Not one economist or politician can articulate the ramifications of using the
system already in pace, Chapter 11, to support these failing companies instead
of taxpayer dollars. Not one intelligent attempt has been made to
provide a hand up, say $100B, rather than a hand out, $700B.There's
no reason whatsoever to commit American Taxpayers to this kind of communism.
About half of you reponded to my comments ondescendingly because of my age (and
thus i could not possibly understand the issue and this could not possibly be my
opinion! I must have been brainwashed). Do not disregard me because of my age. I
know we have a big problem on our hands but the solution is not to give our
bureaucratic and wasteful governement the control of the entire mortgage sector.
Not only would that fail to fix the problem but it would precipate
numerous others. the biggest one is this. By controling these companies they
would effectively control the mortgage sector, (while continuing to run these
companies into the ground)that means they would control practically half our
economy. I don't know about you but i'm not a big fan of socialism. We cannot reap the benefits of a capitalistic society and then refuse to take
the occassional hits that come with it. another thing wrong with the bill is
that the same corrupt people who caused the problems are the ones the government
is putting in charge. doesn't that seem just a little ridiculous?
Don't worry, the Fed will just print $700,000,000,000. They're REALLY good at
that.I wish I was an ink salesman.
Bailout = long term pain (see depression and government intervention)NO Bailout = short term pain. long term economic benefit and strength.The answer is obvious.
Historians and economists agree; the Great Depression wasn't caused by the stock
crash of '29. It was caused by the policies of Presidents Hoover and
Roosevelt and by the Fed's credit tightening in the aftermath of the crash.Likewise, it isn't a 777 pt drop in the Dow that will lead us into
Depression, but what the government does next.
Just wanted to throw in my two billion cents:The House killed the
$700 Billion bail out plan-The market value lost $1,200 Billion,
about 7%. (cnn.com) Markets dropped 4-8% in Europe, 7% in Canada, and similar
losses are seen in Asia and Australia.It makes $700 Billion seem not
......To sum up (I ran out of my 200 words) "Well done" to those of any party
who resisted this power grab by the administration regardless of party.I will assume good motives for both Matheson (a Democrat) and Bishop (a
Republican) for voting against the bailout. Shame on Cannon, but no great
surprises there; he always seems to vote contrary to the cause of freedom.
I for one certainly do not get my information from Rush Limbaugh who I think is
a pompous male donkey. Neither do I from Glenn Beck who was first for the
bailout and, so I hear, apparently changed his mind.What I find
encouraging is that many people from both the major parties and other parties
too, independently came to the conclusion (or just used their common sense) to
decide that bailout was "ridiculous" and immoral and abuse of government
power.I get a little tired of the patronising attitudes of so many
of those who favor this unconscionable course, and their false assumptions and
allegations as to why those who see things differently are doing so. There are
false premises, non sequiturs, straw man arguments, and ad hominem attacke. I
feel that they would be happier in a high school debate with those who are just
learning to think and can receive the prasie of their 'liberal' teachers.
"Emily" had to be somewhat independently minded to survive high school
brainwahsnig.I also get tired of being scolded by news readers who
cannot stick to their job but who must be forever interposing their own statist
views into news stories.
Unfortunately, many of those who have been responding to this letter, are
gravely mistaken on the casue of the crisis and the remedy for it. I, with most
people that are able to use reasoning and logic, do not believe that a
depression in any way shape or form is desirable. And whatever means are
nessecary to reach some sembalnce of a stable financial sector seems to be the
only way to avert disaster. What might happen, hopefully not, is that credit
will become very tight, hurting all forms of comerce wether in the real economy
or on Wall Street. This, my ill informed friends, if left unchecked would be a
major hurdle for any economy to get over.I think it is sad that so
many of the people on these message boards get thier news and info directly off
of Rush Limbaugh. The government bailout is not a massive step towards
socialism, but rather, another manifestation of the required mixed economy of
the United States. Dont let the talking heads fool you into believing that third
way economics are some kind of evil throw back to the USSR. We have firmly
entrenched representive democracy, far from a dictatorship.
A fifteen-year-old isn't old enough to understand all the sophisticated reasons
people offer in support of doing colossally stupid things. It's a great
advantage.As for the knee-jerk first poster: look, mate, government
can do good, and it can do harm. It does good when we keep it within its
legitimate and proper sphere as a referee, not a player. Reasonable people can
disagree about the extent of government's proper role, but a man who's not at
least somewhat wary that government might aggrandize itself at the expense of
liberty is a slave-in-waiting. Finally, notice that after the
bailout was voted down -- which its supporters warned would result in the
apocalypse -- was followed by only a mild down day on Wall Street, less than 1/3
the percentage drop of the 1987 crash. We survived that correction with only a
mild recession; why are we to believe this correction -- a milder one -- will
yield a worse result?
This editorial is a great observation. In order for the government to give $700
billion dollars away, they first have to take it from someone else: us.
Well, Emily is probably reflecting the views of parents and others but that is
very common. The great thing is that not all parents are teaching their
children to look to the Government for handouts. It will take a while to raise
a generation as sensible as Emily.The vast majority of the people of
America are very much against the bailout. It is a bit shocking that so many of
their elected representative let them down by voting against their wishes;
nevertheless a small but clear majority voted as their constituents would have
wished.What a wonderful victory; let's hope that the administration
will take no for an answer; yet their elitist arrogance seems to know no
bounds. The people know better than all their self-interested
"experts". We'll weather the storm and not make it worse by encouraging the
reckless greed of Wall Street, or further inflating the economy. If things get
tight prices will fall, and people will learn not to rely on constant borrowing.
House prices will fall if we do not interfere; what a relief to first-time home
Hypocrisy,If a depression is what would result from not bailing out
these irresponsible and failed institutions then that is what MUST happen.It is not capitalism for America to operate on the foundation of
privatizing corporate profits, while socializing corporate losses.These companies were irresponsible, unethical, and completely mismanaged and
they deserve to feel the brunt of that. If it means that millions who got into
debt irresponsibly lose their possessions then that is what needs to happen, as
well.Our entire economy is built around play money - currency that
only means something because we say it does - and this is one of the startling
evidences of that.Of course the government is fighting tooth and
nail against the people's wishes to bail out their corporate buddies, because
they know the gaping holes in the system, and are scared to death of them being
My plan calls for comprehensive reform. The financial systems are a convoluted
complex mess allowing people to skim, manipulate, and obtain billions cyclical
bail outs. In software engineering it's called spaghetti code, a kludge. Yes it
might take a few weeks extra to resolve, which is not to palatable in todays
short attention span I want it now society.
Look at history. FDR set up a restoration fund that went through each
foreclosure and renegotiated the terms so people wouldn't lose their homes and
the lenders got their money back. This is needed now. Government might properly
referee this mess, but shouldn't take ownership of anything.
Alternative | 9:33 a.m,All right, so what's your plan?
The effective, beneficial alternative is to come up with a plan and not just
"toss a bunch of money at it".This from Forbes.com regarding the
$700 billion figure: "It's not based on any particular data point,"
a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a
really large number." I agree we need to do something, but do we
really have to support a number just because its "really large"?
Well, Emily, what are they supposed to do? Let us sink into depression, which
would be a thousand times worse? If you have an affective,
beneficial alternative, I'll be happy to hear it.
I was stunned when I got to the bottom of that letter to see it was written by a
15-year-old. I don't know if she came up with this line or borrowed it from
someone else, but it should make us all think: the more the government gives
us, the more it can take away.Obviously this isn't a hard and fast
rule that should govern all governmental decisions. But it does highlight one
of the pitfalls of dependency and entitlement.I for one am beginning
to think Ron Paul and Bob Lonsberry might be right on this: the bailout
solution may be worse than the problem.
The more I see the government get involved, the more I think that maybe a
depression would be good for the country. We have become too used to our
excessive wealth. In many ways, we have become a prideful nation, which,
typically means that downfall is iminant. The nation could use a good humbling
Hearing a 15 year old say this is the very first sign of hope I have seen in
this malaise.The first person to comment on this letter obviously
has no clue the degree to which the executive branch of government, which
includes the Treasury, has seized power. Ironically, this person is probably a
Emily is spot on. So is 1:08. Why should taxpayers be responsible for reckless
behavior? It gives no incentive for personal responsibility. Under the current
plan, the companies go unpunished.
Emily clearly doesn't understand the situation.Although I hate this
bailout, we have no other choice. The alternative is a near guaranteed
depression. Atleast now, we give ourselves a chance...
Right on Emily!!!A proper government is only a policeman, acting as
an agent of mans self-defense, and, as such, may resort to force only against
those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are:
the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign
invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or
fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective
law. But a government that initiates the employment of force against men who had
forced no one, the employment of armed compulsion against disarmed victims, is a
nightmare infernal machine designed to annihilate morality: such a government
reverses its only moral purpose and switches from the role of protector to the
role of mans deadliest enemy, from the role of policeman to the role of a
criminal vested with the right to the wielding of violence against victims
deprived of the right of self-defense. Such a government substitutes for
morality the following rule of social conduct: you may do whatever you please to
your neighbor, provided your gang is bigger than his.
Another Utahan brainwashed at an early age against "evil" government. What a