Let's, for a moment, stipulate that there needs to be a bailout .......

Stinky The Clown

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:20 PM
Original message

Let's, for a moment, stipulate that there needs to be a bailout .......

.... someone - and I can't recall who - suggested that rather than giving it to them all at once, we dole it out a hundred billion or so at a time.

Yes, I know we are not giving them all cash all at once .... only the ability ti use the cash as they see fit (as if there were a practical difference).

Anyway, what's wrong with the idea of doling it in small chunks?

(Like McCain, economics isn't my long suit ...... but I aint runnin' fer prez.)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

gravity

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:22 PM
Response to Original message

1. The was Senator Chuck Schumer

Who suggests that they do it in installments

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

valerief

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:23 PM
Response to Original message

2. Let's pretend, for a moment, that a witch is really after Sarah Palin.

I dunno. Re the bailout, it's just another ruse to pillage. That's it. Nothing more. That's what they do.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Old and In the Way

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #2

4. hehehehehehehehehehehehe

hahahahahahah:rofl:hahahahahahahahah

oh, that subject line is too much. I think every time I comment on Sarah Palin, I'm going to use this as an opener. If I'm the 1st reporter to interview Palin, my 1st question will be: "OK, so was the exorcism successful?"

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

valerief

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #4

6. Ha! And this bailout is just as ridiculous. It's the new IWR. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Old and In the Way

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:24 PM
Response to Original message

3. Give 'em $50BB now and have them come back in January to explain why

they don't need the other $650BB.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

avaistheone1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:29 PM
Response to Original message

5. That won't work because they are going to ask for 2 trillion dollars later.

THIS is just the beginning of the shake-down.

imo

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

moondust

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message

7. Agree, chunks is good.

Built-in periodic review and cancellation options might prevent some Wall Street con artists from trying to game the bailout process for tons of cash.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

lifesbeautifulmagic

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Wed Sep-24-08 09:40 PM
Response to Original message

8. Any financial services executive that made anything in

excess of a million, in golden parachutes or bonus's or whatever mumbo jumbo pay scheme they came up with should be asked to give at least half of it back to fund the bail out, just to show us little people that they have good faith in this solution.

And i am sick of them talking about "continuing the prosperity". What prosperity? I am working harder then ever, and my income has been stagnant for the past five years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Sat May 04th 2024, 09:19 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.