I am currently undecided about the bill. What I don't like about it is the way in which it is being presented. Typically when someone tries to force you to make a big decision in a hurry, especially when it involves a large sum of money, they will typically gain something from the deal at your expense. One representative from Indiana used the analogy of a used car salesman. When the salesman gets pushy and insists that you must make the purchase "today" or the deal will be gone forever, typically that means you will get shafted by going along with the deal.
Maybe this bill is what's necessary to lead the country out of the current financial mess, and maybe it isn't. I don't trust Bernanke or Paulson because they likely have very close ties to Wall Street and I think they would put what's best for their friends before what's best for America. Wall Street seems to have an insatiable thirst for money at any cost, and I don't think that will ever change. Specific to the bill, I also don't see why buying these mortgage-backed assets won't simply cause the banks to load up on the next big get rich quick scheme. We will then be facing this situation again in ~10 years when the next asset bubble bursts.
I am not an economics major, but I believe the term "information asymmetry" applies in this situation. The average voter may not understand the complex issues behind this bill, but I see no reason to blindly put our trust in Paulson, Bernanke, etc. They are in a perfect position to exploit everyone else simply because of the information they have. I simply don't trust the people supporting this bill because they are in a perfect position to use their superior information to take advantage of everyone else.
Facebook
Twitter