More Bailout Madness

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

x

[Iscariott]

Dont worry about it man, in a decade they'll all be rotting on pikes.

[Dunecat]

Dont worry about it man, in a decade they'll all be rotting on pikes.

That we had to buy from them... >.<

[Iscariott]

That we had to buy from them... >.<

I had always pictured using the metal posts from torn down road signs...I call it recykilling.

[SorelusImperion]

While I am not generally opposed to a bailout it seems to me that in the USA reensembled more an early christmas present. There are contradicting news though so I may have to adjust my opinion.

[Valiant Champion]

Money numbers mean nothing aside from causing inflation to skyrocket. The end game is what matters to the world banking system. When something of real value like physical property falls into their hands.

Currency is no more than a piece of paper or a few bits of computer memory that value is assigned to and nothing more.

Thats why the US government laughed the FDIC lady to scorn when she suggested they take the money to help keep people from losing their homes.

Now that would ruin their plans.

Remember the bailout is that the government can buy up all those bad mortgages and homes. Forget the people who are losing them.

[C.M.]

The illegality they keep mentioning has nothing to do with the law itself but rather if Paulson had the authority to make the change. With all the measures taken to deal with the crisis that authority is now in a gray area. The whole "authority can change hands when the hits the fan" approach is very worrisome in my opinion and leaves doors wide open for abuse.

The purpose of section 382 is to close a loophole which would allow companies to purchase bankrupt corporations and use their accumulated operational losses to reduce their own taxes. Before the law was introduced bankrupt companies were purchased for their losses, in essence the absence of the law made it so that the owners could still get a few dollars for their failed ventures. Not having that law benefits mostly companies as they can lower their income taxes while it only reduces the capital losses for the original owners. It's a loophole that can lead to abuse if left open and any respectable well run government tax agency will have it closed. The key words being respectable and well run.

As a short time measure it may actually be beneficial, a lot of small investors lost a lot of money with the market crash. The value of some of their stocks reached 0$. For the average Joe that can mean that he's lost a significant part of his retirement fund, temporarily repelling section 382 would mean that the stock worth 0$ can now be salvaged for a few dollars. Not much but better than nothing, especially since these are the same people who are paying for the bailout. It would also help struggling companies deal with the recession and help save jobs.

As a long term measure i would be royally pissed off that corporations are allowed tax shelters while i foot the bill for the bailout.

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

x

[bigfootedfred]

they took your money.
Didnt use it for what they said they would i.e 'rescuing the economy'
and gave it to rich ceo's, who in turn used it to buy up other companys and stocks and give themselves fat pay offs..

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

x

[danzig]

Kuchinich opposed. -- This was a total set up by the Bush Administration, the last big heist before riding off into the sunset.

___________

Your blindly naive biased nonsense is really amusing here considering the fact it was republican objection to the bailout that initially stalled it. Made even MORE amusing that this entire mess is a creation from Clinton presidency. This issue however isnt even a political party issue but rather a general goverment one that despite objection from most americans still pushed it thru.

Regardless if you insist on continuing down this line:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/30/bu...ailout.html?hp - 95 Dems against 133 GOP against
http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...vote=00212#top - 25 votes against 15 Republicans
http://www.truthout.org/100308R - 172 Dems voted yes/62 against 91 Rep yes/108 against

Now please explain how this is a republican thing? If you want to blame Bush then sure go for it but stop with this other nonsense.

[Valiant Champion]

Thats nonsense. Senator Bunning here in Kentucky as well as most Republican Senators and Congressmen tried to stop the Bailout. The Democrats pushed it and despite concerns by the Republican congressmen about overwatch pushed it some more.

The Democrats and Bush worked hand in hand on this. Most of the Republican party resisted this and if it were a majority Republican Senate and house it would have never passed.

Something really interesting is how all these jumbo mortgage homes are burning up in Los Angelos by the thousands. I am sure those fires were started by accident.

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

Thats nonsense. Senator Bunning here in Kentucky as well as most Republican Senators and Congressmen tried to stop the Bailout. .

That was the successful con. Bush proposed it. Paulson (literally) got down on bended knee and told Pelosi the country would explode if they didn't pass it. The GOP supported it vigorously and then pulled out on the first vote and then they filled it with pork, claimed not to like it, set up a team of people to vote against it (while ensuring it would still pass) and passed it, for their constituents on Wall Street. -- and that's the real telling factor for anyone half way reasonable:

Whose constituents benefit from the Wallstreet bailout? -- Republican, of course.

Who's surprised that a bailout of Motor Companies that will primarily benefit the working class -- the Democratic constituency -- is now being poo-pooed by Paulson?

This was another GOP rape of the United States. Socialism for the Rich, Feudalism for the Rest.

This is how they've worked for two decades. Now it's transparent. Anyone can see it. This is the pattern:

1. The GOP causes the problem.

2. They enrich themselves through a more problematic solution to the problem

3.They blame the democrats for both the problem and the problematic solution.

Now that "The Surge" is failing, there's even pundits blaming the war and the failed surge on Democrats and that will increase when Obama takes office.

The point is, however, they pulled this trick too many times. We know that pattern and we can call it before it happens.

If you voted for Bush, the bailout is your disservice to the United States.

___________________

[Valiant Champion]

That was the successful con. Bush proposed it. Paulson (literally) got down on bended knee and told Pelosi the country would explode if they didn't pass it. The GOP supported it vigorously and then pulled out on the first vote and then they filled it with pork, claimed not to like it, set up a team of people to vote against it (while ensuring it would still pass) and passed it, for their constituents on Wall Street. -- and that's the real telling factor for anyone half way reasonable: Who's constituents benefit from the bailout? Republican or Democrat? Who's surprised that a bailout of Motor Companies that will primarily benefit the working class -- the Democratic constituency -- is now being poo-pooed by Paulson.

This was another GOP rape of the United States. Socialism for the Rich, Feudalism for the Rest.

This is how they've worked for two decades. Now it's transparent. Anyone can see it. This is the pattern:

1. The GOP causes the problem.

2. They enrich themselves through a more problematic solution to the problem

3.They blame the democrats for both the problem and the problematic solution.

Now that "The Surge" is failing, there's even pundits blaming the war and the failed surge on Democrats and that will increase when Obama takes office.

The point is, however, they pulled this trick too many times. We know that pattern and we can call it before it happens.

If you voted for Bush, the bailout is your disservice to the United States.

___________________

You must have forgot to take your medication!!

[Oswald von Wolkenstein]

You must have forgot to take your medication!!

Prove it wrong, if it's crazy. It's what happened. It's what happened a number of times.

Again -- look at who benefits from a crime if you want to find the culprit. That's not crazy. That's standard procedure.

Now please explain how this is a republican thing? If you want to blame Bush then sure go for it but stop with this other nonsense.

I have no doubt that you got fooled, as danzig clearly is, but just don't blame me for not being fooled. The GOP and their constituency benefit the most from this and pushed for it the most and from the first vote it was clear they were going to try to get it passed while passing the blame onto the democrats.

And Pelosi knew this was going to happen -- and she sunk the first bill
and the Republicans howled, "We need to act!!!" and so the second bill was passed in the great bait and switch. (And we knew it as soon as it came) I just guess the Pelosi didn't think that you'd forget that Republicans were clamoring for the bill.

House Republican leaders urge members to support bailout


House Republicans Support a Plan That Would Insure Troubled Mortgages


But I never doubted you all. I knew you would be able to instantly forget and then that you would call the rest of us who didn't forget, crazy. It's so cute.

It's standard GOP "screw America!! Let's Get Richer" politics at its best.

_________________________
_____________________________

_____________________

[danzig]

I have no doubt that you got fooled, as danzig clearly is, but just don't blame me for not being fooled. The GOP and their constituency benefit the most from this and pushed for it the most and from the first vote it was clear they were going to try to get it passed while passing the blame onto the democrats.

Seriously wth is your problem? How can something be the fault of a party where the majority of no votes came from? You got this pegged out to be some big conspiracy where republicans purposely setup the Democrats and then voted against it to seem like the good guys...absolutely hilarious. And you still ignore the fact this economic crisis, this housing bubble collapse etc are all as a direct result of Bill Clinton and the congress (republicans included) in the 90s.

[Nietzsche]

I'm curious how many supported the bank bailout but find this unsettling? To me, they are exactly the same thing. It's money given to a failed enterprise. Hand-outs promote irresponsibility. Which will of course increase the likelihood of this happening again in the future.

In related news, I would rather lose every American automaker, than have my taxes increased to support their gas-guzzling low quality junk.

@Valiant: Good point sir.

[danzig]

I'm curious how many supported the bank bailout but find this unsettling? To me, they are exactly the same thing. It's money given to a failed enterprise. Hand-outs promote irresponsibility. Which will of course increase the likelihood of this happening again in the future.

In related news, I would rather lose every American automaker, than have my taxes increased to support their gas-guzzling low quality junk.

Except the cars arent low quality junk..the problem was the big three responding too slow in offering enough high millage vehicles because americans were busy buying up SUVs. Ford and GM are along the way to turning it around but then bang economic crisis. Even despite their failure to adapt quickly enough they do need to be tossed a lifeline if only because the sheer number of jobs involved. Tossing them a lifeline so they can get past this hurdle and stand again on their own two feet cost less in the long term them letting them fail.

[wilpuri]

Section 382 reversed.

Tax bailout for companies receiving bailout money -- they are exempt from taxes if they buy failing companies. This costs U.S. taxpayers a further $140,000,000,000 in addition to the $750,000,000,000 official bailout. (Secretively and most likely illegally) but they might get away with it. Bush shock doctrine strikes again.



______________

Can't Obama save the world already, what gives.

[Valiant Champion]

Another company or individual can buy up failed car companies but they wont for the time being because who wants to honor all those retirements, pensions and benefits.

It would take a failure by the Union in supporting automaker employees for a buyer to come in and take over.

More than likely all present employees would be terminated and then rehired or others hired at lower wages and less benefits.