so. do you really want this to be 1929? is that it?

do you really want the economy to collapse? do you really want millions more to be out of work? in food lines, struggling to get by?

selling apples on the street?

is that it? is that the thing that would make us happy here?

do you think the controls in place to prevent that from happening are so much worse?


a legitimate question.



the government in 1929 did not step in to prevent the crisis. and what happened happened.

the government in 2008 did.


any thoughts about that? and the difference?

nt

paying attention and have been warning about this for literally years) are people MISSING

when people scream LET IT COLLAPSE... it only shows how little they understand the consequences of a collapse

And though history never repeats itself.. I HOPE this works, or we are up a creek without a paddle in ways that most folks screaming LET IT FALL don't even get

values on these mortgages opens up so much opportunity for abuse. I am so tired of reading how we are getting ripped off in Iraq and with our other defense contractors. Ugh.

it is bernacke and Paulson who've taken the lead

As some have said, where the hell is the President of the US?

And by the way even people like oh... Krugman, agree that they cannot allow it collapse, or this will make the Summer of '31 look like a walk in the park

Now last time I checked Paul Krugman is quite the progressive, but perhaps I am wrong. And so has Reich added his voice to this, another RIGHT WING Chicaco School boy huh? :sarcasm:

:banghead:

Now all I can think of is the huge lobbying effort that must be going on.

Even if you have full faith in Henry Paulson, Intrade currently gives John McCain a 48 percent chance of being president. Are you willing to give essentially unlimited discretion over the use of $700 billion — with explicit protection against any review by Congress or the courts — to Phil Gramm?

ummm...no.

edited to add: and i don't trust paulson as far as i can throw his ass.

but not from doing SOMETHING

Him, I and many others had to read the early public drafts

Have sent letters already to congress on this

Fear they ... are .... getting ... increasingly wonky

a lot of people just don't believe this bailout that is being forced on us is the answer.

They hate govt. intervention in the economy.

Bernanke and Paulson. Two bankers. Remember what Thomas Jefferson warned what would happen if we let bankers take control?

Never happen. Not the really big guns of money. They'll be just fine.

Simple yes or no will do

If the people are going to pay for it.

a nice mixed economy which worked very well for quite a bit of the people back in the 1950s

It was the new deal that set that in motion

And yes, I know it didn't work for everybody, but it did work much better?

What are YOU GOING TO DO?

I want a plan, not bithing anymore

And if you are thinking of a nice COMMUNIST revolution... with a full command economy... it works as well as this system does...

Yes, you read right, both extremes don't work well for most folks and are a form of religion

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy

And their references at the bottom are usually great

Realize that the Third Way, aka your blue dogs, also advise for a FORM of a mixed economy

But in the US of the 1950s things like factories were in private hands, while power companies, roads, education and other services were in the hands of the state...

Realize that mixed economies have extensive interventions and management of the economy by the state in the form of regulations and the Depression era laws, such as the Wagner Act and others allowed for close intervention. Also we used to break up big monopolies, using the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Now compare this to today, up to last week.

The right wants to privatize education
Private roads are all the rage
Power companies have been privatized,

You'd think the police and fire are next.

I thought that you might be referring to the Truman years.

as if they had power to affect the course of events?

that is the job of a citizen last time I checked

Or has the foundation been broken because it was built on sand.

The economic system we have will not provide solutions for our planet.
It is built on a concept of non controlled growth.

Its like building on the barrier islands again after living through consecutive hurricanes.

I agree, GNP cannot be the only measure of success though..

but there are better economic models to look at for this century and our planet

Its a good place to start.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4046852&mesg_id=4046852

The present economic system is a threat to our present political system.


-----Agreed-------

We need an economic system

that is more egalitarian, thru taxes or however.

------90% taxes for upper 1%, with 70% for the upper 10% under that and 40% for the rest was the norm in the 1950s, the real poor didn't -pay... it was a true progressive taxation system, why the right fought to change it tooth and nail-------

We need an economic system with regulations to prevent

the wealthy from sticking it to the rest of us.

------I hate it that people don't know this, but there are ACTS in the books that do exactly this. ANTI TRUST legislation. The last time it was used well AT&T was broken up.... and and should they be modernized? Absolutely, but they are in the books already--------


We need an economic system that will encourage a wider

middle class and a smaller upper and lower class society.

------ See abut the New Deal and how the mixed economy of the 1950s did exactly this-------


We need stronger anti-monopoly laws. We need

to break up companies that are "too big to fail".


------ See above, legistlation is in the books-------

We need an economic system that respects labor and

unions more.

------We can start by bringing back into effect the laws passed in the 1930s to do precisely this, and get rid of Taft Haley, which started the process of right to work states. These laws has to be modernized... but they are in the books already... and things of the era that were weakened to crazy points, such as the National Labor Relations Board, have to be regained... defanged under Reagan------

The present economic capitalism does none of the above. We need big change. Call it

socialism or whatever you like.

------The present system is NOT capitalist, it is fasicsm.... get that into your head. As to socialism, stay away from the term or people will be scared shitless... programing and all... but if you call this New Deal II... people will identify... and yes I would go FARTHER than the 1930s legislation did--------

consciousness and humanities social needs. Capitalism in itself is not evil
but when it grows beyond the basic human needs of society then it is a cancer.

I don't digress your points but check out the thread and the links in that thread I gave you.

New Deal II has to include things like the environment, no doubt about it

And a mixed economy deals with social needs, why the RW has done all it can to destroy it

That said, this is NOT a capitalist system... hasn't been for decades

Capitalism involves the competition of small time competitors, not Wally Mart

I loved Bernie Sanders statement today

If a Corporation is "Too Big to Fail", Then It Is TOO BIG!!!!


Peace out!

I know monday I will be spending quite a bit of time calling congress critters AGAIN

Making my demands known and being ignored by her Majesty the speaker of the house (or her staff... that truly is dismissive of us the people)

Damn, AT&T didn't get the message.

now they have not used it

this is happening to protect the wealthy from the consequences of their actions. The Bushies don't give a rat's ass about the rest of us.

for us to deal with this.

Last time I checked the Wagner Act was still in the books, for example

In other words, if the congress critters want to, they already have the tools IN THE BOOKS

door 2 is a bailout...door 3 is a bailout..

Pick one......you can't lose You guys are all winners.

Bastards

Which will protect ordinary people with investments in these firms.

It calls for none of the trust-busting and regulation you speak of. In fact, that's exactly why DUers are upset about it, and calling for it to be turned down. The latest incarnation adds just about any sort of troubled debt--creditcard, school loan, whatever--to the assets he wants to replace with an institutional subsidy. I'm just boggled that you think that a Hoover-style financial market subsidy would avert, rather than cause, economic disaster. Now go take a nap, or do some reading up, and stop projecting your ignorance on others and posting accusations of foul motivations.

The New Deal didn't deregulate mortgage lending.

which are what Krugman & Reich are proposing, you arrogant ignoramus? The unlimited Paulson bailout is set to include
practically all defaulting assets of any large financial institution for an indefinite period of time, indicating that this is not a situational bailout of some institutions, but a bizarre effort to fix the tanking economy by "trickle down". All these things--credit cards, student loans, loans in general, are failing because the economy, "Main St.", is failing. Trying to fix it this way will make things immeasurably worse. It will destroy the dollar, making everyone's savings, especially Baby Boomers who have an entire lifetime of savings, worthless just when this largest demographic is aging out of the shrinking job market. It starts a vicious cycle where the "rescue", while temporarily bailing out investment houses and banks makes the economy worse, so people can't pay back more loans, so more "assets" need rescuing, and so on. In a shockingly short time there will be no way to save the financial institutions, and the money needed for a proper rescue of the economy will be gone.

Legitimate question.

even with this huge bailout but we will be a trillion dollars more in the hole.

All I'm reading suggests they're doing nothing more than siphoning off what they still can. This "bailout" will only exacerbate things.

screaming, "LET IT COLLAPSE!"?

I am screaming "REVOLUTION!" And maybe now, just maybe, my screams are being heard.

N/t

i don't think like you, you don't think like me. so be it.

if we were in a pub i would buy you a pint, maybe you would buy one for me. and we could argue all night long.

that to me is beautiful.



and you just might change my mind...

And you would be lucky if we didn't kick your ass out the bar
and rob you, for your intellectual dishonesty.

I don't even know if I would accept your drink if you paid for it.

i would never want to live in a world where friends of differing opinions could not sit over a pint and argue their positions all night long.

convincing the one or the other of their wrongness. or maybe not. and then walking out at the end of the night arm in arm as friends.


"kicking your ass out of the bar and robbing you? for your intellectual dishonesty?"


wtf?

is this your world of today? is this what you do?


if so, you guys have this whole thing wrong. you have no concept of life and differences and friendship...

bigots and racists come to mind...

but I don't think your orneriness is going to do a damn thing to help unentrench him from his position.

Its not a matter of if, but when. This bailout just gives them enough time for politicians to get re-elected and banksters to get money out of the market. Its a massive transfer of wealth from the taxpayers to the banksters. The only way to pay for this mess (after the bailout) is to print more paper money which will lead to hyperinflation. No economy based on fiat currency has ever, EVER inflated its way out of debt. Check your history books.

Our way of life, our excesses of consumption, debt and waste is not sustainable. They are delaying the inevitable.

Only after the last tree has been cut down

Only after the last river has been poisoned

Only after the last fish has been caught

Only then you will find out that money cannot be eaten
- ancient Cree philosophy.

and the actions being taken may make the coming collapse even worse than it's going to be.

Most people don't see this aspect yet; some do but still are plugging their fingers in their ears and going "lalalala", and others see it clearly.

We can all take a big hit to every person's assets - pensions, savings, homes, jobs, cars, wall street salaries, bonuses, etc, from rich to working class - and this thing will limp on badly for a year, but then we make progress healing up the wounds. Likely.

Or we can continue with these delaying actions, while people take up the cause of the latest fraudulent magic wand that they are gullible, or desperate, or scared enough to believe will make these problems go away, and this thing will collapse into something that will take DECADES of suffering to resolve fully.

No oversight?

No regulation?

Just "trust us?"

about watching a wood chipper eat your brother. Hushed tones, fear and loathing extremely apparent and hope and dread that it never happen again.

No one wants a crash. If you think the Bush scare tactics are our only option, you haven't been paying attention for the last eight years. In any other country Bush would be gone ... forced out by an overwhelming vote of no confidence. There is no way I'd agree to this bailout with Bush in power. None! I don't care if they say it's the end of the world. Haven't you learned? They cannot be trusted!

We're in a coma here. Kick the bums out, all of them. I'm thinking the vote of no confidence would have come a few months after 9/11 for Bush if this were a thinking populace. He would never have been elected in the first place. But our two party system is an embarrassment anyway.

Lived in Italy where they change govt's like underwear, discuss politics like we discuss celebrity gossip and they can still strike and bring their country to a halt.

ok...works for sarah palin! :eyes:

:rofl:

hope you enjoy cardboard, since you WILL NOT be able to buy stuff

Your job, will go bye bye,

And credit will be impossible to get

So go ahead, let it crash

I am sure that will teach THEM (whoever they are) a lesson

The amount of magical thinking in this place is amazing.... and the lack of understanding of BASIC economics, let alone this shit, as well as history is down right scary

At least the people in the 1930s understood it better

i have a pension to worry about, but that doesn't delude me from the FACTS. bushco is going to take their billions AND we're going to be screwed. the best predictor of the future is the past.

that's how i feel, but YMMV. nothing personal, yunno. i respect your postings, nad.

peace

so have you placed calls to congress critters?

Are you willing to take to the streets on a moments notice?

We have TOPS a week, to influence anything

Yes!

Which we are lacking in case this long-shot doesn't work.

From what I hear, that much money pumped back into the economy in the form of job creation, safety nets, etc. is EXACTLY
what is needed for the health of the overall economy. A nation of paupers & pennyless serfs are not buying ANYONE's goods or
services.

We tend to think of the Asian countries as flush with cash, right? And their households and private sector do save a lot.

But Japan went through a crippling recession in the 90s and the government borrowed a lot, and is in debt to the tune of 1.8 times GDP.

Applying the same to us, assuming we could convince the world that we are serious about fiscal policy and taxing the wealthy at an appropriate rate, that means that the upper limit of the total federal debt could be $22 trillion.

Now I certainly am not in favor of increasing the federal debt -- especially for stupid, wasteful things like military spending and war that serve no productive purpose -- but borrowing to stave off a great depression seems worth it.

Moreover, unlike most spending, oddly, this is not really spending at all. It's trading one asset for another. Assuming the valuation is done right, we get mortgage backed securities discounted to what their worth and when the crisis is over, sell them for a tidy profit.

And they're certainly not going to buy our bonds if we are in the midst of hyperinflation caused by printing excess money w/o a real economy to stand behind it. Japan still has a manufacturing sector. Restoring ours is what we need to be doing with whatever we can borrow if we want to survive. Knowing a couple of numbers doesn't mean you understand what's going on.

The Japanese bailout plan is generally understood as having failed, and thinking that in-bed-with-Goldman-Sachs Paulson is going to value the assets correctly is, well, not fully believable.

Of course it wouldn't be "a little" hardship. I acknowledge this. But still there's a very small part of me that absolutely wants this country to have to learn its lesson, again.

Doesn't matter anyway. The "controls" put into place only delay what's coming anyway.

neither do I want it to be 1939. We cannot give Bush another blank check. They are attaching a rather alarming power grab provision in the bail out bill. We can't let them do this. And we WILL be in food lines regardless of this bail out. So let's take the hit now and save our grandchildren from the dumber-than-shit half of America and their leader Bush's folly.

for this shit.

You tend to miss the point that main street is getting fucked and wall street
is getting saved.

The fucking plan sucks and it shouldn't be defended.

Are we supposed to bailout these companies and they don't suffer any consequences? All the taxpayers get in return is billions of dollars in debt?

I need to have more information.

for Manchester United....

Let the people who've looted the public treasury for 8 years (Halliburton, The Carlyle Group) pay for their share of this. You know they won't be expected to pay a dime. Let fucking John McCain and Phil Gramm give up a couple of their mansions they were able to buy while gaming the system (McCain really was projecting the other day.) I have absolutely no sympathy for the Pigs At The Trough. Let them eat cake.

Has pensions, investments, social security, and mutual funds involved here. You can't let Wall Street collapse without effecting that. How about us upper middle class people with jobs in finance, we are on main street too.

They shouldn't have helped the finance industry destroy the economy

That'd destroy our country to prove a point. That won't help anyone.

Maybe the jobs should go to more competent and/or ethical people who don't ruin the economy

First of all you're using language of a guy Hannity uses to caricature Democrats. Pretty scary.

If we go into a depression and banks fail we all lose money. Not just rich people. People with even bank accounts would lose life savings.

Fuck the Little Eichmanns who help the rich get richer.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Sorry the logic is just bullshit in its presentation of either or.
'Breadlines or their way'

Yes, something needs to be done but it an't
your way!

it will happen anyway, regardless of the bailout. so....do you want to be screwed both coming and going?? because that is what's going to happen.

then all homeowners in need of help also need to be bailed out, having people lose their homes----hurts all of us and if they aren't helped then guess what, shit will collapse.

There are no penalties or accountability for their greed and drug habit.
They need to go into to rehab.

Don't pretend that its a handout to solve things
Regulations are not a part of this package, its crap.

Its buying a burned out building.

and a movie. It's funny how they want to nationalize the loss but never the profits.

With this plan the Treasury isn't just handing money over to these firms, they are actually purchasing assets which can then be turned around and sold. I agree we need to regulate this better but that's a separate issue. The point is we're already in this mess, too late to regulate ourselves out of it.

Yes, these "assets" are purchased for maybe .80 cents on the dollar and then resold to investors for .10 cents on the dollar. You and me and everyone who pays taxes are on the hook for those .70 cents.

And the $700 billion number is just the limit that can be purchased AT ANY GIVEN TIME. Once $700 billion is purchased at .80 cents and sold at .10 cents. King Paulson can do it again and again with a limit of $700 billion WITHOUT ANY OVERSIGHT. The final number is not $700 billion, the final number will be in the trillions of dollars, one or two trillion is the debt that me and you and all the taxpayers are saddled with.

Got it?

For one thing Treasury would try to get firms to offer to sell assets for the lowest value. It's silly to say(without proof) they'll purposely sell assets for lower than what they were purchased for.

Secondly it's funny to hear people say this will give Paulson so much power when we'll have a new Treasury secretary in 3 months so if Paulson does anything that horrible it'll be reversed.

LESS than zero, in many cases.

It's a handout. A handout to the uber-wealthy
that's being paid for by the working class.

In the RTC scenario the assets were mostly commercial property and multi-unit apartment buildings.
Easy to sell and the government still lost $300 billion (in 2007 dollars).
This mess is mostly single family homes.
With "assets which can be turned around and sold", there's a problem...Uncle Sam would be in the position of kicking millions of Americans out of their homes.
Political suicide.

We need to set up something where people who want to work it out and stay in their homes can do so. But there are also people who jumped in above their means who can't afford their mortgages or don't want to work it out. We need to promote responsibility too. If I pay my mortgage then they should have to as well.

...but are still struggling?

How is it right to bail out those who took bad deals, but not support those who made smart financial decisions?

did they share their profits with us ever, no.

The bridge loan to AIG is separate from this deal.

Like blaming a rape victim for the crime.

Excuse me, but the loans are not the real problem with the financial system
you haven't been reading enough, there is something much deeper going on

and the same thing would occur with AIG and the others.

Why would we all be screwed?

Because the government is telling you that?

If people invest all their money in stock, when it is well known that stocks can lose value, whose fault is that if they are not diversified

When banks gave loans to people who couldn't afford the loans, whose fault is that?

Why should companies who screw up be rewarded?

in wall street.

I hear this guy in the van has some great stereos for sale.

Those 401ks and pension plans, are protected already, and will be moved to companies who are viable

n/t

The fine print on every stock mutual fund says very clearly that they could lose their principle
even most money market mutual funds say that

If they artifically prop this garbage up, we will have much more problems down the road

Telling people with mutual funds "you're on your own suckers" isn't a progressive solution.

Too much faith in the market is how this crisis occured.

This medicine is worse than the illness

PLEASE READ

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4048616

what did they do with it?

CEOs took huge bonus packages, and that money did NOT help the airlines, because the airlines which received that money, were being badly managed

destroyed all of the things put in place during the 1930s to prevent this from happening again so long as the Government spends billions, possibly trillions, of dollars we don't have to keep the bubble from fully popping?

It's ok to absolve the government from destroying economic protections so long as, at the moment of crisis, they pony up, socializing all the debt while the greedy CEO assholes are protected and get to just shrug and keep their millions?

This bailout is the worst thing they could do. It tells companies to keep on "keeping on". Get too big? No worries, the government will make sure you land on a nice soft cushion of money - and taxpayers underneath the money - so you, and your remaining corporate profits, can just roll away from the collapsing shit pile burying the taxpayers underneath the rubble. It does not address accountability in any way, shape or form. It does not penalize the people who prospect and fail, instead it protects them with tax money.

Have you not seen the myriad of financial articles saying that even THIS bailout bill is a band aid fix on a compound fracture sized wound and it, alone, isn't going to fix the problem? It may not even fix the problem long enough for a better solution to be found.

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't want to see the economy collapse, but I'd rather see responsible reform than an across the board buyout that bends the middle and lower class over just to protect the upper 2-5%.

we definitely need to do SOMETHING

But THIS IS NOT IT!

and haveing bush* dictate the terms is DEFINITELY not to be trusted...

this is "it" just like the Patriot Act was "it" and the Department of Homeland Security is "it"...

we will rue this "it" SOON...

Paulson has sent a proposal to Congress. Congress will dictate the terms. And Dodd has already said it will not pass without some form of reciprocity.

What a bunch of crap

bullet wound and offering NO way for these greedy shitheads to actually PAY THEIR WAY.

Bring it down. If a few thousand of the speculators were given Mussolini neckties maybe the rich would learn not to write checks other generations have to cash.

I don't recognize my country any more. It is gone.

for the bastards that sent us there.

Belize. I think need to go eat mangos and salt water fish for a while.

Lied about getting uptown again.....I'll do it TOMORROW!!!!

Check out Madeira ......... I have the legal power to move there and I've been there


http://www.madeira-island.com/

It has one of the largest depository for plants and trees on the planet.
It is in the United Nations spot for a natural heritage site.

Anything can be grown because the elevations.

Some say it is the one the islands of Atlantis just like the Canaries.

Well, it must be getting late, but check it out. Its far enough away from
the chaos that will incur from continental problems

I lived there as a child. We used to go every year for the St. João festival in June. Haven't been there in ten years though. Sigh.

I think everyone realizes that some kind of government action is inevitable.

But what kind of action, and who ultimately pays? Those choices make all the difference.

And no, I don't think buying tainted financial instruments with nearly a trillion taxpayer dollars is a wise or fair choice.

At the very least, I'd rather they attack the instability of the mortgage-backed securities at the level of the homeowner and the actual mortgage. Provide guaranteed mortgage aid for homeowners who are about to fall into foreclosure. That way, you save the homeowners and the neighborhoods, too, not just Wall St.

and be replaced with something that serves the people not the corporations.

Its a public institution and agency of the government.

I want Americans to understand that deregulation put us where we are, and I want to regulate the shit out of the market. That's what I want.

posted by kpete earlier http://current.com/items/89322147_the_financial_meltdown_explained

THE LOGIC ALONE .............. DROVE ME NUTS

SO MANY FALLACIES OF LOGIC......HERE OP.......LOOK AT THIS

Dr. Michael C. Labossiere, the author of a Macintosh tutorial named Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0, has kindly agreed to allow the text of his work to appear on the Nizkor site, as a Nizkor Feature. It remains © Copyright 1995 Michael C. Labossiere, with distribution restrictions -- please see our copyright notice.

I count at least 7 fallacies by the OP.



http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/

In fairness, most of those have never known anything remotely like that, haven't studied history in context with empathy and have been failed by a public education system that, with all the budget cuts and dumbing down over the past 25 years, has left them unable to think critically and recognize the consequences of some of the statements that they make.

Often out of justified anger- or empathy with the suffering that they see today.

We had to do something. Dire consequences if we didn't act. 1929 happened because nothing
was done.

I also agree that reckless irresponsibility is the reason we're in this mess.

Three years ago, when my husband and I were shopping around for a home--we drove around and saw
many expensive homes with signs out front that read, "Get in this house for only $900 a month!"

Three years ago, we were both in shock. Three years ago, I looked at my husband and said, "This
is not sustainable. This is going to blow up in our faces."

We KNEW. We understood what would happen. My husband and I aren't experts on the economy. We
were just two Americans driving around--and WE knew.

Don't tell me the banks, the credit-card companies and the big investment houses didn't understand
what was doing on. WE KNEW. They did too.

What bothers me most about this financial scandal--is that the powers that be act as if this all a big
shock. It makes me feel that we're being so bamboozled and so taken for a ride--in ways that we
can't even imagine.

Crazy mortgages and relaxed lending practices were facilitated by laws passed by Congress that relaxed
banking standards and regulations. Credit-card companies were able to extend credit to anyone with
a pulse--because those companies hired hundreds of lobbyists to help pass legislation that would
relax credit standards and allow them to raise interest rates on unsuspecting customers.

The very definition of a bank has been altered. In the 1950's, people dressed in suits and had a formal
meeting when they asked for a mortgage or a business loan. Now, people apply online to use their homes
as ATM machines--just to buy furniture from Pier1 or a vacation to Aruba. Lax regulation and new laws that opened the
door--to EVERYTHING we're seeing now.

And we're supposed to believe that Congress, the banks, the mortgage companies, the brokers and the CEOs
running these big investment houses and insurance companies---DIDN'T KNOW?

I agree that a bailout is imperative. But I am sick to death of being lied to and insulted.

Sorry for the rant...I'm just sick of it.

Reading any one of a number of threads on DU, or even Obama's statement, would inform all those who've been in Timbuktu this past week that Paulson's plan is looking more and more like a trigger for Great Depression II. Responsible economists are all recommending a much leaner bailout of only mortgage-based securities along with re-regulation of financial institutions and trust-busting of the "too big to fail" behemoths. This is very different from Paulson's "trust me" proposal of absorbing endless bad debt of all sorts, paying for it with an overproduction of what would become worthless dollars, until it's the U.S. Treasury that has to default. With no money left to pay for New Deal style job stimulus programs, the result could make the Great Depression look like a walk in the park.

In this case, entrusting the same people who got us into the mess to get us out of the impossible mess they created, is akin to having Tony Soprano & Co. do your accounting after they robbed you.

bought by Barclays. Isn't that what would happen to any company who goes out of business? The assets would be bought by someone else

Does this really fix the problem?

If a company is managed badly, what are the consequences?

i do want to see this latest bail out come with some significant fixes to the problem. if we just bail out and don't attend to the real problem (i.e. greed, deregulation, "free market roolz!!!") we are simply delaying the collapse, and enriching those that don't probably really need any more enriching.

in 1929, the government let the capitalists reap their just rewards. the whole country suffered. 1n 1933, the glass-steagall act was passed by congress to prevent 1929 from ever happening again. it seems that law worked for many years until it was chipped away at, and finally made irrelevant. and here we are now. perhaps you have heard cries for the 2008 equivalent of glass-steagall? i haven't.

i don't know if you've noticed, but there already are millions without work (or work without meaningful pay), visiting the food banks, struggling to get by. without the bail out, there is collapse, with the bail out and no significant change to business as usual, the regular people (once called 'middle-class,' 'working class,' and those struggling at or below the poverty level) in this economy are still on the way to out of work, in food lines, struggling to get by.

privatized profit, socialized debt. that really isn't the best way to "free market" and "capitalism." is it? :shrug:

to do something it wants badly. Does Iraq ring a bell? These guys are crooks and there has to be a better way.

Paul Krugman thinks it should be No Deal and I agree wholeheartedly.

Is that it?

Read Krugman's article today about why this plan is a "no deal," and has no prayer of doing anything other than transferring huge amounts of money from the working class to the investor class:

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/09/20/no-deal/

Stop playing into the do-or-die mentality that the Bush criminals use to turn disasters into profit for their kleptocrat friends.

thanks for asking.

And there’s no quid pro quo here — nothing that gives taxpayers a stake in the upside, nothing that ensures that the money is used to stabilize the system rather than reward the undeserving.
I hope I’m wrong about this. But let me say it again: Treasury needs to explain why this is supposed to work — not try to panic Congress into giving it a blank check. Otherwise, no deal.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

and I use the term loosely, are always against government intervention to help the middle class go the college and afford health care, of the poor to get a roof over their head and food on the table; however, when WALL STREET is in trouble, when the big money boys have problems, it's tax-payer dollars to the rescue!

Again, I agree with the bailouts, but then, I also agree with national health care, so I, unlike so-called "conservatives," am actually consistent.

let the whole fucking thing collapse.

let the masses with their pitchforks overcome the rich and put their heads on pikes. let us grab up their silverware and run off grunting into the forest.

let's let men be men and allow them to ummm... do what men do when things collapse...

let's devolve once again into feudal societies. we don't need no fucking economies. mortgages. credit cards. oil.


kill or be killed.

i'm all for it.


let's do it! who's with me!

...about. They are caught up in consumerism, in "tomorrow is doomsday," every day.

It's what sells.

If the news reported "everything is fine!" would people care? Nope.

Is to complete lose it and either pray for disaster or say this will work itself out. Not very progressive to just say everyone's on their own. Sounds like Libertarians.

People who have *not* experienced it *love* the idea.

In fact there's a large contengent of American's who believe Jesus will come soon and fire and brimstone will rain down upon society.

Millions believe oil will suddenly run out and the world will turn into a western TV show.

Thousands, by my own reckoning, believe that civilization will collapse one day and we'll all be fucked.

Yet GapMinder *proves* that *all of these beliefs are nonsensical*.

I like Obama, but I don't see the FDR. His economic team was not a strong point for me. All I see are "Wall Street" Bob Rubin and "I never met a trade deal that I didn't like" Laura Tyson.

Unless these old dogs have learned some new tricks, I don't see much happening.

the country with no consequences? Do you want the first American King to be a Bush? Helping the poor and middle class instead of the rich after the 1929 crash is what saved the nation then. Why do we never learn the lessons of history?

After the New Deal was passed many Socialists accused FDR of supporting only banks and money interests.

I don't know why people keep presenting it this way.

The Bush administration is trying to force a massive giveaway and a serious grab for power onto the American people, and the Dems are on the verge of once again rolling over and caving in.

Presenting this as a choice between accepting the Bush administration plan or suffering dire consequences, with no other choices, is not supported by any evidence whatsoever. That is what the Republicans want us to believe. Why would anyone here promote their propaganda about this?

The End of Days will occur. BAH! There are always more choices and Congress should not be stampeded to act irrationally. Isn't that how we got into this mess? Irrational exuberance? Congress should act but only after weighing ALL options.

Are people paying attention at all? And we are supposed to be the opposition voices to the right wing? God help us.

The Republicans cause these problems that they are then going to "fix" for us - always at the price of the Constitution being further shredded and billions of dollars going into the pockets of their wealthy and powerful friends, while we all go broke. They manufacture these "crises," get everyone in a crazed panic, and then ram through authoritarian legislation and pull off massive thefts of the public wealth.

The Dems keep caving in and selling us all down the river.

Besides this bailout plan? Of course there is evidence that doing would have dire consequences. Look at the history of '29 crash. Look at the fact some of the largest financial institutions have collapsed.

That is deceptive, and that is a trick that the right wingers have been using for years - "oh yeah then what's your alternative?" It is blackmail. We don't need to "have an alternative" to object to being mugged and robbed.

THIS bailout plan is the only alternative, you say. I think you gave yourself away with that. Why would THIS bailout plan be the only possible alternative? For the same reason that invading Iraq was the only response to 911? That Telecom immunity was the only alternative to dealing with that "problem?" Fir the same reason that privatizing Social Security was presented as the only alternative for solving that supposed "problem?" For the same reason that NCLB was the only possible alternative for solving that supposed "problem?"

Hundreds of knowledgeable observers are talking about "alternatives." You don't even have to Google, since many DUers are bringing dozens and dozens of articles with alternatives to us right here.

This seems to be the talking point, since I am seeing it all over the place - "the only alternative to the administration's swindle is '1929.'" Democrats are worried about a depression, not a stock market crash. "1929" is not the worry, preparing for 1932 is - for Democrats. Get it? Democrats - as opposed to free market personal responsibility supply side right wing libertarians.

Bullshit, a thousand times bullshit. You are either woefully ignorant, or you are intentionally deceiving people.

And until someone offers an alternative we'll have to go with the only plan that exists. As far as economics I'm nowhere near right-wing and long-term I think we need very progressive economic reforms. But for now Paulson and Bernanke's plan appears most viable.

That is the pattern.

Panic! Fear! It is a crisis! We need to do something right now or we are doomed!

And then, gee, what a coincidence. The right wingers just happen to have a "plan" they have been working on for the last 20 years, all ready to go. More deregulation, more handouts and freedom and benefits to the wealthy, more theft of the public treasury, more erosion of the Constitution.

Are you saying that the right-wingers are ones calling this crisis that we need to act now to avoid catastrophe?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601070&sid=axJX99yQWKVo&refer=home">Obama Urges Fast Bipartisan Plan to Avert Economic Catastrophe
[br />By Kim Chipman and Edwin Chen

Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Barack Obama urged the Bush administration and lawmakers to work quickly to craft a bipartisan plan to ease the country's financial crisis and avert economic ``catastrophe.'' ]

Of course. The fact that many Democrats are still playing bipartisan footsie with those monsters doesn't change that.

I am not so much advocating anything as I am predicting. I don't expect to persuade you of anything, but this must be said for the benefit of the others reading this thread who are tempted to be stampeded or confused by the deceptive arguments you and others are using and support caving in to the right wingers.

Bipartisan my ass. There is no safe way to compromise with the right wingers. Have we not learned that yet?

Are you saying the fundamentals of our economy are strong?

We ain't buying it anymore.

path forward will be clear.

When you hear people talking in black-and-white terms or false choices (ie either elect republicans or there will be a mushroom cloud) it's time to step back and look closer.

Such attitudes are nothing but secular versions of the fundies' belief that they will make Jesus come sooner if they f*ck up the planet.

I see no such thing.... but man, you must hate hearing about a possible socialistic reaction to this mess to reach so far....

What a weird and absurd comparison.... "secular versions of the fundies' belief"... nurffff

Hard times for the poor demand socializing needs for many.... that concept predates capitalism itself .....

I don't know where to start with that inflammatory and derogatory insult to thousands of people here.

I think you are projecting. It would be more accurate to say too many DUers have this delusional fantasy that they can continue to purge the party of any and all left wing political thought, and hang on to their libertarianism and promote it within the ranks and still call themselves Democrats."

How any Democrat could - in this crisis - still be mocking and ridiculing the political Left with the same old tired talking points is just stunning.

The general public is rapidly moving in the direction you are ridiculing my friend. Get on board or get out if the way. The anti-left faction within the party is toast every bit as much as the right wing libertarians have been. Both have now been thoroughly discredited, and the red-baiting days are over.

n/t

What is a "progressive?" A libertarian with an "organic" label slapped on their ass?

He is ridiculing the Left, and thereby promoting libertarianism, in my opinion. I suppose you would have us believe that never happens around here.

Anyone can say "I am on the Left." Many do, and then promote libertarianism under various guises.

I don't know or care what you "are," I am going by what you are advocating.

Do you mean just Socialists because his post applied to socialists.

My, we are getting a clinic here.

Calling anything that is even vaguely left wing, or that is in alignment with the traditional principles of the Democratic party, is routinely called "socialist" as a way to discredit it.

So no, a post does not "just apply to socialists" merely because that is what the poster calls those who disagree with him. Pretty basic logical fallacy you are promoting there.

It is the Hannity school of logic you are using - "of course you would say that, you are a liberal" (and therefore discredited) with liberal being defined as "a person who says anything critical of anything about the extreme right wing."

Right on cue, you claim that he actually is talking about this straw man, that the straw man actually exists, these mythical "socialists."

"Only socialists (who are bad and we should fear)oppose libertarianism, and all opposing libertarianism are socialists (so as Democrats we should not oppose libertarianism). Clever, but transparent. If so many people here were not so traumatized and battered and confused by the relentless right wing propaganda over the years, they would see through this more quickly.

If anyone expressing anything in opposition to free market libertarianism can be labeled a "socialist" that allows people to call themselves "Democrats" as they promote libertarianism. That is how the party is being undermined and sabotaged by the few, who seek to confuse and frighten the many.

Thanks for running through all of these logical fallacies for us step by step, so that the readers of this thread can see exactly how the deception and propaganda work and be strengthened in their resistance to it.

I never said anyone who isn't libertarian is a socialist. When did I say that? I support a single-payer health system, certainly not libertarian.

Here is how this started:

"Too many DUers have this delusional fantasy that a collapse will result in some socialist revolution. Such attitudes are nothing but secular versions of the fundies' belief that they will make Jesus come sooner if they f*ck up the planet."

I objected to that. I made a solid case about what is wrong with that statement.

I'm just a socialist who has grown out of the dogmatic Hegelian BS secular religion that is Marxism that has been a debilitating weight around Socialism's neck. I suggest you read The Open Society and It's Enimies by Austrian-British philosopher Karl Popper if you want to know why I am no longer a Marxist.

Within a capitalist market system. Certainly not big libertarians here.

I can only surmise they did, but let it happen anyway, I believe that's the big difference.

Giving tax cuts to the wealthiest while waging premeditated voluntary war, thereby exploding the debt, melting the dollar and sitting in the White House with their thumbs up their butts keeping the nation dysfunctional-ly addicted to the ever increasing costs of fossil fuels which harmed the environment and the economy instead of promoting alternative forms of renewable energy just so their corporate oil masters could make a killing at the people's expense, ignoring the ramifications of the health care crisis and it's effects on the economy.

Taking this a step further, if Cheney/Bush knew this was going to happen and I believe they did, this is a payoff for them at the people's expense sort of in the form of blackmail. The victims or people either bail out the primary perpetrators; that being the wealthy and powerful which screwed them over in the first place or face the threat of "selling apples on the street" for a living.

just as a healthy reminder that what these bastards do, effects us in ways they don't seem to want to imagine.

Not by a goddamned longshot.

No welfare for the wealthy until they learn to share.

Certainly can't find any fault with that logic, no siree.
:rofl:


Edited to add:

Couldn't you come up with something better than playing the "America haters" card against those who don't share your opinion? If ever a political meme deserved to be put to rest in the retirement home for shopworn cliches that would be it.


Here's a succinct description of the plan, and it doesn't even come from a traitorous America-hating DUer.

"Austan Dean Goolsbee is an economist and is currently the Robert P. Gwinn Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business."
(Posted at Eschaton)

"GOOLSBEE: There is more information on the back of a box of Froot Loops than on what they've presented."


"Basically, you'd have to be insane to give Paulson a $700 billion blank check with no strings attached. The fact that this is what Paulson has asked Congress to do is enough reason to tell him to fuck off and come up with something better, with him utterly out of the loop."
http://www.eschatonblog.com/

The OP is refering to DUers who specifically said they want the system to collapse.

but the stock market is long overdue for a major correction, like about 5,000 pts on the DJI or so. That way, the people responsible for this mess will feel at least some pain.

The stock market actually started heading back up on Friday! Does that make any sense?

Few CEOs felt pain over this, they made 200 million this year instead of 300 million.

All scum. So are the analysts. And many CEOs did feel pain. They live lavish lifestyles and are addicted to spending shitloads of money. Many of their wives will leave them, as the money was a large part of why they married these people who are rarely involved in the family life.

To hell with them.

:nopity:

or how investments are managed: the boards of directors, the shareholders, the money fund managers, and ultimately everyone who has a 401K or makes decisions about how to manage their own wealth. If the stock market enters a nice healthy downturn from all this, they all may learn something from the experience. What kind of system is this where all risk is socialized and profit is privatized? They really have gamed the system so that the American dream is dead and only the wealthy and powerful can enjoy this "land of the free".

Did I, or other DUers, suggest that we wanted 1929 back?

:wtf:

The bailout needs to be investigated carefully by a panel of forensic accountants under the direction of Congress. If bailouts on a case by case basis are justified, then as Obama said, it needs plenty of oversight.

In my interpretation of the meaning of "oversight", it implies decreasing power to the Executive Branch.

is not considered because forensic accounting would uncover illegal frauds, and once uncovered, referrals for prosecutions and special prosecutors would be needed. So instead, what we are getting is "QUICK" don't think, it's an "EMERGENCY", we need your money "NOW".

I can't remember the number of times I've seen Bush and other congressional leaders declaring the fine FUNDAMENTALS of our Economy. QUICK, don't THINK about that, hand over your wallet NOW!

Show us some proof that this financial crisis is analogous to 1929? There is a lot of crying wolf and screaming that if we don't do exactly what the Bush-Paulson-Bernanke axis-of-incompetence demand a collapse is inevitable. OK, what kind of collapse, who will get hurt, who will benefit (someone always does)?

I'd like to see some serious discussion before we taxpayers hand over $700+ Billion to an administration that fails at almost everything it does - it does not fail at making the rich richer and that's about it.

Time to STOP blindly believing every screaming clown that says do this or else. Let's find out what this bailout is really about and how that $700+ Billion will be used. I bet it's set up to keep Bush's corporate welfare state afloat. Prove that this is a 1929 analogy - maybe it's worse, maybe not, but lets take some time here folks.

1. All executives who received bonuses must pay them back

2. No more bonuses until the company is profitable

3. Financial institutions must reform their lending practices, both being more careful about whom they lend to and getting rid of practices that screw the consumer

Some say yes and others no

I am somewhat turning against this bailout in that it seems things would not have been that bad if the government had done nothing. From what I heard, this is not as bad as the events of 1929. So far, I have only heard that the country might have gone into a deep recession. However, I have not heard anyone say not bailing out these companies would have lead to a 1929 style depression.

It really seems from what I have heard on the news today it would have just been harder for people to get loans. I know some people will be angry that I say this, but less people being able to get loans does not seem to be that bad of a thing since it appears that banks wanting to give out too many loans is what cause this problem. According to tonight's edition of ABC Nightly News this problem was caused because banks/bank executives wanted to make more money by giving more people loans. As a result, they began giving loans to people who could not afford to pay the loans and as a result these people eventually were not able to afford to pay for their loans. So, it seems to me that what is going on now, in the loan markets, is a real correction. Banks are not willing to give loans to anyone who cannot afford the loans. Yes, some people who can afford the loans are probably being hurt also, but it might be a good idea to have banks cut back on giving out loans.

housing and the ponzi scheme of housing which made these people rich is not being fixed with this - housing is over priced and until it comes down to the ordinary person's salary this is throwing money to the rich and will not help anyone - this is the wrong solution

Short of a Bush/Cheney resignation, no deal.

Fight now or watch your family spend generations in slavery!

We don't want that, just like we didn't want carnage from Ike, which we were also accused of.

But we aren't going to support writing a blank check to people who have been shown not to give one shit about this country or anyone in it, or the rule of law.

It's not an "either/or" thing. This is just like the Patriot Act--they're trying to shove it down our throats because it's an "emergency." Well, it's not an emergency for us so much as it is for the financial thieves.

Then a crash would be best, in the long term.

Unregulated capitalism is putting the whole world in danger.

Around here, this week, it's all about REVENGE...saving the economy be damned!

And, don't even bother trying to point out that the nationalization of the financial sector is tantamount to an admission of socialism -- good, sweet, humanist socialism -- because we aren't having any of that "reason" and "logic." So there!!

if you think otherwise, start using the reason and logic you praise

Deflationary depression (no bailout) happening ASAP, or a hyperinflationary depression (with bailout) beginning around 2010. I choose the hyperinflationary one.

but most are just screaming that this won't work, that this is just a last robbery before it all goes down the tubes and that this isn't what is needed. Things, big things are needed but this is just a handout to the fellow robber barons, not a help to the American people. I don't want it to be 1929 again but neither do I think this corporate handout is going to keep a depression, maybe the worst depression ever, from happening. This isn't a fix, it's a robbery.

Edited to add: Did I mention that this is a robbery?

It's govt. purchasing assets, it's not like handing over money and getting nothing in return.

on the hook (and I won't give ANYTHING to these THIEVES)!!!!!

Pointing out the fact that Right-wing (including DLC) policies have caused this, and that Bush's tenure is most responsible does not mean anyone is enjoying this.

The bailout in the end will do nothing to help the economy or regular people - it's just the final stage of looting of the public sector by the money elites.

The idea that economic depressions brought on by profligacy and unproductiveness can be prevented by even more borrowing is highly debatable.

AIG.

Hard to say we've done nothing picking up over a hundred billion in debt already.

I've real problems with the taxpayer picking up 700 billion of bad mortgage debt.

You are essentially devaluing the dollar dramatically with no oversight, no real plan, just trust the Executive Department led by Paulsen and Bush. Frankly, I don't trust them.

Could a bipartisan legislative agency be set up to manage this. Repubs wouldn't go for that unless Clinton was still in the WH.

They'll be a bailout, but not without Repubs allowing more accountablility, oversite, and limits on executive pay, protections for homeowners, taxpayers, and guarantess.

Frankly, it may be better to let it go, and use the 700 billion on a much needed job program after the fall.

ho-hum.

:sarcasm:

Bailing out = more inflation/devaluation = making matters worse. Just before the crash back then they pumped lots of new money into the system too. Then came the money retraction, then BOOM! CRASH! Just before every depression there's a money retraction after a build up of inflation. The moment you start hearing about a money retraction. Get your money out as fast as possible.



This is an old game that's been around for a long, long time. Recognize it.