I SURE am glad that our REPRESENTATIVES voted to give away $700 BILLION

[Mind_your_head]

to "prevent" this meltdown! :sarcasm:

Supreme "bad judgement call" - you should (and will) all be fired next election cycle that you're up!

[Horse with no Name]

1. Just more raiding the treasury

It's not going to help but I am sure there are some fatcats whose nests haven't been feathered yet.
I'm glad they could oblige.
Our kids and grandkids will never be able to pay the debts that have been run up in the past 8 years.

[Mind_your_head]

3. I'm not sure how, but MY kid is NOT going to be held hostage to this shit

I REFUSE to go along with this "game"!

[lligrd]

2. 700 Billion Less To Address The Real Problems

Oh well!

[sandnsea]

4. Yeah, it was all a "scam"

wasn't it. :eyes:

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. They don;t get it, the TARP hasn't even started working

wanna bet though that the TARP will not go fully into place but the funds will be used for the emergency lending the Fed Chairman was talking this morning?

Me calling my reps, this is time to stop reacting and time to start acting... bank holidays to stop the fall comes to mind

[Mind_your_head]

12. Nadin, you're such a tool. n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. Two questions since you know this

what is TARP

And what is the timeline?

Free hint, read the bill

Another free hint, what do you think the british Finance Ministry is talking about doing? SEE TARP

Now care to continue insulting people?

[Hannah Bell]

65. tarp = goldman welfare.

Wolfgang Munchau in EuroIntelligence..also says that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson devised the badly-flawed Troubled Assets Repurchase Program to benefit Goldman.

Although this is a widely-held view, few financial commentators have been willing to say so in writing.<<


"The US administration’s TARP proposal is a case in point. It has lambasted by almost every economist, including those who normally disagree with each other on most things. Buying up toxic securities at above market prices is simultaneously the most expensive and unfairest way to recapitalise the banking system. It is very difficult to believe that the US treasury secretary can possibly be driven by a motive other than a wish to benefit the investment banks he once chaired, and which stands gain handsomely from such a package, and which would never dream of accepting any government capital infusions. The only alternative explanation for his behaviour is immense stupidity – and I know that he is not a stupid man."

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/

[Mind_your_head]

17. TARP - Troubled Asset Relief Program, right?

http://www.bondbuyer.com/article.html?id=20081007ABHYXLQT

Assholic program. Assholic promises.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Since you can google look up HOPE

[Mind_your_head]

24. Hope is the BIGGEST PIECE OF SHIT to come down the pike....

and I posted an original thread about this "other form of robbery".

Nadin, you REALLY evidence yourself and where 'you're coming from'!

You're not a progressive. You're a 'rich' gal and you'd like to keep it that way!

Just an observation.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. Really? That is why I have been advocating wiht the people that matter

for the WPA

And for an expansion of the housing program to actually do what Roosevelt did

Really I know, FDR wasn't a progressive either

Having a clue as to how HISTORY and events move I know that the New Deal did not emerge from FDRs head athena like

Now if you think that... we part company

I like facts, not myth

Now I have not said HOPE is ideal, but I also realize in the current environment nobody can even call the WPA well WPA... guess who said he was going to implement that without saying the words?

Now you like to make accusations... and since you are flinging poo I will fling some back... your crazy conspiracy thinking ain't that different from the crazies on the other side... who also believe this is a scam


Say hi to them... as you and them will fight all that is needed to be done.

[endthewar]

34. Save your breath. Some people can't be saved from their own idiocy.

[Hannah Bell]

58. eh, the "you're so ignorant" brigadistas have returned, i see,

[Hannah Bell]

42. you know "the people that matter"?

tell them "you suck" for me.

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. Sure, after all they will be the ones responsible for enacting that

legislation

Would you like me to tell then that you think they suck as well?

I'm sure to open with that

Should I also include some of the tin foil and mythical thinking ongoing here?

And where should I start?

Oh yes, the money is on its way to a swiss bank account. I'm sure they'll get a good laugh

[Hannah Bell]

45. yes, they suck. tell them for me. thanks.

actually, i'd say worse - but it/s the internet...

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. Sure... and should I quote who exactly? Marx, Engels, or perhaps Lenin?

(who I happen to like by the way... but the same way I like Adam Smith... nice utopias, the lot of them)

[Hannah Bell]

49. i gave you my message for "the people that matter". you may resume your mission of selling

the bailout & babbling about the new deal now.

"you suck" is, btw, pretty much the message from my whole town.

no one's buying the bullshit.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. So you do not think we need bottom up legislation to get out of the hole

I think Hoover agrees with you

[Hannah Bell]

52. i think your history is - shall we say - selective.

as is your economic analysis.

but please, there must be someone at DU who hasn't yet heard your stories of the new deal.

carry on.

[nadinbrzezinski]

55. If you say so

so waiting for the glorious revolution?

[tavalon]

56. Wait, are you saying that the bailout is bottom up legislation

I don't know what if anything the 700 billion dollar bailout is going to do to stem the bleed, but it isn't bottom up legislation.

[lib2DaBone]

61. TARP .......Taxpayers Are Really Pissed

[anigbrowl]

21. Might as well save your energy

This thread was clearly set up for ranting in.

[Mind_your_head]

30. No, not true.

Honest concerns, debate.....yes.

[anigbrowl]

41. Hence all the CAPS and so on. IT's OK to vent

but it's pretty obviously a thread for venting in. I call 'em as I see 'em.

[Hannah Bell]

64. yeah, those tarps sound mm-mm good - for goldman.

Wolfgang Munchau in EuroIntelligence..also says that Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson devised the badly-flawed Troubled Assets Repurchase Program to benefit Goldman.

Although this is a widely-held view, few financial commentators have been willing to say so in writing.<<


"The US administration’s TARP proposal is a case in point. It has lambasted by almost every economist, including those who normally disagree with each other on most things. Buying up toxic securities at above market prices is simultaneously the most expensive and unfairest way to recapitalise the banking system. It is very difficult to believe that the US treasury secretary can possibly be driven by a motive other than a wish to benefit the investment banks he once chaired, and which stands gain handsomely from such a package, and which would never dream of accepting any government capital infusions. The only alternative explanation for his behaviour is immense stupidity – and I know that he is not a stupid man."

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/

[Mind_your_head]

7. Yes, it is. Why do you "roll your eyes":.....please enlighten all of us dumb peasants/pissants

[sandnsea]

10. So the markets and banks and govts aren't going under?

Really?

[calmblueocean]

5. If they hadn't voted for the 'rescue' package, we'd be lower than this

and most people, I think, know it.

I'd still prefer it if they'd listened to Fazio or Kucinich, but something needed to be done. And lots more still does, or we're all going to get wiped out.

[Horse with no Name]

9. It is a Ponzi scheme

Honestly...why spend $700 billion to keep us afloat an extra week or two?
We are going to crash--I'd just as soon save the next generations a few bucks that they don't have to pay back because our fucking country was deregulated out of business under our watch.

[nadinbrzezinski]

15. How much do you think it cost to get out of the depression?

1 Trillion

Adjusted for inflation...

that is 12 T

Just an FYI

The New Deal was not cheap

Hell, the WPA alone, if (rather when) implemented today, will run anywhere from one to two trillion dollars

[Horse with no Name]

16. But the New Deal has been dismantled

Part and parcel in this $700 billion package deal.
IMHO, we lost more than we gained by our capitulation on this.
I know we don't agree and I am not going to belabor the point.
Everyone will end up bleeding before this is over.
The $700 billion was merely an expensive bandaid.
It will eventually come off and expose the wound. At that point, we'll find that it wasn't a superficial cut but a mortal wound.
It's throwing good money after bad.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. MAJOR parts of this bill were early new deal

the new deal has not fully been dismantled either... see social security

This package has elements of very early new deal legislation

It took six MAJOR packages and five congress to get it all in place

It will take a similar effort to get something similar in place and NOT all of it is gone, see Warner Act.. which incidentally needs updating

[Horse with no Name]

20. I'm glad you are confident

We'll leave it at that.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. I'm not, just that the history of the great depression has been in the back

of my head all this time, for the last three to four years

And I feel like I took a time tunnel down Albuquerque and came out in the summer of '32

[lligrd]

25. 'the WPA alone,will run anywhere from one to two trillion dollar'

Hmm, about what the Pentagon lost in Iraq?

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. well we are partly in this crisis because of that

tax breaks and wars tend to do that

[Name removed]

36. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Mind_your_head]

11. Lower in what way?

I can foresee....that even though I've lived and paid my mortgage for the past ten years, have no credit cards.....I'll be out on the street within the next 12 months. And that's not "hubris". That's FACT!

[sandnsea]

14. Why would you be? n/t

[Mind_your_head]

23. Why would I be out on the street with the next 12 months?

Because I won't be able to pay my mortgage, *duh*.

I won't have enough income and my *back-up* savings/IRA/401K has gone to Sh*t/NOTHING.....there's NOTHING to draw upon in 'hard times'

Osama YOU HAVE WON! You GOT.IT.ALL! CONGRATULATIONS! :sarcasm:

[Oregone]

26. Your anger should be redirected from the distraction of Osama,

And rather at this strange breed of Corporatism mixed with Free Market Capitalism....

Unregulated markets where a government will only intervene to give handouts/contracts/tax breaks to big business.

[Mind_your_head]

28. How can I puff myself up to be a big business?

Big business for dummies, ya know?

TIA,
M_Y_H

[Oregone]

33. Are you good at borrowing money, and giving head to politicians?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you may qualify for our receiving incredible amounts of corporate welfare.

[sandnsea]

32. I'm sorry to be dense

But don't you have a job? Probably 80% of people are not going to lose their job. If you don't even have any credit card debt, you're probably in good shape.

[lligrd]

39. You Are Not Dense Just Overly Optimistic nt

[sandnsea]

43. Let me get this straight

I'm a gloom and doom sucker because I believe there is a global financial crisis.

But because I know most people will not lose their jobs, 75% did not lose their jobs even in the depression, I'm overly optimistic.

Is that it?

[lligrd]

47. How Well Did Those Jobs Pay? nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

48. Depends, most folks who KEPT their jobs

saw years of no rise in wages

Those who lost jobs and got WPA jobs saw pay under the Warner Act as minimum wage, or prevailing wages...

And given that Obama hinted at the WPA today... it is coming

That minimum wage kept the economy in life support and also led to the initial re-industrialization of the country, which, contrary to common belief, was not as well industrialized as some believe... that did not happen until WW II when the US effectively became a command economy

[lligrd]

51. Exactly. And I Agree Completely With The Need For A WPA

like program but you do realize that "they" will fight tooth and nail against it and that the 700 billion was part of their fight against it?

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. The bill has elements of very early depression era legislation

but today Obama actually said WPA without using the words

It is coming and this bill, the TARP component, if it worked, and the jury is out on that one, was going to buy us time.. that is all

Tomorrow, or rather later today, I need to call them to demand that they start doing what needs to be done... and we don't have time for the election

That said, after November, you can bet Obama's team is on the way to the Treasury, like if it was '32... and that they are looking at all that massive legislation to see what can be used and what cannot

[lligrd]

40. You Will Have Plenty Of Company

If it makes you feel any better. I hear your pain and think it is totally realistic.

[ProfessorGAC]

63. How Is That A Fact?

You really haven't read any capital or liquidity statements from any of the major banks have you?

The banks that didn't screw up are doing just fine. They will continue to do just fine.

And, stricter regulatory environment will be the end result of this fiasco and you will NOT be out on the street.
The Professor

[lligrd]

27. I Disagree

The package was designed to restore faith in the market. To that end, it has failed miserably!

[calmblueocean]

59. There's some truth to that.

Honestly, Nancy Pelosi ought to be removed as Speaker, in my opinion, for forcing a vote on this without knowing she absolutely had the votes sewn up. The market was looking for reassurance that grownups were in charge of the economy, and when the bailout failed to pass the first time, it had a catastrophic effect on market confidence. You never get a second chance to make a first impression, and the impression the market got was that the internals of government were just as chaotic and shaky as the internals of Wall Street.

Still, there's a big difference between shaky leadership and NO leadership. If government intervention had seemed out-of-the-question, an impossibility, the market would already have cratered and we'd be standing in its ruins right now. As it is, we've still got a shot at managing this crisis, and we wouldn't have that if we'd just refused to intervene at all.

Having said all this, I think there were better plans than the bailout being proposed, and I think just throwing money at Wall St. is going to be ineffective. We're probably going to need to nationalize the financial system before this is all over.

[ProfessorGAC]

62. And Your Evidence Is. . .?

Since most academic economists and econometric analysts think this bailout is a band-aid on a chest wound, and don't think it will accomplish much that wouldn't be better addressed by a systemic remedy in a few months, you're opinion is grounded on what?
The Professor

[pokerfan]

8. But, it would have been worse without the bailout!

The bailout wasn't for the market or 401(k)s or employment or too keep people in their homes.

It was so rich fat-cats could party: http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/14879">AIG funds blowout party with taxpayer bailout dollars

[lligrd]

35. Least They Could Have Done Was Invite Us

Since we payed for it.

[Horse with no Name]

37. None of this would piss me off as bad IF we paid for it

Instead, we maxed out credit cards and wrote hot checks.
That is the legacy we are leaving for our kids.
Well that, and a fucked up planet to boot.

[lligrd]

38. Oh, You Meant The Collective "We" nt

[girl gone mad]

53. We have real trouble on the immediate horizon.

I thought our dollar would hold up for a while, but I see signs that it's slipping.

[balantz]

57. Buddy, can you spare a dime? n/t

[Greyhound]

60. $850B. No comment other than to say "you ain't seen nothin' yet". n/t