• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

So the bailouts are for the rich?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: K1052
Probably will be taken over by the feds and assets sold for a song because nobody wants the load of securities they're saddled with.

You can shout "fiscal responsibility" until you're blue in the face. It doesn't change the fact that we are presented a limited set of choices on how to deal with this, each shittier than the last. The bailout is the least shitty way out available at present and a sizable portion of that money will come back to the government. It isn't a good solution, merely the least damaging one.
Respond to my post above where I list 6 of the top 10 US banks and show that they're doing fine. Pray tell, what will be the repercussions of NOT approving this bill? I'd love to hear your worst case, doom and gloom scenario. 😉

Some of those banks have clearly stepped off cliffs in stock price recently if you actually look at the graphs. Others have less exposure to the sub prime mess and the securities backed by it. Remove the possibility of government intervention, then we'll see what happens. Another problem is that banks are becoming very hesitant to loan to each other which is a key component.
 
Originally posted by: K1052
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: K1052
Probably will be taken over by the feds and assets sold for a song because nobody wants the load of securities they're saddled with.

You can shout "fiscal responsibility" until you're blue in the face. It doesn't change the fact that we are presented a limited set of choices on how to deal with this, each shittier than the last. The bailout is the least shitty way out available at present and a sizable portion of that money will come back to the government. It isn't a good solution, merely the least damaging one.
Respond to my post above where I list 6 of the top 10 US banks and show that they're doing fine. Pray tell, what will be the repercussions of NOT approving this bill? I'd love to hear your worst case, doom and gloom scenario. 😉

Some of those banks have clearly stepped off cliffs in stock price recently if you actually look at the graphs. Others have less exposure to the sub prime mess and the securities backed by it. Remove the possibility of government intervention, then we'll see what happens. Another problem is that banks are becoming very hesitant to loan to each other which is a key component.
Yes, of course they're all going to be down due to the sector getting killed. But it's clear that their stock prices are bouncing back, how much of that is "bailout speculation" who knows. But I'm glad you recognize that there were smart lenders who will still be fine after this is all over.

It may take a year or two for them to regain trust in one another, but the fact remains that the top 10 lenders (minus Wachovia) will still be there. Will businesses be affected? Absolutely. Will unemployment rise? Absolutely. Will the economy bounce back? Yes, but not until we hit a recession. The bailout will not prevent the recession, only lessen its impact IMO... but keep in mind that if the 700billion doesn't make us that money back, Congress will be going after the financial companies in 5 years. Which makes me think of a dog crapping on a $1 million dollar antique couch and being lectured "not to do it again". Congress going after someone? Sad.

 
Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Yes, of course they're all going to be down due to the sector getting killed. But it's clear that their stock prices are bouncing back, how much of that is "bailout speculation" who knows. But I'm glad you recognize that there were smart lenders who will still be fine after this is all over.

It may take a year or two for them to regain trust in one another, but the fact remains that the top 10 lenders (minus Wachovia) will still be there. Will businesses be affected? Absolutely. Will unemployment rise? Absolutely. Will the economy bounce back? Yes, but not until we hit a recession. The bailout will not prevent the recession, only lessen its impact IMO... but keep in mind that if the 700billion doesn't make us that money back, Congress will be going after the financial companies in 5 years. Which makes me think of a dog crapping on a $1 million dollar antique couch and being lectured "not to do it again". Congress going after someone? Sad.

A lot of it I'd suspect.

The 6th and soon to be 3rd largest banks in the US have been knocked out of the game and others that we probably don't know about are still in trouble. Should the bailout bill fail you'll be looking at a serious crisis of confidence in the banking sector. Loans between institutions will stop as people look around and realize there isn't enough room in the lifeboats for everyone. Not to mention the increased chances of seeing an old fashioned run on the banks as the media covers the meltdown.

I really think you're underestimating the effects of cutting the financial sector loose. The bailout won't prevent a recession but it stands a chance of preventing a depression.


 
I think one of the issues people are struggling with is the concept/idea of "Credit". In my mind, there are actually two basic types.

1) Responsible lending secured by tangible assests/business plans with a good chance of repayment/gain.
2) Free-for-all, anything goes, rape them while we can, lending with no reason other than greed, credit hawkers.

The companies in category 1 probably need some assistance due to the actions of group #2. Middle class America has fallen behind on mortgages, business loans, etc because we are up to our ears in frivolous, high interest personal debt owed to rude, greedy, never saying no, crooks.

Unfortunately, most folks don't stop to think about the difference. Why would I be in favor of a bail-out for companies that are charging me 20-30% interest, abusing me at all hours of the day/night, and CONSTANTLY offering me MORE OF THE SAME.

Besides, what ever happened to the old pay-as-you-go way of doing business?? Is credit (as we know it today) really necessary?

Just my ignorant $0.02 worth!
 
I am so glad that all the support for the Capitalistic and Free market system has all turned out to be hot air. Since the loan and credit system is so important to the US and World economy, Nationalize and regulate it.
 
Originally posted by: K1052

I really think you're underestimating the effects of cutting the financial sector loose. The bailout won't prevent a recession but it stands a chance of preventing a depression.

How do you prevent a depression by artificially keeping prices high temporarily.

This has less to do with tax payers and more to do with everyone, it's just a quicker way to even more inflation. Don't worry, without true monetary reform there WILL be a depression in the next 5 years, or when the national debt hits about 15-20 trillion. Along with hyperinflation as some people think that printing money to pay everything off will solve our problems.
 
As I posted in another thread, that was tagged as SPAM (maybe so?)
I still think this is worth noting since so many Americans are really upset
this bailout is happening. I think it reflects many if not most tax payers
irritation with all of this.



Michael Moore's email he sending out:

Friends,

Let me cut to the chase. The biggest robbery in the history of this country is taking place as you read this. Though no guns are being used, 300 million hostages are being taken. Make no mistake about it: After stealing a half trillion dollars to line the pockets of their war-profiteering backers for the past five years, after lining the pockets of their fellow oilmen to the tune of over a hundred billion dollars in just the last two years, Bush and his cronies -- who must soon vacate the White House -- are looting the U.S. Treasury of every dollar they can grab. They are swiping as much of the silverware as they can on their way out the door.

No matter what they say, no matter how many scare words they use, they are up to their old tricks of creating fear and confusion in order to make and keep themselves and the upper one percent filthy rich. Just read the first four paragraphs of the lead story in last Monday's New York Times and you can see what the real deal is:


"Even as policy makers worked on details of a $700 billion bailout of the financial industry, Wall Street began looking for ways to profit from it.

"Financial firms were lobbying to have all manner of troubled investments covered, not just those related to mortgages.

"At the same time, investment firms were jockeying to oversee all the assets that Treasury plans to take off the books of financial institutions, a role that could earn them hundreds of millions of dollars a year in fees.

"Nobody wants to be left out of Treasury's proposal to buy up bad assets of financial institutions."

Unbelievable. Wall Street and its backers created this mess and now they are going to clean up like bandits. Even Rudy Giuliani is lobbying for his firm to be hired (and paid) to "consult" in the bailout.

The problem is, nobody truly knows what this "collapse" is all about. Even Treasury Secretary Paulson admitted he doesn't know the exact amount that is needed (he just picked the $700 billion number out of his head!). The head of the congressional budget office said he can't figure it out nor can he explain it to anyone.

And yet, they are screeching about how the end is near! Panic! Recession! The Great Depression! Y2K! Bird flu! Killer bees! We must pass the bailout bill today!! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

Falling for whom? NOTHING in this "bailout" package will lower the price of the gas you have to put in your car to get to work. NOTHING in this bill will protect you from losing your home. NOTHING in this bill will give you health insurance.

Health insurance? Mike, why are you bringing this up? What's this got to do with the Wall Street collapse?

It has everything to do with it. This so-called "collapse" was triggered by the massive defaulting and foreclosures going on with people's home mortgages. Do you know why so many Americans are losing their homes? To hear the Republicans describe it, it's because too many working class idiots were given mortgages that they really couldn't afford. Here's the truth: The number one cause of people declaring bankruptcy is because of medical bills. Let me state this simply: If we had had universal health coverage, this mortgage "crisis" may never have happened.

This bailout's mission is to protect the obscene amount of wealth that has been accumulated in the last eight years. It's to protect the top shareholders who own and control corporate America. It's to make sure their yachts and mansions and "way of life" go uninterrupted while the rest of America suffers and struggles to pay the bills. Let the rich suffer for once. Let them pay for the bailout. We are spending 400 million dollars a day on the war in Iraq. Let them end the war immediately and save us all another half-trillion dollars!

I have to stop writing this and you have to stop reading it. They are staging a financial coup this morning in our country. They are hoping Congress will act fast before they stop to think, before we have a chance to stop them ourselves. So stop reading this and do something -- NOW! Here's what you can do immediately:

1. Call or e-mail Senator Obama. Tell him he does not need to be sitting there trying to help prop up Bush and Cheney and the mess they've made. Tell him we know he has the smarts to slow this thing down and figure out what's the best route to take. Tell him the rich have to pay for whatever help is offered. Use the leverage we have now to insist on a moratorium on home foreclosures, to insist on a move to universal health coverage, and tell him that we the people need to be in charge of the economic decisions that affect our lives, not the barons of Wall Street.

2. Take to the streets. Participate in one of the hundreds of quickly-called demonstrations that are taking place all over the country (especially those near Wall Street and DC).

3. Call your Representative in Congress and your Senators. (click here to find their phone numbers). Tell them what you told Senator Obama.

When you screw up in life, there is hell to pay. Each and every one of you reading this knows that basic lesson and has paid the consequences of your actions at some point. In this great democracy, we cannot let there be one set of rules for the vast majority of hard-working citizens, and another set of rules for the elite, who, when they screw up, are handed one more gift on a silver platter. No more! Not again!

Yours,
Michael Moore





 
Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Originally posted by: K1052

I really think you're underestimating the effects of cutting the financial sector loose. The bailout won't prevent a recession but it stands a chance of preventing a depression.

How do you prevent a depression by artificially keeping prices high temporarily.

This has less to do with tax payers and more to do with everyone, it's just a quicker way to even more inflation. Don't worry, without true monetary reform there WILL be a depression in the next 5 years, or when the national debt hits about 15-20 trillion. Along with hyperinflation as some people think that printing money to pay everything off will solve our problems.

This isnt to keep prices high, this is to add liquidity to the markets so business can borrow for daily operations or expansion. One of the biggest reasons blamed for the Great Depression was a lack of liquidity in the financial markets. That brought our economy to its knee's. Do we want to repeat history? I am not an interventionalist by any stretch of the imagination but this is something that unfortunately has to be done. After this is done congress and the next administration have to find out what caused this and fix it on the regulatory side. I have a feeling it was a combination of the govt dictating to the financial markets to lend to the poor so everybody gets a house while relaxing the restrictions on lending to make it happen. The perfect mix of shit was created that we are all swimming in today.

 
Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Originally posted by: K1052

I really think you're underestimating the effects of cutting the financial sector loose. The bailout won't prevent a recession but it stands a chance of preventing a depression.

How do you prevent a depression by artificially keeping prices high temporarily.

This has less to do with tax payers and more to do with everyone, it's just a quicker way to even more inflation. Don't worry, without true monetary reform there WILL be a depression in the next 5 years, or when the national debt hits about 15-20 trillion. Along with hyperinflation as some people think that printing money to pay everything off will solve our problems.

Unloading the debt to the gov (even at highly discounted rates) lets the companies move forward or at least be acquired by other more stable companies and restores confidence. The whole trillion dollars spend won't vanish as the loans will be repaid and some of the mortgage backed debt will pay off. Probably only loose a couple hundred billion when its all done.

As far as public debt to gdp goes we're not even on par with most of Europe yet. let alone Asia. We aren't going to be seeing hyperinflation any time soon.
 
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Genx87
I am no finance expert. But this bailout isnt just for the rich. It is for everybody. Without the ability to lend or borrow the economy will grind to a halt.
I love how you doom and gloomers claim this bill is for everyone. How? We don't even know the true value of the assets that would be purchased by this bill... and do we REALLY need more "committees" (the bill calls for 2 more to be formed) to watch over us? That is the Federal Reserve's job, now we need 2 groups to watch them? It's like getting 2 accountants to check my accountant's work: it's knee-jerk overkill and its purpose is to manipulate the taxpayers into approving this horse manure. "Let's make them feel safe, Henry!"

Last, you (and a bunch of other morons in this forum) claim we won't be able to "lend or borrow" if this bill isn't approved. Ok, then why are Chase, Citi, and most of the large banks and their subsidiaries (Smith Barney) still doing fine? If I hear one more person post that we won't be able to get a loan (car, house, business) because of this "crisis" I'm going to cry. Not to mention that half of the people posting actually work in the financial sector so of course they're biased. They may not get a huge raise this year w/out this bailout. Proof that 6 of the major 10 banks are still doing ok (and keep in mind that Wachovia was the ONLY one in the top 10 that went under):

JP/Morgan Chase 2 year chart - business as usual

Citi 2 year - close to alltime low but bouncing back with Wachovia buyout

Bank of America 2 year - already bounced back.

Wells Fargo 2 year - AT AN ALL TIME HIGH

Suntrust 2 year - Business as usual.

HSBC 2 year - bouncing back.

Keep spreading your doom and gloom, but some of us know that some banks actually didn't fall for the subprime BS and are still F-I-N-E. Yeah, we won't have as many lenders to choose from, but hey, the fat has been cut and you have to actually have a credit rating to get something now. Imagine that?


So, what are you going to say when all the financial experts are right and lending between financial institutions dries up and those banks that are in a good position don't have the capital to run the economy and unemployment hits 25% in 90 days?

Oops? Is that all we'll get? An Oops?


 
Sportage ,
You lost me as soon as you said MM.
Do your homework and see who he really is and who he represents.
The guy is a walking conspiracy theory and mouthpiece for the socialists.
He'd just as soon have your money and distribute it to you as he felt necessary as any of the others.
You may allow him and other idiots to tell you what's best for you and your money , but leave mine alone.

McCain '08
 
Originally posted by: Squisher
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Genx87
I am no finance expert. But this bailout isnt just for the rich. It is for everybody. Without the ability to lend or borrow the economy will grind to a halt.
I love how you doom and gloomers claim this bill is for everyone. How? We don't even know the true value of the assets that would be purchased by this bill... and do we REALLY need more "committees" (the bill calls for 2 more to be formed) to watch over us? That is the Federal Reserve's job, now we need 2 groups to watch them? It's like getting 2 accountants to check my accountant's work: it's knee-jerk overkill and its purpose is to manipulate the taxpayers into approving this horse manure. "Let's make them feel safe, Henry!"

Last, you (and a bunch of other morons in this forum) claim we won't be able to "lend or borrow" if this bill isn't approved. Ok, then why are Chase, Citi, and most of the large banks and their subsidiaries (Smith Barney) still doing fine? If I hear one more person post that we won't be able to get a loan (car, house, business) because of this "crisis" I'm going to cry. Not to mention that half of the people posting actually work in the financial sector so of course they're biased. They may not get a huge raise this year w/out this bailout. Proof that 6 of the major 10 banks are still doing ok (and keep in mind that Wachovia was the ONLY one in the top 10 that went under):

JP/Morgan Chase 2 year chart - business as usual

Citi 2 year - close to alltime low but bouncing back with Wachovia buyout

Bank of America 2 year - already bounced back.

Wells Fargo 2 year - AT AN ALL TIME HIGH

Suntrust 2 year - Business as usual.

HSBC 2 year - bouncing back.

Keep spreading your doom and gloom, but some of us know that some banks actually didn't fall for the subprime BS and are still F-I-N-E. Yeah, we won't have as many lenders to choose from, but hey, the fat has been cut and you have to actually have a credit rating to get something now. Imagine that?


So, what are you going to say when all the financial experts are right and lending between financial institutions dries up and those banks that are in a good position don't have the capital to run the economy and unemployment hits 25% in 90 days?

Oops? Is that all we'll get? An Oops?
You must have missed my above post where I said 300+ billion was already injected into the economy with AIG, Fanny/Freddie, Bear Stearns, so don't act like action hasn't been taken yet. We've already been fleeced for half of the cost of the Iraq War already.

No offense, but 25% unemployment is freaking nonsense doom and gloom talk. I'm not seeing any "financial expert" predicting that, please link. I'll personally paypal you $100 if the bailout doesn't go through and that ever happened. Quote me on it.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Originally posted by: K1052

I really think you're underestimating the effects of cutting the financial sector loose. The bailout won't prevent a recession but it stands a chance of preventing a depression.

How do you prevent a depression by artificially keeping prices high temporarily.

This has less to do with tax payers and more to do with everyone, it's just a quicker way to even more inflation. Don't worry, without true monetary reform there WILL be a depression in the next 5 years, or when the national debt hits about 15-20 trillion. Along with hyperinflation as some people think that printing money to pay everything off will solve our problems.

This isnt to keep prices high, this is to add liquidity to the markets so business can borrow for daily operations or expansion. One of the biggest reasons blamed for the Great Depression was a lack of liquidity in the financial markets. That brought our economy to its knee's. Do we want to repeat history? I am not an interventionalist by any stretch of the imagination but this is something that unfortunately has to be done. After this is done congress and the next administration have to find out what caused this and fix it on the regulatory side. I have a feeling it was a combination of the govt dictating to the financial markets to lend to the poor so everybody gets a house while relaxing the restrictions on lending to make it happen. The perfect mix of shit was created that we are all swimming in today.


I know that's what it's being sold as now, keeping liquidity in the market. Maybe the market should be illiquid for a while? Instead we're going to throw borrowed money at the problem. This bill artificially price fixes houses, it doesn't give the market a chance to correct itself, to me that doesn't make a whole lot of sense. As a bonus, inflation raises.

I don't have a link which seems to be required on these forums, but I've read that the real inflation rate is around 10-11% based off of the 'old way' of calculating it. We'll see this number continue to rise as we print more money for bailouts like this, for the war, and for more social programs. We won't tax to get the money back, we'll pay for it in inflation. If you think a year or so ahead it really doesn't matter much, but 10 years, 20 years, suddenly your savings start looking a bit tiny and you're working for the rest of your life.
 
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
i would like to so more equity intervention, but whatever. The will loosen up credit markets and let peopel start buying homes again, which will stop the fall in home prices and hopefully slow the default rates.

But prices need to fall still, prices for houses are still too high. The market needs to take care of itself. The banks that can't manage the mess they made need to fail.
 
Originally posted by: Genx87
I am no finance expert. But this bailout isnt just for the rich. It is for everybody. Without the ability to lend or borrow the economy will grind to a halt.

Its grinding to a halt here in the Southeast part of the country because no one can freaking get any gas. There isn't a gas station within 20 miles of me that has gas and im not even in Atlanta.

If the Republican's are "BIG OIL", then the Dems are "BIG BANKER".
 
I said this in another thread.

At the end of the day the economy will still be on the brink of disaster, the people who own these banks are still going to be rich, and the country and people are still going to be massively in debt.

The bailout does nothing but secure those who are already loaded.
 
So, big banks with capital refuse to lend out money, but I as a taxpayer should lend it to secure my future? Hmm, Big Bank X stands to make millions/billions in profit off of loans but yet they refuse to lend. Seems to me that the companies needing to borrow money are a pretty poor credit risk if traditional institutions refuse to put their wealth on the line. How about the people with the actual wealth in this country bail out the friggen economy? Oh, that's right, the market would still implode if the taxpayer isn't on the line for the debt. This whole mess is assinine hocus pocus and quite a few of you are buying right into what you're being fed. If people/institutions with billions/trillions refuse to salvage this toxic mess, why in the world do we believe it's worth saving? Oh, that's right, they told you you'd be out of a job if we don't. Rule by fear people, it's the age old way of doing things.
 
The little guy had his handout a few months ago. Now its time for the big guy to get his.

Whats the problrm? Hell, free money for everyone!
 
Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek
So, big banks with capital refuse to lend out money, but I as a taxpayer should lend it to secure my future? Hmm, Big Bank X stands to make millions/billions in profit off of loans but yet they refuse to lend. Seems to me that the companies needing to borrow money are a pretty poor credit risk if traditional institutions refuse to put their wealth on the line. How about the people with the actual wealth in this country bail out the friggen economy? Oh, that's right, the market would still implode if the taxpayer isn't on the line for the debt. This whole mess is assinine hocus pocus and quite a few of you are buying right into what you're being fed. If people/institutions with billions/trillions refuse to salvage this toxic mess, why in the world do we believe it's worth saving? Oh, that's right, they told you you'd be out of a job if we don't. Rule by fear people, it's the age old way of doing things.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek
So, big banks with capital refuse to lend out money, but I as a taxpayer should lend it to secure my future? Hmm, Big Bank X stands to make millions/billions in profit off of loans but yet they refuse to lend. Seems to me that the companies needing to borrow money are a pretty poor credit risk if traditional institutions refuse to put their wealth on the line. How about the people with the actual wealth in this country bail out the friggen economy? Oh, that's right, the market would still implode if the taxpayer isn't on the line for the debt. This whole mess is assinine hocus pocus and quite a few of you are buying right into what you're being fed. If people/institutions with billions/trillions refuse to salvage this toxic mess, why in the world do we believe it's worth saving? Oh, that's right, they told you you'd be out of a job if we don't. Rule by fear people, it's the age old way of doing things.

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

:thumbsup::thumbsup:
 
Originally posted by: SirStev0
I said this in another thread.

At the end of the day the economy will still be on the brink of disaster, the people who own these banks are still going to be rich, and the country and people are still going to be massively in debt.

The bailout does nothing but secure those who are already loaded.

Did you check out who owns the largest part of US banks?

I'll give you a hint, it isn't a person, nor any hedge fund.
 
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: SirStev0
I said this in another thread.

At the end of the day the economy will still be on the brink of disaster, the people who own these banks are still going to be rich, and the country and people are still going to be massively in debt.

The bailout does nothing but secure those who are already loaded.

Did you check out who owns the largest part of US banks?

I'll give you a hint, it isn't a person, nor any hedge fund.

Its that son of a bitch Kennedy isnt it!! I always knew he had something to do with this......
 
Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek
So, big banks with capital refuse to lend out money, but I as a taxpayer should lend it to secure my future? Hmm, Big Bank X stands to make millions/billions in profit off of loans but yet they refuse to lend. Seems to me that the companies needing to borrow money are a pretty poor credit risk if traditional institutions refuse to put their wealth on the line. How about the people with the actual wealth in this country bail out the friggen economy? Oh, that's right, the market would still implode if the taxpayer isn't on the line for the debt. This whole mess is assinine hocus pocus and quite a few of you are buying right into what you're being fed. If people/institutions with billions/trillions refuse to salvage this toxic mess, why in the world do we believe it's worth saving? Oh, that's right, they told you you'd be out of a job if we don't. Rule by fear people, it's the age old way of doing things.

They've tried. people have put tens of billions into BSC, LEH, WaMu, and Wachovia, only to be wiped out.


If you consider that if Bill Gates and Warren Buffet put 100% of their assets into this problem, it'd only be a 1/7th of the total idea. Never mind the fact that them doing that would depress the price of the assets they are already in.

To rule by reasonable caution and rational fear is smart. It is utterly stupid to be ruled by ignorance of the actual reality of the situation.

People like you never see the problem until it is at your doorstep. Once the credit crunch hits your job, you'll understand. However, I hope I never see you mention you're applying for Unemployment, or waiting in a food line. You're going to be the cause of our downfall and you deserve nothing at all as a result.
 
One commentator on CNBC previously said with bill as currently constructed, we were putting out $700 billion to get maybe $100 billion in effect (where's all the other money going, I wonder)

Plus, a really smart bond market player Tony Crescenzi also think this "Paulson SIV Bailout version 2008" is also a joke: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=872909280&play=1 (start 7 minutes in). Sounds like they agree with recent Wall Street Journal Editorial that taxpayers should be injecting capital through preferred shares, and stock holders should be completely wiped out before one penny of taxpayer bailout money is lost... Recent NY Times article on way Sweden did it also said taxpayers won't accept a bailout unless current shareholders are left with nothing first.

Someone else said we still have a couple weeks before employers perhaps can't start making payrolls.


 
Quite a few economists, and for varying reasons, oppose this bailout. Among them are Stieglitz and Sameulson. Are these people all wrong? How would we know if they are wrong or right?

At this juncture, we have the people who brought us this recession and this debacle offering a plan that was rightly rejected by the House. Why should any American think this Congress and this Administration are capable of adequately understanding the markets and the economy AND creating an effective solution?

Excuse me, but I am very skeptical that these bozos in Washington are doing anything more than DOING. Certainly little thinking has occurred, as no time has elapsed.

If Congress and/or the administration wants to sell this bailout to the American people, they need to do a much better job. This bailout had almost no dialectic tension until Monday's vote. We all owe the Dems and Republicans who voted against this stupidity a debt of gratitude for at least slowing this thing down long enough so brains could be engaged.

-Robert
 
Back
Top