Skip to main content

The public, faced with what they see, rightly or wrongly, as a giveaway "bailout" to big corporations that made profoundly stupid decisions, is irate. So what do you suppose would be the single worst thing you could do, at this point? I mean, the very, very worst -- something that screamed "we're going to fleece you all for every penny, and if you object we'll drive the economy into the ground around you."

I'd say "pair the bailout with more tax cuts" is probably right up there, on the Screw The Public scale. From AP:

Majority Leader Harry Reid and GOP Leader Mitch McConnell say, however, that they're going to add a tax cut package already rejected by the House on Monday.

The bipartisan move caps a day of behind-the-scenes maneuvering on Capitol Hill over what sweeteners to add to the bill to attract votes from House Republicans.

Reid and McConnell's move may prove popular with Republicans, but it risks a showdown with House leaders insisting that a popular measure extending certain business tax breaks be financed by tax increases elsewhere in the code.

Of course. Naturally -- when in doubt and you have a sucky plan, make it much, much worse in order to attract a few whining, petulant House Republicans who couldn't find their asses with two hands and an ass-finding device.

Same thing. Every damn time, it's the same thing. If the Republicans proposed a rule that Democrats could no longer wear pants on the Senate floor, the Democrats would agree to it, just to be accommodating. And then they'd look at us like we were idiots when we got mad at them for it.

So fine, my position has changed. I was previously "skeptical" of the Paulson plan. Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun. I want the whole premise to be made Unspeakable, so that future generations shun anyone who even threatens to mention it.

Lest you think it couldn't get worse still, we've got another idea that's been floated from everyone from conservatives to progressives, thanks to intense pressure by the companies in question:

Another possible change to the bill would call on regulators to modify "mark to market" accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.

Some House Republicans say current rules forced banks to report huge paper losses on mortgage-backed securities, which might have been avoided.

There was a note of irony in that proposal. One Republican familiar with the discussions conceded it amounted to step toward deregulation at a time when Obama, McCain and House members in both parties are clamoring for greater controls on the financial industry.

Of course, we got away from "mark to market" accounting for the very reason that it was so manipulatable, and companies were using it to cook their books, leading us to situations where companies were reporting inflated asset values to investors while in reality being financially quite sick. And that's exactly why it's so wanted now, in the current situation: instead of forcing companies to report an estimated current value for their "toxic assets", we can make this whole problem go away by simply letting the companies report theoretical "future" values for those same assets -- the same as they were doing in years past, leading to this very bubble. Sure, it'll be papering over the problem for a little while longer, but that's exactly what all the companies in question (and a lot of legislators) fervently want.

Conservatives have been looking hard for ways to blame the current economic mess on the public, or cruel taxes, or those shifty brown people. They've assured us that the market will just fix itself, if we do blah blah blah. And they've got a thirty year history of being so completely wrong about anything even vaguely associated with any of this stuff that you'd have to be a very special kind of moron to believe them about anything, at this point. What exactly about "let business make up it's own, less stringent accounting rules" was working, in the past? Where are the piles of cash that were supposed to be generated from tax cut after tax cut on the most wealthy? How has that all been working out, during this administration?

Serious voices have been talking about institutional fixes like a transaction tax, rules for short selling, etc., and shorter term fixes like mortgage relief, liquidity fixes and the like, but all the Republicans can fart out is "more tax cuts for business!" and "deregulate, so business can do what they like!" Of course. Let's all pretend that there's any rational logic involved in just throwing more tax cuts at the companies, in the hopes that their slightly-improved bottom lines will eventually "trickle down" enough to make up for the gawdawful mountain of debt about to be piled on us.

We live in a damn kleptocracy. Face a financial crisis, or do whatever business wants: that's the only apparent choices under consideration here. I hope that if the worst happens and another truly large depression does come, the American people have the collective resolve to tar and feather all these people. We can send them out into the ocean on a garbage barge with an ample supply of food, water, and talking points, and whichever country wants its economy similarly wrecked is welcome to give them a home.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:05 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

      •  How about adding something for the PEOPLE????? (28+ / 0-)

        Like extending Unemployment coverage???

        They're bailing out the people that did the robbing, how about something for the people that were ROBBED???

        I am here to represent the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

        by Josiah Bartlett on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:14:08 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  For the people with more than 100 grand in bank (25+ / 0-)

          ... there's a nice little change in FDIC coverage.

          What? You're not one of those People?

          And remember: If you don't like the news, go out and make some of your own. - Scoop Nisker, the Last News Show

          by North Madison on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:04 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

            •  Government of the Rich (14+ / 0-)

              By the Rich
              For the Rich

              It's disgusting.  No one offered any help when the foreclosures started happening.  Now that too many people are defaulting, suddenly the Mortgage holders get some help.  I'm mad as hell!  Fighting Mad!

              Please do not take anything I say as being Authoritative, Enlightened or well thought out...

              by StephanM on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:38:31 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Anger is a VERY appropriate emotion... (13+ / 0-)

                ...to feel in response to this news.  Here's something I put on an economist's blog this morning:

                This pretty much sums up the ridiculousness of the pro-bailout position. The corrupted, risk-taking manipulators who created this crisis are turning to the American taxpayer and saying, "If you don't pay us hundreds of billions of dollars to protects us from losses, we're going to blow up the whole economy!"

                Gelbach is essentially acknowledging that we are being threatened by Wall St. blackmailers. He says we have no choice but to pay the ransom they are demanding or else we will end up with 25% unemployment and unrelenting misery that will last for at least 10 years. Either he is a willing accomplice to the crime or he is an economist who is utterly uninformed about economic alternatives.

                If new bailout legislation does not get passed and the stock market crashes in the next few days and most of the financial companies go bankrupt, it is simply not true that the American people would necessarily be forced to suffer through a long and miserable Great Depression II, just like in the 1930's. It is an absolute certainty that---if everything were to collapse tomorrow---Congress would be able to take action that would restore the economy to booming prosperity within a year's time.

                How might it accomplish this? Well, instead of spending $1-$2 trillion to protect rich people from the possibility of gambling losses, Congress could spend $1 trillion on creating and capitalizing a Taxpayers' Bank that would be able to provide MAIN ST. with all the loanable funds that small businesses, non-financial firms, and households might need while the financial sector is crumbling. Then, it could spend another trillion on increased government spending on infrastructure and other public INVESTMENTS.

                How could the economy possibly experience a loss of GDP when the federal government is pumping an additional $2 trillion into the economy? It simply won't matter what is happening in the private banking sector or on Wall St. Let the whole thing play out in a beautiful, creative destruction drama, where trillions of dollars in paper wealth gets written off, and a sound foundation is restored.

                At the very same time this is happening, firms in the REAL ECONOMY (located on Main St.) will be experiencing robust demand for the goods/services they produce and sell. They'd have access to all the capital they might require for investments.

                When the private banking sector has finally cleansed its books of non-performing 'assets', it will finally be in a position to lend again, and that is when Congress could re-privatize the Taxpayers' Bank, if that is what it wanted to do.

                So when Gelbach says...

                Since all sectors of our economy depend on credit availability, massive layoffs will occur if this situation lasts much longer. It would take years to recover.

                ...he is not stating the truth about choices that lie before us. He is unjustifiably assuming that Congress can do, or would do, nothing to set the economy promptly on the path of prosperity. Or could it be that he is intentionally ignoring the fact that Congress could easily prevent any recession from developing into a full-blown Depression?

                The only way it is going to be possible to FIX the fundemental problem that created this mess is if Congress performs Bypass Surgery and allows the meltdown occur, taking care to help the losers as best they can.

                •  It's An Old Adage (4+ / 0-)

                  "If you don't pay us hundreds of billions of dollars to protects us from losses, we're going to blow up the whole economy!"

                  "Give Me The Money Or I'll Shoot Myself In The Head"

                  It's been used to great effect for a long time now.

                  <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

                  by superscalar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:56:05 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  And DEREGULATION continues apace. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Josiah Bartlett, PAbluestater, elwior

                    Changing the "mark to market" rule is only an example of yet more deregulation on the financial industry.

                    Apparently, that zombie isn't dead either...

                    •  Unabated to the quarterback 5 yard penalty!!!! (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Josiah Bartlett
                    •  I am not so sure... (0+ / 0-)

                      Because if it is an illiquid market then "mark to market" is not accurate.  This one is really tough because "mark to market" gets you what the asset is worth if it were sold now.  But, a method for a mortgage backed security that takes into account the percentage of the underlying mortgages that could default and the income generated by the security would represent what it is worth if it were held to maturity. But, without knowing what decisions the holder will make in the future neither is entirely accurate,and the latter can be games by modifying the assumptions used to come up with a value.

                      I am not sure it is clear cut one way or another.  Now, that is not to say I think there should be no rule.  There needs to be an agreed upon rule that everyone follows, but maybe the current rule is not the best one, or maybe it is the best of many flawed rules and we just happen to be in a situation right now where the flaws in "mark to market" are emphasized.

                    •  House Bill HAD mark to market provisions (0+ / 0-)

                      Monday's house bill already had mark to market provisions

                      Section 132. Authority to Suspend Mark-to-Market Accounting.
                      Restates the Securities and Exchange Commission's authority to suspend the application of Statement Number 157 of the Financial Accounting Standards Board if the SEC determines that it is in the public interest and protects investors.

                      Section 133. Study on Mark-to-Market Accounting.
                      Requires the SEC, in consultation with the Federal Reserve and the Treasury, to conduct a study on mark-to-market accounting standards as provided in FAS 157, including its effects on balance sheets, impact on the quality of financial information, and other matters, and to report to Congress within 90 days on its findings.

                      WaPo 9.28.08 House Bill Text

                •  Actually Kleptocracy isn't the right word for it. (6+ / 0-)

                  We live in a damn kleptocracy. Face a financial crisis, or do whatever business wants: that's the only apparent choices under consideration here.

                  This sort of get to it but...

                  Main Entry:
                  klep•toc•ra•cy  
                  Pronunciation:
                  \klep-tä-krə-sē\
                  Function:
                  noun
                  Date:
                  1819

                  : government by those who seek chiefly status and personal gain at the expense of the governed ; also : a particular government of this kind

                  Kleptomanicracy is a better word for it after all that we have seen with the incessant scandals like Enron, Global Crossings, Tyco, the S&L scandals... it absolutely is a compulsive behavior.

                  Main Entry:
                  klep•to•manic•ra•cy  
                  Pronunciation:
                  \klep-tə-mā-nē-krə-sē\
                  Function:
                  noun
                  Date:
                  1819
                  : government by the Wall Street ruling elite who compulsively seek chiefly to steal the governed blind ; also : a particular conservative government of this kind

                  -more at corpratist fascism, banking blackmail

                •  you can't perform bypass surgery if the patient (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Josiah Bartlett

                  bleeds to death before reaching the operating room.....

                  A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

                  by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:37:08 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Well... (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    mataliandy, elwior

                    We can hook up the bypass machinery easily within a week.

                    Take any bank that is about to fail and have the Treasury buy up its assets.  The individuals who work for the bank will still be there under different ownership, only it will now be fully capitalized with taxpayer funds.  

                    Any interruption of blood/money will be very brief, surely no more profound than the interruption we saw after Nine Eleven.  

                    "Death" for the financial sector would only be a temporary death.  If we let it crash in a day or two, the remaining banks will be lending again within a month, if not a week or even days.

                    •  repeat after me: (0+ / 0-)

                      It's not about failing banks!

                      It's not about failing banks!

                      It's about banks that are unwilling to lend.  And I find it rather amusing that you oppose a plan to buy up assets from these banks but would support a plan to buy the entire bank.

                      A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

                      by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:07:59 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Amused? (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Josiah Bartlett

                        I'm not laughing.  You consider it to be all the same thing?  

                        Buying up toxic paper from banks, i.e., taking away all of the risks they assumed, would leave the taxpayer with precisely the same corrupted system to depend on, only this time the gamblers would be reasurred that it doesn't matter what risks they take, they will never have to pay the consequences of their excessive risk taking 'cause the taxpayers can be counted on to cover their downside risks.

                        That is a huge cost, and opportunity cost, that the taxpayers will have to pay, even if the Paulson Plan manages to quiet the markets for several more months.

                        Would I be correct in assuming that you really care nothing for something called Economic Justice?

                        •  you are talking about moral hazard and I actually (0+ / 0-)

                          agree with you on this point:

                          would leave the taxpayer with precisely the same corrupted system to depend on, only this time the gamblers would be reasurred that it doesn't matter what risks they take,

                          The problem is that we are where we are.  If the credit markets freeze then nobody wins.  Long term we need to perform "surgery", i.e: reform the regulatory structure so this can't happen again.  Short term we need to keep the patient from bleeding to death before we reach the OR.

                          In the short term we need to pass a plan that attracts enough bi-partisan support so neither party can run against the other on it.  You'll note that the Republicans were already planning to do this.  In the long term we need President Obama to reform the regulatory structure -- something he has talked about since entering the race and obviously feels very passionately about.

                          Would I be correct in assuming that you really care nothing for something called Economic Justice?

                          Would I be correct in assuming that you are drawing negative conclusions about people merely because they disagree with you on the particulars of this one issue?  Go ahead and paint me as some sort of closet wall street fat cat republican if you think that helps you counter my arguments.  At the end of the day it looks like Congress is going to do the right thing here, so it's all a moot point anyway.

                          A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

                          by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:55:43 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  No (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Crookshanks

                            Would I be correct in assuming that you are drawing negative conclusions about people merely because they disagree with you on the particulars of this one issue?

                            No.  That's why I put the statement in the form of a question, because I was aware that the guess could be wrong.  And I think you have made it clear that we are on the same page re: the importance of fixing the moral hazard problem.

                            The reason we differ is because I believe that the consequences of the crash can be managed in the best interests of Main St. AND that there is no better resolution of the mess than a complete collapse.

                          •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            James Kroeger

                            No.  That's why I put the statement in the form of a question, because I was aware that the guess could be wrong.

                            Well, thank you for that at least.  Too many people on both sides of this debate here are playing "shoot the messenger" rather than debating the merits of the argument.  I just rec'ed you for not being one of them.

                            that there is no better resolution of the mess than a complete collapse.

                            I guess that's where I disagree.  My employer (like many others) is completely dependent on our short term lines of credit.  We are a non-profit in-patient mental health care provider -- when we admit a new patient it takes weeks or months for Medicaid to start paying us for that patient.  Without short term credit we literally can't stay in business.  If we can't stay in business our 60 employees have no jobs and our patients have no where else to go.

                            You could tell that story a dozen different ways in a dozen different industries but it always has the same ending.

                            For what it's worth I'd much rather be proven wrong on this whole issue than be right about it.  One way or another though it's out of both of our hands at this point.  I called my Congressman and Senators and encouraged them to vote yes.  I'm guessing you did the same and encouraged them to vote no.

                            My humble suggestion is that we all go somewhere, have a beer and drink to Democratic success in November.

                            A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

                            by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 10:37:49 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Moral Hazard (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Josiah Bartlett, James Kroeger

                            This is why I think a bottom up bailout is much more useful because it takes care of the moral hazard problem.

                            I have seen some posts that say we should not bail out home owners with mortgages because because it is rewarding bad decisions.  That is correct, but unlike a Wall Street bail out it is much less likely to create the expectation that the government will bail that home owner out again.  The reason is that in bailing out a few dozen large corporations it is a small group and many of them feel they are too large to be allowed to fail, that they expect if they ever get in that situation again they will be able to tap the tax payers again.  Home owners will not have the expectation if a portion of their mortgage were paid off or terms were altered.  Because it would take million of home owners getting in trouble to cause the government to intervene again and that is just not likely.  To a home owner it will be a one time extraordinary circumstance to Wall Street they will expect to be bailed out again when they take too many risks.

              •  CHILDREN, CHILDREN ! CHILDREN ! (4+ / 0-)

                Harry Reid is buying time.

                He and Pelosi are letting the GOPpers have what they want  -- for Bills that come up -- all the way short of letting them pass anything.

                Reid and Pelosi and their teams know that this GIVEAWAY is crazy.

                Paulson =EQ= Cheney.

                It takes time to build a coalition that can rally around an alternative.

                This Reid Bill coming up is D.O.A. coming over to the House.

                Look for a REGULATORY OPTION to surface and take the day early next week. The Progressive Caucus and the Issa crew are on the right track.

                Yeah, team !!

                Droogie is as Droogie does....

                by vets74 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:00:32 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  It's going to help small businesses (4+ / 0-)

            and it's one of the things that Obama recommended -- if the original $100K limit had been indexed for inflation, it would be up to about $250K by now anyway. (Wish I'd saved the link to the article someone posted on that.) Also helps middle class boomers who might suddenly come into a moderate sum of money when their parents die and the family home is sold; it might encourage some of those folks to keep the money safe in a money market account or long-term CD rather than playing with it on the stock market.

          •  Now I don't have to split my million dollars... (5+ / 0-)

            up among ten different banks.  I can split it among just four banks.  

            Now my money won't be so inconvenient to get out and roll in when I feel like it.

            "Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism." Tommy J.

            by Dissentinator on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:53:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  The WORST four possible.. (3+ / 0-)

              Chase:  survives due to not to successful banking practices, but from wealth accumulated from excessive usury.  Was the only bank in the last Senate hearing to admit to using all of the deceptive practices initiating the hearing the hearing - and boldly told Senators they would not stop.

              Wells Fargo: has held itself out to deal with only the best who have the most.  In fact owns virtually all of the payday lending stalls tucked into every poor neighborhood in the country charging all of the the poor and students with the loan and grant checks as much as 59% fucking percent interest!

              And CITI:  they were ready to go broke themselves just a few months ago.  Whose blood money did they take?

              Had we all not been sidetracked (!)we never would have allowed these mergers.

          •  Retirees sometimes do have more than $100k (4+ / 0-)

            I'm against this bailout. But here's a tidbit on the FDIC insurance issue, different than that of small businesses:

            My mom is elderly, sold her house, moved into a retirement home. She had very little savings and is relying soley on Social Security and a small (today smaller) 401k from my deceased dad. Plus that money from the sale of their home.

            She's a Depression-era child, so she never invested with it. She was being prudent and put it in a bank. Called Wachovia. I've been scrambling for weeks trying to spread it around so she doesn't lose everything if her one bank goes under. It isn't much, but it is supposed to let her live with a tiny bit of dignity for the rest of her days.

            I'm not saying that as a defense of this whole plan, which I think is rotten. But I don't think the FDIC insurance change is bad at all.

        •  sadly (17+ / 0-)

          In this case, we have to fix the credit markets--not throw in more goodies.  The Paulson plan sucks--take the $700b and open up 10 government banks to competes with the current crooks.  That adds capital.  Giving cash for crap will allow the banks to hoard the cash--as they're doing now.

          •  That's a plan that might work (12+ / 0-)

            If the problem is lack of capital for loans, supply capital for loans, and the let the banks go broke.  Sounds good to me.

            Reid stupidly thinks the goal is to pass a bill, ANY BILL, to supplicate the markets. What a disaster.

            The sleep of reason brings forth monsters. --Goya

            by MadScientist on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:31:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Fuck the banks!!! (4+ / 0-)

            I'll gladly live in a cave around a fire for as long as I have to, so long as I know the scumbag investment bankers who robbed this country blind in an effort to create wealth out of whole cloth will be sitting in a cave as well.

            "Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism." Tommy J.

            by Dissentinator on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:55:47 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  dear god (5+ / 0-)

              i am so glad that neither kos nor many of the people on here are making the actual decisions on this.  if you don't understand what is happening, you really shouldn't comment on it.  sure, this bill could always be better, but there is an extreme time element here.  credit markets are collapsing across the board, across the world and you want to split hairs.  at this point, herding cats won't solve the crisis.  we don't have a month, week or many more days before MORE irreparable damage is done.  people talk about how greedy the banks were and want to let them suffer.  truth is they couldn't have done it without us - collectively.  sure, i have been prudent with my finances and many of you probably have been as well.  but many, many people lied about income, took on more house than they could handle, levered up.  and this fueled and enabled wall street to create this mess.  so don't just blame the banks.  also, kos is dead wrong on mark to market accounting.  there are two types of asset buckets at banks - available for sale (which should be marked) and held to maturity.  right now, MTM would mark both even though the HTM loans WILL realize their book value eventually.  this causes banks to avoid M&A because the marks on weak targets would wipe out equity which causes even more stress.  kos, seriously, get someone who works in credit to advise you before you post this drivel.  you are being very irresponsible to the base.   i liked this site much more when it stuck to its core strengths -> attacking mccain and palin.  experts on economics matters you are not!

              •  Classic trickle down (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Josiah Bartlett, elwior, Veritas36

                What provision in the bill assures that banks will actually turn around and actually loan out the largess fron Czar Paulson.

                There are more debt bombs coming next year - the banks are hoarding capital now - and will continue to.

                Diaried this plan four days ago:How to fix the credit crunch

                I propose taking the 700 billion and chartering new banks 51% owned by the citizens of the United States.  There is a standard multiplier of 10X for capitalization of banks so that would make 7 trillion dollars immediately available for lending to sound businesses - instantly ending the credit crunch!  Not only that, but 49% of the shares could be sold to investors - nearly doubling that amount to 14 trillion.  Since these banks would be mandated to make only sound loans, they would attract depositors, further (and enormously) increasing their capitalization.  

                Heretical as this is to "free marketers" these banks would actually make a profit.  There is so much "scared money" out there that there are literally trillions in money market funds - and short term Treasuries are in such high demand that they are actually paying negative interest rates!  There will be no shortage of investors or depositors in these new institutions.

                Some of our current banks will fail.  They are going to fail anyway - and if we simply keep printing money to bail them out, the United States will fail!  When all the 250 trillion in toxic derivatives start to unwind - and they will, bailout or no bailout - it is important that we haven't inflated our currency into wastepaper status and that is crucial to our survival as a nation.

                Some of these banks are going down.  Period.  The question is, will we allow them to drag our nation down with them.

                Progressive Representatives in the House have even better Ideas.  Doing something counterproductive - that doesn't address the real problem is NOT better than nothing and nothing is not whan anyone is proposing.

                If there is a liquidity problem on main street, get some liquidity to Main Street.  It's not rocket science.

                "A noun, a verb..." and P.O.W Thanks, Joe Biden

                by UneasyOne on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:48:45 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

              •  Maybe the bailout is the cause (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Josiah Bartlett

                Ever think the credit problem is related to the investment banks thinking that a government bailout is coming?? Maybe they are waiting and sitting on the bad assets instead of selling them for 0.10/dollar and dealing with the problem.

                But no one wants the banks to lose that much money. They are hoping to sell them for 0.40/dollar.

                And this whole "the country will run out of credit" is bullshit. If there is a demand for loans out there someone else will pick up the slack.

              •  The banks should be held responsible. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Josiah Bartlett

                Yes, some people took more than they should have.  But, many people have high health care costs, others have lost their jobs, the higher cost of living with sinking wages is another problem.  The people who took the loans are not the problem.  It is the responsibility of the people giving the loans to make sure they are given in trust worthy way.  That didn't happen, I read yesterday that dead people in Ohio were even given loans.  Loans were given with no request for income verification.  

                This happened for several reasons, first, the credit swap derivatives gave insurance to the lenders that the loans would be covered on a default.  So, lenders felt free to loan irresponsibility, there was no threat of a loss.  Of course lenders made bad choices.

                Then, the CSDs became a market unto themselves.  People can insure anything.  So, the CSDs were oversold (no regulation here), people took these out knowing the housing market was crashing, and they wanted to make some money.  So, there was more money owning on the house than it was worth.

                Now, we have an incentive to actually create an even bigger housing crisis.  Don't bail out the people loosing their home, because the CDS owners will make more money that way, many more times than what the home is worth.  Don't loan people the money, then they can sell their homes and the CDS owners loose their CDS investment.

                This has very little to do with the people buying the houses, and lots to do with a banking system that profits by foreclosing.

                •  Could it be.... (0+ / 0-)

                  that the Credit Default Swaps were not priced correctly to begin with?

                  As in the actuaries did not look at the right populations to develop their loss probabilities?

                  I am here to represent the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

                  by Josiah Bartlett on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 04:13:06 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Thank you for correcting my opinions... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Josiah Bartlett

                I had no idea that credit markets were collapsing around the world, thanks for the update.  

                Nobody wants to lend money for investment banks to buy MBS's or other illiquid securities that nobody knows the real value of.  Of course, nobody wants to buy those junk assets anyway, again, because nobody knows what they're worth.

                We, the people, are being asked to pony up to buy these assets because nobody else is dumb enough to buy them right now.  Have I got it so far?

                Now, we, the people, are responsible for this mess because we allowed unscrupulous mortgage brokers and banks to drop their standards lower than a flea's ballsack and then pass on the responsibility for collecting payments on that loan to a third party that was making fees for late payments and foreclosures, but not losing a dime on foreclosed loans.  The loss on the foreclosed loan was being felt by the buyer of the mortgage backed security who was promised an income stream from a bundle of loans that were put together with the promise of paying a specific interest rate (or some other feature).  Of course, the securitizer of that bundle of loans entered into a credit default contract with an unknown third party to hedge the risk on the MBS paying the income stream to the guy further up-paragraph.  

                And of course, everyone was happy, until reality set in and the people (we, the people) who tricked those brokers into giving us loans we couldn't afford started to default (whoever could've predicted?!?) and then the whole Ponzi scheme fell apart.

                Yeah, I wish I had the financial acumen of you and those guys on Wall Street.  I had no idea this crisis was the fault of the American people who were exhorted to live the American dream and buy a house with 1% down, a 2% Nehemiah grant and a 6% sales concession thrown in to boot!  Yee haw!  A president who told everyone to go shopping in the face of the greatest tragedy ever to befall my hometown.

                As a fellow born in Brooklyn, I feel like I've been around the block enough times and have enough common sense not to be lectured to by someone who doesn't capitalize the first letter of every sentence and who thinks that the mission of Dkos is to bash McCain and Palin (proper nouns are also usually capitalized) rather than to elect public officials who will espouse and enact a progressive agenda for the betterment of our society.  Argh!

                "Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism." Tommy J.

                by Dissentinator on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 12:02:24 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  I agree! (4+ / 0-)

              I didn't invest in the stock market, and I didn't take on a mortgage.  Why should I be taxed to death so that other people can retire and shady banks can keep on being shady?  I want healthcare and new energy sources with my part of that 700 billion, and if I have to live in a tent to get it, so be it.

            •  well, A) they won't be.... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Josiah Bartlett

              ... and B) It's pretty telling that you are so vindictive that you'd destroy the whole country just for the satisfaction of seeing a handful of people suffer.

              I'll gladly live in a cave around a fire for as long as I have to, so long as I know the scumbag investment bankers who robbed this country blind in an effort to create wealth out of whole cloth will be sitting in a cave as well.

              A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

              by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:40:04 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Vindictive? I'd destroy the country? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Josiah Bartlett

                A) You have mistaken retributive justice for vindictiveness.  I believe that allowing the investment bankers who have gambled with the wealth of our Nation to go without some form of punishment will lead to a situation where nobody will be deterred from doing such things in the future, where there will be no chance to rehabilitate these degenerates and where they will be left in positions to continue doing what they have been doing.

                B) I didn't destroy this country, they did.

                C) The plan to bailout the banks will probably not work and will require the borrowing of hundreds of billions of dollars which, in and of itself, will have a deleterious economic effect.

                D) I still believe this plan (or plans) is a stop-gap measure to keep the 800 pound gorilla in the room (the 62 trillion dollar credit default swap market) from collapsing before the election.  Because if you think the last couple of weeks have been catastrophic, just wait until the other shoe drops.

                Then you'll be lucky to find a cave of your own.

                Ladies and Gentlemen, thanks for playing..

                "Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism." Tommy J.

                by Dissentinator on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:32:51 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

        •  Well, the people came up (4+ / 0-)

          Apparently it was in the context of pushing to insert a provision for refinancing with full recourse home loans into the bill.

        •  Why should there be something in there for us? (3+ / 0-)

          We're paying for it, after all....the least we can do is  be gracious about it and shut the hell up about how we're going to pay our food bills.

          Geez.

          We're SUCH a nation of whiners.

          I can see BS from my house.

          by Mad Mom on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:44:38 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Republicans will veto anything for the people (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Josiah Bartlett

          OK, but Democrats also hide behind it. This says to me that Dems can't be bothered to even try and fight for us.

          So tired of their lame excuses.  They are so focused on filling their campaign coffers, there's zero interest to do anything other take funnel our money straight to the rich who don't create anything but more wealth for themselves.
          The wealthy will keep investing overseas, as the US labor force grows increasingly desparate for work, they'll accept the lowest possible wages to survive. Nice.

          It's been bad enough watching Bush rule like a tyrant. Congress is operating with the same contempt that Bush has for the American people.
          They are shutting us out and slapping us down.

      •  The "discussion" of relaxing the mark-to-market (7+ / 0-)

        accounting rules was already in the House-defeated version of the bill:

        SEC. 132. AUTHORITY TO SUSPEND MARK-TO-MARKET ACCOUNTING.

        (a) AUTHORITY. -- The Securities and Exchange Commission shall have the authority under the securities laws (as such term is defined in section 3(a)(47) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(47)) to suspend, by rule, regulation, or order, the application of Statement Number 157 of the Financial Accounting Standards Board for any issuer (as such term is defined in section 3(a)(8) of such Act) or with respect to any class or category of transaction if the Commission determines that is necessary or appropriate in the public interest and is consistent with the protection of investors.

        Then, the next section, which one would think would precede any action of the previous part reads:

        SEC. 133. STUDY ON MARK-TO-MARKET ACCOUNTING.

        (a) STUDY. -- The Securities and Exchange Commission, in consultation with the Board and the Secretary, shall conduct a study on mark-to-market accounting standards as provided in Statement Number 157 of the Financial Accounting Standards Board, as such standards are applicable to financial institutions, including depository institutions. Such a study shall consider at a minimum --

        (1) the effects of such accounting standards on a financial institution’s balance sheet;

        (2) the impacts of such accounting on bank failures in 2008;

        (3) the impact of such standards on the quality of financial information available to investors;

        (4) the process used by the Financial Accounting Standards Board in developing accounting standards;

        (5) the advisability and feasibility of modifications to such standards; and

        (6) alternative accounting standards to those provided in such Statement Number 157.

        (b) REPORT. -- The Securities and Exchange Commission shall submit to Congress a report of such study before the end of the 90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act containing the findings.

        I would contend that the SEC's easement of the mark-to-market accounting yesterday was the catalyst for the surge on Wall Street.

        I concur that the mind-body-and-soul destroying immorality of this "bailout bill" should condemn it forever to infamy.

        •  Mark to Market must stay (9+ / 0-)

          I invest, a little, why should I invest in any thing if I can not trust the accounting practices of those who want me to invest in them.  If you get rid og mark to market, you portentially have the next Enron only 100 times worse.  Having valueless paper junk sold ar real value for real dollars is what got us in to this mess.

          We need to deal with the mess now, not put it off for another week, month, year or ten years.

          12 step program, setp 1 recognize that you have a problem.

          Sarah Palin Proud Socialist

          by Bloke on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:46:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Exactly. Mark - to - market keeps banks honest (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            ssgbryan, Bloke, math4barack, Veritas36

            on a monthly basis.

            Whether the revaluation hits the P&L or equity, it helps to provide stability to the balance sheet. A series of small monthly movements is way better than one huge surprise.

            Suspending this practice does lead to calamitous revaluations, such as Enron, or will pull a curtain over a bank's true financial condition.

            I mean you can't just make stuff up. - Barack Obama

            by Trim Your Bush on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:04:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Then when reality hits we get a crash (0+ / 0-)

              it took the Japanise 10 years to get out of their banking mess becasue they kept shoring up and hiding the problems.  Do that and you never start onteh road to recovery.

              Sarah Palin Proud Socialist

              by Bloke on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:05:18 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  The balance sheet is a fiction anyway (0+ / 0-)

          As a general rule, the balance sheet does not reflect the going concern value of an enterprise.  While mark-to-market improves the estimate somewhat, in a depressed market, it tends to more closely reflect a fire sale price.  I'm not sure it's a big deal, 'tho it does constitute a flagrant attempt to cook the books that effectively defrauds the low-information investor.

          For the most part, investors don't pay attention to the balance sheet -- you are buying your estimate of future earnings.

    •  The Insiders' party (53+ / 0-)

      Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are working for the same people who employ Hank Paulson and Mitch McConnell.  Hint: it ain't us.

      The politicians in Washington are in panic mode now, and every iteration of this bailout clusterf*ck will only get worse.  After the election they'll probably commit even more thievery while everybody's diverted by the transition drama.  

      Come January we the people will need to serve notice on our new president and Congress: climb out of the rectums of the Money Aristocracy and start working for us, or there'll be hell to pay.  Our celebration on November 4-5th will necessarily be short, indeed.

      I can't expect to live in a democracy if I'm not prepared to do the work of being a citizen.

      by Dallasdoc on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  amen, DD. n/t (2+ / 0-)

        JOHN McCAIN = George W. Bush's 3rd term.

        by chumley on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  if they aren't listening to you before the votes (5+ / 0-)

        have been cast, what makes you think they will listen to you after they have been?

        Come January we the people will need to serve notice on our new president and Congress: climb out of the rectums of the Money Aristocracy and start working for us, or there'll be hell to pay.

        "Hell to pay" would be voting the bastards out that you feel are ripping off the taxpayers.

        A PBS mind in a Fox News World | -5.25/-4.72 | Obama 08!

        by Crookshanks on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:35:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thats right! Why the fuck is anyone talking... (0+ / 0-)

          about come January.  Are people here and across America brainwashed?

          It is come November!  And we should vote out the Dem leadership, handsdown.

        •  Reid needs to be primaried (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          UneasyOne

          and Pelosi and Frank as well.

        •  What hell to pay did you have in mind? (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          mudskipper, Dallasdoc, Korry, mkor7

          A bunch of people screaming isn't going to do it. And after the election, they will have at least 4 more years to benefit from their relationships with banks and wall street. What are you going to do about it?

          Let's face it. As long as we have a debtor economy, they have got you by the short hairs and you know it. As long as you are in debt to them, you are their slave.

          Cut up your credit cards. Go without for awhile like the rest of the world does. You are financing your food? Are you crazy?

          You are trapped and you are going to do what they tell you. Golden handcuffs are still handcuffs.

          I have come to the conclusion that the only solution is to let them all crash. Build something better from the pieces. Will there be some suffering? Yeah. But not that much more than millions of people in the world suffer every day. Maybe it is time to learn some hard lessons.

          As if things could get worse without getting better.

          by A Voice on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:20:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  The corporations have the government right (3+ / 0-)

        where they want it.

        I'd be curious to know what percentage of our tax dollars are being diverted into the hands of private interests the benefit of which we will never see.

        Then times it by ten if this bail out plan is passed.

        McCain, Republican Party, Palin = Captain, Sinking Ship, Anchor.

        by Pescadero Bill on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:41:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Rec'd for 'climb out of the rectums'...should (0+ / 0-)

        we be sending 'rectum' ladders and decontamination suits to our very own special Democratic Crooks so that they can climb out with fake grace and dignity?  If there is any upside to this train wreck at all, it is that we are watching as the smoke and mirrors and masks are being torn off the faces of the very people that have 'pretended' to represent we the people. Thick as thieves.

        Now, can someone help me here, cause I think I need an to understand something.  I thought, that the way our government worked was that the House had to approve a bill before it went to the Senate?  Did I miss something here?  I looked it up:

        When a bill is being voted upon in either house of Congress, a majority of Yes votes out of all the votes being cast is required to pass the bill. The bill must be passed in identical form by a majority in each house, and then it is sent to the President.

        Can someone tell me if something changed overnight?
        Thanks.

        This is an injustice so grave and extreme that it defies words is taking place; that the greatest beneficiaries are those who are most culpable. Glen Greenwald

        by Badabing on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:50:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  This kind od scum shit is not (0+ / 0-)
        going to change just because we change the party in the White House.

        Sorry but the fact that we have a Republican President and do not have a 60 vote majority in the Senate is still no excuse for this kind of legislation.

        There is no sense of any kind why they are doing this now when the Democrats clearly had the advantage going into this thing if they would but do it.

        Peace
        :)

        June 3rd 2008 America is at last started on the road to long awaited recovery

        by eaglecries on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:06:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Don't you mean NOVEMBER, WTF did you say Jan? (0+ / 0-)
    •  Our Congressional Leadership would rather... (17+ / 0-)

      destroy the American Economy in the long run with this BS Bailout Bill, than do anything courageous.

      What will it take to get through to them?

       title=

      We the People ordained our Government to promote our General Welfare;
      If We the People want Health Care for All, Government should provide it.

      by Jimdotz on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It is pretty fascinating to watch (7+ / 0-)

      the fiscally conservative Republicans and the progressive Democrats pairing up for a different plan vs. the original tax funded/corporate bailout being pushed by our corrupt administration and our corporate-enabling, complicit congresscritters, Pelosi, Reid, etc.  Is anyone taking names?

      John McCain "If I were dictator, which I always aspire to be" 9/30/08

      by mjd in florida on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  ya. What the fuck is wrong with Harry? (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Heartcutter, Gorette, Uberbah

      No matter how cynical I get, it's impossible to keep up.

      by Flippant on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:24:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Can we summon Dionysus (4+ / 0-)

      to trek into Hades and bring Mike Mansfield back from the dead?

      /*You are not expected to understand this.*/

      by aztecraingod on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:26:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If You're In Washington, Go Protest Now! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishBiscuit
    •  You are wrong. This bill will usher in a new (5+ / 0-)

      progressive era.  This is the GOP surrendering to the Democrats.  A lot of liberals on this site get freaked out by anything that resembles a give away to corporations.  This bill is no such give away.  We're buying assets and imposing strict regulations in a way that would be unimaginable over the last 10 years.

      This bill ends laissez-faire capitalism.  With an Obama administration implementing these ideas, I have no doubt that the economy will stabilize and begin to improve once he takes office.  In the short run, this bill will help ease the credit crunch in the remaining month of Bush's term. After Obama wins the election, Paulson won't do anything without checking with President elect Obama first.

      The shortsightedness on this site baffles me.  Read the bill.  It's a good framework.  We have the numbers in Congress to improve it after the election.

      Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

      by khyber900 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:37:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  We're buying crap and hoping (5+ / 0-)

        that a market for crap appears within 2 years.

        Why, why, why is there no mechanism to have Wall Street pay for this?

        "But these are loans, they have to be paid back!"

        Yeah, good luck with that. As Donald Trump says, "If I owe you $1 million, that's my problem. If I owe you $100 million, that's YOUR problem."

        DeFazio's securities transfer fee must be adopted. ANY money paid out must result in warrants for tsock purchases. We want this money BACK, Wall Street!

        --Sent from my Blackberry, "the miracle John McCain helped create." (not really, for both)

        by duck on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:44:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yes read ! these are the renewable tax credits (0+ / 0-)

        that McCain killed in Dec 2007 in the 2007 Energy Bill. Remember how only CAFE passed in the end? Two thirds was left behind. The PTC and ITC for wind and solar to give people a break on installation.

        Nine times the Senate has tried to put the energy tax credits back but got stuck in the house last week.

        This is a VERY cunning plan to rewrap these into a new must-pass (bailout) bill, and I salute the Senate for attempting this.

        Bush cannot veto it now.

        Quick history of the last few weeks:
        On 9th Attempt Democrats Pass Energy Provisions
        House Fully Funds Renewables So Possibly Sinks Them
        Bailout Failure Improves Energy Bill Chances

        •  Man that's nuts. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          dotcommodity, VincaMajor

          We still feel we have to sneak things in to bills to get them passed?

          WTF? By all rights and means the Dems should sweep congress and the WH in November. Then we get the bills passed we want passed. And we won't have to be forced into working three months out of the year to prop up the flimflam artists on Wall St.

          If the Dems allow this albatross of a bill to be hung around their necks, they'll lose a lot of votes that would have assured control of congress.

          It's an insane dumb moved and very much timed to happen when it is. You think it's a coincidence that it's happening right before the election? This is the hustlers who have been luting the treasury for the last 8 years having one last grand go at grabbing every thing they can. And the Dems are playing right along.

          No! Put off the vote till after the election. It will make the Dems look like the fiscally responsible party and not beholden to Wall St. That will assure a massive victory on election day.

          McCain, Republican Party, Palin = Captain, Sinking Ship, Anchor.

          by Pescadero Bill on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:32:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I agree, only getting 8 more Dems in the Senate (0+ / 0-)

            will eliminate the need to sneak good legislation in around Republican obstruction.

            WE only have 51 Ds, (yeah Lieberman votes for clean energy) and we need 60 to bypass every cloture-vote (the vote to vote)

            But we'd have to get all 8 in, and not worry about all the races that we can't win, all the house races that only yield more House Dems, (we have enough in the house to pass clean energy now - need em in the Senate) or waste time defeating the 2-3 Repubs who vote with us on clean energy: (Coleman, Collins and Snowe)

      •  "buying assets" (0+ / 0-)

        That part has been distinctly unclear so far.

        There have been no assurances that the money won't just be dumped into the derivatives market... ie no equity... they're more like options or futures.

        I don't trust them to do the right thing.

      •  I'm not sure what you're talking about. (0+ / 0-)

        Where is the money for the bailout coming from?

        And more importantly, to whom is it going?

        We The People will have more and more of our tax dollars diverted into the hands of private interests with very little, if anything in return for it. And a greater burden of taxes imposed on us as a pay off.

        We're not buying anything, we'll own nothing. These so called "assets" will be on paper only and will quickly disappear into the hands of slick operators chumming up to certain pols. And it imposes no such "strict regulations".

        You want to impose strict regulations write explicit laws doing so. Don't try and sneak them in on some other f'ing bill.

        I don't know where you're coming from, but don't try and sell me a burrow and tell me it's a thoroughbred.

        McCain, Republican Party, Palin = Captain, Sinking Ship, Anchor.

        by Pescadero Bill on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:17:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'll bet Joe Lieberman loves it! (0+ / 0-)

      Silver lining: all that canvasing and booth staffing is a drag, and my family wants me at home taking care of my ailing mother who has McCain's disease. It'll be a relief to have an excuse to bail on the whole campaign volunteer thing.

      We'll see how Gordon Smith votes on this. If he supports it, maybe I'll still run out there a few more times to get Merkley in.

      REPUBLICANS: The Older White Meat.

      by AdmiralNaismith on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:48:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  It is worse than you think... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chumley, IL clb, Badabing

      "I'd say "pair the bailout with more tax cuts" is probably right up there, on the Screw The Public scale."

      Really?  You think that's really bad?  How about "pair the bailout with more...UNFUNDED...tax cuts".  You know, as if cutting taxes for those who don't really need it isn't bad enough, what we'll do is we'll cut those taxes and then BORROW the money to pay for those tax cuts.

      "Reid and McConnell's move may prove popular with Republicans, but it risks a showdown with House leaders insisting that a popular measure extending certain business tax breaks be financed by tax increases elsewhere in the code".

      The implication here is that those "certain business tax breaks" are not financed by tax increases elsewhere or anywhere.  

      Wheeeeeeeee, lets just keep borrowing money that our grandchildren have to pay back so that businesses can make more money.  Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!  We're saved!

      "Dissent is the Highest form of Patriotism." Tommy J.

      by Dissentinator on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:51:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, as if the next couple of generations (3+ / 0-)

        will have the kinds of jobs that will help pay this off.

        We're becoming indentured servants against our will and without any say. I feel I'm witnessing Congress enabling the next great economic failure of the American economy.

        They seem to be doing everything wrong.

        McCain, Republican Party, Palin = Captain, Sinking Ship, Anchor.

        by Pescadero Bill on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:01:36 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Very good point. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Pescadero Bill, Dissentinator

          I haven't had a job in almost two years, and I have an MA.

          Just what kind of jobs do most of you think your children are going to have? I've been to college -- doesn't make any difference.

          When your kids are in their 30s, they won't be making half what you made in your 50s, and by the time they are 50, they will be dependent on their kids. Just like I am now.

          We need JOBS in this country: good-paying, non-outsourceable jobs, not crazy paper-shuffling jobs with rules that few understand and only a small portion of the people can make money at.

          I'm tired of this country doing everything for Wall Street, while Wall Street does everything it can to screw the rest of us into the ground.

          Sarah Palin's governing philosophy: "Choice for me, but not for thee."

          by Brooke In Seattle on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:07:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The modern congress critter has this (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dissentinator

            misconception that propping up corporations and Wall St. in general is good for Americans because it creates jobs.

            When in fact corporations are working strictly for the bottom line and if that means working over congress to get their taxes reduced and then outsourcing jobs to countries where people will work for $2 an hour, then they'll do that.

            Corporations are like kids threatening to have a tantrum and run away if they don't get what they want. When in fact they already do throw tantrums and run away. And Congress are like parents that feel they can't live without the child's love (campaign contributions) so they cave in to them and act as if this some how works out for the family (America) because it protects the younger children (us).

            It's become one big dysfunctional family dynamic.

            We need people in Congress who understand what their role was always meant to be; the guardians of the people against ruthless capitalists/corporatists and an overbearing ruling class.

            McCain, Republican Party, Palin = Captain, Sinking Ship, Anchor.

            by Pescadero Bill on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:53:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Well I am not so sure but what before this (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dissentinator
        is all settled out that we don't see them saying we have to tax the working class more in order to pay this.

        In fact it is actually a hidden tax in it that we will all be paying in the form of inflated prices and lower dollar value.

        Peace
        :)

        June 3rd 2008 America is at last started on the road to long awaited recovery

        by eaglecries on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:15:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I hate him more (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MiklCraw4d, FishBiscuit

      than I hated Daschle.

      That's pretty serious.

    •  Talk about unserious... (0+ / 0-)

      Serious voices have been talking about institutional fixes like a transaction tax, rules for short selling, etc., ...

      This is just inane...

      Our problem today is with mortgage backed securities.  They are not exchange traded so you can't really short them - you could sign a contract promising to deliver them later if you wanted to but it would be pretty unlikely because they are extremely illiquid.

      Transaction taxes are also unlikely to impact them because people don't do a lot of trades with them.

      You seem to be focusing on the last crisis, not the current one.

    •  It never ceases to amaze me... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishBiscuit

      ...at the utter fecklessness, spinelessness, and general in-the-tank DINO-ness that Pelosi and Reid often exhibit.  Can we please, please get a better Speaker and House Majority Leader next session?  Please?!?

      Their MO seems to be a) give in to the Republicans whenever possible, and if that doesn't work, b) make things even worse until the Republicans do go for it.  I understand that Pelosi has to be a Democrat to get elected from her district, but I still can't figure out Reid.

    •  Fucking nuts! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishBiscuit

      Majority Leader Harry Reid and GOP Leader Mitch McConnell say, however, that they're going to add a tax cut package already rejected by the House on Monday.  

      Why is Obama supporting them and this?  We really need a whole bunch of new and better Democrats.

      The bailout explained as only Dennis Kucinich can:

      Here is a very quick explanation of the $700 billion bailout within the context of the mechanics of our monetary and banking system:

      The taxpayers loan money to the banks. But the taxpayers do not have the money. So we have to borrow it from the banks to give it back to the banks. But the banks do not have the money to loan to the government. So they create it into existence (through a mechanism called fractional reserve) and then loan it to us, at interest, so we can then give it back to them.

      Confused?

      This is the system. This is the standard mechanism used to expand the money supply on a daily basis not a special one designed only for the "$700 billion" transaction. People will explain this to you in many different ways, but this is what it comes down to.

      They're asking for another four years -- in a just world, they'd get 10 to 20 ~~ Dennis Kucinich

      by dkmich on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:31:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't know about that but (0+ / 0-)

      when I saw "tax cut" I went WTF???? Honestly, at this point in time, if congress came up with a fair and viable solution, I'd be willing to pay a little MORE in taxes on my measly (under $30,000) a year income. My main question the entire time has been "Tell us what we are going to cut or where we are going to raise money to pay for $700 billion." Any talk of tax CUTS for anyone is insan. In fact, this bill should be a no-go until all the Bush tax cuts are repealed/

      We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14: http://www.oneill08.com/

      by anastasia p on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:43:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I just called my representative's office (Dem) (0+ / 0-)

      and told them that if Democrats pass anything that resembles the Paulson plan, I will be voting straight Republican, including for McCain.  I was not kidding.

      If these clowns think they've got this election in the bag and that they can screw over the public to provide welfare to the rich, then they've got another thing coming.  I strongly believe in the values espoused by Democrats, but this is just too much to handle.  Democrats have sided with Republicans on everything important to me anyway -- civil liberties, Iraq, and now this bailout -- so why should I vote for them?  There are almost no differences between them and the Republicans anyway.  If we need to live through another disastrous Republican administration and Congress to get rid of these spineless Democratic congress members now so we can rebuild later with worthy candidates, then so be it.  

      Some people will complain about being a single issue voter, but it's not just a single issue.  I was livid when Obama supported FISA, but I still contributed to his campaign and have been (somewhat) enthusiastic about him.  If the bailout plan that gets passed does nothing for stressed homeowners and only protects the interests of the wealthy, then the Democrats will have lost me completely for this election cycle.

    •  The Truth hurts sometimes, thanks Hunter (0+ / 0-)

      for telling it about this idiotic "plan" by Reid to vote on this STUPID Republican Bailout.

      Maybe we should just give a million dollars to every registered Republican?  

      Makes as much sense if your goal is to Save Conservatism in America.

      And I'm afraid that IS the bottom line for Reid.

      He is a Democrat.  But he is not a Progressive.  Nor is anyone who supports a Republican Bailout.  

  •  if the republicans were in charge (18+ / 0-)

    this vote would have happened at midnight and if you didn't vote for it you would be supporting the terrorists.

    THis is a crock of shit.  What happened to the backbone the spine?  For crying out loud.

    Sen. Obama, how could you let this happen?  You are the leader of the party aren't you?  Then it is time to start leading.

    Republicans are not a national party anymore. Read My Lips: One Spouse, One House.

    by jalapeno on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:06:52 AM PDT

    •  The Repugs ARE in charge... (10+ / 0-)

      can't you tell? WTF does a majority mean anyway? When it comes to THIS Congress, it means jack shit.  The rethugs are STILL in charge and the most powerful Dems are hopelessly inured to that machine.

      Where is Neo, anyway? We need help only The One can provide...

      My sig line lawyered up and is currently claiming executive privilege.

      by legalchic on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Who said he was leading here? (7+ / 0-)

      His only public statement since Monday was to call for the FDIC insurance to be increased from $100k to $250k.  Not exactly a profile in courage there.  Plus, as Kuttner points out, those who have >$100k in the bank know enough to put it in > 1 bank.

      The Paulson Plan fell 13 votes short in the House.  There are many >13 House Dems who voted nay.  Instead of answering their concerns, our "leadership" bought off the Goopers one more time.

      Obama will inherit the most difficult situation of any newly-elected prez since FDR.  He will inherit a major void in party leadership in both houses.  The Paulson Plan was his dry run here, and he's not handling it terribly well.

      Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?

      by RFK Lives on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:14:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  So let's get some (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Shannon S

        That voted yea to switch if this new bullshit is going to be added. The fight is still in the house.

        Obama/Biden '08 Yes We Can!

        by alkalinesky on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:15:56 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  OBAMA IS NOT PRESIDENT!! (12+ / 0-)

        It is not HIS dry run, the meltdown is not HIS responsiblity and it is not HIS to "handle".

        This is a WH/HR issue that THEY have to deal with.  O can support or condemn, encourage or deride but he has no authority to "fix".

        Stop repeating McCain talking points about "you don't stand on the sidelines" - we can see what McInsane's "leadership" did for the bill and him.

        •  He will inherit the terms of the bailout (3+ / 0-)

          He was the designated party spokesman when Reid, Pelosi, et al went to visit the WH last week.  While the meltdown is, obviously, not his responsibility, the cleanup soon will be, and decisions are being made now that will have a huge impact upon what he can do 3.5 mos from now.

          I'm not repeating the talking points of a GOP nominee who becomes increasingly irrelevant w/ each passing day.  A little over a month from now, McCain will be just another senator, Palin will be back in AK trying to dig out from a huge mess that she and her husband created, and Obama will be trying to figure out how to dig out from a much more consequential mess that others created.

          That's my point here.

          Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?

          by RFK Lives on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:36:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  OBAMA IS THE PARTY'S LEADER (0+ / 0-)

          Same as every other election year - but Obama should have even MORE influence since he's raised more money and gotten more votes than anyone else in history.  How many Dems don't want a piece of that?  But on vital issues like FISA and this blowjob for Wall Street, Obama just follows the Bush Dog line.

          •  OBAMA will be... by Friday or early next week. (0+ / 0-)

            'Cain is bullshit.

            He didn't do squat on this problem.

            Come Friday or early next week, there's room for Obama to get into the mix and validate the REGULATORY OPTION that finally takes the day.

            Don't be surprised to see Obama present the winning plan on the Seante floor.

            A major speech.

            Details.

            Tie-In with the GOPpers who are actually not corporatists. The small buz, small gov people.

            Yeah, Obama could become the country's effective leader -- Friday or early next week.

            Reid and Pelosi are buying time to set it up.

            Droogie is as Droogie does....

            by vets74 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:07:55 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  We could use some leadership from him (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RFK Lives

          You can't even get to Obama -- no one is answering the phone, and his mailbox is full.  Everyone in my delegation was accessible, as was even Harry Reid.

          I'm not happy, guys.  Obama should be talking about our concerns on Main Street, and what needs to be in this bill.

      •  He need to crash the gates in his first 100 days. (5+ / 0-)

        In the days between November 4 and January 20 he need to put together a package to raise taxes on the wealthy, re-regulate and importantly, re-supervise the banking industry, completely re-evaluate this whole bailout mess.  He will have a hundred day honeymoon to get these issues addressed.

        I am here to represent the democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

        by Josiah Bartlett on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And has 'This' been changed in the bill ? (0+ / 0-)

           
        This is from Update: Screaming in a Burning Theater: Zero Bank Reserves Hotlist
        by Letters to the Fathers

        SEC. 202. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR THE FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD TO ESTABLISH RESERVE REQUIREMENTS.
               
        Wow, looks like somebody is taking a ratio to zero. I wonder what that ratio is? I bet you in the back already know.

        Let’s go to 12 U.S.C. 461, and see exactly what is is we are adjusting.

        Let’s see here, Section 2, Subnote A of 12 U.S.C. 461. How is that for obscure! Let’s see what we got here.
           (A) Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its transaction accounts as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose of implementing monetary policy—
           (i) in the ratio of 3 per centum for that portion of its total transaction accounts of $25,000,000 or less, subject to subparagraph (C); and
           (ii) in the ratio of 12 per centum, or in such other ratio as the Board may prescribe not greater than 14 per centum and not less than 8 per centum, for that portion of its total transaction accounts in excess of $25,000,000, subject to subparagraph (C).

        You dirty apes.

        You mean to tell me that each depository institution can maintain zero reserves against its transaction accounts? You put it right there in writing! Sure you buried it across three bills, but you are now allowing for the possibility that banks can hold zero reserves!

        This is how the bank code would have read had the bill passed today:

           Each depository institution shall maintain reserves against its transaction accounts as the Board may prescribe by regulation solely for the purpose of implementing monetary policy—
           (i) in a ratio of not greater than 3 percent (and which may be zero) for that portion of its total transaction accounts of $25,000,000 or less, subject to subparagraph (C); and
           (ii) in the ratio of 12 per centum, or in such other ratio as the Board may prescribe not greater than 14 per centum and which may be zero, for that portion of its total transaction accounts in excess of $25,000,000, subject to subparagraph (C).

        So you plan on restoring confidence in the banks by allowing the banks not to have any reserves to match people’s checking and savings accounts? What, was the FDIC just going to cover that all? Wait, don’t answer that, I already know the answer.

        But remember the effective date! The original Relief Act of 2006 called for a date of October 1, 2011 to allow banks zero reserves, if the Federal Reserve Board thought it fit. This bill would have moved that up to tomorrow!

        Tomorrow people! Do you hear me! Tomorrow we could have all woken up to the possibility of zero holdings in our banks and it being legally allowed!

        I thought this was a great diary and truly informed me as to who was pushing us over the cliff. Bet you no one has changed a word of this.  So what if 'they' promise to up the FDIC to $250,000, it doesn't mean jack shit if this part of the bill is still in there, and a promise from these crooks is as good as Charles Manson saying: I promise I won't kill everyone I can get my hands on if you just let me out of jail.

        This is an injustice so grave and extreme that it defies words is taking place; that the greatest beneficiaries are those who are most culpable. Glen Greenwald

        by Badabing on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:15:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Amen, Hunter (25+ / 0-)

    this whole thing makes me sick.

    "...and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." --Barack Obama, January 20, 2009

    by jiordan on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:07:09 AM PDT

  •  Knew you'd eventually come around, Hunter (13+ / 0-)

    this hideous bailout is opposed by committed conservatives and progressives alike, and should be.  Killing it is good public policy, good politics and good moral values.

  •  Wait - I thought these were tax breaks (10+ / 0-)

    for energy-saving measures, things like that?

      •  Great point (5+ / 0-)

        Although those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana might want that tax break a little sooner.

      •  But that destroys Hunter's point. (11+ / 0-)

        We're going to get some tax incentives we wanted anyway with a bailout bill we were going to begrudgingly accept.  How does that make the bill "worse"?

        The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world goes from gray to colorful.

        by alkatt on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:16:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I didn't claim that those particular provisions (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Cartoon Peril, divineorder

          make the bill worse.

          Nor did Hunter - he said that the aggregate of ALL the add-ons does.

        •  The details are not yet available. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          divineorder

          All we know is that the tax breaks are designed to make conservative republicans happy, and some part of the tax break package can be described as involving alternative energy in some sense.

          Here's what I mostly don't get:

          Why change the plan at all?  Every news story I read is saying those conservative Republicans were scared shitless that their refusal to vote "yea" actually resulted in the plan not passing, and that everyone on the Hill is now getting calls from constituents screaming bloody murder that a bill must be passed.

          So, again, why are Dem leaders handing Republicans an extra goodie on a bill that they are going to pass anyway, this time around?

          •  Actually, the House Repubs don't (4+ / 0-)

            like some of the tax credits here:

               The tax plan passed the Senate last week, on a 93-2 vote. It included AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks. In a compromise worked out with Republicans, the bill does not pay for the AMT and disaster provisions but does have revenue offsets for part of the energy and extension measures.

               That wasn't enough for the House, which insisted that there be complete offsets for the energy and extension part of the package.

            •  That story applied (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              temptxan, divineorder

              to a tax bill that was shot down last week.  Do we have some reason to think that same package is being tacked to the bailout now?

              All I know is the NYT is saying the Senate is not giving out the details of the revised plan.

              Top lawmakers said the Senate proposal, worked out after a day of behind the scenes maneuvering, would include tax breaks for businesses and alternative energy and higher government insurance for bank deposits.

              -- snip --

              The senators Tuesday night issued no details of their proposal and said none would be available until Wednesday. The lawmakers were gambling that the tax package would appeal to lawmakers who helped sink the measure in the House on Monday, without driving off Democrats who have opposed extending the tax incentives without offsetting spending cuts elsewhere.

              House Democratic leaders reacted cautiously to the new approach, with Representative Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland, the majority leader and a chief advocate of paying for the tax breaks, saying, "I am talking with my House colleagues about the Senate action and how to best proceed."

              Why would tacking a bill that the House killed last week to a bill that the Senate wants the House to pass this week work?

              •  It may not, for all we know. (3+ / 0-)

                The point is, those tax breaks don't make it "worse," except strictly in a fiscal sense.  If it were "unconditional tax cuts for the rich," that would be a different thing altogether, but these are tax breaks for struggling families, and for alternative energy.

                The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world goes from gray to colorful.

                by alkatt on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:40:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  And my point is that we have (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  divineorder

                  no idea what those tax breaks are.

                  I am saying something very simple: people are quoting a news story about a tax package the House killed last week, and telling us that this is the same package that is being tacked to the bailout, now.

                  (1) How do they know?  The Senate itself said it is not releasing details.

                  (2) Why would that work?  The idea is to get the House to pass the bill and the House killed that exact package last week.

                  •  Yes we do, at least according to what I read. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Phoenix Woman, LithiumCola

                    Link.

                    The Senate proposal would cost more than $100 billion and extend and expand many individual and business tax breaks, including tax credits for the production and use of renewable energy sources, like solar energy and wind power.

                    The bill would also extend the business tax credit for research and development, expand the child tax credit, protect millions of families from the alternative minimum tax and provide tax relief to victims of recent floods, tornadoes and severe storms.

                    Members of the House and the Senate said the bill would create tens of thousands of jobs and reduce the nations’ dependence on foreign oil. But the two chambers have been at odds over whether and how to offset the cost of extending the many tax breaks covered by the legislation. The major obstacle has been Representative Hoyer of Maryland and other centrist Democrats.

                    The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world goes from gray to colorful.

                    by alkatt on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:53:41 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  From that same article: (0+ / 0-)

                      The senators Tuesday night issued no details of their proposal and said none would be available until Wednesday. The lawmakers were gambling that the tax package would appeal to lawmakers who helped sink the measure in the House on Monday, without driving off Democrats who have opposed extending the tax incentives without offsetting spending cuts elsewhere.

                      I am attending to that.  I see your point about the details that you quote further down in the article.

                      I am not sure what to do with those to pieces of information: (1) No details are forthcoming.  (2) Here are some details.

          •  What do you mean the details are not yet avail? (0+ / 0-)

            Isn't it the rejected tax cut package?  Are you saying they are adding more tax cuts in addition to those reported?

          •  That's all??? WE HATE REPUBS GRR??? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            zenbowl, a wolf raised by boys

            All we know is that the tax breaks are designed to make conservative republicans happy

            If that's the only reason people are poised against this, without even looking at what they're for, people are seriously messed up and hyperpartisan.

            Issues actually still matter, you know.  If we're getting tax incentives for people and alternative energy, the Republicans themselves are screwed because it's a "tax cut" and they can't oppose it, even if they could give a rat's ass about the issue itself.

            The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world goes from gray to colorful.

            by alkatt on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:27:28 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Regarding the suggestion that I am seriously (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              srkp23, divineorder

              messed up.  My concern, as expressed in the comment you are responding to, is that the bill would probably pass anyway, with no alterations, if simply handed to the House again.  As for the idea that we might like the proposal if we saw it: sure.  That's possible.  But we haven't seen it, and I am not sure why alterations are needed in the first place.

        •  If you give a bank a free hand in accounting (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ssgbryan

          then you give them the ability to define their assets and liabilities however they like. Strict accounting is fundamental to banking, isn't it?
          Does't this just further deregulate them, allowing them to play MORE make-believe games with the money?
          This doesn't fix anything; it just allows them to dig themselves further into a hole.

          Whenever I is feeling a bit scrotty, a few gollops of frobscottle is always making me feel hopscotchy again. ~Roald Dahl

          by Andhakari on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  they're sprinkles on a turd sandwich (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ssgbryan, Veritas36
        •  Seems like (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Veritas36

          lipstick on a pig, to me.

          "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

          by wader on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:32:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I would also add that there are tax cuts (5+ / 0-)

        and then there are tax cuts.   These aren't the kind that Repubs typically like to dispense: they're renewable energy incentives, child care relief, natural disaster relief, etc.

        I am still not for the bill, but these cuts are not the bogeyman they appear to be when labeled under the generic "tax cuts."

      •  This is a big shakedown (0+ / 0-)

        You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

        by Cartoon Peril on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Source? (0+ / 0-)

      Do you have a source on that?  It would be an interesting data point.

      •  it's CQ Politics (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        socratic, weasel, Meng Bomin

           The tax plan passed the Senate last week, on a 93-2 vote. It included AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks. In a compromise worked out with Republicans, the bill does not pay for the AMT and disaster provisions but does have revenue offsets for part of the energy and extension measures.

           That wasn't enough for the House, which insisted that there be complete offsets for the energy and extension part of the package.

      •  In middle of Yahoo article (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        weasel

        The Senate measure will graft the bailout language to a tax bill it approved last week, on a 93-2 vote. It includes: a provision to prevent more than 20 million middle-class taxpayers from feeling the bite of the alternative minimum tax, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks.

        Yahoo news

        They also mention in that article adding mental health parity, since Bush has not signed the bill congress passed.

    •  I know. Use your stimulus checks (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      divineorder

      that will fix the economy.

      Deregulate my check book, McCain, yeah that's it, that's the ticket

      by 88kathy on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:19:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  ISM sux.....throw in a rate cut... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar
  •  hell no (6+ / 0-)

    stop this now, right now.

    This is ridiculous.

    No bailout causing banks to fail and straining the FDIC is better than this.

  •  This May Include the Renewable Energy Life Line (10+ / 0-)

    So I am for these add ons.  Otherwise the wind and solar industries shut down.

    "I can't believe that the noblest impulse of man-- his compassion for another-- can be completely dead here."

    by Daxman on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:08:19 AM PDT

  •  Calm down people (23+ / 0-)

    It's just part of Reid's secret plan to get Congressional approval ratings below 0, at which point they wrap back up to 100%.

  •  Lewis Black on bipartisanship: (26+ / 0-)

    Bipartisanship is when a Democrat stands up and says "I've got a really bad idea!"

    And then a Republican stands up and says, "And I can make it even shittier!"

    No, Madame Vice President, "Godzilla vs. Megalon" is not a Supreme Court case

    by Shelbyville Manhattan on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:08:50 AM PDT

  •  I'm with you. Kill the banksters' bailout bill. (10+ / 0-)

    "The most significant difference between now and a decade ago is the ... rapid erosion of spare capacities at critical segments of energy chains." Cheney, 2001

    by Akonitum on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:08:53 AM PDT

  •  is the Senate adopting McSames motto... (5+ / 0-)

    COUNTRY (CLUB) FIRST!!

    a crying shame!!!

    Oh, Jesus: protect me from your followers!

    by trippinsf on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:09:13 AM PDT

  •  Welcome, Hunter! (12+ / 0-)

    We don't need any bailout at all.  We're being blackmailed, and this time (for once) let's make the blackmailers fold first.  

    I'm not unhappy about the business tax cuts, because they'll lose more Dems than the Republicans they pick up, and the thing should lose by a wider margin next time.  

    When Lou Dobbs is the last vestige of sanity on TV, you know we're really up the creek--but when I saw how jovial Kaptur and DeFazio were yesterday, really enjoying the no-bailout battle (as opposed to the usual sad-sack aspect liberals have when fighting kleptocracy), I really started to think this one is winnable for real.

    -5.38/-3.74 I've suffered for my country. Now it's your turn! --John McCain with apologies to Monty Python's "Protest Song"

    by Rich in PA on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:09:34 AM PDT

  •  A fundamental question: (11+ / 0-)

    Do you want the response to the economic crisis to be controlled entirely by the Bush Administration?

    If so, support the Paulson plan - House or Senate version. The $700 billion can all be spent by January 19th 2009. It's equal to about 18 months of ALL discretionary domestic spending, so it leaves President Obama or President McCain with no flexibility to mount their own plan.

    If you would rather minimize the dependence on the competence and motives of the Bush Administration find another way of intervening.

    •  Is it possible that the wise old Dems (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      4Freedom

      haven't even been working on a comprehensive fix to the banking industry BEFORE all this went down? If leadership hasn't been preparing to do something before now, they should admit their incompetence and move aside for leadership who want to put forward a DEMOCRATIC bill with democratic values. Reid and company just want to play footsie with the Rethugs.
      Man, forgive me for visions of Chamberlain in the rain with a blank piece of paper in his hand.

      Whenever I is feeling a bit scrotty, a few gollops of frobscottle is always making me feel hopscotchy again. ~Roald Dahl

      by Andhakari on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:36:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Paulson's "Treasury Boys" made it clear (0+ / 0-)

      that even though the 700 billion is segmented in bill, they can grab all 700 at once if they want to.

      They also said the executive compensation restrictions are farcical.

      Lastly, Paulson is screeching and getting down on one knee begging, saying this has to be done Now, but apparently he has no plans to do his "injections" for several weeks.

      We're being swindled.  And all our lawmakers care about is getting out of DC to work on their elections.

      The House web site is virtually shut down with response about the bailout from constituents.  They had to take emergency measures, limiting emails, to keep it up and running.

      "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson

      by joanneleon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:42:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  how we can throw a tax cut in there (4+ / 0-)

    is really beyond me and now is definitely not the time to have a tax cut... But I guess the Right only responds to things with a tax cut and how sickening..

    Be thine own palace, or the world's thy jail. John Donne (1572-1631)

    by ebbinflo on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:09:44 AM PDT

  •  It's PRIMARY time. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Uberbah, alkalinesky, lisastar, axel000

    House members can slip under radar, and they have safe seats.  But Senators are vulnerable.

    But if any Dem dares to try to tax f'n tax cuts onto this bill, that calls for a Primary Challenge.

    We should start raising money now.

  •  can I just send an email to Harry Reid (7+ / 0-)

    w/ the following:

    "Fuck you, you fucking fucks!"

    ARRRRRRGH! I can't take it anymore!!!

    "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds" --Ralph Waldo Emerson (Hear that, George??)

    by still small voice on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:10:06 AM PDT

  •  Is there someone else up there we could talk to? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LithiumCola, Cartoon Peril

    ...crickets...

    mj

  •  Call it a day until January 21 2009. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox, Cartoon Peril, Uberbah, axel000, kir

    When the adults can work on economics.

    St. Ronnie was an asshole.

    by manwithnoname on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:10:14 AM PDT

    •  Bullshit (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Flippant, Uberbah

      These are supposed to be the fucking adults - they have a fucking majority!

      We need Obama's leadership now.  This is a fucking disgrace.

      "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin, R.I.P. (1937-2008)

      by Alfonso Nevarez on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:19:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Forget the GOP and the crap they want. The Dems (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Alfonso Nevarez, mchestnutjr

        can do their own plan, pass it, and we all can pressure the President to sign the damn thing or the GOP will suffer the consequences for many, many years. Why do they have to please Repugs when their ideas are for shit?! They are more of the same policies that have put us in the craphole we are now in.

        I mean, really -- what the hell is their problem? Why can't they say, "thanks for your ideas, but they suck royally and hurt most Americans, so we dont need that kind of help. Now get out of our way..."

        Is out politics that broken and backwards (OK, bad question...)

  •  The goats and sharks line... (12+ / 0-)

    was the greatest piece of rant I've ever read.  No, really, it brought tears of respect to my eyes.

    I'll be using that soon, in a rant of my own.  And I am grateful.

  •  Duh. that's why all the progressives (6+ / 0-)

    who thought the defeat in the House was a good thing were fooling themselves.

    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

    by Geekesque on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:10:23 AM PDT

  •  health (5+ / 0-)

    We seem in a rush to fix problems in credit markets but no hurry to fix healthcare.  We ain't what we used to be--a caring country (or was that just in the high school history books).

  •  We need a new Senate Majority Leader in '09 (7+ / 0-)

    Please let it be Hillary or Feingold.

    Government for the people, by the people

    by axel000 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:10:27 AM PDT

  •  Pretty sure you are overreacting (9+ / 0-)

    the tax cuts are essentially just the AMT patch and the continuation of the renewable energy tax credits, plus one for coal.

  •  Don't understand the tax cuts. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cali Scribe, Cartoon Peril, 4Freedom

    What is Reid thinking? Now is not the time for tax cuts.

    -5.25, -6.31 "Fascism is capitalism plus murder." - Upton Sinclair

    by butchergirl on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:10:46 AM PDT

    •  Any good Democrats in Nevada? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      butchergirl

      Might be time to start working on a primary challenger for 2010, unless we can talk him into retiring -- we should be rolling back the Bush tax cuts, not adding to them, unless the tax cuts benefit the middle class and small businesses caught in the credit crunch...not the fat cats who caused this fuckup.

    •  That he can get Republican support by giving them (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      butchergirl

      something that they already had -- which was bipartisan support for a good set of tax credits that were going to expire.

      Its like giving away nothing.

      Disclosure: Proud to be the Volunteer coordinator for Indiana for WesPAC

      by ElaineinIN on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:29:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  there's a lot of good stuff in there (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      butchergirl

      The tax cuts - as far as I can tell - are credits for alternative energy, a cut for low income home owners, and a change to the alternative minimum tax.  These are changes I can get behind.  I also support the mental health parity and raising the limits of the FDIC.

      However, the mark-to-market nonsense should be a poison pill.  No self respecting democrat should vote for that, and I intend on letting my senators know.

      Strangely the media doesn't seem to want to cover the mark to market bit.  Here's CNN

      The AP really lays it out:

      Blunt also said he believes there's a better chance of getting the legislation enacted in the wake of a move to ease Security and Exchange Commission accounting rules in a way that would give businesses more leeway in how they value their assets.

      Bloomberg:

      WaPo:

      LA Times:

      An effort is underway to add some accounting relief for companies that have to revalue mortgage-related holdings.

      WSJ:

      NYT:

      Based on the picture the media is paining, it looks like a good bill.  It'd be nice to hear the whole story from them.

  •  Is the Senate drunk? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    4Freedom, Uberbah

    You have exactly 10 seconds to change that look of disgusting pity into one of enormous respect!

    by Cartoon Peril on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:11:06 AM PDT

  •  Believe it Hunter, believe it (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Flippant, divineorder, abraxas

    Who emboldening them to do stuff like this?  Kosaacks right on this blog crying like babies that their stock investments are down.  Pathetic.

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:11:06 AM PDT

  •  The AMT adjustment is okay. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phoenix Woman, Cali Scribe, missLotus

    But I can't imagine why they'd want to float so many tax cuts, other than it's an election year and they want to disintegrate the "Obama will tax you more" meme before the election.  Which is lame, agreed.

    All I can say is, nothing is permanent.  With a bigger majority, all this can be reversed.

    The Obama/Biden Inaugural -- the exact moment when the world goes from gray to colorful.

    by alkatt on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:11:07 AM PDT

  •  I am flabbergasted (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox, Mambo, axel000

    I am sick.

    Honestly, they are talking tax cuts and MORE deregulation?

    I don't even know what to say to that.  

  •  I'm writing on this now (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    4Freedom, In her own Voice

    Thank you, Hunter, great work.

    The answer is no.  En-no, no.  NO.  NO.

    It can be a very difficult concept for many people.  Looks like they'll have a tough time on this one, bummer.

  •  Un-Fucking-Real (5+ / 0-)

    Tax cuts? Are they out of their mind? It's time to isolate the far-right nutjobs, not to let them control the agenda.

    Canada - where a pack of smokes is ten bucks and a heart transplant is free.

    by dpc on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:11:43 AM PDT

  •  I can't stand any of these politicians anymore. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox, wobbledon, gdwtch52

    I can't listen to them, can't watch them.

  •  Unfuckingbelieveable (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gdwtch52, math4barack

    Reid is the biggest fucking sellout of all time.  Fuck fuck fuck.

    Times like these leave one no swear words to spare!

    by masondav2004 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:18 AM PDT

  •  Puts Obama in a little box--vote NO on a bad bill (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox, dss, 4Freedom

    and risk being labeled "obstructionist" for the consumer; or vote FOR it and pass  a terrible bill. Even if this passes the Senate; it fails in the house.

    Disaster ahead.

    The White House will be The People's House--B.Obama

    by Phil S 33 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:19 AM PDT

    •  those of you with blue dog or GOP representatives (0+ / 0-)

      They might listen to you this time.

      The tax cut provisions in this bill (even though they are good) are not paid for, if we want this bill defeated they are the people to do it.

  •  At what point (0+ / 0-)

    do we storm the castle.

    I hope that if the worst happens and another truly large depression does come, the American people have the collective resolve to tar and feather all these people. We can send them out into the ocean on a garbage barge with an ample supply of food, water, and talking points, and whichever country wants its economy similarly wrecked is welcome to give them a home.

    Amen.

  •  Dems should make a better bill uniting (8+ / 0-)

    with the progressive Dems instead of the conservative Republicans.

    This is very bad and I am most disappointed that Obama would support this even worse bill.

    There is a majority of democrats in the house..This is not necessary to get a rescue passed!

    This does not bode well for Obama's ability to increase taxes on the rich and cut them for the middle class, increase regulation etc....

    It ties his hands.

    A bad bill made critically worse

  •  this is such a stupid idea and the Dem's are (9+ / 0-)

    missing a great opportunity to absoluely fuck over the rethugs once and for all.

     What is needed is a short term Democratic led rescue package to restore confidence in the banking sector while protecting taxpayers to get us through until January when the next POTUS and congress can enact long term structural reform.

      It should be crafted to be modest in its price tag, it should be easy to explain and sell to the majority of taxpayers who are oppossed to the bailout because it is so expensive and directed to wall street.

      Pelosi should be able to muster enough Dem votes and a few of the more responsible GOP types that know something must be done to ensure passage...let the majority of the house GOP go on record as giving main street the finger when they needed a hand.

    "The fundamentals of my economy are strong" ...John McCain

    by polticoscott on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:47 AM PDT

    •  Probably never make it through the Senate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Andhakari

      Still very much worth trying, though.

    •  That proposal is too, too reasonable and misses (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eaglecries, FishBiscuit

      the point that there is enormous pressure from institutions, both within and without the financial sector, to get a last lick in before Obama  enters the WH, as well as to ease the fears that have been generated in the credit markets.

      A Democratic president will leave no room for doubt as to who will take the blame when the economy goes south. For the last four years it has become clearer and clearer that Republicans are going to rip off our economy for whatever they can and leave the Democrats as the fall guys.

      What is happening behind the curtain is that some of the wizards pulling the strings have bought off or otherwise compromised many Democrats. I'm reminded of the anthrax scare in Leahy's office years ago. He was a much feistier opponent for the Republicans before that incident. He is presently wavering in his support for a bailout, despite constituent objections.

      I'm hoping a reasonable solution like you propose can be accomplished. But with the declining 401ks and tightening credit markets, fear is rampant, and fear can cloud reason. Clouded reason can permit the Pelosi/Reid Democrats to ram through a bad plan unless voters raise an even stronger clamor.

      McCain = Bush on steroids. -Pat Buchanan

      by 4Freedom on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:32:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  yes! a modest, short-term "rescue" pkg. (0+ / 0-)

      so the alternatives can really be discussed.    

  •  Are you even aware that's a popular tax cut bill? (9+ / 0-)

    That was voted on because it has tax credits for child care, renewable energy, research and development, and the AMT Patch? That is a GOOD Tax bill.

  •  According to the nooz (10+ / 0-)

    the "added" tax breaks are:

    "AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks."

    Those don't really look that bad to me.

    I support Barack America and his trusted sidekick Joe Delaware!

    by socratic on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:12:59 AM PDT

    •  as typical horse trading (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sparhawk, eaglecries, 4Freedom

      maybe not.

      but as a plan to pay for a $700 billion loan from taxpayers, it sucks.

      any tax cut that make this thing politically feasible is in effect passing on the cost to our kids. and I say that as someone who pays AMT and is a supporter of some sort of rescue package that gets these toxic assets out of the way so normal banking/credit activity can continue.

  •  Umm yes lets fund a $700 billion dollar bail out (5+ / 0-)

    by cutting taxes. Thats just as brilliant as funding a trillion dollar war by cutting taxes. Hell we can just borrow more money or if other countries decide that UST-bills are no longer a good investment we can just print more money. The people who get hurt the most are just the peasants errr umm never mind. If you are worth $100 million dollars its really not that bad if all of a sudden that $100 million is only woth $60 million. However if you make $2000 a month but all of a sudden that $2000 doesn't pay the rent, put food on the table and fill your gas tank or worst yet you lose your job, well your pretty much screwed.

    The new republican slogan: privatizing profit / socializing loss.

    by ryan81 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:03 AM PDT

  •  Nice rant, but... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gdwtch52

    How 'bout providing some phone numbers and emails so we can contact these schmucks and kick the hell out of them.

  •  And of course Congress' web sites are down (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mosesfreeman, 4Freedom

    so no one can comment on this absurdity.

    "Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it." ML King

    by TheWesternSun on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:08 AM PDT

  •  OK, ok (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar

    I was willing to go along at first, in the interest of speed.  And, at least we had the opportunity to recoup some of the money.

    If they throw this in there, I'm done.

    Fuck this.

    The dogs are in the motherfuckin' street

    by GenXWho on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:21 AM PDT

  •  massive tax increase (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mosesfreeman, bee tzu

    Unless we're willing to nuke Tokyo, Singapore, Beijing, Moscow, and a string of smaller cities around the corner from the Straight of Hormuz we're going to be up to our asses in increased taxes. This is electioneering and it won't stand the light of day when a new Congress takes office - we'd be selling Aegis cruisers on Ebay if taxes are reduced ...

  •  Plenty of money to bailout the rich bastards (10+ / 0-)

    None for healthcare.
    None for infrastructure.
    None for SCHIP.
    None for Katrina.

    Bottom up, people.

    If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

    by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:32 AM PDT

    •  Exactly! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishBiscuit, lisastar

      Take this money and put it into education.  Let's "bail out" all of those young people who are shouldering huge amounts of debt in order to get the most basic of educations.  Let's put it into providing health care for all so that people aren't going bankrupt and defaulting on loans due to one medical emergency.  

  •  What we DO NOT need is more de-regulation! (5+ / 0-)

    Who is this guy, Obama? Find out the facts at http://obamascrapbook.com

    by PeacePuppy on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:13:49 AM PDT

  •  Can't win the game playing by (3+ / 0-)

    the rules?  Well, just change the rules.  That's what they're doing.  

    I'm understanding this concept less and less.  If we agree that our current problem was caused by a "bubble", then why are we trying to maintain that bubble?  We'll be back in this same spot in two years.

  •  The purpose of politics is power (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar, speedingpullet

    and we don't have any.  What was done covertly has been done openly in this administration, and now it's too late.

    I woke up feeling mildly irritable.  Right now I feel like I could hammer my file cabinet into sheet metal with my bare hands.

    "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

    by escapee on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:14:05 AM PDT

  •  To BushCo: FIND OUR MONEY and PUT IT BACK (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bee tzu

    Diary is up: BushCo and "lost money". Details on these pirates will come out bit by bit until they comply.

    -- the Sicilian princess

    What is the foundation of *your* client relationship to Planet Earth?

    by LRLine on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:14:41 AM PDT

  •  On a calmer note (0+ / 0-)

    They were only short twelve votes. Minor progressive tweaks to the existing plan to entice a few more Democrats, if they were populist tweaks, would not have scared off any Republicans already voting for it.

    And it might have been enough to tip the balance and not have to pander.

    "Instead of prosperity trickling down, the pain has trickled up..." - Barack Obama.

    by Bobs Telecaster on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:14:44 AM PDT

  •  Lolol (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, Amor Y Risa

    "I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun."

    Brilliant.

  •  The Paulson plus gifts plan (0+ / 0-)

    sucks for taxpayers.

    What are the best plans out there that lets the market or top one percenters pay for this?

    How about adding a stock transaction tax. There is alot of churning in the market and a penny or so added to a transaction could add up fast.

    Republicans : Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor

    by ctsteve on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:15:00 AM PDT

  •  Fuck Reid...and while were at it, fuck Obama. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, abraxas

    Where the hell is our nominee?

  •  That isn't the worst part.... (3+ / 0-)

    the tax cuts/credits/whatever...

    They are the GOOD part of the bill..

    AMT relief, Alternative energy credit (Solar/Wind/Geothermal) extensions.. These are the GOOD things.

    After those, what you have is the bill, and the mark-to-whatever we say rule.  Still no oversight (except the Sternly Worded LEtter(TM).  Still buying Anything, even if there are unknown derivitive(sp) risk, even if there are NO ASSETS underneath (see CA Heloc loan paper, credit card paper).

    The Tax parts are the good.  I don't know about the Mental Health aspects, but I could be for those sight unseen if the Dems like that part.  The rest of the bill is the bill.  

    Talk about Lipstick on a Pig, this will probably be Lipstick on Cthulu.

    Hopefully I'm dead wrong, but it comes back to the key question:  

    If George Bush, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Henry Paulson, Helicopter Ben, John McCain, and John Boehner are for something---and Godwin's law doesn't apply---, doesn't one have to question it?  A Lot?

  •  The Last Disastrous Act of the 110th Congress (6+ / 0-)

    or maybe not.  Perhaps they can do some things that are even worse by January.

    Do they want to throw away this election?  Really, how can Reid and Dodd send Obama in to vote for this?  It feels like a sabotage.  He will take a big hit in the polls, and McCain will turn around and vote against it.

    The only good thing about this is that the Blue Dogs will never support it, so it should go down in the House, even if the Senate traitors push it through.  This Senate has been selling us out, over and over and over again.

    Check out Jim Webb's speech on the Senate floor yesterday.  He sounds very skeptical of this bill, and brought up some great points about how this needs to be "tightened up" and how Paulson is being given too much power, and how he has potential conflicts of interest.  The weird thing though, was that even as Webb was bringing up these very valid points, he sounded a bit sheepish, and afraid to speak against it.

    This has got to stop now.  Pass an emergency bill with 50 billion for Paulson to get by with.  Don't let him make the grab for the whole 700 billion at once, as it seems he is planning to do, based on the Treasury/Wall St. conference call leaks.

    As strange as it sounds, I'm hoping for a full revolt by the House, with the progressives and the conservative Republicans coming up with some palatable plan that has a good chance of working.  Given some time, I believe they can come up with it and I'll bet they can sway a lot of Reps.  It's clear that the leadership on both sides does not have control.

    "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson

    by joanneleon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:15:53 AM PDT

    •  Didn't you hear Obama's speech in Reno yesterday? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joanneleon

      Reid and Dodd are doing what Obama wants.

      "If a company is too big to fail, it is too big to exist." Sen. Bernie Sanders

      by Sagebrush Bob on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:35:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm not sure who is pushing whom (0+ / 0-)

        But I know that Obama is out there selling it.  However, he's doing it in a very strange way, talking out of both sides of his mouth.

        The thing that bothered me most about yesterdays speech was this:

        I’ve also said that if I’m President, I will review the entire plan on the day I take office to make sure that it is working to save our economy and that you are getting your money back.

        I found that statement to be pathetic.  First rail against Wall St. and pretend to defend the taxpayers, then say you're voting to hand them 700 billion, tell people to stop calling it a bailout, and then promise to make it all better - LATER.

        Pathetic.

        "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson

        by joanneleon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:51:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  What a bunch of ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox

    fracking idiots. So, they are going to buy off anywhere from 12 to 100 or so individuals in order to screw a few hundred million. Nice.

    "We can have democracy in this country, or we can have great wealth concentrated in the hands of a few, but we can't have both." - Louis D. Brandeis

    by VA6thDem on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:15:55 AM PDT

  •  Perfect (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    paradox, mcurry, In her own Voice

    the Congress of the Corporate States of America is now in session.  And spare me that "United States of America" stuff, the various branches of government have combined in recent years to tear every piece of the Constitution of that now dead entity into tiny little shreds.  And justified it on the basis of partisan political advantage...

  •  They are Good Tax Cuts - REALLY (10+ / 0-)

    The tax cuts are a fix of the AMT - (This is a middle class tax cut) and extending the renewal energy Tax cuts.

    Not all tax cuts are bad.

    And as far as modifying the Mark to Market rules if done intelligently - that means modifying them not getting rid of them it should help correct the current distortion they are creating.

    I am Dyslexic, it is a battle (which I often lose) to write without error. Thanks in advance for putting up with my mistakes

    by jmorton on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:16:23 AM PDT

  •  More tax cuts for the filthy rich? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mcurry

    So that Congress will vote for the Wall Street bailout bill which will hand over $700 billion of taxes from average Americans to the same filthy rich who are responsible for this mess?
    Someone is being led by the nose in this country, and it ain't the filthy rich.
    Perhaps it's time for this country of exploited bozos to explode.

    We're shocked by a naked nipple, but not by naked aggression.

    by Lepanto on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:16:52 AM PDT

  •  Take A Deep Breath, Hunter (and everyone else) (9+ / 0-)

    This is a stopgap measure.  Stop reading too deeply into it and getting your undies in a bunch.

    Congress has to pass something that 1) Bush will sign and 2) both parties will agree to for mutual cover.

    Yes, an aggressive Democratic bill would be great...but it would not get signed (let alone pass atm).

    Let this be, and then double down and fight all the more furiously for Obama and a Democratic Congress.  Once they are secure in their power we can hold them to their word.  No more excuses then.  THEN!

    Today is the tomorrow we worried about yesterday.

    by Long Haul on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:03 AM PDT

    •  1. The Money's gone in 2 weeks.. (6+ / 0-)
      1. We never get that back..
      1. Nothing in this bill forces them to loan one red cent.  A good chunk of the up to 90% PROFIT to the banks may just sit in the vault, or in reserves, with the FED paying them interest.  
      1.  PAulson and Bernanke are the oversight board?
      •  Which is why (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tony26

        the sane thing is to break the $700 billion into chunks, creating a much smaller fund that is replenished quarterly, subject to ongoing good behavior.

        Giving anybody carte blanche for up to $700 billion at one time is insane.

        However, a long term commitment of up to $700 billion can probably do the job for a lot less than $700 billion, and keep people, if not exactly honest, at least prudent.

        The important thing is to create confidence.   A big commitment is probably necessary for this.  Carte blanche is not.

        I've lost my faith in nihilism

        by grumpynerd on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:05:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  NOW! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      In her own Voice

      If not now, when? Oh, right..."then".

      NOW!

    •  I'm all for political finesse on this (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      4Freedom, In her own Voice

      if dems knew how to play...but this money will disappear, nothing done to change the problem, and fat cats laughing their asses off while they stuff their bank accounts.

      There are no guarantees Nov 4 and nothing will come easy even if Obama wins

      If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

      by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Then cut the money back to $200B (0+ / 0-)

      the way Trapper suggested yesterday if you want a stopgap measure. That way we can revisit the issue in January/February when we've hopefully got real adults running the country.

      We rushed into Iraq without considering the consequences, and we know where that got us -- we've probably spent close to $700B on that sinkhole anyway. I don't want to throw another $700B into a similar sinkhole without a lot of safeguards and oversight, plus knowing that the assholes who caused the mess are going to help feel the pain of cleaning it up.

    •  Don't you see? This is class warfare! (3+ / 0-)

      Did the stock market go up yesterday because hope returned to Wall Street? Give me a break! Once again, the greedy haves just bought up quality stocks on the cheap like it was the day after friggin Xmas sale. These lying SOBs broke this country and now they have to pay. No Bailout! Let's see legislation that takes care of our middle class and let's have the top take care of themselves. They always have, they always will.

      Sure one could argue that things could get a lot worse.
      This is another 700 billion down the GOP crapper, when is enough really enough?

      Livin' the Murkin Dream!

      by smartinez on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:31:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Remember Cash to Iraq? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mosesfreeman

      Remember cash to Iraq?  When will we see our return on this outflow?

      Photobucket

      And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

      by In her own Voice on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:08:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh that paid for itself! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        In her own Voice

        Many many times over in fact, with all of the Iraqi oil revenue we generated.... right after we finished cleaning up all of the flowers they gave us after being greeted as Liberators.

        Where have you been all of this time? Obviously not watching Fox News! Don't you trust your President?????

        Why do you hate America?

  •  F___ the Finger Pointing - FROG MARCH! (6+ / 0-)

    Nothing will restore confidence in the US Financial Markets like seeing those responsible for lying us into this collapse being marched off to jail with their faces hidden under Armani suit jackets.

    Livin' the Murkin Dream!

    by smartinez on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:03 AM PDT

  •  Replace Mark to Market w/ Shark to Rocket (3+ / 0-)

    Rocket full of plan infused goat fed sharks to the sun!!!

    I love it.

  •  Kill It! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, smartinez

    A desperately bad bill.  We need to knock their phones off their desks.

  •  OBAMA--this is your chance to vote NO!!!!! (6+ / 0-)

    harry reid is intentionally handing you a populist stick...now beat the drum and vote NO!!! or mccain will...

  •  Why would they tar and feather them when (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan, FishBiscuit, audiored, LRLine

    they pushed for this crap,  The reason is that the stock market is going down.  Boo F-ing Hoo!  That's how stock markets are.  They go up, they go down.  If you weren't prepared for that, why did you invest in it?

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:17:57 AM PDT

    •  Markets go up and down (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ssgbryan

      If you are not prepared for the Bear, prepare to get mauled. If you are nervous, go now, go into cash or T-bills because no magic bullet is going to make this stabilize.

      What is the foundation of *your* client relationship to Planet Earth?

      by LRLine on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:59:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  kos finally whipped you line, eh? (2+ / 0-)

    evstatus.com - Status of the Electoral College

    by FleetAdmiralJ on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:18:01 AM PDT

  •  the money all blew away in the (0+ / 0-)

    dust bowl
    these is hard times pardner
    it's all dusty
    there's no crops in the fields.
    we lost the homestead

    and as Paula Poundstone said it won't be long till we are sucking Rose O Sharon's teat.

    Deregulate my check book, McCain, yeah that's it, that's the ticket

    by 88kathy on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:18:10 AM PDT

  •  any actual DETAILS? (0+ / 0-)

    the story I read said increase FDIC insurance limits, add it to change in the AMT tax to help the middle class, but no detail on what exactly a "business tax cut" means.

    I am NOT in favor of reducing corporate taxes, they have been reduced enough!!!

    louise 'hussein' to you! proud donor to "White Dudes for Obama" Endorsed 11/1/07 and never looked back!

    by louisev on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:18:15 AM PDT

    •  Don't need the AMT cut either (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mcurry, alkalinesky

      That's another bullshit crisis that Dems have fallen for.  If you don't have excessive deductions you won't get hit with AMT.  Find a competent tax acoountant and it won't be an issue even though technically you are in the income range where it could be a problem.  F the AMT tax cut.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:20:33 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  here (0+ / 0-)

         The tax plan passed the Senate last week, on a 93-2 vote. It included AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks. In a compromise worked out with Republicans, the bill does not pay for the AMT and disaster provisions but does have revenue offsets for part of the energy and extension measures.

         That wasn't enough for the House, which insisted that there be complete offsets for the energy and extension part of the package.

      •  I find how people here get all worked up (2+ / 0-)

        without bothering to learn the facts really terrifying.

        Our economy is about to crash, really crash. This isn't about fat cats. This is about making sure that average folks keep their jobs, houses, etc.

        Without this, companies won't make payroll, small businesses won't have the credit they need to buy raw materials, etc.

        Forget who is to blame, this country's economy (and the world's for that matter) is based on credit. If there is no credit there is no economy.

        •  No it isn't (0+ / 0-)

          It is about getting the taxpayer to buy worthless debt instruments.

        •  Sadly, with or without this... (0+ / 0-)

          companies still won't make payroll, credit still won't move, and many many jobs will still be lost.
          They've been throwing money at this for over a year (up to $810 billion so far).
          This won't do a damn thing but mollify the markets for a day or so.
          Enjoy the short two days of euphoria that we "DID SOMETHING!"
          Then get ready for the next big idea.

    •  reading the bill (4+ / 0-)

      The sections under the business taxes are

           SEC. 301. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF RESEARCH CREDIT.

           SEC. 302. NEW MARKETS TAX CREDIT.

           SEC. 303. SUBPART F EXCEPTION FOR ACTIVE FINANCING INCOME.

           SEC. 304. EXTENSION OF LOOK-THRU RULE FOR RELATED CONTROLLED FOREIGN CORPORATIONS.

           SEC. 306. MODIFICATION OF TAX TREATMENT OF CERTAIN PAYMENTS TO CONTROLLING EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS.

           SEC. 307. BASIS ADJUSTMENT TO STOCK OF S CORPORATIONS MAKING CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PROPERTY.

           SEC. 308. INCREASE IN LIMIT ON COVER OVER OF RUM EXCISE TAX TO PUERTO RICO AND THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

           SEC. 309. EXTENSION OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CREDIT FOR AMERICAN SAMOA.

           SEC. 310. EXTENSION OF MINE RESCUE TEAM TRAINING CREDIT.

           SEC. 311. EXTENSION OF ELECTION TO EXPENSE ADVANCED MINE SAFETY EQUIPMENT.

           SEC. 312. DEDUCTION ALLOWABLE WITH RESPECT TO INCOME ATTRIBUTABLE TO DOMESTIC PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES IN PUERTO RICO.

           SEC. 313. QUALIFIED ZONE ACADEMY BONDS.

           `SEC. 54E. QUALIFIED ZONE ACADEMY BONDS.

           SEC. 314. INDIAN EMPLOYMENT CREDIT.

           SEC. 315. ACCELERATED DEPRECIATION FOR BUSINESS PROPERTY ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS.

           SEC. 316. RAILROAD TRACK MAINTENANCE.

           SEC. 317. SEVEN-YEAR COST RECOVERY PERIOD FOR MOTORSPORTS RACING TRACK FACILITY.

           SEC. 318. EXPENSING OF ENVIRONMENTAL REMEDIATION COSTS.

           SEC. 319. EXTENSION OF WORK OPPORTUNITY TAX CREDIT FOR HURRICANE KATRINA EMPLOYEES.

           SEC. 320. EXTENSION OF INCREASED REHABILITATION CREDIT FOR STRUCTURES IN THE GULF OPPORTUNITY ZONE.

           SEC. 321. ENHANCED DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED COMPUTER CONTRIBUTIONS.

           SEC. 322. TAX INCENTIVES FOR INVESTMENT IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

           SEC. 323. ENHANCED CHARITABLE DEDUCTIONS FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF FOOD INVENTORY.

           SEC. 324. EXTENSION OF ENHANCED CHARITABLE DEDUCTION FOR CONTRIBUTIONS OF BOOK INVENTORY.

           SEC. 325. EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF DUTY SUSPENSION ON WOOL PRODUCTS; WOOL RESEARCH FUND; WOOL DUTY REFUNDS.

      Most of the actual text is mumbo-jumbo editing the US Code, so some of it I'm not totally sure what it's saying.

      evstatus.com - Status of the Electoral College

      by FleetAdmiralJ on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:24:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  thank you!! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        slinkerwink, MelSC

        that helps. I was wondering if they were sweetening the pot with some of the "GOP plan" from last week, but it looks like they are putting in some extensions on things that are popular with Republicans that won't be toxic to Democrats.

        louise 'hussein' to you! proud donor to "White Dudes for Obama" Endorsed 11/1/07 and never looked back!

        by louisev on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:30:14 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Kill it! (0+ / 0-)

    Hunter is right.  If something is made this bad just to pass then it must suck.

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:18:48 AM PDT

  •  ExElephants diary has senate phones (0+ / 0-)

    If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

    by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:18:53 AM PDT

  •  someone encourage me to drive to Sedona (0+ / 0-)

    re: driving up highway 89A to park and post a sign.... serenity in Sedona to practice her soundbites......?  It's not that remote...Hidden Valley road only a few miles from highway 89A south of Sedona..... a sign that says what - something intelligent like "McCain is a liar?"
    and DPS moving me on my way?

  •  At this point (0+ / 0-)

    I just want the stupid thing done.  I think it is necessary and I want the stinker to be supported by everyone.  

  •  to paraphrase the good Rev Wright (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar

    God damn the Democratic party.

    All right, everybody be cool, this is a robbery! -GW Bush

    by audiored on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:20:03 AM PDT

  •  This is beyond absurd. (0+ / 0-)

    Bail out the rich and give them tax cuts to boot?  Help, I am stuck in an alternate universe!

    •  it's not bailing out the rich (6+ / 0-)

      These are the actual tax cuts:

         The tax plan passed the Senate last week, on a 93-2 vote. It included AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks. In a compromise worked out with Republicans, the bill does not pay for the AMT and disaster provisions but does have revenue offsets for part of the energy and extension measures.

         That wasn't enough for the House, which insisted that there be complete offsets for the energy and extension part of the package.

      Hunter needs to get his facts straight about this bill before he goes off on his rant.

      •  tax cuts for coal factories? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tanya

        Gee slinkerwink, that's mighty progressive for you.  Let's pump even more crap into the atmosphere.

        AMT tax - bogus issue!

        "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

        by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:24:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The Bailout Is Grafted Onto That Tax Bill (6+ / 0-)

        The bailout measures are being grafted onto the AMT bill to extort the public into supporting it.  The bailout measures themselves are a giveaway, and undo reforms put in place after Enron.  

        This talk of doing away with mark-to-market is just going to encourage more fraud.  The capital gains tax breaks are just giveaways to the rich.

        This bill needs to die.  I doubt Pelosi will even bring it to her caucus.

      •  Which expiring tax breaks? (0+ / 0-)

        It is all pretty vague and I will err on the side of caution and mistrust in this congress to say that I don't believe they won't give away the house to win.

      •  Yes it is a bailout for the rich (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        ssgbryan

        I think the mind games worked on you; they put in some mildly progressive tax cuts to distract you from the SEVEN HUNDRED BILLION DOLLARS THEY'RE GIVING TO CORRUPT WALL STREET FIRMS!

        Keep your EYE on the BALL, citizen!

        We're in this together you idiot. No wonder this country hasn't improved; it's filled with idiots who wave around "Dem" and "GOP" like they're baseball teams.

        by Dragonchild on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:35:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Democrats wonder why there is so little enthusiam (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Tanya

      this year.  If it weren't for Obama I think alot of us would just stay home.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:21:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hunter, tell us how you really feel (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, Tanya, In her own Voice

    Nice rant.

    Really all this thing is missing is a complimentary toaster oven.

    You know, so we can eat cake.

  •  UN-BE-lievable! It's revolt time fellow citizens! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, Tanya, FishBiscuit, Ham08

    There needs to be a transaction TAX and more regulations in this frickin' bill, not tax cuts and deregulation -- which is, ah -- what helped to get us into this damn mess. My level of anger and frustration with these spineless morons that are supposed to be representing US (the majority of citizens -- remember us?) is beyond description. Our representatives keep screwing us over as they talk about how concerned they are about "the American People"?

    Yeah - right. They're fed up with Wall Street and those greedy corporate interests? Really? Why then, pray tell, do they continue to scrub our already infected wounds with a god-damned brillo pad while they ask if those same greed monsters need their feet massaged? Answer me that...please....you freakin' assholes.

    I can't stand it. I just can't stand it anymore.

  •  Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    smartinez, Tanya

    They're like brainless robo-dolls.

  •  This is sickening. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, Tanya, FishBiscuit, abraxas, Ham08

    Why is Obama supporting this?  It certainly does not reflect his own list of requirements.

    I feel like I have a split personality today.  On one hand, I am totally disgusted and saddened by the Democratic party leadership.  On the other hand, I am happy to see Obama doing so well in the polls, while I am pissed at him for supporting this bullshit bailout bill (Oh, I forget, call it a rescue and everything is ok).

    One thing is for sure - as an institution, the Congress is totally worthless.  Which makes it all the more important to elect Obama.  President Obama would never have let this mess happen in the first place.

    Any party that would lie to start a war would also steal an election.

    by landrew on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:22:37 AM PDT

  •  How about a tax increase on the people with the (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tanya, lisastar, temptxan, Ham08

    money? You know, those 1% that hold 50% of all the wealth.

    They have the money. Tax 'em and that should finance the $700B everyone is talking about.

  •  The Dems are about to screw all of us peasants. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tanya

    I say, it's time for the peasants to use the "nuclear option."

    Which is to say, screw the House and Senate Dems.  Vote for someone else, or just stay home.

    Yeah, I know.  That means the Refucks take control.

    But it really won't matter very much, and besides, they'll self-destruct.

    Then the rebuilding process can begin.

    Bailout Plan B is bad beyond words.

    I'm deranged....

  •  Flaming death it is. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Tanya

    You write:

    So fine, my position has changed. I was previously "skeptical" of the Paulson plan. Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun. I want the whole premise to be made Unspeakable, so that future generations shun anyone who even threatens to mention it.

    So let it be written, so let it be done.

    If anyone wants to help, here are the memes:
    BushCo defined by lost money and
    NoNews is Good News

    If we had all the money that was supposed to be in our treasury since these jerks took over, we wouldn't be facing fiscal meltdown. Pragmatic congress-critters, do your jobs. You can do this.

    --the Sicilian princess

    What is the foundation of *your* client relationship to Planet Earth?

    by LRLine on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:24:32 AM PDT

  •  Again, a "Rush to Steal." (7+ / 0-)

    We've got ONE MONTH before we vote GWB out of office.  Then wait TWO MONTHS until he is out of town.  We only need, then, THREE MONTHS OF MONEY before we can put together a sane bill that doesn't cost more than the entire (misbegotten) Iraq war.  The largest transfer of public funds to private hands in history.  And Congress rushes to give it away before the clocks runs out on GWB.  

    What Congress has forgotten is its ability to hold hearings.  To get testimony.  To obtain evidence.  And then to craft a bill based on said evidence.  To think about things.  But this isn't about solving a problem.  It's about stealing as much as possible before there is a new President.

    We don't have to do a motherf**king thing right now, other than extend bridge financing to troubled companies.  At a helluva lot less than the $750 billion dollars that is STILL the target number, after all the blowback.

    I propose $50 billion dollars right now, today, then see where we are this time next month.  The government has operated under "continuing resolutions" for years under Bush, because of Congress' failure to pass spending bills.  Let's do that here.  A continuing resolution, month to month, until we get a new president and a strong dem majority in Congress.  

    Harry Reid should be impeached or recalled or whatever it is you do to someone who is so utterly feckless in his role as Senate Majority Leader.  Anytime Mitch McConnell says something is needed, run the other way.  DO NOTHING, CONGRESS.  DO NOTHING.  Month to month financing until after Bush is gone.

    "Lawyers, I suppose, were children once." To Kill A Mockingbird

    by DC Scott on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:24:48 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for several gut laughing funny comments (0+ / 0-)

    You forgot to drive a stake in their hearts.  You know they will be back if you don't do that.

    I do kind of see mark to market is best for this period, since housing was in a bubble.

    There is some merit to using another method for evaluating loans.  Here are a few examples.

    Some loans or the buyers may not look good on paper, but their parents will help with their payments.

    Others are very frugal and can make payments, that most can't.

    Houses will go up a little each year and they will become market price.

    Others will get a raise in pay.  

    Some may have an elderly relative who is teetering on the edge of death and plans to leave the buyers a small fortune.

    Mark to market goes by what was loaned on a home and what it is worth today.  They probably do need to roll back some of the mortgages, but not as many as they think.  They should wait until the loan is in trouble.

    The biggie is the fraudulent loans that were leveraged more than once. Personally, the banks should have to suck up part of those losses.  They knew better, but what the heck they were making too much money to care.

  •  Tax cuts.... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    relentless, bakenjuddy

    From many below....

    "AMT relief, $8 billion in tax relief for those hit by natural disasters in the Midwest, Texas and Louisiana, and some $78 billion in renewable energy incentives and extensions of expiring tax breaks."

    Question, what Republicans in the house that couldn't vote for this bill before will do so now with these particular tax breaks? The "$78 billion in renewable energy incentives" sounds interesting, but what Republicans have been hiding under rocks for the last 8 years or decades for that matter that think that those tax breaks are appropriate.

    Frankly, I just don't trust house republicans at all and anything to get more of them to go along is certainly worth major scrutiny.

    The perfect plan, Is not the man Who tells you, You are wrong

    by dss on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:03 AM PDT

  •  Can we call it fascism yet? (5+ / 0-)

    Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of State and corporate power. - Benito Mussolini

    •  It's official! Mussolini lives on (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LRLine, Ham08

      So I guess it;s time for someone to whine about their stock losses?  Or their families losses?  Boo F Hoo ... losing money in the stock market ... how shocking!

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:26:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  IF THE PROBLEM IS CREDIT FOR MAINSTREET (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve, relentless, speedingpullet
     why not just take most of that 700 BILLION in taxpayer dollars and open up a FED DISCOUNT CREDIT WINDOW FOR MAINSTREET like they did for wallstreet....  that way the people who's money is being spent are the people who will get to borrow that money BACK AT A DISCOUNTED rate....  POOF, no more MAINSTREET CREDIT CRUNCH

    McCain's MILLIONAIRE MENTALITY cannot help average hard working Americans!!

    by KnotIookin on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:31 AM PDT

  •  I vote we send Hunter (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    iconoclastic cat, Tracker, jgtidd, Ham08

    to Harry Reid's office to explain things to him.

    "When those who are accountable are right, they take the credit. When they're wrong, they take the heat. It's a fair exchange." - Lehman Bros ad ca. 1980s

    by Mehitabel9 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:35 AM PDT

  •  IRS: revoke 501b for any group (0+ / 0-)

    that needs it. You have money there that has accumulated since 1953. Get the money and PUT IT BACK.

    What is the foundation of *your* client relationship to Planet Earth?

    by LRLine on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:25:44 AM PDT

  •  Sooooooo (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    relentless, jgtidd, speedingpullet

    Were increasing our obligations and cutting our revenue?

    If this works, I'm going to have to reassess my earlier plan of sitting at home smoking pot and eating Cheetos all day.

    Apparently, the Federal Government thinks that's good financial planning.

    My friends, What Senator Obama doesn't understand is the flurgle flurgle flum flum floooeey!

    by nightsweat on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:26:22 AM PDT

  •  Why do you hate (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jgtidd, FishBiscuit, In her own Voice

    the sun?

  •  Nobody wants to buy... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    relentless, dave3172, andrewj54

    ...mortgage backed securities right now. That doesn't mean 100% of the mortgages in the mortgage backed securities are or will ever go into default. Right now only about 4% are. It also doesn't mean the actual houses backing those mortgages all burned to the ground and the land they sit on poisoned.

    If we continue to force these institutions to value  mortgage backed securities based on what they can get for them right now you are basically saying that your house and your equity in your house are worth nothing because the guy down the street lost his house to foreclosure. Chances are you if you want to sell your house right now you can't. It's not because it's worth nothing it's because prospective buyers can't get a mortgage. The same goes for those mortgage backed securities. They're not worth nothing but they look like it if no one will buy them right now.

    If you want to make another Great Depression a self fulfilling prophecy then by all means let's do nothing to save the world's economic system.

  •  Thank you to the commenters who have (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    missLotus, a wolf raised by boys

    pointed out - at elast in part - what the tax cuts in question are. I didn't understand much of the facts based on the original post.

    Take off your bedroom slippers. Put on your marching shoes. Go do some politics. - Barack Obama

    by 28th Democrat on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:27:13 AM PDT

  •  they already change mark to market (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve

    as per TPM

    U.S. securities regulators Tuesday gave the financial industry a reprieve from marking hard-to-value assets down to fire sale prices, throwing a lifeline to an industry beset by strained credit markets and the latest round of bank failures.

    get on the phones. I just called my congressman asking him to hold firm. The receptionist said calls were split, so if we are going to stop this outrage it is going to be in the house.

    To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men~~ Abraham Lincoln

    by Tanya on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:27:14 AM PDT

  •  I will point out (3+ / 0-)

    the mark-to-market idea is a temporary plan and can easily be reset by Obama in 2009 as he will appoint the SEC head and that is who makes that change.

    In a larger sense, though...what did you think would happen when the first plan went down? That they would scrap everything, renegotiate between both Chambers and then have a new plan?

    Look around you at the credit markets. States are finding that they have no money now to run basic services and fix infrastructure. And every day that passes, that problem gets worse.

    It's all well and fun to yell "Fuck Wall Street!" But it runs a lot deeper than that.

  •  It during times like these that you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Habitat Vic, Dems 2008

    kind of forget that we control both houses of congress.  The Republicans know how to play Dems like a fiddle.  

    John McCain: Fund Iraq? No problem! Kids Health Insurance? Screw 'em.

    by PeteB2 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:27:19 AM PDT

  •  I'm afraid the people will only want to tar & (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit, In her own Voice, Ham08

    feather those Wall St. rich guys.

    The Democrats will allow the perception that it's Wall St. and not the crap Republican policies and econ theory that caused the problems.

    The Democrats are so bad at making this stick to those who own the disaster. Pelosi cannot do it. Reid cannot do it. Obama has not done it enough but he might be able to if he hits it hard enough and makes it simple and real.

    "John McCain showed his personality this week and made some of us fearful." - George Will (Heh.)

    by Gorette on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:27:47 AM PDT

  •  Won't Say I told You So (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Frank, dave3172, user1000

    But the bill that kos and the ill-informed were railing about was better.  Yes, the mark to market gimmick is CRAZY.  Basically the valuation of these assets, because they are illiquid currently, will be good faith.  Hardy har har.  Nice going kos.

  •  Thanks to the people who opposed the first one (5+ / 0-)

    Who didn't see this coming? The first bailout was flawed, but better than 1) the stock market crashing and 2) the inevitably sweetened redux.

    •  The stock market crashed ... boo hoo hoo (5+ / 0-)

      Yep, I knew that one was coming.  If you can't afford it going down, what were you doing investing in it?

      Paulson's bill sucked from the start and now it sucks even more.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:37:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Government by Dow!!!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

        It's all about the Dow.

        The chicken littles run insane every time it drops... The crooks in Wall Street KNOW this. The idiot Presssdent knows this.

        And here we are. A bad bill made WORSE in an affort to prop up the Dow.

        PATHETIC.

  •  My bold prediction. (0+ / 0-)
    This compromise will go down in flames.  Democrats will then concede the entire issue and pass the original Paulson plan without any help to homeowners or corporate regulations whatsoever.  However the tax cuts and deregulation the House Republicans want will be included.  McCain will take credit for it and say he was against the other bills all along and only he can stand up to the "Bush Liberals" in the Democratic Congress.

    The Republicans smell blood and the Democrats ALWAYS cave.  Why should the House Republicans start being reasonable now?

    •  It's unnecessary (0+ / 0-)

      The local banks and business people would have been calling and pressuring these House GOP after watching the market meltdown.

      I don't think much of a sweetner was needed. There's already too much pressure after everyone lost a huge chunk of their savings on Monday.

      The House GOP dawdled while the market's collapsed. They OWNED the meltdown.

      At this point, send up the same fucking bill and let them eat it.

  •  Mark to Market (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve, In her own Voice

    As a CPA, it has not gone unnoticed by me that the Repugs are trying to use "Mark to Market" accounting as one of the core reasons of the financial collapse.

    They want to "rollback" the use of it, along with the capital gains rate and that should miraculously solve the whole problem.

    "Mark to Market" is nothing more than valuing assets, ie "mortages" at fair market value. Banks and financial institutions are required to reflect assets such as these at duh, market value and not historical value, which non-financial institutions  do.

    The repugs contend that the mark to market rules, since it reflected actual "reality", caused the panic and the meltdown of the financial institutions, as opposed to the fact that the value of the mortgages sunk out of sight and the liability of the CDSwaps got totally out of control.

    These guys will just never learn, they would rather go down with the ship than ever admit that they are wrong.

    The AICPA this morning just came out with a position echoing the above, and called for the mark to market rules to remain in place.

    I saw two clowns on tweety the last few nights, Darryl Issa and the despicable Tom Delay, who were hitting this mark to market red herring very hard, basically claiming it would cure the problem, along with the lowering of the Cap gains rates.

    Just unbelievably depressing.

  •  From Fark's jayhawk88 (4+ / 0-)

    QFT:

    I love how they throw a tax cut on it as an "incentive to Republicans to vote for it". What the hell is it, a Scooby Snack? Republicans will vote for the Eating Babies Act of 2008 if a tax cut was thrown on it?

    Um, they just might.

    We're in this together you idiot. No wonder this country hasn't improved; it's filled with idiots who wave around "Dem" and "GOP" like they're baseball teams.

    by Dragonchild on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:30:10 AM PDT

  •  Cost impossible to determine (0+ / 0-)

    CBO's analysis:

    In testimony to the House Budget Committee, Peter Orszag, head of the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, said it is not possible to give a solid estimate of the overall cost of the plan, though over time it should cost less than $700 billion. If the Treasury were able to buy assets at a low price and sell them for more later, taxpayers could benefit. On the other hand, the government could get stuck with overpriced goods.

    Orszag pointed out that intervention on such a massive scale carries some risks. Costs will be shifted to taxpayers, while some larger institutions, which may be carrying assets on their books at inflated prices, could fail if Treasury purchases effectively set a lower market price for the assets they hold.

    "More broadly, there is an inherent tension between minimizing the costs to taxpayers and pursuing other policy goals," Orszag said.

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:30:25 AM PDT

  •  More tax cut FAIL=Economy Rescue? (0+ / 0-)

    Dude, what?

  •  You do need to reassess your plan (0+ / 0-)

    In my humble opinion you should be eating potato chips and sipping your 'feel good'.

    But there is some merit to your plan.

  •  Another Pulitzer-worthy essay, Hunter. nt (0+ / 0-)

    "We in the gloam, old buddy," he said, "We definitely right in the middle of it." -Larry Brown

    by BenGoshi on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:31:59 AM PDT

  •  Chamber of Commerce stepped up efforts to lobby (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also stepped up efforts to lobby for passage of the plan.

    http://www.mycentraljersey.com/...

    Nice company Democrats are keeping these days.  Will they be huddling with Cato Institute and AEI next?

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:32:05 AM PDT

  •  My problem is not with these tax cuts.. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ssgbryan, FishBiscuit, lisastar

    they can load anything they want on this.  This is still Paulson's bill.  It gives unprecedented powers to one unelected, unaccountable despot.  

    It rewards the criminals.

    It creates more ways for these criminals to exploit the situation and enrich themselves.

    The day after this bill passes millions of Americans will still be making less, more in debt, suffering from inflation.  

    This bill will make it far worse for most working Americans as inflation will further eat into their standard of living.  The federal government will not have the means to extend employment insurance, or health care and other benefits to ease the situation for working Americans.  The same people that supported this bill has made it nearly impossible for working Americans to get out for under their debts.  

    You corporate whore shills can shriek all you want about how this thing must get passed.  

    You can't defend that that this situation is a mass redistribution of wealth from the bottom to the top, a reward and opportunity to the swine and wall street and a ball of shit thrown in the face of every working class American.

    All right, everybody be cool, this is a robbery! -GW Bush

    by audiored on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:32:26 AM PDT

    •  no to Paulson bill. period. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      audiored, LRLine

      If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

      by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:33:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Please cite proof of criminality (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Dauphin

      I see this stated over and over as fact -- please state an argument about criminality rather than a bald conclusion.  Mortgage brokers may be to blame for predatory lending, but that is not the investment banks that packaged the loans and securitized them.  If anything, they were negligent in their diligence of underlying loans as were the institutions which acquired them. So, a little meat on your bald accusations would be a pleasant departure from the pitchfork and torch crowd because you are not helping.

  •  Phone calls today? (0+ / 0-)

    Our penance for letting this happen in the first place.  Vigilance.

    ExElephants diary has ALL the numbers.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

    by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:33:15 AM PDT

  •  Hunter, have you even read the bill? (8+ / 0-)

    This is a good bill that has been poorly explained until Suzie Orman got on tv.  It provides a framework to end laissez-faire, supply side capitalism.  Passing this bill will end the Reagan/Bush era and usher in a new era of progressive politics.

    The bill calls for hands-on government management of the markets and the real estate industry. There is no doubt that additional improvements can be made, but here is the basic outline:

    - There are at least 3 layers of oversight:  a new oversight panel, Congress and the Courts.

    - The treasury buys mortgages through the TARP program (Troubled Assets Relief Program), sets up regulations for all participating companies, restricts golden parachutes and incentives that reward reckless behavior, and has the right to rewrite mortgage contracts in favor of homeowners.  There are no direct grants or subsidies to corporations.  We are not propping them up.  We are just taking off their bad debt (incidentally, a great analog to this idea is what John Kerry proposed to the health insurance companies in 2004.  We'll take over your catastrophic cases, and you lower premiums to the customer.  This is a Democratic concept adapted to the markets).  

    What the hell is wrong with this from a progressive perspective?

    On the merits, no Democrat should vote against this bill.  This bill helps homeowners directly, and gets at the root of the financial crisis:  the housing industry and manipulation of mortgage securities for speculative profit unconnected with true value.

    We will end up recovering most of the money used to purchase contracts if we hold them long enough to sell at value.  

    If you didn't want all the extra goodies (and those are progressive supported tax cuts btw), then more Dems should have voted for the original bill.  

    I credit Harry Reid and the Senate Democrats for having the foresight to understand that President Obama needs an economy that still functions in order to be effective, and to recognize that this bill ends the era of de-regulation, Reaganomics, Bushonomics, once and for all.

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:33:43 AM PDT

    •  I guess you aren't bothered (0+ / 0-)

      by replacing the "invisible hand" with Paulson's hand.

      Sucks to me.

      •  Paulson won't be managing this for more than 30 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        andrewj54

        days.  Once Obama is elected on November 4th, Paulson won't do anything without the approval of the President elect.

        If progressives start thinking about this bill with an Obama administration in mind, they will be less hostile to it.  Too many are too traumatized by Bush to realize that it is Obama who will be implementing this bill, not Bush. As you can tell from the crappy sales job he has been doing on this issue, he doesn't care and he's done with being President.

        Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

        by khyber900 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:46:30 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Of course he hasn't read the bill (2+ / 0-)
    •  So there is a restriction... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mosesfreeman

      to just purchasing mortgages?

      I don't think that is in the bill personally based on the reviews I have read of it by various economists, but then again I have not actually read the entire thing.

      Also, if true, what mortgages are going to be bought up? At risk mortgages are bundled up in huge chunks of tens of thousands of mortgates whos actual house prices are falling like a rock in CDO's and its these entire chunks that the folks want taken off their hands. These investors are not just interested in having the ones in foreclosure taken off their hands they want all of it taken off their hands and replaced with treasuries.

      Also, Hunter specifically mentioned two things in this diary, the tax cuts and the BS mark-to-market fraud as what has pushed him totally away from this, are you saying that democrats and progressives should just embrace those things because some BS oversight was added to this whole thing?

      We don't have the means to pay for this and we're supposed to accept tax cuts and fruadulent accounting rules.

      Sheesh, I don't think anyone really understands any of the real issues involved with this mess and how this bill won't solve any of them...

      What we do for ourselves dies with us, what we do for others and the world remains and is immortal. (Albert Pine)

      by laughingriver on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:57:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I haven't read what the Senate is voting on (0+ / 0-)

      But the House bill truly sucked, and was loaded with poison pills.

      Check this out (Counterpunch):

      What Wall Street Hoped to Win

  •  Contacting Congressional Delegates?! (0+ / 0-)

    So I'm hopping mad and ready to scream at everyone of my representatives and a few others, but there seems to be a huge log jam at the contact info sites as I'm getting the following message:

    Server Error
    The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request.

    Application server is busy. Either there are too many concurrent requests or the server still is starting up.

    The bold text was done by me.

    I know eventually that I'll get the info to come up (heck I should keep it on file for future reference), but can anyone say what the most effective form of contact is?  Email, phone, mail?  ALL OF THE ABOVE?

  •  Phone and e-mail; get this plan STOPPED (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ShaunMcDonnell, lisastar

    let's blow their servers again!

  •  I found this in a LTE today: (0+ / 0-)

    Okay.  How about this:

    All mortgaged properties must get an appraisal on their primary residence.  If he appraised amount is less than the principal owed on the mortgage, the government sends the mortgage company a check/loan to cover the difference.

    The money the gov sends to the bank for the difference should create an infusion to allow banks to start lending.  This keeps folks in their homes and affordable mortgage payments coming in.  This allows bad loans to get off of the banks books.

    If the bank still can't make it, they should fail.

    McCain/Palin: Lie Traffickers

    by ccmask on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:35:52 AM PDT

  •  need big picture progressive reply (0+ / 0-)
    Great minds think alike, and all that:

    Rick Pearlstein back in August:
    http://www.prospect.org/...

    ...and little ol' me
    per my  comments here in diary from Sept 24
    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    And my in more fleshed out diary/rant on September 30 (before the congressional vote):
    $700 Billion Not Nearly Enough - Shock Doctrine Jujitsu
    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    Digby:
    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/...

    also some actual economists:
    http://www.rgemonitor.com/...

    http://www.rgemonitor.com/...

    http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/...

    •  Wm Greider on DemNow this morning:Senate moving (0+ / 0-)

      to the Right, instead of the Left;voting today because they think they have enough votes (60 or 70) to pass it. And the public is not getting the whole truth from pols and want it.

      I never make predictions, so here's my first:The public will punish Congress if it passes a lousy bill.  I have been saying that Sen. Obama's candidacy for the President in 2008 saved the Democratic Party.  I think that if the House 95 doesn't stop this stampede give away (and worse as the diary shows), there will be a backlash.  Democrats will not vote for the Congress members or not vote.

      Two members of my household wrote letters early this AM and sent them (on paper;heard that the Congress shut down its email system;good, we've got them nervous)to our representative.  Both persons said "didn't like your 'yes' vote for bad bill".  One person wrote: "If you vote for bad bill....I have been voting since 1960, I will not vote in Nov."   The other wrote, "If you vote for a bad bill and don't rewrite &vote for a good one, I shall vote for President and then leave blank boxes below."

  •  Millionaire's Gravy Train, arriving at 0700 (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, alkalinesky, lisastar, xysea

    billion, that is.

    Reid is a disgrace. This bailout is a disgrace.
    Worst of all, it is unconstitutional.

    ALL bill pertaining to revenue must start in the house. Reid seems to have forgotten this basic fact.

    What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.

    by agnostic on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:38:42 AM PDT

  •  I told you so. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Frank, Anglo, Dems 2008
    And I hate to say that, but when the first bailout bill failed and everyone said this would allow time to go over things better, I thought where have some of you been these last 8 years?  All this does is give them more time to fuck us up.  The bill was NEVER going to get any better than what we had the first time, and at least it could have been passed without the tax cut and pork crap you know are going to be on it now.

    It wasn't just banks holding a gun to their heads - they also managed to hold a gun to Congress' head and our heads, only we thought we could dodge a bullet by bluffing.

    Well, now we have.  And look what we get rewarded with...

    Vote like your life depended on it.

    by xysea on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:39:27 AM PDT

  •  Called Harry Reid's office (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ShaunMcDonnell

    All circuits are busy.  You bet they are

  •  Since these tax cuts are mostly to help (6+ / 0-)

    the middle class, you might want to hold off on your rant, partner until you see the details.

    I WANT tax credits for green energy.

    I WANT tax credits for hurricane relief.

    I WANT relief from the fucking AMT.

    I WANT the sales tax deduction on my Income Tax since I live in a state that doesn't charge state income tax.

    I'm sick and tired of people going off on rants without knowing what they are talking about.  I expect better from the front-pagers.

    "Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest." Mark Twain

    by fortuna on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:39:39 AM PDT

    •  Then get them (0+ / 0-)

      Just don't attach them to a fucking $700 billion bailout.

      $700 billion is $2500 per citizen.

      It's like you're happy with a mugger giving your wallet back after stealing your car.

      We're in this together you idiot. No wonder this country hasn't improved; it's filled with idiots who wave around "Dem" and "GOP" like they're baseball teams.

      by Dragonchild on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:51:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm just saying that these "tax breaks" are (0+ / 0-)

        not a bad thing.  My opinion of the bill otherwise has nothing to do with it.  I'm just saying let's deal with facts for a change.

        "Patriotism is usually the refuge of the scoundrel. He is the man who talks the loudest." Mark Twain

        by fortuna on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:54:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Agreed (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ctsteve

    Hunter for Senate.

    But seriously it might be time for Obama to go out on a limb over this one. Chennel his Tsongas side for a little while.

    •  You bet your ass I want Hunter as my President: (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      relentless, LRLine

      "I was previously "skeptical" of the Paulson plan. Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun."

      And, he's a friend of agriculture, marine life, and the space program to boot!

      Bless you, Hunter!!!! Write on, my friend, write on.

  •  This area needs to be revised... (0+ / 0-)

    I understand what you are saying, I think, but you don't have this worded right..

    Of course, we got away from "mark to market" accounting for the very reason that it was so manipulatable, and companies were using it to cook their books, leading us to situations where companies were reporting inflated asset values to investors while in reality being financially quite sick. And that's exactly why it's so wanted now, in the current situation: instead of forcing companies to report an estimated current value for their "toxic assets", we can make this whole problem go away by simply letting the companies report theoretical "future" values for those same assets -- the same as they were doing in years past, leading to this very bubble. Sure, it'll be papering over the problem for a little while longer, but that's exactly what all the companies in question (and a lot of legislators) fervently want.

    We did not move away from mark to market accounting because it can be manipulated, we moved to mark market because it is not manipulated.

    Mark to market gives the true value of where the assets are today, not some theoretical value that can be manipulated. This is precisely why Bear Stearns ran into trouble. They were using a "mark to model" pricing scheme that bore no resemblance to the true mark to market.

    I am very much against doing away with mark to market. It is the only way to truly value an asset on the books of a financial institution. Bonddad has a great diary on the rec list about this very subject.

    He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man...Dr. Johnson (HST)

    by mikeypaw on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:41:13 AM PDT

  •  Austerity IS in our future... (0+ / 0-)

    as I've said earlier today.

    When will people wake up and realize that taxes=government income.  We can't pay our bills or begin to pay off our debts if we don't have the revenue.

    Ugh.

  •  Phone lines are tied up (0+ / 0-)

    You can always FAX as well. Urge on NO vote on this hideous piece of garbage.

    "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

    by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:42:43 AM PDT

  •  Why are we trying to appease the Repubs??? (0+ / 0-)

    The Republicans are the ones that got us into this whole freakin' mess in the first place.

    The Dems are in the majority.

    Why try to appeal to 12 Repubs when there are 95 Dems in the House that don't like this bill? Why not appeal to those 95 Dems?

    This is just f@#ked up.

    I just can't wait until we have a progressive majority again.

  •  Right. Let's all just kick our own teeth in. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MelSC

    Kill their servers. That'll show 'em - just how narrow-minded and stupid we are.
    You want a better Congress, put yourselves where your mouths are and run.
    What? Not enough money to participate?
    Change the campaign finance laws (you all are lucky McCain is not trumpeting that one).
    Whatever bill is passed has to do two things: get money flowing and make credit available. You can bitch and moan all you want, but if these things do not happen, you can thank yourselves for being out of work, or broke, or sick and unable to pay for it, or, worst of all, living in a country that no one wants to invest in.
    Think you are not totally dependent on other countries' willingness to invest in the US BECAUSE of its insatiable desire for shit to buy for your well-being and lifestyle? Think again.

  •  Stupid "rescue" package is now a piece of junk (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, lisastar

    that will resolve nothing, and underpin us to live in trickle-down "prosperity" for another generation.

    "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

    by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:43:36 AM PDT

  •  The New Press (0+ / 0-)
    2 peopel in AZ conversations:
    1. longtime TV broadcast and now in academia...journalism (Walter Cronkite Scool of Journalism)...comment : aren't you impressed withe new breed of bloggers.. i.e. politico, etc...
    response: "I don't even look - that's not journalism."
    me inside... are you kidding...yellow press? that was back in a day when there was 1 paper in town or state..... not anymore... The AZ Rep used to (and maybe still does) threaten clients if they advertised in another small daily - forget it with the Republic.... and oh the Phoenix 40? and Keating/McCain....
    my god thank you kos... but it's still not enough...re:
    2. Vendor at door...has to be nice wan'ts to sell..."How's biz?" "oh terrible" "what do you think of bailout/election?"
    "Oh I have alwasy like McCain, but I just don't understand..."  "Were you here during the RTC?Keating?  Do you know his vote record? Do you know about Cindy..etc etc..."  "Oh my goodness no, I didn't know...."  She didn't b/c AZ Republic is not Free Press any more than most the TV... and cable... but what is now free is the DIVERSITY of voices... right here at the computer...
    Keep it up guys... you are feeding the National level of awareness and maybe some in Phoenix too!
  •  Can't the Democratic Senate, (0+ / 0-)

    Congress, and President Obama revisit all this stuff in 2009?  Can they get the bailout through now, and then clean it up later?

  •  Security transfer tax would be good (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar

    This would raise money and decrease speculation

  •  CALL YOUR SENATORS (0+ / 0-)

    If you oppose this bill, tell them you're extremely angry about this and request/demand (depending on your temprament) that they vote against this bill.

    Make it very difficult to support this. The House plan was killed by popular uprising: kill the Senate plan too!

  •  And there you have it. Predators and prey. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar

    In America, you have two political parties: the STUPID party, and the EVIL party.

    Sometimes they do something that is both Stupid AND Evil.

    And that is called "Bipartisanship"!

    ---attributed to Yakov Smirnov or somebody

    REPUBLICANS: The Older White Meat.

    by AdmiralNaismith on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:44:51 AM PDT

    •  That's how I feel about it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sparhawk, AdmiralNaismith, lisastar

      Stupid = Democrats
      Evil = Republicans

      But have no fear ya buddies in the US Chamber of Commerce, a virulent anti-worker lobby group, is working on changing NO votes to YES votes.  So, will Dem rank and file start sending their donations to the Chamber of Commerce?  You can help them outsource another 100 million jobs or so!

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:52:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Just chill. (4+ / 0-)

    This must be your first time watching the details of legislation being passed, huh? They're looking for a few votes.

    The tax cuts I've heard so far seem like good ones. I vote we all chill a bit, stop being knee jerk reactionaries, and pay attention to the details.

    Tax cuts for alternative energy? Sounds like a good thing to me. Call me a right wingnut.

    •  They're looking for a few votes (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sparhawk

      for a piece-of-shit bill. When you have a piece-of-shit bill that nobody likes because they have a gut feeling about throwing money at people who lost money, the trick is to make the bill palatable by any means.

      I've told my Senators this, and one of them, Jim DeMint, may actually vote no. The other, Lindsey Graham, is solidly in the yes column. Ha, just like Barack Obama, Joseph Biden, and John "failed economic policies" McCain.

      You want to see momentum change? the second this vote is tallied, see dozens of McCain ads that tout that for all Obama talks about failed economic policies, he flew into Washington, D.C., the other day and voted for one!

      "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

      by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:52:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Then stop pretending this makes it worse. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sapper

        OK. You don't like the bill. I get that. Then argue on the merits. This crap about the evil new add-ons appears to be just that. Crap.

        As for the election. Obama, McCain, Biden, and Clinton will all vote for this bill. It's going to be really hard for either Obama or McCain to say anything negative about the other voting for it.

        •  Obama's vociferously against (0+ / 0-)

          the economic policies of the past. This is one of them. This plan is so 1980. It is a trash plan. What merits to you see giving money to people in the markets who lost the money in the first place?

          The add-ons and riders to this bill are only signs to me. They're on all bills. But it's very telling when this bill tacks on a lot of republican crap to make the populists on that wing bite. The populist democrats already smell a rat, and they're not going to vote for it.

          It's all the more telling for Obama because he staked his campaign on crafting sound economic policies. This is not sound economic policy, and he's going to vote for it.

          All votes are equal, but Obama's vote for this plan is going to be resounding compared to McCain's.

          "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

          by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:21:53 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  What do you want? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sapper

            Really.

            Do you want all the legislation that hasn't been passed to re-regulate and reform our government and financial markets to be passed this week? Huh? Is that what you expect?

            It comes down to do you believe that we are in a crisis. If you believe that, then we have to do something in the short term, and fixing everything that's broke isn't going to happen. We need a tourniquet, to stem the bleeding until a Democratic President and Congress can take over in january.

            As for the add-onls being republican crap, which ones. Be specific. Because at the moment all I see is a bunch of progressive "crap".

            As for Obama's vote resounding more than McCain's, the only reason will be because he will better explain why we need this vote now.

            •  Straw man (0+ / 0-)

              You're barking around a different tree. You're writing a whole hell of a lot thinking that I don't believe there is a crisis.

              Well there is a crisis. It's been going on for 30 years. I've seen hundreds of small little business that are reflective of and responsive to their communities WIPED OUT. In my little agricultural/industrial state of South Carolina, I have seen family farms and small agricultural businesses supplanted by agribusiness machines that get subsidies and are not taxed in this regressive little state. I have seen small and medium-sized textile mills, furniture companies, clothing operations and other manufacturing plants close their doors and either declare bankruptcy or leave the country.

              I live in a city that has the same McDonalds and Wal Marts here as there are in Raleigh, Alexandria, Knoxville, Atlanta, Jacksonville, New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and so on. We're just the same here as everywhere else.

              Except in the schools where we're 49th in just about everything.

              Except in poverty, where we're 49th in just about everything.

              Except in equal pay, where we're dead last.

              Except in violent crime per capita, where we top the list.

              The crisis I've seen has been around for much, much longer than two friggin weeks ago, when the knucklehead Bush administration, which thought everything was hunky-dory a month ago up and decided that everything was going to hell. Going to hell. We didn't do this, and we will go to hell.

              There are alternatives to a Paulson bailout that could be more effective. Or, any type of plan just may not work as much as it may work. Believe in it, fine. I believe it will serve only to delay a hard awakening that will damn us to hell for decades if we don't address the real problem: the actual mortgages in default, and our society that spends spends spends, runs out of money, gets a credit card and spends some more.

              You can't entirely legislate and budget your way out of this problem. You have to ride this out, and suck it up.

              Stop creating these white-black comparisons with everyone who differs from you.

              "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

              by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 10:12:08 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  So let's see (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                sapper

                Your response is to complain how bad your state has it. I feel. I really do. But it's irrelevant to the current situation.

                As for there being alternatives, certainly. Let's hear it. Which solution do you advocate, because your solution is to "suck it up," do nothing, and ride out whatever economic collapse is coming.

                You don't even see that you're the one creating the white/black comparison. Everything about this solution is wrong. Nothing is good. I, on the other hand, don't like this solution either, but that isn't the question. The question is, do we have to do something before January 1. If we do, then this may be the only solution that is available to us. If not, then we wait.

                The problem with this diary and its commenters, is everybody's running around in a panic wailing about how bad these additions they know nothing about are, when most of them just are annoyed the bill is up for reconsideration in any form. Nobody is talking about solutions. Everybody is just talking trash.

                •  NO. (0+ / 0-)

                  My solution is NOT, nor ever has been, to just lie there and do nothing. My outlines of my state were meant only to outline that the crisis has been going on for quite a while, and no one has ever bothered to pay attention.

                  My "solution" if you'd call it that, because we don't really know anything at this point, I've said a million times I guess. Take the 700 billion or less than and address the actual mortgages in fault, the real debt. Something along that line. I've said this every time I've mentioned the folly of throwing money away to "rescue" Wall Street. I have no idea if it would prevent a crisis, I don't even know that it will.

                  No buddy, I'm not "running around in a panic wailing about additions." I'm being an American, stating publicly my concerns with a bill that I believe to be fundamentally wrong. Fundamentally wrong. Not the tack-ons, they're only signals in my mind that people wouldn't otherwise vote for it.

                  If you look all over this board and other boards, there are people talking all sorts of solutions. You just don't want to hear them. Or you can't think about them yourself. Tell me, instead, why you feel the Paulson plan would be a great idea? If you're all fired up in support of passing this piece of junk, please tell me why?

                  Do you think that it will go toward a long-term solution for the seemingly constant lack of liquidity in all markets? Do you think that it could go a long way into covering our collective asses while we busy ourselves trying to find the bottom of the housing market? Which is a task, I should remind you, that we have been trying for the last four quarters to find?

                  If you want solutions, go find the republican party, or the Bush administration. They seem to have every "solution" in the book. I am an idiot, albeit a father who has genuine concerns about how we are going to pay for this bill, or any bill, for that matter.

                  No matter what bill is passed, or lack of passed bill, we will all certainly pay. That is without question.

                  "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

                  by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 02:56:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Tax cuts to build coal plants? AMT? (0+ / 0-)

      Yeah that's a bunch of crowd pleasers.

      I just told Lautenberg's staffer that this bill just went from bad to hideous.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:54:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Stop with the Republican memes (0+ / 0-)

        Those tax cuts are actually necessary to keep a solar panel manufacturer in my state in business. And the AMT needs to be fixed. I get it. You don't like the rescue plan. I was unsure, but seeing so many people making ignorant arguments and throwing around misleading bullcrap has made me more positive towards it.

  •  Bailout=GWB's parting gifts to execs (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch, LRLine

    I can see BS from my house.

    by Mad Mom on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:45:51 AM PDT

  •  End the Kleptocracy. Let it all burn down! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, lisastar

    The only way we could ever have anything even approaching democracy in this country is to let the present system collapse, then confiscate the wealth of the speculators who created this crisis and redistribute that wealth to the working class.

    "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

    by chimpwatch on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:46:36 AM PDT

  •  "Worse than a stoning?" (0+ / 0-)

    Why does Python keep coming to mind?

    "Immature, erratic, impulsive and subject to peer pressure"--J. Alter "Lost, erratic, out-of-touch, flailing, impulsive gambler"--E. Schmeltzer

    by Inland on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:47:03 AM PDT

  •  One word comes to mind: (0+ / 0-)

    criminal.

    Several other words: Fire Harry Reid. Fire Nancy Pelosi. Throw everyone who votes for this piece of shit legislation under the bus.

    That goes for Barack Obama, Mr. grassroots, Mr. 30 years of failed economic policy is poised to vote in favor of yet another trickle-down "solution."

    Again, criminal.

    And people, republican and democrat, are getting very angry that the people who spent the money to crisis proportion will get more money.

    Call it anything, those people will be bailed out. And the likelihood of people beyond wall street will feel any real benefit is nil.

    "Half of the American people never read a newspaper. Half never vote for President. One hopes it is the same half." - Gore Vidal

    by sapper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:47:21 AM PDT

  •  Will this legislation unfreeze (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    lisastar, audiored

    credit markets?

    Why should it?  What will it do to bolster the confidence among banks that is required for inter-bank lending?

    Nothing I can see.

    Terrible legislation.  Just terrible.

  •  I feel all dirty ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk

    I just called Thad Cochran and Roger Wicker and pretended to be a wingnut mad about the "constitutional question" of the Senate initiating a spending bill (honestly, it is what they are doing) that the House rejected, and complaining that the bill is ... gasp ... SOCIALISM!

    "Any single man must judge for himself whether circumstances warrant obedience or resistance to the commands of the civil magistrate" John Locke

    by TheGryphon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:47:40 AM PDT

    •  There is a proper balance... (0+ / 0-)

      ...between government and private action in the economy. Government does some things better (health care), private industry does some things better (supermarkets, video games, etc).

      This is the bad kind of socialism...

    •  HR 3997 (0+ / 0-)

      They did some weird things with the bailout bill, so that it is now technically a Senate amendment.  I'm not sure what the Senate did with it to add the tax stuff, but these technicalities might be what allows the Senate to vote first.

      Here's what Kagro X wrote about the bill on Monday:

      Anyway, if you're scratching your head about how the bailout legislation, which was conceived over the weekend, ends up numbered H.R. 3997 when they're already well into the 7000s with House bills already (they're numbered in order of their introduction), the answer is that they're going back to a trick we've seen them use before -- taking an old bill that has passed one House but not both, and hollowing it out and replacing that text with the new stuff.

      So H.R. 3997, an old tax bill that passed the House, bounced back and forth a few times after being amended, but was never passed in the same form by both houses, which means it's still available as a legislative vehicle. That means that technically, what's under consideration in the House today is an amendment to the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to H.R. 3997.

      Seriously.

      Why? Because pretending that the bailout package is just a new amendment (in the nature of a substitute) for what now stands as the old body of H.R. 3997 means they can get expedited consideration on the House floor, plus be protected from a Republican motion to recommit, a procedural move that has plagued the Democrats throughout the 110th Congress. It's something I recommend they rethink in the 111th.
      http://www.dailykos.com/...

      "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson

      by joanneleon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:39:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's hard to tell whether you know anything about (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    andrewj54

    mark to market.  We didn't "get away" from mark to market, we change "to" mark to market.  If I buy an investment and my intent is to hold it to maturity and I do hold it to maturity, why shouldn't I be allowed to report the asset on my books based on the expected value at maturity?  If I "change my mind" and sell the asset before maturity, that of course used to get disclosed and then the reader of my financial statements would learn how much they can trust my current "intent" to hold my other held-to-maturity assets.

    Further if mark to market is so good for financial investments, why not mark to market all assets?  Do you know that real estate is carried at book value and not marked to market?  You can look it up.

    •  Lots of stupidity these days (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      joanneleon, andrewj54, FishBiscuit

      Some on this blog would not even rally around the candidate they pushed so hard to elect - Donna Edwards!  What a disgrace.  Progressives come up with a solid plan, Donna Edwards is part of it and does this site rally around her? No!

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:58:24 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Ya pegged it hunter. No serious fix for the cause (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper

    No absolute guarantee for repayment (repo fat cat houses and yachts if necessary). No Re-Regulation to keep it from happening again (next month).

    Forget it. The sky won't fall, the oceans won't burn, the earth won't stop it's spin. We can handle everything else.

    His name was droogie6655321

    by geez53 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:47:54 AM PDT

  •  I might interject... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    slinkerwink, sapper, jgtidd

    that the goat in Hunter's request would not allow a shark to eat it.  He's obviously never tried to get a goat to "allow anyone or anything to do anything to it..."

    What you need is to bring that goat to the house floor and let the goat headbutt some ass.

    My goat, all 110 lbs of her is ALPHA over my draft horse of 1700 lbs.  She walks softly but carries a mean skull...

     

  •  Remember earlier this year, the economic stimulus (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper, lisastar, Deep Harm, temptxan, audiored

    package?

    The progressive economists were calling for helping the truly needy, with extending unemployment benefits and increasing food stamps, and saying that tax cuts were not going to do much.

    And what did we get? Tax cuts.

    And where are we now? Even further down the creek without so much as a stick to paddle with.

    And what do I hear from our great leaders again? More tax cuts.

    Unbelievable. Just unbelievable.

  •  What was the point of working so hard (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper, chimpwatch, audiored
    to gain a Dem majority in Congress?  Even when the people are against them, the rethugs are still running things...

    www.bushwatch.net - Kicking against the pricks since '98!

    by chuckvw on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:48:38 AM PDT

    •  It's time for a third party. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chuckvw

      We have two big business parties. How about a political party that represents the interests of working people (95% of the population)?

      "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

      by chimpwatch on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:56:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  So far the Hunter plan is the best (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper

    combine it with the Difazzio plan and it is a winner.

    I especially like the ocean part.

  •  This is why the bill needed to pass before... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rob Humenik, Frank, slinkerwink, sapper

    Now that the real brains (like kos) have had their say, rallying the peasants to storm the castle and demand the defeat of the first bill, we will see real politics take place a bastardized piece garbage drafted that only adds to the real problems that face the country.  Instead of passing a bill that would meet the specific objective of meeting the liquidity issue facing the economy, we will now see a bill that piles on "political gifts" that make the problems worse, but coerce support to get the bill passed.  Sometimes the best bill to push through is one that both sides hate.  Now we're going to get a bill that is good for both parties, which means it is bad for the electorate.  The target was in the cross hairs of the congress, but the uneducated electorate made them flinch and blink, moving off target putting the electorate right in those cross hairs.  I wish people would think about the macro issues, rather than the micro issues, before "rallying support".  We get the government we deserve.

    •  Ya this is all kos's fault (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      annominous

      LOL.

      So now we can't even fight awful bills because our own party will just make them worse? Sure showed us.

      Fuck. That. The first bill needed to die and so does this one.

      •  You have to understand the issue... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Rob Humenik, slinkerwink

        ... to fight the bill.  Congress clearly did not understand the intent of the bill, and still has no idea WTF they are trying to do.  kos has clearly, and repeatedly, considered this a political issue, which it is not.  This has been spun into a political issue, by the likes of kos, which has made the issue worse.  This is very much like the "intelligent design" debates, where a problem is spun into a political issue simply because it is examined from a micro perspective.  Looked at from a macro perspective and the issue becomes a non-starter and a simple one to deal with.  Take a few steps back and look at the issue from a wider perspective and you'll see the folly of the politicos and the reasons why the economists were begrudingly saying this bill was serviceable and met the goal of the economy wide liquidity and credit issues.

  •  Just finished my daily barrage of calls (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper, relentless

    to my congressional delegation, including the Republicans.  To them, I reprised their own mantra: PAYGO.

    A modest transaction tax on securities trades would discourage day-trading and other forms of speculation, requiring those who caused the mess to bear a disproportionate share of the cost to fix it.

    And of course, I ranted about trickle-down economics and the ill-advised tax cut.

    I made it clear that my vote for Mark Udall will be conditioned on his vote this week.  If he isn't going to go to bat for us now, there's really no reason to vote any more.  What does it matter that he claims he is a nominal progressive, when he votes the way that Wall Street tells him to?

    Fascism.  We has it.

  •  I don't want a tax cut (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper, lisastar, speedingpullet

    I want a freaking better paying job.

    I'd gladly pay more taxes if the reason was that I was getting paid more.

    Giving me a tax break when inflation is rising faster than my paycheck isn't going to help!

  •  RE your quote, "We live in a damn kleptocracy. " (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sapper, chimpwatch, temptxan

    Of course.  Why else would Congress ignore requests from citizen groups to include federal whistleblower protections in the bill, or fail to pass separate legislation (S.274/H.R.985) that would give federal employees (with oversight of banking, food safety, and other important functions) meaningful whistleblower protections?  After passing the House and Senate, S.274 and H.R. 985 have been sitting on the shelf for months, waiting for a reconciled version of the bills to be presented for a final vote. The response from Congress:

    crickets

  •  Just emailed Harry to give him a piece of my mind (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    Dear Senator Reid,

    I was shocked and disappointed to learn that you are adding tax cuts into the bailout bill to please the Republican minority.  Why are you weakening this already horrendous, inexcusable bailout bill?  Why aren't you and Speaker Pelosi working on progressive legislation with fewer "sweeteners" for conservatives robbing everyday people?  Please, sir, think twice about where your priorities and interests lie.

    This bailout sickens me.  By the way, I am a staunch progressive Democrat and a social worker.

    Sincerely,
    [abnormalsanon]

    My pit bull would make a better VP.

    by abnormalsanon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:52:09 AM PDT

  •  Obama could be a hero (0+ / 0-)

    If he would come out and call this plan what it is...BULLSHIT.  The Dems are in the drivers seat and per usual they are letting the GOP mow them over.  Tell Paulson and Bush to take their plan and shove it, sit down with economists that might have a freakin clue as to how to fix this, rewrite predatory mortgages so there might be a chance in hell of them being paid, Seize banks that are bankrupt and start over from scratch.  ENOUGH!  

    ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

    by Kristina40 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:52:45 AM PDT

    •  Please Understand (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      chimpwatch, Kristina40

      Senator Obama's Economic Advisor is from the Chicago School of Economics and is the Senior Economic Advisor to both the DLC and PPI.

      What do you think Austan Goolsbee is whispering into Senator Obama's ear right now?

      It is my personal belief that Senator Obama is no less the deer caught in the headlights than Senator McCain right now.

      <div style="font-size:10px;text-align:center;background-color:#ffd;color:#f33">If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow - G. Bush

      by superscalar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:59:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think you (0+ / 0-)

        are probably right.  There are very few in this country right now that have a clue as to what is going on.  I wish he'd give Roubini a call...

        ~War is Peace~Freedom is Slavery~Ignorance is Strength~ George Orwell "1984"

        by Kristina40 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:03:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  sigh (0+ / 0-)

    it's beginning to look like
    they may have sent petty thieves to
    Australia
    but
    the sociopathic royalists flocked to the New World

    Before Jesus, there was love. Without love, there would be no Jesus.

    by oobi on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:52:56 AM PDT

  •  Hunter, you're kind of wrong on some things here. (4+ / 0-)

    Check out dday's post over at Hullabaloo.

    First, as others have mentioned, the most significant tax breaks are in there to encourage "green collar" job creation.  They are GOOD tax breaks.  Not Corporate Giveaway tax breaks.

    Second, and this is the big one:

    The "mark to market" issue is more complicated than you make it sound.

    First, "mark to market" is what we currently operate under, so you've got your terminologies mixed up.  It forces companies to report their asset values by the price they'd currently likely get on the open market.  This DOES prevent (in theory) Enron-style book-cooking, which is why the rule was implemented in the first place.  But the flipside is that it can make a shaky market a lot shakier.

    Here's how:  Say I'm a company that's got a bunch of mortgage-backed securities.  Say some of them are based (via derivatives etc) on subprime loans that have very high risk.  Now, in the current market, NOBODY is going to buy those sorts of securities.  So under mark-to-market, I have to place the value of those assets at practically zero.  But the fact of the matter is, even though they're highly leveraged, very risky and "toxic", that doesn't mean they are LITERALLY WORTHLESS.  They still have some intrinsic value; i.e. it's reasonable to assume that some of those mortgages, surely, aren't going to be defaulted upon.

    So in other words, mark-to-market, in a situation like the current one, can actually force companies to present an overly pessimistic view of their asset values.  It's like the exact opposite problem to the one Enron created, and right now it's making banks look a lot less stable on paper than they may actually be in whatever passes for "reality" these days.

    Of course, that doesn't mean it makes any sense to go back to pre-Enron rules about ANY of this stuff.  But it does mean that it makes sense to consider rethinking that rule, as long as there are restrictions in place that require some sort of transparent reporting of any assets to which a company gives a value estimate that is different than that asset's mark-to-market value would have been.  I'm no economist so I don't know quite how that would operate, but it's rather uninformed to just rail against the change without really looking into it.

    •  thanks for that (0+ / 0-)

      I'm trying to learn a little before I start frothing at the mouth, and it's good to get a different perspective.

      What you say makes sense, but I don't think I could support removing the mark to market requirements without a sunset clause.  

      It seems to me in more stable times mark to market is necessary, and we need to be sure it goes back in.

      •  Sunset clause (0+ / 0-)

        I agree on that one.

        I'd be interested to know if there are any mechanisms that, for example, require mark-to-market estimates in general but allow companies to, for example, petition the SEC for an exception for certain assets, as long as there's sufficient transparency in the process.

  •  Why are Voting for Dems? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    If they are going to just turn around and give the GOP the everything they want? It is perfectly understandable why the public keeps voting GOP; it cuts out the middle man.

    •  It's time for a third party representing workers (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lisastar

      We've got two big business parties. We need one political party that represents the interests of working people (95% of our population).

      "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

      by chimpwatch on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:57:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Progressives may revolt (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        chimpwatch, In her own Voice

        and go over to the Green Party.  Many of us are starting to think that the "big tent" approach is a fraud.  Progressives are shut out of every discussion, marginalized even by people on this blog.  You can't even mention Kucinich's name without being ridiculed.  

        "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

        by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:00:25 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Try mentioning Nader & see what happens (0+ / 0-)

          Progressives are being played for fools by Obama, just like during the Clinton years. Nader tried to work with Democrats for decades before he bolted.

          "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

          by chimpwatch on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:11:03 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Retards (0+ / 0-)

    I'm gonna blast them all by email. Thanks for the info.

  •  As those of us in the rational universe tried to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Rob Humenik, FishBiscuit

    tell folks, the longer this goes, and the more versions are rejected, the worse the proposal gets.

    The bill rejected in the vote was worse than the proposal that was all set to go before House Republicans and McCain blew it up, and this one will be worse than that.

    If this one falls apart, look for an even worse package rammed through too late, with too little, in panic mode.

    But reason is not driving the public right now, and especially not online.

    This is our fault. We made it impossible for Frank and others to get the failed bill through because we whipped up opposition to it - and even aligned with, and promoted the sites and writings of, the likes of Michelle Malkin and other uber right-wingers, merely because they also opposed the bill (nevermind that for opposite reasons).

    We didn't back up our progressive reps, and we certainly did not provide any room for ANY Democrats in competitive races to stick their neck out on this one.

    By crusading against the good, naively yearning for the great, we end up with the poor.

    This is not our Representatives' fault - they did what we, the public SCREAMED at them to do.

    No, suddenly, we're telling them to ignore the 50-to-1 calls against a bailout (any bailout) and follow their conscience?

    Where were those calls before the last vote?

    One day posterity will remember, this strange era, these strange times, when ordinary common honesty was called courage. -- Yevgeny Yevtushenko

    by RandomActsOfReason on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:57:34 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely shameful (0+ / 0-)

    I agree, send it down in flames.  How DARE they.  Obama needs to vote against this.  

    To paraphrase Stephen Colbert: 2008-Great Depression or Greatest Depression?

    by MufsMom on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 07:58:21 AM PDT

  •  Truth in Labeling (0+ / 0-)

    Truth in Labeling laws ought to make it clear the "mark to market" portion should be called what it actually is and renamed the "license to lie" provision.

    •  And yet mark to market is often used (0+ / 0-)

      Marcy Kaptur has a valid point.  The accounting rules are making this look worse than it is.  But fro you to frame it as this is a fantasy answer is just dishonest.  The real answer is to make ordinary loans instead of buying up assets that I think we all agree have unknown value.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:03:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Order!! Drop your pants. (0+ / 0-)

    I once attended a board meeting to discuss "Stupid".

    Before the meeting was called to order I made a request.

    "I would like everyone to stand up and drop their pants. If we are going to talk stupid we may as well look stupid".

    As for finding your own ass...a box of flys.

    Outrageous you say? Ok, we will drop the tax cuts...now lets vote on the original 3 page Paulson request...I'm tired, I just want to go home.

    My kids want Reid for their dad, and Pelosi for their mom.

    •  The 3 page plan - NO! (0+ / 0-)

      Okay bring that to the floor and we'll vote no.  Just want to go home?  If you are a staffer, then quite honestly too bad.  Stay in session and work on a plan that meets our agreed upon principles.  Stop selling out already!

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:05:17 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The Republicans obviously (0+ / 0-)

    have no freaking idea what is going on.

    I've seen this in business.  You get some entrepreneur who has reached the point where he doesn't know how to run his business any longer, and there are desperate crises brewing.  Suddenly, he starts acting like it is five years ago, a time when things looked a lot simpler.  He spends afternoons chatting up small fry prospects as if he had all the time in the world, he mucks around with the filing system,   he screws around with the computer systems, dreams up weird and idiosyncratic accounting systems ... all while major projects are imploding and major customers are draining away and employees are mutinous.

    It's a simple fact of human nature: when you don't know what to do, then you tend fall back on doing things you associate with a less demanding time, when the way you spent your time did not matter so much.

    The idea of a big corporate tax cut to address this particular crisis  is crazy, even if you think they're a great idea otherwise.   But it is comforting to them.  They may not know what is going on or how to fix it, but tax cuts got them where they are today, dagnabbit.

    I've lost my faith in nihilism

    by grumpynerd on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:00:39 AM PDT

  •  This is ridiculous. Calm down. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    a wolf raised by boys, MelSC

    I've never seen so much uninformed knee jerk panic on the left. It's embarrassing. Much effort is needed here for people to know what the hell they are talking about before they open their mouths.

  •  I admit - it takes a lot to move me to action (0+ / 0-)

    But I've written so many letters to my congressmen this morning, I'm dizzy.

    This is outrageous!

  •  Ain't no one gonna be tarred... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    In her own Voice, speedingpullet

    The powers that be have too many Tasers, guns and tanks to allow for any actual dissent that might lead them to actually be afraid of us.

    They will laugh at us little people until Jesus comes down and takes us "home."  (Around noon next Wednesday, if the celestial trains are running on time.)

    -

    •  That's right - it's all in the shock doctrine (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      In her own Voice

      The people are being shocked into submission.  If you rebel they have the police state already in place to put it down.  In the end they will fail but Americans are in for three decades of utter misery.  You think the Bush years were bad; you haven't seen anything yet.

      But that's right, go ahead and whine about the stock market.  Yeah, that's real helpful.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:08:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  LOL - you read that website too? (0+ / 0-)

      "Why would that kind of work be 'ridiculous'? Who are THEY fighting for?"-------------- BHO on the GOP's mockery of community organizers.

      by speedingpullet on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:21:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  More tax cuts for the Distressed Gentlefolk (0+ / 0-)

    They are all truly insane.  Here is their thinking: "No change is the best change."  This is the fascist, idiot nation we have devolved to.  Start learning Mandarin, kiddies.  Buy yourselves rickshaws and/or learn to sew.

    I'd leave the country but where the hell is there to go?

  •  This is how Washington Dems who have become (0+ / 0-)

    so mired in the give-and-take make concessions. They have the ability to hold this up and make it better, but instead, they take the "easy" route to make it into a christmas tree to woo 12 more votes in the House.

    Next we'll see earmarks attached to it, helping each of those 12 Rethug members win their elections. IDIOTIC....but it's going to pass. They simply are unwilling to consider more reasonable plans that focus on main street directly.

    Obama helped make that a sure thing. Be ready for a rough four years if he wins. We'll be fighting this way of doing business all the time.

    •  I agree. (0+ / 0-)

      I lost all my faith that Obama administration will be a good one.  He'll be way better than the lunatic ticket from hell - McCain/Palin - but I see an administration strapped by debt and bad decisions from the past two decades.  He'll have a hard time getting much done.  

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:11:27 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Where the heck have YOU been? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      MelSC

      My God, people, this is the way the American economy WORKS.  It's been an accelerating process since before Reagan, and you're feeling discouraged because Obama can't do anything about it, so his presidency will be a "disappointment"?

      Sometimes the people on this site act as if they've never read the Business section of a major newspaper or paid any attention to economics except during a crisis.  

      Changing the way America does business isn't the work of a single President or Congress.  And it's not going to happen with an electorate that only bothers reading the financial news when things get really, really bad.  

      Voting Republican is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

      by dotalbon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:35:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  More hysterics. (5+ / 0-)

    Look, what did you think would happen? That something better was going to come out of this? Did anyone really believe that a "pure" Dem plan was going to pass, or even pass within a reasonable timeframe?

    The previous bill wasn't good, but it was workable enough to not let the current government screw it all up, and could be reset under a new government.

    Well, that one was kicked out by free-market fundamentalist Republicans and "progressive" Democrats, egged on by an angry blog mob with torches and pitchforks. And now you're going to have to swallow something that's worse.

    Sucks to be you.

    I give Obama credit for actually, repeatedly, making the point yesterday that this isn't just some isolated problem amongst rich CEOs on Wall Street, but that it affects everybody. He has a much clearer head than the angry mob here.

    Presidential politics is like jumping into raw sewage with your mouth open -- Batfish

    by Frank on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:07:46 AM PDT

  •  More tax cuts, more burden on the taxpayers left (0+ / 0-)

    Who gets the cuts?  Businesses.  
    Who benefits?  The wealthy.

    I've reviewed my comments from last night.  I continue to oppose increasing the FDIC insurance to $250K.  Again, it benefits the rich at the expense of the working poor.

    No bailout, not now, not ever.

    The privileged man, whether he be privileged politically or economically, is a man depraved in intellect and heart. -- Mikhail Bakunin

    by angry liberaltarian on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:09:14 AM PDT

    •  The FDIC limit is pretty much the only thing (0+ / 0-)

      I do agree with.

      Its something that can be done immediately, without any taxpayer input, and will help boost confidence between small banks and businesses.

      After all, the whole clusterf**k is 'confidence measure' - why not instill confidence in the people who actually need it, and let Wall St twist in the wind?

      "Why would that kind of work be 'ridiculous'? Who are THEY fighting for?"-------------- BHO on the GOP's mockery of community organizers.

      by speedingpullet on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:18:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  mark to market got Enron to implode (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    In her own Voice

    I seem to recall that "mark to market" was an invention of the Enron wizkids that allowed them to claim all sorts of preposterous values for their "assets" (which were really liabilities).  Isn't allowing this a bad thing, rather than an improvement?

    •  mark to market (0+ / 0-)

      What Enron did was "mark to fantasy" until reality pulled the rug out.

      Illiquid "level 3" assets, those with no bids, basically, can currently be marked to model (fantasy) under FASB rules. This was supposed to change recently but that was pushed off.

      Mark to market will indeed kill a lot of toxic, shitty companies that deserve to die. If the asset has no bid, today, it must be marked "zero" and written off. By the same token, quality long-term assets e.g. mortgages & CDOs have a market, just not today, because nobody trusts anyone.

      It's a real quandary.

      But the fix is to restore trust, transparency, and oversight. Until thaat happens you can hand out $16 bazillion and cut [corporate, natch] taxes to zero and it will change nothing.

      me talk pretty one day.

      by mudskipper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:53:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gaaaahhhhhh!!!! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    It's like they decided to inject plutonium into a life-sized statue of Dubbya, which was already sculpted from arsenic crystals.

    Then they cover it with icing made from mercury, and plonk it in the middle of a kid's birthday party and encourage the kids to have a 'slice of cake'.....

    Can this get any more stupid?

    "Why would that kind of work be 'ridiculous'? Who are THEY fighting for?"-------------- BHO on the GOP's mockery of community organizers.

    by speedingpullet on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:15:15 AM PDT

  •  Throw the bumbs out! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    How do we obtain a list of congressmen that voted "Yes" to the bailout?

    Everyone that voted yes on the bailout bill, even thought it failed, needs to be hammered by calls and emails in protest.  These people need to be voted out of office, period.  We cannot forget what they did, so even the ones that are not in danger of losing their seats, now, will be punished in the near future.  There are other options to fix our economy and congress is not even considering anything other than a bailout.  Where is the regulation that prevents this from ever happening again?  Where is the punishment for those who exploited the American people's ignorance in money matters?  Congress is going to allow them to continue doing what they have been doing, even after a bailout!  Not only that, they want to give these bastard criminals even more tax cuts/breaks.  What kind of insanity is this?  Throw the bumbs out!!!

    The fact that congress would even consider such criminal legislation, that forces the tax payer to bear all of the pain, while the Wall Street and Federal Reserve Criminals that caused this disaster receive all the gain, tells us that our government is so utterly corrupt, they will never do what is right to fix the economy.

    Wall Street is just like a casino, in that all bets are overwhelmingly in favor of the house (Morgan/Stanley, Goldman/Sachs, and other Federal Reserve Board member banks).  To those that are in favor of a bailout, I say to you, that if you are willing to gamble your entire life savings on stocks and money markets, then how can you be surprised that the risk of failure finally met up with you?  You took the risk when you gambled in a casino and now you want the rest of us that worked hard and put away savings to bail you out?  Puhhhhleeeeez! *Face Palm*

    Time, as a coordinate measure, is sometimes confused with the perception of time. -- Ham08

    by Ham08 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:16:16 AM PDT

  •  Called my Senators (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal

    Durbin and Obama.

    Left a message for Obama (not called yet, it's been about 30 minutes), and Durbin's staffer doesn't know his position.

    Just so you know.

  •  Reid... Be Honest! (0+ / 0-)

    If Reid would only be honest, he would put out a 30-second spot that reads like this:

    "We are proposing the "Trillion Dollar Act for Wall Street Bankers of 2008." Wall Street financiers are too poor. Therefore, the Senate has decided that the middle class must give them a trillion dollars. It's only fair; so have a heart. They need your money. Be grateful, and let us know the next you don't want to give them money. Then, we can give them another trillion dollars. Thank you very much.

    This ad was paid for by the Democratic National Committee.

  •  On the Today Show this morning, they (0+ / 0-)

    reported that days ago calls were 90-1 AGAINST the bill. When people started seeing that THEIR ox was being gored, the calls started to almost completely reverse. Now the public is nervous and wants a, well, a
    bailout. Sorry, latest news.

  •  Lie to us. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    Another possible change to the bill would call on regulators to modify "mark to market" accounting rules. Such rules require banks and other financial institutions to adjust the value of their assets to reflect current market prices, even if they plan to hold the assets for years.

    Okay, that solves the problem. If the financial instyitutions are broke, let them say that they aren't.

    "I'm not opposed to all wars; I'm opposed to dumb wars." -- Obama in 2002

    by Frank Palmer on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:18:35 AM PDT

  •  "Nothing is so constant as change" and (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    Harry Reid's cowardice.

  •  Class war against the working class (0+ / 0-)

    And only one side is fighting the war.

    "Men use thought only to justify their wrongdoing, and employ speech only to conceal their thoughts." Voltaire

    by chimpwatch on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:18:49 AM PDT

  •  That's why opposing earlier package was stupid (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Frank

    Did people really think that letting a bill, that involved this much money, ferment in Congress for another week was going to make it taste better?

    The idea of "stopping it now so we can negotiate something better" is as dumb an idea as any I have ever heard.

    Dumkopfs!

    -2.38 -4.87: Maturity - Doing what you know is right even though you were told to do it.

    by grapes on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:19:16 AM PDT

  •  contacting senators (0+ / 0-)

    I can't get a fax through to schumer or clinton at either their DC or NYC offices. The contact number on their websites appears to be faulty. The machine dials the number and an automated response says, "to continue your call dial 1 followed by the 7 digit number" I do that, but the fax is still unsuccessful.

    any one else experience this?

    If you aren't outraged, you are an idiot

    by indefinitelee on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:20:58 AM PDT

  •  I've got plenty of feathers (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    You bring the tar...

    It seems to be a given that utter failure is the ONLY thing that will get people motivated for true change.

    "This Machine kills fascists" ~ on Woody Guthries guitar

    by trinityfly on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:21:42 AM PDT

  •  My favorite lines from Hunter's essay: ROFL (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    Same thing. Every damn time, it's the same thing. If the Republicans proposed a rule that Democrats could no longer wear pants on the Senate floor, the Democrats would agree to it, just to be accommodating. And then they'd look at us like we were idiots when we got mad at them for it.

    So fine, my position has changed. I was previously "skeptical" of the Paulson plan. Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun. I want the whole premise to be made Unspeakable, so that future generations shun anyone who even threatens to mention it.

  •  Why do the Dems have no balls? (0+ / 0-)

    Why?

    Join the Facebook Group: John McCain is a Liar

    by acsguitar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:25:46 AM PDT

  •  Vote YES on the Garbage Barge Initiative! (0+ / 0-)
  •  Plan Before Senate: Unlimited FDIC Borrowing (0+ / 0-)

    WSJ Breaking headline reports that

    The Senate financial market rescue bill would temporarily allow the FDIC to borrow unlimited amounts of money from the Treasury Department in connection with the larger government deposit coverage that would extend until the end of next year.

    True?  Something we shouldn't worry about, or black hole?

  •  In the meantime, the banks just get bigger (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    and that brings its own dangers.  See David Lazarus's column in today's LA Times:

    http://www.latimes.com/...

    Lazarus points out that when banks eat one another and get this big,  they can't be allowed to fail; the effects would be catastrophic and worldwide.    Uncle Sam (you and me) must underwrite their risks, since no private concern is big enough to do it.

    And who will break up the banks?  Anybody seen Teddy Roosevelt lately?

     

    Voting Republican is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

    by dotalbon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:29:18 AM PDT

  •  is this the Paulson plan (revises) or not? (0+ / 0-)

    that's all I want to know.

    If we cannot elect this man, we don't deserve him.

    by lisastar on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:30:21 AM PDT

  •  Trickle down, surge up. I want to throw up. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandy on Signal, FishBiscuit

    I can't believe the middle class ever bought into trickle down.  Just the name says it all.

    Siglitz, Nobel Prize winner in Econ, said that the trouble with the bail out, in all of its iterations, is that it is based on trickle down economics, which doesn't work.

    They need to start from scratch.

    How insidious of the Dems to put more of the tax burden on the middle class to lure Republicans into voting for this odious bill.

    Clearly, Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, et al are puppets of the special interests.  They do not care about the middle class.  Period.

    Their position on impeaching this administration was deplorable.  Now Bush is still in office to rob us like this right before an election.

    Then, he will go after Iran or do something horrendous to steal the election outright or via a distraction of his making.

    I'm just sick of it.

    Information is the currency of democracy. ~ T.J.

    by CIndyCasella on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:33:44 AM PDT

    •  the middle class NEVER bought trickle down (0+ / 0-)

      before Reagan's term was up, even its promoters said it was bullshit
      the middle class does not buy it now
      the issues are liquidity and credit - neither the middle class nor the government can really affect credit, only banks can
      do I like all this? hell no but I dislike a dead in the water economy more and the hard left and hard right just don't give a shit or understand what the hell they are doing - they are fighting ideology with  ideology and we are hostage to the fringes

      •  Read Siglitz @ bill. He has a Nobel Prize in Econ (0+ / 0-)

        When people resort to insulting others, it means they have no case.

        the hard left and hard right just don't give a shit or understand what the hell they are doing - they are fighting ideology with  ideology and we are hostage to the fringes

        I will not respond any further to your insults.

        Information is the currency of democracy. ~ T.J.

        by CIndyCasella on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 12:14:53 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I mean Stiglitz (0+ / 0-)

          Bail-out blues by Joseph Stiglitz.

          There is a growing consensus among economists that any bail-out based on Paulson's plan won't work. If so, the huge increase in the national debt and the realisation that even $700bn is not enough to rescue the US economy will erode confidence further and aggravate its weakness.

          To be sure, the rescue plan that was just defeated was far better than what the Bush administration originally proposed. But its basic approach remained critically flawed. First, it relied – once again – on trickle-down economics: somehow, throwing enough money at Wall Street would trickle down to Main Street, helping ordinary workers and homeowners. Trickle-down economics almost never works, and it is no more likely to work this time.

          Information is the currency of democracy. ~ T.J.

          by CIndyCasella on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 01:34:09 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  The Bailout is Fascist (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lupin, ronlib, sunflwrmoonbeam
    This thing needs to go down, again. Its a synergistic (in the pollution sense) monstrosity of government and big business, and will do nothing but provide further monopolization by the big guys swallowing up the little guys WITH the support of the taxpayer. I know let's kill all of our regional banks, wipe out every source of credit for small business and manufacturing and call it Nazi Germany.

    Welcome to the brave new world of everyone going to the monolithic CORPORATION that has attained omnipotence (not even through "market" competition) but through government fiat. We won't even be able to vote with our dollars, we can just go crawl under a rock and die if we don't want to play like a "good corporate customer/citizen).

    Yeah for the corner of government and business!

  •  Obama in LaCrosse, WI (0+ / 0-)

    He just said two things, after explaining the plan, saying it's not just a giveaway:

    1. He's going to vote for it
    1. He urges everyone to vote for it, to, quote "step up to the plate, even though it may be unpopular"

    Good for him. Even though the bill is now worse, but he's still doing what other elected representatives should have been doing all along: explain the plan, and stand up for something that may be unpopular.

    I respect someone who is willing to do that, even though I disagree with parts of it.

    Presidential politics is like jumping into raw sewage with your mouth open -- Batfish

    by Frank on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:36:09 AM PDT

  •  The name of the plan is too telling (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mudskipper, FishBiscuit

    Troubled Assets Relief Plan = TARP. Someone thought that was cute.

    What do tarps do? They cover stuff up.

    •  LOL (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      FishBiscuit

      This is a sad day for America.  It's clear that people are no longer in control of their government.  Don't matter what party is in.  The corporate crooks always have first calls on the Congress.  We are lucky to get an occasional crumb.

      "Is this the United States Congress or the board of directors of Goldman Sachs?" -- Dennis Kucinich

      by noofsh on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:41:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Call to Lugar to Voicemail; Bayh circuit overload (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    joanneleon

    I went straight to voicemail just now 11:30 EDT and Richard Lugar's Washington number. Left blistering message, in fact, I was almost shouting, I was so mad, calling Congress a bunch of criminals rewarding the criminal behavior of failed Wall Street investors who gambled with the money they were charged to manage. Pointed out the 10 trillion or so debt we were about to increase. Ranted about the ludicrous idea of tax cuts in that context.

    Called Bayh's Washington number about 10 times, it was either busy or I would even get a 'circuits overloaded' fail message. Finally got through to human being and repeated the same message, in same furious tone of voice.

    I am disgusted.

    Congress is just a bunch of criminals helping other criminals cover up and not take responsibility for their criminal actions.

    That is all both houses have become anymore.

    Why does Congress hate America so??

    "We must become the change we want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi

    by HeartlandLiberal on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:40:23 AM PDT

  •  If DeLay were still around: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    Nothing is more important in the face of a depression than cutting taxes.  

    [corporate taxes, nor yours, you useless eaters]

    me talk pretty one day.

    by mudskipper on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:46:29 AM PDT

  •  Hunter (0+ / 0-)

    I thank you for speaking out on this.  I urge you to keep this issue front and center on the site today.

    "The true measure of a man is how he treats someone who can do him absolutely no good." --Samuel Johnson

    by joanneleon on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:46:51 AM PDT

  •  I swear to god Jules... (0+ / 0-)

    If you give those republicans 700billion$ I'll have to shoot them on general principle.

  •  Hunter, I love you.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    You have a way with words that I appreciate more than you know....

    I was previously "skeptical" of the Paulson plan. Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun. I want the whole premise to be made Unspeakable, so that future generations shun anyone who even threatens to mention it.

    Since Pelosi refuses to impeach the lying war criminals, I wish this could be accomplished right now (since I don't believe the bailout would work anyway; some have already said it won't, there will be a crash no matter what, and we'll be left holding the bag for a monstrous debt on top of the crash to come):

    I hope that if the worst happens and another truly large depression does come, the American people have the collective resolve to tar and feather all these people. We can send them out into the ocean on a garbage barge with an ample supply of food, water, and talking points, and whichever country wants its economy similarly wrecked is welcome to give them a home.

    If this sucker is gonna crash anyway, I advocate NO bailout.  Let the juveniles who wrought this mess learn to grow up and live (invest) within their means with regulations, and fix it themselves by sacrificing their bonuses and their golden parachutes and their monstrously huge salaries.  Fuck 'em.

    (¯`*._(¯`*._(-IMPEACH-)_.*´¯)_.*´¯)

    by NonnyO on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:48:00 AM PDT

  •  Funniest thing said about bailout (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    Now I want it to die a hot, flaming death. I want its ashes to be fed to goats, and the goats fed to sharks, and the sharks put on a rocket and fired into the sun.

  •  Down With Reid and Pelosi (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FishBiscuit

    The Iraq War is still raging. Afghanistan is still in the crapper. We're still torturing and wiretapping anyone and everyone, now certified "legal". We've given away $TRILLIONS to murderers, frauds and thieves, keeping only the debt. Bush crucifies us with his Reign of tError, without fear of impeachment. Cheney remains at large in the Cheney Bunker.

    For 6 Bush years, Democrats could simply blame Republicans. But for two solid years, the "minority excuse" hasn't been available. Reid and Pelosi are collaborators.

    We cannot hand those two traitors, who spit in the face of the people who voted them a majority, a huger majority in a Democratic trifecta power monopoly. The government is going to get that monopoly. But Reid and Pelosi have proven beyond doubt that they personally must be kicked to the curb.

    Are you better off than you were 2 years ago? Isn't enough enough? We need not just "more", but better Democrats heading the chambers of Congress. Or else meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 08:51:08 AM PDT

  •  Is it just me (0+ / 0-)

    or does the paragraph in this article re: mark to market accounting not make sense?

  •  Amen Brother, Amen. (0+ / 0-)

    Couldn't have said it better myself.

  •  Do the sharks... (0+ / 0-)

    ...have frickin' laser beams on their heads?

    "SEVEN HUNDRED...BILLLLLION DOLLARS!"

    Lousy Smarch weather!

    by FishBiscuit on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:00:32 AM PDT

  •  Our country is too big (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lupin

    Smaller is better. I predict our country will break up into its natural regions as did the Soviet Union.

    George Bush dug us into a deep hole. . . John McCain was carrying the shovel! ~Barack Obama

    by mrobinson on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:01:38 AM PDT

  •  If they do this! (0+ / 0-)

    I swear to God I will spend every second of my life from the moment this is signed into law finding a way o fund primary challengers against Ried and the whole damn lot of em. I don't care if it's Ted Kennedy I'll do everything in my power to strip them of their seat and influence because his is just that dangerous. I love this party but I'm sick and tired of being ashamed of it. I thought that was all over.

  •  The end of the US of A as we knew it... (0+ / 0-)

    ...has been written large since 2000 (and in fairness, before that) for anyone who cared to look, just as the end of the USSR was inevitable.

    I keep flashing on the "I'm not dead yet" scene from MONTY PYTHON & THE HOLY GRAIL. We're the guy on the cart and the Oligarchs from Wall Street are preparing to deliver that final blow.

    OVER HERE: AN AMERICAN EXPAT IN THE SOUTH OF FRANCE, is now available on Amazon US

    by Lupin on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:09:42 AM PDT

  •  The French responded with the guillotine (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch

    I favor gentler methods. Throw these monsters out of our country!

    Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine!

    by jimbo92107 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:12:22 AM PDT

  •  A = A. We owe Iraq 709 billion. Guess why (0+ / 0-)

    they need cash right this fucking minute. More details at this diary.

    So, let's break Main Street USA for Main Street Baghdad. Way to go, BushCo.

    What is the foundation of *your* client relationship to Planet Earth?

    by LRLine on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:16:18 AM PDT

  •  BETRAYED! (0+ / 0-)

    As expected, the US House of Representatives website is completely bogged down by Americans trying to express their outrage at this act of looting by our "representatives" on behalf of Wall Street speculators.

    We are betrayed! These are the greedy, corrupt economic royalists that FDR warned would seek to turn America into a corporate feudal state. Now they steal the people's money in one last burst of thievery, draining the US Treasury of the last few sheckles before they all take off for Paraguay!

    Reinstate the Fairness Doctrine!

    by jimbo92107 on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 09:20:01 AM PDT

  •  I Want My Tax Cut! (0+ / 0-)

    The idea of putting a tax cut in the package isn't bad by itself. It's a question of who gets the tax cut.

    I've been arguing for two weeks that they ought to bundle the "bailout" with Obama's income tax plan. It cuts taxes. It just does it in a revenue-neutral way.

    Look, unless they avoid a deepening recession the assets underlying all of this will continue to get worse and worse, possibly pulling even the strongest institutions down with them. We have to shore them up. That has to be part of the package because once there's a patch Congress will have no will to act and Bush would just veto any real relief they did pass.

    We have to get something that will push the value of those assets up. That means, first, putting money into the spending economy (giving it to the working class so they will spend it and it has a chance to bubble up), and second, bringing in more wealth-creating jobs so that we have the underlying economic wealth needed to pay off all this debt. It also means ending the war operations as quickly as possible so that we can stop borrowing to fund them (or raising taxes on the rich, which is the only way to pay for them without tanking the economy).

    So, I want my tax cut. I want tax cuts for everyone making less than $250K. I want it right now, as a part of the plan.

    Otherwise, I'll put my money in a mattress and wait for the economy to recover.

    In 2018 or so.

  •  At the rate this is going... (0+ / 0-)

    ...I can see the next Civil War from here. And I'm NOT in Alaska looking west, either.

    Remember the Declaration of Independence? It says:

    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

  •  Mark to Market, maybe not. But.. (0+ / 0-)

    Since the bailout plans seem to imply that the government will pay some definite amount for the toxic assets in question, or otherwise set some value for them, how about if the institutions currently owning them are just assigned the same values for those toxic assets? It would be kind of like abandoning mark to market but by not letting the owners do the evaluating, perhaps it would have some of the beneficial effects without the toxic effects seen in other situations.

    Just an idea...

  •  Factually correct or not.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    relentless

    You`ve got to admit that`s one of the best damn rants ever posted on the innertubes.

    Goats, sharks, rockets to the moon!!!

    Jesus I`m in tears!

  •  I think Hunter has it wrong. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    relentless

    Let's call it for what it is.

    Feed the ashes to pigs, put lipstick on them. Feed the pigs to sharks. Have the "masters of the world" put lipstick on the sharks. The ones that survive get a lead parachute (they are alchemists, after all) parachute to evacuate the rocket ship somewhere over Mercury.

  •  Death throes or panic attack? (0+ / 0-)

    This kind of thing doesn't happen very often and will be in the history books.

    Business is writhing and shaking on the floor in its death throes. Others think it could be just having a little panic attack.

    It is all fear, horror and hysteria and the crisis is not really funny.

    If you take just a few steps back from the drama, it begins to look like a trick, a heist.   And it is kind of funny.  All those who hate anyone who gets money for nothing have taken so much of our money for nothing.  Now they have came back for the rest of it.

    McCain said there are some who just think of their own interest instead of the country.  It just gets funnier and funnier.  The no tax, no welfare crowd are now trying to make us feel guilty for not giving them their gubmint check.

  •  Section 104, Paulson ON the oversight board now? (0+ / 0-)

    I'm reading on another blog that, in the new bailout bill, section 104 states that Paulson is named to the oversight board...don't have time to chase this down today.  Anyone have info?

  •  Naomi Klein, "The Shock Doctrine" (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chimpwatch
    Read it, meditate on it, spread it, live it...because it's happening.

    As an Iraqi-American academic born and raised in New Orleans, this voter is not pleased.

    by naltikriti on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:13:12 AM PDT

  •  If I wasn't against it I would be now. (0+ / 0-)

    This is insulting.  The oversight is Paulson and Bernake and their ilk.

    There would be a Financial Stability Oversight Board,
    composed of the Federal Reserve chairman, That is Bernanke.

    The Treasury secretary, That is  Paulson.

    the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency,
    the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission and
    the secretary of Housing and Urban Development.
    Securities and Exchange Commission and the secretary of Housing and Urban Development.

    The rest of them are from the stock exchange and housing.

  •  This is really pissing me off. (0+ / 0-)

    I listened to that Texan talking head from the House on Rachel Maddow last night. He seemed to be very careful not to say anything actually meaningful or revelatory about what shape another proposal might take. He went from obvious platitudes right into mark-to-market. It was very Palinesque.

    If the public is blaming the Republicans 2 to 1 for this mess, the pressure should be on them, no? Talk has already been going around about how the Dems own economic policy issues. Why are they trying to appease the House Repubs; especially considering  third of the Dems weren't even on board? Why are the Dems not driving the debate about what specific measures to enact? They should be crafting thee definitve Democrat plan for this fix and trying to MAKE the Repubs come to the table.

    •  Yes, the Dem's need to step up. (0+ / 0-)

      The first person with a plan now can blame the other party for not wanting to help. Right now it looks like a neo-con bailout scheme and so maybe Pelosi and gang won't want to vote for it. I'm curious to see what Obama does if this gives a big payday to uber-business. Somebody needs to come up with a pro-normal folk plan and get that on track to skewer the Rethugs with, and quit trying to polish this turd.

  •  Step 2. Now they are starting to whine. (0+ / 0-)

    They say, "We just aren't explaining it right.  If it was explained, everyone would want it."

    How many times have we thought, "If they knew what it was like on main street they wouldn't do this or that?"

    How many times have we thought, "If we could just find the right words."

    Their problem is that the opinion makers and the Fixed News have cryed wolf so many times, that no one wants to listen to them.

    It is a bad bill. Paulson made big bucks in derivatives.  He should not be in charge.

  •  Such Bullshit (0+ / 0-)

    These democratic congressional leaders must be replaced yesterday!  WTF are they thinking?  A 50-year economic crises, and they use the opportunity to lard up a rescue bill with wingnut bullshit?  This is outrageously stupid, totally unoriginal, just...pathetic.  Absolutely pathetic.

    The bill is opposed by wingnut republicans, and by progressive democrats, so WTF don't the democratic leaders add measures that will draw support from progressives?

    God DAMN I'm fucking pissed about this.  The opportunity of a lifetime that every politician DREAMS of having, and these "leaders" piss it away on the same damn right wing orthodoxy that brought about this crises.  It's like Cheney and Rove have been using directed energy weapons to cook the brains of Reid and Pelosi -  or maybe Reid and Pelosi are just republicans running false flag operations as a sort of safety release valve for public unrest.  Or maybe they're just fucking stupid, unprincipled tools who rose to the top on pure ambition.  

    I swear if I lived in San Francisco, I'd be THIS CLOSE to voting for a republican over Pelosi, just to kick her capitulating ass out of congress.

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Wed Oct 01, 2008 at 11:51:56 AM PDT

  •  Haven't we Learned? (0+ / 0-)

    All of this is cosmetic. The Republican's can't sell the bailout to their constituents so they think hmm, what does everyone love? Oh i know lower taxes! How could anyone, anyone, ANYONE, think that the best thing to do after spending 700 billion is to give the government LESS revenue. Does Harry Reid not know where the government gets its money?  The mark to market rule is also cosmetic, the losses still exist even if we pretend they don't. Deregulation is the problem, the last thing we need is more of it.

  •  Good politics, horrible policy (0+ / 0-)

    I like the AMT package, I support the AMT package but to graft it on to this massive atrocity of a bailout makes me furious. I know why they did it. I know it makes good politics, you beat your opponent over the head with the idea that they voted against all the truly great things in the tax bill and hopefully assuage the hurt at the polls of having to cram through this totally unpopular, appalling bailout and at the same time give the blue dogs cover from their "increased revenue" complaint (the AMT package will cost about $100 billion over ten years. I'm not pissed because of the tax cuts which I support but because of this looming wall of brimstone that will blunt the growth of our nation for the next ten years. I can't support this bill because in this instance it's just good politics not good policy.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site