Congress OKs historic bailout bill > General

Unanswered

Active Topics

Forums

Subject: Congress OKs historic bailout bill

Email me when someone replies to this thread.

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 1 of 2

Author

Messages

showboat
Posts:67

10/03/2008 11:13 AM	Alert
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/financial_meltdown WASHINGTON - With the economy on the brink and elections looming, Congress approved an unprecedented $700 billion government bailout of the battered financial industry on Friday and sent it to President Bush for his certain signature. The final vote, 263-171 in the House, a comfortable margin that was 58 more votes than it garnered on Monday. The vote capped two weeks of tumult in Congress and on Wall Street, punctuated by daily warnings that the country confronted the gravest economic crisis since the Great Depression if lawmakers failed to act. "This legislation is to fix a problem in our financial markets," said spokesman Tony Fratto. "It's not sold as giving a boost to the economy, but rather preventing a crisis in our economy... If it works as we hope it will, credit will be able to begin flowing again." "How can we have capitalism on the way up and socialism on the way down," said Rep. Jeb Hensarling of Texas, a leader among conservative Republicans who oppose the central thrust of the legislation — an unprecedented federal intervention into the private capital markets.

tpc
Posts:498

10/03/2008 11:34 AM	Alert
This should have been done last week. The repubs have been a real profile in cowardice. They became enamored with their own ideological bullshat at great expense to the country. We ain't out of the woods yet' by a long shot. Good news for some of you in this forum-THE PAIN IS ON THE WAY. Some seem to rejoice in pain especially the smug older ones who apparently have a nestegg to carry them thru. They complain about society but don't want to take responsibility for their contribution to the problem. Want to blame it on the newbie adults who are a product of the bs environment we placed them in. Give em a break-there is plenty of time for them to get their ass burned.

BigTrace
Posts:194

10/03/2008 11:43 AM	Alert
Posted By tpc on 10/03/2008 11:34 AM This should have been done last week. The repubs have been a real profile in cowardice. They became enamored with their own ideological bullshat at great expense to the country. We ain't out of the woods yet' by a long shot. Good news for some of you in this forum-THE PAIN IS ON THE WAY. Some seem to rejoice in pain especially the smug older ones who apparently have a nestegg to carry them thru. They complain about society but don't want to take responsibility for their contribution to the problem. Want to blame it on the newbie adults who are a product of the bs environment we placed them in. Give em a break-there is plenty of time for them to get their ass burned. You Dems had the power to pass this on your own, so who's the coward now?? This was the WORST piece of legislation EVER and will go down in history as a complete failure for the people. Mark my words..

jakob
Posts:473

10/03/2008 11:47 AM	Alert
Where's the $700B bailout window? I have a security backed by a shed full of crap in my back yard I'd like the unload at a "hold to maturity" valuation. LOL. What a sad day. This $700B will be pissed away as fast as the $150B stimulus package earlier this year, with the same result.

bh
Posts:9

10/03/2008 11:51 AM	Alert
The bill increases FDIC insurance to $250,000. This increase is temporary, until Dec 31, 2009 (unless this is again extended by congress). The Prez will sign the bill in a few minutes. But does anyone know when the increase takes effect? Immediately upon the Prez signing?

lurknomore
Posts:270

10/03/2008 11:56 AM	Alert
Big Trace-- Your claim, "This was the WORST piece of legislation EVER and will go down in history as a complete failure for the people. Mark my words," would have some relevance (rather than just being an ideological rant) if you would state the criteria by which it should be judged. People on either side of the it's good" vs. "it's bad" debate should be able to agree that statements like yours (i.e., "complete failure for the people") are irrelevant unless there is some set of outcomes and timelines against which to render a judgment. How about it?

tpc
Posts:498

10/03/2008 1:57 PM	Alert
[quote]You Dems had the power to pass this on your own, so who's the coward now[/quote] Big-this legislation was proposed by the president and supported by the sec of treasury. Last time i looked-they were republicans. But the dems may have the last laugh. The new package added tax breaks from the amt and for businesses. Now the dems can say that those who opposed the package were against tax cutting. Ironic.

BigTrace
Posts:194

10/03/2008 2:15 PM	Alert
Posted By lurknomore on 10/03/2008 11:56 AM Big Trace-- Your claim, "This was the WORST piece of legislation EVER and will go down in history as a complete failure for the people. Mark my words," would have some relevance (rather than just being an ideological rant) if you would state the criteria by which it should be judged. People on either side of the it's good" vs. "it's bad" debate should be able to agree that statements like yours (i.e., "complete failure for the people") are irrelevant unless there is some set of outcomes and timelines against which to render a judgment. How about it? You're right, at this point, it is a rant as I've explained myself through so many other threads here, I care not to explain it again. Overall, as Jakob just said, this will just be another 700B spent, with a bunch of crap legislation thrown on top of it. The 150B we just spent on giving everyone a stimulous check had no bearing on this economy other than a temporary lift. The roots of the problem lie so far down that congress fails to see it and just throws more money at the problem instead of trying to actually solve the problem. Truly a sad day. Someday you guys ought to all wiki the 2007 and 2008 US Budget and look how fast it is climbing in terms of the countries debt (interest) spending. We're already running at a deficit and just adding onto the already 11.3 trillion owed. Those in the RE business should see this as a "negative amortization" loan. I don't know anyone who has ever survived a negative am loan without some sort of refi, a huge balloon payment or at worst, bankruptcy and foreclosure. How long do you think the world creditors are going to stand idlly by while we keep spending on the worlds largest credit card. At some point, they're either going to call their notes or better yet, cut off their lines. Then we start printing more money, devaluing our dollar further and then the HURT really starts happening as the inflation bug starts creeping up. We should all revisit this subject again in about 6 months and I think you'll find things worse, not better.

BigTrace
Posts:194

10/03/2008 2:22 PM	Alert
Posted By tpc on 10/03/2008 1:57 PM [quote]You Dems had the power to pass this on your own, so who's the coward now[/quote] Big-this legislation was proposed by the president and supported by the sec of treasury. Last time i looked-they were republicans. . You're correct but it could've been passed by a Democratic House, and a Democratic Senate. They wanted EVERYONE to drink the kool aid since this is an election year and if it fails, they want everyone to take the hit. If the Dems believed so highly in the bailout along with Bush and Paulson, they could've railroaded it through along party lines and Bush would've signed it the first time. In their haste, they just forgot about throwing in the junk legislation which is basically why it went back for round 2. Look at the market today. Not such a "warm" welcome to the bailout is it??

TotoMMB66
Posts:98

10/03/2008 2:24 PM	Alert
Don't forget the $85B gifted to AIG. They claim they'll pay it back, but I'll bet this "loan" gets forgiven sometime between now and January. And this should mark the end of the administration's claims that "The economy is sound". Hopefully this is the last meaningful thing Bush does as Pres. I think it will come down to world lenders calling due on our loans, the completely ruin the country. So, when this band-aid falls off of the broken leg of America, we can try to solve the root causes of these issues, not just patch things up temporarily. Ron Paul in 2012 (please note: I'm a Dem)

showboat
Posts:67

10/03/2008 2:53 PM	Alert
I like and support what my congressman had to say in an email to his constituents who chimed in on this issue: Dear "showboat", As you know, earlier this week I voted against the Congressional bailout. While some changes were made to make the bill more acceptable to House Republicans, I simply could not bring myself to support it today. It's not that I don't believe that we are in a financial crisis. We are. But putting these problems on the back of the taxpayers is not the answer. My worry is not just with the amount of new debt being foisted on the taxpayer (more than $10,000 per household), but the problems going forward when the federal government owns such a large stake in so many banks and businesses. How would you like to be a business competing with a business partially owned by government? It's just going to create problems we aren't thinking of right now. I've enclosed the text of my speech I gave earlier this week on the House floor. I hope you'll take a few moments to read it. Best regards, Jeff Flake ________________________________________________ Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this bailout, not because I don't believe we face a financial crisis in this country. I rise in opposition to this bailout because I know we're in a financial crisis, one that will be prolonged with this legislation. The premise of this unprecedented government intervention is that the free market has failed and that government must come to its rescue. In reality, the crisis we now face is a result of government intervention in the market. We are in this predicament largely because implicit, and eventually explicit, federal guarantees in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac shielded the financial services sector from market discipline. Mr. Speaker, those who believe they can control and direct the market's invisible hand will eventually be slapped by it. That's the painful and embarrassing situation we find ourselves in today. We don't have enough money in the federal treasury, nor can we responsibly borrow enough money, to keep the market from finding its natural bottom. Now is the time to act on the free market principles we profess to believe in. Let's vote down this bill and instead pass legislation that is consistent with those principles. I yield back the balance of my time.

BigTrace
Posts:194

10/03/2008 3:22 PM	Alert
Thanks Showboat, my expressions exactly

BigTrace
Posts:194

10/03/2008 3:24 PM	Alert
Posted By TotoMMB66 on 10/03/2008 2:24 PM Don't forget the $85B gifted to AIG. They claim they'll pay it back, but I'll bet this "loan" gets forgiven sometime between now and January. And this should mark the end of the administration's claims that "The economy is sound". Hopefully this is the last meaningful thing Bush does as Pres. I think it will come down to world lenders calling due on our loans, the completely ruin the country. So, when this band-aid falls off of the broken leg of America, we can try to solve the root causes of these issues, not just patch things up temporarily. Ron Paul in 2012 (please note: I'm a Dem) No offense Toto, some of my good friends are Dems, but you see the true picture amongst all the smoke and mirrors the feds are trying to make us believe. Just more money on top of money we can't afford already.

TotoMMB66
Posts:98

10/03/2008 3:54 PM	Alert
I'm in your camp Trace. Each side uses smoke and mirrors... No sooner did the bill pass that I saw an article titled: "Credit markets to Washington: Bailout isn't enough". Super. I'm sure there are some folks who are now figuring out the next round of "bailout". There's also a list of each members vote on the amended bill. (Both of these articles were on yahoo, I imagine they're available everywhere). I wish the opponents were more vocal. Also, I'm surprised the pork wasn't mentioned more by those same opponents of the bill. So, it has now become like every other piece of legislation...the real intention gets surrounded by a ton of unrelated crap, just to please enough people. I hope everyone in each of those "yes" districts vote those representatives out. The Prez once claimed that history will look back and see he was a pretty darn swell leader (not his exact words, but close). I have a feeling there will be plenty of records that indicate he really put us through 8 years of hell (and left a lasting legacy of blunders).

TotoMMB66
Posts:98

10/03/2008 4:03 PM	Alert
Also, someone explain to me what happens now? A lot of representatives said they were going to change their votes after Monday due to constituents crying after the market dropped 778 points. The market recovers some of that Tuesday. Then today, this bogus bill passes, and the market swings from a 250-point gain to a 150-point loss. What happens if the market drops another 400-500 points next week? Fire another $700B bullet? Lower interest rates below 2% (the 1% "blessing" Greenspan gave us seems to be part of today's problems)? It seems like the cause-and-effect analysis the government is doing is both looking at the wrong cause, and even then, getting the wrong effect...What kind of hysteria is there going to be when the Dow slips under 10,000? Not very encouraging.

lurknomore
Posts:270

10/03/2008 4:36 PM	Alert
Big Trace--I can see we are making progress. You have stated, "We should all revisit this subject again in about 6 months and I think you'll find things worse, not better." Now you just need to tell us which "things" you believe will be "worse," and how we will know (measure) that. Also, what "things," if they were "better" (and measured how) would show you were wrong. It is a truism in science that falsifiabiliity is a requirement for any testable hypothesis: If no possible set of outcomes could show that it was incorrect, then no evidence can ever show it was right, either. Is your claim potentially falsifiable, or it is just an a priori "fact" based on your economic/political ideology? The world (well, the small part of it represented here) is waiting.

lurknomore
Posts:270

10/03/2008 4:48 PM	Alert
Toto--I'm sure you know it doesn't really work like this: "world lenders calling due on our loans." Fortunately, Ron Paul has no more chance of becoming President than Dennis Kucinich. Neither can win his party's nomination. As a famous Bush administration appointee said, "You have to play the hand you're dealt." Or did he say, "You go to war with the army you have"? Either way, it will take a major, decades-long depression to overturn the two-party system, and that is so unlikely as to be ignored. (And Ron Paul won't be around by then anyhow.)

tpc
Posts:498

10/03/2008 4:57 PM	Alert
[quote] We're already running at a deficit and just adding onto the already 11.3 trillion owed.[/quote] Big-wow. A republican worried about the deficit. Are you rip van winkle??? The deficit was just under $1t (998b) when jimmy carter left office in 1981. And now you have become aware that the debt limit has been raised to $11.3T (an old number-since raised to 11.6T). You must be listening to rush limbo. Fat rush maintained that every time tax rates have been lowered that tax revenues went up. What he neglected to say-the bigger the tax cuts, the greater the deficits. In case you forgot-Clinton increased the tax rate to 39.6% from 36% and had surpluses for the last 3 years of his administration. When clinton left office, the deficit was $5.8T. Dufus bush had to have the debt ceiling raised to $11.6T. A doubling of the deficit in just 8 years. How is that for conservative principles (an oxymoron).

restless
Posts:12

10/03/2008 5:20 PM	Alert
tpc The last three years of the Clinton administration were benefited by the Tech Bubble. The one that upon bursting dropped that overall market 5 trillion dollars, cost Gray Davis his job, etc. That would be the equivalent of Bush leaving office at the height of the housing bubble and putting the resulting downturn on the new President. Also, programs implemented under his watch result in the creation of bad mortgages that have led to the current turmoil. So don't glorify Clinton.

jpinpb
Posts:1450

10/03/2008 5:37 PM	Alert
Subprime was on Bush's watch. Although the stocks went up w/the bill passing, and some of you are glad the bill passed, my question, since some of you think the bill will help, when do you expect to see "improvement" as a result of the bill passing? I read this today: "The credit markets have been nonplused by all of this activity in Washington. Banks that have cash aren't lending it. The cost of borrowing dollars in London has been rising and shows little sign of easing. The London Interbank Offer Rate is considered a good barometer of how much banks trust — or don't trust — each other. And right now banks have determined they aren't willing to risk lending out their cash because they might not get it back. Their wariness is not misplaced. European and U.S. governments have had to rescue five banks in the past week alone. Because of the tight lending conditions, banks and institutional firms are going to the Fed to get cash. Commercial banks averaged $44.5 billion in daily borrowing over the past week — up from a little more than $39 billion a week earlier, the central reported Thursday."

You are not authorized to post a reply.

Page 1 of 2

Forums > General > News > Congress OKs historic bailout bill

Please login or register to post in the forums.