bailout

Post Reply New Topic

what do you think of the proposed bail out?

Which proposed bailout? President Bush put one forward, then there was a proposed compromise, then the House Republicans came up with another plan.

ALL
i don't understand
are they saying that the us government is going bankrupt??

wamu just got bought and sold.


is this a government assisted corporate takeover?

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/In ... 92608.aspx

The bailout is sketchy - ie. it could make money if the mortgages snap back, on the other hand its $700 billion unchecked in Paulson's hands (and yes, this is one of those wonderful pieces of legislation - or work - that republicans and democrats can all agree on in terms of its worth).

On the other hand, I think the new proposal is far better. The idea that McCain, Boehner, Ryan, and some other people came up with to, rather than having the bailout, have the Treasury insure the mortgages rather than buy them all up in lump sum. Lieberman just got off the phone with Prager a few minutes ago, sounds like they may even have a resolution to take to the voting floor by even tomorrow morning. Regardless it sounds like they're very much committed to trying to get this in and resolved before the markets reopen Monday.

Last edited by techstepgenr8tion on 26 Sep 2008, 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

kay...?

Who else thinks we're completely screwed?

*raises hand*

Retirement? What retirement?! Gone. Poof.

My father lost $20,000.00 in one day!

I dunno about the rest of ya'll but I'm scared witless. I'll admit it. I can't even spit right now.

Make the bastards that tanked their own companies accountable.

$700 billion is a 100% waste of government money.

Who knows how long it will take for the government to make $700 billion back?

President Bush's 3-page proposal on the $700 billion bailout
is sketchy enough, there are not enough details.

If his proposal goes through in Congress,
then it will be $700 billion unchecked by Paulson.

Wall Street needs to pay for their own bailout,
rather than depending on the government to do so.

Right?

Bingo.

This bailout strikes me as short-term-life-raft=long-term-bloody-train-wreck.

They should be accountable for the risks they took. Not taxpayers. A tax fallout that will be carried by an already staggering middle class.

No bail-out. No way.

I planned within my means, and got a fixed-rate loan...

Where's my bailout?

If any proposal, even a compromised one, goes through in Congrees,
it will turn Paulson into a financial dictator.

This is the Bailout from Hell!

Wanna open a Tech-Ska Mutual?

Fiddling whilst Rome burns...

Don't you love politicians?

I think it comes down to that initial proposal - which is a terrible big-government solution. Gingrich has also commented, as the Democrats are the one party where there's huge support for Bush, that it would mean that Paulson (who seems well allied with the Dems) would have all this bailout money and would have the ability to leverage and generally push Wallstreet around (on behalf of benefactors like Reid and Polosie; the later of which I find Hilary quite likeable in comparison); really scary stuff when you think about it.

The second one is coming from a lot of the different solutions that have been coming in from prominant economists. The really sad part, most of Bush's advisors and Henry Paulson - all old Goldman Sax people, probably all corroborating on handing that ball of crap to GWB (they probably should have added the Brooklyn Bridge and Everglades while they were at it). Yes, technically, if carried out in a purely innocent matter, the first plan could gain money if the market goes up, at worst could only lose a percentage but not all be lost (even if we had a 1930's type depression) but regardless - starting next year tax payers would be squeezed hard.
The idea of insuring the debts and playing it as it goes seems far better and this way there's no one playing God (especially a someone with no oversight).

On a side note though, if there's ever been a time where McCain's done a great job ar wracking up populist points (which I think has been during this whole time his and Sarah's biggest strength), the replacement proposal is what the people really wanted. The debates are coming up tonight and it should be interesting how much of this whole matter will get injected into the dialog.

Indeed it will. I've been following it over here. I don't normally take too much interest in US politics, but as current events are some of the most important (in a world context) we're likely to see for some time, and will shape the world we live in for decades to come, then it does become somewhat captivating.

a new order of the world is coming.

My dad has lost $5,000 so far.

Oh, and this bailout is a scam and a farce. It'll just lead to a period of stagflation that'll make the depression look like cake.