have brought the current economy to its knees and in need of payday loans, were sold.

Political Football Anyone?

Political Football Anyone?I would rather have payday loans.

Now, whether you believe in political conspiracies or not, it’s not a secret that they happen. We see this all the time with big powerful corporations who bribe candidates with campaign gifts for a return of favor when in power. The tobacco and oil industries are just a couple of these power swaying giants.

I find it remarkable that out of the eight following donors six have failed to succeed. Read the names:

The donors include investment bankers Bear Stearns, Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, insurer American International Group and mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Since March, with the exception of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, all of these companies have been bailed out by the government, have been sold at deeply discounted prices or have simply failed.

The trouble that these donors were facing were likely evident for some time before they made the donations that they did. If times were so tough and or troubled why would the funds have been given. Maybe, some political favors were purchased. Is this how the federal bailout came to fruition?

Regardless of what has happened already, and the shady circumstances which have left the American taxpayer holding a $700 billion dollar bill, we still have far yet to go. Perhaps the new president of the United States will be busy for the first part of his presidency fulfilling the favors purchased by the contributions of these large enterprises.

Time will tell the tale as they say. Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, and someday perhaps the books will be opened and the America people will get an explanation or at the very least a receipt. Until then we will just have to wait it out.

If you are in need of your own personal bailout, you can apply for payday loans.