The Rockefeller Republicans are alive and well. That being said, if there is any opposition to this from Washington, it looks like it will come from House Republicans.
Okay genius, how will other banks appear? How the hell are other banks supposed to appear if there is no credit available? David Blaine going to perform some street magic and pull billions of dollars out of thin air and start a bank? People who have no background in finance speak against this like they have some idea that would work instead, yet I haven't seen anything of that nature. Most of these people who are against it are Liberals who are so anti-Bush that they let their feelings towards Bush and his administration cloud their judgment on what is right for this country and try so see everything as negative and something that won't work. Yet they have no real knowledge of what's at hand here or how to solve it. Everyone just wants to be a critic.
I meant on the board, not in Congress. I agree with you that most opposition in Congress will come from Republicans.
Did this mini-rant make you feel better? The "clueless angry liberals" spiel is not only irritating, it's played out and just plain boring. It's not like these assets will just dissappear forever if the government does not buy them up. Someone will buy them, although probably at a lot less than you, me, and our children's children's children's children's children just paid for them. As for where will other banks come from - I don't ****ing care. Unless you can PROVE me wrong, you really don't have anything to fall back on except silly rants about how awesome your financial acumen is and how all the liberals are somehow conspiring to take down the economy.... oh wait.
Uhh...hell no. Chicago economists are not the people you want to talk to. This is a money and banking problem - Economists are not qualified to deal with this at all.
You don't ****ing care? You want to sit here and criticize a plan to save this this country financially and pull stuff out of your ass about how "other banks will appear" and then say you don't care? It really shows how much you lack any clue as to what the hell is going on here. Who is going to buy those assets? Nobody out there has billions of dollars laying around in cash to buy those assets. Add that to the fact that credit is drying up and that it's getting harder and harder to get loans, it is an impossible situation for any single person or company to buy those assets. The government is the only entity that can buy them. And then you want to tell me that I have to "PROVE" you wrong? Did you prove me wrong? Oh nevermind, I forgot you did... You said not to worry about banks failing because other banks will appear. Like I said, how are they supposed to appear? Oh nevermind, you don't ****ing care. What do you have to fall back on? My portfolio along with millions of other Americans portfolios are the nation's problem. Do you have any savings? Anything for retirement? If you do, you should be worried too. If you don't, well then you probably don't need to be saved because you aren't going to survive that long anyway. Like I said, offer another solution. Don't pull crap out of nowhere when you have nothing to back it up. You have no credibility at all in a topic like this, nor have you established any, so prove you know what you're talking about or stay out of the discussion.
Of course I'm sure that you are. The one that told us for months if not years how stupid we are for saying that the economy is going into the ****ter. We have low unemployment! The market is up! Everything is fantastic!
Let's take a step back. I don't care because I see no reason why it would be impossible. If you think this is erroneous, explain why - I'd like to know. Saying that this plan "saves the country financially" is beyond disengenuous. It saves wall street, while burdening an already totally overburdened country. I am worried. My portfolio has been hit hard. Do I think this means we should rush off and dump 700 billion into companies that made bad decisions? NO. My solution: Wait. Or at least stage the bailout somehow.
how about the terrorists? don't they win too... cause we're all running around with fear in our eyes.
Wrong I know something needs to get done, but i dont think we should be stuck with the bill while they are free from paying up too. Get a grip, we dont disagree, just on the stipulations that some heads need to roll.
What good will it do to raise the value of my house, when you are only doing it by decreasing the value of the dollar. The market should have been allowed to play out. I don't think this really helps longterm, and I am only more concerned about where will be down the road. Everything needed to be downsized for a while, but the government can't allow that for one reason. Officials don't get re-elected when the economy is in recession. People shouldn't panic, they shouldn't worry, they should just stay the course and let everything play out. Credit hasn't dried up for the people that have good credit. The market can rebound without the goverment bailing it out.
Ok maybe a deal wasn't struck 100%...this thing really needs to get done soon or we face the possibility of a Great Depression part 2... Tentative meltdown deal: Bush, McCain, Obama meet WASHINGTON - President Bush and the two men fighting to succeed him joined forces Thursday at a historic White House meeting on a multibillion-dollar Wall Street bailout plan, aiming to stave off a national economic disaster. Key members of Congress said they had struck a deal earlier in the day, but its future was unclear. The tentative accord would give the Bush administration just a fraction of the $700 billion it had requested up front, with half that total subject to a congressional veto, Capitol Hill aides said. But nothing appeared final. Amid several signs that conservatives were balking, Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the top Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, emerged from the White House and said the announced agreement "is, obviously, no agreement." Both of Congress' Republican leaders, Rep. John Boehner and Sen. Mitch McConnell, issued statements saying there was not yet an agreement. Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain, who have both sought to distance themselves from the unpopular Bush, sat down with the president at the White House for an hourlong afternoon session that was striking in this brutally partisan season and apparently without precedent. By also including Congress' Democratic and Republican leaders, the meeting gathered nearly all Washington's political power structure at one long table in a small West Wing room. More here: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080925/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown
I already explained why earlier in this thread, yet you seem to ignore it. Credit is getting tighter and tighter. Add nationwide panic and people pulling our their money, even less liquidity. If banks can't loan to each other, they will begin to fail. If there is no access to capital, nobody can just start a bank. Banks borrow money from other banks all the time. They have to, in order to maintain daily operations. If you can't borrow money in a credit strained market, then you can't survive. So essentially we go around in circles....Banks "appear" (even though nobody would even consider that because they know they would fail) and then they fail. Nobody has that much in liquid assets in order to start a successful bank. The only way is to borrow from government which is what the plan is about in the first place. You just think things happen by themselves as long as you don't have to be bothered to do it. "Oh somebody else will do it..." It does save the country financially. Without this, the country is risking going into a deep depression. You think saving people's hard earned money is not saving this country financially? How about saving the value of their homes? What about business who can't get access to capital to create jobs and keep this economy running? How about the businesses who will have to layoff so many people because they can't afford to pay them anymore? How about families not being able to send their kids to college because they can't get a loan to do it? Yeah let's just say to hell with people's savings and to hell with jobs for Americans. It's not saving the country financially anyway, right? Everything will be fine and dandy You're still stuck in the mindset that its a "bailout" for companies on wall street. This market needs liquidity, otherwise the system fails. And the system is not only confined to wall street. It is the entire financial backbone of this country. The companies that made the bad decisions have already been hit hard in the market and have had to write down tons of losses. The ones that made a lot of bad decisions have failed, while the other ones that didn't make as many have suffered. If you want to point fingers at the companies that made bad decisions, shouldn't you be pointing your finger at the people who took out loans way above what they could afford? That's a bad decision as well. We don't have time to wait. The more we wait, the more we get deeper into territory that we can't just simply reverse out of. We're sitting in quicksand. Like I said before, you just seem to be content to wait because someone "will" buy those assets or start banks or the market will fix itself. It just does not work like that.
They pay taxes just like you and me. Who said they don't have to pay a part of the bill? Where are you getting that idea? If anything, they are more likely to be in the upper tax bracket so they're paying more than you or me are for this. I don't see the issue here. Their companies have already been hit hard as it is. Information is priced into the stock of a company. And there are stipulations in the bill saying there will be a limit on executive pay and whoever will be controlling this money chooses the management of the companies. Again, I don't see the issue here.
