Bull. everyone knows there will be "some" kind of deal between now and Feb. 1. I am extremely confident in that. And again, I'm so damn tired of having to pay attention to the feelings of these bastards. Their mommies should have done a better job with the self-esteem issues. And really, if you think the Bush administration is only going to use 1/7 of that and graciously leave the rest on the table for the Obama administration, you are incredibly naive. They will spend every cent by January 20.
Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) calls BS on the whole Nancy Pelosi hurt their feewings bit: <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/clcREgqjZSU&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/clcREgqjZSU&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> "It was a stupid speech... But, it didn't move any votes."
Might have prevented companies to drop dead in one week like lehman, allow companies to unwind their bad assets more slowly and work through liquidity issues. The pain probably wouldn't be this sudden and sharp. People were already realizing how bad some of these subprime products were, going forward they were gonna be gone regardless.
"In general, markets have well-known inefficiencies. One is that transactions do not take into account the effect on others who are not party to the transaction. These so-called "externalities" can be huge. That is particularly so in the case of financial institutions. Their task is to take risks, and if well-managed, to ensure that potential losses to themselves will be covered. To themselves. Under capitalist rules, it is not their business to consider the cost to others if their practices lead to financial crisis, as they regularly do. In economists' terms, risk is under priced, because systemic risk is not priced into decisions. That leads to repeated crisis, naturally. At that point, we turn to the IMF solution. The costs are transferred to the public, which had nothing to do with the risky choices but is now compelled to pay the costs - in the US, perhaps mounting to about $1 trillion right now. And of course the public has no voice in determining these outcomes, any more than poor peasants have a voice in being subjected to cruel structural adjustment programs. A basic principle of modern state capitalism is that cost and risk are socialized, while profit is privatized. That principle extends far beyond financial institutions. Much the same is true for the entire advanced economy, which relies extensively on the dynamic state sector for innovation, for basic research and development, for procurement when purchasers are unavailable, for direct bail-outs, and in numerous other ways. These mechanisms are the domestic counterpart of imperial and neocolonial hegemony, formalized in World Trade Organization rules and the misleadingly named "free trade agreements."" -Chomsky
Like a socialist voice in the wilderness, I've wanted the nationalization of key industries for years.
How do you figure? No fewer than 3 people answered that question. Selection bias doesn't help you make an argument.
Don't be so sure there hoss. Desperation makes men do crazy things. <object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/KsKfMuENxhY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/KsKfMuENxhY&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object> McCain May Suspend Campaign Again "John McCain made the morning show rounds today. On Fox they were virtually begging him to 'suspend' his campaign again in the wake of the bailout failure yesterday on the Hill. You know, since it worked out so well the first time. McCain's answer: He just might suspend again."
Missed a few while trying to fire off two posts. (Boo-boo on my part. Should have remarked "relative silence" given the flow of conversation.) Anyway, I still don't see where Paulson saying he will wait until he sees which institutions fail next as translating into him waiting because "has be raise, borrowed or otherwise found to be made available." While Paulson does mention he wants to wait to get guidance from other banks and, in another instance, says that he will have to hire the necessary agents to get the system running, that he is waiting to raise the money. Continuing my central theme:
And how may I ask, is Paulson gonna get the money? Does he have it stashed in his little piggy bank somewhere? Without this bill there is NO MONEY. It's the taxpayer's money. Without this approval, there is NO MONEY, hence no bailout.
Ask Paulson. Don't twist my meaning. I don't claim to be a Master of the Universe but I am not an idiot. Of course the bailout had to pass first. At this point I guess I should be snarky and point out that strawmen do not help you make an argument or question your reading comprehension skills... whatever. No where did I state that Paulson would act without the bailout plan. Paulson said that once the bailout passed he would then wait to see what banks would fail before moving into action. He didn't say it would be because he had to wait to raise money.
Greed is a horrible thing........ "Hey, I know, lets pass it on to the taxpayers to bail out greedy politicians and ceo's"....... Sincerely, Every single person in washington
So the Senate will supposedly take up the bill with some window dressing tommorrow. To bad. It will get filibustered by Coburn and maybe a few others. The Senate will be able to pass it, but not until after 2 days of embarassment and the House votes on yet another version.
There's no way it will be filibustered. The Senate's been much more on board with the bailout, and even if they weren't, everyone agrees a vote is needed ASAP. You'd easily get 60 votes to kill any filibuster.
It doesn't take a successful fillibuster. A cloture petition can't be voted on until the second calendar day after signed. 1 Senator can extend debate for 2 days.
