www.votenobailout.org-tell em what u think
stupidcorporatewhore
Posts: 761
no strings and nothing in it for the "investors"(us) is NOT acceptable.
http://www.votenobailout.org/
sign the petition.
tell em where they can put their golden parachutes.
In my mind they should thank us for saving them. They deserve to walk away with nothing.
http://www.votenobailout.org/
sign the petition.
tell em where they can put their golden parachutes.
In my mind they should thank us for saving them. They deserve to walk away with nothing.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
The economy will fall...
C
R
A
S
H
into me....
The topic here should be what strings should be placed and what would be supported to save your credit holdings...(i have little
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
The problem with the bailout is that it only prolongs the inevitable. We need to fix the problem, which is one of fundamentals, not just throw money at it.
cheney's wallet
It's been a very long time. It's nice to stop by and say hello. .
My question to you is what would you and others who are experienced and great analytical thinkers (ie the movers and shakers who make a difference) suggest as remedy...
We can't sit here and watch our country fall...
Where would this bail out support come from? My hunch is our social security fund. And even as I sit here, I think how a bailout costing us our tax dollars could even promote more restriction in our lives via more war and more detention...
I don't think we should excuse the behavior of those responsible, but I would like to learn more dynamics involved concerning this bailout as I really know little...
Some very wise friends of mine, who I value, support the bailout, but with remedy...
also here's a link to help others; here
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
I think I love you.
seriously, Its not really an anti bailout thing as much as it is about a president who has fucked things up (at least for regular people) about as bad as he can and now wants us to give him 700 billion just because he says "trust me". How stupid are we?
he says: no strings.
we say : no, strings!
we pushed him back when he wanted to steal our social security, we'll push him back on this.
I would never suggest that we should sit here and allow our economy to crumble. The cost of a total system wide failure would far exceed the $700 billion proposed for the bail out. First I would disagree that our economy is petroleum based. Our economy is based on debt. It was once stated that if every single American suddenly stopped using their credit cards and simply purchased goods/services with cash that our economy would crash. For decades now our economy has been kept afloat by debt. This whole crisis was birthed because of debt. So simply throwing money at an entity that is powered by uncontrolled spending is useless. Yes a crash may be averted for the time being with the bail out but eventually we will find ourselves back in this situation because the US economy has nothing tangible to base itself on. Manufacturing gone, auto industry gone, technology we fall far behind in that aspect. We need to create a new sold base for our economy and even though I don't support him for president, Obama does have a good idea with a "green" economy.
I would say instead of just forking over $700 billion dollars, we use 1/3 of that money and buy up some of the bad papers clocking up the market. The we start investing in a new economic infastructure that will be able to carry our economy. If a house is falling a apart do you spend all your money on new siding and windows but ignore the foundation?
I love how you are able to put complexity into terms so that everyone can understand.
good day to you.
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
Paulson Works the Hill, Trying to Close the Deal
Article Tools Sponsored By
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN
Published: September 24, 2008
WASHINGTON — In his latest sales pitch on Capitol Hill, the Treasury secretary, Henry M. Paulson Jr., pressed reluctant House Republicans on Wednesday morning to endorse a $700 billion rescue plan for the financial system, as Congressional leaders worked anxiously behind the scenes to build support for a vote later this week.
Skip to next paragraph
Related
Paulson Gives Way on C.E.O. Pay; Bush to Speak Tonight (September 25, 2008)
In Bailout Furor, Wall Street Pay Becomes a Target (September 24, 2008)
At a 90-minute meeting with House Republicans, lawmakers complained bitterly to Mr. Paulson that the White House had failed to explain its proposal to the American public, prompting a deluge of calls and e-mail messages from constituents overwhelmingly opposed to taxpayer money bailing out Wall Street investors.
The White House announced that President Bush would speak to the nation at 9 p.m. Wednesday night on the financial crisis.
As Mr. Paulson met with lawmakers in the House, the Federal Reserve chairman, Ben S. Bernanke, was making a similar pitch before the Joint Economic Committee, where he was testifying about the broader economic outlook.
The morning meeting for Mr. Paulson came hours ahead of what may be his most important appearance in Congress yet — a hearing before the House Financial Services Committee. If Congress is to act this week, as the White House has demanded, then Mr. Paulson effectively needs to close the deal at the hearing.
In a sign that lawmakers still expect to reach a deal, despite an enormous outcry among rank-and-file lawmakers, House Republican leaders emerged from the meeting stressing the impact of the financial crisis on regular Americans.
“It is certainly critically important that every member have an understanding of what we are dealing with, what the secretary and what the chairman are seeing out there, and how these things relate to Americans’ pensions, their home values, their access to small-business credit lines and consumer credit,” said Representative Adam Putnam of Florida, the No. 3 Republican.
Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader, said: “I am concerned about the crisis, because I think it affects our economy, the American people’s jobs, their retirement security, their savings, their college funds, and I do think the Congress has a responsibility to act and I am hopeful that in the coming days we will be able to come together around a plan.”
Even as leaders seemed to be laying the groundwork for an agreement, critics began to push for alternatives, including a proposal by some Republicans to eliminate the capital gains tax on the types of distressed assets that the Treasury is hoping to purchase, as a way of encouraging the private sector to increase liquidity in the market.
One champion of such a plan, Representative Thaddeus McCotter, Republican of Michigan and chairman of the Republican Policy Committee, became the first member of the leadership to say outright that he would vote against the administration’s plan.
“They want a public bailout, that’s their approach,” Mr. McCotter said on Wednesday as he left the meeting with Mr. Paulson. “We believe in private recapitalization and proper incentivization.”
Many lawmakers said they felt caught between the administration’s urgent insistence on quick action by Congress and the distaste among constituents for using taxpayer money to prop up big banks and other financial institutions.
“I am trying to address the concerns of the people who are calling me,” said Representative Gary G. Miller, Republican of California, as he left the meeting.
“Truly, my calls are 150-to-1 against it,” Mr. Miller said. “Overwhelmingly, people in the private sector are looking at this and saying it’s just a big bailout for a bunch of fat cats on Wall Street.”
“The goal is to protect the American people,” he added. “It’s not about bailing out bigwigs on Wall Street. That’s not the goal at all here. It’s not about bailing out the stock market. It’s about people being able to borrow to buy a home, to be able to borrow to buy a car, to be able to borrow to send your kid to college.”
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
But these things don't have to happen today, this year, or even in the next couple of years. If the economy crashes to the point that I cannot buy a house for 3 years, what have I lost? In the grand scheme of things, probably not much. I still can't see where all the "problems" are that they are complaining about. I understand that my credit card % may increase, but other than that, how is this actually going to affect ME? I think that's what Americans are struggling to understand...and the "leadership" is not explaining very well. THey are only explaining how it's going to affect Wall Street, not Main Street.
not only that but new and surviving banks will soon step in to fill the gap.
rhandi forums *please read and note that even banks in other countries (Europe) are experiencing closure.
What this essentially means is that major employers will not be able to pay to stock their stores; if they can't stock their stores, people lose jobs and when people lose jobs, we all know that crime and illicit activity becomes means for survival.
Our country is built by credit holdings; and the flow stops, then consequences will last beyond three years. I don't even use credit, but I do care enough about you to help you.
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
If that means that any of the Big 3 or any other LARGE company can't get money because their leadership is more concerned about appeasing only the shareholders and their own wallets instead of basing their business on sound practices, then they deserve to go under. I understand that such a thing would cause alot of job losses, but not everyone is going to be out of a job. As I said before, just because the economy tanks doesn't mean everyone stops doing business.
There are still requirements. We need to eat, so grocery stores will still have open doors (and employees), which means that food production companies will still have to produce the food to sell (which means employees); and we need crops so farmers will remain employed; and we need packaging materials so packaging plants will still have doors open (more employees); and those plants need supplies so we'll have suppliers with open doors (more employees). We also need gas to get from place to place, so gas stations will have open doors (more employees); we'll need someone to drill for the oil, transport the oil, process the oil (employees, employees, employees). These are all somewhat un-skilled jobs.
THen you have the professionals - doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc. that companies need in order to keep ahead of competition so that they can sell their product to keep their doors open.
While the stock market may crash and people lose alot of their retirement accounts or banks go under and so the amount of cash available is lessened, I don't think it's going to be as drastic as they are predicting. THe sky isn't falling, and a $700B bailout isn't going to magically solve the problem - this is a problem that will not be solved by throwing money at it...or allowing a small group of someones determine where that money goes without any oversight.
If the politicians truly wanted the support of the general American populace, they would have started out by earmarking the majority of that money to ensure people get to keep their houses (if they actually deserve them). Those people that bought a house using some sort of wacked-out loan to the point that if they otherwise couldn't afford the house with a traditional 30-year fixed mortgage made a bad mistake that we as the general population should NOT have to fix. Their choice for that house and those loans were for simple greed - they wanted something they otherwise couldn't afford, and we (the collective we) should not have to bail them out.
I am concerned for all who will wish to buy a home and possilby never see such a dream.
Thank you for your points.
a derivitive of nature.
nature is god
god is love
love is light
The big three JUST GOT A 25 BILLION DOLLAR BAILOUT TODAY.
No one caught that one, huh?
Look.
I like your concern, but the assumption that "a few banks failing" is JUST "a few banks failing" is WAY WAY WAY WAY off the money. No pun intended.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Yes, we need to do something, but we need to do something with our heads on straight. We will live with the results for decades. Bush is not a particularly good used car salesman...and we're sick of buying his lemons. And, my daddy always warned me...don't buy anything from a salesman who says you have 24 hours to act. He is setting you up just to watch you fall. Bail him out? Yeah, we have to. Bail him out without thinking of what we're doing to us? NOT A CHANCE.
Verona??? it's all surmountable
Dublin 23.08.06 "The beauty of Ireland, right there!"
Wembley? We all believe!
Copenhagen?? your light made us stars
Chicago 07? And love
What a different life
Had I not found this love with you
bump...
They had close to that amount after Clinton's second term, then W took office.