Comments for The Bailout Passes! Now What? »
Posted By Happy31 1 year, 1 month ago in NewsIt is officially called H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008. It is also called the Wall Street Bailout Bill, the Rescue Bill, the largest Federal power grab in US history, the socialization of the US Financial sector, and, of course, the crap sandwich. As of a few moments ago, the legislation passed the House on a 263-171 vote. Wall Street rallied at the news while down on Main Street, folks are getting ready for a piece of that sandwich.
Read Full Story at americasbestcompanies.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 17
-
-
-
0%
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
The Core Proposals Have Not Changed, Just the Wrapping
The heart of the bill, that lovely great $700 billion Wall Street Bailout, is still there. This, of course, means that one of the primary objections to the original bill is still very much in place. True, the Senate version makes the bailout more palatable—raising the FDIC insurance cap to $250,000 for example—but not in any way that really takes care of core objections. What the Senate did was to tie a number of other popular bills to the failed bailout proposal, add in a hefty helping of pork and then drop it steaming and stinking onto the plate of the House, figuring that there would be enough excess spending and tax-play to make everyone happy. Oddly enough, they were right. Here are just some of the things that the Senate included in this bill:
Rum producers in Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.
Wool research.
Corporations operating in American Samoa.
Bicycle commuter benefits.
Children's wooden practice arrows.
Film and television productions.
Commercial fishermen affected by the Exxon Valdez oil
spill.
Motor sports complexes.
Mental health parity in health insurance. -
0%
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
Let me now speak to my hopes and fears. No one truly knows if this plan will work. We all hope it does. No one knows the true amount of taxpayer exposure. Treasury could spend $700 billion in no time flat and come right back to Congress for $700 billion more. Some believe the taxpayer will actually make money in the deal and I hope that proves true. But history as my guide, I have strong fears it will not. And at what point do we finally bailout the American taxpayer from the unconscionable burden he or she faces from out of control Washington spending? -
Neutral
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
This bailout mess and the headlong rush to do something to solve it tells us one thing: Perhaps the biggest change we need in Washington is the elimination of unrelated amendments and earmarks to legislation. Bills should be clean, of single purpose, and given straight up or down roll call votes, no more voting “present” to weasel out of taking a position. No buying votes for weak, uncertain or even dangerous legislation such as this bailout bill or the laws that Congress has passed over the years that have brought us to this apparent point-of-no-return. I know that isn't what the politicians would want, it would force them to actually work for a living and be honest about their positions, standing by their votes. I can't imagine many on either side of the aisle wanting to do that, but what a change for the better it would be! -
Neutral
Wolfie20071 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Bills should be clean, of single purpose, and given straight up or down roll call votes, no more voting “present” to weasel out of taking a position. No buying votes for weak, uncertain or even dangerous legislation such as this bailout bill or the laws that Congress has passed over the years that have brought us to this apparent point-of-no-return."
Reply
I'm all for this suggestion being implemented but the biggest problem we face is getting Congress to pass a law to enact it. It's always a catch 22 when dealing with our Congress.-
100%
chevydog1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I have to agree. One of the things I've long disliked is the practice of adding unrelated stuff to bills to get them to pass. It's usually used for budget resolutions; but nothing is really immune from it. It makes a mockery of what politics is supposed to be--the mutual altering of positions to get something in the end that is partly acceptable to all concerned parties.
Reply
For whatever reasons (mixed I'm sure), a large number of Representitives from both parties decided that the initial bill wasn't acceptable for the purposes that it was supposed to achieve. The bill as passed by the Senate did very little if anything to address this situation; IMHO our Senators did not do what they were elected to do.
I think that if a proposal has merit, it can stand or fall on that. I guess that i narrowly supported the objective of the original bill as unpassed by the House; though I would have preferred to see more deliberative time taken and a few more conditions applied. I hope that what we have now will work as predicted. But I'm not sure that even if it does that the price wasn't too high.-
100%
BOLYER271 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I didn't like the power it gives our government. Now the treasury sec. and the board (which consist's of the people that got us here) now can spend the money as they see fit. When decision's are made no justice system, no government board, no people can ever question or try them for there (careless and bias) decision's on who and what get the "$700B" if things go south. I did not like the scare tactics of both the bush admin. and the dem's in congress. They played right into Bush's plan. I think we need to clean house in all branches. I hope the AMERICAN PEOPLE do not sit back and let there government walk all over them again like they did last week.
Reply
-
-
-
75%
RedRiverJ1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Would You Buy a Used Car From These People? I find this 'crisis' very strange and very well timed. Thank You Barney Frank, ACORN, Chris Dodd, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and all the rest of you scoundrels that gave yet another shaft to the American taxpayers.
Reply -
-
100%
canadianrancher571 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Read your above comments and I agree with them completely , when you ask when the stock markets will respond it just makes me mad because does it not show that a large number of people have become socialists, all those free market people waiting on the government to do something.
Reply
-
-
100%
bmorgan1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
As well as everything else, the thing that really gets me is the amounts of money being talked about. They are stupenduous. 700 BILLION ... ooh let's add 110 BILLION !! Charles Cooper illustrates this so clearly when he suggests “Treasury could spend $700 billion in no time flat and come right back to Congress for $700 billion more”. The actual value of money must lose any meaning when you're talking about and dealing with these kinds of amounts of money everyday. I mean .... never mind 700, Take just 1 Billion. What does $1 Billion buy the taxpayer, then? Cheap trinkets?
Reply -
0%
BOLYER271 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
i will not vote another dem or rep into office. mccain has showed he will not stand against a bill full of pork barrell spending like he says he will. obama did not stand with the will of the people and voted with and pushed w's agenda. both showed a lack of leadership. the way i see it is McCAIN/OBAMA more of the same!
Reply -
Neutral
AnteUp1 year, 1 month ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I've been watching the hearings on C-SPAN - but I'm wasting
Reply
my time. This effort at "transparency" is a total joke.
Follow the link below and find out how Bush gave John Negroponte
the authority to exempt the major firms and banks of his choosing from ANY SEC oversight in May of 2006.
http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/may200...
Did anyone know about this? Have you heard it mentioned
in the media? Have you heard any testimony to Congress
referencing SEC oversight waivers?
loading ...
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.