To everyone who fell for Bush’s fearmongering again and was attacking the Republican congressmen for not passing it at first, I’d like to take this opportunity to say “I told you so”.
In the spring Paulsen said the economy was fine. Four months later the same guy said we were on the brink of collapse and only he could save us if we gave him a trillion dollars with no strings attached.
These guys must be hung like herd animals because we never seem to tire of getting screwed by them.
http://bailoutsleuth.com/ When the companies get their hands on the money they treat it like it is theirs. They believe in huge salaries and bonuses for themselves and their friends. Paulson promised to have transparency. They have been redacted the paper work. They have blacked out the parts which tell how much we are paying to audit and how much money is being given out to banks. That is not transparency. They lied about this. They can not be trusted.
Even the healthy banks that don’t want help.
Hmmm, at first blush I was convinced of the socialistic aspects of this bailout. But then I pictured this meeting.
Company presidents gathered round a table with the leaders of a semi-planned economy, who tell all of the corporate leaders that they had better get behind the big program for the good of the country, and if they do they will be protected and richly rewarded. Meanwhile the smaller companies are forcibly merged, shut down, or left to go bust.
It does remind me of a certain type of government, and it’s not socialism.
Is there a way for me to say “hey, this reminds me of Fascism, and I really mean it this time?” :mad:
Is this an inopportune time to point out that if we are borrowing money (through t-bills) at 3 1/2%, and loaning it out to healthy banks at 5%, that the gov. is going to make a nice profit out of this?
Yes, you have wrecked the world. You win.
Yep.
The opportune time to point that out will be when you are holding that so-far-imaginary profit in your hand.
:dubious:
While China isn’t going to attempt to cash in on those bonds any time soon, you know you’ll be paying dividends on those bonds when the economy starts to perk up again, right? IIRC the US is up to 40%+ of it’s total tax income being spent on paying the interest on it’s mortgages. You can’t just ignore the debt; it’s not going to go away. So, if I get the gist of it, 40% of your (federal) tax dollars go to scratch China’s back and keep them from becoming . . . uppity.
You’re forgetting Opportunity Cost.
Not to mention the government has some really stupid buying habits, and almost always sells the things it buys at a significant loss. What I’m wondering is what’s going to happen when the government decides to sell the shares in the various banking institutions. Flooding the market with shares tends to make the price drop.
Two questions:
-
How does this help deal with the financial (subprime/mortgage/credit/currency/whatever else) crisis?
-
If it was such a sweet deal that the banks couldn’t turn it down, doesn’t that suggest that Paulson could have struck an even more profitable deal with them?
I do not understand the machismo of “we’re #1 and can obliterate any country we like”. Actually, in real terms, America can not even win a war in Vietnam or Iraq. A serious escalation would bring international condemnation and intervention. I doubt the world would stand by while America commits genocide anywhere. Most probably the world would unite against America like they did against Nazi Germany and, no matter what some people may think, America does not stand a chance against most of the world united. That posturing is silly and childish. And not true to reality.
Countries who think they can dominate the world are well on their way to failure and downfall.
Who’s this “we” in the title? What “we” thought? What we radical lefty DFH thought was that the money would be parceled out to the benefit of rich old white men in suits, with a Republican representation rate of about 99%. Who we are assured, despite recent evidence, are wise in the ways of The Market. After all, don’t they make obscene amounts of money? And we know that The Market only rewards competence, because It Is Written.
So we are assured that these are the best and wisest, their hands steady on the tiller, and the recent debacle was due to some unknowable force that unhinged the Free Market. Sunspots, maybe.
Its a deranged sort of Social Darwinism, survival of the fattest.
That, sir, was poetry of the finest sort.
Correct, that was an admirable twisting of the misappropriation of $700 billion taken from the taxpayers by the government into an attack on the free market.
Bravo.
Valete,
Vox Imperatoris
There is not now, nor has there ever been, any such thing as a “free market”. It is capitalist dogma, to be accepted on faith. I am perpetually astounded by how many men who pride themselves on being hard-headed and realistic will sombrely lecture on the principles of a thing none of them have ever seen, nor ever shall.
Might as well be the migratory patterns of unicorn.
This is (IMO) one of the best posts ever written for truth. Thank you, levdrakon.
Waging war is good business. We have lost all conflicts with countries lately that have no air force and no navy. We get driven out at the end. War is obsolete and that is a lesson we can not learn. Iraq is a war for oil. it is always about money. You can not occupy another country. So in the end, what can you win? Want the oil in Iraq. Be a real caoitalist and buy it.
Thanks!
I don’t think we lose wars. We lose the peace.
Paulson originally wanted a bailout bill under which his decisions on allocating the money would not have been reviewable by any court or agency. That was not included in the final version – but has it made any difference?!