digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

Merrill Lynch is no more

cnbc.com — Merrill Lynch agreed to be acquired by Bank of America for $29 a share, or $43.5 billion, after being pressured into a deal by federal regulators.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • ccb621, on 09/15/2008, -25/+105Bye bye, bull.
    • cannibaljp, on 09/15/2008, -4/+61i think it warrants a bit more than "Bye bye, bull" -

      What the hell is happening to our economy?

      When financial giants fall, they take out a lot of people with them.
      • MOJIRA, on 09/15/2008, -6/+14My money is with Bank of America so I think I'm safe.

        Plus, as I understand it; we're insured up to 100,000$ per account per bank and I don't have that much.
      • whahaa, on 09/15/2008, -6/+9this was all planned from the start.

        /tinfoil hat
      • shadekeiko, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4@ MOJIRA
        Close, it's not by account though - I believe it's by name. You could have a ton of accounts with a certain bank, but if the sum was over 100,000 and they all were under the same name, then you'd still be screwed. The key is to spread over different banks, or have them under different names (i.e. Name Lastname vs. Name O. Lastname...or something to that effect, I think).
      • logicet, on 09/15/2008, -2/+36MOJIRA,
        you are incorrect. The FDIC is not capitalized enough to insure all bank deposits. They just want you to believe that.. They only have about 1% insured.

        http://www.adrich.com/OPNArchive/Opn2008/Aug08.htm
      • Hangly, on 09/15/2008, -1/+14Freddie Mac took a big chunk out of the FDIC cash, and when WaMu goes under it will use up the rest.

        The FDIC was designed to protect against the failure of individual (smaller) banks, not the entire industry.
      • eviltandem, on 09/15/2008, -0/+12Our financial institutions are, for the most part, smoke and mirrors. Even our money is not real (in the sense that is has some actual value).

        So when people start getting nervous that something might not be worth what they thought it was, it's not, because it's only worth what we think it is. Nobody wants to be the last one holding the potato, so everyone is forced to act on what they perceive to be the value of something, making that the value of it.

        This is essentially a run on the bank. When you invest in the stock market, etc, your money doesn't go into that like a bank. It gets exchanged for pieces of paper that represent a sort-of chunk of a company.

        So if people want their cash, and all you have is pieces of paper that nobody else is willing to buy from you at full price atm, then the gig is up. Merrill Lynch can't cover these losses because they have no actual money to use. Their capital is the paper-stuff that nobody wants to buy right now.
      • echriswa, on 09/15/2008, -0/+7From my persepctive this thing is only going to get worse. Rest assured the credit card companies are next.

        At least four people in my family are now forced to file bankruptcy. All have had excellent credit their whole lives, but the housing crash has wiped them out.

        So for those of you who think you're 'safe' in your jobs, and don't have to worry about us little peons, where will your customers come from?
      • PorchSong, on 09/15/2008, -3/+13You fools are so wrong. Merrill is not gone. And this merger will mean that the Bull will be strong and protected--unlike Lehman and AIG. The name will remain in place as well as the branding. It was a merger, not a buyout--regardless of what you hear in the press. Stock was traded out. A buyout is simply that, buying the existing stock without and exchange of your own stock. BofA ponied up 25% of its stock to Merrill. Merrill WILL be a subsidiary of BofA. Furthermore, Merrill's Blackrocks holdings (49%) will be part of the deal.

        The Bull is not going away. The Merrill name is not going away. Merrill simply lost its Independent Brokerage status. Does that mean that Merrill could have gone the way of Lehman's? Possible, but not guaranteed. But, Merrill could have survived as well.

        With the current climate, it was prudent of John Thaine to seek the merger. He protected the shareholders--WITHOUT a golden parachute.

        Lastly, Bob McCann will still be in charge of the Global Wealth Management Division. And, BofA's FA's will now be integrated into Merrill's Global Wealth Division.

        Educated yourself before attacking "Evil Corporations," as, these corporations are owned by the public.
      • sleazycheese, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6@PorchSong

        Golf clap, sir.
      • toonworld, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4@cannibaljp

        at a cost of $12 billion per month for the Iraq war and you're still wondering what happened to your economy? You're kidding right? Please tell me you're kidding!
      • jerrycurley, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2regardxlesws of why this happened, this is NOT a case of "when giants fall"
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+8I work for Merrill Lynch. In this morning's "Town Hall Meeting" video conference, John Thain (CEO), said that as it happens this is a surprisingly ideal fit with very little overlap between the two companies. Therefore, while there will be SOME redundancies, there are not likely to be "massive layoffs" as predicted by some early speculatory commenters.
        The combination of BoA's assets and ML's wealth management services will actually make a VERY VERY VERY strong BoA/ML.

        None of us here is worried about job security.
      • 11oops, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1@ TheLoneHoot... They always say that. Give it some time, a few consultants, and a productivity study or six and then report back to us.
    • st00f72, on 09/15/2008, -0/+7It's just not a bull market.
      • zephyr42, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1Bears, beats, and battlestar galactica?
    • voyetra8, on 09/15/2008, -2/+5LOL at people digging you down. WTF.
    • hootpie, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6We're making the same mistakes we did heading into the great depression...

      http://digg.com/business_finance/We_study_history_ ...
    • voyetra8, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4Lehman Brothers bankrupt:

      http://digg.com/business_finance/Lehman_Brothers_F ...

      Time to panic yet?
      • fascfoo, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4Trust me. People in NYC are already panicking. While the fall out nationwide waits to be seen, the loss of Lehman and Merrill are still relatively contained within the financial services industry.

        Of course, the ripples felt throughout NYC will be big in everything these big spenders user to lavish money on (apartments, restaurants, luxury goods, etc).

      • nycmac247, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4The fall of AIG will mean the beginning of the end for the insurance industry, starting with commercial.
        The first sign we'll see is their leased commercial aircraft being grounded....
      • divrekku, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1@ nycmac247:

        Wrongo. There will be a restructuring of certain types of insurance as well as price increases for what is now perceived as riskier investments or more-likely events, but insurance as an industry is too ingrained in our current system to be completely gone.
    • chanop, on 09/15/2008, -0/+5Hello Bear Market. I knew there was a reason Colbert hated bears.
      • PorchSong, on 09/15/2008, -4/+3Hello bear marker? News flash, we have been in a bear market almost a year now. Are they teaching you anything in college? Or is it strictly social indoctrination now?
    • mirunit, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Did they not have a commercial on recently about how you 'needed the strength of Merrill in these tough times, with proven investments' or something to that extent?
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I work for ML - I don't recall seeing that.

        Regardless, ML will be strong with BoA. They compliment each other VERY well and will become a powerhouse. It turns out to be a very fortuitous deal.
    • eschompthis, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3bye bye? when you see big corporations fall like this its you thats gonna go bye bye.
    • SlowelyFadeAway, on 09/15/2008, -2/+2Hey people, it's not too late to start securing your savings with gold!
    • phike, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1Lehman was acquired, but their brand name might stay -- bigger news is that Lehman is GONE - as in worth $0
      • phike, on 09/17/2008, -0/+1EDIT: MERRILL LYNCH was acquired, but their brand name might stay -- bigger news is that Lehman is GONE - as in worth $0
  • kingofinternet, on 09/15/2008, -110/+131decades of a failed economic policy, a fruitless war, welfare for the rich, and a broken educational system. goodbye america, you got what you deserved. good luck to the next president.
    • bc289, on 09/15/2008, -22/+62what does this have to do with the failure of merrill lynch?
      • AgmLauncher, on 09/15/2008, -25/+45Nothing, he's just a troll and an anti-American snob that thinks he knows everything about the world.
      • HunterSeeker42, on 09/15/2008, -11/+21But he's the king of the internet! OF COURSE HE KNOWS WHAT HE'S SAYING!
      • Hrodrik, on 09/15/2008, -16/+11Everything, bc289.
      • kaelyiesta, on 09/15/2008, -3/+20Troll or not, he is right. It's just a consequence of a larger set of bad policies.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+9Well the current administration's favoring the free market economic ideals which favor deregulation and less oversight might have something to do with it.
      • Yatata, on 09/15/2008, -4/+7everything. He's talking about the bigger picture. An american empire with standing armies colonizing other parts of the world for resources while draining the heart of the american economy is unsustainable. connect the dots. The failure of Merill Lynch is just the tip of the ice burg for what's to come, and all you have to blame are the failed economic policies of the neo conservatives. A deregulated free market will always eat itself alive.
      • evilsin, on 09/15/2008, -1/+8i might or might not agree with kingofinternet

        but i easily can see why he would feel this way

        what i don't understand is why Americans start calling other Americans ignorant anti-American snobs

        nationalist bullying like this makes us look like a nation of fascists; behavior i have seen in other countries but i never thought i would see it here.

        im not a troll, i love my country, i am well traveled, and i have worked in finance for many years. i can also see why kingofinternet would feel this way.
      • rowjimmy, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4they don't actually favor free-market ideals, they favor nepotism. big big difference. corporate welfare, subsidies, public backing etc have no place in a free-market economy.
      • GliTCH82, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5What the ***** is wrong with you? Free market? Free market capitalism doesn't bail out Freddy Mac and Merrill Lynch. What the ***** is up with this hypocrisy, conservatives say we don't want welfare because we'll turn socialist, so instead we dump billions into saving giant ***** corporations with little oversight as to how the money's getting spent? For all we know some people in that corporation want to see it topple, so they can get those funds and pocket the change. Are you ***** ***** me? Corporate welfare is still welfare. So make up your ***** mind.
      • Idiggapony, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5Whatever. I, for one, bow to our new king of the internet.

    • knute5, on 09/15/2008, -6/+21Seems the lack of sound regulatory practice and policy is at least partly to blame. "Wall Street got drunk," is the expression I believe was used. Somebody should have cut the lushes off long before they got into their cars...
      • Demener, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6"Wall Street got drunk" is a Bush quote...

        It's the only analogy he could understand.
      • salomejones, on 09/15/2008, -3/+2And it's not *quite* accurate. My office is a couple of blocks south of Wall Street, and I have friends and collegues at every level of that particular industry, and while alchohol is a very popular drug among them...

        Cocaine is ubuquitous. I think that pretty much explains it all. The drug that makes you want sex more than anything in the world, and absolutely prevents hard-ons. Poetic.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Well, Bush, cocaine, alcohol... certainly not the first time you'll see those referenced in the same thread.
      • TruthExposed, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6 "Wall Street got drunk," - true, but the Fed bought the booze.
    • stagmire, on 09/15/2008, -2/+8Yes, "the rich" are jumping for joy at this wondrous news!
    • Bkaufman, on 09/15/2008, -9/+7Just so you know, a bunch of people at merril who bought up mortgages from banks are to blame here. Sorry, not everything is Bush's fault.
      • mewoot10, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2It was partially the old CEO's fault, he was replaced, but he made a lot of money, and the new CEO tried to fix the old CEO's mistakes, like buying and building so many securities, I mean CDO squared wtf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collateralized_debt_o ...

        anyway, yes not everything is bush's fault. It's the greed of many in the business world that spurned all this crap.
      • Memitim, on 09/15/2008, -3/+2No doubt. The Bush administration may be a steaming bag of dicks but this mess is just bad business. The money train was full steam ahead and even the big boys got in deep, but it was all built on bad paper and *****. I guess things look different when mortgages get bundled en masse but it was pretty obvious that things were out of hand to those of use who saw housing prices inflating to ridiculous levels. They ***** up and now they are paying for it.
      • salomejones, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5Ahem. The president of the united states is ultimately responsible for the state of the union---economy included. So whether or not he did anything to directly cause it, the fact is undeniable that he's done exactly jack ***** to stop it. It IS his fault.
      • laserdog, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Yeah, it's not like the 2004 RNC convention buzzword of choice was creating an "ownership society":

        "Another priority for a new term is to build an ownership society, because ownership brings security and dignity and independence.

        Thanks to our policies, home ownership in America is at an all- time high.

        Tonight we set a new goal: 7 million more affordable homes in the next 10 years, so more American families will be able to open the door and say, "Welcome to my home.""

        -George Bush, 2004 nomination acceptance speech.
    • jusgreat, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3I guess this also explains a very successful Bank of America as well?

      • echriswa, on 09/15/2008, -2/+4Or a very successful US bank...I know of at least three people filing banktruptcy who have US bank cards. This market screwed everyone, not just poor minorities.

        We haven't even seen the worst of it. Bush is just trying to make it wait until he's out of office. Then the wingnuts can blame it all on the liberals.
    • crazycraka, on 09/15/2008, -7/+13***** you?
    • echriswa, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4It has everything to do with Merrill...just the tip of the iceberg. Those IPO's can't hide the truth forever.

      • PorchSong, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Look you poor, pathetic, ignorant fool. "Those IPO's can't hide the truth forever." You know you just said, "Those Initial Public Offerings (IPOs) can't hide the truth forever." Please, for the love of God, shut the hell up and go sit in front of your Obama shrine and pray for forgiveness from the Messiah. Do you even know what an IPO or "Initial Public Offering" is? Obviously not. When I see someone who espouses ignorance on this level, I have to shake my head in wonderment. IPOs.. HAHAHAHA you stupid dork.

        Massive FAIL.
    • radiofrequency, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1The only economic policy that's a failure is the one that rewarded the crooks on Wall Street all these decades for the poor work they've been doing. Good riddence to MER, LEH, BSC, CFC.
    • beblunt, on 09/15/2008, -1/+0lol you guys in the US should be very worried, poor bastards. You know those stories from the 1930's about people eating their pets? hahaha let me know what poodle tastes like! Cos we'll be next.

      world war lolz, Iran vs Israel and the US within 3 months, imagine the ensuing drama then!
  • zerton, on 09/15/2008, -33/+21Merrill Lynch always sounded like the name of a guy who wanted to take all your money
  • SlavaPastuk, on 09/15/2008, -42/+27Looks like they got Merrill Lynch-ed


  • MikeMania, on 09/15/2008, -48/+9phew, I thought someone died.
  • latrosicarius, on 09/15/2008, -44/+12Lynch Merrill
  • gigabyte3d, on 09/15/2008, -36/+8bye bye
  • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -14/+296Thank god the rest of us don't have to pay for it this time...
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -1/+94you don't know that yet
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -3/+8At least Paulson has the good sense to push for private solutions, especially in the case of Lehman. If this becomes a trend though, I'm moving to Europe while my currency can still pay for that.
      • BoonTobias, on 09/15/2008, -9/+4his name was robert paulson
      • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -5/+2Ya i see this as a "get out free card by banks and executives" Basically this is windfall and we all suffered because of it, even if they didn't do it we are screwed.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -10/+3his name was robert paulson
    • nycmac247, on 09/15/2008, -2/+30Yes, that would be the Detroit auto makers next, not Merrill
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+14I'm going to be ***** pissed if they get a bailout, though now that it's on the table it's hard to take it off. Thank Congress for promising them 25 billion $ earlier in the year.
      • benhunted, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2I got even money that it'll be an airline.
      • brad3378, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6To be fair, the "Detroit bailout" is a loan that was promised by congress a year ago as part of the Energy Bill. They still have not received any of the promised loan funding.
      • brad3378, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3Since diggers like to spin stories in favor of their agendas, here is an article about Detroit's Loan that was approved last year:

        http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/chi-sat-aut ...
        FTA:
        "Congress authorized $25 billion in loans in last year's energy bill but has not funded the program. The loans were intended to help the industry meet new fuel economy standards of at least 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent increase."
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Right, but now the heads of the big 3 are testifying in front of Congress and asking for double or triple that. In all fairness, the credit market has deteriorated since then, but it shouldn't be that hard to find private equity for anything that's greentech right now. I'm not trying to push an agenda, I just would prefer that the government not prop up the market like this. Our currency is going to tank.
    • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -18/+7HA! Guess who is financing this deal? This was done on the weekend and totally unexpected. The only institution I can think of with 44 billion on hand is the fed. Guess where that money comes from? Me and you. This is all in the name of not letting a big company fail.

      http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/me ...
      • dilpil1, on 09/15/2008, -1/+15Buried for a tenuous understanding of finance.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -1/+10Dude, in the link you posted it explained where the buyout capital came from--BoA shares. Are you obtuse enough not to even read your own evidence thoroughly?
      • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -1/+20No, you guys are right. I read the article wrong as I am putting all this together. They did finance with stock. They were going finance Lehman Brothers with a guarantee from the fed. So this is a different deal. I apologize for the misleading statements. Thanks for correcting me.

        This deal does dilute BAC shareholders by the way since BAC is going to issue more stock to finance the purchase - which is BS for the stockholders.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -1/+11Respect for being open in your opinion, I digg that
    • sentime, on 09/15/2008, -2/+57Sure just wait till BoA is too big to fail.

      You'll be paying for that one.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+15Exactly, wasn't the FF bailout partially caused by them having exceeded that critical mass?

        So does it seem smart to merge our way out of this problem?
      • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -0/+11This is how he fed operates. They would rather have a bad merger than see a failure since it might create a run on banks and then collapse the whole system. Or it might not but they apparently don't want to find out.
      • Sublimin4L, on 09/15/2008, -0/+8They might just be trying to wait it out. With Lehmann getting ready to file for bankruptcy, Fannie and Freddie under govt control, the feds decided it was enough, and pressured BofA to buy Merrill. It could lead to BofA failing down the road, but at least it's not immediate. Next would be Detroit (doesn't GM have hybrid tech it developed and/or shared with MBenz and Chrysler?), unless they get a bailout.

        Also, how in the hell does liquidity just "evaporate"??
      • DonTazeMeBro, on 09/15/2008, -1/+8Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
      • bobbyi, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4>Also, how in the hell does liquidity just "evaporate"??

        It happens when people lose their confidence in you and are no longer willing to lend you money.
      • kaelyiesta, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1Fiat currency is funny that way, sublimin4L.
      • zephyr42, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1BoA is different because they are VERY diversified and have not taken on excess bad debt, which is why i'm sure BoA has agreed to buy ML. ML, like BoA, worked hard to rid themselves of the worst of their debt, it wasn't enough but together they should be fine.
      • AbelZhu, on 09/16/2008, -0/+0If BofA fails you had better ***** hope the US government steps in or we're all heading for the *****.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 09/15/2008, -3/+9Maybe not.

      It's possible that they get to stiff the stockholders now with devalued shares, then ask the government for a bailout, while the important holders reap the benefits of a higher valued stock, at which point they bail out and THEN leave the Taxpayer as holding the assets of the company.

      >> Others think that BoA shares are the end of this matter. Does anyone forget Bear Stearns so quickly? I recommend checking here on monday to see what this dude has to say about it; http://market-ticker.denninger.net/

      Rest assured, the smart money will be in an offshore account, and no top executives will be harmed in the collapse of the US economy -- just in case some NeoCons out there were forced to stay up late at night in worry.
    • stereosaurus, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4Yeah, they've gotta save up to bail out AIG in the next couple weeks. I guess I'd rather have my tax money go to maybe save some people's savings than I would to fighting wars, but still...
      • truck87bp, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I think it might be tomorrow for AIG than in 2 weeks.
      • beblunt, on 09/15/2008, -0/+0Don't be fooled, not all facism looks like Adolf Hitler! Bush is just a figurehead like McCain is going to be in their big dream of world domination, I can't disagree with what they're doing. This is the only solution to the problem the States is facing, it's not all about defense and construction contracts, the US isn't finished yet, they'd never let it happen.

        /Cue the apocalypse and four horsemen.
    • oldgal, on 09/15/2008, -2/+2but wait, there's more news: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2 ...
    • julesbond007, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Well it's not like we have an option...
    • mewoot10, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4If the financial market collapses, it will have a longterm negative effect on americas economy, so with lehman brothers filing bankrupcty and all the other firms which have gone for lack of a better term "belly up" it's not good. And it's already effecting america, people are being more stingy with their money, and prices are rising on many things, stocks are going down, investors are losoing money. It's all related, like the food chain.
      • AbelZhu, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Just wanted to agree and add that for every job on wall street, it creates 3 more in new york city. Banking accounts for 25% of personal income in NYC - imagine the tax dollars generated alone by personal income; not to mention the firms themselves.

        See a downfall in banking, and you'll see budget cuts across the board - education, firefighters, NYPD, etc.
    • Angostura, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6Not through direct taxes, but rest assured, everybody pays in some form.
    • Hangly, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2We'll end up paying for it when BofA goes under.

      Why one failing bank would want to take on the liabilities of another failing bank is beyond me.
      • eviltandem, on 09/15/2008, -3/+11They aren't. Basically all the bad debt is being given to the American government, and all the good stuff is being kept by private organizations.

        But we can't afford universal medical care. Giving everyone equal access to health care would be wrong. That's socialism, and it's evil, unAmerican, communist, immoral, and just plain WRONG!

        But this isn't socialism! We don't like socialism or welfare (unless it's to bail out a corporation or wealthy individuals). That isn't socialism, it's a "bailout". Very different. They are spelled differently, and if you notice they even have a different number of letters!

        This is capitalism with STYLE!
      • Hangly, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Ahem.

        We'll end up paying for it when, as you say, all the bad debt is given to the American government.
      • dave122, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1It's not socialist, it's privatized gains and socialized losses - we're only halfway there!
    • eviltandem, on 09/15/2008, -0/+5...and as a country we still are talking about lower taxes!

      We can't pay for our current stuff, and now we're just taking hundreds of billions of extra debt on with no matching rise in income, services, or jobs.

      At this rate our faith in the government's ability to repay these things will start to come into question. It's running bigger losses than any of these companies just on day-to-day activities.

      The US government is now the center of the financial world. Everything hinges on us maintaining faith in it's ability to repay debts. Better hope that doesn't change...
      • csstudent, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1How about we talk about cutting government spending too instead of always thinking that raising taxes is the solution.
      • ldailey06, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2I think his point is that cutting taxes certainly isnt the solution
    • greevar, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Don't forget about all of the jobs that will be lost. Who is going to pay for unemployment for all of these people? That's right, we are.
      • LordRedSnake, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Let's not engage in class warfare here. The mid-level grunts working 70-100 hour weeks at Lehman made good cash for busting their asses and selling their souls, but they're not responsible for the piss poor management decisions that came from the top. They're also not responsible for the unnaturally low interest rates the Fed set that encouraged this disaster in the first place. Faulting brokers, bankers, and analysts for this crisis is like blaming UAW workers for Detroit's inability to compete in the auto market. I don't think anyone would be opposed to laid off UAW workers collecting unemployment.
    • LordRedSnake, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2The only ones we've had to pay for so far are Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. They were GSE's in the first place, spun off from the Treasury with an implicit government guarantee. They should have been privatized but the opposition claimed that the private market should not be the last guarantor of loans and thus we had a bastardized public/private hybrid that was sure to privatize profits and pass the losses on to the taxpayer.

      The Bear Stearns "rescue" on the other hand merely offered a Fed backstop to make the deal go through, yet JP Morgan has not had to tap the Federal guarantee yet and even in the event they do, the CDOs used as collateral will in time be worth several times more than the Treasury bills they were swapped with. In this case the taxpayer actually gains (unfortunately this is a drop in the bucket of the wasteful excess found elsewhere).
    • adoram, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1You think we're not going to pay for it, one way or another? Think again!
    • BESTenemy, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1 Where do you think Bank Of America got that money? Lehman Brothers was worth pennies compared to MER, but there were no bidders. In the current deleveraging environment no one makes bets unless they are backed by either the FED or the Treasury. Bank Of America, along with JP Morgan and Citigroup are primary borrowers of the FED credit fascilities. They were on the short-selling protection list announced a month ago. They get the money straight from the guys that print the bills.

      50 billion (70% premium over Friday's MER market capital) is your money. You (the taxpayer) did pay for it. You just don't know it yet.
  • JanusTheDoorman, on 09/15/2008, -18/+50Another one bites the dust...
    • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1mmmmmmmmmmmm nope. Another one actually avoids biting the dust by agreeing to a VERY smart/beneficial deal. Thain actually made a VERY VERY smart move here. Lehman Brothers? Yes, THEY bit the dust. Merrill Lynch? Not at all, not by a longshot.
    • Albo23, on 09/15/2008, -2/+1Why do we have financial institutions handling our money? Why can't the entire government just handle it? We now have these mega corporations handling my money that can screw the entire economy over with no consequence. Of course the government wouldn't screw their own economy so why not?
      • Pantheran, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3"Of course the government wouldn't screw their own economy"

        Really? REALLY? That is your assertion here?
      • Albo23, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Well.... :/ Come on, Bush was the main issue but these financial instutions are really killing us in every way imaginable. They can just fall and we're done, the government cant do that.
  • sablowsky, on 09/15/2008, -9/+115It's gonna be a rough day on the market tomorrow..ugh.
    • ih8ducks88, on 09/15/2008, -0/+28It's been rough for the last 10 months especially the last 2 weeks. It's just going to be a continuation of that. Lehman, Merrill, and AIG are going to drop terribly.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+17Remember all those people saying to buy commodities after the dollar's temporary rise made them cheap? Yea, they're looking ***** smart now.
      • anarcurt, on 09/15/2008, -0/+26NYT reporting AIG has 48-72 hours left without extra capital. ***** falling apart.
      • trogdorBURN, on 09/15/2008, -0/+8time to sell short and make some cashh
      • dksupremacy, on 09/15/2008, -2/+1Ive been buying AIG since it hit $14, Its gonna hit at least $20 again, Market has overreacted, They still have positive cash flow per share and have 154B in cash. They also plan to sell assets, AIG will dispose of its aircraft-leasing arm, International Lease Finance Corp., which has a fleet of more than 900 airplanes valued at more than $50 billion. NTY reported they need 18 billion to stave off credit downgrades.

        Im taking advantage of other people's emotions
      • jfujita, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2AIG dropped to $7.50 at pre-market trading. dksupremacy you should get out pretty quickly.
      • PorchSong, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2@dksupremacy

        Wrong. AIG down 52.88% today. They are desperately trying to raise capital to the tune of 40 Billion--and failed. They are toast.
      • dksupremacy, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Nope, Im calling it, Buy as much of AIG as you can, Its at $6 now and I keep buying to lower my avg purchase price. I've done my research and Don't bring emotions to the table. Btw AIG was granted 20 Billlion
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2dk, someone made good money shortselling you today
      • PorchSong, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1@dksupremacy

        AIG will most likely be out business later this week. All indications are that they are going to be downgraded (their rating) tomorrow or Wednesday and that will be the final nail in coffin. They were down 61% today and desperately seeking capital infusion. The 20B you are saying was "granted" was really just permission to tap their insurance side of business. Bad move. Sinking ship. But, you are more than welcome to ride that ship down.

        WAMU is next on the hit list as well. With over 70% of their assets tied to CMOs, they can not possibly hope to survive. They really have no business outside of mortgages.

        So here is the rundown:

        Bears -- Failed and bailed out.
        Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- Failed and taken over by government
        Lehman Bros.-- Failed and filed Chapter 11
        Merrill Lynch -- merged with Bank of America to assure its future viability and now strong as ever.
        AIG -- On the cusp of failing. My best guests are the end of week. Stock down 61% today.
        WAMU -- Again, on the brink of failing with no hope of bailout.

        Wachovia -- will fail most likely as they bought Golden West Bank aka World savings, or the inventors of the Option Arm. They are holding a crap load of real bad loans that are going to adjust in a bad way over the next 18 months. They will be very hard pressed to survive.

        UBS -- toss up. They might get caught in the credit crunch.

        Survivors:

        Goldman Sachs -- still strong but could be sucked down with financial market pull downs.
        Morgan Stanley -- same as above.
        Merrill Lynch -- No longer independent investment firm as GS and Morgan Stanley because of the BofA merger, but still a major world player.
      • dksupremacy, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1@ Porch and Wilarseny
        I forgot to mention Im not in AIG for the short-term, Im in it for the Long at least 3 yrs, I made the same bet with Ambac, bought tons of shares at $2 and it shot up. I still believe AIG is waayyy oversold and im picking them up. I don't believe AIG is in the same condition as Lehman and Bears. Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan are working to prepare a potential $75 billion lifeline to AIG. I'm not gonna stop buying, it's at $2.60 now, im not worried, i'm gonna keep buying

        - The Great Contrarian -
    • SDM187, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6s&ps are down 4500 pts overnight... dow is down 350!!
    • brad3378, on 09/15/2008, -5/+2Tomorrow is going to be an AWESOME day for me.
      I'm betting against the U.S. Dollar via commodity driven stocks.

      The more bailouts, the less the dollar is worth at the global level which boosts the prices of commodities which should help me retire very young.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2smart man if you picked them up a week or two ago when the dollar peaked
      • chuckDontSurf, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1"The more bailouts" Have you been paying attention? They're been no bailouts for Lehman and Merrill.
      • trizzlelv, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2You're that guy at the craps table who bets against the table to crap out huh? Jackass.
      • mirunit, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Except the dollar is up vs EU and oil is down.
  • DuffyDirect, on 09/15/2008, -17/+33cnbc is cracking me up tonight, cramer looked like he ***** his pants
    • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -3/+2Cramer always looks like that. He's a dick. Remember, he's the guy who VERY emphatically screamed at a guy not to get out of Behr-Sterns the day before it plummeted through the basement.
      • jcfisher3rd, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4He was talking about assets in Bear Stearns brokerage accounts not their stock.
  • Moisgreat, on 09/15/2008, -11/+218Never trust the banker when playing Monopoly.
    • MOJIRA, on 09/15/2008, -0/+19Indeed, the banker always seems to end up with a few more 500$ bills.
    • kwasmosis, on 09/15/2008, -1/+10Never trust the banker when, ________________.
      • BTraina, on 09/16/2008, -0/+2never trust the banker when, your trading with Indians on the Oregon trail
    • DarkprinceArmon, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2lol in never play as a character if I'm the banker.
  • bodylanguage, on 09/15/2008, -16/+8god what a crazy year this has been
  • duggynyc, on 09/15/2008, -22/+21It is truly a historic time we live in. However, emerging from this in a few years is a financial powerhouse in Bank of America.
    • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -4/+8Exactly like the kind we just bailed out in Fannie & Freddie, right?

      If part of the problem was that these corporations just became too large for their own good, is the best way out of the situation to merge?
      • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -2/+6This a federal reserve engineered merger. This is not banks wanting to merge.

        http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/me ...
      • DigitAl56K, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3lonesomewolf is correct, read the first line in the original linked article.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3That's exactly what I'm saying... while this may give them enough footing to survive for the time being, doesn't a merger effective create more problems down the road? I know it's the Fed's job to prevent total collapses, but I think if it pushes for more mergers then the *****'s just going to hit the fan a bit later and a bit harder.
      • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Yes Wilarseny. You are right and my whole family owns large positions in BAC and we are all freaking out.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1good luck, sir.. hope you can sell before it tanks tomorrow
    • DigitAl56K, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5That all depends on the risk of the securities/debt BoA just bought. TFA already says Merrill wrote down $40bn last year.
    • jeffvvisoft, on 09/15/2008, -4/+11RNC click gang working over time
    • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4If too many rats don't climb aboard and sink BAC.
    • VitriolAndAngst, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4Wow, one Mega-bank and nothing but failures? I'm so excited, pinch me.
    • anarcurt, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Yeah the company who also bought Countrywide. BofA is loving itself some ***** assets.
    • DarkprinceArmon, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Actually we'll have 2 major Banks. The Federal Reserve, and Bank of America. I don't get how Bank of America can keep buy crap assets in this horrible economic downturn.
      • Tehrab, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Four words: buy low, sell high.

        BofA bought Merrill without the baggage. I would do that deal a thousand times over if given the opportunity.
  • IphtashuFitz, on 09/15/2008, -13/+186Great... Pretty soon all money in the US will be handled by Bank of America Megacorp...
    • Obamillusion, on 09/15/2008, -1/+27Of course the Federal Reserve really controls the money...

      BoA was pressured into buying Merrill; this might not even work out well if Merrill still has a lot of toxic assets.
      • ih8ducks88, on 09/15/2008, -0/+14Merrill saw what happened to Bears Stern and the direction Lehman Bros. was headed and started to liquidate as much as possible to try and prevent going under. It worked to some degree because they are getting bought out whereas Lehman is going bankrupt tomorrow.
      • Obamillusion, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Merrill's core business is still good, it's just all the risky assets the previous CEO invested in (he got fired...). It's just a huge amount of money to write off and hopefully BoA has the capital to do make it work.
      • gooniegoogooz, on 09/15/2008, -2/+0BofA was not pressured into buying Merrill, pure hubris and greed on the part of corporate america going for broke. Hopefully this is the last we see of this, the only possibly good outcome of all this mess. BofA, although holds my little bit of capital (which is scarry), cannot sustain in the mess they have put themselves into. First non-performing Countrywide with absolutely no assets and huge liability, and now Merrill with over half-TRILLION $$ in debt and overstated "assets"?? WTF
    • Hrodrik, on 09/15/2008, -2/+5Which will have many connections with the people in the government (not the state), I suppose. The rich get richer.
    • dycc07, on 09/15/2008, -1/+8aka the Federal Reserve
    • honutt, on 09/15/2008, -0/+9First they took over my credit cards, now they're taking over my 401(k)...
    • MOJIRA, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4Nah don't worry about that; General Electric and British Petroleum will own everything before Bank of America does.
      • billbugger, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1... or China at the rate we're borrowing money from them, to buy their exports. Basically borrowing money to give it back to them, like a bookie working for a casino.
    • oldgal, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5I think BofA is just trying to make Guinness World Book for most concurrent shareholder lawsuits and highest tonnage of bad paper.
      or
      Sr. Execs make big bucks on these deals. Maybe Ken Lewis is just getting himself a bail-out before you need a parachute present.

      Buying for $29.00/share when it closed under $17 on Friday with comments like it may be undervalued?

      If due diligence has not been done (sorta sounds like it has and sorta sounds like it hasn't - I can't tell) then the deal could still fall apart, or the selling price could change. On the other hand they sure make it sound like the deal has been made.
    • CarStan, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Its something i thought about when i was 13. I asked my teacher in economics: So if we have a completely free market that only lets the strongest companies survive, won't we end up with one big corporation that buys all the others? And wouldnt that, one company that employs all the people, controls all their money, be exactly the same as communism/socialism?
      One big entity that controls the whole market and people?
      • mneinast, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4you took economics when you were 13?
      • CarStan, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4i am from germany. from 8th grade on and higher there was an additional curriculum. We could choose between Economy, Philosophy and Religion. I took Philosophy after that year, because economics didnt make sense to me, or there were obvious flaws to me my teacher wasnt able to explain away.Philosophy was much more understandable and fun. We go to read Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder.
    • dankenstein, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Well, it is called Bank of America, maybe they saw this coming....
    • kayvman78, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Bend Over America...
    • MelvinSchlubman, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1> Pretty soon all money in the US will be handled by Bank of America Megacorp

      a subsidary of Buy n Large
    • ultrasparc, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Bank of Evil
    • Tyrghast, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I'm just looking forward to when I can visit the Wal-Mart village: it will be behind the current Wal-Mart megastores, and will be able to tour and buy houses and cars and every possible thing you can think of.
  • wilhoitm, on 09/15/2008, -24/+86Where is the token Republican that is going to say that the economy is doing great, better than ever!
    • jeffvvisoft, on 09/15/2008, -5/+42He and his cronies are busy burying this story and comments
      • wilhoitm, on 09/15/2008, -1/+12I think they are on the Golf Course! The Wedge club would be great for hole number 13.
      • rowjimmy, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2it's just called a [pitching|gap|sand] wedge, not a "wedge club"
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -11/+7um i haven't heard people bragging about the economy no matter what side you come from. But i don't think we need another chicken little. The fault rests with the banks. I smell Extreme Banking Regulations coming on.
      • bjornski, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NVjq2py7BA

        The man McCain listens to for economic advice.
      • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -3/+1I agree with him... now if we could just control inflation
      • rv361162, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3To control inflation, you must 1st stop creating credit out of thin air for banks to issue at a discounted rate.

        So, in essence and simply put, you abolish the Federal Reserve and start the process of controlling inflation (if that's even possible with a fiat currency)

        Fiat currency (google it) is just paper with nothing it can be changed into.
    • HoratioHellpop, on 09/15/2008, -12/+6You honestly think it was "republicans" that made Merril Lynch make piss-poor decisions about their own portfolio? Cripes, you're a dumbass.
      • caramba420, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2When you get to that level of wealth, (r) and (d) have no meaning. All that matters is greasing the right wheels Stanley O'Neal contributed to both Democrat and Republican candidates and PACs.

        http://www.newsmeat.com/ceo_political_donations/E_ ...
      • wilhoitm, on 09/15/2008, -2/+3How many Democrats do you really think work at Merrill Lynch with their 200k+ salaries! I mean there are a few Democrats that clean the toilets and sort the mail. Ultimately it is Republican greed and idealistic de-regulation that has caused this problem. This is What happens when you have a Republican in the White House for 8 years!
      • mille716, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Horatio (and actually the two others who replied), the OP never stated that republicans caused the Merril Lynch to go under. Its just that all these financial institutions going under is a clear sign of an economy in trouble yet somehow though Bush won't admit the US is in tough times.

        No party caused it but only one is admitting its real.
    • mewoot10, on 09/15/2008, -9/+4Republican or Democrat, we're all in this together, and we all know (unless your stupid, and disconnected from society, Yes we all know that kind of person) that the economy is in this *****, i don't think that the republicans would be the people to say that the economy is in this *****, i mean people always give them the bad rap for giving rich people tax cuts, and say they are the "business" party, so it seems like they know something about money.
    • FutureGuy, on 09/15/2008, -3/+11Another trophy for Bush to hang on his wall of shame. Merrill Lynch (s)is(/s) was an icon of Wall Street.
      • diggimator, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3(s)is(/s)?... Oh, you meant "is" with a strikethrough dash. I guess digg doesn't like the "less than" character (test: <s>is</s>)
    • CarStan, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4He's on Fox News of course.
      http://www.newshounds.us/2008/09/11/hannity_has_a_ ...
      • ldailey06, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1As long as there's one aspect of the economy that's good, it's in good shape. His logic is flawless.
    • MutatedNantuko, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6Cue McCain: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=igAmVs0cvY8
    • tigerlil1, on 09/15/2008, -6/+1This is a great big thanks for the losers (idiots) that made loans that will destroy the financial empires. Don't blame the President for this, blame the maggots that made very bad loans to people. Sad time but like everything else America will move on and over come another disaster. McCain/Palin are the best for the USA.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight... The same McSame that tried to pressure federal investigators not to look any further into Charles Keating during the S&L crisis, because ol' Chuck was giving McSame's wife and father in law a sweetheart real estate deal. It became known as "the Keating 5" - look into it.

        McSame is the WORST thing we could have happen right now. This whole issue facing the market right now is based on the lack of oversight and regulation in the banking industry making loans they never should have in the first place. A guy like McSame, who likes to use his office to pressure regulators to look the other way, is NOT what this country needs.
      • caramba420, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3"Insanity is doing the same thing, over and over again, but expecting different results. "
    • fastang, on 09/15/2008, -7/+1Where are the democrats? Oh that's right...Having gay sex and hugging trees.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4First of all, what a wonderful non sequitur.

        Secondly, I believe you'll need to follow Larry Craig and Mark Foley to the mens room for the gay sex part.
  • bongfarmer, on 09/15/2008, -8/+41"Morgan [Stanley] turned down a possible acquisition because it couldn't examine Merrill's books in 48 hours, a person close to the matter said."

    the wheels are coming off, scramble much?
    • stradf, on 09/15/2008, -2/+20A smart move actually. Don't risk buying crap, especially with so-complex products.
      • dzw120, on 09/15/2008, -1/+7Amen, they got burned hard by the credit derivatives, they've learned an important lesson in understanding underlying risk before making any purchases.
    • salomejones, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4And this is exactly why Morgan Stanley still exists, and will continue to well after this crisis. It's good to see some functional grey-matter on wall street.
    • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Do you seriously doubt BoA failed to perform any measure of due dilligence on ML's books?
  • umbriago, on 09/15/2008, -6/+19Well, that's gonna sting tomorrow.
    • form3hide, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Can't wait to go into work tomorrow as a new Bank of America employee.
  • frankidadio, on 09/15/2008, -10/+45The size of Bank of America. I don't know. Makes me a bit nervous.
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -2/+19Why they are one of the few banks that kept there heads high and refused to give out loans based on ridiculous circumstances. Meanwhile banks around the country were falsify income numbers and lying to customers. Thank god we have a BofA... I call Wachovia next to sink
      • bjornski, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I've been waiting for them to go under for a while.
      • mille716, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1***** man, they're both North Carolina banks.
      • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Most of them are :)
    • HoratioHellpop, on 09/15/2008, -2/+1In the old days (just a few decades ago) ... I don't remember there being dozens and dozens of big-name banks/investment firms. This will be rough, but I wonder if some good will come of it .... paring the bad fruit from the tree?
      • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2well so far, BofA has kept its head above water and out of the *****. We will see
    • Hangly, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3The sheer size of BofA won't make all that bad debt go away.
    • mistertrogdor, on 09/15/2008, -2/+3HAHA Bank of American Ad at the top of my page
      • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2lol google adsense is on overdrive today
    • psibladeZX, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Well, its investment banking operations were slim and nil so now it will be a more rounded bank.
    • rv361162, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Didn't BOA purchase countrywide?

      They sure have some cash on hand, eh?
  • warr1979, on 09/15/2008, -51/+251First Bears-Stern now Merill Lynch next Lehman Brothers, In eight years one administration DESTROYED this country every day it gets worse and worse...Greed is going to kill America and its a shame :(
    • jmnormand, on 09/15/2008, -5/+67greed kills all empires...
      • fireburner23, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1Teldar Paper, Mr. Cromwell, Teldar Paper has 33 different vice presidents each earning over 200 thousand dollars a year. Now, I have spent the last two months analyzing what all these guys do, and I still can't figure it out. One thing I do know is that our paper company lost 110 million dollars last year, and I'll bet that half of that was spent in all the paperwork going back and forth between all these vice presidents. The new law of evolution in corporate America seems to be survival of the unfittest. Well, in my book you either do it right or you get eliminated. In the last seven deals that I've been involved with, there were 2.5 million stockholders who have made a pretax profit of 12 billion dollars. Thank you. I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentleman, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms; greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.
    • mcsenget, on 09/15/2008, -16/+7More like over about a hundred years since the birth of the BANK.
    • num3thod, on 09/15/2008, -13/+6...and taking the whole damned world down with it : (

      Shame indeed.
    • HunterSeeker42, on 09/15/2008, -19/+81What did Bush do about this? This is all fallout still from the housing / lending market, not war debt or whatever
      • geoboy, on 09/15/2008, -8/+56To be fair, the Bush administration's pushing for unnecessary war and approving the spending of tons of money that doesn't exist hasn't helped the economy either.
      • redfox2600, on 09/15/2008, -3/+2Although to be on topic none of that really had anything to do with people buying houses.
      • DiggMasterJ, on 09/15/2008, -2/+10War spending; or rather, printing money for war spending, is driving huge inflation. People can't afford to pay their mortgage. Gas costs more, food costs more, taxes are going up to balance city and state books, paychecks are NOT going up.

        Still isn't THE reason, but 554 billion, ***** BILLION, yes, I said B-B-Billion dollars, would go a long way if it were spent fixing this economy.
      • addrake, on 09/15/2008, -0/+9did he say B-B-Billion dollars?

        O-O-Oh *****!

      • tw12lve, on 09/15/2008, -3/+2So the govt. should bail out risky lenders/borrowers ? And that's Bush's fault how? Inflation != risky loans
      • Idiggapony, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2No, it's all Bush's fault. I bought my house because he invaded Iraq, and now I can't pay my mortgage.

        Damn you, Bush!

    • whatyeah3, on 09/15/2008, -12/+100Though it is fun to point the finger at the current administration, I don't see how this is their fault. This is the result of imprudent business practices and short-sighted financial decisions.
      • trogdorBURN, on 09/15/2008, -3/+34Thank you. Someone has some financial intuition.

        /accounting and finance major rant
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -6/+24I'm not well-versed in the background of this debate enough to give a definite rebuttal here, but I think what people are saying is this administration pushed for removing regulation and oversight into a lot of these processes, which allowed companies to take on worse/riskier assets with little transparency.
      • whatyeah3, on 09/15/2008, -6/+8Wilarseny: You may be right, however you must look at the big picture. The companies that we are losing will hurt the economy. Likely their loss will hurt us greatly, but the damage will not be permanent. After this fiasco, it will not be necessary to regulate as much as the companies will have learned to tighten their lending standards. Though I understand that at chaotic economic times such as these it is easy to panic and hope that someone will save us (government intervention/regulation), in the long run will not only recover but be better off.
      • BreatheRhetoric, on 09/15/2008, -7/+5They haven't pushed for removing regulation. Ever hear of SOX?
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6I agree with you; it's not really my position, just playing DA. I only hope investors can see far enough in the long-term from now on to not take these kinds of risks with the entire US financial system.
      • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -3/+4Yes, this has been in the making crossing several administrations. It takes years to engineer a failure of this size.
      • lebruf, on 09/15/2008, -2/+2This has way more to do with Greenspan and his over correction for what happened in the dot-com meltdown than it has anything to do with Bush.

        It also has a lot to do with the practices of a severely underegulated Mortgage industry with banks stupid enough to buy the worthless paper they were selling.

        Get off your political high horse and stop blaming Bush/Cheney (who can be blamed for a LOT nonetheless) for everything that's gone wrong in the past 8 years.
      • Sidemarx, on 09/15/2008, -1/+0The rush to find high returns when Greenspan kept rates low is a lot what did this. Excess liquidity seeking higher returns led people to adjust risk return relationships and basically create leverage for securities. If you have an instrument yielding 8% that can be completely blown through if house prices drop 15% you have to ask yourself if maybe this is a little risky.

        Now I despise the current administration and everything about it. Their policy of undermining the price of the dollar has lead major problems. A return to PPP was inevitable, even though we are back up and bouncing around.

        Financial institutions are the only companies that can blow up in a matter of days. We just lost three banks that tallied up over 300 years of I-Banking experience in less than six months.
      • Comatoast, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3America was encouraged by this administration, after 9/11, to "spend, spend, spend" in order to keep the economy strong. Encouraged to buy homes through lenders that, because they have paid for deregulation and knowing that the gov't (via taxpayers) would bail them out should they fail, had no reason not to pass these bad loans.

        Americans don't know how to save, and the vast majority don't. We're encouraged to spend in order to keep a flimsy economy aloft. An economy that is based almost entirely on pushing money around from place to place in order to make more money. We don't produce anything here anymore.

        I have a bad feeling all of this will change in 50 years when we WILL be producing goods again - this time for more economically sound countries like China. We will be producing cheap crap for them to consume.

        This is just another example of what happens to an economy making money only from money with no solid base of goods produced.
      • Picer, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Which the republicans are all about
      • bobbarkerbilly, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2whatyeah3 : "After this fiasco, it will not be necessary to regulate as much as the companies will have learned to tighten their lending standards."

        Suuuuuurrrrrrrreeee.

        Then in time they will get greedy again, loosen their lending standards, and make the same mistake again.
      • dave122, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1The administration didn't cause this problem (mostly) but they did piss me off when they bailed out BS, FF, and whoever comes next. They did some risky stuff to get a quick payout and they failed, welcome to capitalism - hire a better risk management department next time.
    • Obamillusion, on 09/15/2008, -3/+15This is the result of cheap credit and banks taking stupid risks with bad mortgages. Merrill, like other companies, was duped into buying "great" securities that were backed by crappy mortgages and destined to fail. Blame the Federal Reserve if you want, but that's a privately held company and Bush didn't have much to do with it.
      • ScottMitchell, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6You'd think a large, mutli-national company like Merrill, whose job it is to analyze financial products, would not be able to be "duped" into buying overvalued mortgage-backed securities. Who, exactly, duped them?

        The truth is that Merrill, like many other investment banks, took too much risk in an attempt to maximize profits. And while the Fed isn't bailing out Merrill (thankfully) it makes me think that they would have to bail out BofA when it starts to falter, as they're now "too big to fail" and "too big to be bought out."
      • Obamillusion, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3They were duped by the companies like Goldman Sachs who created and sold the complex securities, and the agencies that rated the securities well. They had good returns until the mortgages started failing. Merrill DID take too much risk, though. The previous CEO Stan O'Neal was behind a lot of this investment, and he got fired for it.
      • ih8ducks88, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6Banks packaged bad loans with good loans into CDOs and sold them on Wall Street. They were great investments while the economy was great but when more and more people defaulted on their mortgages, more and more CDOs became junk bonds thus creating the situation we're in right now.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1"The previous CEO Stan O'Neal was behind a lot of this investment, and he got fired for it."

        I'd love to get fired the way Stan ONeal got fired! I'd love to get fired with one percent of the package he got.
      • Obamillusion, on 09/16/2008, -0/+0Yeah he got fired but got massive compensation... He should have been punished, instead he got early retirement.
    • rockstar1o9, on 09/15/2008, -2/+20I don't necessarily disagree with you but could you clarify the link between the Bush Administration and the demise of Merrill Lynch and Lehman Bros? It seems like the sub-prime crisis is more directly a result of poor financial decisions by Americans who took out loans they couldn't afford, unscrupulous mortgage brokers who preyed on the ignorant, an inept and flawed Federal Reserve System, and the Wall St banks who didn't do their due diligence. All problems that were festering long before Bush took office.
    • Daniel591992, on 09/15/2008, -8/+5Dual citizenship FTW!
      • CedEx, on 09/15/2008, -0/+0Don't you still have to pay taxes?
      • DeucesWild, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1From my understanding (and what I remember at the moment) not unless you make over 75k a year. You still have to file though. Over 75k then the tax will still be reduced based on what you have already paid in taxes to the country you currently reside in (so it could still be 0).

        Also to my understanding only two countries in the world tax their citizens abroad. The Phillipeans (who's citizens work a great number of seafaring boats around the world) and the grand 'ol US of A. Hey freedom doesn't come cheap!

        I'm leaving the country as well come next April but it's been planned a lot longer than this mess started.
    • ih8ducks88, on 09/15/2008, -2/+13Merrill isn't going under they are getting bought by Bank of America before they go under (which will happen in the next few days if they aren't bought). Lehman Bros. will go bankrupt tomorrow and it doesn't look like anyone is going to try and purchase them.

      It wasn't this Bush administration that killed the economy. It was either his father or Clinton because the mortgage crisis is what is killing the economy. People were able to borrow money and refinance loans over and over and as soon as the economy started a downturn it would be like a ticking time bomb. You are giving GW a little too much credit with this one. Don't get me wrong he is an evil man and he will burn in hell but this is the one major financial disaster that isn't his fault completely.
      • ScottMitchell, on 09/15/2008, -1/+9Blame the Fed for pushing interest rates to historic lows. And blame those rating agencies that gave absurdly high ratings to mortgage-backed securities that were collateralized by subprime junk. And blame home owners that bought more house than they could afford because they were sure the value would go up and they could refinance or flip it for a profit.
      • afbase, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2The only thing that could be blamed for any administration is the failure to oversee the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, the Chairpersons of the Fed, and the Treasury more forcefully. The Chairperson is under the direct oversight of the president. Another person that is under the President's control is the Treasurer.

        Keep in mind that the Treasurer has had his hands on the oversight of Fannie and Freddie takeover, the Bear Stearns takeover, and this weekend's lovely picnic of financial CEO's at the Fed in NYC determining how best to minimize the financial fallout.

        The Bush Administration has been extra quiet about this management in which they have control of. Do they really know what they're doing? Does the Fed or the Treasurer? Probably not.
    • xtractor, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Bear Stearns*
    • pixelguru, on 09/15/2008, -5/+11Greed is what capitalism is based on. It's not give-money-to-your-neighborism, or buy-only-what-you-needism. The whole system is based on "too much is never enough". Everyone was saying for years that real estate prices were hugely inflated, and every other TV and radio ad was trying to sell people ridiculous mortgages. Everyone saw this train wreck coming, but nobody wanted to do a thing about it as long as they were still making truck-loads of cash trading these worthless securities. All it took was a little puff of clean air to bring the whole house of cards crashing down, and it's looking like the windstorm is far from over.
      • BabaRamDass, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Actually this was not the result of Evil Capitalism, but rather market distortion caused by the government willing to bail risky businesses out of their self-inflicted troubles. You would know this if you hadn't been blinded by your hatred.
      • pixelguru, on 09/16/2008, -1/+1I wouldn't call enlightenment blind hatred. Capitalism is based on the accumulation of wealth and materialization - it's based on greed. It's a system with a lot of positives, but it would be foolish to ignore the many negatives. In the case of the current economic crisis, a whole lot of people were blinded by greed and ignored the obvious financial danger as they collectively stampeded right off the edge of the cliff. I would see this as a negative. I also see a repeating pattern of bubbles and busts (.com, real estate, commodities) where the high and mighty free market gets twisted all too easily into a series of "get rich quick" schemes. The greedy nature of the system seems to foster such bubbles all too easily. Yesterday, billions of dollars vanished out of retirement accounts and pension funds. Why? Was it ever really there in the first place, or was it just an illusion of perceived value perpetuated by greedy investors knowingly working the system for their own selfish interests? It's all how you look at it, and I advise to keep your eyes and your mind open. Capitalism is far from a perfect system, and someday, we will have something better.
    • dkeck14, on 09/15/2008, -2/+12How is this administration responsible? Government Sponsored Enterprises. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac could make riskier business decisions because of their guaranteed line of credit with the government. To compete with GSEs (to make sure to maintain profit growth) other corporations where drawn into the same risky practices.

      GSE's created a distortion in the market, this is the result. It was both government and select corporations working hand-in-hand. Ron Paul gave a speech in 2003 on GSEs (predicting the fall of Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac), highlighting this specific issue: http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2003/cr09 ...
      • echriswa, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4Guess Republicans should have nominated Ron Paul.
    • deadbaby, on 09/15/2008, -3/+3It probably will yeah but it's not a shame. Perhaps that's just how a capitalistic systems find their end over time. Every political & economic system has its flaws. Capitalism had a good run but there may come a time where it just doesn't scale anymore and the whole system has to be brought down and rebuilt.
    • chkdg8, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2And this is beyond the people's control. We have been raped to no end and now this. It's not going to end anytime soon. What a shame.
    • mewoot10, on 09/15/2008, -2/+3This had nothing to do with the bush administration, and you warr1979 having 63 diggs at this moment is a little absurd. Merryl lynch and other companies hid alot of their assets by creating fake entities so even if it was a controlled market which i would hope wouldn't happen, but it might have saved some companies in this instance, it was the people selling those damn loans, those damn sup prime risky loans, and it's all those stupid people who are like HEY I'm GOING TO BUY A HOUSE WOO HOO, IM GONNA GET ME A LOAN, 3 years later, OH CRAP IM FILING BAKNCRUPCY I CAN"T PAY FOR THIS LOAN, and then those people blame bush, lol. So basically, all these people are bankrupt, and they are blaming all the wrong people, Not themselves or the greedy banks who offer sup prime loans but the bush administration. Very very ignorant. But yes, greed is going to destroy this country.
    • Hangly, on 09/15/2008, -2/+2This started in the 90's and is the fault of the Fed, not of any president.
    • TinternAbbot, on 09/15/2008, -2/+2The administration? Please, these firms destroyed themselves by acquiring risky assets that they didn't understand, thinking that the housing boom would last forever. The same thing happened after the dot-com bust. This is on a larger scale, but it's the same thing.
    • mike17032, on 09/15/2008, -4/+1Its really sad when the diggiot "economic experts" voice their flawed retarded opinions as fact.
    • ansatsu29, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Lehman filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy, Merrill being bought by BoA, then AIG is restructuring. Man, the markets here in Asia should brace themselves...this is another economic earthquake and tsunami heading towards the Asian markets.
    • PorchSong, on 09/15/2008, -1/+7God you guys are idiots. Bears was bailed out. Lehman is bankrupt. AIG is failing. Merrill Lynch performed a merger. Merrill protected its shareholdders by performing this move. Merrill was NOT BOUGHT by BofA. Please get your facts straight.

      Merrill just guaranteed its viablility into the future. Merrill and the Bull will remain the same. Nothing will change within the Global Wealth Managemnet Deivision. That is what attracted BofA in the first place. Now BofA will have an international play in investments.

      I fell like I am swimming upstream here. People react without actually understanding what the hell they are talking about. Merrill is here to stay.
      • TheLoneHoot, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3100% correct.
      • Wilarseny, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Every once in a while, someone on digg knows something. Congratulations on being that one person in this thread.
      • ansatsu29, on 09/16/2008, -2/+1yeah right porchsong, just read the news and quit telling anyone that they are ***** economic idiots. people are entitled to their own opinions. if they perceived the meltdown as a negative news to their respective markets, let them be.

        get your facts straight. i know that the bull has merged with BoA and yes, they have been bought by the BoA (of course, in this kind of mergers, somebody must buy someone) at the cost of almost $50 billion dollars. get your news straight and stop acting like an "wall street" know how as well as yelling at diggers like ***** economic idiots.

        just let other people share their opinions and leave them that way.
    • gabacho2, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Damned communists
  • zephyear, on 09/15/2008, -18/+95haha

    we're *****
    • mewoot10, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4I certainly hope not, but it seems that way.
    • klitzbtc, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5Yeah all we can really do is laugh now, no point debating it, just enjoy the ride.
      • CedEx, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4WHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!
    • zaphar, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2I'm not, but the government certainly is. Maybe people will realize what's going on now.
  • RobotLeAwesome, on 09/15/2008, -11/+40well that's kind of lame that just meaALL GLORY TO BANK OF AMERICA.
  • TheDarkTemplar, on 09/15/2008, -15/+25*****, Merrill bought out the bank I work for last year and now this???? I'm pissed! Well looks like I may be joining the ranks of the unemployed!!!
    • lopla, on 09/15/2008, -17/+5And 100bucks says you'll be voting for Mccain. LMAO people are clueeeeeeless
      • PrincessSalami, on 09/15/2008, -3/+3And that means you will be voting for Obama I take it?

        if so and you are voting for Obama (and its not because you've come to realize that barring a revolution a 3rd party candidate will not be elected, so instead of wasting your vote on one you have instead decided to vote for Obama because he might possibly perhaps be a little better then McCain)

        Then you sir, are the really the clueless one!

        Obama 08! (blank stare)
    • twiztidsinz, on 09/15/2008, -3/+15Whaddyamean???
      The republicans told me the economy is just fine and there's nothing to worry about..
    • TheDarkTemplar, on 09/15/2008, -14/+8yes. I will be voting for McCain. You cant blame the republican party for single handidly making this happen. This has been happening since 98/99 when the dot com bubble bursted and we were in a similar situation. The fed, under the direction of Greenspan who is not affiliated with any party and is not part of the govt (the fed is a psuedo corporation) cut interest rates down to 1 % which made money cheap. So go ***** yourself you damn libs.
      • coreman, on 09/15/2008, -1/+3No, go ***** yourself and all the mostly Republican and some Democratic congresspeople rolled back various laws along the way that had been place since the Depression to prevent the setups that led to the Depression over the last 10-15 years...

        Yes, I work for (a company owned by) Merrill Lynch. Will find out tomorrow I'm sure how long it'll last... I thought it was going to hit the fan in October after 3d Qtr reporting...
      • echriswa, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Oh yeah trust a man who graduated at the BOTTOM of his class. He'll make things so much better.

        This has everything to do with making the rich richer, and inflating our military budget for PNAC.

        Partisan to the point of destroying this country...you make me sick. Or maybe you're a neocon DARKTEMPLAR. Stupid evil illuminati.
      • bobbarkerbilly, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I hope you won't be taking unemployment checks when you're unemployed. We know how much you republicans hate welfare.
      • TheDarkTemplar, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2@echris

        darktemplar is an hommage to the game starcraft. And because Im republican, that doesn't necessarily mean that I support or even voted for Bush. Hell, Im one of the few that did not back him in the 2004 election and I really cant stand the man. Yeah believe it or not, there are Republicans out there who don't like Bush. Although this is the internet and unfortunately, any arguement I make is open to speculation, hearsay, and flaming.

        @bobbarker

        don't worry about me dude, no unemployment checks will be taken. I've been in banking for a while and I've listened to the those whove been through this in the 80s, I've been stashing away for a time like this so don't trip.
    • Rubuntu, on 09/15/2008, -7/+8@TheDark Templar

      The Republicans are a disaster and you know it. You republicans all end up believing the lies you keep repeating. God Bless you and your misery! 9/11 happened on your watch, now this, and like an idiot you trying to blame a party which has been out of power for 8 years. Moron.
      • TheDarkTemplar, on 09/15/2008, -3/+3You obviously have no idea what you're talking about, huh Ubuntu??? The so called "lies" we are repeating is economic history. Keep in mind 9/11 was caused by people who hate America, and last I checked America included democrats. No, Im not trying to blame a party thats been out of power for 8 years. I'm blaming the culmination of events that led to this. No one party is responsible. And yeah, even though Im pissed at this happening, I wont be miserable, you won't believe a word I say because well, this is the internet and you'll probably end up flaming me more. I've always taken personal responsibility which is a pillar of the true republican party. dont believe in taking social welfare and was smart enough to save for situations such as this. Oh well, I loose my job, ***** it Im unemployed for a bit live off my savings and I get another one.
      • Rendonsmug, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1As a fan of personal responsibility you must be cheering this. The people in charge of these banks might have screwed the companies and the American public, but they will be getting fat checks for themselves.

        So yay for Bear Sterns execs, hoorah for Merrill Lynch board. Your personal responsibility is something to admire and emulate.
    • TheDarkLordXenu, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6I think we may have the same employer... :(
    • psibladeZX, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1I have no clue why all these people got all politically partisan over your comment... sucks that you may get the boot depending on what you do... if you're in good standing you may survive the acquisition... my girlfriend got acquired by BAC when she worked for US trust... and she's still there so... not everyone gets the boot... hang in there.
    • radiofrequency, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4I hope things work out for you.
  • SlavaPastuk, on 09/15/2008, -24/+6Smoke Weed!
  • bharadwajharish, on 09/15/2008, -10/+6The Companies needs the third world for survival and consolidation.It's becoming a fact.
    • whatyeah3, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4Care to explain? (Not flamebait, just curious)
  • MoeWasHere, on 09/15/2008, -17/+20WOW

    Just ***** wow.
  • Vorphlack, on 09/15/2008, -15/+9Brought to you by Carl's Jr.
  • willdoitlive, on 09/15/2008, -29/+18▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒███████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██████████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒███████▓▓▓▓▓▒███▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒██████▓▓▓▓▓▓▓▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▓██▓▓▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒████▓▓▓████▓▒▒████▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒███▓▓█▒█▒██▓▒█▒█▒█▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒███▓▓▓█▒▒▓▓▒▒▓▓▒▒█▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▓▓▒▒▓▓▒▒▒▒▒▒▓▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████▓▓▒▓█▒▒▒▓█▒▒▓▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████▓▓▓████████▒█▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████████▒▒▒▒▒██▓█▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██████████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▒█▓▓█▒███▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█████▓▒▒▒▒▓███▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██████▓▓▓▓████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒▒▒█▓██████████████▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
    ▒▒▒▒▒███▓██████████████▓▓▓▓▒▒▒
    ▒▒███████▓██████████████▓▓▓▓▓▓
    ██████████▓▓███████████▓█▓▓▓▓▓
    This is Madness!
  • jewishmafio, on 09/15/2008, -13/+19Holy *****... Im so glad i sold all my merrill mutual funds years ago. Or else right now i might be royally ***** considering that some the stock had money in Merrill. Honestly... Bank of America is going to turn into our treasury lol.
    • crausch, on 09/15/2008, -0/+5LOL
    • byrdgang, on 09/15/2008, -0/+5I don't know why you're being dugg down. You sold the mutual fund family...sounds like a good idea.
  • lopla, on 09/15/2008, -17/+5Good to see the Republicans finish out a strong term. The def deserve to be voted in again. McCain surrounded by lobbyists is not a Bush republican so he can fix it..
    • HotSaucePanCake, on 09/15/2008, -3/+1you should post more, i've only seen your comments every other post blaming some one or some party for all the troubles in the world...
  • juicycutlets, on 09/15/2008, -14/+34yay deregulation!
    • domnu, on 09/15/2008, -6/+15This is not a result of deregulation. In fact, the US financial markets were/are some of the most tightly regulated markets out there. The current economic mess comes as an inevitable consequence of the central economic planning of the Federal Reserve (neither part of the federal government nor actually in possession of any reserves), our reliance on a fiat currency, and the willingness of those in D.C. (on both sides of the aisle) to spend without restraint.

      End the fed, balance the budget, and restore sound money. Then you won't have this kind of crisis.
      • juicycutlets, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4deficit, budget, iraq budget.
      • Apsu55, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2You know, with the rising costs of metals, and the lowering worth of our fiat currency, I say, we melt all our pennies and sell them for their metals. We could make healthy profits by doing this. But the government says it's illegal.
    • nycmac247, on 09/15/2008, -4/+3deregulation = third world country
    • zaphar, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1What's your definition of deregulation? If it's handing the money supply over to a single corporation and then using the force of government to keep it that way, then yes, I guess you'd be right. If you mean released for competition in the marketplace, you'd be wrong. The US financial sector is essentially locked down by the federal government. The federal reserve is in a gray zone, it's not really a part of the government, but it functions as if it is.
  • Shadow57, on 09/15/2008, -15/+98Great. Now Bank of America owns my bank (formally LaSalle), my credit card (formally MBNA), and now my investments (formally Merrill Lynch). How is this legal?
    • diadem2, on 09/15/2008, -3/+13You may want to consider joining a credit union.
    • lonesomewolf, on 09/15/2008, -2/+7Interesting isn't it?
    • synapz, on 09/15/2008, -12/+10Why should it be illegal?
    • Teradoc, on 09/15/2008, -1/+17Hey if you had a mortgage from Countrywide....guess what! It's now BOA!
    • drpaidout, on 09/15/2008, -1/+12Would you rather have your service providers go under and potentially risk your savings?
    • spinchange, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1My question is, who will bail out B of A if they fail, now or in the future?
    • dpazar2, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1if you owned Merrill Lynch stock, you made 12 bucks/share today,
    • Indierocka, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6ha, that'll teach you to diversify
    • BESTenemy, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1 You may thank Alan Greenspan for engineering the bubble mechanics and Bill Clinton for repealing of Glass Steagall Act in 1999, without which the consolidation of deposit and investment banks whould not have been possible.

      Now AIG - the biggest international property insurance is collapsing and they're talking bailouts. It is completely illegal (or at least it was officially so 1933-1999). Each time a deposit bank "bails out" and investment or an insurance company, they're committing a crime. They use money taken out of direct deposits to make "casino bets". They're using yo