$700 billion dollars is just the beginning

I think that you have to agree that there wasn't much debate about if there should be a bailout but a quick and slick public relations campaign that needed to spread the word that "700 billion dollars is a big number, because this is a big problem".

Skepticism and cynicism permeate my though process, but I am willing to happily admit I'm wrong because of both of these attributes.

What I have concluded from a little research is that Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers didn't go bankrupt because of individual mortgage loans defaults and foreclosures. These were simply the catalysts at the bottom of a huge pyramid of leverage that ultimately uncovered the sheer lack of transparency in the financial markets. But instead of discussing intense new regulation, the US government is just writing out checks.

Professor Nouriel Roubini: http://www.rgemonitor.com/blog/roubini/

Ron Paul: http://www.usnews.com/blogs/the-home-front/2008/09/19/ron-paul-this-bailout-wont-be-the-last.html

The Motley Fool: http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=89259&t=01001482315991999237

Here is one example of possible plan failure 

http://econompicdata.blogspot.com/2008/09/game-theory-why-bailout-wont-work.html

The only proponents of the plan are the same people that kept telling us everything was okay up until the last minute.  I have no faith that it will work and believe that there are better ways to shore up the markets than by the purchase of toxic assets, at even a bargin price.  The only benefactors are the share holders of the rescued entities and the unsecured creditors of banks. 

At last count (April 2008) Japan and China owned 1.1 trillion dollars in US treasury securities.  Does anyone want to venture a guess as to how the government will come up with the 700 billion dollars?  That's right, sell treasury securities.  What country currently has the fiscal ability to purchase significant chunks of these securities?  You got it, China. (Hence the analogy of the Carpathia rescuing the surviviors of the Titanic).

The better way to solve the problem would have been to reduce the debt overhang on millions of insolvent households through government backed refinancing plans (possibly utilizing Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae now) thereby reducing the toxicity of the current assets and reducing the debt burden from the bottom up.  Once the share holders are relieved by this bailout, what incentives are present to force change in corporate menatality...none.

So much for Nancy Pelosi's ploy of denying 30 years of history, blaming everything on Republicans and taking all the credit for any fix for the Democrats. She's absolute idiot, I tell ya, an IDIOT!   

While this Republican/States Rights supporter could have support the bailout as one of the three main things the Constitution requires Congress to do (i.e., provide for the national defense, provide for a stable currency and regulate interstate commerce), I also take comfort in seeing the U.S. House of Representatives fail to pass a $700 billion boondoggle that enables the continuation of the very mistakes that got us into this mess to start with.

There are ways to fix the problem without raping the taxpayer - but those ways start with our government NOT FORCING LENDING INSTUTUTIONS TO GIVE ZERO DOWN PAYMENT LOANS TO PEOPLE WHO CAN'T PAY THEM AGAINST PROPERTIES THAT ARE DESTINED TO DECLINE RAPIDLY IN VALUE.

Do you hear me, Barney Frank and Barack Obama? Shall I SAY IT LOUDER? Was getting to that debate really more important than working on a solution to this "crisis" that both parties could live with?

That's what I thought. Now we're all totally screwed, and no matter what the mainstream media says, the debate was basically a draw that settled nothing.    

So are you saying ?

Ignore the media and believe only me, a Republican.

So are you saying ?

Ignore the media and believe only me, a Republican.

-citizen

No, Citizen, I'm saying ignore all the politicians and pundits who are trying to put a partisan spin on this mess, accept the fact that both parties had a hand in it, and worked toward a bi-partisan solution. I'll start the ball rolling: With more than a hundred Republicans and almost a hundred Democrats voting AGAINST this bailout bill, it was a "bipartisan" failure.

Of course, ignoring the mainstream media spin on it would be a good start. Like you, they're in the tank for Democrats this time around. But you won't do that, I know, 'cuz you keep posting their regurgitated crap as if it's Gospel.

By the way, Ed, Pelosi lost control of her party when the Democrats put up all those "moderate" Democrats in districts with weak "moderate" Republicans in 2006 to increase their numbers. Now, she's discovering that, unlike "liberal" Democrats, "moderate" Democrats have a mind of their own.

Now she understands how all of us Republicans felt sometimes about having John McCain on the Senate side. We never could keep him and Lindsey Graham on the reservation either.

I haven't absorbed all this new news yet so I'll refrain from commenting on it.

But so far all I'm hearing, on the news, that it is basically a Republican failure to get their people 'lined up' properly.

To me,  this scenario indicates McCain's true lack of leadership qualities and republican politician followers.

  Perhaps I need to rely on 'Faux News' for the only truth in this matter!

It doesn't bother me that much though because I really think that not enough thought has been put into this whole bail-out deal yet.

There's a part of me that sez let those greedy #@&^*!%'s go bankrupt and spend the monies on/in new directions and businesses that won't be so greedy.

I bet the Small Business Administration could use a few billion .. don't you?

Let our Democrat friends never forget that Jimmy Carter started this mess and Bill Clinton pushed it further, to 'give' homes to minorities whether they could afford it or not.

-prevail

And don't forget to tell us all about 'POOR MARY-JO & TED KENNEDY'.

Sheesh ...

The last two posts - one by a right-leaner and one from a left-leaner - perfectly illustrate what I said about the impossibility of bipartisanship nowadays.

Prevail, I would contend to you that, yes, Democrat rhetoric, boneheaded ideas about home ownership for all and political posturing designed to buy the votes of the dumbest amongst us started this snowball, but I would also contend that Republicans, when they controlled both houses of Congress from 1994-2002, had ample opportunity to stop it before it became an avalanche.

Citizen, I would contend to you that, with more than 230 DEMOCRAT members of the House of Representative, if Barack Obama, in his infant wisdom (no typo there) could have used his "massive" influence to get 11 more of them to vote for this bill, his party could have passed it with or without any more Republicans.

Both parties have to bear the burden of this mess, and both parties have to put presidential politics aside in order to resolve it.

But I do agree with you, Citizen. I, too, am indifferent to this bailout. They either need to fix it right, which requires some thought and discussion, or they need to leave it alone and let the free markets work. Wall Street bankers and stockbrokers will survive. If they don't, I'll chip in for an extra mop or two to get them off the sidewalks after their 50-story death dives.

As for "poor Mary Jo and Ted Kennedy" that was a long, long time ago. Teddy may be paying a price now, but fortunately that tumor only affected one of his two brain cells that hadn't already been killed by alcohol, so he'll be good as new, for whatever that's worth, in no time.

Have you noticed the price of oil?  OPEC is losing their turbans over this.

Some think the consumer will be a damn sight better off if there is no "bail out."  Donald Trump is asking why does Gvt want to buy bad debt:  Why not buy "good debt?"  Good point

From the JDTippett e-mail files. Looks like Lindsey agrees with me that Pelosi's an idiot, although he and I certainly disagree on the doom-and-gloom prophesy regarding what happens if the bill isn't passed in some form in the next few days:

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) today made this statement after the vote in the U.S. House of Representatives against the financial rescue plan.  He said:

“I have never been more disappointed in the Congress than I am today.  I hope every member of the House of Representatives -- Republican and Democrat -- who voted against this legislation will work in the next twenty-four hours to improve the bill.  Now is the time to put the national interest above the self interest.

“Speaker Pelosi’s partisan comments before the vote obviously did not help matters. Now is not the time for extreme partisanship but time for our nation to pull together for the common good.

“If we do not address this issue, our nation may be headed toward a major financial collapse.  For the common good, we must find a solution to this problem.  Without the ability to borrow money to build a business, buy a home, or go to school, our country will be brought to its financial knees.

“Today’s actions will ripple throughout our economy.  More people will lose their homes.  Businesses may be forced to shut their doors.  Life savings and retirement accounts will take a severe hit. I fear those who voted against this legislation have put our nation’s economy at risk. 

“Democratic and Republican leaders must find a way to bring more votes on board to this bipartisan bill.  I will continue to do my part in this effort as I realize the cost of congressional inaction will be steep.”

Only wish the FEDS would bail out John Q. American when THEY are over their heads, or make bad business choices, or rob the system of billions and billions by speculative moves.  I heard one of these big-sh*t jamokes last weekend say that if the US Gov't would spend the $700B. on rebuilding AMERICA instead of "bailout" with no accountability or method of recovery of funds, that every single major road, highway, rail line, airport radar system, water supply & sewer system and power line and transmission center in the entire continental USA  could be rebuilt or replaced,  with about 300BILLION left over for military or social use.  Maybe a bit conservative, contractors would LOVE that task...  but point being we'd get SOMETHING for this skrewing we're gonna get.

All I know is tomorrow I'm pulling every penny from my banks, S&L's and 401-K accounts and stashing it where I know I'll be able to find it after the REST of the system collapses!