700 Billion ... A Trillion ....

Not to be overly ass-kissy, but my god I'm glad you're on this website. It's just nice to have a breath of fresh air in the Political Discourse forum.

People don't care because people don't understand how it affects them, because the effects won't be felt until after the election. This just a band aid to stem the tide long enough to help John McCain get elected.

I really hope Obama or someone is able to articulate in plain, accessible terms what taxpayers are being asked to do and what will happen once the administration has its trillion.

Naomi Klein wrote about how this will most likely play out here.

There was another interesting piece (which I excerpted in the "economy" thread) about what will likely transpire after these bailouts since it's essentially history repeating itself. That article's here.

The thing is, I think people are used to hearing "trillion" thrown around, whether they realize how much money that is or not, is a different issue. But we could be talking quadrillions by the time all is said and done.

So...what happens if Congress doesn't enact this proposed legislation?

Several major financial institutions go under....huge job losses...catastrophic losses for people that have stocks in their retirement plans and 401Ks.

Wealthy folks retract and don't invest in jobs via venture capital.

So what's the counterproposal? I'm just asking because I've yet to hear anyone in the media say there was one. Or was the only other option to let these companies slide into the abyss?

Sen. Bernie Sanders has the best one, from my perspective:

“A five-year, 10 percent surtax on income over $1 million a year for couples and over $500,000 for single taxpayers,” which he says he would “yield more than $300 billion in revenue.”

His plan.

I like much of that, yt, especially the part about the Feds getting a percentage of the profits when the stock goes back up on these companies thanks to the bail out.

The big thing we need to enforce is there will be no profiteering from the policies that got them into this mess in the first place.

You forgot the big one... no one can borrow money. There would be only 6 million car sales each year (according to Paulson) and there would be no way for people to buy homes.

I listened to the hearing all day today and they mostly came off like it was a giant pill they didn't want to swallow and were asking what other proposals they had considered before coming to this one and trying to more or less horse trade this deal down to a smaller amount (150 million) and then maybe come back for more in January.

Some other Senators were making some off the hook suggestions but none of them were very good (like private sector rescuing them and going to the well of the old S&L solution). The thing that caught me was Paulson said he talked to the chairman about this on Sunday and said his 3 pages was an outline and they were supposed to work on it this week and how this isn't a black check, its a specific amount and everyone who was in this meeting knew it. The real telling signs was when the people who were in this meeting used some of the language that Paulson and Berneke used to describe the actual crisis. The amount of political posturing in that hearing was pathetic by both sides.

From what I got out of the hearing.. no one is going to bite at it. Paulson said there should be regulations and oversight and they kept hemming and hawing about different things. I think they're all trying to stick their head in the sand and say things aren't going to be that bad. Someone tried to rationalize it at one point by saying if we approved this right away it would take weeks or months to impliment so what's the rush?

Paulson was lying today about the oversight, and anyone with half a brain and an internet connection knows it. His original proposal specifically called for no oversight.

This, by Chris Bowers, lays out some good questions (hyperlinks in the original piece):

They've been sitting on this plan for weeks. Paulson's PR blitz is a calculated move to shock the system. Even if changes are plugged in, it's still a massive giveaway to the most cynical of looters, and finance types are lining up to manage these transactions. Everyone's trying to get in on the payout. That should make any self-respecting human being -- even the rich -- sick to their stomaches.

My take: Dodd's highly punitive plan should be enacted with a much lower money ceiling (say, $100B, tops). That ensures that only the firms/banks that are in dire straights will take it, and punts the bulk of the issue until after the elections, when we can focus less on the politics of bailout and more on the effectiveness.