Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Day 2: Still damning GOP and 95 Democrats
Get caught up here.
That all being said, this is not an easy decision. We're talking about trying to shore up credit at the cost of a monstrous burden on the taxpayers. There is genuine debate regarding the effectiveness or lack thereof of a bailout. There are many reputed economists who suggest that the bailout is likely more harmful than beneficial. (Krugman, Hussman, Zingales, were just a few to start. source: NYT, multiple dates) The American people are also up and down regarding this; as near as I can figure, most polls show that the American people are divided regarding a bailout, they favor it in principle, but do not like this particular legislation, and were happy that it failed. So, while I am sympathetic to the concerns of the Bush administration regarding this crisis, I am a bit more understanding regarding the second thoughts of the Representatives here.
I personally do not favor this bailout at this time. There is insufficient evidence to suggest that it would be effective, and prevent the perpetuation of the problem, while absolutely putting the taxpayer (and thus the economy) in worse shape. I think we need to analyze how this occurred, and go back to the drawing board.
Now, let's load up a real liberal bill, replacing every bit of social legislation knocked down since Ronnie R. was preznit, and dare the president to veto it, and the right wingers can go hang.
The four pillars of Reagan’s economic policy were to:
1. reduce the growth of government spending,
2. reduce marginal tax rates on income from labor and capital,
3. reduce government regulation of the economy,
4. control the money supply to reduce inflation.
Total bullshit. How simple. They were all asleep at the switch. I guess we should have left redlining and the vestiges of its de facto discrimination in place?
After all as Representative Bachmann of Minnesota has said, them minorities and their loans are the bases of this crisis. Say could it have been the racism and discrimination that stimulated the CRA the actual underlying cause?
By the way I just love that bowl of cherries you've presented.
In addition, McCain said a housing bill approved in Congress gives Treasury the authority to purchase up to $1 Trillion in mortgages, and the agency should do so.
"Housing and mortgages are at the root of this crisis," McCain said. "I encourage Treasury to take action to shore up mortgage values."
Sometimes he says it is just a Billion but what the hey. What is he talking about? Does he think that there is just a trillion dollars laying around not being used?
You keep talking about old news. I'm talking about history.
This effing problem, and most others having to do with finance and the economny, started with the very first Republican objections to the New Deal.
I'll take every damn charge and accusation against the Dems, or anyone else. But you, in your unthinking worship of the unregulated "free" market, get everything else.
There's plenty of blame to go around, and I hope that it eventually does. I also hope that this rescue is well thought out; it still feels very railroaded to me--but then again, I don't trust most of the pols in DC to be worth a hill of beans, and it seems that they only occasionally stumble onto the right track.
"Washington Mutual became an active supporter of the homosexual agenda. But today, it is no more. Corporate America has learned the hard way that anti-family policies are bankrupt in more ways than one."
Oops. My bad.
If an intelligent word was ever uttered in the halls of Liberty "Unversity," would any intelligent ear be there to hear it? What is the sound of one money-grubbing hand grubbing? Does Jerry Falwell's ghost s--t in the woods around Lynchburg?
Sorry. That kind of holier-than-thou BS makes me a little crazy, so I went a little crazy.