labolsa.com

el Plan de Rescate y Buffett,

Personalmente el plan no será el bálsamo de fierabrás, pero es la opción mejor porque:
- No tener plan de acción es mucho peor
- Si se quiere restablecer la coyuntura normal, ¿cabria otra solución?. Si Existe nadie lo ha dicho.
- Los contribuyentes se llevan la carga, pero sin plan la carga y el coste para todo EEUU, y por ende el mundo seria mucho peor.
- La burbuja inmobiliaria, mezclada con derivados han dado una mutación cancerigena en el sistema que esta inyección de dinero podría parar y estabilizar.
- Si viene respaldada por un señor como Buffett, al que por lo visto no le gusta perder dinero, la cosa esta todavía mas clara.
- Quiza el pero es… que hace un tipo como Bush con un plan como este ( Parafraseando a burnig).
- Ver mi comentario sobre el circulo que explica como se gestan este tipo de problemas financieros (por cierto algo parecido dice Buffet en su entrevista con Rose) y como se acaban solucionando. “La teoría de la Estupidez” de Cipolla http://www.labolsa.com/foro/mensajes/1222345059/

Os dejo un pequeño estracto del plan:
EMERGENCY
ECONOMIC STABILIZATION

The purposes of this Act are—

(1)
To immediately provide authority and facilities that the Secretary of the Treasury can use to restore liquidity and stability to the financial system of the United States; and
(2)
to ensure that such authority and such facilities are used in a manner that—

(A) Protects home values, college funds, retirement accounts, and life savings;
(B) preserves homeownership and promotes jobs and economic growth;
(C) Maximizes overall returns to the tax- payers of the United States; and
(D) Provides public accountability for the exercise of such authority.


CONSIDERATIONS. 3
In exercising the authorities granted in this Act, the Secretary shall take into consideration—
(1) protecting the interests of taxpayers by maximizing overall returns and minimizing the impact on the national debt;
(2) providing stability and preventing disruption to financial markets in order to limit the impact on the economy and protect American jobs, savings, and retirement security;
(3) the need to help families keep their homes and to stabilize communities;
(4) in determining whether to engage in a direct purchase from an individual financial institution, the long-term viability of the financial institution in determining whether the purchase represents 18
the most efficient use of funds under this Act;
(5) ensuring that all financial institutions are eligible to participate in the program, without discrimination based on size, geography, form of organization, or the size, type, and number of assets eligible for purchase under this Act;

(6) providing financial assistance to financial institutions, including those serving low- and moderate-income populations and other underserved communities, and that have assets less than $1,000,000,000, that were well or adequately capitalized as of June 30, 2008, and that as a result of the devaluation of the preferred government-sponsored enterprises stock will drop one or more capital levels, in a manner sufficient to restore the financial institutions to at least an adequately capitalized level;
(7) the need to ensure stability for United States public instrumentalities, such as counties and cities, that may have suffered significant increased costs or losses in the current market turmoil;
(8) protecting the retirement security of Americans by purchasing troubled assets held by or on behalf of an eligible retirement plan described in clause (iii), (iv), (v), or (vi) of section 402(c)(8)(B) of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, except that such authority shall not extend to any compensation arrangements subject to section 409A of such Code;
(9) the utility of purchasing other real estate owned and instruments backed by mortgages on multifamily properties.