Umm, no. I agree with what Barney Frank said yesterday: "Here's the story: There's a terrible crisis affecting the American economy. We have come together on a bill to alleviate the crisis. And because somebody hurt their feelings they decide to punish the country. I mean, I would not have imputed that degree of pettiness and hypersensitivity....But think about this: Somebody hurt my feelings so I will punish the country. I mean, that's hardly plausible. And there are 12 Republican members who were ready to stand up for the economic interests of America but not if anybody insulted them. I think they are covering up the embarrassment of not having the votes."

Maybe it is because reasonable people don't want the government to bail out those who did a horrible job managing their businesses?

The bipartisan support of killing this bill really pleased me. The "lets send them fat cats a message" rhetoric from Obamacain did not.

Send them a message by giving them $700B for doing a shitty job? Come on, I have to vote for one of you!

The harmful bailout did not fail because of Pelosi's goofy speech. It failed because many Representatives, Democrats and Republicans, received a TON of calls and Emails from voters.

These voters do NOT want hard-working, responsible taxpayers to be forced:

1. To bail out bad behavior.
2. To pay for the mistakes of lending institutions.
3. To pay for the mortgages of buyers who never should have taken on those mortgages.
4. To pay for risky behavior in a way that will only encourage MORE risky behavior.

In short, just enough voters GOT INVOLVED to torpedo the BAD BILL that was presented yesterday.

Ward - i think you may be right. i hope so. because if so, that kind of voter involvement is a silver lining

Here is an observation related to (1) the bailout and (2) the new Chicago Tribune.

Did you see the pathetic Chicago Tribune website today?

First, the lead story was NOT the bailout, as it should have been. Instead, they had a Palin Derangement Syndrome-afflicted artist, completed with large photo, with a nude "portrait" of Sarah Palin.

Second, after apparently getting hit with complaints, they rapidly REMOVED the nude-Palin-portrait story and the accompanying skin-filled photo.

Third, the new lead story is STILL not the bailout. Instead, it is a story about the Beanie Baby tycoon buying a unit in the Chicago Spire.

Bailout story? What bailout story?

Welcome to the new Chicago Tribune!

Clarification: I meant to say that they changed the presentation of the nude-Palin-portrait story from being the lead-story-with-photo.

The portrait story is still on the website but it is lumped in with the other stories.

Bloomberg is reporting that the Fed is moving ahead with pumping $630 billion into the global economy, anyway.

@Chuck
exactly: Ron Paul already noted that the Fed has the vehicle for 'injecting liquidity' which we end up paying for via inflation instead of tax dollars... this was not aboout credit, this was about trying to pin the economic crisis on Democrats via Congress.

Starting last Monday, Republicans were circulating position papers talking about how opposing the bailout was a great idea for the upcoming House elections. It gave Republican reps the opportunity to distance themselves from Bush and to claim some popularist cred. Also, if this first-step bailout worked, no one would get much credit, but if it fails, there would be a lot of blame to go around. Based on this, the Republicans assumed that the Democrats would be the adults and do whatever it took to pass the bill, and as a result, risk all the blame if it failed. It was a nasty, purely partisan decision. It's too bad that Pelosi gave them some obvious cover, but the Republicans would have simply found some other excuse for why two-thirds of them decided to vote to fix the problems they primarily created.

The "Nancy was mean" excuse has as much credibility as the claim that Obama was calling Palin a "pig."

For anyone who thinks this bailout plan is a scam, please explain why the TED spread is at about 3, or explain why that isn't important. Alternately, you could explain why side bets on CDOs (often much higher than the face value of the CDOs themselves), let alone the fear of paying out on CDSs, isn't a big deal.

If you can't offer those explanations, or, more likely, if you have an understanding of those issues comparable to Sarah Palin's, then you many not be in a position to call this a "scam."

To give you some perspective, if I were given the ability to appoint the US government and know that the population would go along with whatever I did, Dennis Kucinich would be a leading candidate for my appointment for president.

But the sad reality is that we have a corporate and banking system that has ground to a halt because of a lack of regulation and a resulting lack of transparency. Every big bank out there knows that they are sitting on a ton of scary obligations derived from crap mortgages, and they know that all the other big banks are in the same deep do-do. But because nice folks like Phil Gramm worked so hard to make sure these derivatives didn't have to be disclosed (let alone actually regulated), no bank can trust any other bank when they say that they are "doing just fine." As a result interbank and other lending has ground to a halt.

This sub-optimal bailout is a necessary first step to prevent lots of companies from collapsing very soon. There's a lot more work to deal with the underlying problems of crap mortgages and reregulating the financial system to create better transparency, which will hopefully happen under an Obama presidency with Democratic control of Congress. But for now, we sadly need this bailout to happen soon.

@TomDArch
Thanks for a very non-informative explanation.

I'll repeat myself without acronyms: banks are not willing to lend money to failing banks because they don't think they will get their money back since their assets are tied up in bad mortgages.

Why is leadership being equated with forking over tax money no questions asked? Leadership is saying FU to the president and sticking up for the taxpayers.

The bailout has been described as buying overvalued securities so we can establish a market price so people can start lending again.

The bailout is not "creating credit" for companies, it is buying mortgage backed securities at an inflated price so they can be sold somehow.

Mortgage backed securities should be sold for what they are really worth and not propped up by our tax dollars.

What is paralyzing the credit markets is uncertainty as to whether a "huge idiot" (HI) will walk in and purchase these securities at an inflated price.

If that HI says no, then the companies that leveraged themselves out of business will go bankrupt and be bought up at a true market value.

Propping the economy up now is just prepping us for a larger fall down the road.

Sell me on the negative effects of letting the market crash. We need a new system anyway. Our currency has permanently lost its value, and we continue to simply print more monopoly money as the answer.

First, our currency still is sought by foreign central banks and investors; the euro has yet to knock us off the throne, and neither the pound, yen, yuan or whatever else seems likely to do the trick, despite the trend of the falling dollar.

As for printing "monopoly money," that is certainly a danger, DJ, but has yet to happen in the way you have implied. If it were to happen, you would surely notice much more than what is happening now. Prices would go seriously haywire--making recent trends seem benign--and many of you with jobs would no longer have your jobs.

This bill is pure shit, end of story

Really? Then what is your idea? Simply letting the market crash? I suppose you have no retirement funds, or a job, or any other investments or even savings, right? I mean, are you willing to lose it all?

Your language reads like you support a return to the gold standard. Or, that you want to burn down the house in order to save the house. That's a fine theory, I suppose, if you ignore the millions--or billions--of people around the world who would suffer, and the potential for more violence as the world sorts out this problem.

Yes, we need changes, and lots of them, but some neo-Marxist wish for the whole house of cards to simply collapse will hurt you much more than you probably think. Unless, of course, you are a farmer eager to return to bartering.

The breadown of local Congressmen on yesterday's vote is very interesting. It was very nice (no sarcasm) to see "NO" votes from Democrats Jesse Jackson, Jr. and Dan Lipinski.

On the Republican side, we knew we had "NO" votes coming from Judy Biggert and Peter Roskam.

But why in the HECK did Mark Kirk vote "YES"? Is he trying to lose re-election? Is he really a Republican? Does he really think this stinker was a good bill?

I am very disappointed in Mark Kirk.

"but some neo-Marxist wish for the whole house of cards to simply collapse will hurt you much more than you probably think."

Matilda, life is not with out its risks right?
And this is coming from some one with three retirement plans from different jobs worked over the years, including presently. Yea I have a solid hard investment (that can’t be taken away as easily as 401s) i.e. my home, But F*ck it I'll take the risk over being played( AGAIN) a Fool by "wall street", Dick Cheney types, etc.

Their plan (written by them) doesn’t even spell out how mortgages set to default will be saved because how do you untangle mortgages bundled into thousands and sold off to the secondary market on percentages? This difficulty was not their concern. The only thing clear about their plan is that our money is going to pay off THEIR dept springing from THIER greed. Do you have any idea how they live?

Now you wanna bale them out as if they’ve learned some lesson? This bale out only shows OUR continued willingness to be raped by the same blue stocking elite and their corporations that we have been giving corporate welfare too for rat too long. And over the years starting with Reagan we have been giving them more. Seriously have you seen the articles about the spring off Wall Street firms lining up to get rich on running these programs? This makes Mayor Daley seem small time!

This is nothing more than an abusive F*cked up relationship. They beat the crap out of us, smile say sorry and we continue going back with out lessons learned because secretly we admire them secretly, we envy and wanna be them.

As some one who is invested in this economy, I say not another dime. And as its o bad( which it is) why don't the corporations rescue themselves? Hell Pelosi and McCain's wife could cover half of this by writing a check. Yea I live pretty well (all things considered and comparatively) and I’m scared, but I’m tired of living on their plantation.

Matilda:
If anything Marxism would be bailing out the market- pure capitalism would be to let it crash.

i couldn't give a shit if the market goes to hell. ... i don't have a thing to lose.

Do you like being employed (assuming you are are will be one day)? Or having a chance at some civilized health care system in this country within your lifetime? Or seeing your parents and friends have money, either for food or retirement? Or seeing this city remain (relatively) clean and somewhat safe (research how cities finance themselves; the market plays a huge role)? Or having new trains and buses for the CTA? Or more cops in Chicago?

If you answered yes to any of those questions, then you DO have a very strong interest in seeing the market survive (and, of course, reformed and regulated in a wiser manner). Look beyond yourself; the whole system is connected, and if it crashes, you can be sure some of the debris will land hard on you and people you love, and delay all the good progressive things that so many people claim to want.

i thought that our dollar was getting its ass kicked by the euro.

The euro in recent years has gained significant value against the dollar and, more recently, the pound. Still, foreign central banks and investors still treat the dollar as a prime currency, and oil continues to be priced in dollars. Until that changes--and things could certainly change one day--the dollar remains king, even if it is a much weaker monarch. Don't believe me, though. Research it for yourself. It's not that hard to do.

Simply reading the Wall Street Journal or Financial Times from time to time might be helpful to understanding this extremely complicated mess, assuming you don't want to take a seminar in economics, which I would not wish on my worst enemy.

Sorry, I don't traffic in superstition, even ones as fun as designed by the Mayans. Nice to hear you have a steady job.

If the market sinks, you can be sure more people will put off having babies. That typically happens during the worst downtimes.

.....“Do you like being employed...having a chance at some civilized health care.. seeing your parents and friends have money.. retirement...seeing this city remain...clean and somewhat safe...having new trains and buses..more cops"
If you answered yes to any of those questions, then you DO have a very strong interest in seeing the market survive (and, of course, reformed and regulated in a wiser manner?”

Matilda,
the problem is you speak from a middle class conservative mindset of protecting the status que for the middle class at all cost. Instead of dealing with the fact that thier protection
(that continues to erode slowly any way)
has made them blind, disconnected and lazy.

Meanwhile the economic elite has raped pillaged and plundered the land while pushing entire generations of people( and growing) into the abyss. These people are removed from this crisis because they are so far down.

Your system that you keep defending means nothing but continued poverty and dehumization to this growing group of people both here and abroad.

Then you actually have the nerve to think once this 700 billion dollar check is signed and this crisis is off the front pages, there will be some reform, some regulation, in a wise manner? Do you even know what the plan entails?

This is why it’s hard to take you serious. When and how is that going to happened in this Country?
And speaking of the dollar abroad, I just got back last week. Our dollar was significantly weaker even in a third world country than I have ever seen it. Our dollar has had its day.
Oh and I would recommend a macro economic seminar and if any one is interested I’ve got a whole slew of books I can suggests. Seriously this was a crisis that was predicted years ago.

Our system doesn’t need reform, it needs a drastic overall and if you think it will be done with out all of us feeling some real pain, you’re wrong. This is history.
Oh and you mentioned plans. Well plenty of them are out there including dennis kucinich's New Deal Concept
But these people are not allowed in the room. No Affordable housing, social service, education, consumer protection experts and advocates either. Just wealthy bankers and "congressional leaders"
that you feel o. k in trusting

well, I'm not into myself enough to say I care about the middle class more than the lower class. I will leave that to you. And the reason why you don't see any populist rising, is because the majority of us jump all over poor folks. a few folks only jump on the rich, Yet every body(including intellectuals feeds into stupid myths around the middle class with out critique. Maybe you should pick up a book on Nazi Germany, Maybe you should read Wiezel(Sp) book called Night. Maybe you should be more about telling the truth as oppossed to trying to sound intelligent.

"vital to the stability of the republic", huh? What are you Princes Leia? spare me the dramatic, all parts are vital. I never argued or "dismissed" one over the other. My only point is the ability to get the message of "wake the f*ck up" to the middle class by being honest, instead of this continual hand holding and political pandering that's not working. Let finally take their lumps like so many others had, have to because of them.
This is the same middle class the voted for Reagan Twice and Bush Twice. We are all in this together. They can no longer vote based on gays, guns, and abortions. This is their wake u, call. Its all of our wake up call. So instead of trying to talk our way out of this sh*t so we can go back to Monday Night foot Ball and NASCAR. Instead of bribing the rich, so we can get a few more crumbs,
Why don't we look at this as an opportunity to build something new, build something that works for the future?

Heck, Tilda with your kinda placative thinking, the Montgomery Bus boycott wouldn't have lasted a week! Maybe this is a time for courage to figure out a new way? Take some risk like Harriet Tubman did when she left the plantation. We use to have some people of courage. Now we got million air politicians like O'Bama passing themselves off as "courageous"

Reminds me of that only song "has any body here seen my old Friend Martin? Has Any body here, seen my old Fried Robert? Has any body hear seen my old friend John?"

Now on to a more important topic, Moi I actually plan on starting my own cult, based amongst my beer stained credentials of ministry that hang on
my refrigerator door and Decadency. But until I have more land, urban worshipers
are excepted! Tithing can be done in Stout and Ale!

Spook Out

ohhhhh, I do see your point dear tilda. It's clear as mud.
And its as staid and status quo as it is parochial and provincial. Perhaps you should spend more time studying in Europe where common brick layers have more intellectual heft than most Americans with master degrees.
Are you really that blind to trivialize a rare fleeting chance to reform our nation, by pointing out to me what I of course already know? That the middle class also voted for democrats?

Do you a know that under Clinton the disparity between rich and poor grew further than under Reagan? Don't you get it? Who you vote for in the end is now meaningless. Who brought NAFTA? And who was Carter? Nothing but a conservative baptist, until they kicked him out of office. The same with Al Gore. Gone is the country that produced FDR and the time that created LBJ. And while I may not broach the subject, I certainly would not debate against an argument that JFK,RFK, and MLK where killed by powerful interests in this country, party of OUR government, part of WallStreet. Don't you get it? The fact that we have had the "same" father and son Mayor for basically 50 years? Our Father and Son president, doing their job to also protect a certain class by any means necessary.

And of course a populist government would be a nightmare, especially for minorities. And that's why I said nothing about populism. But so is this bull shit broken Titanic that you call a "republic" for an increasing number of people, including your blessed middle class.
They are just to blind to know it. And you and WallStreet want to keep them that way, for different reasons of course

But perhaps a sudden painful economic shock might force them this mighty middle class to look beyond monday night foot ball and maybe have to deal and understand and befriend some N*ggas, some f*gs, some D*Kes, some
some Communist, standing in the soup line next to them or on the unemployment line. Or maybe coming to them with solutions
Maybe being scared will humble them, shake them up? Provide some intellectual vertigo and unhousing?

Yea the problem is Matilda that even in cyber space you can't dream outside your narrow Midwest conservative construct. Yea you go back to your comfort zone where every thing is safe and predictable, where you can postulate about the underside of this county from afar. But one day you might find because of your preoccupation with preserving the Archie and Edith Bunker Class those Harry and Louise's who killed heath care for their own nieghbors, that in another 30 years of this same old same old that the next economic crisis will be the Chinese, Russians and the Africans and their supporters in the Middless East and Asia, coming to get some real pay back on mainstreet and we will deserve it. Because yet again just like 9/11 we choose to tread water instead of moving forward.