GODDAMMIT!!! Warren Buffet puts down a $5 billion bet on the

[Subdivisions]

bailout and then Congress calls him to ask what he thinks of what they've got so far. To which he answers: (paraphrasing) "If Congress doesn't resolve this financial crisis, we will see the biggest financial collapse in American history."

Why is Congress consulting with someone that has so much to lose if he does't get what he wants?

I'm sick of this shit.

Eidted to add: Heard this on CNN just now.

[Zynx]

1. If you know anything about Warren Buffet you will know he is a good man.

He supports the Democratic economic agenda almost fully.

[Subdivisions]

5. So? All I know is he has a big bet on this and Congress is consulting

with him on the bailout. That's BULLSHIT!

[still_one]

15. How would you like a 25% unemployment? How would you like an immediate

dry up of credit. This wouldn't be a recession, it would be a full depression

Buffet is actually trying to help. In fact, he warned about this problem several years ago, but no one listened to him

There is nothing wrong with them askin for his advice now

[Subdivisions]

20. He has a $5 BILLION BET! His coucnel is tainted! JESUS CHRIST! n/t

[still_one]

26. I know your position is that there is a conflict of interest, we just disagree /nt

[Moochy]

45. What you dont beleive in 9 zeroes?

$5,000,000,000

You are always entitled to have your own opinion, but not your own system of logic and number system.

[still_one]

63. I believe that a great depression must be avoided /nt

[girl gone mad]

85. Please stop with the Great Depression canard.

There is no indication that we are facing food shortages and a housing shortage (the opposite on both counts, in fact).

If you believe that this country is not in a significantly better position to handle hard economic times than we were in the 1930s, let's talk about that bridge in Alaska.

[MadHound]

27. How will you like zero government funding for anything?

How will you like high, quite possibly hyper inflation?

That's what's in store for us with this bailout. Within six months, our US Treasury bonds(the instrument by which we fund our debt, this bailout, and by extension our government) are going to be downgraded. Commercial houses we're already downgrading our bonds before this bailout, after this goes into effect, it will soon become official. Then the fun begins. We will have no money for government spending. No money for Social Security, no money for infrastructure, no money for defense, NO GODDAMN MONEY PERIOD. Do you understand? Do you grasp the magnitude of this gross fuckup our so call reps have committed us to?

On top of this, the large injection of cash is going to devalue the dollar, leading to high, even hyper inflation. Picture Depression era Germany.

These are basic economic principles, and our so called representatives have completely ignored them. Instead, they were more concerned about bailing out their corporate masters than in doing what was right. A depression we can survive, we've done it before. However this bailout is going to unleash an extinction level economic event that we can't survive. A depression will look like the Roaring Twenties by comparison.

This bailout was done to help out their corporate masters and allow a three to six month window for Bush to get out of office. But this is going to be a catastrophe in the long run.

[still_one]

58. I think the risk for a depression is much greater than hyperinflation

I understand your position, but believe that everything must be done to prevent a depression.

It won't be the "corporate masters" that will be hurt, as much as the average citizen

Credit would dry up overnight. This would affect grocery stores who obtain food on credit, to people who owe money on their credit cards

The economy would not just stall, it would shut down

My position is that the risk for depression is much greater than hyperinflation

Your example of Germany was due to the lack of a Marshall plan after world war i. The lessons were learned after world war ii not to repeat those mistakes

[MadHound]

68. Get this, it really isn't the inflation that is the concern here

It is the fact that our US Treasury Bonds, the instrument whereby we are selling our debt, and by extension funding our government spending, will be downgraded. When this happens, nobody will want our worthless paper. Our taxpayer revenue will be consumed in paying our debt, and there will be nothing, zip, zilch, zero, nada in the way of government spending. No funds for Social Security, no funds for defense, no funds for infrastructure, no funds to pay government employees, no funds for anything.

You think that a depression is bad, just wait. We're all going to be around to watch this extinction level economic event come in and kill our economy, our government, our country. A depression we can recover from, but not this. Do you get it now?

[still_one]

77. I'll tell you what, the sun is still going to rise tomorrow, and the world isn't going to end

The terms of the bail out are not that bad. Half is given now, oversight provided, warrants are issued to the taxpayers, mortage rates will not readjust so those that have trouble will not lose their homes

The only ones against doing anything are the shorts

Treasury bonds are NOT going to be downgraded

[MadHound]

79. Keep your head in the sand if you wish

I prefer to know what's coming down the pike, and frankly it isn't good. Already some commercial houses are downgrading bonds on the simple announcement of the bailout. <http://financialtrader.com/Bond_Investor.html> Other people have been warning of this possibility for the past few months <http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/JA17Dj02.html> What do you think is going to happen now that the bailout is official and we're on the hook for another trillion in debt?

I'm not "against doing anything". However I am against doing something stupid, something that will kill our credit rating and bring about high or hyper inflation. This bailout will do just that, and our economy, our government and our country will be severely hurt, much worse than if we had done nothing at all.

Once again the Bush plan of using fear worked. It stampeded enough people in Congress and in the country to once again go and jump off a cliff to our destruction. So go ahead, be part of the herd, keep your head in the sand. But when our country is in economic ruin, don't you dare say that you weren't warned.

[still_one]

84. OK, we agree something must be done. Tell me what you think should be done if you don't mind

Incidently, What I think the bailout will do immediately is provide liquidity

[sendero]

87. Not like he supports his..

.. own investments, and that is all he is doing here.

[stray cat]

2. Isn't Buffet fighting for people like himself paying a larger chunk of taxes

I think he is pushing the fact that he pays the lowest tax rate in his office even compared to his secretary. I trust Buffet more than anyone in the administration - he is on our side as far as I can see.

[Sal Minella]

12. I've seen him announce to a videocam that It's NOT fair his secretary's income is taxed at a

higher percentage rate than his own income.

[Posteritatis]

31. ... Is that actually true? Gah. (nt)

[Catch22Dem]

55. Is it true that he said that? Yes. (n/t)

[AZ Criminal JD]

86. When he said that he was asked to release the tax returns of himself and his secretary.

He refused. I call bullshit on his claim.

[Midlodemocrat]

47. Yes, He actually has stated the same publicly.

His $5 billion was put into the market as a vote of confidence.

Buffett isn't one of those guys who is planning to trickle down all of his monies to family. He is giving all of it to the Bill Gates foundation to distribute.

In fact, one of Buffett's granddaughters was working as a nanny pretty recently until she found a position in her field. He'll pay for college, but that's it.

Seems to be that the dems here should be embracing him, but he's rich and people here hate the rich.

[An Intellectual]

64. The problem is that he has that money in the first place.

No human being needs that much money; we could take 99% of it and he'd never notice.

In fact, we should.

[MrsMatt]

78. He actually lives on his salary and not his wealth

his salary is 100,000 per year (no bonuses)

He's donating the bulk of his estate to charity - he doesn't believe in inherited wealth.

He's been arguing for increased taxation on the rich, and against the repeal of the inheritance tax.

He lives in the same home he first bought. He drives an old car

He's endorsed Obama.

What the hell more do you want?

[Midlodemocrat]

81. Proving you know nothing about the man and what he does with his money.

[PVnRT]

89. Given your signature

Your post makes no sense.

[AllieB]

90. Are you for real or a caricature?

You don't know Warren Buffet obviously.

[lonestarnot]

3. Buffet is also saying

the government should buy the trash at market value and not a dime more. I trust him more than I do that fucking Paulson. These richies all make me sick.

[NNN0LHI]

21. Whats the "market value" for trash though?

I pay money to have trash hauled away.

Don

[lonestarnot]

39. Here. You may want to read what he said, because I find trash to be stuff

children in some places in Haiti pick through to survive. http://www.clusterstock.com/2008/9/warren-buffett-reveals-bailout-s-dirty-little-secret

[dkf]

4. Maybe Goldman has a bunch of plays if the economy collapses.

If they own the credit default swaps, they have a whole lot of financial institutions by the you know whats.

[Catch22Dem]

6. Don't be pissed at Buffet

He's a brilliant businessman and a big supporter of causes important to you and me.

[Subdivisions]

8. Read my post again. Is it Buffet I'm criticizing? n/t

[napi21]

7. Buffett is recognized by almost everyone as a financial magician.

I have no problem with them talking to him. I understand why you see it as "his self interest", and there's truth to that, but he is certainly much more capable than anyone in Congress to anticipate the old "unknown consequences" pitfalls.

[Subdivisions]

11. My point is that Congress should not be seeking the councel of

someone who has a vested interest in this bailout working to his favor. I don't care who he is.

[frogcycle]

24. there is no-one without a vested interest

his is bigger, but he also doesn't give a crap. He won't be around all that long, and he's already disposing of wealth. If his estate makes money off the $5B, it will go largely to charity. Congress will get straighter advice from him than from Paulsen and his cronies, and they know it. I applaud them for asking him.

[Subdivisions]

25. I thought he gave all his money to Bill & Melinda Gates anyway. What

happened to that?

[frogcycle]

28. complicated deal

where most of the gift is post-mortem, I believe

[Midlodemocrat]

59. Virtually all of it. And, virtually none of it goes to his family.

He'll pay for education; after that the family is on their own.

Far from your typical greedy billionaire. This isn't about a conflict of interest. Warren Buffett has the midas touch. People want to make money the way he has.

It's about confidence in the system.

The OP is flat out wrong.

[napi21]

33. That's foolish! When you're looking for advice, you should always

go to the person(s) most knowledgable.

[Subdivisions]

35. So, what's wrong with consulting ECONOMISTS? Shelby had a whole list of them. n/t

[napi21]

44. It's obviously a choice. I did not see the names on Shelby's list,

so I'm guessing a bit here, but I'm pretty sure I wouldn't recognize most of those names, but I sure know Buffett's name & reputation! I believe it's also true that all those "Economists" also have a vested interest in the Market!

[still_one]

9. You are so wrong about Buffet /nt

[Subdivisions]

13. AGAIN, READ MY POST. I'm not criticizing Buffet. I'm TALKING ABOUT CONGRESS! n/t

[adamuu]

67. perhaps the problem is your post, then. n/t

[valerief]

10. It's Theft Theater. That's all it is. They rob us blind but give us a show (dinner not included). nt

[avaistheone1]

14. There are many prominent economists who should have been consulted.

I have no problems with Buffet. He may be a supporter of democratic ideals, but he likely has a bias for advancing his own business interests.

[Subdivisions]

16. Yes. Yet, CONGRESS consults someone with $5 Billion at stake. n/t

[Sixty_cycle_humm]

29. I agree with what your saying

but at this stage it would be very hard to find ANYONE with that amount of expertise who wouldn't have a horse in this race somewhere.

Warren Buffet is respected on our side and theirs both, he has a brilliant mind with this stuff and to be honest he is far more knowledgeable IMHO than anyone elected sitting around the table trying so solve this disaster.

We could do far worse as council on this - $5 billion gamble of or not.

[Subdivisions]

34. Shelby had a list of over 100 economist he was waving around the other

day. None of those people are smart enough to be consulted by Congress? Instead, the seek the advice of someone with a $5 Billion bet?

[avaistheone1]

75. There were progressive plans and progressive economists that were completely shut out

of this plan. So I have strong doubts how good a plan this is going to be for anyone but the banking industry.

[Burma Jones]

17. Buffet is an Obama Guy

He's the only guy that has made money in the last year which tells me he isn't being bailed out......in fact, he would benefit by everything bottoming out as he would pick up some nifty bargains....

He is also about as far from a greed-head as you're going to see in a Billionaire. He is a responsible Capitalist

[Subdivisions]

18. GOD FUCKING DAMN IT!!! ONE MORE TIME: I'M NOT AIMING AT BUFFET!!!

I AM OUTRAGED THAT CONGRESS IS CONSULTING SOMEONE WITH A $5 BILLION BET ON THIS BAILOUT GOING THROUGH! IT'S NOT RIGHT!

[Burma Jones]

23. Allright then, how about looking at it as Congress talking to someone that

has NOT incurred big losses in the last year or two by stupidly betting on stupid investments.

He does seem to have run the only financial house that knew what it was doing.......

[AZ Criminal JD]

88. What are you talking about?

Have you seen the losses in his Berkshire fund?

[Posteritatis]

30. CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL! (nt)

[Subdivisions]

36. Do you have something substantive to say? n/t

[LBJDemocrat]

40. Buffett supports Obama. I support Obama. Buffett good.

I agree. These people remind me of Rush Limbaugh listeners who will change their position 180 degrees depending on what position has Rush's sanction at a point in time. I share your frustration.

[Moochy]

48. The transitive power of HOPE!

I love your subject line...

[RoyGBiv]

91. But, you are ...

You're saying that because Buffett has an investment, he will default to offering advice that benefits him, regardless of what would happen to the economy as a whole. And that's wrong, partly because you're mis-characterizing his "bet."

Buffett's investment does a couple of things, the main one being giving Goldman the leverage it needs to have a better chance at survival if the bailout does not go through. Buffett is trying to prop up a holding company with a 5 billion cash infusion. He chose Goldman for a number of reasons, chief among them his opinion that it has the best chance of survival due to its reaction to the crisis being far more intelligent than some other companies.

Buffett is quite simply a genius. If I had his phone number, he'd be the first person I'd call for financial advice.

[metapunditedgy]

19. Buffet profits nicely

on the GS deal; he is first in line to recover his investment if Goldman fails, as well. (Since Congress has also claimed the _gov't_ will be first in line to recover, it will be interesting to see who nudges out whom.)

There's no question Buffett stands to gain, and he has publicly said that he's making a big bet on the bailout.

THAT SAID, I don't see why Congress shouldn't get his opinion. Hopefully, the folks talking to Buffett are smart enough to ask for real information from him, rather than just believing any spin he may (or may not) offer.

So the real issue is whether Congress is competent and trustworthy enough to put the deal together reasonably well.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. Yup. It's kinda like an accounting frim asking Tony Soprano for advice.

[HamdenRice]

32. Your completely wrong. Buffet is putting $5 billion in to shore up confidence

He's doing the right thing at considerable cost -- a way of adding psychological confidence to the government's plan. How you can't see that is perplexing to say the least.

[Subdivisions]

37. How you can't see that it is CONGESS I'm criticizing is perplexing, to say the least. n/t

[Romulox]

41. Right. He's just being a nice guy by buying a position in a company then using his influence

to push hard for a bailout of that self-same company!

He's a capitalist, after all--and he makes just as much money from being a friend to the working people as he does by manipulating the political process to divert taxpayer money to his own profit.

It's really perplexing that you can't see that! :silly:

[Moochy]

73. Critical thinking not needed

We have neo-liberal ideology to give us confidence in these rich people and their plans for our money!

[Kaleko]

70. Exactly. Thank you.

[Midlodemocrat]

38. You have completely miscategorized Warren Buffett.

He's one of the most genuine people on the planet.

He's also brilliant when it comes to matters financial.

They should have contacted him in the first place.

[Romulox]

42. He has a CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Being "genuine" doesn't enter into it.

People with conflicts of interest should recuse themselves from debates of these sorts precisely because the mere appearance of impropriety is damaging to one's credibility. :hi:

[Midlodemocrat]

46. Actually, his $5 billion was to show confidence in the market

and its viability. So, I disagree.

[Romulox]

50. Confidence in the fact that he has the ear of those who control the purse strings, you mean?

It's a chicken and egg argument. Since he stands to gain financially from this bailout, and since you can't prove a negative...you can't prove Buffet didn't abuse his access for his own gain.

This is why the mere appearance of impropiety is damaging.

[Midlodemocrat]

52. Do you know anything about the guy?

Do you know that he has no intention of passing his money down to his family? That he has constantly railed about the fact that people like him should be paying more in taxes? That his secretary shouldn't be paying what she is paying when compared with what he is paying?

He's not the enemy here. But, he's rich and we know how DU feels about the rich.

If he lost that entire $5billion, it wouldn't affect his lifestyle at all. He lives exceptionally modestly in Omaha. Yes, he does have property on Laguna Beach, but since he is determined to donate all of his profits from BH, I'm giving him a pass.

He is one of the most generous people alive today.

[Subdivisions]

53. Why are you making this about Buffet even though it's about Congress? n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

56. Seriously?

Wow.

[Romulox]

61. We're supposed to have a government of LAWS, not of MEN.

Ponder how that might apply to the present situation. :hi:

[Subdivisions]

69. Now you're going to be condescending? Wow. n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

83. Well, educating didn't work, so why not.

BETTER THAN POSITING IN ALL CAPS AND THEN CHANGING THE FOCUS OF THE ALL CAPS RANT.

[shanti]

80. thanks for the info

i didn't know this about buffet, but he does not seem like the regular super rich asshole. i was against this bailout at first because it was arranged by the *ush squad, but buffet being the financial genius and all, i will defer to his brilliance. and if it's good enough for obama, it's good enough for me! i'm sure obama isn't looking to lead a collapsed country.

what i want to know is - what is bushco getting out of this? with the changes to the bill that congress is suggesting, will * sign off on it? if he doesn't, we KNOW it's dirty.

[Subdivisions]

43. ARRRGGGHHHH! n/t

[Midlodemocrat]

49. Hey, YOU'RE the one who made it about Buffett.

And, apparently you know nothing about him.

Generally, when an OP starts out with GODDAMMIT and a person's name, the OP is about that person.

Sorry. Bed = lie in it.

[Subdivisions]

51. My OP was about CONGRESS consulting with someone who has

a $5 billion bet on this bailout going through. That is a conflict of interest.

[Midlodemocrat]

54. I'm guessing you don't know anything about Warren Buffett

or you wouldn't have posted that.

He is putting the money into the market BECAUSE people envy his King Midas touch. Regular Joe's save up just to buy ONE SHARE of his BH part A stock because of their faith in him.

It's about confidence in the market.

Buffett isn't your average billionaire. He's a fighter for the little guy. He's a poor choice for you to rant about.

[Subdivisions]

62. I'M RANTING ABOUT CONGRESS CONSULTING WITH SOMEONE

WHO HAS A $5 BILLION BET ON THE BAILOUT PASSING!

Ok, it's obvious you have no comprehension of the point of my OP. So, I can no longer take you seriously on this particular topic, though I generally respect you as a fellow DUer on most issues.

[Catch22Dem]

60. You're missing an important point about Buffet though

He already made his money back on that $5B "bet" as you call it. From what I understand, and I could be wrong, he made it back several times over the very next day.

[Subdivisions]

66. I'd like to see more about that. My point is conflict of interest. Congress

should not be consulting someone who has a big stake in the game. That's all I'm saying. There are plenty of economists out there whose advice and council would be much more objective than a guy who puts billions of dollars on the line.

[northernlights]

71. Everybody has a stake in this game

Everybody. If they only consult people who do not have a stake, they'll be talking to dead people.

The reason Buffet is so very wealthy is because he is financially brilliant and is one of the very few people who truly understands what will happen as a result of not bailing out, what kind of bailout is most likely to be effective, etc.

I'd far rather they consult Buffet on this. Just because they're asking his opinion and advice doesn't mean they're following it slavishly. But the more input they seek, the more diverse ideas they consider, the better a perspective they'll have on the package they put together.

[prayin4rain]

57. Congress has been ridiculous from the second this started to the very end. n/t

[adamuu]

65. Actually I believe in Warren Buffet quite a bit, and I have a small position in BRK-B

He never bets against America. Ever.

[mainer]

72. Any advantage to investing in BRK-A?

The A shares are running $135,000 now, and I'm wondering if anyone here owns any -- and what the advantages are over BRK-B for such a staggering price.

[adamuu]

74. BRK-B incurs a penalty of losing some proportion of shareholder voting rights

i think the proportion is 5 to 1.
other than that, its the same thing as BRK-A just more digestible pieces.
BRK-B simply makes BRK-A more accessible to small investors. The tradeoff is that your votes count less (even if you had $135,000 worth of BRK-B your votes wouldn't get the same weight as if you has $135,000 worth of BRK-A)
A service like ING's ShareBuilder makes it even more accessible to someone like me, since you can buy partial shares. BRK-A is not available though. Just BRK-B. I don't know why.

Edit to add: BRK-A has never been split.

[mainer]

76. thanks. I never bother to vote as a shareholder anyway.

I always throw away those mailings -- it's too much work to go through them. It seems like investors might as well stick to BRK-B.

[Midlodemocrat]

82. I have shares in both BRK-B and BRK-A

and I wholeheartedly agree with you.

And, seeing as how he intends to give away most of his fortune, he's completely all right in my book.

[Irish Girl]

92. Just noticed this

Apparently Buffet has been stirring up some controversy - here is a site run by SEC Registered Investment Advisor Mike Morgan, who is very disheartened with Buffet at the moment.

On Monday September 8th, Mike Morgan wrote

I thought today was bad enough, but then I just listened to an interview this morning with Warren Buffet and his littlte chickadee, Becky Quick.

Warren started off saying, very clearly, "The Fed did exactly the right thing." He then went on to say he wouldn’t change anything in the plan. How sad. How truly sad for a (formerly) great man to cave in to this crap. Here’s a guy that doesn’t even know what the full plan is yet, but he says he would not change anything, and that the plan is "exactly right."

Warren didn’t mention his motives for lending support to Paulson . . . like a huge portion of his net worth in Wells Fargo or the fact that much of his wealth depends upon the Paulson charade being carried on for as long as possible . . . so guys like Warren can back out of a lot of the positions they are in.

It gets sadder. Buffet admitted he spoke with Paulson on Sunday. Why? Why in the world would Paulson call Buffet, other than to enlist Buffet's support for Paulson's scheme . . . or maybe to call in a favor or two. Listen to the Buffet interview this morning. It makes no sense, and he does not sound as clear with thought as he always does. It was the first time I heard Warren Buffet interviewed, when I didn't believe him. That's sad.

http://realestateandhousing2.blogspot.com/2008/09/warren-buffet-drank-kool-aid.html">Warren Buffet Drank The Kool-Aid

On Tuesday September 23rd, Mike Morgan wrote

Very sad times. Remember the Maria Bartiromo interview with Buffet, when he slipped and said Paulson called him on the big Sunday a couple of weeks ago? Many people wondered why Paulson would call a private citizen to discuss Fed matters? Obviously, we now know.

Sham Deal - Buffet gets special stock with a 10% dividend and he gets the right to by another $5B at $115, when the stock was trading at $125 and the deal makers knew it would spike on this kind of news. So why didn't Goldman set a higher price on the stock? Buffet would have never done the deal. He probably cut this deal with Paulson himself when they spoke on that funky Sunday.

Conspiracy? - We have never witnessed anything like this, with rule changes and special deals and the biggest thief in the world, running the financial world. The Buffet deal could only have been done if Goldman had a new business model . . . because the old business model was busted. Voila, they have a new business model as of Sunday night courtesy of King Henry . . . and less than 48 hours later, Buffet come in with $5B.

Someone needs to question that Sunday conversation. Someone needs to question this Sunday's move to bring Goldman under the Fed's wings as a commercial bank. Someone needs to question the very deal struck with Buffet. But no one will.

Main Street or Wall Street? - The price of Buffet's stock is at $4,300 for Class B and $128,800 for Class A . . . because he doesn't want to deal with Main Street. And Warren Buffet stands to lose more in a market crash than any person on the planet. Warren Buffet's deal with Goldman is just another example of the power of Paulson and his Wall Street fraternity.

Free Markets Will Prevail - Eventually, the free market will prevail. Eventually, the markets will crash. But once again, the market will bubble up on the Buffet news. Paulson is truly brilliant. There could not have been a better moment than now to pull this card out of his sleeve. After today's Hearings, Paulson was cooked and he was going to be the focus of the media tonight. Not anymore. Now the focus will be on the household name of Warren Buffet and his purchase of stock. But . . . and this is a HUGE but . . . Even though the consumer and the PPT will be back in there buying tomorrow, nothing has changed. The toxic stuff is still there. We have not resolved anything. This just give Wall Street more time to suck up the dollars and more time to trade in and out of pension fund portfolios.

Ban On Short Sellers - Maybe we need to question why a sham deal like Buffet's should be allowed. It is the opposite of what we saw with short sellers, but at least the short sellers were all dealing on a level playing field. In fact, the deal would not have been done at all if Paulson did not instruct Cox to ban short selling.

Paulson Crossed the Line - Why has no one yet publicly questions why Buffet has a private call from the Secretary of the Treasury about a company the guy ran as COO and CEO . . . and government business with a private citizen involved in Wall Street so heavily. This was a private deal with our top government guy in the mix. If we thought we had stinky fish yesterday, we have super-stinky fish today.

I hope you will all take a moment to write your Senators and Congressmen again, because market manipulations like this will destroy everything we have ever dreamed of. Wall Street is pulling out all stops to make sure Main Street crashes . . . so Wall Street can come back in and pick up the pieces for next to nothing.

Tomorrow . . . The markets will probably rally on the Buffet Bail-Out, but eventually the stink will overcome even Warren Buffet. He had no choice. If no one stepped up to the plate tonight, it was all over tomorrow. And he would have suffered huge losses. We already saw that this afternoon. Obviously, Paulson still has weapons. We just never dreamed he had so many fraternity brothers. I think this deal will come back to haunt even Buffet, because there is so much more to be written . . . and even great men (or formerly great men) can't stop Mother Nature or the Free Markets.

http://realestateandhousing2.blogspot.com/2008/09/paulson-calls-in-buffet.html">Paulson Calls In Buffet