Watching the vote live right now. It's 228 nay, 205 yea.

The dow was down 700 points at one point, when it looked like the vote might pass. Seems to be recovering a bit now.

I saw the dow down 710 3-4 minutes after it failed to pass. Last I saw before I came back up the elevator was down 510.

so the bailout didnt pass??

Well, it should've failed already. Time's been up for awhile, but she hasn't closed the vote yet.

Not sure what's going on.

207-226 with 1 person not voting.

Keep in mind they can change their votes up until the gavel. Not sure if some mischief is going on.

I bet that John McCain will come riding to the rescue, if it wasn't set-up that way I'll be amazed.

wow.. have not been back to these boards in about a year, and I see that nothing changed... other then maybe ******** being alot more bitter...

I was just going to ignore this post, but then I saw Rovers comment...

"I bet that John McCain will come riding to the rescue, if it wasn't set-up that way I'll be amazed."

Last time I looked, there are 233 Democrats and 203 Republicans in the House... and the bill needed 217 to pass... How is this the Republicans fault if it fails.... Lets see... 233 > 217 so.. when 90+ Democrats vote against this bill and it fails.... it is the Republicans that are the problem... interesting. So if Rover is right.. then there are some Democrats that want McCain to save the day...

Once again, this is politics at its best. WHY did the Queen Pelosi need the Republicans to support this bailout (after the last two years of shutting them out)? Well.. could it be that she did not want to be the only party on the hook if this bailout turns out to be a total failure??

oh well.. I guess I will go back to being a troll once every 11 months.. I am sure things will stay the same... Fandros and a few others against the disciples of a media made god.

LOL, I think you misunderstood, but by all means stay away.

I don't think any party would ever want sole responsibility for giving 700 billion tax payer dollars to corporations...

I did not misunderstand anything... I know what Rover was referring to.. but my main point is this... I am guessing before the night is through..Pelosi will be on the TV preaching how it was the Republicans that caused this to fail... when she cannot even rally her own party...

That is the reason this is the worst Congress in history... Piss poor leadership.... it is pretty damn hard to have a worse approval rating then Bush.. but she and Harry sure managed to do it...

she is horrible, doesn't change what rovers said though.

Dow down 717 for the day atm...

That is the reason this is the worst Congress in history... Piss poor leadership.... it is pretty damn hard to have a worse approval rating then Bush.. but she and Harry sure managed to do it...

Meaningless. They both get re-elected each year overwhelmingly.

oh well.. I guess I will go back to being a troll once every 11 months.. I am sure things will stay the same... Fandros and a few others against the disciples of a media made god.

Pray tell oh wise one... what is that super special thing about that allows you to see the world with such clarity and insight?

You write like you are barely literate, yet think you the holder of some sacred truth that most people can't see.

What a fucking joke.

You write like you are barely literate, yet think you the holder of some sacred truth that most people can't see.



Quoted for irony's sake.....

I didn't know greater than/less then signs were proper punctuation in a sentence!

I am thinking this time though... replace McCain with Obama and Rover will be 100% correct...

Pesidential elections aside... I am focused on the Congress as my center of heartburn. They are the one's that control this country.. and it is them that are failing. All you ever hear is how it is Bush's fault... well he is only one part and Congress can cockblock most things he wants to do... but in the last two years.. this country has taken a serious step back and the only thing that as changed is the Congress.

Today was a prime example. Whether you wanted the bailout or not, today was just another example of inept leadership. WHY on earth, when you know you need Republican support (since you could not get enough Democrats) would you get up and SLAM the Republican President just before the vote????? Slam the person who WANTS this bailout to pass?

Pelosi and Reed are a huge failure....

LL... obviously you think that your shit does not stink.. because you are so much more intelligent than me (sixee did make a wonderful catch though), but I do not have time to sit and spell check or proof read everything I type on a discussion board. I get people coming into my office and talking to me all the time as I am trying to type this, and either lose track or miss a few words here or there.. but if you want to judge me on my illitereacy then by all means...please do. But I am sure if I go back an read the posts since I have been gone, I will see that you are still the elitist that thinks he is smarter then anyone here...

I didn't know greater than/less then signs were proper punctuation in a sentence!

Hence why they were removed....

WHY on earth, when you know you need Republican support (since you could not get enough Democrats) would you get up and SLAM the Republican President just before the vote????? Slam the person who WANTS this bailout to pass?

Business as usual, I suppose?

This was a failure of leadership more so on the republican side than on the democrat side.

Say what you want, Pelosi delivered a majority of the democrats in congress, I point this out as you have decided to use her as your point.

That being said, I don't know what you do for a living, I wonder if your income is in the top 2% of the economy, if it's not, why do you support a party that has consistently done damage to you? You being a veteran, other than McCain being a veteran why do you support him? From that point of view he has consistently voted against every bill that has been written in favor of veterans programs and benefits.

McCain states that he will cut taxes, yet it is proven that he means the top 1% of which he is a member of.

He says he will not raise your taxes, probably right, he will not raise your tax rate but he will most certanly tax your health benefits as equal to at least $12000.00 in income which means you will pay more in taxes.

McCain took a gamble with this, he took a gamble with Palin, so far he's down by two in what are extremely important decisions, in both he has failed. He loves to say he's a maverick, a fighter pilot, someone who makes snap decisions. He's a checkers player...we need a chess player.

Oh, and by the way...he wasn't a fighter pilot, last I saw an A-4 was a light bomber...that's just a pet peave of mine.

But the bottom line is...you, no matter what the truth...the substantive truth, still support him. I find that quite interesting.

Last time I talked to Shanno, he worked in recruiting for the military.

Say what you want, Pelosi delivered a majority of the democrats in congress, I point this out as you have decided to use her as your point.


Then how did it fail? Majority = win? More Democrats in Congress than Republicans, and its the Republican's fault the bill didn't pass? I don't understand the logic....

He said Pelosi delivered the majority of Democrats, not all the Democrats.

Rover,,

When you have the majority and can pass the vote without any of the opposing party, then you have no one to blame but yourself. There is something in the bill that is shady, or many more would have passed it.

As for McCain, I will go on the record and say that I do not have my nose up his ass. I did not vote for him earlier this year, and he has not been my favorite republican. But when it comes to what is important to me as a voter.. then yes he is better then Obama. He supports the military (which pays my bills), and is much more capable of handling the war (which effects me directly). Obama knows NOTHING of the military and to think that he will be my commander in chief scares the shit out of me. Not saying the current one is a great leader himself.. but I do not want someone who knows the same or less.

Prime example.... Last week during a National Guard conference.. McCain and Biden talked to the troops... Where was Obama??? Always during the elections.. the presidental nominees have spoke to this conference. But not this year.. I find that interesting.

By the way Tal.. I am not a recruiter... I do network security... But if you want to enlist.. let me know =)

Then how did it fail? Majority = win? More Democrats in Congress than Republicans, and its the Republican's fault the bill didn't pass? I don't understand the logic....


Shanno brought Pelosi in as a failure, I didn't say she didn't fail. I said she delivered a majority of dems on this...that fact is indisputable.

There are at least two big losers here politically...Pelosi and McCain.

Pelosi because she was too quick to bring this to a vote, a vote that it in itself is probably the most important vote in our time. McCain, well he took what was a really stupid gamble and up until 15 minutes before the vote he was shooting his mouth off as being the leader who brought the house republicans to the table, he didn't.

Both show they have no ability to lead, that is the bottom line.

Just as a side note.....

More than two-thirds of Republicans and 40 percent of Democrats opposed the bill.

The Republicans are "cockblocking" the president more than the Dems.....not that I wanted this piss poor bill to pass. We spent more time debating whether Barry Bonds used steroids than this fucked up piece of legislation.

He supports the military (which pays my bills), and is much more capable of handling the war (which effects me directly).

You are dead wrong, he supports them only rhetorically. Do your homework.

Why is he capable of handling the war? Why is Obama not? McCain has been wrong in every decision about both Iraq and Afghanistan, while Obama has called it dead on accurately.

And please, the surge is about 30,000 troops, it is a strategy within a failed strategy. That's all it is.

By the way Tal.. I am not a recruiter... I do network security... But if you want to enlist.. let me know =)

I thought you had to work in recruiting for a while after you returned from your last tour? Maybe I'm wrong, but it's been a long time since we last talked. I thought that's what you were doing for a time after you returned.

Last I checked, Oil was down 10.82 a barrel, so that's at least one positive...

This wasn't a partisan vote. It makes no sense to hold the Democrats (or Republicans) responsible for it failing or not, as a party.

That said, everyone there said that Pelosi single-handedly torpedoed it by giving a very divisive, partisan speech right before the vote. She apparently lost a lot of Republicans who were lined up to vote yea.

Pelosi is an idiot and was a horrible selection as Speaker of the House.

This was cowardice and election year gamesmanship while our house of cards burns, plain and simple. The Republicans have 27 or so seats in serious play in the House this year in addition to concerns about this year's Presidential election; and the Congressmen, afraid to be seen as betraying their outraged constituencies and losing their seats as a consequence, were afraid to vote for the bill even though they know darned well what failure to come to terms will mean.

Given the gravity of the situation, it is beyond sickening to me that the financial meltdown is being used in such a fashion. I'm outraged that it has come to this (that we are forced to bail out those agencies who created this whole sick mess to begin with), but our *leaders* should understand that an eye for an eye in this case *will* leave everyone blind, and they need to recognize that stabilizing the banking system before we end up with no liquidity for anyone on Main Street or anyone else. What's going to happen when even the comparatively 'well off' banks (B of A, which was still sending me offers as of last week, Wells Fargo) are forced to call in their markers? How righteous is the mob at the Bastille going to feel when the noose tightens still further around their own debt-stretched necks?

A reasonable compromise deal was worked out on this bill which would have guaranteed third party oversight, the ability reserved to Congress to withhold 50% of the bailout funds, and numerous other provisions that made the bailout far from a blind giveaway. While it's a bitter pill to swallow, even the less-financially-informed in Congress have to know in their heart of hearts that it is better than the alternative, which is continued free-fall.

Playing politics with people's retirements and the enormous amount of debt that most Americans are strapped with, as well as the enormous amount of debt that was *as a nation* are strapped with and our hourly loss of both capital and creditworthiness in the name of riding citizen 'righteous anger' to re-election is both wildly irresponsible and irrational - and while I assign some blame to the Democrats for failing to show the backbone to pass it with or without Republican support, I blame everyone who is lacking the integirty, the courage, or both, to recognize the pickle that we are in for what it is and acting in a responsible and constructive manner.

Regards,
Nydia

What makes you so sure that passing a bill like this is going to be a net positive?

God bless America. Who seriously thinks we need to pay $700B? The market will correct itself. My colleagues and I (upper-middle management) think this is a terrible idea for the markets.

We spent more time debating whether Barry Bonds used steroids than this fucked up piece of legislation.

Yeah, that's fucked up isn't it.

I think passing the bill, while hardly a panacea, will be a net positive in that it will allow the market an opportunity to catch its breath while we get through the election and can craft more enduring and long-term regulatory legislation, and will hopefully at least lessen the grade of the bumpy ride down that has to happen as the money supply contracts to a more realistic size.

Don't get me wrong - I think the money supply *needs* to contract, that and we need, when all is said and done, to have much stricter lending and investment policies and regulation than we have now. That having been said, I think that allowing the system to go into free-fall would be, no matter how much we may despise both the policies and the people who got us where we are now, cutting off our noses to spite our face - Americans simply have too much *current* debt, and are so heavily invested (via their own action, or those of their 401k investment fund managers) in bad debt , that the pincer effect of money tightening and loss of equity would be (and already is) devastating.

What makes you think allowing the market to correct itself would equate to "free-fall"?

Be careful that you don't fall prey to fear-mongering from people who really don't care whatsoever for what happens to you, but needs to sell that to help those who are already orders of magnitude better off than any of us.

I spent the afternoon working on a political spot with one of the Democratic Congressmen who voted no on the bill. He said, despite the pleas from both sides of the leadership, his constituency just really didn't want it to pass. He's up for re-election, and he had to answer to his constituents.

I'm sure the same scenario repeated itself on both sides of the isles. The average person doesn't want $700 billion of their tax money going to Wall Street. They don't want their money devalued by $700 Billion dollars as we go deeper into debt. If the problem was mortgages, and the government now owns Fannie May and Freddie Mac, why not offer to refinance all of those bad mortgages with government backed mortgages and a ridiculously low interest rate (say 3%). Take that $700 Billion, and get it back in 30 years with an extra $700 Billion from the interest to put back into the communities. Instead, we take this massive sum of money (plus all the money we used already in bailouts not voted on) and pad people's bad investments.

The bailout was doomed to fail this time around due to the will of the people, but I (as does the Congressman I was with today)expect they'll fix the wording and pass it in the Senate and then latter (Thursday) the House will vote again and pass it.

The best part of this story is that Obama was highly criticized for not putting his campaign on hold to fix the problem. McCain stopped the campaign, went to DC to fix the problem, promised a majority of the Republican vote, and left to resume the campaign. Today the Republican's in the house gave McCain an overwhelmingly large middle finger.

Though what do we know about this, Shanno obviously is more informed than the rest of us - so lets just sit back and listen to him speak.

What makes you think allowing the market to correct itself would equate to "free-fall"?

LOL..I can't resist...isn't it doing that right now?

Be careful that you don't fall prey to fear-mongering from people who really don't care whatsoever for what happens to you, but needs to sell that to help those who are already orders of magnitude better off than any of us.

That is a huge question in peoples minds, this is a rush to whatever this time.

It's almost like the Bush administration see's the writing on the wall and knows the "modern" republican idealogy is a failed one and he is letting his buddies grab one more load before he goes.

I honestly believe, either way we lose. This whole shitstorm can be solved not with a market correction it needs to be solved from the ground up. I've seen some economists who say that now we are going to need to tap into the entrepreneurial spirit and push small business creation.

I couldn't agree more.

"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." - Benito MussoliniSeriously, do you want to pay $700B? There are approximately 138 million taxpayers[1] in the United States, so divide the number of taxpayers to the amount, that is $5,072 that each taxpayer will suddenly owe, plus unrealized debt coupled with inflation. A terrible idea. Don't forget about AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae--you'll find that each taxpayer will suddenly owe a lot more than the number I just presented.

What is frightening about this entire situation is that this is the last great heist of Wall Street. There will be regulations in place to prevent this in the future, but the $700B bailout plan is letting the Wall Street PROFIT (i.e. executive compensation) while the rest suffers. Too many Americans don't see this. There won't be a HEIST like this any more--this is their biggest opportunity to steal from the American public.

The market can correct itself. "When you get bit by a snake, you're supposed to suck the poison out." I say, let it crash. The sooner it crashes, the less damage will be done, and the sooner we can start to recover. All the bad debt needs to be liquidated, not sold to the taxpayer. Once we rid America of all this debt, free and open markets can prevail. Sure, it's going to suck for a while, but this is going to be a lot better than the other way around. Do you not have FAITH in a free economy? Sometimes, we need to think with our brain instead of with our hearts. Here's to the tinfoil criers!

Nydia, you are falling prey to an old Chinese saying: 殺雞嚇猴 (Shachi hsiahou), which literally means "killing the chicken to scare the monkey." They used Lehman Brothers as an example to scare the SHIT out of you. Now the monkeys are freaking out, and it's time to save the rest of the chickens!

What the Republicans have been trying to do is let Lehman Brothers die so everyone cries, "The sky is falling." Just because Wall Streets needs the money doesn't mean we have to give it to them--how about your friend asks you for $20,000 today; would you give it to him?

Did these companies donate to the US Treasury when they had record profits? Should we privatize the profits and socialize the loss? They're using fear tactics to STEAL money from you! Banks will still loan, you will just have to prove that you are worth of the loan. What was it with $20,000 per annum salary earners buying $500,000 homes?

Now, things are starting to look good. I didn't have to complete my Hong Kong SAR (China) immigration from. Until they try to pass the $699B bailout.

[1] http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/07databk.pdf

Here is the roll call (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2008/roll674.xml)

Shanno, do some math and then shut the fuck up.

Legislation Text (http://www.rules.house.gov/110/text/110_hr3997_amnd_samnd.pdf)

Quoted for irony's sake.....

Now that had me laughing loudly, hehe.:D

I'm aware of what the cost of the bailout is going to be :/, and I'd have to say I don't particularly care for the bit of fearmongering I witnessed on CNN this afternoon while passing through the Student Center on campus with regard to trying to terrify people into supporting the bailout. However, I think many of the people screaming against the bailout (including some of the (mostly younger) posters here) are being naive or willfully ignorant about what allowing the market to 'correct' all at once really means for everyone from soon-to-be-retirees (such as my parents, who are typical upper middle class refinanced, heavily in the stock market, in their late 60s, and watching their retirement evaporate before their eyes) to small business owners (who have to 'float' between when they perform/bid jobs and when they get paid for them) to those already heavily burdened with consumer debt (but making their payments) who get screwed when their creditors call in their loans and drastically reduce their credit limits due to no fault of their own.

Let me be clear: I'm as pissed off at the thought of 'rewarding' Wall Street for its egregious behavior (which we must remember that we, through our legislators, permitted to become legal), and the thought of running up more debt, as anyone, but I also think that we need to pass something, even an interim bill for less than the asked for amount, with a lot more conditions, just to stem the collapse in confidence (part of the reason I supported the Dodd bill was because it gave the Congress the right to withhold funds if they felt they were being misappropriated). And to answer Rybit's question, no, I *don't* expect the 'magic of the market' to fix things *after* the dust settles, just as I didn't trust it the first time around, and we'd be insane to ever let trade in securities and other non-'real' assets take place in anything resembling the unfettered fashion we have in recent years again. The fact remains, however, that large segments of the rank and file population, not just the Wall Street rapists, are being put in real jeopardy by the continued fall in investor confidence, and if you're young, debt free or nearly so, and have a decade or more to ride the current crisis out, the picture looks very different than it does if you are in your fifties or 60s, heavily leveraged, and approaching retirement, or in a business where you rely on credit to get from one job to the next.

Regards,
Nydia

By the way, I'm out of town on a friend's computer and can't open the pdf (and don't want to download adobe reader to a computer which isn't mine). Can someone post a link to, or recapitulate, the language of the final version of the bill to html or .doc or .txt?

Thanks much,
Nydia

(edit) I'd also like to add that this issue (of our financial markets being held in limbo/freefalling while we wait for some sort of concrete action) doesn't just affect us; it has enormous implications for us via our creditors and trading partners around the world who are watching the value of those pledged assets plummet. From this evening's BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7643199.stm

The best part of this story is that Obama was highly criticized for not putting his campaign on hold to fix the problem. McCain stopped the campaign, went to DC to fix the problem, promised a majority of the Republican vote, and left to resume the campaign. Today the Republican's in the house gave McCain an overwhelmingly large middle finger.




I really liked Craig Ferguson's take on McCain suspending his campaign.

"You can't take a time out; there is no time out on Democracy, you can't turn it off and on." "We didn't stop for 9-11!"

Obviously, those are not the exact words, I am sure, but that is pretty much what he was saying.

As for Pelosi, her partisan speech was a good example of how poorly she thinks ahead, but anyone who changed their vote as a result of that speech was putting their hurt feelings ahead of national priorities, and should be tossed from Congress anyway.

I am glad in some respects that it did not pass, being seemingly rushed without much discussion, as Ailwon pointed out. This will make both candidates have to be more specific with their economic proposals and spending/tax cut talk, which should be a good thing.

Hey. Sure I put my opinion all over the place.

But at the VERY least I source sites and explain the logic, or what passes for it, behind my point of view.

What I abhor is people who come in with non proven ideological myths that they then use as some sort of bedrock from which to spout bullshit rhetoric.
Disagree with me? Fine, but don't expect any respect for a world view that thinks that "libs" do this or that, or can predict the actions or motivations of other human beings like some lame ass political fable based on your spoon fed, talking point, ideology.

The only reason I post here is to engage in good discussion and to learn things on occasion. I don't care if I convince you or not. Thats not the point.

man, this market down turn couldn't have happened at a better time for me.... My household income is pretty much at a peak for the next 10 years or so..... and I will now be able to buy buy buy :)

We need to make lemonade people !!!!

i am not versed in economics but would this be feasible:

You set a certain criteria, say Primary Residence, with a Fixed rate of X% or a ARM over X%, that is within foreclosure time frame. The government bails out the individual loan helping the bank get rid of a bad mortgage.. Restructuring it to a manageable rate, letting the bank manage it, with the bank giving a percentage to the government for the bailout and they keep the other profits.

THis would allow people to keep homes, which then slows down the downward spiral of the housing market, allow banks to manage these loans and start writing new loans, that follow certain guidelines set forth by the government committee on housing loans or whatever they would call it.

With the money "made" form thse restructured loans they can restructure more and more untiil the industry is more stable and banks are gaining more debt.

As a member of joe blow America, I have yet to hear anyone make a decent argument as to how and why an Epic failure of wall street affects me.

I have a 30year fixed, that is very affordable, because I bought smartly. I have a good job, not in the financial industry, because im not a douchebag. So what if my Discover card stops working. I will just pay my monthly bills with cash or checks. I am a firm believer that Capitalism needs to play out. If my bank fails, big deal. Someone will buy my mortguage. The thing that scares me the most is that the FDIC actually has reserves to cover < 2% of the accounts that they insure.

I am buying lots of Apple stock and thinking of buying some real estate. The best time to make money is during financial crises. That is something my Asian parents taught me and I'm sure it's what Jewish people teach too. How do you make money? That's why Asians save 80% spend 20% for these occasions!

Glad I got my car loan when I did. really glad I decided to wait to buy a house.

In other news, Pelosi is a cunt. I'm sorry but I don't know what kind of political grandstanding bullshit she thought she was trying to pull off, but what ever message she had (unless it was "I'm a dirty cunt!") was lost by that speech she gave before the vote.

That aside, part of the free market is some businesses *have* to fail. This idea that everyone has to be a winner in America has got to stop somewhere, it's already infecting every bit of life.

When the team that wins state for the local high school only gets a participation ribbon cause they don't want to make people feel bad about losing there is something wrong.

When the corporate bloat starts failing because they were too risky with their investments we don't need to reward their shit poor decisions, we don't need to pay their executives more money for fucking up, we need to watch them walk away as broken as their companies. Maybe the CEOs at the other Corporate giants will take a clue and do their job right.

It sucks hard watching my retirement fund take a kick to the balls like it is right now (Silly me I put half of it in volatile stocks) But on the other hand I'm going to turn around and up my contributions so I put more in to buy cheap stock. And then when the market rights itself again I'll make back whatever I lost.

I just feel bad for the guys who have their retirement eggs all in one basket. If we need to be bailing anyone out, it's the workers who are getting fucked by their companies failing. (How to do that, I haven't quite armchair-congressmaned my ideas together on yet but I digress) Not the wall-street fat cats who are only going to make 50 million this year instead of 75. They can afford to park the gulfstream for a year and pinch some of those pennies.

You have to be kidding me?

Pelosi's fault?

Look, either fucking do what you think is in the best interest of the United States or don't. That should be the ONLY criteria. I don't care if Pelosi got up there and started calling their momma's names.
"Oh im not going to vote on this bill because some lady said mean things" Meanwhile we lose 1.5 TRILLION dollars of the value of our market.

What
The
Fuck

GROW UP. Seriously. Vote for the bill if you think it will help, don't vote for it if you think it won't, but if they try to come back with this 3rd grade, namby pamby, BULLSHIT then I think they are going to see a political backlash the likes of which this country has never seen.

Shit, maybe this time they can include a "Im made of Rubber, you are made of glue" provision to this bill so people can not worry about people who be talking junk about them.

"Oh im not going to vote on this bill because some lady said mean things" Meanwhile we lose 1.5 TRILLION dollars of the value of our market.

GROW UP. Seriously. Vote for the bill if you think it will help, don't vote for it if you think it won't, but if they try to come back with this 3rd grade, namby pamby, BULLSHIT then I think they are going to see a political backlash the likes of which this country has never seen.


What you said here strikes me as wrong.

Perhaps the people that didn't vote for this bailout had better reasons for not approving it, such as representing their constituents' wishes? Perhaps that silly little thing called representation means something to those people in Congress, and isn't some silly concept that gets in the way of what 'needs to be done for the good of the country'. Makes a little more sense than acting like 3rd graders, but we ARE talking about politicians, though.

Maybe the People have spoken: they don't wish to give more chickens to be guarded by the foxes, just to be told that the foxes have yet again, reverted to type.

Also, I wouldn't believe EVERYTHING the news is telling you. Perhaps the "political backlash the likes of which this country has never seen" reaction is just what was wanted?

Perhaps the people that didn't vote for this bailout had better reasons for not approving it

Perhaps they did, but unfortunately the reason they gave was that their feelings were hurt by a speech.

As a member of joe blow America, I have yet to hear anyone make a decent argument as to how and why an Epic failure of wall street affects me.

I have a 30year fixed, that is very affordable, because I bought smartly. I have a good job, not in the financial industry, because im not a douchebag. So what if my Discover card stops working. I will just pay my monthly bills with cash or checks. I am a firm believer that Capitalism needs to play out. If my bank fails, big deal. Someone will buy my mortguage. The thing that scares me the most is that the FDIC actually has reserves to cover < 2% of the accounts that they insure.

The argument is that businesses can no longer borrow money, and for some reason businesses need to be able to borrow in order to be successful - which is a load of crap imo, but thats what businesses feel they need to operate. So layoffs and pay decreases will probably occur like wildfire, until businesses begin to adopt a model where they can only spend what they can afford.

Of course Wall Street's failure, on one hand, has fucked up many a person's 401k/403b Retirement Fund (my dad just yesterday added 2 years until he can retire, for example). So that directly affects most US Citizens in some way or another (except for me, where all my money is in bricks and mortar or the bank)

The argument is that businesses can no longer borrow money, and for some reason businesses need to be able to borrow in order to be successful - which is a load of crap imo, but thats what businesses feel they need to operate. So layoffs and pay decreases will probably occur like wildfire, until businesses begin to adopt a model where they can only spend what they can afford.

Of course Wall Street's failure, on one hand, has fucked up many a person's 401k/403b Retirement Fund (my dad just yesterday added 2 years until he can retire, for example). So that directly affects most US Citizens in some way or another (except for me, where all my money is in bricks and mortar or the bank)


That is knee jerk.... just wait a month before you can EVEN say anything about the market..... hell, next year at this time the market may have corrected itself and things are back to normal...

I guess if the market is up next month he can retire 2 years early?

I find myself in the unusual positioin of agreeing with Phel..... how does this hurt me? Im sure the market will take a beating but it will recover. There is too much money out there to think this is over.......

As far as Pelosi and her comments..... No matter what LL thinks, if you want to get something done you do everything possible to make it happen. Her speech was rediculous. It seems in her jeans to make things as viceral as possible 100% of the time. If it is SOOOOO improtant she should have said her piece and sat the fuck down rather than make it the "nancy pelosi" show ....

a good point is made, how does it effect me, hell anyone here ion this board directly. Yes we have changed spending habits but thats smart moves to make sure we ca weather a potential storm.

My 401k is down 29% on the year which it was up 6% 4 months ago, so that effects me, but i am not worried i wont be able to retire, it just adjust things slightly. In th grand scheme of things more years before retiring isnt so bad, 8-10 would be WTF.

Having read more about this bailout, there is enough big banks to make it through th storm, and enough mom and pop banks that didnt over extend themselves to keep things running. We may just have to watch a good chunk fail and somehow deael with the unemployment backlash to some extent that would come.

What you said here strikes me as wrong.

Perhaps the people that didn't vote for this bailout had better reasons for not approving it, such as representing their constituents' wishes? Perhaps that silly little thing called representation means something to those people in Congress, and isn't some silly concept that gets in the way of what 'needs to be done for the good of the country'. Makes a little more sense than acting like 3rd graders, but we ARE talking about politicians, though.

Maybe the People have spoken: they don't wish to give more chickens to be guarded by the foxes, just to be told that the foxes have yet again, reverted to type.

Also, I wouldn't believe EVERYTHING the news is telling you. Perhaps the "political backlash the likes of which this country has never seen" reaction is just what was wanted?

Then why did a few of them get on TV and say Pelosi was a reason that they didn't vote for it? I don't remember the names as I was watching interviews during my lunch yesterday.

That is knee jerk.... just wait a month before you can EVEN say anything about the market..... hell, next year at this time the market may have corrected itself and things are back to normal...

I guess if the market is up next month he can retire 2 years early?

I find myself in the unusual positioin of agreeing with Phel..... how does this hurt me? Im sure the market will take a beating but it will recover. There is too much money out there to think this is over.......

As far as Pelosi and her comments..... No matter what LL thinks, if you want to get something done you do everything possible to make it happen. Her speech was rediculous. It seems in her jeans to make things as viceral as possible 100% of the time. If it is SOOOOO improtant she should have said her piece and sat the fuck down rather than make it the "nancy pelosi" show ....

If by "knee jerk" you mean accurate, then yes it is "knee jerk". Unemploymment jumped to a 5 year high in August and is certainly going to beat that for September. Businesses not being able to borrow WILL lead to our economy shrinking, even the most conservative estimates are pretty bleak. Yes, after the election and the beginning of next year it will start to bounce back, but this does affect us all and will continue to do so for a while - with or without a bailout.

The amount the stock market dropped this month is dramatically larger than any drop we've faced in the past few decades. Yesterday alone was worse than anything since 1987. Unlike in the Great Depression, we're pulling a lot of other countries down with us: The Nikkei lost 4% and Australia lost 4.3% so far today. They'll rebound again today, drop some more tomorrow, but generally speaking the past few months have been trending downward and as long as banks are failing (nearly 5% of all US banks expected to fail between now and the end of 2009 by the most conservative estimates).

Is it the end of the world? No. Will some families go hungry and lose their homes and jobs? Absolutely. Will consumer confidence and spending in the Holiday season suck? Definately. Most retailers rely on the holiday season for up to a quarter or a half of their sales, and a slow holiday season will most undoubtely close a large number of retail outlets and lay off people who rely on seasonal jobs.

Eventually the economy will turn again, consumer confidence should skyrocket if Obama is elected (recent Gallop Poll reports that 50% of America is confident that Obama is doing a good job dealing with the economic crisis compared to 37% for McCain and 28% for Bush) and next Februrary will certainly be a good month for our economy under any new leadership. I will add that it will be especially great if we don't have $760+ Billion worth of debt pilled up because of this mess.

If you don't think the turning economy will effect you, your friends, your family, or your community - anything I say won't change your mind anymore than the facts and reports out there *shrug*.

I haven't read this crazy long thread but I still want to state my opinion on the "fail-out" plan. I am glad this didn't pass, I don't want it to. I think it's bullshit that companies are getting bailed out for shitty/risky policies. What the hell is capitalism for? Let them fail, let the economy rebuild, for the love of god don't make more money out of thin air!

This seems like a gambler running to the ATM to get more money out in an effort to win back what they lost......

If it effects us now or later what is the difference? Do you really think that putting any amount of money into this will prevent this from happening down the road again?

It is my understanding that there WERE safe guards against this in place and were gradually removed over time...

The market goes up and down. People lose there house in any market.

The economy effects me yes, but will it effect me to the extent that it is being portrayed, I just don't see it.

Like someone said, we spent more time working on Barry Bonds than this Bail out idea.

We need something done but geez, this seems like a crazy mad rush to keep the very people who screwed it up running the circus......

And if your dad has to retire 2 years later from a one day down turn that is crazy.

I haven't read this crazy long thread but I still want to state my opinion on the "fail-out" plan. I am glad this didn't pass, I don't want it to. I think it's bullshit that companies are getting bailed out for shitty/risky policies. What the hell is capitalism for? Let them fail, let the economy rebuild, for the love of god don't make more money out of thin air!

I should have just waited for Fild to post so I could say "yeah that!"

I have read that the DOW could fall as far as 6,000 with in the year. I've lost bundles but then again at least I was afforded the chance to actually loose some of that money, LOL so many people in this country don't even have a retirement. It will come back, if not we are all in a world of hurt, not just my 401 or Roth.

My house is 3 years from being paid off, car loan is 1 year from being over with very low miles. Live modestly...weather out the BS. Now if you have kids (college, all the other things to save for), or are close to retirement...your stress level is going up, hang in there..stay away from tall buildings!~

Sixee. One of the core principles of the representative democracy is that we send people to office who we trust. We trust their judgment in times like this, we trust their ability to make tough decisions.

Vote how you believe. Marshal your experience, your knowledge, your resources, your conscious, your values and the things that people THOUGHT they were sending you to washington for AND DO WHAT YOU THINK IS RIGHT.

If those 12 Representatives said "Im not voting for this Bill because I think its the wrong thing for this country." I have nothing but respect for that. But to say "I was gonna vote for it, but I got my feelings hurt"... Well then fuck you.

The point of having a representative democracy is completely lost if all they do is kowtow to whoever is screaming loudest in their faces at any given moment.

The bottom line is that most people are NOT going to be in favor of this bailout until THEY feel they need to be bailed out. Its human nature. But the fact is that if we wait for it to get to that point, its too late.

Here's the chain of events.
Loans disappear. No more money comes in.
Projects stops, unemployment skyrockets.
Car loans dry up, US auto companies, already on the brink post greatest losses in history, and maybe close up shop, because they cannot sell cars even to people who want them.
Retail stores start closing up.
Pay rolls start not being met.
Everything grinds to a screeching halt.

At that point people will be wanting this fucking bailout, and pretty pissed off that they had a chance to stop it, but lacked the courage.
And heads will fucking roll.

I have read that the DOW could fall as far as 6,000 with in the year. I've lost bundles but then again at least I was afforded the chance to actually loose some of that money, LOL so many people in this country don't even have a retirement. It will come back, if not we are all in a world of hurt, not just my 401 or Roth.

My house is 3 years from being paid off, car loan is 1 year from being over with very low miles. Live modestly...weather out the BS. Now if you have kids (college, all the other things to save for), or are close to retirement...your stress level is going up, hang in there..stay away from tall buildings!~

I have a daughter. Another one being born two weeks from today. AND I work on the 21st floor of a high rise.

Here's the chain of events.
Loans disappear. No more money comes in.

(some banks are solvent. Wells Fargo makes good loans. This time we loan money to people who can *drum roll* actually pay it back)

Projects stops, unemployment skyrockets.

Like new construction? It was false market due to the availability of money being lent.

Car loans dry up, US auto companies, already on the brink post greatest losses in history, and maybe close up shop, because they cannot sell cars even to people who want them.

So we go to 60 months no interest (like they are doing now) and cars continue to be bought.

Retail stores start closing up.

This may happen if the stores are weak. But well run and established would probably do as they already were.


This is just an alternate chain of events that may happen... And I'm not saying there will be no repercussions or ill effects.... I'm just worried about going down this bail out road because of this incident.

We don't know what will happen. BUt I just heard on the radio that other countries are now worried about our financial stability..... well screw them. I bet China isn't.

Here's the chain of events.
Loans disappear. No more money comes in.
Projects stops, unemployment skyrockets.
Car loans dry up, US auto companies, already on the brink post greatest losses in history, and maybe close up shop, because they cannot sell cars even to people who want them.
Retail stores start closing up.
Pay rolls start not being met.
Everything grinds to a screeching halt.

At that point people will be wanting this fucking bailout, and pretty pissed off that they had a chance to stop it, but lacked the courage.
And heads will fucking roll.

The alternative being, the bailout passes, and in a few years:
Loans disappear. No more money comes in.
Projects stops, unemployment skyrockets.
Car loans dry up, US auto companies, already on the brink post greatest losses in history, and maybe close up shop, because they cannot sell cars even to people who want them.
Retail stores start closing up.
Pay rolls start not being met.
Everything grinds to a screeching halt.

Because the World Ended <TM> the last time this all happened....:rolleyes:
Either it happens now, or it happens, bigger later on.

We don't know what will happen. BUt I just heard on the radio that other countries are now worried about our financial stability..... well screw them. I bet China isn't.

Fuck what the other countries think, I am worried about our finacial stability as a country. Bailout or no bailout doesn't change that thought pattern for me.

The bail out just further delays the inevitable. Until our practices change in how we loan out money, in how the majority live off more debt than they can afford, we aren't going to see long term economic feasibility in our country. We have to fix the problems, not just apply band aids (or wrap the whole country in bandages as the bail out would) if we want to actually get out of the current situation.

My problem with this is simple....

The name of it...

BAIL OUT

Call it an infusion, investment, something else..

Make sure that you're buying real assets and put in stipulations that:

1. Help people who have jobs and can pay on the mortgage, pay the mortgage in some form.

2. Put in stipulations on pay outs for executives...none of this money can be used for golden parachutes (I believe this is already in there)

3. As these "infused" companies recover, make part of their profit go towards recovering some of the losses we suffer by buying their idiotic loans.

4. Wait to sell any of the assets procured in the investment until the market recovers to some degree. There's no use dumping the properties at pennies on the dollar in a market where there's no demand.

5. Careful and prudent oversight. I don't trust Bush, Paulson, McCain, Pelosi, Obama :), anyone with this much money with no oversight and paulson is a fucking moron for asking for it.

6. No free money, if it's mis-managed, heads roll...big time.

If it's an investment, people will want a return on it. Chances are, they won't see it in this lifetime. I know I want a ROV on all this.

In regards to #6, what sort of punishment do you think is harsh enough to keep people from screwing the country over? Treason charges?

GROW UP. Seriously. Vote for the bill if you think it will help, don't vote for it if you think it won't, but if they try to come back with this 3rd grade, namby pamby, BULLSHIT then I think they are going to see a political backlash the likes of which this country has never seen.

Shit, maybe this time they can include a "Im made of Rubber, you are made of glue" provision to this bill so people can not worry about people who be talking junk about them.

It's interesting to hear that after all of your support for Obama's rhetoric based candidacy... Either those words do or do not have power.

If you believe Obama can effect change by talking eloquently, why are you surprised that Pelosi can screw the pooch by being her horrible self?

I doubt there will be any political backlash. The vote reflected the will of the people, for once. Everyone I've talked to is happy it didn't pass. The House is too close to election time to risk pissing people off, for once.

My problem with this is simple....

The name of it...

BAIL OUT

Call it an infusion, investment, something else..

Make sure that you're buying real assets and put in stipulations that:

1. Help people who have jobs and can pay on the mortgage, pay the mortgage in some form.

2. Put in stipulations on pay outs for executives...none of this money can be used for golden parachutes (I believe this is already in there)

3. As these "infused" companies recover, make part of their profit go towards recovering some of the losses we suffer by buying their idiotic loans.

4. Wait to sell any of the assets procured in the investment until the market recovers to some degree. There's no use dumping the properties at pennies on the dollar in a market where there's no demand.

5. Careful and prudent oversight. I don't trust Bush, Paulson, McCain, Pelosi, Obama :), anyone with this much money with no oversight and paulson is a fucking moron for asking for it.

6. No free money, if it's mis-managed, heads roll...big time.

#1 - That is why the democrats who voted against this voted against it, they wanted that as well
#2 - Its in there
#3 - Its in there
#4 - 5 years was the resale timeframe in there already
#5 - Its also in there with judicial review
#6 - You'd have to be more specific with this one, though other companies who were bailed out had their leadership replaced.

On number 1, it's the primary reason I was glad it didn't pass.

On number 6, I meant mismanagement of the $699 billion. I don't want to see this money used to line the pockets of already rich bastards like the money has been going to Iraq and Halishitpileburton. Though later on I'd like to see some work done to discover who profited must from these loans and some recovered from them personally...though I am aware of just how remote and maybe impossible that may be. I'm just god damn sick of these assholes that let greed rule their lives and fleece their companies for millions. I'd like to see some of the golden parachutes over the last few years recovered, again I realize this may not be able to be done legally.

So far people I know who support the bail out...... George Bush, Obama, McCain, Pelosi, Barney Frank....... need I say more?

So far people I know who support the bail out...... George Bush, Obama, McCain, Pelosi, Barney Frank....... need I say more?
Yes, what exactly are you implying linking these 5 together?

Hey, wasn't Japan in the same situation a few years ago(2004'ish)? Didn't they bail out a bunch of banks? And aren't they in another situation now? What does this tell us?

Yes, what exactly are you implying linking these 5 together?

Politicians = teh suck?

that's a given Sixee, but what exactly was he implying grouping those 5 together and saying "need i say more?"

Maybe he means it a bipartisan screwover?

Well see, as we go back and forth, we see his rhetorical "need I say more?" actually needed to say more.

Maybe he just wanted to see us go back and forth like this, wondering what he meant?

This is why we can't have nice things...

Well see, as we go back and forth, we see his rhetorical "need I say more?" actually needed to say more.

And those weren't the people who suggested the bailout, Bernake and Paulson aren't even on his list. Those 5 people would all claim to want US trade superiority, an end to global terrorism, US energy independence, and so on ... so I suppose Bise would choose to be against all of those as well for the same reasons.

It's interesting to hear that after all of your support for Obama's rhetoric based candidacy... Either those words do or do not have power.

If you believe Obama can effect change by talking eloquently, why are you surprised that Pelosi can screw the pooch by being her horrible self?

I doubt there will be any political backlash. The vote reflected the will of the people, for once. Everyone I've talked to is happy it didn't pass. The House is too close to election time to risk pissing people off, for once.

I dont embrace rhetoric. I embrace what I think is a better set of ideas.

Of course words have meaning. But there is a VAST difference between supporting a candidate for president based on what he says or promises and a persons DUTY as a member of the House of Representatives.

Vote for the bill or against it. But to let decisions on what is in the best interest of the nation at a time of great crisis by someone saying "The failed policies of George Bush and the Republican Party got us to this point" is a fucking joke. It is egotism of the highest order.

No, there won't be a political backlash if they pass a bill. The backlash will come if they do nothing and the things that we are being warned about come to pass.
Once the pain gets down to the ordinary people in any sort of tangible way, then they will want blood.

The problem is we are such a nation of narcissistic, selfish fools with the memory of a goldfish and the foresight of a fruitfly. Its like "Hey you shouldnt smoke or eat Mcdonalds every day or youll die"
Yeahhhhhh... whatever..... until they get a tumor.

Or global warming doesnt exist until I can literally feel, and be inconvenienced by, its effects.

Shit. Whatever. A good part of me really wants to see them let it all burn the fuck down. Let it all go. Lets see how far down the rabbit hole this leads. Just from a historical curiosity.

Remember, the "Free Market" is a natural force. It isnt benign or malignant, it just is, and it destroys or creates with the same fury.

Remember the last set of legislation that got passed quickly due to fear-mongering?

This liquidity fear-mongering is just the new terrorism. Bailout or not, the FED is in 100% control of liquidity. It may contract to nothing (they're already holding the rate 1/4 point artificially high, compared to what the market is dictating), but it won't be the fault of anyone who voted against this "bailout".

Well, if anything, Wall Street is moving strong today. It sends a message to Congress--get the fuck out. I just placed an order for 100 shares of AAPL; watching intently--I may try to buy $50,000 of AAPL shares today. If Ayonae Forums shut down, I think you'll know the reason, haha.

Level 2 quotes for teh win.

This is the banks version of "I make you an offer you can't refuse" the classic either your brains or your signature are on the paper.

I feel like I'm being told if we don't support this we are done and if we do support this we are done...the truth seems to evade us.

We are being asked to give money to the same institutions that engineered this whole thing so they can continue on to do the same thing, much like the coke fiend who says if I can get one more kilo this time I'll sell it for real and make a profit. Are we feeding a dope addict dope (the banks) with this?

Other questions I have and wish someone in Washington would answer: Why is it not a good thing to place a halt on foreclosures and renegotiate so a large portion of homeowners could stay in their homes? Why is that a point used by republicans for not supporting it, these are their constituents that are in this problem.

I dont think the Dow is up because everything is hunky dory by any means.

The Dow is up because I think people believe that something will pass eventually.

Anyone who sticks everything they have in the stock market is a fool. If you can't afford to lose it don't stick it in the market.

The markets volatility is something that's been going on for the past three years at least, it went up today based on buy orders from people with liquidity.

L2 is dead on, those who are against this will find their politics quickly change to a socialist philosophy when it hits them.

The Dow is up a bit today because people are trying to profit off corrections from the panic of yesterday. It's the height of folly to try to extrapolate long-term conclusions from a highly volatile market period. Like any hysteria, you won't be able to piece it together until after it's over because by definition it doesn't make any sense.

FYI, the "bailout" wants to move us to requiring banks to hold 0% reserves. There's your increased liquidity. You pay them 700 billion, they change the rules so that banks can manufacture liquidity at even higher risk of failure, and you think they helped you.

You have to approach this thing rationally, instead of letting the fear-mongering run your brain. Stop and look at what actual economists are saying about this sham.

In other words, your hair is NOT on fire....

No,

Its actually a good thing that what has been revealed is that this whole thing isnt the "Ticking Bomb" many of us had been lead to believe.... but it is bad.

Obama comes out looking pretty good in all of this for staying pretty cool during the whole thing. McCain morphed into Henny Penny a bit there.

So maybe we can take our time and put together something that isnt a total shit sandwich.

Well, we're certainly sitting on a ticking bomb, but this "crisis" is missing the point.

For that matter, most people (understandably) think that the current mess is all due to the sub-primes. You hear people saying that they don't want to pay this bailout because they didn't take out a loan they couldn't afford, not realizing how far beyond that it has gone.

However, no matter how well you shore up our financial crooks, nothing will weather the storm that comes with the Dollar falling out of its reserve currency position around the world. That will be game, set, match for our current economic paradigm here.

So far people I know who support the bail out...... George Bush, Obama, McCain, Pelosi, Barney Frank....... need I say more?


Ohhhhh getting to quote myself !

I just picked those people of the top of my head....it wasn't meant to be all inclusive.

Everyone one of us on this message board can't stand at least one of them...that being said, if they are for the *crisis* bail out should we not at least question it?

Well, we're certainly sitting on a ticking bomb, but this "crisis" is missing the point.

For that matter, most people (understandably) think that the current mess is all due to the sub-primes. You hear people saying that they don't want to pay this bailout because they didn't take out a loan they couldn't afford, not realizing how far beyond that it has gone.

However, no matter how well you shore up our financial crooks, nothing will weather the storm that comes with the Dollar falling out of its reserve currency position around the world. That will be game, set, match for our current economic paradigm here.


And that is my fear; it's a very real possibility and if the FED is allowed to keep pulling money from its' ass that is exactly what will happen.

But yeah, the media have everyone thinking the sky is falling and I doubt most people really know why or how it affects them. The media is having a field day spewing misinformation and often times conflicting information. It disgusts me.

What I find interesting is during this time the oil speculators fear a drop in demand so that the price per barrel is dropping at the same time the Dollar is gaining strength.

Then entire global economy is going to redefine itself and maybe show some armchair economics "majors" as being out of their depth.

Excellent breakdown on the votes by district:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/29/business/20080929-CONGRESS-VOTE-GRAPHIC.html


Cheers,

What I find interesting is during this time the oil speculators fear a drop in demand so that the price per barrel is dropping at the same time the Dollar is gaining strength.

Then entire global economy is going to redefine itself and maybe show some armchair economics "majors" as being out of their depth.

The dollar isn't up.

The Euro is down, because of a prediction that European central banks will have to cut their lending rate by 95 basis points over the next year (leading to increased inflation of those currencies).

The dollar has gained strength against foriegn currencies. That works for me.

Armchair economics for the win!!

The Dow is up 400 points right now too. I guess everything is okay!

...

Oh wait, maybe it would be abject stupidity to say that a well-explained daily bump negates a long-running trend. Yeah, that's probably more likely it.

The Dow is up 400 points right now too. I guess everything is okay!

...

Oh wait, maybe it would be abject stupidity to say that a well-explained daily bump negates a long-running trend. Yeah, that's probably more likely it.

I've long thought that the DOW isn't really the indicator it used to be.

Hence me never risking my retirement ,still 23 years off, in anything other than low risk bonds and such.

I never said that we're okay, I merely said I thought it was interesting.

Indicator of what?

I think Rybit was correct: they were trying to get the monkeys all riled up.

Governance by the Dow!

We are a Dowacracy.

Indicator of what?

Indicator of our economic well being or lack there of.

It's not supposed to be.

Well the media would have you believe it. I'm not going to sit around and debate with you. I know folks that are paniking because the DOW dropped 700plus point yesterday. My son was unhappy with my glee at the bailout failing to pass it's vote.

The rush to fix things because the DOW dropped is ludicrous. The baillout had to fail, if they *our beloved politicians* take time and craft a welll thought out document as opposed to a rushed one then perhaps it'll be worthy of support.

So, you're listening to actors about what indicates the economy? Good luck with that.

"Fixing" anything at the expense of the dollar is folly in the long term, which is exactly what any bailout bill will be doing. My fear is that they'll simply retool it to seem more "bi-partisan" and it'll pass the vote.

Meanwhile, most have taken their eyes off the ball. Giving banks 0% reserve restrictions to generate liquidity is a recipe for disaster, no matter how you repackage it.

You know the sad thing about all of this? The mark-to-market crap and the derivatives. When I first about those financial terms two years ago, I thought I was the one who wasn't getting the derivatives and the valuation method. Then I realized how ridiculous the theory is--it's a one-time trick.

The idea, in simplified terms, is to basically turn five dollars into twenty dollars by continuously lending out money. The problem is, you need to constantly have people borrowing for the banks to profit. So they eliminate loan qualification requirements, by making no requirement, whereas 10 years ago, you actually had to prove you were capable of paying back a loan. So when people couldn't pay anymore, the entire system collapsed.

These ivy league fraudsters apparently aren't that smart. You know, the momentum conservation theory? It's like trying to make five atoms out of one atom--just can't happen.

It's like trying to make five atoms out of one atom--just can't happen.
It can if you put a lot of energy into it. :P

You know the sad thing about all of this? The mark-to-market crap and the derivatives. When I first about those financial terms two years ago, I thought I was the one who wasn't getting the derivatives and the valuation method. Then I realized how ridiculous the theory is--it's a one-time trick.

The idea, in simplified terms, is to basically turn five dollars into twenty dollars by continuously lending out money. The problem is, you need to constantly have people borrowing for the banks to profit. So they eliminate loan qualification requirements, by making no requirement, whereas 10 years ago, you actually had to prove you were capable of paying back a loan. So when people couldn't pay anymore, the entire system collapsed.

These ivy league fraudsters apparently aren't that smart. You know, the momentum conservation theory? It's like trying to make five atoms out of one atom--just can't happen.


Hence as I said...the largest ponzi scheme ever perpetrated.

From a chain email...anyone wanna snopes it...feel fre I'm too tired!

I'm against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG or any of the financial institutions that have miss-managed themselves into extinction. But not being one to offer opposition to a plan without presenting my own, here is what I suggest.


I'm in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in a Americans Deserve It Dividend
[ADID]. Here is how it works:

To make the math simple, let's assume there are 200,000,000 [200 million] bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+ years of age. Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up.

So divide 200 million adults 18+ into $85 billon that equals $425,000 per person. My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a ADID.

Of course, it would NOT be tax free. So let's assume a tax rate of 30%. Every
individual 18+ has to pay $127,500 in taxes. That sends $25.5 Billion right back to
Uncle Sam.


But it means that every adult citizen over 18 will get $297,500 in their pocket. A husband and wife has $595,000.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?


Pay off your mortgage - that would probably solve the housing crisis.

Pay off college loans - what a great boost to new grads.

Put away money for college - it'll be there.

Save in a bank - that will create money to loan to entrepreneurs.

Buy a new car or appliance - create jobs.


Invest in the market - that capital drives growth. Pay for your parent's [or get] medical insurance - hey now you can afford to get sick so you probably won't Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean - ok, that’s a political thought.

85,000,000,000 \ 200,000,000 = 425

Someone didn't input enough zeros in their calculator.

$425... hmm, I'd pay off my mortgage...wait a second!

Let's do $700,000,000,000 divided by number of working, people who can work roughly 170 million. That's around $4k per person...now we are talking....

Let's bump it up to a trillion and eliminate Republicans, they're are all rich or ignorant anyways(j/k)...now we are up to around $12k

Okay now we eliminate Texas, their all jerks anyways and their responsible for Bush....now we already got rid of Republicans so we just need to eliminate all the Dems and Independents in Texas...at last count...nevermind both of them moved out.:)

Okay, we eliminate California, they're all tree huggers and Gary Colemans....that should get us in $14k range...hmm

Nevermind it's futile, just won't work.:devil

Sounded good till I got to the 'deadbeat dad' part. What about 'deadbeat moms' that don't pay child support?

Studies show they are less likely to pay child support than fathers, but, dads get the bad rap, as they are less likely to get shared or sole custody because boobs make you a better parent to most judges.

So the numbers of 'deadbeat dads' are higher, but the percentage of 'deadbeat moms' is greater. In the interest of 'equality' they should be represented.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,59963,00.html


http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-234.pdf

And basic math skillz FTW on the chain letter....

While the correct sum is in fact $425 (sounds a lot like that big Stimulus Package ... ), what makes me laugh is that idea is effectively the Marx/Keynesian idea of wealth redistribution for the greater good that we were lynching people over quite recently.

85,000,000,000 \ 200,000,000 = 425

Someone didn't input enough zeros in their calculator.

And its $850 billion, not $85 billion that was being proposed.....
Using the real numbers it would be $4250/per 200 million eligable citizens....

And it looks like the Senate passed it's version of the bill, now the real question is, will the House Democrats like the tax breaks worked into this version, or will they take the place of the few Republicans that might come on board?

And its $850 billion, not $85 billion that was being proposed.....
Using the real numbers it would be $4250/per 200 million eligable citizens....

And it looks like the Senate passed it's version of the bill, now the real question is, will the House Democrats like the tax breaks worked into this version, or will they take the place of the few Republicans that might come on board?

Man you are clueless.

85,000,000 = the AIG bailout. The "bailout" is 700,000,000

Maybe it was the term 'bailout' that had me confused.....

'Rescue' is the latest buzzword, right?

Fuck if I know, a turd sandwich by any other name is still a turd sandwich.

Here's a few alternatives to bailing out/rescuing anyone.

1. Eliminate the capital gains tax on just the inflationary part of capital gains (for a starter),

2. Cut the corporate tax rate in half,

3. Eliminate the Alternative Minimum Tax,

4. Reduce foreign aid,

5. Reinstate Glass-Stiegel, and

6. Repeal Sarbanes-Oxley.

All gotten from the Bob Barr website. But Libertarians are all just a bunch of whackjobs, ya know? :rolleyes:

No, just Barr.

So I called my Congressman Ron Bishop up today.

Told them HELL NO on the Bailout bill.

Was funny , the poc asked for my address and said "let me have it" for my opinion and topic I wanted to address ;P

I've been trying to get through today, but the phone's off the hook at my rep's DC office.

Got thru to my Rep's local office and voiced my displeasure. also got the local staffer to promise me he would'nt rip the phone out of the wall and toss it into the street untill at least 4:30 PST.

Doesn't matter.

Its gonna pass.

Crime that pays is crime that stays?

We need to march on Washington, or something....

We need to march on Washington, or something....


Funny thing...there seems to be some movement of military units in the country.

Doesn't matter.


The shame of America

With rifles and the Consitution, while we still have them.

there seems to be some movement of military units in the country.

Ok, now I'm getting freaked a bit.

Couple of days ago (Tue. 9/29) while driving south on I-5 we noticed a column of APC's heading north.

While this is not an unnormal occurance in the puget sound area to see units on the move. this was differant! each APC had thier .50 cals mounted and most important they where manned!!!!!!!

Now i understand the no big deal line. but they were manned as these troops headed north (towards Seattle) at 60-70 MPH! thats not normal!

Odd unless things have changed all the vehicles I drove in the military would not have driven well at a rate of speed like that. Not to mention in a convoy on a highway you have a lead vehicle setting the pace. I can't imagine an APC doing 70mph. Are you sure it was an APC and not a hummer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Bradley

41 MPH for the Bradley APC

Hummers can't go above 55 unless the governers are removed.

Take off the tinfoil hats....

If you dig in the news enough, you'll find that NorthCom has active duty Army here in the country, as of 10/1.

http://www.northcom.mil/News/index.html

Looks like for a long time before that. OMG, They helped with the Hurricane Ike efforts, QUICK! It's the END OF THE WORLD <TM>!!!!!!!

Keep looking. You're missing it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2_Bradley

41 MPH for the Bradley APC

Hummers can't go above 55 unless the governers are removed.

Take off the tinfoil hats....

So he wasn't tracking them on Radar and his estimate of speed was off...so must not be true:rolleyes:

Sixee, why is this deployment not a possibility in your mind? What do you draw upon to think it could never happen?

odd you guys mentioned the military presence. There is some sort of Army Battery location REALLY close to my house. Normally they have 2-5 what look to be artillary, a few covered troop transports. When i drove home last night, they yard was FULL of transports, more artillery, some different style jeeps than normal and a full blown armored APC.

Will see if i can stop on th way home and ninja cell phone pic the yard.

HaG9d_4zij8

So he wasn't tracking them on Radar and his estimate of speed was off...so must not be true:rolleyes:

Sixee, why is this deployment not a possibility in your mind? What do you draw upon to think it could never happen?

I never said the deployment didn't happnen, I merely pointed out his facts were wrong, when it came to the vehicles in question, and that jumping to conclusions based on those observations, seemed a bit paranoid to me.

When I was in the Army, we did manuvers in Germany, as well as in the U.S. It was quite common for us to drive convoys, and I'm sure to civilians, all the big trucks, and weapons looked quite impressive.

Fact of the matter is, unless you see AMMUNITION, seeing weapons mounted on vehicles, means about as much as if a convertable has its top on or off. Deployment of vehicles and soldiers, given the fact that we still have troops fighting overseas, doesn't mean much, at least not to me.

Since I live less than 50 miles from the largest military installation, and I know people who live/work on that post, I think I'd know if some Presidential Directive came down for the Army to mobilize against the populace. Keeping a secret like that would be damned difficult, as news travels faster on an Army Post, than anywhere.

odd you guys mentioned the military presence. There is some sort of Army Battery location REALLY close to my house. Normally they have 2-5 what look to be artillary, a few covered troop transports. When i drove home last night, they yard was FULL of transports, more artillery, some different style jeeps than normal and a full blown armored APC.

Will see if i can stop on th way home and ninja cell phone pic the yard.

Part of me would love to see them nab ya for doing so. Just question you mind ya, but to gleefully nab pics of our troop movements and publish them always sits ill with me.

Maybe nab is too strong of a word, question might sit better ;P

For the record I have always hated to hear the news calling out troop departures and such. HATE it in fact.

Wait, you'd want them to "nab" him for taking a picture of something he saw between where he lives and works, in Florida? What the fuck?

This isn't Iraq (yet)...

No, I want the press to be responsible.

He saw it earlier, now he wants to run back and "ninja" a pic of troop movements so he can publish them.

To me that's irresponsible as fuck, you just need to apply common sense.

Of course you haven't served and had friends and family on the line San. So someone being given troop movements and maybe using it to inflict harm wouldnt' strike home.

You're right, it's not Iraq thank god. But your lack of common sense would have stood us ill over there.

Since I live less than 50 miles from the largest military installation, and I know people who live/work on that post, I think I'd know if some Presidential Directive came down for the Army to mobilize against the populace. Keeping a secret like that would be damned difficult, as news travels faster on an Army Post, than anywhere.

Did you not even bother to read the first few announcements on the NorthCom page you yourself linked?

Talking to me?

Of course I did, and of course you didn't read mine.

I also said I hate it when the press does it period no?

The world doesn't revolve around you, sir. I was responding to who I quoted.

Looks like they are building a response force to respond to any CBRNE incidents.

Look, the military has excellent skills when it comes to dealing with that sort of thing. They have methods and proceedures that are time tested, and work.

Who would you rather have in place to respond to such an incident? The Cub Scouts?

Of course you haven't served and had friends and family on the line San. So someone being given troop movements and maybe using it to inflict harm wouldnt' strike home.

Well, that's a stupidly overbroad (and incorrect) statement to make about my friends and family. An unsurprising insight into your polarized thinking process though.

How exactly do you think that Grey seeing what was happening in his own back yard somehow equates to dangerous spying on "troop movements (LOL?)"? Do you think if stealth was crucial to whatever they're doing that Grey would see them on the way home from work?

Enlighten us.

What next? Should it be illegal to take a picture of the police too? Meter maids? Park police?

It's absurd that the very people who have sworn to uphold the Constitution should "nab" Grey and suspend his Constitutional rights.

Looks like they are building a response force to respond to any CBRNE incidents.

Look, the military has excellent skills when it comes to dealing with that sort of thing. They have methods and proceedures that are time tested, and work.

Who would you rather have in place to respond to such an incident? The Cub Scouts?

You might notice that I never said I was for or against. Just trying to help you understand that there are indeed 4,700 armed Army soldiers here now, under the command of NorthCom.

There are clouds in the sky today as well. Does it mean it's going to rain?

I'm polarized,heh, if anyone has become polarized and rather limited in his thinking and excecutions of his powers it's you bud.

Since we know we have cells inside our borders ( only a fool would attempt to disbelieve that with our shoddy border security) having movements posted and televised by anyone is sheer lunacy.

I apologize for thinking you lacked friends and family involved in the military. Now I'm really shocked at your callous attitude and behavior towards folks you care about.

We should think twice before we make public any sort of troop movements. It's not given to us to make those kind of decisions for thoe folks moving in those formations.

Sorry, it's a sore point with me and always shall be.

No, I want the press to be responsible.

He saw it earlier, now he wants to run back and "ninja" a pic of troop movements so he can publish them.

To me that's irresponsible as fuck, you just need to apply common sense.

Of course you haven't served and had friends and family on the line San. So someone being given troop movements and maybe using it to inflict harm wouldnt' strike home.

You're right, it's not Iraq thank god. But your lack of common sense would have stood us ill over there.


We aren't in Iraq and we have every right to photograph anything we want to in this country, a column of APC's, Artillery is not and should not be a secret if that movement is within the USA. Who are we trying to keep it from?

Yea they were not Bradleys or Strykers, but was some type of turreted transport. it was odd none the less.

Good thing you live where you do Fandros or youd be dead of heart attack living where I do as it was all over the news this week that Ft. Lewis based Army I corp and the 5th and 7th Stryker Brigades are getting ramped up for deployment early next year. most likely gonna be filmed as the Troops load up to the cheers from thier family and supporters at the port of Tacoma. Grey taking a pic of some equipment thats in full view from a public roadway in rural Fla. endangers troops in the middle east is a hell of a leap.

Well, that's a stupidly overbroad (and incorrect) statement to make about my friends and family. An unsurprising insight into your polarized thinking process though.

How exactly do you think that Grey seeing what was happening in his own back yard somehow equates to dangerous spying on "troop movements (LOL?)"? Do you think if stealth was crucial to whatever they're doing that Grey would see them on the way home from work?

Enlighten us.

What next? Should it be illegal to take a picture of the police too? Meter maids? Park police?

It's absurd that the very people who have sworn to uphold the Constitution should "nab" Grey and suspend his Constitutional rights.

I never said suspend his rights, are your rights infringed everytime a policemen ....errr nm, forgot who I was talking to.

I don't want Grey hurt, or mistreated by any means. I'm not even referring to him personally but the press in general.

Yea they were not Bradleys or Strykers, but was some type of turreted transport. it was odd none the less.

Good thing you live where you do Fandros or youd be dead of heart attack living where I do as it was all over the news this week that Ft. Lewis based Army I corp and the 5th and 7th Stryker Brigades are getting ramped up for deployment early next year. most likely gonna be filmed as the Troops load up to the cheers from thier family and supporters at the port of Tacoma. Grey taking a pic of some equipment thats in full view from a public roadway in rural Fla. endangers troops in the middle east is a hell of a leap.

Yup and the danger our troops face are only abroad.

I didn't say they'd be in danger in Iraq, sheeshhh read.

So wait. You think that Grey has some unique power of being able to observe "troop movements" at known locations, while these imaginary "terrorist" cells can't? Come on.

I really can see how it's dangerous to report real-time movements in an active conflict, but not here.

This is America. If we turn it into a battleground where people like Grey loose their freedoms just for going about their lives, the "terrorists" have already defeated us completely.

Forget it, nevermind. Sometimes I forget and take to heart not ever sharing that sort of military info with anyone not in a need to know.

My background and beliefs need not be shared by those who don't give a damn or have the same framework to operate from.

Proceed on,back on topic and what not!! ;P

APC's, Artillery is not and should not be a secret if that movement is within the USA. Who are we trying to keep it from?

LOL exactly it was 10AM on I-5 between Seattle and Tacoma. they were seen by thousands of people.

Yeah, because OPSEC is a joke.

Loose lips, sink ships? Not on the Intertubes!

here here Six!!

A mechanized battalion moving down a public highway in full view of thousands of people is good operational security? I do believe that in the area mentioned there is a large base....no?

Here's something I figured out way back when. We had a plan, we kept it secure, we spoke only within our chain of command, then one day these large CH-46 Sea Knights flew in and well....there went operational security in the cloud of dust created by that WAP WAP WAP of the rotor wash.

Well, it certainly isn't WWII, that's for sure.

I never said the deployment didn't happnen, I merely pointed out his facts were wrong, when it came to the vehicles in question, and that jumping to conclusions based on those observations, seemed a bit paranoid to me.

When I was in the Army, we did manuvers in Germany, as well as in the U.S. It was quite common for us to drive convoys, and I'm sure to civilians, all the big trucks, and weapons looked quite impressive.

Fact of the matter is, unless you see AMMUNITION, seeing weapons mounted on vehicles, means about as much as if a convertable has its top on or off. Deployment of vehicles and soldiers, given the fact that we still have troops fighting overseas, doesn't mean much, at least not to me.

Since I live less than 50 miles from the largest military installation, and I know people who live/work on that post, I think I'd know if some Presidential Directive came down for the Army to mobilize against the populace. Keeping a secret like that would be damned difficult, as news travels faster on an Army Post, than anywhere.


This is so crazy true.

On 9/12 it was rather amusing that although the MPs had their hummers with the M60s mounted and aimed at the gates there was no ammo in them. Neither was their ammo in the M16s of the guards at the front doors of our hospital.

*now to read the rest of this thread, it's interesting*

This is so crazy true.

On 9/12 it was rather amusing that although the MPs had their hummers with the M60s mounted and aimed at the gates there was no ammo in them. Neither was their ammo in the M16s of the guards at the front doors of our hospital.

*now to read the rest of this thread, it's interesting*

They were definitely loaded with ammo here, parked in front of the Smithsonian.

I can understand that since the Pentagon was a target the previous day.

Yeah, because OPSEC is a joke.

Loose lips, sink ships? Not on the Intertubes!

So basically you think the people behind Google Maps and MS TerraServer are about the worst thing to ever happen? Because there is nothing any individual without major security clearance could ever divulge that those don't. The era of OSS anti-whisper campaigns has been dead and buried longer than any of us have been alive.

You guys really should read The Transparent Society (http://www.amazon.com/Transparent-Society-Technology-Between-Privacy/dp/0738201448/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1223088128&sr=8-1) or something similar, the nature of information passed you by a long time ago whether you like it or not, and the questions pertaining to how to deal with that have changed completely since 1945.

(to answer a question, that specific book is not the end-all treatise on the subject, and is in fact ten years old, but provides a good basic summary of what ubiquitous recording and photography means, and where you can go once it happens. hint: it happened.)

Never fear my good fellows....... my brother may be switching military services to work with Homeland Security !!! we are all saved!

Seriously though, he is the most patriotic and "do the right thing, even if it sucks for him" kind of guy I know... :)