Historic bailout bill passes Congress; Bush signs

NF Reporter · 10-04-2008, 12:01 AM

AP - With the economy on the brink of meltdown and elections looming, a reluctant Congress abruptly reversed course and approved a historic $700 billion government bailout of the battered financial industry on Friday. President Bush swiftly signed it.

Full Story...

Eagle One · 10-04-2008, 10:20 AM

The first time I heard the $700 Billion figure, all I could think was "700 WHAT?"

I've since noticed that none of the news stories or politicians are asking the questions I want answers to:
>Who will go to prison for this mess?
>Who will be fired?
>Who will be fined?
>Why are bankers will seven and EIGHT figure annual incomes being allowed to keep their fortunes?
>What the **** have the politicians been doing for the last 20 years?
>Why aren't the people who are paid well to oversee the bankers in jail?
>Where is the accountability? It seems that nobody will be held accountable.

mkt711 · 10-04-2008, 03:11 PM

Well that's Reaganomics for you. The thing is that we know exactly what the problem is. Conservatives have been crying for de-regulation for the past three decades and now it is finally starting to collapse on us.

Many analysts have warned about this and I'm surprised we lasted this long.

The scary part is that McCain, who's party is almost single-handedly responsible for this mess, has a shot at becoming elected to this nations highest office.

The sad truth is that no one will go to jail.
We will most likely revert back to the free-for-all money making orgy we had before.
'Joe six-pack' will be left with around 40,000 in debt. (U.S. National Debt Clock)
And, oh yeah, this bailout isn't even a solution. We are just delaying the bigger problem.

Eagle One · 10-04-2008, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Well that's Reaganomics for you. The thing is that we know exactly what the problem is. Conservatives have been crying for de-regulation for the past three decades and now it is finally starting to collapse on us.

Going back 20+ years to blame former Pesident Reagan doesn't explain the current mess, nor does it in any way excuse the reckless, greedy, irresponsible politicians and bankers. And, I'll remind you, the Clintons both had a hand in a similar mess and consequential bailout in the 1980's. They certainly didn't want to talk about oversight and regulations.

I still have the same questions. Why is nobody talking about accountability or prosecution? If the bankers created a $700B mess legally, without violating any laws, then Congress should be stripped of all personal wealth and sent to Gitmo.

waltky · 10-04-2008, 11:54 PM

Wall St. may pass on it...

Now Wall Street may shun $700bn bail-out
Sunday October 5 2008 - Fears are mounting that many Wall Street banks and financial firms will refuse to participate in the US government's $700bn bail-out package, leaving global markets and world economies in a perilous state for months to come.

Quote:

'There is a growing feeling that banks ... might instead decide to tough it out,' said Thomas Caldwell, chairman and CEO of Caldwell Financial, a $1bn-plus fund manager. For the past two weeks all eyes in the market have been focused on US Congress and its attempts to pass Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson's bail-out package - a bill to allow the US government to buy up to $700bn of toxic mortgage-related assets from American banks, which would in theory free the credit markets and set the gears of global commerce spinning once more.

Last Monday, after the bill was thrown out by the House of Representatives, more than $1 trillion was wiped off the value of US stocks as the market was gripped by panic. The bill was passed on Friday afternoon, however, after the inclusion of $149bn of tax breaks and strict rules for participating banks. But Wall Street analysts, believe the addition of so many terms to the bill might deter potential participants.

One of the least attractive elements is a section designed to curb executive pay at banks that participate in the bail-out package. These include limiting stock-related pay and banning 'golden parachutes' for executives. 'I think this hodge-podge of regulations and rules will be enough to put many [chief executives] off participating,' Caldwell said. Sources close to Goldman Sachs and Merrill Lynch indicated the banks might choose not to participate in the bail-out as there is a growing view on Wall Street that the market may be bottoming out.

Analysts also believe that the mere presence of the government as buyer of last resort will be enough to get credit markets moving again, and that a large number of banks would not need to take part for the legislation to succeed. Wall Street ended its worst week in seven years with another tumble on Friday. The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed down more than 157 points on Friday at 10,325.38.

Now Wall Street may shun $700bn bail-out | Business | The Observer

mkt711 · 10-05-2008, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Going back 20+ years to blame former Pesident Reagan doesn't explain the current mess, nor does it in any way excuse the reckless, greedy, irresponsible politicians and bankers.

I wasn't blaming Reagan just his economic philosophy that has become the foundation for fiscal conservatives and the way they operate.

Also I think it is rational to look at recent history to decide where we are now. Looking back at how we got here will only fix it so this same mess doesn't happen in the future. 20 years is extremely recent history.

You're right too, this is no excuse.

Quote:

I still have the same questions. Why is nobody talking about accountability or prosecution? If the bankers created a $700B mess legally, without violating any laws, then Congress should be stripped of all personal wealth and sent to Gitmo.

Yeah it's a shame isn't it? There has been some federal interest into what these businesses did but I don't expect much to be done.

But you can't blame one branch of the government the same way you couldn't blame one person.

Quote:

And, I'll remind you, the Clinton's both had a hand in a similar mess and consequential bailout in the 1980's. They certainly didn't want to talk about oversight and regulations.

Agreed. While no one is innocent here, it is overwhelmingly the fault of conservatives. I mean, deregulation is(or should I say was?) their biggest talking platform along with being being pro-life and limiting gun control.

Adriel · 10-05-2008, 10:23 PM

I first heard this on the radio and I thought only one thing. This is what this country needs, but then I thought on it a little bit. Don't you think that we will go right beck to where we were? I mean if we bail out the banks and relieve money owed and take them out of debt, woulden't that just give them all the more room to go right back into debt? I think that if this works, it will work for about 10 years, then we will have to do it all over again.