Comments on: The Bailout is Now A Trillion Dollars More Expensive than World War II. The Madness Must Stop

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 14:24:55 +0000

Happy Thanksgiving to you, too, tom. No wager (I'm not much of a betting man). I do think the 'Skins will cover the spread. If they can find some offense, it's likely to be a very close game. If not, then not. But I think they'll find enough to keep the Giants honest.

By: fostert

fostert — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 09:50:51 +0000

Oh, and happy Thanksgiving. And do you want a wager on the Redskins- Giants game? The spread is 3.5. And I can send you some Rocky Mountain Oysters against your Chesapeake Bay Oysters. I don't eat shellfish, but my friends do. And the Rocky Mountain version may seem a little weird, but they're good. But you have to eat two. That's just the way they serve them. But you can suggest any wager.

By: fostert

fostert — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 09:27:21 +0000

You don't really seem to know how accounting works. We're talking about 1/2 trillion in cash and the rest in securities, loans, and asset purchases. A lot of this seems to be in special preferred stock which will pay good dividends. What's disturbing is the lack of Congressional oversight. It would be nice to know just what kind of deals we're really getting. I can understand why we wouldn't want to mark to market these assets right away. But a monthly mark to market report to Congress would be nice. I remember when we bailed out Chrysler. They paid back the loan ahead of schedule and the Federal government actually made money on the deal. And so did Chrysler. But there was a lot of oversight on that deal. What's happening now is happening with the typical Bush Administration secrecy. And that's not acceptable. We need to guarantee a return of two points over the TED. And maybe we will get that return, but we won't know if the administration won't report on what they're doing. So let's see what they're doing. I don't expect it to be up to Buffett's standards, as we're fishing downstream from him. This kind of bailout can still be managed profitably for everyone. But the administration's insistence on a lack of accountability is not helping. With Bush's secrecy, how do we know?

By: Americaneocon

Americaneocon — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 02:44:37 +0000

Taking a break from politics for the holiday.

Happy Thanksgiving!

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:31:56 +0000

Not a lot, EricH. I've seen estimates including a lot more of those guarantees and collateralized loans that push the total well over 7 trillion dollars. That's insanity right there.

Forget small government and libertarianism. That's at least corporatism (which in bygone days tipped very neatly over into fascism). There's no way they can make their proposals work. They're simply way too big. The only thing they can do is to throw tons of cash out and hope that it makes for a soft landing.

By: EricH

EricH — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:25:50 +0000

The number you quote includes debt guarantees…and lending programs that will require collateral from the financial institution…so it's not totally expenditure, if that makes you feel any better.

By: Jimmie

Jimmie — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 15:09:08 +0000

I honestly don't know. I know what Congress has given can be taken back and some of this money isn't going out the door right away. Perhaps there are ways to gum up the works until we can get folks in there in 2010 who can rescind the whole mess.

Alternately, I'm thinking a lawsuit may be in order. For the life of me, I can't see how any agency can spend money that's not yet been appropriated. To my knowledge, the only money that's been approved is the 700 billion that was voted on before the election. Everything else has yet to be officially given out and if a dime that has not been appropriated does get out, Washington should be hit with so many lawsuits that it'll look like snow for all the white falling down.

By: Cheesestick

Cheesestick — Tue, 25 Nov 2008 14:57:04 +0000

How?