PDA

View Full Version : House Rejects $700B Bailout Plan



Eshlemon
09-29-2008, 03:48 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/29/national/main4484536.shtml


House Rejects $700B Bailout Plan
Package Designed To Rescue Wall Street Is Shot Down, Sending Stocks Plummeting

(CBS/ AP) The House on Monday defeated a $700 billion emergency rescue for the nation's financial system, ignoring urgent warnings from President Bush and congressional leaders of both parties that the economy could nosedive into recession without it.


Mr. Bush and a host of leading congressional figures had implored the lawmakers to pass the legislation despite howls of protest from their constituents back home. Despite pressure from supporters, not enough members were willing to take the political risk just five weeks before an election.

Ample no votes came from both the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle. More than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill.

The overriding question for congressional leaders was what to do next. Congress has been trying to adjourn so that its members can go out and campaign. And with only five weeks left until Election Day, there was no clear indication of whether the leadership would keep them in Washington. Leaders were huddling after the vote to figure out their next steps.


"We're all worried about losing our jobs," Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wis., declared in an impassioned speech in support of the bill before the vote. "Most of us say, 'I want this thing to pass, but I want you to vote for it - not me.'

Pass a bill and go campaigning and face angry constituents or don't pass it and do nothing and don't go campaigning. Tough call for Congressmen who's jobs are in jeopardy.

Of course, there's always the possibility the politicians voted for on the bill based on merit or lack of.:rolleyes:

MDFINFAN
09-29-2008, 03:53 PM
I'm not sure if this is a bad thing...just yet anyway.. it could be..but I like the cautiousness of the house repubs on this one..

Dolphan7
09-29-2008, 04:08 PM
If the world doesn't end as we have been told, then this is a good thing.

phinman1
09-29-2008, 04:31 PM
It's not a good thing. The sooner something is passed the better. The reason the Dow is down over 775 points is fear.

The veil has to be lifted from the debt clogging the market, some of it good and some of it bad. Banks are frozen and aren't lending to other banks because they don't know the nature of exactly what the other bank has. Nobody trusts each other.

With a bailout, the government can go about the business of lifting the veil off of these debts, and therefore everyone will know exactly what is up.

Right now, fear is hammering the market, and it will continue to. The only way to allay the fear is transparency, and that is what the bailout would mean.

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 04:43 PM
I'm not sure if this is a bad thing...just yet anyway.. it could be..but I like the cautiousness of the house repubs on this one..

Me too.

There was a good analogy on the radio. People spend weeks researching before they plunge into buying a 51 inch plasma TV, and Congress was going to pass this bill with very little work put into it.

I have to agree with the House Republicans until I know more about it.

Megatron
09-29-2008, 04:46 PM
Hey everyone, long time no see.

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 04:48 PM
Hey Megatron.

Now McCain is accusing Pelosi of bringing down the bill. What in the world is he talking about?

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 04:49 PM
Wow, this is the biggest Dow drop in history. Should I buy stocks now, or wait and see where the bottom is?

Megatron
09-29-2008, 04:50 PM
Hey Megatron.

Now McCain is accusing Pelosi of bringing down the bill. What in the world is he talking about? He's referring to the speech she made about it being Bush's fault that we are in this mess, right before the vote.

MDFINFAN
09-29-2008, 04:50 PM
Hey everyone, long time no see.

Where have you been?

Eshlemon
09-29-2008, 04:51 PM
Hey everyone, long time no see.

All Hail Megatron!

To Punish and Enslave!



Good to see you back dude.

MDFINFAN
09-29-2008, 04:52 PM
Wow, this is the biggest Dow drop in history. Should I buy stocks now, or wait and see where the bottom is?

Find the bottom, and buy those companies with a good rep while low.. you'll be glad you did..this is the best time to buy, wait 2 days then buy.

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 04:55 PM
He's referring to the speech she made about it being Bush's fault that we are in this mess, right before the vote.

So they voted against it to spite her? Isn't that a bit, um, immature?

Megatron
09-29-2008, 04:57 PM
Where have you been? You know where.:lol:

Eshlemon
09-29-2008, 04:59 PM
So they voted against it to spite her? Isn't that a bit, um, immature?

As mature as a tirade on Bush and Republican ideology right before the vote?

Don't know if the few Republican votes would have made a difference anyway as 40% of Democrats voted against...unless they where voting in spite too.

MDFINFAN
09-29-2008, 05:04 PM
You know where.:lol:

Opps, had nothing to do with it...:lol:

WSE
09-29-2008, 05:18 PM
get the bill right

its going to affect our economic future for years to come- no need to rush it through

get the proper safeguards and oversight in, than pass the bill. Its inevitable a bill like this is going to be passed, but I do like how time is being taken to think through the best version of it.

Dolphins9954
09-29-2008, 05:24 PM
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/29/national/main4484536.shtml







Pass a bill and go campaigning and face angry constituents or don't pass it and do nothing and don't go campaigning. Tough call for Congressmen who's jobs are in jeopardy.

Of course, there's always the possibility the politicians voted for on the bill based on merit or lack of.:rolleyes:



Great news. Let's only hope this continues. If Washington actually Kills this Bill. Then there is still hope. The majority of polls shows Americans are against this bailout. Voting against it is the will of the people.

Bonedoc7777
09-29-2008, 08:58 PM
they should not be worried about losing a job that should not be for life anyway, second if they did not let big corporations send every single manufactoring job overseas because they wanted to make 400 percent profit, maybe we would not be in this situation to begin with

Dolphins9954
09-29-2008, 08:59 PM
I'm so happy this bill failed. The American people won today. The first time in a long time. Check out this picture of our so-called representation laughing it up before the vote. Thinking they were going to be successful in passing one of the biggest con-jobs our country has ever seen.



http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/bailgasm-1.jpg



Now we have to hope that our elected officials keep it up. And don't sell out. Which would be the likely scenario. E-mail and call your Congressmen. Let them know what the majority of America already knows and wants. NO TO THE BAILOUT.

In the end this bill will probably pass. And Americans will get the short end of the stick brought to them by Washington. But at least there are some in Washington looking out for the people.

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 09:08 PM
As mature as a tirade on Bush and Republican ideology right before the vote?

Don't know if the few Republican votes would have made a difference anyway as 40% of Democrats voted against...unless they where voting in spite too.

Well you are correct in that Pelosi was being overtly political. But one is a speech, and one is a vote.

I am still not sure how I feel about the bill failing, though. I find it interesting that, across political spectrums, no one I have met supports the bailout.

Eshlemon
09-29-2008, 10:13 PM
Well you are correct in that Pelosi was being overtly political. But one is a speech, and one is a vote.

I am still not sure how I feel about the bill failing, though. I find it interesting that, across political spectrums, no one I have met supports the bailout.

We're probably making to much over the political rhetoric that is just the typical reaction to the speech especially one at such an important vote.

I don't really think she was depending on a few republicans that her tantrum may have turned away...that would have made her speech one of the dumbest by a Speaker ever. IMO, she was trying to scare her democrats into falling in line with everything Bush is evil. Wonder even if that backfired after working so closely with Bush to get this done.

I think most people are thinking along the lines of D9954 economists and nobel prize winners thread. Yes, something must be done but panic driven legislation is worse than no legislation at all.

Now will be interesting to see what Congress decides. Does the crisis of apocolyptic doom they've been predicting warrant cutting into their campaigning for re-election.

MDFINFAN
09-29-2008, 10:18 PM
I'm so happy this bill failed. The American people won today. The first time in a long time. Check out this picture of our so-called representation laughing it up before the vote. Thinking they were going to be successful in passing one of the biggest con-jobs our country has ever seen.



http://www.finheaven.com/images/imported/2008/09/bailgasm-1.jpg



Now we have to hope that our elected officials keep it up. And don't sell out. Which would be the likely scenario. E-mail and call your Congressmen. Let them know what the majority of America already knows and wants. NO TO THE BAILOUT.

In the end this bill will probably pass. And Americans will get the short end of the stick brought to them by Washington. But at least there are some in Washington looking out for the people.

I wouldn't go as far as saying America's won, what I think is at least we get a chance to see what's really expected on wall street and then address the real problems instead precieved problems.. We really need to get this right, and not just put a bandaid on it.. this doesn't mean that there's not a real problem, and I don't want americans getting screwed in the end..if we have to do something, let's be sure what we have to do...that's why I'm for taking it slow..not that this isn't needed..

milldog
09-29-2008, 10:59 PM
I wonder how many who were voting on this bill pulled their stocks out this morning. Bet you money someone will get investigated for insider trading.

Tetragrammaton
09-29-2008, 11:26 PM
Now will be interesting to see what Congress decides. Does the crisis of apocolyptic doom they've been predicting warrant cutting into their campaigning for re-election.

That is why I am so surprised. A lot of these guys have competitive elections, particularly the Republicans. You could argue that voting no on the bailout would shine more than any stump speech they do, but they are allowing their opponents to frame the debate.

The bigger issue is the Jewish holidays, though.

The_Dark_Knight
09-30-2008, 12:20 AM
The reason the defeat of this bill is a bad thing is due to the open expression of bipartisanship to come to a resolution and salvage our economy. When the leadership of both parties came forward and said they had reached a deal, it was assumed that the interests of not only republicans and democrats been met, but the interests of the American people as well. And to have this bill defeated only demonstrates the ineptness and incompetence of the US Congress to act in the best interests of the American people.

Now I'm not saying that the defeat of this bill is a bad thing (personally I do think it is) but what IS bad about it is we have our government following in the exact same footsteps of President Hoover's administration and the then US Congress. Their inaction at the failing economy then led to a continued downward spiral of the economy. The President and the leadership of the congress all VOWED to work aggressively and quickly to pre-empt a repeat of 1929...and the only thing that has happened is a REPEAT of 1929. The global markets have been watching, listening and now they hear that the government of the United States is not of its word.

The Dow plummeted today as did the NASDAQ. The shares in my IRA's are worth less today than they were when I opened them 6 years ago. My mutual funds are just barely worth more now than they were when I invested in them 6 years ago. As I type this response, The Nikkei is down 365 points and the Hang Sang is down 275 points. Does anyone think this isn't going to effect our market in the morning?

Not trying to compare apples and oranges, but people think the US has lost its standing in the world due to our foreign policy???? People had better be MORE concerned about the US losing its standing in the world financially.

Remember the stories your grandparents used to tell you about the Great Depression? Well, if our government doesn't get off its *** and act...you'll be able to share the same stories to your own grandchildren. History once again...is repeating itself.

fishfanfromjerz
09-30-2008, 01:04 AM
Find the bottom, and buy those companies with a good rep while low.. you'll be glad you did..this is the best time to buy, wait 2 days then buy.


absolutely....lot of value in the market right now

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 01:41 AM
The reason the defeat of this bill is a bad thing is due to the open expression of bipartisanship to come to a resolution and salvage our economy. When the leadership of both parties came forward and said they had reached a deal, it was assumed that the interests of not only republicans and democrats been met, but the interests of the American people as well. And to have this bill defeated only demonstrates the ineptness and incompetence of the US Congress to act in the best interests of the American people.

Now I'm not saying that the defeat of this bill is a bad thing (personally I do think it is) but what IS bad about it is we have our government following in the exact same footsteps of President Hoover's administration and the then US Congress. Their inaction at the failing economy then led to a continued downward spiral of the economy. The President and the leadership of the congress all VOWED to work aggressively and quickly to pre-empt a repeat of 1929...and the only thing that has happened is a REPEAT of 1929. The global markets have been watching, listening and now they hear that the government of the United States is not of its word.

The Dow plummeted today as did the NASDAQ. The shares in my IRA's are worth less today than they were when I opened them 6 years ago. My mutual funds are just barely worth more now than they were when I invested in them 6 years ago. As I type this response, The Nikkei is down 365 points and the Hang Sang is down 275 points. Does anyone think this isn't going to effect our market in the morning?

Not trying to compare apples and oranges, but people think the US has lost its standing in the world due to our foreign policy???? People had better be MORE concerned about the US losing its standing in the world financially.

Remember the stories your grandparents used to tell you about the Great Depression? Well, if our government doesn't get off its *** and act...you'll be able to share the same stories to your own grandchildren. History once again...is repeating itself.


If I remember correctly. History is repeating itself. Before the Great Depression there were many bailouts just like this one. Done by the Fed and the government. In the end the bailouts did nothing. And the depression came anyways. Even with the bailouts.

More debt and more inflation is not the answer. We need the opposite.

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 01:46 AM
I wouldn't go as far as saying America's won, what I think is at least we get a chance to see what's really expected on wall street and then address the real problems instead precieved problems.. We really need to get this right, and not just put a bandaid on it.. this doesn't mean that there's not a real problem, and I don't want americans getting screwed in the end..if we have to do something, let's be sure what we have to do...that's why I'm for taking it slow..not that this isn't needed..


When almost 1 trillion dollars of debt was stopped. America won. Trust me. The majority of Americans are against this. Passing this bill will screw us all in the end. More debt, More Inflation and More power to the Federal Reserve in not the solution. It's the problem. It's like taking poison for a cure. The same poison that got us in this mess to begin with.

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 01:51 AM
Well it looks like the Federal Reserve said the hell with the American people and did it anyways.




Sept. 29 (Bloomberg) -- The Federal Reserve will pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system, flooding banks with cash to alleviate the worst banking crisis since the Great Depression. The Fed increased its existing currency swaps with foreign central banks by $330 billion to $620 billion to make more dollars available worldwide. The Term Auction Facility, the Fed's emergency loan program, will expand by $300 billion to $450 billion. The European Central Bank (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=EURR002W%3AIND), the Bank of England and the Bank of Japan are among the participating authorities.

The Fed's expansion of liquidity, the biggest since credit markets seized up last year, came hours before the U.S. House of Representatives rejected a $700 billion bailout for the financial industry. The crisis is reverberating through the global economy, causing stocks to plunge and forcing European governments to rescue four banks over the past two days alone.

``Today's blast of term liquidity will settle the funding markets down, and allow trust to slowly be restored between borrowers and lenders,'' said Chris Rupkey (http://search.bloomberg.com/search?q=Chris+Rupkey&site=wnews&client=wnews&proxystylesheet=wnews&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&filter=p&getfields=wnnis&sort=date:D:S:d1), chief financial economist at Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ Ltd. in New York. On the other hand, ``the Fed's balance sheet is about to explode.''

The MSCI World Index of stocks in 23 developed markets sank 6 percent, the most since its creation in 1970. Credit markets deteriorated further as authorities tried to save more financial institutions from collapse.



http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=ahwz_k5JvuB8&refer=home



It's good to be King.

Ferretsquig
09-30-2008, 03:30 AM
Increasing the swap line is just another way to make more short term liquidity available to the market. It doesn't have anything to do with the bailout. The statement that the fed is going to "pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system" is misleading at best.

The_Dark_Knight
09-30-2008, 04:03 AM
If I remember correctly. History is repeating itself. Before the Great Depression there were many bailouts just like this one. Done by the Fed and the government. In the end the bailouts did nothing. And the depression came anyways. Even with the bailouts.

More debt and more inflation is not the answer. We need the opposite.
Not quite 9954. I did alot of reading the past few days and learned alot about how the depression came about. I posted it in another thread. I'll confess...too lazy to find it to re-post it

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 11:06 AM
Not quite 9954. I did alot of reading the past few days and learned alot about how the depression came about. I posted it in another thread. I'll confess...too lazy to find it to re-post it



Lessons From Hoover



People like to look back on FDR's New Deal as a success story of government intervention. These people ignore two important facts: a) that Hoover repeatedly tried to save the Wall Street banks in the preceding years and failed, and b) by the time FDR became president almost every bank in America had already failed. There was almost nothing left to save.The first thing to understand is that Hoover was an activist president (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,954983-4,00.html) in regards to the economic crisis.


Indeed, while Hoover fulminated against "socalled new deals," it was Roosevelt who accused the President of "reckless and extravagant" spending, and of thinking "that we ought to center control of everything in Washington as rapidly as possible." Roosevelt's running mate, Congressman John Nance Garner of Texas, 63, even claimed that Hoover was "leading the country down the path of socialism."



The best example of Hoover history repeating (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/22/162939/365/755/482314) under the Bush Administration is the current policy of the Federal Reserve swapping treasuries for nearly worthless mortgage-backed securities.

New York Times, October 8, 1931
Real Estate Men On Hoover Plan
Skepticism as to President Hoover's plan to liquidate frozen bank assets was expressed yesterday by Charles G. Edwards, president of the Real Estate Securities Exchange. The exchange deals almost exclusively in real estate bonds, of which it is estimated that $1,500,000,000 at par value are in default throughout the country.
[...]
"President Hoover's financial plan," Joseph P. Day said in part, "is a step in the right direction towards making real estate investment more liquid. The system will make it possible for the Federal Reserve Bank to issue acceptance notes against sound real estate securities, thus stabilizing their values. Real estate mortgages are commonly regarded in banking as frozen assets. The Hoover plan seeks to take these substantial investments from the frozen asset class and give them a recognized value."
All of these things President Hoover tried, and all of these things failed to save both the real estate market and most of the Wall Street banks.
There is a cost to that failure, and that cost is wasted taxpayer money that could have been better used if it was simply directed at the working man and woman.



http://www.economicpopulist.org/?q=content/people-are-asking-wrong-question



Bush=Hoover

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 11:15 AM
Increasing the swap line is just another way to make more short term liquidity available to the market. It doesn't have anything to do with the bailout. The statement that the fed is going to "pump an additional $630 billion into the global financial system" is misleading at best.


Where do they get the money to "swap"?

MDFINFAN
09-30-2008, 11:24 AM
Lessons From Hoover




http://www.economicpopulist.org/?q=content/people-are-asking-wrong-question



Bush=Hoover

Isn't that a different system than the one we use today.. at that time banks were'nt a part of wall street, today banks are tied directly to wallstreet from the 98 deregulation act.. I don't know the whole thing as it's been awhile since I've studied the great depression...but the banking system going down affected borrowing.. Most businesses exclusively borrowed from banks, ppl in vested in wall street purely for companies profits.. Now that both the banks and wallstreet are pretty much in the same business, I'm not sure doing it the way congress has expressed won't work.. Again like everyone else I'm trying to educate myself on the current situations.. The other part of the great depression is we were a manufacturing based economy and would actually sell our way of the crisis, as long as there was liquidation in the banking system for companies to borrow for expansion and paying short term payrolls. Since the mortages were strickly banks, that froze the liguidity of banks. In the end we started to put americans back to work thru infustructure jobs, which pull our steel mills back to work, and then home ownership rose, liquidating the bank, and lines of credit could go to companies to build.. It's almost the approach Obama is trying to use before this bail out situation occurred. That's why I said the next president will have to spend almost a trillion dollars his first year and be in deficit to get this economy moving again.. Somehow in all of this, we are going to have to create some kind of manufacturing base for long term stability or other wise we'd captives to other countries.. unfortunately our greedy companies moved our bread and butter over seas, and not helped this country that created them in the first place.

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 11:38 AM
Follow the Money.



House Members Voting 'Yes' On Bailout Received 54% More Money from Banks And Securities Firms Than Members Voting 'No'

Dems voting 'Yes' received twice as much as Dems voting 'No'




(EMAILWIRE.COM, September 30, 2008 ) BERKELEY, CA—Members of the U.S. House of Representatives today voted against a $700 billion financial system bailout. MAPLight.org has found that, over the past five years, banks and securities firms gave an average of $231,877 in campaign contributions to each Representative voting in favor of the bailout, compared with an average of $150,982 to each Representative voting against the bailout--54 percent more money given to those who voted Yes. 205 Representatives voted Yes and 228 voted No, with 1 Not Voting.

House Democrats split their votes on this bill, 140 voting Yes and 95 voting No. Democrats voting Yes received an average of $212,700 each, about twice as much as those voting No, $107,993.

House Republicans also split their votes on this bill, 65 voting Yes and 133 voting No (and 1 not voting). Republicans voting Yes received an average of $273,181 each, 50% more than those voting No, $181,688.

“Profit-driven companies wouldn't be making campaign contributions if it didn't buy them influence or access," said Daniel Newman, MAPLight.org's executive director. “Votes in Congress align with the river of money that flows through our political system.”




http://www.emailwire.com/release/16500-House-Members-Voting-Yes-On-Bailout-Received-54-More-Money-from-Banks-And-Securities-Firms-Than-Members-Voting-No.html

Wildbill3
09-30-2008, 11:46 AM
I was like WTF why didn't it pass? I thought it was a no brainer to pass this. but then upon reading further, I realized that the bailout was nothing more than a payment to reward rich fat cats for being inept with other peoples money, and for losing other peoples money, they'd get paid? Screw that. take that 700 billion and give it to the rest of us.

MDFINFAN
09-30-2008, 11:52 AM
Follow the Money.



House Members Voting 'Yes' On Bailout Received 54% More Money from Banks And Securities Firms Than Members Voting 'No'

Dems voting 'Yes' received twice as much as Dems voting 'No'





http://www.emailwire.com/release/16500-House-Members-Voting-Yes-On-Bailout-Received-54-More-Money-from-Banks-And-Securities-Firms-Than-Members-Voting-No.html

I hear you, but you're still barking up the wrong tree, while noble in your presentation, it doesn't address the underlining problem with our economy, companies sending jobs over seas, no manufacturing here in America, and us being a buy only type country.. I'd said add companies can't go over seas to a bailout, and in the short run, we're going to have to do some bailout, we can't grow our way out of this, we have nothing to sell....understand the root cause and not just what's in front of u....this bail out will happen, we have nothing else.. Wall street has no assets to use to get your pension back.

phinfan3411
09-30-2008, 12:06 PM
I hear you, but you're still barking up the wrong tree, while noble in your presentation, it doesn't address the underlining problem with our economy, companies sending jobs over seas, no manufacturing here in America, and us being a buy only type country.. I'd said add companies can't go over seas to a bailout, and in the short run, we're going to have to do some bailout, we can't grow our way out of this, we have nothing to sell....understand the root cause and not just what's in front of u....this bail out will happen, we have nothing else.. Wall street has no assets to use to get your pension back.

I think you are identifying a different problem MD. Yes it is a problem, and unfortunately, it will have to be addressed at some point, but I believe this banking/mortgage/fannie/freddie/Lehman/aig etc.. is it's own problem.

If you are saying we could get over it easier with a bigger, and better manufacturing base, I would agree with you, but that is, again, a seperate problem.

By the way 9954, keep up the good work, love your posts brother!

LouPhinFan
09-30-2008, 12:31 PM
How about taking the $700B and dispersing it to all people that filed taxes last year. They could do it in a parabolic arc starting with less going to the upper tax bracket, most going to the middle class brackets, and less going to the lower class bracket. In 2003 there were approximately 130 million tax returns filed. I'd say for 2007 there were around 140 million tax returns filed (just a guess). As an example, upper tax brackets would get around $1000 back, middle class would get around $8000 back, and the lower class would get around $2000 back. Obviously that is just an example so don't take it literally.

Of course you would have to trust people to spend that money wisely, whether it be paying of credit cards (like I would do), or refinancing their homes, or spending the money in the economy.

Yeah nevermind, it was a stupid idea.

phinfan3411
09-30-2008, 12:39 PM
How about taking the $700B and dispersing it to all people that filed taxes last year. They could do it in a parabolic arc starting with less going to the upper tax bracket, most going to the middle class brackets, and less going to the lower class bracket. In 2003 there were approximately 130 million tax returns filed. I'd say for 2007 there were around 140 million tax returns filed (just a guess). As an example, upper tax brackets would get around $1000 back, middle class would get around $8000 back, and the lower class would get around $2000 back. Obviously that is just an example so don't take it literally.

Of course you would have to trust people to spend that money wisely, whether it be paying of credit cards (like I would do), or refinancing their homes, or spending the money in the economy.

Yeah nevermind, it was a stupid idea.


Better idea than the guys in congress imo.

Finfang
09-30-2008, 12:46 PM
How about taking the $700B and dispersing it to all people that filed taxes last year. They could do it in a parabolic arc starting with less going to the upper tax bracket, most going to the middle class brackets, and less going to the lower class bracket. In 2003 there were approximately 130 million tax returns filed. I'd say for 2007 there were around 140 million tax returns filed (just a guess). As an example, upper tax brackets would get around $1000 back, middle class would get around $8000 back, and the lower class would get around $2000 back. Obviously that is just an example so don't take it literally.

Of course you would have to trust people to spend that money wisely, whether it be paying of credit cards (like I would do), or refinancing their homes, or spending the money in the economy.

Yeah nevermind, it was a stupid idea.

It's not a crazy idea. I posted in another thread that I wanted them to give every single tax payer $1 million dollars but that was a crazy idea. I now believe you need to give everyone enough money to pay off all their bills but not enough to make everyone quit their jobs. Maybe say in the $100,000 range. Inflation will increase of course but it is way better than the garbage they have on the table now. It will never happen though because there would be nothing in it for "Big Government"

No wonder Paulson wants this bail out so bad. He is an ex-Wall Street guy who has something to gain in all this. Why else would they want this plan to have have no judicial review. Because it stinks and they know it. They are creating panic to push this through. This plan failed because it has zero accountability. Hey you can just pay us back when you can, if you can. Give me an effin break.

Anyway this is just another effort to bleed us dry.

GIVE THE MONEY TO THE PEOPLE NOT TO WALL STREET CRIMINALS!!!!!!

mmitro55
09-30-2008, 01:42 PM
first off let me say that this issue was brought on by both parties, there is not one president or party that can be blamed. and i fully agree with voting this down, i think the market will recover on its own.

MDFINFAN
09-30-2008, 01:54 PM
I think you are identifying a different problem MD. Yes it is a problem, and unfortunately, it will have to be addressed at some point, but I believe this banking/mortgage/fannie/freddie/Lehman/aig etc.. is it's own problem.

If you are saying we could get over it easier with a bigger, and better manufacturing base, I would agree with you, but that is, again, a seperate problem.

By the way 9954, keep up the good work, love your posts brother!

What I'm saying is tie keeping our money at home as a part of this plan..that's what I'm saying, I don't want to save wallstreet just to find that a lot of it's companies now get the capital to move over seas...we are by definition, moving our economic overseas thru wallstreet.

Ferretsquig
09-30-2008, 03:27 PM
Where do they get the money to "swap"?

It is a swap of currencies. The fed sends a certain amount of dollars to a foreign bank and the foreign bank sends their currency in return at whatever the exchange rate is at the moment. It is designed to inject dollars into foreign banking systems where they're used for interbank transactions. The fed and every other western bank is worried because of the reluctance of banks to give short term loans to each other after all this debt failure. Pouring dollars into the system in effect lowers the borrowing rate and increases the short term liquidity to make up for the bank's reluctance to lend.

Ferretsquig
09-30-2008, 03:33 PM
It's not a crazy idea. I posted in another thread that I wanted them to give every single tax payer $1 million dollars but that was a crazy idea. I now believe you need to give everyone enough money to pay off all their bills but not enough to make everyone quit their jobs. Maybe say in the $100,000 range. Inflation will increase of course but it is way better than the garbage they have on the table now. It will never happen though because there would be nothing in it for "Big Government"

140 million taxpayers * $100,000 = ?

And just for some comparative figures:

total federal budget: $3 trillion
total external debt: $13 trillion

Just a little crazy.....

LouPhinFan
09-30-2008, 04:22 PM
It's not a crazy idea. I posted in another thread that I wanted them to give every single tax payer $1 million dollars but that was a crazy idea. I now believe you need to give everyone enough money to pay off all their bills but not enough to make everyone quit their jobs. Maybe say in the $100,000 range. Inflation will increase of course but it is way better than the garbage they have on the table now. It will never happen though because there would be nothing in it for "Big Government"

No wonder Paulson wants this bail out so bad. He is an ex-Wall Street guy who has something to gain in all this. Why else would they want this plan to have have no judicial review. Because it stinks and they know it. They are creating panic to push this through. This plan failed because it has zero accountability. Hey you can just pay us back when you can, if you can. Give me an effin break.

Anyway this is just another effort to bleed us dry.

GIVE THE MONEY TO THE PEOPLE NOT TO WALL STREET CRIMINALS!!!!!!

Like Ferret said, we don't have enough money to give out that much. You're talking about giving out $140 mil X $100,000. That's a stagering $14,000,000,000,000. Yeah, that's $14 TRILLION!

Plus there are many people, probably including myself that would quit their jobs if they got $100,000 dropped in their laps. It would be like that slave reparations skit on the old Dave Cappelle show. I'm rich b****!

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 07:33 PM
It is a swap of currencies. The fed sends a certain amount of dollars to a foreign bank and the foreign bank sends their currency in return at whatever the exchange rate is at the moment. It is designed to inject dollars into foreign banking systems where they're used for interbank transactions. The fed and every other western bank is worried because of the reluctance of banks to give short term loans to each other after all this debt failure. Pouring dollars into the system in effect lowers the borrowing rate and increases the short term liquidity to make up for the bank's reluctance to lend.


So where exactly does the dollars come from?

Is it printed up?

Finfang
09-30-2008, 07:39 PM
Okay, okay I hear you guys and I totally understand my numbers are ridiculous but that is my point.

So we are supposed to buy into this bailout. $700 billion dollars is no drop in the bucket either. Everyone treats this like pocket change. The whole thing is outrageous.

Anyone ever hear of a no peek loan. Basically they don't even look at your credit rating but in exchange you have to pay whatever interest rate they slap on the loan. This is not only careless and sad but also fraudelent. This is one of the many tactics used by these mortgage companies and banks.

Sorry I'm just not into giving money to people who have so absurdly mishandled money in the past. Give it to the people

Eshlemon
09-30-2008, 08:15 PM
Okay, okay I hear you guys and I totally understand my numbers are ridiculous but that is my point.

So we are supposed to buy into this bailout. $700 billion dollars is no drop in the bucket either. Everyone treats this like pocket change. The whole thing is outrageous.

Anyone ever hear of a no peek loan. Basically they don't even look at your credit rating but in exchange you have to pay whatever interest rate they slap on the loan. This is not only careless and sad but also fraudelent. This is one of the many tactics used by these mortgage companies and banks.

Sorry I'm just not into giving money to people who have so absurdly mishandled money in the past. Give it to the people

And the reason for these loans? So the 'people' that can't afford prime loans because they don't meet risks can get low or no equity loans. Blaming the bankers and loaners is easy when the entire industry from lender, borrower, and mortage backer are for increased risk for expanded credit availability.

"Give it to the people" is what started this.

Eshlemon
09-30-2008, 08:25 PM
Lessons From Hoover




http://www.economicpopulist.org/?q=content/people-are-asking-wrong-question



Bush=Hoover

Hoover also raised taxes, greatly increased regulation, increased spending and state market controm, 'it takes a village'...by the time of the election in 1932 Hoover was the first "commie" presidential candidate when running agains FDR.

Dolphins9954
09-30-2008, 08:34 PM
I hear you, but you're still barking up the wrong tree, while noble in your presentation, it doesn't address the underlining problem with our economy, companies sending jobs over seas, no manufacturing here in America, and us being a buy only type country.. I'd said add companies can't go over seas to a bailout, and in the short run, we're going to have to do some bailout, we can't grow our way out of this, we have nothing to sell....understand the root cause and not just what's in front of u....this bail out will happen, we have nothing else.. Wall street has no assets to use to get your pension back.


I agree 100% we need more manufacturing jobs here. Hell we need more jobs period. I don't believe telling companies they can't leave the United States is the answer. Isn't that illegal and unconstitutional? This bailout would do nothing for manufacturing jobs at all. This bailout besides being a power grap and takeover. Is also a bailout for fat cat wall street types. They are getting rewarded if anything for their actions. When it should be the opposite. Everyone likes to blame the banks for all of this. But that is not honest at all. The blame goes to the government as well. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which is in the center of all this mess. Was paying off politicians from both sides. To look the other way while they gave out loans like used car salesman. They donated heavily to Washington to make sure they got what they wanted. Washington even encouraged them to expand sub-prime lending. Which they were happy to oblige given the fact that Washington promised to back all their debt. All this lead to the bubble that has now burst. It was a win win for politicians in Washington. Not only did they make money from the banks and lenders paying them. They also made money for their states. All these inflated homes prices lead to more property taxes. Which lead to more money for the government to spend and put us in debt with. You also have to put some of this blame on the people as well. Why would you get a house that you can't pay for? That is not the case for everyone. But alot of this was from high risk loans. That ended up foreclosed on.

Plus you have to take into account. That this bailout means nothing when you have a runaway government that spends to much. Taxes to much. Puts us in record debt. And a Federal Reserve constantly inflating our currency. Which is the root of it all. This bailout would have put us at 11.3 trillion in debt. You have Mccain and Obama adding another 4 to 5 trillion on top of that. That would put us around 16 trillion in debt. And exactly how will that make our economy better and bring back jobs?

Ferretsquig
10-01-2008, 02:12 AM
Anyone ever hear of a no peek loan. Basically they don't even look at your credit rating but in exchange you have to pay whatever interest rate they slap on the loan. This is not only careless and sad but also fraudelent. This is one of the many tactics used by these mortgage companies and banks.

Sorry I'm just not into giving money to people who have so absurdly mishandled money in the past. Give it to the people

Who mishandled it? The people doing the defrauding or the people being defrauded? I have very little sympathy for people stupid enough to sign that piece of paper.

CedarPhin
10-01-2008, 02:38 AM
I'm glad there was no bailout. We should let the banks collapse, we'll be alot better off in the longterm. This bailout is nothing more than putting a bandaid on a shotgun blast to the face.

If I go and lose 700 dollars betting in Vegas, should I go to the government and ask for my 700 back?

Dolphins9954
10-01-2008, 05:55 PM
Here is our so called representation hard at work. Making a bad idea even worse.


Senate to vote on financial rescue plan Wednesday



22 hours ago
WASHINGTON (AP) — Senate leaders have scheduled a vote for Wednesday on the $700 billion Wall Street rescue plan rejected by the House.
Majority Leader Harry Reid and GOP Leader Mitch McConnell say, however, that they're going to add a tax cut package already rejected by the House on Monday.
The bipartisan move caps a day of behind-the-scenes maneuvering on Capitol Hill over what sweeteners to add to the bill to attract votes from House Republicans.
Reid and McConnell's move may prove popular with Republicans, but it risks a showdown with House leaders insisting that a popular measure extending certain business tax breaks be financed by tax increases elsewhere in the code.
The Senate plan would also raise federal deposit insurance limits to $250,000 from $100,000.



http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5ioHc80xKMiATnqCpK0cDKJzk_nPQD93HBJ903


Are these guys insane. Not only do they want to pass one of the biggest spending/bailout bills in history. Now they want to add tax cuts to it. Are these guys really that dumb? Or just don't have a clue at all. More Spending, More Debt, More Inflation, Power Graps and tax cuts. This is madness.

Finfang
10-01-2008, 06:10 PM
I'm glad there was no bailout. We should let the banks collapse, we'll be alot better off in the longterm. This bailout is nothing more than putting a bandaid on a shotgun blast to the face.

If I go and lose 700 dollars betting in Vegas, should I go to the government and ask for my 700 back?

No. That would be a form of Socialism I believe. Double standard.

That is exactly what we are dealing with here. Socialism. Wall Street gambles and loses and are bailed out by the government. I would invest my money too if I knew there was zero risk. Hell that would be like fairytale land instead of the real world.


Government wouldn't help you out because you have nothing to give them in return.

Finfang
10-01-2008, 06:20 PM
Who mishandled it? The people doing the defrauding or the people being defrauded? I have very little sympathy for people stupid enough to sign that piece of paper.

Well I'll tell you not a lot of people can resist the temptation of a new home dangled in front of their face even if it is beyond their means.

I was approved for way more than I signed off for when I bought my home because I knew to spend within my means.

Will I be taxed by the bailout even though I played it smart? You betcha! Do you think they will take into account who was involved in this mess and who wasn't when they put there hand out to cover the fats cats butts? Hell no they won't.

Go ahead and blame the people if you want but I blame the enablers.

And our greedy, careless government of course.

CedarPhin
10-01-2008, 06:22 PM
No. That would be a form of Socialism I believe. Double standard.

That is exactly what we are dealing with here. Socialism. Wall Street gambles and loses and are bailed out by the government. I would invest my money too if I knew there was zero risk. Hell that would be like fairytale land instead of the real world.


Government wouldn't help you out because you have nothing to give them in return.

Exactly.

Dolphins9954
10-01-2008, 09:46 PM
Well it looks like our Senate and both candidates sold our country out today. Let's hope the House has the balls and courage to once again stand up to this bailout/government takeover.




WASHINGTON - After one spectacular failure, the $700 billion financial industry bailout found a second life Wednesday, winning lopsided passage in the Senate and gaining ground in the House, where Republicans opposition softened.

Senators loaded the economic rescue bill with tax breaks and other sweeteners before passing it by a wide margin, 74-25, a month before the presidential and congressional elections.

In the House, leaders were working feverishly to convert enough opponents of the bill to push it through by Friday, just days after lawmakers there stunningly rejected an earlier version and sent markets plunging around the globe.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown


So they added even more things to this already huge spending bill. Not only that but they threw in tax cuts. Gee I wonder how the tax cuts will work with huge amounts of spending and debt that goes along with it? Not to mention the record amount of inflation. This proves that both candidates have no clue how to fix the mess we're in. Both of their soultions is "more of the same". We have no choice or difference.

Dolphins9954
10-02-2008, 11:43 AM
Here is the list of Senators that sold our country out. That includes both our presidential candidates. So much for a choice and difference.


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hX_MaTaUTKVxe0Z1tfLTOa1U75MgD93I3IQ80


Smoke and Mirrors.

Eshlemon
10-02-2008, 03:03 PM
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/kevin_hall/story/53350.html

Senate $700 billion bailout plan:



Give the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. the ability to borrow without limit from the Treasury to help stabilize banks it regulates, both large and small. This isn’t in the House legislation.

WTF, borrowing w/o limits is why we're here.


Limit courts from issuing restraining orders or injunctions against the Treasury secretary unless alleging a constitutional violation. In those cases, injunctions would have to be handled on an expedited basis by federal courts. Significantly, there is no limited liability expressed that would necessarily protect the federal government from lawsuits by investors when the government purchases distressed assets.

Treasury secretary looks to be getting some protection...but now government can be sued for purchasing these high-risk investments??? Guess if you make the goverment a player in the private market sector they've got to be on the same level legaly as the rest of us???



Raise the nation's debt ceiling to $11.3 trillion.

Sorry guys, but don't think that's enough...lets make it 13 trillion and call it the Dan Marino cap.


Don't know what this has to do or has a part in bail out.


Make permanent authority for undercover operations.

Make permanent authority for disclosure of information relating to terrorist activities.


Bailout now includes $110 billion in tax breaks...some of my favorites.

from energy section:


Give steelmakers tax credits for purchase of renewable fuels.

Allow fringe benefit reimbursement for qualified bicycle commuters.

Provide small tax credits for purchase of energy efficient dishwashers, washing machines and refrigerators.
from the Tax Code section:


Extend cost recovery period for motor racing tracks.

Extend tax credit for investment in the District of Colombia.

Exempt from excise tax certain wooden arrow shafts for use by children.

FCOL, can we have the House bill back?

As the writer said the bill's got something additional for everybody...enough to pass the House? The fundamentals of the bill the House rejected are still the same with a little more tacked in on topic, and a lot of off topic added in.

Ferretsquig
10-02-2008, 04:05 PM
Good news is we haven't even included all the payoffs which will be required to buy votes in the house. If it cost that much to buy off 10 senators how much will 100 reps cost? I guess they usually come cheaper.

Dolphins9954
10-02-2008, 04:20 PM
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/staff/kevin_hall/story/53350.html

Senate $700 billion bailout plan:




WTF, borrowing w/o limits is why we're here.



Treasury secretary looks to be getting some protection...but now government can be sued for purchasing these high-risk investments??? Guess if you make the goverment a player in the private market sector they've got to be on the same level legaly as the rest of us???




Sorry guys, but don't think that's enough...lets make it 13 trillion and call it the Dan Marino cap.


Don't know what this has to do or has a part in bail out.




Bailout now includes $110 billion in tax breaks...some of my favorites.

from energy section:




from the Tax Code section:





FCOL, can we have the House bill back?

As the writer said the bill's got something additional for everybody...enough to pass the House? The fundamentals of the bill the House rejected are still the same with a little more tacked in on topic, and a lot of off topic added in.


This bill is actually worse than the first one. If the House votes for this. Then it shows how easy it is to buy votes. I find it amazing that our elected officials believe that adding more spending and tax cuts is the answer. That's exactly what got us in this mess. This is one of the biggest spending/bailout/power grap/government takeover bill probably in the history of our country. They add more debt and tax cuts to it. And all of a sudden it's a better bill? Do they really think we're that stupid. I hope the House kills the bill again. But I don't have much hope when selling out your country is so easy and the norm in Washington. You also have both Mccain and Obama voting for this bill. Thanks for representation guys. No change coming. Only a transfer of power from one crook to another.