Obama tries to screw up banking next

[oreo]

The best thing he can do for this country is take a permanent vacation.

It's almost impossible to get credit now, guess Obama is going to keep it that way.

What a schmuck.

Stocks slide as Obama calls for tougher bank rules - Road Runner

Stocks slide as Obama calls for tougher bank rules
Published - Jan 21 2010 04:54PM EST

By STEPHEN BERNARD and TIM PARADIS - AP Business Writers



NEW YORK— The stock market stumbled Thursday as President Barack Obama proposed an overhaul of the nation's banking system that could limit financial companies' ability to make huge profits on trading.

While I disagree with Obama 99.9% of the time, I do agree that banking in this country needs to be regulated--in order to prevent another economic collapse--such as we are going through right now.

We may be going back to the Glass-Stegall act--that was instituted in 1933--& again which was deregulated in 1999. 1999--does that sound familiar to you all? Fannie/Freddie were also deregulated--no one needed a good credit rating, no collateral was needed & of course no down payment was required--this while banks were pressured into lending to people who could not repay the loans. Wall street banking firms bought them up (mortage backed securities) as fast as they could--& started trading them in the black hole--called the derivatives market--aka hedge funds. They with the help & full support of our federal government built a house of cards that collapsed leavinig the American tax payer holding the bag.

The Banking Act of 1933 was a law that established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in the United States and introduced banking reforms, some of which were designed to control speculation[1]. It is most commonly known as the Glass–Steagall Act, after its legislative sponsors, Carter Glass and Henry B. Steagall.

Some provisions of the Act, such as Regulation Q, which allowed the Federal Reserve to regulate interest rates in savings accounts, were repealed by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. Provisions that prohibit a bank holding company from owning other financial companies were repealed on November 12, 1999, by the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act.[2][3]

Goldman Sacs grew 5 times larger after the deregulation. In fact all Wall Street banking firms grew so BIG--that they "were too big to fail."

Now, I know that everyone is having a fit over the stock market losses over the last few days. BUT--in reality--where exactly are the "profits" that make for bull markets? Banking stocks have gone up dramatically over the last several months on the euforia that they "survived." This of course, thanks to billions in tax payer bail-outs.

Our long term financial security & growth depends on solid banking practices.

So my question to all of you nay-sayers-- When Joe on the street heads to a casino to spend his money--are you going to back him with your credit card for his losses? I kind of doubt it. Shouldn't we expect the same from our banks? Because, if banks lose--it's our loss--because it's our money.

It looks like this bill will require banks to keep their investments--made from the profit of their operations separate from depositor money--(or our deposits) from being bet on the casino table. In my opinon--that's not a bad idea.

 

[oreo]

Perhaps you should have removed the words "right now." Businesses were not falling faster than houses on a Monopoly Board in 2007, and they were not laying off people at the rate that began the following summer of 2008. Of course small businesses are worried NOW but primarily because they cannot get credit to keep those businesses going. How health care will unfold is secondary to that prime concern, whether you recognize that or not.

You guys also keep tossing other issues into the mix totally unrelated to the bank crisis, like cap and trade. That has been run aground, thanks mostly to the right wing media which in their usual fashion dismissed the independent reporting that utility rates would indeed NOT rise to unrealistic amounts. But in any event, cap and trade is dead from all I read, so there's just no sense in losing anymore sleep over at least that gripe. And I presume that most small businessmen are also aware of the current status of cap and trade and don't consider it a factor in projections for the immediate future.

I said..businesses are not clamoring for loans right now and that's exactly what I meant to say. And gas prices are certainly part of the economic uncertainty. Do you have any idea how much money an extra dollar per gallon pulls out of the general economy? Were it not for people getting their tax returns, retail sales would be completely in the toilet.

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

Businesse's only borrow money when they have a need to expand. To expand they need demand for their products or services. Right now there is no demand--therefore they are not borrowing. I know--I am a 30+ small business owner.

It is DEMAND that is horribly lacking in this country. The "only" way demand increases is to give consumers more money to spend on the products & services they need. It's called "trickle down" economics. What we are experiencing is Obama's flood the basement economics which is not working.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You miss the point entirely it was the Fair Housing Act, then the Community Reinvestment Act during Clinton's years where the government put the gun to the heads of banks FORCING them to make HIGH-RISK loans or be red-lined for growth and opportunities in other neighborhoods. The GOVERNMENT started the whole melt down of the financial industry.

They are not going to loosen up credit as long as they have an economic fool in the White House, they are scared to death to do so. Each day comes a new directive from the White House. Business and banks do not like uncertainty and with this economic moron in there, there will be no assurances of what he is going to do next. They are as nervous as a cat on a hot tin roof. That's why the sell-off in the markets. The more he talks about this, the more the markets will crash.

BTW- The only reason he is doing this now, is to re-direct the focus from his failed health care initiative and the catastrophic loss of Massachusetts. If you are fool enough to fall for this non-sense-, go a-head, he is not fooling the majority though, we are on to him.

A tax on the banks is a tax on the rest of us.

Once again, the CRA did not FORCE banks to do a goddamned thing. Stop making up shit. And you're not "on to" squat. You just like to think you are. My advice is to read some unbiased history of the bank failures. If you don't trust Wikipedia, then go to any number of other online encyclopedias where most have already spelled out the historic details, going way back to the CRA which you completely mischaracterize.

Bill Clinton's drive to increase homeownership went way too far - BusinessWeek

The National Homeownership Strategy began in 1994 when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan, and Cisneros convened what HUD called a "historic meeting" of private and public housing-industry organizations in August 1994. The group eventually produced a plan, of which Mason sent me a PDF of Chapter 4, the one that argues for creative measures to promote homeownership.
The very worst idea in the plan, which fortunately never gained approval, was to let first-time homebuyers freely tap their IRA and 401(k) retirement-savings plans with no penalty to scrounge up a downpayment. That, HUD estimated, would have "benefited" 600,000 families in the first five years.

Plenty of other ideas in the plan did become reality, though. Knowing what we know now about the housing bust, the earnest language in the document seems faintly ridiculous. Here's an excerpt. Read it closely and you can see the seeds of disaster being planted:

For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership.

Note the praise for "creativity." That kind of creativity in stretching boundaries we could use less of. Mason puts it well: "It strikes me as reckless to promote home sales to individuals in such constrained financial predicaments."

I recommend you actually read the CRA law.

There is not a bank in this country that has ever claimed that the CRA forced them to make loans to unqualified borrowers. That is as classic a rightwing feelgood myth as there is.

 

[CMike]

Once again, the CRA did not FORCE banks to do a goddamned thing. Stop making up shit. And you're not "on to" squat. You just like to think you are. My advice is to read some unbiased history of the bank failures. If you don't trust Wikipedia, then go to any number of other online encyclopedias where most have already spelled out the historic details, going way back to the CRA which you completely mischaracterize.

Bill Clinton's drive to increase homeownership went way too far - BusinessWeek

The National Homeownership Strategy began in 1994 when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan, and Cisneros convened what HUD called a "historic meeting" of private and public housing-industry organizations in August 1994. The group eventually produced a plan, of which Mason sent me a PDF of Chapter 4, the one that argues for creative measures to promote homeownership.
The very worst idea in the plan, which fortunately never gained approval, was to let first-time homebuyers freely tap their IRA and 401(k) retirement-savings plans with no penalty to scrounge up a downpayment. That, HUD estimated, would have "benefited" 600,000 families in the first five years.

Plenty of other ideas in the plan did become reality, though. Knowing what we know now about the housing bust, the earnest language in the document seems faintly ridiculous. Here's an excerpt. Read it closely and you can see the seeds of disaster being planted:

For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership.

Note the praise for "creativity." That kind of creativity in stretching boundaries we could use less of. Mason puts it well: "It strikes me as reckless to promote home sales to individuals in such constrained financial predicaments."

I recommend you actually read the CRA law.

There is not a bank in this country that has ever claimed that the CRA forced them to make loans to unqualified borrowers. That is as classic a rightwing feelgood myth as there is.

Let's see the survey of all the banks in this country please?

 

[oreo]

Once again, the CRA did not FORCE banks to do a goddamned thing. Stop making up shit. And you're not "on to" squat. You just like to think you are. My advice is to read some unbiased history of the bank failures. If you don't trust Wikipedia, then go to any number of other online encyclopedias where most have already spelled out the historic details, going way back to the CRA which you completely mischaracterize.

Bill Clinton's drive to increase homeownership went way too far - BusinessWeek

The National Homeownership Strategy began in 1994 when Clinton directed HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros to come up with a plan, and Cisneros convened what HUD called a "historic meeting" of private and public housing-industry organizations in August 1994. The group eventually produced a plan, of which Mason sent me a PDF of Chapter 4, the one that argues for creative measures to promote homeownership.
The very worst idea in the plan, which fortunately never gained approval, was to let first-time homebuyers freely tap their IRA and 401(k) retirement-savings plans with no penalty to scrounge up a downpayment. That, HUD estimated, would have "benefited" 600,000 families in the first five years.

Plenty of other ideas in the plan did become reality, though. Knowing what we know now about the housing bust, the earnest language in the document seems faintly ridiculous. Here's an excerpt. Read it closely and you can see the seeds of disaster being planted:

For many potential homebuyers, the lack of cash available to accumulate the required downpayment and closing costs is the major impediment to purchasing a home. Other households do not have sufficient available income to to make the monthly payments on mortgages financed at market interest rates for standard loan terms. Financing strategies, fueled by the creativity and resources of the private and public sectors, should address both of these financial barriers to homeownership.

Note the praise for "creativity." That kind of creativity in stretching boundaries we could use less of. Mason puts it well: "It strikes me as reckless to promote home sales to individuals in such constrained financial predicaments."

I recommend you actually read the CRA law.

There is not a bank in this country that has ever claimed that the CRA forced them to make loans to unqualified borrowers. That is as classic a rightwing feelgood myth as there is.

Then what's this---

"Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits."

http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/b...dit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html?pagewanted=1

 

[CMike]

I said..businesses are not clamoring for loans right now and that's exactly what I meant to say. And gas prices are certainly part of the economic uncertainty. Do you have any idea how much money an extra dollar per gallon pulls out of the general economy? Were it not for people getting their tax returns, retail sales would be completely in the toilet.

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

Businesse's only borrow money when they have a need to expand. To expand they need demand for their products or services. Right now there is no demand--therefore they are not borrowing. I know--I am a 30+ small business owner.

It is DEMAND that is horribly lacking in this country. The "only" way demand increases is to give consumers more money to spend on the products & services they need. It's called "trickle down" economics. What we are experiencing is Obama's flood the basement economics which is not working.

Businesses also borrow money if they can't meet their expenses.

Why do you think it's only for expansion?

Basically, businesses borrow money when they need money.

 

[Vel]

Perhaps you should have removed the words "right now." Businesses were not falling faster than houses on a Monopoly Board in 2007, and they were not laying off people at the rate that began the following summer of 2008. Of course small businesses are worried NOW but primarily because they cannot get credit to keep those businesses going. How health care will unfold is secondary to that prime concern, whether you recognize that or not.

You guys also keep tossing other issues into the mix totally unrelated to the bank crisis, like cap and trade. That has been run aground, thanks mostly to the right wing media which in their usual fashion dismissed the independent reporting that utility rates would indeed NOT rise to unrealistic amounts. But in any event, cap and trade is dead from all I read, so there's just no sense in losing anymore sleep over at least that gripe. And I presume that most small businessmen are also aware of the current status of cap and trade and don't consider it a factor in projections for the immediate future.

I said..businesses are not clamoring for loans right now and that's exactly what I meant to say. And gas prices are certainly part of the economic uncertainty. Do you have any idea how much money an extra dollar per gallon pulls out of the general economy? Were it not for people getting their tax returns, retail sales would be completely in the toilet.

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

This is an article from January, but as the business climate is similar, it's still quite relevant. And as a small business owner, I can tell you personally that there is no way I would take out loans given the uncertain future. It's not really much different from an individual's finances. If you think you might lose your job next month, then I doubt that you're going to take a loan out for a new car next week. I think most ( most being key ) businesses are being very cautious.
*******************************************
Manufacturers: We’re facing uncertain future
If Roger Wilken could predict what 2009 would look like for his company — Clear Solutions in Hinsdale — Wilken said he’d be in rare form.

“I don’t know anybody that feels confident and secure,” said Wilken, the president of Clear Solutions, a manufacturer of acrylic displays, predominately sold for the retail sector.

“Everybody is worried and keeps their wallets in their pockets.”

The Monadnock Region’s other manufactures sing a similar refrain: the new year means an uncertain economic future that calls for belt-tightening all around.

“We’re trying to hold down whatever overhead costs we can,” said Gary Barnard, president of thermoplastic molding manufacturer MoldPro in Swanzey.

MoldPro’s customers include independent inventors and national companies in fields like medical suction and laboratory testing.

Barnard said the company is also keeping inventory as low as possible, staying in touch with customers and being cautious with borrowing.

SentinelSource.com | Archives | Manufacturers: We?re facing uncertain future

 

[oreo]

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

Businesse's only borrow money when they have a need to expand. To expand they need demand for their products or services. Right now there is no demand--therefore they are not borrowing. I know--I am a 30+ small business owner.

It is DEMAND that is horribly lacking in this country. The "only" way demand increases is to give consumers more money to spend on the products & services they need. It's called "trickle down" economics. What we are experiencing is Obama's flood the basement economics which is not working.

Businesses also borrow money if they can't meet their expenses.

Why do you think it's only for expansion? In other words, business in this country has holed up along with the American consumer.

Basically, businesses borrow money when they need money.

The only reason business or ourselves would borrow money to pay for long term expenses or debt--is if we see work coming our way--to where we would be able to repay the loan.

Currently in this economic enviroment there is no work in the foreseeable future--therefore we are not going to expense new loans--(acquire more debt) that cannot be paid back.

Expansion--coming from demand for products & services--is the #1 reason business will borrow money.

 

[CMike]

I said..businesses are not clamoring for loans right now and that's exactly what I meant to say. And gas prices are certainly part of the economic uncertainty. Do you have any idea how much money an extra dollar per gallon pulls out of the general economy? Were it not for people getting their tax returns, retail sales would be completely in the toilet.

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

This is an article from January, but as the business climate is similar, it's still quite relevant. And as a small business owner, I can tell you personally that there is no way I would take out loans given the uncertain future. It's not really much different from an individual's finances. If you think you might lose your job next month, then I doubt that you're going to take a loan out for a new car next week. I think most ( most being key ) businesses are being very cautious.
*******************************************
Manufacturers: We’re facing uncertain future
If Roger Wilken could predict what 2009 would look like for his company — Clear Solutions in Hinsdale — Wilken said he’d be in rare form.

“I don’t know anybody that feels confident and secure,” said Wilken, the president of Clear Solutions, a manufacturer of acrylic displays, predominately sold for the retail sector.

“Everybody is worried and keeps their wallets in their pockets.”

The Monadnock Region’s other manufactures sing a similar refrain: the new year means an uncertain economic future that calls for belt-tightening all around.

“We’re trying to hold down whatever overhead costs we can,” said Gary Barnard, president of thermoplastic molding manufacturer MoldPro in Swanzey.

MoldPro’s customers include independent inventors and national companies in fields like medical suction and laboratory testing.

Barnard said the company is also keeping inventory as low as possible, staying in touch with customers and being cautious with borrowing.

SentinelSource.com | Archives | Manufacturers: We?re facing uncertain future

I completely agree with all the quotes.

If you feel that you can't make your expenses, you may take out a loan so you can, rather than fold.

 

[oreo]

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

This is an article from January, but as the business climate is similar, it's still quite relevant. And as a small business owner, I can tell you personally that there is no way I would take out loans given the uncertain future. It's not really much different from an individual's finances. If you think you might lose your job next month, then I doubt that you're going to take a loan out for a new car next week. I think most ( most being key ) businesses are being very cautious.
*******************************************
Manufacturers: We’re facing uncertain future
If Roger Wilken could predict what 2009 would look like for his company — Clear Solutions in Hinsdale — Wilken said he’d be in rare form.

“I don’t know anybody that feels confident and secure,” said Wilken, the president of Clear Solutions, a manufacturer of acrylic displays, predominately sold for the retail sector.

“Everybody is worried and keeps their wallets in their pockets.”

The Monadnock Region’s other manufactures sing a similar refrain: the new year means an uncertain economic future that calls for belt-tightening all around.

“We’re trying to hold down whatever overhead costs we can,” said Gary Barnard, president of thermoplastic molding manufacturer MoldPro in Swanzey.

MoldPro’s customers include independent inventors and national companies in fields like medical suction and laboratory testing.

Barnard said the company is also keeping inventory as low as possible, staying in touch with customers and being cautious with borrowing.

SentinelSource.com | Archives | Manufacturers: We?re facing uncertain future

I completely agree with all the quotes.

If you feel that you can't make your expenses, you may take out a loan so you can, rather than fold.

Business typically does not borrow money they can not repay or they do fold into bankrupsty. Loans have to be repaid by businesse's also.

What's happened is there is NO demand for goods & services from the American consumer. Therefore, since Americans have holed up--so do businesse's.

 

[Vel]

Prove that businesses are not trying to get loans right now?

This is an article from January, but as the business climate is similar, it's still quite relevant. And as a small business owner, I can tell you personally that there is no way I would take out loans given the uncertain future. It's not really much different from an individual's finances. If you think you might lose your job next month, then I doubt that you're going to take a loan out for a new car next week. I think most ( most being key ) businesses are being very cautious.
*******************************************
Manufacturers: We’re facing uncertain future
If Roger Wilken could predict what 2009 would look like for his company — Clear Solutions in Hinsdale — Wilken said he’d be in rare form.

“I don’t know anybody that feels confident and secure,” said Wilken, the president of Clear Solutions, a manufacturer of acrylic displays, predominately sold for the retail sector.

“Everybody is worried and keeps their wallets in their pockets.”

The Monadnock Region’s other manufactures sing a similar refrain: the new year means an uncertain economic future that calls for belt-tightening all around.

“We’re trying to hold down whatever overhead costs we can,” said Gary Barnard, president of thermoplastic molding manufacturer MoldPro in Swanzey.

MoldPro’s customers include independent inventors and national companies in fields like medical suction and laboratory testing.

Barnard said the company is also keeping inventory as low as possible, staying in touch with customers and being cautious with borrowing.

SentinelSource.com | Archives | Manufacturers: We?re facing uncertain future

I completely agree with all the quotes.

If you feel that you can't make your expenses, you may take out a loan so you can, rather than fold.

As a 20 year business owner, I agree with Oreo's assessment. The only way that you would take out a loan is IF you could see signs that business would improve in a timely enough fashion that you could pay the debt back. I don't see any signs that this economy can turn a corner with the policies that this government has been talking. All I see on the horizon are higher costs due to gas and other energy prices and an increase in the percentage of unemployment tax that will be required as the state's coffers shrink.

 

[CMike]

Businesses also take out loans to keep things going, in the hope that they will pay it back.

The banks took out loans from the government, not to expand, but remain solvent.

Businesses do this too.

BTW I am a business owner too.

 

[Vel]

Businesses also take out loans to keep things going, in the hope that they will pay it back.

The banks took out loans from the government, not to expand, but remain solvent.

Businesses do this too.

BTW I am a business owner too.

Well you might, but I sure don't know many other business owners that would unless they had good reason to believe that things would get better in a hurry.

 

[oreo]

Businesses also take out loans to keep things going, in the hope that they will pay it back.

The banks took out loans from the government, not to expand, but remain solvent.

Businesses do this too.

BTW I am a business owner too.

Then you're a very dissolusioned business owner-- Solid business practice dictates that you do not borrow money that you cannot afford to repay. You make cut-backs. lay off employees & dramatically cut business expenses--even selling inventory at great discounts to keep your business afloat.

Simply put, business in this country have gone into survival mode. Borrowing money at this time only defers the inevitable for a period of time & makes it much worse because now you have another monthly payment.

Small businesse's in this country were NOT on the list of the "too big to fail"--LOL And if small business operated in the same manner as the federal government they would be bankrupt 15 minutes after they had their grand opening--LOL.

That is why business is not borrowing at this time. There is no DEMAND for their products & services.

 

[CMike]

Here is a survey of business owners. They seem to disagree with you.

The Small Business Outlook for 2009 - Survey Results

What Businesses Want The Government To Do

We also asked our survey takers to comment on what, if anything, the government should do to help small businesses get through the recession. A handful of the respondents indicated they thought the government should do nothing. "Leave us alone. That means don't increase anybody's taxes and quit spending money you don't have," wrote one respondent. "The government should stay out of it and everything will work itself out," wrote another.

But, the majority of business owners commenting on this question indicated that access to capital and/or tax reductions were what was most needed to help small businesses through the recession.

Here are a just a few of the comments we got about loans and access to capital:

"Require that some of the money given to shore up the banks be used to give out small business short term loans. Require the banks getting money from the government that hand out credit cards be required to reduce their credit card percentages to customers and business owners. If the fees and percentages drop, customers and business owners alike will have more liquid cash."

"Less talk and more action about small business loans. Actually make funds AVAILABLE to qualified borrowers because right now all it is, is talk and no action."

"Loan money or force the banks to loan money so I can hire someone!"

Some, wanted bailout money to go to small business in the form of grants , either for startup businesses or for existing business, and one respondent suggested a loan program where a startup would receive a loan of up to $50,000 and not have to make the first payment on the loan for 90 days after receiving the money.

"Give us the stimulus money and we'll get the economy moving," wrote on business owner. "Big businesses and banks just use the money to clean up their balance sheets."

And another commented, "Stop handing out money to the people who caused the recession in the first place. For every beginning there is an end, even for big business. Let the backbone of the country, Small Business, do its thing and stop driving us further in debt."

 

[CMike]

I am from Michigan which was hit really hard. I have a MBA.

I had a hard time getting a job for some time. In fact, I applied to grocery stores and got rejected.

I ended up doing door to door sales for commission only. In all weather I was out there knocking on doors. In fact, I went on road trips, and came back on the weekends.

I formed my own company and hired salespeople.

I now make 15x more personal income than I did two years ago. I am in two states and I am opening up another office in another state.

Actually the bad economy works great for me. In fact, the worse the economy the better it is for me. I am in a unique position.

I realize I am also very lucky, and I don't take anything for granted.

 

[Vel]

I'm truly glad that things are going well for you. I'm fortunate that my business is well established and while not recession proof, is holding up well so far. Please check the following 2010 report from NFIB. The section on credit markets is enlightening.


http://www.nfib.com/Portals/0/PDF/sbet/sbet201001.pdf

 

[oreo]

I am from Michigan which was hit really hard. I have a MBA.

I had a hard time getting a job for some time. In fact, I applied to grocery stores and got rejected.

I ended up doing door to door sales for commission only. In all weather I was out there knocking on doors. In fact, I went on road trips, and came back on the weekends.

I formed my own company and hired salespeople.

I now make 15x more personal income than I did two years ago. I am in two states and I am opening up another office in another state.

Actually the bad economy works great for me. In fact, the worse the economy the better it is for me. I am in a unique position.

I realize I am also very lucky, and I don't take anything for granted.

O.K. Mike--exactly what is it that you do--when you state that the worse the economy is--the faster you are growing & making money?

IOW--what are you selling or smoking?

 

[oreo]

Here is a survey of business owners. They seem to disagree with you.

The Small Business Outlook for 2009 - Survey Results

What Businesses Want The Government To Do

We also asked our survey takers to comment on what, if anything, the government should do to help small businesses get through the recession. A handful of the respondents indicated they thought the government should do nothing. "Leave us alone. That means don't increase anybody's taxes and quit spending money you don't have," wrote one respondent. "The government should stay out of it and everything will work itself out," wrote another.

But, the majority of business owners commenting on this question indicated that access to capital and/or tax reductions were what was most needed to help small businesses through the recession.

Here are a just a few of the comments we got about loans and access to capital:

"Require that some of the money given to shore up the banks be used to give out small business short term loans. Require the banks getting money from the government that hand out credit cards be required to reduce their credit card percentages to customers and business owners. If the fees and percentages drop, customers and business owners alike will have more liquid cash."

"Less talk and more action about small business loans. Actually make funds AVAILABLE to qualified borrowers because right now all it is, is talk and no action."

"Loan money or force the banks to loan money so I can hire someone!"

Some, wanted bailout money to go to small business in the form of grants , either for startup businesses or for existing business, and one respondent suggested a loan program where a startup would receive a loan of up to $50,000 and not have to make the first payment on the loan for 90 days after receiving the money.

"Give us the stimulus money and we'll get the economy moving," wrote on business owner. "Big businesses and banks just use the money to clean up their balance sheets."

And another commented, "Stop handing out money to the people who caused the recession in the first place. For every beginning there is an end, even for big business. Let the backbone of the country, Small Business, do its thing and stop driving us further in debt."

Well--let's take a look at this from the bankers prospective:

An established small business owner comes in for a loan & of course the business owner will have to give 2 years worth of income tax returns--with current gross sales & profit.

Banker--why are you here:
Business Owner: to borrow $100K
Banker--What do you need $100K for
Business Owner: To pay bills with.
Banker--Your current gross sales & profit are in the tank-in relation to the last two years income statements. So do you have any future contracts--that would enable you to repay this loan.
Business Owner: Not in the foreseeable future.

Would you loan money to this small business? --

I don't think so.

 

[CMike]

Actually the bad economy works great for me. In fact, the worse the economy the better it is for me. I am in a unique position.

I realize I am also very lucky, and I don't take anything for granted.

O.K. Mike--exactly what is it that you do--when you state that the worse the economy is--the faster you are growing & making money?

IOW--what are you selling or smoking?

I am sorry Oreo I don't wish to say.