The financial crisis deniers are speaking almost EXACTLY like the climate change deniers.

[msallied]

And they're using almost the exact same language: "Why should I care?" "It's a HOAX!"

And I say to both of them: Doing nothing in the face of a potential crisis is FAR more shameful than doing something and being wrong.

But that's just me. I don't want to see millions out of a job. If we can do something to prevent it, then I want to try.

[BlooInBloo]

1. I'm with Obama: "I *am* my brother's keeper"...

No matter how much of a jackass he might be.

[msallied]

2. Amen.

[ShortnFiery]

7. He's playing the middle line. Yeah, I'm Billionaire's and Millionaire's welfare fund. No. eom

[msallied]

9. Have you read the current legislation on the table?

Do you know a damn thing about how a liquidity crisis affects EVERY American??

If banks fold, we ALL lose. It's NOT just the investors. It's the businesses who depend on the ability to receive short term loans to pay their employees and do business. It's about the whole fucking economy going down the toilet. The Democrats are NOT letting legislation go to the floor that is designed to protect criminals. If you bothered to read about any of this, you'd stop yammering about the same tired as fuck talking points.

[BlooInBloo]

Typical response to your question:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4112965&mesg_id=4113209

[Tallison]

26. Drives me nuts

The simplistic thinking about an incredibly complex issue. The fact is that Wall St. and Main St. are connected by a million little tributaries. 'Bailout' is a misnomer, and I wish the media had never picked up and run with it.

[msallied]

30. Most people just want to see the wealthy burn, out of some sense of contempt.

That's fine and dandy, but they'll learn good and quick WHY that's such a bad outlook to have. We're all linked together in this. Unless you live off the land and are off the grid circa mid-1800s with your money stuffed into a mattress, then I guess no. There is nothing to lose for them.

[Odin2005]

87. It's Schadenfreude.

They are cutting off their noses out of spite, letting emotion trump reason.

[Danger Mouse]

78. dear lord...'i don't need to read it'...it sounds like repuke logic.

[girl gone mad]

93. Who are you again?

I've been following this crisis for years.

The last we need is a lecture from some ill-informed anonymous internet poster.

[msallied]

95. And you think YOU have the right to ask such a question?

Are you somehow more informed yet less anonymous? Warren Buffet? Is that you??

[girl gone mad]

113. I've blogged about this particular crisis for 5 years now.

Funny, I don't recall seeing you in a single thread on the subject before this afternoon.

[msallied]

118. Then you're not paying attention. I've been among many threads for months on this board.

But thank you for providing me with those awesome credentials, O Mighty Blogger. There are none other like you in the world, I am sure, who can formulate their opinions onto a website! I will step down to your mighty bloggery wisdom. This pissing contest I have lost, for you... are a Blogger.

:eyes:

[girl gone mad]

126. In other words you have no credentials...

but you feel qualified to tell the rest of us how we should think and accuse those against this particular bill of being idiots akin to global warming denialists?

You're just hyperventilating here, not conducting any kind of rational policy discussion.

[msallied]

Project much?

[girl gone mad]

151. Is that the best you can do?

You name call those who oppose this bill on strong, reasoned grounds.

You've brought nothing to the debate but insults and fear mongering.

Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail at some point.

[msallied]

153. Actually, I didn't namecall the people who oppose the bill.

I namecalled the people who deny there is even a problem. And your own insults and elitism is duly noted, O Great Blogger.

[girl gone mad]

157. The gist of your argument throughout this thread..

has been that anyone opposed to immediate action is ignorant.

You are just spreading panic here, at a time when we could use some real debate.

[msallied]

158. Actually no, it hasn't. The gist of my argument has been strictly about the DENIERS.

And I've been debating those who STILL think the original Paulson deal is on the table, when it hasn't since it came out! People are then basing their opinions on either old information or completely false premises, that we're going to have to dole out $700 billion immediately, without question. That is not and has not been the case, and I really wish people would stop thinking it IS.

[girl gone mad]

174. I guess we have a choice today. We could listen to..

Dennis Kucinich and Michael Moore, two hard working liberals with a long history of being on the right side of economic issues, or we could listen to you, a woman who believes that we need to rescue rich people because rich people are the heartbeat of our economy and their success is our success. A fundamental belief which puts you solidly in agreement with Bush and the rest of the trickle-downers.

[moodforaday]

179. Bull-shit. Sorry, but that's what it is.

The banks are not going to fold, because the bankers are not suicidal. Credit freeze does not have to happen, and there other better ways of preventing the crisis than a giveaway. Look up the quote I posted a few nothces above, or check this article for a number of alternative ideas:

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/100700/the_fiscally_insane_bailout_bill_might_not_pass_--_here%27s_5_reasons_it_shouldn%27t/?page=entire

But right now everyone is running scared of a dollar mushroom cloud. They must have also believed Condie when she threatened the other one.

[Tallison]

18. That's shortsighted

Globalism means your welfare's already inextricably tied to the functioning of a well-regulated market. When that stops working, you stop working.

[msallied]

23. Exactly. And there are a lot of economies that now depend on ours to function.

When America falls, a lot of the world goes down the toilet with it. This was not so much the case in 1929.

[cemaphonic]

169. It was very much the case in '29

The infamous hyperinflation (think wheelbarrows of cash) toward the end of the Weimar Republic in Germany was a direct result of the Great Depression in the US, since the German economy was being heavily supported by American loans. While the Weimar economy was good, from about 1924 to 1929, most of the radical parties (of which the Nazis were just one) were politically marginalized. The economic instability lead directly to exploitable political instability, and a decade later, all of Europe was at war.

[Spider Jerusalem]

170. No, it wasn't; you need to brush up on your history.

The German hyperinflation occurred in 1923. If it was the direct result of anything at all it was the direct result of the ruinous reparations payments forced on Germany under the stipulations of the Versailles Treaty.

[cemaphonic]

171. D'oh, that's right!

Yeah, the insane hyperinflation was '23, but the economy (and political landscape) did stabilize after that, in part due to American investment. The Weimar economy did get hammered again after the '29 crash, and that period helped usher in the Nazis.


Guess I shouldn't shoot from the hip with my history lectures.

[Teaser]

58. My 401k thanks you

.

[Tallison]

13. Good point

Globalism means that our world is smaller than ever and we're more interconnected than ever, whether we can stand the thought or not. There are no islands left from which to laugh as we watch 'the other guy' gets his. Racists, bigots and isolationists will learn this the hard way by poking their own eyes out trying to teach the mythical 'other guy' a lesson.

[Odin2005]

81. Exactly. n/t.

[moodforaday]

178. Why not institute a fund

to help finance the mortgages of those in danger of defaulting? So that they keep their homes, banks get their money, and no-one (in principle) has to go broke. Wouldn't that be a batter way to take care of everyone who needs it?

The bailout does the opposite: the banks get your home *and* your money. And Obama is enabling that.

Credit crunch is not a preordained outcome:

The Fiscally Insane Bailout Bill Might Not Pass -- Here's 5 Reasons It Shouldn't | AlterNet

(...)
"Harvard's Ken Rogoff, a Former Federal Rerserve and IMF official, insists that the prospect of this bailout is, unto itself, taking a manageable problem and making it into a more intense crisis. He says that credit is frozen primarily because banks want to avoid dealing with other banks that might drive a hard bargain, and instead would rather wait for free money from the government. Without the prospect of that free money, Rogoff suggests that credit would probably begin moving again, if slowly."
(...)

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/100700/the_fiscally_insane_bailout_bill_might_not_pass_--_here%27s_5_reasons_it_shouldn%27t/?page=entire

[grannie4peace]

3. that's true

[ShortnFiery]

4. Yeah, it's so crucial, it must be passed NOW ... right NOW?!? ... hum? It's a SCAM.

Yes, we are going to have a financial crisis one way or another, but no reason to throw the baby (our tax dollars) out with the bath water (last wet kiss to corporate america before they go tits up).

[sharp_stick]

5. And your economic credentials are...... n/t

[ShortnFiery]

11. History. If it is "critical" then WHY can't we take at least two weeks to glean consensus?

Anytime a salesman/woman says to me that I must BUY their item NOW ... RIGHT NOW, I know that it's only a scam to get me to act quickly because they KNOW I will regret this rash decision.

[msallied]

15. You have nothing on which to base your opinion on this than a flimsy analogy?

The dominoes are big, and they're already falling. It won't take long until it gets to your neck of the woods. Trust me. Once businesses run out of their cash stores because they can't get their short term loans to finance their ability to do business, then those places will fold.

[girl gone mad]

159. Speaking of flimsy analogies...

This thread was started on the basis of a very flimsy analogy.

You are throwing out some fairly hefty hypotheticals there. Well, I have a hypothetical for you, too: How about pushing wheelbarrows full of worthless US dollars to your corner store if this deal goes through as written. Are you scared yet? Are you going to deny the very real threat of currency deflation? You should be panicking, not denying it like those idiot anti-global-warming people.

[weezie1317]

181. Because banks are failing NOW. Two more weeks means more going under. See Washington Mutual. !!!

[msallied]

6. Pardon me, but I think that you are throwing the baby out with the bath water.

The millions middle-class American people who will be out of a job because of all of the small businesses that will fold in the midst of a liquidity crisis are the babies. The bathwater is the greedy assholes whom the current legislation is NOT aimed at bailing out, by the way.

[ShortnFiery]

8. Hello? Much of this SCAM paper money is going overseas. They'll take the money more OVERSEAS.

Don't you get it, it's one last financial rape to the American Taxpayer?

[1corona4u]

17. Obviously, you have nothing to lose....

seems to be the position of people against this bill.

[msallied]

24. Oh if they have a job, they have something to lose.

They just don't understand that yet. They think it's all about rich people taking the fall, not even understanding that this can hit us ALL.

[1corona4u]

33. Yep, just like they said fuck AIG...

but what they didn't think about is how AIG could have affected each one of us. I said the other day, AIG touches a lot of people's lives, and they may not even know it. I got hurt on the job a few years back, and guess who my company's liability insurance company was. AIG. They paid for all of my medical treatment, therapy, wheelchair, etc., while I was out of work for 6 months.

They also provide auto insurance. I guess people never stopped to think that if AIG would have folded, that they could have gotten in an accident on the way home from work, and someone who HAD been covered by AIG could have hit their car and totaled it. Sure your insurance would cover it, but guess who's insurance is going up? Yours.

People just don't think things through, I'm convinced of that.

[slinkerwink]

16. you really have no idea of how severe this economic problem is, do you?

[redstate_democrat]

19. Our tax dollars won't mean shit if we don't have an economic infrastructure

If our entire economic system collapses, those "tax dollars" you talk about won't really mean much.

[Critters2]

10. Major difference: We were told the financial crisis was immediate, impending...

TOMORROW!! Tomorrow came and went, with the markets climbing, rather than the crash we were told to expect. I am concerned about these issues, but I can only maintain a state of panic for 3 days, 4 tops. I don't believe the sky is falling, because I have yet to be hit by anything.

[msallied]

12. The Dow Jones Industrial Average is NOT the only indicator of the health of an economy

When banks run out of capital to lend to small businesses, millions of people will be out of a job. THAT hits middle-class America like a ton of bricks.

This is NOT about bailing out the rich.

[ShortnFiery]

14. Much of that money is going OVERSEAS. Dammit, this won't work and will only leave ZERO money

for programs such as Health Care and Education.

[msallied]

20. Where are you getting this bullshit?

Do you understand what happens when banks fold? Do you understand what happens when banks run out of money? Do you know what liquidity means?

As I refer back to my OP, you sound EXACTLY like a climate change denier. Pulling any reason out of a hat to do nothing at all. Why? Because you have so much contempt for ALL wealth (even the kind that has helped America) that you'd do anything to see it burn.

[1corona4u]

25. Link please....

to back up your assertion.

[girl gone mad]

111. There are no real signs of it happening, however.

[1corona4u]

21. I guess you forgot that the largest bank failure already happened...

WaMu...remember that teensy little bank, they were seized last week, Thursday.

[Critters2]

34. I guess I forgot because

the sun came up the next morning, I went to the bank, and actually cashed a check. All without a $700B bailout.

So, when does this sky start to fall, again?

[1corona4u]

37. See, you're a simpleton.

If it doesn't personally affect you, yet, then it's pure bullshit. I can tell that economics is not your strong suit, and neither is your understanding of the world arround you.

Oh, and by the way, how many solvent financial companies do you think are left that can buy a bank out, like WaMu. not that many.

[Critters2]

41. And you insult people who disagree with you. Now we both understand one another.

I think people who fuck up should deal with some consequences. I don't doubt that we're headed for hard times, now that the dollar will be worth shit (but less shit than before), now that we're helping out the Wall Street speculators that made this mess.

But, no, I'll never believe the panic mongers. So, insult away. It doesn't strengthen your position.

I guess human relationships are not your strong suit.

[msallied]

45. You talk like a Republican who complains about the cold weather and says

"Global warmin my ass!"

You are JUST that ignorant.

[Critters2]

50. Ooh, another insult. I'm likely to start believing your position any moment now.

Yep, I'm coming closer and closer to believing the world, as we know it, is about to end.

Insult me again...that might do it! :hi:

[msallied]

55. You're a weakling. If your acting intelligently is dependent upon people kissing your ass

then you're beyond hope.

[Critters2]

63. And you hold to some strange logic wherein you can beat me into submission,

by calling me the just right number of unkind epithets. Yeah, you're a genius.

You believe what the Bush Administration tells you, and I'm the stupid one.

Shouldn't you be in Iraq hunting for WMD?

[msallied]

67. I'm sorry, but it wasn't just the Bush Administration telling it.

You are either purposefully lying or you are really completely unaware of what's actually going on.

And I'm not beating you into submission. I am merely expressing my complete disgust at your willful stupidity.

[Critters2]

70. Paulson is the Bush Administration. Bernanke is the Bush Administration.

These rats have a history. I refuse to believe these liars.

So, where were those WMD again?

[msallied]

72. Is Barack Obama the Bush administration? Is Warren Buffet the Bush Administration?

This crisis has been foretold for years.

[Critters2]

77. Then a) why wasn't something done sooner, and b) why was it a crisis two weeks ago...

a CRISIS that couldn't possibly wait to be dealt with. Except that we did wait. And the sky hasn't fallen yet.

Again, how's the hunt for those WMD goin'?

[msallied]

85. Bernanke and Paulson declaring there was a problem was them finally ADMITTING there was a problem!

For YEARS while economists and Democrats were warning that this whole thing was going to crash. Of COURSE they were going to deny the future consequences of their deregulations, because they were ALL getting rich off of it! McCain's own campaign manager was on the take from Freddie and Fannie even as they were going into the toilet. And all as this was building up, millions of people were losing their homes. Several friends I know who work in real estate (including my mother and my best friend) saw the writing on the wall even THREE years ago, and yet Bush stands up there in his State of the Union address and BRAGS about how homeownership is at an all-time high, all the while knowing that those homes were being banked on bad loans.

When even the bad guys start to admit there is something wrong, THAT is when you pay attention.

[Critters2]

92. Now, see, THIS is a rational, cogent and persuasive argument.

Thank you.

And you did it all without insulting me once. I knew you could.

I do persuasive speaking for a living. Not insulting your audience is the FIRST thing they teach you at persuasive speaking school. Now you know why.

Again, thanks.

[msallied]

94. If you were paying attention, you would have known this already.

I see little excuse for someone who is an adult and who claims to be active in politics to NOT know this by now.

[Critters2]

102. It's like an addiction with you, isn't it? I actually congratulate you, and you insult me.

Get some help...and welcome to my ignore box.

[msallied]

107. Boo hoo. And believe me, the pleasure to be ignored by you is ALL mine.

[endthewar]

134. You really have been out of line with your insults

Just because someone disagrees with you, that's no reason to insult and trash them in this way. :hi:

I also think that it's possible to believe that a financial crisis exists but that this proposed bailout is a bad idea. It doesn't even pass the smell test. It's a huge power transfer to the executive branch that will in effect have very little oversight. Yeah, they claim there will be oversight, but they have yet to prove that it will be effective.

If Bush came to your door personally and said that he needed $3000 from you by the end of the week, no questions asked, for him to save the world again, would you give it to him?

Yeah, that's what I thought...

[msallied]

139. Bush DID come to our doors and ask for that money by the end of the week.

And we didn't give it to him, no questions asked. You're basing your argument on a false premise.

[endthewar]

143. Congress spent more time on steroids in baseball than on this bailout

Everybody knows that both sides have serious reservations about this bailout bill. The rush to pass the bill is due to fear, not because those questions have been answered. Bush even started off with some line about how the time for blame will be later. Well, the time for blame needs to be now, so that we know what policies led us to this position. That's the only true way to protect us from this again.

For example, some of the House Republicans have a rough proposal to have a moratorium on capital gains taxes, cut corporate taxes, and deregulate even further. How can a politician seriously believe in that proposal? Because we haven't had any fact-finding expeditions to figure out what caused this. Each side will just say that the other side's policies are responsible, and that's why everybody should trust their policy.

Like it or not, this bill is going forward without a truly substantive Q&A. The questions have been asked, but the executive branch has not answered. Leading economists are warning us against this bailout program. Don't say that you weren't warned about what we were getting into.

[Raineyb]

164. There are also some serious structural problems with the bill

It's giving over $700B to the same people who caused the problem without fixing any of the underlying issues that caused the problems in the first place. There's no provision to stem speculation, nothing forcing banks to hold the mortgages they make, nothing stopping investment entities from selling these derivatives. Hell, there's not even a reinstatement of the Glass-Steagall act. So it looks to me like we're shoving more money at the same systems without making the changes needed to make sure such events don't happen again. Meanwhile all this extra money being borrowed is only going to push down the dollar even further and make our inflation problems worse. I fail to see how it does not benefit the country as a whole to take a bit more time before passing anything. God only knows about all the other shitty legislation this administration has rammed down the throat of congress by scaring the shit out of people. Does the words "Patriot Act" mean anything to anyone out there?

Regards

[Critters2]

144. Obviously she would. She just did. nt

[endthewar]

147. I'm glad that not everybody is buying the BS that Bush is selling

The history books will have fun covering this. Decades from now political historians will ask why did the nation trust Bush after he led this kind of charade to get people to buy into his Iraq War. Why did they agree to this huge transfer of power to the executive branch after a Bush presidency marked by ever expanding executive powers. Why did Congress spend months on steroids in baseball but mere hours on a $700 billion bailout program?

[Critters2]

152. If any single member of the Bush administration were to tell me the sky was blue,

I'd have to wonder why the sky had suddenly ceased to be blue.

[msallied]

154. If you'd been paying attention, you would know WHY they were asking.

Because WE were asking first!

[endthewar]

162. I doubt that they needed to check with their constituents

to figure out whether or not the public wanted anyone to ask questions before giving Bush $700 billion in unmarked bills. :eyes:

[endthewar]

161. Actually, the sky isn't blue

It reflects the color blue, so doesn't it make more sense to say that the sky isn't blue since the only color it reflects is blue? It absorbs all other colors. Normally when I describe something, I describe it by what it contains, not what it rejects.

I've got you thinking now. :rofl:

[endthewar]

129. Keep fighting the good fight!

Don't let the haters get you down. :patriot:

[Odin2005]

97. The logic is so similar to that of the GW Denialists it's disgusting.

The reasoning is basically "I don't see any banking crisis so it must be all a scam!!!" :eyes:

[endthewar]

148. Difference between supporting this bailout program and denying this crisis.

Yeah, there's a crisis, but most economic experts think that this is a bad program.

[1corona4u]

149. NO they don't. They said the ORIGINAL one was bad.

NO ONE has said anuthing about the current bill. No one. It barely made it out today.

I'm hiding this thread now, because I can't stand the paranoia.

[moodforaday]

180. Four words:

Weapons of Mass Destruction.

They required immediate action too, remember? If you asked questions, you were a traitor.

Now you are personally doing Bush's cronies' work for them.

[1corona4u]

47. My strong suit is calling it like I see it.

I don't kiss anyone's ass for the sake of making friends.

[girl gone mad]

160. Wamu made bad bets.

People who kept more than $100,000 in Wamu just weren't paying attention.

What exactly are we supposed to be panicking over?

It looks like many solvent small banks are rising up to fill in the gaps left by the dissolution of some of the larger firms. Small banks could even pool their resources to help good businesses meet their capital requirements.

Raise interest rates a little bit, the most severe aspects of the crisis can be averted without having to bailout the gamblers.

[polichick]

22. The difference is this crisis is being sold by the same con men responsible for...

...Bush's War and the Patriot Act.

[msallied]

27. Oh really? Is Warren Buffet a neocon?

Again. It's a general contempt for wealth that is driving this denial, because it sure isn't logic. Same with the dumb bastards who will deny climate change just because they hate "them librul hippies."

[polichick]

28. I think people are wise to question this administration over and over and over again.

[msallied]

31. They DID question this administration.

Which is why the original plan they set forth is no longer on the table.

[w4rma]

182. Warren Buffet is just hedging his bets to make a whole load of money off this crisis and bill. (nt)

[1corona4u]

40. So what., there have been plenty of credible people who said it's real.

Including Obama.

[polichick]

48. Just pointing out that it's not quite the same as with the climate doubters...

"Fool me once, fool me twice" applies here, especially when there are plenty of experts against it too.

(Obama is a politician trying to get elected; he has no choice.)

[msallied]

56. Obama warned about this in 2006 too. This has been forewarned for quite sometime.

This is not a "sudden" thing.

[polichick]

64. Which is exactly why it might not need to be so suddenly resolved...

I'll live with whatever they do (what choice is there really?) ~ but I'm not 100% sold.

[GodlessBiker]

29. The financial crisis supporters are speaking EXACTLY like the Iraq War supporters.

You must believe what we are saying or risk devastating and horrible consequences.

And you must act now based upon trusting our judgment.

[msallied]

32. The difference is

The evidence of a crisis is all around us. My own bank, WaMu, is now called JP Chase. I watched the market crash last week. I'm watching financial institutions that have been around for over a century being seized by the government. I'm seeing houses sitting on my street that have been empty for OVER A YEAR because they were seized and can't be sold. I'm paying half again as much for the same groceries I was buying a year ago. You cannot hide the signs of our failing economy. This is not some elusive WMD.

Like climate change, the evidence is there. It cannot be ignored, unless you choose to.

[Critters2]

36. You watched the market crash? Damn! I was hoping to see that!

When did it happen?! And why wasn't it reported?

[1corona4u]

39. Where have you been, in a cave?

Jezzzzz...

[Critters2]

Yeah, I was in the cave where the market closed up 120 points.

After closing up 200 points.

What cave were you in?


Btw, I saw the market crash in 87. The next morning, I had a cruller. Now THAT was a crash!!

[msallied]

57. You didn't see the market crash over 500 points when Lehman Bros went under?

And do you not understand why markets sometimes will close up the following day after a crash? If you don't, then you know nothing about this topic and are simply painting yourself to look like an idiot--again.

[msallied]

42. You know what? You're a fool. A complete and total fool.

When the DOW lost over 500 points the other day when Lehman Bros and Merrill-Lynch folded, where were you exactly?

[Parker CA]

54. Okay, seriously, what do you suggest we do?

You're so easily bashing anyone supporting this bailout. What is your suggestion? You clearly are living in a very insulated world where global and national economics do not apparently affect you. Please, share some of your insight as to why this is such a terrible decision based on the economic stage we're living in, and more importantly, rather than bashing, please, suggest an alternative that is realistic.

I'm very curious.

[Critters2]

61. What I suggest is that you stop insulting people wise enough to not

go into a panic at the word of the same people who brought us *gasp* weapons of mass destruction and the patriot act. There may be a problem, but I refuse to go into a breathless seizure because the Bush Administration tells me I should. We were told the market would CRASH, that the economy would come to a screeching halt 2 FUCKING WEEKS AGO!! Now you insult those who just happen to have noticed that those things didn't happen.

There is good reason to believe the Bush administration is lying. It's been known to happen. Attacking those who remember is not going to solve any problem--real, imagined, or exaggerated.

[Parker CA]

71. Okay, get it straight. That was my first post in this thread. Who have I insulted?

Also, that is a great mind frame to have. I agree, not running around screaming that the sky is falling is a very valid response, it will do no good, but ignoring the reality of the issue could prove far more fatal.

But again, what is your solution? You have said what we should NOT do. What do you suggest we SHOULD do, as an alternative to the bailout? That is what I am most curious about regarding your position and viewpoint.

Do you truly believe that doing nothing, proving that the current administration is a lying bunch of a**es, and that watching the market crash, whether it is today or a month from now, is the right plan?

[GodlessBiker]

43. The question is not what the evidence is, it's what it means. Our economy is in the toilet, but you

honestly think that 700 billion going to banks and investment banks will solve it? Your groceries will not go up even more over the next year?

Perhaps if we invested 700 billion into jobs and other programs that help lift an underemployed working class it might allow people to pay for the houses they have purchased.

This "emergency" has been heralded by the Bush administration. I have no reason to trust them. As with the Iraq War, political leaders in Washington seek safety in numbers, thinking that if they all jump over the cliff together, voters won't be able to blame anyone in particular.

[1corona4u]

44. You might as well give up. They don't get it.

[msallied]

46. Denial is nonpartisan. Sigh.

[1corona4u]

49. I hear ya.

Oh well, in a year from now, it won't matter anyway. We will be better off than we are now, not perfect, but at least better off.

[1corona4u]

69. And you know what else....

when in the fuck did Obama say that middle america would have to pay for this. When, because I sure missed it, and I was listening intently during the debate. Seems to me he said that he would CUT useless programs to help pay for it. He did not say that middle class america's taxes would go up. I'm not worried about who pays for it, because I don't think it will be the middle class....

[msallied]

73. I agree precisely.

Besides, our government desperately NEEDS to cut spending and it can start in that fucking money pit in the desert! Gah! lol

[Raineyb]

172. Then where pray tell do you think the money is going to come from?

Everyone will be paying for this bailout. When the dollar goes further into the shitter and you can't buy anything, it costs you. When we can't get a decent healthcare system because "we can't afford it" it costs you too. When municipalities jack up their taxes to make up for what's missing from the Federal and State government, it costs you.

There's no evidence that the people who caused this problem are the only ones who are going to pay for it nor is there any evidence that the companies have to change the way they do business to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again.

So it would appear that we have a bill that's giving the Treasury Secretary more power, no decent means of curbing excessive CEO compensation, and not changes in the way these companies do business in order to make sure this doesn't happen again.

This is not a good bill and the "pass the crappy bill now and we'll fix it later" method of running government is simply not acceptable.

Regards

[BzaDem]

75. WRONG. The financial crisis DENIERS are speaking EXACTLY like the Iraq War supporters.

The supporters of the financial crisis have critically questioned Bush, came up with a completely different plan than Bush wanted, got advice from many economists (liberal and conservatives) and got a solution.

The deniers are saying that the financial crisis doesn't exist SOLELY because the Bush administration says it does. They aren't critically analyzing the financial crisis, or anything else. They just mechanically go against whatever Bush says, just like the IWR supporters went mechanically for what Bush wanted (without any critical thinking).

[doc03]

35. I'm not a denier. I don't buy this BS that the only way to go

is for me to pay for the excesses of a bunch of speculators on Wall Street. Tax the damn stock traders, mortgage brokers and speculators. I heard about one of these clowns last week being on the job 17 days and walking off with $20,000,000 what I read they are going to do is put a 20% tax on it. Their answer take a $25,000,000 Golden Parachute next time.


on edit: Bush will probably add a signing statement eliminating that tax anyway.

[lumberjack_jeff]

38. Except for that whole solution thing, you might have a point.

Give $700b to Exxon and they'll avert the global warming catastrophe.

[TheKentuckian]

51. So you want to be holding the bag when nothing is done?

Do you think that Congress would not be seen as irresponsible if it all crashes?

Not wanting to address this is pure and unadulterated emotionalism and willing desire to cut off your nose to spite your face.

All the people against taking action will sing vastly different tunes when they stop getting paychecks, have nothing in their investments or savings, can't use the ATM, and lose their jobs. Then very suddenly people will recall why we have a representative democracy rather than directing policy based on uneducated, emotion driven, and kneejerk reactions.

I understand not buying the situation, I have deep reservations myself, in fact I'm sure the intent was to rob the treasury, but the risk of doing nothing is too insane to allow it to even be an option. We have to at least TRY to rebuild our foundations before allowing the economy to crash.

[msallied]

59. I agree with you completely. That was the point of my post. lol

[Batgirl]

52. I think this is an interesting comparison (to the climate change deniers.)

However, I disagree with characterizing opponents of a bailout as acting from vindictiveness or stupidity. Most of the rage is coming from a despairing belief that it's all going to crash anyhow and not wanting to throw a life preserver to the Wall Street perps before it does. It's really unfortunate that the initial proposed bailout -- give us a shit ton of money with no oversight -- set the tone for an eruption of public anger and made it that much harder to get the public to sign off an a new and improved version.

I do think your "denier" analogy holds up in the sense that a lot of the opposition is based on not understanding the full ramifications of non-intervention, as well as not understanding if the reworked bailout is an improvement. Speaking for myself here, as someone who has spent time firmly in the no-bailout camp, at some point over the past couple of days I noticed there are several people here, whose opinions I greatly respect, who have spoken out in favor of doing something. I'm not an economist, this is an area where I lack real knowledge, and I don't think an opinion I have formed based on emotionalism, is necessarily correct. I don't think that acting purely from anger, no matter how justified, is shown to have good results.

The fact that Obama's advocating for this, however reluctantly, is an additional persuasive factor.

So all these things have added up to me changing my mind. But it wasn't because of anyone insulting me by ascribing bad motives.

[msallied]

60. The analogy was intended specifically to address people's refusing to read up on current news.

The original Paulson deal has been off the table since pretty much the day it was introduced and people are STILL yammering on about it as if the news hasn't changed since then.

[Batgirl]

65. I do think the analogy holds up in that sense.

In fact I was trying to say the analogy applied to me to a certain extent. Extreme anger and distrust of the Bush administration made me assume any proposed bailout was just another con. However, others whom I do trust have come forward to say something does have to be done. And I believe them.

[grantcart]

53. Even though I posted threads trying to explain the 'liquidity crises' I cannot agree

that it is the same thing.

The reason is that in this case the base line information we are getting, by necessity, is from the same people who had no problem denying climate change, and fixed the intel on WMD.


I know that there is a real problem and that a systemic collapse could occur much easier than anyone excpected, but that's because I had a large company (400 employees) and have seen it from the other side.

If I had not had that personal experience I would be first among the doubters simply because of the war.

BTW as I was thinking back I remember one year we had terrible rains and floods and the entire urban area was under water for 2 months. For a while we could not get to our factory except with the help of Army trucks.

The banks were given some extra money so that we could borrow more than normal and we were able to maintain payroll and get back on our feet. With out that help tens of thousands of medium sized companies would have failed because of a lack of capital liquidity due ironically to a flood and too much water.

I admire your willingness to take a tough stand on such an unpopular point at DU, you are correct to do so, but I do not judge those that disagree - except for the anarchists who want everything to 'burn to the ground'.

[msallied]

66. I use this analogy because

both sides are exhibiting the same refusal to acknowledge the risks. The same willful ignorance regarding the evidence. The same selfish contempt that we are supposed to be too educated to know better than to use. The people in denial ARE the anarchists. They think that as long as they can still cash check that this problem doesn't affect them, just like the climate change deniers who say that it doesn't matter what we do now because they'll be dead by the time it REALLY starts to matter. They would close themselves off into their own little bubbles and and refuse to act until, of course, it gets personal. Such behavior is reckless. It's the behavior of people we would ordinarily repudiate.

And the Bush administration wasn't the only one who recognized the crisis. Democrats AND nonpartisan economists have been warning about this for years, and now it's finally happening and the time has come to act and now people are suddenly clamming up and saying that the either have no desire to act or there is no problem at all.

The $700B plan was a bad one. I don't dispute that for a second. But that is NOT the deal that is on the table right now and people need to stop acting like it is! It takes a simple glimpse at today's headlines know as much.

[grantcart]

138. Some people in denial are anarchist but some are just suspicious

so even though they express real hatred at my posts I understand for some it is jut hard to believe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4107895


You are to be commended for taking the issue straight on

[TexasObserver]

62. Please stop using such silly and inaccurate pejoratives.

Just because I understand economics and politics better than you doesn't make me a "financial crisis denier."

The weakest kind of argument is the one you make, which implores people to agree with you or be labeled unsavory.

You clearly do not know enough to make an educated assessment of the situation. If you did, you'd know the "financial crisis" is no more an emergency than the anthrax attacks were. You sound exactly like all those who stampeded to support the Patriot Act.

[msallied]

68. That's your view, and it's not supported by a very wide concensus now is it?

The $700B bailout was not supported, but that's NOT what's on the table. I observe identical patterns of behavior and I stand by that assessment. You don't have to like it, but it's the truth.

[TexasObserver]

79. Yes, it is supported by a widely held consensus.

The consensus of taxpayers.

Your "observation" is merely a weakly formed notion you pulled from your ass, one that has no basis in fact. You simply like to label as unsavory those who disagree with your conclusion. THAT is the truth, and you don't have to like it, but it's the truth.

If you're a teenager, that's your excuse. If you're not, you don't have an excuse.

[msallied]

89. Yes, taxpayers are smarter than Barack Obama and Warren Buffet. Mkay.

The hubris and ignorance you accuse me of is duly noted in your own post.

[TexasObserver]

96. Barack Obama wants to be presidential. Warren Buffett is protecting his port folio.

You're the consummate follower, led around by her nose.

I'll back Obama's play, but it's still a dumb political move. I've concluded that you literally lack the ability to assess matters of finance, so I'll get back to you if I need help on cats or such.

[msallied]

100. Warren Buffet is an economic adviser to Barack OBama

and has warned of this impending crisis for years. I'm sure as the second wealthiest man in the world who is donating 90% of his wealth to charity and doesn't support the Bush tax cuts, he's not nearly as self-serving as you're painting him to be.

And in all of your attempts to be the John McCain in this debate, you, like him, have YET to present on single bit of fact to back your assertions.

[TexasObserver]

108. You keep making pronouncements everyone knows.

You sound like George Bush, always explaining that which everyone around you already knows.

There's an election. The voters decide, not Warren Buffett. If they don't like the bailout, it doesn't matter whether it was really, really needed.

[msallied]

120. And amid all of your hubris, you offer not one single solution.

[TexasObserver]

137. Now you change the topic, insert a non sequitur, and attack me personally.

My solution has not been an issue. There's no reason to bring up my solution, certainly not to someone as incapable of understanding it as you. The term "pearls before swine" comes to mind.

[msallied]

140. Wow. You have proven you are simply not worth debating.

I ask you for your clarification on this topic and you refuse to provide it. You clearly have nothing here. Thank you for wasting my time. Welcome to my ignore list.

[TexasObserver]

145. I am, but I don't bother debating the ignorant and illogical.

[Odin2005]

112. Popularity is not truth.

If an incorrect opinion is held by the majority of people that doesn't make it any less wrong.

[TexasObserver]

116. A majority of voters is the election.

Which part of that can you not understand?

You act as if this is a matter of "rightness," as determined by some omniscient presence. It's not. It's a matter of votes. If the voters don't like or want the bailout, it's WRONG.

[msallied]

122. Wow. So a gay marriage ban, by that logic, is also right.

[TexasObserver]

130. You clearly do not have the ability to use logic.

We are not talking about what is "right." We are talking about what is politically wise.

Obama is not in favor of gay marriage. Neither is Biden. Want to know why? It's because it is not politically feasible in our representative democracy to support gay marriage and be elected president.

The bailout is bad politics because it lacks the support of the majority of Americans, and their votes matter. Your opinion of their votes does not matter.

[msallied]

136. Did you or did not say that it wasn't about what was "right"

and then assert that votes equal gospel? They do NOT, especially on issues like this where the welfare of this country's economy is hanging in the balance. You want to put this bailout issue on an actual ballot and let the people vote for it? Yeah, great idea!

[Odin2005]

132. FALLACY ALERT!!!

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

[1corona4u]

133. Maybe people are parroting the rightwing bullshit....

that's what I see on this board....go read the fucking bill. It's limited, and by the time that Obama takes office, he will be able to straighten out the effects of it, limiting the financial obligations to the middle class tax payers. But, I HIGHLY doubt the middle class will see ANY tax increases from it.

[TexasObserver]

142. Maybe people who don't understand finance are easily scared.

Most of those who are hyperventilating as if we're about to have a really serious crisis are those who lack even the most rudimentary understanding of economics or finance.

All the typical nervous ninnies here are running around like chickens with their heads chopped off. It's always something when one is inclined to find drama in every aspect of life. Some people live for the DRAMA they create around themselves.

[TheKentuckian]

74. So you believe that nothing will happen

and everything will be all cool and froody?

A lot of savvy and educated people disagree with your assessments. If its a complete scam then we stop the dispersement and are out 250 Billion (too much but at least we can put on the brakes) but if you are wrong the entire country goes directly into the toilet with no way out. I'm going to say the safe bet is going forward with the brakes, oversight, and payback plans now included over the fiddle while Rome burns option. My sense is BushCo has purposefully tanked the economy and wanted to take full advantage of a real problem, rather than the problem being imaginary.

This is not Iraq, Iraq was based purely on a fantasy as presented at the time. I still have no idea how people felt an immediate threat over a country with a broken military, isolated, inspectors on the ground, and an aircap as well as a blockade in place could possibly be a direct threat or get the nuclear cycle going under our noses.

This issue is more nebulous for certain but I see no reason to be angry and talk down to people who that disagree with you on this. Scam or not the markets will seize and then shit will roll down hill. The people up top are in much better shape to absorb this than those on the bottom and we have an infrastructure and foundation so broken that if we don't stall this until we have better footing that we fall and can't get back up.

[TexasObserver]

88. That is not what I said. I do believe we're headed into a major downturn.

I don't believe 700 billion can fix a problem that is in the trillions of dollars.

I see the bailout as little more than a temporary fix, something to allow the Bush administration to limp into the sunset before the markets really cave in.

The DOW has been inflated with hot air for several years, and it's got to be let out. They can contrive to keep it above 10K all they want, but it's still losing REAL value. The dollar will fall and its buying power will be reduced.

I believe we are in serious trouble, but it's not greater than we faced in 1987. I believe the bailout is politically stupid for Democrats, unless and until the public is demanding it.

[msallied]

91. Actually, it's $250 billion for now.

And the rest to be phased in later if an oversight committee deems it so.

I see you're still playing the Paulson trumpet. Update your instrument.

[TexasObserver]

101. Yes, we all know. We all get the same media.

Yes, $250 billion now, then another $100, then maybe more.

So what? The political issue is whether there is support among the voters. Which part of that are you incapable of comprehending?

[msallied]

114. Apparently we don't get the same media since you were JUST asserting

the $700B blank check meme another message ago. And it's clear that the taxpayers don't (and shouldn't have) support that idea. And neither did Congress since they didn't exactly rush to the floor with it, now did they? How they will accept the reformed deal remains to be seen. Letting the whole works fall into the lake of fire, however, doesn't appear to be an option.

[TexasObserver]

127. No, I did not assert that. I identified the bill as it is indentified.

Stop lying. I've never said it was a blank check. I've said it's a deal for $700 billion, which it is.

You clearly have emotional issues that compel you to obsessively post about matters you do not understand, and you appear to lack the education to understand. Now you'll post some other outrageous lie or misapprehension, because you can't stop yourself.

[msallied]

131. You are the one who swaggered in here and claimed I was ignorant

without offering a SHRED of factual evidence to refute my original argument. Instead, you merely prove me correct. I await your evidence to the contrary. Hint: calling me ignorant is not sufficient evidence.

[TexasObserver]

168. Ignorance is lack of knowledge in a specific area. I observed that you are ignorant in this topic.

It's not name calling. It's describing the state of your knowledge about matters of finance.

[jobycom]

76. And just like the WMD deniers, too!!!

Oh, wait, they were right.

[Critters2]

80. Yeah! Imagine not trusting the BFEE! WTF is wrong with us?!! nt

[Danger Mouse]

82. It just goes to show you that for all the time we spend making fun of repukes...

we sure can display some repuke thinking.
Let's see...blind hatred and vindictiveness towards the wealthy? Check.
Unwillingness to accept a point of view that doesn't align perfectly with their viewpoints? Check.
Unwillingness to even absorb information that might show them that their opinion is full of shit? Check.
Using 'because I said so' instead of logic or evidence to make a point? Check.

[Critters2]

86. Ummm...repukes ARE the wealthy...

which at least partially explains my blind hatred and vindictiveness.

[Danger Mouse]

90. yes, but the blind hate is getting in the way or our logic.

saying 'fuck the rich, let them suffer' when in reality, we will ALL suffer is just stupid.
cutting off the nose to spite the face...you know?

[lostnotforgotten]

105. Been Through What I Have And Blind Rage Is All You Have Left

To the rich - Off with their heads.

I've been poor before and I can survive being poor again!

[Danger Mouse]

135. But now you're wishing that suffering on millions of Americans, with families

And 'off with their heads' was a popular sentiment during the French Revolution. But then people forget that they soon started cutting off the heads of pretty much anybody they didn't like.

[msallied]

125. Some of the wealthiest people in the world are Democrats.

Explains your sheer ignorance.

[soothsayer]

83. the bailout capitulators remind me exactly of the 'I'm against the iraq war, but Saddam was bad, so

I guess we had to go in there' crowd. Too lazy or too scared to come up with plan B or C or D, and easily rushed into going along to get along.

[soothsayer]

84. the bailout capitulators remind me exactly of the 'I'm against the iraq war, but Saddam was bad, so

I guess we had to go in there' crowd. Too lazy or too scared to come up with plan B or C or D, and easily rushed into going along to get along.

[crazy_vanilla]

98. yes, if they say it enough times, it becomes the truth

:sarcasm:

[lostnotforgotten]

99. Ah Yes - No Data And No Explanation But You Still Want Us To BELIEVE

What's up with that?

[msallied]

104. So how's your bank doing? Any foreclosed houses on YOUR street?

Any evidence that our economy isn't hitting the toilet? Or is it simply your willingness to cut off your nose to spite your face that colors your opinion?

[lostnotforgotten]

109. And What Does That Have To Do With Data And A Reasonable Explanation

No hand waving - not sufficient!

[Critters2]

115. LOL!!! Thank you!! nt

[lostnotforgotten]

121. Make Your Case

eom

[msallied]

119. Where is your data? I thought all you had was blind rage.

And your hatred for the rich, of course.

[lostnotforgotten]

123. I'm Against The Bailout - I Don't Need To Make The Case - You Do

Because you want to spend my tax dollars!

[msallied]

128. Yes, your hatred is duly noted. It's very productive.

[girl gone mad]

176. Small local banks are thriving right now.

The industry is resilient despite the struggles of some members. Washington Mutual, a troubled Seattle savings and loan that was among the nation's largest mortgage lenders, yesterday was seized by the government and sold to J.P. Morgan Chase.

At the same time, many smaller banks said they were actually benefiting from the problems on Wall Street. Deposits are flowing in as customers flee riskier investments, and well-qualified borrowers are lining up for loans.

"We collect money from local savers, and we lend it in the local community," said William Dunkelberg, chairman of Liberty Bell Bank in Cherry Hill, N.J. "We're doing fine. There are 9,000 financial institutions out there, and most of them are small and most of them are doing fine."

Dunkelberg, a professor of economics at Temple University and chief economist for the National Federation of Independent Business, added that a recent survey of that group's members found that only 2 percent said getting a bank loan was the great challenge facing their businesses.

Even some of the nation's largest banks, which have pushed hard for a federal bailout, deny that the current situation is forcing them to reduce lending. "The strength of our core businesses, capital and liquidity are enabling us to continue to support our customers," Bank of America, the nation's largest bank, said in a statement. It added, however, that the bailout plan would allow more lending.

[izzybeans]

183. So this bailout matters to the foreclosed upon homeowner how?

Demonstrate it's relevance to them. Show us how this will help them.

Why not send them the money directly? Instead of the banks that set them up to fail?

Climate change is easily demonstrable to the lay public. I wonder why no one is really trying with this one.

Maybe Colin Powell will show up with a vile of Dust Bowl sand to show us our future. We know how well that story goes.

There is nothing wrong with wanting to be shown proof. There is something seriously wrong with being scarred witless because of the big words they are using.

[girl gone mad]

103. I'm really getting a kick out of all of these latecomers..

suddenly lecturing us on the direness of the situation at hand.

Where were you people a month ago?

How about a year or two ago when I was asking why DUers were ignoring the housing bubble?

You had better things to think about, I'm sure.

Now you people have the nerve to try to cram your ignorant opinions down my throat because if we don't act immediately, the world will end??

What a complete joke.

[msallied]

150. I crammed this down your throat? Wow, I had no idea my powers extended so far.

You are far more vitriolic than I, Miss.

[Two Americas]

106. you won

What's the problem?

[amborin]

110. NOT bailing out the banks *might* help with global warming

more houses, more subdivisions, more species extirpated, more traffic, more congestion, more energy used, more CO 2 released, more materialism, etc......

a total economic collapse might get us all onto a different track...a less materialistic track

Marcuse spoke to this years ago....rampant consumerism, loss of true human values, development for the sake of development

where does it lead us?

to more materialism, more gas guzzlers, etc.....

all of which intensifies global warming and destroys biodiversity

[RichGirl]

117. I respect true activists...

But I have a problem with alarmists. I bet the same people who have been running around for years, warning everybody of a stock market collapse, are now calling it a hoax!

[Odin2005]

124. It's the same underlying flaw in thinking.

In both cases the deniers can't see, or refuse to see, the problem because everything SEEMS normal from thier myopic vantage point. It's the old anti-intellectual "those pointy-headed intellectuals and their fancy models must be wrong because I don't see any problem" BS.

You can't fix stupid.

[ContinentalOp]

141. The people here who keep screaming about the crisis are like the people who took us into Iraq.

Nobody here is questioning that there is a serious crisis, and nobody questioned the idea that terrorism is a serious problem. It just doesn't follow that THIS is necessarily the right solution and that it must be rushed through IMMEDIATELY. Just like "invade Iraq immediately or there will be a mushroom cloud over NYC" wasn't necessarily the appropriate response to 9/11.

[ContinentalOp]

146. Can the economic experts here explain something to me about liquidity?

So if credit suddenly dries up tomorrow and nobody can get a loan, why does it become impossible to fix the problem at that point? Why would the $700 billion dollars help now but not after the credit crunch happens?

If all lending really comes to a freeze, why can't the federal government simply step in as a major lender? Why can't we offer $700 billion in very low interest loans to the financial sector which they can then use to fund mortgages, business loans, etc.? Wouldn't that bring the liquidity back into the system? Why is it impossible to restart the system after a crash?

[msallied]

156. Because once businesses start crumbling due to lack of liquidity

and those businesses close, then it's real hard to open them back up again.

[ContinentalOp]

163. How can it happen that fast though?

Has the credit crunch already started? Is it a gradual process? Or starting on Monday will all of my credit cards be shut off and no banks will be lending any money?

[iiibbb]

165. How many paychecks can you miss?

[ContinentalOp]

167. 6

:shrug:

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

155. They're probably singing this song

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjnvSQuv-H4

[nolabels]

166. LOL

:rofl:

[Festivito]

173. Nice try. Not buying either of it.

We need to make sure the small investors are safe, but not the big rich smart guys.

[spinbaby]

175. This administration is sounding exactly as it did in 2003

Remember the WDMs? Remember what a danger Iraq was? Remember all the terror threats that amounted to nothing or, worse, were instigated by the FBI?

They've cried wolf so often that WE NO LONGER BELIEVE THEM.

[Warren Stupidity]

177. I'm missing the part where there is peer reviewed scientific evidence

and a consensus across the community of experts that the 'credit crisis of 2008' is real. Instead this crisis, real or not, has been put out as a fact beyond reproach and there has been no open peer reviewed debate on the data and its implicatyions.

I don't know if it is a hoax or a fact. I do know that the media hasn't bothered to even ask any questions.