Do you support the Paulson bail out?

[Canadian Grunt]

Do you support the Paulson bail out as it was first presented?

Do you support the Paulson bail out proposal as it stands?

I am trying to start a poll but I am unsure if it will work


Air your opinion

 

[brewer12345]

As it stands how? The thing the administration presented, which is DOA? The compromise with Congress, which nobody seems to know the details of? SOmething else?

 

[OAG]

No, but it makes no difference from the latest news.

 

[Canadian Grunt]

As it stands how? The thing the administration presented, which is DOA? The compromise with Congress, which nobody seems to know the details of? SOmething else?

How it was first presented. I don't know the final verdict.

 

[Canadian Grunt]

How do I change the poll title to match the first post title edit?

can a moderator help on this?

 

[FIREd]

Let's see borrowing $700B to buy distressed assets that may have an upside potential in the end, or at the very least a substantial residual value and potentially avoid a complete meltdown of the entire financial system... Hum, yes, that sounds like a good reason to borrow that kind of money. I think it beats borrowing $700B to invade Iraq. But that's just me...

 

[al_bundy]

How it was first presented. I don't know the final verdict.

give us money and don't bother to ask how we are going to use it and don't let the courts ask either

 

[tightasadrum]

Let's see, would I rather lose an arm or a leg or a stick in the eye?

 

[Walt34]

Heck no. Stick the taxpayers with the tab for other people's foolishness? Bad idea.

Maybe I should mortgage my house to the hilt, run up credit card debt for toys and vacations, and then ask for a bailout because well, gee, I didn't win the lottery, and things just didn't work out the way I wanted them to.

 

[haha]

I think it would be prudent for anyone with substantial assets in the stock market, or who is still working, or running a business or in fact is exposed in any way to anything other than insured savings and government bonds to support a bailout.

We can hope that it is done with discipline, and at market values. But how many of us want to wake up Monday with our accounts down $100,000 or more?

Get'er done, we'll worry about the rest later. Hey, you kid-free folks should be ecstatic. We breeders have produced the people who will pay for this, if indeed any paying needs to be done.

ha

 

[MichaelB]

The original Paulson proposal is best. Give all the money to Paulson, no questions asked, no scrutiny ever, then hope for the best.

Risky and crazy as that sounds, I think it's safer than 1) The senate getting involved, 2) the house getting involved, 3) bush getting involved, or 4) any combination of 1,2 & 3. Remember, there is no problem so serious that it can't be made worse when our politicians get involved.

The future is looking grim. I see three options: learn chinese, practice being a Wal-Mart greeter, or get a job a Goldman Sachs.

Edit: I just watched marc Faber and Jim Rogers at Bloomberg. Very enjoyable - they certainly know how to get their points across

 

[LOL!]

A lot more of that $700B is going into my pockets than is coming out. I fully support it.

 

[lazygood4nothinbum]

i'm unsure. always a saver and never a debtor, i didn't start this mess, didn't flip a house. i understand the $700b bailout as proposed will cost about $2,600 per person. it happens i have that. so even though i didn't cause this, can i just write someone a check and then my life goes back to normal without the fear of collapsing what's left of my little world?

as i understand the conditions of this hostage taking, the world will end if we don't pay up. i hear that the bailout should fix the economy. what that means i don't know: it's gonna take $700b to what, reinstall the smoke & mirrors? does that secure the rest of my future or is this just a delay tactic? i don't have any children to pass this off on but i'd rather go back to work now than when this collapses again in 10 years, you know, when that $700b extortion payment runs out.

if this works, if it does whatever voodoo it is suppose to do, then i suppose, that sounds worth it. but what i'd like to know is why wouldn't the $700b bailout work. what assures me that i am not having the wool pulled over my eyes, besides that gun pointed at my head?

a contract is only good when it is not signed under duress.

 

[JB]

I'm unsure and agree with Lazy's comments. Isn't this adding just another layer to the debt pyramid that's been at the root of our faux economy?

 

[Spanky]

How about lending them money and use the assets (both good and bad) as collateral?

 

[Donzo]

We need to do something and buying paper that has value to keep the market from crashing sounds real good to me.
I'm afraid we are going to get a taste of market lash because of the lack of a plan tomorrow morning.......I don't want to look -- but I will.
Gotta keep reminding myself that I have years of cash, years of cash......

 

[harley]

Assuming that some of those "give Paulson the money and power and get out of the way" posts are not sarcasm, doesn't anyone ever consider that in 3 or 4 months he may not be the guy with the money anymore?

I used to use this argument on my super-neocon friend, whenever he was defending the Bush usurpation of power de jour. Are you willing to have Hillary (logical at the time) holding all these same powers?

Personally, I don't know if the bailout is the best answer, but I think any quick decision is going to be a mistake. I would rather have the markets fluctuate and twitter for a few weeks in an attempt to create a reasonable bill than just "do something". I always have a bad feeling when the gov't decides it has to "do something".

 

[barbarus]

NO!


Thursday's Hudson - iTulip.com Forums

 

[ChrisC]

Yes, notwithstanding the sniping of the politicians and economists over this plan, I think it's the only viable game plan at this stage of the 2 minute drill. It's not a Hail, Mary pass, but if you don't execute the plan I think market phobia and panic will descend on us, and personally I see a hit to my retirement accounts in the magnitude of at least 20 percent by the end of the year. (I'm already down around 15 percent, YTD.)

I understand the emotional baggage this issue has to many, but this is business and we need a plan, with modifications, to be adopted by Monday.

This has been a major political screw-up by the current Administration in not selling this plan to the American public. They really needed the financial celebreties that common folk know, like Suzie Orman and Melody Hodson, sell this plan, and they blew it.

I think John McCain threw a grenade into the process yesterday.

 

[bpp3]

How about lending them money and use the assets (both good and bad) as collateral?

Seems to me that either buying the assets, or providing loans with those assets as collateral -- these seem to be the two plans proposed at the moment -- amount to the same thing. Either one is a bailout.

This nonsense about the government/taxpayer maybe making a profit in the end is just that. The bailout only works if the bad loans, or securities built on top of them, are purchased at or close to book value, not true value.

I find it delicious irony that Bernie Sanders, self-described democratic socialist, is one of the ones saying "talk to the invisible hand," while many of the erstwhile rugged-free-marketeers are begging for government handouts.

 

[ziggy29]

The part about giving close to a trillion with no Congressional oversight is, and should be, DOA.

Any institution that wants/needs bailout money should agree to a structured deal such that the taxpayers are reimbursed from future profits, to the extent feasible while allowing the businesses to operate. Whether that takes the form of a loan, profit sharing or equity in the business is secondary.

IMO, these are the two main points.

 

[donheff]

This was not a good poll. I voted no because I don't like Paulson's proposal but I do support a bail out. I want to see some safeguards added along the lines of the compromise that seems to have been derailed. I have no idea if the bail out will work but when voices as diverse as Buffet, Soros, Bernanke, Paulson, Bush, Dodd, and Frank are united that the crisis is terrifying I am willing to toss in the towel and try something.

 

[ziggy29]

I have no idea if the bail out will work but when voices as diverse as Buffet, Soros, Bernanke, Paulson, Bush, Dodd, and Frank are united that the crisis is terrifying I am willing to toss in the towel and try something.

I agree. When just about everyone from all relatively mainstream ideologies agrees in substance that it has to be done, then it needs to get done. We should put in as many safeguards for the taxpayer as reasonably possible, but what we can NOT do is let pursuit of the perfect be the enemy of the 'good enough'. Rome is burning while Congress fiddles.

 

[audreyh1]

I don't think the problem is the pursuit of the perfect. I think it is that all the legislators hate having to pass this bill and want cover. Congressman are getting their ears boxed by their constituents and they are up for reelection in a few weeks. Their constituents are mad as hell and would rather see Rome burn rather than "bail out the fat cats". Thus the "rebellion" of the GOP congressmen who don't believe in govt. intervention anyway. No one has communicated to Joe Blow how he might get burned too. This is a particularly bad time for leaders NOT to be able to articulate the problem and sell the solution to the average man on the street. I think they need to find such a spokesperson ASAP.

On the other hand, there is such a gut level of revulsion to any kind of government rescue after the excesses of the decade that Main Street is willing to live with whatever fallout occurs. Whether or not that willingness persists if the fallout is bad - who knows. I suppose if the pain is great enough, more people will be willing to work together to improve the situation.

Audrey

 

[ziggy29]

I don't think the problem is the pursuit of the perfect. I think it is that all the legislators hate having to pass this bill and want cover. Congressman are getting their ears boxed by their constituents and they are up for reelection in a few weeks. Their constituents are mad as hell and would rather see Rome burn rather than "bail out the fat cats". Thus the "rebellion" of the GOP congressmen who don't believe in govt. intervention anyway. No one has communicated to Joe Blow how he might get burned too. This is a particularly bad time for leaders NOT to be able to articulate the problem and sell the solution to the average man on the street. I think they need to find such a spokesperson ASAP.

I believe in the "trickle down" theory where this is concerned. It's hard for some Joe Sixpacks to see, maybe, but as much as it feels good to make Wall Street fatcats suffer and squirm, perhaps these people just don't realize that it's likely to be an economic Pyrrhic victory.

They don't realize just how much it will put their jobs at risk. Or their retirement savings. Or the solvency of their pension funds.

In any event, this is showing the magnitude of the "leadership deficit" we have in Washington, and that goes for both parties.