Radical bailout plan has a jawdropping price tag »
Posted By TechnologyExpert 1 year, 1 month ago in NewsStruggling to stave off financial catastrophe, the Bush administration on Friday laid out a radical bailout plan with a jawdropping price tag — a takeover of a half-trillion dollars or more in worthless mortgages and other bad debt held by tottering institutions.
Read Full Story at news.yahoo.com »
1009 Views Share Story 12 Comments Report
Submitted By:
TechnologyExpert
I am Editor-in-Chief at Alice Hill's RealTechNews (http://www.realtechnews.com). I also have my own blog (Tech-Ex) at http://TechnologyExpert.Blogspot.com. Finally ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 23 (view all)
-
100%
quackpot1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, it will be necessary for EACH ONE OF US to pony up an average of $3,000 to bail out the crooks that created this mess.
Reply
The mess was orchestrated by strong deregulatory policies of the Bush administration together with the republican congress.
In more noble times, a leader who failed his people so badly would have long ago fallen on his sword. In 2008, Bush sends his top people to elect McCain to give the U.S. middle class suckers more of the same.-
100%
Candida1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
quackpot: "Yes, it will be necessary for EACH ONE OF US to pony up an average of $3,000 to bail out the crooks that created this mess."
Reply
Yes, it will be necessary now, but all of this could have been avoided. All 50 states tried to take action years ago, and the federal government prevented them.
Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime
How the Bush Administration Stopped the States From Stepping In to Help Consumers
By Eliot Spitzer
Thursday, February 14, 2008
"Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis. This threat was so clear that as New York attorney general, I joined with colleagues in the other 49 states in attempting to fill the void left by the federal government. Individually, and together, state attorneys general of both parties brought litigation or entered into settlements with many subprime lenders that were engaged in predatory lending practices. Several state legislatures, including New York's, enacted laws aimed at curbing such practices.
What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge? As Americans are now painfully aware, with hundreds of thousands of homeowners facing foreclosure and our markets reeling, the answer is a resounding no.
Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye... "
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic... -
Neutral
mark-stevens1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Whose the crooks, the local realtor selling houses to anyone... no social security, number, no proof of income, no credit check, $475 a month fo a $300,000 house... oh for the first five years. maybe the local banks that paid the sellers... This rot started at the bottom.
Reply -
-
-
100%
Dionys1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I heard $700 billion. Which is still less than that insane pre-emptive war based on intentional lies and misdirection.
Reply
That said, they should let these companies collapse. Every one. I don't get 'bailed out' if I make idiotic investment decisions. They shouldn't either.-
100%
Candida1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Yes, that's true, but it's not that simple. If they let all those banks fail, then a lot of people's retirement savings would be wiped out and there would be other consequences as well. Suppose the dollar lost half its value. The rich could still manage. Those who have nothing but debt would have their debt cut in half, and those who have saved all their lives would have their savings cut in half. Foreign money would stream out or steam out faster, unemployment would rise, a lot of people would suffer.
Reply
I see this situation as I see the Iraq war. The best solution would have been to prevent it, but now that it's happened, there are just bad and worse solutions. -
Neutral
jordan111 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
That said, they should let these companies collapse>>>>
Reply
They can't, and especially AIG. This might help explain it. Now if most Americans were better educated on how the economy works, & what happens when no one watches the store, this may not have happened. We could have cut the idiot deregulators off at the pass, for one. But as it is, in our own interests it's probably time to learn about this. I'm trying, and it ain't easy.
http://financialsense.com/fsu/editorials/amerman/2...
-
-
100%
donald511 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Wow, isn't this going to break the 11 Trillion federal debt ceiling on Dumya? And Dumya proposed a half trillion budget for next year too that we can't afford because of his tax cuts!
Reply
In China they are arresting those bad baby formula CEOS and developers of poor constrution destroyed in earthquakes.... here under Dumya they still get bonuses and medals.
We had Enron and Worldcom at the start of Dumya's tenure and the Bushies/repugs did nothing! What do you expect from a president who sold his Harken stock in '89 after the Board he was on released a memo that board members couldn't sell because of their inside info?
Corrupter in Chief is giving us another Repug instigated GREAT DEPRESSION! -
-
100%
Tcaros1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush is draining the US Treasury.
Reply
1. The war
2. Oil prices, oil industry
3. Mortgage lending and foreclosures
4. Wall Street
The world bankers are gradually owning all the money to start the dark times ahead. People are too stupid to realize what is happening.
He's working with others who prefer to replace our government with a facist government. -
Republicrat1844Comment removed: Retracted by user1 Reply
-
JoseMadreComment removed: Hard Banned
-
faeryrangerComment removed: Spam
-
Neutral
faeryranger1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
maybe they should have read the whole bill first: we'll be bailing out foreign banks who can sell bad assets from their overseas holdings and then expect the treasury to buy them under this bail out.
Reply
Not One Dime!
By Mike Whitney
10-2-8
The mystery has been solved.
For nearly a year, we have been asking ourselves why the investors
and foreign banks that bought up hundreds of billions of dollars of
worthless mortgage-backed securities (MBS) from US investment banks
have not taken legal action against these same banks or initiated a
boycott of US financial products to prevent more people from getting
ripped off?
Now we know the answer. It's because, behind the scenes, Henry
Paulson and Co. were working out a deal to dump the whole trillion
dollar mess on the US taxpayer. That's what this whole $700 billion
boondoggle is all about; wiping out the massive debts that were
generated in the biggest incident of fraud in history. Rep Brad
Sherman explained it like this last night to Larry Kudlow:
"It (The bill) provides hundreds of billions of dollars of bailouts
to foreign investors. It provides no real control of Paulson's power.
There is a critique board but not really a board that can step in and
change what he does. It's a $700 billion program run by a part-time
temporary employee and there is no limit on million dollar a month
salaries....... It's very clear. The Bank of Shanghai can transfer
all of its toxic assets to the Bank of Shanghai of Los Angeles which
can then sell them the next day to the Treasury. I had a provision to
say if it wasn't owned by an American entity even a subsidiary, but at
least an entity in the US, the Treasury can't buy it. It was rejected.
The bill is very clear. Assets now held in China and London can be
sold to US entities on Monday and then sold to the Treasury on
Tuesday. Paulson has made it clear he will recommend a veto of any
bill that contained a clear provision that said if Americans did not
own the asset on September 20th that it can't be sold to the
Treasury. Hundreds of billions of dollars are going to bail out
foreign investors. They know it, they demanded it and the bill has
been carefully written to make sure it can happen."
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.