I want to email a couple representatives from around these parts but the scoundrels websites are down.
Basically want to tell them I am extremely disappointed with their vote and that a vote for the next version means I will a) never vote for them (not that I would every vote for them anyhow) (b) will vote for their opponent (unlikely, but who cares).
Basically want to tell them I am extremely disappointed with their vote and that a vote for the next version means I will a) never vote for them (not that I would every vote for them anyhow) (b) will vote for their opponent (unlikely, but who cares).
and be sure to point out the fact that the senate is trying to shove it down their throats and using loopholes to circumvent the constitution
really hope this tactic by senate backfires on their asses
i don't care if they vote for it or not (most that voting no in house not voting no period) it was pretty clear they were gonna vote for some form of this bailout at some point
just that many want to take more time and get it right...not rush it.....
just do it the right constitutional way and take your time....
really hope this tactic by senate backfires on their asses
i don't care if they vote for it or not (most that voting no in house not voting no period) it was pretty clear they were gonna vote for some form of this bailout at some point
just that many want to take more time and get it right...not rush it.....
just do it the right constitutional way and take your time....
just means everybody (the taxpayer) is gonna be paying for FDIC shortfalls a little sooner
pretty much a given that FDIC is gonna run dry at some point...and raising to 250k will only speed that up
basically its a net loss for everybody unless they happen to have 250k vs. 100k in a bank that fails...
and its pretty easy to scan the marketplace and find the safer banks
once again the prudent saver in the know gets the shaft....cause he will protect themselves regardless....
and once again the goal is to protect the banks as a whole not the average joe
upping to 250k reduces amount of bank runs etc...
like i'm sure before WM and WB looked like they could go under.....people were likely dropping holdings down to 100k at the very least....if not running completely
now with this law people will only have to trim to 250k in crappy banks
pretty much a given that FDIC is gonna run dry at some point...and raising to 250k will only speed that up
basically its a net loss for everybody unless they happen to have 250k vs. 100k in a bank that fails...
and its pretty easy to scan the marketplace and find the safer banks
once again the prudent saver in the know gets the shaft....cause he will protect themselves regardless....
and once again the goal is to protect the banks as a whole not the average joe
upping to 250k reduces amount of bank runs etc...
like i'm sure before WM and WB looked like they could go under.....people were likely dropping holdings down to 100k at the very least....if not running completely
now with this law people will only have to trim to 250k in crappy banks
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081002/ap_on_bi_ge/financial_meltdown
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.
The measure didn't cause the same uproar in the Senate, where both parties' presidential candidates, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama, made rare appearances to cast "aye" votes.
The rescue package lets the government spend billions of dollars to buy bad mortgage-related securities and other devalued assets held by troubled financial institutions. If successful, advocates say, that would allow frozen credit to begin flowing again and prevent a deep recession.
Even as the Senate voted, House leaders were hunting for the 12 votes they would need to turn around Monday's 228-205 defeat. They were especially targeting the 133 Republicans who voted "no."
Their opposition appeared to be easing after the Senate added $110 billion in tax breaks for businesses and the middle class, plus a provision to raise, from $100,000 to $250,000, the cap on federal deposit insurance.
They were also cheering a decision Tuesday by the Securities and Exchange Commission to ease rules that force companies to devalue assets on their balance sheets to reflect the price they can get on the market.
There were worries, though, that the tax breaks would cause some conservative-leaning Democrats who voted for the rescue Monday to abandon it because it would swell the federal deficit.
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.
The measure didn't cause the same uproar in the Senate, where both parties' presidential candidates, Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama, made rare appearances to cast "aye" votes.
The rescue package lets the government spend billions of dollars to buy bad mortgage-related securities and other devalued assets held by troubled financial institutions. If successful, advocates say, that would allow frozen credit to begin flowing again and prevent a deep recession.
Even as the Senate voted, House leaders were hunting for the 12 votes they would need to turn around Monday's 228-205 defeat. They were especially targeting the 133 Republicans who voted "no."
Their opposition appeared to be easing after the Senate added $110 billion in tax breaks for businesses and the middle class, plus a provision to raise, from $100,000 to $250,000, the cap on federal deposit insurance.
They were also cheering a decision Tuesday by the Securities and Exchange Commission to ease rules that force companies to devalue assets on their balance sheets to reflect the price they can get on the market.
There were worries, though, that the tax breaks would cause some conservative-leaning Democrats who voted for the rescue Monday to abandon it because it would swell the federal deficit.
Shutting down the credit markets will bring on a complete meltdown
there are alot of well known respected economist who believe doing nothing is the best solution
*those who are pro bailout, doesnt even know if this will work
*those who are pro bailout, thinks 700k bill is minimum and not enough. we need double that to really open credits
*again how can a 100% right thing to do, have soo many experts also stating this wont work
there are alot of well known respected economist who believe doing nothing is the best solution
*those who are pro bailout, doesnt even know if this will work
*those who are pro bailout, thinks 700k bill is minimum and not enough. we need double that to really open credits
*again how can a 100% right thing to do, have soo many experts also stating this wont work
yeah i'm kinda torn on the whole thing honestly....i really don't know how bad things would get if they didn't do that.....it likely would be as ugly as they are saying....as much as i hate agreeing with them.....credit would pretty much be frozen worldwide..and it would be mass panic
i just hate these aholes that's all
i know this bill isn't gonna stop the gloom anyway
just drag it out longer
but we gotta make sure along the way we get the right reform down the road
which is less government not more of it....more government of the FDR variety will be the near term trend obviously.....
They don't give a shit what we think unless they are up for re-election within a couple weeks. Dianne Feinstein (who I shall call Satan incarnate) said that she got nearly 90% of phone calls and emails asking her to vote against this bill. She said she was going to vote for it for the good of the country.
I'm with you on this one tiz. How bad will things get even with this bill passing? Will it just prolong the agony until later and there goes our $850 billion for nothing!
What about all the banks that are viable? Won't they get all sorts more business when other banks fail? Isn't that what capitalism is supposed to be about?
who knows the ultimate cost to the taxpayer
likely will take a loss just a question of how much
plus the more they do this sort of shit
the less ammo and more expesive it gets down the road
to do FDR like worker programs and such that obama will want to do
and tax revenues will continue to suck
hell they even threw tax cuts into this bill
in some ways they shooting themselves in the foot i think
and maybe making this worse
likely will take a loss just a question of how much
plus the more they do this sort of shit
the less ammo and more expesive it gets down the road
to do FDR like worker programs and such that obama will want to do
and tax revenues will continue to suck
hell they even threw tax cuts into this bill
in some ways they shooting themselves in the foot i think
and maybe making this worse
huh?
the bill is to unfreeze the credit markets
people with good credit can't get a loan right now....or its extremely hard.....
that much is true
interbank rates are well above the target rates
banks won't even lend between each other right now
let alone to the J6P with a good credit rating and a steady job and not in a humongous amount of debt
the people in gobs of debt with little to no savings and are grunt workers with little in the way of braincells vs. somebody that has a college degree in say engineering or something of that nature......are fucked beyond recognition regardless
Last edited:
Tiz, my point is that now, doing nothing as the redneck mofo's are demanding will effectually FREEZE the credit market and cause the financial Armageddon that everyone fears.
Perhaps I misunderstoond QL's post, but is seems he's an advocate of Congress doing nothing. Correct me if I am wrong in that assumption
